January 2003 posts
All
We Want is Life Beyond - Thoughts on *Showtime* -- OnM, 20:17:36
01/13/03 Mon
*******
We don't need another hero
We don't need to know the way home
............ Tina Turner
*******
Right at the moment, we are exactly half-way through the current
season, and in comparison to where we were lastyear at this time,
there is a world of difference in our Buffy. Episode 6.10 was
the famous (or infamous, depending onviewer POV) Wrecked,
where Willow nearly gets Dawn killed, and Spike and Buffy finally
bring down thehouse, almost literally. Then, in the 11th outing,
we had Gone, where Buffy found refuge in invisibility.
Forpurposes of a 'then & now' analysis, I'm going to crib one
paragraph each from my 'reviews' of those shows andreproduce it
here. First, from Wrecked, where I used a mock-fanfic construction
to get into what I thought might be going on in Buffy's head:
Of course, he would argue that the soul has nothing to do with
anything. It only predisposes one to follow the path of good,
it doesn't assure it. By the same token, the lack of a soul doesn't
guarantee that one will inevitably follow the path of evil. Serial
killers can have souls, and I once referred to him as being a
serial killer who happens to be in prison, thanks to that chip
in his head. For that matter, why don't I just keep him literally
locked up? The police may use criminals as informants, that doesn't
necessarily mean they have to let them run free. I could force
him to stay in the crypt, and just beat the information out of
him when I needed it. Not that he might not like that. It's occurred
to me on more than one occasion that maybe I'm approaching this
relationship all wrong, that he wants me to control him,
be his superhuman mistress or some other sick thing. I still recall
that comment he made back after Dru left him the first time, that
he would 'find her and torture her until she loves him again'.
What was scary was that it made sense to me in some perverse fashion.
But why would he think I'm capable of such a role? I'm not really
a bitch, I just play one in order to serve my calling.
Now, from Gone:
Buffy, initially retreating into fear/isolation after her first
sexual encounter with Spike, has apparently realized that sitting
alone in her room surrounded by crosses and garlic bunches won't
hack it either. Even in a world without supernatural evils to
battle, there are still the mundane matters of human existance
to ferret out solutions to, such as dealing with the child welfare
authorities, gaining some form of regular employment, and assisting
her friends in dealing with their own particular difficulties.
In between then and now, Buffy appears to have either re-discovered
her calling, or else evolved a greater understanding of herself
and what she is capable of. Buffy has always been at her weakest
when she allows her fears and insecurities to inhibit her actions.
This weakness is the same one that we all deal with from time
to time, but the greater weight of duty that rests on Buffy's
shoulders strongly amplifies the effect. She seems to gain the
same degree of 'amplification' in the other direction when events
force her to narrow her focus and concentrate on 'saving the day'
to the exclusion of all else, even if it's only one single day
that needs to be saved and not the entire future universe of days.
Since the very first season, nothing makes Buffy more powerfully
dangerous to the forces of evil than attacks directed at her friends
and family, a cogent point which the supposedly all-knowing First
Evil manages to gloss over time and again.
Buffy's new dynamic with Spike is a perfect illustration of this--
last year at this time she hadn't a clue as to what kind of balance
she could strike in dealing with conflicting feelings, both her
own and the ones that Spike appeared to exhibit. After some initial
uncertainty at the beginning of this season, Buffy has apparently
decided that the proper course of action is to reward Spike for
his positive actions without simultaneously giving the impression
that she loves him in other than a comrade-like fashion. In fact,
Buffy is doing exactly the same thing with Spike that she is doing
with the proto-Slayers and even the Scoobies-- trying to lead
by example, and work to inspire mutual trust and loyalty. While
a kind of hierarchy is clearly being put into place that somewhat
resembles a military-style chain of command, there is a greater
(matriarchal?) emphasis on it being more family-like, flexible
and forgiving than the rigid structures typical of a patriarchal
military order. Is this new focus having greatly beneficial effects?
It certainly appears that way to me.
In Showtime, I was struck by two things above all else.
First, the time frame of the ep couldn't have been more than a
few days at most since the Uber-Vamp nearly killed Buffy, giving
her what very well might have been the worst physical beating
of her life. Despite this, her physical body seems to have recovered
completely, other than a few faint scars here and there-- astoundingly
remarkable even for her normally accelerated healing abilities.
Even more significantly, Buffy's personal interactions have returned
to the way she was in the current season's first few shows, where
she could effortlessly switch between HumanBuffy and SlayerBuffy
modes without missing a beat.
Second, the First Evil now seems to be a far less formidible foe
in terms of its physical manifestations, and far more formidible
in the way that it weakens its prey by psychological means. The
fact that Buffy has begun to understand this means that the initial
part of the battle has alreadly been won. The question (in my
mind) that remains is whether or not Buffy can come to accept
that the First Evil cannot be literally killed or destroyed, as
the Beljoxa Eye (and the FE itself) have declared. (If the Joyce
visitations are the real thing, and not the FE, Joyce has also
stated as such).
I accept this last contention to be true, by the way. The reason
that Willow's locator spell caused the FE to 'invade' her body
and mind was simply because it has a portion of itself within
her already, and always has. I believe that the writiers will
eventually reveal that the FE resides in all of the Scoobies,
and in fact in nearly all sentient creatures. Therefore, Buffy
needs to come up with a plan that somehow prevents the FE from
having such a pervasive influence on it's potential victims, rather
than trying to beat it out of literal existence. She needs teflon,
not artillery to keep the First at bay.
Look at the tools that the FE routinely employs to work its will.
As it stated when it was crucifying Spike to open the seal and
release Ubee from captivity, it's a sucker for the 'classics'--
fear, pain, loneliness, despair. In Showtime, it uses these
tools to not only continue to batter Spike psychologically, insisting
that his hopes that Buffy will come to save him are for naught,
but to plant the fears of certain death in the minds of the proto-Slayers
that are gathered at the Summer's house. Notably, it (temporarily)
succeeds in the latter case, and fails in the former case. Holding
on to the single thought that Buffy 'believes in him', Spike has
refused to switch his moral allegiance back over to the side of
evil, as the First seems to (desperately) need him to do. Failing
in this, the FE tries to break his will by convincing him that
his faith in Buffy is misplaced, that she will not save him. He
quietly repeats, "she will come for me" over and over,
like a mantra or a prayer. The FE is openly disturbed by this,
and even more disgusted when it ultimately turns out to be prophetic,
in one of the best closing moments of this season or any. (And
more on that later on).
There has been ongoing speculative discussion in the fan community
about whether or not Spike will turn to evil again before the
end of the season, possibly betraying Buffy or the other Scoobies.
At this point, I think that the answer would be emphatically no,
although of course this doesn't mean that Spike could not still
be tricked or manipulated into causing unintentional harm. At
the end of the 'Thunderdome' sequence in the fourth act, we get
to see the First Evil (in the momentary guise of ex-proto-Slayer
Eve) standing up in the upper reaches of the scaffolding, glaring
angrily down at the triumphant Buffy and her now reinvigorated
and reassured 'army'. That ravaging anger isn't simply because
Buffy managed to dust the 'unkillable' Ubee, but for a far greater
triumph-- Buffy can now rescue Spike, and the First knows it can't
do a damn thing about it. Spike's fervent prayer has been answered,
and nothing convinces the faithful like undeniable evidence that
the Almighty has come through after all. This makes Spike exponentially
more dangerous than he was before. It's bad enough that an
evil vampire falls in love with his mortal nemesis. It's worse
yet when his love grows to the point where he seeks out a soul
to 'make himself worthy' to his love. It's The End of The Evil
World As We Know It when 'mere' eros transends into agape. The
new Joan of Arc is assembling a band of warrior disciples, who
watch her deeds in awe and decide that if the world is
going to end, they're going to be at her side. (Just like Xander
and Evil!Willow). This is the heaviest of the possible heavy stuff,
and if the FE is capable of fear, this is a clear realization
of that fear.
Speaking of fears, Giles and Anya's journey to the dimension of
the Beljoxa Eye adds a few new, and highly debatable
ones to the ongathering mystery. If we believe the statements
that the Eye has made, then the FE has been able to take its current
course of action because there has been 'a disruption in the line
of the Chosen One', who of course we immediately assume to be
Buffy. Giles presumes that the 'disruption' is due not to Buffy's
previous death (or deaths?), but because she is still living after
it (them). Anya latches onto this line of reasoning, and becomes
even more despondent as she points out to Giles that Buffy is
alive because she, Willow, Xander and Tara brought Buffy back
to life. "Things would have been better if Buffy had just
stayed dead", she tells him, and walks away mournfully into
the night.
As we all know, there's always a talisman, and there's also always
a list. Here's one of mine on some of the possibilties for what
the 'disruption' might be that the FE 'took advantage of', in
the words of Beljoxa's Eye:
1. Buffy's first resurrection, way back in season 1. This lead
to the calling of another Slayer, even though Buffy was living
again. Everything from that point forward has made things progressively
worse for the cause of Evil.
2. Buffy's second resurrection 4 months after her death in The
Gift. The 'price' for that one appeared to be Tara's death,
but maybe that was only the sales tax.
3. Spike willfully getting his soul back. This just doesn't happen,
but then Buffy seems to make the impossible possible at regular
intervals.
4. Buffy saving Dawn's life. Perhaps in cosmic terms, the Key
was meant to stay the way it was, or at least be returned to its
original state. Dawn should have 'died' in the dimensional portal,
not Buffy.
5. The mere existence of the Scooby Gang. The Slayer is supposed
to work alone, other than of course with her Watcher. The First
Slayer insisted that this was Buffy's proper destiny, but Buffy
thought otherwise.
6. The 'Chosen One' in question isn't Buffy-- it's Faith. The
'disruption' may have been Faith's fall from grace, and subsequent
seeking of redemption, leading to her voluntary imprisonment.
When you think about it (and several other posters have already
brought this subject up), Faith could be considered to be the
current Slayer, not Buffy. The situation for Faith, from a prophecy
standpoint, could be much like Angel's-- he is expected to play
a role in the coming apocalypse (the 'big one', I guess), but
it's unknown on which side he would serve. Perhaps the First Evil
is sparing Buffy because they forsee doing so as a way to bring
Faith back into action, and thus restore whatever the original
'path' for her was supposed to be-- I'm guessing it was the evil
path, not the redemption-seeking one. BTW, anyone like to bet
that the FE will reappear in the image of Mayor Wilkins when Faith
gets back into the game?
To date, I have been leaning strongly towards the idea that the
Giles we have been seeing recently is still the real thing, maybe
a bit shell-shocked at the turn of events with the Council getting
destroyed and his inability to offer any significiant help to
Buffy and the gang. Now, I am once again far less sure. If ?Giles?
is really some kind of puppet of the FE, the visit to Beljoxa's
Eye could be part of the setup to deceive the good guys. Anya
strongly resists Giles' desire to visit the Eye, but we are never
told the specifics of why. On the surface, it appears to be about
hating 'vortex dimensions', but there could be other reasons.
On a metanarrative level, there is the Eye's name itself. Other
boarders have already noted that 'joxa' could mean 'joke', and
I think also mentioned that 'bel' is Italian for 'pleasant' or
'fine'. I might be stretching here, but 'Bel' (with a capital
'B') is also a measurment unit for sound-- it's where the word
'decibel' is derived from. Is what the Eye says just a 'fine joke'
or a 'sound joke'? Could it be that the Eye always speaks the
literal truth, but that the 'truth' conveniently leaves
out a few important little details? Something like the politician
who states that "67.5 million people voted for me in the
last election" and conveniently fails to mention that
252.7 million people voted for the other guy. Interesting...
If ?Giles? and/or the Eye are in cahoots with the FE, then we
have to assume that Anya spreading the word that Buffy should
have remained dead has the potential to stir up serious trouble--
even Buffy herself might lose some of her new-found confidence
if she thinks that the FE could win simply if she remains alive.
I have little doubt that if Buffy seriously thought she could
'seriously hurt' the FE by virtue of her death, she'd martyr herself
in a heartbeat. This could even be another possibility as to the
meaning of the 'Buffy won't choose you' line that ?Joyce?
presented Dawn with. Buffy might become convinced that her death
would set everything right, and Dawn would be convinced that it
isn't true.
I very strongly suspect that regardless of the Eye's literal
implications, Buffy needs to stay alive. I think anything
that suggests otherwise is exactly what the FE is hoping
for. The FE knows that Buffy is too smart and morally strong to
fall for its traditional despair and pain inducing tricks, but
Buffy does have a martyr complex (for the best of reasons, but
a martyr complex nonetheless) that could be easily exploited.
***
OK, I'll shift gears here and ramble on a mite about the 'Thunderdome'
ref that permeates the fourth act of *Showtime*. Being a serious
fan of the Mad Max film trilogy, I couldn't help but chuckle that
I thought "Two men enter, one man leaves" at just about
the same exact instant that Andrew spoke the words onscreen. It
was an additional chuckle of a more philosophical sort when I
considered that Andrew, always stuck with the inability to see
beyond the barest surface of any situation, did not see the real
connections between the film and the videodrome that Buffy inhabits.
Note: In the event that you have never seen the film Mad
Max: Beyond Thunderdome or the first two films of the trilogy
(Mad Max and The Road Warrior), I will be making
several critical spoilers for it/them known during the next several
paragraphs. If you wish to avoid these, please scroll down to
the next '***' mark. BTW, I can recommend any of these films very
highly-- they are right up there on an creative, layered artistic
level with the ME Buffyverse. If you've never seen them, please
consider doing so.
( . . . Mad Max Trilogy Spoilers below . . . )
In the Mad Max universe, Max is a member of an Australian police
force in a time after a global nuclear apocalypse has devastated
the world's civilizations. Vicious gangs roam the roads of the
remaining cities and towns, terrorizing the populace, spreading
violent, dog-eat-dog anarchy in the traditional meaning of the
word. (Think of the demon biker gang in Bargaining, but
with cars). Max is honest, strong, courageous, a loving husband
and father, who does his job as best he can (and does it rather
well, in fact) despite what seem to be an endless series of pyrrhic
victories. At the end of the first film, one of the gangs kill
his wife and child for the sheer joy of it, and Max becomes a
'broken, burned out shell of a man', as the opening narration
to the second film aptly states the situation.
Several years ago, I was reading a story-- I believe it was in
Time magazine, but I'm not sure-- that was discussing the
role of religious images in contemporary arts and culture. In
answer to those people who were constantly bemoaning the 'complete
lack of spiritual thought' in popular entertainment, the author
wrote that there was just as much, if not more religious imagery
and metaphor as there had been previously, it's just that it wasn't
traditional imagery or metaphor. The author went on to
illustrate that, for example, there were still messianic figures
present everywhere, but because they may not be overtly Christian
or Judaic or Muslim or whathaveyou, they tend to be dismissed
or ignored. Like Campbell, this writer looked for the enduring
mythology underneath the surface, and saw it everywhere. One of
the author's observations floored me, because I-- 1) had never
thought of it before and-- 2) recognized immediately that he was
absolutely right. How could I have missed it?
Well, I missed it because for the most part I wasn't used to looking
at movies on more than a surface entertainment level. Now, I did
know that there was more going on than just your typical action-adventure-with
lots-of-car-chases when I saw The Road Warrior for the
first time, but it really didn't occur to me that Max wasn't just
a burned-out cop looking for some kind of redemption or meaning
to life, but was a kind of modern messiah.
If there are any doubts about this, they tend to be assuaged by
the time that you have watched all films. It's very clearly there
if you look for it. Whether the writer of Bring on the Night
deliberately referenced it or whether it is just a general synchronicity,
the scene where Buffy gives her "One thing more powerful
than Evil..." speech to the disheartened proto-Slayers is
perfectly analogous to the moment when Max, who has been so badly
battered by a horrific car crash (while trying to evade the anarchist
gangs) hobbles out into the embattled camp compound of the 'good
guys' and states, with ironic John Wayne-like bravado,
"If it's all the same to you... I'll drive that tanker."
Max is so beat up that he doesn't look like he could drive a wheelchair,
let alone a giant tanker truck, but the desperate people around
him sense something about him that makes them willingly acquiesce.
The decision makes no sense objectively, but yet somehow it makes
perfect sense. This is irrational behavior unless you feel in
your gut and your heart that Max has been sent by God, and carries
with his person the chance to achieve the impossible, which in
fact he does (with the help of his new 'followers').
Max is a reluctant messiah, just as Buffy is. He has faced death
(psychologically/metaphorically in Max's case) just like Buffy
and somehow has to come out the other side and reach a kind of
enlightenment. It is a harrowing journey, and does not conclude
until the third film, although a serious step forward does take
place in the second film.
In the third film, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, Max is traveling
through the desert wastelands when he is robbed of his pack animals
and wagon. He follows the thief to a place called 'Bartertown',
where a powerful woman named 'Auntie Entity' gives him the chance
to regain his stolen possessions if he will do her one favor--
kill a man. It turns out that Auntie is ruler in appearance only--
the real power behind the throne is a tiny dwarf-like man who
was apparently an engineer in 'the old world'. This man has protected
himself against the people who want to steal his knowledge for
their own purposes by allying himself with a powerful, seemingly
mutant creature that literally carries him on its shoulders. The
'creature' always wears a hood that covers his entire head, so
we cannot see his face.
Auntie wants this man-creature killed, so that the engineer will
lose his 'leverage' and so serve her needs as ruler without interference.
Max agrees to the deal, and the two are ushered into a metal latticework
dome-- the 'Thunderdome' of the title-- to duel to the death.
A huge crowd of people gather and climb all over the lattice of
the dome, eager to see a little state-sanctified carnage. (The
situation as depicted makes a number of satirically biting and
dead-on references to nasty game shows and 'professional wrestling'
events, likening them all to the overriding political implications
of Bartertown in specific, and capitalism in general).
The duel begins, and Max is getting beaten rather badly, but he
has a trick available-- he has discovered previously that the
'creature' experiences agonizing pain when he hears loud, high
pitched sounds, such as a whistle. Max starts blasting away on
a whistle he concealed on his person, and begins to win the fight.
In one near-final, brutal blow, he strikes the creature so hard
that he breaks the straps holding its helmet in place, and the
helmet goes flying, revealing the face of 'the beast'. The crowd
gasps-- apparently no one has ever seen the true visage of this
being. Max strides up, weapon in hand, about to swing it down
on the creature's head for the death blow, then stops short in
horror.
The 'creature' is not a creature at all-- the face is revealed
to be that of a severly retarded man, retardation likely caused
by exposure to radiation. Max understands immediately what the
truth is-- the engineer takes care of the 'monster' as much or
more than the monster takes care of the engineeer. There is no
actual malice in the 'beast'-- he doesn't have the intelligence
to even form the thought. He may be physically powerful and imposing,
but in reality he is no more than a very young child. Max is appalled
at what he has almost done, and drops his weapon, refusing to
kill what he sees as an innocent life.
This does not go over well with Auntie or the crowd. The rules
state that 'two men enter, one man leaves'. There are no exceptions--
there cannot be, according to Auntie, or the system will fall
apart. (One of the many delightful perversities of this film is
that, one a certain level, she is right-- the purpose of Thunderdome
is to solve disputes with a 'little war' rather than allow them
to slowly build into the great ones that nearly devastated the
planet. What is the alternative?) Of course, Max doesn't agree,
and from there on the story takes Max to what might be a solution,
or maybe just another serious dilemma to solve.
I think this little summary points out the similarities between
Showtime and Thunderdome, but as usual ME has put
a sideways spin on things. The scaffolding of the construction
site might mimic the steel lattice of the Thunderdome, and Buffy
has to engage in a fight to the death within it, but the comparison
breaks down in that Ubee is presented as being completely vicious
and evil, whereas Max's opponent is an 'innocent' who is defending
the person who takes care of him, and doesn't really understand
the violence that he inflicts or what it really means. Does this
mean that Buffy only thinks of the surface level of the nature
of 'Thunderdome', that controlled violence is a reliable way to
keep the smaller conflicts from becoming larger ones?
This might seem to be the case, but we know that Buffy understands
the difference between necessary violence and when it is more
appropriate to rely on other means to resolve conflicts. Buffy
refused to kill Glory because it also meant killing Ben, an 'innocent'.
(Giles, you will note, took up the Auntie Entity 'greater good'
position in that situation). Buffy gave her own life to close
the dimensional rift in The Gift rather than sacrifice
Dawn, even though it could be argued that Dawn wasn't 'really
human'. Buffy has spared Spike, and now even looks out for his
welfare, and the same with Anya.
I think the main comparative point deconstructs into the concept
that Buffy, like Max, seeks a better way, and so instinctively
works to find a path away from despair and towards hope. The Thunderdome
itself is just a structure, like the law-- it cannot cover every
possible contingency. Ultimately, it not power, it's how you wield
it. Is Max a 'hero'? Perhaps. Perhaps he just understands that
there isn't always a 'way home', when the home that you once knew
is gone forever. Max comes into his own power and passes that
power on to others when he becomes a force for change, for showing
many of the residents of Bartertown that there is an alternative--
that life 'beyond' is possible. Buffy has gathered her 'disciples'
in the same way, and I suspect she will teach them the same lesson.
( ... End Mad Max spoilers ... )
***
So much for 'Thunderdome' analogies and the primary diversions
of the review. Now on to various secondary diversions! ~~~ Some
fans have been wondering if BtVS S7 is going to turn out so as
to reveal that Buffy's visit to the 'Asylumverse' in last year's
Normal Again was actually the reality, that Buffy has been
delusional all along, that ME will pull some version or variant
of the last episode of St. Elsewhere. I don't think so,
myself, but I find that I am anticipating the shows of May to
a far greater extent than in any of the previous six seasons.
In any event, just like with my ?Giles? / is-he-or-isn't-he dilemma,
I'm also back to wondering whether or not my original conjecture
that we have been watching events take place in more than one
parallel Buffyverse is back to having possible merit once more.
After the first two or three shows, I was pretty sure this was
the case, then I tended to change my mind, now the telepathy thing
with Buffy is flipping me back.
Other possible explanations? Well, we already know that Willow
has telepathic abilities, presumably as a result of her magical
abilities. But, we've never seen Buffy initiate contact the way
she did in this episode. I really doubt it's a goof-up, it's just
too big a one to assume that. Did Buffy get Willow to magically
gift her with telepathy, as a possible way to converse with the
core Scoobies and not have the FE 'overhear'? The appearance of
the ability did appear right after the revelation that the
FE was masquerading as Eve. It'll be interesting to discover
whether or not the shooting script reveals an answer, or of course
we may get an explanation in a future ep.
~~~ It's kind of neat to see Dawn finding her place as the go-between
(age and experience-wise) among Buffy and the collection of proto-Slayers.
Now they get to be whiny and annoying and she gets to be
the one who is more confident and experienced. In all fairness
though, the SIT's have a right to be at least a little whiny--
this evil thing is all pretty new to them, Buffy just had the
living crap beat out of her, the one remaining Watcher seems lost
in some kind of ineffectual fog half the time, the witch is on
the twitchy side, the construction guy is always making with the
dark funnies, and who the hell is this Spike dude, anyway? I'm
guessing that in a few more weeks, if they get a little action
behind them, the whininess quotient will decline.
~~~ Has Andrew accepted Buffy as his new leader, or will he continue
to do the Dr. Zachary Smith bit for the rest of the season? Even
if he does cleave to the straight and narrow, he did kill Jonathan,
and Buffy and all of the Scoobies know that, and he is still a
human. Buffy wanted Faith to go to jail, which of course she eventually
did. Will Andrew eventually end up there also?
~~~ ME is still playing it cool on the possible Kennedy-Willow
shippage. Regardless of where they go with that, I am liking Kennedy
more and more each ep, and so am fervently hoping that this doesn't
mean she'll turn out to do a Nina on 24 kinda thing-- that
would be a mega-bummer. I like her confidence, the way she studies
Buffy (for real, not the suck-uppage kinda studying Annabelle
affected to anyone with authority), the fact that she worries
that she's 'too old' to become the new Slayer. Perhaps Buffy might
point out that a good age to become a Slayer is like just after
never? If she's called though, I think she could handle it.
~~~ One of the other things that had popped into my head when
I first heard what the title of the ep was going to be was that
"It's showtime!" was the phrase that Joe Gideon
(the Roy Scheider character) repeated every morning in Bob Fosse's
All That Jazz. At the end of that movie, something happened
to him that might also have some bearing on Buffy and season 7.
Or it might not. Buffy surely fits the definition of potential
workaholic, though. Hummm...
~~~ Sometime, perhaps in the long pause after the season ends
this summer, I think I might feel the urge to go back over each
episode of the past year and collect all the numerous movie references
for a bit of analysis. Maybe I'll do a special Classic Movie
of the Week or maybe I'll still be in awe/shock/surprise/
(and hopefully not) disappointment at whatever transpires in episode
7.22, and I'll need to talk about that first. Knowing me, it'll
likely be both, but if I recall correctly, there hasn't been a
single episode presented so far this season that hasn't had at
least one movie reference dropped into it somewhere.
~~~ As I mentioned earlier on, I really really liked the way the
end of the episode played out. Like many of the best BtVS ep enders,
there was very little speech, just well chosen camera angles,
good lighting, and first rate work by the actors. The scene nicely
linked to the one from season 5 where Spike has been tortured
by Glory, and it attempting to recover in his crypt when what
appears to be the Buffybot comes in, and instead turns out to
be Buffy herself. Here, of course, he initially assumes that the
FE has returned to torment him some more, but then discovers that
once again Buffy has come through. There is also additional mirroring
in that I could see this scene as a thematic bookend to the one
in Fool for Love where he sits soundlessly next to Buffy
on the back porch of the Summers' house, trying to confort the
devastated Buffy with his simple presence.
I especially enjoyed the subtle little detail that when Buffy
cuts down the first restraint and his arm and hand fall onto her
shoulder, she doesn't move, not even slightly. It's quite a feat
to convey the impression of 'solidity' both in the concrete and
the abstract at the same time, all without words. Nice job, guys.
~~~ I liked Anya's hair.
*******
Out of the ruins
Out from the wreckage
Can't make the same mistake this time
We are the children
The last generation
We are the ones they left behind
And I wonder when we are ever gonna change
Living under the fear, till nothing else remains
Looking for something
We can rely on
There's gotta be something better out there
Love and compassion
Their day is coming
All else are castles built in the air
And I wonder when we are ever gonna change
Living under the fear till nothing else remains
So what do we do with our lives
We leave only a mark
Will our story shine like a light
Or end in the dark
Give it all or nothing
We don't need another hero
We don't need to know the way home
All we want is life beyond
Thunderdome
*******
Thus endeth the review.
............ OnM
*******
[> ***Spoilers*** for BtVS
S7.11 and before, the *Mad Max* film trilogy, and S1 *24*
-- OnM, 20:31:29 01/13/03 Mon
[> [> For all those interested
in More Mad Max-- link inside to CMotW 01.25.2002 -- OnM,
08:52:20 01/15/03 Wed
Go here:
http://www.atpobtvs.com/existentialscoobies/archives/jan02_p13.html#12
for my CMotW review of the original Mad Max film (No. 1 in the
trilogy. Also where I put 'February' in the thread title instead
of January-- sheesh!
***
Sidebar for Sol, if you happen to read this-- Why when I search
in the archives for my CMotW's and such, does it never find any
results? What am I doing wrong?
I put in either 'Classic Movie of the Week' or even just the word
'Classic' and it returns zero results.
Just wondering.
[> Re: All We Want is Life
Beyond - Thoughts on *Showtime* -- Jay, 22:15:18 01/13/03
Mon
As always, your review is well worth waiting for.
I thought I might suggest another possibility to your list of
disruptions. I was thinking about Evil!Willow taking the bullet
out of Buffy in surgery. They made it seem that she was moments
away from death, only to be rescued by darkest magics. It just
occurred to me as another possibility.
I was wondering if you would considered Spike de-programmed now
or could that song still be his trigger? Because, he might still
steal a submarine if it is.
Finally, and I'm really digging here, I was thinking about your
movie comparisons and Andrew's remarks about Dalton as Bond. I
forget exactly what he said, and I'm too tired to dig it up right
now, but it was something about how Dalton came in at the end
of an old regime, the Broccoli's were just mailing it in or something
like that, and Dalton made Bond rogue. Now, I think I know who
the Broccoli's are, but who is Dalton?
[> [> Timothy Dalton,
Bond #4 (pre-Brosnan) -- HonorH, 22:59:06 01/13/03 Mon
[> [> [> That's not
what I was going for -- Jay, 17:49:08 01/14/03 Tue
I was actually going for some clues about the end of Buffy, or
this version of it. First the scene I was referring to (transcribed
by me):
DAWN
Buffy said if you talked enough,
I'm allowed to kill you.
ANDREW
Not even.
DAWN
Even.
ANDREW
Licence to kill, huh?
Pretty cool.
You know, Timothy Dalton never got his props
'cause he came in at the end of an old regime.
But, he had it going on.
He went rogue with the Broccolis,
they were just treading water, stylistically.
DAWN
I-is there a language that you're speaking?
What I'm shooting for here, and I'll admit it's a long shot at
best, is that I believe the end of the old regime is the end of
Buffy. The Broccolis are Sarah, Alyson, Emma, and maybe a producer
or two. What I'm having trouble with is who is suppose to be Dalton.
Is it the character of Andrew himself? Or might it be whoever
the rumored spinoff might be centered on, or a character that
we haven't even met yet?
When I first watched this episode last week, I was wondering if
there was any point at all to this scene, and then I saw it wasn't
in the shooting script. Which makes me think that Joss added it
himself. And this would indicated that it does have some kind
of "other" meaning.
[> [> [> [> Ah...well
in addition to my post below (Well Known Future Casting Spoiler)
-- shadowkat, 19:53:08 01/14/03 Tue
Well...if you already know this - you probably wouldn't be asking
the question.
I think this is what they were talking about. You'd have to be
a big Bond geek to get it or spend too much time in low-rent video
and comic book stores. The whole Bond thing is inside joke amongst
the writers and popped up three times last year with Warren, Jonathan
and Andrew.
The joke is more about the changing of the lead - Buffy would
be Connery, who never really went away and even came back during
Moore's turn in the non-Broccoli produced Never say Never Again.
Kendra is probably Moore. Faith - Dalton - who went rogue and
took the License to Kill literally.
Dalton was in the movie with the same name: License to Kill hence
the reference.
Or it could be Kristy Swanson - Connery, Sarah - Moore,
Kendra - the guy in Her Majesty's Secret Service (one note wonder)
and Faith is Dalton.
"Licence to kill, huh?
Pretty cool.
You know, Timothy Dalton never got his props
'cause he came in at the end of an old regime.
But, he had it going on.
He went rogue with the Broccolis,
they were just treading water, stylistically."
Faith came in but never got her props because she came in at the
end of high school. She had it on. But went Rogue with the Scoobies,
they were just treading water being ready to graduate and all.
It's also may be read to mean this season. But Dalton is definitely
Faith. The question remains who is Bronsan??
Does that help?
SK (who clearly knows way too much about James Bond films)
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Ah...well in addition to my post below (Well Known Future
Casting Spoiler) -- Jay, 21:06:38 01/14/03 Tue
I think that initially, that the writers were poking fun back
and forth with all the Bond references last year. But this last
one had some real meaning behind it. Last year it was just one
big "ha ha" joke that we all were in on. This one, they
tried to sneak it past us.
I concede that Faith may be Dalton, but I definitely do not recognize
that she is for a fact. I reserve the right to consider (gasp)
Dawn a possibility on top of all other ones that I have thrown
out there. At least for me, the question that remains is who is
Dalton? Bronsan is obviously Wesley (Earshot).
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Bronsan is Wesely??? Not following your logic here.
-- shadowkat, 06:19:37 01/15/03 Wed
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> I believe Jay is referring to Xander's comments
-- Rahael, 07:08:16 01/15/03 Wed
with regard to Wesley having his Pierce Brosnany eyes all over
his Cordy.
Personally, I think Alexis Denisof is far more handsome than PB.
[> [> Bond, pop culture,
and other ME references - the vengeance theme? (Spoilers Life
Serial and 7.11) -- shadowkat, 19:34:44 01/14/03 Tue
Okay bear with me - very stream of consciousness post.
First Bond stuff:
Timothy Dalton made Bond rogue - probably refers to Dalton's more
theatrical approach to the role and series take on it since Roger
Moore. The films Dalton was in are Living Daylights and License
To Kill. There is an ongoing debate amongst Bond film addicts
on which actor played the
best Bond. Warren believes it was Connery (as do most high level
geeks - and it's the popular view of Ian Fleming buffs), Jonathan
believed it was Moore. But Andrew? Dalton which made Warren want
to pummel him. (This whole riff is done in Life Serial while Spike
and Buffy are in the bar and the geeks are in the fan outside
watching them.)
I personally see this as an on-going inside joke amongst the writing
staff - clearly one of the writers loves Dalton (my bet is on
Petrie) while the others are fighting on Moore and Connery. Go
into a small video store some time - bring it up and see how long
the debate lasts - it can be quite amusing. Oh and the people
who love Connery? Think Bronsan is the next best.
Broccli's are the producers of Bond and have held the rights to
Flemings books since the 60s I believe.
Andrew believes Dalton did a great job and gave us a darker, more
serious Bond but the Broccoli's failed him in the scriptwriting
so he never had a chance. Another inside joke on the part of the
ME writers. If you watch the shows closely - the writers continuously
make fun of themselves, their geek obsessions, their fanbase (which
shares these obsessions) and their writing. They also love to
make fun of pop culture. Hence all the references.
You could make a drinking game out of the number of times Andrew
or some other specific character references a pop culture item
- be it a comic book, movie, or tv show.
Not all the characters mind you. They're very careful to limit
it to the comic relief characters or geeky ones.
Notice Buffy and Spike rarely reference pop culture any more.
Yet occassionally you'll get a reference. Same thing on Ats -
it's usually Gunn, Wes or Cordy. Lately Lorne.
Here's the references - assuming you're still with me and didn't
get bored by all the James Bond stuff (yep I'm a film/pop culture
geek - I admit it):
Beyond Thunderdom - the third in the Mad Max triology. Well known
by Whedon and company because well Whedon worked on the Kevin
Costner rip-off of the Mad Max movies Waterworld.
Thunderdom is seen by Mad Max fans as the worst of the three movies
and the cheesiest (same as fans see Return of the Jedi in Star
Wars). All three starred a young Mel Gibson who was the anti-hero.
A former cop who turned dark in the first film and left the force
after his wife and children were horribly murdered by a street
gang. After enacting vengeance against the gange - Max goes off
on the road seeking some sort of solace or meaning. He becomes
a type of Clint Eastwood Anti-Hero (which is seen in the Spaghetti
Westerns by Sergio Leon). In the film - Mad Max takes on a series
of deformed and monsterous fighters under the watch of Tina Turner's
control. When he wins - the captives of the city - the children
enslaved by it - are freed.
The three villains Andrew mentions in either Showtime or BoTN
- can't remember which:
Voldemort - the villain of the Harry Potter Books
Doom - Dr Doom from Fantastic Four (which is movie Petrie is writing
at the moment)
Apocalypse - the X-Men's worste villain
The uniting factor for these villains? They all become villains
because of vengeance. Voldemort was treated horribly as a child,
felt ignored, and left out by friends - so became evil. Doom -
felt like an outsider and was horribly disfigured by an accident
caused by Mr. Fantastic, Reed Richards, so he became Doom and
sought Fantastic's destruction, and he wanted to rule the world...but
hey have to start with a goal. Apocalypse was a tortured Egyptian
slave who sought vengeance against the Pharoah who tortured and
enslaved him. All become horrible villains. Think Holtz times
10,000.
License to Kill - reference to the movie License to Kill starring
Timothy Dalton when Bond went rogue, Bond felt betrayed and against
the advice of MI6 went after the man who killed his friends. He
sought vengeance - in the same way that Mad Max seeks vengeance.
Give ME pointers for being consistent in their pop culture references.
License to Kill is mentioned by Andrew to Dawn, he references
two items after uttering "cool you have an license to kill"
1. The movie where Bond turned rogue - explained above. Bond goes
on a vengeance spree.
2. The license Bond has which means he can kill without being
charged or imprisoned, basically he is a government sanctioned
hit man. This is similar to what Andrew might regard Buffy's powers
regarding vampires. It also references how Buffy keeps saying
she does not have a license to kill - a common theme in superhero
comics - what separates the villains from the heros is the villains
can kill and the heros can't.
It can be said that Buffy's slaying of Ubervamp - in some ways
fits the Mad Max motif - I'll slay you because a) you hurt me
and my friends bad, and b) because you stand in the way of freedom.
As opposed to the Bond motif in License to Kill - which is I can
kill you for being a rat bastard so I will.
See - pop culture can be cool!
Now aren't you happy you read this? ;-)More than you ever wanted
to know on Bond wasn't it?
SK
[> [> [> Sorry -Typos!
Spoilers: Mad Max Beyond Thunderdom, License to Kill, Harry Potter
in above post -- shadowkat, 19:40:40 01/14/03 Tue
Typos abound - major one was series - should be serious. Sorry
didn't proofread.
Also spoiler for Harry Potter Prisoner of Azkaban but not overly
serious spoiler.
[> [> [> I have a
different interpretation of the Life Serial Bond scene...
-- KdS, 02:55:44 01/15/03 Wed
May make me just as geeky as the trio but I see it this way:
Connery: Widely praised by hard-core spy buffs and Fleming fans
because he has a real hint of the cruelty and violence that was
in the original novels - hence Warren likes the brutality and
wants to be that guy.
Moore: Far lighter, more cartoonish and entertaining, more about
jokes than really nasty violence - translates to Jonathan's rose-tinted
view of villainy at this point.
Dalton: Often contemptuously dismissed - hence Andrew.
[> [> [> [> 'kat,
KdS-- You guys are amazing. No sh*t. -- OnM, 08:43:24 01/15/03
Wed
Never thought to make much of the Bond references, thought they
were just mostly offhand drops to enhance the 'geeky' nature of
the Troika.
KdS, I think this is exactly what was intended-- I can't
see it presented any more clearly, and it makes absolutely perfect
sense.
'kat, your insights on the writers are fascinating, and very logical.
I always love it when what seems like a largely offhand remark
by a Buffyverse character has some far more involved resonance
with some other series event-- especially as possible foreshadowing.
Now I'm thinking about the Dawn/Andrew interaction completely
differently.
Very cool.
One minor quibble though, 'kat-- the children that Max saves at
the end of Thunderdome weren't slaves of the city-- they originally
lived in a paradise far away from Bartertown, but approximately
half the tribe wants to return to the 'city' that they came from
originally, something they see as part of a prophecy. The other
half wants to stay in the protected, beautiful valley they currently
live in.
Max is trying to get the group that wants to leave back to the
'old world' where they can ultimately rebuild it, but they need
Master, (the dwarfish engineer guy) to pull it off. Thus, the
trip back to Bartertown is to free Master and send him off with
the kids.
( Yeah, yeah, I know-- details, details... )
;-)
Great stuff, everyone, and thanks again one and all for
all the kind comments about my 'reviews'-- I really appreciate
it!
-- OnM
[> [> [> [> [>
more with the Bond (spoilers I guess) -- fresne, 10:00:03
01/15/03 Wed
Well, okay the funny thing about the Bond references is that I've
had that conversation. Heck we had that conversation after the
episode last week.
Last Tuesday it boiled down to
· Male A liked Moore best because he grew up watching the
Saint. So, he always thought that there were black and white Bond
movies until he realized the difference. Likes Dalton least.
· Male B liked either Connery or Brosnan (it was a conversation
I don't really remember). Liked Dalton least.
· Females A and B (I get to be A because I'm writing this)
liked Dalton the best, because er, he's a hottie and intense with
it. Although, the last Bond movie, the first scene with M, does
make me see Brosnan's points. Liked Moore least, cause of personal
preference ew factors.
Which goes back to my personal theory (possibly completely off
base) that in most discussions that I've had, the men liked the
Bond that they most want to be. The women liked the Bond that
they most want to be a Bond chick with, if you're not a prosterior
kicking, science quoting, gun toting Bond chick there's no point.
Heck, I have Bond chick costumery, but you know, of course I do.
So, I kind of wonder, is Andrew be Bond or date Bond? Be or Date,
I find his preference particularly interesting because it's one
of the few times in the series that Andrew states an opinion in
opposition. Most importantly he disagrees with Warren. That's
singular.
To then pick the Bond that goes rogue, well interesting. I mean
Dalton's not the one that only did one movie, whose name I can
never remember, who really is Andrew, you know Tucker's brother.
However, with only two movies, a brief appearance in the Bondverse,
Dalton makes enough of an impression to generate controversy.
I love it when "throw away" pop culture references get
me to thinking.
[> [> [> [> Books
and Computers -- Arethusa, 09:21:35 01/15/03 Wed
It's interesting that the Troika don't seem to read the books.
Bond is more a grim civil servant doing his job because he's really
good at it than a glamorous babe-magnet with cool gadgets in the
books. In fact, in BtVS we tend to see the good guys reading and
surrounded by books (including Angel) and the bad guys watching
tv or on computers. The monks in I Robot, You Jane use a book
to imprision a demon, but a computer releases him and is his conduit
for evil. The Troika and Tucker in The Prom watch too much tv
and get bad ideas. Jenny, a computer teacher, ends up betraying
the Scoobies and Willow, a hacker, uses magic she learned from
Jenny's websites to feed her insecuities. The adults in Gingerbread
take away all the books, but Sheila doesn't take away Willow's
computer. The too-human Dalton is criticized by the judge for
being fond of reading. Ted sells computer software. Riley was
introduced in a bookstore, but Walsh was often shown in front
of her computer and video monitors. Spike used a computer to track
down Buffy in her dorm in The Initiative. Spike is often shown
watching tv, but is shown reading when his character begins to
move from black to gray.
Of course, there are many instances of good guys on computers
or bad guys with books. The Scoobies watched tv, and Jenny and
Willow were usually good. So, take it or leave it.
[> Excellent, OnM! --
HonorH, 22:57:47 01/13/03 Mon
Might just have to rent me some Mad Max now. Always look forward
to your reviews, and for once, I've nothing to contribute. So
I'll just stick with "Excellent!"
[> My Theory About Giles
(SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- Robert, 00:03:00
01/14/03 Tue
First, you review and analysis were very nice. I really appreciateed
the opportunity to read it.
>>> To date, I have been leaning strongly towards
the idea that the Giles we have been seeing recently is still
the real thing, ...
My theory is totally mad, but then again so am I. I suggest that
Giles is not the real Giles and is also not a manifestation of
the First Evil. Rather, the Giles we see is a manifestation of
the coven of witch's, back in old England. The real Giles is dead.
The coven knew that the gang would need the moral and psychological
support of their old mentor to make it through the coming crisis.
The shooting script for Bring on the Night was too specific
that Giles must not physically interact with objects. Obviously,
this could be deliberate obfuscation by Mutant Enemy to screw
with our minds. But, I don't think so. I think that Giles is a
manifestation, but of what?
If Giles were really the First Evil, I would think that the coven
would have figured it out and revealed said discovery to Willow.
Plus, despite the oddness of Giles' behavior, he does seem to
be working on the side of good. I am also guessing that the coven
is the only other entity with the resources to create such a manifestation.
So, how mad am I?
[> [> Re: My Theory About
Giles (SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- genivive, 07:31:33
01/14/03 Tue
Has Giles changed his clothes since he got there? He is always
wearing that cordouroy coat.
[> [> Re: My Theory About
Giles (SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- CW, 07:57:17
01/14/03 Tue
The only thing working against your theory is that if Giles is
dead, it is almost beyond belief that the First wouldn't use his
image to foment fear, doubt, and mistrust. The appearance of two
Giles, one from the coven and the other from the First Evil, could
create chaos especially since neither could prove it was 'real.'
I think the First would love that. So I think to make your idea
work, the real Giles would have to be alive in a coma somewhere
under the protection of the coven. That's kind of a stretch, but
far from impossible.
[> [> [> Re: My Theory
About Giles (SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- masio1000,
08:31:56 01/14/03 Tue
Giles is way too corporal to be dead. They did a good job at confusing
us. I thought for sure he was dead from the moment that axe went
down near his neck, but i've learned something about this show--that
no matter how clever i think i am, the writers are two steps ahead
of me. so....In the end i think he's alive maybe. He had the only
records of the FE with him when he came to the house. Buffy and
the others have taken a look at them. The FE wouldn't be able
to touch them. that 's the only "real" proof, except
that there are way too many reasons to justify him being dead...or
at least the writers pointing us in that direction. On the other
hand, my original theory is more complex. Everyone who's dead
is honest to goodness dead. the FE is manipulating Giles (maybe
half-dead?) body and the only thing that may get you to bed tonight
is the belief that if (when?) Buffy wins, TPTB will grant Buffy
some wishes:
How about these?
All killed by the FE mininons come back to life
Spike is made into a man again
Buffy looses her powers (as a wish or as consolation)
waddayathink?
[> [> When Things Changed
(SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- Darby, 09:17:25 01/14/03
Tue
They HAVE told us, and it was specifically laid out in the script.
When Giles and Anya are in the vortex dimension, they have to
interact with the physical nature of wind; they also emerge with
hair and clothes disheveled. Either this is a huge mistake (always
a possibility, but there was no real need to make it windy), or
this was purposely put in to show us that Giles really is corporeal.
Maybe that's why when Giles inadvertantly touches Anya on the
way out, no one bothered to reshoot or edit...
[> [> [> I noticed
that too, but (Spoiler for Showtime) -- Sophist, 09:30:38
01/14/03 Tue
The shooting script posted by Psyche contains this express direction:
ANGLE ON GILES and ANYA emerging from the kitchen. (Note again:
Giles can not touch anyone or anything.)
Seemingly inconsistently, it later says:
GILES and ANYA emerge from the SHIMMERING GATEWAY, which promptly
vanishes. They're a little unbalanced at first, having been standing
in a swirling vortex, and their clothes and hair are in some state
of disarray.
They look at each other, straightening themselves
[> [> [> [> Re:
I noticed that too, but (Spoiler for Showtime) -- slain, 14:24:06
01/14/03 Tue
I didn't noticed much dishevelment (coming very close to writing
deshelvement there), but to me the fact that Giles was capable
of being transported suggested that he's real. I think what I
would find to be effective proof of his realness (before the show
proves it by someone touching him, that is) would be a scene when
we're in Giles' POV, or just one where he's alone for any length
of time.
I always suspect characters when we aren't given their POV; they
were very careful in BoTN to avoid showing Giles' POV shot as
he sees Buffy climbing out of the hole pursed by Ubee - instead
we're given a fairly unconventional low angle show of Giles appearing
in front of the sun, from either Buffy or the Ubee's POV - when
we expect to see Giles rushing forward to help Buffy, and to be
in his POV as he does it. But the extent to which this is done
suggests to me that M.E. are deliberately highlighting the fact
that Giles isn't touching things or being given POV shots, to
distract from another character; Giles' potentional F.E.ness is
made obvious and sometimes awkwardly so, but for the purpose of
misdirect.
[> [> [> [> [>
i was just thinking this -- masio, 18:10:19 01/14/03
Tue
That is so right
Giles is such a red herring---and i don't mean in the FE department.
the obvious thing to look for if Giles is not the FE is who is,
but we should be asking, is there something else entirely that
we are missing because we are speculating on Giles and the is
he or isn't he?
[> [> [> You know
I have to agree -- shadowkat, 20:00:00 01/14/03 Tue
In BoTN I wasn't really sure, but Showtime? I think he's corporeal
just damaged. Or the writers and producers are screwing up big
time in the editing. I mean fouling up on blowing up a clear replica
of the same building in Never LEave Me is one thing but it's quite
another when you show someone whose not corporeal either touching
or acting corporeal. Particularly when you go out of your way
to do other things.
OTOH - it is possible they goofed. After all we see Spike's reflection
twice in HIM but no reflection in later episodes.
Editing is not as easy as it looks apparently and they film these
things under tight deadlines. Sometimes literally in 48 hours
- so you don't have lots of time to get everything right.
Structurally and Theme wise? I think it makes more sense that
Giles is alive and coporeal because I have a feeling the evil
this year is more well insidious and less obvious. Hence Joyce's
comment - evil is inside all of us. Be less interesting if Giles
wasn't Giles. Just my hunch.
[> [> [> Wouldn't
it be typical...(SPOILERS for Showtime and before) -- Darby,
08:58:01 01/15/03 Wed
First, my credentials: when the storyline didn't come straight
back to Giles after the axe incident, I predicted that he'd show
up in Sunnydale eventually and we wouldn't know for sure if it
was him, and no one would know to suspect.
A wilder prediction: very soon, he will have to make contact
with someone (catch someone during a fight, say) and he will just
do it. We in the obsessive viewing public will jump from out seats,
but it will never be addressed on the show, perhaps beyond
an offhand remark from Giles that he had been attacked in London
and needed a corrective haircut afterward.
Just remember, you can't win the Insane Troll Logic Speculation
Game if you don't play!
If I were on Angel, the demons would have my soul, my truck,
and Sara...
[> Just wanted to say thanks!
-- neaux, 04:34:57 01/14/03 Tue
I've been waiting all week for your review, because I just knew
your were going to elaborate on the Mad Max connection.
While I got the reference and the visual connections to the movie,
I had never really sat down to watch a whole movie in the Mad
Max series.
Heck when, Thunderdome came out I was young. Maybe 8 or 9, and
a movie with Tina Turner was a movie NOT worth seeing. But Now
I really want to check these movies out!
Thanks
[> All we Want... All we
Dream... Beyond thunderdome.... -- aliera, 05:18:33 01/14/03
Tue
~~~ I liked Anya's hair.
~~me too...and many other things. I may post a little later if
there's time but if not, thanx muchly on the essay. Always a keeper
from you.
Out of the ruins
Out from the wreckage
Can't make the same mistake
this time
We are the children
the last generation
We are the ones they left behind
And I wonder when we are ever gonna change it
Living under the fear till nothing else remains
We don't need another hero
We don't need to know the way home
All we want is life beyond the thunderdome
What do we do with our lives
We leave only a mark
Will our story shine like a life
Or end in the dark
Give it all or nothing
All that really matters is the light in your face
In you I see the longing of the whole human race
I've been running from the truth
I've been running since my youth,
tired of running
I will stand here till you see
I am you and you are me,
tired of running
There really is no difference
when you look beneath the skin
Someday I know we'll go beyond
this world we're living in
Now when I lay me down to sleep
I will be dancing in my dreams
Seeing the way it all should be
I will be dancing
All that really matters is the light in your face
In you I see the longing of the whole human race
Now when I lay me down to sleep
I will be dancing in my dreams
Seeing the way it all should be
I will be dancing
Now when I lay me down to sleep
I will be dancing in my dreams
Seeing the way it all should be
I will be dancing
Dancing in my dreams
On and on the story goes
Or it's the passing of the torch
With one small voice it all begins
Then there are millions more,
millions more
-*-*-*-aliera-*-*-*-*-
From the album "Wildest Dreams"
-Dancing in my Dreams
(B. Russell, M. Cawley, K. Fleming)
Producer: Trevor Horn
Album: Wildest Dreams (96
[> Worth the wait! --
ponygirl, 07:28:34 01/14/03 Tue
I think I actually enjoyed your review more than the episode!
I really hope you do your analysis of the movies referenced this
year, I think- beyond pop culture cuteness- there are some real
clues being given. I hadn't fully thought of all the implications
of the Thunderdome reference -- it's been years since I've seen
that movie-- but you've certainly provided a new angle on it.
The twist in Max's battle - that he hadn't grasped the big picture,
and Showtime's flashback, where the same scene is seen twice but
with vastly different meanings... it all makes me think that we're
headed for some sort of big reversal, and one that may not come
at the traditional midpoint, but be saved for the end. Ah the
torture of a week without BtVS!
[> The meaning of 'Beljoxa'
-- slain, 14:10:49 01/14/03 Tue
First, great post - I'm also a big fan of the Mad Max trilogy,
for many of the same reasons I like BtVS, I think.
In Swedish, "beljoxa" means (depending on how you transliterate
the bel part) "ball-fiddle" or "part-fiddle"
or, if you stretch it a little, "electricity fiddler"
- perhaps a reference to Enron or the Californian energy crisis?
Yes, I am being silly, but that's not to say I'm not right.
[> As always, nicely done
-- Sarand, 14:47:23 01/14/03 Tue
I always look forward to your analyses. And I, too, loved the
references to the "Mad Max" series. I always think of
"Road Warrior" when I watch "Bargaining."
And please do a review of the movie references for this season.
Being something of a movie buff, I usually get the more obvious
references but would love to hear about the less obvious ones.
[> Bleeding of Realities
-- Yoda, 08:07:34 01/15/03 Wed
Wonderul review OnM! Loved your Mad Max comparisons. One other
thing you mentioned perked my interest. That was the speculation
that we have been watching events take place in more than one
parallel Buffyverse.
My theory is that the disruption that Beljoxa's Eye mentions was
caused by Buffy jumping into the portal instead of Dawn. Her blood
may have been enough like Dawns to close the door but since she
isn't the Key she wasn't able to lock it. The door might be slowly
creeping open and alternate realities of the Buffyverse might
have been bleeding into each other ever since then.
This would explain why Buffy & others have acted so out of character
at times. We would have been seeing alternate reality versions
of themselves bleeding into this reality.
In Normal Again Buffy might have been made aware of one of these
alternate realities. She believed one was real and one wasn't.
But maybe both realities were real. That would explain why we
have never heard of Buffy being in a psychiatric ward until Normal
Again. In our reality Buffy might never have been in a psychiatric
ward but in an alternate reality she was and still is. Her memories
from two different realities bleeding into each other.
This bleeding of realities would also explain why time has been
so wonky. Since some things happen one way in one reality and
a different way in an alternate reality. So if you placed one
on top of the other they wouldn't match up. This bleeding of realities
would mess up the time sequence of events. More food for thought.
[> [> Wow! -- OnM,
09:42:54 01/15/03 Wed
I really, really like this!! As I mentioned in the ep review,
I've been going back and forth and forth and back on this whole
'parallel Buffyverse' theory, but you've opened an additionally
fascinating-- and very logical-- tangent.
Closed the door, but didn't lock it. The universes are still
(slightly/occasionally) bleeding into each other.
So, for example, Buffy can initiate telepathic contact in one
reality, but not in another.
Yeah. Very nice!
[> [> Re: Blending of
Realities -- aliera, 09:59:25 01/15/03 Wed
I have to agree and hope for something along these lines Yoda...it
was such a strong feeling of mine last season.
I watched the eps in a unusual (for me) way. I didn't watch any
until after Hells Bells aired and then watched them all in one
fell swoop on tape...that was when I started visiting the boards,
I couldn't figure out where the feeling was coming from.
Questioning posts along these lines met with some...disparagement,
and I dropped mentioning it; but, it's been a leafy niggle ever
since. Thanks for chiming in. ;-)
[> [> question concerning
Normal Again -- masio, 10:15:41 01/15/03 Wed
I have not talked to one person who noticed what i did in this
ep. (Normal Again)
When Buffy is chasing Dawn, Dawn hides in a locked bathroom. Buffy
knocks down the door and Dawn isn't in there, and there is no
indication of how she got out of a second floor room. Buffy looks
in the room, sees shes not there and immediatly turns to her left
and sees a creeping dawn. How the Hell did she get out!!!? I rewound
a million times but ended up assuming it was a hint to the asylum
universe being true.
what do you guys think?
Couple of
thoughts on early Angel -- Tchaikovsky, 04:11:28 01/14/03
Tue
Via the kindness of yabympan, I was able to sit down last night
and watch the first three Angel episodes, 'City Of, 'Lonely Hearts'
and 'In the Dark'. Below are just a few, largely unconnected thoughts.
I suspect many of them are very old news to most Angel watchers,
and apologise in advance for this. My only real claim is coming
at the series with fresh eyes.
'City Of...'. Exactly how long did it take me to realise that
this show was fundamentally Whedon-esque in style? How long before
I knew it couldn't be anyone else? About two minutes. The most
obvious criticism which could have been thrown at the series opener
was that it contained long patches of boring exposition, necessary
for a new audience, tedious for Buffy fans. Whedon side-steps
the 'spouting my entire history' cliche so beautifully, by making
the stranger, (Doyle) do the exposition for him. While the explanation
is got out of the way, the more fanatical viewer is wondering
just how he knows this, what it purports, and just generally cheering
at the trademark Whedon subversion.
Other thoughts about this episode. It's made clear right from
the start that the position of the characters in relation to society
is entirely different from that in BtVS. In Buffy, it's about
children growing to be adults, rigidly within society, and growing
up through it, even if it sometimes seems alien. In a sense, the
original idea of the episode is people stuck within a society
being led to someplace else. Buffy, Willow and Xander are all
normal people who become invested in an abnormal society. But
metpahorically, it's just all about growing up.
In Angel, all the characters are transparently aiming for re-integration.
Angel wants 'forgiveness', and he is persuaded to stop brooding
in the dark by Doyle, who contends that everyone has their issues.
Of course, Cordelia has become a social isolate in a really painful
way. I admire the fact that in BtVS Season Three, Cordelia's fall
from grace is tragic, rather than being a simple example of the
popular, unsympathetic person getting their comeuppance. At the
beginning of 'City of', Cordelia is trying to become a part of
the showbiz community, but is having trouble. The theme bringing
them together is a need to re-integrate into society- to define
themselves once again.
Of course, standing against these outcasts is the very scarily
done patriarchy of Wolfram and Hart. No such element exists in
Buffy up to this points, (if we can discount the excellent appearance
of the police at the end of 'Out of Mind, Out of Sight', and this
patriarchy somehow ties in both with the contrast to the outcasts,
and with the city itself, a place with a hierarchical structure,
and with skyscraper structures.
The style of Angel is quickly defined as different from Buffy,
which is something I appreciated. There are many more smash cuts
and white-outs. The series quite quickly positions itself as,
at a surface level, an antidote to lawyer shows. And I can see
the more left-wing aspect of Angel, which some have mentioned.
I thought 'City of' was a really excellent episode. 'Lonely Hearts
I had less time for, once again succumbing to my lack of interest
in Fury episodes, with long, draggy scenes at the bar. But there
were a couple of interesting points above the transparent AIDs
metaphor. Loneliness was done well, and I really admired the construction
of Kate, a character I want to (and I think will) see more of.
The whole vibe of this episode reminds me strongly of the portrait
of LA painted in Buffy's excursion in 'Anne'. There's that feeling
of underclass, of dinginess, of loneliness and walls. The hierarchical
structure of Wolfram and Hart reminds me of Greenwalt's aversion
to structured privilege which he vents in his commentary for Reptile
Boy.
'In the Dark' was an interesting episode, if really mostly about
the excellently written and acted Spike until the last few scenes,
which I really enjoyed. In some sense, Angel is admitting that
an attempt at simplistic re-integration to society without pennance
is useless. He needs to look after the people of the dark, but
also to grow from out of the darkness, rather than merely transplanting
himself. My problem wiht this episode is the swamping of the nascent
characterisation of Cordelia and Doyle by the arrivals of Spike
and Oz. It seems like an obvious backwards step.
I don't like it as much as Buffy yet, for several reasons. Boreanaz
and Carpenter have only one tenth the acting skills of Gellar
and Hannigan, which makes me less invested in the character. But
the season hasn't built to a crescendo, nor the character interactions
yet, so I am much looking forward to giving it more time.
TCH- begging to be told 'Shut Up' if these points are obvious
to regular Angel watchers.
[> Re: Couple of thoughts
on early Angel -- Rahael, 05:04:41 01/14/03 Tue
Well, I think these are very good thoughts, and since Angel isn't
as well discussed here as Buffy, you may indeed be pointing out
many things for the first time - such as the imagery of high rise
towers, and structured privilege, contrasting btw with Angel in
his basement.
I'd like to point out to the Angel fans that I did some posts
about eating and food in early S4 but didn't get any replies ;)
[> Re: Couple of thoughts
on early Angel -- Flo, 05:19:12 01/14/03 Tue
Thanks for these insights, T. I've just seen a few episodes of
AtS, so I generally feel in the dark when it's discussed on the
board. You've given me at least a bit of something to chew on
(food reference for you, Rahael!) in terms of placing AtS into
the context of my Buffy obsession.
I must say, if I develop an addiction to two TV shows, I'll have
to find a place to live and get myself a TV. As my life currently
consists of couch-surfing, it's hard enough to find a free television
every Tuesday!
[> Re: Couple of thoughts
on early Angel -- JM, 05:40:31 01/14/03 Tue
Glad you are enjoying Angel. Was surprised to find myself a fan
so quickly when it first started. Am looking forward to getting
the S1 DVDs. Since I haven't seen these eps in over three years.
Liked Kate too right from her introduction. Miss her a bunch,
I bet Angel does too.
One thing to keep in mind, Angel really doesn't have the same
arc structure at all as Buffy (especially S1). Buffy very definitely
has a more season over arc, where as Angel seems to have three
fairly distinct mini-arcs, with a set of spectacular episodes
marking the exit from each arc.
S1: "Hero" and "I Will Remember You"
S1: "Five by Five" and "Sanctuary"
S2: "The Trial" and "Reunion"
S2: "Reprise" and "Epiphany"
S3: "Offspring" thru "Lullaby"
S3: "Loyalty" and "Sleep Tight"
(And despite what some people accused last year, I think that
they have ended every season so far on a cliff hanger, S1 Darla,
S2 Buffy, and S3 an actual cliff.) Season 3 was actually the first
time the three arcs were even actually all connected, by the topic
of Connor, and the majority of the first arc had almost nothing
to do with him.
The one thing similar between the shows' season-long formats is
that Buffy seems to me to have three movements within the season,
with the intensity rising, then falling within each movement,
then rising to a pitch at the end of each movement, with the greatest
crescendos at the end of the second movement and the end of the
third (the finales). Angel doesn't have to my eyes the same kind
of deterministic, ominous forward motion. More of a dormant volcano
with occasional eruptions, that then goes back to muttering. And
the eruptions may set things in motion, but they actually don't
move the narrative closer to any denouement. Because Angel never,
ever gets the big victory. There are no big, concrete wins in
LA.
Not sure that I prefer one format to the other. Angel's has more
freedom, and unpredictability, the march to the finale less telegraphed
I guess. But Buffy's does give one a sense of victory/sacrifice/triumph
or something. Anyway YMMV and probably does.
[> [> Logging this
-- Tchaikovsky, 06:02:48 01/14/03 Tue
Will keep this is mind while watching. So much to learn, so much
to see.
TCH- feeling as happy as a Rob
[> [> [> S1-3 Spoilers
Above -- JM, 06:18:45 01/14/03 Tue
So, so sorry TCH. Meant to indicate that in the original message
subject line. Hope it doesn't detract from your viewing. Would
love to hear more of your thoughts as you watch.
[> [> [> [> Don't
worry. -- Tchaikovsky, 07:11:11 01/14/03 Tue
Your post didn't really have the kind of spoilers I object to,
just vague patterns, and anyway, I must admit to being a bit self-spoiled,
having haphazardly watched a few episodes of Season Two. But I'm
sure they'll make more sense second time round.
TCH
[> [> Ah! 'Five by Five'
and 'Sanctuary' - my two personal favourite... -- Marie, 08:33:27
01/14/03 Tue
...AtS episodes. The fight scene between Faith and Angel has to
be one of the best in either of the two series (BtVS and AtS,
I mean), and Elisha Dushku's acting as she fell to pieces just
about blew my mind.
Marie
[> Re: Couple of thoughts
on early Angel -- Darby, 05:40:54 01/14/03 Tue
One of the great things about Angel over the long haul
is watching the development of the actors. DB, especially, has
come a long way in the chops department, but CC has gotten better
(if a bit inconsistently). AD may have always had the chops, but
has been given more and deeper (and more fun for us!) things to
do - like JM, he seems to be able to handle anything thrown at
him. It's odd to think that if the BtVS Wesley was all that we'd
seen, we'd have a very different impression of his abilities!
I sometimes feel sorry for actors whose best-known character required
broad / over-the-top / camp expression, done spot-on but looking
like lack of ability or sophistication.
[> [> Acting a cliche
-- Tchaikovsky, 07:17:22 01/14/03 Tue
Agree with the acotrs only being able to act what they are given.
I have this problem with Clare Kramer. I never know whether I'm
unimpressed by her acting because of her, or just because she's
really given nothing to do.
On the other side of the argument, the Mayor of Season Three was
really beautifully acted. I wonder whether the actor really invested
more in the role than was even written for it. But I suppose that
kind of thing is really beyond the call of duty.
Looking forward to seeing Alexis Denisof stretched anyway.
TCH
[> [> [> Harry Groener's
Mayor Wilkins -- tomfool, 09:37:19 01/14/03 Tue
I just watched the S3 DVD extra that provides an overview of S3.
It confirms that although Joss may have a general outline for
the season, there is a lot of organic evolution at work each season
too. The interview with the writers seems to imply Harry Groener's
initial portrayal of Mayor Wilkins was more straight-arrow and
therefore more delightfully perverse than they'd originally envisioned.
So yeah, I think the role evolved with the ability of the actor
to go places they had never imagined. I don't know if they originally
envisioned him so much as a father figure to Faith and with so
many layers of complexity. I don't think they foresaw Eliza D
taking over all of her scenes so completely either. When they
saw the chemistry between the two actors, they knew that the father-daughter
undertones would work. Although the major arc of S3 was predetermined,
the actors' abilities and decisions helped it evolve to a different
and better place.
And of course we've all heard about JM's Spike being a short-term
character that grew into much more. Any other characters come
to mind that grew way beyond their original purpose/role?
[> [> [> [> Re:
other actors -- tim, 10:10:21 01/14/03 Tue
"And of course we've all heard about JM's Spike being
a short-term character that grew into much more. Any other characters
come to mind that grew way beyond their original purpose/role?"
For what it's worth, I once read an interview with EC in which
she said both she and DB had simlar experiences.
--th
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: other actors -- Darby, 12:09:58 01/14/03 Tue
And the story goes that Tara and Willow's dalliances with magic
were supposed to be only metaphorical lesbian "experimentation,"
but the scenes were so charged right fron the first one in Hush
(plus Seth Green was leaving) that they decided to go from subtext
to text.
[> [> [> Harry Groener:
Yes, he really is that good. -- cjl, 09:51:28 01/14/03
Tue
I know Harry Groener from three specific roles:
Nerdy loser Ralph on "Dear John" (U.S. sitcom)
Psychologically unbalanced Betazoid on "ST:TNG" ("Tin
Man")
Oily politician on "BtVS" (S3)
He doesn't exactly disappear into each role, because a certain
degree of innate empathy is common to all three. But that's his
strength: he finds what's sympathetic about difficult characters
and makes the audience like the character as well. (In "Dear
John," you like Ralph's kind heart even though you're afraid
he's never going to break out of his neurotic patterns; in "Trek,"
you like his xenopsychologist, because you empathize with his
loneliness; and in "Buffy," you like Mayor Wilkins--despite
yourself--because his belief in family isn't just campaign speeches.)
It's a good strategy, and it pays off big dividends when the character
is supposed to be a villain.
What's amazing about the above description is that Harry Groener's
background is in muscial comedy, and he's an amazing dancer--something
you never saw on Buffy, and only once on "Dear John."
We love his work, yet most Buffy fans are probably unaware he's
entertaining us with one foot metaphorically tied behind his back.
Not that I'm complaining about Hinton Battle, but HG could have
played Sweet. With no problems.
Buffy Finale
just got a little more Angelic? -- glowy, 04:24:59 01/14/03
Tue
http://enquirer.com/editions/2003/01/13/tem_TVPIX13.html
Regardless of Angel's fate, Mr. Levin says he's given Mr. Whedon
permission to reunite Buffy and Angel on UPN for Ms. Gellar's
finale, if she's quitting the role.
"I told Joss that if it was creatively justified, and in
the best interest of the show's storytelling, and something he
feels is necessary, I certainly wouldn't stand in the way,"
Mr. Levin says.
[> AAaaaiiiieee!!!!
-- bl, 04:29:58 01/14/03 Tue
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONOnonononononoooooooooo!
[> [> "no way!"
...WAY. -- ZachsMind, 07:51:21 01/14/03 Tue
[> Re: Buffy Finale just
got a little more Angelic? -- Rufus, 08:07:38 01/14/03
Tue
Gee isn't that magnanimous of that guy at the WB to give ME persmission
to have "their" star of Angel do a crossover, only if
it is the last Buffy and only if. I bet that got the writers sharpening
their pencils to see what they could do about a "reunion"....;)
[> [> Re: Buffy Finale
just got a little more Angelic? -- CW, 08:37:17 01/14/03
Tue
It would make a good joke on the WB if in the last Buffy episode
they sleep together, turn Angel evil and leave it that way. Of
course it would also be interesting, if in a perverse way, if
they sleep together, turn Buffy evil this time, and leave it that
way!
[> [> [> Re: Buffy
Finale just got a little more Angelic? (speculative spoilers)
-- KKC, 13:07:46 01/14/03 Tue
Just for the sake of broad representation of viewpoints... I always
thought that it would end up being the other way around. I always
imagined that if the show were to end this year, there would be
a scene at the end of the finale which occurs a few years after
the final victory. Buffy would be just settling on the couch,
having a phone conversation with Dawn (who's presumably off at
college at this point) and reminiscing about old times before
life became normal. A knock at the door would turn out to be Angel,
standing on the porch in full daylight, fresh from his Shanshu
experience. Fade to black off Buffy's stunned reaction.
That way, you get a nice happy ending without infringing on the
ability of the Angel series to continue. Of course, this is Mutant
Enemy we're talking about, so a happy ending may not be quite
what we expect or want...
-KKC, trying to find a serial cable for his cell phone that doesn't
cost $60. :(
[> Re: Buffy Finale just
got a little more Angelic? -- Juliet, 18:52:02 01/14/03
Tue
Well, that's only his permission, not a guarantee.
I don't want to see Buffy/Angel reunited, but I think some closure
would be nice. They have a lot of issues to solved and questions
left to be answered...and I think the usual ME angst can be achieved
as long as a few are left untouched.
And (buffy/angel future spoilers..highlight)since
the big bads are connected this year, maybe Buffy and Angel will
have to fight together, or at least say hi. (all
done now :-))
Juliet
Some
recent Buffy-related reading -- KdS, 07:59:08 01/14/03
Tue
Just thought that you might want to know that the S6 edition of
Keith Topping's Slayer has just come out. This one isn't
quite as good value as usual, as it only covers S6, but one can't
really complain as the previous S1-5 edition was getting towards
the limits of a single paperback volume. Most of the information
will be on the web somewhere, but if anyone's like me and would
still rather pull a book of the shelf than boot the computer up,
dial up, and pay phone bills, it's still much better value and
less cheerleading than the official Watcher's Guides. Unfortunately,
Topping's sometimes controversial artistic judgements have really
gone haywire this year. Not only do I not sympathise with, but
I can't even comprehend, the mental processes of someone who can
praise the drug material in Wrecked and dismiss Dead
Things as mere sex 'n' violence sensationalism. He does, however,
incorporate the most thorough and balanced review of all sides
of the DeadEvilLesbian controversy I've ever read into the pages
on Grave. Honorificus will also enjoy the fashion judgements
on each episode ;-)
I also recently acquired the comic strip Tales of the Slayer
collection (stories about past Slayers, scripted by regular BtVS
authors and one former actor) and was very impressed, even if
it still seems a tad overpriced to me. All the stories fit into
an overarching theme of the Slayer's dual nature as protector
of society and outcast from it (if you have a big library near
you, get a copy of John Clute's Encyclopaedia of Fantasy
and look up the entry PARIAH ELITE) but quite a few of them overtly
or subtextually grapple with the issues of dehumanisation being
discussed in luna's topic below. The most important of these will
be discussed in a long essay to follow later today, but I can
also recommend Amber Benson's very dark French Revolution piece,
Jane Espenson's wonderful twist-ending Jane Austen parody, and
Joss Whedon's genuinely horrible medieval piece, which leaves
me in no doubt whatsoever that any positive references to Christianity
in BtVS are totally accidental ;-).
While it wasn't good enough for me to spend money on it, I also
dipped into the second prose Tales of the Slayer collection,
which includes a Jane Espenson story about Buffy and the Scoobies
that still fits into the historical theme (wink). Fortunately,
it's less overpoweringly grim than the first volume. It intrigued
me that the comic strip collection written by the ME team members
had its tragic moments, but left room for heroism, while the first
prose collection written by regular BtVS prose spin-off writers
could only have been grimmer if it had come with a free bottle
of sleeping pills and a big plastic bag. Volume Two fortunately
has a few sympathetic characters who survive to the end of their
stories. If you have a spare ten minutes in a bookshop that isn't
too paranoid about browsing, you'll enjoy the Buffyverse Christmas
Carol parody, in which a particularly smug and unfeeling Watcher
gets edifying visits from Slayers Past, Present, and Yet To Come
(guess who).
[> Re: Some recent Buffy-related
reading -- CW, 08:26:53 01/14/03 Tue
I'm not sure the season 1-5 version of Toppings' Slayer ever
came out in North America. I have a season 1-3 version which I
studiously avoid looking at when I'm doing referents for Rob's
Annotated Buffy. It's a decent quick reference, but it's far from
perfect. Topping isn't as well versed in American daily life as
he'd like to believe, and sometimes criticizes things about the
show that are perfectly realistic. Also, as KdS hints, his analysis,
at times, would get just ignored or even get chewed up if he posted
it here.
[> [> Slayer, seasons
1-5 -- MaeveRigan, 11:59:40 01/14/03 Tue
Topping's Slayer, Seasons 1-5, did come out in the states,
because I bought it in the US at B&N; my copy has prices in pounds
and dollars.
Agree that it's not quite all that, but it's a pretty good reference
for guest-stars, Brit-speak, and episode music, and a one-stop
source for Jossian commentary--though that isn't documented very
well.
Why The First
has chosen NOW to end the Chosen Line. (post Showtime S.7 speccy
& spoilery) -- ZachsMind, 08:33:54 01/14/03 Tue
Why has the First chosen NOW to end the Chosen Line? Because it
realized this is the first time that it CAN.
"John" [mailto:fidhle at iamdigex dot net] said in response
to a post of mine that's since scrolled off the front page while
I slept:
"I think the change that occurred is that Faith is in
prison, and thus can't participate in the great battle FE is setting
up and also most likely will not die anytime soon, thus she will
not call forth the next slayer. A perfect time to try to get rid
of the SIT's and end the chosen line forever."
Ooh! I like this idea. First, the Eye Guy said it was the Slayer
that caused the disruption of the Slayer line. If we assume Faith
to be THE Slayer that the Eye Guy was talking about, it means
that there's a specific reason why Slayers are supposed to die
as often as they do. If the Slayer power doesn't keep moving around,
it's no longer a difficult target for any Evil (First or otherwise)
to get hold of. So the reason why the power of the Slayer is not
genetic and seems to follow no logical consistency other than
to target young maidens, is to make it difficult for anyone (evil
or otherwise) to interfere with its mission.
However, since unlike any Slayer before her, Buffy's been pretty
obvious and longlasting as a Slayer, completely failing to hide
what she is, it's made it easier for The First Evil to forumulate
a plan to take the Chosen Line out. It's like Buffy's painted
a big bullseye on her butt and told every evil force on the planet
to come & get it. With her being relatively stationary and out
in the open, evil has been able to thrive near the hellmouth.
She's put all this effort into squelching evil, and instead she
has been quenching its thirst.
Oh, but irony is a harsh mistress.
Obviously The First has WANTED to take out the Chosen Line since
the beginning, but hasn't had enough time to try before now, because
the power of The Chosen One kept moving around, and not even the
next Slayer knew who would be next. The First Evil was unable
to formulate a plan and put it into action fast enough before
The Slayer would die and the next one would be called on the other
side of the planet.
In fact it's possible that the real reason why the Hellmouth was
there in the first place was to encourage the Slayer to stay in
one place to defend it, making it easier to put the Chosen Line
into this trap. The Master. The Hellmouth. The Initiative. This
could all be an elaborate plan, by The First, to try and coerce
the Chosen Line into a stationary position long enough for it
to get a bead on it to take it down.
One could argue that by trying to determine who the next Slayer
would be, the Watcher's Council was inadvertently actually helping
The First. Somehow The First got info about all the remaining
SITs from the Council and then destroyed it, while hunting down
all the SITs it could find. It couldn't do any of this before
now, because it's only been recently that there was a finite number
of potentials to take out, and a Slayer who has lived long enough
to keep the variables from changing.
Which brings us back to Faith. Like Buffy, Faith a long lasting
Slayer. Unlike Buffy it's because she's been incarcerated, probably
in such a way as to make it difficult for anyone to kill her.
Although it might be interesting if we learn later this season
that Faith's now on death row. That The First has had the ability
to kill Faith for a long time now, but is staving off the execution
until its completed its business with the SITs. The First can't
kill Faith - and can't allow Faith to die - until AFTER the last
of the SITs is dead.
What THIS means is, Angel & the gang have to go into whatever
prison Faith's being held, and break her out. This will probably
happen the moment Faith is on the electric chair because that's
super dramatic, which explains why they introduced that electric
powered babe earlier in the season. All this will of course have
to happen after the present storyline where Angel & the gang have
to stave off their own apocalypse, but that shouldn't take long.
Then once she's out of jail, Faith will make her way to Sunnydale
for the final showdown with The First.
Or as usual I could just be full of mud.
[> very good theory
-- masio, 09:04:37 01/14/03 Tue
I like your theory Faith is obviously the key (no pun intented)
to the whole thing. I don't see why Angel an company has to break
her out (when she is fully capable of getting out on her own)
but the idea that she is the "real" slayer is without
a doubt the truth.
The whole idea of slayers not living long may come into play as
well, especially considering Spike's speach about killing the
NY slayer in the 70's and what that might mean for Spike in coming
weeks...
"Every slayer has a death wish"
Appearently the problem is that Buffy has a life wish---she cant
die--or doesn't know how.
[> My knowledge of the American
penal system comes mostly from Oz ;-) -- KdS, 09:15:29
01/14/03 Tue
Which would make it seem that if you really want someone dead,
prison is one of the easiest places to have them done and get
away with it.
[> [> Death Row --
Helen, 09:27:56 01/14/03 Tue
Is Faith likely to be on Death Row? I don't know very much about
the American penal system, but what happened with the Deputy Mayor
would probably be called manslaughter in UK (unlawful killing
without malice aforethought), and that was never a capital offence
in this country when we had the death penalty.
Like the theory about the Slayer line, and tend to agree that
as far as most of the Big Bads are concerned, Faith is the Slayer
not Buffy (Kaky trousers in Faith, Hope and Trick didn't seem
to be aware Buff was still around, he described Faith as THE slayer).
So her incarceration provides both fracture the the powers of
goodness, and excellent opportuinities for the FE.
[> [> [> Two Slayers,
no waiting. -- cjc36, 09:49:44 01/14/03 Tue
The fact that there are TWO now when in all recorded history there
had only been ONE Chosen may be the 'deal breaker' with the principalities
that the FE is seizing on. Perhaps the UberGood/PTB decided he/she
liked having two slayers around for a while, thus disrupting the
balance of good and evil, disrupting the 'slayerline' and creating
this newfound 'in' the FE is going with.
Or, as some have suggested, perhaps Spike getting resouled was
the thing....if not for Buffy being back from the dead, he'd never
gone to Africa to see a man about a girl.
[> [> [> Re: Death
Row -- CW, 11:04:22 01/14/03 Tue
Remember Faith also did in Lester, the geology professor, and
that wasn't manslaughter. Chances are since she turned herself
in and confessed, she wouldn't be facing the death penalty. For
the purposes of the story it wouldn't be impossible though. In
reality, a smart lawyer could probably have had her just tell
the truth about her slayer self to the authorities, and she'd
be spending her time in a hospital prison's mental ward instead
of behind bars.
[> [> [> Seems that
death row would be unlikely -- Vickie, 14:30:56 01/14/03
Tue
Faith probably wouldn't have gotten a death sentence. Even though
we still have it in California (hey, we're working on it!), you
usually have to be pretty depraved (or a minority) to get it.
While we know Faith is depraved and a serious danger, the authorities
might not.
Here are Faith's crimes as we know them:
- Accidentally killed Allan Finch. This would probably be considered
manslaughter, or at most second degree murder.
- Killed Lester Wirth in cold blood, as CW mentioned.
- Killed "box man" in Choices. These last two on
the orders of Mayor Wilkins.
- Assaulted at least three people in LA. The leather jacket
guy, the guy at the club, and Lee at Wolfram and Hart. Lee probably
wouldn't press charges.
- Seriously assaulted Wesley. There could probably be other
charges: kidnapping or false imprisonment, special circumstances
here--which is pretty much what you need for a death penalty.
On the other hand, Faith turned herself in. Presumably confessed
to some charges. If Wesley didn't testify against her (and I really
cannot believe he did), she might be in jail for very few years,
getting anger management therapy and in medium security.
[> [> [> [> I was
under the impression. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:17:51 01/14/03
Tue
That someone couldn't get the death penalty unless they were guilty
of first degree murder. This does change if the country is at
war, in which case the death sentence is handed out more freely
for lesser crimes if they concern the war in any way, like the
Rosenburgs or soldiers executed for mutiny.
[> Re: Why the First....
(spolier/spec S7) -- cjc36, 09:41:17 01/14/03 Tue
"Obviously The First has WANTED to take out the Chosen Line
since the beginning, but hasn't had enough time to try before
now, because the power of The Chosen One kept moving around, and
not even the next Slayer knew who would be next. The First Evil
was unable to formulate a plan and put it into action fast enough
before The Slayer would die and the next one would be called on
the other side of the planet.
In fact it's possible that the real reason why the Hellmouth was
there in the first place was to encourage the Slayer to stay in
one place to defend it, making it easier to put the Chosen Line
into this trap. The Master. The Hellmouth. The Initiative. This
could all be an elaborate plan, by The First, to try and coerce
the Chosen Line into a stationary position long enough for it
to get a bead on it to take it down."
>>My problem with this theory is...what if any of the past
BB's had succeeded? Post Prophesy Girl, it would have meant nothing
in regards to the passing of the torch. <<
"One could argue that by trying to determine who the next
Slayer would be, the Watcher's Council was inadvertently actually
helping The First. Somehow The First got info about all the remaining
SITs from the Council and then destroyed it, while hunting down
all the SITs it could find. It couldn't do any of this before
now, because it's only been recently that there was a finite number
of potentials to take out, and a Slayer who has lived long enough
to keep the variables from changing."
>>But Buffy didn't keep the variables from changing. Buffy
died in S1, calling Kendra, who went home, I assume. Then Kendra
was killed a year later, calling Faith. The Slayer line is not
Buffy's concern. She's really *not* the Slayer in regards to torch-passing.
She's already passed the torch.<<
>>The finite number angle: Has this been said in the show's
dialog? Do we know that, for some reason, *now * is different
than the past in that the number of potential slayers is now quantifiable?<<<
"Which brings us back to Faith. Like Buffy, Faith a long
lasting Slayer. Unlike Buffy it's because she's been incarcerated,
probably in such a way as to make it difficult for anyone to kill
her...."
>>It is not unheard of for someone to die in prison. Dhalmer
was killed there. Sure, he was newsworthy. But Faith, being someone
who's broken some limbs there, I'm sure, would quickly become
a target to whatever old prison yard power base is there. All
it would take is a lot of them and a shank, and she'd be dead.
The First could motivate a gang of prisoners. She isn't any safer
being behind bars, IMHO.<<<
>>Why it matters to wait until the SITs are dead puzzles
me, but this is because I haven't heard everything from Joss about
how this whole thing works. So what if Faith is killed? Does this
make a whole buncha new SITs? I wouldn't think so myself, but
I, of course, am probably wrong. Okay, Faith dies and one of the
newbies is now the Slayer and no new group is made/called/visited
by Ed McMahon. All FE's gotta do is kill the rest of the SITs
and a newbie Slayer and the job's done.
I just don't know where - at this moment - they're heading with
this. I do think the Buffy Barganing thing being the problem is
a red herring, though.
[> Nice theory -- Random,
14:40:36 01/14/03 Tue
Good theory. Something like that has been germinating in my own
thoughts, but I couldn't quite formulate it.
Technical notes:
While killing the Deputy Mayor would be manslaughter at best,
and thus probably rate no more than 10-20 with possibility of
parole, killing Professor Worth was deliberate, premeditated murder,
and who knows how many others she's killed (that chickenhawk she
encountered upon arriving in L.A. must have died -- Angel could
enter his apartment.) Plus California has a rather draconian system
of 3 strikes/you're out. And if any, I mean, any of her
murders were commited in conjunction with another felony, she's
eligible for murder one even without the premeditation. Thus she
could very well be on death row...which actually makes life a
helluva lot safer for her, because death row inmates are generally
segregated from the main prison populace. She's not hitting the
electric chair anytime soon, though (does California even have
the death penalty?) Appeals are almost mandatory and take several
years to exhaust (ironically, many prisoners who have tried to
drop their appeals were stymied for years, the ultimate conflict
of justice versus injustice.) Small points: when Angel went to
visit her, she was obviously a part of the main prison population
(she spoke of resisting the temptation to slap down a challenger)
and thus was not likely on death row. And, as a Slayer, she's
probably not exactly vulnerable to being killed. Ask all the vampires,
demons, Big Bads, et cetera on BtVS how hard it is to take out
a Slayer.
Darker Than
Fiction - Rebecca Rand Kirshner's "Sonnenblume" (comic
spin off) -- KdS, 09:22:15 01/14/03 Tue
As I described in a post earlier today, I just acquired a copy
of the comic collection Tales of the Slayer Vol. 1. One
particular story in it conjured up such a powerful and conflicted
response in me that I have to write something on the board to
get some clarity about my own ideas and see what other people
think. The story in question is Sonnenblume, scripted by
regular BtVS scriptwriter Rebecca Rand Kirshner and drawn (?)
by Mira Friedman.
(The following paragraph consists of a detailed synopsis of the
story and can be skipped if you've read it). The story opens with
Slayer (we correctly assume) Anni discussing in voice-over captions
her standard teenage confusions and desire to be part of something
bigger than herself. Shockingly, however, the pictures reveal
that she is part of something bigger than herself - she's marching
in the ranks of the Bund Deutscher Maedel (the female version
of the Hitler Youth) at the Nuremberg rally. A tiny Adolf Hitler
(shown in extreme long view) delivers what I assume to be a genuine
quotation about the need for Germans to be strong, fast and tough
given their destiny as rulers of the world. Anni's Hitler Youth
brother Karl sends her to buy bread for the family, and she buys
from a local bakery owned by a family named Green. Mr. Green is
disturbed when his young daughter praises Anni's uniform and a
final shot of the bakery reveals a Star of David. On the way home
Anni kills a brown-shirted vampire attacking a young woman, the
voice over describing how she wants to be like everyone else but
isn't. When she gets home she is upbraided by her mother for dropping
the bread and breaking her mother's rolling pin (with which she
staked the vamp). Her mother upbraids her again when she tells
her that the bread was from the Greens' bakery, telling her not
to buy from Jews. We then see Anni training with her Watcher,
an elderly wheelchair-using man of paternal aspect. He appears
to have no problem with the fact that she is wearing a prominently
swastika-emblazoned singlet. In voice over, she asks him if there
are evil human beings, and he tells her that there is evil all
around them, and that she must learn to recognise it in her gut.
At school, a blond, cigarette-smoking Nazi (with an intriguing
hint of Spike about the face) tells Anni and her class that Germany's
blood is under threat from Jewish contamination. At home, Anni
dreams confusedly of Green, the vampire she killed, and the caricature
poster Jew from her school lesson. We then see Anni walking with
two other BDM girls. Mrs. Green greets her and the other two girls
are disturbed by her friendship with a Jewish family. Anni bows
to peer pressure and shockingly insults Mrs. Green, saying that
she'd rather eat shoes than anything touched by a Jew. Anni blows
out the candles at her fifteenth birthday party. Karl complains
about the cake, saying it tastes of old shoes, and leaves for
his Hitler Youth meeting. A little while later, Anni climbs out
of the window to go patrolling, wearing a dress patterned with
sunflowers (sonnenblume - the nickname Mrs. Green used to her
at the beginning). She walks into the midst of the infamous Kristallnacht
pogrom and sees the Green family being beaten by a group of Nazis.
While the Nazis laugh at a joke, the Greens sneak into a building.
An SS officer orders the Jews loaded into a truck and asks where
the Greens went. In voice over, Anni decides that she must "do
her duty". She walks over to the building the Greens entered.
The SS man asks her if she knows where the Greens are. She says
yes, points to the door of the house, then snaps the SS man's
neck with a Slayer powered uppercut. In voice over, she explains
that she has recognised the real evil and decided to fight it,
because she can't be like everyone else. She lets herself into
the house and cautiously calls to the Greens, announcing herself
as "Sonnenblume".
During World War Two itself and shortly afterwards, there were
quite a few stories in which typical American superheroes fought
the forces of the Third Reich on the battlefield itself or the
home front. While most of these stories were unambiguously propagandistic,
the authors were simply reflecting the crisis of their era. As
the last survivors of the period enter old age and the Third Reich
becomes for better or worse part of history, such stories appear
more disturbing and less defensible. If we have any deep feeling
at all, we can't simply enjoy a story in which some superhero
figure goes off to intervene, save the Jews and biff the Nazis.
We can't forget that neither Superman nor Captain America flew
down, that no Chosen One arose, that a large proportion of the
population of Europe were tortured and murdered in circumstances
that most of us are lucky enough to find unimaginable (and my
greatest sympathy and admiration goes to the people on this board
who have survived something close to such circumstances). I find
it hard to read Sonnenblume without wondering about the
circumstances in which it was written. Were the various writers
given freedom to write about any period they wished? Or was there
some ill-formed feeling of necessity that someone write a "Nazi
story" in a spirit of conscious Confrontation of Issues and
quest for Significance? It's hard not to speculate about Kirschner's
and Friedman's own national and religious backgrounds, and I make
no apology for suggesting that they are relevant. If one has a
personal connection to a certain subject, it does give one greater
leeway in writing about it.
Given the obvious and frightening potential for a monumental lapse
of taste, the contrasts between Sonnenblume and the other
stories included in the collection are remarkable. While the other
stories are drawn in styles variously naturalistic, impressionistic
or in the standard issue DC/Marvel tradition, Sonnenblume
is drawn in a stylised manner reminiscent of woodcut and Central
European children's book illustration, announcing that we are
reading something in the style of fable rather than naturalistic
storytelling. Even given the usual Buffyverse suspension of disbelief,
the climax of the story is hard to credit, as the Greens slip
effortlessly away from the Nazis and Anni beats an SS officer
to death in the street without attracting any hostile attention.
The wish-fulfilment is so overt that it seems to acknowledge that
this is a dream of what should have happened in a decently-ordered
universe. Moreover, the small-scale and provisional nature of
Anni's victory saves the story from seeming to deny real-life
horror. Some notable choices are taken to universalise the situation
so that we can't dismiss it as taking place in a safely alien
society. All the characters speak standard English, with no stage
Teutonicism in the manner of the gratuitous high school French
that mars Amber Benson's story. Similarly the Jewish family are
given a name that is not even Germanic, but thoroughly Anglo-Saxon.
The division between human and demonic evil is also blurred in
the story in a disturbing manner. The vampire Anni kills is drawn
in a manner less reminiscent of the standard ME vampire than the
typical cartoon vamp, human but for outrageously extended fangs.
There is a hint of the ME vampire's exaggerated brow ridges, but
it may simply be the blocky nature of the art. (This is also in
contrast to the other stories in the volume and other BtVS/AtS
comic strips I've seen, in which vamp-faced vampires are usually
drawn as even more bestial and inhuman than the TV versions).
By contrast, the street Nazis are drawn with subliminally fanged
teeth. It is unclear (although it's the impression I get) whether
Anni kills the SS officer on the story's final page. If so, it
would seem to be a breach of the Buffyverse's usual rigid prohibition
of killing humans. However, this prohibition usually operates
in societies where human miscreants are subject to some form of
justice system however flawed. In a truly lawless society, or
one where the law is thoroughly perverted to evil ends, is the
Slayer's jurisdiction extended? Another disturbing issue is the
nature of Anni's Watcher. Is he speaking guardedly of Nazism when
he discusses evil around them, or is he himself a Nazi talking
about the menaces of Jews and Communism? Before you reject the
idea, there are aspects of the presentation of the Watchers' Council's
philosophy that would not be incompatible with fascistic political
beliefs.
My key problem with the story, though is the necessity of its
writing. It seems that the writer and artist themselves are treading
with desperate delicacy, struggling with conflicting ideas and
the potential for aesthetic and moral disaster. Again I have to
ask the question, what was the driving force for this story to
be written? To explore the dangers of conformity, the dangers
of myths featuring dehumanised Evil? Or just because a Third Reich
story seemed necessary to attract readers? Are there subjects
so inherently massive that any fantastic approach is too inherently
frivolous? Any ideas?
[> Re: Darker Than Fiction
-- Rahael, 09:45:19 01/14/03 Tue
An excellent, thought provoking post.
The question of whether such horrifying historical periods like
Nazi Germany should ever be tackled by Art, or only be tackled
by certain kinds of art is a pretty huge question.
What's your gut feeling? Were you repulsed, or was it genuinely
thought provoking?
[> [> Maus was the way
to do it -- luna, 11:27:40 01/14/03 Tue
If art is going to deal with that period, I think the two volumes
of Maus, by Art Spiegelman, were the best way a graphic novel
could approach it. No heroic saviour, but a way of seeing the
truth. A lot more tasteful than Life Is Beautiful, too.
[> I loved "Sonneblume."
(spoilers) -- Rob, 10:26:10 01/14/03 Tue
It was my favorite story in the collection, precisely because
of these controversial issues. I don't think it's tasteless. Just
look at perhaps the greatest book ever written on the Holocaust.
It is a comic book named "Maus," by Art Spiegelmen,
writing about his parents' experiences in the Holocaust. The Jews
are depicted as literal mice, and the Nazis as Cats. While this
may seem simplistic, such visual symbols make for an extremely
powerful book, because it turns the stereotypes on their heads.
The Nazis called the Jews vermin, so this book turns it around
by making them mice. In fact, I think the style of this comic
was meant to be a direct homage to "Maus," which has
similar blocky cartooning. I found "Sonneblume" to be
thought-provoking and brilliant, the way it has metaphor collide
with real life. The Slayer is meant to protect society from evil.
But what happens when the society the Slayer is meant to protect
is more evil than any legendary monsters that may be lurking on
its outskirts? I think the point of this story is that the Holocaust
was such an awful, unthinkable situation that it transcends all
rules. The reader must make the judgment for her/himself whether
this Slayer is justified in slaying humans, but the important
thing is that Anni decided for herself that it was the only thing
she could do.
Rob
[> [> Re: I loved "Sonneblume."
(spoilers) -- Rahael, 10:35:35 01/14/03 Tue
Thanks for confirming something for me Rob - I thought that every
tale in that book was an homage to another story/book/novel -
i.e Jane Espenson's was an homage to Jane Austen. I thought when
I read it that Sonneblume was an hommage to Maus.
Another point is that when 'society' is so uncohesive, dysfunctional
and at breaking point as it is depicted in that particular Tale
- Sonneblume is still protecting society. Still protecing the
values of 'society'. The Vamps she is meant to fight become suddenly
less threatning than human beings doing terrible wrongs, and it
is explicitly highlighted here that we cannot simplify 'humans'
and 'demons/Vampires' into actual political and historical situations,
cos here we have as series of historical events where the demons
and vamps are not 'politicised others'. They are still there.
They are just suddenly put into perspective, just as our normal
fears and emotional 'demons' suddenly seen part of ordinary life.
[> [> [> to finish
typing my last sentence! -- Rahael, 10:38:50 01/14/03 Tue
They are just suddenly put into perspective, just as our normal
fears and emotional 'demons' suddenly seem to be just a part of
normal life. When society breaks down so badly, we get plunged
into a world where the fears and demons of ordinary life would
seem like a blessed relief.
[> [> [> [> Great
thoughts, Rah. -- Rob, 11:05:25 01/14/03 Tue
[> [> D'oh. Should have
read the whole thread. -- luna (Anyway, we agree), 11:33:39
01/14/03 Tue
[> The Slayer vs. society
(spoilers for Tales) -- ponygirl, 12:33:17 01/14/03 Tue
I'd say the theme throughout Tales was the idea of the Slayer
standing apart from the world. She fights to protect society even
when it seems the values of that society aren't worth perserving.
The Slayer of the Middle Ages is killed by the superstitious townspeople,
the French Slayer is unknowingly used in the complicated class
struggles pre Revolution. The Jane Austen era Slayer is hampered
by gender roles, and the vampire in the Western story suggests
that she has more in common with the Hispanic/Native American
Slayer than the white men of the Council. Nikki's tale has hints
of the Black Power movement of the '70s.
Yet despite many reasons for the Slayer to oppose or at least
turn away from her duty, Sonnenblume is the only story where she
does. As it is made clear in the opening story with the First
Slayer, the Slayer's job is to battle monsters, then move on,
leaving society's non-supernatural concerns alone. One can imagine
the temptation of the Slayer to change society, to impose herself
on history. It seems the Council has its own version of Star Trek's
prime directive, for its own protection, and, it is made clear
in the Middle Ages story, for the Slayers.
In Sonnenblume, though this all changes. I agree that the difference
between it and the other Tales in both drawing and tone is striking.
It is also notable that Ani is far younger than any of the other
Slayers we see. I agree KdS, this does come across as a fable
or a children's story. The time the Slayer found an evil so great,
an issue so clear, that she had to take a stand against human
society. And it seems clear to me despite the hopeful ending,
that she failed and ultimately died in the attempt. Just as all
the other Slayers did or will.
I agree with your points KdS about Anni's Watcher. We don't know
if he is encouraging her to fight Nazis or support them, he is
telling her to use her judgement. And there is much in Anni's
depiction to suggest that she could have just as easily made a
very different decision.
I think finally the lesson we can take from Sonnenblume is that
the job of the Slayer is perhaps not truly to protect society
or change society but to look at evil, recognize it, and use everything
in her power to destroy it.
Sonnenblume wasn't my favourite story in Tales, nor my least favourite,
but I do appreciate its inclusion. And I do prefer the approach
taken with it, some stories we can only look at in a more definite
frame of fiction. Like Maus, it needs some distancing for the
story not to collapse under the weight of its subject.
[> The Sight of Evil
-- Sara, 16:20:35 01/14/03 Tue
I'm coming out on the side of loving "Sonnenblume."
I think we need to be careful of being too sensitive about certain
things - can only Jews write about the Holocaust? Only those that
survived it? Can only African-Americans write about slavery or
segregation? Only women about patriarchal oppression? If we limit
what times, events and voices are fair game we limit the ideas
that we're exposed to, because we shut down people who might speak
of, and to them. The only restriction I would put on any sensitive
topic that it be handled with truth, and respect.
I think "Sonnenblume" meets my critieria. It uses the
setting to show a fascinating window into recognizing evil. The
slayer has been taught to understand demonic evil, and yet will
she be able to identify human evil when it's all around her? She
is being taught that Jews are evil, not just that they're dangerous
politically, not just that they're damaging the financial stablity
of Germany but that they are evil. As a child, will
she recognize that this lesson is evil? Not necessarily. We see
children of many backgrounds learning that entire groups of people
are evil, should be eliminated. A friend of mine that visited
family in Israel during one of the suicide bombings in Tel Aviv,
saw 7 year old Palestinan children calling for death to the Jews
and celebrating those murders. And sadly, we know that this is
only one example that's happening in the world today. Plenty of
different groups to hate, and plenty of hate to go around.
The thing I liked best about the story was that it didn't matter
which choice Anni made at the end. I think it would have been
just as powerful a story if she had walked away, because the whole
point was about the choice. It wasn't about some revisionist fairy
tale of super powered heros winning World War Two, it was about
how evil looks, and will you recognize it when it's the face of
your brother, your neighbor, your friend, your country?
- Sara
Buffy-related
reading recommendation. -- Rob, 11:31:16 01/14/03 Tue
I remember a while back people speaking here about Sarah Vowell,
the essayist/columnist, who also happens to be good friends with
Doug Petrie. An essay in her newest book, "The Partly Cloudy
Patriot" is especially interesting, in that it incorporates
an interview/conversation she had with Doug. The article, ostensibly
about the Gore/Bush election campaigns, manages to touch on everything
from "Revenge of the Nerds" to "My So-Called Life"
to American history to..."Buffy"! There is an extensive
section in the article examining the nerds of the Buffyverse (Willow,
Giles, Wes), and how effectively Joss and the ME writing staff
have created the postmodern nerd. The article argues that had
Gore taken a hint from Joss (mixing self-deprecating humor while
at the same time embracing his nerdiness for all the world to
see), he might have won the presidency. This is quite an article,
and quite a book, on the whole. I highly recommend it to everybody
here.
Rob
[> P.S. -- Rob, 11:32:47
01/14/03 Tue
The article is called "The Nerd Voice."
Rob
"The
slayer" -- Ferthepoet,
11:33:54 01/14/03 Tue
About the Eyes guys refeering to the slayer there has been a discussion
about wheter he meant Buffy or Faith, now there´s a third
possibility he may had been refeering to the First Slayer...
My Theory is that the First Slayer had been protecting the candidates
before impending the First Evil to know who they were but now
that Buffy had rejected the First Slayer and her ways now she
had simply decided to walk away and don´t care any more
about prorecting her candidates from the FE
[> That's a very interesting
idea. More to mull over! -- Rob, 11:54:25 01/14/03 Tue
[> [> The eyes have it!
-- Hauptman, 14:09:34 01/14/03 Tue
Interesting point. Josh, Inc. is shuffling the cards here. I have
no idea where the red queen is, but I know it's probably not going
to be where I thought. I doubt this has anything to do with Buffy's
resurection. I mean, the girl dies all the time. I don't remember
exactly what the eye said ( I have given up on recording every
episode as I never watch the tapes, or watch them too much and
ruin my appetite for the DVDs) but I think it could be Faith,
evil-evil Faith who is the problem. If the slayer line lies with
an evil thing, or at least questionable thing, that may be enough
to turn the balance. Also, Giles is a murderer, Willow is a murderer,
Anya is a murderer a thousand times over, Angel murderer, Spike
Murderer, Andrew murderer, Dawn is a clepto (which is equivalent
to murder according to Three-Strikes laws in California). Buffy
isn't surrounded by the best people in the world. Karma, people,
Karma. The first evil has been seeping in for a long time.
Buffy/Whedon
trivia tidbit -- Arethusa, 12:10:26 01/14/03 Tue
I watched "Blind Fury" recently, as part of my deep
and abiding interest in Rutger Hauer's career (which incidentally,
led me to discover "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"). Two
characters in the movie were violent but comically stupid cowboy
types called Lyle and Tector Pike. Lyle and Tector Gorch were,
as most of you guys know, two violent but comically stupid cowboy
characters in Bad Eggs and Homecoming, and Pike was the named
of Buffy's boyfriend in the movie. Whedon isn't in the movie's
credits, but I think I detect his script-doctor fingerprints.
Does anyone else know of a movie from the early nineties that
just screams "Whedon was here"?
[> Re: Buffy/Whedon trivia
tidbit -- Darby, 12:35:41 01/14/03 Tue
I was recently listening to the directors' commentary on "Shallow
Hal" and it was mentioned that one of the last stages before
filming was to get a bunch of talented people in a room and read
through the script, one last "fix-it" session with a
group that can't be credited. I strongly suspect that, if this
is a common approach, Joss used to be one of those people (maybe
still is for a select few), even if he wasn't specifically a script
doctor on a given movie...
Yeah, I know that doesn't specifically address the question, but
it is another tidbit...
[> [> Yes, he used to
be a script doctor. -- Arethusa, 12:44:10 01/14/03 Tue
He worked on Speed (did early drafts or doctored), X-Men (the
only two funny lines in the movie are his), and others I can't
remember. Writers (Petrie and Esperson) on S3 commentaries both
said whenever someone compliments them on really good lines, almost
all of them were written by Whedon when he went over/punched up
the scripts.
[> [> [> True, but
this group thing is something different -- Darby, 12:56:33
01/14/03 Tue
[> Couldn't it be from "The
Wild Bunch"? -- Rahael, 14:18:30 01/14/03 Tue
Lyle and Tector Gorch are also characters from the Peckinpah movie.
[> [> Though there's
nothing to say -- Rahael, 14:23:56 01/14/03 Tue
that it couldn't have been Joss adding it in on both occasions
;)
[> [> [> I had no
idea! -- Arethusa, off to the video rental store., 16:52:30
01/14/03 Tue
[> [> [> Well, there's
his age... -- dub ;o), 18:38:24 01/14/03 Tue
How old was Joss in 1969? Was he even born?
;o)
[> [> [> [> Re:
Well, there's his age... -- Rahael, 02:04:36 01/15/03 Wed
I was assuming the Buffy-ish film that Arethusa was referring
to was made slightly later!
[> Re: Buffy/Whedon trivia
tidbit -- Michael, 17:10:14 01/14/03 Tue
Lyle and Tector Gorch were the names of two cowboys in Sam Peckinpah's
The Wild Bunch, which I believe was referenced in The Harvest
(Don't go all Wild Bunch on me now.)
Pike Bishop (Played by William Holden) was the leader of The Wild
Bunch.
Lyle and Tector were played by Ben Johnson and Warren Oates.
Probably someone's homage to Peckinpah, who has no doubt inspired
some of the slow-mo violence on Buffy (The Wish).
[> [> Re: Buffy/Whedon
trivia tidbit -- Utopia, 19:48:50 01/14/03 Tue
I believe Angel was a character in The Wild Bunch too.
slayer-mechanics
question -- Clen, 12:16:28 01/14/03 Tue
the turnover rate is quite high I'm sure, but there still seems
like there would have been a fair number of potentials (at least
before the Bringers started getting to them). Assuming some Slayers
are lucky, skillful, or just run and hide or get imprisoned, they
must commonly not be running low on supply.
What happens to the potentials who never get called? Are they
"supernaturally-sterile" after a certain age?
Demon-opause? Can the Chosen One become sterile too? Must the
Slayer be a young girl/woman?
[> The Calling -- Hauptman,
13:56:46 01/14/03 Tue
I actually wondered about that. Assuming that there was some cosciousness
at work when the Slayer-thing was set up, one must assume that
they used to have a huge turnover that required several girls
to take up the fight per year. I am not sure how many potentials
we have seen killed this season (I think it must be around five),
but there are roughly six left that we can see, plus Faith and
Buffy. That would give us at least one a month. What does that
mean? I dunno. I am just putting it out there that that is a lot
of slayers. Since Buffy wasn't aware of her Slayerness until she
was called, one has to assume that there are Slayers in the world
that have not been identified. There could be Slayers in the Amazon
Jungle or in Siberia. How did the Watchers find them anyway?
Okay, so there are always at least a dozen potential slayers.
Buffy has been running about since she was 16 and she is in ther
20s now. That would be around 12x7=84 potential in the age range
of 16 to 23. Kendra was recognized as a Slayer from childhood.
So there should be potential slayers that are just kids, younger
than 16. Where are they? And I wonder what happens to the older
slayers, those that hit the age Buffy is now without being called.
Maybe they are released. I would be interested in seeing an older
slayer potential. Can you imagine being forty and told that you
are the chosen one? Joyce the Vampire Slayer? "Honey, diner
is in the oven. Do your homework and go to bed. Mommy has to go
slay."
I suck at math, but just based on what I see, there should be
a lot of slayer potentials running around. Hundreds of them. 'Course
there may be more to being a potential than being a girl. There
may be all kinds of age, location, historical requirements that
have to be met (ex. Buffy is the only slayer who had an active
parent to my knowledge).
Finally, wouldn't be cool if Willow could come up with a spell
to activate all of the slayers at once? It is just magic and I
would think it easier than locating, tranporting and replacing
a soul...or raising the dead.
The First's
Thirst for Face (more things to make you go hmmm) -- neaux
(tongue-tied), 12:31:52 01/14/03 Tue
Ok.. we know The First is out to get Buffy and it could ultimately
be out to win the war of Evil vs. Good.
But what if it really just wants face? Maybe its looking to take
on the perfect persona.. or wants the cutest or most handsome-est
face out there. That would explain a lot of what is going on.
I mean seriously there are lots of Ugly disgusting demons and
ghouls out there.. and maybe The First realizes that the true
Face of Evil needs a makeover. Whenever we see The First, it tends
to shift into characters that look the most appealing to the person
or subject it is confronting.
Andrew sees The First as Warren and Johnathan.
Spike sees The First as Buffy and Dru.
But here is a more logical answer. What if The First doesnt choose
whose face it gets to wear. Maybe the Face of The First is chosen
by its' victim/subject. It explains why Angel sees Ms. Calendar
and other people from his past.
In this scenario, the issue of Face deals directly with the idea
of FACE-UP. This idea that you recognize the existance of something
and confront it bravely.
So now things become more interesting. Could it be that Andrew
needs to confront Warren and Johnathan? Spike needs to re-confront
Buffy and Dru?
The Form of Eve could represent Buffy/the scoobies' need to confront
the existance of SITs.
these are just a bunch of crazy thoughts I've had..
so what do ya think?
[> spoilers aired eps of
season 7 above. -- neaux, 13:34:08 01/14/03 Tue
[> facing up -- yeah, I
get it! -- Flo, 18:17:05 01/14/03 Tue
By George, I think you've got something here. My brain is moving
too fast for my fingers so bear with the stream-of-consciousness.
SO, if the entire show is about growing up, and an important part
of growing up is moving away from dualistic thinking (good v.
evil, black v. white, etc.), AND if, as previous posters have
suggested in previous threads, all the members of the SG, and
by extension of what the represent, all of us, must encounter
and integrate our "dark" and "light" aspects,
well, maybe this is what the FE is affecting by taking on the
faces of those we need to face up to.
Think about it -- who has been most susceptible to the influence
of the FE as it takes on various faces?
Andrew, who obviously has yet to see distinctions between polarities.
Dawn, (if Joyce was the FE afterall), who is just beginning to
see shades of grey, but who still is unclear. For instance, as
several brilliant posters have discussed, her tendency to see
vamps as humans, and to demonize Spike not for his vamp activity
but for his more human behavior.
The SIT's, who are depicted as being brand spanking new to this
whole evil thing.
All of these have valuable lessons to learn by facing their dark
sides in the faces the FE has taken on for them.
But what about Angel and Spike? Both have been incredibly susceptible
to being manipulated by the FE when it takes on the faces of those
they are connected with. Perhaps encountering their darkness and
seeing and accepting its destruction is part of the re-soul getting?
Thing is, why would the FE want us to grow into all our magnificent
shades of grey? Wouldn't the end of dualistic thinking effectively
destroy both good and evil themselves?
Maybe the FE wants this -- just like a hypothetical First Good
may want it. Maybe this is the whole point of the great polarity
game that humans have been playing for ages? Maybe this is indeed
the end of the world, but the outcome isn't win or lose, it's
just the ending of the game/war between the fabrications that
are good and evil.
Season 3--
Anne (contains S3 spoilers) -- Alison, 13:56:09 01/14/03
Tue
This may have been discussed ages ago, but I had never seen anne,
and just watched it when I got season three on DVD. I noticed
that the weapon Buffy takes from the "overseers" in
the hell dimenson(the one that was shown in the final credits
shot for season three)looks like the communist symbol. That got
me thinking about how the hell dimension could be seen as the
industrial revolution factories and the weapon as the Marxism
and the labor unions that ended the opression....any thoughts,
comments?
[> Re: Season 3-- Anne (contains
S3 spoilers) -- JM, 16:07:19 01/14/03 Tue
I never picked up on it myself, but once I saw it mentioned in
several published commentaries, I did notice it this time. It
seems way too deliberate to be a coincidence. As well as the "use
them up and spit them out" reference. I'm not sure that Joss
would actually like to be a film maker in communist USSR, but
since he penned the ep it might be his commentary on the ruthless
and demeaning business that is Hollywood. For all of the left
leaning politics of its denizens Tinsel Town sounds like one of
the most ruthlessly capitalist and market oriented businesses
and company towns in America. Though maybe I just watched too
many episodes of "Action." (Before it was killed by
said system. Sigh, Jay Mohr, miss ya.)
[> [> See Masq's ATPoBtVS
site under episode index and check out "Anne". . .
-- Finn Mac Cool, 17:12:48 01/14/03 Tue
That point is addressed, and supplies a quote from Joss Whedon
explaining it.
[> A twist on things...(spoilers
for BtVS 3.1) -- Random, 17:51:04 01/14/03 Tue
I've seen this particular image examined several times on this
board. However, the prevailing interpretation is hardly the only
one. What also needs to be noted is that Buffy co-opts the weapons
of the oppressors. The hammer and sickle, symbols of labor,
are what give the demons power over their slaves. And the humans
are slaves, not merely degraded tools of capitalism --
capitalist tools at least get paid, however inequitably.
So we see a classic example of dehumanization through the ultimate
egalitarianism...enforced by an elite. Not an unapt parallel to
the actuality (rather than Marxist theory) of Leninist/Stalinist
communism in the USSR. When Buffy asserts her identity, it can
be seen as the triumph of rugged individualism over the egalitarian
communist ethic where everyone is "nobody" [special]
and thus equally degraded. She refuses to cast of personal identity
("I'm Buffy [brief pause]the Vampire Slayer. And you are...?")
regardless of the threats employed to destroy her individuality
(shades of "1984" or "Brave New World," anybody?)The
irony of Buffy's use of the hammer and sickle in battle against
their former owners could be considered as a commentary on the
ultimate fate of such totalitarian societies -- revolution by
the very workers that the government produced and controlled by
force.
Of course, the alternative explanations (see Masque's excellent
-- as always -- commentary on "Anne"; the religious
angle was quite perceptive)makes considerable sense too. I'm just
tossing out my initial reaction to the episode, a reaction based
primarily on the fact that the weapons were originally
in the hands of the demons and represented, both physically and
symbolically, the power the demons had over their slaves. BtVS
is, after all, about how a handful of individuals can change/save/destroy
the world by operating outside of the constricts (and, for that
matter, constructs) of society.
[> [> Great post
-- Rahael, 18:07:03 01/14/03 Tue
[> Some place in the DVD's...
-- CW, 19:25:47 01/14/03 Tue
There's an extra feature about weapons on the show. They explain
how they got that knife. To make a long story short, they wanted
something wicked looking and found that knife in a catalog.
A little trivia
tidbit on Boreanaz and how he's come through.... -- Briar
Rose, 15:28:37 01/14/03 Tue
David Boreanaz was an extra when he appeared on Buffy. He was
supposed to be in a couple of eps as "Bit Part Day Player"
and had his speaking lines added only after Joss saw real potential
in his acting and chemistry with SMG.
Boreanaz's story is now legendary among the Hollywood Hopefuls
slogging through their extra duties and praying for a shot. Unlike
most of them however, DB has become a better actor with every
episode. And the fact that he has been able to actually carry
the lead in his first actual full time part in a show is remarkable
and due largely to his screen presence.
Joss is molding careers with allowing fairly unknown and untried
actors to truly grow and he deserves a big amount of respect by
the acting/Industry community and the fans for that as well.
[> Re: A little trivia tidbit
on Boreanaz and how he's come through.... -- JM, 19:29:46
01/14/03 Tue
Joss himself notes that DB and NB didn't have anywhere near the
experience that SMG. ASH, and AH had but he could tell from the
beginning that they added something. (Well, his female crew clued
him in about DB.) I think that NB may not have had experience
but he definitely had innate talent. His comedic timing is superb
and the Pack proved that he can do menace. He's amazingly predatory.
DB's a little rockier the first season, though he has some deliveries
that hint at the actor he will one day be. In "Angel"
his interaction with Darla and his explanation of a soul are very
good. They get across the emotion of the moment so effectively,
and show how rivetingly he can deliver a single, seemingly fantastically
awkward line. [This from someone who's been mostly neutral about
Angel the character and never got the physical appeal of the typically
handsome.]
I think that by season two the actor and the crew had figured
out how to capitalize on his natural talents, and everything grew
from there. I think DB's talent for comedy ranks up there with
EC (who wasn't all that well known either). Angelus gave him a
chance to show what he could do naturally well. Not just malevolent
comedy but the energetically malicious and aimlessly negative
side of masculinity as well. And then he revealed something Joss
hadn't seen before as Grace in IOHEFY. And what he saw convinced
him that he had a new lead on his hands. [I think you're right,
in another environment, with less talented and innovative directors
and writers what DB was capable of might never have come to fruition.
Goodness, who knew Nathan Fillion had Mal inside of him?]
Personally, I think AA and especially AD are the real powerhouses
on "Angel," in that I think they can handle anything
that is thrown at them. But DB has given me many, many moments
of pure pleasure. His chemistry with JB is riveting, surpassing
IMHO even his with SMG. So many episodes, he's really impressed
me (warning several not fan faves): "Reprise" above
all, Yoko Factor, Dear Boy, Carpe Noctem, Provider, Couplet, Forgiving,
and Rain of Fire. And watching the earliest Buffy eps, I can see
how much he's grown. And he's been gracious enough to do it all
in front of us.
[> [> Thank you :-)
-- yabyumpan, 22:15:48 01/14/03 Tue
Thank you so much, it's so rare to see DB's talents acknowledged,
I some times feel I'm shouting in the desert. For me, he's a totally
compelling actor with a wide range which includes a lot of subtlety
and depth.
If you were
trapped in an elevator... -- ZachsMind, 15:38:19 01/14/03
Tue
Here's the scenario. You work for Mutant Enemy in a medium level
capacity. You happen to be around the network suits for UPN occasionally,
and you get people like Whedon & Noxon more than just their coffee,
but you get their coffee a lot too. You're far from someone with
any influence. All you have really is a mouth, a pair of legs,
and a first name that they say a lot with orders immediately after
your name.
One day, due to some strange series of coincidences that are too
strange and coincidental to bother explaining, you find yourself
in the elevator of some big building in California. You're there
as an assistant to Joss Whedon's assistant, and Whedon's talking
to some guy in a suit who looks important, and who confirms for
Joss that they just learned (and the news media hasn't picked
it up yet) that Sarah Michele Gellar is most definitely not coming
back next fall. They have to go up to this board room and talk
to some other suits. Whedon's still a little bummed from being
unable to save Firefly, and you sense he's very determined but
also a bit unsure about salvaging Buffy.. without Buffy. The meeting
they're about to have is very important, because it could mean
the beginning of the end for Mutant Enemy's vanguard show. It
could also potentially mean you getting laid off in six months
or less, if Buffy goes under.
Somewhere between floors nine & ten you hear a weird whirring
sound somewhere just outside the elevator, and suddenly with a
rather rude & frightening lurch, the elevator stops moving. You,
the guy in the suit, Joss Whedon & your immediate superior find
yourselves on the floor of the cab, wincing from bruises and looking
around as the lights flicker on & off. Then the power goes out
& you're all trapped in darkness. The emergency phone isn't working.
Any attempts to climb out of the elevator only prove to reveal
more danger to your situation. Apparently you're safe where you
are, but above you are power lines that randomly spark & well
it's just safer if y'all stay put.
After about twenty minutes or so, you manage to get someone on
the phone. It's a firefighter guy. He explains there was a contained
fire in one part of the building but that everything's okay and
y'all are gonna be alright. It's just gonna take about an hour
or so to get you out.
All you can do now is wait. So y'all sit there in the dark. Naturally,
once the imminent danger seems a little less imminent and you
all calm down a bit, the suit & Whedon start talking again about
life after Buffy. What can Whedon do with the characters that
are left after SMG leaves the show?
They ask Whedon's assistant (your immediate boss). She gives her
opinion. Then all three of them smile & nod and they look over
at you.
"What would be your ideal spinoff series after Buffy leaves?"
Whedon asks you. What would you say?
[> Re: If you were trapped
in an elevator... -- Miss Edith, 15:46:29 01/14/03 Tue
A series set in the past with Angelus, Darla, Spike and Dru together.
I would love to have another look at William and see the gangs
reaction to him when Dru first vamped him. Not to mention Drucilla's
reaction to being vamped. Some more of punk Spike from the 70s
would be good too as I always enjoyeed watching him and Dru together.
I would love to see the two of them drugged up at Woodstock.
[> My answer, to get things
started... -- ZachsMind, 15:52:53 01/14/03 Tue
[I wrote this & posted it elsewhere in response to something else,
and it gave me the idea of trying this here. Would like to hear
what y'all would want from a buffyless "season eight naught"
]
I think a spinoff, with Willow, Xander, Dawn & Spike picking up
the pieces of this year, stumbling into the role of rebuilding
The Watcher's Council, would kick some major butt. Have Dushku,
SMG & ASH (and others) make special guest appearances. Make the
new Slayer either Rona or Kennedy, with Principal Wood as a reluctant
Watcher in Training. Make sure all the other potentials die by
the end of season seven cuz I wouldn't wanna see any of them again,
but Kennedy, Rona & Wood are cool.
Dawn would begin briefly glowing at the most inopportune times,
and over time aquire the following abilities 1) flight and/or
telekinesis, 2) ability to control & focus energy, 3) dimensional
teleportation powers that manifest akin to kleptomania on a much
grander scale. However the more she uses her abilities, the less
human & more energy-bally she becomes. This is a very slow process,
happening over a period of one or more seasons.
Xander discovers he's a "luck magnet" which is why he's
never died no matter how many times he's gotten close to death
before. He basically can't die, but doesn't learn this until something
happens where he definitely shoulda died. Whenever he cheats fate
in a big way however, something bad happens to someone he loves.
He also accidently siphons luck at random times from other people.
This is an ability he has ALWAYS had in a small amount (explaining
quite a few things over the past several years) but begins to
increase in frequency & he starts to learn how to notice it happening,
and later how to control it.
Willow continues battling with the magicks within and her inner
demons. The First (after being thwarted in season seven of Buffy)
tries to turn Willow against her friends. Willow also discovers
possible access to a powerful GOOD source of magic, and works
to turn from the dark to the light. If Kennedy's still around
she and Willow also hop in & out of bedrooms a lot.
I don't know what Spike could do. Kinda stumped there now that
he's got a soul. But my point is, there are still stories to tell
here without Buffy.
Actually, if Wood's the Watcher & Rona's the Slayer, it'd tie
in nicely with some other programming on UPN, which wishes to
cater to a wider range of people rather than just stick to one
high profile demographic. At the risk of sounding politically
incorrect, a black Slayer would attract people regardless of ethnic
background to the show.
I don't care if SMG's a regular. I don't think she makes the show
anyway. It's the people around SMG that make her look so good.
I know the show's named BUFFY, but so long as Whedon's captaining
the ship, I'd hop on board a newly christened vessel.
Rather than naming it after somebody, call the spinoff "Remnants."
That way next time someone wants to jump ship it won't make much
difference.
[> [> It's all about
Anya! -- Sara, 16:44:52 01/14/03 Tue
I'm not good at this speculating, coming up with ideas, kind of
stuff. My next career will certainly not be auteur, however I
just love Anya and could definately see her carrying a show. "Anya
the Vengence Demon" (ATPoAtVD anyone?) showing the wacky
adventures of a vengence demon and her pals as they make life
miserable for bad boyfriends, cheating hubbies, and any other
guys that we gals would like to see tortured for eternity. Sounds
like a good tv night of rollicking fun to me! Hey Darbs, what
da ya think? Didn't recycle the bottles, huh? I wish...
Actually I love your ideas, I certainly see Auteur in your future!
My favorites are Rona and Wood as Slayer/Watcher, and Xander's
luck magnetness. Very cool!
- Sara, wondering where's a vengence demon when you need her?
[> [> Re: My answer,
to get things started... -- masio, 17:24:24 01/14/03 Tue
I really like this idea, especially the Xander part, but i don't
see why there would need to be a slayer. Since the next slayer
will probalby be summoned somewhere on the other side of the world,
i doubt they'd know her. I also see spike being used in a huge
capacity. He could have all the star power of Angel but we could
see it from the beginning of the whole soul scenario. Plus not
everyone would be so easy to forgive him for the past.
I also agree that the title should not reflect a character but
"remnants" is sort of silly. I think "slayers"
or "The Hellmouth" would work better.
[> [> [> Re: My answer,
to get things started... -- ZachsMind, 22:12:38 01/14/03
Tue
Well regarding the next Slayer being summoned from the other side
of the world, Whedon's specifically written things in such a way
as to insure that IF there's a next Slayer, whe will be summoned
in Sunnydale. All the known S.I.T.'s are in Sunnydale right now.
Unless he goes against the grain of his own writing and throws
in a wildcard - some woman from Ireland or Australia who both
The First & the Watcher's Council never knew about - then the
next Slayer has to be one of the S.I.T.s that we have been introduced
to. I'm splitting my bets between Kennedy & Roni. They're being
portrayed by the most talented actresses among the newcomers.
I chose the title "Remnants" because based on the direction
Whedon's been going with the series, when season seven is over,
there's a high chance there will be no Sunnydale, there will be
no Hellmouth, and there may or may not be a Slayer exactly, when
we get to the season finale.
If The First Evil is successful, neither Kennedy nor Roni will
turn. No one will. And with SMG leaving the series, Buffy will
be MIA. At the beginning of season six, Willow and the others
attempted to insure with the help of the Buffybot, that all the
lesser demons and creepy crawlies believed the Slayer to still
be very much alive.
So what I suspect is that in the early episodes of "Remnants"
the remaining characters after season seven would be putting the
pieces back together after a big major blowout. Willow could concoct
a plan that would make the baddies of the world believe Roni is
the next Slayer and that Wood is her Watcher. Odds are at first
neither of them would like the idea. Roni would effectively be
a powerless Slayer, at least at the beginning. Willow could use
her powers to bestow upon Roni abilities that would simulate the
powers of the Slayer, but they'd be unpredictable to say the least.
However, eventually the ruse would no longer work. The First would
probably spread the knowledge that The Slayer Chosen Line is extinguished.
If I understand what I've read about the comic book series "Fray"
correctly, there's not supposed to be a Slayer line for fifty
years after Buffy. So I surmise any spinoff series from Buffy
without the Slayer would be in a world that was slayerless. So
calling the tv series "Slayer" wouldn't make any more
sense than calling it "Buffy" without Buffy.
So again, I theorize "Remnants" as good a name as any.
Perhaps they'll call it "Hellmouth" but if there's no
longer a Sunnydale, the Hellmouth will probably cease to exist
too, at least in Sunnydale, and I'd rather not they create a new
series where the Scoobies run all over the planet hunting down
new Hellmouths and trying to close them. Talk about repetitive.
Been there done that bought the T-shirt.
The new show should be like a phoenix rising from the ashes of
a seven year roller coaster ride gone wonderfully mad. So "Remnants"
is what I'd pitch to Whedon if stuck in an elevator with him and
a network suit. Throw in some scantily clad babes and a keg of
beer and it'd be a party.
[> [> Re: My answer,
to get things started... -- masio, 17:57:27 01/14/03 Tue
I really like this idea, especially the Xander part, but i don't
see why there would need to be a slayer. Since the next slayer
will probalby be summoned somewhere on the other side of the world,
i doubt they'd know her. I also see spike being used in a huge
capacity. He could have all the star power of Angel but we could
see it from the beginning of the whole soul scenario. Plus not
everyone would be so easy to forgive him for the past.
I also agree that the title should not reflect a character but
"remnants" is sort of silly. I think "slayers"
or "The Hellmouth" would work better.
[> Survivor: The Hellmouth
(hosted by Clem), or... -- Dichotomy, 16:08:25 01/14/03
Tue
Clem Knows Best
My Favorite Demon (starring Clem)
Late Night with Clem
The Odd Couple (starring Clem and Spike)
[> Assuming I wouldn't be
too intimidated to speak. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:26:50
01/14/03 Tue
Perhaps the option I favor most is a spinoff with Faith and Xander
as well as some new characters. However, a problem might be it
would come off too Angelesque, and, of course, Eliza Dushku would
have to be available.
I personally speak against a spinoff with Spike (except possibly
as a supporting character) since there's already one vampire with
a soul and his own show.
Idea #2: Bring in a brand new Slayer and a brand new Watcher.
You don't even need any characters from Buffy or Angel, except
possibly as guest stars. It would be really cool to see ME explore
the Buffyverse through the eyes of a whole different set of characters.
Idea #3: Even though Angel is a Buffy spinoff, it was designed
to have a darker tone and a different plot arc from its parent
show. Perhaps ME could go the other way and create a lighter spinoff
of Buffy. Not neccessarily on the level of, oh say, Sabrina the
Teenaged Witch, but leaning more towards the comedy angle. Dawn,
Xander, Anya, possibly Willow could all work in this.
Naturally, my opinion of what a good Buffy spinoff might be could
change when I see the end of this season (to see whose dead, whose
changed, and what has happened to Sunnydale and the Buffyverse
at large.
[> Re: If you were trapped
in an elevator... -- Michael, 17:05:18 01/14/03 Tue
One of the things that makes the series so great is its ability
to use the aspects of the supernatural to deal with every day
issues.
Therefore, how about a series entitled The Slayer Chronicles?
Create a series of episodes that follow the earlier adventures
of the slayers. Write them in an arc style and maybe tell a story
about a particular slayer over a period of weeks. Then move onto
another slayer, not necessarily in chronological order. The writers
could address issues or just have fun.
Think of the fun having different TV and movie stars playing the
slayers and their enemies. Wouldn't Gillian Anderson make a great
Watcher?
Have the whole thing narrated by Anthony Head.
[> [> Like Quantam Leap!!
-- Helen, 02:33:46 01/15/03 Wed
[> Spin offs -- Celebaelin,
17:30:18 01/14/03 Tue
Giain maiden/woman/hag coven Willow/Anya/Dawn? complications Macbeth
"When shall we three meet again?" but not EXACTLY like
charmed, right?
or
Spillow kick ichor and take grimoires full of names (?Wike) good
or evil it still works, how does balance thing pan out exactly?
PLUS male fantasy element MINUS demographic changes due to implausable
retrograde female disempowerment and sexual preference double
shuffle
or
erm...the natural successor slayer (maximise demographic as desired)
is not as gregarious but in addition to education from her watcher
is regularly vistited by the First Good in the form of, well,
anyone we know really with wisdom/cryptic advice etc
[> Well, first off...
-- Wisewoman, 18:27:15 01/14/03 Tue
I'd wanna know how I could tell they were all smiling and nodding
and looking over at me...in the dark!!
Then I'd lay it on the line...Buffy and Spike go out together.
(No, not as in "dating"...sheesh.) At the end of Season
7 they are both either killed saving us all from the apocalypse
of the FE or they're trapped inside the Hellmouth while closing
it forever, or some combination of the above. This is because
SMG is either gonna get pregnant pretty quick or go into heavy-duty
movie making mode, and because JM, whether you believe it or not,
is now in his 40s and it's gonna start to become obvious that
he's not an "ageless" vampire. Anya may come to a bad
end with them, or she may just depart, but EC isn't coming back
either.
Okay, they're out of the way, so I pick Kennedy for the next slayer,
and she's now in a couple with Willow, so it's back to the the
master bedroom for the Divine Ms. Rosenberg. Giles is the last
remnant of the CoW and he doesn't want to stay in North America
any longer than necessary, so he gives Xander a crash course in
Watching and takes off, possibly to appear in occasional cameos.
The main youth/romantic themes have to be carried by Dawn, who
is not and never will be the Slayer (if I have anything
to say about it!), but who still has to have a place to live until
she graduates high school.
The beauty part? We're back to a Slayer, a Watcher, and two Scoobies
(Willow and Dawn) which was the initial formula for success. Next
up...some kinda brooding dark hunk for Dawn to drool over or...no...maybe
a beachboy blonde...
;o)
[> [> How could you have
seen them in the dark? (many possible answers) -- ZachsMind,
22:40:08 01/14/03 Tue
"I'd wanna know how I could tell they were all smiling
and nodding and looking over at me...in the dark!!"
Uhm.. Your eyes adjusted to the dark.
*ding*
Uh. The emergency lights came on but not enough power to actually
get you out of the elevator.
*ding*
Joss Whedon always carries a flashlight - didn't you know that?
*ding*
It was the kinda dark that you see in tv shows where there's an
unrealistic light source for the camera but the actors pretend
they can't see very well.
*ding*
They were really aliens from another planet and they were about
to eat your brain.
*ding*
Your immediate employer was blind but had a seeing eye dog.
*ding*
The network suit was wearing a windsor knotted tie that glows
in the dark.
*ding*
The lights didn't really go out but you had on your trusty pair
of fear sensitive sunglasses.
*ding*
They weren't really smiling and nodding but I was trying to make
you feel better.
*ding*
Joss Whedon is in the habit of saying stage blocking out loud
so you heard that they were smiling and nodding and looking over
at you cuz Whedon was reading the script. Uhm. Err.. With his
flashlight.
*ding*
Grrr! Argh! Oh gee whiz! I dunno! Whaddaya want from me!!?
*storms off melodramatically in a sarcastic huff*
Thank you everybody! I'll be here all week! Don't forget to tip
your waitress! Good night!
[> [> [> LOL --
dub ;o), 06:24:10 01/15/03 Wed
[> the show: "GOT WOOD?"
-- neaux, 18:45:46 01/14/03 Tue
Think Boston Public meets Buffy.
Principal Wood runs a tight ship at Sunnydale High. But with the
school now accepting Demons and the Undead as well as Humans...
things get a little out of control. How does Wood cope?
Episodes would include:
Principal Wood giving detentions to Hell Dimensions.
Principal Wood falling for the French/Dragonese Teacher
Principal Wood realizing one of his students is cheating by reading
minds.
Principal Wood has a really big Bat, so everyone calls him "Batman."
[> Per Nic Brendon's suggestion...
-- cjl, 21:01:18 01/14/03 Tue
The Xander/Spike Detective Agency, with Kennedy or Rona as the
Slayer/hired muscle, and Willow as the femme (non-)fatale who
gives the boys their meatier, mystical cases.
Spike could either still be souled vamp, or shanshu-ed, depending
on how they end S7. Mostly comedy, but occasional sidetracks to
the serious (see above), especially when Spike's evil past comes
back to haunt him.
Guest stars: SMG, Michelle T, Juliet Landau, Mark Metcalf and
Julie Benz (in flashback), David Boreanaz (if available), Kali
Rocha, and Maggie Smith as William's mom.
[> Re: If you were trapped
in an elevator... -- Anneth, 21:26:04 01/14/03 Tue
Scooby Gang: Voyager
At S7's climactic grand finale, Xander, Willow, Spike, and Anya
are sucked into the Hellmouth when Dawn accidentally channels
the Key energy for a moment, leaving our intrepid heros stuck
off in some totally unknown demon-dimension. Each episode chronicles
their desperate attempt to get back to the Sunnydale they know
and love. Along the way, they pass through innumerable hell-dimensions
and equal parts hilarity and character-development ensue. They
could run into different versions of themselves (the return of
Vamp Willow and XanderXander?), earlier or later incarnations
of themselves or people they love or hate (Tara? Oz? Joyce? MayorSnake?),
explore the things that never were, a dimension where all slayers
are men and watchers are women? A dimension where there are Human
Slayers?) and kick a lot of ass.
So far I've enjoyed this season, but it has kind of a claustrophobic
feeling - most of the action takes place in the Summers residence
now-adays. It's kind of frustrating to compare this season to,
say, season 2, where things happen in all sorts of different locales
(Angel's apt, the factory, the school library, classrooms, hallways,
graveyards, the Bronze), I think that this Journey Through Hell
(big metaphore for all that growing up we experience when we hit
about 23 years) would open things up really well, and help explore
the characters and their possibilities. The character development
this season has been a little lacking, too, what wiht all the
impending doom and stuff. Who has time for self-examination when
the world's about to end, anyway?
That's my two cents, anyway. Good game!
Anneth
[> [> Anneth -- great
idea, I love it! -- Flo, 00:27:46 01/15/03 Wed
[> Ship them all off to
LA -- Tyreseus, 21:48:05 01/14/03 Tue
Buffy somehow ends the season by destroying the Hellmouth in Sunnydale,
which causes it to shift to LA. All the remaining Buffy characters
transfer over to Angel the Series and we can stop all this cross
network nonsense.
Or, since that seems unlikely and will still leave ME at the helm
of only one show...
Same idea as above, but the hellmouth moves across the country
to a small town in upstate New York. Rona is called as the slayer,
but watcherless, Xander, Willow and Kennedy agree to act as her
watchers. Since Dawn is still a minor and there's still no sign
of Hank Summers, they petition for guardian status (even an arranged
marriage to help get through the process - causing tension in
the Kennedy/Willow relationship) and the whole gang moves to a
place they don't like, don't know, and feel incredibly out of
place. Willow gets a job teaching at NYU, commuting into the city
daily. Xander, unable to find construction work, becomes a stay-at-home
dad (where he takes up drinking and becomes more like his own
father until he takes control of his own destiny finally). Kennedy
takes a job as a school librarian at the small high school that
serves the county. Dawn and Rona, best friends, often sneak into
NYC to meet up with a mysterious slightly older kid who bears
a striking resemblence to Buffy's vampire ex-boyfriend of yesteryear.
The new hellmouth is located under the upstate mansion of "the
ambassador," an unexplained diplomatic position with tight
security and mysterious secrets.
Touching and
the F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- spaceclown, 19:03:22 01/14/03
Tue
In Showtime, right after Spike dreams of Buffy, then wakes and
sees the First Evil as Buffy, she touches his face and he seems
to react to her touch. Anybody know what's up with that? I thought
that it/she couldn't interact corporally.
[> Re: Touching and the
F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- Utopia, 19:13:56 01/14/03 Tue
She doesn't touch his face. If you look carefully you see that
she sort of makes moves as if she were going to, but her hand
never makes contact.
I suspect that he reacted because she was in his personal space.
Heh.
[> [> thanks! --
spaceclown, 19:34:27 01/14/03 Tue
[> [> It is kinda misleading...
-- ZachsMind, 21:17:45 01/14/03 Tue
If memory serves, and I find myself watching The First closely
nowadays to see if I can catch them goofing, Buffy/First puts
her hand up to Spike's cheek. Her hand is between us and him,
which shows how sometimes TV can play tricks on the eyes, since
we only see things from one angle. This can play with depth perception.
Something directors like to do. But if you watch closely, Buffy/First
then moves her hand away and moves her finger as if to tap it
playfully on his nose. Her finger is easily centimeters from his
face.
"Is this bothering you? Is this bothering you? I'm not
touching you!" - Tom Servo, Manos the Hands of Fate
[> Re: Touching and the
F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- Liv, 19:21:09 01/14/03 Tue
Initially that struck me too, but then I just figured it might
have appeared that way because of the camera angle, with MorphyBuffy
stopping just short of grazing Spike's cheek. Spike may have been
reacting more to the motion than to an actual physical sensation.
Or I could just be rationalizing an ME gaffe. Who knows?
What really drove me insane was the telepathy scene. Not only
did it seem odd that Buffy initiated it, but I reviewed the scene
several times and that simply is not SMG's voice! This has probably
been addressed already, but any theories as to who really spoke
and what it implies?
Liv
[> [> Are you a Canadian?
-- Finn Mac Cool, 19:32:21 01/14/03 Tue
From what I have heard, the Canadians got a different voice, but
SMG's was added later before it came to the U.S.
[> [> [> Re: Are you
a Canadian? -- Liv, 19:35:11 01/14/03 Tue
Really?!
Hehe... well, I AM Canadian, but I downloaded the ep.
Weirdness. Did they think we wouldn't notice?
[> [> [> Whoa! Thanks
for clearing that up! -- Wisewoman, 20:07:43 01/14/03 Tue
I watched the ep first on cable from a Boston station and it was
SMG's voice. Two hours later I watched it on Canadian TV and though,
"Huh??!!" It was definitely not her voice and
sounded so different from the previous version I'd seen I thought
I was losing it...but then I think that so often lately...oh well.
;o)
[> [> [> [> I'm
glad that's cleared up, too. I watched the scene over and over...
-- Rob, 20:30:27 01/14/03 Tue
...and, being in NY, I kept hearing SMG's voice. I was wondering
whether everybody else was crazy or I was. Now the discrepancy
is finally explained!
Rob
[> [> [> [> [>
and, again, thanks -- Jem, 21:49:37 01/14/03 Tue
In a rare break from my usual lurking, I had asked about this
earlier, but was too slow to catch the response. My message was
archived before I could check to see if I was the only crazy one...and,
nope, I'm just Canadian. Just wanted to add to the chorus of thanks...
[> [> [> Re: Are you
a Canadian? -- lynx, 00:44:44 01/15/03 Wed
this is almost a definite by now. i am canadian and it was NOT
SMG's voice.
[> [> Re: Touching and
the F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- spaceclown, 19:56:08 01/14/03
Tue
I agree...that telepathy thing was seemingly from out of nowhere.
I guess it will be important at some point later in the season.
[> [> [> Re: Touching
and the F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- Cheryl, 20:14:35 01/14/03
Tue
My take, and from what I've read here and elsewhere, is that Willow's
ability to communicate telepathically was shown at the end of
Season 5, when she communicated with Spike to rush the tower and
then again in Season 6 when she assisted the Scoobies slaying
in the cemetery.
Then, this season she and Buffy "melded" (for lack of
a better word) when Willow returned (after Willow and Scoobies
couldn't see each other and Willow nearly got eaten) and Buffy
gave Willow her strength (cuz she had plenty to spare) to help
her heal.
In Showtime, Buffy communicates with Willow telepathically, but
not Xander. Willow communicates with Xander and Buffy - that's
why Buffy tells Willow to get Xander (and Xander exclaims "what?!"
in the middle of the SITs debate).
Does that make sense?
And hopefully the board will let me post this, cuz I've been having
a heck of a time all night posting anything here.
[> [> [> [> Special
abilities (Showtime spoiler) -- spaceclown, 20:32:38 01/14/03
Tue
Yes, that does make more sense now. Thanks for the info.
[> Re: Touching and the
F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- Vickie, 21:08:53 01/14/03 Tue
The other respondents could be right. Spike could be flinching
back from her approach and not from her touch. However, I watched
Amends tonight, and FEJenny soothes Angel by brushing back his
hair. She definitely touched him. The hair moved and he reacted
to her touch.
Maybe we were just seeing Angel's POV, but I think the FE "reality"
has changed.
[> [> Re: Touching and
the F.E. (Showtime spoiler) -- Tyreseus, 23:37:30 01/14/03
Tue
Going to watch "Amends" later, but if I'm not mistaken,
wasn't Angel's interaction with FE entirely in dreams? The restrictions
on the FE may be different whether in dreams (where touching is
allowed) and reality (where it isn't).
About the
whole Cordy/Angel conundrum (not long) -- JM, 21:22:41
01/14/03 Tue
OK I'm definitely done for the duration until after the new ep.
But I thought I'd throw this out there. My little sister joined
the Buffyverse in S6 having been seduced by Spike. When I tried
to get her interested in Angel, she was all "Ew, Angel's
lame, his hair sticks straight up." Now she's watched a bunch
of DVDs and is all "Angel lurves Buffy how can I watch C/A."
So I gave her my opinion. I figured I'd throw it out there. As
I'm sure opinions will change once we get new eps. Anyway, I told
her:
"I'm not sure that Angel and Cordelia are in love, even if
they think they are. Angel and Buffy were in love; Xander and
Anya are/were in love; Gunn and Fred are in love (for now). I
think there was more of a foundation of mutual respect in Angel's
relationship with Darla and with Kate than there is with Cordelia.
I do think they are best friends and do love one another. But
I don't get a romantic vibe. It's more like they are in mutual
need, being the most important person in each other's lives --
and not having to share -- provides some terribly important ego
stroke. And they're both people who seem to need a certain amount
of ego stroking. They're willing to put up with a great deal of
pain and suffering, as long as it confirms that they are "important
people" in the cosmic sense. I guess the difference is that
people in love think of/care about the other person more than
themselves. Not convinced at all that Angel or Cordelia are doing
that with regard to each other."
The reason I think this is that need seems to come up as consistently
as romance. In TVT Angel says "I need you. . ." Fred
also says "Angel really needs you." Cordy says "You
wouldn't need me." In Birthday, Cordy is infuriated by seeing
Angel saying she is weak, not by any expression that he doesn't
care about her. And the "test" proves to her that she
is necessary to him. In DD Angel says "I need her."
In Apocalypse Nowish Cordy says, "Maybe I am important .
. . I was needed . . ." Connor says "You're important
to me." These are two people who have convinced me that they
would die to be "needed." To be more than "no one."
Umm, run with it? Got to do something until 9 p.m. tomorrow, or
today.
[> Re: About the whole Cordy/Angel
conundrum (not long) -- yabyumpan, 23:33:40 01/14/03 Tue
Ok, I'm going to disagree with some of what you've written being
the ever hopeful C/A shipper that I am :-)
"I'm not sure that Angel and Cordelia are in love, even if
they think they are. Angel and Buffy were in love; Xander and
Anya are/were in love; Gunn and Fred are in love (for now). I
think there was more of a foundation of mutual respect in Angel's
relationship with Darla and with Kate than there is with Cordelia."
First off, I would dispute that Angel and Buffy were in love with
each other so much as some idealised version of who they thought
the other person was. Tall, dark, handsome, mysterious V sweet,
innocent, virginal, heroine. While they were both all of these
things there was more to both of them which didn't get touched
as it might shatter the illusion. I think it was as 'real' as
first love can be but I don't think either of them were mature
enough to give or recieve real love. I don't for a second dispute
the very strong connection they had (have) or how important they
are to each other, i just don't see it as 'true love'. (but then
I don't have a romantic bone in my body so the whole melodrama
of it just made me retch, I get the same reaction from Romeo & Juliet)
and now I've pissed off all the B/A fans..... ;o)
I also strongly disagree regarding the lack of mutual respect.
I think they are both very sensitive and respectful of each other.
I find it hard to conceive how you can see Darla as being more
respectful, or Kate.
"I guess the difference is that people in love think of/care
about the other person more than themselves. Not convinced at
all that Angel or Cordelia are doing that with regard to each
other."
Again, not seeing this at all. (I'm not going to comment on this
season as I've seen spoilers up to Ep 15 which throw everything
up in the air but also make sense of certain recent actions.)
I do think they have both put themselves on the line for the other
on many occasions, Angel probably more than Cordy but that's sort
of his job ;-) While I agree that they both do need to feel important
and to feel 'needed' I don't think that's the basis of their friendship
or their attraction to one another.
I believe they have both helped to bring out the best in each
other, helped each other to grow and become better people/manpires.
There is an acceptance and even affection for each other's faults
and foibles and a strong belief in each other. All of which adds
up to a strong friendship from which the 'romantic' love has grown.
I think people have problems seeing them as a couple in part because
there is no high melodrama, no fireworks, no smouldering passion
etc. It's a very gentle, comfortable love. I'm sure one of the
main reasons why I like it as a pairing is that all my important,
long term relationships (not that I've had very many, I'm just
old!) have developed from a very similar place. In fact I think
I've only ever gone out on 2 'dates', I've usually just fallen
in to relationships with people I've been friends with.
I'm actually not really happy with the way ME have handled it
thus far. It's now developed into a 'melodrama' which for many
of us who love the pairing, cheapens what made it so appealing,
but then this is ME who I'm sure have it written bold in their
writters hand books that no lead character is allowed to have
a happy, healthy relationship (boo hiss ME). I also think it's
probably true, as CC said in a recent interview, that it's not
a good idea for the two main leads to become romantically involved,
thus sparking the 'Moonlighting syndrome'. Perversly, while I
love them as a couple I would have been just as happy if they
never got together. The friendship was great and enough and I
wouldn't have to watch ME put them through the ringer.
JW truely is the FE with TM standing by his side as the Senior
Partner :-)
This post
is aimed at Rahael -- JM, 21:00:57 01/14/03 Tue
Bad, evil Rahael,
I think you know it's not that Angel-focused posters don't notice
topics, it's that they're historically exceptionally slow. (Or
in my case, incredibly dumb and couldn't work on their late response
to the food topic during their lunch break because they - me and
shanghaied colleagues - were trying to jump start the car they
forgot they left in the fire lane with flashers going for three
hours. Turns out only accountants can successfully jump old Pontiacs.
Who knew? Thank God we have a few.)
Your post strongly reminded me of one of my long-gone anthro classes,
but I'm still having trouble accessing the memories. Google didn't
help. We read a riveting article equating kinship categories with
cultural food taboos. I think there are something like ten archetypal
kinship systems, all cultural constructs. For example there are
kinship systems in which matriarchal cousins are considered same
tier kin as siblings, then some in which only cousins on the father's
side are considered sibling. And some in which the fathers brother's
children and the mother's sister's children were siblings but
not other cousins. In the article the discussion focused on how
kinship systems branch out from those people who have to take
you in when no else will, to those who are more remotely connected
to you, to those you can mate with, to those who are just weird
people you don't really want to interact with.
The article also paralleled how cultures, particularly our own
- in this case American - segment animals into similar categories,
with mating being equating with eating. There are the inner tier
of animals that are immoral to consume, in America primarily dogs
and cats (they correspond to siblings). The next tier are animals
it's uncomfortable to consider consuming - horses are the only
one I can think of here, mainly because the article noted the
difference in some European markets (these are second cousins).
Then there's the tier of animals it's comfortable to consume:
cows, pigs, chickens, and turkeys (these are conventionally acceptable
mates). The there's the tier of animals that aren't taboo, but
exotic: alligators, emus, armadillo, octopus, etc. (They aren't
immoral, but you'll probably get some talking behind your back.
You know, like about the war bride, or the guy in the foreign
exchange program you talked into staying, or the southerner your
Yankee family can't really relax around.) The big point of the
article is that except for strict sibling relationships, in most
cultures, both food and sex categories seem to be largely cultural
constructs. From what I've heard pigs and turkeys also make amazingly
loyal and intelligent pets. And dogs and cats are very yummy if
prepared correctly. It's in our heads as much as anything. (And,
no, I don't play kitten poker. Or not to win.)
The thing about vampires that really strikes me is that the sexual
and consumption metaphors are conflated right out in the open.
Vampirism isn't always about sex, but it often is. And not just
on Buffy; the writers are responding to the tropes that date back
to Bram Stoker at the very least. And at the same time that vampires
are figuratively embodying all this ambiguous sex, they are simultaneously
literally crossing the ultimate scary food taboo in Western culture
- cannibalism. (Well they would be if they weren't just crappy
hallucinations, I mean fictional characters.)
And what's made it even more interesting in the Jossverse is the
deliberately invoked incestuous vibe. Sires feed on their victim,
parent an offspring, and are often lovers. (And that's all without
touching the whole Darla-Angel-Dru-Darla mess that squicked the
hell out of Gunn.)
So with all that background everything about food seems to have
multiple layers. Good parallel between Angel feeding Cordy and
Wes at the end of "Parting Gifts." He establishes the
family unit in the sharing of food. Later as they gain parity,
Cordy attempts to feed him twice, spiced blood in TsiLA and toaster
waffles in TVT. Wes crosses a definite friend/enemy/acquaintance
taboo line by feeding Angel. (I can't think how many early slash
fics had variations of the theory. I bet no fanfic fan ever thought
we'd get it canonically.) A scene both intimate and obscene enough
for the hardened Justine to avert her eyes. And one that blurs
the lines of authority as fully as their complex enemy/hero/boss/employee/enemy
relationship already has. Angel feeds on Wes. In a typical vampire
encounter that would make him the dominant, the predator, potentially
the sire. Instead Angel is prone, a passive recipient; Wes is
upright, in control, more pelican than meal.
Angel's difficulty with appropriate lines comes through in his
hallucination about feeding off Cordy. Does the hallucination
indicate that sexual union would also be inappropriate? (Neither
of them can have entirely discounted perfect happiness.)
Among other blurry boundaries, the incestuous offspring of sire
Darla and grand-sire Angel is Connor. Consuming his son's blood
almost triggers an infanticide, and ultimately leads to attempted
patricide. Both also serious taboos. At this point pulling an
Oedipus with "poke your eyes out" Connor and "am
I a mother" Cordelia seems inevitable.
(Oh, plus also, slightly OT, am I the only one who was picking
up incest vibes when Gio was implying that Gunn was trying to
get his sister to vamp him. Because those comments in TOoM were
entirely squicking me.)
OK at this point it should also be clear that I don't actually
have a thesis, just a series of disconnected concepts. Please
consume and sire acceptable intelligent offspring. Or just bury
it in the archives. Either way bed is beckoning.
[> Re: This post is aimed
at Rahael -- Flo, 00:47:50 01/15/03 Wed
I think it's interesting that Angel has, at least twice, had humans
offer their own blood to revive him -- Wesley, as you mention,
and Buffy in Graduation Day II. There may be other examples --
I haven't seen enough of AtS to know for sure.
This really flips the power differential of the predator/prey
relationship on its head. Is Angel the only vamp who gets this
kind of treatment? Or, I should say, is willing to accept this
kind of sacrifice from another? We see Buffy feed Spike from a
Kiss the Librarian mug, and even offer blood lovingly when she's
under Willow's spell -- but not from her own body.
Reminds me of the Christian sacrament -- taking the blood of Christ
into your own body or something like that. Perhaps this was discussed
on the board at the end of S3? This would support the whole Buffy
as Christ metaphor. But what about Wesley?
[> [> Thanks for resurrecting
that Angel Thread! -- Rahael, 02:02:12 01/15/03 Wed
Just keeping this one alive until I can sit down and answer it
properly.
[> [> [> Oh, good
you saw! Yay! -- JM, 03:21:21 01/15/03 Wed
Woke up in this morning and realize the cutesy opener that seemed
so clever last night might seem rude. And it wasn't meant that
way. You were my inspiration! I just have a very slow maximum
speed. LOL! Thanks for responding.
[> [> [> [> When
I'm bad, I'm better ;) -- Rahael, 04:22:37 01/15/03 Wed
Don't worry. I loved it!
[> [> Angel's sexual
and physical hunger (Spoilers for aired AtS S4 eps) -- Rahael,
07:10:54 01/15/03 Wed
I am inclined to think that there are different contexts for these
two sacrificial images. I've already set out below why I think
Wesley metaphorically fulfills the Father devouring Son prophecy,
(only with the son holding the power, not the father).
I think that there are some very interesting aspects to Buffy's
sacrifice that might be Christlike, but says more about the B/A
relationship. Firstly, it kind of foreshadows the season 5 climax
of "my blood can stand for your blood". Buffy's about
to use Faith's blood to save Angel - but at the last moment, she
uses her own instead. And as they both lie weakened in the hospital,
they have an intense bonding experience. I think it is highly
significant that this is where we first learn about Dawn. Whose
blood is going to be so crucial. Blood for blood. Sister's blood
for sister's blood. Buffy/Faith, Buffy/Dawn. Again with the kinship
imagery! I also think this lends a great deal of support to the
idea that Faith was involved in the creation of Dawn.
And of course, at the heart of wine and the wafer is the idea
of the consummation of the blood and body of a human. More than
human.
But I also think that it's significant that Angel's drinking of
Buffy's blood occurs right before he leaves. It represents in
a single image why their relationship cannot work. He is consuming
her, just as in his dream, his bride was consumed by fire, which
represents his sexual and physical appetite for her. (Cor, Angel's
dreams are not happy are they?). In a slight tangent about his
dream of marriage - it's another reminder why they won't work
- Buffy is dressed in white, the symbol of bridal virginity, which
again reminds us of Surprise. It's not a romantic image at all.
So I tend to think that the blood that Angel receives from Wesley
represents mother's milk (vino de madre! Another image of kinship
and blood btw) and the blood he received from Buffy is charged
with a doomed eroticism.
[> [> [> great insights!
thanks for the reply! -- Flo, 10:15:23 01/15/03 Wed
[> [> [> Re: Angel's
sexual and physical hunger (Spoilers for aired AtS S4 eps)
-- yabyumpan, 13:04:50 01/15/03 Wed
A few quick thoughts re: Angel/food/family
Cordy giving Angel blood to drink in TSILA "don't be embarressed,
we're family"
The almost casual acceptance of Angel's need to drink blood by
AI and Angel's willingness to drink in front of them lets us see
just how much he is accepted for what he is, even Gunn seems unfazed
by Angel's 'special diet'. Also that he is part of a 'Family'.
They accept his need for nourishment and that in turn nourishes
him emotionally.
Within the confines of his 'family' he can be what he is without
fear of rejection.
Food does seem to play a fairly large part in their family life,
they feed and nourish each other. It's also interesting that very
often in fan fiction, this part of their life is regually highlighted.
In FF, they are often shown eating together, often with Angel
cooking for them. It's used to show closeness and gentle teasing
- arguing over what sort of Pizza to order etc. It's something
that I've seen used in crossover fiction to show just how close
they are as a family, with the Scoobies being shown as horrified
that Angel is openly drinking blood and Spike being jealous that
he has that kind of acceptance.
As for Wesley feed Angel, I haven't seen the episode yet (soon,
yay) but one of the things that occours to me that i haven't seen
mentioned is that Wesley took his son, his 'blood relative'; but
feeding Angel some of his blood, in some way it feels like evening
up the score.
Sorry this is a bit scappy and incoherant, my brain may have woken
up but I'm now hurrying out of the door to go to work so my thoughts
are a bit rushed. Maybe more in the morning (although hopefully
by then they'll be Ep 8 threads to read and join in)
[> [> Religious Symbols
-- JM, 14:04:55 01/15/03 Wed
Maybe Wesley's offer is a Judas kiss? The celibate Angel perhaps
a priest?
On the romantic front: Rebecca in Eternity, whom Angel is attracted
to, tries to get him to turn her. As does Darla. And Kate doesn't
offer herself, but Angel does feed off of her. It is both something
that he fantasizes about later and the event that turns her back
into a reluctant ally. Marcus bites Lilah, who is unwilling, after
seducing her, and this marks the beginning of her vendetta. Not
sure what all that means though.
[> [> [> wesley as
judas -- Flo, 16:08:31 01/15/03 Wed
If Wesley's blood offering is like a Judas' kiss, would this foretell
yet another betrayal by him? Do you think he had ulterior motives
for reviving Angel?
It could be that feeding Angel from his own wrist fulfilled both
a need for redemption -- like a Prodigal Son in some ways -- as
well as a part in an evil scheme involving Wesley and W&H.
I don't think so, but what else could a Judas' kiss lead to?
[> [> [> [> Wesley
as judas, with six eyes he was weeping redux -- fresne, 18:00:26
01/15/03 Wed
Wesley as Judas. Blood of the Sacrament. Dead into living. Wine
into blood.
My thoughts tumble in no particular order, but I want to get this
out before the opportunity slips over the edge of the world.
Spoilers for the movie Dracula 2000 to follow, commingling as
they will with AtS spoilers.
I don't know if anyone here saw Dracula 2000, which I really must
acquire given the intriguing nature of the central premise. The
first vampire is/was Judas. Vampires are dead and yet living because
when Judas hung himself after his betrayal of Christ, he was denied
death. Walks the earth in a curse. Vampires shun the cross, because
Judas betrayed Christ to a cross. Sunlight burns because it is
representative of God's light. And so on.
Thoughout the movie much is done with Judas' allure for the opposite
sex, which is actually part of the curse itself (it's been awhile,
so I don't quite remember why). As in the book Dracula, these
women are his potential brides and his food. The "last female"
of the plot, who also possesses the same allure for men, the woman
he pursues and pursues, turns out to be his daughter. BTW, they
did an incredible job with casting since, once you know to look
for it, she really does look like him. Only in female form.
Conceptually, there's nice some play on her blood being from his
blood. Saved. Unsaved. Living. Dead. Male. Female. Day. Night.
And so, I turn to Angel's dream of drinking Connor's blood. Angel
drinking Wesley's blood. Well, actually I think of the song Red,
Red Ribbons, but that's a digression.
Sanjan knew of a prophecy that Connor would kill him. So, he rearranged
prophecy and manipulated betrayal where there was none, which
resulted in Connor's abduction. Resulted in Connor spending his
life training non-stop to kill demons. I wonder if Sanjan would
have benefited from spending time with the Master. By going to
face the Master, Buffy freed him. By going to face the Master,
she was reborn stronger still. Prophecies are tricky things. In
one of those religious conundrums, could there have been an Easter
Sunday without first a Judas kiss?
We've paralleled Wesley with Judas before when Lilah gave Wesley
his very own copy of Inferno. The way his cut throat parallels
Judas' suicide by hanging. His fate in Satan's mouth, eternally
devoured. I had a great more to say about it at the time, so I
won't repeat myself, http://www.ivyweb.com/btvs/board/archives/may02_p06.html#3
However, instead of like Ugolino in Inferno, (Holtz, Angel, Connor,
Justine, etc.) being frozen in vengeance, eternally devouring
his former ally/betrayer, Wesley having regained speech, feeds
Angel with his blood. Blood is life. Do this in remembrance. To
regain memory.
And it is clearly an intimate act. Justine, her eyes all averted.
A giving act. Like Ugolino's sons in Inferno who offer their father
their own flesh to feed upon to sustain him from starvation. All
of a sudden, I'm filled with a desire to parallel Furies with
Fred, the Stone Woman at the Gates of Dis with Lilah (well, I've
done it once already), but I'm going to stop so I can go watch
fresh Angel.
As they offer my mind something to eat and drink and devour.
[> [> [> [> Re:
wesley as judas -- JM, 19:35:07 01/15/03 Wed
No I don't think he did. (Other than the ulterior motive of redeeming
a debt he was aware of. And being in the position to reject Angel
right back in Ground State.) I was thinking of him more being
a Judas figure but the timeline being a bit wonky.
But the truth is he did betray him again, although accidentally.
By deliberately betraying Lilah in STB he incidentally betrays
Angel and co.
[> Blood, Kinship, and Food
-- Rahael, 05:19:08 01/15/03 Wed
Really great post JM.
"The article also paralleled how cultures, particularly
our own - in this case American - segment animals into similar
categories, with mating being equating with eating. There are
the inner tier of animals that are immoral to consume, in America
primarily dogs and cats (they correspond to siblings). The next
tier are animals it's uncomfortable to consider consuming - horses
are the only one I can think of here, mainly because the article
noted the difference in some European markets (these are second
cousins). Then there's the tier of animals it's comfortable to
consume: cows, pigs, chickens, and turkeys (these are conventionally
acceptable mates)."
This is fascinating - I wonder whether AtS' myriad and complex
demonic community are constructed this way, unconsciously by ME.
For example, Lorne the demon has a different relationship category
than the demon of the week living in the sewers. Or Angel and
Cordelia - both of them have semi-demon status, but still differentiated
from say Merle. Just a random thought.
I think also the point you make about Vamps crossing taboo boundaries
- cannibalism, and sexual boundaries - I think you can add another
important 'unmixy' boundary that they encompass which is dead
flesh walking. Vamps are simultaneously alive and dead, and that's
a pretty squicky thought. I know that my biggest squick factor
is indeed the transgression of the life/death boundary - that's
why I found "Forever" so creepy, and why "Afterlife"
was so powerful.
I think that one of the most interesting intersections between
Vamp feeding and Family in AtS is that there is a suggestion that
the first things newly created Vamps do is to go and eat/kill
their families - this is what Angel did, this is what Penn did.
Funnily, the first thing that happens when the demon enters is
that suppressed resentment against familial ties are unleashed.
Furthermore, Angelus goes straight to Holtz's family as a way
of wrecking vengeance. It is clear that close kinships are incredibly
powerful relationships in AtS. They seem to lie at the heart of
most behaviours.
And one that blurs the lines of authority as fully as their
complex enemy/hero/boss/employee/enemy relationship already has.
Angel feeds on Wes. In a typical vampire encounter that would
make him the dominant, the predator, potentially the sire. Instead
Angel is prone, a passive recipient; Wes is upright, in control,
more pelican than meal.
I was wondering about the whole 'The Father Will Devour the Son'
thing, when I think of this scene. Isn't it Wesley positioning
himself as the 'Son'? One thing we know about Wesley's complicated
and painful past is that he is very much the Son trying to assume/takeover
the paternal position - as if recapturing that power and using
it for positive use will negate or heal the harm that was done
to him in its name. I wonder whether he was so terrified for Connor
because his own background (rather in fact, than Angel's) that
lead him to believe that this is what all fathers do. After all,
everytime he looks at Angel before he makes the decision shows
him how much Angel loves Connor.
As you say, when Wes feeds Angel, he assumes power over the parent
by taking the parental role. I'm wondering if this is yet another
transgression - because doesn't Chronos get eaten by his own children?
So the mythic event would be children eating parents, which metaphorically
speaking is more true to life - parents die to give way for their
children. Also, maybe the fact that Angel is going to keep on
living long after his mortal son dies is another transgression
- Connor should never have been born - his birth was completely
unexpected.
After all, throughout S3, what defines Angel throughout S3 is
his very obvious, almost obssessive focus on his son,to the exclusion.
This must have roused some very painful, conflicting feelings
for Wesley. Especially when we think of his wistful thoughts about
Fred's parents at the end of their visit.
(By the way, in that ep, Fred's parents, like the parents of the
yucky insects turn up to claim their young, who is/are missing.
This foreshadows what happens to Angel/Connor.)
Of course, their is almost a metaphor play with the word 'blood'.
Many of us will say "blood relations", but for Vampires
blood (and their own families) are a source of food. It was cunning
of Wolfram and Heart to feed Angel the blood of his own son. I
wonder if many of the squicks this season is the more obvious
transgression kinship links that have always been in the background
of AtS.
More thoughts to follow, probably.
[> [> Spoilers for AtS
S3 and all aired S4 eps above -- Rahael, 05:29:28 01/15/03
Wed
[> [> Re: Blood, Kinship,
and Food -- yabyumpan, 07:56:58 01/15/03 Wed
Interesting thoughts which if I hadn't just woken up I might be
able to respond to! As it is, just trying not to loose yet another
AtS thread before my poor brain has a chance to form a coherant
thought. :-)
[> [> [> I'll keep
it alive! -- Masq, 10:27:12 01/15/03 Wed
Reading, but not enough time these days to post on-topic.
[> [> [> Speaking
of disappearing threads LOL -- JM, 12:48:53 01/15/03 Wed
Thought I would tack on an OT reply since I never got a chance
to respond to you before the C/A post fell off the boards. Hmm.
. . . Think I was a bit sloppy. I didn't mean that C and A treated
each other disrespectfully, just that Angel seems to want to protect
her so often, like in "Slouching Toward Bethlehem."
And it seems to partially hark back to first season/early second
where the dynamic had a very patriarchal flavor, with Angel playing
the father figure to Wes and Cordy as the quarreling children.
And his relationship with her at that point had more of a hierarchical
quality as well. Some of that still seems to inform his interactions
with her. Probably also the fact that he's known her since she
was sixteenish. Where as in interacting with Kate and Darla, he
seems more like he's interacting with another adult. (Not trying
to insinuate that Darla was constitutionally capable of treating
anyone with respect. Though Angelus and Darla seemed to respect
each other's prowess.)
Wasn't trying to put a value on the love relationships either.
I really do think that Cordy and Angel love each other, perhaps
more fully than anyone else in their lives before, and really
know each other. Just not fully convinced it's romantic love -
at least not mutual. And I don't necessarily think romantic love
is better, agree with you critique of the IMHO pathologies inherent
in A/B. But romantic love is different - like Xander had/has it
for Buffy, but not she for him. Not sure what distinguishes the
two, maybe nothing, maybe it's another cultural construct. LOL.
If there is a difference it's probably a mix of plain old love,
some sexual attraction, and a desire to sacrifice yourself for
the other, whether on a real or metaphorical level.
I do sometimes get romantic vibes from Angel toward Cordelia,
but not so much the reverse. With Cordelia I feel more a sort
of possessive friendship, though I guess I buy that it could provide
the foundation for romantic love. I'm just not sure yet mostly
because of what went on in "Birthday." She would rather
die than give up the visions. Not only that, she would rather
die than let anyone know how much danger she is in, because she's
afraid they'll try to take her visions away. Until she addresses
that internal void, that she's using the visions, the mission,
and her importance to the PTB to fill, I'm just not sure that
she's in the position to love, or give herself, romantically.
Though, I did like how she kept repeating the phrase, "It's
not you, it's not you" to Connor. I wondered if she meant
that on several levels.
(If it helps to place my perceptions/projections/prejudices, I
always felt this about Scully and Mulder too. That they weren't
really romantic, simply really close and really lonely. Philos,
maybe agape, but not eros. But a great deal of fandom didn't agree
with me, including Chris Carter. Hee!)
[> [> Hijacking the bit
about Wesley's relationship with Angel. -- Arethusa, 16:11:17
01/15/03 Wed
I was wondering about the whole 'The Father Will Devour the
Son' thing, when I think of this scene. Isn't it Wesley positioning
himself as the 'Son'? One thing we know about Wesley's complicated
and painful past is that he is very much the Son trying to assume/takeover
the paternal position - as if recapturing that power and using
it for positive use will negate or heal the harm that was done
to him in its name. I wonder whether he was so terrified for Connor
because his own background (rather in fact, than Angel's) that
lead him to believe that this is what all fathers do. After all,
everytime he looks at Angel before he makes the decision shows
him how much Angel loves Connor.
It's possible that Wesley is still trying to please his father.
It's interesting that Wesley gave the role of father in his life
to Angel, not Giles, whom I would have thought would be the logical
choice. Instead he chose the intiminating, physically powerful,
mercurial Angel. Who actually did give Wesley what he wanted from
his father-acceptance, approval. But Wesley, locked in the cupboard*
by his father, is afraid of him, too. Why didn't Wesley tell Angel
about the "devour your son" prophecy? The only (semi)logical
reason I can think of is fear. He's afraid of Angel. So he believed
in the prophecy, and not in the friend.
*(There are some correlaries to be made here to Harry Potter and
especially Percy Weasley, but that would make me even geekier
than I already am.)
[> [> [> Very good
point and speculation (Habeas Corpses spoilers) -- Scroll,
19:37:52 01/15/03 Wed
It's interesting that Wesley gave the role of father in his
life to Angel, not Giles, whom I would have thought would be the
logical choice. Instead he chose the intiminating, physically
powerful, mercurial Angel.
This makes me wonder how much Angel has in common with Wesley's
real father. Angel can certainly be a bully when he gets into
a bad mood (I'm remembering his treatment of Merle). I doubt Angel
would ever lock Connor in a cupboard, but he does know how to
inflict punishment (as Dru could testify). Wesley seems to take
after Giles much more -- a calm, logical, oftimes ruthless man
whose passionate nature is hidden from all but a select few. Ruthless,
but not a bully.
Considering Angel's difficulties in relating to his son, Connor,
perhaps he could take some tips from Wyndam-Pryce, Sr. on how
not to raise a son. Namely, lay off the physical intimidation,
guy. No locking in cupboards. Though to be fair, Angel has only
once physically intimidated Connor, in "Deep Down" --
I don't count their fight in "Spin the Bottle" since
that was Liam, not Angel.
OTOH, Angel makes it clear that he cares for Connor even though
they don't get along. He may have thrown Connor out of his house,
but Angel cares enough to go running to Connor's rescue whenever
he's in danger. Wyndam-Pryce, Sr. seems as cold as artic wind.
And maybe he's dead, since the Watcher building blew up. At least
Angel is UN-dead.
On another note, Angel seems to have this really bad tendancy
to throw people out of his house when he's angry with them. I'm
not sure this is a good thing. First Wesley when he kidnapped
Connor, then Connor when he dumped Angel into the ocean, and now
Cordelia because she slept with Connor. Back in S2, Angel fired
all his employees because they got in his way. If Angel keeps
up this trend, he's going to lose all his friends before the season
finale!
Perhaps it is a (subconscious) pre-emptive strike; Angel left
home, angry with his father. He took the initiative and abandoned
his family. On some level, Angel must've realised how damaging
and hurtful that was to his father. Now that he's the patriarch,
he's the one doing the throwing-out. He banishes his family before
they can abandon him?
[> [> [> [> Re:
Very good point and speculation (Habeas Corpses spoilers)
-- JM, 20:30:18 01/15/03 Wed
Eek! I want this thread to survive until I finish my response
about families and boundaries, but it's not going well, and I
can't resist this one.
Angel's clearest arc of patriarch is Parting Gifts to Reunion
(or there abouts). During it he at least twice unconsciously mimics
the negatives of Wesey's literal father figure. IGYUMS has subtly
been hinting at Wes's issues with his father. Disappointment and
fear. Earlier Angel has accidentally indicated he'd rather Doyle
were here than Wesley. Immediately after the demon reveals some
negative things about Wes's childhood, reality demonstrates how
deeply afraid he is of Angel hurting him physically.
And then in Reunion he mirrors the biggest trauma of all. When
Wes lost his job as watcher, he lost more than just his life long
vocation. He became an exile from his homeland, apparently not
worth redeeming by his family for the price of a plane ticket.
And about Angel exiling people who piss him off. Under Angel's
reign, Wes, Cordy, and Gunn have been fired; Wes got smothered
(though it was understandable); Connor hit the streets; and Cordy
just got given her notice for the second time. Under Wes, Angel
got given a second chance and Gunn got given a warning. Hmm...
trend?
On the other hand, I wonder if Wes's real father (as opposed to
the construct in his head) wasn't more like Wes has behaved the
last couple of months with Lilah, and just about everyone else.
Someone who grasped the cosmic good versus bad, but tries to live
his personal life as a total pr*ck. But Wes's had his epiphany
now. So he's fixed, right?
[> [> [> [> [>
Angel and Wes -- oceloty, 22:37:00 01/15/03 Wed
I think Angel has a habit of pushing people away in order to protect
them. It isn't always the best thing to do, but it is consistent
with Angel's fear of his own darkness. In S2, he said he fired
the gang because he wass embracing the darkness and didn't want
them to get hurt. In S3, he went to see Wes while he was still
angry and hurting -- and completely lost it. So now Angel sends
people away so he won't do something he'll regret.
I think Wes' epiphany is going to make things interesting. In
S2, Angel's epiphany was just the beginning. He realized something
about the world and his place in it, but also that he couldn't
undo the mistakes he made. He had to make apologies and rebuild
the relationships he'd damaged. Wes has figured something out
and started to do things differently; I'm really curious how his
relations with his (former?) friends will play out now.
[> Just curious... --
Darby, 07:49:42 01/15/03 Wed
Was your anthropology prof just trying to show that the cultural
patterns had interesting parallels (which they do), or that there
was a predictable correlation between who you were allowed to
mate with and what you were allowed to eat? I'd eagerly accept
the former, it's a neat idea and suggestive of internal patterns
of culture (okay, I'll just say it and get it out of my system:
memes!! Better now...), but it's much tougher to buy into the
latter.
Just kidding about the memes thing - it's more likely to be a
genes thing than a memes thing.
Never mind.
[> [> LOL -- Rahael,
07:55:21 01/15/03 Wed
[> [> Re: Just curious...
-- JM, 09:12:23 01/15/03 Wed
Well she was just trying to expose us to a lot of theories. The
only theory she insisted we accept unqualifiedly was about bullfighting,
male sexual identity, and breasts in Spanish culture, from her
own work. (I'm greatly simplifying and exaggerating it, mostly
because I can't remember most of it LOL.)
The theory definitely wasn't saying that every culture with the
same kinship patterns categorized the same animals as food/not
food. Similar kinship patterns would appear all over the geographic
map in societies totally unrelated to one another and hence not
having the same animal food sources. The naming conventions for
the kin systems were simply helpful for the scientists comparing
ethnographies.
The theory, let's see if I can get this even marginally correctly
or clearly, is that sex, death, and food are three really important
things in every culture. And elements of one are often used to
symbolize another in rituals. (Think fertility sacrifices for
better crops. The grave as a womb. And other things I've forgotten.)
The other part of the theory was that many societies use the same
type of categorizing system for kinship and animal classification
(folk, not talking Linnaeus here). Even though the two systems
- kinship and food - might not have any symbolic connection with
each other, they had the same basic shape. A center representing
self with concentric larger rings surrounding. For kinship the
center most rings are not acceptable mates. The middle rings provide
the optimum mates (e.g. neighbors or more distant kin) and the
outer-most rings the strangers that inhabit the rest of the world.
Depending on the society's rules, the outer-rings were either
considered acceptable, but not optimum, mates or un-acceptable
but for different reasons than not marrying your mother.
All societies have some sort of mating taboo, some kin members
who are too close. Of course not all societies have food taboos,
but those that do, tend to structure them in a similar concentric
manner. There are some animals that cannot be eaten, because they
are too close - often holy or protected - some that are optimum,
and some in the outer rings that are too bizarre or considered
taboo because they are unclean, dirty, etc.
The theory wasn't arguing that kinship systems cause food taboo
systems, simply that the same processes of enculturation reinforces
the categories to the point that their "truth" becomes
an automatic assumption. The theory was pointing out that the
way human brains work leads to categorizing and systematizing
information and also that many categories are purely cultural
constructs and will not be shared by another culture, necessarily.
And also that they might not have the backing of scientific "truth"
behind them even though we might unconsciously assume they would
because we feel they are true on a visceral level. The starting
point of the article was why horse steak sells so badly in America.
Does this help me seem a little less farfetched? I hope so, because
I'm really enjoying the vampires/incest notion and won't give
it up easily. LOL.
Attn: Rah,
KdS & TCH -- yabyumpan, 00:32:12 01/15/03 Wed
For Rah and KdS, you have mail :-)
TCH, glad you're enjoying AtS so far, sorry I didn't respond to
your post but by the time I had time to do it (like now) it'd
gone the way of most AtS post's! I agree with pretty much everything
you wrote regarding the episodes, that tape is one of the ones
I play the most. I love 'City of..', I think it's probably one
of the best opening episodes for any series I've seen. 'Lonely
Hearts' - strangely I've never seen the AIDS metaphor before although
I can see it now, but I agree with you that it was more about
loneliness and the sense of isolation you can feel in a big city.
If you're interested, on Psyche's site, there's a very interesting
un-aired episode which was supposed to introduce Kate but WB/FOX
decided that the subject matter was too heavy. Kate was working
so deeply under-cover that that she gets totally cought up in
the sex/drugs scene, Angel 'saves' her of course but it's a very
dark, edgy piece.
Love 'In the dark', even though it is very Spike heavy, I think
we do get a pretty good insight into Angel and his quest for redemption,
both when he's being tortured and when he smashed the ring. Although
it is Cordy and Doyle light we do get some interesting glimpses
of Cordy behind the bravardo and hints of Doyle's under world
connections, which are explored more later.
Please do keep posting your reviews. I've watched them all so
often, it's good to have a fresh eye plus more AtS posts are always
a good thing :-)
[> Will be there! --
Rahael, 02:12:55 01/15/03 Wed
Am going to reply via email but I thought I would allow your thread
to live a little by acknowledging receipt here..
[> [> Actually --
Rahael, 06:31:29 01/15/03 Wed
I'll reply here. Purely because I'm trying to kill the monster
thread that been archiving any new attempt to start discussion!
I'll be there at around 7.30 at the latest, bearing nibbles. And
various items that I have to return to you and KdS. I'll probably
be there earlier, it's just in case I get delayed at work - it's
always unpredictable.
Thanks for hosting this!
[> A bit more early Angel
then -- Tchaikovsky, 03:08:59 01/15/03 Wed
A couple of quick thoughts on 'I fall to pieces', and 'Rm w/a
Vu'.
It's funny. I should have known from 'I was Made to Love You'
that the reference in the first title was literal, but it didn't
occur to me. It's an interesting kind of monster. Again, the moster
is human. In the grown-up life of LA, problems feel like real
life, rather than feeling like the big, scary monsters of adolescence.
Come to think of it, I suppose this is one reason why Buffy Season
Six turned off a lot of viewers. It's partly about how growing
up makes you stop thinking your life is a melodrama, (Buffy/Angel
Seasons 1-3), and start realising that the horrors are often mundane,
and of no interest to anyone else. The show itself was having
growing pains. [Realise I have entirely ignored the Pylea arc
that I caught some of in Angel- oh well.]
The monster in this episode lets Greenwalt play with all the parts
of the body and their apparent metaphorical connotations, something
which I think is a little bit underused. The hands suggest a thoughtless
possessiveness, the eyes an inappropriate voyeurism to something
he shouldn't scene, and the viscera, (or whatever that scary gory
thing is), the mindless violence of fighting. In fact, in each
case I guess the point is that the disconnected body part is disconnected
from the brain and the heart. It's a cold, mechanical life that
the doctor leads.
I really liked Rm w/a Vu. It's a typical Espenson episode, which
you can take as 'merely' funny, but is actually multi-layered
and interesting. I'm starting to really like Cordelia as a character,
something I thought unlikely to ever happen. On Buffy, it's like
we only saw the left hand side of her face or something, and now
we see something different. It's a perspective thing. While she
is just bitchy comic relief, she works through a funny but crucially
unempathetic character. Here, she is often the person on centre
stage, and the consequences make her a much more layered character,
revealing her insecurity about the vacuousness of her (former)
life, as well as revealing how her put-downs are really only a
defence mechanism for her insecurity.
The control freak mother of Rm w/a Vu' was fairly chilling, and
was one of the lines from the song playing on the gramophone 'You
always hurt the one you love', as in 'Dead Things'? If so, what's
Spike quoting?
Still not entirely entranced by the main trio of Angel, Doyle
and Cordelia, but I'm liking it as much as most other shows. It's
still falling somewhat short of Buffy for me though.
Will keep posting these prattlings to bolster the Angel debate.
TCH
[> [> Any ideas about...
-- KdS, 03:24:40 01/15/03 Wed
Must admit I'm still seriously squicked by I Fall to Pieces
given that Angel, Cordy and Doyle essentially torture a human
being to death. I can see why killing Meltzer might have been
necessary given his powers, but I'd have liked a bit more moral
debate.
[> [> [> Can't help
thinking -- Tchaikovsky, 04:46:21 01/15/03 Wed
That in Sunnydale they would have thought of some ingenious ploy
that doesn't involve putting him in a steel box forever. Something
which offers him the chance of redemption, but does not allow
him anywhere near his obsession. But I can't think of one myself,
and agree with the moral ambiguity of taking life withoutany apparent
thought.
Plus a couple of unrelated thoughts that I missed in the last
post.
Love the theme tune more every time I hear it. The cello as an
instrument is both mellow and yearning. If anyone's never listened
to Elgar's Cello Concerto, do so now!
Angel at this stage is still a shadow as a character- black clothes-
he's the foil to Buffy, the opposite, the fatale. His self-identity
is not well-formed enough to be able to carry a show.
Doctor- another figure of hierarchical society- someone you should
trust because they're in a position of power.
Doyle's? line 'At least it's only his hands down there'. A contender
for 'Bleurgh'-iest line ever.
TCH
[> [> [> [> Another
Angel newbie! -- Rob, 07:39:47 01/15/03 Wed
I just started watching "Angel" a few months ago. Masq
made tapes for me, and I saw the whole first three seasons in
the space of about two weeks, and I was practically a virgin to
the show before. Glad to see someone else jumped on board...and
I'm not the only one who took this long to get into it! It will
never replace "Buffy" for me, but I think you'll see,
as you approach the middle of the first season, and certainly
by the second season, that it is quite a great show, in its own
right, although for different reasons than "Buffy."
It very quickly became my second favorite show, and that is saying
a lot.
Rob
[> [> [> [> Re:
Can't help thinking -- JM, 12:59:45 01/15/03 Wed
Jeez! I don't remember any of this. I really want my DVDs, now!
I was such a D/C shipper that the only thing I noticed in the
early eps was whether the half-demon was making any progress on
the ex-rich, ex-bitca front.
Love, love the cellos too. I used to watch the Jeremy Brett "Sherlocke"
series, about 40% just for the string credits. Did you notice
the recycled shot from Anne of the girl on the street? Someone
pointed it out, on another board I think. Kind of a tiny little
connection between the two shows. (Well and also the characters.
And the mythology. And never mind . . . .)
[> [> [> [> Regarding
that cello -- Vickie, 19:20:52 01/15/03 Wed
If you like the AtS theme (and who doesn't?), check out the nice
fore-echo in Amends. During the 1838 section, there's another
cello bit that woke me right up during my recent viewing. Somebody
thinks that sound says "Angel."
[> Coming! -- KdS, 03:22:31
01/15/03 Wed
Did you get my reply?
[> [> Re: Coming!
-- yabyumpan, 07:39:31 01/15/03 Wed
No I didn't! It's probably joined your pre-christmas message and
is floating merrily 'round cyberspace, I think we have a problem
here Houston :-). Anyway, see you later for your 'Lessons'......
[> Rah, yab, help! --
KdS, 12:48:23
01/15/03 Wed
OK, now I can't even get into my email account, and I didn't print
your directions out!
Do you think one of you could forward the message to my other
email account which I've linked in the header of this post please,
just in ca\se it isn't fixed tomorrow?
[> [> Done :-) --
yabyumpan, 13:16:07 01/15/03 Wed
[> [> [> Got it, thanks
-- KdS, 14:42:57 01/15/03 Wed
Six Degrees
of Speculation-**reasonably general spoilers for Season 7**
-- manwitch, 05:31:03 01/15/03 Wed
1) The First Evil can be thought of, metaphorically speaking,
as separation. Originally, before the first evil, there was bliss,
eternal undifferentiated consciousness. The First Evil was our
separation from that bliss into differentiated consciousness,
into separate forms that live, die, feel pain, into an identity
as something other than bliss. Again, this is my interpretation
of the metaphor, not history within the buffyverse as read by
Giles or something.
2) The First Evil on BtVS seems to represent separation. It is
separate from others, untouchable. It manifests itself as those
separated from us by death.
3) The First Evil's mode of attack appears to be separation. It
is attempting to separate the Slayers from their line (preslayers),
from their support (the council, watchers), to separate Buffy
and her friends from each other through lies that destroy their
trust in each other and confidence in themselves.
4) The First Evil seems to have selected Spike as its point of
entry into the buffyverse, even to the point of elevating him
to "key" status by using his blood to open the portal.
Spike is an interesting choice for this, as he represents everything
that is separate from Buffy. "He's everything I hate, everything
I'm supposed to be against." Spike, as he relates to Buffy,
represents the binary oppositions (separations) that come with
the world of separate forms: human/vampire, good/evil, man/woman,
dead/alive, blonde/artificial blonde.
5) The First Evil is, we are told, taking advantage of an instability
in the Slayer line. Amidst the speculation of what that instability
is, I would like to add as a possibilty that the instability is
separation. The Chosen Line has in some way been divided. There
have been several separations: Buffy/Kendra, Buffy/Faith, Buffy/Dawn.
This last one has some interesting possibilities. Dawn was made
from Buffy, her blood is Summers blood, just like Buffy's. Perhaps
the separation of Dawn from Buffy, which in a way is the separation
of Buffy from Buffy, is part of the instability.
6) The First Evil will only be overcome by overcoming separation.
My opinion, obviously. How it will play out in the story is a
mystery to me, but I would expect that in some way Buffy and Spike
will be unified. Spike will overcome his status as binary opposition.
Whether this happens literally (i.e. he becomes human, alive and
good) or merely symbolically through Buffy's tender acknowledgement
that she no longer recognizes in him these oppositions, I don't
know. Also, I think the Slayer line will be unified. Again, this
raises Dawn as a "person of interest." I think Dawn
is a preslayer. She has Buffy blood, so whatever it is in the
blood (midiclorians?) that causes Slayers to be called upon the
death of the previous Slayer, Dawn has it (possibly). If she is
a preslayer that would make her, interestingly enough, both the
heir to Buffy (she is created from Buffy, who was charged by Joyce
to "love her as I love you" i.e. mother/daughter), and
also the potential heir to Faith and the Slayer power that currently
resides with her. Dawn, it may turn out, is the one capable of
reuniting the red and the white. I know people think this is too
obvious for ME. But it would also allow for Buffy to ride off
into the sunset, alive or dead. She could leave Dawn and live
her own life if she knew that Dawn could now take care of herself.
Plus, Dawn as the next slayer allows the other characters to have
continutity into next season and would put arguably its most prodigious
acting talent in the central role. And finally, Dawn as the next
slayer would lend some purpose to the ponderously mindless Star
Wars banter that comes relentlessly from the three goofballs.
"You don't have the midiclorians" says Andrew. But what
if it turns out she does. "He was our last hope." "No,
there is another." I don't think Faith is that other hope.
Maybe, but it seems unlikely. "Yes," says Darth/First
Evil, "You have a sister. Obi Wan was wise to hide her from
me." Dawn might not appear on the preslayer registry, having
been created by monks only a couple of years ago. And surely the
monks did not create new memories for the First Evil.
Anyways, this is just speculation. And remember, I'm the one who
thought Sam was the big bad of last year.
(Hey Rahael, if you are reading this, thanks for the kind words
down below. I miss the board too. Life can get way too busy sometimes.
I even missed a Buffy episode a couple weeks ago, for the first
time since I started watching back at the end of Season One. I
was most displeased. Grrr. Argh.)
[> Separations and Connections
(Spoilers for aired S7 BtVS eps) -- Rahael, 06:16:03 01/15/03
Wed
This is just excellent Manwitch - especially your key point:
"The First Evil on BtVS seems to represent separation.
It is separate from others, untouchable. It manifests itself as
those separated from us by death."
because it plays into the theme of boundaries, of their creation/destruction,
integration/disintegration that is a real point of interest to
me when I watch BtVS.
And most especially because it plays delightfully with the idea
that 'it's all connected'. Separation and connection, two ideas
that coexist in a kind of creative tension. It works for me also
because we've talked about Buffy being separated from her feelings
in S6.
And the fact that S6 was all about division and separation, a
theme which was previously dealt with in Season 4. I think this
time around, the cohesive, integrated triumph of the Scoobies
will only be resolved at the end of S7. This time, the theme is
taking longer to resolve.
"Hey Rahael, if you are reading this, thanks for the kind
words down below."
Not at all. I shamelessly encourage all the posters who make me
think and write the most! Hope you get a chance to hang around
here a little more.
[> [> Great post, manwitch.
Rahael, perhaps there's a pattern? -- Ixchel, 10:02:18
01/15/03 Wed
manwitch, you make some interesting points (very eloquently too)
and I like the character of Dawn, so I would probably enjoy this,
but I find four things difficult in Buffy leaving (dying or just
moving on). Buffy dying seems somewhat repetitive and IMHO wouldn't
have the impact of TG (I could be wrong though, I often am). Also,
I find it difficult to believe Buffy would leave Dawn after everything,
even if she felt Dawn was strong enough (I had problems with Giles'
reasons for leaving too, which didn't mean he didn't). And if
Buffy were to go off to live her life elsewhere, would she still
be the Slayer? If not, I feel (JMHO) that part of this whole journey
has been Buffy accepting herself as a slayer, so this would negate
that. To clarify, by "accepting" I don't mean that she
must supress everything that makes her Buffy and be someone else's
idea (the First Slayer's, the CoW's, etc.) of a slayer, but rather
that she realize she _is_ her own Slayer. And she decides what
this means (IMHO she seems on her way to this realization this
season). My last reason is purely personal, _I_ don't want her
to go, I'd miss her. Again, wonderful post and I hope my more
mundane response isn't sort of, well, beside the point. :)
Rahael, maybe the seasons make a pattern regarding separation
and unity? Starting with S1 I see a coming together of the group
through its formation, then with S2 Angel's transformation causes
division, leaving Buffy alone at the end of the season. In S3
it seems that the group moves back toward unity (though Faith
is lost) and then in S4 there is the separation you mention (though
the season ends with the unity of Buffy, Willow, Giles and Xander,
still there is that sense of division especially in Restless).
Again in S5 I perceive a rebuilding of cohesion (though Joyce
is lost), culminating in TG and then the dissolution of S6, where
everything came apart. If this is the pattern then S7 should end
in unification, as you say. Of course, I could just be seeing
pattern where there is none (a common human tendency). Fascinating
comments as always, Rahael. :)
Ixchel
[> [> [> Re: Great
post, manwitch. Rahael, perhaps there's a pattern? -- leslie, 14:20:22 01/15/03
Wed
"And if Buffy were to go off to live her life elsewhere,
would she still be the Slayer? If not, I feel (JMHO) that part
of this whole journey has been Buffy accepting herself as a slayer,
so this would negate that."
I can see a way around this, though I sincerely doubt it's the
path that will be chosen (or Chosen). One of the things that has
always puzzled me a bit is the very local quality of Slayers.
Now granted, most of the time that there have been Slayers, international
or even long-distance domestic travel has been tricky, but Slayers
seem to be called because there's a particular problem in the
place they happen to be or, as it seems in Buffy's case, their
lives are somehow manipulated by Fate or the Council to get them
where they need to be, such as the Hellmouth (which appears to
have periods of dormancy, such as the whole period the Master
was stuck in it). We do, however, see Kendra arrive twice in Sunnydale
because Mr. Zabuto senses "a dark power rising" there,
and in the WishVerse Giles is able to get the AlternaBuffy to
zip over from Cleveland (in a remarkably short time--does she
have a private jet in this alternate universe?). Furthermore,
Faith is called in Boston, isn't it, when things are clearly still
hot on the Hellmouth. So, it would be fairly simple to call Buffy
away to an emergency situation elsewhere while leaving some or
all of the Scoobies behind to keep an eye on the Hellmouth while
she's gone.
[> [> [> [> That
makes sense, leslie. -- Ixchel, 16:23:34 01/15/03 Wed
Actually, I wish they'd used something similar with Giles' absence
in S6 because it would've been far more palatable for me (and
others, I think).
Ixchel
[> Re: Six Degrees of Speculation-**reasonably
general spoilers for Season 7** -- Cheryl, 07:20:56 01/15/03
Wed
"Spike, as he relates to Buffy, represents the binary oppositions
(separations) that come with the world of separate forms: human/vampire,
good/evil, man/woman, dead/alive, blonde/artificial blonde."
Liked your take on this, but just wanted to point out that both
are artificial blondes. At least their current shades come from
a bottle. :-)
[> [> Reality vs canon:
contradictory evidence. -- Darby, 07:32:36 01/15/03 Wed
SMG may not be a natural blonde, but Buffy may be, depending upon
whether the memory from Killed by Death or the girls from
Weight of the World and a photo we've since seen at Buffy's
house represent Buffy as a child. Or she could have been really
blonde at 7, brown at 11, and then blonde artificially at 15...nahhh.
[> [> [> Re: Reality
vs canon: contradictory evidence. -- shadowkat, 09:14:17
01/15/03 Wed
According to the scenes in Bargaining when she emerges from the
Grave - she's a redhead.
Personally? I have no clue. But apparently inside her brain Buffy
is blond and that is all that matters. ;-)
[> [> [> [> Hair
darkens as we get older, then starts to gray.*L Look at the eyebrows
for the truth. ;) -- Briar Rose, 15:13:47 01/15/03 Wed
[> [> [> Don't her
roots show in several eps? -- KdS, 12:42:33 01/15/03 Wed
[> Re: Six Degrees of Speculation-**reasonably
general spoilers for Season 7**+ vague Fray spoiler -- Darby,
07:27:37 01/15/03 Wed
Fascinating observations & ideas. I'm trying to figure out how
it jives with all that we've been told about how the First predates,
well, existence, and maybe we're taking the concept of Evil too
moralistically.
Quotes from the First: "Before the Bang." "Fact
is, the whole 'good and evil, balancing the scales' thing? I'm
over it. I'm done with the mortal coil." Balance can't be
done without separation.
Perhaps this connects to the whole quantum mechanics theme running
through Angel this season. What generated the Big Bang,
caused that imbalance which led to the somewhat off-kilter universe
of today? Was it some sort of force that must try to yin whenever
there's a yang, that down a long winding road became a counter
to the rise of good (does moral energy have a polarity)? Anyway,
the First's role may have changed with the rise of mortals, it
may have gotten pigeonholed on the Evil side as other entities
took over on the Good one. I'm overthinking this, aren't I?
But that's what a great, insightful post does, doesn't it? -Get
out gray cells out of hypersleep?
I also like the Dawn implications you've brought up. The whole
Dawn-as-Slayer thing had never made much sense to me, as the blood
thing just seemed familial and more metaphorical than actual.
However, your observations made me remember that Joss established
in Fray that some aspect of genetics (twins each get some
measure of Slayer power) impacts the Choosing of the Chosen, and
with the oblique Star Wars quotes added, I think that you
may be onto something. (A challenge to my pet theory that it was
all about Justine...)
- Darby, wishing he had your confidence in MT's abilities to handle
such a role.
[> The Zen of Separation
-- Sophist, 08:43:01 01/15/03 Wed
I'm fumbling for an idea here. Doesn't every separation perforce
unite those on the same side of the divide? Is there the glimmer
of a solution here?
Adding my voice to Rah's: I love your posts and hope to see more.
[> Interesting post...(Spoilers
from Lessons to Showtime) -- shadowkat, 09:41:56 01/15/03
Wed
I agree with the others who posted - your posts make me think,
even if I'm not sure I always agree. Have recently however.
I think you may be right about the First possibly equaling separation.
But I'm not sure. It could mean so many things.
So let's look back over the episodes and see if this metaphor
has consistently been emphasized this season.
First let's go back to Amends - that's really the first time we
meet the First. In that episode the First works really hard to
a) seperate Angel from Buffy in some way b) separate Angel from
humanity and c) separate Angel from life.
When the first fails in getting Angel to kill buffy, or use Buffy
to become Angelus again - the First attempts to get Angel to kill
himself - stating that will also work.
The First convinces Angel and Buffy that it was the one who brought
Angel back from hell but we're never really sure about this.
Now onto season 7:
1. Lessons - the First appears to use a tailsman to separate Dawn
from Buffy. Dawn and Buffy are separated in the school - only
connected by a cell phone. Spike is separated from everyone in
a boiler room with the door closed, kept alone by the First to
torment - something the First resorts to again in Never Leave
Me - taking Spike literally back to the same place. We see the
first take on the separate forms of each big bad - in a sense
unifying them but also keeping them as separate entities. All
the Big Bads are connected in the first, yet also separate in
our heads.
From Beneathe You - Him - the First succeeds in keeping Spike
separate and alone in the school basement. In HIM, Buffy breaks
this cycle. And the group is suddenly reunited. Anya is brought
back into the circle as well.
In Selfless - an attempt was made to separate the SG with Buffy
going off to kill Anya and Willow and Xander being against it.
If she had succeeded - one wonders if Xander would still be so
chummy with Buffy. Everyone is separate in the middle of Selfless
- but with Anya's sacrifice - Anya separates from D'Hoffryn and
the SG start to reunite.
Same Time Same Place is all about our fears keeping us separate
from each other. Willow does a spell that literally separates
her from her friends -into another dimension. Spike is separated
by his mind which in a way has separated into a multiple personalities
to deal with the separate entities he's encountering in the basement.
Beneath You - Spike's mind separates into multiple pieces.
Anya and Xander are separate.
Help - Cassie's prophetic abilities and knowledge of her death
separates her from everyone. Buffy attempts to bring her into
the group and manages to make Cassie feel less separate. Cassie
in turn makes Spike feel less apart from things.
HIM - the four women (Dawn, Willow, Anya, Buffy) are separated
from each other by a spell yet united by their yearning for the
same man. The separation causes the problems - ie. the competition
which can separate us. Spike and Xander in contrast overcome their
differences shown in the beginning of the show and unite to help
the girls, their bonding or uniting saves the day.
Sleeper - Spike is separated from the others again by distrust.
He reunites with them by telling Buffy the truth and showing her
what's going on. The song separates him, but his humanity and
remorse reconnects him.
Never Leave Me - again with the First trying to separate everyone
fighting them in different rooms and pulling Spike away. Also
the two groups doing separate interrogations.
Getting rid of unifying orgainizations - the Watcher's Council.
The attempt to kill Giles when the one watcher says Gather them.
CwDP - the first attempts to instill distrust in each person,
separating them from the whole.
Bring on the Night - the Ubervamp tries to separate Buffy from
her friends. The First attempts to separate Spike from buffy and
the others.
Showtime - Eve attempts to separate the proto-slayers from Buffy
and each other - create discordance in the group. Andrew also
serves to create this.
So yep - i think we can track the metaphor all the way through.
But what does it mean? If the theory is everything is ultimately
connected, and the consistent theme in the series is we are stronger
if we work together than maybe this is what they are going for.
And dang it a friend came by and I have to eat lunch...so someone
else will have to pick it up unless I get back to it. Toodles.
SK
Tonight, tonight!
-- Rob, 11:39:03 01/15/03 Wed
Any other dorks like me already have a tape in the VCR for Angel
tonight, even though they're going to be home to watch it?!?
Rob
[> Won't be just any night.
-- Arethusa, 11:48:07 01/15/03 Wed
Can't wait. VCR is standing by. Holding out strongly against seductive
wildfeeds. All systems go, Captain!
[> Not dorky.. you're just
prepared for any contingency! -- ponygirl (who set her timer
first thing this a.m.), 11:51:01 01/15/03 Wed
[> That'd be this dork
-- Masq, 12:51:54 01/15/03 Wed
The VCR is set just in case I get delayed by four hours between
the time I leave from work and when Angel starts. Who knows what
could happen? My boss could hold an emergency afternoon meeting
that goes on and on and on and on, the bus could break down, monsters
could attack the city!
And then of course, there's my insistence on taping Angel on two
vcr's at once. This bit 'o dorkiness came when I realized the
tape I'd used for the first seven eps of the season was defective.
I'm now retaping all of the eps but the reruns, as usual, are
dripping like slow Chinese water torture. But I'm also now taping
new eps on both VCR's even though the tape I have now seems fine.
*Alas, obsession *
[> I'll see your dorkiness
and raise you... -- Calvin, 12:55:58 01/15/03 Wed
The question is, Rob, how many times have you gone back and checked
to make sure it was set correctly? No work today, and I have already
checked twice. I am apparently taking the end of "Buffy"
and the remote possibility of no "Angel" pretty hard.
I need help. Seriously.
Calvin
[> [> Welcome to my paranoid
dimension. -- HonorH, 13:04:48 01/15/03 Wed
When I set up to tape BtVS, I re-check all the settings to make
certain I've got them correct, switch off the TV, then switch
it back on and check the settings again. Then I'll obsess about
it all the time I'm gone (I've a standing engagement Tuesday nights)
and only stop being paranoid when I get home and watch the ep
I just taped. Oh, and I always set for at least ten minutes after
the ep has ended just to make sure I get all of it, as I once
clipped the last seconds of "Beneath You". Just seconds,
mind you, but it irritated the hell out of me.
[> [> [> I had an
even worse experience -- KdS, 14:37:19 01/15/03 Wed
First time I saw "Out of my Mind" the schedule was running
late and my recording ended with Buffy, Riley, and Graham walking
out of the hospital. Didn't find out til I got on the web that
I'd missed Spike's dream totally
[> [> [> [> I even
check the weather to see if there is a chance of thunderstorms...
-- Jay, 16:40:01 01/15/03 Wed
So I'll know if I should hook up an antenna instead of the cable
connection. Now, if my electricity got knocked out, I'll call
a friend of mine 50 miles away and have him tape it. This stuff
has happened enough, although not during Buffy or Angel - thank
god, that I've come up with these contigencies.
[> [> [> [> [>
Or snow storms! -- Masq, 16:57:57 01/15/03 Wed
An October snow storm made me miss the first airing of "Halloween".
A rain storm made me miss the first airing of "Band Candy".
What I don't miss now is the midwest!
[> Right there with ya!
-- Cheryl, 13:22:07 01/15/03 Wed
I say there's no such thing as being too prepared. :-)
[> Dork here! But my VCR
paranoia is completely justified. It's TOTALLY evil. :-) --
acesgirl, 13:46:22 01/15/03 Wed
[> Re: Tonight, tonight!
-- JM, 13:48:19 01/15/03 Wed
I check display the counter every five minutes to make sure it's
stills taping. Means I have a hard time focusing on the ep. Drives
my husband a little crazy, but at least he watches. Used to drive
my roommate bananas. But accidents do and have happened. Trust
nothing.
[> Just this once, I forgot!
... -- Thomas the Skeptic, 14:00:49 01/15/03 Wed
... but, barring an act of God or an apocalypse of Buffy-like
proportions, I know I'll be at home by 7:00 pm (EST) and will
make all the necessary preparations then. Which IS kind of dorky
when you think about it since I'll be watching while recording
and could just do it manually without going to the trouble of
pre-setting! By the way, Rob, not to hi-jack your thread or anything,
but while I have your attention I wanted to say something about
a post I made last week: it was in the last thirty minutes before
leaving work for the weekend and I was feeling a combination of
end-of-week blahs and start-of-new-year blahs. I wanted to write
a clever comment about how the writers were tweaking our noses
about all the divergent opinions surrounding season six, indulging
in a bit of inside joking if you will, by letting Anya express
misgivings about resurrecting Buffy. In re-reading what I wrote
it sounds more like something penned by Kierkegaard on barbituates!
(Teachs me a lesson about posting when I'm tired or blue or both...).
I can understand how you might have thought I was now disappointed
in the show but I really am not. I agree with you that 7 is shaping
up as one of, if not THE, best. I do still miss the "happy
shiny crap" that littered the dialogue in seasons past but
I love the intensity and feeling of imminent final resolutions.
In other words, my fears of lapsing from the one true faith were
somewhat premature...
[> Ya'll want paranoia...
-- Random, 14:22:04 01/15/03 Wed
I've missed exactly one first-run episode of Buffy since
"The Pack" (the eppie in question was "Primeval,"
and I still don't know why I missed it!)and still set my VCR to
tape. Of course, I inevitably take manual control once I'm safely
ensconced in my Buffy-watchin' chair -- all the better to pause
(excise) commercials. But Angel has far less pull on my schedule,
so I've set my VCR and left my obsession in the hands of the Machine.
But I always do a test run -- especially with BtVS -- by
setting the VCR to start taping at some point in the immediate
future (say, 5 minutes from the point in time that I'm actually
setting it) to make certain that the timer hasn't mysteriously
stopped working or something. Once I've confirmed that the timer
-- and blank tape, for that matter -- still functions properly,
I set it for the right time and cross my fingers. Beat that one,
ya'll.
[> Re: Well, yeah! --
Brian, 14:22:19 01/15/03 Wed
[> Thanks for the reminder.
I checked. Everyting was set, but the VCR was still on. Dhooo!
-- Just George, 14:42:16 01/15/03 Wed
What makes
a great "Buffy Night"? -- Tony
L., 15:48:08 01/15/03 Wed
Currently organizing "Buffy Nights" at a Pittsburgh
bar during new episodes, and just wondering what ideas people
have that could make it really cool. What's been done in other
cities when Buffy fans get together? What's a good idea that's
never been done for? Help me brainstorm... (Thanks)
[> Re: What makes a great
"Buffy Night"? -- Flo, 16:27:51 01/15/03 Wed
I have found that the show stands so well on its own, my past
efforts to make Buffy night more spectacular have just made it,
well, complicated. The one recommendation I'll offer is to create
a forum within which to talk it all over after the episode. Having
a super-informal facilitator to ask engaging questions and avoid
have the group be monopolized by one person is helpful.
Most importantly, IMHO, make sure that people at various fan-levels
feel welcome. For instance, invite but don't pressure people to
engage in discussion afterward. Also, help people feel welcome
to join discussion even if they are completely new to BtVS.
Because the show is strong and engaging on its own, I think the
best thing you can do is to openly enjoy it and allow others to
do the same. Vague advice, perhaps, but hopefully it's helpful!
HAVE FUN!
--Flo, who's life is too unstable to plan anything as great as
Buffy night in her town
Financial
news: Wolfram & Hart Announces Massive Layoffs (Angel 4.8 spoilers)
-- cjl, 20:01:31 01/15/03 Wed
First impressions of "Habeus Corpses":
-- The romantic subplots are mostly annoying (exception below).
I'm getting a little tired of Gunn's constant verbal sniping at
Wes, especially after Gunn's talk with Fred when the boys got
back the hotel. She said she loves you, Charles! She knows the
Seidel thing is a bump in the relationship, but she wants to work
it out! Why do you want to drive her away by displaying your massive
insecurity in front of the whole world? Honestly, I thought Gunn
was smarter than this--but I guess he can't help himself. Had
to agree with Angel: put a sock in it.
-- But there is a sign of hope. Despite all the snarkage and mistrust,
Gunn and Wes' brotherly love is still alive. G&W's mutual
pledge to kill the other if either one went all George Romero
on the gang was touching, in that "comforted and creeped
out at the same time" way Cordelia talked about in "Billy"...
-- Cordelia and Connor. Angel's deep hurt and jealousy. Cordy's
inexplicable behavior keeps on rolling. She couldn't have handled
this worse if she planned it. Her morning-after speech made Connor
feel like the spawn of Satan, and by hiding the tryst from Angel
(he was waiting for her to come forward), she shattered his trust
even further (if that's possible).
-- Angel didn't handle things well, either. He could have confronted
her at any time, asked for her explanation. Leaving her behind
with Lorne (while pointedly inviting Fred!) wasn't protectiveness--it
was a deliberate punishment.
-- The exception: I love Lilah and Wes. They're the best couple
on both series. He breaks it off, then rushes into W&H to save
her; she could have kept her mouth shut and walked away, ensuring
Wesley's safety--but she chose to tell Wes about Connor. Is Lilah
actually redeemable? Can she ever wear a white hat? (Or would
she be more comfortable buying Wes "His and Hers" grey
hats?)
-- Alas, poor Gavin. I like Daniel Dae Kim. I found Gavin boring.
Rest in Pieces.
-- If Andy Hallet is going to be a regular, they're going to have
to give Lorne more to do.
-- The Beast. He's not an especially nuanced Big Bad, but I find
his modus operandus interesting. He seems to be sowing Chaos,
and his attack on Wolfram & Hart and the Girl in the White Room
is a huge disruption to the forces of Order. (Remember, the GitWR
put the lid on Sahjhan when he was getting a little too frisky;
so, evil or not, she was working for the forces of Order.) But
WHY is the Beast sowing Chaos? Is he connected to Connor, or is
the Fang Gang missing an alternate explanation?
Despite the soap operatics, a Solid ep. Love the title and I'm
not even a lawyer. 8 out of 10.
[> 1st impressions of Habeas
Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer for next episode) --
Jay, 20:14:48 01/15/03 Wed
First, kill all the lawyers.
I usually prepare myself pretty well for the summer breaks, plus,
it's summer with lots 'o fun to be had. And, even though we've
had semi-regular episodes of Buffy, I needed a AtS fix, big time.
This two month break in the middle of a season is brutal, especially
after an episode like Apocalypse, Nowish. Welcome to Wednesdays,
Angel.
I'm really enjoying the tense scenes with Gunn, Fred and Pryce.
Pryce and Lilah's early scene was a little bit of a let down,
but they make up for that soon enough, escaping from Die Hard.
I've been flip-flopping on the subject of Cordelia a lot this
year. With the exception of Spin the Bottle, it seems like no
one remembers how to write for her anymore. I get feeling the
only reason Lorne was in this episode was because he was in the
last one, and they couldn't explain his absence without at least
a token appearance. At least we get a somewhat plausible explanation
why the rain of fire news reports never reached Sunnydale, with
the officials calling it a meteor shower. If anyone in LA bothered
to put a camera on it though...
I like how even though Connor hasn't seen his father conducting
an interrogation or formulate a plan very much, he does them the
same way. So Lilah is even more quick to pull out a gun than Wesley.
I'd hate to have to figure up a body count for a website with
this episode. Gavin, we hardly knew you. It's really starting
to get creepy. Damn Wesley, you scared me that you might become
predictable once you gave that good and evil speech to Lilah.
Grenade! Lots of tp (the cornerstone of corporate America). Lilah
lives. Badass Pryce has entered the building again, with bad news.
Join the Pryce team and fight more evil before 9am than other
evil fighters fight all day.
Sorry Cord, you're staying home with the demon folk. Anyone else
see the glint in Fred's eye when Angel picks her over Cordelia?
I love Angel smacking down Gunn and Wes's back and forth. Really,
really creepy. Pryce: let's be certain. Nice policy Wes, did you
just adopt that? Splitting up=bad. Creepy on overdrive. Connor
lives. But doesn't handle the distinction between zombies and
vampires very well.
Okay, I'm assuming this will play out more later on, but shouldn't
Gunn be ten different shades of dead by now? Might this be foreshadowing?
(I'm guessing.) Ooooh, the white room. I love it when they revisit
a classic. They brought along Fred for a reason. Gunn killed Gavin.
You bastard! The Beast kills the girl in the white room. I'm flabbergasted.
Wolfram and Hart is like, gone dude. (Although, I'm not sure an
army of zombies isn't interchangeable with an army of lawyers).
Except for Lilah. The answer is among you. Nice V formation team.
The Beast got big feet. Home.
Best news: A new episode next week. And from the scenes from next
weeks new episode, Electro-girl is back!
[> [> Re: 1st impressions
of Habeas Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer for next episode)
-- JM, 20:39:08 01/15/03 Wed
Actually, I thought Fred was hurt. She didn't realize that Angel
was punishing Cordy (or at least keeping her out of a space he
might get over stimulated and lose his cool). I think Fred was
hearing "Because I'd never hurt someone I care about, now
get out of my way" all over again. I wonder if she's starting
to worry that her loyalty only goes one way.
[> [> [> Re: 1st impressions
of Habeas Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer for next episode)
-- Cleanthes,
20:54:23 01/15/03 Wed
Here I thought Fred worried that Angel knew she took part in the
professor's murder and that was why he so eagerly put her in harm's
way.
[> [> [> Re: 1st impressions
of Habeas Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer for next episode)
-- Jay, 20:59:45 01/15/03 Wed
I didn't read it that way. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'll have
to re-watch it again, which I don't see happening in the next
24 hours. But when I did re-watch it initially, I paid attention
to see if my first impressions were on. The scene was long enough
to afford Fred two reactions. I saw her being initially surprised
that Angel singled her out over Cordy, but then proud that he
did. She always considered Cordy a champion, and is fully aware
of her being a higher being, making herself feel inferior to her.
Although completely unintentional, Angel elevates her over Cordy,
momentarily, and she seemed to appreciate it.
I hate to concentrate everything on a three second scene, but
I'm curious on how others read it.
[> [> [> [> I thought
she looked hurt (spoilers) -- Scroll, 21:27:55 01/15/03
Wed
Actually, she looked confused first, then kinda hurt. Not majorly
crushed and devastated, just a little piqued. I don't think Fred
understood Angel was punishing Cordelia; she just heard, "I
care about you, I don't want you getting hurt. Fred, get a move
on."
[> [> [> [> [>
My vote goes to: she looked hurt (spoilers) -- Briar Rose,
00:50:51 01/16/03 Thu
[> [> [> [> [>
[> I'll second that... -- Flo, 01:21:22 01/16/03
Thu
...or third it, I've lost count. I think that Angel's comment
to Fred was all about Cordy and Fred, at least at some level,
knew she was just playing second fiddle once again.
[> [> [> [> Re:
1st impressions of Habeas Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer
for next episode) -- JM, 21:28:33 01/15/03 Wed
You could definitely be right. I was talking to my husband way
too much during the ep. I think he wanted to strangle me. But
he didn't, so that's good, right?
[> [> What I'm Curious
About (Habeas Corpses spoilers) -- Rob, 20:50:27 01/15/03
Wed
The zombies--was that a failsafe spell that W&H had installed
in the building, should everyone in it be slaughtered...or can
the Beast do this?
Why did the Beast come to kill the Little Girl?
How the hell can they ever fight a creature that is absolutely
indestructible?
How will I ever be able to wait until next week's episode?
Random thoughts:
~~I really liked this episode. A whole lot. It was tense, and
rather grim. The outright devestation of W&H was unbelievable,
and disturbing.
~~I can't tell you how glad I am that Cordy realizes that the
Connor thing was a mistake.
~~Gunn is staring to really grate on my nerves lately. He always
is so adament about being completely uncooperative with people
he's having fights with. He did it to Angel in the latter half
of the second season, and now he's doing it to Wes. His complete
inability to see the possibility that the person he's mad at might
have his own side drives me bonkers, but lately more so than usual.
Not saying that I hate Gunn, but I wish he'd tone down on the
outright hostility to Wes.
~~I adore Wes/Lilah more than I can possibly say. Who knew that
she had a heart? I'm starting to really feel for her.
~~I loved the black/white/grey scene. Brilliant!
~~Lorne needs a plot line...PRONTO!
~~I'm liking the Beast, for now. But I hope (and I'm sure) that
a twist will be coming soon, because he could get real boring
real fast, if for the rest of the season all he does is stomp
around, kill, and grunt some angry phrases. For now, though, again,
the Beast is cool.
Rob
[> [> [> Re: What
I'm Curious About (Habeas Corpses spoilers) -- Finn Mac Cool,
21:11:11 01/15/03 Wed
"How the hell can they ever fight a creature that is absolutely
indestructible?"
Well, Buffy and the Scoobies did it in Season Five with Glory.
Granted, the only reason they were able to kill her was because
she turned into Ben, but we didn't know about that until either
episode twelve or thirteen, and Angel's only at episode eight
right now. So fighting against an indestructable creature isn't
totally new to the Buffyverse, just to the Angel Investigations
team.
[> [> [> [> If
you saw next week's trailer... -- neaux, 04:25:00 01/16/03
Thu
You know that a special character returns to help fight the beast.
[> [> [> Re: What
I'm Curious About (Habeas Corpses spoilers) -- JM, 21:32:51
01/15/03 Wed
Actually I heard the make-up's a b*tch and that the contacts hurt,
so I'm OK with only a few minutes an ep, as long as he gets a
martini double take. And maybe the occasional cigarette.
[> [> [> My theories
(spec and spoilers for 4.8) -- Scroll, 22:01:24 01/15/03
Wed
I think the Beast turned the dead lawyers into zombies; it wasn't
a W&H fail-safe. My reasoning is based on little more than the
absence of one line, but hopefully it'll hold up to scrutiny.
Wes and Lilah are fleeing from the Beast, stepping around dead
people to reach the utility closet (btw, somebody has to do a
post on utility closets in the Buffyverse, there's got to be a
connection). Lilah sees Gavin dead and says, "Gavin, the
poor bastard." She doesn't seem the least bit alarmed about
all the dead lawyers around her; she is only worried about the
Beast. Okay, the Beast is probably a greater threat than zombies
but still...
So Wes and Lilah tumble down the chute into the sewers. Wes tells
her to get out of town, Lilah reveals that Connor is still in
the building. "Even though there's no way in, I thought you
should know." But Lilah knows Wes well enough to know he
will go straight to Angel, they'll all gear up and try to get
in anyway. So why doesn't she warn them about the zombies?
Either: a) W&H senior partners installed this fail-safe without
informing Lilah; b) the Beast did it. I'm leaning towards the
Beast since, when Darla and Dru slaughtered 13 lawyers in S2,
nobody got turned into a zombie. In fact, Holland Manners continued
working for W&H in his afterlife. Zombies wouldn't do the Senior
Partners much good, IMHO.
As for why the Beast killed the White Room Girl, I agree with
s'kat that this is a battle between Order and Chaos. As for why
the Girl saved the Fang Gang, perhaps she saw them as agents for
Order, though for the PTB.
Echoing the love of the black/white/grey scene. That little Lilah
speech summed up the idea of moral ambiguity on Angel with
finesse and irony.
[> [> Re: 1st impressions
of Habeas Corpses (spoilers for AtS 4.8 trailer for next episode)
-- Yoda, 05:45:15 01/16/03 Thu
Actually Gunn didn't kill Gavin. He killed the Zombie that Gavin
became. I thought it was kind of sweet. Gunn said that he couldn't
stand to see someone he knew like that even if that person was
an enemy (or evil - can't remember exactly).
[> Mostly agree. See my
post above. -- shadowkat, 20:59:21 01/15/03 Wed
Unfortunately you posted this while I was still writing mine.
Oh well. But agree more or less on everything above. ;-) SK
I gave it an A. But on number scale? Yep 8 out of 10, which I
guess is A-.
Gavin was boring but so not the actor's fault - he started off
interesting until Lilah poked the hole in his sails.
Gunn is getting on my nerves as well. Hoping he stops snarking
in jealousy.
For rest see post above. SK
[> (Angel 4.8 spoilers)
Well - some things that made me say Yay! -- Briar Rose (just
in THAT mood....), 00:44:50 01/16/03 Thu
Thank Goddess for the Rain of Fire, because it appears that it
caused Cordy to regain her (more) natural hair color again! I
guess all the red pigment of the flames landed on her scalp. What
was up with that really bad streak job for her assention to "Glowy
Gal" anyway?????
Kudos - They finally re-shot the entire Conner/Cordelia boning
scene - because in the first installment, Cordy looked like a
store mannequin in need of re-positioning. "I'm Giving You
Something Real..."? She looked like a really tired and bored
hooker after the last wave of Marines on shore leave. I'm afraid
it had more to do with her renewed romance with Miss Clairol than
the actual body language though....
Good to see ME finally addressed the over-indulgance issues of
the Glorious Green One. Maybe he'll cut back on the martinis when
he realizes that people just pop in and he can't decifer if it's
drunkeness or regular weirdness anymore. That should work faster
than any Hephalumps and Woozles ever would. How do you tell when
Lorne is green around the gills anyway?
Who is responsible for DB's hair turning into the Freddy Prinze
Junior helmet look????? This person MUST be stopped before they
do anymore makeovers! Even normally bad Angel hair is an improvement
over this new slick and immobile strands thang. Ted Koppel has
looked more natural.
Hey! Nice to see that Angel hasn't improved his communication
skills since breaking it off with the Buff-ster. I don't even
remember his patented "urgh - grr" being employed in
this ep to try and tip Cordy off that something was seriously
w-r-o-n-g.
It's nice to know that zombies are now taken over in "shifts"
because there was no order or reasoning behind the last killed
being one of the first changed, or why none of the zombies-to-be
residing in each stairwell were a walking when the Good Guys ENTERED
that stairwell, only conveniantly activated as they can most effectively
corner the AI gang.
Okay - okay... I loved the episode.*L
I am surely happy that they will give us 5 more before another
long glut of reruns and prempts. And it was a pretty nice save
on the C/C upchuck activating action -reasoning that "We're
all gonna die" is one reason why people make bad sexual mistakes.
Still don't even get the reasoning Cordy was using that Connor
would just immediatly understand one-nighter, let alone mixed
messages, even though I did before argue on ATPo for her morality
still being intact as in; that being in righteous and real fear
of your life can and has caused more than one human in the history
of the world to say, "Love the one you're with" and
that she might have been in the state of mind of "At least
he shares Angel's BLOOD. If I can't have my beloved Angel with
me as my death approaches, then..."
I completely agree that Chaos and Order are more important to
the theme of the season than Good and Bad. In all of the major
religions I have studied (and there be lots) the ideas of "Good/Right"
and "Bad/Evil" are based in INTENT andnot in actual
action. As Lilah stated so wonderfully - everything is gray. (minus
her snarky racial insinuations, natch) When Angel or Buffy or
any "Champion" kills a Big Bad, there could be an arguement
made that they were "wrong/evil" because taking a life
that is not done in direct defense of your own is not considered
"Good/Right" in most religions. As a reference, Buddism
does not make an arguement that killing a mosquito that carries
thyphoid and might kill you if it bites is any better than killing
a mosquito that doesn't come near you. Killing anything is wrong,
period. Thus Order is more desirable than "Right/Good"
or "Bad/Wrong." The Bible makes it quite clear (in the
New Testament, which most people regard as "the true Bible"
now... Unless you're George Bush, I guess) that only in defense
of one's self is violence unto murder justified.
I will TRY and make it through another week for the next ep -
it seems just when the story line gets juiced up that they pull
the plug and no new eps are shown until I've forgotten half the
plot. I see that Buffy is becoming a Bi-Weekly installments program
and it truly Bites! ~s~
Current board
| More January 2003