January 2003 posts


Previous January 2003  

More January 2003

Why can't Angel remember everything he did as Angelus...Demon possession and the mind -- Rufus, 02:07:46 01/23/03 Thu

How can Angel not remember everything he did as Angelus? I think we have to start with the original creation of the vampire......s1 The Harvest.....

Giles: This world is older than any of you know. Contrary to popular mythology, it did not begin as a paradise. For untold eons demons walked the Earth. They made it their home, their... their Hell. But in time they lost their purchase on this reality. The way was made for mortal animals, for, for man. All that remains of the old ones are vestiges, certain magicks, certain creatures...

Xander: So vampires are demons?

Giles: The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a human, mixed their blood. He was a human form possessed, infected by the demon's soul. He bit another, and another, and so they walk the Earth, feeding... Killing some, mixing their blood with others to make more of their kind. Waiting for the animals to die out, and the old ones to return.

The vampire is a hybrid, created from man, a supplement that allows the demon to animate a human host. What the vampire has to work with consists of the human form (which eventually does transform to a permanent demon state with great age), the memories and personality of the host. The vampire without a human mind to control has no way of existing on the mortal plane. To prove this all we have to do is look at Drusilla, and Kralic (Helpless s4), both have some form of mental illness, and while disease of the body may be put into remission, disease states of the mind aren't. If you have an insane human, the vampire will be insane.

People have asked why Angel forgot for a time what he had done as Angelus, and there is a simple reason for that, a form of Multiple Personality Disorder happens with the demon state. The person who once was is the basis for the vampire, but the loss of the soul creates a situation where the person who once was can't control their actions as the demon is able to act out in criminal ways due to the loss of the soul/conscience. The constant killing, predatory acting out (to the host personality traumatic) buries the former personality combination of the person + soul. When you create a vampire you get demon infection (one side effect, death of the body and soul) + person who once was (the mind remaining intact the body animated by the demon infection) = evil vampire. This hybrid seems to have programed into it the predatory preference for human blood (though it can exist on animal blood), and this need to create a comfy hell for the old ones to come back to. All this leaves the vampire at odds with everything it once stood for as a human. One unexpected result was the amount of time the vampire could evolve with humanity, actually some living along with humanity to differing degrees (Winters in Angel s1).

So is the vampire still the person who once was......and to that I say...yes....the mind is what makes us who we are, beyond the body, and without the human host mind the vampire can't exist. And we only have one personality, but trauma can cause a fracture in the personality, not a brand new seperate personality, and we know the demon infection doesn't bring a personality to the mix. But what happens to the person who once was, that part of them who grew up, and is still acting out their past traumas, past experiences and preferences. Well, it's still there.....just apart from the vampire personality. A way to explain this is using Multiple Personality Disorder as a framework to describe why a vampire and host personality can fracture and exist apart from each other.

Contrary to prevalent opinion, MPD patients do not have more than one personality; the so-called different personalities are fragmented components of a single personality, abnormally personified and dissociated from each other. Adult patients exhibit core symptoms: voices in the head and ongoing blank spells or periods of missing time. The voices are the different parts of the personality talking to one another and to the main, presenting part of the person who comes for treatment. Periods of missing time occur when aspects of the personality take turns being in control of the body and memory barriers are erected between them. Colin A Ross, MD

The trauma of death and the constant killing that the vampire does causes the original personality to fragment, dissocociate and function seperate from the original host personality. Liam is turned into Angelus, who becomes Angel when the soul is returned...but notice Angelus means Angel. Angel represents the turnaround in dominance of the fragmented personality. When Angelus is cursed with his soul, Angel doesn't remember for a moment what he has done, but soon enough he is informed from his memory of everything he has done as Angelus. Calling Angelus, Angel is a reminder to Liam of what he can still be capable of. Same goes for William, who became Spike.....who remains Spike but is still called William at times. It gets all confusing till you remember that one personality in reaction to trauma can fragment and create an amnesiac state between the personalities. The amnesia evident upon the return of the soul, the original personality trying to sort out what has happened while behind a barrier.

Although MPD patients are, by definition, diagnosed as having more than one personality, they in fact don't. The different 'personalities' are fragmented components of a single personality that are abnormally personified, dissociated from each other, and amnesic for each other. We call these fragmented components 'personalities' by historical convention: much of the scepticism about MPD is based on the erroneous assumption that such patients have more than one personality, which is, in fact, impossible. preceeding quotes from "The Osiris Complex" by: Colin A. Ross, M.D.

To make this simple....see vampirism as a cursed state, where the person becomes demonic, possessed and controlled by evil that fractures the original personality. In fairytales the person isn't blamed for what they did while in a cursed state. In real life we don't punnish those who act in criminal ways while insane. In the Buffyverse the curse is partially lifted when the soul is returned, the demon is suppressed, not able to act out like it would want to. The vampire a metaphor for our darkest urges given the chance to act out independently of the conscience or soul. So though Angel and Spike are still under a partial curse, as they are still part demon, the soul/conscience has been returned and they can act through the personality who always was, Liam or William, as there can be only one personality.

The Osiris complex designates what I believe is the most important motif in psychopathology:the fragmentation of the self in response to external trauma. In the Isis-Osiris myth from ancient Egypt, Osiris is murdered by his jealous brother Set, who cuts him into pieces and scatters them far and wide. Isis then gathers her brother Osiris's fragments together, reintegrates them, and resurrects Osiris in a new form. "The Osiris Complex" by: Colin A. Ross, M.D.

Vampirism is a fragmentation of the self, caused by the trauma of the initial infection (add in mortal death) and subsequent continual acting out in the form of evil acts (killing). Ensoulment causes the fractured parts of the personality to become aware of each other, and a battle for dominance ensues. So, it is likely that for every good act Angel does, part of his personality is cringing in disgust, while if evil is done the other part feels guilt and remorse. But Angelus isn't a totally seperate personality, just a fragmented part of a whole. With a soul the balance tends to be in favor of what the person was like while human, without a soul, the demon is able to search out the darkest aspects of someones mind and use them as a template on how to act out in an evil way. We all have, in varying degrees, the capacity to do evil but our conscience or in the Buffyverse the soul causes our actions to tend towards good. We may have evil thoughts but the conscience/soul is puts on the ethical brakes. In a vampires case the brakes are off and that moral compass is switched to gravitate twords evil. Just as in humans vampires act along a spectrum where some act out in an extreme way and some less so.

There is a question of how Angel can't remember some of what Angelus did, but I simply refer back to what Dr. Ross says about the personality....there can be only one, but that one personality can fracture and dissassociate, Angelus is still Angel, dissassociated from the whole, parts of that personality remaining amnesiac from the other. In Angel and Spikes case this lingering amnesia could be there to prevent further trauma to the ensoulled vamp. Angel is aware of Angelus, but it is conceivable that there are fragments of memory that Angel can't access but Angelus can.
[> Spoilers for 'Long Day's Journey' -- Rufus, 02:09:26 01/23/03 Thu

[> Re: Why can't Angel remember everything he did as Angelus...Demon possession and the mind -- Majin Gojira, 05:57:33 01/23/03 Thu

And here I thought the Beast just did some whacky to Angel's Memory, and it was just wearing off...
[> [> This was my theory, too -- kind of like the thing with Spike. (spoilers BtVS & Ats)) -- yez, 07:02:53 01/23/03 Thu

The sleeper thing.

While I think Rufus' theory is interesting and would make for an interesting story, for me, it doesn't really jibe with the whole premise of Angel's curse and the show really -- a soul having to suffer with the burden of knowledge of what a demon did while in control of his body. And that means he has to remember the horrible things Angelus did, or else what's the point? Also, this season on Angel what with the sudden importance of (the never-before mentioned, as far as I know) Angel's photographic memory and all the crap with Cordy, I have my doubts about getting anything that interesting and complex.

Unless they basically boil it all down to something like, "This was the most horrible thing Angelus ever did, and Angel must've blocked it out to protect himself" or better yet, "There are some things so horrible that even Angelus has to block them out of his memory to stay sane."

I'm trying to hold out some hope and give them the benefit of the doubt, and I'm hoping they suprise me, but my impression right now is that they missed the boat. All the characters should've been asking this exact question LAST NIGHT and BEFORE just leaping to the conclusion that they need to access Angelus somehow. Hell, they should've been screaming out, "But you've always remembered the other things Angelus has done! How can this be possible?" and then someone else could've offered a reasonable theory that could later be replaced by an even better explanation. But ecause none of the characters bothered to, it just reeks of weak plot device ("We need to get Angelus back on the scene in time for sweeps.").

yez
[> [> [> Re: This was my theory, too -- kind of like the thing with Spike. (spoilers BtVS & Ats)) -- Rufus, 07:27:49 01/23/03 Thu

it doesn't really jibe with the whole premise of Angel's curse and the show really -- a soul having to suffer with the burden of knowledge of what a demon did while in control of his body. And that means he has to remember the horrible things Angelus did, or else what's the point?

Actually it does jibe.....if you think of the mind as a whole, a trauma occurs and the mind fractures from the stress. A vampire infection would take over the body and use all the memories to do evil......upon the return of the soul the balance shifts and the soulled vamp finds that part of the personality that makes him what he was is more dominant but as the memory of the past (as a vampire) is so traumatic there are incidents that can remain with the Angelus part of the personality....Angel remembers almost everything except for some things he may not be ready or may be programmed not to know.
[> [> [> [> Yes, this I could buy. But still, why didn't the other characters ask?! -- yez, 07:54:07 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> They probably will next week! -- Scroll, 08:29:52 01/23/03 Thu

I can understand why they left the episode of with Wesley calling to bring Angelus back -- it's for dramatic purposes. I'm very sure the Fang Gang will really examine the situation before they do something as dangerous and rash as getting rid of Angel's soul (or hypnosis or whatever).
[> [> [> [> [> [> Maybe, but when a dramatic device leaves part of audience going 'What?!' -- yez, 09:50:35 01/23/03 Thu

... it's not worth it, IMHO.
[> [> [> [> Re: This was my theory, too -- kind of like the thing with Spike. (spoilers BtVS & Ats)) -- maxam, 08:55:22 01/23/03 Thu

or it could be a "false"memory implanted by the beast to make angel think he had done something so terrible when he was angelus, manipulate angel into thinking there's no point in staying "good" so that angelus emerges to suit the beasts ultimate purpose (obviously if there's no sun angelus can run around destroying things 24/7)
[> [> [> [> [> Question on blotting (Angel spoilers) -- yez, 10:02:48 01/23/03 Thu

I kind of got lost when they were explaining how the whole blotting out the sun thing was going to work. Did they say first LA, then southern CA, then spreading to the rest of the country and world?

I hope I didn't get that right because that caused much rolling of the eyes on my part. HOW CONVENIENT that only LA has the sun blotted out so that they don't have to address it on BtVS, even though, 1) what possible explanation, correction, BELIEVABLE explanation, could there be for the sun only being blotted out in one city?, and 2) don't the Scoobies ever turn on the TV or radio, and wouldn't the whole "Sun blotted out in LA" be a hot news item for at least that region?

Grrr, arrrgh!

On the other hand, if I got it wrong, just forget I said anything at all...

yez
[> Or... (spoilers LD'sJ) -- ponygirl, 06:57:50 01/23/03 Thu

Fabulous analysis Rufus! And since you are the queen of spoiler trollops I don't doubt that you are right. However at this point my own theory is that Angel doesn't remember meeting the Beast because Cordelia's vision is false. I think she's the "sleeper" in this particular scenario and is being controlled by another force. Could it be that the fragmentation you talk about with Angel is applicable to her as well? After all we don't know how or why she came back from the higher plane or what sort of being she actually is at this point.
[> [> And some of us are beginning to not care anymore... -- yez, 07:10:22 01/23/03 Thu

That's a good theory and could make a cool plot twist, but I'm so frustrated with the whole Cordy ascension and mysterious reappearance thing that I find I don't even care anymore. While it would be easy enough to believe that our old Cordy had managed to get herself kicked out of the higher plane for being rude and obnoxious, I haven't been able to maintain interest in "new-and-improved superpower Cordy" since last season. And now with the airing date change, I can hardly get myself to tune in anymore. Am I the only one having these problems? The problems with the caring and the tuning in?

yez
[> [> [> Really? (spoilers LDJ) -- ponygirl, 07:29:26 01/23/03 Thu

Actually the last few episodes have seen some of my most fully engaged AtS watching ever. And now that I've decided that Cordy is controlled by some sort of possessing thing I find her so much easier to watch. It would explain the memory loss, the consistently inconsistent behaviour, C/C, even possibly her hair. I'm also hoping that we find out that the whole higher plane/superpowers thing was a complete mislead 'cause I'm with you, yez, superCordy was no fun at all!
[> [> [> [> LOL......her hair....no kidding.....;) -- Rufus, 07:34:15 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> :D! OK, I'm with you -- possession it is. -- yez, 07:59:14 01/23/03 Thu

I did enjoy the return of sarcastic, catty Cordy in last night's ep and in Spin the Bottle (?) -- I hope once the possession is over, she remains.

yez
[> [> [> Re: And some of us are beginning to not care anymore... -- Shambleau, 10:05:36 01/23/03 Thu

yez is me.
[> [> [> [> Always nice to run into other parts of my own shattered personality. ;) -- yez, 10:35:08 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> Re: Or... (spoilers LD'sJ) future spoiler speculation -- Rufus, 07:32:21 01/23/03 Thu

What I said has nothing to do with my Trollop status, but how I see the mind working. Trauma can do a lot of things and I saw that MPD could also explain the amnesiac symptoms Angel exhibited upon getting his soul back. If Cordy is in fact "the sleeper" you could be right about the fragmentation applying to her too.
[> PLEASE Keep Spoilers Out of Subject Titles! -- Robert, 08:14:14 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> My topic is from last nights show... -- Rufus, 13:28:12 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> Which some of us have not seen. -- HonorH, 16:45:12 01/23/03 Thu

Like our UK friends or the WB-impaired, like myself. Not, of course, that I'm not a total Spoiler Trollop for AtS, but some people might just object.
[> I think I agree with this theory, but ... -- shadowkat, 12:50:57 01/23/03 Thu

Read through your points and to be honest it makes more logical sense than anything else anyone including me has come up with.

Vampirism is a fragmentation of the self, caused by the trauma of the initial infection (add in mortal death) and subsequent continual acting out in the form of evil acts (killing). Ensoulment causes the fractured parts of the personality to become aware of each other, and a battle for dominance ensues. So, it is likely that for every good act Angel does, part of his personality is cringing in disgust, while if evil is done the other part feels guilt and remorse. But Angelus isn't a totally seperate personality, just a fragmented part of a whole. With a soul the balance tends to be in favor of what the person was like while human, without a soul, the demon is able to search out the darkest aspects of someones mind and use them as a template on how to act out in an evil way. We all have, in varying degrees, the capacity to do evil but our conscience or in the Buffyverse the soul causes our actions to tend towards good. We may have evil thoughts but the conscience/soul is puts on the ethical brakes. In a vampires case the brakes are off and that moral compass is switched to gravitate twords evil. Just as in humans vampires act along a spectrum where some act out in an extreme way and some less so.

This makes sense. I think it also explains why Angel wakes up confused about what happened in Becoming and why Spike states in Never LEave ME that he feels as if he was watching someone else do it, that he was separate from what occurred.

Angel comments about this too - says he feels as if he is watching it outside himself - in Amends and in different episodes in Angel. When he gets his soul - he is overwhelmed with guilt but doesn't understand or remember everything right away. Spike is similar in Sleeper - when he tastes Buffy's blood, he remembers it all but it throws him because clearly didn't remember it before.

But and here's where I disagree, I don't believe ME are going for the MPD metaphor so much as the drug addiction one, which can cause exactly the same symptoms in the more advanced users. Many of the effects you describe, black outs, amensia, Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde behavior - have been used to describe what happens to drug addicts or people under the influence. Heroine addicts and alcoholics are known to exhibit different personalities while under the influence. Drugs have been known to remove inhibitions and while high someone may kill someone, engage in date rape, etc and have 0 memory of it the next morning due to a black out. Numerous movies and tv shows have used this tactic. I've met people who will do things under the influence of these drugs that the sober, drug free person would never consider doing. I remember several cases that I saw in Leavenworth Pentitentiary in the 90s, the killer I met, insisted he did not kill a bunch of people, yet the evidence stated otherwise and his eyes were yellow, he had track marks in his elbows and it is possible he did not remember doing all of them. He could have done them while jacked and functional on heroine - it's possible although was never proven. Another guy, who had a family, kids, etc, robbed banks just to get cocoaine, while in prison he went through a series of courses to get past this harmful addiction. A movie that also describes this is Requiem of A Dream starring Ellen Burnstyn which discusses what addiction can do to you. In Sleeper - the Aimee Mann songs discuss the effect of drugs on relationships and behavior and are juxtaposed with Spike in a nightclub where drinks and drugs flow freely. He is drinking from a flask - like an alcoholic is often seen doing in TV shows. The vamp who approaches him wonders why he brought his own. In Potential - he refers to the addiction again in comparison to alcohol - as Pig's Blood Spritzers and Human Blood is better from the neck, then paying high prices for the weak stuff - would be akin to paying lots of bucks for 3.2 beer when you can get hard alcohole or heroine nearby for nothing. They also mention how getting a drink is wrong. Then we have - the comment in Never Leave Me - "he's going through some pretty powerful withdrawls, we probably should get him some blood." Willow - "we can always give him Anya."
Buffy - "No we probably should wean him off of human blood."
Earlier in Sleeper - "The taste of human blood? Think I'd remember that." And "Back on the juice?" Very obvious drug metaphors. I'd question this metaphor as just one writers fetish - if they didn't keep repeating it in both series over the years. Angel has used it repeatedly. And the emphasis on the oral fixations and addictions of Spike are numerous - smoking, alcohol, blood. It is interesting - that since getting a soul we have not seen Angel or Spike ever smoke. Both drink alcohol from time to time, with little effects, but neither have smoked. Without a soul? They smoke.

At any rate I think you are right - I think this is what happens to addicts when they are on an addictive substance that removes all their inhibitions, what keeps us from doing evil or bad things. Not everyone reacts this way of course. But I've met people who do.

It is an idea Whedon and Company have played with before, in Halloween - when the costumes the characters where cuts off their real personas from the one they wish to convey through the costume. Buffy becomes the weak, whimpering female, Willow an uninhibited ghost, Xander the military guy. Xander describes watching what happens, knowing it all, but unable to do anything - a stuck observer. Here - the problem is amensia, Angel and Spike aren't just stuck observers, but under the influence of the drug - their demonic persona is in complete control and they are literally knocked out. What they remember is flashes - they can't access as much info as Cordy did. To them it's as if someone took their body and used it - similar actually to what happened with Buffy and Faith in Who Are You and whatever memories Buffy has of it - would be clouded. And possibly even more similar to Living Conditions - where Kathy takes Buffy's soul.

Not sure if this makes sense. Beginning to confuse myself again...so should probably stop. At any rate, I think you're on the right track with how the writers understand the whole ensouled vampire idea.
[> [> Re: I think I agree with this theory, but ... -- Rufus, 15:28:49 01/23/03 Thu

I think the best way to look at this is that I'm talking about how the mind can work in ways we haven't considered. The addiction metaphor is there but also is the trauma induced fracturing of the mind...the addictive substance along with trauma a contributory factor in the resulting fracturing of the mind into Angel and Angelus and how one can have aspects the other may be amnesiac to.
[> Isn't there a simpler explanation? (Spoilers for 4.9) -- Masq, 15:37:51 01/23/03 Thu

The Beast was able to make Angel drug Cordelia and kill Manny and forget he did it. Why couldn't the Beast have made Angelus forget he even met the Beast?

That doesn't account for why Wesley thinks only Angelus (Angel sans soul) would remember that long-ago meeting, but then, no theory about why Angel forgot meeting the Beast can account for Wesley's insane troll logic.
[> [> I agree, Masq. And regarding Wesley... -- Ixchel, 16:21:03 01/23/03 Thu

Maybe he believes that the only way to access this knowledge is through Angelus because of some additional information that we don't have yet? I know it's weak, but it's all I have.

Ixchel
[> [> In a word............no -- Rufus, 16:54:08 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> Re: Isn't there a simpler explanation? (Spoilers for 4.9) -- anom, 22:37:36 01/23/03 Thu

"The Beast was able to make Angel drug Cordelia and kill Manny and forget he did it."

Angel killed Manny? It looked to me like the Beast did it while both Angel & Cordelia were drugged. Both were asleep when Gwen & Gunn came back, & Manny's head was broken open (well, we just see his torn straw hat, but Angel, w/no sign of being under the Beast's control at this point, says so). Not Angelus' MO...much more like the Beast's, esp. given that he wanted the orb.
[> Re: Why can't Angel remember everything he did as Angelus...Demon possession and the mind -- Kev, 20:40:38 01/23/03 Thu

The fact that the writers had Angel himself mention that he couldn't understand why Angelus could remember something that Angel couldn't remember tells me the writers are aware of the problem here. (don't ask me to diagram that last sentence...) While kicking this around with some local fans, we hit on the beginning of a theory that perhaps you all could kick around a bit. What if Angel doesn't remember Angelus meeting the Beast, because it never happened? Perhaps the "answer is among you" line doesn't refer to Angelus at all, and this is just a ploy by the real bad guy or girl, to get Angelus into the picture to cause even more havoc. Or, are we way off base here?
[> [> Part of my answer is in inviso text as it's a major spoiler. -- Rufus, 03:10:14 01/24/03 Fri

Spoiler Angelus in fact did know the Beast. Angelus kills the beast restoring the sun. end of Spoiler

When I wrote this post it was a way of explaining the complexity of the mind and the fact that your memories can be manipulated for various reasons. People think of the brain as a hunk of meat when we know that the brain is so complex we really don't know why it works. I was also dealing with the fact that people constantly say that Angelus and Angel are totally different seperate entities. Angelus means Angel, and the difference between the two can be explained using the information from the quotes I gave regarding the Osiris Complex. If Angelus was a totally seperate entity then why is Angel going through the redemption quest at all, he would do better to find a way to exorcise the demon or make Angel human but no longer a champion.....but the demon is only a corrupting influence that is neutralized by the presence of the soul which returns the ability to choose between evil and good...as we can see Angel even with a soul slips every once in awhile.
Why Brilliance is in the Eye of the Beholder (spoils Angel LDJ..) -- neaux, 04:50:22 01/23/03 Thu

Here's a quick little post about Brilliance.

Brilliance-
1. The state or quality of being brilliant, as:
a. Extreme brightness.
b. Exceptional clarity and agility of intellect or invention.

2. Splendor; magnificence.
3. Music. Sharpness and clarity of tone.

Why was Angel's episode (LDJ..) heavy into brilliance (or lack there of)?

Here is a quick rundown because I dont really have time here at work to elaborate.

1. Major plot point- Blotting out the Sun and referrs to point (1a)

2. The actual phrase- Brilliant! Used by Wesley and mocked by Gunn as the group walk up the rickety stairs. (Also one of the funniest lines in the episode) refers to point (1b)

3. Angel's lack of memory- refers to (1b)

4. Cordy's brunette hair- refers to point (1a)

5. Gwen's inability or reservations in using her powers for anything important (1a)

6. Wes and Fred are the two main character's known for their brilliance and are downplayed this episode (1b)

So why these points? I would say the opposite of brilliance is DIM. and This episode reflects the characters that are dim (in the dark) so to speak. They are darkened by their recent actions, their inability to focus, their inability to remember, their inability to fight. I believe that counts for Angel, Gwen, Cordy, and Gunn.

like I said I wish I could write some longer kickass post but I'm more of a lister as those who read my posts have probably realized.. and that I suffer from over punctuation with dot dot dots and parentheses. ^_^

anyone care to elaborate of brilliance or dimness??
[> oh yeah.. and you should realize who the beholder is.. ^_^ -- neaux, 04:51:30 01/23/03 Thu

Suspicious of Giles? *spoilers & speculations through Potential* -- keriann, 05:59:44 01/23/03 Thu

My husband and I have been arguing on whether Giles may be an incarnation of the FE - especially now that he's conveniently missing at the same time the FE is recovering its strength. I'm sure we are being led to this conclusion by the writers because of the lack of explanation on how he got away from the axe-wielding robed minion - but my husband keeps citing the fact that he hasn't seen Giles HOLD anything since he returned to Sunnydale.

Okay - let me elaborate his point of view: 1) The First can only take the form of someone dead, 2) He seems to recall something in the research on the First that it HAS to use minions and demons to do its work, because it is pretty much immaterial - composed pretty much of evil energy only.

Can anyone verify or disprove this theory? My memory isn't good enough, and I don't have hard copies of these recent episodes - but it seems that Eve, if not Giles, was able to carry things (or at least fill out a sleeping bag). I'm just not sure my husband can jump to his conclusion based on his current reasoning. Any help??
[> Re: Suspicious of Giles? *spoilers & speculations through Potential* -- Kay, 08:56:26 01/23/03 Thu

I actually think along the same lines as your husband. Now, I am going from memory but I don't recall seeing Eve hold anything or touch anyone. She wasn't training with the others, and as far as filling out a sleeping bag, I don't recall seeing it, but that would be an easy thing for the First to fake, either she sleeps on top or it or makes it look like its full or since for most of that eppisode the potentials were talking she never slept at all.

As for Giles I had the thought that he was the First and have been specifically watching to see if he holds anything or touches anyone, and as far as I could see he hasn't. When he first gets to the house Buffy starts to go to hug him and he steps back to let in the potentials. He isn't carring the books he got from the watcher's council, and is keeping his hands in his pockets a lot. He isn't there to help Buffy get away from SuperVamp. And more importantly he isn't helping. He hasn't given them any really useful information. He has a clearly defined defeatist attitude. He has repetedly said thing to Buffy that add to her stress, even finding out the reason why the First is attacking now isn't really helpful, but guilt producing.

But I don't think that Giles is dead, the First can appear as someone who has died not necessarily someone who is dead, i.e. Buffy. Personally I think (or hope) that Giles either earlier is his life or after the axe attack, died but got brought back and then "woke up in a coma" and is currently in hospital.

So based on what I've seen, there hasn't been anything to disprove that Giles is the First.
[> [> Re: Suspicious of Giles? *spoilers & speculations through Potential* -- anom, 15:26:20 01/23/03 Thu

"When he [Giles] first gets to the house Buffy starts to go to hug him and he steps back to let in the potentials."

Looked more to me like the Potentials cut in front of him. ME is playing it extra ambiguous.
[> [> Re: Suspicious of Giles? *spoilers & speculations through Potential* -- Q, 21:08:02 01/23/03 Thu

I do have all the eps on tape, and Giles has not touched a single thing since his return. I personally think this is just a smokescreen, but we are obviously meant to discuss this, what is up with the G-man? Plus, HE is the one gathering the Potentials! Wouldn't the First want that?

As for dying in the past-- Do you thing the Eygon summoning could have counted for that? Weren't they basically flatlining to summon in Eygon?
[> Re: what I was thinking... -- Purple Tulip, 21:33:44 01/23/03 Thu

...is that it is too obvious to make Giles an incarnation of the FE. But also, the FE doesn't seem to be able to take on the image of more than one person at a time. And I am almost positive that he and "Eve" were in a room at the same time, with the FE masquerading as Eve. So if it can only be one person at a time, then there is no way that Giles could be the FE.
Who's your least favorite Potential? (mild general season 7 already aired ep spoilers) -- Rob, 08:21:59 01/23/03 Thu

Mine definitely has to be Rona. The girl just drives me up a wall, because she is just so defeatist, we can never do this, etc., and even more so, has an attitude about it. I may not be being fair to her, but I don't know if its the character, or the actor's delivery, but I keep hoping that the next time the FE attacks, she'll be in the front lines.

Step in line and choose your own least favorite Potential! ;o)

Rob
[> LOL. I like Rona. -- Sophist, 08:37:19 01/23/03 Thu

That's the trouble Rob -- you're so quick to criticize, but some of us just love them all. :)
[> [> Quick to criticize? Moi?!? ;o) -- Rob, 09:29:21 01/23/03 Thu

Frankly, I'm kind of relieved that I have found things to criticize on "Buffy"...every now and then. It can be so stressful loving EVERYTHING about the show, as I usually do. ;o)

Rob
[> [> Re: LOL. I like Rona. -- Cheryl, 10:18:34 01/23/03 Thu

I like her too. I was going to say I like them all, and then realized that I don't remember who the MIA SiT is, and didn't even realize one was missing until everyone else mentioned it. So maybe I don't like that one? I think they're all kind of fun and quirky in their own ways and I like the diversity.
[> I'd have to agree -- Apophis, 08:40:34 01/23/03 Thu

If it weren't for the fact that she could beat the crap out of me, I'd like to smack Rona. I get that things aren't going very well for her at the moment, but there's nothing she can do about it, so she may as well suck it up and deal. Conversely, for reasons I couldn't explain even under the threat of torture, I like Vi. It bothers me, but I do.
[> This is like picking your favorite Cordette (mild general season 7 already aired ep spoilers) -- Darby, 10:10:59 01/23/03 Thu

Once you get past Harmony / Kennedy, on what basis do you choose? They're interchangeable!
[> You mean you can tell the difference? -- Solitude1056, 10:45:48 01/23/03 Thu

Originally I was cheering ME's sudden willingness to be multicultural. Latina, black, east ender - or whatever that brit girl's awkward accent is. Sometimes it sounds an awful lot like that guy from Mary Poppins, a movie I won't actually admit to having seen except for the fact that I had a younger sister who thought Poppins rocked. But anyway. Where was I. Oh, right.

Anyway, so we have this delightful variety - a whole smorgasbord o' cultural variety - well, not really. I mean, no one's shown up who's Asian (yet), there aren't any indigneous peoples in the group, and the real extent of the diversity is about what you'd find in a generally middle-class large-city suburbs. Effectively, people with different accents and skin colors who are all still remarkably middle-class! But whatever. I was happy... until I finally figured out ME's sadistic plan. They weren't trying to be diverse. They weren't interested in multiculturalism. They weren't interested in sensitivity to anyone of color or culture. They did it just so we could tell the proto-slayers apart. That's sick. That's just so not right.

I mean, ME seems to have no problem with bit players of color or culture (Kendra, Carlos, Janice, earlier slayers) but don't, fer cryin' out loud, keep them around! Gracious, we couldn't actually develop these extra seemingly non-WASP characters. If we didn't have skin color or accent to be able to tell them apart, what would we do? Chloe was Latina, Nickie was the black slayer, and no I don't know the name of the slayer during the Boxer Rebellion. This makes for a nifty shorthand, so I'm able to say:



And if we didn't have the multiculturalism, then I'd have to say something like:



But, see, in my fond memories of the early Joss-dominated episodes, I could've said:



Because, you see, used to be the characters didn't all talk identically. Making people look different seems to me to be a quick & easy crutch that ME is using to avoid having to take the time to make the characters actually think, act, and speak differently.

*sigh*
[> [> Yes...that is exactly my difficulty with these characters. So agree. -- shadowkat, 12:05:40 01/23/03 Thu

Thank you - you put my feelings on why these peripheral characters on Btvs this season aren't working for me into words and did it very well.

Because, you see, used to be the characters didn't all talk identically. Making people look different seems to me to be a quick & easy crutch that ME is using to avoid having to take the time to make the characters actually think, act, and speak differently.

So agree. These characters ME keeps introducing on Btvs - I can't tell apart any more than I could tell the Cordettes apart. Darby is so right - it's like picking your favorite Cordette. Outside of Harmony, does any of the Cordettes stand out in your memory?

Anyway, so we have this delightful variety - a whole smorgasbord o' cultural variety - well, not really. I mean, no one's shown up who's Asian (yet), there aren't any indigneous peoples in the group, and the real extent of the diversity is about what you'd find in a generally middle-class large-city suburbs. Effectively, people with different accents and skin colors who are all still remarkably middle-class! But whatever. I was happy... until I finally figured out ME's sadistic plan. They weren't trying to be diverse. They weren't interested in multiculturalism. They weren't interested in sensitivity to anyone of color or culture. They did it just so we could tell the proto-slayers apart. That's sick. That's just so not right.

Yep, have the same gut feeling. It's almost as if UPN told ME that they had to be more multicultural to fit in with UPN's new niche programming. So sadistically just grabbed as many multicultural teens as they could and figured, we'll show potentials can come from any race and any creed.
Yet they don't develop them.

How hard is it to give a character a little personality so you can tell them apart. Granted you can claim we're in Buffy's pov and she can't tell them apart, but you can only take that so far. After a while it feels like Hacceity's remark "Adventures in slayer sitting".

And we already know ME can do this -as Solitude puts it so well in her post - We have the great Nikki who is more developed with 0 diaglogue than any of the proto-slayers are with dialogue. We had the Boxer Rebellion slayer - who doesn't even have a name that we know of and is more developed and has a clearer personality. We have Kendra. We have Dawn's friend in The Body - who is one of the few of Dawn's friends - I liked. Janice had more developed personality. It's not that they can't do this - they can, so why is it this year that they seem to have gotten lazy about it? Look at the peripherals we remember? Larry?
Amy? Forrest? Graham? Percy? The warlock boy that befriended Willow and Amy in Gingerbread. Harmony? Janice?
Clem? Sophie - even had something to her.

This year the only peripherals who stand out to me are
Nancy, Webs and Cassie - all one-shots never really seen much afterwards. And the guy who was interested in Cassie.
Everyone else melds together in my head.

Have to agree on the potentials: While Rona may seem annoying, at least I remember her - she stands out. And she reminds me a little of Season 1 Buffy to be honest. Outside of Rona? I only register Amanda and possibly Kennedy, who is I agree very Mary Sue like - there is nothing bad about this girl. She's nice to Willow. She tries to help Buffy and Spike has to hold her back in the crypt scene. I keep waiting for something to dislike about her. (In this way she reminds me of Prinicipal Wood who is too good to be true too, absolutely perfect and the male equivalent of Mary Sue - no blemishes. always nice. seems to be around merely to echo the main characters thoughts or reinforce them, has no clear personality or life that we see outside this. Undeveloped.)But at least we'd miss Principal Wood or Kennedy if they disappeared. Did anyone notice Chloe's death or that she was gone? And if Vi and Molly disappeared would you care or notice, well except for the fact that I would be relieved to no longer have to listen to Molly's accent which is the worst representation of a British accent I've heard in my life, never noticed the Mary Poppins ones - so that is saying something.

I wouldn't mind the potentials so much - if ME would give them a little more personality, something besides a few lines of snarky diaglogue or complaints or chatter. Not sure what...but ME did it with prior characters...right?
[> [> Agree, up to a point. -- Rob, 12:30:12 01/23/03 Thu

"Making people look different seems to me to be a quick & easy crutch that ME is using to avoid having to take the time to make the characters actually think, act, and speak differently."

I think the major problem is that, even if they wanted to, ME doesn't have time to develop these characters any better. There are 10 episodes left of Buffy. Possibly ever. The plot necessitated having a whole group of new girls appearing on the show, but if time was actually taken to distinguish every single one of them, there would be no time to see the characters we've cared about for the past 7 years (there isn't really enough time for them right now, anyway!).

Also, the diversity was also necessary, I think, to hammer home the "Slayers could be from anywhere in the world, any race, ethnicity, etc" thing. There would have been just as much of a problem if all the Slayer were blonde, WASPy girls. ME really couldn't win either way.

Unfortunately, the Potentials have to be divided into the Latina, the Black girl, the Girl with the Beanie, the Southern Girl (from "Showtime"), etc but I'm kind of glad more time isn't being spent with them. Because, again, I want the focus to be on the core Scooby Gang. It's too late on the show to truly care about a whole new group of people. Maybe that's the problem with the Potentials. There's no way to give them a chance. And there's more coming every week. So I like to think of them just for what they stand for.

Do I care about each of these girls? Not by a long shot.

But I do care about the Slayer line being wiped out. So instead of thinking, "Why should I care if Rona, Kennedy, etc dies?" I just think about the larger picture, that if they are wiped out, no more Slayers. And for that reason, I don't want them to die.

Otherwise? Don't mean to sound callous to fictional characters lol, but if this was a regular horror movie, they all would have been picked off by now. The bland characters always are.

Am I making any sense?

Rob
[> [> Only partially agree -- Peggin, 13:43:40 01/23/03 Thu

I was happy... until I finally figured out ME's sadistic plan. They weren't trying to be diverse. They weren't interested in multiculturalism. They weren't interested in sensitivity to anyone of color or culture. They did it just so we could tell the proto-slayers apart. That's sick. That's just so not right.

Well, Kennedy is Mexican (or at least the actress is) and Rona is black, and I find them both to be very distinct characters. I also think Amanda is as well developed as anyone could possibly be after appearing in all of two episodes -- back in Help when she told Buffy about how she had beat up some guy who had been picking on her, she already stood out to me as having a distinct personality, and that was long before we even knew she was a Potential.

I admit, I don't yet feel like I know anything about Chloe (if she's even still in the picture), and Molly and Vi seem pretty much the same to me, except that one wears the funky hat and the other has an accent.

But of the other three -- the ones who have personalities -- two of them are multi-cultural characters. So, I can't agree with the idea that they're not developing the minorities. It's the white chicks they aren't developing.
[> [> [> Chloe missing had nothing to do with the storyline but her (the actor's) other commitments -- Rufus, 04:54:14 01/24/03 Fri

[> Difficult choice especially since learning all the names seems -- Cactus Watcher, 13:24:44 01/23/03 Thu

not worth the effort. Have to agree that to some extent it's Cannonfodderette 1 through Cannonfodderette n, where n is greater than 4, but less than the population of Sunnydale. I like Kennedy, though having her hit on Willow the moment she met her wasn't a terrific idea. I think Rona would probably be the best next slayer. Like Buffy she's got the healthy "Gee I'd really like to stay alive" attitude. The girl from Phoney-British-Accent-Land is so non-descript I can't even remember what she looks like at the moment. Can't remember the name of the younger latina (Kennedy being the older one), but it doesn't matter. Reading the posts yesterday I know who Vi and Amanda are. I guess both of them are my least favorites, not that there is anything wrong with either girl or the actresses behind the girls. It's just that both of them are so wimpy looking, they make Willow look tough.
[> [> Hey, I like the girl from Phoney-British-Accent-Land! Btw, I'm calling her that from now on! -- Rob, 13:54:20 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> Re: Okay, that's Molly, and I think she's from 'Phoney-Australian-Accent-Land.' -- dub ;o), 17:54:27 01/23/03 Thu

Buy hey, I could be wrong.

;o)
[> [> [> [> Not a good sign,we have trouble guessing what accent she's faking. -- CW, 04:44:15 01/24/03 Fri

But, my latest viewing makes me lean toward WW's point of view. If she's faking Swedish, she's really bad.
[> [> [> [> I'm English, and I say it's definitely meant to be cockney (NT) -- abt, 05:04:36 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> Re: Difficult choice especially since learning all the names seems -- Malandanza, 23:12:38 01/23/03 Thu

"Have to agree that to some extent it's Cannonfodderette 1 through Cannonfodderette n, where n is greater than 4, but less than the population of Sunnydale."


I'm not sure the SiT's have to die. There has been talk about who would make a good watcher -- Buffy, Spike, Xander, etc., but I wonder if they might all become watchers -- at the end of the season each Scooby (and Buffy, if she lives) takes a Potential to train. Maybe the spin-off could be Watchers instead of slayers.

And I agree with you about Rona -- she's the one I like the best because she reminds me of Buffy from the early seasons. I don't much care for Amanda and I doubt that Joss would be interested in making a series where the quirky, dark-haired, social outcast is really a superhero.
[> You guys are tough! -- Dariel, 14:29:53 01/23/03 Thu

I kind of like them all. With Amanda as my favorite (dorky girl as the next Slayer--I love it!), and Rona as the least favorite (and she's growing on me). They all have personalities--you just have to watch closely.

I think the problem is that there's just too many of them. It's hard to embrace such a herd at one time. And, who wants to get attached to cannon fodder?
[> [> Well said, Dariel. My feelings exactly. -- Ixchel, 22:17:40 01/23/03 Thu

Question - possible lameness in Selfless and Beneath You -- Helen, 08:54:45 01/23/03 Thu

Why was Anya able to reverse her curse on Ronnie herself in Beneath You, but in Selfless D'Hoffryn had to step in with the big price to pay to reverse her work on the Frat boys?

Is this another example of lameness creeping in, or is there a really obvious explanation I'm missing?
[> Re: Question - possible lameness in Selfless and Beneath You -- Tess, 08:59:46 01/23/03 Thu

I think the difference was that the Frat boys in Selfless had to be bought back to life, which always carries a big price in the buffyverse, whereas Ronny just had to be made human again.
[> [> Re: Question - possible lameness in Selfless and Beneath You -- maddog, 09:08:26 01/23/03 Thu

I was figuring it was either that or the multitude. Ronnie was just oen guy...the frat had many. But yours makes more sense.
[> [> What Tess said, plus The Wish -- PepTech, 09:16:17 01/23/03 Thu

Anyanka could have (or so the theory goes) gotten rid of the spider thing by herself, because its appearance was the direct result of the Wish. She could not do anything about the *indirect* results - that required D'Hoffryn (and a price).

In Beneath You, she could turn Ronny back, but she didn't bring back the dog, or repave the streets, or whatever else Ronny changed when he was demonized.

As far as consistency with The Wish goes, my own theory is that the non-Buffy Sunnydale dimension always existed in parallel, and Cordy's wish translated our (viewer) POV over. But that interdimensional stuff gets tricky.
[> [> [> Interdimensionality -- Helen, 09:20:28 01/23/03 Thu

That makes sense, because if Giles destroying the power centre had destroyed bizarro world, it wouldn't have been possible to get VampWillow crossing over in Doppelgangland - she wouldn't have existed.

Its like the world without shrimp, waiting for the POV to cross.
[> [> [> Why The Wish is consistent... (Wish and Selfless spoilers) -- Rob, 09:33:37 01/23/03 Thu

I rewatched The Wish recently. They never said that Anya did have the power to reverse the alternate universe. The only thing that reversed it was breaking her amulet, and taking away her demon abilities. Which is the same thing D'Hoffryn did to her in Selfless. She herself couldn't have said, "Wham! Turn the world back the way it was!" just like she couldn't have resurrected the frat boys.

Rob
[> [> [> [> Re: Why The Wish is consistent... (Wish and Selfless spoilers) -- Slayrunt, 22:02:00 01/23/03 Thu

The problem I'm having with the consistency between the two is the time (unless it is an alt reality as per Peptech).

Let me explain.
The Wish- day 1 9am- Cordy at school meets Anya.
8pm- Cordy outside of Bronze with Buffy, gets stitches ripped.
day 2 12pm- Cordy makes wish. Anya grants wish.
8pm- Cordy meets VampXander and VampWillow.
11pm Cordy killed by you know who.
11:30pm Giles calls Cleveland for Buffy.
day 3 Buffy shows up and frees Angel and goes after the Master.
Giles does research on Anayka and discovers the amulet.
Angel, VampXander, VampWillow and Buffy killed
Giles breaks amulet.
Back to day 1 12pm- Cordy makes wish, Anya couldn't grant wish.


Selfless- day 1 7pm- Guy and girl show up at frat house for party.
7:05pm- Guy tells girl that he's done with her.
7:06pm-7:17pm Guy and friends laugh at girl.
7:17pm- Girl makes wish.
7:17:30pm- Anya shows up.
7:18pm- Laughing stops, screaming starts.
day 2 9am- Anya leaves and Willow sees her.
10am- Willow goes to talk to Anya.
4pm- Willow tells Xander and Buffy about Anya, argument ensues.
7pm- Buffy and Anya fight.
7:20pm- D'Hoffryn shows up
7:30pm- D'Hoffryn grants Anya's wish.
7:30pm- Frat guys get up
7:40pm Anya leaves.
Etc.
* all times are made up, but order is correct

In one it goes back to the wish in the other, it does not.
[> [> [> [> [> There's a reason. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 04:33:33 01/24/03 Fri

Most of the time, reversing a vengeance demon wish doesn't involve making it so that it never happened. It's ususally like in Selfless, where it's reversed, but it's effects on people remain. However, Cordelia's wish was one which required turning back time. As such, reversing the wish also requires turning back time, which is why it was as though the wish never happened. Look at it this way:

Cordelia wishes that Buffy never came to Sunnydale. Anya goes back in the folds of time to stop Buffy from coming to Sunnydale.

Giles smashes Anya's amulet, reversing the wish. So the exact opposite of the original wish happens: time is folded back to make Buffy come to Sunnydale.

Now, for "Selfless":

Girl wishes frat boys could feel what it's like to have their hearts torn out. Anya summons a spider-demon she knows to have a fondness for hearts. Spider-demon eats the hearts of the frat boys.

Now, if Anya had reversed the wish, once again the exact opposite of the original wish would happen. Instead of summoning the spider-demon, she would either banish or destroy it. However, she couldn't undo what the spider-demon had done because the girl's wish didn't involve altering the time stream, so she couldn't make it as though the spider-demon had never been there.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself! -- Rob, 07:42:45 01/24/03 Fri

[> It's no different than what Hallie did in OAFA -- Sophist, 09:24:29 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> I know its no different, but that still doesn't tell me why or how -- Helen, 03:03:05 01/24/03 Fri

Why was Hallie able to reverse her own curse (and yes, Anya said, only the vengence demon who made the curse can undo it), but Anya couldn't undo it herself in Selfless. Its a goof.
[> [> [> Re: I know its no different, but that still doesn't tell me why or how -- Peggin, 04:23:50 01/24/03 Fri

No, it's not a goof, because the two situations are quite different. A vengeance demon may be able to reverse her own spell, but she can't reverse the damage done as a secondary effect of her spell.

Hallie's spell trapped them all in the house. Reversing the spell freed them from the house, but it didn't undo the damage that had been done while they were trapped -- for example, Richard's gut wound didn't automatically heal.

In Beneath You, Anya took back the spell that turned Ronnie into a worm. That didn't fix any of the damage Ronnie had caused while he was a worm. Rocky the dog was still dead, for example.

Anya's spell created a spider demon thingy. I'm sure she could have reversed her spell, but all that would have done would have been to make the spider demon disappear. It wouldn't have cured the gaping chest wounds the spider demon had infliced on all those boys. Since Buffy had already killed the spider demon, reversing the spell would have been an empty gesture at that point.

I do suspect Anya might have been able to reverse the deaths and become human again if she had smashed her necklace, but I don't think she was thinking that way at the moment. She wanted out, but she also wanted to be punished for what she had done, and smashing the necklace would have been too easy. Instead, she got a punishment that was worse: a taste of her own medicine. She got to find out what it's like to make a wish, and then be absolutely horrified when she got exactly what she wished for.
[> [> [> [> Add in this...... -- Rufus, 04:31:51 01/24/03 Fri

D'Hoffryn had already limited Anya's powers in that she was restricted in when or why she could teleport. D'Hoffryn has the power to remove all of Anya's at any given time. So many people had died that Anya simply didn't have the power to change it....she could only "wish" to take it back, D'Hoffryn is the most powerful vengeance demon and even he had rules to follow to grant Anya's wish.
Beast Speculation - Bizarre, even for me. Spoilers to date. -- Darby, 10:32:19 01/23/03 Thu

Is it possible that the Beast is Angel?

Vampires in the Buffyverse lose their human physicality as they age, but the effects vary, as seen with the Master, Kakistos, and possibly Balthazar.

Through the early part of this season we've been given a lot of quantum physics jargon, so time travel or alternate dimensions with different time rules both could enter in here.

There was a Moorcock thread up earlier (just want you to know where all this is coming from).

Could the Beast be Angelus from the End of Time, returned to somehow alter his own past? Perhaps he's tried before, and the paradoxes that emerged robbed Angel of his memory of the meeting.

Heck, it could even be Connor.

Just on the premise that the Beast has some backstory already at least partly known to us, how do you think he fits in?

On a side note, AI is going to have to solve this sun-blotting thing pretty quickly, before it reaches Sunnydale, or the continuity of the two shows is going to be hopelessly confused. They could avoid mentions of the Rain of Fire, which was essentially local, but the sun going out over the Scoobies will be kinda hard to ignore...
[> Re: Beast Speculation - Bizarre, even for me. Spoilers to date. -- ZachsMind, 10:41:19 01/23/03 Thu

The Beast said in Cordy's vision that Angeles is "a worthy adversary." It would be rather conceited, even for Angeles, if he was referring to himself. The Beast did look right at Cordy when he first showed up, as if he knew her, but I don't think he's Angeles.

Maybe he's Jonathan? Stranger things have happened.
[> It's already confused. Spoilers to date (also BtVS). -- PepTech, 10:55:03 01/23/03 Thu

On a side note, AI is going to have to solve this sun-blotting thing pretty quickly, before it reaches Sunnydale, or the continuity of the two shows is going to be hopelessly confused. They could avoid mentions of the Rain of Fire, which was essentially local, but the sun going out over the Scoobies will be kinda hard to ignore...

Remember this exchange from BoTN?

--------
BUFFY
No. Mom, I can't.
JOYCE
Buffy, you have to heal.

BUFFY
I don't have time.

JOYCE
Are you worried about the sun going
down? Because some things you can't
control. The sun always goes down.
The sun always comes up.
(beat)
Except in L.A., just of late.

-------

That was Buffy 7.10, which they must have planned to air after Angel 4.9, until the networks screwed up the timing. Remember Angel started a week after Buffy this season.

It's encouraging, though, that the writers are at least trying to synch this stuff up.
[> [> They did cut that line, though, and could get away with ignoring Angel events. -- Darby, 11:24:25 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> Huh? -- PepTech, 11:50:17 01/23/03 Thu

I could have sworn I heard Joyce say that. Granted, having read the shooting scripts, there's a chance I only hear Joyce saying that in my mind's ear...

Nah, I remember at the time thinking it was a weird thing for her to say.
[> [> [> [> But she didn't say it -- Vickie, 12:06:31 01/23/03 Thu

Unless I'm having a senior moment, the line was not broadcast. Need to recheck the tape...
[> [> [> [> [> Re: But she didn't say it -- PepTech, 12:14:45 01/23/03 Thu

Please do... I may need some medication myself :-)

Either way, the fact that the writers thought about it is encouraging to me. It seems very likely that some other mention (or hopefully more than that) of the LA events will get into upcoming Buffy eps.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: But she didn't say it -- Darby, 13:41:41 01/23/03 Thu

Definitely not in my broadcast version (I looked for it on the rewatch after having read the script), although it's quite likely she said it on set - there's a quick cut right where the added phrase should be.
[> [> Thanks for pointing out. Pls. help with other ? on the evil plan that 'doesn't suck.' -- yez, 12:41:08 01/23/03 Thu

I posted this below, but since no takers, thought I'd pose it here, too, where it might get more attention:

I kind of got lost when they were explaining how the whole blotting out the sun thing was going to work. Did they say
first it would go out in LA, then southern CA, then spreading to the rest of the country and world?

If I got that right, then there'd be another attempt by the writers to keep the shows from tripping on each other, though I think it's a little lame. We're shown a cloud or something coming over the sun, not a cloud hanging over LA (ueber-smog?), so how could it be that only people in LA couldn't see the sun?

yez
[> [> [> Ummmm....magic? POV magic? -- Darby, 13:52:15 01/23/03 Thu

[> Re: Beast Speculation - Bizarre, even for me. Spoilers to date. -- Kay, 11:03:47 01/23/03 Thu

I had the thought, before Long Day's Journey, that the Beast was some sort of representation of the evil Angel, while Connor is the representation of the good Angel. They still have not stated why or how Connor exists, and everyone says how much he is like Angel, and he is. But without the demon, curse and history.

But after last night, I don't think that is true. Perhaps the Beast is the First Vampire. Vampires as they age begin to look more and more demony, the Master etc. The Beast has a basic human form and is intellegent (side note: I was very impressed that the Beast is even scarier now that he is talking.) As far as I remember we haven't seen the Beast in the daylight, which would explain the blotting out the sun bit. Now, we haven't seen him drink blood, but that doesn't mean much. That could also be why there isn't any information on him. He predates writing, and was probably around for a while before the slayers evolved.
[> [> A logic lapse on the shows. Spoilers to date. -- Darby, 11:37:31 01/23/03 Thu

They've used this repeatedly and get us all to nod along. If something predates writing, there wouldn't be anything written about it.

But doesn't Stonehenge predate writing? Does that mean there's no record of it to be found?

If something has been around through all of recorded history, then something would have been written about it (as in Fred's great line about "leaving a parchment trail"). Somebody would have named it (doubt the Druids went "down ta the henge") and the guys would find stuff. The Beast is coming from somewhere that left no records...

At least when Giles discussed the First a couple of episodes ago, he acknowledged that it had probably been working behind the scenes or known as something else through the ages or somesuch and that's why so little had been written about it.
[> [> [> agree, absolutely! -- anom, 22:18:57 01/23/03 Thu

"If something predates writing, there wouldn't be anything written about it."

Yup. That just doesn't make sense. Even when Tara first said (Amends?) they were dealing w/something that "predates the written word," I thought, "So what? Rocks predate the written word, & there are plenty of words written about them!" OK, it's not as specific as Stonehenge, but still.

Oh, & "down ta the henge"?!? LOL--literally!!!
[> [> [> [> Re: agree, absolutely! -- Rob, 07:40:13 01/24/03 Fri

They should probably amend the phrase to "predated the written word, and then was not spoken of or seen since then." If something predated the written word, but then either vanished from existence, or didn't make itself known, appeared in different forms, etc, that would be the only way there would be nothing written about it.

Rob
[> Why you should be right. -- neaux, 11:31:32 01/23/03 Thu

In theory, you should be absolutely right. I thought that the first minute I saw the beast. Why?

Because The beast is a rip-off of Dark Dante from Devil May Cry. Dark Dante is of course the alter-demon-ego of Dante the main character.

This concept of Champion and Evil Alter-ego is of course a rip-off of the Evil Dead series where Ash has his demon alter-ego, Dark Ash.

The only reason why it wouldnt be Angel, is that for this theory to work, David Boreanaz would need to play both roles, just as Bruce Campbell did in the Evil Dead series. And since I do believe the Beast is played by another actor.. it kind makes the theory less plausible.
[> [> Re: Why you should be right. -- Darby, 11:49:44 01/23/03 Thu

If the transformation-over-time is dramatic enough, you wouldn't need the same actor to play both parts. The Beast guy is obviously bigger, but then he's stonier and more cloven-hoofy, too.

I'm just wondering why he's avoiding killing the AI folks.

Maybe he's not future Angelus, but future Angel! Or both, doomed to try to turn his history first one way, then the other - help Angelus kill the gypsies to create Angel (in Cordy's flashback), force Angelus to re-emerge at another critical point now - through an eternity of alternate eternities. "Trust me, it won't help."
[> [> [> I understand but.. -- neaux, 12:24:39 01/23/03 Thu

But.. it would be 10 times cooler if David Boreanaz played both roles. Dont ya think?
[> [> [> [> That would just remind me of... -- Tchaikovsky, 14:27:32 01/23/03 Thu

...that really abysmal film 'The Man in the Iron Mask', which Leonardo Di Caprio did straight after 'Titanic', (itself over-rated). He wasn't evil in his evil half, or nice in his nice half.

Apologies to the author of the novel of course. Not your fault.

TCH
[> [> [> [> [> Apology accepted. -- Alexandre Dumas, 17:41:37 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> [> Wow! A celebrity lurker -- Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, 05:05:21 01/24/03 Fri

I had always thought I was the oldest poster to the board, (and maybe the most dead, along with Dead Soul). But perhaps not..

TCH
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> The dead usually just lurk. -- Persephone, 09:35:50 01/24/03 Fri

Hades made troll posts, but stopped becuse they all degenerated into nauseating debates on posting morality. He thinks the potentials belong in Tartarus. Tantalus is a major spoiler trollop. Sisyphus thinks Buffy will never kill all the vampires and demons, and should just give up. I'm more partial to AtS, though. Mmmm, Angel.
Non-spoiler Angel observation and a Charmed rant -- Kay, 10:44:04 01/23/03 Thu

Happy Birthday to Angel. I just realised that Angel, having been vamped in 1753, will be 250 years old this year. I wonder if that may have something to do with what's happening now.

Also, I happened to catch part of Charmed 100th eppisode (old habits die hard, turned it on before I remembered that Angel is on Wednesday. Usually I turn off the volume and see what ugly outfits everyone is wearing, while waiting for Angel). In the show Cole, who is an Angel rip-off, an evil demon who fell in love with one the witches (Alyssa Milano) and tried to be a good guy, but failed, and is about as scary as Fred, he set up an alternate world in which he is still with her. However, things are not good between them as evidenced in their numerous affairs. In fact, his mistress is a petite, very light-skinned, woman, with shoulder length very blond hair whose name is DARLA.

Now I have a hard time believing that this was a coincidence, especially since they made a point of saying her name even though she had one line. I'm not sure as to why they would do that, but it kindof pissed me off. I would love to hear anyone's reactions or thoughts.
[> Lol-I love Charmed rants. -- Arethusa, 10:58:35 01/23/03 Thu

I've done a couple myself. I sometimes dip into Charmed becuause it's always on, and I saw the same thing. I had to laugh, because in any comparison between AtS or BtVS and Charmed, Charmed is not going to come out the winner. Didn't you just love Disillusioned Piper, what with the leather and the pathetic attempt at attitude? It was S6 depressed Buffy, but of course only for a few minutes, 'cause who wants to bum out the audience? The bad guy even says something like "I'll see you in Hell," and Piper says, "I'm already there." Heehee.

And didn't Cole go insane some time this year?

"About as scary as Fred" Heehee. Actually, Fred's a little scarier now.
[> [> Re: Lol-I love Charmed rants. -- Kay, 11:10:21 01/23/03 Thu

Someon on the board called Charmed the anti-Buffy. And that pretty much sums it up.

Yeah, Piper was totally out of her element, and not very believealbe. I didn't catch the line about hell, but that's about the quality of dialogue on the show, which is why I try not to listen.

I dont' know about Cole going insane, but he is a wuss, and a whipped one at that, and your right, I forgot about Fred zapping Connor.
[> [> [> I think that was I -- Arethusa, 12:15:56 01/23/03 Thu

who called it the Anti-Buffy, although I'm not positive. I tried to look up that discussion in the archives, but the search feature is not working.
[> [> Me too! -- ponygirl, 11:38:15 01/23/03 Thu

I think I watch Charmed the way some people watch American Idol -- just to see how bad it's going to get. It's not even a guilty pleasure because I feel neither pleasure or guilt, I just throw it the occasional eye roll when I look up from my book.

Weird I was just talking about why I keep watching Charmed today at lunch.
[> Charmed needs better writers... -- ZachsMind, 11:10:41 01/23/03 Thu

Perhaps the reference to Darla was intended as an homage. Yes of course Charmed has at least indirectly been influenced by Buffy & Angel. If they were more obvious about tipping their hat in reference to that, I'd have more respect for the writers of Charmed, but they don't so I don't.

The potential of Charmed was great, but the writers are disjointed and uncertain. They look like they're taking risks and then they back off. They allegedly killed off Cole this latest episode, but I doubt he'll stay gone. He should though. Phoebe claims she no longer feels love for the guy. There's no longer any real conflict there other than white hats versus black hats. I say they cut their losses there and move forward.

I got into Charmed solely because it was the leadin for Angel. Now that Angel's been moved to Wednesdays I'll probably quit watching because I don't really enjoy what they're doing with the plot. It's boring and predictable.

What really ticks me off now though is that Angel is opposite West Wing, another of few good shows on television nowadays. I hate having to miss West Wing, and my VCR sucks raw eggs from a straw.
[> [> Re: Charmed needs better writers... -- Kay, 11:21:28 01/23/03 Thu

I thought that it had great potential when it started, but two eppisodes was enough to convince it wasn't going to happen. Even an emotional plot like Prue getting killed, lacks the emotional resonence of the average Buffy or Angel eppisode.

It rather concerns me that they moved Angel mid-season. Now it was up against Alias which has a similar demographic, but also I heard that Angel's contract is up with the WB, and I wonder if they aren't trying to kill it or at least justify their not picking it up for next year. Since Buffy left, the network has either ignored or mishandled the show and ME going is oing to have to go in for another round of neogotiations with them, it may be payback time.

I have always found it interesting how the situation of shows Buffy and Angel mirrors the characters. Angel the character, came into his own when he left Buffy. Angel the show, only proved its worth when it was seperated from Buffy. Angel the character is haunted by his history and association, while the show has also been. Buffy has never really recoverd from losing Angel, and the show has never been quite as good as it was 2nd and 3rd season.
[> [> Re: Charmed needs better writers...they've got one... -- Darby, 13:47:11 01/23/03 Thu

We watch the show - it's a good family show (and hey, pretty women, not complaining, and Sara likes Julian McMahon) and actually useful for addressing inconsistencies and the like, but every few episodes it gets noticeably better. The dialogue is crisper, the characters more reasoned and self-aware, with some wry metanarrative tossed in as well (for those that watch, Cole is also at his funniest). I just haven't put a name to the writer yet...
[> [> [> I also watch Charmed and it has gotten better . Sure, it isn't Buffy or even Angel, but nothing is! -- Briar, 01:26:15 01/24/03 Fri

[> Technically... -- Rob, 12:16:25 01/23/03 Thu

...Angel's 350, since he spent 100 years in a hell dimension between seasons 2 and 3 of Buffy. ;o)

Rob
[> [> Re: Charmed - 6 boobs in action or The wayward children of Charley's Angels -- Brian (feeling mean and testy, and really needing a martini), 12:28:48 01/23/03 Thu

Like the rest of the country, Louisville is cold, bonechilling cold with a nasty wind that claws its way through whatever portective layers you got on and flays your flesh like a starving Gnarl.
[> [> [> RE: 6 boobs in action or the wayward children of 'Charlie's Angels' -- cjl, 13:08:55 01/23/03 Thu

So...why is this a problem? Were you expecting something else?

Charmed was created by Aaron Spelling, and Aaron Spelling programs have always been about EYE CANDY. In Seventh Heaven, it's All God's Children Got Eye Candy; with Charmed, it's (Bewitched + Boobs) x 3 + Julian McMahon thrown in for the ladies to ogle. With Charlie's Angels, it was Eye Candy + a droplet of detective series added for plot (sic).

I watch Charmed on occasion. I like watching Alyssa and Holly and Rose (especially Alyssa and Rose). Don't miss Shannon too much, because I was never emotionally invested in the characters in the first place. Joss-like integrity simply wasn't built into this series.

(Side note: I had hopes when Nell Scovell of Sabrina joined the Charmed staff, because StTW S1 had the best balance of goofy supernatural comedy and teen alienation I've ever seen next to early Buffy. But Ms. Scovell quickly was swallowed by the blandness.)

Charmed is...charming. Not too substantial, and the show is at it's best when it goes for light comedy. I don't expect anything more.

And did I mention Alyssa and Rose?
[> [> [> [> I Want Candy -- Arethusa, who's had to listen to way too much Aaron Carter, 14:09:39 01/23/03 Thu

The problem is that by copying BtVS, it's setting itself up for comparison to the show. Maybe I need to learn to appreciate mind candy more. Can you suggest any non-reality tv shows filled with amiable beautiful guys for women to ogle?
[> [> [> [> [> ER - you can always turn off the sound. Kovach is beautiful. John is pretty. Pratt is cute. -- Briar Rose, 01:30:51 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> Six Feet Under -- grifter, 02:02:12 01/24/03 Fri

Six Feet Under isn´t only a terrific show, it also has some hot guys (hey, non-gay male here, they´re hot as far as I can say, so don´t sue me if they´re not to your liking ;).

It should return to HBO soon in it´s third season.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Six Feet Under -- Rob, 07:37:37 01/24/03 Fri

SFU should fulfill your need for a deep, story arc-heavy series that has true substance. It's the story of a family who owns a funeral home in LA, and there's a lot of exploration about the falsity of the be-young-and-fit-and-healthy-forever Hollywood lifestyle versus the fact that death occurs there every day. Another great show that exposes a darker, more cynical view of LA! And the characters are the best on television, after Joss' shows.

I actually have a Six Feet Under website at http://www.sixfeetunderfan.com but if you haven't started watching the show yet, be cautious, because there are a lot of spoilers. Unless you want to catch up with the story, of course.

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Rob. -- Arethusa, 08:01:50 01/24/03 Fri

You did a beautiful job on your site. I'll check out the show, although the last thing I need is a new obsession! Did you see the tv series "Sports Night"? It also starred Peter Krause, and an unusually excellent cast. It was created by Aaron Sorkin, and is available on DVD, according to what I've read. I liked it very much.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Six Feet Under -- ponygirl, 08:15:00 01/24/03 Fri

I am so looking forward to the DVD release next month! I caught a few episodes of the first season and really liked it but the quirks of Canadian cable made it hard to keep up. BTW I read that Drew Goddard got his job largely based on a SFU spec script he wrote.

Great site Rob!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, guys! -- Rob, 12:38:55 01/24/03 Fri

Arethusa...Yes I LOVE Sports Night, and have bought the DVD set. That was a really exceptional show that never got the audience it deserved and was cancelled far too soon (although Peter Krause himself has said that, in retrospect, he's glad Sports Night ended when it did, or he wouldn't have been able to do SFU). I'm glad it has built up enough of a following through reruns on Comedy Central to warrant the DVD set. DVD may be the best invention ever, not for perserving movies, but TV shows.

Ponygirl...Me too! I am dying for the DVD set! Even though I've seen every episode at least 4 or 5 times to do the pages! I guess since you have a bunch you haven't seen you have more of a right to be psyched about it though. ;o)

I actually met Michael C. Hall, the guy who plays David, the gay brother, and his wife, after seeing them both in a performance of "Chicago" on Broadway, about 4 or 5 months back. I talked to him for a while. Really nice guy! The pictures of me and him are on the "webmaster's Page" if you're interested.

Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Drew Goddard and Six Feet Under and spec scripts (minor CWDP spoilers) -- shadowkat, 21:28:03 01/24/03 Fri

Not a rumor - I went to Bronze Beta and in the VIP Archives, Drew Goddard posted that he did get his job at Btvs for writing a spec script for Six Feet Under.
A spec script - is a script for a tv show that may have similar themes to the one you want to write for, but you do not send the script to that show. Why? Because Btvs writers/producers can't read spec script's for Btvs - if they do and accidentally use anything from them - they can get sued, it's why they don't read or admit to reading fanfic. Same thing with Six Feet Under - can't read spec for Six Feet Under. So what you do is - you want to write for Btvs? You write a spec for Farscape or Six Feet Under or Sopranos and send it to them.

Drew says his script was about characters talking to dead people with lots and lots of sex. He says you should include lots of sex because they really like that.

Having seen Six Feet 'Under - in the days I could still afford HBO and Showtime...yep, the sex and the conversations with dead people works very well. Actually part of CwDP - the part with Buffy and Webs and the part with Willow and Cassie - reminded me a great deal of Six Feet Under.
[> [> Re: Technically... -- ZachsMind, 13:24:08 01/23/03 Thu

I doubt even Angel knows precisely how old he is at this point. It's not like he took a calendar with him to hell. =)
Slayer Lineage (spoilers through BtVS 7.12, AtS 4.9; future speculation) -- PurpleMarrow, 11:55:30 01/23/03 Thu

Spoilers through BtVS 7.12, AtS 4.9; future speculation


I've got a theory...

I don't remember seeing this particular theory posted, so feel free to point out if it has already been raised as a possibility. I think that Joyce's statement to Dawn in CwDP that "she won't choose you", does in fact tie into Dawn as a potential slayer (regardless of the occurrences in "Potential" that indicated she wasn't one). I'm also speculating on what the next role for Buffy may be, particularly as it relates to slayer selection. I do not recall ever seeing anything definitive on how potential slayers are chosen, or how one of them is selected to be the slayer. The Council of Watchers may have worked throughout history to locate potential slayers and divine which would be chosen next, but it was never their decision.

What makes someone a potential slayer, and how is the next slayer chosen? What if it's the first slayer? Who better, since she's connected to the entire slayer lineage, and is the one who has "seen" how slayers have performed over time? She is the mother to all of them, both figuratively and metaphysically.

There's been a lot of discussion regarding Buffy not being the current slayer, with the slayer lineage residing in Faith. But what if there is a NEW lineage, and it starts with Buffy? Buffy originated within the current slayer lineage, but now she exists outside of it. She has become her own point of origin. Buffy's elevation to the mystical head of her own line of slayers may not occur until her time on Earth is done (I specifically avoided using the term "death", since it is not required for elevation (e.g. Cordy)). It seems unlikely that a new lineage could survive for long or propagate while the original one existed, based on the balance requirements that have been continuously suggested. The end of the original line would occur if all of the potential slayers were eliminated, and the current slayer was then killed (although you would think that new potentials would be generated on an almost continuous basis). But wouldn't it also end if the original slayer were somehow destroyed? That seems to be the sort of monumental change that could be approaching in the battle with the First Evil. Would the elimination of the first slayer remove the active slayer's (i.e. Faith's) powers? I'd guess yes, although she might revert to "potential slayer".

If the original lineage was destroyed, the only way to maintain balance would be for another lineage to take its place. In steps Buffy, now elevated to be the mother of all future slayers. And since the decision on who the next slayer will be would reside with her, she would in fact be in a position to give it to whomever she felt was most qualified, including Dawn. Bur she won't choose her, because she wants her to have a normal life (or at least as close to normal as is possible on the Hellmouth).

I particularly like the theory because it expands on the misdirection that is so frequently employed by Joss and ME. First Dawn shows slayerish qualities (end of Season 6), and then the SIT's arrive to bump her out of the picture. But wait, she could be a SIT! No, actually it's Amanda. Then Buffy gets elevated and she CAN choose Dawn, but decides not to.

Home run, foul ball, or did I hit myself in the head with the bat?
A Few Manny-isms (Spoilers through Buffy 7 and Angel 4) -- BEV, 13:26:56 01/23/03 Thu

My premise is that Manny, like Whistler, like Doyle, Like Mayor Wilkins, or the early Spike, is a truth-bringer. In his own kitchy way he expresses the heart of several key ME doctrines, these in turn can be helpful in guiding us to an understanding of the events of the currents seasons of both ME shows. Without further ado, the Mannyisms,

1.) "Never trust the books kid, or the bookies, real JuJu always takes place on the QT."

Thoughts: this statement lends credence to my personal theory that there is something going on in L.A. and in Sunnydale that what we are seeing of it is only the tippy top. The timing of the Apocalypses is too convenient. It is like the Buffyverse is just falling apart at the seams.

Early on in Buffy there were statements made (by Halfrek at least) that something was coming, and that even the "old ones" were afraid of it, whatever it was. Manny seems to back that up. Ra only knows how ancient this guy was, but I am willing to bet he and his order were easily in the "old ones" catagory. And they were hunted down, JuJu or no JuJu and killed systematically. What could do this?

I s the first behind the unleashing of the Beast? if we had had the possibility of Crossovers I would have liked to see Manny sent to SD for protection. Too bad.



2.) Gwen: we thought you were in Belize?

Manny: "I was, till I heard M'asec-tet got whacked. I never liked that chick...evil right down to her Mary Jane's but...phwww...family, whattaya gonna do?"


This is a major prophetic statement for the AI crew. They are Angel's extended family, and I personally think that the hidden nugget here, is that one of them is evil. I'll only hint that I think it may not be Angel, and i am sure, for other reasons, it isn't Connor.

3.) Angel: What did you mean before, "the beast is gonna turn out the Sun," is that some kind of metaphor?

Manny: Sorry, I don't speak college boy, I said what I meant, this Beast you're looking for, is looking for a way to put end to daylight.

This, I am fairly sure, holds a truth applicable to Buffy. When then older powers speak up, they tend to be straightforward. Metaphor is a young lover's game. I am more certain than ever that "from beneath it devours" is a literal statement. SD is going to be swallowed at some point, and so may the earth.

4.) "The world is the Devil's oyster."

An interesting image. Especially given that, later in the episode, the Beast swallows a blackend orb (like a black pearl), ceremonially cutting us off from the sunight. I think the Beast is a clear metaphor for the power of evil (hell he is the very face of evil) and his swallowing of the orb is symbolic of how evil is going to swallow the whole earth, before the Scoobs and the AI gang find a way to pull us back from the brink.

5.) Angel: The good news is, we've discovered the Beast's plan.
Gunn: Which is?

Manny: to blot out the sun for all eternity, you guys got a john?

The lesson here is, first things first. The Beast comes, and the AI gang put there lives on hold, they allow bad relationship situations to fester and old suspicions to flurish. Meanwhile Manny, being way, way, older and more worldly wise, has learned the great liberating truth that life goes on, right to the f_cking edge.


6.) "There's more to me than meets the eye, for instance, I'm immortal, unless I'm ritually murdered of course."

Parting thought, no one in the Buffyverse is immortal forever. As Anya says in the Graduation Day arc, most things that can take a physical form on this plane, can be killed here, it was true of Glory, and true of Sahjahn, it's true for the Ra Tet, and it is true for the Beast. It remains to be seen if this holds for the First, but, if I were the Scoobs, I would sure as heck be looking for a way of getting the bastard to manifest in a body.


Long live M'anjet
[> What's a QT? -- Scroll, 14:08:29 01/23/03 Thu

I'm assuming this is slang for something, but I don't know what...
[> [> On the Q.T. means 'quietly' -- CW, 14:18:40 01/23/03 Thu

Ancient American slang. My dictionary doesn't give any hint what Q.T. may have stood for.
[> [> [> Abbr. of QuieT -- oboemaboe, 14:23:39 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> from 'World Wide Words' -- lynx, 03:22:53 01/24/03 Fri

According to Robert Hendrickson, in The Facts on File Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins, the first reference is from a British ballad of 1870, which contained the line "Whatever I tell you is on the QT". It seems to have been just an abbreviated spelling, using the first and last letters of the word quiet, the mild obfuscation also suggesting a meaning for the expression. The Oxford English Dictionary has a first sighting from 1884: "It will be possible to have one spree on the strict q.t.". Mr Hendrickson points out that it also occurs in a famous London ditty of 1891, sung by Lottie Collins, which which also introduced the famous chorus line "Ta-ra-ra-boom-de-ay":

A sweet Tuxedo girl you see,
Queen of swell society,
Fond of fun as fun can be,
When it's on the strict Q.T.
[> [> 'Quiet Tip' which is slang for 'Secretly' (NT) -- Sofdog, 06:44:03 01/24/03 Fri

Raise your hand if...(small LDJ spoiler) -- Rob, 13:48:55 01/23/03 Thu

...you also shouted "Woo hoo" when you saw Cordy's hair's gone back to brown!!

Just had to get that out of my system. :o)

Rob
[> Re: Raise your hand if...(small LDJ spoiler) -- Sheri, 14:00:52 01/23/03 Thu

I would "woo-hoo", but I'm still scratching my head wondering when Cordy was able to find the time to run down to the local drug store and pick up a batch of Miss Clairol.
[> Not only that... -- Masq, 14:24:50 01/23/03 Thu

But the snark returned with the hair. Seems to me it left when she went blonde, too. It's like that bleach soaked through to her brain or something!
[> [> I noticed that too! -- Rob, 14:41:44 01/23/03 Thu

The second she appeared with the brown hair, shades of the old Cordy started creeping in immediately. Out with the blonde, in with the backbone! Her hair just has to grow a little bit longer, and I think Cordy will be returned to her normal self immediately. Maybe her Queen C powers really did always lie in her hair!

Btw, how much did I love Gunn's comment that she's been acting weird lately?!? Thank you!!

And re: when she had time to dye her hair. Didn't they say she's been at Connor's for two days since the rain of fire? Holed up with him in his apartment. Maybe she got bored, wandered down to the local pharmacy, thought what the heck, and went for it.
[> [> [> Alternative theory/flashback request -- pr10n, 15:45:25 01/23/03 Thu

Although it's not MY cuppa, it would thrill the hearts of many to see Connor gently massaging shampoo into Cordy's damp hair, applying the foils, chatting with her about shades of brown and her complexion, giggling as he brushed...

[Must hurry and send post before my wife sees it. :) ]
[> [> [> It only takes about ten to twenty minutes.*L I love the color now. -- Briar Rose, 01:08:39 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> The effects of bleach on the characters -- Finn Mac Cool, 18:49:18 01/23/03 Thu

You're comment about the bleach soaking down into Cordelia's brain gave me the funny thought that it seems to be different for Spike. He was at his MOST nutty and crazy when he stopped bleaching regularly. He was able to act like his old self in "Beneath You" once he went and whited it up again.

So that's two characters whose personality's change with bleach. Anyone got a theory about bleach and Anya?
[> [> [> spike's bleached-ness (minor 'showtime' spoilers) -- anom, 22:03:27 01/23/03 Thu

Never mind when Cordelia had time to dye her hair, when did Spike? He was in that cave how long, getting beat up when he wasn't tied to a rock, & when Buffy came to get him, his hair had lost some of its curl, but no dark roots were showing...& we know from Lessons that his hair does grow out....
[> [> [> [> Re: spike's bleached-ness (minor 'showtime' spoilers) who dunnit? -- SpikeMom, 23:11:27 01/23/03 Thu

I bet all those SITs sitting around the house with nothing to do would love to play "beauty parlor" and touchup Spike's roots for him. Maybe that's why they're having fights over the bathroom.
[> [> [> [> [> but the scene i was talking about was in the cave, before he got back to the house -- anom, 08:49:24 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: but the scene i was talking about was in the cave, before he got back to the house -- leslie, 15:58:17 01/26/03 Sun

He was lurking in the school basement. The school nurse surely has a stash of peroxide somewhere, plus there are abundant showers, sinks, etc. in a high school. He probably picked up with blue shirt from someone's locker, as well.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> sigh...no, that was *before*...& in the house w/the potentials was *after*... -- anom, 21:05:28 01/26/03 Sun

...& sorry, but I'm getting a little frustrated here. This is what I wrote:

"He was in that cave how long, getting beat up when he wasn't tied to a rock, & when Buffy came to get him, his hair had lost some of its curl, but no dark roots were showing...& we know from Lessons that his hair does grow out...."

I don't understand how that wasn't clear. "In that cave...getting beat up...tied to a rock...Buffy came to get him." That didn't happen in the school basement (where the bleached part was growing out), or in Buffy's house w/young impressionable potentials helping him w/the hair dye. And I said "cave"! Maybe I should've mention the ep name: Showtime, when Buffy killed the übervamp & came to get Spike. His face is swollen, his hair looks greasy, & the curly has loosened...but the roots are still blond. He hasn't had a chance to touch up his hair at least since he met Buffy at the house where she fought the vamps Spike had sired under the influence of the First (don't think anyone bothered w/his hair while he was tied up being questioned & fed pig's blood). Then the Harbingers come & bring him to the cave. Buffy fights the übervamp 3 times & needs recovery time in between, several potentials come into town, Spike gets periodically beaten by said übervamp & taunted by the First. So, as I asked before, How much time went by before Buffy came & cut him down, & still no dark roots showing? (On the one hand, it may have been only several days, but it didn't feel like it; on the other, he may not have bleached it since he showed up "in costume" in Beneath You.)

Hope I didn't get too snarky...but this is the 3rd time I've tried to get a response to what I'm actually talking about.
[> [> [> [> Isn't William a natural blonde? -- Masq, 09:24:31 01/24/03 Fri

While JM isn't, William had blonde hair pre-vamp in Fool for Love.
[> [> [> [> [> Kind of strawberry blonde. -- slain, 13:29:23 01/25/03 Sat

I think the hair colour Spike had in 'Lessons' was designed to be William-coloured, only a little dirtied from using a rat as a sponge, perhaps. But much nicer nevertheless, in my opinion - clearly Buffy must have been being kind when she said he had 'better hair' in Beneath You. I would also have preferred the original hair colour as it gave, missing leather coat aside, a physical way of differentating his character from soulless Spike. In terms of writing and acting, I thought they'd regressed back to Season 6 Spike in 'Potentional'; at least if he'd had different hair we'd have been able to say "No, look, he has changed!".

That essay, "Hair: Philosopsychological Connations in BtVS" still awaits being written, amazingly.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Kind of strawberry blonde. -- Doriander, 15:17:41 01/25/03 Sat

I would also have preferred the original hair colour as it gave, missing leather coat aside, a physical way of differentating his character from soulless Spike. In terms of writing and acting, I thought they'd regressed back to Season 6 Spike in 'Potentional'; at least if he'd had different hair we'd have been able to say "No, look, he has changed!".

His hair's the same, but the eye brows ain't. S7 Spike, souled Spike either bleaches his eye brows, or stopped dyeing them dark. Makes him look less sinister. Personally, I'd have preferred it if souled Spike in Lessons were completely bald, take that much contested 'make me what I was' statement more literally; hairless as a newborn.

Doriander (who got fed up with Spike fans debating which Spike 'do is the hottest)
[> [> Maybe Connor lent a hand in the application.....he does have super-speed..;) -- Rufus, 04:57:09 01/24/03 Fri

I don't care how her bloody hair got back to brown, I'm just happy to see CC looking better than I've seen her for awhile. She makes a lovely brunette....and a washed out blonde.
[> Hand raised! And my quirky theory (spoilers to LDJ)... -- Ixchel, 16:04:15 01/23/03 Thu

Regarding Cordelia's behavior is that she was under some compulsion to have sex with Connor. She has seemed more and more like herself since HC. As if once she'd done that, she was freed. Of course, this doesn't mean I don't think she couldn't be the "sleeper" rather than Angel, as some have suggested. I'm probably completely wrong, though.

Ixchel
[> Hijacking thread for another Cordy observation (LDJ spoiler) -- darrenK, 16:46:28 01/23/03 Thu

During the clamor to protect Manny, Cordy protested the guard schedule b/c it put the superempowered characters together. She declared herself to just be "human."

This might be an obvious question but what happened to Cordy being part demon? And what happened to the array of superpowers she evidenced last season?

This reminds me of Dawn's situation where the writers seemed to abandon the idea of her being "the key" once it was no longer necessary to the season's principal plotline.

On shows where continuity is important and the characters have memories, it's a little frustrating.
[> [> I think she said 'mere mortals' -- Masq, 16:52:15 01/23/03 Thu

But you're right, the reference seems to imply that she no longer has super powers.

But maybe she doesn't. Maybe they were just a lead-up to her being whisked away to the Higher Dimension. Maybe the PTB's needed her up there for some reason, and conspired to have her chose to take on demon powers so that she could survive in that dimension.

Now that she's back, she doesn't need them anymore, and doesn't have them anymore.

I mean, she hasn't displayed them once since she got back, and she's been in some pickles since then.

Of course, a sentence or two in the dialogue about being non-glowy again would suffice and be nice.
[> [> [> Re: I think she said 'mere mortals' -- leslie, 16:01:37 01/26/03 Sun

"Now that she's back, she doesn't need them anymore, and doesn't have them anymore.

I mean, she hasn't displayed them once since she got back, and she's been in some pickles since then."

Indeed, interesting that it turns out that her "visions" of Angelus and the Beast are, in fact, memories from when she assimilated everything in Angel's life up in the Great Beyond.
[> [> About the key thing... -- Apophis, 18:11:07 01/23/03 Thu

We've seen no evidence that the Key can be used in any other way than what Glory had planned. Perhaps the Key can only be used in a certain way at a certain time. Since that time has passed (and isn't likely to come again any time soon, considering how long the Key was around before it was used for the first time), Dawn is effectively no longer the Key. Sure, she's got the potential to be the Key and she's still made of living energy, but she's essentially useless without the time and the place. Dawn may die a natural death long before the next time that the Key could be used comes around. Dawn was the Key while Glory was trying to use her; now she's just Dawn.
[> [> [> if the Key is eternal? -- Dochawk, 18:53:46 01/23/03 Thu

Does that mean Dawn is eternal? Well except when the key is used to open portals?
[> [> [> [> Re: if the Key is eternal? -- Apophis, 19:27:07 01/23/03 Thu

I figure that the Key is eternal, while Dawn is not. Dawn has aged normally so far (only 2 years, yes, but she's at a stage in the human lifespan when changes come quick) and I believe she'll continue to do so (barring unforseen circumstances) until she dies of old age (see above, re: the unforseen). The Key, however, is like her atman; what we know as Dawn will fall away, but her essence, i.e. the Key, will continue on until it is forcibly destroyed. This raises the question of whether or not Dawn can/will enter an afterlife when she dies (working on the assumption that there is an afterlife in the Whedonverse, which I believe the evidence supports). I figure she will, mainly because I like her and I'd hate to see her cease to exist (I know, I know, fictional character, I need a life).
[> [> [> [> [> Re: if the Key is eternal? -- Dochawk, 00:23:28 01/24/03 Fri

Her body could age because its a function of the Monk's spell, but if her lifeforce, which is the key energy (if it isn't, then all she would have had to do was bandage the wound and the blood would stop flowing and Buffy wouldn't have had to sacrifice herself), continues then she really shouldn't die. In fact, she should be like Manny, only mortal in a ritual killing.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Oooo yuk -- KdS, 08:46:28 01/24/03 Fri

Um, Doc, have you worked out the implications of what you just suggested. Eternal life with normal aging = very nasty, surely?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Oooo yuk -- Dochawk, 09:15:37 01/24/03 Fri

Hey, its not hopeless actually. Why do you think I work with hormones?
[> [> Re: Hijacking thread for another Cordy observation (LDJ spoiler) -- akanikki, 14:13:10 01/25/03 Sat

Did anyone notice when Cordy sat down in that chair in Angel's room, how she cupped her hand around her stomach? It was very normal gesture for someone who is pregnant and a totally strange one for anyone else (except, possibly, if they are recuprating from surgery). I cannot imagine that the director left that gesture in, unless it was deliberate and a clue of things to come.
[> [> [> Re: Hijacking thread for another Cordy observation (LDJ spoiler) -- Arya_Stark, 20:30:39 01/25/03 Sat

I noticed that too... and I agree with you about the director not leaving it in unless it was intentional.

Later in the same scene, Cordy is telling Angel about her "vision" and being inside of somebody. Angel says "Who was inside you?" Then he laughs (more of a snort actually) and corrects himself to "Who is it you were inside?"

So, a very pregnent gesture followed in the same scene by Angel asking who is inside of Cordelia. Either one alone I'd be willing to overlook, but together it's too many pregnancy references in one scene.

Something we're supposed to pick up on, or a red herring?
[> [> [> [> The second one is a joke about C/C -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:40:01 01/25/03 Sat

When a man and a woman have sex, the man is technically inside her. So the "who was inside you" thing is a somewhat cruel and lude joke on Angel's part.
[> An extreme 'yes' just from preview pics. -- HonorH, 20:47:28 01/23/03 Thu

In fact, I've written up a small vignette celebrating the fact. Should be up at BFA and FFN soon.
[> [> but what does Honorificus think? -- Helen, 08:40:31 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> [> She celebrated by downing two lighter fluid martinis. -- HonorH (with a headache), 00:10:55 01/25/03 Sat

She couldn't find words harsh enough in any language to describe Cordy's bleached look, which was a first for her. The return to brown has been taken by her as a victory for fashionistas everywhere.
About Portals (Heavy Spoilers for Long Day's Journey) -- BEV, 13:49:03 01/23/03 Thu

Like resurrections, portal openings seem to involve very unstable magicks. We have yet to see a portal open on either series without serious and dire consequences. Am I the only wondering where the Beast went, when Fred and Wes mojo'd him on up? My hope is that, in those mere seconds, he spent a sufficient time is some hell dimension to wreak real havok before finding a way back, or (delicious thought) being sent back, by the champion of yet another reality, who would then follow him through what ever portal he came back through (his coming back happened off-camera, on the QT so to speak) to find the AI crew who sent this Beast to the now pissed off champ's reality in the first place.

By the way, if they go through with the waking Angelus plan, before exploring other options, I am going to get pissed. Okay, maybe Chuckles is more than a match for Angel and Gunn, but for Angel, Connor, Groo, Landock Mar, Gwen, Gunn, Wes and whoever the hell else they could scrounge (like guys off what is left of Wes's crew)? C'mon, I am thinking you get the Destroyer, and the 2 Champions together,and they could eventually wear the bastard down, hell Wes's 12 gauge put him on his knees, and Angel alone sent him tumbling into the great unknown. Any Angelus now seems premature.

ok, rant over.
[> I don't know... (LDJ spoiler) -- Rob, 13:55:51 01/23/03 Thu

...It seems they've exhausted all other options. The only ONLY ONLY lead they've really gotten is Angelus. I think it might be a necessary evil.

Rob
[> [> Idea! -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:22:11 01/23/03 Thu

They give Angel a "happy drug", like the one he was given in AtS season one, which causes Angelus to briefly reapear. But then Angelus might get loose and start guzzling pills to stop his soul from gaining dominance again.
[> [> How 'bout Missile-weilding!Buffy? -- yez, 14:22:36 01/23/03 Thu

And was I the only one who kept snickering every time they said "Ra-tet" or whatever that was because thoughts of a demon kickline kept flashing in front of their eyes?

Now appearing in Vegas, Lorne and the Ra-tets!

yez
[> [> [> Same thing came to my mind, yez. -- Sheri, 15:28:56 01/23/03 Thu

if only we still had cross-overs... I can just see Buffy mangling that name up.
[> [> Re: I don't know... (LDJ spoiler) -- BEV, 14:26:17 01/23/03 Thu

I'll believe that when I see Connor, Angel, Cordy (who showed some super natural chops in Slouching), and maybe Groo, all go at him at once? Why would this not happen?
Because the Beast conveniently threw Connor out the window the last time? At some point Connor and Angel should take a stab at the scumbag together. I fear this will never happen, and we are about to lose Angel for good.
[> [> [> Other storytelling forces at work? (spoilers for LDJ+next week teaser) -- darrenK, 16:28:23 01/23/03 Thu

Besides the pure fun of having Angelus back for a while(?), IMHO it's also a chance to reconstruct Angel's ensouling spell with some different limitations--giving the writers some other storytelling options.

I've read no spoilers suggesting this. I just don't think they'll keep Angel as Angelus and I can't imagine that they'd leave the "happiness clause" in place considering they've had it as a plot device for 6 years and are probably tired of it.

Perhaps this time, Angel won't be able to have a moment of pure unhappiness? Goodbye Mr. Mopey, hello more Vegas episodes?
[> [> [> [> Oh Darren.. ..they'd never make viewers that happy! ~w~ It's a good idea though. -- Briar Rose, 01:02:35 01/24/03 Fri

[> If you're invulnerable, it doesn't matter how many people are sent against you. -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:19:56 01/23/03 Thu

Take the Mayor, for example. Buffy could easily take him on herself. Hell, XANDER could probably take him on himself. But he was invulnerable, so it didn't matter if you had Xander or a thousand Slayers, you still couldn't do anything to hurt him.

So far, the Beast has been totally unharmed by Gwen's electro-touch (I'm assuming some shock occurred, since everything else she makes flesh contact with does), the same goes for bullets and grenades (I'm going on the assumption that the impact of Wesley's bullets drove the Beast down, but it didn't seem to have actually hurt him). Fact is, if you got all those guys together, you might be stronger than the Beast, but you still wouldn't be able to actually hurt him.
[> [> Re: If you're invulnerable, it doesn't matter how many people are sent against you. -- BEV, 14:33:04 01/23/03 Thu

Well my response here is,

a) we shouldn't go on the assumption that Connor, Cordy, Groo, Angel, Landock, Faith (who I left off before), Gunn, and Wes couldn't kill it. We have no reason to believe this other than Wes saying, that he and Angel and Gunn and Gwenn have exhausted all options, which seems to me premature.

b)they don't have to kill it, just contain it, probe it for weakness, put in a some mystical version of the locker in the SD library.
[> [> [> Who's Landock, exactly? -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:08:21 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> Landok is Lorne's cousin -- Scroll, 18:16:57 01/23/03 Thu

...from the Pylea arc of Season 2. He's Landokmar of the Deathwok Clan, a warrior who jumps through a portal when Cordelia reads a portal spell from a book in the UCLA library. He may think humans are cows, but he's a decent enough guy and a strong fighter.
[> [> [> Re: If you're invulnerable, it doesn't matter how many people are sent against you. -- AgnosticSorcerer, 19:18:25 01/23/03 Thu

"a) we shouldn't go on the assumption that Connor, Cordy, Groo, Angel, Landock, Faith (who I left off before), Gunn, and Wes couldn't kill it. We have no reason to believe this other than Wes saying, that he and Angel and Gunn and Gwenn have exhausted all options, which seems to me premature."

We have plenty of reasons to believe the Beast is impervious to harm or, at least, has a limited invulernability to harm (e.g., Glory). First of all, we have had not only Angel and Connor go up against this Beast, but we've had numerous weapons thrown against him of both medevial and modern variety such as guns, swords, crossbows, and GRENADES. Cominbed attacks against the Beast seem to be a fruitless effort and consider the severity of the situation, a full-on strike without any key factor (as was the rocket launcher with the Judge) would be a big, fat waste of time.

Both Connor and Angel seem to be ineffectual.

Cordelia has yet to display any more of her demonic abilities or at least she has yet to remember that she has demonic powers, the nature of which is still shrouded in mystery.

Groo is quite busy ruling over his own dimension and attempting to establish a beneficial monarchy (I don't remember the state of government when they left) and probably has a bunch of problems of his own stemming from the socio-political upheaval especially from the ruling demon classes. It would be another great waste of time to find an energy nexus, create a portal, and then convince Groo to leave his people behind so he can fight for another dimension's issues.

Faith is in prison and again, a big waste of time attempting to spring her out of a high-security prison when they have a bigger more accessible lead.

Right now, Angelus is their biggest and strongest lead. At this point, AI has NO IDEA what the Beast is planning next and thus far the only times it makes an appearance is when it is acting out its plan. Without a lead, there's no preemtive strike. Again, they need a lead and Angelus is their only lead.

"b)they don't have to kill it, just contain it, probe it for weakness, put in a some mystical version of the locker in the SD library."

The Beast not only has the power to kill the strongest and most nefarious entity of the Ra-Tet, but also is capable of interdimensional teleportation. I sincerely doubt a container of some type would prove effectual.

Also, in regards to one of your previous posts: we have no idea which dimension was thrusted into. Fred and Wesley made no mention of which dimension they picked and the time-space continuum may or may not have flowed at a different rate than our own; that is unclear. For instance, time did indeed move faster in the hell-dimensions Buffy and Angelus both encountered, however, time did not pass any faster in Lorne's home-dimension.

If you want to try and get anybody to fight the Beast, my choice would be Darth Rosenberg.
[> [> [> [> Glory and something you typed.... -- Helen, 07:18:39 01/24/03 Fri

"We have plenty of reasons to believe the Beast is impervious to harm or, at least, has a limited invulernability to harm (e.g., Glory)."

Wasn't Glory also known as, The Beast?

Coincidence? Probably.
[> [> On the Beast -- Majin Gojira, 14:50:44 01/23/03 Thu

Well, that thing is UBER with a capital "U".

From what I have seen, The Beast is about as strong as Golden Age Superman.

That means he can deadlift lift over 10tons.

Plus, his skin is much thicker too. Golden Age Supes could be KOed by a grenade or other explosive. This thing waded through one, barely delayed by it.

When anything is that uber, it usually has a singular, but devestating weakness. I bet they're going to see what Angelus knows, since he met it before and the world is still here, he might know how it was stopped the first time.
[> [> [> Re: On the Beast spoiler for future ep. -- Rufus, 04:25:03 01/24/03 Fri

When anything is that uber, it usually has a singular, but devestating weakness.

People may want to remember what Majin Gojira just said.
[> Re: About Portals (Heavy Spoilers for Long Day's Journey) -- Darby, 19:29:44 01/23/03 Thu

I think we've been told that the Beast uses portals. It gets from place to place without being seen in transit, it disappears in an instant, and how'd it get back when portaled away?
SIT Locator Spells -- Dochawk, 14:51:56 01/23/03 Thu

Well I was just thinking of the coven's locator spell that was good enough to locate an SIT in Sunnydale in spite of the fact that there were already 5 known to be there (one has since disappeared, Chloe went Poof). Could the spell have known if there was another SIT in the Summer's household? (Could it tell 5 from 6 or 4 from 5 or however many there were at the door). And why couldn't both Dawn and Amanda have been SITs? Just because the Bringers said so? The bringers didn't know until that day. Just speculating that Dawn isn't out of the woods just yet and it would be just like ME to once again lead us down the wrong path.
[> My instinct tells me we haven't yet heard the last of this. -- Sophist, 16:05:17 01/23/03 Thu

[> [> Mine too. -- Ixchel, 20:15:53 01/23/03 Thu

[> I keep thinking back to NLM -- HonorH, 16:42:41 01/23/03 Thu

The Bringers were batting pretty much everyone around with sticks (save for Andrew, whom they obviously came to kill in the process of nabbing Spike), but one throws Dawn to the floor in the exact position the girls from "Lessons" and BY were and pulls a knife to stab her. Not Anya, or Xander, or Willow, or even Buffy, but Dawn. Makes me go "hmm!"
[> [> Re: I keep thinking back to Lessons -- Silky, 18:59:44 01/23/03 Thu

The very first Buffy/Dawn scene, Dawn says to Buffy:

"Yeah, I planned to get killed, come back as a vampire and bite you."

I thought that was going to happen in Potential for awhile there.
[> [> Re: I keep thinking back to NLM (ooh, spooky!) (Spoilers) -- pr10n, 19:23:08 01/23/03 Thu

Psyche helps me with this tidbit:

The First says to Uby, "Take 'em all. Except for her. Have
fun."

And of course, "her" is debated to death in these parts. But what if "she's" Dawnie? And Buffy is going to have a choice re: same?

I'm just saying.
WORST PLAN EVER! (spoilers for promo of next week's Angel) -- Sheri, 15:24:17 01/23/03 Thu

Ok, just gotta rant a little bit (and cross my fingers that WB is just trying to mislead us).....







Why oh why would AI think that bringing back Angelus is a good plan???? Have they forgotten that Angelus is EVIL? Do they expect him to actually help them out? Unless the Beast and Angelus have bad blood between them, I would think Angelus would be pretty appreciative about the whole sun being blotted out thing. Not seeing why he'd help AI save the world, when he's shown in the past that he's perfectly willing to end it.
[> One possible angle... -- ZachsMind, 15:48:35 01/23/03 Thu

We know that evil entities tend to not like working together. Sure, Angeles wants to destroy the world, but he's an arrogant creature: he wants to be the one to do it. This Beastie guy would be a major threat to that.

I think it's a modern take on the Old Maid story. The little old lady who swallowed a spider to kill the fly. They'll sic Angeles on the Beast, Angeles will kill The Beast, then they gotta figure out a way to get rid of Angeles before HE destroys the world. Without killing Angel.
[> [> Re: One possible angle... -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:03:29 01/23/03 Thu

Also, the promo showed him being chained up. Torture him enough, and maybe Angelus will cave and make with the info. And, if he lies, Cordelia's memories may be able to subconsciously tell if he's being false.
[> Re: WORST PLAN EVER! (spoilers for promo of next week's Angel) -- Purple Tulip, 21:21:33 01/23/03 Thu

Ok, and can someone please explain to me how they can take away Angel's soul just like that and bring back Angelus, when the only thing that would do it before was one moment of true happiness with Buffy. I don't watch the show very often, so I'm sure that I am missing something that everyone else already knows, but if someone could just fill me in I'd be greatly appreciative.
[> [> something else did it once (promo/old ep spoilers, next ep spec) -- anom, 21:51:34 01/23/03 Thu

In Eternity (1st season), Angel (without his knowledge) was given a drug that induced "bliss"--a state that mimicked complete happiness closely enough to release Angelus. He reverted to Angel once the drug wore off. The others could (w/his consent this time, presumably) chain him & give him the drug...& then see if they can get him to cooperate.
[> [> Re: WORST PLAN EVER! (spoilers for promo of next week's Angel) -- Tess, 22:01:06 01/23/03 Thu

And way back in season 3 of Buffy (I don't remember the episode name) Faith drenched him in blood and a demon started chanting which was suppose to take away the soul, only it didn't work.

I guess we'll just have to watch next week and see how they actually do it. Darn, I wish I wasn't spoiled.
[> [> Request for clarification of facts (spoilers for promo of next week's Angel) -- Robert, 08:47:14 01/24/03 Fri

>>> ... can someone please explain to me how they can take away Angel's soul just like that and bring back Angelus, when the only thing that would do it before was one moment of true happiness with Buffy.

You have made two claims here. First, Angel's soul can only be removed by one moment of true happiness. Second, the true happiness must be with Buffy. Can you provide support for these statements? What episodes were these facts established?

In the BtVS season two episode Innocence is the following dialogue.

GYPSY MAN
The curse... Angel was meant to suffer.
Not to live as a human. One moment of
true happiness, of contentment... one
moment where his soul that we restored
does not plague his thoughts - and that
soul is taken from him.
JENNY
Then if he somehow has... if it's happened,
then Angelus is back.
GYPSY MAN
I hoped to stop it. But I see now that
it was arranged to be so.
JENNY
Buffy loves him.
GYPSY MAN
And now she will have to kill him.

This passage establishes that a moment of contentment is a sufficient condition for removing Angel's soul, but it does not state that the moment of contentment is a necessary condition. In other words, there may be other methods for removing Angel's soul. The BtVS season three episode Enemies showed us a possible alternate method for removing Angel's soul. At least the mayor believed that the method would have worked, if the shaman had not been indebted to Giles, and thus blown the spell. Also, the passage above does not support your claim that Buffy must be the source of the moment of contentment.
[> [> [> Re: Request for clarification of facts (spoilers for promo of next week's Angel) -- Purple Tulip, 17:15:41 01/26/03 Sun

I was not implying that sex with Buffy was the only method that would restore Angelus---what I was asking was IS there another way of doing this that I was unaware of. I don't really watch the show so I was not aware that they had restored him once before. By only watching Buffy, I have only seen one thing do the trick, and that WAS sex with Buffy, that one perfect moment of true happiness and contentment that he found with only her. So this lead me to think that nothing could do it but one moment of true happiness and contentment, not neccessarily with Buffy, but with someone. I don't think I am making anything up here or making any false claims, but simply going on what the shpw has showed me.
[> Look at it this way..........spoilers for future eps -- Rufus, 04:44:18 01/24/03 Fri

I feel that this year is all about Angel finally growing up....the brooding, the adolescent snits (loved Cordy's line), the fact that he tends to forget the mission and gets preoccupied in his personal "stuff". It makes sense to bring back Angelus.....confront that part of himself that many people seem to find attractive. He saw the pure demon in Pylea, but he never really delt with the demon which is actually part of himself and how he has always reacted to life. I see the return of Angelus as a way to finally have Angel confront who he is as Angelus and get over it.
[> [> Great points! and not really that spoilery -- ponygirl, 08:19:29 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> Well said... -- shadowkat, 14:49:29 01/24/03 Fri

I feel that this year is all about Angel finally growing up....the brooding, the adolescent snits (loved Cordy's line), the fact that he tends to forget the mission and gets preoccupied in his personal "stuff". It makes sense to bring back Angelus.....confront that part of himself that many people seem to find attractive. He saw the pure demon in Pylea, but he never really delt with the demon which is actually part of himself and how he has always reacted to life. I see the return of Angelus as a way to finally have Angel confront who he is as Angelus and get over it.

They almost have to do it - now that they gave Spike a soul, can't have one grow up without the other one. ;-)
Because I think that's the metaphor they are going for with this whole soul thing - maturity, dealing with what you've done, getting past the juvenile escapades, using the past to build a future, not brooding over the past and letting it hold you back.

I would argue that it's not that people find Angelus "attractive" so much as just more entertaining and interesting - b/c of how the actor portrays him. There's a difference. It just happens to be more fun to watch someone snark and plot and connive then watch someone sit in a chair and brood. There's uh more to watch and you can tell what the character is thinking, when they sit and brood, you have no clue. Granted there are actors out there who can make brooding extroardinarily interesting - Jack Nicholson, Gene Hackman, Daniel Day Lewis come to mind, but
Boreanz isn't one of them...at least not yet. He does a very good job in some ways, but he's just more entertaining and unpredictable sometimes when he goes dark and vicious.
Not sure if that makes sense. It's why Riley wasn't all that interesting to watch at times. (The reason I'm pointing this out - is there is a tendency to think that the reason some people weren't as into the Angel as they were Angelus or that they didn't like Riley as well as Spike - is because they prefer nastier aspects, uhm no. That's not it at all! It's just one is more interesting to watch - causes more conflict, more a funhouse aspect than a tunnel of love. Less predictable. Drives the plot forward more and as a writer you have more to do with them. In real life - ie. dating, you want the grown-up guy, in tv - you want to be entertained, have a funhouse effect (none of us want to live in the funhouse, we just want to vicarously visit it on Tues and Wed nights) - let's face it you're never going to date these people or meet them or even be attracted to them in real life, you just want to see what the heck they'll do next. ;-) )Don't misunderstand our excitement over Angelus' possible return as being attracted to evil or juvenile antics...it isn't. Not at all. (Not that you are necessarily...it just seemed that someone could come to that conclusion from your post.;-))
[> [> [> Re: Well said... -- yabyumpan, 04:02:33 01/25/03 Sat

"...the fact that he tends to forget the mission and gets preoccupied in his personal "stuff"."

I'm curious as to what people's expectations of Angel are.

If a person is at work and gets a phone call to say someone close had become seriously ill or that their child had gone missing, would they be expected to finish what they're doing in a calm manner, make sure there's no loose ends and then deal with the situation in their own time? Would that be the 'right' thing to do? Wouldn't we say to them that family comes first, the job is secondary? And yet it seems that Angel is expected to ignore concerns about his family, to be almost 'emotionless', to just be a 'warrier for the good' or he gets accused of 'forgetting the mission', making him a 'bad' person.

Surely the show is not all about 'the mission' it's about his journey. Helping the helpless and stopping the apocolypse are part of that journey but it's also about connecting with people, learning to care, to love, to trust. How is his atonement worth anything if he does all the 'mission' stuff while ignoring those closest to him, don't they go hand in hand?

With regard to the brooding in LDJ, although I haven't seen the ep yet, I was under the impression that he was in his room researching. Being in a 'snit' and licking his wounds for sure but not totally unfocused. I can appreciate that he probably needed a kick up the backside to get him moving again but in terms of acting like an adolescent (which I know you didn't say but was implied on the show and on the board) how many grown up, mature people wouldn't react in a similar way after the betrayal he'd recently witnessed? As I said, I'm curious as to what people expect of him. It seems people have far higher expectations of Angel than other people on either shows and maybe of themslves.

"I see the return of Angelus as a way to finally have Angel confront who he is as Angelus and get over it."

I agree with this but I'm curious as to what you mean by "Get over it". I don't really see how he can 'get over it', he's not going to stop being Angelus with a soul. Untill/unless he Shanshu's he's always going to be a Vampire with a soul, he's always going to have those memories of what Angelus did and unless he becomes like a lot of the humans on the show,(W&H and others) he's always going to feel guilt and remorse.

Yes, I'm an unapologtic Angel Apologist, but that's mainly because people seem to judge him by an impossibly high standard and then come down on him when he fails to meet those standards.
[> [> [> [> Re: Well said... -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:06:59 01/25/03 Sat

Two flaws with your job and family reasoning:

First, Angel's job is more important than almost anyone else's. Let's say I'm the President of the United States, and a situation arises where I really need to hunker down and work otherwise a nuclear war resulting in millions of deaths will occur. If I have family troubles going on at the time, I still think it would be wrong to ignore my job for that. And that's the same sort of situation Angel is in. His job is protecting the lives of people on a daily basis, and, in the current situation, stopping the end of all life on earth. Add in the fact that there's no one who can fill in for him, and I think he does have to put his job first.

Second, even if Angel's job wasn't so absolutely essential, there is still a limit to how much time you can take off from it. If you wish to continue the job/family analogy, say Angel was a middle-manager in some company. He finds out his wife is having an affair (not an exact corolation since he and Cordy weren't an item, but it's close enough), and he takes a sick day or vacation day off to deal with the situation, and takes a few more after that. Well, eventually he could very well lose his job, and if all he does with his time off is brood rather than actually trying to fix what happened, he's just made things worse for himself. Now, if it was a situation of Angel having a sick wife, more time off from work would be much more excusable. But that situation hasn't really arisen.

Just one more thing: I think the stuff about Angel getting too involved with his personal life revolves around the fact that he (and most of AI) haven't done much this season in the way of fighting evil. Gunn, Fred, and Connor fight vampires in "Deep Down", but only because they're using them to find Angel. In "Ground State", Angel only is drawn into Gwen's problems only because they're both after the Axis of Pythia, which Angel wants only so he can find Cordelia. In "The House Always Wins", the focus of Angel and company is on freeing Lorne and later Angel rather than stopping DeMarco. In "Slouching Towards Bethleham", it's Connor, who isn't actually part of Angel Investigations, who fights the human eater, and Wolfram & Hart makes a move against AI, not the other way around. In "Supersymmetry", Professor Seidel is the one who attacks Fred first by opening the portal. In "Spin the Bottle", there really isn't any evil to fight. It's only recently, with "Rain of Fire", that Angel Investigations has started going on the offensive. The "ignoring the mission" thing is just an impression it's easy to get when most of what we've seen of the season has AI only fighting evil when it comes after them first.
[> [> [> [> Re: Well said... -- Rufus, 23:53:18 01/25/03 Sat

Yes, I'm an unapologtic Angel Apologist, but that's mainly because people seem to judge him by an impossibly high standard and then come down on him when he fails to meet those standards.

I see the good and bad in Angel, and part of his problem started with the man before he became a vampire, and that is the way he tends to internalize problems then not do anything about them...in life resorting to drink and women to avoid them, in unlife and soulled he retreats from others and broods (still self-centered)....as long as he is in his room or disconnected from humanity, he is no damn good to anyone including himself. That is the point Lorne was trying to get across to him. You can't be a hero in your own mind, you have to do something to earn that status. Lorne and others are there to keep reminding Angel of that.

As for getting over it in regards to Angelus...he can't change what he did while soulless, so to brood himself into inaction or the idea that nothing he does will make any difference won't improve how he feels about himself. Doing what he said he should do in Epiphany (ease suffering) is the way.
[> Kind of Interesting angle from Egyptian Mythology (spoilers African pre-history to Old Kingdom) -- Shiraz, 08:22:37 01/24/03 Fri

Considering the beast seems to be based off of Egyptian mythology and intent on blotting out the sun, this would make him analogous to Apep, the serpent Ra defeated in creating this reality.

According to Egyptian mythology, every night as Ra's Sun barge journeyed through the underworld, it would be attacked by Apep, who intended to swallow the sun and engulf the world in darkness.

Defending the barge from this attack was Seth, the Egyptian god of chaos, war, and the desert. He was Osiris' murderer and the closest thing the Egyptian pantheon had to a devil figure.

If you view Angelus as Seth (which isn't much of a stretch) the plan works on a mythological scale at least.

But yeah, from a twenty-first century character-driven story perspective, the plan is pretty whacked.


-Shiraz
The Beast: Anti Messiah? (Spoilers up to 4.9 and future spec) -- Masq, 16:32:40 01/23/03 Thu

Back in November, I posted a theory that Connor is supposed be a Messiah figure:

I was looking back over my previous episode analyses for this season and came across that Yeats quote that accompanied my analysis of "Slouching towards Bethlehem":

"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"

In the analysis, I noted an interpretation of Yeat's poem, "The Second Coming" in which Yeats is likening the coming of an anti-Christ to the coming of the original Christ. The original Christ is born in Bethlehem and ushers in a two- thousand year era (gyre) of cycle of history, the era of Christianity. In the twentieth century, however, Yeats hypothesizes, a "second" coming will occur, the birth of a totalitarian "beast" that will usher in a new era of history.

This takes me back to the scene in this week's episode in which the beast is "born" into our world in the same spot as Connor was born one year previously. What if Connor is supposed to be like the "Christ" in the poem, while the "beast" is, well, the "rough beast". The beast in the poem is depicted as being born in the same spot Christ was born.

Of course, in our AtS scenario, the two "comings" are only a year apart, not two thousand years, and the apocolypse that would overthrow "Christianity" for "totalitarianism" will occur over the course of the fourth season of the show, but hey, it's a thought.

It occurs to me that the Beast is supposed to be the "anti-Messiah". It appears as if his goal is to return the reign of the demons to the Earth. He has blotted out the sun in L.A., and gradually it will spread around the world, destroying mortal life and allowing demons and vampires free reign.

This could be what many demons have longed hoped for and prophecied--the reclaiming of the Earth by demons. As I point out in my discussion of The Second Coming poem, his goal is to usher in a gyre (era) of the demons that will last as long, if not longer, than humankind's rule of the planet.

Of course, there have been many other demons who have already tried this, especially making use of the Hellmouth, but hey, isn't that what Buffyverse stories are all about?
[> While it has been tried before. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:03:37 01/23/03 Thu

Very few of them have ever succeeded in causing this much destruction in the early phases of their plan, which is a point in the Beast's court.

Keep in mind, as Wesley said, the Beast's actions so far have only been the beginning to something bigger. What I'm worried about is the fact that he's killed thousands of people so far, and demons will presumably soon be reaking havoc on LA. I wonder how they're going to make it believable that the Beast and his followers don't wipe out the whole city.

Maybe the Beast could end the world by simply going to every city on earth, start a rain of fire and some earthquakes, massacre a bunch of people, and leave the pitiful few survivors to be killed by rampaging demons.
[> [> [> Re: The Beast: Anti Messiah? (Spoilers up to 4.9 and future spec) -- Tess, 07:35:43 01/24/03 Fri

""And why did he choose to perform the spell where Conner lives?""

Could it be the beast wants them to think its because that's where Conner lives when actually he chose that spot because its where Cordelia lives?
[> [> [> Re: The Beast: Anti Messiah? (Spoilers up to 4.9 and future spec) -- Rufus, 08:58:31 01/24/03 Fri

Keep going with that thought......;)
[> Re: The Beast: Anti Messiah? (Spoilers up to 4.9 and future spec) -- ELR, 09:10:45 01/24/03 Fri

Good points, Masq. Another allusion to Yeats' poem in "Long Day's Journey" was Connor's comment to Cordelia, "Things are falling apart out there." "The Second Coming" begins:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world

IMO, we saw one aspect or type of this pattern carried out on BtVS last season. We may well be seeing a more literal manifestation on AtS this year.
Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- Yu Yu Hakusho, 15:38:08 01/23/03 Thu

Okay, we all know that if a vampire lives long enough, he or she will eventually devolve in apperance, looking monsterious all the time and losing the ability to appear human. However, does the same hold true for Angel and Spike, two vampires with souls, striving to be good? Will their souls and character prevent them someday resembling the Master? Also, if Spike had stayed soulless, and yet tried to be good (no matter what the reasoning or motivation), could he have saved himself from devolving too?

Any ideas on this subject?
[> Re: Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- ZachsMind, 15:57:01 01/23/03 Thu

I think you're on the right track. Vampires seem to only become more demonic as they strive further away from their humanity. If a vampire with a human soul continued doing evil despite their human conscience, they'd still continue showing physical signs of being more demonic and losing their humanity. They'd also go pretty mad. If a vampire without a soul were to encourage their humanity, be it by choice or not (like a chip in the head) they'd slowly lose a grip on their more demonic physical qualities and behave more human.

However, while humanity in a mostly demonic vampire would drive the vampire mad because the humanity couldn't take it, the reverse it not true, because Evil is much more patient. One would think if Angel could remain without Angeles and without committing any acts of evil for a few hundred years, the evil inside him would just get bored and vacate Angel for a soul more willing to participate in evil, but it doesn't quite work that way.
[> Re: Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- AgnosticSorcerer, 19:29:50 01/23/03 Thu

I do not think the possession of a soul is relevant to the physical appearance of a demon. It would make no logical sense in my mind nor has there been any kind of mention or evidence for it on either show.

Granted, both Spike and Angel are quite old in comparison to mortals, but compared to the Master and Kakistos they are relatively young.
[> Re: Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- Rufus, 04:34:11 01/24/03 Fri

One has to wonder if the change in appearance of the long lived demons is due to the amount of evil they have done, becoming a reflection of their inner self.....and if so does the change in intent that may come with getting a soul back mean that the demon infection can't progress.
[> Re: Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- Peggin, 04:37:03 01/24/03 Fri

Interesting question. I don't think there's really a clear answer to this from the show. We know that, as a vampire ages, he becomes more animal-like, but what causes that?

Is it simply having the demon inside? If so, having a soul makes no difference and both Angel and Spike should also become more animalistic as they age.

OTOH, it could just be some kind of mystical outward projection of the vampire's psyche. In this case, it's a kind of a metaphor for the fact that, as your typical vampire ages, he becomes less and less human in thoughts and feeling. In that case, neither Angel nor Spike should become more animal-like in appearance.

Considering how much Joss likes to make things metaphorical, I would guess that, if this question is ever explored, we'll find out that it's that latter. I think that any vampire who thinks and feels like he is connected to humanity will not develop animal like traits as he ages.
[> [> We said the same thing.....I like how you said it better.....;) -- Rufus, 04:40:14 01/24/03 Fri

[> [> Good answer -- Random, 21:28:26 01/24/03 Fri

This may explain why a four centuries-old Darla was still quite the hottie. Like Spike and Angel, she was certainly not your "typical" (your word) vampire, despite her obvious relish for evil and her off-and-on devotion to the Master. Vamps like Darla, Angelus and Spike all allow their human traits free rein even while their indulging their vampiric natures. Angelus was almost certainly more vicious and brutal than the Master, personality-wise, but he was very much of this world, playing within the human sphere, while the Master -- very individualistic, with personality quirks and a sense of the absurd, if you'll recall -- never quite assimilated. His plans were much more centered around his demon nature, regardless of how individual and human he seemed. Kakistos...well, being a one-shot guest star in the 'dale, we don't have much to go on, but we do know he wasn't terribly progressive (as his dialogue with Trick indicates) and probably gave more rein to his demon nature than his smooth-talking lieutenant. Interesting question, and interesting reply.
[> [> What if the difference in psyche is the result of the aging process? -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:12:44 01/25/03 Sat

Another thought, maybe it's becoming animalistic and demonic in appearance that made them so seperate from humans, since they then couldn't blend in with human society.
[> Re: Question for all you vamp theorists out there -- Darby, 05:47:46 01/24/03 Fri

The answer hasn't even been alluded to on the shows - what you think depends upon how you see vampirism:

If it is a metaphorical "acting out" of impetuous youth, centered on self to the exclusion of others, then it's reasonable to assume that the condition will alter over time (or not) depending upon acts. What you see is what they've been.

If it is a contagion, as presented early on in the show (although the metaphor was there early as well), then a progression is reasonable, too. We have seen some progression - our older vamps seem much more resistant to sunlight and other vamp weaknesses than the newbies.

Hey, ya pays yer money ( or in this case, watch the commercials ), ya gets ta make the choice.

Current board | More January 2003