Willow on Disney+

[Anonymouswizard]

I was going to respond to this, but I see it's already been addressed. When's the last time you watched it? It's ridiculous and I love it.

Maybe a month ago. So I can say with certainty that it takes itself seriously, despite having silly scenes.

Modern media seems deathly afraid of playing things seriously and keeping a straight face, as if they think I won't except it. But it turns out that, at least for some of us, if you make it well then you can get away with a lot more by keeping a straight face. Willow is a great example of how it works. Madmartigan isn't a knight in shining armour, but he actually hits the roguish charmer archetype pretty straight on (just with insane sword skills as well).

To me the series has this odd mixture of being too irreverent and not quite good enough while being really archetypal. It could go either way, more silly and irreverent or more serious, and potentially work a lot better.

[gbaji]

The problem with playing fantasy as both straight and serious is that you tend to limit your audience to people who *really* like fantasy. The folks who really love the genre will love it. No one else will watch it. Conan was a great serious/straight fantasy film, for folks who are fans of sword and sorcery. No one else watched it. And that's probably the best "serious" fantasy film that came out in the two decades prior to Willow. If we expand setting a bit, we could put Highlander in there too (for fans of such things). But same deal. Very niche audience.

You have to include humous/silly elements to draw people who aren't already fans of the genre into watching the film. And that's what they did with Willow. And they balanced that with an actual "serious" plot (there's plenty of examples of "just silly" fantasy films). Which worked perfectly. And yeah. I find similar stuff going on in the series as well. Yes. It's a series. There's literally more screen time, and thus more "things" in there to question and nitpick, if you're inclined to do so. And there's certainly some subplots, and characterizations that fall flat, or just don't work in the series. But the actual "tone"? Seems about right to me.

LotR was pretty much the first actualy big box office success in the fantasy genre that did actually play it completely straight/serious (still had Merry and Pippin though, so...). And was an epic achievement for having done so. I think we're all aware of how hard that is to actually pull off though. So yeah, I think the Willow series did a pretty good job. As I said earlier, I enjoyed it a heck of a lot more than I thought I would, and surprisingly one of the things that I enjoyed the most was that the characters were not so serious all the time, and seemed trope aware at times (the first couple episodes where they kept making snarky comments about what they were doing and why and how stereotypical it all was "going on a quest"). Dunno. It just worked for me.

[Sapphire Guard]

It's not like Fantasy can't have lighter moments, but when the lighter moments are about or adjacent to character deaths who other characters know well and there is no appropriate reaction, that can ring sour.

Sometimes the audience accepts it (Jesse, Willow and Xander's episode 1 fallen friend in Buffy who never is mentioned again vanished and the audience didn't notice or care) but it's risky.

[Kyberwulf]

Like I said earlier. You can have a movie that is more serious, and has moments of levity. In the Movie the funny bits "subverted expectations" but never to the detriment for the film as a hole. When we say there is a tonal shifts, its that it almost becomes a different genre in the middle of an episode, then switches back. It's so incoherent. One of the main problems I see is that it's trying to do to much character stuff, like have to many characters at once. They should have spent a season on fleshing out the world. One movie 35 years ago isn't much to go on.

[Easy e]

I do agree with whoever said that the show got better as it goes on. The final battle with the Wraiths/Possessed dudes is a bit of a turning point and it gets better from there. Princess Kit gets a bit more bearable too after the scenes in the mines.

[gbaji]

It's not like Fantasy can't have lighter moments, but when the lighter moments are about or adjacent to character deaths who other characters know well and there is no appropriate reaction, that can ring sour.

Are you talking about the series of tropish deaths that occur in the first couple episodes? Yeah. Like I said, that was setup. And it was handled in a very intentional "Ok. that guy died. now we move on" kind of way.

Spoiler

Show

Of course the old general guy is going to die. He's not a main character, and will just get in the way of the hijinks and whatnot. Literally dies mid sentence pause. I found it hilarious. And it very much set the tone of the series (ie: "we're only taking ourselves juuuuust this much serious, but not a smidge more").

Willows buddy also dies because, well, he's not a main character, and we need to show the actual main characters that "this is actually kinda serious". Um... And it is a "big deal" to Willow, and is mentioned and has relevance later.

Again though, this is all setup. Once you get through those first couple episodes where this stuff happens, the series settles down. And from that point on, has a pretty good pace, has reasonable consistency (you kinda know what you're getting), and I thought worked just fine. Is it a freaking masterpiece of art? Nope. Was it fun to watch? Yeah. I enjoyed it far more than I expected to, and that may be due to low expectations, but is at least something. I've just seen so many seriously awful fantasy set series over time, that anything that is "decent" and "actually follows a reasonable plot" gets very high marks in my book.

Sometimes the audience accepts it (Jesse, Willow and Xander's episode 1 fallen friend in Buffy who never is mentioned again vanished and the audience didn't notice or care) but it's risky.

Yup. And heavily depends on how well the audience connects with the story and characters that are left over after that point.

[Sapphire Guard]

Yeah, but whether they react appropriately to in world death heavily affects whether I invest in characters or not. Killing the extras tends to feel cheap, you only need to do that if you are out of other ideas.

[Anonymouswizard]

Okay, I managed to struggle slightly more into the second episode, and it has become slightly better. Partially because there's been less just talking about Big Plot Stuff™ and more focus on character development, and partially because it's becoming clear that everybody else kind of hates Annoying Princess. Plus Boorman is trying really hard to make friends, and it's totally cringe but it kind of works.

It's also nice that they're avoiding what I feared when introducing the 'Elora is destined to be a powerful mage' stuff. It's pretty clear she's at least having as much trouble learning as Willow did in the original film, and that Willow is expecting that. At this rate she'll have mastered maybe a single useful spell by the end of series 1.

[TheSummoner]

Regarding tone. The key here is balance and timing and it's something Disney is absolutely terrible at (just look at Star Wars or Marvel). A movie can have a generally serious tone while still having moments of levity. What it can't do is mash the two together without giving the heavier moments time to breathe.

For those interested, it's come out recently that the planned second (and third?) season(s) have been cancelled.

[Scarlet Knight]

I am glad I did not listen to Critical Drinker. Turns out my wife and I enjoyed it. It's not LOTR, but it's not supposed to be. It's Willow, with all it's silliness.
Loved:

Spoiler

Show

Kevin Pollak returning for a cameo as a brownie

For those interested, it's come out recently that the planned second (and third?) season(s) have been cancelled.

{scrubbed}

[runeghost]

{scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Without touching on politics, I suspect it has more to do with the recent change of leadership at Disney. With big corporations, there always seems to be a degree of territorial marking by new CEO's (even if they're the old CEO coming back). Canceling projects that aren't outstanding critical or commerical successes is an easy way to do that.

[Ionathus]

Regarding tone. The key here is balance and timing and it's something Disney is absolutely terrible at (just look at Star Wars or Marvel). A movie can have a generally serious tone while still having moments of levity. What it can't do is mash the two together without giving the heavier moments time to breathe.

Yep, mood whiplash is a big part of why I drifted away from Marvel after Endgame. The need to tag everything with a quippy joke just keeps undercutting my investment in the movie. Overly Sarcastic Productions has a really good video that touches on this topic ("Lampshading"), in which she makes the really good point that if you play around with bathos too much, your audience will start to go "uh, okay, fine, I guess it is dumb to care about things...?" and then promptly stop caring about your story.

Sometimes the audience accepts it (Jesse, Willow and Xander's episode 1 fallen friend in Buffy who never is mentioned again vanished and the audience didn't notice or care) but it's risky.

In fairness, the first season of anything (and especially the pilot) often gets a pass from fans on continuity and characterization. There's a reason that "oh but that's Book 1, it doesn't count" is a common statement when discussing Order of the Stick.

[Anonymouswizard]

Yep, mood whiplash is a big part of why I drifted away from Marvel after Endgame. The need to tag everything with a quippy joke just keeps undercutting my investment in the movie. Overly Sarcastic Productions has a really good video that touches on this topic ("Lampshading"), in which she makes the really good point that if you play around with bathos too much, your audience will start to go "uh, okay, fine, I guess it is dumb to care about things...?" and then promptly stop caring about your story.

Yep, it's why I like things being played with a straight face. Of course the occasional break from that like Bond pulling out a post-kill wisecrack once or twice a film works, but it's literally due to rarity.

Or, of course, you can tell a joke with a proper structure. 'No Mister Bond, I expect you to die' isn't the joke, it's both the punchline and the film characterising Goldfinger as ruthlessly pragmatic. The joke starts from the moment the scene is set up as an interrogation, and the punchline is both subversive (it's actually a shockingly efficient death trap) and completely logical for the situation. Of course Goldfinger is helped by the fact that the film follows through on the resulting implications while making the plot more logical in the process.

[Ionathus]

Yep, it's why I like things being played with a straight face. Of course the occasional break from that like Bond pulling out a post-kill wisecrack once or twice a film works, but it's literally due to rarity.

It's helped by wisecracks being part of the pacing and fun of Bond stories. The point there is that he's an unflappable master spy who keeps his cool in life-threatening situations, so having him drop a Bond one-liner after a tense moment is part of what audiences expect from Bond and it doesn't break the flow or audience immersion.

If you instead had Bond drop a one-liner and then a sidekick with a grating voice immediately pops up to say "do you always have to be so quippy in life-or-death scenarios? You're such a sociopath.", that would be more like the excessive bathos I'm thinking of.

Spoiler: Marvel rant

Show

I loved Thor: Ragnarok, because playing things straight just wasn't working for the Thor movies IMO. Turning things goofy and tossing Thor around like a ragdoll was a fun choice, but it definitely also has some of the most egregious moments of "come on, dude, you don't have to punctuate every heartfelt moment with a joke." It is okay, occasionally, to let the sweeping orchestral music play out and conclude in a cool dramatic moment. You don't have to, say, stick a 20-second "ha ha Bruce Banner broke his neck, what an idiot" intermission into The Hulk's big save-the-day scene at the climax of the movie.

Not to constantly talk about Everything Everywhere All At Once, but one thing I really loved about that movie was how earnest all of the anticlimaxes were. The movie was intentionally going for the goofy tone, and playing with the constant swings from drama and danger into comedy was part of the movie's overall absurdity and its message of "nothing matters, therefore everything matters." But if you're not trying to evoke that tone on purpose, and you're just making a summer blockbuster that also has to have humor in it, it's gonna annoy me when the quips seem...insecure? Like, you were afraid that other people would laugh at you, so you laughed at yourself first, but now you're the only one still laughing at yourself and everyone just wants you to move on with the story.

Or, of course, you can tell a joke with a proper structure. 'No Mister Bond, I expect you to die' isn't the joke, it's both the punchline and the film characterising Goldfinger as ruthlessly pragmatic. The joke starts from the moment the scene is set up as an interrogation, and the punchline is both subversive (it's actually a shockingly efficient death trap) and completely logical for the situation. Of course Goldfinger is helped by the fact that the film follows through on the resulting implications while making the plot more logical in the process.

Dang, I really should watch Goldfinger shouldn't I?

[TheSummoner]

In fairness, the first season of anything (and especially the pilot) often gets a pass from fans on continuity and characterization. There's a reason that "oh but that's Book 1, it doesn't count" is a common statement when discussing Order of the Stick.

Most people are willing to forgive a bit of weirdness early on while a writer figures out the tone and structure of a new story. Key word being new, which Willow isn't.

Dang, I really should watch Goldfinger shouldn't I?

Yes. It's probably the best Bond movie and by far has the best theme song. What's funny is the "No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die" scene has been parodied to death as a ridiculous death trap sort of scene, but Goldfinger is fully intending to kill Bond when he has him there. He isn't going to leave him unattended to escape. Bond isn't going to do some ridiculous stunt to break out. Sure, it would've been more efficient to just shoot Bond in the head, but Goldfinger probably got closer to actually killing Bond in that scene than any other villain and the only thing that saved him was some quick thinking and a good bluff.

Some of the parodies were pretty good though...

[Cikomyr2]

It's quite a shame that they won't get a 2nd season. It's been scratching my girlfriend's fantasy itch in a way not felt since we finished Rings of Power and Shadow and Bone.

[Wintermoot]

It's quite a shame that they won't get a 2nd season. It's been scratching my girlfriend's fantasy itch in a way not felt since we finished Rings of Power and Shadow and Bone.

Shadow and Bone season 2 just dropped yesterday. You are in luck!

[Kyberwulf]

LOL I think its a good this show got canceled, it all seem phoned in. Like they were banking on all the certain people to watch the show, just because they demand more representation. At some point all these companies are going to have to realize that it isn't going to happen. They are going to demand change but not support them.

[KorvinStarmast]

Two shows that only got one season that I thought were good.
Police Squad
Firefly

[Anonymouswizard]

LOL I think its a good this show got canceled, it all seem phoned in. Like they were banking on all the certain people to watch the show, just because they demand more representation. At some point all these companies are going to have to realize that it isn't going to happen. They are going to demand change but not support them.

More representation in a good series is an amazing thing. More representation in a mediocre series is a meh thing, more representation in a bad series is worthless at best. It's why, slightly problematic as the implementation is, the representation given to actors with dwarfism in the original Willow is a good thing.

Plus also, it's Disney, it's not like they're good at representation of LGBT people. A lesbian couple is by far the safest option they could have chosen, and it's honestly surprising to me it's not bit parts that can be cut without issue. People watch Disney media expecting representation in the same way I watch yoai expecting plot.

[The Glyphstone]

Relying on the wizard and princess demographics to watch a show based on representation was probably a bad idea.

[TheSummoner]

Basing a show around representation is definitely what a studio should be doing. I remember my favorite movie as a child being The Lion King and just not being able to connect with the characters because I'm not a lion. It made the story completely unrelatable, which is probably why the movie was such a flop.

[Easy e]

They should have mixed up the timeline of episodes to make it more interesting, like The Wotcher season 1 did.







/s..... maybe.....

[KorvinStarmast]

They should have mixed up the timeline of episodes to make it more interesting, like The Wotcher season 1 did.

/s..... maybe.....

Witcher, not Wotcher.

[Easy e]

Witcher, not Wotcher.

Ugh.... darn typos! I will leave it for posterity as a monument to my stupidity.

[Cikomyr2]

Witcher, not Wotcher.

Who Wotches the Wotchers?

[Palanan]

The Wotchmen, of course.

[gbaji]

Basing a show around representation is definitely what a studio should be doing. I remember my favorite movie as a child being The Lion King and just not being able to connect with the characters because I'm not a lion. It made the story completely unrelatable, which is probably why the movie was such a flop.

Nice. I see what you did there.

Yeah. Maybe start with a good plot/story *first*. Then worry about what demographics you are hitting with the characters. And to be honest, I've seen many good stories ruined (or at least made markably worse) by studios brazenly trying to meet some demographic appeal standards, than I've ever seen any story made better by it. Either the characters fit and make sense for the story you are telling, or they do not. "The story and characters were awkward and horribly written, but I loved it because it included a character like me!" was said by no-one ever.

Um... Honestly, I didn't get any vibe off Willow that this was a particular issue though. The characters, as presented, seemed to work just fine to me. I think some were thrown off by the modern slang and speach patterns, but that didn't bother me at all. I guess if there was one negative (and maybe a big one!), it's that once you got about a third of the way through, it really did pretty much hit every trope along the way. Not a single thing that happened was really a surprise or a twist at all. Well, except for

Spoiler

Show

Graydon actually being killed and/or sucked into the void thingie, but even that got tropified pretty quickly.

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly Willow isn't even that diverse. While it would be difficult to remove the actors with dwarfism from the series otherwise we're talking one lesbian couple, which probably could have been made straight with no changes to the story. If they were truly aiming for diversity for diversity's sake I'd have expected a lot more.

[TheSummoner]

As far as Kit and Jade go, the issue is that the entire romance subplot doesn't really add anything. Turning Jade into a man wouldn't fix that. It's like the writers were going down a checklist and "romance subplot" was something that Disney's market research team dictated had to be in the show so they threw it in. Writing by committee is a problem Disney seems to suffer from in general, though, so this isn't a Willow-specific problem.