Vidding thoughts
I went ego-deliciousing last night and found someone had written a blog entry about fan works as transformative, listing my Dollhouse vid She Walks as feminist critique and putting me in the company of a couple of vidders whose work I love and admire. So, you know, good things! Blushy good things!
By the way: if you left me a comment on She Walks and I never answered it, I apologize. I looked at that entry and realized I never answered any of the comments. I've never been in a place where I was at peace enough with that vid to converse about it much even to the extent of thanking people for feedback. I know it's like, five months later? But thank you.
I am currently trying to beat down the urge to make a second Dollhouse vid; I don't know that I have enough anger left in me. I do have backburnered a different, more hopeful vid that was going to be the spiritual successor of She Walks without being a Dollhouse vid at all; though "more hopeful" is sort of relative, since the source is all filmic dystopias and is meant to represent modern American society. But it's to be a vid about that moment when you get out. So maybe. I hope to finish that one someday.
But the Dollhouse vid bunny that's eating my brain now is actually threatening to become a full-on Jossverse critique, evil dead lesbians and crazy broken supergirls with protective father-figures and all. The song I've bunnied on would make it pretty much a direct missive to Whedon, with the "I" and the "you" and the repeated question. My main complaint about this is damn it, this is not what I do, I refuse to be the vidder who tries to make vast sweeping statements about vast sweeping canons. I will not follow up History of Trek Fandom vid with History of Jossverse vid nor with History of Whoniverse vid nor with More Than A Century of History of Fans Asking This Question: Holmes and Watson, Doin' It or Not? vid. I have vid bunnies for all of these concepts. Goddamnit I have learned my lesson, I will not be that vidder.
The thing is, I don't know how to address some of the problems in Dollhouse without pointing out that they're repeating patterns in Whedon's work. Maybe no one will notice BECAUSE ALL THE ACTORS ARE THE SAME FOREVER AND EVER? Ahem. Not that I want to mock his casting choices either.
I want to make my points... more pointed. No more grand, sweeping vids, as much as they eat my brain. So the Sherlock Holmes vid will not be the history of everything, it will be about the cannibalization and reinterpretation of the source under female gaze WHICH IS NOT GRAND AND SWEEPING AT ALL I promise you.
*headdesk*
eta so apparently I will be feminist critique vidder for oh, the next six billion years. Jeez. The last time I tried to make a classic slash vid it turned into a classic slash fandom vid. Hello, my name is Juls, and I have a problem with meta.
[Originally posted on Dreamwidth. |
comments | Sign in with OpenID to reply.]
By the way: if you left me a comment on She Walks and I never answered it, I apologize. I looked at that entry and realized I never answered any of the comments. I've never been in a place where I was at peace enough with that vid to converse about it much even to the extent of thanking people for feedback. I know it's like, five months later? But thank you.
I am currently trying to beat down the urge to make a second Dollhouse vid; I don't know that I have enough anger left in me. I do have backburnered a different, more hopeful vid that was going to be the spiritual successor of She Walks without being a Dollhouse vid at all; though "more hopeful" is sort of relative, since the source is all filmic dystopias and is meant to represent modern American society. But it's to be a vid about that moment when you get out. So maybe. I hope to finish that one someday.
But the Dollhouse vid bunny that's eating my brain now is actually threatening to become a full-on Jossverse critique, evil dead lesbians and crazy broken supergirls with protective father-figures and all. The song I've bunnied on would make it pretty much a direct missive to Whedon, with the "I" and the "you" and the repeated question. My main complaint about this is damn it, this is not what I do, I refuse to be the vidder who tries to make vast sweeping statements about vast sweeping canons. I will not follow up History of Trek Fandom vid with History of Jossverse vid nor with History of Whoniverse vid nor with More Than A Century of History of Fans Asking This Question: Holmes and Watson, Doin' It or Not? vid. I have vid bunnies for all of these concepts. Goddamnit I have learned my lesson, I will not be that vidder.
The thing is, I don't know how to address some of the problems in Dollhouse without pointing out that they're repeating patterns in Whedon's work. Maybe no one will notice BECAUSE ALL THE ACTORS ARE THE SAME FOREVER AND EVER? Ahem. Not that I want to mock his casting choices either.
I want to make my points... more pointed. No more grand, sweeping vids, as much as they eat my brain. So the Sherlock Holmes vid will not be the history of everything, it will be about the cannibalization and reinterpretation of the source under female gaze WHICH IS NOT GRAND AND SWEEPING AT ALL I promise you.
*headdesk*
eta so apparently I will be feminist critique vidder for oh, the next six billion years. Jeez. The last time I tried to make a classic slash vid it turned into a classic slash fandom vid. Hello, my name is Juls, and I have a problem with meta.
[Originally posted on Dreamwidth. |
comments | Sign in with OpenID to reply.]