Pitch Meeting's explanation of comparing Jen's life being "infinitely worse" than Bruce is one of the first things the show did to make people hate her. Women generally deal with sexual harassment and doubt of their abilities all the time, but comparing that to being an international fugitive who lost loved ones and had to be mistreated, even incapable of killing himself, is debatably worse in my personal opinion. I don't know anybody who can express anger and not suffer consequences any more than another. She gets the hulk powers and is immediately able to control it, which tells the audience that cat calling and not getting promotions are worse than being hunted down for years, made to be perceived as a monster, can't live a normal life at all without changing everything about who he is.
Her not wanting to be a superhero is fair, because she' put a lot of work into being a lawyer, same with Bruce being a scientist. Her job, however, seems to be more institutionalized and requires following a system while Bruce working for SHIELD allows him to do what he need to do under people who understand who and what he is to some degree. I can't be a superhero and expect to keep my job as a janitor without going out every few hours to save the world. Some of our supervisors teleport and shit.
That is definitely a big reason viewers disliked her; Ryan George said it well. However, to me, this wasn't the show telling us that her struggles are genuinely harder than Bruce's. To me, this is rather the show showing us that she is in fact flawed and believes that to be the case, but it isn't. And thus, that is why I believe that this dismissal, ignorance, and generally unfair way of thought (in regards to her own issues compared to Bruce's) represent some of the flaws that she is later meant to grow and mature to overcome over the course of the show. Maybe I'm looking upon it in a more favorable light than it deserves, but the consequences that come in E08 and the general flow of her character arc and maturity are, to me, indicative that the writers actually regarded the things audiences hated about Jen as flaws.
Exactly. Being a lawyer is simpler to her, she's familiar with it, knows it, understands it, and is GOOD at it. She's dedicated so much of her life towards it. The world of superheroes, in comparison, is so foreign and alien to her. But the way she exhibits not wanting to be a superhero is pushy and dismissive. To me, it comes off disrespectful to these people who are constantly putting their lives at risk for the world. That is why it registered negatively with me.
@@failureoncommand "To me, this is rather the show showing us that she is in fact flawed and believes that to be the case, but it isn't." I would believe that except no one in the show really disputes her on this, not even Bruce. It kind of implies the audience is supposed to agree with her. Whether that was intentional or a writing mistake remains to be seen.
@erubin100 That is an accurate observation, but it feels to me that despite the other characters never disputing this, the actual trajectory of the story does. Maybe not clearly enough, but by showing us that she's wrong about her assessment of her own control over her anger, it kind of made sense to me that she'd be wrong about this as well, since they kind of came as a package deal in her controversial rant in episode 1.
The story and Jennifer Walter's character arc, as you have described them, would have made for a very interesting, thought provoking and entertaining show. Maybe it all just got lost in the execution, especially in the finale. If this was the intended focus of the show, however, it was not well conveyed in the show's publicity or public statements by the creators.
Perhaps that is the issue here, but I suppose I tried to distance myself from the media mess that followed this show's release because it seemed like a lot of sources were blending reality and fiction in their reporting of the situation.
I almost completely disagree with your take of the show. I don´t think there intent its what you think it was, but I see that you are choosing to see the good in it. It's interesting to listen your different point of view. Best of luck with the channel.
Though I believe the writers' intent with the show was different than what is commonly believed, I still tried to put that aside in an effort to review it within a more isolated scope. I tried to focus most on Jen's character arc as it appeared to me within the general flow of the show. It just felt like the trajectory of her journey gave credence to my analysis, as she was in fact punished for the traits people despised her for. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter, though, if you'll share them. All that aside, thank you so much for commenting. This must be the most respectful "I disagree with you" I've ever heard, and it's incredibly refreshing. I'm glad you could still find the video interesting(somewhat, I hope) for what it is despite having a different opinion. Truly admirable and much appreciated!
I just realized that people really dislike her character because her most disliked characteristics in the early episodes remind me of an arrogant, hot-headed, know-it-all teenage boy who thinks he knows everything (we've seen these characters in beloved shows time and time again). But women don't get that kind of leeway because some men take offense to the thought of having to see themselves through a female main character, so she's instantly branded as "bad" and "other" when I bet many of this shows haters have displayed the exact same character traits as Jen. We as the audience know that she should really take her cousins advice and slow TF down to feel this all out first because we know what Bruce has been through to get to that point, but she is in major denial of what's just happened to her and there's no chance of that in the early episodes given her personality. She naively thinks that she can go back to her regular life, much like any person who has just been shocked by some sort of life sentence or dramatic life change. To relate her reactions to more real world examples, think of someone who has just been told they have a life-changing debilitating disease that requires aggressive and body weakening treatments right before they're about to pursue their dream of finishing an ironman competition, or maybe they just suffered the death or loss of someone or something extremely important to them. Under that lens, even the most likable of people can behave like obnoxious jerks if the denial and anger at their circumstances is strong enough. We literally see her go through the stages of grief, all of which can be very ugly and unflattering for whoever is going through it...and some people are criticizing her for being unlikable for those very human qualities. It's really a shame that TV shows seem to be required to have a likable main character. It isn't always that way, though it does help when the main character is a woman (gee, I wonder why). One example: Walter White of Breaking Bad wasn't a likable character, despite having some admirable qualities. Breaking Bad had some supporting characters that we all really cared about over the seasons. ((And please don't try to say that he was likeable in the first season -- he sexually forced himself onto his pregnant wife in the kitchen and shoved her face into the fridge (or was it a wall?) to hold her in place while he finished -- she was clearly uncomfortable and afraid of him -- needless to say I don't find that to be the quality of a super likeable person.))
I don't think TV shows require a likeable main character, not at all, but I do think that the way this show was structured and presented kind of necessitated that. This is more of a wholesome, almost underdog story as we see Jennifer Walters struggle with this much "superior" aspect of herself. We're meant to empathize with her and root for her, even when we see her be annoying or behave like a child. I feel like shows like these need to give their audience something to like about this character first, because we need to like her enough to root for her as she grows out of her bad habits or behavior. Otherwise, seeing an unlikeable character in a show like this is just going to make us lose interest in watching the journey. Jen isn't the type of character that is interesting enough to carry a show on her back without being likeable, neither is this the type of show that supports something like that. Some examples of shows that can handle an unlikeable protagonist is Breaking Bad, because the focus is on the drama and the journey and seeing how far this character is going to go. Another is House MD, because you're just fascinated by seeing House be mean and snarky and watching his thought processes that sometimes you don't mind all that much that he's a prick.
The rant Jen did in the first episode, while not showing any of those struggles she rant about in any episode and all the men are either idiots, douchebags or perverts troupe is what killed it for me.
The rant was what pushed most people away, though it's hard to deny that the issues in what she said weren't later highlighted. You had people catcall and follow her in the first episode, you had others try to attack her in the streets later on in the season, and you had her male lawyer associate Dennis always try to act like she he was better than her at the job for no apparent reason. In addition, there were many "great men", in that sense, that weren't idiots, douchebags, or perverts. Spoke about this in a previous reply, so Ima just copy/paste that. This series has Matt Murdock being wise, charismatic, and intelligent. It has Pug who is both funny and smart, in an awkward kind of way. It has Bruce, who does nothing but help, guide, and mentor Jen. You have Luke Jacobsonn, talented, quirky, and a costume designing genius.
@@failureoncommand True. I can look pass the bad CGI, the bad fight scenes, the stupid twerk scene and them not following the original comic story for Jen. But this modern trope/trend I see a lot of them doing. Nope. Can't work with. To be honest. If they had cut out the second half of episode 1 and the final episode it could have been more tolerable.
I wanted to like this show. I played her in the MVC games as a kid. I just didn’t get a heroes journey…..if she listened and learned from Bruce then slowly got better through struggles. To the point where even she beats him. He’d be all impressed. It would’ve felt earned. Hopefully they right the ship.
I like your analysis. Giving a character flaws to work through in an arc is generally a good idea, except sitcoms generally require ending where you began. Marvel pitched it as an Ally McBeal type show, except the writers later admitted they weren't really familiar with that show or legal shows in general, and it showed. I found the writing to be muddled and confused overall, which is a shame because this could and should have been a much stronger show. Subbed.
Thank you so much! I actually hadn't delved much into the show background, as far as the writers and their intent went, because I was so overwhelmed with the amount of hate that it put me off. That's my bad, though. The legal aspects were definitely clunky though. I don't know, maybe if a second season comes to pass, they could benefit from this one as a learning experience.
@@failureoncommand I have lots of friends that are lawyers and a couple watched the show. They laughed at the legal aspects, and not in a good way. The best quote from one of them was "How do bozos get to write a high-profile multi-million dollar show knowing this little?"
While some people too quick to presume to know more than they could about the writer's intentions in the negative, you're still doing the same thing, but just on the positive. It is pretty clear that the writers are typical hard left feminists, so at least anybody should be able to see that the feminist dogma is probably not meant to be a character flaw, and I'm not sure how you can ignore the effect their personal politics have on their writing. As far as the anger thing goes in general, you may have some fair points, but it being considered a flaw is rather inconsistent; Sometimes she seems to feel vindicated in her anger like when she's getting pissy with Bruce early on, and the show never called it out. In the end, it's probably a mixed bag between bad writing and self-inserts, but that's only speculation of course.
Perhaps it came off that way, but my intention wasn't to be too quick to presume the writers' intentions, or to really solidly ascertain them. It was mere speculation on my part as well, an alternative proposition based on what I'd gleaned from the show, but an opinion and speculation nevertheless. I do not think I was "too quick" with it, though, or at least I tried not to be. It seemed like a unifying factor between a lot of the hate videos on She-Hulk was that their creators failed to watch beyond the first episode, or made these assumptions very early on in the series. The reason I don't count my presumptions as too quick is because I took the time to watch the whole thing and tried my best to give a fair, balanced analysis after going over the material extensively. (as opposed to just spouting hate to get on board some rage-bait bandwagon) The fact that Jen's speech in the first episode, the one most cited as indicative of feminist dogma, ends up having its credibility disproved by the events of episode 8 is what makes me feel like this was indeed a character flaw, as the show actively shows us that Jen's own outlook on herself was in fact wrong, albeit briefly and only in the final two episodes. The reason I ignored the writers' personal politics was because I made an effort to disregard external factors, and chose to focus purely on the show itself and on how I viewed the trajectory of the story and Jen's arc. And to me, with no external factors, this is what I was left with. The fact that she's never explicitly called out on the issues and bad behavior is odd, I'll give you that, and a failure in my eyes. However, when I take into consideration the ending and the conclusion of Jen's character arc, this lack of call-out comes off to me as an oversight as opposed to an outright indication of approval.
I'm glad someone is actually going through and not just boiling it down to "show woke show bad" I liked this show and I liked this review. Thank you and subbed :)
My biggest disappointment with this show is in comparing it with the comics. I really thought this show would end up being a PG-13 Daredevil-style show. I never felt like She-Hulk was a dramatic character difference over Jen Walters, which she really should have been. It should have been a difference like Clark Kent and Superman, but it really seemed more like it was still Jen, but now good looking and maybe a little more confident.
While I agree that the duality was not really highlighted enough, I still feel like the struggle between the two parts kind of worked. Seeing She-Hulk get everything she wants while Jen got nothing emphasized the gap between them, even if the two didn't didn't feel distinct enough.
It kind of baffles me how much hate this show has gotten, when it seems very clear that the writers of this show not only expected this exact response but they baked it right into the show and decided to brilliantly lean into that. I say brilliantly because I'd hedge a guess that a non-zero amount of people watched the show just to criticize it, which still contributes to overall viewership. By knowing exactly how a certain group of people would treat this show, they decided to have a laugh and keep the conversation going by poking the "trolls" (who were honestly so easy to rattle it's kind of embarrassing). I will say I was a little frustrated with a minor detail of the finale and the resolution of the season. Take the lawyer awards ceremony as an example -- if that were a real world scenario, the power would have been cut before the hidden camera video played for that long. For goodness sakes, that's a room full of lawyers, right? In 2022 I feel like people have more of an understanding of the unfair power dynamics of revenge p0rn (the video wasn't exactly that, but was deliberately made in such a way that is meant to mimic revenge p0rn). I honestly feel like the power would've been flipped quickly and that it might've been shut off before she "lost control." But anyways, that's what they decided to do, and it help set them up for the next season, if there is one. Overall, I had so many laughs watching this show, even if I wasn't necessarily rooting for or against Jen. The biggest thing I got a kick out of was how they knew what type of negative feedback they were going to get, and proactively made fun of it in their own show. I actually like that they didn't go over the top with making her likable right out of the gate (or ever, arguably-- she made some shortsighted choices)..Instead of bending over backwards to attempt to win over their haters, they chose to show a more human female character who has really common flaws (which you astutely pointed out in your video). I'm curious to see where things go, if they get a chance to continue the story.
Dude this was the best analyses of the show and character of Jen. I never really knew why I felt disappointed about the finale, I felt like something was missing. She just had the whole fourth wall break scene but then everything was OK after that. it felt unresolved, thanks for pointing out why. I was so hyped by her losing control that I was genuinely hyped and curious to see how she can overcome that and also win over the public and proving that she wasn't a monster they made her out to be (and maybe they can slot in a message about how women are unfairly scrutinized and embarrassed publicly), but instead she went back to court and everything was OK. I don't think the show is that bad but I'm glad somebody addressed the main issue I had that i couldn't quite articulate myself, instead of calling the show a man-hating feminist, woke blah blah blah. Really hoping your UA-cam channel picks ups bro, we need more well thought out videos like this. Your way of thinking is helping me with analyzing media and hopefully I can take these lessons and apply them in my own story, for example that first point you made about how the show introduced us to the protagonist's worst feature or flaw instead of getting us to know her better before introducing us to her flaws. its an interesting take that i didn't think about, but I'm glad i learned it. First thing i need to learn before writing though is proper grammar though, as whoever is reading this can tell, i got issues with that lol. But great video, keep it up.
Thank you so so much, truly. Really warms my heart reading this. I'm glad I impressed and really happy you could take something away from this! I had the same feelings regarding the show as you've described, so I'm also glad I managed to speak your mind. And your grammar seems more than fine, in my modest opinion! Cut yourself some slack. Have you seen how others type online? lol
I believe your analysis is more in the lines of how the writers should have written her as opposed to how they actually wrote her. If they really intended for her to face any consequences for her actions, she would be called out for her behaviour more than she was on the show. If we were to consider her positive character traits, they weren't written well enough for viewers to be convinced of her having a good enough side. Jen didn't have to be likeable from the beginning; she only had to learn from her flaws and grow out of them. Inherent goodness doesn't necessarily make for good writing. With the direction suggested in your video, this series would have been much much much better executed and perceived.
Thanks for the very articulate comment! While I agree that she wasn't called out for her bad behavior nearly enough, she did clearly face consequences by the end, that being her punishment for losing control in episode 8. She did "learn from her flaws and grow out of them", but in a rushed, haphazard, half-assed manner that sort of started off decent but then really bungled the landing.
@@failureoncommand can't help but agree when you put it that way. Although, I maintain that the impact of her behaviour wasn't fleshed out properly for it to be considered real consequences. While they did punish her for her behavior in e8, the punishment itself had no impact upon the climax. In the end, she simply changed the ending to suit herself which totally and entirely defeated the purpose of her facing any consequences.
I agree with this take. But they *could* have turned it around in that last episode. Imagine Jen's character accepting the blame, calling back to Bruce's advice, accepting her new powers, and then doing exactly what Matt advised her to do - save the day as She-Hulk and then put the bad guys away as Jen Walters. You could have wrapped it all up in a nice bow and actually made all the previous episodes worth watching. Instead, it was a giant middle finger and everything was wiped away. I guess the writers just considered that kind of ending to be 'too formulaic' and decided to get cute vs. giving us a good payoff.
Well said. And this would be the first time a character that started off hated was slowly become a likable and even loved over time. An example I can think of is ahsoka Tano from Star wars. First season or even the first two seasons she was a very character. She was as arrogant as a teenager because she literally was an arrogant teenager. But actually learned and grew over time physically and emotionally as a person, she slowly became better in attitude and better as a character. And over time many people group to like her as a character and she became many people's favorite. Seahawk absolutely could have been just like that. Maybe she was hated and insufferable in the beginning and overtime we learned to like her. It could have delivered it way better than how they did it here. It truly is such a missed opportunity.
i'd like to add one thing to your analysis. i don't necessarily agree when you say that Jen's flaws are just character flaws, and not meant to represent the writers' worldview. in fact, i'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is, but that's beside the point. my major issue with that character portrayal is that the lines that are spoken don't represent what actually happens. Jen says she's great at controlling anger, while at the same time getting angry about it. and that to me is a huge contradiction (paired with the fact that towards the end of the series she gets angry again). on top of this basic contradiction, there's also the fact that Jen's anger control doesn't seem to obey any particular logic, except what fits the story at the moment, which to me is a sign of bad writing. when she first turns into She-Hulk she's able to control herself pretty fine, and the meaning that said scene wants to convey is pretty obvious: they want to establish that She-Hulk is a better Hulk than the Hulk (a cliche that has been overly used by disney in recent years when it comes to writing strong female characters: they're already great and fantastic and perfect from the get go; it's impossible for them to fail at anything and if they do, they'll solve the problem in a matter of minutes or the problem will fix itself just like that; they're usually immune to consequences of their actions and always have some side characters rambling about how awesome they are even if said awesomeness is never actually shown; their character arc is something like "they are perfect already, they just need to realise that they are, a truth that has been hidden from them by the evil patriarchy that's keeping them down. once they do, they'll become even more perfect"). Then she gets angry when she's giving her third wave feminist speech, and that seems to work as a way to underline what she's saying. She goes berserk at the end of the season when her privacy is violated and her big moment at the award gets wrecked, and that's pretty understandable, but then she's in control when literally attacked by thugs on the street at night. i don't know about you but the logic behind her anger management seems quite flimsy to me. or rather, it's flimsy in the context of the plot, but pretty consistent if you frame it as meta commentary on what women go through in their daily life according to a third wave feminist.
Thanks for the very detailed comment. To me, Jen's flaws aren't representative of the writers' worldview because of the trajectory of her character arc. I'll elaborate on that when I reply on your other points below. The lines that are spoken don't represent what actually happens. I don't know if I failed to communicate it effectively in the video, but one of the points I was trying to stress on the most was that this is intentional. Jen says she is great at controlling her anger... But she isn't, and that's the point. She thinks she is because she's cocky and ignorant . She's ignorant of how hard it is for one to control their anger when they wield such immense power, when they can cause massive change with their power. I elaborate on this extensively in Chapter 1 of the video. So no, at least to me, this isn't a contradiction, but rather the whole point. I believe the writers meant to paint these as flaws, because of what happens at the end of Episode 8. You pair this with the fact that towards the end of the series she gets angry again, that being episode 8. That is exactly what I refer to in the video. In episode 8, she loses her temper, causes major harm to public property and almost hurts innocents along the way. It's not painted as a good or justified thing, but rather portrayed correctly as wrong, as an overreaction. So the writers do NOT think that this is okay. To me, this is finally the instance where she realizes that she isn't great at controlling her anger and that it isn't as easy as she believes. This notion is supported by the fact that the writers paint this breakdown in a clearly unfavorable light. It's further supported by the scene in episode 9 where she seems like she wants to beat Todd up but ends up telling him she'll see him in court. It is obviously meant to showcase that she is _now_ in control of her anger, that she has matured enough to take him to court instead of beating him up. So it isn't a contradiction. It's her character arc. She thinks she can control her anger, later discovers that she can't, and afterwards learns to. That was the whole point of my video, and it saddens me that that was not clear to you, through either a fault of mine or yours. As for the recent Disney "strong female protagonist" cliche, I won't deny that. It's prevalent in media that strives to make a quick buck off pretending they care about women, but instead rob them of their humanity by making them flawless shells of characters without interesting character arcs whatsoever. However, I don't see that as the case here at all, as Jen has flaws, flaws that are at least UNDENIABLY "solved" at the end of the series (the Todd scene I mentioned before). This scene would not exist if the writers didn't believe that Jen *needed* to prove that she has controlled her anger, which implies that they believe that she didn't know how to control it before. As for the inconsistency of her anger, I don't really agree with it. To me, she's been pretty consistently BAD at controlling her anger all throughout, up until the conclusion of her character arc in episode 9. She can control herself when she first turns into the She-Hulk because there's no anger-inciting incident for her to go berserk over. Not until the guys start catcalling her, thus triggering a burst of anger which is stopped by Bruce. She's angry from the start, just never out-right raving mad and mindless, but rather always is reactionarily so. It's the equivalent of a normal, sentient human, who is incredibly angry and particularly prone to furious outbursts, as opposed to a an almost mindlessly mad fury like Bruce's (in his OG days). She's not angry when she's attacked by thugs in the street at night, because why would she be? She's not threatened. She knows she can kick their ass, and they aren't really provoking her much. This is in contrast to the guys in episode 1, who make her defenses rise high in a time where she is still unaware (mostly) that she's become a Hulk and has the power to stop them.
@@failureoncommand i have to admit that you made me change my mind on some things. i wrote my comment halfway through the video, and already by the end i started to see the point you were making. your answer to my comment further developed on that, and i thank you for the time you took to reply, it was very kind of yours. i guess it's definitely possible to see it as you're seeing it, and while on some aspects of this reading you won me over, i still kinda retain my original opinion, although, for me to elaborate it would take a whole 20 minute video essay like yours i'm afraid ahahah. anyway, i appreciated your video indeed, and more than that the insight and politeness of your reply. you see, when i discuss topics like these online i'm always looking for positive exchanges of ideas and yet what i get most of the time is either a flame or a bunch of likes, none of which i'm particularly interested in, therefore i'm especially thankful for this conversation. you got yourself a like and a new subscriber my fella!
Man, you've frankly made my day. Thank you so much for all the kind words. I really feel you when it comes to these online discussions. There's rarely proper, healthy arguments, but instead just all-out wars or a general echo-chambering of ideas. So believe me, I am equally as thankful for this conversation, if not more. It is really refreshing to be able to have these healthy discussions like this, because at the end of the day, that's why I'm putting content out. To hear what people think, and to hopefully get them to listen to what I think, you know? And this reply of yours truly makes me happy, because it feels like one of my first times really successfully accomplishing that as a content creator. Making this video allowed us to have a healthy, non-toxic discussion about this, and that's a milestone for me. Thanks again, friend! Looking forward to hearing your opinions on other stuff I put out in the future, and to maybe seeing that 20 minute video essay of yours one day!
@@failureoncommand omg man, i'm moved, what else can i say! this is the healthiest, most wholesome exchange i've had in a while on the internet. i'm so glad to read such enthusiastic words buddy, for real, and i'm happy for having been the humble trigger for this conversation. it kinda feels meaningful now, doesn't it? you can bet i'll keep following: clever takes and politeness together are such a rare and valuable feat on this platform, i woulndn't miss it for the world. (by the way, i checked out you channel and i saw you have quite a few videos on house of the dragons, which i haven't seen yet. i'm planning to catch up sooner rather than later though, so i'll go back to those once i'm through with the show)
Thanks a dozen once again, man. Honestly, same: this is the most wholesome online exchange I've had in QUITE a while. As for the House of the Dragon vids, no rush. They're not really all that much, save for the full series review. The Recap Shorts were merely an experiment with shorts, and have little value. I hope you enjoy the show when you get around to it though. Great conversation, man. Cheers, and have a good evening! (or morning, depending on where you're at)
I really appreciate this point of view and nearly agree with everything you said. However, I feel that if her character did change she should've dealt with her consequences instead of telling everyone else to deal with theirs while she magic erases hers away. I also think it was a flaw to have all the consequences crash down on her in one episode, it was too much
Thanks for commenting! Yeah, definitely, she should have actually had time to deal with the consequences as opposed to just jumping into a weird side-meta arc and skipping to a conclusion. That is what bungled the ending.
They shoulda had that guy react negatively to she-hulk's blood and turn into an actual troll larger than her that she had to beat which a buncha women, girls, etc. witnessed and cheer for her which led to her finally accepting becoming a superhero if it meant being a role model to them and turning her into a cultural icon. And I wish they made it something where the lawyer don't like superheroes and it was clear that they all didn't like them due to the justice system beliefs etc. to make her dislike of superheroism more understandable (despite her cousin being one) and even add more weight and depth to her arc by finding that balance in the end and make it her goal to get others in the justice system to realize the benefits of superheroes and make it part of her future arc once x-men and mutants are properly introduced and face their discrimination. Could be why she developed a relationship with Daredevil too.
Very interesting ideas as far as the lawyers vs. superheroes mentality; I feel like that could've added something fascinating to the story. I, however, don't agree as to your proposed ending; I think it defeats the purpose of them not wanting to do a big Marvel-esque finale (even though they effed up and did it either way).
@@failureoncommand true I get the part about the ending and actually agree with it now, it was a more grounded series (not as much spectacle) but they stubbed their foot on the grounded climax. So much potential for this show, I wish Marvel's phase four stuff wasn't so rushed cuz this coulda been a great show if the creators had more time (like every other phase four project) to flesh it out
I'm glad to hear someone break this down from a writers perspective. you didnt immediately jump on the same issues everyone else pointed out. you dealt with the material as presented and gave strong constructive critique. I would love to hear a longer more episodic break down, but this was fine.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate this comment. I actually had written a longer, episode by episode break-down of the show, but I felt that it dragged on and wasn't really entertaining, so I scrapped that script entirely and rewrote it as such. Perhaps I'll focus more on episode by episode breakdowns moving into the future. Thanks again!
I don't know how I stumbled upon this video, but I really appreciate your deep and nuanced look at this series. It actually made me more appreciate what the writers were going for, even if the execution wasn't the best. (I heard they originally wanted the first episode to be the eighth episode, as a flashback, I wonder if that would have changed initial perceptions?) Though it's far from your only point, I think the reason why it's one of, if not the most hated series, is a lot simpler than character or general writing issues... people who dislike it aren't likely to stick around for the whole series and analyze the writing... I would wager it's just fragile men not liking female leads. Things can be good or bad and open to criticism regardless of the gender of the protagonist, but it's very clearly disproportionate - Ms. Marvel also got a lot of hate too, which I would also say is unwarranted. With many more female characters in the MCU, including replacements or counterparts to the main original male Avengers (except Captain America?) - it'll be interesting to see how the MCU fares moving forward and if we can ever get a female-led MCU movie or series that isn't review-bombed.
A level-headed take on it. I think the lack of a character arc is at the heart of a lot of the criticism. Also, the idea that they were going to do something 'different' by being character-focused kinda tells me that they never watched the Netflix Marvel shows, or the ABC Marvel shows, that came several years before She-Hulk and absolutely pulled off character-driven shows in the Marvel universe (even if they weren't totally connected to the MCU). Hell, just watching a season of Daredevil would have given them the perfect launching point - both from a 'legal show' point of a view and a character arc point of view. In the end, it felt like Jen learned nothing throughout the whole season and that her character got to reset everything on a whim - totally eliminating an arc and totally decimating the importance of any of the supporting characters.
Agreed! I actually hadn't even considered that. The Netflix marvel series would definitely have been great sources of inspiration to draw from for something like this. It's a shame, really. But I guess that's the treatment you can expect when you're not official OFFICIAL MCU.
Studios keep trying to win feminism points by throwing in a line or two about real issues women face, yet they do it in such a terrible way it ends up making the female character look like an asshole and completely discredit their feelings (and real women’s feelings) in the process. It’s so frustrating! It shouldn’t be this hard to represent a woman’s perspective in a genuine and nuanced way.
My dude, she’s a poorly written character! No one writes like this on purpose. She never changes. I don’t blame She-Hulk, I blame the show writers. If it takes 8 episodes to do anything, it’s poorly written. You’re giving these people way too much grace.
Thanks for commenting. I may be giving them "too much grace", but my intent is to analyze the media as it is, writers and their background aside. This is how it came off to me based on the trajectory of the plot. However, I must say that your arguement isn't exactly factual. Many people write like this on purpose. The concept of a flawed protagonist is not foreign. The concept of a dislikeable protagonist isn't foreign as well. Characters like Gregory House, like Walter White (at one point), and so on. People who are severely flawed but who are interesting to follow either way. And I don't mean to strike a comparison between Jennifer Walters and House or Walter White, those are in two very different leagues of writing. I just mean to argue your main proposition that "no one writes like this on purpose", which is an unfair generalization that discards the Unsympathetic/Unlikeable Protagonist tropes entirely. Character arc (as defined by Wikipedia): A character arc is the transformation or inner journey of a character OVER THE COURSE OF A STORY. The Wikipedia page continues to explain that "character arcs often unfold beside the narrative arc in the following way", then continue to explain the traditional 3 Act Dramatic Narrative Structure, with the basic principles of inciting incident, turning point, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution. Point I'm trying to make is that "If it takes 8 episodes to do anything, it's poorly written" may be one of the broadest negative statements I have ever read online, and disregards the basic principles of the character arc and dramatic narrative structure.
@@failureoncommand as a writer myself, and an avid watcher/absorber of all types of media, I disagree with your opinion on She-Hulk. Your comparison to Dr. House is ideal, because his character makes my point for me. He is flawed, but was never written to be disliked by his audience. He’s a cantankerous curmudgeon who’s extremely good at his job. However, he’s clearly afraid to be alone, and cares for his students to a level that borders on holding on too tightly. Those he calls friends are a short list, but all know that when things go left, Dr. House is your dude! House is also not established with decades of lore to pull from, which makes She-Hulk’s poor excuse for show even sadder. I’m fine with a disagreement in points of view. I can appreciate your attempt at civil discourse. However, your civility doesn’t change the fact that the She-Hulk show is a dumpster fire from its 1st 15 minutes to its last 15 minutes. As for my comment about length of time to grab an audience, it’s quite simple. A show like The Madalorian grabs everyone in the first episode. But that’s not always going to happen. The Witcher on Netflix didn’t really catch until episode 3, but episode 2 is such a disjointed mess that most people who checked did it then. It’s later seasons are another story all together. Arcane gets the ball rolling from the first 20 minutes. But, that’s for fans of animated drama. Wandavision gets you hooked from the first or second episodes, but loses some by the last. Moon Knight is similar. You MUST hook your target audience within a sensible amount of time, or you’re failing. No one will sit and watch what they don’t like beyond an hour, unless the fanbase is built in. Classic writing follows this same thought process. Your “protagonist” must keep us invested in them and willing to keep following their story. She-Hulk does that in old comics, but never in the show. Poor character traits make you immediately unlikeable? No. House proves that easily. But taking the character nowhere makes everyone feel like their time is being wasted. And that’s what She-Hulk’s show is. A complete waste of time.
Thanks for taking the time to draft such an articulate reply. I take issue, however, with the fact that you didn't focus much on actually pointing out the flaws of the show, save for through the sweeping generalizations you made in the initial comment. You've instead only said that the show doesn't hook its audience, but have given no explanations as to the short-comings that constituted this failure, nor the how or the why. You've stated that She-Hulk doesn't keep you invested, at least in the show, but also offered no explanation as to why. You also say that the character was taken nowhere. But how? I've offered up an 18 minute video of where I thought the character was being taken, and my own view of her character arc. If you want to say that the show took her nowhere, I'd appreciate it if you elaborated on that as opposed to presenting very specific examples from other media. Frankly, and I mean this with utmost respect, it feels to me more of a "look at me, I'm an avid media absorber" as opposed to an actual attempt at a valid argument. I am indeed attempting civil discourse, and can also appreciate a difference in opinion. However, addressing the show the way you have (garbage, a waste of time, a dumpster fire) is more of you airing out some personal grievances, and not an actual civil, well-analyzed discussion. P.S. House is heavily based on Sherlock Holmes, and has a lot of his traits pulled from the books and inspired by the great super-sleuth himself. So while there isn't a traditionally extensive lore to pull from, there is an inspirational basis. Moreover, I think you attribute to House a benevolence that exaggerates that presented in the show, but that is a conversation for another day lol
@@failureoncommand Ah, a slight insult mixed with a stronger argument for the granting of grace to the show. Okay. I’ll take your bait, and give you more explanation then, good sir. She-Hulk’s origin, for example, in the show makes no sense. Dribs and drabs of blood turning her into a hulk could never make any sense to a rational mind. Her original comic book origin did two things supremely better. First, it portrayed her as a very competent lawyer while giving a scenario much more plausible to why she would become a hulk by injuring her to a near fatal state. Instead, the show runners decided that Jen didn’t need to be saved, and made her a human “jaws of life” and strong enough to drag a 200+ lbs man from a car accident. The dragging part was less plausible, but let’s step up the unbelievability even further. The Hulk would never let Banner sit their and die. EVERY TIME Bruce Banner is near death The Hulk prevents it. The accident alone would’ve forced his change in every other circumstance with the exception of when the writer decides it shouldn’t happen. That’s called “The Hand Of The Author”. It’s too obvious. Jen saving herself and Bruce, again, “The Hand Of The Author”. That very obvious hand is the match that lights the dumpster fire. Then the show runners admitted that they couldn’t even know where to start writing a lawyer show, and never bothered to even try. That’s why you bring in writers with such experience to help you. Did they do that? Nope! Even when Jen’s competencies were questioned, she blew the “Evil White Male Co-Worker” off like a smarmy nuisance and her buddy made her out as a rockstar. They showed nothing, and told us everything. More poor writing on display. And the well goes even deeper. Her promiscuity was put on display in the most tasteless way imaginable. I’m not against her being into the boys, as that’s a very much expressed part of her character in the comics. However, she had no chill in the show. That’s a small thing, but still a thing. Her being better than Bruce as he tried to train her was laughable. They made him useless and his life experiences meaningless. You can use her treatment/dismissal of him as a character expression, but they never pulled any of it back. She never learned from those things. And they were supposed to be on really good terms? Friends even? And the ending showed that more than anything else. They gave a middle finger to not only their audience, but to those people who cut the checks. If their goal is to burn up the fanbase, then not have another season, then they’ve achieved their goal. Otherwise, I don’t get it. Poor writing is the crime. I don’t fault you for having a different opinion. It’s fine for people to disagree. However, I hope I’ve clarified my opinion a bit more now.
You've definitely clarified things. Thank you for taking the time to write all that, I really appreciate seeing this point of view made clear, concise, and organized. And while I don't agree with a lot of it, it makes sense, and I can understand it. Agree to disagree, at the end of the day. I'm glad we managed to get a decent discussion out of it, though. Appreciate ya!
I think the show should've opened with that award ceremony and Jens subsequent violent outburst. She'd be put to Emil's old jail saying: well, that sucks, mah dudes. You are probably a bit confused. Let's rewind a bit, ok? Then we'd go to the wedding where we would see her being hit on by drunk creeps, mistreated by that bridezilla and abused by Titania. Bruce, who is also at the wedding, would then save Jen from her, which would make Jen angry and humiliated on the ride home. After the crash and the birth of She-Hulk, I'd keep almost everything the same (tweak the ending obv, and keep Titania the big bad behind Todd and his virgin army). That way the show would show us and not just tell us about Jens struggles and help garner sympathy for her. I think it would make her feel like a real person. It would also provide Titania the motivation to go after Jen, and not show up to the hearing without an explanation. oh and great vid btw :) instant sub
Thanks for the kind words, and for the fascinating thoughts! That's a very interesting variation to the story... I agree that it would definitely garner sympathy much better for Jen as a character.
I think this was a good premise and a welcome fresh angle for the MCU. Unfortunately, I don’t think the writers were good enough to convey such complexity, especially in the format of a sitcom, which means needing to be funny on top of great character development and plot. I agree that we were meant to see her as a brat in her initial interactions with Bruce. The problem is that the show seems to back up her claims by showing her seemingly able to beat him and to get a hold of the duality of the hulk form from the jump when we saw Bruce take years to get to the professor persona. They could have explained this with a bit of exposition…maybe she’s not as powerful as OG Hulk and so it’s easier for the duality or it’s because she got the blood from him after whatever scientific experiments he did on himself to allow for the hulk form to be controllable. Additionally, over subsequent episodes the majority of the storyline don’t focus on the primary flaws of her arc (the cockiness and acceptance of her new reality). Too much time is devoted to her hunt for a man to date, her insecurities, and her lack of self-knowledge overall. It’s not that those aspects can’t co-exist, but episode to episode it was hard to know what journey she’s on. Not only did the finale fail to deliver but the middle episodes also failed to show gradual changes. The pay-off wasn’t there, and the set up was shaky. Unfortunately too much of the negativity focused on the “wokeness” aspect so I don’t think there will be any self-reflection leading to an understanding that it wasn’t the politics…it’s that it wasn’t well written.
Thank you for the incredibly detailed comment. I agree on practically every regard. The wonkiness of the middle parts of the journey, I think, is owed to something you mentioned: the writers' inability to juggle such complexity along with the necessities of a sitcom. Felt like they got carried away focusing on making it a funny and relatable "Jennifer Walters" story that they couldn't find spots to fit back in what I believe to be the general character arc at play. Additionally, as you've said, a lot of the show's issues could have been alleviated at least slightly with a few simple lines of exposition.
A very, very, very optimistic take on that crappy show. Maybe, if you are right, when She-Hulk enters the "bellow" part of the hero's journey, we all gonna be cheering the writers and their complete and utter genius in hindsight...maybe. Most likely not..
Perhaps more favorable than most of the internet has been, but I wouldn't call it optimistic. I don't quite understand what "bellow part of the hero's journey" means. Would you care to elaborate?
16:51 But we didn't miss out the crucial transitory phase, episode eight was literally her crucial transitory phase. While episode nine was more an epilogue of things that we already knew.
Thank you for commenting. Honestly, I don't see it that way at all. SPOILERS: Episode 8 was the climax of her development: her finally being put face to face with the fact that she has flaws, that she is not always in control. However, the episode ends with that realization coming to pass, as she holds that one guy up in the air and turns to look at the camera. The crucial transitory phases that follow should be her learning to come to terms with this realization, and making effort to actually get over it, accept it, and realize that she is indeed capable of anger, and to somewhat strive to keep it in check. To me, that was what episode 9 should have done. Instead, it showed us Jen skip all those steps to land upon the final square of her development: her showing Todd that she does not intend to let anger control or cloud her by instead telling him she's taking him to court (as opposed to beating him up), and her affirming to the press that she has accepted the superhero part of her that She-Hulk is meant to play. None of those are ever shown at any points prior; the last thing we see in episode 8 is her realizing the extents of her power. So to me, you are partially right, episode 9 was an epilogue, but it was not of things we already knew, as all we were shown within was new within Jen's character (her finally realizing AND controlling her anger and her accepting her role as a superhero).
@@failureoncommand But she already acknowledged that she is capable of anger at the beginning of the season finale, not to mention that suffered consequences from her actions by having her powers taken away. We also saw her pursuing legal action against Todd, showing that he was NOT intending to physically hurt him but to hold him accountable. I don't think we need to see her character get over or controlling her anger because that is what she was already doing.
She acknowledged that she is capable of anger but never did we see her come to terms with controlling that anger. She started to suffer consequences but it was immediately halted in order to throw us into the meta side-story. The whole episode is supposed to revolve around this resolution, this crucial piece of her story. Her coming to terms with her anger and accepting her responsibilities as a superhero are no small things. And we only saw her do those after a meaningless side plot of meta commentary. She didn't do any growing on that meta adventure of hers. It was like a pause from the flow of her character arc, an unrelated side adventure, and then back to conclude. After all the show had set up, I'd say we DID need to see her controlling her anger, because all we saw prior was her moping about losing her powers and a bit of the consequences of that.
@@failureoncommand Your argument that Jen needs to come to terms of her anger would make sense IF Jen intention was to physically hurt or kill the people who wronged her. But it's NOT her objective, her goal was to bring them to court to hold them accountable.
Irrelevant of her intention, the vast extents of her newfound strength, her lack of control over them, and her general recklessness puts people at risk of death or severe injury at all times. The greatest example of this is her extreme violence in the fight against Daredevil, both towards him and the surrounding area. Her intention is pure, of that I have no doubt, but her execution is flawed because she doesn't realize how huge her strength is until she loses control at the gala in episode 8. If all I've put forward still doesn't convince you, with the arguments I've presented in the video and here, then we can just agree to disagree. We're looking at the situation differently. Either way, thank you for commenting. It was really interesting hearing your thoughts on the matter!
I enjoyed a lot of things in the show, but I understand that many others didn't. However, delving into that would be much more subjective than I wanted the scope of the video to be, as I tried my best to focus on analyzing Jen's character arc irrelevant of all else. Obviously, I was still very subjective, but hopefully you get my meaning.
I think the Jen's flaws argument could be an interesting angle but I think it's undermined by the fact that she's a better "hulk" than "the hulk". I think it would be a better plot point for Jen to be arrogant while still not knowing how to control her hulk abilities like Bruce can. This leaves room for growth and development, two things we really didn't see in the show.
The intent and execution are entirely different things. It was executed poorly and that made it a bad show even if I agree with your character analysis of Jen. The runtime wasn't enough for this character to grow naturally. It felt abrupt. That ending was indeed awful. Instead of commenting on the formulaic nature of the MCU why didn't they do the opposite of that and then have the meta commentary? It would've at least salvaged this show. 4/10 show.
For sure. I think if they'd added one more episode and had a normal finale that didn't take up its entire runtime disrupting the whole narrative, the flow would have been much, much better. It's a shame, really.
Great breakdown. I think this is a thoughtful, well-produced review. I thought it was a really good show, with Jen/She-Hulk being a great character from the start, BUT I think the finale should have been split into two parts to give us that proper character conclusion. It could be great instead of really good.
Thank you so much, man. Means a lot coming from you. Exactly; to me there's a lot of wasted potential here. With a better ending, the show could have really balanced itself out. 9 is a weird number to end a series on anyways...
I’m glad you commented on this trend of hating she hulk. Your style is completely original and I like your unique perspective on Jennifer’s arc which I felt was perfectly articulated! Thank You!
You've commented on 3 of my videos thus far (that I've seen) and honestly, each comment is sweeter than the last. Thank you so much, you truly flatter me. I'm honored I could impress, and hope to continue doing so if you plan to stick around with the channel!
Is the writers were more worried about making a good show instead of just strong in the trolls then maybe it would have actually turned out decent. Because there is some potential from this character and eating some of the actions taken in the writing. And I don't know what it is about the actress, but there's something about it that I kind of like and want to like when it comes to your character. I feel like if she was given better material to work with then she would have given us a better She-Hulk from the process. But instead they wasted it in order to get one back at the trolls only if anything prove them right.
I watched it and rolled my eyes a few times but it wasn't half as bad as folks made it out to be. It was a light comedy show from a female point of view within the world of superheroes.
I find it funny how disney's attempt to keep the success of the first 3 mcu phases by pissing on and destroying everything people liked.. All the new characters come off as an annoying little sister who wants to play with the older kids while at the same time making fun of them
Great analysis. I wonder, how much writers trolling the audience? Had to do with shaping the show? And how correct you are with this analysis? Not trying to look on down side here. Just trying to look at from both angles. But, it's a Interesting view.
This made me dislike the show a little bit. I defended the show for a while. Mad it 6 or 7 episodes before I dropped it. In those episodes it really seemed that her negative traits were praised or valid. Took them a little too long before bringing them to bare. I might go back and try it again.
I would recommend at least finishing it. It'll make more sense once you see the full scope of things, even if you do get ultimately disappointed with the finale.
This is a well thought out and well presented analysis of the show, which would be a great defense of the intent behind it, even if it isn't a great defense of the skill of the writers.... IF the writers hadn't come out and publicly stated that the flaws were NOT placed there to develop and arc for Jen; but the intent was, in fact, to push an agenda and piss of as many "fans" as they could.
I actually hadn't delved much into the show background, as far as the writers and their intent went, because I was so overwhelmed with the amount of hate that it put me off. I tried to only focus on what I was seeing within the context of the show itself, irrelevant of external factors. However, I should have some read some interviews either way. After reading this comment of yours, I tried to find some articles on what you'd mentioned, but I can't seem to find any of the writers having said that anywhere. It's been a while so they're likely buried at this point. Would you please link me to where that was said, please?
@@failureoncommand @Failure On Command Ok well I tried to reply twice w/ links but for some reason my posts are getting auto deleted so. No links this time. There is the interview the team did with Variety where they admit that they wrote the show in a way specifically to elicit certain criticisms so that they could make fun of the people who didn't like the show. And then there is the interview the Director did w/ Screen Rant where she indicates that villainizing the fans was the intent from the very beginning.
@@failureoncommand Ok looks like the issue was the Link to Variety... possibly because the article title contains the F word. But if you google Variety and She-Hulk Finale you it should be able to find it.
I read through the article, and nowhere here did anyone say that the intent was to "push an agenda" or that the flaws were placed there to piss off fans. They mention that they anticipated a lot of the hate and fought back against it, but that's only implied to be the hate that is being spewed by people with an aversion to women superheroes in general. Specifically, the type of fan behavior/outlook that the writers claim to be toxic is the one later presented by the Intelligencia incels within the show. This behavior is basically restricted to people just being unaccepting of women superheroes, people who only sexualize that hero, people who get overly pissed off because they believe she doesn't deserve her powers (which is a actually just a plot element: the hero slowly proving themselves to be worthy of their powers), and other similar behavior displayed by members of the Intelligencia crew. I can understand that it looks like the writers were just oppositional to all negativity in general, because the writers themselves were a bit heavy with their portrayal of these toxic internet communities. I feel like they made them too common-place, normal, and easy to join, which did not make sense and wasn't fair to online communities in general. It's fairly common to see wells of negativity surrounding certain media, but it isn't that easy to stumble upon mass hate groups who harbor death wishes upon creators of said media or people associated with it. So yeah, I do think the writers of the show irked more people than they intended with their portrayal of these "trolls", but I believe that their intent was to only target the trolls with a genuinely misogynistic perspective upon female superheroes and protagonists in general. They didn't, however, seek to annoy all fans in general just for the fuck of it, and nowhere did they defend Jen's initial toxic behavior.
@@failureoncommand I suppose it doesn't state it in absolute terms but they indication is pretty strong. Both that they knew that they would receive criticism and that they were banking on it so that they could make that criticism the villain of the show and feel empowered to dismiss it. Because they are writing geniuses who created the most intelligent and well written show in existence. From Screen Rant Q: That's exactly what I wanted to talk about next. Was it always the plan to have toxic fandom as the season's villain? And can you talk to me about the irony of seeing that play out in the real world while knowing it was the Big Bad of the season? Kat Coiro: Well, I'll say the writers are so connected to the Twitterverse, and so they crafted this Big Bad that was the toxic fanbase. I am not on Twitter. I'm only on Instagram, so I hadn't experienced it in the way they had. But when the show came out, I started getting these really nasty messages and just stuff you can't even imagine. But I kind of took it with a grain of salt, because I knew where we were going. And what I noticed is that the criticism started petering out because I think even the trolls realized that by being nasty and negative, they're playing right into our hands, thereby proving that we are intelligent, which is the thing they don't want to admit that we ladies are. From Variety Q:In addition to breaking the fourth wall, the finale tackles some of the exact same trolling comments that Marvel fans have been making. How did it feel to watch that happen as the show aired, knowing how the finale would turn out? Tatiana Maslany: Jessica Gao is a genius and knows about the culture we’re living in and her position in it when she’s writing these stories about a woman superhero. She knows what that response is going to be. As a cast, it was delightful sending each other these troll responses, like “Oh my god, give them a week and then they’re going to literally see this pop up verbatim in the show and become the villains of the show.” It was thrilling. Q: Were you expecting to face the trolls when you signed on for the show? Tatiana Maslany: Reading the script, it was so true. There’s so much resistance to a woman just existing in that space of superheroes. There’s always going to be that. I sort of anticipated it. It’s why I also feel it’s important. There’s such an entitlement to space held by certain people, and to even exist as She-Hulk is like a fuck-you, and I love that. Q: How did it feel to accurately predict what the trolls would be saying? Jessica Gao: Our writers room opened three years ago. The fact that we were able to predict what the reaction was going to be, what a lot of the trolling comments were going to be, really shows how very tired and unoriginal these trolls are. That really tickled me because the little troll that lives inside of me really loves trolling the trolls.
I haven’t seen the show but it seems like it was trying to be the Marvel equivalent of “Fleabag.” A show that supports and mocks its female characters in equal measure. You see the good and the bad in all the characters in a fair way. Don’t try to be Phoebe Waller Bridge unless you ARE Phoebe Waller Bridge.
I really like your more nuanced take on the show. Nowadays it's always either fanboys that will defend everything and anything or haters who will see every little flaw and will claim that everything is woke or has an agenda. It's quite refreshing seeing someone taking the middle road.
I didn’t think it was that bad , people just didn’t want to see any female leads . I’m a fan of the comics so I’ll always Love Jennifer , most haters never read the comics and think she was just invented. I think the timing was off because now allot of people were already on a marvel hate train and feeling that highlighting female characters isn’t a good idea . Many were so over the top with their hatred for this show which made me not take them seriously
Jessica Gao before the release of She-Hulk: I’ve read a lot of the comics, especially the John Byrne run; I love that run. Jessica Gao after the show’s release: We thought it would be so cool if we took all of the legitimate criticizm made by true She-Hulk fans and dilute it down into a group of terminally online, sexist trolls who we could make the villains of the show. Turning legitimate complaints into strawmen in order to victimize your main character: definitely not neo-feminist propaganda.
I didn’t like her enough to continue watching it. I know someone who talks and acts like her that I’m not a fan of and it’s hard to shake the association. Sounds like they dropped the ball so I’m not missing much.
Jen Walters gains powers and then uses them to get laid, get a job, jump start her career, brag about how great she is. She never helps anyone but herself, doesn't care about anything unless it's about her. She could have fun, but waits around for some man. Jen Walters is boring. The world revolves around her, but we don't care. Worse she never learns a lesson, never changes, perfect the way she is. You are giving these Writers credit. They hate this source material.
Feels like you either didn't finish the show or just didn't get the point. The main issue the show goes over is Jen coming to terms with her She-Hulk-ness and the fact that She-Hulk seems to get everything right for her, while normal Jen struggles to accomplish anything. She helps other, not all the time, but that's natural as the whole point is that she's LEARNING to become a superhero. "She could have fun, but waits around for some man" I don't know even know what that means. She does learn her lesson and change by the end, but that change is handled poorly, which is a main aspect of this video.
You wanna talk about overambitious? If it wants to be a legal drama the it's inviting comparison to The Good Wife. Bringing in Daredevil just reminds us of the previous highly popular series about a superhero lawyer. She Hulk the series has not found its own niche in the market. Even as it criticises MCU for being derivative, it isn't really terribly original itself.
She can't do anything about an attack by a street gang other than go to the law? Um.... that's not because she's a woman. That's because she's a human being. I didn't watch She Hulk because it is widely panned and I didn't like the other Marvel shows I tried out. But the guest star pop star twerking with her made it very unappealing even though I used to love the star in her prior show Orphan Black.
Thanks! Definitely several channels in the way of inspiration: Filmento, The Cosmonaut Variety Hour, HiTop Films, and Pillar of Garbage. More recently, I've been keeping up with others like Captain Midnight and Just Write. There are also a bunch in terms of just non-video-essay reviews, like Angry Joe, Jeremy Jahns, and Ryan George (Pitch Meetings). As far as just general UA-cam channels I like, you got the usual suspects: Jacksfilms, penguinz0, Drew Gooden, Danny Gonzalez, Kurtis Conner, Cody Co, Pyrocynical, Leon Lush, Elvis The Alien, Bionic Pig, gameranx, Ranton, and a bunch others. Props to Finzar for the editing side of UA-cam; much learned there.
SheHulk Attorney at Law; First, a show about a woman who wants to get laid, then a ‘legal’ comedy a distant second, and a superhero show way way back in last. Blokes don’t want to see it. Women definitely don’t want to see it. What was the point?
The show just wasn't very good. Cheap CGI did not help. The "I control anger because I am woman" bit is such a pathetic and lazy way to write a character as being a strong woman. Clearly they have no idea how hard it is to have your manhood constantly challenged by not only women, but most men we encounter. Playing sports you get called a pussy and worse all the damn time.
I think your analysis emphasizes the best possible interpretation of the writers' script at every turn and ignores the comments of the writers and actors to the media that clearly indicate their misandry. Yes, I initially saw Jen's rant to Bruce as the benchmark of her personality from which she would grow and mature. She never did and the last episode was the ultimate expression of her childish "Make it didn't happen!" avoidance of responsibility.
The intention to show that she grew out of her angry, over-confident ways is there. The part where she does the growing is skipped, but they show you that final scene with Todd that's meant to tell you she did grow. Another commenter said the same thing as you in regards to the writers and their comments to the media, which I'd avoided at first. After that comment, I did my research, and I don't think that anywhere (that I saw) they said anything to indicate that they supported Jen's mindset and worldview. They were clear about wanting to troll toxic fans and were hellbent on doing so, hyper-fixating on the matter, but the implied target of that trolling is meant to be fans whose personalities are later represented by those Intelligencia incels... Meaning, mostly, misogynists.
THANK YOU SO MUCH! For the life of me, I can't find a single video on this series that's not either "It sucks because WOKE WAHMEN!" or "It's awesome, FUCK YOUR OPINION INCEL!" This is pretty much the heart of the matter: it's a series that could've worked with just a few minor tweaks, namely a.) making Jen sympathetic in the first episode, instead of later episodes, and b.) cutting out that stupid fourth wall break in the final episode, because that was just lazy writing to the max.
Thank YOU! That was my own gripe as well, as it seemed like no one on the mainstream Internet was trying to approach this in a semi-neutral way. I tried my best to remain balanced and as fair as can be, so I truly appreciate the fact that you appreciated that. Means a lot!
@@АлексейМомот-щ7о READ. MY. COMMENT! I clearly said to cut out the particular fourth wall break IN THE FINAL EPISODE, not throughout the series! You can still have fourth wall breaks, but that one took it to an unnecessary extreme that basically gave an excuse for the writers to not truly resolve anything.
Thank you brother. After watching so many she Hulk sucks and MCU is dead videos, I was really looking for a video like yours. People have been very negative about this show and MCU in general recently. People are just hating it for the sake of hating it. I Really loved the analysis and I will watch the show with your ideas in regards.
I thought I was crazy when everyone liked the finale except me. I thought it took away from Jen's journey as well as the story of the season. It didn't feel like a season finale, it made the show feel incomplete. And this is coming from someone who actually liked the rest of the show and liked Jen aa a character, but i still think the ending did a massive disservice to the plot. It was also just straight-up jarring because the rest of the show did not set up that type of fourth wall break. Talking to the audience is one thing, but straight up breaking through the disney+ window to walk into the "real world" is another.
@@drewr1843 so strange how you felt the need to respond twice on a comment calling out fragile men… so strange and obvious your little feelings have been hurt lol
Yeeeah...no this show is really piss poor bad. The character "flaw" is a common trend with the "M-She-U" phase 4. It's only character growth if she makes some progress rather than divulge deeper into the stereotypes and never admitting her flaws/apologizing for her own faults. Which she doesn't...just Karen's her way to get everything resolved and get what she wants.
Pitch Meeting's explanation of comparing Jen's life being "infinitely worse" than Bruce is one of the first things the show did to make people hate her. Women generally deal with sexual harassment and doubt of their abilities all the time, but comparing that to being an international fugitive who lost loved ones and had to be mistreated, even incapable of killing himself, is debatably worse in my personal opinion. I don't know anybody who can express anger and not suffer consequences any more than another. She gets the hulk powers and is immediately able to control it, which tells the audience that cat calling and not getting promotions are worse than being hunted down for years, made to be perceived as a monster, can't live a normal life at all without changing everything about who he is.
Her not wanting to be a superhero is fair, because she' put a lot of work into being a lawyer, same with Bruce being a scientist. Her job, however, seems to be more institutionalized and requires following a system while Bruce working for SHIELD allows him to do what he need to do under people who understand who and what he is to some degree. I can't be a superhero and expect to keep my job as a janitor without going out every few hours to save the world. Some of our supervisors teleport and shit.
That is definitely a big reason viewers disliked her; Ryan George said it well. However, to me, this wasn't the show telling us that her struggles are genuinely harder than Bruce's. To me, this is rather the show showing us that she is in fact flawed and believes that to be the case, but it isn't. And thus, that is why I believe that this dismissal, ignorance, and generally unfair way of thought (in regards to her own issues compared to Bruce's) represent some of the flaws that she is later meant to grow and mature to overcome over the course of the show.
Maybe I'm looking upon it in a more favorable light than it deserves, but the consequences that come in E08 and the general flow of her character arc and maturity are, to me, indicative that the writers actually regarded the things audiences hated about Jen as flaws.
Exactly. Being a lawyer is simpler to her, she's familiar with it, knows it, understands it, and is GOOD at it. She's dedicated so much of her life towards it. The world of superheroes, in comparison, is so foreign and alien to her. But the way she exhibits not wanting to be a superhero is pushy and dismissive. To me, it comes off disrespectful to these people who are constantly putting their lives at risk for the world. That is why it registered negatively with me.
@@failureoncommand "To me, this is rather the show showing us that she is in fact flawed and believes that to be the case, but it isn't." I would believe that except no one in the show really disputes her on this, not even Bruce. It kind of implies the audience is supposed to agree with her. Whether that was intentional or a writing mistake remains to be seen.
@erubin100 That is an accurate observation, but it feels to me that despite the other characters never disputing this, the actual trajectory of the story does. Maybe not clearly enough, but by showing us that she's wrong about her assessment of her own control over her anger, it kind of made sense to me that she'd be wrong about this as well, since they kind of came as a package deal in her controversial rant in episode 1.
The story and Jennifer Walter's character arc, as you have described them, would have made for a very interesting, thought provoking and entertaining show. Maybe it all just got lost in the execution, especially in the finale. If this was the intended focus of the show, however, it was not well conveyed in the show's publicity or public statements by the creators.
Perhaps that is the issue here, but I suppose I tried to distance myself from the media mess that followed this show's release because it seemed like a lot of sources were blending reality and fiction in their reporting of the situation.
I almost completely disagree with your take of the show. I don´t think there intent its what you think it was, but I see that you are choosing to see the good in it. It's interesting to listen your different point of view. Best of luck with the channel.
Though I believe the writers' intent with the show was different than what is commonly believed, I still tried to put that aside in an effort to review it within a more isolated scope. I tried to focus most on Jen's character arc as it appeared to me within the general flow of the show. It just felt like the trajectory of her journey gave credence to my analysis, as she was in fact punished for the traits people despised her for. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter, though, if you'll share them.
All that aside, thank you so much for commenting. This must be the most respectful "I disagree with you" I've ever heard, and it's incredibly refreshing. I'm glad you could still find the video interesting(somewhat, I hope) for what it is despite having a different opinion. Truly admirable and much appreciated!
I just realized that people really dislike her character because her most disliked characteristics in the early episodes remind me of an arrogant, hot-headed, know-it-all teenage boy who thinks he knows everything (we've seen these characters in beloved shows time and time again). But women don't get that kind of leeway because some men take offense to the thought of having to see themselves through a female main character, so she's instantly branded as "bad" and "other" when I bet many of this shows haters have displayed the exact same character traits as Jen.
We as the audience know that she should really take her cousins advice and slow TF down to feel this all out first because we know what Bruce has been through to get to that point, but she is in major denial of what's just happened to her and there's no chance of that in the early episodes given her personality.
She naively thinks that she can go back to her regular life, much like any person who has just been shocked by some sort of life sentence or dramatic life change. To relate her reactions to more real world examples, think of someone who has just been told they have a life-changing debilitating disease that requires aggressive and body weakening treatments right before they're about to pursue their dream of finishing an ironman competition, or maybe they just suffered the death or loss of someone or something extremely important to them. Under that lens, even the most likable of people can behave like obnoxious jerks if the denial and anger at their circumstances is strong enough. We literally see her go through the stages of grief, all of which can be very ugly and unflattering for whoever is going through it...and some people are criticizing her for being unlikable for those very human qualities.
It's really a shame that TV shows seem to be required to have a likable main character. It isn't always that way, though it does help when the main character is a woman (gee, I wonder why).
One example: Walter White of Breaking Bad wasn't a likable character, despite having some admirable qualities. Breaking Bad had some supporting characters that we all really cared about over the seasons. ((And please don't try to say that he was likeable in the first season -- he sexually forced himself onto his pregnant wife in the kitchen and shoved her face into the fridge (or was it a wall?) to hold her in place while he finished -- she was clearly uncomfortable and afraid of him -- needless to say I don't find that to be the quality of a super likeable person.))
I don't think TV shows require a likeable main character, not at all, but I do think that the way this show was structured and presented kind of necessitated that. This is more of a wholesome, almost underdog story as we see Jennifer Walters struggle with this much "superior" aspect of herself. We're meant to empathize with her and root for her, even when we see her be annoying or behave like a child.
I feel like shows like these need to give their audience something to like about this character first, because we need to like her enough to root for her as she grows out of her bad habits or behavior. Otherwise, seeing an unlikeable character in a show like this is just going to make us lose interest in watching the journey.
Jen isn't the type of character that is interesting enough to carry a show on her back without being likeable, neither is this the type of show that supports something like that. Some examples of shows that can handle an unlikeable protagonist is Breaking Bad, because the focus is on the drama and the journey and seeing how far this character is going to go. Another is House MD, because you're just fascinated by seeing House be mean and snarky and watching his thought processes that sometimes you don't mind all that much that he's a prick.
YOU PUT IT INTO WORDS! That's exactly how I felt about this series and to see it put in a very clear and concise (with sexy voice over) is amazing!
Thanks, my man. Glad I spoke your mind.
The rant Jen did in the first episode, while not showing any of those struggles she rant about in any episode and all the men are either idiots, douchebags or perverts troupe is what killed it for me.
The rant was what pushed most people away, though it's hard to deny that the issues in what she said weren't later highlighted. You had people catcall and follow her in the first episode, you had others try to attack her in the streets later on in the season, and you had her male lawyer associate Dennis always try to act like she he was better than her at the job for no apparent reason.
In addition, there were many "great men", in that sense, that weren't idiots, douchebags, or perverts. Spoke about this in a previous reply, so Ima just copy/paste that.
This series has Matt Murdock being wise, charismatic, and intelligent. It has Pug who is both funny and smart, in an awkward kind of way. It has Bruce, who does nothing but help, guide, and mentor Jen. You have Luke Jacobsonn, talented, quirky, and a costume designing genius.
@@failureoncommand True. I can look pass the bad CGI, the bad fight scenes, the stupid twerk scene and them not following the original comic story for Jen.
But this modern trope/trend I see a lot of them doing. Nope. Can't work with.
To be honest. If they had cut out the second half of episode 1 and the final episode it could have been more tolerable.
Great analysis, the series didn’t sound so appealing before watching this. You really elevated it.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate it
It still doesn't sound appealing.
I wanted to like this show. I played her in the MVC games as a kid. I just didn’t get a heroes journey…..if she listened and learned from Bruce then slowly got better through struggles. To the point where even she beats him. He’d be all impressed. It would’ve felt earned. Hopefully they right the ship.
I understand where you're coming from, and you do have a point there.
I like your analysis. Giving a character flaws to work through in an arc is generally a good idea, except sitcoms generally require ending where you began. Marvel pitched it as an Ally McBeal type show, except the writers later admitted they weren't really familiar with that show or legal shows in general, and it showed. I found the writing to be muddled and confused overall, which is a shame because this could and should have been a much stronger show. Subbed.
Thank you so much!
I actually hadn't delved much into the show background, as far as the writers and their intent went, because I was so overwhelmed with the amount of hate that it put me off. That's my bad, though.
The legal aspects were definitely clunky though. I don't know, maybe if a second season comes to pass, they could benefit from this one as a learning experience.
@@failureoncommand I have lots of friends that are lawyers and a couple watched the show. They laughed at the legal aspects, and not in a good way. The best quote from one of them was "How do bozos get to write a high-profile multi-million dollar show knowing this little?"
While some people too quick to presume to know more than they could about the writer's intentions in the negative, you're still doing the same thing, but just on the positive. It is pretty clear that the writers are typical hard left feminists, so at least anybody should be able to see that the feminist dogma is probably not meant to be a character flaw, and I'm not sure how you can ignore the effect their personal politics have on their writing. As far as the anger thing goes in general, you may have some fair points, but it being considered a flaw is rather inconsistent; Sometimes she seems to feel vindicated in her anger like when she's getting pissy with Bruce early on, and the show never called it out. In the end, it's probably a mixed bag between bad writing and self-inserts, but that's only speculation of course.
Perhaps it came off that way, but my intention wasn't to be too quick to presume the writers' intentions, or to really solidly ascertain them. It was mere speculation on my part as well, an alternative proposition based on what I'd gleaned from the show, but an opinion and speculation nevertheless. I do not think I was "too quick" with it, though, or at least I tried not to be. It seemed like a unifying factor between a lot of the hate videos on She-Hulk was that their creators failed to watch beyond the first episode, or made these assumptions very early on in the series. The reason I don't count my presumptions as too quick is because I took the time to watch the whole thing and tried my best to give a fair, balanced analysis after going over the material extensively. (as opposed to just spouting hate to get on board some rage-bait bandwagon)
The fact that Jen's speech in the first episode, the one most cited as indicative of feminist dogma, ends up having its credibility disproved by the events of episode 8 is what makes me feel like this was indeed a character flaw, as the show actively shows us that Jen's own outlook on herself was in fact wrong, albeit briefly and only in the final two episodes.
The reason I ignored the writers' personal politics was because I made an effort to disregard external factors, and chose to focus purely on the show itself and on how I viewed the trajectory of the story and Jen's arc. And to me, with no external factors, this is what I was left with.
The fact that she's never explicitly called out on the issues and bad behavior is odd, I'll give you that, and a failure in my eyes. However, when I take into consideration the ending and the conclusion of Jen's character arc, this lack of call-out comes off to me as an oversight as opposed to an outright indication of approval.
I'm glad someone is actually going through and not just boiling it down to "show woke show bad"
I liked this show and I liked this review. Thank you and subbed :)
Thank you so much! Great to have ya along!
My biggest disappointment with this show is in comparing it with the comics. I really thought this show would end up being a PG-13 Daredevil-style show. I never felt like She-Hulk was a dramatic character difference over Jen Walters, which she really should have been. It should have been a difference like Clark Kent and Superman, but it really seemed more like it was still Jen, but now good looking and maybe a little more confident.
While I agree that the duality was not really highlighted enough, I still feel like the struggle between the two parts kind of worked. Seeing She-Hulk get everything she wants while Jen got nothing emphasized the gap between them, even if the two didn't didn't feel distinct enough.
It kind of baffles me how much hate this show has gotten, when it seems very clear that the writers of this show not only expected this exact response but they baked it right into the show and decided to brilliantly lean into that. I say brilliantly because I'd hedge a guess that a non-zero amount of people watched the show just to criticize it, which still contributes to overall viewership. By knowing exactly how a certain group of people would treat this show, they decided to have a laugh and keep the conversation going by poking the "trolls" (who were honestly so easy to rattle it's kind of embarrassing).
I will say I was a little frustrated with a minor detail of the finale and the resolution of the season.
Take the lawyer awards ceremony as an example -- if that were a real world scenario, the power would have been cut before the hidden camera video played for that long. For goodness sakes, that's a room full of lawyers, right? In 2022 I feel like people have more of an understanding of the unfair power dynamics of revenge p0rn (the video wasn't exactly that, but was deliberately made in such a way that is meant to mimic revenge p0rn). I honestly feel like the power would've been flipped quickly and that it might've been shut off before she "lost control." But anyways, that's what they decided to do, and it help set them up for the next season, if there is one.
Overall, I had so many laughs watching this show, even if I wasn't necessarily rooting for or against Jen. The biggest thing I got a kick out of was how they knew what type of negative feedback they were going to get, and proactively made fun of it in their own show.
I actually like that they didn't go over the top with making her likable right out of the gate (or ever, arguably-- she made some shortsighted choices)..Instead of bending over backwards to attempt to win over their haters, they chose to show a more human female character who has really common flaws (which you astutely pointed out in your video).
I'm curious to see where things go, if they get a chance to continue the story.
Dude this was the best analyses of the show and character of Jen. I never really knew why I felt disappointed about the finale, I felt like something was missing. She just had the whole fourth wall break scene but then everything was OK after that. it felt unresolved, thanks for pointing out why. I was so hyped by her losing control that I was genuinely hyped and curious to see how she can overcome that and also win over the public and proving that she wasn't a monster they made her out to be (and maybe they can slot in a message about how women are unfairly scrutinized and embarrassed publicly), but instead she went back to court and everything was OK. I don't think the show is that bad but I'm glad somebody addressed the main issue I had that i couldn't quite articulate myself, instead of calling the show a man-hating feminist, woke blah blah blah.
Really hoping your UA-cam channel picks ups bro, we need more well thought out videos like this. Your way of thinking is helping me with analyzing media and hopefully I can take these lessons and apply them in my own story, for example that first point you made about how the show introduced us to the protagonist's worst feature or flaw instead of getting us to know her better before introducing us to her flaws. its an interesting take that i didn't think about, but I'm glad i learned it.
First thing i need to learn before writing though is proper grammar though, as whoever is reading this can tell, i got issues with that lol.
But great video, keep it up.
Thank you so so much, truly. Really warms my heart reading this. I'm glad I impressed and really happy you could take something away from this!
I had the same feelings regarding the show as you've described, so I'm also glad I managed to speak your mind.
And your grammar seems more than fine, in my modest opinion! Cut yourself some slack. Have you seen how others type online? lol
@@failureoncommand Thanks so much man.
I believe your analysis is more in the lines of how the writers should have written her as opposed to how they actually wrote her. If they really intended for her to face any consequences for her actions, she would be called out for her behaviour more than she was on the show. If we were to consider her positive character traits, they weren't written well enough for viewers to be convinced of her having a good enough side. Jen didn't have to be likeable from the beginning; she only had to learn from her flaws and grow out of them. Inherent goodness doesn't necessarily make for good writing. With the direction suggested in your video, this series would have been much much much better executed and perceived.
Thanks for the very articulate comment!
While I agree that she wasn't called out for her bad behavior nearly enough, she did clearly face consequences by the end, that being her punishment for losing control in episode 8. She did "learn from her flaws and grow out of them", but in a rushed, haphazard, half-assed manner that sort of started off decent but then really bungled the landing.
@@failureoncommand can't help but agree when you put it that way. Although, I maintain that the impact of her behaviour wasn't fleshed out properly for it to be considered real consequences. While they did punish her for her behavior in e8, the punishment itself had no impact upon the climax. In the end, she simply changed the ending to suit herself which totally and entirely defeated the purpose of her facing any consequences.
@@bhavatirao9350 Agreed!
I agree with this take. But they *could* have turned it around in that last episode. Imagine Jen's character accepting the blame, calling back to Bruce's advice, accepting her new powers, and then doing exactly what Matt advised her to do - save the day as She-Hulk and then put the bad guys away as Jen Walters. You could have wrapped it all up in a nice bow and actually made all the previous episodes worth watching. Instead, it was a giant middle finger and everything was wiped away. I guess the writers just considered that kind of ending to be 'too formulaic' and decided to get cute vs. giving us a good payoff.
Well said. And this would be the first time a character that started off hated was slowly become a likable and even loved over time. An example I can think of is ahsoka Tano from Star wars. First season or even the first two seasons she was a very character. She was as arrogant as a teenager because she literally was an arrogant teenager. But actually learned and grew over time physically and emotionally as a person, she slowly became better in attitude and better as a character. And over time many people group to like her as a character and she became many people's favorite.
Seahawk absolutely could have been just like that. Maybe she was hated and insufferable in the beginning and overtime we learned to like her. It could have delivered it way better than how they did it here. It truly is such a missed opportunity.
i'd like to add one thing to your analysis.
i don't necessarily agree when you say that Jen's flaws are just character flaws, and not meant to represent the writers' worldview. in fact, i'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is, but that's beside the point.
my major issue with that character portrayal is that the lines that are spoken don't represent what actually happens.
Jen says she's great at controlling anger, while at the same time getting angry about it.
and that to me is a huge contradiction (paired with the fact that towards the end of the series she gets angry again).
on top of this basic contradiction, there's also the fact that Jen's anger control doesn't seem to obey any particular logic, except what fits the story at the moment, which to me is a sign of bad writing.
when she first turns into She-Hulk she's able to control herself pretty fine, and the meaning that said scene wants to convey is pretty obvious: they want to establish that She-Hulk is a better Hulk than the Hulk (a cliche that has been overly used by disney in recent years when it comes to writing strong female characters: they're already great and fantastic and perfect from the get go; it's impossible for them to fail at anything and if they do, they'll solve the problem in a matter of minutes or the problem will fix itself just like that; they're usually immune to consequences of their actions and always have some side characters rambling about how awesome they are even if said awesomeness is never actually shown; their character arc is something like "they are perfect already, they just need to realise that they are, a truth that has been hidden from them by the evil patriarchy that's keeping them down. once they do, they'll become even more perfect").
Then she gets angry when she's giving her third wave feminist speech, and that seems to work as a way to underline what she's saying.
She goes berserk at the end of the season when her privacy is violated and her big moment at the award gets wrecked, and that's pretty understandable, but then she's in control when literally attacked by thugs on the street at night.
i don't know about you but the logic behind her anger management seems quite flimsy to me.
or rather, it's flimsy in the context of the plot, but pretty consistent if you frame it as meta commentary on what women go through in their daily life according to a third wave feminist.
Thanks for the very detailed comment.
To me, Jen's flaws aren't representative of the writers' worldview because of the trajectory of her character arc. I'll elaborate on that when I reply on your other points below.
The lines that are spoken don't represent what actually happens. I don't know if I failed to communicate it effectively in the video, but one of the points I was trying to stress on the most was that this is intentional. Jen says she is great at controlling her anger... But she isn't, and that's the point. She thinks she is because she's cocky and ignorant . She's ignorant of how hard it is for one to control their anger when they wield such immense power, when they can cause massive change with their power. I elaborate on this extensively in Chapter 1 of the video. So no, at least to me, this isn't a contradiction, but rather the whole point. I believe the writers meant to paint these as flaws, because of what happens at the end of Episode 8.
You pair this with the fact that towards the end of the series she gets angry again, that being episode 8. That is exactly what I refer to in the video. In episode 8, she loses her temper, causes major harm to public property and almost hurts innocents along the way. It's not painted as a good or justified thing, but rather portrayed correctly as wrong, as an overreaction. So the writers do NOT think that this is okay. To me, this is finally the instance where she realizes that she isn't great at controlling her anger and that it isn't as easy as she believes. This notion is supported by the fact that the writers paint this breakdown in a clearly unfavorable light. It's further supported by the scene in episode 9 where she seems like she wants to beat Todd up but ends up telling him she'll see him in court. It is obviously meant to showcase that she is _now_ in control of her anger, that she has matured enough to take him to court instead of beating him up.
So it isn't a contradiction. It's her character arc. She thinks she can control her anger, later discovers that she can't, and afterwards learns to. That was the whole point of my video, and it saddens me that that was not clear to you, through either a fault of mine or yours.
As for the recent Disney "strong female protagonist" cliche, I won't deny that. It's prevalent in media that strives to make a quick buck off pretending they care about women, but instead rob them of their humanity by making them flawless shells of characters without interesting character arcs whatsoever. However, I don't see that as the case here at all, as Jen has flaws, flaws that are at least UNDENIABLY "solved" at the end of the series (the Todd scene I mentioned before). This scene would not exist if the writers didn't believe that Jen *needed* to prove that she has controlled her anger, which implies that they believe that she didn't know how to control it before.
As for the inconsistency of her anger, I don't really agree with it. To me, she's been pretty consistently BAD at controlling her anger all throughout, up until the conclusion of her character arc in episode 9. She can control herself when she first turns into the She-Hulk because there's no anger-inciting incident for her to go berserk over. Not until the guys start catcalling her, thus triggering a burst of anger which is stopped by Bruce. She's angry from the start, just never out-right raving mad and mindless, but rather always is reactionarily so. It's the equivalent of a normal, sentient human, who is incredibly angry and particularly prone to furious outbursts, as opposed to a an almost mindlessly mad fury like Bruce's (in his OG days). She's not angry when she's attacked by thugs in the street at night, because why would she be? She's not threatened. She knows she can kick their ass, and they aren't really provoking her much. This is in contrast to the guys in episode 1, who make her defenses rise high in a time where she is still unaware (mostly) that she's become a Hulk and has the power to stop them.
@@failureoncommand i have to admit that you made me change my mind on some things.
i wrote my comment halfway through the video, and already by the end i started to see the point you were making.
your answer to my comment further developed on that, and i thank you for the time you took to reply, it was very kind of yours.
i guess it's definitely possible to see it as you're seeing it, and while on some aspects of this reading you won me over, i still kinda retain my original opinion, although, for me to elaborate it would take a whole 20 minute video essay like yours i'm afraid ahahah.
anyway, i appreciated your video indeed, and more than that the insight and politeness of your reply.
you see, when i discuss topics like these online i'm always looking for positive exchanges of ideas and yet what i get most of the time is either a flame or a bunch of likes, none of which i'm particularly interested in, therefore i'm especially thankful for this conversation. you got yourself a like and a new subscriber my fella!
Man, you've frankly made my day. Thank you so much for all the kind words. I really feel you when it comes to these online discussions. There's rarely proper, healthy arguments, but instead just all-out wars or a general echo-chambering of ideas. So believe me, I am equally as thankful for this conversation, if not more. It is really refreshing to be able to have these healthy discussions like this, because at the end of the day, that's why I'm putting content out. To hear what people think, and to hopefully get them to listen to what I think, you know?
And this reply of yours truly makes me happy, because it feels like one of my first times really successfully accomplishing that as a content creator. Making this video allowed us to have a healthy, non-toxic discussion about this, and that's a milestone for me.
Thanks again, friend! Looking forward to hearing your opinions on other stuff I put out in the future, and to maybe seeing that 20 minute video essay of yours one day!
@@failureoncommand omg man, i'm moved, what else can i say!
this is the healthiest, most wholesome exchange i've had in a while on the internet.
i'm so glad to read such enthusiastic words buddy, for real, and i'm happy for having been the humble trigger for this conversation. it kinda feels meaningful now, doesn't it?
you can bet i'll keep following: clever takes and politeness together are such a rare and valuable feat on this platform, i woulndn't miss it for the world.
(by the way, i checked out you channel and i saw you have quite a few videos on house of the dragons, which i haven't seen yet. i'm planning to catch up sooner rather than later though, so i'll go back to those once i'm through with the show)
Thanks a dozen once again, man. Honestly, same: this is the most wholesome online exchange I've had in QUITE a while.
As for the House of the Dragon vids, no rush. They're not really all that much, save for the full series review. The Recap Shorts were merely an experiment with shorts, and have little value. I hope you enjoy the show when you get around to it though.
Great conversation, man. Cheers, and have a good evening! (or morning, depending on where you're at)
I really appreciate this point of view and nearly agree with everything you said. However, I feel that if her character did change she should've dealt with her consequences instead of telling everyone else to deal with theirs while she magic erases hers away.
I also think it was a flaw to have all the consequences crash down on her in one episode, it was too much
Thanks for commenting! Yeah, definitely, she should have actually had time to deal with the consequences as opposed to just jumping into a weird side-meta arc and skipping to a conclusion. That is what bungled the ending.
They shoulda had that guy react negatively to she-hulk's blood and turn into an actual troll larger than her that she had to beat which a buncha women, girls, etc. witnessed and cheer for her which led to her finally accepting becoming a superhero if it meant being a role model to them and turning her into a cultural icon. And I wish they made it something where the lawyer don't like superheroes and it was clear that they all didn't like them due to the justice system beliefs etc. to make her dislike of superheroism more understandable (despite her cousin being one) and even add more weight and depth to her arc by finding that balance in the end and make it her goal to get others in the justice system to realize the benefits of superheroes and make it part of her future arc once x-men and mutants are properly introduced and face their discrimination. Could be why she developed a relationship with Daredevil too.
Very interesting ideas as far as the lawyers vs. superheroes mentality; I feel like that could've added something fascinating to the story. I, however, don't agree as to your proposed ending; I think it defeats the purpose of them not wanting to do a big Marvel-esque finale (even though they effed up and did it either way).
@@failureoncommand true I get the part about the ending and actually agree with it now, it was a more grounded series (not as much spectacle) but they stubbed their foot on the grounded climax. So much potential for this show, I wish Marvel's phase four stuff wasn't so rushed cuz this coulda been a great show if the creators had more time (like every other phase four project) to flesh it out
I'm glad to hear someone break this down from a writers perspective. you didnt immediately jump on the same issues everyone else pointed out. you dealt with the material as presented and gave strong constructive critique. I would love to hear a longer more episodic break down, but this was fine.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate this comment.
I actually had written a longer, episode by episode break-down of the show, but I felt that it dragged on and wasn't really entertaining, so I scrapped that script entirely and rewrote it as such. Perhaps I'll focus more on episode by episode breakdowns moving into the future. Thanks again!
I don't know how I stumbled upon this video, but I really appreciate your deep and nuanced look at this series. It actually made me more appreciate what the writers were going for, even if the execution wasn't the best. (I heard they originally wanted the first episode to be the eighth episode, as a flashback, I wonder if that would have changed initial perceptions?) Though it's far from your only point, I think the reason why it's one of, if not the most hated series, is a lot simpler than character or general writing issues... people who dislike it aren't likely to stick around for the whole series and analyze the writing... I would wager it's just fragile men not liking female leads. Things can be good or bad and open to criticism regardless of the gender of the protagonist, but it's very clearly disproportionate - Ms. Marvel also got a lot of hate too, which I would also say is unwarranted. With many more female characters in the MCU, including replacements or counterparts to the main original male Avengers (except Captain America?) - it'll be interesting to see how the MCU fares moving forward and if we can ever get a female-led MCU movie or series that isn't review-bombed.
Thank you so much! I agree, there's definitely a lot to go into on the gender side of things, but that's a whole deep dive of its own...
A level-headed take on it. I think the lack of a character arc is at the heart of a lot of the criticism. Also, the idea that they were going to do something 'different' by being character-focused kinda tells me that they never watched the Netflix Marvel shows, or the ABC Marvel shows, that came several years before She-Hulk and absolutely pulled off character-driven shows in the Marvel universe (even if they weren't totally connected to the MCU). Hell, just watching a season of Daredevil would have given them the perfect launching point - both from a 'legal show' point of a view and a character arc point of view. In the end, it felt like Jen learned nothing throughout the whole season and that her character got to reset everything on a whim - totally eliminating an arc and totally decimating the importance of any of the supporting characters.
Agreed! I actually hadn't even considered that. The Netflix marvel series would definitely have been great sources of inspiration to draw from for something like this. It's a shame, really. But I guess that's the treatment you can expect when you're not official OFFICIAL MCU.
Studios keep trying to win feminism points by throwing in a line or two about real issues women face, yet they do it in such a terrible way it ends up making the female character look like an asshole and completely discredit their feelings (and real women’s feelings) in the process.
It’s so frustrating! It shouldn’t be this hard to represent a woman’s perspective in a genuine and nuanced way.
Yeah, I feel you. Sucks that it's women in the chair this time around, and they're still bungling up that representation.
My dude, she’s a poorly written character! No one writes like this on purpose. She never changes. I don’t blame She-Hulk, I blame the show writers. If it takes 8 episodes to do anything, it’s poorly written.
You’re giving these people way too much grace.
Thanks for commenting. I may be giving them "too much grace", but my intent is to analyze the media as it is, writers and their background aside. This is how it came off to me based on the trajectory of the plot.
However, I must say that your arguement isn't exactly factual.
Many people write like this on purpose. The concept of a flawed protagonist is not foreign. The concept of a dislikeable protagonist isn't foreign as well. Characters like Gregory House, like Walter White (at one point), and so on. People who are severely flawed but who are interesting to follow either way.
And I don't mean to strike a comparison between Jennifer Walters and House or Walter White, those are in two very different leagues of writing. I just mean to argue your main proposition that "no one writes like this on purpose", which is an unfair generalization that discards the Unsympathetic/Unlikeable Protagonist tropes entirely.
Character arc (as defined by Wikipedia): A character arc is the transformation or inner journey of a character OVER THE COURSE OF A STORY.
The Wikipedia page continues to explain that "character arcs often unfold beside the narrative arc in the following way", then continue to explain the traditional 3 Act Dramatic Narrative Structure, with the basic principles of inciting incident, turning point, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution.
Point I'm trying to make is that "If it takes 8 episodes to do anything, it's poorly written" may be one of the broadest negative statements I have ever read online, and disregards the basic principles of the character arc and dramatic narrative structure.
@@failureoncommand as a writer myself, and an avid watcher/absorber of all types of media, I disagree with your opinion on She-Hulk. Your comparison to Dr. House is ideal, because his character makes my point for me. He is flawed, but was never written to be disliked by his audience.
He’s a cantankerous curmudgeon who’s extremely good at his job. However, he’s clearly afraid to be alone, and cares for his students to a level that borders on holding on too tightly. Those he calls friends are a short list, but all know that when things go left, Dr. House is your dude! House is also not established with decades of lore to pull from, which makes She-Hulk’s poor excuse for show even sadder.
I’m fine with a disagreement in points of view. I can appreciate your attempt at civil discourse. However, your civility doesn’t change the fact that the She-Hulk show is a dumpster fire from its 1st 15 minutes to its last 15 minutes.
As for my comment about length of time to grab an audience, it’s quite simple. A show like The Madalorian grabs everyone in the first episode. But that’s not always going to happen. The Witcher on Netflix didn’t really catch until episode 3, but episode 2 is such a disjointed mess that most people who checked did it then. It’s later seasons are another story all together.
Arcane gets the ball rolling from the first 20 minutes. But, that’s for fans of animated drama. Wandavision gets you hooked from the first or second episodes, but loses some by the last. Moon Knight is similar.
You MUST hook your target audience within a sensible amount of time, or you’re failing. No one will sit and watch what they don’t like beyond an hour, unless the fanbase is built in. Classic writing follows this same thought process. Your “protagonist” must keep us invested in them and willing to keep following their story.
She-Hulk does that in old comics, but never in the show. Poor character traits make you immediately unlikeable? No. House proves that easily. But taking the character nowhere makes everyone feel like their time is being wasted.
And that’s what She-Hulk’s show is. A complete waste of time.
Thanks for taking the time to draft such an articulate reply. I take issue, however, with the fact that you didn't focus much on actually pointing out the flaws of the show, save for through the sweeping generalizations you made in the initial comment. You've instead only said that the show doesn't hook its audience, but have given no explanations as to the short-comings that constituted this failure, nor the how or the why. You've stated that She-Hulk doesn't keep you invested, at least in the show, but also offered no explanation as to why.
You also say that the character was taken nowhere. But how? I've offered up an 18 minute video of where I thought the character was being taken, and my own view of her character arc. If you want to say that the show took her nowhere, I'd appreciate it if you elaborated on that as opposed to presenting very specific examples from other media. Frankly, and I mean this with utmost respect, it feels to me more of a "look at me, I'm an avid media absorber" as opposed to an actual attempt at a valid argument.
I am indeed attempting civil discourse, and can also appreciate a difference in opinion. However, addressing the show the way you have (garbage, a waste of time, a dumpster fire) is more of you airing out some personal grievances, and not an actual civil, well-analyzed discussion.
P.S. House is heavily based on Sherlock Holmes, and has a lot of his traits pulled from the books and inspired by the great super-sleuth himself. So while there isn't a traditionally extensive lore to pull from, there is an inspirational basis. Moreover, I think you attribute to House a benevolence that exaggerates that presented in the show, but that is a conversation for another day lol
@@failureoncommand Ah, a slight insult mixed with a stronger argument for the granting of grace to the show. Okay. I’ll take your bait, and give you more explanation then, good sir.
She-Hulk’s origin, for example, in the show makes no sense. Dribs and drabs of blood turning her into a hulk could never make any sense to a rational mind. Her original comic book origin did two things supremely better. First, it portrayed her as a very competent lawyer while giving a scenario much more plausible to why she would become a hulk by injuring her to a near fatal state.
Instead, the show runners decided that Jen didn’t need to be saved, and made her a human “jaws of life” and strong enough to drag a 200+ lbs man from a car accident. The dragging part was less plausible, but let’s step up the unbelievability even further.
The Hulk would never let Banner sit their and die. EVERY TIME Bruce Banner is near death The Hulk prevents it. The accident alone would’ve forced his change in every other circumstance with the exception of when the writer decides it shouldn’t happen.
That’s called “The Hand Of The Author”. It’s too obvious. Jen saving herself and Bruce, again, “The Hand Of The Author”. That very obvious hand is the match that lights the dumpster fire.
Then the show runners admitted that they couldn’t even know where to start writing a lawyer show, and never bothered to even try. That’s why you bring in writers with such experience to help you. Did they do that? Nope!
Even when Jen’s competencies were questioned, she blew the “Evil White Male Co-Worker” off like a smarmy nuisance and her buddy made her out as a rockstar. They showed nothing, and told us everything. More poor writing on display. And the well goes even deeper.
Her promiscuity was put on display in the most tasteless way imaginable. I’m not against her being into the boys, as that’s a very much expressed part of her character in the comics. However, she had no chill in the show. That’s a small thing, but still a thing.
Her being better than Bruce as he tried to train her was laughable. They made him useless and his life experiences meaningless. You can use her treatment/dismissal of him as a character expression, but they never pulled any of it back. She never learned from those things. And they were supposed to be on really good terms? Friends even?
And the ending showed that more than anything else. They gave a middle finger to not only their audience, but to those people who cut the checks. If their goal is to burn up the fanbase, then not have another season, then they’ve achieved their goal. Otherwise, I don’t get it.
Poor writing is the crime. I don’t fault you for having a different opinion. It’s fine for people to disagree. However, I hope I’ve clarified my opinion a bit more now.
You've definitely clarified things. Thank you for taking the time to write all that, I really appreciate seeing this point of view made clear, concise, and organized. And while I don't agree with a lot of it, it makes sense, and I can understand it.
Agree to disagree, at the end of the day. I'm glad we managed to get a decent discussion out of it, though. Appreciate ya!
I think the show should've opened with that award ceremony and Jens subsequent violent outburst. She'd be put to Emil's old jail saying: well, that sucks, mah dudes. You are probably a bit confused. Let's rewind a bit, ok? Then we'd go to the wedding where we would see her being hit on by drunk creeps, mistreated by that bridezilla and abused by Titania. Bruce, who is also at the wedding, would then save Jen from her, which would make Jen angry and humiliated on the ride home. After the crash and the birth of She-Hulk, I'd keep almost everything the same (tweak the ending obv, and keep Titania the big bad behind Todd and his virgin army). That way the show would show us and not just tell us about Jens struggles and help garner sympathy for her. I think it would make her feel like a real person. It would also provide Titania the motivation to go after Jen, and not show up to the hearing without an explanation. oh and great vid btw :) instant sub
Thanks for the kind words, and for the fascinating thoughts! That's a very interesting variation to the story... I agree that it would definitely garner sympathy much better for Jen as a character.
I like this point of view. Her character growth is greatly blindsided it doesn't feel like she grew at all.
Thank you! That's exactly it.
I think this was a good premise and a welcome fresh angle for the MCU. Unfortunately, I don’t think the writers were good enough to convey such complexity, especially in the format of a sitcom, which means needing to be funny on top of great character development and plot. I agree that we were meant to see her as a brat in her initial interactions with Bruce. The problem is that the show seems to back up her claims by showing her seemingly able to beat him and to get a hold of the duality of the hulk form from the jump when we saw Bruce take years to get to the professor persona. They could have explained this with a bit of exposition…maybe she’s not as powerful as OG Hulk and so it’s easier for the duality or it’s because she got the blood from him after whatever scientific experiments he did on himself to allow for the hulk form to be controllable.
Additionally, over subsequent episodes the majority of the storyline don’t focus on the primary flaws of her arc (the cockiness and acceptance of her new reality). Too much time is devoted to her hunt for a man to date, her insecurities, and her lack of self-knowledge overall. It’s not that those aspects can’t co-exist, but episode to episode it was hard to know what journey she’s on. Not only did the finale fail to deliver but the middle episodes also failed to show gradual changes. The pay-off wasn’t there, and the set up was shaky.
Unfortunately too much of the negativity focused on the “wokeness” aspect so I don’t think there will be any self-reflection leading to an understanding that it wasn’t the politics…it’s that it wasn’t well written.
Thank you for the incredibly detailed comment. I agree on practically every regard.
The wonkiness of the middle parts of the journey, I think, is owed to something you mentioned: the writers' inability to juggle such complexity along with the necessities of a sitcom. Felt like they got carried away focusing on making it a funny and relatable "Jennifer Walters" story that they couldn't find spots to fit back in what I believe to be the general character arc at play. Additionally, as you've said, a lot of the show's issues could have been alleviated at least slightly with a few simple lines of exposition.
A very, very, very optimistic take on that crappy show.
Maybe, if you are right, when She-Hulk enters the "bellow" part of the hero's journey, we all gonna be cheering the writers and their complete and utter genius in hindsight...maybe.
Most likely not..
Perhaps more favorable than most of the internet has been, but I wouldn't call it optimistic.
I don't quite understand what "bellow part of the hero's journey" means. Would you care to elaborate?
16:51 But we didn't miss out the crucial transitory phase, episode eight was literally her crucial transitory phase. While episode nine was more an epilogue of things that we already knew.
Thank you for commenting. Honestly, I don't see it that way at all. SPOILERS:
Episode 8 was the climax of her development: her finally being put face to face with the fact that she has flaws, that she is not always in control. However, the episode ends with that realization coming to pass, as she holds that one guy up in the air and turns to look at the camera. The crucial transitory phases that follow should be her learning to come to terms with this realization, and making effort to actually get over it, accept it, and realize that she is indeed capable of anger, and to somewhat strive to keep it in check.
To me, that was what episode 9 should have done. Instead, it showed us Jen skip all those steps to land upon the final square of her development: her showing Todd that she does not intend to let anger control or cloud her by instead telling him she's taking him to court (as opposed to beating him up), and her affirming to the press that she has accepted the superhero part of her that She-Hulk is meant to play.
None of those are ever shown at any points prior; the last thing we see in episode 8 is her realizing the extents of her power. So to me, you are partially right, episode 9 was an epilogue, but it was not of things we already knew, as all we were shown within was new within Jen's character (her finally realizing AND controlling her anger and her accepting her role as a superhero).
@@failureoncommand But she already acknowledged that she is capable of anger at the beginning of the season finale, not to mention that suffered consequences from her actions by having her powers taken away. We also saw her pursuing legal action against Todd, showing that he was NOT intending to physically hurt him but to hold him accountable. I don't think we need to see her character get over or controlling her anger because that is what she was already doing.
She acknowledged that she is capable of anger but never did we see her come to terms with controlling that anger. She started to suffer consequences but it was immediately halted in order to throw us into the meta side-story.
The whole episode is supposed to revolve around this resolution, this crucial piece of her story. Her coming to terms with her anger and accepting her responsibilities as a superhero are no small things. And we only saw her do those after a meaningless side plot of meta commentary. She didn't do any growing on that meta adventure of hers. It was like a pause from the flow of her character arc, an unrelated side adventure, and then back to conclude.
After all the show had set up, I'd say we DID need to see her controlling her anger, because all we saw prior was her moping about losing her powers and a bit of the consequences of that.
@@failureoncommand Your argument that Jen needs to come to terms of her anger would make sense IF Jen intention was to physically hurt or kill the people who wronged her. But it's NOT her objective, her goal was to bring them to court to hold them accountable.
Irrelevant of her intention, the vast extents of her newfound strength, her lack of control over them, and her general recklessness puts people at risk of death or severe injury at all times. The greatest example of this is her extreme violence in the fight against Daredevil, both towards him and the surrounding area. Her intention is pure, of that I have no doubt, but her execution is flawed because she doesn't realize how huge her strength is until she loses control at the gala in episode 8.
If all I've put forward still doesn't convince you, with the arguments I've presented in the video and here, then we can just agree to disagree. We're looking at the situation differently. Either way, thank you for commenting. It was really interesting hearing your thoughts on the matter!
Blinding the positives... What positives? Other than Charlie Cox as Daredevil?
I enjoyed a lot of things in the show, but I understand that many others didn't. However, delving into that would be much more subjective than I wanted the scope of the video to be, as I tried my best to focus on analyzing Jen's character arc irrelevant of all else. Obviously, I was still very subjective, but hopefully you get my meaning.
I think the Jen's flaws argument could be an interesting angle but I think it's undermined by the fact that she's a better "hulk" than "the hulk". I think it would be a better plot point for Jen to be arrogant while still not knowing how to control her hulk abilities like Bruce can. This leaves room for growth and development, two things we really didn't see in the show.
The intent and execution are entirely different things. It was executed poorly and that made it a bad show even if I agree with your character analysis of Jen.
The runtime wasn't enough for this character to grow naturally. It felt abrupt. That ending was indeed awful. Instead of commenting on the formulaic nature of the MCU why didn't they do the opposite of that and then have the meta commentary? It would've at least salvaged this show.
4/10 show.
For sure. I think if they'd added one more episode and had a normal finale that didn't take up its entire runtime disrupting the whole narrative, the flow would have been much, much better. It's a shame, really.
Great breakdown. I think this is a thoughtful, well-produced review. I thought it was a really good show, with Jen/She-Hulk being a great character from the start, BUT I think the finale should have been split into two parts to give us that proper character conclusion. It could be great instead of really good.
Thank you so much, man. Means a lot coming from you.
Exactly; to me there's a lot of wasted potential here. With a better ending, the show could have really balanced itself out. 9 is a weird number to end a series on anyways...
@@failureoncommand Disney has been just being weird with how many episodes Marvel and Stars Wars get. Andor is 12, and it's utilizing those very well.
I’m glad you commented on this trend of hating she hulk. Your style is completely original and I like your unique perspective on Jennifer’s arc which I felt was perfectly articulated! Thank You!
You've commented on 3 of my videos thus far (that I've seen) and honestly, each comment is sweeter than the last. Thank you so much, you truly flatter me. I'm honored I could impress, and hope to continue doing so if you plan to stick around with the channel!
@@failureoncommand The first 3 of many! I’ll stay tuned and I’m excited to see what’s next!
Is the writers were more worried about making a good show instead of just strong in the trolls then maybe it would have actually turned out decent. Because there is some potential from this character and eating some of the actions taken in the writing. And I don't know what it is about the actress, but there's something about it that I kind of like and want to like when it comes to your character. I feel like if she was given better material to work with then she would have given us a better She-Hulk from the process.
But instead they wasted it in order to get one back at the trolls only if anything prove them right.
Definitely a lot of wasted potential here.
To make it work they just needed to have her saying "what's the worst that could happen?" every now and then.
Lol
I watched it and rolled my eyes a few times but it wasn't half as bad as folks made it out to be. It was a light comedy show from a female point of view within the world of superheroes.
I find it funny how disney's attempt to keep the success of the first 3 mcu phases by pissing on and destroying everything people liked.. All the new characters come off as an annoying little sister who wants to play with the older kids while at the same time making fun of them
Great analysis.
I wonder, how much writers trolling the audience? Had to do with shaping the show?
And how correct you are with this analysis?
Not trying to look on down side here. Just trying to look at from both angles.
But, it's a Interesting view.
Thank you! You put forth some interesting questions. It's always important to look at things like this from multiple angles, so yeah.
This made me dislike the show a little bit. I defended the show for a while. Mad it 6 or 7 episodes before I dropped it. In those episodes it really seemed that her negative traits were praised or valid. Took them a little too long before bringing them to bare. I might go back and try it again.
I would recommend at least finishing it. It'll make more sense once you see the full scope of things, even if you do get ultimately disappointed with the finale.
This is a well thought out and well presented analysis of the show, which would be a great defense of the intent behind it, even if it isn't a great defense of the skill of the writers.... IF the writers hadn't come out and publicly stated that the flaws were NOT placed there to develop and arc for Jen; but the intent was, in fact, to push an agenda and piss of as many "fans" as they could.
I actually hadn't delved much into the show background, as far as the writers and their intent went, because I was so overwhelmed with the amount of hate that it put me off. I tried to only focus on what I was seeing within the context of the show itself, irrelevant of external factors. However, I should have some read some interviews either way.
After reading this comment of yours, I tried to find some articles on what you'd mentioned, but I can't seem to find any of the writers having said that anywhere. It's been a while so they're likely buried at this point. Would you please link me to where that was said, please?
@@failureoncommand @Failure On Command Ok well I tried to reply twice w/ links but for some reason my posts are getting auto deleted so. No links this time.
There is the interview the team did with Variety where they admit that they wrote the show in a way specifically to elicit certain criticisms so that they could make fun of the people who didn't like the show.
And then there is the interview the Director did w/ Screen Rant where she indicates that villainizing the fans was the intent from the very beginning.
@@failureoncommand Ok looks like the issue was the Link to Variety... possibly because the article title contains the F word. But if you google Variety and She-Hulk Finale you it should be able to find it.
I read through the article, and nowhere here did anyone say that the intent was to "push an agenda" or that the flaws were placed there to piss off fans. They mention that they anticipated a lot of the hate and fought back against it, but that's only implied to be the hate that is being spewed by people with an aversion to women superheroes in general.
Specifically, the type of fan behavior/outlook that the writers claim to be toxic is the one later presented by the Intelligencia incels within the show. This behavior is basically restricted to people just being unaccepting of women superheroes, people who only sexualize that hero, people who get overly pissed off because they believe she doesn't deserve her powers (which is a actually just a plot element: the hero slowly proving themselves to be worthy of their powers), and other similar behavior displayed by members of the Intelligencia crew.
I can understand that it looks like the writers were just oppositional to all negativity in general, because the writers themselves were a bit heavy with their portrayal of these toxic internet communities. I feel like they made them too common-place, normal, and easy to join, which did not make sense and wasn't fair to online communities in general. It's fairly common to see wells of negativity surrounding certain media, but it isn't that easy to stumble upon mass hate groups who harbor death wishes upon creators of said media or people associated with it.
So yeah, I do think the writers of the show irked more people than they intended with their portrayal of these "trolls", but I believe that their intent was to only target the trolls with a genuinely misogynistic perspective upon female superheroes and protagonists in general. They didn't, however, seek to annoy all fans in general just for the fuck of it, and nowhere did they defend Jen's initial toxic behavior.
@@failureoncommand I suppose it doesn't state it in absolute terms but they indication is pretty strong. Both that they knew that they would receive criticism and that they were banking on it so that they could make that criticism the villain of the show and feel empowered to dismiss it. Because they are writing geniuses who created the most intelligent and well written show in existence.
From Screen Rant
Q: That's exactly what I wanted to talk about next. Was it always the plan to have toxic fandom as the season's villain? And can you talk to me about the irony of seeing that play out in the real world while knowing it was the Big Bad of the season?
Kat Coiro: Well, I'll say the writers are so connected to the Twitterverse, and so they crafted this Big Bad that was the toxic fanbase. I am not on Twitter. I'm only on Instagram, so I hadn't experienced it in the way they had. But when the show came out, I started getting these really nasty messages and just stuff you can't even imagine. But I kind of took it with a grain of salt, because I knew where we were going.
And what I noticed is that the criticism started petering out because I think even the trolls realized that by being nasty and negative, they're playing right into our hands, thereby proving that we are intelligent, which is the thing they don't want to admit that we ladies are.
From Variety
Q:In addition to breaking the fourth wall, the finale tackles some of the exact same trolling comments that Marvel fans have been making. How did it feel to watch that happen as the show aired, knowing how the finale would turn out?
Tatiana Maslany: Jessica Gao is a genius and knows about the culture we’re living in and her position in it when she’s writing these stories about a woman superhero. She knows what that response is going to be. As a cast, it was delightful sending each other these troll responses, like “Oh my god, give them a week and then they’re going to literally see this pop up verbatim in the show and become the villains of the show.” It was thrilling.
Q: Were you expecting to face the trolls when you signed on for the show?
Tatiana Maslany: Reading the script, it was so true. There’s so much resistance to a woman just existing in that space of superheroes. There’s always going to be that. I sort of anticipated it. It’s why I also feel it’s important. There’s such an entitlement to space held by certain people, and to even exist as She-Hulk is like a fuck-you, and I love that.
Q: How did it feel to accurately predict what the trolls would be saying?
Jessica Gao: Our writers room opened three years ago. The fact that we were able to predict what the reaction was going to be, what a lot of the trolling comments were going to be, really shows how very tired and unoriginal these trolls are. That really tickled me because the little troll that lives inside of me really loves trolling the trolls.
I haven’t seen the show but it seems like it was trying to be the Marvel equivalent of “Fleabag.” A show that supports and mocks its female characters in equal measure. You see the good and the bad in all the characters in a fair way. Don’t try to be Phoebe Waller Bridge unless you ARE Phoebe Waller Bridge.
Can't say I've seen that, but I think I get the general sense of what you're trying to say.
I really like your more nuanced take on the show. Nowadays it's always either fanboys that will defend everything and anything or haters who will see every little flaw and will claim that everything is woke or has an agenda. It's quite refreshing seeing someone taking the middle road.
Thank you so much! Tried my best to give it a fair shake.
I didn’t think it was that bad , people just didn’t want to see any female leads . I’m a fan of the comics so I’ll always Love Jennifer , most haters never read the comics and think she was just invented. I think the timing was off because now allot of people were already on a marvel hate train and feeling that highlighting female characters isn’t a good idea . Many were so over the top with their hatred for this show which made me not take them seriously
I agree
Jessica Gao before the release of She-Hulk: I’ve read a lot of the comics, especially the John Byrne run; I love that run.
Jessica Gao after the show’s release: We thought it would be so cool if we took all of the legitimate criticizm made by true She-Hulk fans and dilute it down into a group of terminally online, sexist trolls who we could make the villains of the show.
Turning legitimate complaints into strawmen in order to victimize your main character: definitely not neo-feminist propaganda.
I don't think the situation is as straight-forward as you're making it out to be, but I see your point.
I didn’t like her enough to continue watching it. I know someone who talks and acts like her that I’m not a fan of and it’s hard to shake the association. Sounds like they dropped the ball so I’m not missing much.
Jen Walters gains powers and then uses them to get laid, get a job, jump start her career, brag about how great she is. She never helps anyone but herself, doesn't care about anything unless it's about her. She could have fun, but waits around for some man. Jen Walters is boring. The world revolves around her, but we don't care. Worse she never learns a lesson, never changes, perfect the way she is. You are giving these Writers credit. They hate this source material.
Feels like you either didn't finish the show or just didn't get the point. The main issue the show goes over is Jen coming to terms with her She-Hulk-ness and the fact that She-Hulk seems to get everything right for her, while normal Jen struggles to accomplish anything.
She helps other, not all the time, but that's natural as the whole point is that she's LEARNING to become a superhero.
"She could have fun, but waits around for some man" I don't know even know what that means.
She does learn her lesson and change by the end, but that change is handled poorly, which is a main aspect of this video.
I appreciate this perspective, it's important to me as a writer.
I'm glad I could offer up something of value!
@@failureoncommand I take it where I can find it.
You wanna talk about overambitious? If it wants to be a legal drama the it's inviting comparison to The Good Wife. Bringing in Daredevil just reminds us of the previous highly popular series about a superhero lawyer. She Hulk the series has not found its own niche in the market. Even as it criticises MCU for being derivative, it isn't really terribly original itself.
She can't do anything about an attack by a street gang other than go to the law? Um.... that's not because she's a woman. That's because she's a human being. I didn't watch She Hulk because it is widely panned and I didn't like the other Marvel shows I tried out. But the guest star pop star twerking with her made it very unappealing even though I used to love the star in her prior show Orphan Black.
Good vid. Any UA-cam channels you like or inspire you?
Thanks! Definitely several channels in the way of inspiration: Filmento, The Cosmonaut Variety Hour, HiTop Films, and Pillar of Garbage. More recently, I've been keeping up with others like Captain Midnight and Just Write. There are also a bunch in terms of just non-video-essay reviews, like Angry Joe, Jeremy Jahns, and Ryan George (Pitch Meetings).
As far as just general UA-cam channels I like, you got the usual suspects: Jacksfilms, penguinz0, Drew Gooden, Danny Gonzalez, Kurtis Conner, Cody Co, Pyrocynical, Leon Lush, Elvis The Alien, Bionic Pig, gameranx, Ranton, and a bunch others. Props to Finzar for the editing side of UA-cam; much learned there.
I liked her the writing was just all over the place in quality
There were many dips, for sure.
This honestly makes Morbius look like a masterpiece.
SheHulk Attorney at Law;
First, a show about a woman who wants to get laid, then a ‘legal’ comedy a distant second, and a superhero show way way back in last.
Blokes don’t want to see it. Women definitely don’t want to see it. What was the point?
I'm confused as to whether you've actually even seen the video or just decided to diss the show regardless.
I like the way u recap the series and i agree with u 👌🏻keeping like this
The show just wasn't very good. Cheap CGI did not help. The "I control anger because I am woman" bit is such a pathetic and lazy way to write a character as being a strong woman. Clearly they have no idea how hard it is to have your manhood constantly challenged by not only women, but most men we encounter. Playing sports you get called a pussy and worse all the damn time.
I think your analysis emphasizes the best possible interpretation of the writers' script at every turn and ignores the comments of the writers and actors to the media that clearly indicate their misandry. Yes, I initially saw Jen's rant to Bruce as the benchmark of her personality from which she would grow and mature. She never did and the last episode was the ultimate expression of her childish "Make it didn't happen!" avoidance of responsibility.
The intention to show that she grew out of her angry, over-confident ways is there. The part where she does the growing is skipped, but they show you that final scene with Todd that's meant to tell you she did grow.
Another commenter said the same thing as you in regards to the writers and their comments to the media, which I'd avoided at first. After that comment, I did my research, and I don't think that anywhere (that I saw) they said anything to indicate that they supported Jen's mindset and worldview. They were clear about wanting to troll toxic fans and were hellbent on doing so, hyper-fixating on the matter, but the implied target of that trolling is meant to be fans whose personalities are later represented by those Intelligencia incels... Meaning, mostly, misogynists.
THANK YOU SO MUCH! For the life of me, I can't find a single video on this series that's not either "It sucks because WOKE WAHMEN!" or "It's awesome, FUCK YOUR OPINION INCEL!" This is pretty much the heart of the matter: it's a series that could've worked with just a few minor tweaks, namely a.) making Jen sympathetic in the first episode, instead of later episodes, and b.) cutting out that stupid fourth wall break in the final episode, because that was just lazy writing to the max.
Thank YOU! That was my own gripe as well, as it seemed like no one on the mainstream Internet was trying to approach this in a semi-neutral way. I tried my best to remain balanced and as fair as can be, so I truly appreciate the fact that you appreciated that. Means a lot!
But cutting out fourth wall breaks wouldn't be accurate to the source
@@АлексейМомот-щ7о READ. MY. COMMENT! I clearly said to cut out the particular fourth wall break IN THE FINAL EPISODE, not throughout the series! You can still have fourth wall breaks, but that one took it to an unnecessary extreme that basically gave an excuse for the writers to not truly resolve anything.
Your review is smarter than the show
Thank you brother. After watching so many she Hulk sucks and MCU is dead videos, I was really looking for a video like yours. People have been very negative about this show and MCU in general recently. People are just hating it for the sake of hating it. I Really loved the analysis and I will watch the show with your ideas in regards.
Thank you so much, I really appreciate this comment! I tried my best to put forward a balanced kind of review, you know?
I thought I was crazy when everyone liked the finale except me. I thought it took away from Jen's journey as well as the story of the season. It didn't feel like a season finale, it made the show feel incomplete.
And this is coming from someone who actually liked the rest of the show and liked Jen aa a character, but i still think the ending did a massive disservice to the plot.
It was also just straight-up jarring because the rest of the show did not set up that type of fourth wall break. Talking to the audience is one thing, but straight up breaking through the disney+ window to walk into the "real world" is another.
Yeah, that's very aptly put. Glad I could kinda speak your mind.
You're giving way too much credit to the writers. It's a pity party for a very unlikable protagonist. Stubborn, selfish and entitled. Disgusting.
Call me your local bank the way I be giving out all this credit
Fragile men: stop making women characters flawless, it hurts my feelings!
Also fragile men: stop making women characters flawed, it hurts my feelings!
Look at you projecting, LOL 😂.
@@drewr1843 oops, triggered you
@@BusterDarcy There you go projecting again 🤣.
@@drewr1843 so strange how you felt the need to respond twice on a comment calling out fragile men… so strange and obvious your little feelings have been hurt lol
@@BusterDarcy Says the one who also continues to reply.. talk about fragile, lmfao 🤣🤪.
Almost great? The whole thing was awful haha
Its failures is what I'm discussing in the video, character development wise... I think it could have been great, and I'm discussing why it wasn't.
E
Yeeeah...no this show is really piss poor bad. The character "flaw" is a common trend with the "M-She-U" phase 4. It's only character growth if she makes some progress rather than divulge deeper into the stereotypes and never admitting her flaws/apologizing for her own faults. Which she doesn't...just Karen's her way to get everything resolved and get what she wants.
Nice vid
Thanks man!
IT SUCKED
WOAH