by Attack Ships on Fire » Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:50 am
Well Hugh, you sure info dumped me. I have to go back and re-read all of what you said, as well as look up the references as I'm not educated on some of the info that you bring up. However, I am somewhat familar with the programs on the idiot box and the creation of TV programs.<br><br>You seem to be insinuating that shows like "Buffy" are presenting a strong female character because someone, somewhere has a Master Plan (MP) to aggressivize women. I believe that "Buffy" came about because it was a cheap and inexpensive property for The WB, Buffy's former network, to translate into a TV show. It fit the criteria for The WB's demographic: young, good-looking characters, fantasy elements that don't come too close to being a straight drama, soap opera characterization and plenty of excuses (fighting vampires) to fit in 3-5 action sequences per episode. That's the way it works in Hollywood: they exist to make money. The showrunner, Joss Whedon, is third-generation Hollywood, so the network felt capable that he could deliver the show on time and budget. The Kuzuis, a couple, owned the rights (they were producers on the Fox theatrical movie) and remained exec producers on the series.<br><br>In spite of all the media talk it received, "Buffy" was never a big hit. It did develop a very loyal fan following, partly as a result of the superior writing of the "teen speak" dialogue and also because it spoke to teenage girls by giving them a heroine that could fight and defeat vampires but faced boyfriend troubles. They could relate to her, and really, aside from "Felicity" in the early-mid 90s, there wasn't much else for teen girls to glom onto that focused solely on a teen heroine as the show's main character.<br><br>"Buffy" was cancelled after 5 seasons but it made it to 7 because UPN picked it up. UPN's ratings were so low, they were hoping the Buffy crowd would spike its demographic. It didn't work.<br><br>I just can't see "Buffy" being part of an elaborate psyop. Parts of it can fit into a thesis but the overall agenda of the show, its seasons and its troubled production history don't fit with a show that was backed by a sinister agenda to produce 7 seasons worth of programming material for young female minds. "Buffy" got made because it was cheap to do for Fox back in 1992, and maybe it got some help standing on the shoulders of Ripley in James Cameron's "Aliens". If "Buffy" were a psyop, I would think that there would be a spinoff series on TV right now, perpetuating the programming, but there isn't.<br><br>Now, you can make a case that TV network shows, as a whole, reflect the psyche of society and I may agree with you, to a certain extent. I don't think it's coincidence that just about every sitcom presently on TV has an overweight blue collar husband who's loveably stupid and an attractive, slimmer, long-suffering wife that tolerates said husband. It may be a trend of Hollywood, it may be a reflection of society reducing the masculinity of males and presenting them as good-hearted guys but still stupid slobs, or it may be that successful comedians generally tend to be pudgy while women have to put more effort into their appearance because Hollywood nearly always shows stereotypically attractive women thinking it will appeal to both sexes. In any case, I don't believe "Buffy" was part of any covert pogrom.<br><br>I promise to re-read the rest of your messages and try to see it from the perspective you present. <p></p><i></i>
