Wednesday’s “Steven Moffat talks companions, TNT picks up Monday Mornings and Animal Practice recasts” news

Doctor Who

Film

  • The AvengersClark Gregg joins Labor Day
  • Kellan Lutz and Vampire Diaries‘ Nina Dobrev join Kid Cannabis
  • Rebecca Hall to replace Jessica Chastain on Iron Man 3?
  • Sean Bean to star in trilogy based on Devil’s Peak books

Trailers

  • Trailer for William Friedkin’s Killer Joe with Matthew McConaughey
  • Trailer for She Wants Me with Josh Gad, Hilary Duff and Charlie Sheen
  • Trailer for Argo with Ben Affleck

UK TV

US TV

US TV pilots

Film

A great big, long, very slow hand-clap to Marvel: Black Widow Strikes

So, as we all know, not a lot of women read comics (honourable exception: me). Or at least superhero comics (another honourable exception: me).

There have been lots of theories as to why this should be, largely put out by men. However, at least one of these theories is that there aren’t any good representations of women in comics – that the female characters that there are are secondary, aren’t well characterised and are usually sexualised for the benefit of younger male readers, making female readers not seem very welcome.

Now DC hasn’t been doing particularly well here, with only about 7% of its readers female. But at least it has a few titles with female leads: Wonder Woman, Supergirl, Voodoo, Batgirl, Batwoman, Birds of Prey, and Catwoman, for starters, although some treat their female characters better than others. Over at Marvel, the situation is far worse, with the last female-led title, X-23, following hot on the heels of Ms. Marvel and Black Widow in getting cancelled.

That’s right – there’s not a single superhero title with a female lead at Marvel.

Now you’d have thought that with the largest opening movie of all time, The Avengers/Avengers Assemble, at the box office right now, it would be a golden opportunity for Marvel to capitalise on the fact that there’s a superheroine in the line up – Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow – who, thanks to the mighty word processing powers of Joss Whedon, gets to kick arse a lot, isn’t second-fiddle to the men, and isn’t there to be someone’s girlfriend.

In fact, you’d be right. Look! It’s Marvel’s The Avengers: Black Widow Strikes, a prequel to the movie available in comic stores now.

Black Widow Strikes

Brilliant. All those women going into movies, seeing a decent superheroine character. They’ll pick up Black Widow Strikes, see there’s nothing to fear from the medium and hey presto, loads of new female comics readers, right?

Oh, wait.

Continue reading “A great big, long, very slow hand-clap to Marvel: Black Widow Strikes”
US TV

Question of the week: is TV more forgiving of bad acting than movies are?

Stana Katic and Nathan Fillion on Castle.jpg

Willa Parkin over on Slate recently made an interesting suggestion:

In a movie, an actor has approximately two hours to convince the audience of his or her skill. They only get one shot at us, and if they’re unnatural or uncomfortable, overly mannered or under-emotive, we won’t connect to or care about them. They will have failed to do their job, and we will see them for what they are: bad.

TV is a whole other story. Actors have multiple episodes to hone their performances, and even if each installment is far shorter than a movie, it’s also contained. It films, it finishes, the actors can see it and take notes. Over the long run of a series, many initially not-so-great actors have dramatically improved — think of Taylor Kitsch on “Friday Night Lights,” Tina Fey on “30 Rock,” or Courteney Cox on “Friends” — just as their writers learn to create material that plays to their strengths, giving them the story lines and jokes best suited to them.

But while the actors and the writers are getting better, the audience is also doing work. As a show goes on, we start to think of bad acting as a character trait, and stop seeing it as the performer’s lack of skill. “Mad Men’s” Betty Draper is emotionless and unreadable because Betty has been infantilized her whole life by a sexist society that has rewarded her for being pretty, not interesting — not because January Jones can only play one note. “Castle’s” Katic is stilted and stiff because her character, Kate Beckett, is uptight and traumatized — not because Katic can’t express feelings and wouldn’t have chemistry with a bottle of peroxide. “Friday Night Light’s” Julie Taylor is oddly unknowable because she’s young and immature (despite having three to four times as much screen time as “FNL” characters we know intimately), not because Aimee Teegarden isn’t up to the level of her costars. (Though the aforementioned examples are all actresses, men fall into this category too: Like David Boreanaz in “Bones” or Winston on “New Girl.”)

So this week’s question is a simple “Do you agree?” –

Is TV more forgiving of bad acting than movies are?

Answers below or on your own blog, please

Tuesday’s “new seasons for The Client List, The Borgias and Southland; and NBC picks up five pilots” news

Film

Canadian TV

UK TV

US TV

US TV pilots

  • NBC picks up 1600 Penn, Animal Practice, Save Me, The New Normal and Revolution
  • TNT’s Tin Star not going forward

Friday’s “David Cronenberg back on TV, Michael Bay’s Treasure Island TV prequel, Supernatural renewed and the BBC’s new dramas” news

The Daily News will return on Tuesday

Film

Trailers

  • New trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man
  • Trailer for End of Watch with Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Pena
  • Trailer for The Expendables 2

Theatre

Canadian TV

UK TV

US TV

US TV pilots

  • Jeff Fahey and David Cronenberg to guest on SyFy’s Rewind
  • AMC orders pilots for two shows, including Low Winter Sun