February 2003 posts


Previous February 2003  

More February 2003

Cordy, Oath Breaker -- Just George, 23:30:48 02/05/03 Wed

Cordy is in trouble. Not only were she and Angelus fairly wooden this episode (as just about everyone was). She made a high stakes deal and thought she could go back on it. Now she is going to pay. No spoilage. Just logic.

The original deal:


Angelus: You
Cordy: That's the offer. No more stalling, no more games. You tell us what you know, you get me.


And just to make sure both we and Angelus understand, Cordy repeats it:


Angelus: Not that there aren't a few things I wouldn't mind doing to that body. Other than the obvious.
Cordy: Tell us about the beast and you can do whatever you want.


But when the time comes to pay up, she flinches.


Angelus: I told you everything I know.
Cordy: Too late.
Angelus: And whose fault is that? Doesn't mater. I showed you mine. Now its time to show me yours.
Cordy: The deal was, you give us information, we save the world, you get me. Well, world not saved.


Sorry Cordy, saving the world was not in the deal. He talks. You give yourself to him, for whatever torture and abuse the most evil vampire in history has to offer. He did. You didn't.

I know Cordy didn't want to sacrifice herself for nothing. But that doesn't matter. What matters is not that she lied to Angelus. What matters is she lied to herself. She thought of herself as a Champion, ready to make a sacrifice for the greater good. That's a load. She proved to be a scared young women, who has been riding fates coat tales for years. And when it came time to be a stand up person, to make a choice and take the consequences of that choice, she flinched. Big time.

The fates will have their due.

-Just George
[> She beat him at his own game, JG.*L It's a woman's prerogative to change her mind. -- Briar Rose (be proud of fem wiles!), 00:08:27 02/06/03 Thu

Angelus has one big Achilles' Heel - his ego. He always feels like he controls the game. When Cordy turned the tables on him, it took him down a peg, it was obvious in that look of "that wasn't the deal..." No, it wasn't HIS deal. Therefore to be left hanging by the one that Angelus assumed would play by the rules of the good guys was enough to shake him up a little.

Sort of like the way that Buffy refused to kill him long before the final confrontation. She played cat to his mouse, when he thought he was holding all the cards and was going to make her come after him? She stayed as far away from him as she could, never fell into the numerous traps he set for her by staying away and acting the opposite of what he EXPECTED and his ego DEMANDED of her. This is also not unlike why he and Darla were together so long. Darla was also willful and didn't mind making Angelus the fool time and again, the more she hit at his ego the more power she had over him.

His ego always functions on the basis of "They will always do as I will." Guess what? One way to win the game is not to play it (Buffy's tactic). The other way is to change the rules once the game has started (Darla & Cordelia's trump).*L

I wish more women would embrace our feline natures. We make great Mothers, Lovers and Friends, but we also make great Spies, Warriors and Thieves! The feminine mystique and survival instinct are our birth rights and should never be let go without a major fight.*S*
[> [> Re: what is the worth of ones word? -- Just George, 00:49:51 02/06/03 Thu

A question might be: what is the worth of ones word? Is your word, given to an honorable being, worth more than your word given to a dishonorable demon? Is the worth of your word defined by the one your pledge to or do you hold it in your own heart?

I believe the value of ones word is based on how honorably they act, not in how dishonorably others act.

When she offered to give herself to Angelus, I think Cordy believed she was committing painful suicide in order to save the world. When Cordy pulled back, I don't think it was her feline nature, I think it showed how little value she puts in her own word. For all the high minded things she calls herself, Higher Being and Champion, Cordy showed herself not fit to listed among the ranks of heroes.

Contrast this to Cordy's masterful acting job in S1 AtS, convincing the temporarily soul suppressed Angelus that that water cooler was filled with holy water. That was brilliant. And that was explained as acting at the time. Since this action was not explained as acting, I take Cordy at her word both times. When she put her life on the line for what she believed in. And when she pulled it back and ran like a little child. "If I don't get to be the hero, then I'm not going to play," to paraphrase what she might have been thinking.

It's too bad really. The old Cordy knew when she was acting. This one is so lost that she doesn't even know anymore.

-JG
[> [> [> Re: what is the worth of ones word? -- yabyumpan, 05:31:14 02/06/03 Thu

"Is your word, given to an honorable being, worth more than your word given to a dishonorable demon?"

I would say 'yes' if your ultimate intentions are honorable i.e. trying to save the world. If you're up against the sort of evil that is Angelus then you do what ever you have to, even if that means making and breaking promises. Bugger being 'honorable' and fair, the sun's gone out and the Beast is on the rampage killing all in his path, you do what has to be done. If Wesley had had any leverage with Angelus, he would have used it and to hell with keeping promises, it's called pragmatism.

So for Cordy to be a true Hero she would have to needlessly sacrifice herself? What for? It wouldn't achieve anything and it would just be more guilt for Angel to carry around once he gets re-souled.

She stood in front of Angelus and played him, played into his ego. She was the only one who really got under his skin, while the others allowed themselves to be played by Angelus's mind games, Cordelia stood before him, unflinching, and used what weapons she had to manipulate him into spilling what he knew. 1:0 to Cordy I think. :o)
[> [> [> [> Re: what is the worth of ones word? -- crgn, 06:28:43 02/06/03 Thu

Exactly. Cordy thought she would get information in time for the rest of the FG to use it, but that's not how it played out. Sacrificing herself at this point to serve her own 'honor' does not advance the greater cause, but in fact reduces the possibility that the FG could still overcome the beast by taking away one of their few resources (Cordy).
[> [> [> [> [> Exactly Yab and crgn.... You just didn't put your tongue in cheek as I did.*L -- Briar Rose, 01:34:29 02/07/03 Fri

[> [> [> Re: what is the worth of ones word? -- Freki, 09:41:53 02/06/03 Thu

Even Angel himself does not seem to feel it necessary to keep his word to a dishonorable being. In DoN last year, he made a bet for his soul with the casino owner, and when he lost the bet he killed the guy rather than pay up.

I think it would be a terrible act for Cordelia to give herself to Angelus even if they had been able to save the world because of his information. They still planned to put Angel's soul back, and he would then have the memory of whatever evil acts he had committed on Cordy to deal with. I just can't see her doing that to Angel.
[> [> [> [> Re: what is the worth of ones word? -- Just George, 16:46:00 02/06/03 Thu

Freki: "Even Angel himself does not seem to feel it necessary to keep his word to a dishonorable being. In DoN last year, he made a bet for his soul with the casino owner, and when he lost the bet he killed the guy rather than pay up."


But, Angel knew he was lying. The plan the gang executed after the card draw showed that. Angel was not lying to himself, only to another. Since ME made that clear, I can put an appropriate level of trust in what Angel says based on the context of the story.

Also, thought the casino owner was not a nice being, I don't remember anything about him being dishonorable. Gunn came to him. Even then, the casino owner tired to talk Gunn out of it. Thinking about it, I never felt Angel was justified in killing the Casino owner.


-JG
[> [> [> [> Bon Mot (spoilers Soulless) -- fresne, 14:46:02 02/07/03 Fri

It's odd really, because Cordy's behavior didn't bother me in the way that the events of DoN did, an episode where the characters behavior bothered me so fundamentally that I almost stopped watching the series. Again. Thus prompting one of my few negative posts, which I really don't like to do. Life's short, why dwell.

At the time, I tried to articulate my unease, but couldn't without sounding distinctly lacking in supple mental flex and yet, well we all have lines in the mental sand. At its heart, is that I am the source of me. The behavior/perceived nature of others is irrelevant. Golden Rule, etc. And okay, breaking your word. Bad long term strategy. All it does is teaches villains (who may or may not perceive themselves to be villains) not to trust your word, because you'll break any vow to someone you don't approve of, don't like.

And yet, I like crafty Ulysses. Guileful Briar Rabbit. Crafty Raven. Tom Sawyer at his fence. Count your fingers when you shake for your deal. Somehow that's different. I suppose it's not so much breaking your word, as well, it's hardly your fault if you're immune to iocane poison and your enemy isn't.

I guess because in my head I did fill in the sotto voiced, "Yes, you can do whatever you want to me (when you get your soul back)" that has been mentioned elsewhere in the thread.

And yet, that's not what she said. I don't mean the first time. I'm thinking of the second. World not saved, you don't get your purchase in exchange. Why tell him at all? At first, I thought it was a clever, well lets see if he knows anything else maneuver, but in retrospect, no not really. She went down there to taunt Angelus (a caged killer) because she was upset. Genuinely upset about those children. Upset that the stranger wearing Angel's face wasn't upset about that dead family. Those dead children. That the noble sacrifice in her head was in vain. That if it was a lie, then that compromise of herself was in vain. Stripping Angel of his soul. The divisiveness. For nothing. World not saved. Black hole sun not washing away the pain. How incredibly human. I was actually relieved to see a glimpse of Queen Cordy. It's been so long.

So, she taunts him like the villains always taunt the hero, telling him/her how it was a lie. How they were fooled. Oops. As I always yell at my fictional characters, kill, then gloat, not gloat then kill. Who'd have thought that Versailles, built for appearance sake couldn't hold a dram of soul. Well, if the hall of mirrors can't keep the drafts out, the peasants out, the German proto-Emperor out, how could it hold a soul in?

Trying to remember the quote. "Le pays est moi." or is it "Je suis le pay." Whatever. The landscape of the city of Angels reflecting the psyche of its king. The sun king is the country. The country is the king. Although, really Angel is more like Ludwig (who fancied himself a moon king). No, wait S**** is Ludwig, what with the madness and all. Perhaps rather than the sun king, we should consider his descendent, "Apres moi, le deluge." After all, Cordy does quasi quote Marie Antoinette.
[> [> [> [> [> I believe you're thinking of "L'etat, c'est moi." -- tim, who thinks he'd look good in tights and a powdered wig, 13:31:37 02/08/03 Sat

[> [> Wonderful Post, GO woman power -- Mack, 07:31:58 02/06/03 Thu

I completely agree with all you have said. Cordy knew exactly what cards she held with Angelus and knew how to play them. I blame Angelus for showing her what he was interested in. My comment to my husband was that I didn't know that primetime TV could get so dirty. Maybe that is how Angelus only sees women, case in point, his comment about what he does when he hears Fred and Gunn at night. That was about one butt cheek away from soft core porn!
[> [> [> I am so glad I wasn't the only one wondering if all the censors were on vaca.~w~ -- Briar Rose, 01:37:27 02/07/03 Fri

[> Cordy's honor. -- Dannyblue, 08:09:53 02/06/03 Thu

I think Cordelia beat Angelus at his own game...for the time being. Basically, she used the truth to make a lie more believable. She tells Angelus they have no options left, and she will do anything to give them an edge. Angelus, knowing Cordy as well as he does, is able to believe that she would "sacrifice" herself for the greater good. And Cordy knows he knows this, and she uses that info to play him.

I have no doubt that she never, ever intended to go through with their bargain. Really, how would she have gone about it, exactly? If they'd found the sorceresses alive and kicking, they would have had what they wanted from Angelus, and immediately restored Angel's soul. Cordy knew this. Otherwise, you'd have to believe Cordy expected to go up to Wesley and say, "Look, I made a deal with Angelus. So, can we hold off on the soul-restoring until he has raped, tortured and killed me? Okay, thanks."

So, she knew this was a "promise" she couldn't keep...even if she wanted to, which I doubt she did. And, once Angel's soul was restored, it would be a moot point. What, Angel's gonna hold it against her for not keeping her word with Angelus?

Under the circumstances, I have no problem with Cordy making false promises to stop the evil let loose on LA. I happen to think it's okay to lie to the Big Bad when it's for a good cause.

That last scene between Cordy and Angelus...I think she had that planned all along. She was having so much fun throwing the deal back in his face, it seemed like something she'd been looking forward to, even before she made the offer. After years of being afraid of Angelus, she wanted a little pay-back.
[> [> Re: Cordy's honor & what is the worth of ones word? -- Just George, 09:51:33 02/06/03 Thu

yabyumpan: "She stood in front of Angelus and played him, played into his ego. She was the only one who really got under his skin, while the others allowed themselves to be played by Angelus's mind games, Cordelia stood before him, unflinching, and used what weapons she had to manipulate him into spilling what he knew. 1:0 to Cordy I think. :o)"


crgn: "Exactly. Cordy thought she would get information in time for the rest of the FG to use it, but that's not how it played out. Sacrificing herself at this point to serve her own 'honor' does not advance the greater cause, but in fact reduces the possibility that the FG could still overcome the beast by taking away one of their few resources (Cordy)."


Dannyblue: " I think Cordelia beat Angelus at his own game...for the time being. Basically, she used the truth to make a lie more believable. She tells Angelus they have no options left, and she will do anything to give them an edge. Angelus, knowing Cordy as well as he does, is able to believe that she would "sacrifice" herself for the greater good. And Cordy knows he knows this, and she uses that info to play him."


If I thought that Cordy was playing to Angelus' ego, I would agree, wholeheartedly. But if this was the case, ME didn't sell me on it. Cordy's final speech should have made it clear she was playing him. But she didn't say that. She made it sound like she would have given herself up IF Angelus' information had let them save the world. That is why I think she was lying to herself the second time and not Angelus the first time.

I think this is part of the disconnect between us. I think that Cord was making a real bargain with Angelus when she offered herself. She sees herself as the Champion. Champions make sacrifices to save people. But, when the info she got didn't save the world, she went back on her deal. If she had been playing Angelus from the beginning I would be proud of Cordy's resourcefulness and acting capability.

But, if Cordy made a deal intending to offer up her life, and then reneged because she didn't like the outcome, then I think less of her. I think making a deal with such high stakes, and then taking her ball and going home because she doesn't like the score, shows how little value she puts in her original word. I'm not saying she should have given herself to Angelus (though that would have shown she put tremendous value in her word). I'm saying that she shouldn't have made the deal in the first place if there was a good chance that she would renege.

I also think ME will make her pay for her negative karma.

-JG
[> [> [> Re: Cordy's honor & what is the worth of ones word? -- yabyumpan, 11:29:50 02/06/03 Thu

"If she had been playing Angelus from the beginning I would be proud of Cordy's resourcefulness and acting capability."

"I'm saying that she shouldn't have made the deal in the first place if there was a good chance that she would renege."

"It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself here or maybe I'm misunderstanding. Are you saying that it would be ok for her to lie from the beginning but that it's not ok for her to change her mind?

"But, if Cordy made a deal intending to offer up her life, and then reneged because she didn't like the outcome, then I think less of her."

So do you believe she should have sacrificed herself to Angelus just because she made a deal with him? Would you actually have thought more of her, maybe thought her worthy of 'champion' status, if she had given her life, even though it wouldn't save anyone else's or the world, just on a mater of principal?

I must admit I find that a bit bizarre. Personally, If she had have gone through with her deal with Angelus I wouldn't see her as a 'champion' just stupid.
[> [> [> [> Re: Principals matter. -- Just George, 12:33:53 02/06/03 Thu

Yabyumpan: "It seems to me like you're contradicting yourself here or maybe I'm misunderstanding. Are you saying that it would be ok for her to lie from the beginning but that it's not ok for her to change her mind?"


I'm saying exactly that. For two reasons, Cordy's seriousness, and the shows dramatic structure.

If Cordy is going to be a "player" in the dark world of AtS, she has to take her own commitments seriously. If she was lying, then great, my point is moot. But if she meant what she said, then by making the most serous deal of her life and casually reneging on it, Cordy has made suspect the value of every decisions she ever makes. How will we know she is serious? How will SHE know?

Also, if Cordy can just back out of any commitment whenever the going gets tough, how can we as viewers trust her? An important part of drama is the "train wreck" aspect. The audience sees things moving in a bad direction, the characters strive to avert the disaster, and the consequences are either averted or not. But, if a character can back out of their commitments without consequence, even though they undertook the commitments with the full intention of going through with them, then the audience has not reason to fear for that character. They are taking no risk and are in no real danger. There is no "train wreck", no drama.


Yabyumpan: "So do you believe she should have sacrificed herself to Angelus just because she made a deal with him? Would you actually have thought more of her, maybe thought her worthy of 'champion' status, if she had given her life, even though it wouldn't save anyone else's or the world, just on a mater of principal?"


Actually, I believe she should never have made the deal if she thought she might not go through with it. And if she decided not to go through with it, she should have found some way to bail out more clever than saying "I don't wannna."

But, to answer your question baldly, yes, I would have found it more dramatic, and I would have thought that Cordy was more of a "stand up person", if she had fulfilled her end of the bargain. Principals matter. Either don't make the deal, be smart enough to get out of the deal, or uphold you end of the deal. Don't make a deal in all seriousness and then bail.

-JG
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Principals matter. -- Dannyblue, 13:03:38 02/06/03 Thu

So if, in a moment of desperation and despair, I make a suicide pact with someone but, after having time to think it over, I changed my mind, I'm wrong for not killing myself? I should have kept my promises, been a "stand-up-guy", and done the deed...because I said I would, and not keeping my word is wrong no matter what?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Principals matter. -- Just George, 16:17:20 02/06/03 Thu

I started to write a reply deconstruction the details of honoring a suicide pact. Then I stopped. First, I don't think the two situations are comparable. And second, I don't want to get into hypothetical situations about people in the "real" world. They can get personal and be easily misunderstood. Cordy is a heroic fictional figure. Her situations and choices are on a mythic scale. I try to judge her choices in that context.

-JG
[> [> [> JG - I agree, on all points - means you must be in the minority -- Dochawk, 15:59:58 02/06/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> Re:Thanks! -- Just George, 16:47:53 02/06/03 Thu

[> [> Re: Cordy's honor (think fast!) -- pr10n, 11:14:19 02/06/03 Thu

The key to Cordy's bargain is her hope that Angel's soul will be restored. I think she's trying to convince herself that one line of reasoning is so plausible, even though it hasn't happened yet, that it is as true as any other possible outcome to the situation, and therefore true.

Similar techniques have been used to fool lie detectors and voters.

Cordy would be ok with letting Angel go all perfect happiness on her, and that's so close to Angelus that she can lie with wide open eyes and a straight face into the Step-Son of Lies himself.

Maybe Cordy thinks she's using the SNL subliminal message trick: "Do anything you want (when you get your soul back) I can be a sacrifice (to a souled guy)..."

The karmic ooopsy? Cordy's sneaky plan is all for naught when Angel's soul is stolen -- watcha gonna do when they come for you?
[> [> [> Re: Cordy's honor (think fast!) -- Dannyblue, 11:42:49 02/06/03 Thu

Cordy is the Queen of the bluff.

She bluffed a vampire into thinking she was a Slayer. Not just a Slayer, but a Slayer 100 times more dangerous than Buffy. She stood toe-to-toe with this vampire, stared him straight in the eye, and lied so convincingly, he ran away rather than fight her.

She bluffed Angelus into thinking her plain, bottled water was holy water. She was so convincing that, when she threw it in his face, he recoiled, crying out in pain...that it took him a minute to realize he didn't feel.

And she's a much better actress now then she was back then. After all her acting classes and what-not, she knows how to get into a role, to make *herself* believe what she's saying, along with the person she's saying it too.
[> [> [> [> Re: The Queen of the bluff is lying to herself -- Just George, 12:50:00 02/06/03 Thu

Dannyblue: "Cordy is the Queen of the bluff."

...

"And she's a much better actress now then she was back then. After all her acting classes and what-not, she knows how to get into a role, to make *herself* believe what she's saying, along with the person she's saying it too."


In my mind "believe what she's saying" when she doesn't actually mean it translates into lying to herself. And I don't see it as a positive trait. It's a trait that we decry in our politicians, businessmen, and other public figures. We would be loath to find it in our friends. I certainly hate it when I do it to myself. I don't think it's a trait that we should applaud in our "heroes."

-JG
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The Queen of the bluff is lying to herself -- Dannyblue, 12:57:45 02/06/03 Thu

I think circumstances matter as much as anything. And, under the circumstances, Cordy had every reason to lie.

Is it okay to lie to a kidnapper if, by lying, you will get your child back safely? Is it even okay to believe the lie for as long as it takes to convince the kidnapper?

Is it okay to lie to a rapist, telling him you won't call the police if he leaves you alive? Is it, then, dishonorable to go back on your promise to a *rapist* and call the police?

Is it okay to lie to a sadistic serial killer/rapist/serial torturer in order to save the world?

I say yes, yes, and yes.
[> [> [> [> [> [> If she didn't lie to herself -- Finn Mac Cool, 15:28:50 02/06/03 Thu

She never would have been able to fool Angelus. In "Deep Down" Angel was able to tell whether or not Connor is lying (though was only able to do so after a lot of experience at being lied to by him). When Cordelia did the holy water trick, she and Angel still didn't know each other terribly well. But now, in Season 4, Angel and, by extension, Angelus know her a lot better. Before she could even attempt to bluff Angelus, she had to make herself believe that bluff, because otherwise he wouldn't have believed her, either.

Just George said that lying to oneself is a trait despised in a lot of professions. However, I didn't notice interrogator on there, which was pretty much what the Fang Gang was in this episode.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: If she didn't lie to herself -- Just George, 15:57:07 02/06/03 Thu

Finn Mac Cool: "Before she could even attempt to bluff Angelus, she had to make herself believe that bluff, because otherwise he wouldn't have believed her, either."

Could you tell me, what line or part of a scene in the episode makes you think she was bluffing? Everyone else seems to see it, but I missed it.

-JG
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> No here's the thing -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:27:17 02/06/03 Thu

When she was actually talking to Angelus, she wasn't intentionally bluffing. I think she employed method acting, where you temporarily step into the role of a character in order to play their part. When she made the offer, she was playing the part of someone who would give herself up to Angelus in such a situation. She played the part in such a way that she herself believed it. It was the only way to lie to Angelus and have him believe it.

I presume she didn't mean it since Cordelia has always struck me as having just a little too much pragmatism in her to die in such a way. I do believe she would die to save the world. I don't think she'd die just to keep a deal.

P.S. I guess I could sum a lot of this up with the wise words of George Costanza on fooling a lie detector: "It's not a lie if you believe."
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> "Angelus lies with the truth..." JG. It's all right there.*S* So did Cordy as so many have said. -- Briar (heroes do what they gotta....), 01:47:35 02/07/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: If she didn't lie to herself -- JM, 16:00:29 02/06/03 Thu

Also, she was using Angelus' MO. Lying with the truth. As she said, she was sticking to the letter of her words, not the spirit. She was trading herself for help. Angelus didn't help them. Even if, big if, he was telling them everything, even if he remembered everything, he didn't help them. The FG gained no ground. Deal null.

It's exactly what he did. Angelus told the truth, but not the whole truth.

We can see from Gunn and Fred's reaction that Fred really is a talker in bed. The little Lolita. But it's not all lust, it's also love.

Everything he said to Wes was the truth. He doesn't have friends, his father despises him, he wants to be the hero, he has the same insecurities underneath, he wants Fred bent over a counter, he resents Angel status. It's the truth, but it's not the whole truth. Wes is different now. He has helped as often as he's screwed up. He envies Angel, he also cares about him deeply. We saw that in "Deep Down." He resents Gunn, but he saved without a moment's hesitation in "Apocalypse Nowish."

With Connor too. Darla did loathe her pregnancy and try to get rid of it. Holtz was disappointed in how quickly Angel and Connor bonded. But that didn't mean they both didn't love him.

Cordelia brought the fight to Angel. She used his tactics. You don't bring a knife to a gun fight. She did intrigue him, but I'm not sure he bought it completely. He seemed way too smug about not going anywhere. I think he knew about the soul.

I'm not sure I buy that the characters need to be honorable. They aren't role models, they're entertainment. And their nasty sides are what give them depth. I don't want to trust or respect them, I want to believe them.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: If she didn't lie to herself -- Just George, 16:31:26 02/06/03 Thu

JM: "Also, she was using Angelus' MO. Lying with the truth. As she said, she was sticking to the letter of her words, not the spirit. She was trading herself for help. Angelus didn't help them. Even if, big if, he was telling them everything, even if he remembered everything, he didn't help them. The FG gained no ground. Deal null."


But I don't see any evidence that Cordy was sticking to the letter of her words. Quoting myself in an earlier post and the show:


The original deal:


Angelus: You
Cordy: That's the offer. No more stalling, no more games. You tell us what you know, you get me.


And just to make sure both we and Angelus understand, Cordy repeats it:


Angelus: Not that there aren't a few things I wouldn't mind doing to that body. Other than the obvious.
Cordy: Tell us about the beast and you can do whatever you want.


But when the time comes to pay up, she flinches.


Angelus: I told you everything I know.
Cordy: Too late.
Angelus: And whose fault is that? Doesn't mater. I showed you mine. Now its time to show me yours.
Cordy: The deal was, you give us information, we save the world, you get me. Well, world not saved.


Sorry Cordy, saving the world was not in the deal.


JM: "I'm not sure I buy that the characters need to be honorable. They aren't role models, they're entertainment. And their nasty sides are what give them depth. I don't want to trust or respect them, I want to believe them."


But how do we believe characters if we can't know when they are lying? And if they are lying to themselves it is almost impossible for us to know when they speak the truth (because the characters themselves don't know). Why should anything they say generate drama if their commitments are meaningless?


-JG
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Queen of the bluff is lying to herself -- Just George, 16:01:30 02/06/03 Thu

Dannyblue: "I think circumstances matter as much as anything. And, under the circumstances, Cordy had every reason to lie."


Absolutely! I would love it if I believed Cordy was lying. As I asked Finn Mac Cool, could you tell me what line or part of a scene in the episode makes you think she was bluffing? I seem to have missed it.

-JG
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Queen of the bluff is lying to herself -- Freki, 16:24:30 02/06/03 Thu

How can you be so sure she *wasn't* bluffing? The determining factor is whether or not Cordy ever intended to actually go through with giving herself to Angelus when she was making the deal. She expected Angel's soul to be restored as soon as they found out what they could about the Beast, and she knows that Angel remembers and feels guilty about all the evil he did while soulless. She wouldn't allow Angel to be burdened by the memory of having raped, tortured and murdered her when he got his soul back. Keeping her bargain with Angelus would be an incredibly cruel thing to do to Angel, and I don't think she ever meant to follow through with it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Queen of the bluff is lying to herself -- Just George, 16:53:17 02/06/03 Thu

Freki: "...I don't think she ever meant to follow through with it."


That is a fair interpretation and one I most other people seem to believe. I didn't see it that way. If it was a bluff, then I applaud Cordy's acting ability but think that ME dropped the ball in making the bluff clear.

-JG
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> How, exactly... -- KdS, 04:38:12 02/07/03 Fri

... do you expect ME to make it as clear to the audience as you seem to want it to be (of course the audience is going to believe that a central character is actually going to volunteer herself for a snuff orgy) while at the same time making it plausible for Angelus to believe her?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> It seems... -- crgn, 07:40:48 02/07/03 Fri

you want or need a "Ha ha, gotcha!" from Cordy the way Angel admitted in the end to duping the casino demon. Admittedly, Cordy is fully capable of delivering such a speech, but that's now where she was emotionally in this episode. And typically such a speech comes because there has been a total win. This was clearly a loss for the FG - the one known way to defeat the demon had been eliminated before Angel ever gave up his soul - so there's no motivation to gloat over duping Angelus.

Certainly the payoff for the audience would have been more clearly established if Cordy had in sad irony admitted lying and offering herself for nothing, but I think we the audience were supposed to be focused on Angel's sacrifice of his soul being the one too late and without purpose, not Cordy's bargain.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Language vs. Intent -- Just George, 09:25:36 02/07/03 Fri

Perhaps I got too caught up in the exactness of language. My wife Donji suggested that I should look at Cordy's character for guidance rather than her words. To paraphrase Donji's position:


Cordy is not moved the exactness of language (none of the alumni of Sunnydale High are), she is moved by intent. When she made the bargain with Angelus, Cordy probably thought of it in terms of: I'm willing to sacrifice to save the world.

Also, at the moment of making the bargain, many things could have all been going through her head. Some may have included:

* If the world ends, then nothing matters anyway. (worked when she slept with Conner!)

* Angelus might not be any worse than the Beast. (demon torture vs. demon torture, how to choose?)

* If my life is the price for saving the world, so be it. (I'm a Champion!)

* Maybe Angel will be re-souled and I won't have to give myself to Angelus. (and giving myself to Angel wouldn't be so bad...)

* Maybe the others will find a way out of this. (how many times have we all cheated death...)

* And so on...

In Cordy's mind the intent of the bargain was clear: I'll risk my life to save the world. In this context, Cordy is not lying to herself so much as being inarticulate and of many minds on the subject. The one thing she doesn't seem to be thinking about is the scenario that occurred: Angelus tells them about the Beast but it doesn't help them save the world.


I can accept this logic. It feels more like Cordy's character to me: high minded and muddled at the same time. And it doesn't assume the great bluff (for which I see no canonical evidence).

I still think it was a dramatic let down.

-Just George
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Language vs. Intent -- crgn, 10:31:07 02/07/03 Fri

Yeah, I see that very much in keeping with Cordy's character, with snarky Cordy snapping at Angelus "I can't help it if you heard what I said and not what I meant!"
[> [> [> [> [> She was just lying -- Darby, 19:32:07 02/06/03 Thu

Cordelia was manipulating the manipulator, knowing that if she told him that he could tell that she was lying, he couldn't admit that he in fact couldn't tell. She knew from Angelus' appearance in Sunnydale that he lost Angel's empathy, his ability to really understand the people who had been close to him.

As Angel, his ability to "read" Cordy was based on shared feeling; as Angelus, it became all analysis, and that wasn't enough.

She was lying, and she knew he wouldn't know, but that she could get him to accept it. And she was smart enough to not give it away later - although it's make my case a lot stronger if she'd copped to it.

My take, anyway.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Cordy - not bluffing, not lying -- Valhalla, 22:41:30 02/06/03 Thu

I never thought she was bluffing OR lying -- I'm with pr10n, although I have a more lawyerly analysis (makes sense, since I used to be a lawyer). Cordy did say he would get her, but she never said when. She was speaking the truth, just not the whole truth -- you get me (when 'you' means Angel, not Angelus).

In the classic deal with a devil scenario, the mortal makes a deal that sounds great, but when it comes time to collect, the devil puts his spin on the deal, which always turns out to be literally within the terms of the contract, but not what mortal-person thought was the deal when they accepted it. Cordelia reversed the script on Angel; Cordy's mortal and he's a demon (ok, not The Devil, but a pretty good Devil-agent).

Cordy was the first one (I think) to say, ok, let's put his soul back in. Had Angel's soul not gone missing, she could (and probably would, if Angel was over himself on the Connor thing and they had time amidst staving off the Apocalypse) have kept up her end of the bargain.

But now she's up the creek, so to speak, because they can't get Angel back. That's the thing about deals with the devil -- even really evil mortal lawyers (W&H) still get tied up in knots when making deals with evil -- in the end, they lose too. But I thought the Champion-type deed of Cordelia's was in daring to make a deal with the devil/Angelus in the first place, even if she thought it was going to be Angel's head denting the pillow.

On another topic -- damn! I'd love to see a Buffy-Angel crossover with Buffy showing up in LA about now. Just the expression on Buffy's face when she'd realized what they'd done.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy - not bluffing, not lying -- Darby, 05:19:27 02/07/03 Fri

The problem here is that Cordy made the deal with Angelus, who is to her absolutely a different person than Angel. Just within her own belief system, if her intent was to give it up to Angel, her deal was still a lie.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Not to torture the point -- Valhalla, 22:04:08 02/07/03 Fri

Not to beat my point to death, but I don't think Angel is an absolutely different person to Cordelia. When Cordy was floating around in space, she saw or felt all the horrible things Angelus had done. When she was back on Earth, it was the fact that she couldn't get that out of her mind that kept her from really hooking up with Angel earlier in the season. If she really separated Angel out completely from Angelus in her belief system, nothing Angelus did would have mattered to her.

Plus Angel's still weighed down with guilt for Angelus's actions. He doesn't act as if Angelus is another person -- you don't feel guilt for things you didn't do. He got a little offended when Cordy implied Angelus might be smarter than Angel. If Angel doesn't separate himself out from Angelus, then Cordy could have some part of her, not even a big part, that doesn't quite separate them out either.
[> Cordelia vs. Angelus: Battle of Wits (immunity to iocane powder not required) -- Valheru, 00:09:56 02/07/03 Fri

I see this slightly different than the rest of you. I do think Cordy was lying. They needed info from Angelus and she thought that offering herself to him would get it. Remember, the last time Angelus was running about, his primary motivation was to torture Angel's lover, Buffy. Cordy thinks, probably accurately, that whenever the Angel-to-Angelus switch occurs, Angelus wants nothing more in the world than to punish the person who meant the most to Angel. In this case, Cordelia believes herself to be that person.

She might be wrong. As is implied in "Awakening," although Cordelia is the one Angel has sex with, it's still Buffy who gives him that moment of perfect happiness. He is projecting his love of Buffy onto Cordy. Angelus, however, is able to see through Angel's psychological symbolism, therefore he knows that, while Cordy is the most important woman in Angel's life right now, in the end it all still comes down to the Slayer.

But Cordy doesn't know any of this. She thinks that, because she's the one Angel loves, she would be Angelus's ultimate target. In the context of the deal, it doesn't really matter, since Angelus probably wants to hurt Cordy the second worst than anyone else; he'd jump at the deal, certainly.

Cordy is hedging her bet. She offers herself to Angelus, hoping that he'll tell her about the Beast. But does Cordy really have to go through with it? As far as she knows when the deal was made, once Angelus spills the beans, the soul will be restored. Even now that the soul is missing, with Angelus trapped in the cage, he's in no position to collect. The only person Cordy has to answer to for reneging on the deal, at this point, is herself, and I seriously doubt she's going to lose much sleep over betraying the world's most evil vampire.

But here's the kicker: Angelus knows all this. He knows that he can make deals with the Fang Gang 'til pigs fly (which, come to think of it, might not be too far off on this show)--there's no way they'll willingly give in to their part of the bargain with him soon to be re-ensouled, or even just trapped in a cage. And since his ultimate goal is to get loose, he also knows that once he's free, he can do any damn thing he wants to them. It's not like Angelus is one to say, "Well, I'm just going to be myself for a few hours, so I'll agree to the deal, do whatever I want to the Chase girl, and then go back to living in the recesses of Angel's mind." In Angelus's mind, whether they make deals or not, he will eventually have his way with them.

So why would Angelus tell them the truth about the Beast? The deal means nothing to him, since he's hoping to get free and torture Cordy and the Gang anyway. As long as the Fang Gang doesn't get what they want out of him, he can bide his time until he can break free. It's like what Spike did during BtVS Season 4: only tell them enough so I can live another day and hopefully I can live long enough to get the chip out of my head, in which case I won't have to tell them anything, since I'll have killed them all.

If Angelus tells the truth, under whatever circumstance, then Wesley opens the safe, calls the shaman, and Angel comes back. If Angelus lies, the same thing happens. So really, under no circumstance is it in Angelus's favor to tell the truth. Hell, knowing him, he'd rather let the Slayer kick the unliving stuffin' out of him than give the Good Guys what they want.

IMO, all Angelus and Cordy did was play a game. But where she thought she had won, it may turn out that she lost on all counts. Worst-case scenario: He gives her false info about his connection to the Beast, he breaks free and kills her and the Fang Gang, then he reteams with Drusilla in a fun-filled romp through Sunnydale after Buffy and Spike just before the Beast ends the world. What we were shown in "Soulless" was the very-best-case scenario, one which I suspect will turn out to be somewhat worse than it appears.
[> [> And what is Angelus doing, anyway? -- Valheru, 22:03:02 02/07/03 Fri

One of the most striking things to me about "Soulless" didn't hit me until my 4th viewing. I got so caught up in the psychological torture and head-shrinking that I didn't even notice it:

Why isn't Angelus trying to break free?

For all the similarities "Soulless" showed us, Angelus is definitely not Hannibal Lecter. In "The Silence of the Lambs," Hannibal seems more interested in pushing Clarice's buttons than getting out of his captivity. For one thing, the prison has trained guards, surveillance cameras, and a bunch of really tough locks, while Hannibal is just one old guy with a razor mind. He must wait in prison, hoping for the day to come that an opportunity might present itself so he might be able to get free without getting captured or killed.

Angelus, however, is more interested in being free than sparring words with the Fang Gang. And given his environment, breaking out is a whole lot easier for him than it was for Hannibal. He is not imprisoned so much as he is temporarily contained. For all their expertise, the Fang Gang is not a group of vampire-prison guards, nor is the Hyperion the Correctional Facility for the Sunlight Impaired. Hell, it only took about 30 minutes for him to get ahold of Fred and bring Gunn into grabbing distance. And unless there's another Master about, Angelus is the most formidable vampire one can face.

But Angelus never even tries to break free. He grabbed Fred and went directly for her neck, rather than use her as a hostage to trade for his freedom. He didn't even try to use his Beast-knowledge as a means of getting out (which, considering what Cordy suggested, wouldn't have been as far-out an idea as I would have thought). He just stood in the cage and played Dr. Lecter to a bunch of Clarice Starlings. Why?

My hunch is that Angelus knew someone was going to steal the soul all along. He needed the soul away from the Fang Gang in order to be free without worrying about being re-Angel-ed, and he knew someone was going to take it from them. So he instead focuses his energies on trying to get the Fang Gang's attention elsewhere from the safe. Make broad, Gang-encompassing remarks to make sure everyone upstairs keeps their eyes glued to the television. Instigate a fight between Wes and Gunn so all attention is on them. In other words, Angelus spent the whole episode distracting them from the person stealing Angel's soul.

Remind anyone of anything? It's the same tactic Angelus used against Buffy so that Drusilla could kidnap Giles in "Becoming." Food for thought, anyway.
[> [> [> To be fair... (4.13 spoilers and unspoiled speculation) -- Scroll, 22:30:36 02/07/03 Fri

Angelus wasn't going for Fred's neck so much as taunting Gunn with Fred's neck so that Gunn would (stupidly but lovingly) try to save his girlfriend's life. It almost worked; Gunn was definitely going to open the cage door. Fortunately Wes is a good shot with that tranq gun. But I think you're right that Angelus was banking on someone getting rid of that pesky soul-in-a-jar. I'm trying to figure out if Connor did it... or Cordelia.

The reason I'm even considering Cordelia is that there's still something very off about her -- though Queen C did make a brief reappearance when she taunted Angelus for falling into his own trap. Still, Cordelia is the one who eventually convinced Angel to get rid of the soul, and she's the one causing much of the rift between Angel and Connor. I think she might be the sleeper agent (if there ever was one) who offed Manny in "Long Day's Journey". But that's just my (unspoiled) spec, I could be totally off.
[> [> [> Good point -- tomfool, 08:55:00 02/08/03 Sat

I agree that Angelus seemed very interested in keeping everyone distracted. If Angelus knew that the soul would be stolen, which the clues point to, I'm leaning towards the Lorne as sleeper theory. If Angelus/beast really did gain some control over Lorne during the reading of Angel's song (as suggested by ?? can't remember the poster, sorry), that seems like the only way Angelus could be completely certain that the soul would be taken. Lorne is the perfect sleeper because he's the least likely and would seem to have the least motive. ME never does anything without foreshadowing and it seems slightly blatant (in hindsight) that Lorne made a point about not joining the gang in the cage room. He therefore seems to have had the greatest opportunity. Anyway, just another vote for Lorne.

Oh, and great parallel to Becoming. Divide and distract is definitely the Angelus style.
[> I think the problem is it was just poorly written. (rant) -- yez, 14:14:03 02/07/03 Fri

I think the writers wanted something to happen in a certain way, and they just couldn't find a good way to make it work. Maybe it went down something like this:

"OK, Angelus comes back. Yeah, that would be good. OK, but why? Why would Angelus come back? Think, dammit, think! YES -- because he had some connection to the Beast in his past and they have to talk to Angelus to find out what it was! Perfect! Oh, damn, but Angel would know about that, wouldn't he.... Ah, screw it, the audience can make up their own reason for why he doesn't know! OK, so now how would they bring Angelus back? Sex? No, been there, done that. Well, I don't know, let's just say shaman. Yeah, a shaman could do that -- shamans can do anything -- and in the process, we can have an fake-out episode where he has sex with Cordy! Yeah... that's good... OK, so they put Angelus in this cage and they put really flimsy restraints on him so he can break them immediately -- horizontal, restrained Angelus would be too boring. OK, so then Angelus breaks free and starts terrorizing them.... No, but wait -- the whole reason they bring Angelus out is to get information on the Beast, so they have to at least TRY to do that even though we're not ready for them to kill the Beast yet. OK, so how do they get the information on the Beast out of him? Angelus would never actually help them. He would never cooperate. Well, they could starve him.... but that would just take too damn long. OK, so they could torture him... No, no, how are they going to do that?! They put those damn flimsy restraints on him and can't get close enough now! And they would just be hurting Angel's body even if they could! Dammit, think! OK, OK, got it, I got it! Cordy will trick him into telling her! But wait, isn't Angelus too clever for that..."

IMHO, it's unbelievable that Angelus would ever trust that Cordy would give herself to him -- therefore, Cordy had to mean it. But this only created a second problem: It's unbelievable that Cordy would be so stupid as to actually ever intend to give herself to Angelus when the plan is to put Angel's soul back no matter what and when it's not even clear that Angelus' information will actually help them or even that they could trust Angelus' information -- so, the character *has* to be bluffing or somehow find a loophole, all while the actress plays it like she really means it. But this created a third problem: If Cordy tries to actually build loophole language into her promise, the audience and Angelus would spot it a mile away and the audience would naturally expect Angelus to comment on it, thereby destroying the illusion and putting us back at square one.

So they're like, "We'll do it ALL. Cordy will believe it, but she'll use the old loophole trick, but we won't actually have her build a loophole into her promise. She'll just SAY she did and we won't have Angelus refute it, and by not refuting it, it becomes true."

I don't know... this is the only explanation I can come with that makes any sense for me. I'd rather have had the final conversation go something like this:

A: "I showed you mine, now you show me yours."

C: "Yeah, right -- like that was EVER going to happen."

A: "You were lying..." (surprised but kind of impressed)

C: "What am I, stupid? Of COURSE I was lying? And if you were Angel, you would've known that. I can't believe you fell for that whole 'Am I lying? You tell me' trick." (referencing earlier dialogue)

yez
[> [> Re: That would have done it for me. -- Just George, 14:32:17 02/07/03 Fri

yez: "I'd rather have had the final conversation go something like this:"

A: "I showed you mine, now you show me yours."

C: "Yeah, right -- like that was EVER going to happen."

A: "You were lying..." (surprised but kind of impressed)

C: "What am I, stupid? Of COURSE I was lying? And if you were Angel, you would've known that. I can't believe you fell for that whole 'Am I lying? You tell me' trick." (referencing earlier dialogue)


That would have done it for me.

-JG
[> [> [> Re: Historical experience -- DEN, 22:39:49 02/07/03 Fri

The experience of the German officer corps in the Third Reich shows beyond reasonable doubt that an oath given to a man without honor is no oath at all.
[> Re: Cordy, Oath Breaker -- Utopia, 19:23:11 02/08/03 Sat

It was a bluff, and she pulled it off flawlessly.
Angelus wrecks Havoc -- Tess, 14:08:48 02/06/03 Thu

Loved the episode even though nothing new was really revealed. Angelus did what I expected which was throw everything out into the open and rip it to shreds.

I'm confused about Lorne's presence. He hasn't really been anything but a background prop this season. Is his continuing presence leading up to a bigger role later in the season?

The Cordy/Angelus bargain didn't strike me as believable. I woulda thought he would have been more interested in assuring he didn't find himself resouled than in being tempted at the thought of having Cordy anyway he wanted her. In fact, wouldn't Angelus rather take an 'unwilling' Cordelia as opposed to one who 'agreed' to whatever he has in mind for her?

The Angelus/Conner interaction was the most revealing. Not quite sure exactly what it revealed yet though. It seems Angelus is not quite as certain in his evil plans for Conner. He seemed to spend more time trying to figure the kid out whereas with everyone else he just went for the throat.

Conner's reaction whenever Darla is mentioned is interesting. He seems to have a lot of interest in his mother without wanting anyone to know he does. Did anyone else think that Angelus' jab about Darla staking herself because she couldn't stand the thought of being around Conner struck deep? The kid has some serious rejection issues.

I'm not good at grasping all the symbolism of the show but was the whole Conner wearing his father's shirt and sitting in his chair a symbol of him seizing more of his father's kingdom?

Things are about to get interesting.
[> Havoc (Spoilers, Soulless) -- Rahael, 15:47:27 02/06/03 Thu

Good points -

especially about Connor taking Angel's shirt. Usurping his place (in his bed?) It's Cordy who gives him Angel's shirt, after all. Perhaps symbolizing how she tries to replace Connor for Angel. Just like she dressed Groo to look like Angel.

Connor would love to get Angel out of the picture. Kill him or make him disappear. Take his place in Cordy's affections.

I think a lot of things were revealed - I think it will be even more significant in retrospect.
[> [> Re: Havoc (Spoilers, Soulless) -- RichardX1, 14:14:36 02/09/03 Sun

>>Connor would love to get Angel out of the picture. Kill him or make him disappear. Take his place in Cordy's affections.<<

I'm starting to think that Connor sees himself as more worthy for championhood than Angel. After all, he's got the superhuman strength, speed, senses, reflexes, everything... except the demon waiting to rip everything to shreds. Maybe Connor wants to win the favor not of Angel or Cordelia, but instead the PTBs.
[> Soulless Speculation (plus a spoiler or two) -- Sara, with a theory, 20:05:05 02/06/03 Thu

Ok, I'm maybe I'm wrong (nah, I'm not wrong I just know it!) - but I've had a feeling all day that Angelus did make a deal with the beast (since when would Angelus turn down wiping out a trio of cute blond priestesses? And what's this about not being a team player - how about he, Spike, Dru and Darla making up the Fab Four) I haven't got all details worked out (such as any of the details...), speculation isn't really one of my skills, but I think that Angel's missing memory was something done to create the situation where Angelus would have to be brought back.

So you say, how did the beast know Angel would get a soul that needed removal? Why did the beast come back now and not earlier? Why the place where Connor was born? These and all other questions will need to be answered by greater minds then mine, but then why else would there be greater minds than mine?
[> [> Re: Soulless Speculation (plus a spoiler or two) -- Tess, 21:44:53 02/06/03 Thu

"And what's this about not being a team player - how about he, Spike, Dru and Darla making up the Fab Four)"

I thought Angelus was talking about not being a team player in the sense that HE doesn't do the grunt work of someone else's schemes. I don't think Angelus considered the fanged four a 'team'. To Angelus, Dru and Spike were little more than minions and Darla in her obsession just went along with whatever evil little plan he dreamed up.

Which brings to mind a question...
In the history of the buffyverse I only remember seeing two vamps who were called 'Master Vampires'. Is there a difference between a vampire who's earned the title Master and just a really strong leader like Angelus or Spike?
[> [> [> Re: Soulless Speculation (plus a spoiler or two) -- Dannyblue, 05:59:48 02/07/03 Fri

Angelus has shown in the past that he doesn't take authority too well, which probably had something to do with how tough Liam's father was on him.

For example, while barely a fledgling (newly risen) Angelus took on the Master. He got a good beating for his trouble, but that didn't stop him from showing as much contempt and disrespect for the older, more powerful vampire as possible.

Angelus could deal with Dru and Spike around. In his mind, they were weak, inferior...minions, as someone else said. Even Darla, who was 150 years older than him, seemed willing to let him dominate (although I think he came closer to thinking of her as an equal than anyone else). But if there's someone bigger or smarter in the yard, Angelus isn't going to want to play with them. He especially isn't going to take orders from them.

I'm thinking, even if he wanted to kill the priestesses, he wouldn't have done it because the Beast wanted him to.

Although, I wouldn't be surprised if more went on between Angelus and the Beast than we saw.
[> Lorne's Visit with.. (soulless spoilers) -- neaux, 05:41:11 02/07/03 Fri

Well Lorne was downplayed in this episode, but He was the first to interact with Angelus.

At the very beginning of the Episode Angel was singing his creepy song, which I believe was intentional.

Angelus knew that Lorne would never go down to see him in his cage, so Angelus made sure to make contact with Lorne through his singing to tell Lorne what was exactly on his mind.
[> Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Masq, 07:07:31 02/07/03 Fri

I'm not sure how much of this is going to end up in my episode analysis, but it's in my notes, so thought I'd mention it here.

On Cordelia and Angelus--Cordelia bluffed Angelus, and though it seems as if she is willing to give herself over voluntarily, she'd have to be insane to, really, and Angelus knows this. It is made all the more creepy when Cordelia rubs his face in it at the end. "I'm not giving myself to you after all, and you will soon be Angel with a soul again, so nyeh nyeh!"

Angelus has a plan for getting out, and she'll be one of the first on his list, just for being her, and just for really pissing him off with her arrogance. He doesn't think she'll withstand what he has in mind for her for an instant. "Something tells me she's a screamer."

Angelus' plan for getting out? Too obvious it's Connor. Everyone else was around when Wesley warned them Angelus would be trying to escape. Connor didn't hear that. Connor didn't hear Wesley's warnings about psychological manipulation. And Connor is a hot-headed teen raised to have one goal in life--to kill Angelus. Now that Angelus doesn't have his cumbersome Angel outer-wear on anymore, Connor is just bursting for a fight.

And Angelus knows this. He baits Connor with it. In fact, he practically has Connor opening the cage when Cordelia comes downstairs and orders Connor away.

As for the symbolism of the outer wear, I kind of thought the shirt represented Angel himself. Angel is like a piece of clothing that Angelus is forced to wear in everyday life. At least, that's Connor's theory--Angelus is the real person. When Angel loses his soul, he sheds his shirt. Connor, full of bravado, is picking up the mantle of the family's great protector by wearing the shirt, but Connor is too full of anger and self-loathing to win. I think he wants Angelus to kill him as much as he wants to kill Angelus.
[> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Arethusa, 09:05:39 02/07/03 Fri

It's as if Cordy is goading him to escape. First she dangles her body as bait, and then she goes back on their deal, rubbing his impotence to punish her for it in his face.

Angelus seemed to be very interested in Connor's identification with Angelus, and not Angel. I wonder if Angelus is debating between killing Connor outright and using Connor's self-loathing to create a little havoc first. The prospect of making his son into his own image must be irresistible to someone with so many father/son issues. And Connor still has little idea how dangerous Angelus is-if he did, he really would be afraid.

I was surprised to hear Angelus insinuate that Fred was in love with Wesley. Despite her increasing self-consciousness around Wesley since Seidel's murder, I didn't think she thought of him as anything but a friend, as she claimed. But one of Gunn's biggest attractions for Fred was that he made her feel safe, which was also the reason she became attracted to Angel at first. Part of Fred is still in Pylea, and she won't be free of her self-imposed cage until she realizes that she's afraid of being victimized again. As in Supersymmetry, when Fred thought Gunn couldn't protect her she turned to Wesley.
[> [> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Isabel, 21:17:33 02/08/03 Sat

"As in Supersymmetry, when Fred thought Gunn couldn't protect her she turned to Wesley."

I understood a different motivation for Fred going to Wesley. I thought it was because she wanted to take care of Seidel herself, and that she knew that Angel and Gunn wanted her well out of it while the macho-men went and dealt with him. I think she commented to Wes that Gunn told her to have a cup of cocoa and a nap after she told them she wanted Seidel dead. If anything, she might have thought that Gunn wouldn't be able to handle Seidel. Her going to Wes for help was not for protection, but because she knew he would not coddle her and would respect her wishes. And loan her weapons.
[> [> [> [> Why go to Wes at all? -- Arethusa, 14:14:19 02/09/03 Sun

Since she wanted to take out Seidel herself, she could have simply grabbed one of the many weapons in the Hyperion and gone after him. Fred was able to open a portal by herself, and could have just shot him with the crossbow, which she knows how to use, or force him to jump into the portal. But she was still too afraid-her reversion to her post Pylea behavior shows this, I think. She wanted back-up, and since Gunn wouldn't, she went to Wes.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: It wasn't about backup. -- Isabel, 17:29:31 02/09/03 Sun

You're right that Fred could have grabbed weapons from the Hyperion. But the likelihood that Gunn or Angel would catch her was increased exponentially. They did NOT want her going anywhere near Seidel and if they caught her they would act to keep her from doing what she wanted. Gunn and Angel were talking about taking care of Seidel, without Fred.

When Wes helped Fred, he loaned her weapons, let her look through his books (perhaps to find some suitably awful dimension to send Seidel-maybe one not easy to get back from,) and drove her to Seidel's office. Maybe I'm remembering this wrong, but Fred turned down Wes's offer to go in with her and help. She knew what she was doing was "wrong," but she had to do it and she wanted no one else to bear the responsibility for what she had to do.

Seidel was an amoral bastard and he would never go to jail. Fred trusted him and he put her through 5 years of hell, slavery and starvation. But she was the lucky one. Of all of his victims, she's the only one who made it back. The rest are probably dead and I think she was doing it for the others too.
[> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Angela, 09:15:59 02/07/03 Fri

"And Connor is a hot-headed teen raised to have one goal in life--to kill Angelus. Now that Angelus doesn't have his cumbersome Angel outer-wear on anymore, Connor is just bursting for a fight."

Plus he's had a parental warning from Dad-Angel; there is no greater inducement on the face of the earth than a parental warning. LOL

"I think he wants Angelus to kill him as much as he wants to kill Angelus."

Ahhhh, now that is interesting. ;-)

And I don't know if it matters, but he clearly views Holtz as his real *father* still, Angelus as his biological father and the source of his shadow, Angel seems to be fading third as the mask or shell (but also the root of his problems and the one who takes away anything good?) Based on that, if the father does kill the son I would guess that it's something that's Holtz engendered that kills Conner and/or Angel having to pull a S2 Buffy to save the world. Good ep.
[> [> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Dannyblue, 11:04:25 02/07/03 Fri

In a weird way, I think Connor is more comfortable thinking of Angelus as his father than Angel.

The Angel he's seen is nothing like the being Holtz taught him about as he grew up. He sees Angel acting the part of the hero, fighting the good fight, caring about his friends, saving the innocent. And that's what Connor believes it is. An act. A mask. He believes all the good things Angel does is a show he's putting on to fool people--even himself--into thinking he's not evil anymore. So, how can Connor really believe him when he says he loves him? When he says anything?

And, if Angel really is the being he's seen since returning to this dimension, that would mean Holtz was wrong. Not just wrong to think of Angel as a monster, but wrong for the actions he took to punish Angel.

But Angelus is "the truth". AT least, the truth Holtz taught Connor to believe in. The mask of goodness is gone, the monster revealed. This is Connor's real father. Not that guy he almost likes sometimes, then feels guilty for doing so. But this evil creature that Holtz wanted to punish, who obviously deserves it.

I think Connor is more comfortable with that vision of his father, than with Angel, who makes him doubt Holtz, his feelings of resentment...everything.
[> [> [> [> Is it really comfort? -- Masq, 14:08:14 02/07/03 Fri

On one level, Connor may be more comfortable thinking of Angelus as his father, because it's consistent with everything he was raised to believe.

But the psychological consequences of believing that Angelus is his "real" father are devastating. When Connor was conceived and in the womb, his mother was "free-range" evil. His infant body developed and grew on the human blood she consumed. If his father is also evil to the core, then what does that say about Connor?

Connor is full of self-loathing. Deep down inside, he believes he is an unworthy being who is as beneath contempt as the demons he hunts. He longs for a human birthright, but he doesn't have one. He is the son of two demons.

Except that his father had a soul when he was conceived, and still does. And his mother came to love him on the strength of Connor's own human soul. Connor does have a human birthright after all. But he doesn't trust in this. It wasn't what Holtz taught him. So Connor focuses his self-hatred on his alleged connection to the Beast. If he cannot hate himself through his good and heroic father, he will glom onto the fact that the Beast emerged where he was born, and that the Beast knows him.

But now his father is evil again. He's everything Holtz said he was. Connor doesn't need the Beast to beat himself up with anymore. He's got daddy.

So I predict, look for Connor to do something completely self-destructive to prove all his well-learned fears and insecurities true.

The sad thing is, they aren't true. But it's easy to believe.
[> [> [> [> [> Well said, Masq. I only hope it's not something... -- Ixchel, 15:41:36 02/07/03 Fri

Fatal. That promo for next week's episode has me a little freaked out.

Ixchel
[> [> [> [> [> [> Who will die? Unspoiled spec for next week's Angel -- Masq, 17:44:28 02/07/03 Fri

I don't think the dead person will be Connor. He still has mysteries about himself to solve, and they seem to be a season-long arc. Plus I think he has an inner desire to be more than his insecurities tell him to be. He wants to live. If Angelus were to attack him, he'd fight for all he was worth.

I'm totally unspoiled about who will die, but I have this perverse theory it's going to be Lorne. Why? Because of all the recent publicity about Andy Hallett (who plays Lorne) getting bumped up to regular status on the show. It's just like Joss to put someone into the credits and then kill him off. He wanted to do that with Jesse in "Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest". He did do it with Doyle.

My second theory is that it will be Lilah. But I hope, hope not. She's a central reason a lot of people watch the show!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Don't forget Tara in that list. -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:07:30 02/07/03 Fri

Though that was a bit obvious, since she was bumped up to regular in the very episode she died in.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Interesting speculations, Masq and good point, Finn Mac Cool. -- Ixchel, 22:07:50 02/07/03 Fri

I thought, they wouldn't kill off Connor after all the effort to integrate him into the show (which I believe they have done successfully, I really _care_ about the character). Then I thought, that's the kind of thing they do. And so forth...

I thought of Lorne also. I hope that he won't go the way of Tara, I'd _miss_ him.

I hadn't even considered Lilah. Of course, it would be when I started liking a character that they'd kill her.

So here's my guilty hope, they'll bring Gwen back and it'll be her (I don't dislike her, I'm just not attached to her like I am to the others). And, if Angelus kills her (and is around for awhile), he can have her apartment (seems like his style).

Ixchel
(with apologies to Gwen-fans)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> That'd be a cheat -- Masq, 22:55:35 02/07/03 Fri

It's supposed to be someone "major". Someone Angel-Investigations-y. Someone Angel's friends would care about losing.

Or at least that one or some of Angel's friends would care about losing.

Who of the characters that have died on the shows were in the main credits? Doyle was. But Jenny, Tara, Joyce, Darla, they weren't.

Ugh! The spoiled people on the board are laughing at us.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: That'd be a cheat -- CW, 07:21:56 02/08/03 Sat

Somebody's going to die? Guess I'd better take a peek again this week. I remember thinking when Jenny died, the promos had me thinking it would be one someone closer to Buffy like Joyce. So I think this time Lorne or Lilah would be good candidates. Of course, with Charisma's pregnancy, killing off Cordy would be a way to give her time off, the idea being if the show returns in the fall she would be miraculously resurrected. [Never seen that before, have we? ;o)] But, unless they start at the beginning of the episode explaining what's been up with Cordy lately, it's probably not her. I'd guess the only safe characters would be Gunn and Wes. Killing off one of them would solve Fred's love triangle problem, and I doubt that story is over. On the other hand killing off Fred doesn't mean Gunn and Wes are buddies again.

This is one of those times when the spoiled really do miss all the fun of guessing.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> speculatin' speculatin' -- WickedDull, 13:34:05 02/09/03 Sun

Maybe it's the Beast. Connor thinks he's close to it and Lorne *is* a demon, so perhaps there'd be some same-species regret.

My vote is Gunn. With Wes and/or Fred having something inadvertently to do with it, just to really complicate things more. Then again, Fred has been kind of boring lately, except that one spark of passion when she and Wes smooched. I'd love to see her, well the whole Angel cast, in a Doppelganger episode like Buffy had. ::trying to imagine what Fred would be like::

err, wait, my other vote is Lorne - since he's 1) basically a demon 2) oddly not telling anyone what he saw in Cordy's head OR from Angelus singing the scary Teddy Bear song. And maybe the actor has developed a horrible allergic reaction to the continued use of that green make-up and can't go on.

(told ya it was speculatin')

Then of course, Buffy could suddenly appear in LA and get killed. Because that never stops her anyway, she just comes right back and would be raised up again in time for next weeks Buffy Episode.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Charisma Carpenter is... ? -- RichardX1, 14:37:37 02/09/03 Sun

... pregnant?

Wait a minute. Cordelia's had sex with Connor, and goaded Angelus to the point that when he escapes he'll probably want to... well, we'd all rather not think about that.

I shudder to think of how these plot twists might be used to accommodate Ms. Carpenter's soon-to-be expanding abdomen.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- s'kat, 09:03:12 02/08/03 Sat

Uhm...well let's look at it logically (and I swear I'm unspoiled on this...I really don't know, spoiled friends have wisely kept their mouths shut (b/c I'd kill them for taking away my ability to guess on it/ that's why I despise spoilers, half the fun is in the guessing and predicting, dang it!), but I would lay serious money down on who dies - that's how much sense this makes to me):

Think about the character of Angelus for a minute. What would Angelus do? What is the most in character thing?
Who does he want to torture? And assuming for a minute he's the one who instigates the death...who would cause the most pain for his "closest" comrades?

Ats has been metanarrating on Season 2 Btvs all season.
And Season 3 Btvs. In Soulless, there's a metanarration (TM OM) on the whole Innocence storyline as well as Enemies and Consequences.

So...let's think, what did Angelus do in Season 2 Btvs?
What happens in Passion? Who are the three characters that play principal roles in Angel's happy dream? Who are the characters in Grounded that are in the photo? The last time Angel became Angelus - did he kill the people he was closest to or try to torture them in another way? What way?
And what literary works does Angelus mention in Soulless and what results does obtain from doing it and how does he feel about that?

Connor won't die - too important to the arc. Don't see that as happening. Now I could be wrong on this - we have the whole Father kills the son - thing. But something tells me that Angelus thinks death is too easy for Connor. And he would rather corrupt him. Also while Connor's death could be fun in the sense that it would destroy Angel when he got his soul back - it really doesn't torture the other characters that much. Wes may care - but only in a failure sort of way. No - the two characters Angelus wants to punish the most, methinks, are Wesley and Cordelia. Remember Angelus is Angel's rage unleashed. And who has he been the angriest at? Who took his son? Who does he blame for everything? Cordy? Gunn? Fred? Lorne? Connor? Or Wes?

Also remember the backstory - does Angelus think death is the worst punishment he can bestow? What did he do to Drusilla? OR even Buffy? Or Giles?

So if you were Angelus, who would you want to hurt most? And if you want to do it? How? What would be the best
way?

Now of course I could be utterly wrong on this, after all I idiotically thought the big bad in Btvs wasn't the FE.
As far as I know Lorne or Connor or Lilah could die next week. But I strongly doubt it. They can still do stuff with them. Keeping Lilah alive is far more useful and torturous for Wes, then killing her. (She's somewhat evil, remember? There's too much they can do.)Also Lorne remember is metanarrating on Spin the Bottle from the possible future. And killing Lorne doesn't in any way further the plot or character arcs. He's not really like Jenny in Passion. (Who is like Jenny in Passion? Who in ATs fits the Jenny role??)Angelus gains zip from Lorne or Lilah's death. Same thing with Connor - doesn't do enough.

No, the only characters whose deaths would blow stuff apart is Gunn, Fred, Wes and Cordy. Question is - will ME actually kill off a credited regular contracted player??
That's the only thing that makes me wonder if maybe I'm wrong - they've never killed a character who has appeared in the credits for a lengthy amount of time. I just can't see them killing Lorne or Lilah..or even Gwen. Nope has to be one of the top four.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Question -- CW, 14:01:26 02/08/03 Sat

Being kind of in and out of things with Angel, I need to ask. Did the preview say Angelus would kill some one or just that someone would die?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Question -- Alison, 14:29:43 02/08/03 Sat

just that someone would die
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks -- CW, 14:35:33 02/08/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- Arethusa, 19:05:23 02/08/03 Sat

An article in the Buffy magazine, #6, gave some potentially important information.
See below, potential spoiler space follows.















Charisma Carpenter, in an interview made before this season started, said that she would like to work on a sitcom because she wanted to be a mother and the hours would be much shorter than on an hour-long drama. "It was good fun to be on a sitcom [in "Birthday"] because that's my secret wish. The next step for me...I would really enjoy being on a sitcom, rather than doing one-hour drama, especially on a night-time show, because the hours are completely different from a daytime drama.... So it would be nice to do a half hour show in a studio, because when I did that episode...we were out by 3pm. I mean, who knew?!? And I was trying to be quick, because I had a lot of wardrobe changes to shoot for the opening of the sitcom, and the crewmembers were like, "Oh, my wife is going to be so grateful, Charisma. Thank you so much for getting us out of here." Well, I didn't get them out of here-it was the way it was scheduled. These people don't see their families, and tend to live an hour away from Paramount Studios where we shoot, so I don't see my family , and if I have children and I get married that's going to be a grave concern for me, so I want to be on a sitcom." Article by Rod Edgar.

The primary focus of Angelus is his "family"-Cordy and Connor. If one of the four core players dies, it will probably be Cordy. That would set up the most pain and guilt for Angel.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- s'kat, 20:31:15 02/08/03 Sat

If we're laying down bets? I'm betting it's Fred - Gunn is the one who accidentally kills her a la Othello.

From the rumors I've heard, I think Cordy is going to be around for a while...because I don't think they are done with her yet. Not nearly. Killing Cordy is the least painful thing they can do at this point.
Besides we have that whole C/C thing to still deal with.

No, the characters they can do the most with right now are Cordy, Connor and Wes. My gut says Fred's the goner. But I could be wrong - they could do in Gunn (foreshadowing from Habeas Corpus and Grounded).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- Arethusa, 10:31:47 02/09/03 Sun

My guesses are always wrong, and it could easily be Fred, especially after the Othello mention and Gunn's accidental hitting of Fred. The triangle is just heating up now, and there's a lot of potential for angst left, so I'm hoping it isn't she.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- Tess, 11:01:47 02/09/03 Sun

""especially after the Othello mention and Gunn's accidental hitting of Fred""

Does ME usually foreshadow deaths this way? I know Buffy offhandedly mentioned her mom having an aneurysm as early as season four. But was there any foreshadowing of Jenny's death? Or Doyle's or Jonathon's?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I don't think so. -- Arethusa, 11:43:01 02/09/03 Sun

Buffy's death was foreshadowed, as was Xander's in Restless. (That plot was abandoned.) I don't think the others were; maybe someone can correct me. But mainly I meant that those two actions put the idea in my head that Fred might die. I didn't think of it as foreshadowing (although it might be?), just a possibility. For example, just because Oedipus was mentioned doesn't mean Angel will die.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Actually they did -- s'kat, 15:53:25 02/09/03 Sun

Jenny's death is foreshadowed twice in Season 2: first in The Dark Age when she is taken over by the demon that Angel ironically saves her from - if he hadn't she'd be dead.

Second in Innocence - in Buffy's dream sequence where she's dressed in black and visiting a grave with Angel and her uncle in attendance.

Jonathan's death is foreshadowed in Season 6 - Warren and Andrew discuss killing Jonathan in Entropy when the milk spoils. They discuss it again in Seeing Red. Andrew cops to the plan partly in Two To Go. And it is made clear at several points that Andrew would help Warren kill Jonathan to have Warren. Also you could say that Jonathan's death is foreshadowed in Superstar when he almost falls into the pit with his monster self - although I think that's pushing things.

Doyle's death is sort of foreshadowed in Bachelor Party and to a degree in the beginning of the year - with the view of giving up your life to be a hero. But they really didn't have much time to foreshadow it and I think it was a last minute plan due to other issues.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> If you count every near death experience as foreshadowing. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 18:14:28 02/09/03 Sun

Then the death of every character has been foreshadowed several times over.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yup. Hence the reason these shows are so impossible to predict -- s'kat, 21:42:46 02/09/03 Sun

And so bloody fun to watch. ;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'm too literal! -- Arethusa, 21:48:36 02/09/03 Sun

I only thought of overt, spoken foreshadowing.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Why I'm so convinced... -- s'kat, 15:46:18 02/09/03 Sun

(If I'm wrong - you all can make fun of me on the board next Wed. ;-) )

Believe me, I really really hope I'm wrong. But it just feels right on so many levels:

Which character has the least avenues to really go outside of the romantic front?
Which character isn't as central to Angel and more central to the supporting characters?
Which character is keeping another character from doing certain things and whose death would seriously flip those characters? a la Tara's death on Btvs last year.
Which character would hurt everyone the most at this point, i.e. the one character who really hasn't done anything nasty and no one wants to clobber? again remember Tara?
Which character - does Angelus care the least about and sees as a tool to hurt other characters?
And finally which character's death would hurt the audience and AI Gang in the best way, yet not hurt their chances of harming the Beast or fighting the Apocalypse or affect any potential cross-overs with the other series in any way?
Lorne? Nope can still use him to fight the Beast and his death really doesn't change anything, sort of like Jonathan dying in Btvs. Same with Lilah - doesn't do anything - would be like Killing Spike last year or better yet Amy or
Andrew at this point on Btvs - doesn't further the plot and there's too much they can do with her. Connor same thing - while people would be upset - there's more they can do with him alive for Wes, Cordy and Angel. Also Cordy - too much mystery surrounding her and there's a ton they can do with her. Also her death doesn't really flip anyone but Connor and Angel - who are well already flipped. Nope the two characters who need to be flipped or thrown in some way are Gunn and Wes and possibly Fred. But killing Gunn doesn't really flip Wes that much, also it's too easy. So that leaves Fred, right?

I used that method to figure out who would die in Btvs last year and it's how I figured out Tara would die before any spoilers were released. No one agreed with me, while a few people did, but very few, most were convinced it would be Anya. Even Though Tara's death was arguably foreshadowed in Restless.

So yep. It feels like Fred. It works logistically plotwise. Furthers the plot, the characters, everything. And it
doesn't really take too much away from the story - since we've played the love triangle for about a year now.
Time for it to come to head. But I want and pray I'm wrong.
Fred, Wes and Lilah are my favorite characters. Would rather have any of the others die over them.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree! -- Masq, 18:40:02 02/09/03 Sun

When I thought about whose death would cause the most story-line angst while causing the least fan-reaction angst, the answer was Fred. It would have Gunn and Wesley at each other's throats. It would have Gunn and Wesley after Angel's heart. It would have Angel into a brood so deep no one could bring him out of it (after all he was Fred's "knight on horseback" in Pylea).

Cordelia would forgive Angel because she sees Angel and Angelus as separate people. Connor would go after his father with righteous abandon.

Amy Acker could go get married and live happily ever after. And Lilah or Gwen could pick up the slack left by one less female character on the show.

I like it!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> "You think you know...what's to come..." -- cjl, 21:12:50 02/09/03 Sun

Mwahahahahahahaha....
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- Isabel, 21:41:42 02/08/03 Sat

I figured the "Someone's going to die" bit is going to turn out to NOT be a MAIN character after all. (I am unspoiled, except for 2 future casting spoilers, which I figure have nothing to do with next week.) I could be wrong. It could be Lorne or Lilah or Cordy or Fred. (For a very male cast, of course they'd be likely to get rid of females...)

If I were a betting person, my money'd be on the Dark Shaman. Alive- he could locate the missing soul or call it back from the ether, dead- he's doing nothing and Angelus stays.

Of course that ties in with my theory that Connor took the soul from the safe. a) He was raised to kill Angelus and doesn't like Angel that much. b) If he kills Angelus, he gets Cordy back, or at least doesn't lose any possibility of getting her back. He'll never get her back as long as there's a possibility of Angel returning. (And she'd Definitely never forgive him for killing Angel.) c) Killing the Shaman would be consistent with his tactics last Summer when he worked to keep Gunn and Fred from finding out what happened to Angel. Eliminate the links to Angel. Of course the Shaman seemed to be human and I think Connor balks at killing humans... Hmmm.

I'm probably totally wrong. But Shadowkat is right. It's fun to guess when you don't know what's coming. I hope it's not Fred, I like her better than Cordy right now. And I hope it's not Lilah, she's always fun. And I don't want nasty stuff to happen to anybody else either.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> On that theory (completely unspoiled spec) -- Haecceity, 22:28:09 02/08/03 Sat

Ok, I've barely seen half the Angel eps this year and I just don't do spoilers, but if this mirror of Season 2 BtVS is being used on both shows then my guess for short straw goes to the Watcher's girlfriend--that would be Lilah or Fred, right? Seems like Angelus spent a good long time examining Wes in this last ep, gotta be a reason.

---Haecceity
appreciating the irony that I can watch Angel all I want on my traitorous, non-UPN TV when I don't like the show as much as BtVS.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: On that theory and... -- Angela, 05:28:11 02/09/03 Sun

if it is actually a kind of parallel to Season 2, then we'll lose Fred or Lilah mid-season and Conner or Cordy at the end.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Unspoiled Spec for next week's episode and Ats 4.11 Spoilers -- SingedCat, 22:46:59 02/08/03 Sat

Man, given the choices, I really really hope it's Cordy. The triangle is too cool to half resolve. Connor still has to kill that demon who sabotaged his youth by getting him abducted last season. Cordy, on the other hand, has IMHO been phoning it in since she got back from Heaven.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> a couple of considerations--and... (spoilers for earlier eps) -- anom, 23:13:43 02/09/03 Sun

...nice to see ya, SingedCat!

Um, right, considerations...OK, I don't think Connor will be the one killed off. For 1 thing, he still has a prophecy to fulfill regarding Sahjhan. And there's too much else they can't pass up doing w/him.

They might well bring back a recurring character like Gwen & kill her off. Hey, maybe it'll be Sahjhan! Or how about Justine? What do you think she's doing while the sun's gone & the vamps are taking over? She might still be fighting them...& it sure would be interesting to see her face Angelus, having gotten the same picture of him from Holtz that Connor did. (Hmm...maybe Connor will save Angelus from her to get Angel back. Or save Angel already back--don't think Angelus would have too much trouble taking on Justine. Did I mention she might be the one to die?)

And regarding who stole the soul, I can't find it now, but someone said having everyone glued to the monitor meant the safe was unguarded, but the Wes/Gunn confrontation started w/everyone in the office w/the safe, & no one watching the monitor! Looked to me like more eyes were on the safe, or at least in that room, than on Angelus.

As for who has the safe combination, I think we can rule out Connor, the shaman, & probably Lorne. The rest of 'em would know it--incl. Angelus, but he can't get to the safe.

Oh, & "And, if Angelus kills her [Gwen] (and is around for awhile), he can have her apartment."

Hahahahahaha!!! I love it, Ixchel!

Of course, if a main character dies (or seems to), we can't assume it's permanent...there's all sorts of ways they could come back!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Who will die? Unspoiled spec for next week's Angel -- RichardX1, 14:31:27 02/09/03 Sun

My theory is that it will be either Fred, Wesley, or Gunn. Then the remaining two have to deal with the love triangle that was turning their friendship (and love, in the case of Fred and either guy) sour, and the blame the remaining two would feel toward each other for surviving.

Of course, I tend to be fooled by the obvious setup (I was the one who thought Connor would turn out to be the Groosalug, after all).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Who will die? Unspoiled spec for next week's Angel -- Freki, 21:49:09 02/09/03 Sun

I think it will be one of those three too. I'm leaning towards Gunn, because his death would cause the biggest problems for the other two in the love triangle. Fred would feel guilty because things hadn't been good between them, and both she and Wes would be terribly guilty because of the kiss. And with the mention of Othello, it would be an ironic twist to have Othello be the one to die. But I'm generally wrong, so it will probably be Lorne or Lilah who dies.
[> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- Kay, 22:34:33 02/07/03 Fri

I don't think that Cordy bluffed Angelus at all. Angelus knew that they weren't going to be able to put his soul back in that second conversation with Cordy. He knew it was gone, and probably knew that it would be. Angelus had to tell them something (he gave them, what he probably knew was, useless information about the priestesses and nothing about the Beast himself) or else they would put his soul back before it had time to be stolen. Angelus was simply waiting for the right time and Cordy's offer was one of those "okay, I'll play" type scenarios. Which he will probably torment or use against her later. Can't wait to see Connor's reaction to knowing that Cordy offered herself to Angelus.
[> [> Re: Some theories on that... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- RichardX1, 14:20:27 02/09/03 Sun

And people wonder why I thought Connor took Angel's soul? Just re-read everything Masq posted. Connor's spent his entire life being raised to kill Angel. Now, Angel's soul is gone, and no one knows where it is. All that needs to happen is Angelus' escape, and Connor has an excuse to fulfill what he's believed to be his purpose in life all this time.
[> [> [> Bah on Connor.. (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- WickedBuffy, 18:03:16 02/09/03 Sun

Was it Angelus or Angel that Connor spent his entire life waiting to kill? Connor seemed pretty clear that Angelus and Angel were separate people. Quoting Angel to Angelus, etc. At first, Connor wasn't at all convinced there was a difference. Now he seems certain.

So if Connor kills Angelus, he kills Angel. He only wants to kill Angelus. Unless Connor has made a bargain with some incredibly powerful "thing" that gives him a way to kill Angelus without killing Angel, he's still in a stalemate about how to kill the demon and not dad. Seems if Connor DID steal the soul, it would only be for safekeeping, not to keep Angel from coming back. Which seems kinda weak.

I still think either the Beast teleported it out or Lorne did it. Lorne "not-gonna tell you all what Cordy OR Angelus were thinking" the Demon.
[> [> [> Gotta say I'm with you on that -- Masq, 18:30:20 02/09/03 Sun

But future eps will tell!
[> [> But - Cordy *WILL* keep her word!... (spoilers for Soulless and future spec ) -- WickedBuffy, 21:19:37 02/09/03 Sun

"It is made all the more creepy when Cordelia rubs his face in it at the end. "I'm not giving myself to you after all, and you will soon be Angel with a soul again, so nyeh nyeh!"


Then again, she'd let Angel have HIS way with her, so maybe that's what she really meant. So, she WILL keep her word as soon as that dang soul is plopped back in! }:>
Thoughts on Buffy 7.4 and Angel 4.3 (Spoilers) -- Liam, 07:52:51 02/07/03 Fri

Buffy 7.4: 'Help':

The episode was interesting, in that Carrie Newton was an attractive character, and the ending was unexpected. I also liked the reference to Willow writing love poems about Xander. Her visiting Tara's grave was nicely done, although I would have thought that her family would have wanted her buried in their home town. I laughed out loud when the student said that she was fed up with people being 'insecure', when Buffy offered this as an explanation as to why she had been bullied.

What I found badly written, however, was how Buffy, supposedly a school counselor, tried to deal with Cassie's situation. (I say this because I work with counselors.)

First, Buffy gives _confidential_ information about Cassie to outsiders like Willow, Dawn, and Xander. Second, she, along with Xander - who has no connection with the school - goes to Cassie's father's at night and makes accusations about him being abusive to his daughter. (While he has a criminal record, it appears to be for being drunk and disorderly, and disturbing the peace, _not_ domestic violence.) She was very lucky he didn't sue the school.

A last thought: Has anyone else noticed that despite being insane, Spike seems perfectly able to wash himself, shave himself, dress himself, get his hair cut, and go to the bathroom?


Angel 4.3: 'The House Always Wins':

I have mixed feelings about this episode.

Good points:

1. It was great to see Lorne back again, and singing. (I've seen AH in the flesh, so I'm very biased.)

2. Fred is getting a little more likeable.

3. Cracked up when the guard said, 'We have a Code Green'!

4. Cordy's hair has improved.

Bad points:

1. The plot looked a little too like 'Double or Nothing', the worst season 3 episode, in that the basic concept was lame. If the futures of the people, including Angel, were sold, how did they get them back again when Lorne smashed the globe, as they now belonged to new people?

2. Angel's references to Bugsy, the Rat Pack, and Elvis. I thought that all this was during what was supposed to be his brooding period, when he stayed in the shadows.
[> Personal opinions on those two episodes -- KdS, 09:20:18 02/07/03 Fri

Agree with you about Buffy's behavior in Help. I must admit, though, that I thought Cassie's hair was quite appalling.

In general I liked Help a lot - one of the best balances of humour and pathos we've seen for a while. My only serious problem with the episode was that I thought Cassie's second poem was a bit unnecessary. The verbal reference to Mr. Miller was nice continuity - looks like he did survive GDII

I must admit, I think The House Always Wins is an underrated episode. I wouldn't call it a good episode - it's silly, over-long, under-plotted, and a warning about the dangers of trusting setting to do all the work, but it isn't actively painful to watch like I Fall to Pieces, Provider or Double or Quits. Fortunately it kept the tone light instead of trying to wring angst out of a silly idea like DoQ. If I were ME I would get the message and make sure no episode of Angel features gambling ever again. The most memorable moments were the jokes that did come off - Lorne singing It's Not Easy Being Green and Fred's attempt to persuade the guards Lorne had escaped in particular. Quite a bit of the plot seemed to be designed as an excuse to put Amy Acker in slutwear, which IMHO was something of a miscalculation as she really doesn't have the physical ability to fill it effectively. When you're that skinny jeans & T-shirts = sexy, basques = pathos and slightly paedophilic overtones ;-)

Speculation on the way Help fits into the overall season follows. Liam, if you're keeping unspoiled for eps which have been broadcast in the US but not here I'd stop reading now. Everyone else please scroll down.





















Help has convinced me that Shadowkat has it right about the approach of S7 to past series. I think we are seeing an adult's hindsight view of adolescence. The schoolkids seem less supernaturally witty, the actors are more average looking and look more genuinely of high school age. Compare Cassie and Mike to Willow and Xander. The demon-worshipping schoolboys are an obvious riff on Reptile Boy yet they're amateurish, performing their ritual not in a sinister cavern but a school library (which itself is far more everyday, less hieratic in appearance than the size and ornate Edwardian furnishings of Sunnydale High School Library Mark I).

The second point for the remainder of the series - I've always been on the side of seeing Buffy's current military outlook as a bad thing, but this episode confirmed it. After the whole theme of S5, why have another episode showing that there are things that can't be defeated? I still remain convinced that the First Evil will be vanquished by sacrifice rather than violence.
[> [> Re: KdS' Help spec (don't read if you haven't seen the other broadcasted eps this year) -- Rob, 09:32:25 02/07/03 Fri

"After the whole theme of S5, why have another episode showing that there are things that can't be defeated? I still remain convinced that the First Evil will be vanquished by sacrifice rather than violence."

I agree, and honestly, how could normal battle techniques be used to fight an incorporeal being that is the source of the darkness that lies within every one? In the end, I don't think it can defeated so much as put back in balance.

Rob
[> [> Re: Personal opinions on those two episodes -- Liam, 10:38:45 02/07/03 Fri

Thanks for your comments, KdS, and for not spoiling me. You guessed, quite rightly, that those episodes are the latest I've seen.

We seem to be mostly in agreement on 'Help', though I've always had a soft spot for teenage characters who appear less than perfect; at least they look more 'normal'.

About 'The House Always Wins', the main thing that saved it from being too much like 'Double or Nothing' was, in my opinion, the character of Lorne.
[> [> But sacrifice and violence are almost always combined in defeating the Big Bad -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:32:28 02/07/03 Fri

Prophecy Girl - Buffy must sacrifice herself, so she can emerge stronger than before and use violence to destroy the Master.

Becoming - Buffy must defeat Angelus in battle, then she must sacrifice Angel.

Graduation Day - Buffy must sacrifice her blood to cure Angel, who then helps in fighting the Mayor and his vamp minions.

The Gift - Violence must be used to defeat Glory, otherwise Buffy wouldn't have the opportunity to sacrifice herself to save the world and Dawn.

Seasons Four and Six are the only ones which haven't kept the balance between victory through sacrifice and victory through battle (almost all battle for Season 4, almost all sacrifice for Season Six). I'm honestly hoping that both are used in the Season Seven finale, because "Grave" and "Primeval/Restless" remain my two least favorite season finales.
[> Schools in the buffyverse -- Rook, 14:38:56 02/07/03 Fri

Schools in the Buffyverse have never really functioned according to rules that govern normal schools. Snyder, for example, could never have unilaterally expelled Buffy in S2. Kids have all kinds of due process rights when it comes to public education; Expulsion is a power that principals simply don't possess... Willow's unsupervised "substitute" teaching stint is another example of a wholly unethical and illegal practice. Sunnydale High is a kid's metaphorical version of a school, where the Principal is God (And evidently the entire administrative staff)and rules are made to be broken.
[> [> Re: Willow -- CW, 20:08:31 02/07/03 Fri

Willow's substitute teaching was not doubt illegal and probably a gross violation of the teachers' union contract, but I think calling it wholly unethical requires you to prove she was a bad teacher, and that they knew beforehand she'd be bad. Before the enormous increase in percentage of high school and college graduates in the twentieth century, replacing a deceased or departed teacher mid-term with the best, most mature student in the class was commonplace. I think many of us remember properly certified high school teachers who never should have been allowed to teach. Ethics doesn't necessarily go hand-in-hand with the law.

Not really disagreeing with you, but be careful about hyperbole.
[> [> [> Re: Willow -- Rook, 06:57:33 02/08/03 Sat

I didn't say Willow was unethical herself, but that the decision to put her in the classroom was. It was based on convenience for Snyder's sake. There were many other options - he could have taken over the class himself, assigned another teacher, assigned a group of teachers on a rotating schedule, assign a member of the support staff without supervisory responsibilities -such as Giles-, or hire a substitute to do it.

Instead he placed a student in the position and created a dual relationship between the school and student, a situation which is questionable at best - and, in fact, made Willow her own teacher, as we'd already seen she was a student in Jenny's class.

I don't think it's hyperbole or stretching the imagination to refer to a High School Principal violating child labor laws as "wholly unethical"
[> [> [> [> Re: Willow -- CW, 07:59:16 02/08/03 Sat

Willow was 16 and it wasn't a hazardous job. It wouldn't violate the child labor laws in most states, although I can't say about California. Other laws were certainly violated, as we've already covered.

When a principal is threatening a student with expulsion he's not likely to stop to explain that he has to go through the superintendent of schools and the school board. Similarly, we know Snyder asked Willow (and certainly didn't force her) to take over the class. What other bureaucratic steps they might have gone through weren't important to the story and we didn't see them.

What you are trying to say is that Snyder is constantly violating professional ethics. Maybe he is. But, saying he is wholly unethical implies that he also violated his basic duty to see that the kids were properly educated (the whole point of the education system). I don't think you've offered any evidence for that.
[> [> [> [> [> I might add -- CW, 08:19:38 02/08/03 Sat

That in US colleges, graduate teaching assistants/associates are always in the position of being students and teachers at the same time.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Willow -- Rook, 08:54:20 02/08/03 Sat

>>When a principal is threatening a student with expulsion
>>he's not likely to stop to explain that he has to go
>>through the superintendent of schools and the school
>>board.

Except that when he actually says she's expelled (Becoming II), he's legally bound to give notice and hold a hearing. He didn't.

>>Similarly, we know Snyder asked Willow (and certainly
>>didn't force her) to take over the class

We didn't see the actual conversation...but it would be very, very, out of character for Snyder to "ask" Willow to do anything...see Band Candy, Halloween, School Hard, and Doppelgangland for Snyder's recruitment techniques. Willow's statement in Doppelgangland make it clear that she feels compelled to go along with Snyder's wishes. This is why these types of dual relationships are discouraged...because unlike the T.A.'s you mention, minors often do not feel the capacity to resist the suggestions of people placed in positions of authority.

Ultimately, Willow does not possess the capacity to resist (Again, see Dopplelgangland), is being placed under a burden that is inconsistent with her role as a student in the school, into a position she is in no way qualified to hold. Whether she consents verbally, or enjoys the activity isn't relevant. She's being used as a convenience by a person that has legal authority over her.

>>he also violated his basic duty to see that the kids were
>>properly educated

He violated that duty to Willow, by depriving her of access to a teacher of any sort in a class in which she was enrolled, and he violated that duty to every other student enrolled in any class taught by Jenny by depriving them of a qualified, certified instructor for those classes.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, Buffyverse has different rules at times. -- WickedBuffy, 20:03:33 02/08/03 Sat

Perhaps there's a little-known special provision in the law that gives a School Principal complete all-out authority to appoint anyone he or she wants to as substitute teacher in the case of the original teachers neck being broken on school grounds by a smartly-dressed vampire.
One question (spoilers for "Soulless") -- RichardX1, 14:52:21 02/07/03 Fri

Is there anyone here who hasn't figured out that it was Connor who took the thing with Angel's soul in it?
[> Re: One question (spoilers for "Soulless") -- Rob, 14:58:53 02/07/03 Fri

My money's on Cordy.

Rob
[> [> Re: How would Connor get the combo to the safe? -- Brian, 15:12:47 02/07/03 Fri

[> [> [> Maybe his super-hearing is as good as a stethoscope? -- oboemaboe, 18:01:49 02/07/03 Fri

[> [> [> Re: How would Connor get the combo to the safe? -- Q, 12:43:37 02/08/03 Sat

From Angelus-- photographic memory, right?
[> Re: One question (spoilers for "Soulless", speculation may ensue) -- grifter, 02:38:50 02/08/03 Sat

My money's on Lorne (explained by other people in a thread below).
But Connor's the runner-up together with Gwen.
[> Re: One question (spoilers for "Soulless") -- Q, 12:45:54 02/08/03 Sat

I think it was a little TOO obvious, like that's what they WANT us to think, and it may be a bit of a surprise.
[> I think it's The Beast. -- WickedBuffy, 19:49:48 02/08/03 Sat

ok, Beastie might be too clumsy and noticeable - unless it's soaked up different powers and types of energy from his other kills.

He talks pretty intelligently (almost like a Watcher) yet so far we've just seen him use brute strength to do battle.

... so I'm thinking it's Gunn.

There's a traitor among them.
[> No -- Rufus, 05:45:38 02/09/03 Sun

[> [> Do we even KNOW what The Beast is capable of? -- WickedBuffy, 11:02:31 02/09/03 Sun

Besides a weakness for disco shoes, brute strength, intelligent speaking voice and at least some working knowledge of magic?

How did all the people at Wolfram & Hart turn into zombies after he killed them? Did anyone else after that? If Beastie is able to do magic like that, then why couldn't he steal the soul? or manipulate one of the AI's to do it?

(PS I must have missed this explanation, but how could The Beast kill the priestesses now when he couldn't before in earlier times?)
[> [> [> Re: Do we even KNOW what The Beast is capable of? (Speculation included) -- Tess, 12:43:01 02/09/03 Sun

(PS I must have missed this explanation, but how could The Beast kill the priestesses now when he couldn't before in earlier times?)

I'm assuming until ME tells me differently, that the Beast had someone else kill the priestess. So far the Beast just seems to be a bigger, saner version of Glory. He's super strong and invulnerable. He seems to be able to teleport. I'm not sure what the Rain of Fire Ritual did for him, but it had to have a purpose other than 'Fire Pretty'. If the Beast, or one of his associates, is able to communicate telepathically, that would explain why Angelus knew his soul wasn't coming back, and it could explain why Angel didn't remember meeting the Beast...if the Beast provided Angelus with the details of a meeting that never actually took place.

Current board | More February 2003