Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2016 15:44:58 GMT -5
Yeah, R&H dodged a bullet there, didn't they. That is why I got worried that Pat Shand might get his claws onto them. However, with the comics more than likely being cancelled, I don't think that's going to happen. R&H were very fortunate to have their story continued by you instead of the likes of Brad Kern or Pat Shand. You treated the characters with respect and gave them a story they deserved. It's hard not to think of R&H without thinking of you and your stories. What was the thing you enjoyed the most about fleshing R&H out and writing your series? Just curious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2016 18:56:22 GMT -5
Thanks, Betty I've always treated the characters with respect, R&H, Kira, Cole, Christy Jenkins, because it was my duty as a writer to do so. I've always felt that, had R&H been created on a show not run by two old men who's values were time locked into the 1950's, they might have been fleshed out better. Just because you start out as a villain does not mean you have to stay one. Or, even so, you don't have to be a 1950's mustache twirling villain that Charmed rolled out all the time. Look at Crowley on Supernatural, for example. He's a card carrying villain, but that hasn't stopped him from helping the Winchesters from time to time. As for what I saw in R&H, I honestly don't know. Seems I just saw something that no one else did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2016 20:26:49 GMT -5
I've always treated the characters with respect, R&H, Kira, Cole, Christy Jenkins, because it was my duty as a writer to do so. I've always felt that, had R&H been created on a show not run by two old men who's values were time locked into the 1950's, they might have been fleshed out better. Just because you start out as a villain does not mean you have to stay one. Or, even so, you don't have to be a 1950's mustache twirling villain that Charmed rolled out all the time. Look at Crowley on Supernatural, for example. He's a card carrying villain, but that hasn't stopped him from helping the Winchesters from time to time. Yeah, a more modern and realistic sense of morality was something Charmed always lacked. The Charmed Ones, Whitelighters, and Elders were always presented as paragons of virtue, even when they did horrible things, simply because they were on the side of Good TM and weren't warlocks, demons, or darklighters. The boundaries between the two "sides" were perfectly obvious and clear-cut, and never the twain shall meet. That's why "Morality Bites" is one of the show's very strongest episodes ever. The "bad guy" was an otherwise normal human being (Nathaniel Pratt), and the sisters' very real capacity for evil was fully acknowledged and addressed, all without them suddenly turning into warlocks, donning black clothing, or anything else that would've made it more black & white.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2016 1:09:58 GMT -5
Charmed really needed someone like Joss Whedon, someone born of Generation X (the 1960's and 70's), in charge. Whedon understood Turn Of The Millennium television and how things worked.
Unfortunately, Charmed got two pre-World War II dinosaurs, Aaron Spelling and Duke Vincent, who forced Connie Burge and later, Brad Kern, to adopt their 1950's ideals and values.
You know, this could be why you never saw any gays or lesbians on Charmed, despite the show being set in San Francisco. Spelling and Vincent came from an age when being gay was actively frowned upon, especially in the entertainment industry. Today you have gay and lesbian actors, and no one cares. However, if it had come out in the 1950's that Rock Hudson was gay, his career would have been finished right then and there. Spelling the Vincent couldn't help themselves here, these were the values they were raised with, and it showed.
This is could be one of the reasons Buffy is so fondly remembered, despite ending in 2003. Charmed ended in 2006, three years later, but it's been virtually forgotten, a mere decade later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2016 14:18:44 GMT -5
Charmed really needed someone like Joss Whedon, someone born of Generation X (the 1960's and 70's), in charge. Whedon understood Turn Of The Millennium television and how things worked. Unfortunately, Charmed got two pre-World War II dinosaurs, Aaron Spelling and Duke Vincent, who forced Connie Burge and later, Brad Kern, to adopt their 1950's ideals and values. You know, this could be why you never saw any gays or lesbians on Charmed, despite the show being set in San Francisco. Spelling and Vincent came from an age when being gay was actively frowned upon, especially in the entertainment industry. Today you have gay and lesbian actors, and no one cares. However, if it had come out in the 1950's that Rock Hudson was gay, his career would have been finished right then and there. Spelling the Vincent couldn't help themselves here, these were the values they were raised with, and it showed. This is could be one of the reasons Buffy is so fondly remembered, despite ending in 2003. Charmed ended in 2006, three years later, but it's been virtually forgotten, a mere decade later. Charmed certainly could've benefited from someone with younger, more modern sensibilities at the helm. Smarter writing and plotting, more diversity, and more impact. A lot of people like to claim that Buffy isn't a "great work of art," either, but consider all of the shows that can cite Buffy as either a direct or partial influence: - Charmed - Alias - Kim Possible - Veronica Mars - Pretty Little Liars (also influenced by Veronica Mars) But, shows influenced by Charmed? - Eastwick: cancelled after half a season - The Secret Circle: cancelled after one season - Witches of East End: cancelled after two seasons The TV landscape would look a lot different if Buffy never existed, but would the same really be true if Charmed never existed? Yes, it was a good show, but it simply had no lasting impact, whatsoever. Charmed never innovated the TV landscape in the same way as Buffy did.
|
|
|
Post by sol on Feb 15, 2016 17:50:50 GMT -5
The Source enormously underestimated seeing power/premonitions, both Phoebe's and the Seer's. Zankou, so didn’t even feel the need to steal Phoebe’s power. On the other hand, Zankou already had the gift of prescience so understood the usefulness of having foreknowledge. As witnessed by Zankou, stealing premonition power would’ve stood the Source in much better stead than Piper and Paige’s trophy powers and he would’ve had the benefit of not having to rely on the Seer who was feeding him conflicting information to suit her own agenda. Probably for a long time the Source was used to have zealous servants, with the Seer and Oracle at his disposal, he needed no more After many years in charge, the Source cannot even conceive that someone'ld betray him as the Seer'll do There had been Belthazor's betrayal, but Cole was Triad's agent and his being half human made his betrayal more acceptable The hierarchical relationships between the Triad and the Source were never very clear, probably there were many rivalries kept at bay harshly seeing that a demon poerful as Zankou was was a prisoner
|
|
|
Post by lilchi7212 on Feb 15, 2016 19:18:46 GMT -5
Charmed really needed someone like Joss Whedon, someone born of Generation X (the 1960's and 70's), in charge. Whedon understood Turn Of The Millennium television and how things worked. Unfortunately, Charmed got two pre-World War II dinosaurs, Aaron Spelling and Duke Vincent, who forced Connie Burge and later, Brad Kern, to adopt their 1950's ideals and values. You know, this could be why you never saw any gays or lesbians on Charmed, despite the show being set in San Francisco. Spelling and Vincent came from an age when being gay was actively frowned upon, especially in the entertainment industry. Today you have gay and lesbian actors, and no one cares. However, if it had come out in the 1950's that Rock Hudson was gay, his career would have been finished right then and there. Spelling the Vincent couldn't help themselves here, these were the values they were raised with, and it showed. This is could be one of the reasons Buffy is so fondly remembered, despite ending in 2003. Charmed ended in 2006, three years later, but it's been virtually forgotten, a mere decade later. They did have Lesbian characters on Charmed heck even the comic books have gay characters in it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 0:35:51 GMT -5
TWO, and only two. And one of them was a Red Shirted Ensign Deadmeat character (from that stupid pirate episode). Hardly good representation of a large part of San Francisco culture.
As far as the comics are concerned, since Paul Ruditis didn't have Spelling and Vincent looking over his shoulder (the first is dead, the second seems to be retired), he was free to adapt a more 21st Century approach to this.
|
|
|
Post by lilchi7212 on Feb 16, 2016 14:05:35 GMT -5
TWO, and only two. And one of them was a Red Shirted Ensign Deadmeat character (from that stupid pirate episode). Hardly good representation of a large part of San Francisco culture. As far as the comics are concerned, since Paul Ruditis didn't have Spelling and Vincent looking over his shoulder (the first is dead, the second seems to be retired), he was free to adapt a more 21st Century approach to this. Kern was the showrunner not Spelling or Vincent. If you want to blame someone blame Brad Kern.
|
|