Hec is me. Fully willing to admit that it's probably extreme bias influencing me, but I can't sync up to the all-over naysayers. Not getting what it is that inspires such fervent anger, even after reading the explanations of just that.

But, but, I was there before there was bile! Ask Matt! He sometimes hated me! Which is fine, truly, and that's part of why I like Matt, and why it means so much to me when he would very occasionally agree with me. And I'm not namechecking him to imply that he agrees me with me about the next paragraph, because I'm pretty sure he doesn't. I'm namechecking him on the "it's not personal" front. It's not.

I do not like Whedon, because I think he cannot plot, and plot is very important to me. I have friends who like Whedon, and I argue with them, and it's fun, because we understand that it isn't personal. And... that's all. I really, really did not like Firefly, and I understand if it is a sore point in this thread, so I don't go tromping around saying "Bleh," just to rain on people's parade. But... I also don't like being lumped in like we're part of some groupthink backlash. We can honestly not like something that you honestly liked. It's fine. Some people that I respect think the movie rocked. It doesn't stop me from wanting to be friends with them. I'll just argue with them, and continue to like them despite their being Wrong. (And that's a joke, to be clear.)

I'd hate to see any thread here become "for lovers only." We're b.org, not borg.

Or, Virginia apparently, if their ad campaign is to be trusted.

Criticism is fine. That review? Is bile. But oh wait, I'm just a Studio Yes Man, so I don't count. Or I drank the bad Kool Aid. Or something.

I read the review, Allyson. Thought it was hilarious. Well-written and funny.

It also hurt me to read it, both because I disagree and because it's rather painfully harsh. I do think there's a lot of bile there - it's clear you were hurt by... something... related to this whole Firefly thing (I'm still not sure exactly what, but it doesn't matter), and the review makes that clear. The criticisms you make aren't nearly strong enough to justify the anger of the wording, by themselves.

It also doesn't help that the review basically insulted me by saying that I couldn't like the movie unless I was part of some terrible, ignorant cult of Whedon which, despite my being a member of this board, I'm really not. I found this place because of Wonderfalls, originally, and I think I'm certainly in good company here with the Tim love (remember how I loved the Inside this summer? Sat in un-airconditioned environments and did NYC watch-and-posts and everything? Yeah, good times). Sure, I like Buffy (including the 5th and 6th seasons OH NOES) and Angel (all of it 'cept bits of 3 and 4) and Firefly (every single episode), but I don't worship the ground Joss walks on, or praise him as the next god of cinema, or consider him in any way infallible. Man does better than most at writing good characters and dialogue, which is what I look for in TV and film and comics, so I look forward to his work, but that doesn't mean I'm drinking the Kool-Aid of his press.

I liked the movie because it was funny, and silly (yes, I liked the stupid catwalk scene, because it felt like such a homage to bad sci-fi movies that it made me grin), and pretty (especially River kicking ass), and often emotionally wrenching, both thematically and with the various deaths. There were bits that rang wrong to me, and bits that were so dumb I had to grin, but they didn't overpower my total appreciation for the movie as a whole. I think I would enjoy it if I had never seen Firefly, if i had never heard of Joss Whedon. It's fun. And I think I should be allowed to believe that without being accused of a religious devotion to a man I don't think is perfect, just talented.

Okay, rant done now. Return to your regularly scheduled programming.

The bile is not necessary. I understand it and sympathize a very little bit with it but, it is too over the top.

It is a good (not great) movie that is still better than most of the drivel put out this year.

Yes, I have seen it 9 times and have obviously indulged in the kool-aid. I just want sequels and more story of the 'verse. So sue me.

Well said, D.

I agree that the article was well written, and funny, but for me, the fact that so much of it was an attack on Joss, rather than his film, overshadowed the valid points of the article. I realize that I am opening myself up to being called a Yes-woman for Joss, but I would feel the same way if this were written about anyone. The personal comments seemed to be just that, too personal, and not so much about the film.

But, but, I was there before there was bile! Ask Matt! He sometimes hated me! Which is fine, truly, and that's part of why I like Matt, and why it means so much to me when he would very occasionally agree with me.

Hmm, weird. I actually remember agreeing with you about a great deal of what you wrote in your Angel recaps, though I have more affection than you for Joss and the Wesley character (well, the latter post-torture by Faith anyway). I know we have the same pick for best episode of the show, and rolled our eyes at the same Joss-written episodes. And both really wished Fred would opt for silent contemplation for a year or three. I guess I should have spoken up more when we were in agreement.

It may be a case of the same situation as the above review of the movie that's stirring up reactions, though... I can go through and agree point by point, and still come out with a diametrically opposed emotional reaction to the film despite seeing the same flaws.

When bile is funny, I often appreciate it. Like now. Thank you, Penelope von Whistleblower, wherever you are.

I agree that the article was well written, and funny, but for me, the fact that so much of it was an attack on Joss, rather than his film, overshadowed the valid points of the article. I realize that I am opening myself up to being called a Yes-woman for Joss, but I would feel the same way if this were written about anyone. The personal comments seemed to be just that, too personal, and not so much about the film.

I originally felt a similar way in reaction to some of the bile inspired by BtVS season six. Somewhere along the line [probably during my extreme over-reaction to (against) Angel Season 5's The Girl in Question] I had an epiphany that, for me at least, it's all, always personal.

When I love a story, it gives me the warm fuzzies towards the talent (the cerebral talent as well as the on-screen pretties). When I feel like a story has done injustice to characters which that same talent has already made matter to me, it makes me angry at them.

I think, for me, the truth lies here: None of it is rational, fandom, that is. Joss isn't a great guy because of those-Buffy-eps-I-love and he's not an asshat because of those episodes-I-hate. He's a writer, and sometimes a writer's stuff works, and sometimes it doesn't. But when the writer is using previously established and well-beloved characters, characters who are--in a very real and irrational sense--characters-he-*made*-me-love, it gets personal when the stuff doesn't work. I'd say it shouldn't get personal, but I think it's probably all part of the fandom dance. And you only end up in fandom in the first place, because of the love.

I'm actually more interested to see it myself now, and see where it works and if/where/when it doesn't.