• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Joss Whedon's S.H.I.E.L.D to ABC!

Has it been revealed when it will be set? I hope it jumps back in time, it would be good to see some stories set around Captain America's era (if SHIELD were formed then, I can't quite remember if they were referenced in the film at this moment) and even possibly around the time of the other movies.

A deleted line from Nick Fury in Captain America: The First Avenger stated that the division that Philips, Stark, Erskine, Carter, ect; all worked for, the SSR, became SHIELD after the war. This contradicts the first Iron Man movie in which SHIELD is said to be a new department, but is consistent with Iron Man 2, which states that Howard Stark was a founding member of SHIELD. YMMV.

As for stuff relating to the other movies, I would love to see some resolution to the dangling Samuel Sterns thread from TIH.
 
Perhaps the name of S.H.I.E.L.D. designated a new official description for a department that had already been in existence, with a different title but similar form and function. (there are plenty of real-world examples)
 
They need to hire Zach Levi for this show. Other than that, I have no demands.

...or would also bringing in Adam Baldwin be too geeky a move? Next thing you know, Jeffster is playing the S.H.I.E.L.D. company picnic.

Ooh...Yvonne Strahovski as Ms. Marvel!
 
^Except that Whedon's already said that he wants the show to stand apart from the movie universe.
It doesn't make much sense to me. The movie universe is the only reason this series is made in the first place. Without it, a SHIELD series is just a series about regular spies, isn't it? It's a bit like doing a Gotham Central series without any reference to Batman or Commissioner Gordon.
 
I think 'stand apart from' means that it won't necessarily just be used to set up Avengers 2 or 3 or will have to feature the movie characters every week. I have no doubt that it will be set in the same continuity as the movie.
 
It doesn't make much sense to me. The movie universe is the only reason this series is made in the first place. Without it, a SHIELD series is just a series about regular spies, isn't it? It's a bit like doing a Gotham Central series without any reference to Batman or Commissioner Gordon.

There was a critically acclaimed comic for a while called Gotham Central, which was about the officers of the Gotham PD, trying to do their jobs in a world where Batman and supervillains existed. Certainly Batman and Gordon were referenced, but the series was about what happened when Batman wasn't around, or after he'd done his thing and swung off into the shadows. There's also a long-running comic called Powers based on the same idea, exploring how ordinary cops cope with doing their jobs in a world where superhumans exist and constantly battle each other; there's already been one effort to bring Powers to television, and I believe a second attempt is in development. The TrekBBS's own Keith R. A. DeCandido has written a book called SCPD: The Case of the Claw, which is the first in a series of novels dealing with that same idea. There's also Marvel's Damage Control, a series about a company that cleans up the messes left by superpowered battles.

Heck, you could even count My Super Ex-Girlfriend as part of the genre of stories about superhero universes told from normal people's perspective. We've seen countless stories about the heroes themselves; surely it's also worth exploring the stories of everybody else, the people who have to cope with being normal in a world of superbeings. Whedon has said as much about this show:
"Well, what does S.H.I.E.L.D. have that the other superheroes don't? And that, to me, is that they're not superheroes," said Whedon. "But they live in that universe. Even though they're a big organization, that [lack of powers] makes them underdogs, and that's interesting to me."
 
^I apologise for repeating myself (I'm sure i mentioned this earlier in the thread) but over the years on the BBS, I've seen a lot of people say that they'd like to see a Gotham PD-type show, featuring the cops in that city, but with Batman and various villains being referred to without actually appearing. Indeed, the original premise for Lois and Clark did not feature Superman, who would have been referred to but not mentioned.

So this looks to be in the same vein.
 
There was a critically acclaimed comic for a while called Gotham Central, which was about the officers of the Gotham PD, trying to do their jobs in a world where Batman and supervillains existed.
I know. And the whole point of Gotham Central was that it took place in Gotham City and elements of the Batman mythos were constantly used and referenced. Now Whedon saying that he wants the SHIELD series to "stand apart from the Marvel movie universe" sounds to me like a Gotham Central show which would never mention the Batman.
 
There was a critically acclaimed comic for a while called Gotham Central, which was about the officers of the Gotham PD, trying to do their jobs in a world where Batman and supervillains existed.
I know. And the whole point of Gotham Central was that it took place in Gotham City and elements of the Batman mythos were constantly used and referenced. Now Whedon saying that he wants the SHIELD series to "stand apart from the Marvel movie universe" sounds to me like a Gotham Central show which would never mention the Batman.

A Batman show without Batman will fail just like Birds of Prey tv show did.
 
Now Whedon saying that he wants the SHIELD series to "stand apart from the Marvel movie universe" sounds to me like a Gotham Central show which would never mention the Batman.

I think that's a surprising way to interpret that particular phrase. He never said it wouldn't mention anything from the movies. He just meant that it needs to be its own thing -- part of the same universe, but with its own stories to tell rather than just being an appendage of the movies. Which, really, is the only way to do it. Look at any other spinoff series. Look at Deep Space Nine or Voyager -- they weren't constantly tying into The Next Generation, but went off and told their own stories set in the same universe. They sometimes connected to some of the same continuity elements, like the Klingons or the Ferengi or the Maquis or Q or whatever, but they established themselves as their own independent entities with their own characters and story arcs. Conversely, when TNG went to movies, it avoided overt tie-ins to the Dominion War arc that was occurring on DS9 at the same time. After all, it was a separate entity with a target audience that might not watch the other productions set in the same universe -- and with a different set of creators who couldn't do their jobs if they were constantly having to follow someone else's lead.

For a Whedonverse example, look at Angel. Although it did spin off two characters from Buffy and did a fair number of crossovers while they were on the same network, it nonetheless set its own largely separate course, building its stories around new ideas rather than just continuing arcs from Buffy. And once Buffy moved to a different network, the two shows became even more independent of each other.

So really, Whedon isn't saying anything new here. His approach is the same that the approach to any spinoff would be. Whatever its connections, a spinoff is still a separate work, still its own production with its own staff, and it needs to strike its own course because that's the only practical way to do it. That doesn't mean it will never reference its source material, but it does mean that, on the whole, it has to define its own independent direction.
 
Joss Whedon and Clark Gregg talk about S.H.I.E.L.D.

Joss said...
"It's going to be a very standalone show," he said. "We'll do what we always do which is every episode will conclude and you’ll have taken away your story, but there will be a through line running throughout. It will not be in the foreground but as in all of these shows, it will probably take foreground at some point, many seasons down the road God willing."

Clark said...
"Joss is going to do what I'm sure will be a really cool, insanely funny, exciting 'S.H.I.E.L.D.' TV show with Coulson on a slab, wherever the S.H.I.E.L.D. graveyard is." Gregg told MTV. "It's funny. I was watching ... some of the scenes from Avengers where everyone is like Coulson's down. Agent Coulson's down. And there's a lot of blood. And I'm thinking, you know what? I might be kind of dead. I'm having to [accept my fate]. I'm scared that I'm going to go to 'Thor,' and they're going to have Agent Coulson's funeral. I got way too attached to this character."
 
First character details!

SKYE | This late-20s woman sounds like a dream: fun, smart, caring and confident – with an ability to get the upper hand by using her wit and charm.

AGENT GRANT WARD | Quite the physical specimen and “cool under fire,” he sometimes botches interpersonal relations. He’s a quiet one with a bit of a temper, but he’s the kind of guy that grows on you.

AGENT ALTHEA RICE | Also known as “The Calvary,” this hard-core soldier has crazy skills when it comes to weapons and being a pilot. But her experiences have left her very quiet and a little damaged.

AGENT LEO FITZ and AGENT JEMMA SIMMONS | These two came through training together and still choose to spend most of their time in each other’s company. Their sibling-like relationship is reinforced by their shared nerd tendencies – she deals with biology and chemistry, he’s a whiz at the technical side of weaponry.
 
Most cases yes. They're just usually a small snippet of the characters (like the ones posted is a perfect example). At least the ones that I've had experience reading.


Interesting sounding characters. Casting is going to be fascinating to keep track off.
 
Sure. If they get too specific with ethnicity, age or even gender, they might cheat themselves out of the best actor for the job. Recall that the legend is that Gene Rodenberry was initially against casting Patrick Stewart as Picard because Stewart wasn't French! Better for casting directors to be vague and non-specific about a characters description, and see who gets the part right.
 
Last edited:
To add a couple specific examples to what Turtletrekker said:

The character of Claudette Wyms in The Shield was originally supposed to be male, but the role ultimately went to CCH Pounder. Hell, for that matter, she was originally up for C.J. Cregg in The West Wing, but I can't imagine anyone other than Allison Janney in that role.
 
Recall that the legend is that Gene Rodenberry was initially against casting Patrick Stewart as Picard because Stewart wasn't French! Better for casting directors to be vague and non-specific about a characters description, and see who gets the part right.

Also the security chief was called "Macha" Hernandez until they decided to cast a pale blond woman in the role and changed her name to Tasha Yar -- and Data was supposed to be Asian or Pacific Islander in appearance. In DS9, the doctor was going to be Julian Amoros until they cast Siddig el Fadil (as he was then known) in the role and changed the character's surname to the Arabic "Bashir."

And of course Ripley in Alien was written as male -- or rather, all the roles were written as gender-neutral and the producers cast accordingly.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top