Why Does Joss Do That?

white avenger

white avenger
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
16,036
Age
78
Location
rome, georgia
What does Joss Whedon have against "happily ever after" relationships? Every time some couple pairs up, you just know that, one way or another, their love affair is doomed to failure at best, tragedy at the worst. Buffy, Willow, Xander, and Giles, all do the "love 'em and get left" thing at least a couple of times throughout the series at least a couple of times throughout the series and will most likely continue to do the same thing for as long as the series lasts. So, what do you personally think Joss' problem with lasting relationships is?

(And, please, this isn't supposed to be a ship war. You might sincerely believe that Buffy and Angel may be THE couple, forever and always, or that Tara was Willow's eternal soul mate, but the fact is, as perfect as they might have been for each other, both relationships, as well as every other one in the Buffyverse, seems to come with a built in expiration date on it. The question is, why can't Joss let somebody, anybody, just be together and love each other without all the break-ups?)

Personally, I think that Joss has taken a page out of Edgar Allen Poe's book. Poe believed that the greatest love story was the story of lost love, preferably when death was involved. Apparently Joss feels the same way.
 
I think it was in his upbringing; he is lashing out at the happily-ever-afterness that was prolific in his family. Golden Girls, Donna Reed, Electric Company. I think his unhappily-ever-after is a direct result of those influences.
 
Is it something to do with what he said once? 'I don't give the fans what they want, I give them what they need'?

I think it's something to do with showing us that, contrary to a lot of TV shows out there, things don't always end in happily ever after. He likes to rock the boat and be different.

Although, right now, something different from Joss would be letting a couple stay together and be happy. And the only two couples capable of that right now are Willow/Kennedy and Dawn/Xander, right?
 
C
CrayonBreakyMe
He's doing something different than what all of the other shows are. I like it. =] Brings out emotion in me. & yes will&kenedy dawn&xander are all that are left lol
1. I am SO tired of hearing people complain about this. I hadn't realized this until I joined BB... (this is the first place of fandom I've joined) but I'm really tired of hearing people complain about it. Seriously, it's not a big deal.
2. I don't think it's that Joss is against love for whatever... I think he understands without conflict, there is no good story. Yes, he could resolve this issue by having a happy couple fight... but breaking up is a much bigger conflict. I personally really like what he did with Tillow. I do read the comics, but even though Killow's been together all the time, I still say Tillow is together... because they would be if Tara was still alive. They didn't break up, one of them died. It's like my grandparents. They didn't divorce, my grandmother died.

But again, I'm kind of sick of people complaining about this. Why does it bother you so much? I barely notice it.
 
C
CrayonBreakyMe
I notice it...but it brings out emotion in me. If everyone stayed together, the story wouldn't have developed more. I've related to almost every couple-issue. I like it.
He hates us all and wants us to suffer terrible, eternal torment.

^ Heh, I like that.

Maybe he's a "earn your happy ending" kind of guy. Think about it - the only lasting happy couple
(Dollhouse's Priya and Anthony)
had to go through hell and back
for ten years
before they got any chance at their happy ending. And then there's still the very high chance one of them gets killed in the process.

The same could be said about Willow and Kennedy, though with what we've seen in the Time of Your Life arc, I doubt it.

Although I don't really believe that. I think the only reason
Priya and Anthony
both ended up alive is because he knows we caught on and fully expected him to kill one of them, so he didn't.
 
C
CrayonBreakyMe
[No message]
1. I am SO tired of hearing people complain about this. I hadn't realized this until I joined BB... (this is the first place of fandom I've joined) but I'm really tired of hearing people complain about it. Seriously, it's not a big deal.
2. I don't think it's that Joss is against love for whatever... I think he understands without conflict, there is no good story. Yes, he could resolve this issue by having a happy couple fight... but breaking up is a much bigger conflict. I personally really like what he did with Tillow. I do read the comics, but even though Killow's been together all the time, I still say Tillow is together... because they would be if Tara was still alive. They didn't break up, one of them died. It's like my grandparents. They didn't divorce, my grandmother died.

But again, I'm kind of sick of people complaining about this. Why does it bother you so much? I barely notice it.

It bothers people because death is usually arbitrary (i.e. a straying bullet, a lucky attack), so the writer has complete freedom whether or not to use it as a plot device. And wouldn't you rather see your favorite relationships and characters continue (to live)?
 
But again, I'm kind of sick of people complaining about this. Why does it bother you so much? I barely notice it.

Because it is every couple, every time, every show.

It's old and honestly unnecessary. Sometimes, people make it work. I, personally, would like to see that in one of Whedon's shows every now and again.
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
I agree and disagree... it can make things unravel quickly too.. just like adding a baby to the mix. It cant be the lead characters, could never be Buffy.. but the periphery.. Faith+Wood would work, Buffy+X not.
BuffyElevated
BuffyElevated
[No message]
Yes, he could resolve this issue by having a happy couple fight... but breaking up is a much bigger conflict.

I disagree. Happy couples have conflicts all the time. It's like Joe Q wanting to break up Spider-Man and MJ, because they were happy and happy couples are boring (well, he had more "reasons" but this was one of them). This is wrong. Even people who love and respect each other will bicker, disagree and fight with each other. If a writer can't write a more or less happy couple interestingly, can't think of any other conflict to give them other than breaking up, this writer is not worth the money he's paid. It's not because happy couples don't have enough conflict.

Look at Wash and Zoe from Firefly. Happily married, not boring, conflict, well-written. Except this ... thing happened. I even daresay that this stopped an excellent storyline right in its tracks, because, had
Wash
(and the show) lived, there would be the issue of them wanting children, maybe, and them questioning their lifestyle.

As for the one party dying, sure, the partner grieving is interesting to see afterwards, but you don't really get much pay off off that in a series finale, or, say, a movie. That is just done for shock value and nothing but.
 
BuffyElevated
BuffyElevated
Very, very well said!
Scobro agrees: I agree and disagree... it can make things unravel quickly too.. just like adding a baby to the mix. It cant be the lead characters, could never be Buffy.. but the periphery.. Faith+Wood would work, Buffy+X not.

Exactly. Buffy may never be able to have something stead simply because of who she is and her calling. Xander and Anya though? Unnecessary. Killing Tara to turn Willow psycho? Lazy, unnecessary, offensive and overwhelmingly anti-feminist. The list goes on.

Perhaps our "heroes" can't have happy, but everyone else should at least be given the chance to fail at it themselves, rather than outside forces preventing that happiness.
 
I think it's something to do with showing us that, contrary to a lot of TV shows out there, things don't always end in happily ever after. He likes to rock the boat and be different.

Thing is, though, sometimes stories do end up happily, and a couple stays together for the rest of their lives.

Never having a happy ending is just as disingenuous as always having one.

At this point it's getting predictable to the point that nobody wants to emotionally jump on board any new relationship he introduces, because we know it's doomed.

It's almost on the verge of becoming funny... one character kisses another and just explodes on the spot.
 
Kean
Kean
Literal kiss of death. Totally agree with the rest you said too.
S
SlayerOfVampyrs
AHhaa, that last bit made me giggle. Definitely agreed.
BuffyElevated
BuffyElevated
[No message]
I agree that "happy", lasting couples can have plenty of interest, but I'm trying to thinking of a good, quality drama series (NOT a sit-com) that has that. Somebody help me out if you can think of one. Because we all know what's going to happen if Beckett & Castle or Bones & Booth get together...the death of the show.

Why does Joss do it? I dunno, I'm not in his mind. I'm not sure if it's anything personal, isn't he married and has been for awhile? I don't see him as being a person with tons of unhappiness in his life. He probably just thinks it makes for more interesting storytelling. We can disagree with him if we want, and of course at this point he should probably surprise us all by NOT killing off a character in a relationship.
 
Z
zobothehobo
EXACTLY! It's not just Joss who does that... it's a genre wide thing. Joss fans just tae it as this big huge thing because Joss talks about it.
I agree that "happy", lasting couples can have plenty of interest, but I'm trying to thinking of a good, quality drama series (NOT a sit-com) that has that. Somebody help me out if you can think of one. Because we all know what's going to happen if Beckett & Castle or Bones & Booth get together...the death of the show.

Mer/Der on Grey's. The show has actually returned to its best now that they angst associated with that couple has been resolved. They remain interesting as a couple and the conflict that is necessary for storytelling is found in their other relationships, in their jobs and family ties.

That goes for the other couples on the show that are staying together and remaining compelling as individual characters and as a pairing.
 
Mumrik
Mumrik
[No message]
Alright Kean, who is that because I'm not a Grey's watcher.

I'm thinking about 2 new shows this season that feature No Ordinary Family & Undercovers. The latter is being cancelled, and even though I'm watching & enjoying NOF, I don't consider it the best show out there. Sometimes I have to make myself watch it LOL. It started with quite a bit of conflict between the couple, but that aspect seems to have magically disappeared

I'm thinking about current crime or action dramas, or sci-fi, and trying to come up with longterm couples, & I can't think of any. I mean, think about it: does anybody want to watch a show about their own (boring) life? LOL
 
I agree that "happy", lasting couples can have plenty of interest, but I'm trying to thinking of a good, quality drama series (NOT a sit-com) that has that. Somebody help me out if you can think of one. Because we all know what's going to happen if Beckett & Castle or Bones & Booth get together...the death of the show.

There used to be shows like that, that had a (reasonably) happy couple that stayed together throughout the show. McMillan & Wife, Hart to Hart, etc... but that was in an era when shows were about the weekly story rather than about ongoing arcs or mythologies.

One of the reasons I love the old Avengers TV series so much is that it featured two star characters of opposite sexes who worked side-by-side every day, had perfect chemistry, liked each other... but never ended up falling into bed just because of some lazy-writing notion that "that's what men and women always do."

For a long time I thought (and hoped) X-Files would go the same way. I loved to see Mulder and Scully interact as partners rather than lovers... but of course the need for "evolving relationships" on shows nowadays demanded that they hook up eventually.

Now it's almost unheard-of for a man and woman to interact as partners without becoming lovers. Beckett and Castle and Bones and Booth haven't gone there yet, but you can only tease something for so long before the audience demands a payoff... either they'll get together, or they'll have a dramatic storyline that ends with them deciding not to get together, and re-setting their relationship based on that.
 
VisionGirl agrees: But even they have not been together the entire time.

That's true. They have had several bumps on their road. The point is though that they eventually worked through them and have ended up together without compromising the quality of the show. Instead it was quite the opposite, they finally coming together permanently added to the quality.
 
There used to be shows like that, that had a (reasonably) happy couple that stayed together throughout the show. McMillan & Wife, Hart to Hart, etc... but that was in an era when shows were about the weekly story rather than about ongoing arcs or mythologies.

One of the reasons I love the old Avengers TV series so much is that it featured two star characters of opposite sexes who worked side-by-side every day, had perfect chemistry, liked each other... but never ended up falling into bed just because of some lazy-writing notion that "that's what men and women always do."

For a long time I thought (and hoped) X-Files would go the same way. I loved to see Mulder and Scully interact as partners rather than lovers... but of course the need for "evolving relationships" on shows nowadays demanded that they hook up eventually.

Now it's almost unheard-of for a man and woman to interact as partners without becoming lovers. Beckett and Castle and Bones and Booth haven't gone there yet, but you can only tease something for so long before the audience demands a payoff... either they'll get together, or they'll have a dramatic storyline that ends with them deciding not to get together, and re-setting their relationship based on that.

^ To be fair, at least with Castle and Beckett it's always been said they'd end up together and you could see it from day one. While with Scully and Mulder, it wasn't. I don't know about Booth and Brennan, because I don't watch Bones.

And I think it's not going to be the death of Castle when they do. They balance each other out so well, what with Castle and all his quirks and Bennett being a no-nonsense type of person, I can hardly see their interactions with each other change after a hook-up.

And I DEFINITELY agree with Kean about Grey's. The way Meredith's and Derek's story just kept dragging on, I was glad when they finally had their post-it wedding and were done with it. They're just much better now, as is the show and I even started to like Meredith afterwards. Of course, the show just has that many characters that two people off the market don't really change that much, drama-wise 😉
 
Back
Top Bottom