12 minute read
Type of car mirror that might have fuzzy dice hanging from it
business manager Louis Aaron ’23
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Advertisement
president Thomas E. Weber ’89
vice president Craig Bloom ’88
second vice president David Baumgarten ’06
secretary Chanakya A. Sethi ’07
treasurer Douglas Widmann ’90
assistant treasurer Kavita Saini ’09
trustees Francesca Barber Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John G. Horan ’74 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Abigail Williams ’14 Tyler Woulfe ’07
trustees ex officio Emma Treadway ’22 Louis Aaron ’23
145TH MANAGING BOARD
managing editors Harsimran Makkad ’22 Anna McGee ’22 Kenny Peng ’22 Zachary Shevin ’22
content strategist Omar Farah ’23
Sections listed in alphabetical order.
head cartoon editors Sydney Peng ’22 Akaneh Wang ’24 associate cartoon editors Inci Karaaslan ’24 Ambri Ma ’24 head copy editors Celia Buchband ’22 Isabel Rodrigues ’23 associate copy editors Catie Parker ’23 Cecilia Zubler ’23 digital news design editor Anika Maskara ’23 associate digital news design editor Brian Tieu ’23 graphics editor Ashley Chung ’23 instagram design editor Helen So ’22 print design editor Abby Nishiwaki ’23 newsletter editor Rooya Rahin ’23 head features editor Alex Gjaja ’23 Rachel Sturley ’23 associate features editors Annabelle Duval ’23 Ellen Li ’23 Tanvi Nibhanupudi ’23 multimedia liason Mark Dodici ’22 head photo editor Candace Do ’24 head podcast editor Isabel Rodrigues ’23 associate podcast editors Jack Anderson ’23 Francesca Block ’22 Katie Heinzer ’22 head video editor Mindy Burton ’23 associte video editors Uanne Chang ’24 Daniel Drake ’24 Marko Petrovic ’24 head news editors Evelyn Doskoch ’23 Caitlin Limestahl ’23 associte news editors Bharvi Chavre ’23 Naomi Hess ’22 Marissa Michaels ’22
head opinion editor Shannon Chaffers ’22 associte opinion editors Won-Jae Chang ’24 Kristal Grant ’24 Mollika Singh ’24 head prospect editors Cameron Lee ’22 Auhjanae McGee ’23 associte prospect editors José Pablo Fernández García ’23 Aster Zhang ’24 head puzzles editors Gabriel Robare ’24 Owen Travis ’24
145TH BUSINESS BOARD
chief technology officer Anthony Hein ’22 Associate Business Manager, Director of Finance Andy He ’23 business directors Benjamin Cai ’24 Nelson Rogers ’24
Lead Software Engineers, System Architects Areeq Hasan ’24 Darius Jankauskas ’24
project manager Gloria Wang ’24
software engineers Pranav Avva ’24 Rishi Mago ’23 business associates David Akpokiere ’24 Abiram Gangavaram ’24 Samantha Lee ’24 Ananya Parashar ’24 Shirley Ren ’24 Jasmine Zhang ’24
JOHN EHLING / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN
Live-actions suck, watch animation instead
By Etiosa Omeike
TV and Shows Critic
The hour-long premiere of “Avatar: The Last Airbender” (2005) debuted 16 years ago, yet here we are in 2021, still reflecting over both its thematic depth. The film masterfully engages with contemporary topics such as nationalism and propaganda in its exploration of the Fire and Earth Nations — and offers meaningful character development, both internal and external, as we navigated the spectacular character arcs of Katara and Zuko.
Likewise, “Shingeki no Kyojin,” better known in the United States as “Attack on Titan,” is currently one of the most-watched shows in America, featuring maneating Titans that the people of Paradise Island must fight in order to leave humanity intact. The show’s unparalleled foreshadowing, sensational character cast, and philosophical groundedness, rival those of the first six seasons of “Game of Thrones,” “Breaking Bad,” and many of the other most popular TV shows, as it jumps from conversations about freedom to the value of relationships.
Animation is beyond capable of creating captivating
worlds and evoking emotional feelings that leave watchers wanting more, but that doesn’t seem to stop directors from creating “live-action” adaptations that are hard to view as anything but moneygrabs. The most infamous of these is, without a doubt, M. Night Shyamalan's “The Last Airbender” (2010). The whitewashing of Sokka and Katara, the neverending and unnecessary narration, the horrible retelling of the original story, and terrible special effects all certainly contribute to the movie’s well-deserved status of being among the worst films ever created.
But they all suggest a more general issue within live action media: that the unique worlds of animation, full of their many quirks — whether those quirks be special power systems, such as bending in Avatar, or wackily designed characters, such as those of “Inside Out” (2015) — simply don’t translate well into film.
Perhaps it’s unfair to generalize the disaster film that is Shyamalan’s “The Last Airbender” to all other live actions, but that just doesn’t seem to be the case. Take, for example, the newly-released adaptation of “Winx Club” (2004) on Netflix, “Fate: The Winx Saga” (2021). Departing from the child-like properties of its predecessor, “The Winx Saga” is far more “mature.” It adds tensions to the main cast of fairies through the creation of love-triangles, subtly deals with pressing contemporary issues such as fatphobia, and is more than willing to be gory, opening up its first episode with the murder of a man. Maturity in and of itself isn’t the problem here; rather, the issue is the fact that live-action shows such as “The Winx Saga” must be mature. “The Winx Saga” could never capture the episodic fantasy about cute-yet-badass fairies who discover more about their powers that is “Winx Club.” Instead, because “The Winx Saga” is a live-action show, it has to be darker, more complex.
But therein lies the issue: if all that live-action films and shows can offer us is complexity and “mature” themes, themes that are already prevalent in animated shows/ films such as “Attack on Titan,” of what benefit are they?
My answer is simple: nothing. There is nothing a live-action film can do that animation can’t. Live-action adaptations, as they seek to differentiate themselves from their animated counterparts, have an inherently limited scope as to their genre. Animation is “for kids” and liveaction films and shows are “for adults,” and out of this dichotomy is birthed a myriad of media that should’ve stayed in its original forms.
Of course, this is as much an attack on the very intention of translating animated media for the sake of making it more palatable to adult audiences as it is on liveaction media. The very association with animation and kids is flawed. There are far too many animated shows — like “The Amazing World of Gumball” (2011) — that, while seemingly packaged for children, include humor that many adults would enjoy.
There is, of course, also the issue of branding shows/ movies as “for kids” and “for adults.” Marvel movies such as “The Avengers” sell so well precisely because they break down this dichotomy: rather than seeking to destroy “childish” creations such as superheroes, they use heroes to their full potential on the big screen.
Of course, this isn’t to say that live-action films and
shows aren’t an individually enjoyable medium. Certainly, one could find “The Winx Saga” a captivating story or the Disney+ retelling of “Mulan” (2020) more enjoyable than the animated original. However, this doesn’t address the fact that live-action adaptations, as they currently are, lack the uniqueness to stand on their own. If live-actions can do what Marvel Studios does, by creating new, reallife worlds that allow for animated stories to flourish on a new medium, then I would certainly receive them more positively. But until then?
‘WandaVision’ creator Jac Schaeffer ’00 discusses Princeton connections, sitcom inspiration, and female representation
By Paige Allen
Head Prospect Editor Emeritus
On Jan. 15, the first episode of Marvel’s most recent series, “WandaVision,” landed on the streaming platform Disney+. In its first week, “WandaVision” was one of the 10 mostwatched original shows across streaming platforms, according to Nielsen estimates. By the end of January, it claimed the title of most-watched series across streaming platforms, despite only three of nine episodes having then been released. By Feb. 15, according to Parrot Analytics, it became the most popular series in the world.
The creator, head writer, and executive producer behind the superhero streaming sensation is Jac Schaeffer ’00, a director and writer who concentrated in English at the University before earning her M.F.A. from the University of Southern California’s School of Cinematic Arts. Her previous work with Marvel includes contributions to “Captain Marvel” (2019), and she is also a writer for the upcoming “Black Widow” (2021).
Schaeffer spoke with The Daily Princetonian about her process — and how her time at the University influenced her work. This conversation has been edited for clarity and concision. It includes spoilers for season one of “WandaVision.”
The Daily Princetonian: What do you feel you still carry with you in your work today from your time at Princeton?
Jac Schaeffer: I was heavily involved in theater, behind the scenes and acting. I was in [Princeton] Triangle [Club], and I did some shows at Theatre Intime; I did some thesis productions as well. I did a little bit of choreography for the [Princeton] Shakespeare Company. I was in the arts, and it’s what I wanted to be doing. I wanted to direct more than anything.
I learned so much about storytelling and mainly about acting. I was never a terrific actor. I played sort of versions of myself, and I like a lot of attention, so it worked out. But I learned the vulnerability involved in performing. I’ve had wonderful and productive relationships with actors, and I do think that a lot of that is born of my experience acting at Princeton.
There was a baby film program — it wasn’t actual film, it was video film — and I took a class, and then I applied to get a certificate, and I didn’t get in, which I find hilarious. It made me feel a little frosty at the time, but even at the time, I was like, well, one day I’ll be hugely famous and I’ll do an interview with The [Daily] Princetonian and say that they didn’t let me into the program.
DP: Did anything from your time at Princeton influence the writing of “WandaVision” specifically?
JS: I wrote my thesis on dystopian literature. It was a comparison of early dystopian novels with contemporary novels that are sort of cyberpunk novels. I had always been very interested in speculative fiction and “what if” stories and near future stories as a social commentary, as a way to look at ourselves. I loved “Twilight Zone” as a kid, and now I love “Black Mirror.” That infused all of my work, and Princeton was where I looked at all of that academically. “WandaVision” is an obvious synthesis — really more of a collision — of tones and influences and genres.
The other thing is I have a group of friends from Princeton: there are 10 of us, and we’re very tight. Back in the before times, before COVID[-19], we would do a trip together once a year. They’re extraordinary women who live all over the country, who do all kinds of things — doctors, lawyers, environmentalists, some are mothers. They’re just the best women, and they have impacted all of my work greatly. I think about them whenever I write anything.
You know, the character that Monica [Rambeau] met on the show that everybody thought was going to be Reed Richards, the engineer? That character is Major Goodner, and she’s named after one of my friends, Aly Goodner [’00], that I went to Princeton with, who’s part of this group. I made that choice because that character represents every time one of these women has come through for me and every time they’ve been good at their job. It became this hilarious thing for me that everybody was like, “It’s going to be Reed Richards, it’s going to be some important man,” and I’m like, “No, it’s just a lady who’s awesome at what she does and who will be there for her friends.”
DP: Is Westview, N.J., at all based on Princeton, N.J.?
JS: No, it’s not. The New Jersey piece of it was meaningful to me because of Princeton and because my mom is from Jersey. We were always going to do the Northeast, and I think I probably nudged it toward New Jersey.
Westview was because Kevin Feige is from Westfield and we liked that, but we didn’t want it to be a one-to-one, so then we thought of Westview because “W” [and] “V,” Wanda Vision.
DP: How did you prepare for writing “WandaVision,” a series which draws from a swath of American sitcoms and from Marvel comics?
JS: A lot of the sitcoms were just in my DNA, especially the ’80s and ’90s ones, just being a kid and a teenager and watching them. So I didn’t do a lot of rewatching of those eras, except to be like, “What did that kitchen look like?” and if there was a very special episode, “what was the episode that was the outlier and what did they do?”
There were episodes that stood out in my mind that I wanted to go back to. There was an episode of “Growing Pains” where the daughter had a boyfriend and he died in a car accident, and I remember it so vividly because it was so upsetting at the time. That wasn’t supposed to happen on a sitcom. So I revisited ones that I remembered being sort of a fractured version of themselves.
I was only peripherally aware of “Dick Van Dyke,” I had seen some of it, but I became a connoisseur. Same with “Malcolm in the Middle.” The episodes were assigned to the writers, and I assigned them the responsibility of becoming experts in their era, so some of that heavy lifting was done by them.
As for the comics, I don’t read comics very much. I respect them, I respect the artistry of them tremendously, but at Marvel, they sort of flag things for me, so I look at what I need to. Mostly, they tell me the good stuff, and then I internalize it, and we discuss it and things happen.
DP: For me, much of what’s clever about “WandaVision,” in addition to its script, comes from its visual storytelling and pastiche — the costumes, the set, the changing aspect ratios. How much did you have a say in those kinds of visual elements?
JS: The script was literally written according to the mode that we were in. There were signifiers on the page of when we’re in sitcom mode and when we’re in cinematic mode. There was essentially a legend, like a map, of where we were aesthetically in any given moment of an episode. That was to communicate to the director and to the department heads and, perhaps most importantly, to the actors so that they would know what style of performance to employ in a given moment.
DP: When writing the series, how did you balance accomplishing the big picture goals that moved the broader plotline of the Marvel Cinematic Universe [MCU] forward while also letting “WandaVision” have its own life?
JS: I didn’t really look at it in that black-and-white way. It was Kevin Feige’s idea to do a brief story about Wanda and Vision using the history of television sitcoms. I thought it was an extremely difficult prospect. I believed it could happen, but I was like, this is a real trick. There is a high probability that this could just be parody with no heart or a thought experiment with no heart.
