25 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2024
    1. Nevertheless, I liked WandaVision. Through the first three episodes, the Marvel mythology recedes even as it provides enough stakes and structure to keep the old-timey sitcom riffs from having to shoulder the series. Over the years there have been all sorts of attempts to bring back the laugh-track sitcom, but WandaVision is more successful than most of them (I know, knock me over with a feather) because it’s all icing on the cake—the cake actually being the grim and complex Marvel mythology and backstory. Even as many of the show’s details are doing double duty as hints and feints—Kathryn Hahn’s nosy neighbor isn’t just a brash character cracking endless jokes at her husband’s expense, she’s probably someone else; the commercials that talk so much about being in and out of time are presumably hinting at some big themes—but it’s more interested in the sitcom as a sitcom than it has to be. Its sendup of the way sitcoms have historically hidden real pregnancies or the way they characterize Black neighbors are observations unto themselves, and just not there to further the master plot.

      The writer informs us of how the sitcom is structured. She proves here what makes the sitcom different from a traditional marvel. This information further supports her main idea.

    2. he first two episodes of WandaVision, which arrive tomorrow on Disney Plus (the remaining seven will follow weekly), riff on the black and white classics The Dick Van Dyke Show and Bewitched with affection and precision. The gags are tame, corny, and adorable. Vision carries Wanda over the threshold, but after accidentally apparating through the front door, he leaves her on the threshold. That silly Vision! Housewife Wanda accidentally breaks a flying dish over her hubby’s head. Handy Wanda can zap it back together! In the episode’s set piece, Wanda and Vision forget Vision’s boss is coming to dinner (I can just picture the description in TV Guide) revealing that they have forgotten much else besides, including how they met, how they got there, and who they are. But these hints about what’s really going on don’t keep the episode from working on sitcom terms. The sequence climaxes with the boss’s wife (That ’70s Show veteran Debra Jo Rupp) opening the galley kitchen shutters to reveal Wanda whizzing dozens of pots, pans, and ingredients through the air. When a flustered Vision distracts her by belting out “Yakety Yak,” I giggled along with the laugh track, a chuckle earned by the pure sitcommery.

      The writer summarizes a few of the scenes from the first two episodes. This supports her claim that this sitcom is an appealing show for those who don't like marvels. I've never been a Marvel fan but I can attest that after reading this I would potentially watch the show.

    3. TV, the cliché goes, is an escape, a trapdoor to a sunnier reality—or at least a different one. For us mere mortals, the escape is always metaphorical; our earthbound bodies don’t budge from the couch

      This is an interesting way to begin the article. The writer states the purpose of entertainment television. While this isn't the purpose of the article, I like that she starts this way because it gives the reader a warm feeling and peaks their interest.

    4. WandaVision Is a Marvel Show for People Who Don’t Like Marvel

      The title captures the audience's attention and does a great job of summarizing the purpose of this article. I believe the purpose is to highlight the show to help other TV lover's decide if they should watch it.

  2. Sep 2024
    1. In this regard, fandom is not extreme: the current moment is extreme. And fandom is as much part of the solution as it is part of the problem.”

      Great way to end the article. This answers the question that was posed in the beginning. How does fandom impact creativity? While it comes with issues, it also has positive aspects. Either way, fandom is not the root cause of the issues today. The current moment is.

    2. And fandom is as much part of the solution as it is part of the problem

      The writer states what I gathered was the point of the article earlier. That fandom is a necessary evil. It comes with both pros and cons. The writer has provided examples of both throughout the article but this is the first time that it's clearly stated.

    3. But such a fan-guided approach to art also feels endemic of a time when a lot of mainstream storytelling has come to be regarded more as a product designed to service the consumer than a means of artistic expression.

      The writer has changed directions and now provides an example of the negative impacts of fandom. We get less art and more consumer based product.

    4. On the more extreme end of the spectrum, they even rely on them as investors. A famous example being the 2014 big-screen revival of cult TV detective drama Veronica Mars, a sequel made possible only by the crowdfunding efforts of fans, and which subsequently led to a 2019 TV return on streaming service Hulu.

      Here is another example of the importance of fans. I believe the writer is showing us that even though some may dislike that fans have a voice, they're still necessary and important.

    5. “Fans engaging actively with the materials of their culture has improved our world in countless ways,” says Jenkins. “Television as it exists today is largely a response to modes of engagement that fans have modelled over the past several decades – [

      Here the writer provides an example of the positive impact fans have had on television. Does the writer agree with either side? The writer's stance at this point seems to be neutral.

    6. Yet the extent to which the internet has changed the very nature of fandom is debatable. According to leading media scholar Henry Jenkins, whose 1992 book Textual Poachers is considered the founding text of fan studies, it has merely “increased the scope and scale of the fan community, allowed for ongoing interactions amongst fans, and made the entertainment industry more aware of the kind of fan responses which have been occurring all along”.

      The writer explains here that fandom isn't new, It's just amplified with the internet. If fans have always had a voice in the creative process, why is it an issue now?

    7. “I don’t know quite how I feel about the audience being in on the creation of it while it’s happening,” said Jim Carrey, who plays Sonic’s nemesis Dr Robotnik, when asked about it last year. “I believe in auteurs, and I believe in creatives. I believe in having them do it.

      I like that the writer exposed another point of view of someone who disagrees with fans having a voice in the creative process. I also like that we get this perspective from Jim Carrey, who is a very well-known actor. This is someone that we can trust due to his track-record as an actor. I believe this quote helps shift the opinion of the reader to realize that maybe fans trying to change the artwork isn't necessarily a good thing.

    8. The ability of fans to shape and change the art they enjoy is nothing new. In 1893, the reaction to Arthur Conan Doyle killing off Sherlock Holmes was so intense that he eventually resurrected him ten years later.

      The writer provides some historical evidence of fans shaping art. This allows the reader to understand the timeline in which this has been ongoing. Realizing that fans have had a voice in the art for years, in my opinion makes it seem as if it's normal and ok.

    9. The redesign of the new big-screen Sonic, in response to a fan backlash, shows how people power is now shaping pop culture – but what does that mean for creativity, asks Stephen Kelly.

      Kelly opens the article with an intriguing statement followed by a question, building curiosity to read the rest of the article. This first sentence does a great job at capturing the audience and summarizing what the article is about.

    1. But now we have more shows, so we’re still recapping a lot — it’s just that there’s so many more.

      Here the author explains another reason for the decline in TV recaps. I believe that overstimulation plays a huge role in this as well. There are a lot more shows to recap, however we have to manage our time well and refrain from overconsumption.

    2. It’s not that people have stopped paying attention to TV; it’s that they’re no longer paying attention to the same TV, which means there’s less of an imperative to understand and discuss a given episode.

      Here the reason is clearly explained. In the past, people had to tune in at specific times to watch TV, however today people can watch at show at their leisure through streaming apps.

    3. hereThere are many reasons why a recap series begun in the 2010s is unlikely to attain the popularity of some of the biggest recap series from the aughts.

      The author is now shifting to explain to us why TV recaps aren't as popular anymore. I'm curious to know more.

    4. Married bloggers Tom Fitzgerald and Lorenzo Marquez have been commenting on pop culture and fashion at their namesake site for more than a decade.

      Another example of a popular website. The author is really showing us that TV recap was huge during the 90's.

    5. It was a place for like-minded souls to congregate

      This sentence clearly displays that TV Recap created a culture (group of people who share commonalities). I believe one of the main purposes of this article is to pay homage to the TV recap culture. The author is a staff writer for The Ringer and probably once loved to read TV recaps herself. Thus she is writing to other TV recap fans to reflect on this peak time of TV recaps.

    6. It wasn’t until late in the show’s second season, however, that Jensen started to share his theorizing for public consumption, first as a column dedicated to speculation and then as a recap that combined a functional synopsis with Jensen’s signature style,

      4th supporting material - Jensen and his website. I like how she explains how he got started with his website and why.

    7. A third epicenter of what came to be known as “recap culture” — the diverse ecosystem of writers and commenters that flourished across a constellation of sites — arose in 2007, when Chicago-based site The A.V. Club, an offshoot of The Onion focused on arts and culture, started running its own series of recaps collectively branded TV Club.

      We're now introduced to the third example of TV recap websites that flourished in the 90s. Here the author also let's us know this is the third example.

    8. A few years into the existence of Television Without Pity, Sepinwall launched a recap site of his own, with a single author but similarly expansive ambitions.

      Speinwall was the writer that was mentioned in the beginning of the article but now the author dives deeper into the history of his website that he built for TV recaps. This is the second supporting evidence the author now provides. She's continuing to build credibility. Her tone is informative and direct.

    9. nIn 1998, writers Tara Ariano and Sarah D. Bunting launched a fan site for WB teen drama Dawson’s Creek, titled Dawson’s Wrap, in partnership with tech master David T. Cole; by 2002, they had widened their focus to nearly three dozen shows, from Survivor to The Sopranos, under the name Television Without Pity.

      This is the second website that the author now uses as supporting evidence. She has shifted from explaining the origins of TV recaps to informing us of another website and writers that was popular during this peak TV period in the 90's. I like that she goes in-depth to explain the site and what they reviewed and how they went about it. This is helpful for people such as myself, who aren't big TV fans and have no idea what any of these shows are.

    10. What I was seeing online was that there were a number of fans out there that were building these websites that were devoted to these amazing theories,”

      Alison Herman introduces us to the origins of one of the main ideas of her article, which is the history of tv recaps on the internet. I like that she uses chronological order as it allows the reader to follow along easily.

    11. mid-1990s

      The author reveals the setting here. Throughout the rest of the article she mentions the 90's several times. She also uses phrases such as 20 years later, the following decades, 1998, and 2002. I believe this helps support her purpose of the article which contrasts the differences of tv recaps in the 90's compared to today.

    12. Alan Sepinwall

      My first question is who is Alan Sepinwall and why is this the first person that the article mentions and opens up with. After further research I have confirmed that he is a very well-known American tv reviewer and writer. Opening the article with a well-known tv reviewer establishes credibility for the article. It sets the tone for the recurring theme of other writers that will be referenced throughout the rest of this article. The recount of writers and their work history in regards to tv recaps appears to be a recurring theme throughout this article.