February 2003 posts
A love letter (spoilers for 7.14 and next week's promo) -- Rob, 18:18:09 02/11/03 Tue
Dear Jane Espenson,
Do you mind if I send a big, wet, slobbery cyber-kiss your way? Once again, you have dazzled me with your genius! What a wonderful episode. I just had to write to thank you for...
...the teaser. After all the darkness of last week's episode and the chip cliffhanger, we expected most of this episode to be a huge drawn-out dramatic one where Buffy decides what to do about Spike. But, nope. By your first scene, everything's been decided. And done funny. That was a wonderful surprise. Though some people may be annoyed by it (in fact, I expect you were banking on it) because everyone went into such huge debates over what Buffy's decision should be only to have it resolved in seconds, I thought it was daring and unexpected.
...the wonderful character moments throughout the episode, especially the scene between Xander, Will, and Buffy early on. We haven't seen them hang and joke like this in a long time. It wasn't just like old times. It was old times, and I really appreciated it.
...the brilliant zingers. From Will's "Then you'll have to dress for the ambiguity" to Buffy's "bidey (sp?) of evil" to Xander's decision to become gay. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time.
...Giles acting like Giles again, although a bit more fatalistic than usual. But it is definitely Giles, and the fatalism is understandable considering what's going on. The father/daughterish scene at the start where he discussed his worries about Spike was so perfect.
...the revelation that the Seal of Danthazar can very well be used again and again and again...and could continue to be a threat.
...the quite stunning Principal Wood revelation. Now, I assume that that was Joss' idea, but that final scene you wrote with him confronting his "mother" was ingenious.(Btw, does anyone know whether that was the same actress from FFL? I couldn't remember.).
...every scene of Andrew's, especially those with Jonathan. And the continuance of the Andrew/Dawn shippiness. "You're a peach!" Awww!
...Anya's freaking out over Xander. And Xander being more in the limelight than he has as of late.
...your unique ability to create an episode that is not only supremely funny, but chock full of character revelations, too.
What a fun episode...and I'm glad for it, since from the promos for next week, it looks like the proverbial slap in the face Giles gave the laughing Scoobies truly was a wake-up call. With the dimensional portals, appearance of the First Slayer, and all the s*&!@ that is going to be going down, next week looks like it's going to be a breathless, epic event, and it was nice to have a fun, light episode before that. But a fun, light one that also contributed to the overall story arc.
Thanks again for a great "Buffy."
Love,
Rob
[>
Oh, and... (spoilers 7.14) -- Rob, 18:25:58 02/11/03 Tue
...the flashcards were such a wonderful little nod to "Hush"...and to the little boy's picture of Buffy in "Killed by Death."
Rob
[>
Re: A love letter (spoilers for 7.14 and next week's promo) -- The One With the Angelic Face, 19:24:54 02/11/03 Tue
I immediately realized it was the Slayer from the subway in '77, however, then I hesitated and decided it was simply another afro'd chick, because the actresses were clearly not the same. At least, I think they looked completely different. Could be wrong, though.
[> [>
Re: A love letter (spoilers for 7.14 and next week's promo) -- Dannyblue, 19:54:11 02/11/03 Tue
Oh, this is the Slayer Spike killed in 1977.
1. Spike only killed two Slayers that we know of...the other being an Asian woman at the turn of the century. Chances of her being Woods' mother are slim.
2. Woods' "mother" suggests that, if he doesn't believe her about Spike (maybe he'd suspect she was trying to set him up to take out one of Buffy's allies), all he has to do is look at witness reports from the subway and read the descriptions of her killer.
I figure they either couldn't get the other actress, or the girl who played the 1977 Slayer wasn't an actress. She could have been hired purely on the basis of her fighting skills (she didn't talk in FFL, remember), and they now need a real actress for the part.
I'm trying to guess how old that Slayer was when Spike killed her. She couldn't have been more than 20...if that. Which means she had her son when she was 15 or 16, maybe even younger.
[> [> [>
Re: What I found from IMDB.com (spoilers for First Date and FFL) -- Sang, 23:15:21 02/11/03 Tue
The actress who played Nikki in FFL is a stunt woman April Weeden-Washington. She did stunt in Minority Report, recently.
The one who played Nikkie in First Date is a creole actress K.D. Aubert.
Even before this ep was aired, IMDB featured April as a Nikkie in Buffy 7.14. I am not sure that she was supposed to be back as this role, which turned out to be false.
[> [>
Look at her clothes. -- HonorH, 00:28:12 02/12/03 Wed
The actress might've been different, but the clothes were the same. (This, btw, is what happens when your demonic alter-ego is a clothes horse.) If it is the 1977 Slayer (which I've no doubt they meant her to be), that would make Wood 29, which is pretty darn young for a high school principal. Guess I can let that slide, though, seeing as Sunnydale High has to have quite the reputation and Wood might've been the only one with a real interest in the position.
[>
Ooh Rob, any chance of a brief description of the promo? -- ponygirl, 19:46:49 02/11/03 Tue
Just to tide me over until the upn.com one goes up? Hard to be promo-deprived at such a time!
Jane E does rock, but I'm still very suspicious of everyone. Wood still has Jonathon's body to answer for, and he did tell Buffy about himself only after he had reason to believe she was on to him. And was Giles' escape flashback the real thing? And when did Xander send his text message? I trust no one!
[> [>
I would be delighted... (promo spoilers) -- Rob, 19:57:54 02/11/03 Tue
Here is a VERY DETAILED promo transcript! (cause it just looks THAT good):
Announcer: She's trapped in another dimension, when all hell breaks loose...
A shot of Buffy looking worried. Then in the living room, we see her pulled into a dimensional portal or crack. Then a shot of a big ugly demon smashing through one of the Summers' windows. Dawn takes a swing at it with some blunt object. Kennedy brings her hand to her mouth in shock.
Announcer: Now, the world depends on Buffy's next move...
All the Scoobies are in a circle in the living room. Dawn's reading from a big book, and some strange, glowing shape is spinning around and around, casting shadows all over everybody. Xander and others are thrown like from a blast. A shot of Buffy training all the Potentials outside. Inside, that huge demon from before lifts Spike and smashes him through the ceiling. He bounces into an upstairs room. Quick images. Spike yells. The First Slayer appears and pushes Buffy down the stairs and growls. Now a shot that is in a weird cave. Seems to be in that alternate dimension. Buffy is chained up in a cave and some ceremonial-looking guy holds a staff and bangs it. More Potentials training. Willow screams in a primal fury, with wind whipping her hair. Buffy struggles in her chains. A shot of Wood training with sharp, claw like weapons. More Potentials. Buffy, in the cave, is talking to a red, glowing figure we can't make out.
Buffy: Tell me something I don't know.
Announcer: An all-new Buffy event.
Hope I was able to capture even a 10th of how freaking awesome this ep looks!
Rob
[> [> [>
Rob, you're a peach! -- ponygirl all a-tingle, 20:05:36 02/11/03 Tue
The First Slayer!!
[> [> [> [>
Why, thank you! You too, hon. ;o) -- Rob, 22:13:56 02/11/03 Tue
[>
You left out the best part. -- oboemaboe, 19:55:14 02/11/03 Tue
I thought you were a fellow browncoat. Where's the woohoo for the Buffyverse's first Firefly in-joke?
Giles' comment about not being able to tell the difference between Cantonese and Mandarin refers to the fact that Joss originally wanted the Chinese used on Firefly to be Cantonese because that's apparently more informal and slangish, but somehow, whoever this task got delegated to came up with Mandarin instead. If that's not weird enough, though the actors use Mandarin, the ship uses Cantonese. Who knows what the written stuff is.
It warms my heart that Firefly has not been forgotten!
(Jane Espenson also wrote the episode Shindig.)
[> [>
I didn't even think of that... -- Rob, 20:01:32 02/11/03 Tue
...although I did laugh at the joke, sans the "Firefly" tie-in. This ep had too much great stuff to possibly remember in one post. Again, brava, Jane!
Rob
[> [>
Re: You left out the best part. -- leslie, 09:36:35 02/12/03 Wed
"If that's not weird enough, though the actors use Mandarin, the ship uses Cantonese. Who knows what the written stuff is."
As I understand it, all Chinese is written the same way--the problem is that the same symbol is pronounced entirely differently in the various dialects. It's as though the letters C-A-T were pronounced "awful" in Maine and "presumptuous" in California.
[>
It was like old times, wasn't it? (spoilers 7.14) -- Belladonna, 20:33:26 02/11/03 Tue
What a great episode! After watching season 3 DVD, and some of the funnier moments in season 4, I was really missing the fun, quippy BtVS. I honestly didn't expect to see it in such abundance tonight. Color me pleasantly surprised. I haven't laughed this much in a long time, either! AH's delivery of "you'll just have to dress for the ambiguity" was definitely Willow-y. Reminded me of "a vague disclaimer is nobody's friend" from The Initiative. Course, that could be because "The Initiative" was on FX tonight, but let's not nitpick.
Not too happy about the quick resolution to the Tara grief, but oh well...I'm still immensely pleased! Rob, I echo your love letter! :)
[>
Adding to the praise for JE (spoilers for 7.14) -- Ixchel, 23:08:09 02/11/03 Tue
I couldn't agree more, Rob. This episode was wonderful. The acting, dialogue, pacing; everything was sparkling.
A few things I especially loved (that you don't specifically mention):
In the graveyard scene, the tall, obelisk-ish grave marker says "Snyder". If this has been noticed in some other episodes, call me slow, but I was delighted.
Andrew's comment about a lot of Buffy's people being murderers.
Anya and Buffy's charming bonding and Anya wanting Buffy to stay with her (sort of).
Willow cracking about Buffy's date when Giles looks at her sternly.
Willow's little annoyed look at Spike when he criticized her plan.
Andrew's belief that Buffy will know what to do (I'm officially starting to like him).
And an honorable mention for Willow replacing the microwave and doing laundry.
To answer your question, that wasn't the same actress from FFL (much to my disappointment). This kind of thing bothers me (I had the most difficult time with Xander's father of HB being different from his father in Restless).
Ixchel
[>
Great ep! And a possible promo revelation... -- Valheru, 23:37:57 02/11/03 Tue
Can we just let Joss, Jane, and Drew Goddard steer this ship from now on?
I actually stood up and cheered twice during this episode. The first time was when we finally see what happened to the Harbinger's axe, when Giles went all "Buffy vs. Lagos" on him. The second time was when the Chinese Potential tried to tell everyone she had no idea what they were talking about; it capped off the most natural "laugh while we talk about something serious" scenes the show has done since at least Xander and Anya's interrogation of Andrew in "NLM." When the theme/credits rolled, I yelled, "Finally! Buffy's back!"
Buffy, stylistically, is all about absurd juxtaposition, about throwing two completely dissimilar ideas together and making them work. "Buffy" and "Vampire Slayer." Light and Dark. Humor and Drama. These paradoxes used to be inseparable on this show. But recently, things have been either too dark or too jokey. Things aren't balancing well.
That is, until Jane Espenson was allowed to play again. "First Date" was an episode of balance. An episode where the revelations of Giles's head and Spike's chip can be hilariously explained in a few short moments without undermining the importance of either. An episode where the First Evil can set up a joke and turn it into a threat. An episode where Willow's forgetting of Xander's SOS signal comes across as funny rather than crude. An episode where the Scoobies can talk about love, friendship, and pain while cutting jokes and smiling. And that's all the Valentine I needed (well, the Angel: Season 1 DVD was pretty cool, too).
Was it a perfect episode? Nah. Giles seemed too Wesley-ish, as though he was surprised and appalled at the Scoobies' actions (I mean, have these people ever been serious about apocalypses, Rupert?). Still, he was good-old-Giles enough the rest of the time. My biggest beef with the ep was the horrible direction of the Xander scenes. The first one, where he notices Lyssa, seems to spend more time establishing her into the scene than Xander himself (not really a big deal, but just something that made the scene seem very sudden).
The date-to-sacrifice scene change makes me shake my head, though. There's Xander and Lyssa, talking about his relationship with Anya. He apologizes for dumping his life story on here, to which she replies something like, "I can think of something fun..." RIGHT THEN I would have gone to Lyssa at the Seal of Danthazar with Xander hanging overhead. It would have been a neat visual joke. Instead, the two scenes are split up by the two most plot-revealing scenes in the episode. It's like ten minutes before we get back to Xander's storyline, by which time I had forgotten what he and Lyssa were talking about. If I hadn't known Ashanti was playing a demon (from the promo), I would have sworn the whole "Xander-as-Spike makes Turok-Han, Redux" scene was a dream. The pacing for Xander's scenes was so strange that it made his whole plot seem like it was pasted into the final episode reel at the last minute to fill in time.
So...thanks again, Jane E. Maybe you'll inspire those you work with to try harder to keep up with you. Or you'll inspire them to become gay. I'm not really sure which message you're sending here. =)
Oh, and I just wanted to add an observation/question about next week's promo: after we see Spike tossed through the ceiling, there's a quick flash of something else, and then another shot of Spike in vamp-face. Is it just me, or is Spike wearing the leather duster in that shot? Is he going to reclaim it? If so, I'm stoked already; leather duster means the ghosts of "Seeing Red" are over and Spike can finally get back to his ass-kicking ways (but with a soul, of course). If the episode lives up to the promo, we're in for some awesome next few weeks in the Buffyverse. 'Cuz, see, [spoiler] will be [spoiler] with [spoiler]. [Spoiler] fights [spoiler] while [spoiler] [spoiler] [spoiler]!!!! It's a [spoiler]-fest!!!! [BIG SPOILER!!!]
Simply awesome... :-)
[>
Echoing all your points, with the exception of: -- HonorH, 00:22:45 02/12/03 Wed
Dawndrew doesn't look likely to happen unless Dawn starts looking a bit more like Scott Bakula (or Patrick Swayze). Andrew's peeking out the closet door more every week.
But wow! What a great ep! And was it just me, or do Buffy and Wood have themselves some pretty hot chemistry? The revelation about his mother was just so . . . cool! I'm truly jazzed at where this is going. Can I borrow your pom-poms?
[> [>
Re: Echoing all your points, with the exception of: -- Malandanza, 09:21:00 02/12/03 Wed
"Dawndrew doesn't look likely to happen unless Dawn starts looking a bit more like Scott Bakula (or Patrick Swayze)."
I liked the continuing Dawn/Andrew interaction
not from a relationship standpoint, but a friendship (it doesn't always have to be about sex). Dawn is Buffy's little sister and Andrew is Tucker's little brother -- from the very beginning they've had the same living in the shadows of an older sibling issues in common. Dawn is desperate for attention in house where everyone is a superhero and Andrew thinks she's cool. With Andrew filling that role, we shouldn't see any more attention getting stunts from Dawn -- it's a boost to her self-esteem. For his part, Andrew just wants to be noticed by whoever he's following and while Dawn can be mean to him, at least she notices he's alive. They're good for each other -- there's some growing (non-sexual) affection between them -- more like Season One Xander and Willow without the crush. I also loved Andrew's digressions when the First was talking to him -- it must have been very frustrating for the FE to try to keep Andrew on topic.
Another thing I liked in the 'ships area is that Willow and Kennedy were established as couple without some drawn out sex scene. Very tastefully done.
[>
Funny Stuff That I Loved (Spoilers) -- Wizard, 01:50:00 02/12/03 Wed
Funny Stuff That I Loved-
The Snyder Tomb I'd say I feel sorry for the guy, except for the part where I don't.
The whole Buffy/Willow/Xander conversation ("Bidet of evil." Snerk!)
Chao-An. I do pity the girl, but this was just too funny. "Like many people from Asia, I am lactose intolerant. I am very uncomfortable." "You are trying to kill me!"
A return to the whole Xander-as-demon-magnet thing. I'm surprised how much I missed.
BuffyWood. In all ways, that was cool.
The Flashcards. As if we needed further proof that this is really our Giles. They wouldn't have been quite as funny if not for Hush, though. How many long time viewers found out about the flashcards and said/thought some variation of "Oh, God, what's he been showing the girls." At least he didn't draw Buffy with hips this time!
Xander trying to hop on the gay bandwagon. It was about time he said it. "I'm mentally undressing Scott Bakula." "Aah... Captain Archer." If BtVS was still on the WB, I wonder who they'd have used. Tom Welling, maybe?
Did anyone else get the impression that Giles might be dabbling in the dark stuff to get an edge on the First?
Yo Canada! Anybody see tonight's Angel? (SPOILERS! I mean it!) -- ponygirl, 19:30:42 02/11/03 Tue
Wooooooo hoooo!
I knew it! I knew it! I'm doing my happy dance of fulfilled predictions! Evil!Cordy! I am so hoping that this will be used to cover every irritating and out of character action she's EVER taken! And who's pulling her strings?
I was spoiled for tonight's BtVS and relatively pure for AtS and I am so on the spoiler-free bandwagon (sorry Rufus)... the deductive satisfaction is just such a rush!
[>
sorry, must wait until Thursday -- Clen, 20:34:50 02/11/03 Tue
but I read yours, spoiled myself, and you know? it's ok, I guess I was in the mood for spoiling
[>
Re: Yo Canada! Anybody see tonight's Angel? (SPOILERS! I mean it!) -- Utopia, 21:28:26 02/11/03 Tue
I knew it! I knew it the moment The Beast gave that knife thingie to someone we couldn't see! Oh, God bless Evil!Cordy! I expect great things from her. And Angelus is cool too, nice to see my boy back in stride. Warms my heart!
Feeling very happy up in Canada, despite the snow.
[> [>
Re: Yo Canada! Anybody see tonight's Angel? (SPOILERS! I mean it!) -- ponygirl, 07:06:57 02/12/03 Wed
But is it Cordy? Or is she possessed? Or what? Good catch on the knife I just realized now it was the same one she used on Lilah. Poor Lilah.
[> [> [>
SPOILERS for Tonight's Angel. (slight rant like quality) -- Rahael, 07:25:20 02/12/03 Wed
I also feel really sorry for Gunn. Of course, I've only read the Wildfeed, so it could be misleading, but I feel that I could reach Yabyumpan-like levels of irritation with him (re the whole Fred issue.)
I keep mentally saying to him - you love Lilah, you idiot!!.
I really really like Gunn. I know that's rare these days - everywhere I look, people keep saying how annoying he's being. But I sympathise with him. He didn't think he had a future once, but then AI and Fred happened to him. He spent what he thought would be his last day with her. And the prospect of losing someone you love to a former best friend who also committed what seems an inexplicable act of betrayal - that must be pretty gutting.
I know Angelus made a number of cracks about his colour, and his unsuitability for Fred, so I am hoping this means that ME are going to deal once and for all with this 'only the muscle' issue. I think he's sweet, charming, loyal and has great integrity. And he is intelligent.
(Start of Rant)
This morning I read a comment from someone which 'laughed' at the idea that 'Gunn had brains'. I literally sat and seethed with fury for an hour or so. I had some idea that ME were building up Gunn's insecurity re Wesley's bookish knowledge. But I thought it should be obvious that Wesley's trust in his books lead him to taking Connor away from his father and laying the grounds for heartache and pain for Angel and his son. I think Gunn might point out that that didn't exactly display great wisdom.
I thought it was obvious that Gunn had great qualities, extending beyond muscle.
It kind of frightens me that there are viewers believe that all he's good for is strength, and that he has no intelligence. I am hoping that ME deals appropriately with this idea. Am I the only one who is fond of Gunn??
(End Rant)
[> [> [> [>
The way of the Gunn... SPOILERS for Tonight's Angel. -- ponygirl, 08:35:18 02/12/03 Wed
Go Rant Girl! One of my big AtS beefs last year was how little they did with Gunn's character. He's an interesting guy, with a lot of genuine conflicts that never got much play.
I think he feels the other characters see him as the muscle -- didn't Fred herself describe him that way once? But both Angel and Connor are stronger. He used to have a certain ruthlessness that set him apart, but Wes has him beat there. He used to be a leader but he willingly let Angel and Wes run the show. He's smart but not in the obscure text-y way of Wes and Fred. What is his place in the group?
It was interesting that Angelus brought up race, and I think that's going to stick with Gunn. For whatever reason he has become marginalized and I hope that he's going to deal with it. I was surprised but very glad that Gunn broke up with Fred, rather than sitting back and letting her sort through her feelings. I'm not a Fred fan right now. And I don't want to see her with either Gunn or Wes. She and Wes seems to bring out the worst qualities in each other for some reason.
In any case, I hope the utter disaster that has been the AI's response to the Beast will allow Gunn to step forward. After all Wes' desire for the bookish "a-ha" solution to every problem has allowed them to be manipulated. At the very least I want to see Gunn rub that in a bit.
[> [> [> [> [>
Hehe, me too! (SPOILERS, Tonight's Angel) -- Rahael, 08:59:28 02/12/03 Wed
re Gunn and Wesley.
I should amend my first paragraph - I meant to say that Wesley irritates me re the Fred situation. (Might appear as if Gunn was, and that's not true at all!)
And completely agree re Fred too. Actually, I've realised recently how much I like Amy Acker. She's the only character, who when she cries, will always make tears well up in my eyes (Fredless, etc). When she smiles, there's a lovely moment of pure joy. But, God, I'm really pissed off with her character at the moment, LOL.
And there's something about the way that Wesley regards her, with misty eyed love (contrast this with his attitude to Lilah) that's really weird. Of course I deliberately didn't watch Supersymmetry, so I missed him witnessing Fred climb off her pedestal a little.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Hehe, me too! (SPOILERS, Tonight's Angel) -- ponygirl, 09:15:21 02/12/03 Wed
"And there's something about the way that Wesley regards her, with misty eyed love (contrast this with his attitude to Lilah) that's really weird."
I know! In Awakenings when Wes asked Fred to make the shaman some tea, I felt like we glimpsing a scary place in Wes' head where he had Fred set up as the lady of the manor. It was creepy.
[> [> [> [>
Re: SPOILERS for Tonight's Angel. (slight rant like quality) -- yabyumpan, 09:13:17 02/12/03 Wed
"I feel that I could reach Yabyumpan-like levels of irritation with him "
Ooooh careful ;-) It's a slippery slope which once you're on you might, you know slide (jogging could be a thing). I notice you didn't even type 'his' name, beware, before long you'll be muttering obscenities at the TV screen every time 'he' comes on, like some sort of demented Mutley. he he he he
Totally agree with you about Gunn. Quite often it's Gunn that comes up with insight that leads the gang to a solution, like in RoF when he figured out the map.
As for Gunn's insecurities regarding 'he who shall not be named', it was there right from the start of his relationship with Fred. In 'Couplet' he even says to Fred over breakfast that he thought she would have chosen W*****.
His relationship with Fred is probably the first time he's really let his guard down and allowed him self to feel. I think that part of the reason he chose AI over his gang was that he was tired of the responsibility of being a leader and his confidence had been shot by first Allona dying then George. With AI he could let go of that level of responsibility and just get on with the job at hand. he trusted W***** to be the leader and do the right thing and I think he felt badly let down by the whole Connor mess.
With Angel gone for the summer I think he gained some of his old confidence although was happy to hand back the mantle to Angel when he returned. W***** being around AI again and Fred's attitude to the whole Professor thing shattered that again.
I'd love to see Gunn explored more and in a positive way.
BTW, apologies if I've offended any W***** fans, just having a bit of fun ;o)
[> [> [> [> [>
LOL -- Rahael, 10:13:08 02/12/03 Wed
I'm a Wesley fan and I'm not in the least bit offended!!
Ahh Wesley - so shortsighted! so infuriating! stubborn! but I like him...
See you tomorrow night!!
(PS, just one little favour - could you resend me the directions again? Many thanks!)
[>
Oh yeah...you say you're sorry now.....but I will get you later...or at least half of you..;) -- Rufus, 22:08:50 02/11/03 Tue
The Buffy half
[> [>
Ooh I'm scared... actually I am (I'm weak and I know it!) -- ponygirl back on the wagon for now, 06:58:03 02/12/03 Wed
[>
Re: Yo Canada! Anybody see tonight's Angel? (SPOILERS! I mean it!) -- lynx, 23:51:17 02/11/03 Tue
yup, i knew it was her. although they *almost* got me thinking it was Lorne - but just for a second, really!
spoiler free, me. always have been. (sorry too, rufus.)
Well now... (Spoilers for 7.14) -- Forsaken, 20:22:56 02/11/03 Tue
Tonight was certainly eventful, wasn't it? We're being set up for yet another clash between Buffy's would-be romantic interests. Always a party, if you ask me. But this time around, we have the added motivation of Spike having killed his opponent's mother. I can only wish Wood had been around during Season 2, would have made him oh so very much more angry.
Spike: The last Slayer I killed... she begged for her life.
Would have made the fight much more impressive too, since I get the feeling my boy William won't exactly pour his heart into it if things come to a confrontation at this point. What with being all guilty and soul having now (tho still making a goo at being himself, surprisingly) he'll probably just bare his chest and draw a little X to make sure the bloke doesn't miss the mark. Season 2 Spike, on the other hand... now that would've been something to see. However, if something gets him motivated and it comes to an actual fight (after all, I'm sure the First will have a price for that information besides just the trouble it will stir up) my money will still be on Spike. What does everyone else think of the situation?
[>
Re: Well now... (Spoilers for 7.14) -- The One With The Angelic Face, 20:35:01 02/11/03 Tue
When the actual killing of the Slayer was depicted in FFL, she didn't beg for her life, unless Spike deleted that from his narrative. I think that maybe it was meant to be true in School Hard, however, now it may be simply viewed as dialogue meant to reveal just how dangerous and evil the new villain of Spike was and add some tension to his new rivalry with Buffy. Also, if she really did beg for her life, that's not good because it's not very noble, and the Slayer is noble, albeit sometimes reluctant.
[> [>
Re: Well now... Spike and the N.Y. slayer -- aquaman, 21:09:41 02/11/03 Tue
Actually, I was under the impression in FFL that Spike was telling Buffy that a vampire can't possibly kill a slayer unless the slayer had lost the will to live. That was what he taunted her with - that she would someday give up, tire of the endless fight, and he'd be there when she did. This would imply that his claim that she begged for her life was just to brag about how ruthless he is.
[> [> [>
Does that mean? Spoilers to "7.14 - First Date" -- M, 21:55:55 02/11/03 Tue
If what Spike said was true, a women with a 4 year old child wanted to die. This would get my vote for the darkest place the show has ever gone.
BTW - The son of "The Slayer" is now dating "The Slayer" Should Mr. Wood get together with Conner to compare notes?
[> [> [>
aquaman is correct on the syntax this was used in for FFL... -- Briar Rose, 22:03:21 02/11/03 Tue
Both of Spike's stories on slaying Slayers played out differently in the visuals than in his narrative. Nikki did not beg for her life, but she was begging for him to get it over with, and there was a shot during that strobe lit struggle, pointed toward the corner of the bus that might have contained Little Woodie!
Spike was taunting Buffy. He was using her own fears against her by twisting the human's natural fear of death into the Slayer's (or any warrior hero's) fear of dying - there is a big difference. One makes us more aware in dangerous situations. One causes inertia. No true Warrior Hero can be afraid of dying - even though they can be afraid of death. He did a bit of the old Angelus razzle-dazzle with words: Lying with the truth.
[> [> [> [>
Since when? -- Doug, 15:36:47 02/12/03 Wed
Since when was a Warrior hero not afraid of dying? Is it that they are warriors or heroes? People who go into combat are often absolutely terrified; and what is a Hero but not someone who does the right thing despite their terror. A warrior hero is someone who faces the enemy regardless of the depths of their fear; those who do not feel that fear are more often referred to by another word: lunatic.
[> [> [>
Re: Well now... Spike and the N.Y. slayer -- Forsaken, 18:34:30 02/12/03 Wed
From what I can tell, Spike probably made up that bit about Nikki begging for her life. Most of the fight she just looked angry and defiant, and that didn't change when Spike pinned her down for the kill. Still, if Wood had heard Spike say that about his mom... can we say "brassed off" everyone? I knew we could.
[> [>
The Hell its not noble!! -- Yu Yu Hakusho, 04:00:29 02/12/03 Wed
The 1977 slayer was a mom, she had a little boy at home that was dependent on her. You think she should have just lied there and took it? Hell no! How many times, in real life and on tv/movies, have parents in similar situations (about to be killed by criminals, psychopaths, etc.) begged their assailants to let them live so they can see their kids again? Ultimately, they're not even begging for their life, they are essentially begging their attacker not to deprive their child of their provider/protector. There is nothing pathetic or unheroic about a strong woman swallowing her pride and asking for mercy if it means spearing her son the grief of growing up without her.
*Of course, this is all moot if Spike was just making that part up ;
[> [>
Re: Well now... (Spoilers for 7.14) -- leslie, 12:23:57 02/12/03 Wed
Frankly, the "begging for her life" line fits in entirely with Spike's persistently boastful persona. I talked about this last summer--it is soooooo important for him to be well-thought-of (in a vampire sense) and he really goes out of his way to puff himself up, especially when meeting new people. We're constantly being shown the small but significant discrepancies between what Spike says about himself and what he actually does--for instance, his whole bravado thing when Dru shows up in Sunnydale in S5. As he notes in one of his moments of self-recognition: "Vampires, we like to talk big. 'I'm going to destroy the world.' It's just tough-guy talk."
Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- s'kat, 21:43:40 02/11/03 Tue
At the beginning of tonight's Btvs episode, Giles questions Buffy's choice in removing Spike's chip. Giles believes she's doing it because she has feelings for Spike or that she is ignoring the big evil and the danger. Buffy responds that she did it instinctively, that she believes Spike has the chance to be a good man and with a muzzle on him, he'll never have that chance. We don't do good by using evil to fight evil - she says. That's not how it's done.
I've known about 7.14, First Date for a while now and I wasn't going to post on it. Actually I'd planned to avoid the board afterwards. What can I say? I've been repressing my own Evil Clone (tm Om). ( I was spoiled on this episode a month ago hunting scheduling information. Not entirely spoiled - just on the Wood bit, the Spike chip removal bit, and the whole Xander thing. I didn't know about the FE's reappearance or about Giles. Thank God. Aren't you impressed by my ability to keep these spoilers to myself? It was very hard, particularly with all the erroneous spec on the chip.) The episode was much better than I thought, actually the best one I've seen since possibly Never Leave Me. Also I watched two programs afterwards, 24 and Kingpin that both examined in graphic detail real life evil acts. So I realized...I had to post, just to discuss these thoughts.
For those of you who have not seen 24 or Kingpin, a quick explanation.
1. 24 is a series about a government agent trying to stop a terrorist from blowing up LA with a bomb. In tonight's episode, the agent pretended to shoot and kill a terrorist's kids to convince him to tell him where the bomb is. A religious man of Islam tried to convince the terrorist to tell the truth - because doing evil to fight for what he believed was a just cause - did NOT make it right, the Koran is against the taking of any innocent life no matter the cause. The man retorts - we have different interpretations of the Koran.
2.Kingpin is the story of a powerful drug lord in Mexico. The drug lord believes the evil he does is justified b/c it is just business and he does the business to keep his family happy. The evil of it does not touch him or his family. Then he discovers his wife is doing cocaine and sends her to rehab, infuriated. It's just business, he states. The story, if you haven't seen it, is very much like MacBeth.
What does this have to do with tonight's Buffy episode, you ask? I'm getting to that. Patience.
Tonight I read Om's great review on Killer in Me- featuring his Evil Clone. The Evil Clone made a statement that made me wonder if I've been channeling the Evil Clone. "I'm a misanthrope, I think we should kill everyone and give the planet back to the plants." Now, none of that - Om says, echoing my own thoughts on the subject. That and the whole thing about getting a life. Yep have a life. Why into the fantasy life. ;-)
Doing evil to defeat evil does not equal good. Yet evil is seductive, tempting...it can often convince us we are doing good, that what we are doing isn't all that evil.
Giles believes that Spike should keep the muzzle, that Spike is dangerous and Buffy shouldn't depend on him in any way and the best for her is to make a clean break.
Buffy believes keeping Spike muzzled, especially with a soul is evil. Muzzled he'll never have the chance to make the choice that Andrew does or Anya. The chip will make it for him. He'll just be her pet dog.
Principal Wood wants to kill demons and vampires in part to avenge his mother's death. His mother, our old friend Nikki, was killed by a vampire. Gee guess who? Spike. In his twenties he searched for the vampire. But couldn't find him. Finally he decided as long as I kill them, as many as possible, I make a difference. I avenge her. Sort of similar to our old friend Gunn. On the surface - Principal Wood is fighting for Good, right? Killing vampires is good, right? He tells Buffy that he knew she was the slayer way before he ever came to Sunnydale, he sought her out and sought out the position, because he knew the school drew bad things to it and if he was positioned there when the big bad came down, maybe he could make a difference. He hired her as a counselor - not so she could be counselor and not for her counseling skills (which he laughs at - see I knew it was deliberate) but because she's the slayer.
Still good right? He basically sets her up. But for good reasons, right? Then at the very end - Wood has his own interaction with the First Evil - which he's clearly seen before, just as Andrew did. And the First tells him something he wants to hear - tells him who killed his mother. Spike.
Wood is presented with a choice. Why and how do we fight evil? And more to the point how is Wood fighting his own demons? Do we fight evil with evil? Do the ends justify the means? After all the agent on 24, Jack, uses devilish means to convince a terrorist to confess. He doesn't go through with them - just hints at it. No problemo. Right?
Buffy kills vampires because it is her job and she only kills the ones she has to. She's not freelance. She doesn't kill Spike or Angel who helped her. And she doesn't kill all demons. Clem for instance - stays alive. She kills the ones she has to. Principal Wood kills demons and vampires as a hobby, it is NOT his job. It is what he was taught by a Watcher who took him in. It is how he has dealt with his mother's death. I'm not saying that he shouldn't fight demons, I'm saying he should ask himself why.
I don't believe that Wood is here for romance. Don't think ME is really that interested in romance this year - as they state quite clearly through a frustrated Giles. Wood is present as a subtext on Spike. Spike is the elephant in the room during the dinner date. Spike is the elephant in Buffy's head. She needs him, but she isn't sure why. And how does she deal with what he's done, what he's capable of.
Do you fight evil with evil? Make it all about who has the most power, the better fighting skills? But there's more to it than that - there's also Spike - who is Spike to Spike?
How does Spike deal with Wood? I like Spike's last line to Buffy: "Where does the Principal fit in?" Where indeed?
Spike killed Wood's mother - I doubt he thought a slayer would have a kid. Not that i can imagine him caring. What one thing was Spike the most proud of? What did he brag about the most? Killing slayers. A rare thing. Not many vampires have. Spike is a legend for it. He killed two. The second he described as hot, with moves like Buffy's. The second - he took his prize jacket from - the jacket he strips off and never wears again after the AR scene in Seeing Red. The jacket that we identify with EVIL Spike.
And what is the thing with Spike and Mom? Is Angel to Daddy, What Spike is to Mommy?
This episode metanarrates on other episodes - specifically: Teacher's Pet, Inca Mummy Girl, and Passion. The first two are obvious - Xander. Poor Xander is once again used as comic relief. He gets put in Spike's old spot, by a demon lady. And he wonders aloud what is it with me and demons, why are they attracted to me and why am I attracted to them.
A metanarration on Something Blue as well - Xander the demon magnet. Buffy wonders the same thing about men aloud to Willow - if Principal Wood is evil - am I only attracted to evil/wicked men? What's wrong with me? Maybe he isn't?
Not that I'm really attracted to him. And I don't get the feeling she really is - more curious and intrigued, like me. Who is this guy? And what the heck is he hiding?
(Please Don't take this opportunity to respond with shippy posts - I don't care whether you think B/W will get together or not. Shippy posts cause my Evil side to come out and hate Wood. And I want to like wood, okay?)
The other more interesting metanarration is on Passion. More interesting because this is the link to Angel The Series and to Season 2. In Passion - Angelus kills Giles'
love Jenny. Here, Wood discovers that Spike had killed his mother, Nikki. Buffy must realize this at the dinner table, when Wood mentions his mother was killed by a vampire. She knows Spike killed two. And Spike showing up at the table just as she's getting into dinner - is unnerving to her to say the least. And possibly for the reason stated above.
A reason that echoes Giles' response to the decision she made on the chip.
Why is the chip made a footnote? Now that we all have the same information - I can finally comment on this. Because Spike's reaction to getting the chip out isn't important to the theme or arc. The theme is how do we fight the evil inside us? How do we fight evil? And why? The FE keeps reminding everyone that no matter what happens it will always exist, it is part of all of us. That's true it is.
And it is like Iago, using us to do it's will. But unlike Iago in Othello, the FE can't really manifest itself unless we let it.
Giles - believes what the Watcher's do - the "sky bully" (TM Om) approach. Or the Father's idea. Do whatever it takes. The means justify the ends. After all Giles killed Ben to keep Glory from manifesting again. And poisoned Buffy so she could go through her rite of passage.
Buffy - believes that the means do not always justify the ends. That choice is important. That people should be given the chance to redeem themselves to become good. As Andrew tells the FE - seems Buffy has a list of murders working for her - Anya, Willow, Spike and now Andrew. FE states what everyone is thinking - that she's not making them redeem themselves first. But Buffy doesn't believe people need to be punished to be redeemed, so much as gradually prove themselves. Spike through helping Dawn, etc. Anya when she took back the wish at great cost to herself. Willow and her struggles. And now even Andrew. From the very beginning she has acknowledged choice - Angel season 1, when she chose not to stake him. This may be what separates Buffy from Wood, from the Watchers, from Faith,
from Kendra...who knows?
My hunch...is that this year we will see each character fight it's demons. Each character will make a choice.
And each character will have to decide why and how to fight evil. And face the evil inside themselves. The arc started up again. Wood is important - in that he may very well demonstrate what Buffy should or should not do in the fight against evil.
Hope this made sense. Now that I ended it...it feels oddly like a series of rambling observations. Oh well.
Also Not very critical - but again I like to leave the nit-picky critical reviews to the experts.
Take from it what you will, but spare me the shippiness, please? Thanks.
SK
[>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- Kira, 00:34:44 02/12/03 Wed
"Spike killed Wood's mother... he described as hot, with moves like Buffy's... he took his prize jacket from - the jacket he strips off and never wears again after the AR scene in Seeing Red. The jacket that we identify with EVIL Spike."
And interestingly enough, Buffy was wearing a long black leather jacket tonight, which looked an awful lot like Spike's old jacket. Wood is drawn to Buffy because, like his mother, she is the Slayer. Tonight she was even wearing the same type of jacket his mother wore.
[>
wow! -- neaux, 04:23:31 02/12/03 Wed
I didn't make the Spike/Angel parallel to season 2 until you mentioned it!!
Thanks, and that does make a lot of sense.
[>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- Rufus, 05:20:55 02/12/03 Wed
So, you don't want to know about the Wood/Rufus ship I have worked out?......;)
I think that Wood is there to present the same situation as Holtz in Angel. Is vengeance justified against a vampire once his soul is returned? I don't know how I'd feel about Spike had he killed my mom or any friend. It's clear that Buffy doesn't hold Angel responsible for anything that Angelus did.....but how many people can see past their loss to come to the same conclusion? Wood was left an orphan, raised by a Watcher, who no doubt showed the growing boy a few things. Wood says he wants in the big fight, he wants to do the right thing, the FE picked a wonderful time to divulge the information about Spike killing Woods mother. One more thing.....Wood is sitting over the "bidet of evil" which can't be a good thing. So, will we get a story of a man who can't see past his need for revenge, or will we see something more?
[> [>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- shadowkat, 06:23:20 02/12/03 Wed
Completely unspoiled for this. But here's my theory for what it's worth.
I think Wood may be the lighter version of Holtz. Angel as a series is meant to be darker than Buffy. So while Holtz guns for Angel, Wood will struggle with whether he should gun for Spike.
It's hard to find the words to convey my gut feelings on this - but I think you are right - Wood in some ways is a bit like Connor in Angel. Raised by a man who despises vampires, told to hate them himself. And given the ultimate reason - his mother. Through Wood - we get to see those issues come into play, get to see a grown man who has been taught to hate, has overcome some of that - at least enough to go into education - become something other than the vengeful teen he once was. Wood isn't a Gunn or a Holtz or a Connor. He's grown up (in regards to Connor not Gunn or Holtz) and found a life that is NOT just about killing. Unlike Gunn or Holtz - he's not a street fighter, he became a Principal - an authority figure. He's made his life about more than killing vampires or vengeance. And ironically by giving Buffy a job as counselor - has made her life about more than killing.
Just as Buffy in turn is giving Spike the chance to be more than about killing. She doesn't want him to stay to be the "killer" of demons and vamps. (And no I'm not talking about ships or romance here. I'm talking about something more interesting than that.)
I think - Wood will come close to giving into the FE's temptations - but I also think, unlike Holtz, he may succeed in fighting it back. I think it is a parallel to Holtz but with very different results. If that makes sense.
SK
PS: no problems whatsoever with the Rufus/Wood ship. Go for it. Although, I think you may have a little competition from Honor H who also wants Wood. Rufus/Wood vs. HonorH/Wood wars I can handle. ;-)
[> [> [>
You're too hard on Gunn -- KdS, 08:39:39 02/12/03 Wed
I don't think Gunn was ever just or primarily about killing - more protecting his crew/family. It's possible that he got slightly darker after Alonna's death, but I think bracketing him with Holtz is a little nasty.
[> [> [> [>
I agree -- Doug, 09:46:59 02/12/03 Wed
Gunn is in a different headspace than Wood, Justine, and Holtz. His focus is protecting that which is close to him, while theirs is avenging the wrongs done to themselves and to others.
Within those headspaces you have a spectrum of their willingness to perform extreme acts in the name of what they fight for, measured against their grounding in the mortal world; having a life beyond hunting and killing can help keep them sane. Wood seemed more able to accept that Buffy was fighting alongside a vampire; he was shook-up but he accepted it. Justine said (I don't remember the precise quote) that the Angel Investigations gang deserved to die for allying themselves with a vampire. And Holtz didn't just want to kill Angel, his desire for vengeance was so strong that he didn't want Angel to just die, he wanted him to suffer while he's at it.
So there is variation within categories: Between Wood and Justine and Holtz in the Avenger category, and I would say between Gunn and any other characters in the Defender category (I would say Buffy, and possibly some others would fit in here.)
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: I agree -- slain, 15:20:02 02/12/03 Wed
We're assuming a bit much about Wood, I think. With a lot of vampire hunters (Gunn, Holtz, Justine, Connor) there's always that "But he has a soul now!" thing. I think how they react to this demonstrates their view of vampires - whether it's about justice or revenge. Gunn wants to kill vampires not just for revenge, but because he doesn't want the same thing to happen to others in his community. When he finds demons and vampires that aren't a danger, he changes his view, because killing them would be unjust.
Holtz exasperated me because while he can probably understand about justice, he's more interested in revenge than redemption - he certainly wasn't a Christian. Connor and perhaps Justine are capable of change, like Gunn, and of some kind of internal justice, but Holtz had no interest in it. So I don't think we should assume that Wood is going to be like Holtz, just because of the similar circumstances - he doesn't know all the facts, like Connor and Justine didn't. So I think it's far from a forgone conclusion how Wood is going to react.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Fair enough -- Doug, 16:26:14 02/12/03 Wed
Unfortunately most of what we've got on Wood came in one episode, and in the course of one conversation; so a lot of what people are thinking and saying is assumption.
Also I wasn't arguing Justice vs. Revenge, I was talking about the to motivations: Defense and Justice/Revenge. Justice and Revenge are after all basically the same thing objectively, it's only when individual perceptions and the weighing of the severity of action and punishment get involved that a difference begins to appear. But that isn't what I was talking about, and while Justice and Revenge are topics worthy of discussion best leave them for threads of their own.
"Gunn wants to kill vampires not just for revenge, but because he doesn't want the same thing to happen to others in his community. When he finds demons and vampires that aren't a danger, he changes his view, because killing them would be unjust."
You wrote this and I agree and disagree with what you said. Gunn kills vampires ad other critters to protect those he cares about, we agree on this. But I'm not sure it's just or unjust he cares about but protection. Gunn wants to protect people and therefore he doesn't kill things he doesn't think are threats, only those that stand a chance of harming people.
I'm not down on either of these motivations. Both Justice/Vengeance and Defense have their drawbacks and strengths. Now given that this is a Whedon show people are more likely to get into trouble seeking revenge, but that's something else.
[> [> [> [>
Only if you think I disliked Holtz, I didn't. -- s'kat, 15:44:14 02/12/03 Wed
I don't share your distaste for Holtz, though. So it's really not as nasty as you think.
Gunn - in This Gang of Mine - has turned away from just killing the vamps and demons. And you're right he was never just about that. Actually I see Gunn and Wood as being paralleled here. It's a spectrum - if you like:
Holtz - Wood - Gunn
Wood can either move more towards Holtz or move more towards Gunn, who sees past what Angel was to what Angel can become. Gunn's progression in the underrated episode introducing Gunn in Season 1...from a kid who hates all vampires and demons to one who actually works with Angel is interesting.
I never really bracketed in the way you think. I merely suggested that Gunn, Holtz, Justine, and Wood have something in common - a justifiable hatred for vampires and desire to revenge loved ones. Justine and Gunn = both lost beloved sisters to vamps. Holtz and Wood = family members.
How each reacts to this - is important. Will they become eaten up by vengeance and sink to the level of the demons who destroyed their families or will they find a better way?
Gunn's story isn't over yet - so far he has risen above it.
Will Wood follow Gunn's path or Holtz's is the question?
Losing a slayer mother at the age of four and being raised by a Watcher is a bit different than losing a sister, right?
[> [> [>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- leslie, 12:48:16 02/12/03 Wed
I mentioned this below in another thread, but I think that there is definitely something Oedipal in Wood's interest in Buffy--using her as a substitute/replacement for his mother, one Slayer = another Slayer. And in this light, I suddenly think that his mistaking Buffy for Dawn's mother as his very first act on the show is significant. Now that we know his mother was a Slayer and he knew that Buffy was the Slayer before he came to Sunnydale, we can see that his instinctive equation is Slayer = Mother; the fact that his own mother was one of the very few, possibly only Slayer to be a mother makes his assumption that Buffy the Slayer is also a mother even more telling as an identification of her with his mother.
So, while Holtz's pursuit of Angelus is grounded in a parent's feeling for his children--and perhaps a projection of his own guilt at having been so focused on slaying vampires "out there" that he was not home to protect his own family--Wood's feelings about Spike are going to result from a son's feelings about his mother. Seeing Buffy as a mother-substitute makes her apparent preference for Spike--she goes first to Spike after the demon is slain, notice, not to Xander, the object of the rescue--a perfect Oedipal set-up--Spike is the father standing in the way of the son's fantasized union with the mother. It will also make killing Spike seem even more important since, as he was not able to save his real mother from Spike, he may well see killing Spike as an opportunity to "save" Buffy in the way he was not able to save his mother. Wood was 4 when his mother was killed--the Oedipus complex is supposed to emerge in boys between the ages of 3 and 5. Smack in the danger zone.
[> [> [> [>
Oooh! I just love parallels -- Masq, 13:35:57 02/12/03 Wed
[> [> [> [>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- ponygirl, 13:42:30 02/12/03 Wed
It's going to be very interesting to be sure. And good catch on Wood's mistaking Buffy for a mother way back in Lessons! I'd also like to add that Spike himself said Buffy reminded him of the 70's Slayer in FFL.
We need to see more of Wood to find out how he's going to pursue his vengeance. Is it going to be all about Spike or will he see Buffy as having tarnished the Slayer name with her involvement with vampires? I think the FE's comment about him coming up in the world along with his claim to Buffy about having a reputation in the demonworld suggests that pride could be a weakness for him.
There also seem to be a lot of Riley parallels -- Buffy's description of him as good and solid, the revelation of identity through fighting, the "mommy" issues. I'm wondering if Wood also shares Riley's narrow views on demonkind as well.
[> [> [> [>
Apophis, read this please! -- Caroline, 14:16:31 02/12/03 Wed
Now you will know that my Oedipal theory that you completely pooh-poohed last night in chat is actually valid!
[> [> [> [>
And great post leslie, I completely agree. -- Caroline, 14:19:01 02/12/03 Wed
[> [> [> [>
Brilliant (Spoilers, First Date) -- Rahael, 14:38:12 02/12/03 Wed
Nothing to add to that, but just on a side note - I haven't watched the ep, nor read the wildfeed, but I was remembering the 'Silent Slayers' today. Now we have a Chinese Slayer, who finally speaks, though is not understood (or so I gather!!) but I would venture to say that her voice will grow stronger.
And now Nikki's son emerges.
I feel certain you've picked up on some really important thematic stuff for this season.
[> [> [> [> [>
Communication (Spoilers, First Date) -- fresne, 08:59:47 02/13/03 Thu
Well, I don't want to read too much into it, but it's interesting that the Cantonese Slayer's needs and wants aren't readily apparent without communication. Ice cream is not in fact a universal language and what you think will calm (warm milk) or is a treat (ice cream) can be in fact be harmful.
Even attempting to communicate through pictures/flashcards, may not yield the results that you think.
In the same episode, we have both Buffy and Xander finding that their dates were not what they thought it would be. Meanwhile, back at the Casa de Summers, Willow et al attempt to record the voice of the First Evil. Hear what it says. Study. Uncover the hidden meanings.
Hmmm...
[> [> [> [>
Well said......fashion comment included -- Deb, 14:52:55 02/12/03 Wed
Something bothered me about the whole Spike/Wood/Buffy thing, so I asked myself what does Wood and Spike have in common that Buffy needs (besides a fighter?). Spike definitely had a case of hero worship of Buffy until this season. I think he is more grounded now. Wood also seems to have a case of hero worship. But if Buffy is the mother in Wood's "worship" could it be mother worship that he and Spike have/had in common?
The "I'm not ready to not have you around yet" bugged me too, and not just because it is a double negative. It's feeling a bit like, I want to see who will worship me the most first.
As for the heinous black "spider-web" over jeans thing that Buffy wore: That is the worst fashion blunder yet on the show. I watched the ep four times before I could concentrate on what was happening and not lose it over that outfit. I'm sure it's symbolic, but geez..............
What could have possessed her to wear that thing? I don't usually go berserk over clothing selection, but that thing was just plain, unambiguous evil. Yuck. Yuck. Yuck. Yuck. Yuck.
[> [> [> [>
Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- s'kat, 15:27:28 02/12/03 Wed
Seeing Buffy as a mother-substitute makes her apparent preference for Spike--she goes first to Spike after the demon is slain, notice, not to Xander, the object of the rescue--a perfect Oedipal set-up--Spike is the father standing in the way of the son's fantasized union with the mother. It will also make killing Spike seem even more important since, as he was not able to save his real mother from Spike, he may well see killing Spike as an opportunity to "save" Buffy in the way he was not able to save his mother. Wood was 4 when his mother was killed--the Oedipus complex is supposed to emerge in boys between the ages of 3 and 5. Smack in the danger zone.
Yup that's it exactly. That's the connection with Season 2 Btvs and with Angelus/Giles. Giles the Dad - Angelus wants to take out to deal with his own Daddy issues. Then we have Connor the son wanting to take out Angelus to save/have
Cordy. And of course Holtz who wants to take Angel's son to replace his own with Justine the substitute for Darla.
Now let's look at Spike - do you remember our little spec about Spike's mom, leslie? The sick mother? In Fool For Love, Spike tells Dru what? "Mother's expecting me."
And in Forever - it is Spike who helps Dawn resurrect Joyce, but insists on doing it the right way. And oh yes, which adult figure does Spike bond with? Angel sort of bonds with and seeks Giles approval. Spike bonds with Joyce.
Spike is chipped by the evil mom, Prof Walsh.
Methinks the mother issue with Wood and Spike is going to be a lot more multilayered than we know. Spike has some Mommy issues - Wood is our way of getting to and exploring them.
Joss Whedon seems obsessed with the dysfunctional family.
1. The Disapproving Dad
2. The Sick Mother
Angel = disapproving Dad
Spike = sick mom
Angel's nemesis - Holtz (german for wood apparently) was all about Dad and sons
Spike's nemesis - Wood is all about Mom and sons
Buffy is the product of an absent Dad (Hank), a reluctant Watcher and surrogate Dad (Giles) and the sick mother (Joyce).
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- leslie, 15:47:31 02/12/03 Wed
What I find interesting is that with the return of his soul, Spike is really turning into a sick (ill) father. He seems, for instance, to be much more weakened by the surgery to remove the chip than he was by the surgery to insert it.
Just tangentially, since no-one has commented on it, I loved the way Spike, after his noble renunciation of any interest in a long-term relationship with Buffy (those picket fences are just not a good idea), keeps trying to go off and fetch Buffy from her date with Wood. Plus his posture when the two of them look up and see him standing next to the table. Worst fears realized. Wood may actually have some legitimate Oedipal anxieties!
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- Caroline, 17:43:01 02/12/03 Wed
I think that you are right about Spike's weakness. His fighting prowess in this episode was quite poor and he seems not to have his whole heart in the effort. Perhaps William's attitude towards violence, seen in FFL (I prefer not to think about such things), is reasserting itself.
Another thing I noticed between Buffy and Spike in this episode was that Randy/Joan vibe between them. What I mean was that is wasn't sexual but there was a natural sort of dependence and reliance, the type of stuff that 'old marrieds' have. There has been little of the white-hot physical passion of S6 that made Buffy seek out Spike in spite of her better self. In fact, it's the opposite. There has been very little touching. It's been long, hard-to-read looks between them and the sense here is bittersweet. Giles pointed out the mutual dependency in his 'I want better things for you' speech, Buffy mentioned everyone thinking she was STILL in love with Spike. Buffy is also far more animated with Wood, much more expressive than she is with Spike - Wood is a safer, more acceptable object of desire than Spike superficially. Spike, despite his nobility, was itching to find Buffy after they found out Xander was in trouble and before they discovered that she had left her cell-phone at home. Buffy runs to Spike after the fight with Lissa before she checks on Xander, whose stomach has been sliced open. They are involuntarily drawn to each other despite their best intentions. I was thinking that ME was trying to establish a friendship vibe between these two but First Date convinced me otherwise. (I wonder if the First part of First Date also relates in some way to the First?)
As for Wood and Buffy, I'm very leery of it. Wood did not reveal his identity to Buffy in Lessons - he pretended he didn't know about her identity for months. His office is right above the hellmouth and we have seen him come under the control of the First by burying Jonathan. Buffy herself is suspicious of his charm and wants Willow to check up on him. When Willow does, they curiously find little of him prior to his arrival in Sunnydale. He keeps a well-stocked armory in his office. Then he takes her through an alley to get to a restaurant, proves himself proficient with a stake and brags about his vamp-hunting, even going so far as to claim that he has a rep with vamps, when we know that it's Buffy who has the rep. I got real Riley vibes here - normal guy who turns out to be a demon-hunter and he's not entirely straight with Buffy about it. Wood even admitted to maneuvering Buffy to her position at the school to keep her close. Well, the First also said that everyone was where they should be. And now with the revelation of his identity as the child of the slayer that Spike killed, we have several things being set up - vengeance on Spike for this mother's death as well as the playing out of a rivalry between Wood and Spike for Buffy's favour - which to Wood would be the psychological equivalent of gaining his mother's favour.
What concerns me about this scenario is the importance of two other things said in this show. Buffy stated that 'You don't beat evil by doing evil' and Lissa stated that the time has come for everyone to 'pick partners and align with good or evil'. Taking these two statements together, we can see that anyone who chooses to do evil, even for a good purpose, will ultimately be playing into the hands of evil. The Jonathan-slash-first-slayer (loved that line) stated that 'as long as there is evil, I live'. So the First evil only has the power to promote and continue evil actions insofar as it can manipulate the hearts and minds of others to perform its deeds. It only has the power given to it by humanity to make it manifest. I think this applies equally to all the characters.
Other things I enjoyed about the ep was the references to previous eps - all the ones where Xander attracts a demon, Never Kill a Boy on the First Date (the Owen, Angel, Buffy triangle) the flashcards reminiscent of Hush, the Riley, Buffy, Spike triangle and the paralleling of Andrew's redemption ('Redemption is hard') with all the other killers - Willow, Spike and Anya. Andrew is being presented very literally as a foil to Spike. Andrew is discovered buying pigs blood, Spike comes to the SG for blood and protection. Both are distrusted at first and tied up and then are gradually integrated into the fold. And I loved the funny lines - 'frisky vixen', 'bidet of evil' (which gives whole new slant to from beneath you it devours) and Spike's comment about never liking picket fences.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- s'kat, 20:34:24 02/12/03 Wed
Buffy stated that 'You don't beat evil by doing evil' and Lissa stated that the time has come for everyone to 'pick partners and align with good or evil'. Taking these two statements together, we can see that anyone who chooses to do evil, even for a good purpose, will ultimately be playing into the hands of evil. The Jonathan-slash-first-slayer (loved that line) stated that 'as long as there is evil, I live'. So the First evil only has the power to promote and continue evil actions insofar as it can manipulate the hearts and minds of others to perform its deeds. It only has the power given to it by humanity to make it manifest. I think this applies equally to all the characters.
I think you've stumbled on to the overall theme of this season right there. Remember it.
This is important, I think.
Throughout the episode, the SG are trying to figure out who and what the First is. They research it. They try to tape it. In Bring on The Night - Buffy attempts to google it hunting manifestations of evil and has that bizarre chat with Principal Wood - who states with an evil grin - he's interested in what lies underneath it all. We have Joyce telling Buffy in dreams that she needs to wake up - evil is in all of us. Then we literally have the First show up again in First Date - which may relate partly to the First - as poor Jonathan.
Think about Jonathan for a minute. He did evil to do good on many occasions - most spectacularly Superstar. He wanted to be good, but often did evil. The First is right - as long as we do evil at all - it lives.
It wanted Buffy to stake Spike. She didn't. It wanted Spike to taste and kill Buffy. He didn't. It tried to get Willow to kill herself for the good. She didn't. Now it wants Wood to go after Spike for Buffy's own good.
A friend recently asked if evil is a parody of good? Is it?
Is that how we get tricked into doing evil?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- Caroline, 21:02:33 02/12/03 Wed
I think that you make some really good points. I can't help but think that the gang will truly have to learn the meaning of love, compassion and forgiveness and transcend rather than defeat the first evil. And it is a battle that each character must fight internally before they can fight it externally.
Thanks for a great thread shadowkat.
Now I'm going to mourn Lilah. [sob].
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Studyin' up on evil -- ponygirl, 07:07:25 02/13/03 Thu
I thought that the Scoobies did learn something valuable about the FE - that it can be deceived. It didn't know that Andrew was lying until he really did a bad job of it. It seems that the FE can't read minds after all. And it's not everywhere at once, since it wasn't aware of Willow's activities in the basement until it figured out Andrew's game. I have to wonder if this is going to be useful information down the road.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Studyin' up on evil -- s'kat, 08:42:39 02/13/03 Thu
I thought that the Scoobies did learn something valuable about the FE - that it can be deceived. It didn't know that Andrew was lying until he really did a bad job of it. It seems that the FE can't read minds after all. And it's not everywhere at once, since it wasn't aware of Willow's activities in the basement until it figured out Andrew's game. I have to wonder if this is going to be useful information down the road.
Hmmm good point and catch. Didn't occur to me.
You know if they play this right - ME could do a perfect metanarration on Enemies S3. They already metanarrated on it in Ats. Wouldn't it be interesting - if Spike pretended to be evil to trick the FE? Then flipped on it? Fooling us and everyone but the SG who are already in on it? The SG fooled the First Evil in Showtime by not discussing their plans vocally.
Oh another question - why oh why did Anya tell Spike and Buffy that Giles was the First Evil when she already knew he wasn't? For a joke?
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- ponygirl, 20:21:49 02/12/03 Wed
While I am really longing for Spike to get a chance to kick some ass soon, his weakness of late is reminding me of Angel in s3. Buffy in a caretaker role, struggling with trust issues and the disapproval of her friends, it has a similar vibe. Interestingly the creation of a triangle, Faith's interest in Angel, seemed to spur Buffy to return to a more romantic relationship with him.
I dug Spike's repeated offer to go get Buffy too! Also his punched in the gut expression after his hallway encounter with Buffy makes me wonder how long he will be able to play the unselfish guy. From a framing angle I noticed that he was often above everyone else, at the restaurant table, and then when the others are crouched over Xander the camera pulls back to show Spike standing looking down. It's pretty rare pose for Spike, the original beneath you guy, so it makes me think that, whatever possible feelings Wood may have for Buffy, Spike is going to be the apex of this little triangle.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- leslie, 21:12:20 02/12/03 Wed
"I dug Spike's repeated offer to go get Buffy too! Also his punched in the gut expression after his hallway encounter with Buffy makes me wonder how long he will be able to play the unselfish guy."
Okay, now is my turn to espouse My Own Theory of How The World Should Be: So far, Spike has been feeling that since he has a soul, knows right from wrong, and recognizes his past actions as wrong actions undertaken simply to please himself, he has been behaving on the premise that in order to "balance the books," as it were, he has to deny what he feels and deny anything that would please him as penance. But it seems to me that one of the things someone newly re-ensouled has to learn is how to want things and try to get them without going completely overboard. I brought up this analogy with Willow's magic problem--it wasn't a question of going cold turkey and completely abstinent, it was a question of learning how to do some magic when it is necessary and to know when it is necessary, much like one of the problems with an eating disorder--you can't just stop eating altogether, you have to learn to eat wisely. So likewise, I think Spike has to learn is that it's okay to want something and to express that desire while accepting that he may not get it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- leslie, 21:15:11 02/12/03 Wed
"I dug Spike's repeated offer to go get Buffy too! Also his punched in the gut expression after his hallway encounter with Buffy makes me wonder how long he will be able to play the unselfish guy."
Okay, now is my turn to espouse My Own Theory of How The World Should Be: So far, Spike has been feeling that since he has a soul, knows right from wrong, and recognizes his past actions as wrong actions undertaken simply to please himself, he has been behaving on the premise that in order to "balance the books," as it were, he has to deny what he feels and deny anything that would please him as penance. But it seems to me that one of the things someone newly re-ensouled has to learn is how to want things and try to get them without going completely overboard. I brought up this analogy with Willow's magic problem--it wasn't a question of going cold turkey and completely abstinent, it was a question of learning how to do some magic when it is necessary and to know when it is necessary, much like one of the problems with an eating disorder--you can't just stop eating altogether, you have to learn to eat wisely. So likewise, I think Spike has to learn is that it's okay to want something and to express that desire while accepting that he may not get it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I like your worldview! -- ponygirl, 07:23:14 02/13/03 Thu
I actually liked the Buffy/Spike interaction in NLM far better than FD. Spike got to express a lot of anger over their relationship, suggesting that the soul allows him to not only understand the bad things that he had done but also the bad things that were done to him. Buffy too got to vent a bit. But now it seems that Spike is unwilling to jeopardize the belief Buffy has in him. There was that moment in the crypt in Potential where it seemed like they were both looking to get a bit of banter on, but FD was all wary politeness. I don't think it can last though. Jealousy could be an interesting way for him to explore that balance between selfish and selfless.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yep. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. -- s'kat, 08:23:54 02/13/03 Thu
I'm afraid to do too much dissecting or spec on B/S right now. (Because I know they are going to hurt me.)
But I do agree with everything you've posted on the board regarding this leslie. To add, Spike's jealousy of Wood is more contained than Anya's of Xander - which makes sense.
Spike has matured a little more than Anya has. And well, unlike Anya, he doesn't believe he deserves Buffy or anyone's love. But that said, his comments to Buffy at the end of First Date were fascinating:
1. I should leave - go far away from here, before it gets to me. (Can't help but wonder if part of the reason he wants to leave is so he doesn't have to watch her and Wood get together. Must be somewhat painful. And even though I know W/B won't happen, Spike doesn't know that.)
(Buffy says- no.)
2. Why? You don't need a demon hunter. You already have one.
(Again - possibly a commentary on his own feelings of inadequacy? He was horrible in that fight. Wood was better and more effective than he was. Maybe he feels he's more a hindrance and threat to her than a help?)
(Buffy says and this interested me - that's not why I want you to stay. Pause. I'm not ready for you to leave me yet. (Which oddly enough reminded me of what she said to Angel in Forever, I Will Always Remember You, and The Prom. It also reminds me of what she may have wanted to tell her father. This girl has serious Abandonment Issues - associated with her father and men in general. Every guy she has ever gotten physically involved with - has left her or moved on in some way, Spike is the only one who came back better than before and stayed needing her help. And I could be wrong in my reading of this, but I remain convinced that Buffy was more upset with Spike for Leaving in Villains, then she was about the whole attempted rape thing. In fact she states in HIM - to Dawn - "For the record That's why he LEFT because he knew it was wrong." She emphasizes LEft. And in Grave - when Dawn mentions going to Spike again - she says as if that would help - I don't think she's commenting on the AR there, Dawn jumps to that conclusion...I think what's going through her mind is - well he left so there's no point. To Buffy - the guy leaving is probably the worst thing he could do. It's what hurts her most in Tabula Rasa, Giles leaving.)
3. Spike looks at her oddly. Confused. "Then where does the principal fit in?"
Those three lines continue to intrigue me. I have no clue where they are headed with these two. Have tons of theories. Two that I'm really afraid that they will do.
1. Buffy will get closer and closer to Spike - then whammo, he flips on her and pulls a Cordelia in Ats. We discover he's been bad all along. Makes 0 sense to me and would make me very very unhappy. But I can see it and I dread it.
Also been there done that. So it would be redundant.
But since I'm convinced Cordy and Spike may be being paralleled, I am half afraid they'll pull it. Even though it makes even less sense for Spike than it did with Cordy.
2. Spike does a double flip. The FE tries to make him Evil, but his love for Buffy stops him and he kills himself before hurting her. Really don't want him to die. But I didn't want Lilah to die either...ugh.
The others...too many to list. I am convinced that Wood's presence is more for Spike than Buffy. That Wood is there so we can explore Spike's mother issues and issues with women and contrast those with Buffy's mommy and daddy issues. Just a hunch. Also I agree with Caroline - Andrew is an obvious foil for Spike, just as Dawn is for Buffy.
And the developing Dawn/Andrew relationship (not romance, more friendship, andrew is gay remember?) is a bit of a commentary I think on this from another angle.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
My guess (unspoiled now) -- Dochawk, 10:05:11 02/13/03 Thu
Is that you don't have to worry about Spike going bad. I just don't see a need to repeat Angel and Willow. Sacrificing himself is possible, but if it happens it won't be until the final episode (I can see Spike getting in the way of an attack that would hurt Buffy or Dawn and dying from it). But, wouldn't it be wonderful (if Spike has to die, which I don't want either) that he dies saving Xander? Just seems so much more redemptive when he does it for someone we know he doesn't care much about than for someone he loves. Don't think he'll die though.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Even more redemptive... -- Dariel, 10:45:19 02/13/03 Thu
Would be dying for someone/something not related to Buffy. However, don't want this to happen. I hope ME can come up with something more original than "former bad guy makes sacrifice." (Of course, we loved it when Darla did it!)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Even more redemptive... -- ponygirl, 11:08:35 02/13/03 Thu
What would be reallllly interesting is Wood sacrificing himself for Spike. See, I think the grand sacrificial gesture is what Spike aspires to -- it's the perfect end for the Romantic hero he's always wanted to become. Since it's a perfect end and what he would want I doubt he'll get it. Someone else offering themselves up for the possibility of what Spike could become is a lot harder for him. It gives him value, something he's always doubted he had, but also leaves him to muddle through what it means and figure out the messy business of living. Muddle and mess and life are something I can see ME getting behind. But then since it probably will be the series finale all bets are off and it could just be a bloodbath. Writers being inherently somewhat evil after all ;)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I'm with you... -- dream, 12:06:49 02/13/03 Thu
and I can't imagine them killing off Spike when there's the possibility of films someday. Then again, people in the Buffyverse don't always stay dead.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Even more redemptive... -- s'kat, 12:12:49 02/13/03 Thu
Hmmmm...I could get behind Wood sacrificing himself for
Spike, don't see it happening though. Actually have a hunch ME is reserving Wood for a possible Faith spin-off, just a hunch.
Personally I'd rather see Spike find redemption the way Aersthua states below, by living a different life. After all sacrificing oneself is easy - it's living with the choices we make each day that is hard.
I would prefer they don't kill him as some big sacrifice or even a little one - because I believe that story is beneath ME's talents. It's been done so many times. Why not try something more interesting? Less predictable? Besides they've done it already with Buffy, with Angel...etc.
But I also know it's a tv show...and it's more than possible they'll go that route.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: My guess (unspoiled now) -- leslie, 10:50:39 02/13/03 Thu
I agree. And given the stated and implied future career plans of the actors involved, it seems far, far more likely that if someone dies, it's going to be the one who doesn't want to sign another contract than the one who does.
Honestly, the position I see Buffy in at the end of the series (whenever it may happen) is the same position she was in at the end of S2, when Angelus taunts her that she has been abandoned by everyone and what does she have left, and she answers "Me." Except this time it will be a positive position of strength rather than a spot at the bottom of the barrel. Doesn't mean she won't still have connections to the world and still love her friends and others, but she'll finally realize that it doesn't matter if people leave because she'll always know where she is.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I agree -- s'kat, 12:03:52 02/13/03 Thu
I hope your right. I think you are.
But, wouldn't it be wonderful (if Spike has to die, which I don't want either) that he dies saving Xander? Just seems so much more redemptive when he does it for someone we know he doesn't care much about than for someone he loves. Don't think he'll die though.
I agree so strongly with this. IF they have to make him sacrifice himself in some way, please let it be for a character he's not committed to. Like Wood, Anya, Xander, Willow, Giles or even some other character. But not Dawn or Buffy.
And what leslie says below also makes sense - keep the character - whose actor will resign without costing you tons of money.
(Speaking of spin-off spec? My new one is Wood/Faith series...now that I can see. Would give the writers a chance to explore new characters.)
[> [> [> [> [>
Yes, exactly and there's more -- Etrangere, 07:10:54 02/13/03 Thu
FFL had a lot of mother theme : "Mother's expecting me", and "Tell my mother I'm sorry", and at the end Buffy is heartbroken because of her mother, and now we learn that Nikki too was a mother.
Why did Spike bond with Joyce ? "Get away from my daughter". She was a protecting mother.
So Spike used to be all about mothers. He would do anything for his mum Dru, and was into that Oedipal triangle with Drusilla and Angel.
But to beat Angel(us), he had to ally with Buffy, and lose Drusilla, and thus he started to grow up. Until he got himself a soul and he made it, he's Angel (the whole Tabula Rasa speech).
It's splendid role reversal, he anew into the Oedipal Triangle but this time in the role of the father.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Very good points -- Rahael, 07:21:02 02/13/03 Thu
I can't believe I forgot about all that. In another post I said that FD added maternal overtones to FFL.
How stupid of me to forget about Buffy crying over Joyce, and Spike himself on his way back home, to his mother.
In fact, it's making me re look at the word 'love' in the title. It signifies not only romantic love, but other kinds too. The love that exists between mother and child. Twisted (Spike/Dru) or otherwise.
Buffy's great love in S5 was supposed to be Dawn. But it's also Joyce.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
More on mother's -- s'kat, 07:59:24 02/13/03 Thu
Buffy's great love in S5 was supposed to be Dawn. But it's also Joyce.
And the hellgod of Season 5 is Glory - the evil mother goddess - who bleeds the child to get home.
The villain of Season 4? Professor Walsh - the human version of the evil mother - who chips her surrogate son to make a better army and to control him. Even going so far as to watch him make love on video cameras.
In Season 5 - though - we have Buffy go through a transition that in a way is similar to the transition Spike goes through. By Losing Joyce - Buffy becomes the mother, the support. By losing Angelus/Dru - Spike slowly develops into the father role in the B/D dynamic. The protector of the child at the end of S5 and beginning S6. And like the father - he takes off in Season 6, but only to eventually return. (It is after all Spike - that Buffy takes Joyce and Dawn to in Checkpoint. And again Spike she goes to in Tough Love for Dawn and Spike who gets the vehicle in Spiral and Spike she asks to protect Dawn no matter what in The Gift. (all father roles) Contrast this to Joyce who tells Buffy at the end of Listening to Fear to take care of Dawn for her.) When Joyce dies - she passes the mother baton to Buffy, it depresses and overwhelms Buffy at first, but slowly she begins to take hold of it. So that by the time we reach Grave she is treating Dawn much as she did in The Gift as the child of her heart.
Yes, very Oedipal in a way.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: More on mothers in Season 5 -- Rahael, 08:47:26 02/13/03 Thu
Completely agree.
I've always thought Glory was like a counterpoint to Buffy/Joyce. Where Buffy/Joyce would be the self sacrificial mother, Glory would sacrifice the child.
This is also echoed in the Willow/Tara relationship, where Willow assumes a very maternal role (especially to mindsucked Tara - I'll always find you!), loving in season 5, but growing darker (more possessive, with abusive overtones) in Season 6. There was something foreshadowy about mindsucked Tara slapping Willow and saying "you forgot the fractions, bitch!"
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
And its not over yet (Title Spoilers, but otherwise spec only) -- Sergio, 10:40:35 02/13/03 Thu
The title of a future episode is supposedly "mothers and sons", since there are only 5 potential sons on Buffy, Giles, Xander, Spike, Andrew and Wood who has the obvious mother issue. Giles, do we know anything about his parents at all? Same with Andrew and Xander seems to have parents issues so he could be one of the sons. But of course Spike and Wood both have mother issues, so likely its about one or both of them (Wood's mother issues obviously include Spike and Buffy so there is more there)
[>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- Arethusa, 07:17:48 02/12/03 Wed
I don't believe that Wood is here for romance. Don't think ME is really that interested in romance this year - as they state quite clearly through a frustrated Giles.
I think that's reinforced by Wood's line-echoing Riley's at the end of Hush. Like Riley, he's not Mr. Right. So Rufus and HonorH's ships are safe. ;)
The FE keeps reminding everyone that no matter what happens it will always exist, it is part of all of us. That's true it is.
And it is like Iago, using us to do it's will. But unlike Iago in Othello, the FE can't really manifest itself unless we let it.
Again, right. The FE can only convince others to act, not do the actions itself, which is incredibly important because it underscores the idea that despite appearances, evil is not some separate entity seducing people at random. It is a result of the decisions people make. Andrew, god bless his little mushroom heart, decides to ignore the FE and work for good. And Wood is able to ignore the FE-until it gives him his heart's desire. Likewise, Spike isn't a person unless he has the ability to chose between good and evil. Vampires don't have free will-men do.
But Buffy doesn't believe people need to be punished to be redeemed, so much as gradually prove themselves.
It's interesting to see posters debate if a sinner has suffered "enough" punishment but Buffy has never bought into this CoW-style mindset. To repeat myself, the way a person shows they've changed is by living a changed life.
The question this year-how do you fight evil, when it doesn't have a physical form? (ME might not be commenting on our current political struggle, but the question certainly resonates like it does.) Like the Council of Watchers, with a judicial system complete with capital punishment? One-by-one, like Buffy and Wood, who do it for opposite reasons-altruism versus revenge? Give into it, like Anya before Selfless? Each person has to make a choice, draw a line, as Wesley said to Lilah. The strength needed to fight this battle is as much (or more) mental as physical. If the cause of evil is inside us, than surely so is the cure.
[> [>
Very well said. Agree absolutely. -- shadowkat, 08:20:31 02/12/03 Wed
[>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- dream, 07:46:37 02/12/03 Wed
Do you really think Buffy put two and two together on the Wood's mom thing? I didn't, though she might have. I got more of the feeling that her look of shock was that a slayer who had survived long enough to have a four-year-old might be taken out by a mere vampire. I mean, vampires are nothing to Buffy now. If we figure that most slayers die with one or two years, that's a lot of turnover - Spike has killed two, but that still makes a serious coincidence. (I have no problem with coincidences, by the way. Chesterton said that coincidences are "a spiritual sort of pun," which I've always liked. Just pointing out that Buffy wouldn't necessarily drawn the immediate conclusion.)
I really liked the scene in the restaurant. Buffy seems happy and light-hearted for the first time in ages. I also loved her reaction to the revelation that a Slayer had a child. That must open up worlds of possibility to her in terms of her ideas of who she can be (not recommending that she should, not by a long shot, just pointing out that she would have found the idea inconceivable before. So to speak.) And she might find some comfort in the idea that a Slayer before her had to deal with the combined responsibilities of a child (in Buffy's case, Dawn) and Slayer-hood. She has a lot in common with this Slayer - Spike's statement about the fighting style, the responsibility of a child, and, not coincidentally I would guess, apparent longevity for a Slayer.
[> [>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- s'kat, 08:18:11 02/12/03 Wed
We'll see if this post goes through. Voy ate my response to Aresthua.
I don't think Buffy put it together that Spike killed Wood's mother - just that a "vampire" like Spike, killed a slayer. This similarity alone would make her uncomfortable - it would make anyone uncomfortable to be at dinner with someone - find out they aren't who you thought and discover that their mother was killed by a creature who resembles a close friend of yours.
Spike is an old vampire who killed two slayers. Wood's mother was a slayer killed by a vampire. That would unnerve me if I was Buffy, particularly when Spike shows up. Also the fact Wood is assuming Buffy treats all vamps the same.
There's some interesting lines in the dinner conversation - one of which is Buffy's comment to Wood about how she kills the vamps who are trouble. This is after Wood states - "For a while I hunted for him, but then I finally decided just killing as many vamps as possible would work." Buffy sort of side-steps this, not completely agreeing this is a good thing. Remember she's apologized to a couple vamps in the past episodes - "I'm sorry, just doing my job" - Sleeper.
And to Webs - "sorry, I'm going to win." CwDP. She really doesn't look at slaying the same way Wood does and that is REALLY important to keep in mind. It is a parallel to Holtz, Justine, Gunn and Angel. Holtz believed all demons and vampires should be killed. Justine did too. Gunn also struggles with this - Gunn has struggled throughout Ats on it. (Yeah I know not everyone watches ATs - but ATS is part of the mythology and the writers deliberately parallel the two. PArticularly this year with a few upcoming cross-overs)
At any rate - a good way of understanding what Wood's purpose is and who he is - is by contrasting his behavior to Holtz, Justine and Gunn - while contrasting Buffy's to Cordelia, Angel, and to a small extent Wesley's.
[> [> [>
Oh, absolutely agree. -- dream, 08:38:40 02/12/03 Wed
[>
Re: Do the means justify the ends? Impressions of 7.14 (Spoilers 7.14 Btvs, 24 & Kingpin) -- heywhynot, 14:59:57 02/12/03 Wed
I fully agree with your ideas about how one fights evil being a central theme being played out in BtVS. There is an interesting twist though on what you said:
"Buffy kills vampires because it is her job and she only kills the ones she has to. She's not freelance."
Is it Buffy's job? She is not the Slayer anymore, Faith is. Buffy is outside the slayer line since her "death" at the hands of the Master. Once Xander revived her, slaying wasn't her job anymore. She is the ultimate freelance slayer. Whether she realizes it or not, she has chosen to be an agent for good, to be a hero.
She is a modern day hero of legend like Superman in DC comics. Buffy not only saves the day but does so in a manner that is noble. To her as you said the means do matter.
Season one was Buffy's hero's journey as a slayer. Season one through seven have been her hero's journey as a superhero.
What this all means to the First, I really don't know yet. I am convinced Faith is important to it all.
[> [>
I get a little tired of this "Buffy isn't the real Slayer" talk. -- Finn Mac Cool, 15:53:09 02/12/03 Wed
I'm not denying that, if Buffy dies, no new Slayer will be called. But that doesn't stop her from being the real Slayer. We were told in "Potential" that proto-Slayers already have Slayer powers, it's just that they can never fully express them, though they can rise to the level of very strong and skilled, but not beyond human capability. Taking this as canon, it seems less like Slayerhood is something passed on when one Slayer dies, and an innate quality in certain girls that the PTB only activate when they sense the death of the current Slayer.
While this is not concrete evidence: how about the fact that only the blood of the Slayer could cure the "Killer of the Dead" poison, but Buffy's blood worked just fine? Or how she's also retained psychic dreams that sometimes connect her to other (potential) Slayers? Or what about that fact that she apparently still has a dark power inside of her in "Buffy vs. Dracula", even though, technically, this would only abide inside the "real" Slayer? All in all, I think that Buffy is a real Slayer, though Faith is also a real Slayer. The only thing that makes Buffy different is that she's already used up her "call a new Slayer with your death" card.
P.S. For those who might bring up her comment "I feel stronger" in "Prophecy Girl" as a sign that she had changed into something not quite the Slayer: I'd like to point out that there have been many allusions to pain and death fueling the Slayer's power. If this is true, than actually dying would be a rush of power for a Slayer.
[> [> [>
Missing the Point -- heywhynot, 16:32:44 02/12/03 Wed
I am not saying Buffy isn't a Slayer, just the not The Slayer (the one the line goes through). The point is that Buffy is now choosing to be a slayer. She is no longer the slayer in a line of slayers. Slayers are called, activated however you like to put it, but in the end they are filling a position, a role, a job It isn't her job anymore. To me this makes Buffy more noble and more of a hero. She fights the good fight not because of a title but because it is what she believes in. The title in the first season was the catalyst, the kick in the butt to motivate her but she no longer needs it. Yes sometimes the expectations of being a hero get to her, as they would anyone with high expectations, but in the end she does what is right not what gets the job done.
[> [> [> [>
It doesn't quite work that way -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:41:48 02/12/03 Wed
"Slayers are called, activated however you like to put it, but in the end they are filling a position, a role, a job It isn't her job anymore. To me this makes Buffy more noble and more of a hero. She fights the good fight not because of a title but because it is what she believes in."
But, even before her momentary death in "Prophecy Girl", Buffy had a choice. As we've seen with Faith, a Slayer can choose not to fight the good fight. It doesn't matter whether their death can activate another Slayer or not; they can still choose whether to fight evil or not (on another note, since Faith can no longer fulfill the role of Vampire Slayer, does this make Buffy "THE Slayer" in your reckoning?).
So, I agree with your overall point (Buffy's nobility for choosing to fight evil when she doesn't have to), but disagree on the details. I don't believe she somehow didn't have a choice before she died, but gained it when Kendra was called. Granted, choosing not to fight evil is a lot more tempting if you know someone else is also doing it, but she still had a choice.
I also just having a problem with calling Buffy a Slayer, but Faith "THE Slayer". Buffy is just as much a Slayer as Faith is.
[> [> [> [> [>
Semantics semantics -- TheWickedBuffy/AWickedBuffy, 09:09:22 02/13/03 Thu
I agree completely with Finn, here. And also the part about Buffy being more of a hero because she's choosing to do this.
When does "A" Slayer become "The" Slayer? or vice versa? The "The" title brings with it responsibility and accountable to being a Slayer. That leaves Faith out and points directly at Buffy. Simply because Buffy is slayer-infertile now, doesn't change everything else she already is and does.
Faith might be the slayer who must die to call up the next slayer, but that's about it. Buffy remains The Slayer.
Faith is a Queen. Buffy is The Queen. imho
Joss finally learns to do math (spoiler for 7.14) -- Sheri, 00:59:29 02/12/03 Wed
Wood tells Buffy he was 4 years old when his mother was killed. That was in 1977, right?
So, that would make him 30 now. And as Willow said, he's 10 (give or take a few years, I'm pretty sure she was just guessing) years older than Buffy.
Yeah! Kudos to Joss for getting the math right on this one :)
[>
Re: Joss finally learns to do math (spoilers up to and including 7.14) -- Rob, 07:49:26 02/12/03 Wed
Yes! I noticed that!
And just wanted to add what a great surprise the Wood revelation was, because (a) it wasn't what any of us, I assume, were expecting--I was thinking renegade Watcher or guy working for the First (well now he might be lol), and (b) it fits perfectly into the mythos of the show...even the timeline! And ME rarely gets that right! They have worked Wood into the story perfectly, and now looking back on it, his talk to Buffy about "evil movies" and looking into the face of true evil makes so much more sense now. Regarding his burying Jonathan, I assume he saw the Seal of Danthazar, knew a dead kid on it can't be good, so buried him.
Still, I don't trust the guy. Not saying I don't like him. He's a very likable guy, and a really fascinating character. (Ha to those who said that "Buffy' can't come up with good peripheral characters anymore! Wood and Andrew are two of their best, IMO.) But I don't trust him. How creepy was his "thank you" to the First Evil? Ooooh...shivers running down my spine!
Rob
[> [>
Re: Can we check other math? (spoilers up to and including 7.14) -- pr10n, 08:26:36 02/12/03 Wed
How old was Nicki when Spike killed her? Was she 18? Was she 19? Unless she was 21 or older, Wood's father lives in Polanski-ville, because ((age at death)-4) = creepy young.
Does the mythos really limit the age of the Slayer to early twenties on the outside? Does Giles or Buffy say that? I don't remember the specifics. Still, Nicki was very young to have a child IMHO.
[> [> [>
well yeah... -- Helen, 08:31:51 02/12/03 Wed
but girls of 15 or younger have babies all the time. I'm more interested in how she managed to survive in that intriguing state whilst slaying (see my question above).
[> [> [> [>
Re: well yeah... -- pr10n, 08:54:40 02/12/03 Wed
Right, I read your posts above after mine had wallowed on to the list.
I think my concern isn't with the mother's age -- granted, girls get pregnant <-- but look at my sentence. It implies some parthenogenesis or something, and it's the sentence form we choose under these circumstances. "She got pregnant really young."
Where's Wood's dad? I'm no biologist, but I'm thinking sperm was involved somewhere along in the process.
And my other thought is: was she a Slayer first or a mother first? A lot of intriguing story there, and I think that's what your question above is asking.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: well yeah... Spoilers for 7.14 -- Arethusa, 09:03:14 02/12/03 Wed
It's interesting that her Watcher raised and trained her child, instead of the father. Probably, a slayer wouldn't have long-term relationships. Nikki and her watcher must have been closer than most slayers and watchers.
[> [> [> [> [>
absolutely -- Helen, 09:18:28 02/12/03 Wed
sorry, didn't meant to come across snarky.
I read spoilers about this that said she was his aunt (can't remember where) and that would all have been more plausible. I think on the time line she pretty much had to be Slayer first, but even if she was called when the kid had already been born, what vampire wouldn't have gone straight for the pain and not the kill, and done in the kid? (Similarly, had Dawn really been around concurrent with Angelus, she wouldn't be now. He so would have killed her.)
As for the sperm necessity, well, it never happened to me, but in my limited experience through unfortunate friends, the guy (or boy) who gets a 15 year old girl pregnant is often not in equation nine months down the line, let alone four years.
Perhaps when there is some confrontation between Wood and Spike we'll get some more back story and it will make a little more sense.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Could... (complete spec re: 7.14) -- Rob, 14:02:30 02/12/03 Wed
...the Watcher also be the father of the baby? That might explain a lot. And be quite fascinating.
Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Tales of the Slayer (possible spoilers) -- Scroll, 18:06:54 02/12/03 Wed
I could be remembering wrong since I've never actually read Tales of the Slayers, but isn't there one story about Nikki, the girl killed in the subway? Because I was under the impression that the vamp (Spike) who killed her, softened her up first by killing her boyfriend/lover. So this could've been Wood's father. That would explain why Nikki's Watcher was the one who ended up raising Wood.
From what I remember reading (somebody posted a synopsis on this board) that Nikki was so angry and depressed over her lover's death that she ended up having that "death wish" Spike was talking about in "Fool For Love".
Or I could be totally remembering this wrong and am pulling this out of thin air....
[> [> [>
Re: Can we check other math? (spoilers up to and including 7.14) -- Sci, 08:44:44 02/12/03 Wed
Well, it's not as though underage minority pregnancies were absolutely unheard of thirty years ago in the inner city. Or even today.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Can we check other math? (spoilers up to and including 7.14) -- slain, 14:30:12 02/12/03 Wed
Or, for that matter, anywhere else! My impression is that Nikki was the same age as Buffy when she lost her virginity, 17 or maybe a year or so younger. As for the baby's father, I like Rob's theory about the Watcher - and I want flashbacks, damnit!
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Can we check other math? (spoilers up to and including 7.14) -- leslie, 15:18:28 02/12/03 Wed
Interesting that no-one seems to be assuming that Wood's father was just as young as his mother. Wouldn't that be the logical conclusion? Two teenagers who haven't been taught about birth control? Hardly Polanski territory.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Actually, that's what I assumed... I just think Rob's theory is more interesting! -- slain, 15:23:05 02/12/03 Wed
[> [>
To be fair... -- Darby, 09:51:20 02/12/03 Wed
Neither of those are peripheral, they're "featured." The peripheral characters would be Ashanti, or the First as Wood's mom, or Holden Webster, or Manny, or the "Mmmmm, Angel!" girls, or the soul-shaman, or the worm-guy's girlfriend, or the kid in Him, or the portal closer, even the hamburger loa or the Finder of Lost Things - the ones that you see briefly but which intrigue - or don't. If they devote some time to characters (Wood, Gwen, Kennedy, Lilah, Andrew), I think both shows do fine - I just think that, in general, Angel is better at the hit-and-runs lately. I'm not looking to reopen this contentious subject again, but I had to respond.
[> [> [>
Okay, that's fair. -- Rob, 11:16:16 02/12/03 Wed
I guess my definition was a little broader.
Rob
[> [>
Sounds Familiar -- Walking Turtle, 12:17:18 02/12/03 Wed
---- How creepy was his "thank you" to the First Evil? Ooooh...shivers running down my spine! ----
It was creepy. It was also in response to the FE question ... something like... "Now what do you say?"
His answer was a very proper "Thank you" -- what every child would say to his/her mother. I think his answer indicates he might have lost his initial reaction to FE because of his desire for revenge.
The writers on this show really make every word count -- creepyness and politeness at the same time.
Spoiler 7.14 Big question -- Helen, 01:21:35 02/12/03 Wed
Haven't seen this yet but have gleaned from your lovely posts that Wood IS the son of the 1977 slayer.
Just a thought - que?
Wouldn't a pregnant slayer be incredibly vulnerable? Does anyone think we'll get some back story on how she managed to survive, and keep her son alive for 4 years before her death?
[>
Re: Spoiler 7.14 Big question -- Valheru, 01:37:00 02/12/03 Wed
That's assuming that she was the Slayer when she was pregnant. She could have been, like Buffy, one of those girls who passes the Council's notice. She lives her life as normal. When she's 15-17 years old or so, she has this little tyke. Then, sometime later, she gets Called. Who knows? Spike might've been the very first vamp she ever faced.
[> [>
Re: Spoiler 7.14 Big question -- maddog, 08:03:57 02/12/03 Wed
If I remember correctly Spike spoke very highly of Wood's mom. He liked her fighting instincts and skill...said something about being less traditional, more inventive. I doubt that comes with the very first vampire that you face.
[>
some background (spoilers Tales of the Slayers) -- grifter, 03:50:46 02/12/03 Wed
In the comic book Tales of the Slayers there's a story about Nikki (Wood's mother) by Doug Petrie.
She's definitely no rookie, takes out some vamps and a giant bat-thing.
She's also married to a cop, Li, an asian, so probably not Wood's father. Not much more background is given on her, but there's another story about her in another comic which I seem to have misplaced, maybe someone else can remember.
I know, comics aren't considered canon mostly, but it's by Doug Petrie so I'm sticking with it till it's shown differently on Buffy.
[> [>
Re: some background (spoilers Tales of the Slayers) -- Sofdog, 09:42:29 02/12/03 Wed
Since that graphic is billed as "From the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and features two Joss stories, I'd say it's canon.
It says Li's her man. They seem to live together, but marriage is never alluded to. Li could certainly be Wood's father. That story was pretty funny in that Nikki uses a string of pearls to wrangle a monster. Too funny.
[>
Could even be a new spin-off series -- frisby, 04:59:24 02/12/03 Wed
a series about a young single mother slaying on the side? with a watcher who fills in as father? with Spike there throughout it finally killing her? a novel or fanfiction anyway if not a spinoff
[>
Re: Spoiler 7.14 Big question -- CW, 05:52:47 02/12/03 Wed
I have to agree with the others. Mama Woods was probably a mother before she was called. Figuring she died at about 19, she'd have been pregnant at 14, a mother at 15 and called as a slayer at 16 or 17. Not a pleasant life, but certainly possible.
[> [>
question on your question -- anom, 23:20:20 02/12/03 Wed
"Figuring she died at about 19...."
Where do you get this from? There's no indication of a specific age, & I don't see any reason to believe she became a mother that early in her life. She still may have already been a mother before she was called, but some Slayers are called later than others. Or, again, she may have become pregnant when she was already the Slayer. After all, it was the time of Black Power and the sexual revolution--I doubt Nikki was any more accepting of her Watcher's authority or society's constraints than Buffy has been.
[>
Theory and Another big question: Andrew's microwave fetish? -- yez, 06:10:13 02/12/03 Wed
I don't know that she necessarily had to have been pregnant before getting called. Who knows how the slayer powers would work with a pregnant slayer -- maybe the hormones gave her more strength! And she was in NYC, right? Probably lots of nasty demons, but if it wasn't on the/a Hellmouth, she might've had less nasties gunning for her than Buffy faces normally.
Now my question: What's with Andrew and the microwave? The running "joke" in the last few eps. has cracked me up, but I managed to miss what happened to the micro to begin with. Did it get destroyed when Dawn had her close encounter of the dead kind? Thanks.
yez
[> [>
Re: Theory and Another big question: Andrew's microwave fetish? -- CW, 06:22:44 02/12/03 Wed
How many times does Buffy get body-slammed in a average month? Even dividing that number by four, for a pregnant slayer it doesn't add up to 'healthy baby.' There is only so far one can stretch believability. Could the world really wait months and months while the slayer took 'maternity leave?'
[> [> [>
Why start applying reality now? -- yez, 07:04:30 02/12/03 Wed
If I can suspend my disbelief so that it's normal that a woman with Buffy's bone structure could take the kind of pounding she does without snapping because of some "super powers," then -- at least for me -- it doesn't seem too much crazier that a slayer could carry a baby to term, especially if she was being very careful and laying a little on the low side. If she had family and friends, they might also be picking up some of the slack, like Buffy's have done when she's been sick or dead.
And who knows? If a slayer's body has certain souped up functions, like healing, etc., then why couldn't it be possible that her body might also "process" a pregnancy faster?
I'm just saying I think there would be ways to make it work as a story. Just think of all the drama you could have with all the "He hit her in the stomach -- is the baby going to be OK?! Tune in next week..."
yez
[> [> [> [>
Re: Why start applying reality now? -- CW, 07:39:54 02/12/03 Wed
Nobody claimed Buffy or Wood's mother was normal. But, Wood supposedly is. That makes a big difference.
If you don't have internal consistency (i.e. in "Buffy" some people are normal, some aren't) you just get jibberish. Then folks who dismiss "Buffy" as just teen-trash would have a point.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Why start applying reality now? -- yez, 08:20:43 02/12/03 Wed
I agree, but IMHO, the fetus' (Wood en utero) normal/abnormal state wouldn't necessarily matter. IMHO, it would be the slayer's super powers that might be able to sustain the baby through an assault, just like Buffy can take all manner of pummeling from beasts and demons and gods, and only after attack by the Tarakon (sp?) do we hear about the possibility of "internal bleeding."
Anyway, this is all speculation and theorizing. It could just as easily be, as others have suggested, that the slayer had the baby before being called. We'll never know... unless they tell us.
yez
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Why start applying reality now? -- auroramama, 14:55:38 02/12/03 Wed
Even in a normal pregnancy, the fetus is very well protected from blunt force trauma. The standard for exercise during a non-high-risk pregnancy is whatever the mother is used to as a maintenance routine. Nikki's pediatrician would probably have advised her to stick to light slaying, vamps only, and lay off the demons and apocalypses. Early pregnancy wouldn't hamper her, and she could probably lie low, as has been suggested, for the length of a standard maternity leave in the States.
FWIW, I thought Nikki looked mature -- early to mid-twenties -- and the implication is that she's jaded. Spike's concern here is Buffy and the possibility that she'll get herself killed before he's done with her. At this point Buffy's been slaying for, what, five years? I have to assume Nikki had been at it for a similar length of time. Long enough to lose her focus on survival, to want to go on to something else, even death.
The next question for me is: if Nikki had family ties after all, what pried her loose? Why was she tempted to leave the world if she had a young child? Was it just too much for her? Did she think the boy would be safer without her?
[> [>
Darla was even tougher than usual when massively pregnant -- KdS, 08:42:10 02/12/03 Wed
[> [> [>
Yes, but Connor was special -- Helen, 09:28:13 02/12/03 Wed
I think the baby was protecting her and himself. She even tried to abort him (I don't think we saw this but she did refer to it) and she couldn't. I don't think baby Wood had the same powers.
[> [> [> [>
Yes, but... -- yez, 10:08:05 02/12/03 Wed
while *something* was protecting Connor from harm, I don't think it necessarily applied to Darla -- it didn't stop her from killing herself, for example.
Also, while Connor's special powers might've helped him if say, someone had run Darla through or had dropped him on his head after he was born, and while it is possible that whatever was protecting Connor was also helping Darla, that and Darla's not being overly-weakened by her pregnancy aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. In other words, Darla might not have been weakened AND she may also have had extra protection. We don't know -- one doesn't disprove the other.
yez
respect the doubles -- BBCbaby (up to 6.13 only), 02:00:25 02/12/03 Wed
I was just looking at the 'favourite fight scene' posts and thinking about stunt doubles. In any action show a lot of the acting is physical rather than facial/verbal. Unless the actors are training martial artists/acrobats like Jackie Chan or Buster Keaton, however, a lot of that physical action will be carried by stuntpeople whose names and identities we hardly (or don't, in my case) know. While I don't mind the story being carried by different people (at the other extreme, I remember seeing a puppet Don Giovanni where the Don was played by about 5 puppets ranging from 2 foot to 6 inches high, and the story was perfectly well carried) it seems odd that one set of people should be practically identified with the characters, and the other lot should be so shadowy. I say this because of the value of some of the physical performances in terms of character and plotline, and, after reading the posts, the amount of character delineation and development that actually happens in the fights .. it strikes me that some of the moments I most treasure are possibly not personified by the actors that I think they are. Any thoughts?
[>
Re: respect the doubles -- Helen, 02:35:00 02/12/03 Wed
I understand the point you're raising, but for me when I'm watching BtVS I completely suspend my disbelief about the fights. I know Sarah Michelle Gellar cannot possibly be doing all those stunts herself (although I understand she is pretty spry). But I'm not watching Sarah Michells Gellar. I'm watching Buffy, a girl with preternatural strength and stamina, who can do those things.
What I'm basically saying is that I don't identify SMG with the character Buffy. SMG is an actress, a celebrity. Buffy (who I am aware is not real) is the Slayer.
[> [>
Re: respect the doubles -- BBCbaby, 05:50:30 02/12/03 Wed
sure, absolutely, and I mostly enjoy the show on a level which doesn't worry about whether the actors are flesh, blood or muppets. I'm not saying that there's any ultra importance to who's doing the stunts. But I like knowing if they're flesh blood or muppets, as part of knowing how the whole crate gets in the air. And the other thing about it is that the actors associated with the characters *do* get loads of hero worship (maybe more than they should, since they're just the tip of the creative iceberg, the visible bit (sorry, getting metaphor mix syndrome again). It seems odd to me that when the action is an important part of the acting (maybe 15% of important acting bits in some shows?), the people doing it don't seem to get 15% of the credit. I partly say this because of really liking eg Buster Keaton, (and eg Jet Li) where how he moves is pretty much all the acting (and in that instance of course he gets the credit for that) and then thinking while watching buffy, hey I really like that fight, but who should I be giving respect to for achieving that? I know its the fight designers and editors as well than the stuntpeople, like it's the scriptwriters and directors with the verbal actors. It's not just Buffy, so why do I think of it more here? I think maybe it's partly because Buffy is an unusual combination of a character/interaction type drama and an action show. The action isn't the rationale of the show, as say in Dark Angel or Martial Law, but nor is it a sort of trivial decoration, peripheral to the plot (well, not always, anyway). ???
Another layer of comedy (Spoilers for First Date) -- Cactus Watcher, 07:25:54 02/12/03 Wed
I don't make a secret of the fact that Jane Espenson isn't my favorite Buffy writer. She does have a definite flair for writing dialogue, but she has all kinds of problems coming up with consistent stories. This episode was far from the worst thing she ever wrote. It's not bad, period. But, a lot of the best part of the episode was a flood of story arc information that Joss is ultimately responsible for.
Sometimes I find Espenson's biases and writing flaws infuriating, but this time they just add another layer of comedy.
Imagine a small town in California, zoned and constructed for nearly a century under the guidance of an evil mayor. How else can you explain the miles and miles of commercial district back alleys? How else can you explain alleys in Sunnydale Buffy doesn't know like the back of her hand? Didn't you just love the fancy restaurant that fronts on the alley? A vampire infested alley? You just wish that when they entered the restaurant Buffy or Wood would have asked the hostess, "How's business?"
How fast can Spike run any way? Buffy can walk to school from home. The restaurant was over ten minutes away from the high school by car. Xander somehow had time to send an SOS to Willow before he got tied up. Then we see the discussion about what to do at the Summer's house. Then Spike had to figure out where Wood might have taken Buffy. Poor Xander!
For the doctors in the audience: It looked like that knife went in pretty deep. Figuring they dropped by the emergency room, would the hospital really patch him up and send him home the same night? Does Xander, too, have Slayer self-healing powers?
Xander is back to being the butt-monkey? Has the poor guy ever had a date with a girl who wasn't a demon or who didn't, like Cordy, later turn into one? Don't Buffy or Willow have any human friends they might set him up with?
Like Giles one has to wonder if we really have time for all this nonsense. But, unlike Giles I have to say, I'm glad we do.
[>
Funny in another way... (Spoilers for First Date) -- Darby, 07:50:23 02/12/03 Wed
Xander's gut-wound is a potentially life-threatening type, if any of the digestive organs are pierced. That sword did go in a ways, but it might be Xander's dumb luck that got him through. Seems they'd have at least done some exploratory surgery (I don't know if you can 'scope such a wound) to make sure he wasn't going to die of peritonitis.
Anywhere but the always-busy night shift at Sunnydale Memorial, they'd have kept him at least overnight. Maybe with all the time he's missed from work, his insurance has lapsed.
[> [>
Exactly, what I was thinking. -- CW, 08:03:49 02/12/03 Wed
How did Giles really...(Spoilers for BtVS season 7 and 6) -- manjet, 08:46:57 02/12/03 Wed
How did Giles really survive the bringers onslaught?
His story to the SIT's in FD is an obvious fabrication,
Consider that Robeson, upon awakening saw no Giles and was scared enough of track him down in SunnyD. Consider also that he fear would have been greatly assuaged at the sight of the bringer decapitated corpse in his armchair.
My theory is, Giles escaped magically. He still has some of the mojo he was imbued with in season 6, plus it is possible he got more this year, and he lied to the girls and to buffy because he knows that the First could be listening anytime, could even be one of them. In the end, his "old school" juju will come up big time.
[>
Re: How did Giles really...(Spoilers for BtVS season 7 and 6, and I rewrite the story to my liking) -- pr10n, 09:07:13 02/12/03 Wed
Yeah! Yeah for manjet, and refusing to believe the too convenient story point!
Why did Giles not touch things for several episodes?
1. Because he's the First (which would make him dead -- as dead as Buffy.) He got slapped by the axe, died, was rescued and revived, and voila! Two Giles, or three, if you count...
2. He was for a time uncorporeal, a projection from England, to watch over the SITs until he could finally arrive "from Shanghai" in full on Giles-ness.
Tackle-able, if not lickable (except by Her Demonic Majesty Honorificus and others who have licking dibs).
I'm with manjet, we haven't heard the end of the Amazing Vanishing Giles.
[> [>
As ambiguously as I'd like to agree... -- SingedCat, 09:40:20 02/12/03 Wed
...I am afraid the tiny (and mostly overlookable) seams in the writing this season tell me that this episode saw the complete, if imperfect, dénouement of the writers' little prank on the fans. Not a little fishy, I will grant you, but that's just the red herring...;D
[>
But Consider This. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:36:29 02/12/03 Wed
After killing the Bringer that we saw in the flashback, Giles disposed of the other one, and then called the paramedics for Robson. However, he had to dispose of the two Bringer bodies before they got there, so he was out of the house when they wheeled Robson away. When Robson regained consciousness again (possibly days, even weeks later) he's told that no one else was found in the apartment. He could read this as good (no body of Giles), but also as bad (no live Giles). Given what he saw just before blacking out, he's more likely to lean towards the bad. He wouldn't be able to contact Giles because by then he'd be busy saving the proto-Slayers from the Bringers.
[>
I think I agree - Giles story is a fib... -- WickedBuffy, 18:54:58 02/12/03 Wed
In the flashback of Giles saving himself, he instinctively and quickly brings his arm up to catch the fully swung ax in mid-flight.
I've never been real impressed with Giles strength in the first place, and it didn't even knock him over as he caught the ax, not a bit off-balance. Not a teeter or a flinch. Squeaky shoes don't account for that part.
The movement Giles described WAS, though, very similar to moves that Buffy's made - catching knives right before they hit her face, suddenly swinging her arm back to stake a vampire sneaking up from behind.
It looked very Slayerish and not at all Gilesish. Unless Giles soaked up some kind of magic or some concentrated power from all those Watchers who blew up!
Unhappy Anniversary (spoilers for "First Date") -- cjl, 08:57:50 02/12/03 Wed
Unhappy Anniversary
It's one year since we split
I walk and talk and get around
Lie down, stand up, and sit
I eat and drink and smoke and sing and
Live a little bit
Unhappy Anniversary
It's one year since we split
Unhappy Anniversary
It's ten years since we met
There is no need to remind me
No way I could forget
We fell in love, and then fell out
Both times there was no net
Unhappy Anniversary
It's ten years since we met
Unhappy Anniversary
I cannot count the days
And nights that I have thought of you
Since we went separate ways
I tell my mind to forget you
But my heart disobeys
Unhappy Anniversary
I cannot count the days
"Unhappy Anniversary"
Words and music: Loudon Wainwright III
_______________________________________________________
Good old Loudon. Always cuts to the heart of the matter.
"First Date" was the Valentine's Day episode, so our favorite Scoobs were mostly preoccupied with affairs of the heart. But if you look closer, the main theme of the episode was forcibly vocalized by Giles: stop sticking your thick heads up your arses and look around you. We're in trouble here. Remember what's happened in the past and get ready for what's to come.
All through the episode, we received portents of a past best forgotten, nevertheless coming back to inform the present. There's Robin Wood, the son of a Slayer, who's visited by the ghost of his mother; we have Buffy haunted by her feelings for Spike, and perhaps, by extension, her unresolved feelings for Angel; and we see Andrew finally(!) confronting the disgusting reality of his gruesome murder of Jonathan. (The last one, I'll admit, completely surprised me. I thought the little weasel was going to stay a mushroom for the rest of the series.)
But most affecting of all, buried in the chaos of his disastrous blind date with Lyssa, is Xander and Anya's mutual pain as (what would have been) their first anniversary approaches. I don't know why this touched me so much, since the scenes between Nic Brendon and Ashanti weren't that much to write home about. (Maybe it's because I can relate to their situation.) But I was touched, as both Xander and Anya seem to realize that their lives stopped after the wedding--and they may need to revisit that day one last time before they're able to move on.
More tidbits:
-- Okay, exactly who is the First Evil trying to kill in the Summers house and who's it trying to keep alive? In "Showtime," it advised the Turok-Han to kill everybody except "her." Now, it advises Andrew to shoot the SITs, but keep Buffy, Dawn, Willow AND Anya alive. Why? Did it just watch "Selfless" and decide all four of them are just too cool to kill?
-- Besides his thematic importance in the episode, we get another hint that Giles ain't quite right, or at least that he's not seeing things clearly. Every time we absorbed a scene of Giles at his Watcherly best, it was followed by a scene taking him down a peg or two. His altercation with Spike, the language block with Chao-Ahn and those diagrams(!) all tell us he's trying to deal with something he can't wrap his mind around, and it's pissing him off. (Gotta admit, though, I like pissed off Giles. Better than no-touchy Giles, or No Giles at All.)
-- Instinct. Is it good, or isn't it? Buffy made her decision to remove the chip because her instincts told her Spike deserved the chance to prove himself. Good idea or horror in the making? Xander flew by the seat of pants, and got a shiv in the side for his trouble. Definite badness. Giles says he relied on instinct to stop the bringer, but he was lying through his teeth. On the other hand, Buffy gave a very compelling rationale for de-chipping Spike: you don't prevent Evil by doing Evil. Is this something Giles--who killed Ben to save the world--is willing to hear?
-- Great seeing Danny Strong again. He gave The First an air of exasperation when dealing with Andrew that was almost sympathetic.
-- On the drive to Sunnydale High, please tell me Wood DIDN'T see Spike in his rear view mirror. (I'm just looking for plausible deniability here...)
[>
Question for ya, cjl (Spoilers to 7.14) -- Sophist, 09:31:11 02/12/03 Wed
You've been arguing for awhile that Buffy has been too much SlayerBuffy and not enough CompassionBuffy. Last night clearly showed us CompassionBuffy, but HardAssGiles. You seem to approve this aspect of Giles:
the main theme of the episode was forcibly vocalized by Giles: stop sticking your thick heads up your arses and look around you.
Personally, I thought this was further evidence that something is not right with Giles. Do you agree? Which approach do you prefer?
[> [>
If you look down my list of "tidbit" comments, I think it's clear... -- cjl, 09:36:30 02/12/03 Wed
I don't think Giles is quite right. I found "pissed off" Giles amusing (funny ASH is better than none), but the way Jane's script kept undercutting him at every turn indicates he's not seeing things clearly. I don't think Giles' HardAss attitude is going to work any better than Buffy's.
[> [> [>
Good. I agree. -- Sophist, 10:41:32 02/12/03 Wed
[> [> [>
Then perhaps I wasn't the only one . . . -- d'Herblay, 15:14:21 02/12/03 Wed
. . . who, after Giles finished his big "This is serious! There will be no 'shenanigans'!" speech at the end of the episode and turned around to walk out of the room, expected him to trip over an ottoman and take a gigantic pratfall, preferably landing face-down in a mysteriously-appearing cream pie.
[> [> [> [>
"Remember the..." (spoiler 7.14)... -- Shiraz, 09:38:37 02/13/03 Thu
I thought the impact of his "get serious" speech was more than a little undercut by his use of those "flashcards". For me its kind of hard to take seriously a grown man who attempts to communicate the gravity of a situation through a series of crayon-drawn stick figures.
Also, wasn't Giles shown as a half-way decent artist during one early season 4 episode?
-Shiraz
[> [> [>
I agree with you about Giles... (spoilers, 7.14) -- Peggin, 09:17:29 02/13/03 Thu
I posted about this elsewhere (in the thread about him pretending he could talk to the Chinese Slayer), but I was really annoyed with Giles's attitude. "Time to get serious, stop having fun"? I love Giles, but part of me wanted to slap him and tell him to go back to England. When the hell were they not serious? Gathering Potentials? Check. Training? Check. Research? Check. (They may not have much information on The First, but it's not for lack of effort.) The whole idea that they should just sit around and be serious and somber is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Hell, if the end is coming, now more than ever is the time to do the things that make life worth living.
I also hated Giles's attitude on Buffy removing the chip. I have no problem with Buffy (or anyone else) killing creatures that are evil and dangerous, but to take a sentient creature and conduct experiments on him is, IMO, morally wrong. I agree with Buffy 100% that you don't fight evil by doing evil. If, as Buffy believes, Spike is a good man now, then Giles's argument that Buffy shouldn't have had the chip removed is inexcusable. But even if Buffy turns out to be wrong about Spike, Giles is *still* wrong about the chip.
Spike deserves the right to free will -- the right to live or die by his own actions. It's about having the right to be punished for your crimes. (This might sound a little strange, but it was a big issue in the early days of the women's movement. There were a lot of crimes for which a married woman couldn't be arrested or put in jail because she was a non-person and most of her actions were considered her husband's responsibility, and one of the things women were fighting for was the *right* to be punished for their own actions.) Even if Spike goes evil again, the chip had to come out. Spike wasn't the only one hindered by the chip. It effectively put a leash on Buffy, too. Her own morality wouldn't let her kill someone who was handicapped in that manner. When Spike was chipped, Buffy couldn't bring herself to stake him, even when he did horrible things like teaming up with Adam, kidnapping a doctor to remove the chip and trying to kill Buffy, or chaining Buffy up and threatening to feed her to Dru. The chip turned Spike into a non-entity, someone who couldn't be punished for his own actions. If Giles's fears come true, and Spike turns out to still be evil and dangerous, he should have the right to actually *be* evil and dangerous. Then he should have the right to be punished for his actions just like any other vampire.
[> [>
Re: Question for ya, cjl (Spoilers to 7.14) -- maddog, 11:27:28 02/12/03 Wed
I think we forget that he's the most experienced person there. Buffy may slay more but he's got the background in vampire lore and the demon society. I don't think he's acting strangely at all. He feels like he's the only one thinking clearly. Giles saw something he didn't like...he saw a group of people totally unfocused in a time where focus is the key. And he reacted accordingly.
[> [> [>
OK, he's not The First. But is Giles "all there"? -- cjl, 12:07:36 02/12/03 Wed
"First Date" makes it very clear that Giles is not at the top of his game. And it bothers him. A lot.
"I think we forget that he's the most experienced person there. Buffy may slay more but he's got the background in vampire lore and the demon society. I don't think he's acting strangely at all. He feels like he's the only one thinking clearly. Giles saw something he didn't like...he saw a group of people totally unfocused in a time where focus is the key. And he reacted accordingly."
And has his vast knowledge of demonology done him ANY good in this situation? I think Giles is living through the end of his "Restless" nightmare: he's finally facing off against the primal force he encountered "backstage"--and it has metaphorically scalped him, neutralized his brainpower. (His language problems with Chao-Ahn and the crudeness of his drawings symbolize the failures of intellect.) I don't know if Giles is acting as the voice of experience here or if he's snapping in frustration, angered that his extensive book learnin' hasn't dented the mystery behind The First.
Since his big squishy frontal lobe isn't doing the job, Giles is forced to rely on instinct, and his footing there isn't as sure as it used to be. Note that his dramatic escape from the bringer's axe is all about "training and instinct" when told to the SITs, but is actually more about good ears and squeaky shoes. He doesn't know if he can trust Buffy's judgment about Spike, an amazing development when you consider the confidence Giles had in Buffy's judgment for most of the series, and yes, he seems to have a couple of doubts about the rest of Scoobs' ability to focus on the matter at hand. Not a very good sign for our team.
So, getting back to your comment: Giles has always been able to rally the troops in the past by dragging some ancient tome off the shelves, pointing to the picture of a demon on page 327, and then telling the Scoobs to go and git 'im. At the moment, his usual method of getting the kids' attention isn't available to him, and he's more than a little pissed.
I think Giles has to learn that the Scoobies don't love him because he's Buffy's Watcher; they love him because he's the calm, fatherly influence none of them had in their own lives. Giles has always been reluctant to embrace that role, but if he's going to be of any use to the gang without his usual crutches, he may have to do it now.
[> [> [> [>
Re: OK, he's not The First. But is Giles "all there"? -- ponygirl, 12:37:56 02/12/03 Wed
Agreeage. Also I keep hoping Giles is going to get a moment to acknowledge just what a devastating loss the CoW must be for him. Love 'em, or hate 'em this is a group that defined his whole life -- he was either acting for them or rebelling against them, but it was all about the Council. Now they're gone. Besides that I think Buffy's big picture comment was accurate. She may not be getting it. Giles most likely knows just how many Potentials were killed, it may have been a huge and bloody number. He now is left with a handful of girls who represent the last of a line that stretches back into pre-history and a slayer who he's had to watch die twice. And they have no plan. None beyond let's train to fight a force that doesn't take corporeal form. No wonder he's full of doubt and despair.
Plus my sneaky self keeps wondering if there's more going on than he is saying. Not that Giles is evil, but that he may be withholding information. Giles has shown that he is willing to do questionable things to fight evil, and it may end up that his methods clash with Buffy's somewhere down the line.
[> [> [> [> [>
Yes, I want to see this explored! (spoilers) -- Scroll, 18:09:25 02/12/03 Wed
I really want to see Giles lay bare his feelings (in a stiff upper-lip, British way) about the death of the Council, all his old friends and colleagues, all those potential slayers. I also want to see a scene where Giles sits down with Wesley and tells him about the destruction of the Council. There are very few Watchers left; these two need to band their resources! I don't see why Giles hasn't even considered contacting Wesley yet! Does Wesley even know his parents might be dead?
Ah well, it'll be just my luck that Joss completely ignores this plot line. I suppose there's enough going on that he feels he can forget about the Council. :(
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Yes, I want to see this explored! (spoilers) -- anom, 21:45:37 02/12/03 Wed
"I don't see why Giles hasn't even considered contacting Wesley yet!"
Maybe he has. Considering the situation in LA, the AI voicemail may be full. And if Wes didn't get around to clearing off Lilah's multiple messages from his home phone, Giles may not be able to leave one there either.
And I have no idea how email access may be affected...for sure postal mail delivery is disrupted. "Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night"...but it doesn't say anything about dark of day!
[>
Re: Unhappy Anniversary (spoilers for "First Date") -- slain, 13:42:05 02/12/03 Wed
-- Instinct. Is it good, or isn't it? Buffy made her decision to remove the chip because her instincts told her Spike deserved the chance to prove himself. Good idea or horror in the making? Xander flew by the seat of pants, and got a shiv in the side for his trouble. Definite badness. Giles says he relied on instinct to stop the bringer, but he was lying through his teeth. On the other hand, Buffy gave a very compelling rationale for de-chipping Spike: you don't prevent Evil by doing Evil. Is this something Giles--who killed Ben to save the world--is willing to hear?
I think this is a good point. I loved the way Jane Espenson got past the decision - Buffy has just done it, hasn't paused to consider all the sociopolitical ramifications but rather has done what she feels is right, whereas Giles always tries to do the sensible thing. As he says in 'The Gift', Buffy is a hero; part of being a hero seems to be that Buffy's impulsive heroic decisions usually seem to work out; maybe the only exception to this is getting close to Angel.
The same could be said of Buffy throughout the episode - Giles wants them all to stop fooling around and, metaphorically speaking, get their homework done. But usually, it's Giles who's proved wrong - Buffy might well be right to drop some of her facade, to go out on dates and lighten the mood. Xander might have a bit of a stomach wound (which Willow can heal), but they've eliminated one of the First's agents and Buffy has gained an ally in Wood.
If they'd sat at home playing Scrabble with Giles (only words found in Gray's Demonolexis allowed) then there'd presumably be a new Ubee roaming about, and Wood might well have been killed by all those vampires. The Scoobies don't necessarily do well out of events - they put themselves in the thick of things, and expose themselves to unnecessary risk. My impression is that Giles is compensating for the loss of the Watchers, but returning to the strict training that he's begun to abandon since 'Helpless'.
[>
Re: Unhappy Anniversary (spoilers for "First Date") -- HonorH, 16:54:41 02/12/03 Wed
-- Okay, exactly who is the First Evil trying to kill in the Summers house and who's it trying to keep alive? In "Showtime," it advised the Turok-Han to kill everybody except "her." Now, it advises Andrew to shoot the SITs, but keep Buffy, Dawn, Willow AND Anya alive. Why? Did it just watch "Selfless" and decide all four of them are just too cool to kill?
I think the answer to this lies in Andrew himself: the First thought it would be easier to have him kill just the Potentials rather than slaughter the entire house. Note how it kept dehumanizing the Potentials. It was a, "You just have to kill these piddling little things, not any of your friends," type of speech.
-- On the drive to Sunnydale High, please tell me Wood DIDN'T see Spike in his rear view mirror. (I'm just looking for plausible deniability here...)
Wood's entire attitude changed after he looked in his rearview mirror, so I think he realized Spike wasn't reflecting. They haven't made that kind of gaffe in a long, long time, so I'm pretty sure it was deliberate. Spike going into vamp-face during the fight just confirmed it, and confirmed to Wood that Buffy knew. That plausible enough for ya?
Current board | More February 2003