June 2004 posts


Previous June 2004  

More June 2004


SMG and AH -- ghady, 04:40:27 06/14/04 Mon

Ok, what's the deal with those two? Do they hate each other or what? Were they or were they not at each others' weddings?? It doesn't LOOK like they don't get along--there's just TOO much chemistry between them on the show (Plus, take Charmed as an example, where a bitter relationship between two stars led to the firing/quitting of one.) So? What it is? And how's Sarah's relationship w/ the other cast members?
One final thing: why the HELL was Emma Caulfield so despondent by S7 of Buffy? Why does she keep on saying that she HATED it towards the end?


Replies:

[> Re: SMG and AH -- Cactus Watcher, 07:36:07 06/14/04 Mon

SMG particularly after she started dating Freddie isolated herself from the rest of the cast, stopped seeing the rest of the socilaly, did not go to Joss' get-togethers, etc. At some point SMG drifted away from the others and they pretty much ceased to be friends. I think she's just a very private person and as there often are the can be tensions between the star and the rest of the cast over what they can demand on the set. But, there is no indication that anyone wasn't speaking to everyone else. AH was unhappy that SMG did not tell the other actors personally she was through with playing Buffy, but she told Joss early on in season seven, and as boss, it really was his duty to tell the others sooner than he did.

Emma Caulfield was having serious problems negotiating a contract with 20th Century Fox, and decided she would not work for them any more. It had nothing to do with her direct relationship with Mutant Enemy or the Buffy show.


[> [> Re: SMG and AH -- BrianWilly, 14:03:20 06/14/04 Mon

It kinda bugs me that so much disdain from the cast and the fans was put on Sarah for not informing everyone that the show was ending. Okay, I knew that the 7th season was going to be the last a whole year in advance, through an interview Joss did. I don't have the interview handy with me and I'm not sure if there was subsequent discussion concerning the fate of the show, but to me that whole derisive "We should have told earlier that we were gonna be out of jobs!" attitude, while understandable, was hardly valid. Really, did anyone have any doubts that Buffy was ending with season 7? I love Sarah and Aly and Nicky and Tony and every other soul involved with this show, but read between the lines already.


[> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- Mike, 20:43:24 06/14/04 Mon

I take it that the recent declarations about the driftiness or disdain of the Buffy gang is to confirm that this is totally true and therefore depressing. I feel the exact same way about the year in advance notice about Buffy's inevitable finish. Really Joss, the boss, should have told them in advance about Buffy coming to an end. Then again, it could have went without saying that the series was ending after its 7th yr. Maybe there's something more simple that should be reminded about the driftiness or disdain. It would be easy to jump straight into worries about ending careers and creative differences, but it
may really enough to understand what happened to the
Buffy gang.

If you think about, and I sure do if I put myself in any of the Buffy cast members' place, is that a hit TV series is hard to top for your career. In other words, the end of an era and unfortunately for some the start of a career's end.
I hate to say it but it appears the cast (minus SMG b/c she's like an A-list celebrity at this point) don't have
much places to turn to. Think of hit shows like Melrose Place or Thirtysomething and what happens to much of the cast members once they end. For instance, Thomas Calabero or Kelly Rutherford (MP) haven't been seen or noticed anywhere afterwards. Ken Olin or Melanie Mayron (T)
haven't either. Sometimes, hit TV shows can be the kiss
of death for long-term acting success.

Now for the real tough bit here, the actual Buffy members.
It does seem to make sense that SMG would begin distancing from the rest of the gang once her and Freddie were top news. Aside from being the main star, SMG has been suceeding more or less in her projects outside Buffy. SMG continues to have clout in Hollywood, can't say the same for the others except for AH and maybe MT (more on them in a bit). NB recently fell into rehab for god knows what. Does he have anything post-Buffy? Is he succeeding outside Buffy? ASH? EC? And someone mentioned that Marc Blucas is successful out of Buffy's light, but in what? SMG, sure she's a private person. However that's a damn shame that she doesn't even keep in touch with her former cast
members anymore.

Also sucks that EC felt hateful about Buffy as her contract neared its end. Then again who knows, creative difference?
This lends a bit of credibility to the rough edges that probably emerged within the Buffy cast. That whole thing b/w
SMG and AH is rather discouraging. Just one more thing evident about how things changed b/w 1997 and 2003. Not like the Friends cast who to this day are really good friends. Go figure.

AH, IMHO the more interesting and prettiest star of Buffy,
has had some success with the American Pie trilogy yet Willow and Michelle are all she's known for right now. Certainly people know AH has acted and been in stuff since 87. But to most of the public eye, her emergence came once Buffy hit our living rooms. She's currently doing theater,
or recently has. Heard about this TV deal she's got, but will that be successful. Will she get different types of film roles? MT has recently done Eurotrip and a Trapt video. the difference with her and AH can be simply set about ten years apart. MT has plenty of time to try to shine elsewhere. I mention that b/c of the unfortunate reality about Hollywood's frequent focus on age. Certain thirtysomethings defy the odds, sure helps when you're a mega star like Jennifer Aniston. Again, I really find AH
interesting but I can't be naive about Hollywood's
majority eye. Who knows what will happen to AH, MT, and
the rest of the former Buffy cast.

There's a few things that we can hope will happen. Certainly no Buffy reunion, follow in Friends' lead about
not tarnishing what's fresh now ten years later. That Hollywood can offer enough to the entire former cast now and soon, unless any one of them could care less about acting anymore. That none of them falls into drug-addled
paths to death and destruction. No nude posing for magazines since it's a make or break situation. Charisma Carpenter did it, still don't know yet if that'll build or destroy her career. I don't see the risk being worth it for the likes of AH and MT to name a few.

And another thing, this issue now makes me think about the Angel cast and if they are really friends, have ended AtS in good terms, if there is or was any driftiness or disdain
through those five yrs. As for Buffy, may absence make the hearts grow fonder and may they all succeed in their dreams.


[> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- Riz, 04:04:07 06/15/04 Tue

"However that's a damn shame that she doesn't even keep in touch with her former cast
members anymore."

I don't think that's true, to be fair. SMG is definitely in contact/friends with MT (although I'm sure they're both busy so don't get to see each other all that much). I read somewhere once that Freddie Prinze was also close to her and was teaching her to drive, etc. I also remember Nicky Brendon saying he's still good friends with her and although they don't get to see each other much any more, they still send a lot of (text) messages to each other. Antony Head was at the Scooby Doo 2 premier and him and SMG were coudling, laughing with each other, etc. I also saw him say once that SMG is a like an older sister to his daughters and that she always looks after them when they're on set. James Marsters has said that the only time SMG used 'star power' on set was to help other people out i.e. getting seats for extras and things like that. It does seem that Sarah and Aly have drifted apart but that quite often happens between friends, it doesn't mean there was anything horrible between them. I remember in my last year at school I started hanging around with a new set of people because I grew apart from my old friends, even though we still got on well with each other.

I know none of us will ever know the truth, but from what I can tell SMG is unfairly treated as a diva who acted above everybody else.


[> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- ghady, 04:55:08 06/15/04 Tue

"I read somewhere once that Freddie Prinze was also close to her and was teaching her to drive."--> I think you mean someone else, since Freddie is obviously not part of the Buffy team.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- Riz, 06:55:25 06/15/04 Tue

Nah, I didn't. There seems to be the idea the FPj caused her to be completely seperated from everybody else. Although I do think this is true to an extent, it's clearly not completely the case if he gets on well with MT.

they're probably all so busy that none of them get to see each other much. I never see anybody discussing whether Aly Hannigan still sees Nicky Brendon reguarly or any other combination of cast/crew. SMG is held to an unfair standard, IMO. It's almost as if people WANT her to be a diva.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH - Does Any of This Really Matter? -- Can I Be Anne?, 07:45:04 06/17/04 Thu

I agree with you, SMG is often called a "Bitch" and a "Diva", for no other reason than former fans or "shippers" didn't like the way a certain storyline panned out on Buffy.

They decided they hated Buffy and that it was SMG's fault that Buffy turned so dark in S6! It is so ludicrous as to be mad!

From everything I have heard in "legitimate" publications, and from fans who actually "met" Sarah, she is NOTHING but nice and kind and considerate. Not to mention the ultimate professional. Anyone who complains about Sarah being a "diva" or whatnot, does not know her, they are making up stories they want to be true. Sarah IS a bone fide movie star and celebrity as well. Perhaps people resent her for her popularity outside of Buffy? But, Sarah was a star BEFORE Buffy, in the world of Daytime TV, she's been in tons of commercials since a child, and is the only actress from Buffy who has a shot of actually having a long-term career AFTER Buffy.

Look, everyone has bad days from time to time, especially working so closely with people day in and day out for over 7 years. Things people say and do may be taken out of context and blown out of proportion, through rumor and innuendo. I personally don't believe any of the "diva" crap.

AND....who really cares if sometimes Sarah is "bitchy" Her work, as far as I am concerned NEVER showed her personal feelings about the show - SMG, as Buffy, NEVER let me down. She was always Right On in her portrayal of The Slayer. What more do people want? She did her frickin job! If she chooses to let the verse go after her seven years, well then it is her choice, and if you are a true fan of SMG's, you should just wish her well.

Ally, and the rest of the cast can go ahead and do cartoon voices, but Sarah has decided to move on. She should not be crucified for that choice.

I say, screw the nay-sayers and please "get a life".


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH - Does Any of This Really Matter? -- Gyrus, 09:36:18 06/17/04 Thu

SMG, as Buffy, NEVER let me down. She was always Right On in her portrayal of The Slayer. What more do people want? She did her frickin job! If she chooses to let the verse go after her seven years, well then it is her choice, and if you are a true fan of SMG's, you should just wish her well.

Seven years is a long time for an actor on an hour-long drama; eventually, they all want a break from the brutal schedule that TV acting involves. (It's interesting to note that most of the hour-long dramas that have lasted longer than 7 years have had complete or nearly-complete changes of cast over the years -- LAW & ORDER, NYPD BLUE, and ER, for example.)


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH - Does Any of This Really Matter? -- LeeAnn, 10:49:42 06/18/04 Fri

I agree with you, SMG is often called a "Bitch" and a "Diva", for no other reason than former fans or "shippers" didn't like the way a certain storyline panned out on Buffy.

I did some searches trying to find out why she is described as "bitch" and "diva." I was looking for the dirt but I didn't really find anything that justified the epithets. I finally came to the conclusion that a lot of the words are from the press. SMG is generally inaccessible to the press unless she is doing promotions required by contract. I think that is the main source of the "cold" and "bitch" and "diva" rumors. And I'm not a fan of her work but I couldn't find any stories online that justified the names. Not even Jeff Pruitt's firing, which in retrospect, seems justified considering he was talking out of school about her lack of physical skills and thus hurting the character and the actress.


[> [> [> [> [> You have to remember something here, SMG and AH..... -- Briar Rose, 15:17:34 06/15/04 Tue

are both pretty much newly-weds and I doubt they are spending much time with anyone about now. Maybe there will be more interest in hanging out now that both are working less and their husbands are as well.

But I will say that SMG has always had a reputation for being "difficult" and also pretty quick to feel jealousy and such when her star is outshined. But she's also a very good business woman, and if it's in her best interests I'm sure that SMG will be cooking dinner for AH pretty quick.

You can jump on me all you want, but I know too many former BtVS/Angel extras to discount all of the stories when I have also heard them from the set of Scooby 1 and 2.

As for AH, I don't know if she'd rush back to BtVS/AtS without a major character change for Willow. And that's all I'm going to say about that.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You have to remember something here, SMG and AH..... -- Can I Be Anne?, 12:19:16 06/17/04 Thu

Everyone hears different things. I choose to believe in the "good" not the bad. And as I said, after all is said and done, I don't give a "fig's ass" if SMG is a bitch or a diva or Mother Theresa - she's a good actress and I enjoy her talents. And she's pretty.
So there.
:-)
As for AH and Willow - she IS doing the cartoon voice over. I guess that is a big enough change for her.


[> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- Sofdog, 19:52:42 06/16/04 Wed

"Think of hit shows like Melrose Place or Thirtysomething and what happens to much of the cast members once they end. For instance, Thomas Calabero or Kelly Rutherford (MP) haven't been seen or noticed anywhere afterwards. Ken Olin or Melanie Mayron (T)
haven't either. Sometimes, hit TV shows can be the kiss
of death for long-term acting success."

Actually Ken Olin frequently produces television shows. Acting is only one aspect of an entertainment career and most people in that business seem to have more than one interest or only use acting as a stepping stone. It is hardly a sign of a dashed career that we no longer see someone on screen. Sometimes people want to do other things with their lives.

"Just one more thing evident about how things changed b/w 1997 and 2003. Not like the Friends cast who to this day are really good friends. Go figure."

Well, "Friends" was a bird of different feather. That wasn't a star vehicle. The six cast members were on equal footing. Those actors collaborated after their first season hit to force NBC to renegotiate all of their contracts for $1 million per episode. It was a whole different dynamic from "Buffy."

It's hardly outrageous for former coworkers to drift apart. They no longer have a reason to be together. If the show was the foundation of their relationship, or their friendships have changed, that is life. If someone asked me why I don't keep in touch with my old coworkers, I'd say 'cause we have lives and they're not on the same path. Doesn't mean there's no good feeling. But so what if there isn't?

As for Emma Caulfield being at odds with Fox, well tons of people leave their jobs when they can't get the pay/benefits they think they deserve. Nothing wrong with that. And nothing wrong with being bitter about it.

The success question can't be evaluated by anyone but the actor. If Marc Blucas defines success as doing character bits in movies, he's succeeding. If Charisma Carpenter defines it as launching a career as a sex symbol while living off her Buffy/Angel residuals, she's succeeding. If Alyson would rather get her theater training down... You get the point. If someone told me, 'Sof, you're not doing what you used to do. You're failure,' I'd say 'I'm not who I used to be.'


[> [> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- Gyrus, 07:30:23 06/17/04 Thu

It's hardly outrageous for former coworkers to drift apart. They no longer have a reason to be together. If the show was the foundation of their relationship, or their friendships have changed, that is life.

We should also remember that when actors are working, they work very long hours that leave them little time for any social activities outside of work (despite all the talk about "Hollywood parties"). For example, when BTVS was filming, a 12-hour day was considered pretty short. Therefore, anybody who has moved on to another project doesn't have time to hang around with people from previous projects, however friendly they may be. (This may explain why friends and lovers in Hollywood often make an effort to work together a lot.)


[> [> [> [> Re: SMG and AH -- LeeAnn, 10:39:41 06/18/04 Fri

The difference with her[MT] and AH can be simply set about ten years apart.

I think the main difference is management. I've been surprised at how MT has been getting work and been in the public eye since the end of BtVS. Considering how much I disliked her portrayal of Dawn and her limited on-screen likablity I find that surprising. I think she must have great management. Her skills and attractiveness are not great enough to explain it any other way. People with much more talent, beauty and likabily are not getting the work she is. Starting with AH and EC and CC. Whoever her manager is he/she really knows how Hollywood works. Just putting her in a real or pretend date with someone who won an award at the MTV awards is important exposure (and an old Hollywood tradition).

At least the female regulars from the Buffyverse have been getting some work. The male actors, not so much.


[> [> [> [> [> Re: AH, MT, SMG, CC: Differences, management, status -- Mike, 15:12:12 06/18/04 Fri

Hey LeeAnn you mentioned a vital asset in Hollywood that I missed out on when describing differences about the Buffy cast members; management plays certain significance in an actor's continuous career. Well in terms of being noticed, winning roles and the like. MT aside from SMG has seemed more prolific so far in 2004. There are always tricks of the trade that managers, agents, whatever, know to use to keep an actor's 15 minutes lasting longer. MT might fit as an example. Then again, she's only 18 or 20 I think. And well Hollywood may be looking at MT as a fresh face where
SMG and AH are past that prime (from Hollywood perspective). Hollywood never gets tired of "new faces".
You're probably right about the females from the Buffyverse at least finding more work than the males
b/c I haven't heard or seen any promise from the males
recently. Well other than the voiceover stuff. Unless,
they're laying low or doing theater, I'm still wondering why the males seem to be shafted in post-Buffyverse.
My first message about this matter b/w SMG and the
others sprung from the heels of possibility that the
supporting cast would fade away much before SMG's prime
ends. I would be pissed off too about a show where I played a supporting role coming to an end after 7 yrs and still having not made a name for myself outside of that show. Sure, success can be solely defined by you the actor, yrself. If bit parts in movies is success to an actor,
then ok. If NB feels he's still successful after Buffy. Cool! Otherwise, it would have to hurt in some way that
the prime of your acting career comes to an end. Knowing
that it's inevitable, it nevertheless must suck.
And FYI, I think SMG is a nice, strong, talented actress.
Not this diva crap that people have been saying about her.
I just also think SMG got a lot of better breaks than the rest of the Buffyverse. What if they're all equally talented like her yet haven't gotten involved in the right projects or made their way to the right people like SMG has.
It's probably also bias that some people may have for saying
things about SMG's success vs. other Buffyverse members.
Some fans may like NB, JM, or EC better than SMG, and it would be cool if they can reach the same status as SMG.
I myself am more an AH and CC fan than SMG. So that's from my end, wishful thinking. And personally I hope CC starts getting better stuff to do, not this Playboy issue thing coming out.
The Angel cast is what I'm hoping much more to achieve prolific acting success outside of Angel. Well, DB is now blond, good thing he's working and could probably achieve the same status as SMG. One for the underdogs. The Angel cast, I feel, are the true underdogs in this matter of SMG and others in the Whedonverse. I'm a fan of true underdogs
and by gosh want the rest of this decade in Hollywood to be filled with their faces.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: AH, MT, SMG, CC: Differences, management, status -- cyp, 15:53:03 06/19/04 Sat

SMG gets good gigs because she's known as a teenage-icon and the producers assume she can bring some viewers,her talent doesn't have anything to do with it.And how much time will she be an asset?
You're forgotten pretty quickly in this job.The competition is fierce,new faces appear(and disappear) all the time and the fame coming with a TV-show (particularly a cult-show with a small audience and a bunch of fans scattered all around the world)doesn't last long.Luckily they won't be type-cast(except may be SMG)
We will see them(our actors) in a show here and there,some will find a regular job in a serie or try a movie-carreer,but some of them(most of them,probably)will fade in the background.
The good recipe for a successful career:
A lot of exposure,good contacts,a pinch of talent,a good agent,good looks (and hot!it's a must.Hey,go CC!) ...and a very very big dose of luck!



Numfar do the dance of joy!! Levin out! -- znachki, 14:54:58 06/14/04 Mon

Had to de-lurk for this

[url]http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000531310[/url]


Replies:

[> About a year too late! -- Vegeta, 07:47:55 06/15/04 Tue

I still do not understand why Angel was cancelled. Especially when it is obvious that they have absolutely nothing to replace it with. Those who run the WB are fools and will forever lose my veiwership.

VEGETA


[> Good riddance -- skpe, 18:16:08 06/15/04 Tue




Ghost of the Robot disbands -- Ann, 20:31:46 06/14/04 Mon

http://www.jamesmarsters.com/home.html


Replies:

[> Re: How long did the band exist? -- Mike, 20:50:03 06/14/04 Mon




New Super-Evil reviews! -- HonorH, 22:44:49 06/14/04 Mon

For anyone who's interested, Honorificus has just posted new Super-Evil reviews of "Underneath" and "Origin" at my livejournal. Masq, the "Origin" one is for you!


Replies:

[> Well, you can tell I read it, too, can't you? -- Masq, 12:51:41 06/16/04 Wed

I am an LJ comment whore, as I recently discovered after everyone started posting the results of the "Who Comments Here" meme....

And of course, anything Connorific makes the comment whore on steroids!



The PTBs -- Kana, 03:54:26 06/15/04 Tue

I was wondering, how much power do the, err, Powers have? I just get this feeling that there are metaphysical laws that govern the Buffyverse that even the PTBs cannot break, or maybe the Powers created their own rules about invervention. In any case Jasmine had to go through all the trouble of arranging a miracle pregnancy to descend to the lower plain, so this is clearly finding a loophole to an otherwise unbreakable rule. I mean is she wanted to descend, why didn't she just will it so? If a Power That err Is(?) broke a rule outright would that upset the balance of the universe causing everything to decend into chaos? And if these rules exist outside the powers control, is there a Buffyverse God who created those rules.

Another thing that was bothering me was the fact Jasmine appeared in human form in both our reality and that of the bug creature's world. Shouldn't she have taken bug form? Or is this indicative of the fact the PTBs, although formless, have closer connection to human beings. If God created us in his image perhaps he did the same with the Powers.

By the way, all this talk about theology is completely theoretical in terms of the Buffyverse. I state this as a firm believer in agnosticism.


Replies:

[> Re: The PTBs -- David, 09:14:12 06/15/04 Tue

I think that there are rules that even the PTB can't breeak but i think it might be the laws of physics 'cause didn't Willow say that magic doesn't ignore physics only uses it to its advantage.

Also i don't think that in the Buffyverse, there is one all powerful god, but i do think there are things more powerful that the PTB like maybe the FE or First Good?

I think that the Jasmine only looked human on this world because her 'parents' were human and they created a human body for her to pour herself into. Also on the bug world, didn't the statue have a bug body or something so i think she did look like them just with a human or human-like head.

If you saw her in her natural form, i think she would look a lot different like maybe that tentacled thing that she turned into to feed


[> Re: The PTBs -- steve-dave, 06:40:17 06/16/04 Wed

thats deep


[> Re: The PTBs -- BrianWilly, 20:32:12 06/16/04 Wed

The Powers have a lot of...er, power, but from what I've gathered from watching the show, their main big limitation is that they can't interfere with free will.

Well, they can of course if they wanted to. But they don't want to.

Angel himself explained why, in Peace Out..."Our fate has to be our own, or we're nothing." Yeah, the Powers That Be probably have the power to destroy every evil in the world and make the world a living paradise...but what would be the point? We wouldn't have earned it, or deserved it. In the way of the Buffyverse, humanity has to choose paradise and goodness for itself. If the Powers That Be went around directly making good things happen, that diminishes the value of human goodness. What would the meaning of life be if some uberdeity automatically took care of every single problem for us? How are we good people if there was no alternative to being good, if we had no choice but to be good?

Jasmine, who was a self-proclaimed "Power That Was," didn't like that limitation. She probably really did love everyone and the world...she saw the Powers' refusal to help humans directly as indifference. So she set out the force everyone to be good, free will be damned...which is of course in itself actually evil. She probably had the power to just descend if she wanted to, yes...but then the other Powers would stop her. So she had to take the long way, manipulating events and aligning things just right so that when she finally descended, the other Powers would be too late to do anything without interfering with free will themselves.

See, that's what the Powers can do: manipulate events. They can't force anyone to do anything they don't want to, but they can manipulate events to the point where someone has the choice. They sent Whistler to help out Angel once, to give him the choice of either continuing with his rat-eating or to actually do something good. Then they sent visions to Doyle and Cordelia respectively; after all, it's not technically interfering with free will if you show someone the things they should do. They the gang with the means, and ultimately the gang themselves have to fulfill the ends. This way they can affect the way of the world for the better without interfering with free will. It's a much slower process, but it's the best they can do.



Need help -- David, 09:57:17 06/15/04 Tue

I was thinking of writing my first fic but i want to set it after Not Fade away and want to put it in Wolfram and Hart's perspective. But i want to know what people think the senior partners are so i can include it in my fic, thanks


Replies:

[> Re: Need help -- Ames, 11:25:52 06/15/04 Tue

Nobody knows anything at all about the Senior Partners, so feel free to assume anything you want.

They never appeared or intervened directly at any time during the series, except for a single occasion in Season 2 where one was supposed to manifest itself for a brief visit to W&H LA in a borrowed demon form, but was killed immediately after it appeared by Darla.

Other than that we only ever saw intermediaries, who said very little and could have been lying or misleading or even misled themselves about anything to do with the Senior Partners. We don't even know for sure if the Senior Partners and the Wolf, Ram and Hart are synonymous.

People generally assume that they are evil, powerful, old, and span multiple dimensions - but that's all speculation based on indirect evidence and hearsay.


[> [> Re: Need help -- DorianQ, 22:00:04 06/15/04 Tue

Lilah mentioned directly consulting one (Mr. Suvarta) when she beheaded Linwood and took over his division in Deep Down. That's all I can remember. Hope it helps and good luck!



What is the hellmouth demon? -- Kana, 02:09:20 06/16/04 Wed

Is the hellmouth demon a pure demon like Olvikan or something else?


Replies:

[> Re: What is the hellmouth demon? -- Steve-Dave, 06:41:18 06/16/04 Wed

Like Something Else


[> [> Re: What is the hellmouth demon? -- BrianWilly, 19:56:09 06/16/04 Wed

I agree that the HM demon isn't Olvikan, but I do think that it's probably a pure demon. The Master was trying to bring back the Old Ones -- the pure demons that were banished -- so it's pretty safe to assume that the HM demon was one of them, since opening the Hellmouth was the Master's big goal.

Now, Anya said that "none of you have ever seen a [pure] demon before," but she didn't know that they had ever fought this Hellmouth demon.


[> [> [> Re: What is the hellmouth demon? -- Kana, 07:56:49 06/18/04 Fri

Thanks. By the way'm aware that the HM demon is not Olvikan, i was merely using it as an example of what a pure demon is.



Happy belated birthday to the ATPo board! -- Masquerade, 09:47:39 06/16/04 Wed

June 14th, 2000: the day the board was born!

4 years old Monday!

Just wanted to say how much I appreciate all you guys and the wonderful community we have here!

*smooches*
*wipes tear*


Replies:

[> And it doesn't look at day over 3 and 3/4 -- CW, 10:07:20 06/16/04 Wed

Thanks for starting it all, Masq!


[> [> Re: And it doesn't look at day over 3 and 3/4 -- Masq, 12:44:03 06/16/04 Wed

There are many actions in life I regret, but starting the board isn't one of them! ; )


[> Long may it wave! -- OnM, 10:17:19 06/16/04 Wed

(Waves to Masq)

[Elvis] Thank yuh, thank yuh very much! [/Elvis]

:-)


[> [> ~ waves back ~ -- Masq, 12:45:10 06/16/04 Wed



[> And many smooches to you Masq for raising such a fine board! -- Pony, 10:39:48 06/16/04 Wed



[> [> Sometimes it needed cookies, sometimes spankings! -- Masq, 12:47:01 06/16/04 Wed



[> Re: Happy belated birthday to the ATPo board! -- Ann, 11:47:48 06/16/04 Wed

Why do friends suddenly appear,
Every time you are near?
Just like me, they long to...
Post to you......

Why do posters respond,
Every time you come by?
Just like me, they long to...
Post to you....

On the day that ATPO was born posters got together,
And decided to create a dream come true,
So we examined metaphor on this site
often detailing philosophy in what we might write...

That is why, all the boys [or: girls] in town,
Learn from you, so profound,
Just like me, they long to...
Post to you.......

On the day that ATPO was born 'cause Whedon et al got together,
And decided to give us all a dream come true,
So for four years now Masq came through
And offered us series that we could review...

Buffy and Angel, and all the vampires in town,
Big Bads, all around,
Just like me, they long to...
Learn from you.........
Just like me, they long to...
Post to you...

Happy birthday ATPO. Thank you Masq for this most wondrous space to ponder the goodness from Whedon et al. You took a beautiful gift and made it even better! Thank you and here is to another many years! Cheers!


[> [> OK, that was *very cool* Ann -- Masq (now with the Carpenters stuck in her brain), 12:48:43 06/16/04 Wed



[> Re: Happy belated birthday to the ATPo board! -- StarryNightShade, 12:20:05 06/16/04 Wed

Masquerade,

My heartfelt thanks at having created your labour of love and passion for all of us to share.

I've only known about this web-site for about 4 weeks; and I've benefited immensely. My personal thanks for that.

SNS


[> [> Thanks for joining us! -- Masq, 12:49:46 06/16/04 Wed

Belatedly, but...

Wow, did you show up *after* the Angel finale??


[> [> [> Re: Thanks for joining us! -- SNS, 13:10:39 06/16/04 Wed

Pretty much since the Finale.

I'd been overseas (from Canada) for 9 years in an area where I didn't get English language Buffy or Angel. In fact I didn't watch much TV during that time at all.

I've returned to Canada in September and bumped into (synchronicity ?) Angel on 3 occasions before I decided to buy the Angel Season One DVD set at the beginning of April. Well needless to say I keep having to buy new pairs of socks because old ones keep getting blown away. I've obsessively purchases all available DVD sets and i have been through them all except Btvs Season 6 (half way through that).

Well anytime you get that obsessive about something you'd better find out why....so I did watch the last three episodes of Angel. Regretably to get answers to some of my questions I had to delve into a little spoilage...but I hope to keep that to a minimum. The only problem is having to wait for Ats 4/5 and Btvs 7....darn.

The other regret is that I don't always feel it's right to post a comment as I may not have seen key episodes.

As you see.....it's a long story....yeah right,....bought a bunch of DVDs, got square eyeballs, watched a couple of episodes and found the board....okay, maybe not so long.

SNS


[> Hey! That's the day Nino was born too! (20 this year!) -- Nino :), 13:55:28 06/16/04 Wed



[> [> Re: Here's to Chocolate, Canadians, Cats, and Conversation -- Brian, 19:06:59 06/16/04 Wed

Long may the board prosper!


[> [> [> Re: Here's to Chocolate, Canadians, Cats, and Conversation -- Brian, 19:08:14 06/16/04 Wed

Long may the Board prosper!


[> [> happy birthday to you too, nino! -- anom, 19:35:54 06/16/04 Wed



[> Happy is the day ATPo was born! -- Jane, 18:26:11 06/16/04 Wed

Singing Ann's birthday song now, baking a virtual birthday cake for all...slices of Angelfood cake all around!
Masq, this board is the best gift any fan of the Jossverse could get for her/his birthday. Thank you.
Nino - Happy 20th! extra slice of cake for you...


[> we'll have to have cake at the gathering, too! (chocolate, of course) -- anom, 19:28:22 06/16/04 Wed

Cake, cookies, chocolate...I think you were right, Masq--we may not survive, but we'll die happy. And what a (belated) birthday party!!!

"Just wanted to say how much I appreciate all you guys and the wonderful community we have here!"

Thanks to you, Masq, every one of us here can say the same.

Happy birthday, dear ATPo...Happy birthday to you!


[> & today is someone else's birthday: rahael!! -- anom, 19:46:40 06/16/04 Wed

I think it's already over where she is. And she may not see this for a while (not much time to spend online, & d'Herblay is visiting!). But what does that matter? Happy Birthday, Rahael!!! Hope you & d'H are having a great celebration!


[> [> Penblwydd Hapus i'r Bwrdd a Rah! (Wicked, Masq! Love this Board!) -- Marie, 01:49:47 06/17/04 Thu



[> [> Thank you, Marie and Anom!! -- Rahael, 07:33:13 06/19/04 Sat



[> Re: Happy belated birthday to the ATPo board! -- Cheryl, 20:13:45 06/16/04 Wed

Thank you, Masq! I've loved this board since the day I found it. You done good!


[> [> Thanks! *blushes* -- Masq, 10:24:20 06/17/04 Thu



[> Thank you for giving me internet home!!!! *hugs and cookies* -- angel's nibblet, 00:21:52 06/17/04 Thu



[> Thanks for starting this, and to everyone who's posted! -- KdS, 02:33:28 06/17/04 Thu

[your choice here] bless us, every one!


[> [> Allah? Zeus? Saint Mary? Jasmine? -- Masq, 11:46:07 06/17/04 Thu



[> [> [> Glory! The God of bad home perms! -- angel's nibblet, 17:57:35 06/17/04 Thu



[> [> [> on this board? shouldn't it be bast? -- anom, 10:56:15 06/18/04 Fri



[> A gift for the occasion - -- Darby, 08:46:06 06/17/04 Thu

This kind of reminded me of the situations of several folks here...

http://www.fried.com/pics/liberal.gif

and there are more here -

http://www.fried.com/friedsociety/


[> [> LOL! We've found the perfect compromise! -- Masq, 11:50:17 06/17/04 Thu

Talk about art history, women's studies, philosophy, literature, etc, etc, on the internet as we sit behind computers at our 9-to-5 jobs.

"My philosophy PhD didn't go to waste! I have a website!"


[> Re: Happy belated birthday to the ATPo board! -- breidablik, 09:28:05 06/17/04 Thu

It a wonderful place you've created here Masq!

Thanks to you and all the posters who have so added to my enjoyment of the shows.


[> [> Hey breidablik! Nice to see you here! -- Masq, 11:06:26 06/19/04 Sat



[> (adding voice to chorus of praise) -- MsGiles, 05:45:24 06/18/04 Fri

dauntingly high standard of contributions, discussions, wit
the best way of staying sane at work ever
(I'm here at my desk .. I'm in front of my computer .. I'm concentrating .. that's what I'm paid for .. er .. isn't it?) (although the occasional burst of hysterical laughter does give the game away somewhat)


[> [> Thank you Masq (and everyone) for making this board so Yummy! -- Briar Rose, 12:21:59 06/18/04 Fri




Why is information on STV,s suppressed by the WC? -- Greg White, 16:54:32 06/16/04 Wed

Why is it that whenever a slayer is turned into a vampire the watcher,s council doesn,t want to talk about it? They should admit that it happens and have their own task force to deal with it.


Replies:

[> Re: Why is information on STV,s suppressed by the WC? -- BrianWilly, 19:47:44 06/16/04 Wed

When did official canon* ever mention that

A) a Slayer has turned into a vampire in the past?

B) assuming that A has happened, the Watcher's Council has ever denied it?

C) assuming that A and B have happened, the Watcher's Council doesn't actually have a task force to deal with it?

Do you see what I'm saying? Now, I personally think it's quite possible that Slayers have turned into vampires before, just as it's quite possible that the Watcher's Council has kept it quiet, just as it's very possible that they do have a branch that deals with it.

But we don't actually know any of this, not for sure...it's all guesstimations and assumptions, which makes the situation difficult to analyze. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it actually happened.




*by official canon, I mean information straight from the show itself or from Joss and not information from the novels or comics or games.


[> [> In "EU" there are 2 -- Majin Gojira, 05:07:04 06/18/04 Fri

There is a Slayer-Vamp in the Novels (I do not recall her name), and one in the comics by the name of Yuki Mara (She was turned by the Master).

Yuki Mara is the only one of them to have appeared in anything remotely cannonical--a small guestit in the final story in the "Tales of the Slayer" comic.


[> [> [> Re: In "EU" there are 2 -- Greg White, 06:34:52 06/18/04 Fri

Britta Kessler is a slayer-vamp.Her story in ,,Tales Of The Slayer Vol.1,,is open-ended.It,s entitled,,Silent Screams,,.Her sire was Herr Sahr.Her watcher was Frederich Litchermann.It,s set in 1923 Munich.What happened to her is anyone,s guess.Bringing across a slayer is what vampires like to do most.I,m surprized that it doesn,t happen more often.


[> [> [> [> Re: In "EU" there are 2 -- Majin Gojira, 08:50:43 06/18/04 Fri

"Bringing across a slayer is what vampires like to do most.I,m surprized that it doesn,t happen more often."

Refrase that:

"IF bringing across a slayer is what Vampires like to do, THEN shouldn't it happen more often?"


[> [> [> [> [> I've long theorized that most vampires who put much thought into it wouldn't sire a Slayer -- Finn Mac Cool, 10:19:24 06/18/04 Fri

It's unknown how a Slayer's powers would transfer over to a vampiric form. It's possible they'd lose all their Slayer abilities and, like all other vampires, be given supernatural strength of varying amounts. It's also possible that they'd simply retain their Slayer powers, but it could also be that these powers would be magnified just as becoming a vampire magnifies the strength of normal humans. If it's either of the last two possibilities, then most vampires wouldn't want to sire a Slayer; who would want the competition? You've suddenly brought forth an uber-powerful vampire who, like most vampires, probably doesn't have a problem with killing her own kind to get what she wants. If you want to have a position of power, or eat someone she wants to eat, or simply piss her off, you could wind up a big ol' pile of dust. That would explain why the only vampire we've ever seen express an interest in turning a Slayer into a vampire is Kralik, who was almost totally insane.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I've long theorized that most vampires who put much thought into it wouldn't sire a Slayer -- Rich, 10:30:36 06/18/04 Fri

Also - remember what happened when Dracula encouraged Buffy to taste his blood ? If other Slayers react like Buffy, letting them get that close would be a seriously bad idea.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I've long theorized that most vampires who put much thought into it wouldn't sire a Slayer -- Gyrus, 11:03:14 06/18/04 Fri

That would explain why the only vampire we've ever seen express an interest in turning a Slayer into a vampire is Kralik, who was almost totally insane.

Didn't Angelus say in "Release" that he was planning to turn Faith into a vampire?


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I've long theorized that most vampires who put much thought into it wouldn't sire a Slayer -- Kana, 12:03:33 06/18/04 Fri

If you are referring to the line i think you are referring to then it could be interpreted another way.

Faith: I'm not like you.

Angelus: You will be.

He could have simply meant he was going to kill her, get it? Like a vampire , dead?


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> He could also be refering to..... -- Briar Rose, 12:20:37 06/18/04 Fri

the fact that if Faith had continued on the road she was on before the Fang Gang sprung her, she could have easily turned into the exact same type of malicious and dangerous monster that Angelus was.

It's not hard to see the same type of pathological need to torment and drive insane the people she dislikes. Just look at her need to go after Buffy's BF when she was magically transformed into Buffy. Also before that, when she was all set to kill Joyce, simply because she was Buffy's mother and therefore her death would really hurt Buffy in ways Faith couldn't do directly to Buffy, herself. I guess you could also add her attempts to make it with Angel and her fight to keep her blood away from Angel when he needed it..... Was that self preservation or more about making sure Angel died, which would hurt Buffy tremendously?

I can see where Angelus (the master of emotional attack) would use the past to taunt Faith into believeing that she was destined to fail. Not only in her attempt to get Angelus under control, but also on a broader level. That's what Angelus did the best. Turn a mirror (even if a slightly skewed on) on his victim of the moment, to throw them off balance and make his own plans easier to accomplish.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: He could also be refering to..... -- Kana, 13:53:05 06/18/04 Fri

Good point! When you think about it Angelus could have killed Faith in that fight (Remember the gun) but why go for the kill when you can go for the hurt, which is why he wanted to taunt her as well as beat her half to death.

It's an interesting parallell, Angelus is sadistic because of his lack of ability to love or be loved. In his rage he has to act out. That same time and care that one would put into relationships, he can only translate into torture and inflicting pain onto others. This why Angelus didn't simply just torment those he hated, in fact Angelus hardly hated any of his victims, but he could not care for or love them either so there you have it.

Faith's rage over how people have treated her in the past and as I've said many times before, her poor self-esteem is her personal demon that drove her to do the things that she did. By sinking further into darkness she was attempting to remove her soul, and any hope of redemption (err 'cause like it's hard). So in a way she wanted to be like Angelus and Angel could see that in her. But when she seeks redemption Angelus sees that hope and wants to diminish it.

I don't think Angelus simply intends to throw his victims off balance to makes his plans easier though, i kind of think he gets of on the power of destroying someone in every single way.

Interesting, Angel used that idetification to help Faith, Angelus used it to try and destroy her.


[> [> [> [> [> [> For this I refer to the RPG -- Majin Gojira, 16:14:44 06/18/04 Fri

From the "Monster Smackdown" Supliment, p. 26 (Snipping some of the rules information)

"Slayers have always been a willful lot. That combined with the Slayer's powers may make them immune to being "turned" by a vampire. That's not clearly spelled out in the BtVS TV serues. Indeed, the Fifth season premire suggests the opposite and BtVS stories in other media have explored the idea of a Slayer vamp. We've got some ideas on this subject too (big surprise!).

We are going to say that Slayers are naturally lresistant to being turned into a vampire. They have a natural aversion to anything vampy and the whole hate-hate relationship between vampires and the spirit of the First Slayer going for them. In our view, the demon blood is going to have a hard time survivng its trip through the hostile territory of the Slayer's digestion. Unlike other normal Janes out there, Slayers can make a resisted roll pitting their Will...against a Will...for the invading vampire spirit, to resist the turning. If successful, the ... First Slayerspirit beats the vampire spirit back and keeps it from taking over. Of course, the Slayer may still die, unless a friend is nearby to help out with a blood transfusion or keep her alive long enough to get her to the hospital. If the resisted roll failed, the Slayer will eventually turn into a creature of the night and rise from her grave to terrorize yadda-yadda-yadda...

...A Slayer who dies and returns from as a vampire loses much of her former glory. However, she gets to keep [Snip to: Certain bonuses to strength, dexterity and contitution, as well as her fighting ability, resistance to fear effects and reaction speed, as well as her levels in "Hard to Kill"]. Lastly, she no longer has the ability to sense the presence of Vampires and she may still be attacked by other vampiric adversaries until she's proven she's one of the gang now.

Combinined with the vampire quality benifits (where not duplicated), this makes a former Slayer vamp a pretty tough cookie. We'd expect no less."


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I reeeeeeeeally want to get that book. -- BrianWilly, 18:08:01 06/18/04 Fri

I don't have much pen-and-paper experience, but from what I've heard of the Buffy and Angel RPGs it's really well done and true to the spirit of the shows.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Joss & Co input -- VampRiley, 18:20:59 06/18/04 Fri

Do we know how much imput Joss & Co had on the RPGs? I thought I read something somewhere on this saying one way or the other, but I can't remember it.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> As Far as I know -- Majin Gojira, 04:56:41 06/19/04 Sat

It gets approval from the copyright holders (Fox) and the Creator (Joss)

In order to be published, each one has to be OKed with Fox (Which is the current problem with the latest instalment...Fox hasn't responded yet).

What's great about the RPG's Canonicity is that it is literally an interpretation of what it aired, with warnings to when they knowingly go out of canon.


[> Re: Why is information on STV,s suppressed by the WC? -- lele, 15:36:12 06/21/04 Mon

hmm, neat. Maybe this task force could be the forerunner of the team that went after Faith in BtVS S3,S4 and AtS S1. It would be a nice tie-in. An 'elite' team within the WC, handpicked by whoever heads the council at that time to take care of rogue slayers, possessed slayers, 'turned'slayers, etc. There are rumors of the 'team' but no hard evidence. Maybe they don't even have to be watchers in training, but have to have the 'right' traits(thuggishness hehe) for the job.



Aspects of the Buffyverse - CASTING (Pt 1) -- Darby, 05:07:25 06/17/04 Thu

Well, we can look across the expanse of the Sunnydale Universe with a long lens now, so I intend to take a look at some of the aspects of Television shows and how they apply to the Whedon group. Today - picking folks to say the lines.

Casting is a tremendously important part of successful television, and involves linking individual actors to parts as well as to other actors. Shows like our Whedony favorites, as well as Frasier, The Sopranos, Sex and the City, The Shield, West Wing, even Two-and-a-Half Men, rise above the rest partly on the strength of the entire ensemble. If the mix isn't right, or if only a few casting spots are right (such as Tru Calling or Babylon 5), the overall quality suffers. Buffy obviously has a strong cast, or did initially. How did they put it together? As always, the following is opinion - it's here for other folks to weigh in on.


BASIC REQUIREMENTS.

With Whedon, dialogue is emperor. First and foremost, an actor needs to be able to "get it" with any of these shows. Buffyverse dialogue, although more naturalistic than, say, Mamet or Sorkin, has a rhythm and a presentation that has to sound natural. And, although this does not apply equally to all principals (think of Joyce or Gru), each actor must be able to respond to lines without losing the rhythm (for an example of this not happening, think of Principal Flutie).


REQUIREMENTS FOR PRINCIPAL CHARACTERS (STARTING) -

BUFFY:
Must be able to play mid-teens and drive the male viewers wild. Needs to some extent to embody the Goldilocks aspect of horror-damsels but also be able to kick ass. Must be able to deliver Whedon quips but also handle a lot of dark emotions, as well as be romantic lead. Must be able to generate chemistry with virtually the entire cast. If cast today: Evan Rachel Wood. Maybe Amanda Bynes. Longshot: Hilary Duff. Sarah Michelle Gellar was close to perfect, from the beginning up through Buffy's second death; beyond that, the results are debatable.

XANDER: Also must be able to play mid-teens and be someone others can believably push around, as well as appear physically inept. Useful if they can play academic dumb. Must be able to play funny and to be funny. From actual casting, the latter overbalances the formers. Must have chemistry with BUFFY and WILLOW. Nicholas Brendon probably was a different Xander than any other actor would have been, so much so that it is hard to imagine anyone else adequately filling this role. However, attempts to deepen or stretch the character met with varied levels of success.

WILLOW: Also must be able to play mid-teens and be someone others can believably push around. Must be able to play funny and be able to "fail" funny in a funny way. Must be able to handle nerd-level exposition and believably fake computer usage. Must have chemistry with BUFFY and XANDER. If cast today: Lauren Ambrose, Alexis Bledel. Maybe Mischa Barton (with new hair color), Julia Whelan. Alyson Hannigan fit the mold well, especially in the chemistry generated with the other characters and balancing the shy nerd with the supportive-but-powerful sidekick. She gave the show something to build on with her ability to play a broad range of emotions in a way that reaches the viewers.

GILES: Must be significantly older than other mains. Must be able to play stuffy without being stuffy - must be likeable but someone to poke fun at. Must be capable "straight man." Must be able to handle complex exposition. Must be able to range between physically capable and physically inept. Must have chemistry with BUFFY. Anthony Stewart Head was perhaps the single best casting move, something not that apparent until Giles' role was diminished and then eliminated.

CORDELIA: Must be able to play "stuck up bitch" but add dimensions subsequently. Must seem equal to BUFFY in many ways and capable of generating conflict with her. Must be prepared to set up jokes at the character's expense as well as being capable "straight man." Charisma Carpenter handled the role well, but was a bit too good at playing the outsider - it took her well into Angel to develop any relaxed chemistry with other characters.

ANGEL: Must not seem significantly older than Buffy, although somewhat older. Must be able to drive female viewers wild. Must be able to generate mystery without getting annoying. Must be able to fight convincingly. Must be capable "straight man." Must be capable of being romantic lead. Must have chemistry with BUFFY. David Boreanaz was a lucky find, barely adequate at first but capable of developing, of headlining his own show and navigating a very tricky - and not always completely successful - progression of character as private dick / superhero / submerged evil genius / occasional goofball.

JOYCE: Barely old enough to be BUFFY's mom. Must be capable of exerting authority in a non-authoritarian way. Must be capable of arguing but still being likeable. Emotional connection to BUFFY must be believable. Kristine Sutherland was fine for what she was given, not quite up to typical quippy dialogue but was able to establish a strong familial bond. By The Body, she was Buffy's (and the other teens') Mom.

THE MASTER: Must be able to play evil, powerful, and ancient with a light touch. Must be able to be threatening and non-threatening. Must grasp ironic nature of the character. Mark Metcalf was a critical element to establishing the tone of the series, was able to serve up personality with a character that had not a whole lot to do.

PRINCIPAL FLUTIE: Must be a clueless authority figure. Must be able to be funny without knowing it. Must be able to deliver "touchy-feely" lines without being too creepy. Ken Lerner never quite got Flutie out of the "stock character" zone; his funny lines read funnier than they come off in the episodes.


REQUIREMENTS FOR PRINCIPAL CHARACTERS (ADDED) -

OZ:
Must be able to play mid-to-upper teens. Must be believable as rock guitarist / closet nerd. Must be able to be purposely deadpan-funny. Must have chemistry with WILLOW. Seth Green took over this part - it's difficult to believe that we would have been given laconic minimalist Oz with any other actor playing him. He has difficulty playing any level of dangerous, however.

FAITH: Must be able to play upper teens. Should be equal-but-opposite to BUFFY. Must be capable of playing loose and sexual. Must be able to fight believably. Must be able to play evil without completely losing likeability. Eliza Dushku was well-cast as Faith, but would not have been as good a SMG was at Buffy. As a show main character, she is not as capable of generating connection chemistry with other actors.

SPIKE: Must be likeable badass-rebel. Must have chemistry with DRUSILLA. James Marsters was a gift from the casting gods, which is why he emerged from the depths of demondom and took on multiple incarnations as the show went on. JM can generate chemistry with a piece of furniture.

ANYA: (First) - Must be able to play upper teens. Must have some chemistry with CORDELIA. Must be able to be menacing. (Second) - Must be able to play pathetic / exasperated in a funny way. (Final) - Must have chemistry with XANDER. Must be able to play funny outsider-character-that-comments-on-everything without being too dumb. Emma Caulfield was another find, handling an extremely difficult character type and making her growth believable.

WESLEY: Must be believable as priggish upper-class Englishman, authoritarian without a hint of authority. Must be believable as a bumbler, physically and conversationally. Alexis Denisof seemed at first a poor casting choice - his broad version of Wesley seemed out of place among the deeper characters, and as depth was added in Season 3 it was not even or entirely believable. Whether that was choices made by the actor or the writers is unclear, but they did think enough of him to bring him to Angel with the aim of developing the character. This was when Alexis began to shine, bringing Wesley on a gradual journey to the point where he could have a woman locked in the closet with a bucket, and we accepted it.

RILEY: Must be the embodiment of the All-American Boy and in many ways the opposite of ANGEL. Must be physically imposing enough to balance established power of BUFFY. Must be capable romantic lead. Must be able to play funny and to be funny. Must be able to play conflicted. Must have chemistry with BUFFY. Marc Blucas may not have been the perfect choice, but he was much better than many fans give him credit for. His line delivery was significantly different than the resident actors', which sometimes broke the rhythm of a scene, but with Riley as an outsider that sort of worked. Not as adept with the darker elements of the character, and especially lost connection chemistry with SMG as the storyline got rougher.

TARA: Needs to be earthy. Must be believably shy and quiet. Must have chemistry with WILLOW. With Amber Benson, the chemistry had a subtext that diverted a character arc. Amber never seemed entirely comfortable in Tara's skin, and her delivery of quips never matched the show's rhythm, but she brought an interesting emotional depth that wasn't in the other characters.

DAWN: Must be able to play early teens. Must be able to play bratty little sister with element of danger. Must have chemistry with JOYCE and conflict-chemistry with BUFFY. Michelle Trachtenberg was a good choice, as long as the mystery of Dawn, with its hint of danger, played out quickly. She did not handle shifts of Dawn's "written age" well (the character's emotional age in various scripts was all over the map), but few young actresses could. She handled later developments of the character well, including a tricky transition to sexy.

KENNEDY: Must be able to play late teens. Must be able to play rich brat-type with likeability. Should be sexually aggressive but non-threatening. Must have chemistry with WILLOW. Inari Lymon didn't quite fit this bill, although she got somewhat better at it as time went on.

DOYLE: Must be able to play reprobate sidekick. Must handle sometimes-complex exposition. Must have chemistry with ANGEL and conflict-chemistry with CORDELIA. Glenn Quinn was well-cast, but we'll never know how much beyond the initial Doyle he could have grown.

GUNN: Must be able to play "street" with intelligence. But be able to fight believably, especially with weapons. Should have chemistry with ANGEL and conflict-chemistry with WESLEY. J. August Richards has handled a fair amount of change as Gunn and done it well. He generated chemistry with FRED and then just turned it off, which is not easy. "Lawyer Gunn" never seemed fully integrated into the base character, but that might have been deliberate.

LORNE: Must be able to sing. Must be adept with light insults. Must be able to tolerate heavy prosthetics. Andy Hallett made Lorne likeable and very funny, but his emotional connection to the rest of the group was tenuous.

FRED: Must be able to play very vulnerable and brilliant-but-crazy. Amy Acker gave Fred a voice and established a firm chemistry with most of the other characters. Given a chance to stretch as Illyria, she was more than up to the challenge.

CONNOR: Must be able to play mid-teens. Must be fully believable as fighter. Must be able to play conflicted and dangerous. Must have conflict-chemistry with ANGEL. Vincent Kartheiser was okay as Connor. He played a teen who had grown up with no social connections and little ability to relate to other humans a little too well, which didn't quite gel with the tone of the rest of the group. His rhythm was also very different from the norm, but the return of Suburban Connor showed that these were choices rather than limitations.


There's actually a lot more to discuss. The Big Bads. Wolfram and Hart. The Repeat Characters. The Guests, good and bad. But this seems like enough. More to follow (unless absolutely no one cares, nudge nudge).

TTFN (could Buffy really not know what that means?)


Replies:

[> Re: Aspects of the Buffyverse - CASTING (Pt 1) -- Cheryl, 07:03:14 06/17/04 Thu

There's actually a lot more to discuss. The Big Bads. Wolfram and Hart. The Repeat Characters. The Guests, good and bad. But this seems like enough. More to follow (unless absolutely no one cares, nudge nudge).

There was a time when I thought I'd like to be a casting director because I'd watch something and wonder how the heck they put that group of people together, they were so bad. Other times I'd see someone for the first time in something and *know* they were meant to be a star (for example, Michael J Fox in a guest appearance on Trapper John before Family Ties and Sean Penn in Taps - stars from the get-go). So I think it's fascinating to look back on the casting.

Especially when you consider some of the choices that were made, like:

--SMG originally auditioned for Cordelia
--Julie Benz auditioned for Buffy
--Christian Kane auditioned for Riley

I'm glad they made the right decisions in casting!

I wish I were more familiar with the young stars of today so I could offer some suggestions for who could be cast in which role now. But I have no clue. I know what a lot of them look like, but don't know their names.


[> Some responses -- CW, 07:46:12 06/17/04 Thu

Buffy - SMG really is best when she's chewing up the set. Like the story or not, the Buffy of seasons 6 and 7 who almost never changed her emotional state really didn't allow her to do her thing.

Xander - Nick was a marginal actor when the show started. But, by the time he was playing with his real-life twin in The Replacement, he has improved so much it's almost always possible to tell who is whom, even when they were switching parts between cuts, because Nick was so comfortable with all the extremes of Xander.

Cordelia - I have to wonder if SMG would have stole the show if she'd stayed Cordelia and some one else had been made Buffy. Can't see the show lasting seven seasons that way.

Angel and Anya - At least according to what we've been told both were more a matter of dumb luck and on screen chemistry than planning, so you have to hand it to the actors one way or the other. Emma Caulfield still needs some training in my book. She always expresses the emotion nicely, but she's terrible about making her spoken lines understandable.

The Master - I agree it was a critical part. The Master and his followers as a group really was a leftover from Joss' dumbest ideas from the movie. Mark Metcalf's ability to be less campy than 'scary' probably was the difference between the show being renewed for a second season or not.

Spike - Another example of an actor seizing what was supposed to be a minor roll and shoving it in ME's face.

Drusilla - One Darby skipped - Hard to find another actress both so attractive and so skeletal, so capable of playing such a wise and insane character. It was another part that could have drug the show down quickly if the wrong person had played it.

Riley - I just don't think that ME had a clear idea what they were heading for when the part was cast. Mark was great as cool grad-student guy, okay as John-Wayne-substitute, millitary guy, and just awful as insecure boyfriend guy. I think if they'd looked for that guy who was going to have problems with Buffy down the road instead, the whole part might have come off better.

I largely agree with everything else.


[> a few random (possibly incoherent) thoughts -- radioreverie, 10:13:29 06/17/04 Thu

Have to just make these bullet points as I'm headed out the door. Also, these are just in the order I'm thinking of them.

- Charisma Carpenter's comic timing was always scattershot. Half the time she hit her mark, half the time she was *wildly* off. I was glad to see her gone from Buffy, and her absence from S5 of Angel may be what makes it my favorite of the Angel seasons.
- Emma Caulfield's comic timing was very consistent though, and she didn't tend to overact her hysteria nearly as much as Charisma.
- David Boreanaz definitely improved over the years, but he was the weakest link on Buffy, and continued to be on his own show. The expansion of his comedic skill on Angel was really what saved his role. And the less we mention about the Irish accent, the better.
- I love Alyson Hannigan, and can't think of anyone who plays pain better than her. But I still can't help but wonder what the role of Willow would have been like as played by the original actress, Riff Regan. I think her performance in the pilot was Alyson's equal, and it really would have been interesting to see. Alyson was just always a bit too traditionally pretty for her role, no matter how much I like the way she played it.
- What can I say about James Marsters that hasn't already been said? He brought such a Shakespearean gravitas to that role, and more than any other character, his skill shaped the direction of the show.
- Sarah Michelle Gellar was the actress that grew the most over the course of the series. In the first three seasons, she seemed to be an actress that relied mostly upon certain dramatic tricks to get the emotion across. But by the fifth season, she had truly blossomed. I'd choose her confession to Tara during the latter half of season 6 as my absolute favorite SMG-as-Buffy performance.
- Anthony Stewart Head really was what held the show together in the beginning. He brought so much to what could have been a fairly annoying role in the wrong hands. He was perfect in every respect, and played an incredibly complex and layered character with perfect grace and aplomb.
- Nicholas Brendon played Xander with such a palpable inferiority complex, which was really key to the character. Other actors might have been able to nail the quips, but he really nailed Xander's hidden, impotent rage.
- Amber Benson was soft in all the right ways, but at the beginning she played Tara with too many quirks. The shyness and the stutter were painful rather than endearing, and it wasn't until she started to shed the character's skin a bit that she really shone.
- Michelle Trachtenberg, while annoying to some, really played a thankless character to the hilt. Dawn wasn't just Buffy's little sister. She was mine, in every way. I have to think that all the people who hate her must not have sisters. Because she really got it. Annoying at the worst of times, whiny, entitled...that's what little sisters are. But in the end, they're family.
- Seth Green's Oz was a delight to watch, but ultimately, I'm not sure he could have carried the dramatic weight of the later seasons, and I think his exit was fortuitous. And aside from his lupine affliction, his character was a bit Mary Sue.
- Marc Blucas played his role exactly as written, I think. He was the rebound guy. He knew it. Buffy knew it. We knew it. His disconnection from the group worked very well. He didn't fit into their world.
- Alexis Denisof is what made Angel, in every way. The show would have been unbearable without him. He brought such depth and convincing growth to his character, that it's easy to forget that there never was such a man as Wesley Wyndham-Pryce.
- Amy Acker. Sweet thing, but seemed awfully one dimensional and on occasion on the verge of annoying. So color me amazed when it came to her performance of Illyria. It was nothing short of astounding. Everything, down to her smallest movement, was so perfectly calibrated.
- Eliza Dushku was also scattershot. She was actually better at the more subtle dramatic moments than she was at the bravado, which was supposed to be her defining characteristic. I'm still not really sure how I feel about her portrayal of Faith. She definitely had her moments, but she also really damaged the arc of the 3rd season.
- J. August Richards...I can't say that I ever really warmed to him. His perfomance was lackluster but adequate, though he did start to get a lot better in S5 of Angel.
- Stephanie Romanov got the persona right from the start, though her performance was occasionally shaky and stilted at the beginning. She really became one of the best acted characters in S4 of Angel, and it's really a shame that we didn't get to learn more about her and that she never became a regular cast member. I would have loved to see how she would have interacted with James Marsters.
- Iyari Limon was always going to be hated, so it's hard to judge her performance on an objective level. One of the problems was that she just seemed significantly younger than Willow, both physically and emotionally. She wasn't as bad as most make her out to be, and I think given time her character would have grown.
- Andy Hallett...he was always just a bit too broad for Angel's universe. Though I really liked the world-weariness that he took on towards the end of the series.
- Vincent Kartheiser. I'm really not sure whose fault his character was. He just didn't have layers. A large part of this can definitely be attributed to Vincent's one note performance.
- Juliet Landau...has anyone ever looked so much like a vampire, so completely physically embodied her character? But she wasn't without flaws. She headed towards laughable more than a few times, and her accent was consistent but atrociously inaccurate.
- Julie Benz's whole schtick seemed to be varying the pitch of her voice to signify whether she was good or evil. She had some good moments, but she also had a lot of very hammy All My Children moments.
- Christian Kane's skill is a bit hard to determine. His steely-eyed intensity might have been an accident of anatomy that he had no control over, or it might have been something he was very conscious of. His voice had a grating, monotonous quality which was hard to bear, and he was very sparing with the facial movements. I don't really know how much of this was part of his character, so I can't judge very accurately.
- Adam Busch as Warren was really the most frightening villain one could ask for. Everyone knows a Warren. Everything, his geekiness, his anger, his misogyny, was just perfectly portrayed. His is the only Buffy villain ever to have invaded my nightmares, and with good reason.


And now someone's outside frantically honking the horn for me, so I think I should go!


[> It would be interesting to know how JW believed the various actors implemented his ideas. -- Sophist, 12:42:10 06/17/04 Thu

After all, we each have our own opinions on the various actors; I agree with you in part, with others in part, and have my own opinions in still other areas. I would, however, be interested in knowing if JW felt that certain actors expanded the range of dramatic possibilities, hindered the story line, changed the story line to take advantage of strengths or limit weaknesses, or just hit the role as he intended.

I have read quotes by him which were highly complimentary of AH, JM, SMG, and JL. I can't remember any others off-hand. Even the ones I've read aren't very specific in terms of us understanding how he believed the acting affected the show, although you can obviously make inferences from his comments.

Casting has a huge impact on the success or failure of a show. I wish there were a non-subjective way to measure that impact.


[> [> Re: It would be interesting to know how JW believed the various actors implemented his ideas. -- StarryNightShade, 17:41:57 06/17/04 Thu

According to the commentary with Btvs Season 2 DVD set, David Boreanaz's performance of Angelus possessed by a female ghost in "I Only Have Eyes for You" is what got ME thinking about an Angel spin-off series.


[> [> Whose JL? -- VR, 11:28:26 06/18/04 Fri



[> [> [> Oh, wait. [smacks side of head] Now, it hits me. -- VampRiley, 11:32:11 06/18/04 Fri



[> striking -- manwitch, 11:35:07 06/18/04 Fri

I think one of the most striking things about your list is that everyone on it is staggeringly attractive. Whether that's a Whedon issue, or legacy from the WB, I don't know, but other shows don't demand that even their villains and supporting roles, even small character parts, be played by beautiful people. Who is ugly on Frazier, or Will and Grace, or The West Wing? People may argue, but there will be a list and it will include significant characters. But who's ugly on Buffy? You don't get a less than gorgeous person on Buffy until Warren, really. You could make an argument for Skinner, but I'm not sure it would hold up.

Beyond that, acting isn't a solo act. Writing and directing, even lighting, make-up, costume, and editing, are all part of what we perceive as the actor's performance. The Whedon crew is really pretty phenomenal at bringing all aspects of the art form to bear to create exactly the right characterization. Not that its all as they planned, but the creative synergy with them works.

Look at Sarah Michelle Gellar on the Big Screen. She's ok at best. While the movie Simply Irrisistable is not necessarily the worst story ever told, her performance in it leaves a lot to be desired. She didn't even bother to learn how to use a knife. And the director didn't bother to obscure the fact that she didn't. She's supposed to be this great chef and she can't chop things.

Even Nic Brendan and Emma Caulfield come off as only competent in other endeavors.

But in Buffy, they really come off great. SMG particularly is just fantastic. Its one of the great character creations there's ever been, really. Her performances have been amazing. To name a few of the best: Prophecy Girl, Innocence, Becoming, Ted, Who Are You, Restless, No Place Like Home, The Body, Intervention, The Gift. And the idea that she loses it in seasons 6 and 7 doesn't entirely hold up either, as Afterlife, Life Serial, Once More with Feeling, Dead Things, Normal Again, Seeing Red, Help, Him, and Empty Places or whatever its called, are fantastic. You get her acting consistently at a level she doesn't seem capable of even reaching in another context. Buffy shows a range that SMG doesn't. Its one of the wierd things about acting.

If anything changes in seasons 6 and 7, it would be the writing and the direction. I think the actors do the best they can, but what they're asked to do doesn't always make sense. Whether the writing just wasn't as true to the characters, or whether important development was left on the editing room floor, I don't know. But the actor's seem to stay true in spirit, even if the text doesn't seem quite right. To me the only time where someone was given something simply out of their range, well, it would be Alyson Hannigan as Evil Willow in season 6. But again its direction. She was able to do a scary evil vampire creature in Doppelgangland and it was utterly convincing. But in Season 6, she got caught up in acting scary and evil, and it didn't work. Don't show us scary, be scary. Think of the scariest villains on the show. The Mayor, Drusilla, Glory. None of them play over the top scary. They don't show us how scary they are. In fact, they scare us by not showing us. By playing it down. By being so recognizable and yet so different. If Harry Groener had beeb pushing his chest out and screaming and growling he wouldn't have been scary at all. Evil Willow is at her best in the little scene with Dawn. Its underplayed. Its frightening. But when she does her highpitched scream or stands in her power pose, it just doesn't work.

Same with Oz, in the episode where he cheats, and he stands in macho pose outside the cage. Its just got a silly Tom Cruise quality to it, someone acting tough that you could flick over with a finger. Maybe that's what they were after.

Makeup has an effect as well. The makeup they use on evil Willow flattens out her expressions. Her face seems plastic. Maybe for some reason they thought they wanted that, but it makes her less interesting. The makeup they use on Dawn, as well as lighting and camera angles and costumes, are a huge aspect of how Michelle Trachtenberg comes off as blossoming womanhood in character, not simply as a cute chick on the TV. It makes her performance in Potential or All the Way more convincing, since that's what she's portraying. She's probably, along with Anthony Stewart Head, the best actor on the show, the most transferrable, one might say. But even they need good lines in consistent character, and good direction.

The only really poor acting on the whole series is the trio of season 6 and the atrocious Caleb. But again, writing and direction play the largest of parts. They chose not to write them as real fully fleshed out characters, and encouraged them or allowed them to play cliches. There's no reason why Warren couldn't have been a great character. They just chose not to write it.

By and large, I think it has to be the direction and the consistency of the writing that make all these spectacularly beautiful people come off as exceptional actors. That's the concept I'm arguing for, even if people understandably quibble with my examples. Which is not to say that the actors are just putty. They make it come alive, but they have to have material to work with and some sort of guide. Once they fall into place I think the writers feed off the actors and the actors off the writers, and the direction feeds off and guides all of them.

But so, I'm not sure that any of these people are simply "right" for the part. That's why initially they were seen in different roles. But they showed some flash, some aspect, that worked with a character, and an ability to be directed in that character that probably landed them where they were.

A lot of it is probably luck. We all just got really lucky.


[> [> Oh, and if cast today -- manwitch, 11:44:15 06/18/04 Fri

If Britain stole and adapted our TV shows the way we do theirs, they might give Keira Knightley a go as Buffy. Of course, she'd cost way too much. And she's totally old. Like 19. But I think she's got the qualities one looks for in a Buffy.


[> [> Agree that acting isn't a solo act -- StarryNightShade, 11:47:35 06/18/04 Fri

I remember when Jessica Lange made her debut in King Kong. It was an awful role in a mediocre, at best, movie. Everyone talked about the fluzzie that couldn't act. I don't think anyone would say that now....and given her work with the UN in the Democratic Republic of Congo that anyone would call her a fluzzie.

As viewers we can only judge an individual's acting by seeing how they respond by seeing them in a number of different circumstances. Otherwise we leave ourselves in the "gee, who could of thought so-and-so could act".

SNS


[> [> [> Another Example: Geena Davis -- SS, 14:54:31 06/18/04 Fri

When Geena Davis had her own sitcom, everybody thought it was awful. (Me included)

Then she did Thelma and Louise.....WOW.

And now she is in MENSA, and a few years back almost made it onto the US Olympic Archery Team.


SS


[> Wonderfalls Addendum -- Darby, 15:04:46 06/20/04 Sun

Sara and I were discussing the casting as it applies to some of the other "extended-family" ME shows, and I think that one of the major problems with Wonderfalls was that Caroline Dhavernas, while interesting and attractive, did not present a character with enough likeability to draw the audience in. We didn't care enough about Jaye to want to stick with her, to find out why she was the way she was. The peripheral casting was very good, but the center didn't quite hold - what could have been cute exasperation came out too much like pure snarky. I think that some actresses could have pulled it off.

It's not really all the actress' fault; audience chemistry of this sort is tough to produce. But could you imagine Alyson Hannigan in the part? She could have done it, made us care while reading the same lines, but I don't think SMG could have connected with that role, either - not many folks could. Any other possibilities?


[> [> Re: Wonderfalls Addendum (future Wonderfalls spoilers, well for the DVD anyway) -- Dochawk, 19:18:54 06/20/04 Sun

I agree with you that in the first episode, Jaye was not all that likable, but I certainly did like her by the last aired episode. I had the opportunity over the weekend to see two unaired episodes with Todd Holland and Bryan Fuller (they said Tim Minnear was too shy to come, but he would try to be at the next showings in a month). Anyway, Jaye is much more likeable in the first one (I forget the title, but something about a Lovesick Ass) and its hard not to have your heart hurt for her with what happens in the second episode they showed (Cocktail Bunny(#8).) when (spoiler Alert) Heidi (played by Jewel Staite!!!wonder where she worked with Tim Minnear before?) and Eric are remarried and Jaye's heart is broken.

By the way, in Cocktail Bunny we learn why the animals talk to Jaye, Dr. Ron gives her the monkey and a bunch of other stuff. bryan Fuller also told us that on the DVDs they would point out stuff that had been laid for future episodes and the basic plot lines for season 2 and 3!.


[> [> [> Thanks for all of the info -- Darby, 05:02:07 06/21/04 Mon

The point that I was trying to make was that a show often doesn't get a chance to pull viewers in if there isn't something about the lead that makes an immediate connection.

I think that Amber Tamblyn did that with Joan of Arcadia, a show with both a weird premise and a weird structure. There was something about Joan, as played by AT, that made folks interested, even though she could have been played, from the same script, as much less likeable. I tuned in originally more for the adult leads and some interest in how the show might pull off a near-impossible premise, but it was the cast, pretty much the whole group, that kept me interested - and I don't think my family is that unusual, except that we avoid a lot of the Who Wants a Relationship with a Pedophile?-type garbage on the air. We really wanted to like Wonderfalls, but most of what kept us tuning in there was brand loyalty, the feeling that it was going to get better - the same argument I'll have to use on Sara when the DVDs come out...



Buffy la Cazavampiros -- Cactus Watcher, 08:26:40 06/18/04 Fri

After Darby's DVD Easter Egg question, I suddenly became curious as to what exactly was on the French and Spanish tracks of Once More With Feeling. I took a quick listen this morning to the first section of each, indeed both do have singing in the apprapriate lanuage. The Spanish track is a little odd with some dialog and singing in the origianl English and the rest in Spanish. Both dubbed Willow voices sound like Willow and both are better singers than AH. Buffy's French and Spenish voices also sing a little better than SMG. The Spanish Xander sounds amazingly like NB both singing and speaking, but maybe sings with a little more talent and experience. Both the French and Spanish Taras can sing but neither is as good as the original. The French Tara is a perfect example of someone with too much formal training in singing, and sounds utterly ridiculous singing "I'm under your spell." Never the Gile's nor the Anya's sound much like their counter parts in English, but seem to be adequate singers... Haven't listened to the Spikes yet.


Replies:

[> Dammit! I had a busy night ahead that just got busier!! -- Marie, 08:37:26 06/18/04 Fri



[> [> Update -- CW, 08:58:34 06/18/04 Fri

The Spanish Spike does not attempt 'Let Me Rest in Peace,' but at least muddles through "Walk Through the Fire." The French Spike's voice is so much deeper it's a little strange, but he's also a much better singer than JM palyed nearly side by side.

Genereally the French and Spanish versions do all right with the solos, but the English version is much superior anytime more that one of the Scoobies is singing together as in the "Wish I Could Stay." duet and the group parts of "Walk Through the Fire."

Now, if we could just get a version in Welsh! ;o)


[> How is Buffy's voice in the video games? -- Merle, 15:55:36 06/18/04 Fri

SciFi.com reports that the same actress who did the voice in the games will do it in the animated series. It also mentions the other actors' voices appearing in the pilot. Does that imply that they haven't signed on for a full series, or is it too early to know?


http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2004-06/16/10.00.tv


[> [> To early to know...the series has not yet been picked up -- Majin Gojira, 16:21:02 06/18/04 Fri

If it is, I'd like Sarah to do Buffy...the Video Game voicework for Buffy was passable in the first one, but not so much in the second one--too bubbly.


[> [> [> Re: To early to know...the series has not yet been picked up -- BrianWilly, 17:47:44 06/18/04 Fri

I actually thought Giselle got a little better in the second one; at times I even forgot that it wasn't the "Buffy" I knew speaking. At times, of course. Not always;).

I'd rather have Sarah too, but that seems unlikely now, and if not her then I'm perfectly comfortable with Giselle. As much hope and anticipation as I have for the animated series, I think we'll have to prepare ourselves in advance that it's not going to be like the Buffy that we've known for so many years now.


[> Interesting... -- Ames, 23:00:28 06/19/04 Sat

It's odd the way the Spanish version keeps switching back and forth between Spanish and English with Spanish subtitles. I wonder if it's because they only did the Spanish soundtrack for the shortened version of OMWF, so they have to insert English with Spanish subtitles everywhere a cut was made.

One thing which I noticed in the Spanish and French versions is that the singers are occasionally a little off-pitch in a natural "live" way. By contrast that would seem to indicate that the regular cast recording got some technological help like dynamic pitch correction in post-production.


[> Re: Buffy la Cazavampiros -- Cheryl, 10:15:28 06/20/04 Sun

I wasn't even planning on listening to OMWF in the other languages until you mentioned it. I'm almost up to that episode - it's taking me a lot longer to get through this season, since it wasn't one of my favorites - so now I'll definitely watch all versions.



What other shows are there to watch? -- sogno radiofonico, 14:52:50 06/19/04 Sat

I'm trying to come to grips with the idea of there being nothing to look forward to in the upcoming television season. I really can't shake the conviction that Joss shows are just different, in a way that might alienate me from television forevermore, because nothing else reaches his heights.

I might watch the 4th season of Smallville, even though it is quite possibly the worst show on television. Tom Welling is cute enough for me to forgive that, and it is sadly one of the last genre shows still in production.

I'm disappointed that The WB passed on Dark Shadows. While I was initially quite against it, the cast (Drogyn! *drool*) looked interesting.

I have been watching Six Feet Under, which is well-written and acted, but somehow not nearly as riveting as the Joss troika.

Carnivale was visually interesting but about as involving as getting one's teeth drilled. Partly because many of the scripts were just atrociously bad.

I have heard good things about Deadwood, Dead Like Me, and The Shield. Can anyone elaborate on their charms?

I really hope Marti Noxon's Point Pleasant gets an airing, as it sounds interesting. I think Still Life is also officially dead, yes?

And in January, a new show about a psychic played by Patricia Arquette called Medium will be aired as a midseason replacement, and it sounds at least vaguely interesting.

Desperate Housewives sounds intriguingly dark.

J.J. Abrams' Lost is getting some attention, but as I really couldn't stand Felicity or Alias, I'm not really that hopeful.


And what about shows on DVD? I'm definitely going to buy The Office and Twin Peaks, but what else might some of you recommend?

I'm especially interested in British series that I might have missed her in America...


Nothing else seems to have the combination of gutwrenching drama, wit, and poetry that Joss shows do.


Replies:

[> The Dead Zone, zombies, and wishful genre thinking -- dmw, 15:49:05 06/19/04 Sat

If you want a genre show, what about the Dead Zone? It just started a new season with an intriguingly dark 2-part episode. I've only watched a few episodes of last season in re-runs, but it looks like an interesting show. It's based on the novel, but obviously the story didn't end the same way.

The genre show that I'm wishing for is one based on George Romero's Dead trilogy, showing us how society decays as the epidemic progresses from Night to Dawn to Day. On the bright side, it's a good year for zombie movies, with DOTD 2004 turning out better than expected (if not as good as the original) and the wonderful Shaun of the Dead out in the UK.

Zombies make for a more interesting story than vampires do, so I'm not sure why someone hasn't created a TV series yet.


[> [> I haven't liked what I've seen of The Dead Zone -- raajio no yume, 15:51:23 06/19/04 Sat

It has a very cheesy quality to it, and it's overly episode-oriented.


[> [> Re: The Dead Zone, zombies, and wishful genre thinking -- fresne, 08:51:42 06/21/04 Mon

Definitely, a zombie/fall of civilization series would be fascinating. Although, I'd be prefer to start with the scenario in Dawn, rather than Night, just so we're in the midst of civilization as it falls apart. You'd probably have to slow down the spread of things a bit in order to cover Night, Dawn, Day over the course of a season. Slow the zombies back down to zombie speed, as opposed to zombies on speed. They aren't fast, they are relentless, inexorable and ultimately multitudes. Play with concepts like humans as automatons. Characters in a pressure cooker of behavior. The nature of civilization, is it in our things or in our actions? And so on.


As to Dead Zone, I watched an episode just this morning. I'm very curious to see what the pay off is on the gradual build to Johnny's visions of an apocalypse. There's underlying sense that many of the things Johnny is doing are feeding into a larger coherent story. However, like Johnny himself, we just don't have all the pieces yet.

It still waits to be seen if this is an X-files, we didn't so much have a plan as ambiance, or a Babylon 5, uh, yes, there is a plan. I'm guessing somewhere in the middle. We'll see.


[> [> [> The Dead Zone is a perfect show - possible Spoilers -- Sofdog, 11:43:31 06/21/04 Mon

This season is being called the third but technically it's the fourth. Last year they did a full season followed by an immediate summer season.

The apocalypse arc has been building since the second season when Greg Stilson, the politician, was introduced. The two actually met once as children and that's when Johnny first had that vision of DC. With the guy from the future winking in that situation has gotten ever more intriguing.

I've been in love with the show from day one.


[> [> [> Re: The Dead Zone, zombies, and wishful genre thinking -- dmw, 15:20:14 06/21/04 Mon

Definitely, a zombie/fall of civilization series would be fascinating. Although, I'd be prefer to start with the scenario in Dawn, rather than Night, just so we're in the midst of civilization as it falls apart. You'd probably have to slow down the spread of things a bit in order to cover Night, Dawn, Day over the course of a season. Slow the zombies back down to zombie speed, as opposed to zombies on speed. They aren't fast, they are relentless, inexorable and ultimately multitudes. Play with concepts like humans as automatons. Characters in a pressure cooker of behavior. The nature of civilization, is it in our things or in our actions? And so on.


I think you're right that you'd want to start with Dawn or at least get there quickly, and of course, you'd want to use Romero's classic shambling zombies, not the DOTD2004 sprinters. There's no way anyone's going to survive DOTD2004 for long, and frankly, I think the shamblers are creepier, as there's this sense that they're going to get you eventually, so there's not any point in them running.

I think you'd want to do a season of Dawn, ending with the zombies breaching the protagonists' defences, then moving onto a full Day scenario in the next season. By the way, there are some excellent Romero fan fiction writers at Home Page of the Dead. Rebecca Brock's stories like Junebug and Trailer Park of the Damned are great, and Kurt Warner wrote a good original Dawn style story--Dead in the Water--with a cruise liner instead of a mall, and I love his Christmas short, The Dead of Winter.



[> Re: What other shows are there to watch? -- botitas, 22:40:54 06/19/04 Sat

You are right there is not much out there. However if you have an interest in SciFi, the scifi channel is repeating episodes of Farscape. Farscape has a few similarities to Firefly,outlaws running around the galaxy in a spaceship and if you can get past themesong, you may enjoy it. Farscape was produced in Austrialia and ran for four years on the SciFi channel. Of course since I liked the show, it was cancelled, but I really enjoyed it when it was on and there is to be a new Farscape mini-series later this year. I believe all four seasons are out on DVD, and the Scifi channel often runs three shows in a row late Thursday night.
The Shield is fairly interesting mainly due to its main charater Vic who is a complex mix of good and evil. So the shows blurring of right and wrong has a bit of Joss in it. I believe some of the writers of Angel and/or Buffy now work on The Shield. Another interesting show IMHO is Nip/Tuck. The interactions between the wonderfully faulted characters drives the show and makes it better than most of what's on TV.
Well that gives you a few things to check into but none excite me as much as the Whedon troika, although Farscape's close. Sadly a couple of years ago, I had four programs to record, BTVS, ATS, Firefly, and Farscape, now none.


[> [> Re: What other shows are there to watch? -- Faith, 04:59:43 06/20/04 Sun

Dead Like Me, Tru Calling. Though, I personally like Dead Like Me.,

XxFaith.


[> [> Re The Shield -- KdS, 11:26:26 06/21/04 Mon

The series is, if I understand correctly, largely created by Shawn Ryan, who wrote a number of episodes of AtS2 and was the only ME writer who seemed to feel confident writing Gunn's street milieu.


[> Re: What other shows are there to watch? -- Susan, 07:40:30 06/21/04 Mon

Hey sogno radiofonico,

It's a good question, but there are some quality serial TV shows out there. I'm personlly a big fan of The Shield -- a great anti-hero, complex characters, and story arcs. The first two seasons are out on DVD

I also quite enjoyed 24 -- it won't change the world, but it's fun television. I've found that it's more satisfying to watch it on DVD (all in one gulp, as it were), than to wait for a new episode each week.

I also really like Gilmore Girls -- sharp, snappy dialogue and not as twee as it looks. Apparently Jane Esperanson (sp?) from Buffy is on staff. The first season is out on DVD.

You also might want to give Roswell a try. The first season is out on DVD and Sci-Fi Channel is running it at 4 p.m. starting soon. It's not as complex nor as quippy as Buffy, but it does deal with some interesting teen problems with the alien metaphor. It's well-acted and the set and lighting designs are great.

Good luck!


[> The West Wing -- Gyrus, 08:35:39 06/21/04 Mon

I've been watching this show in reruns on BRAVO and have found that its clever, snappy dialogue is very much like that of BTVS.


[> [> Sports Night! -- Susan, 10:55:45 06/21/04 Mon

Aaron Sorkin's other show, Sports Night, is also full of sophisticated quips and great relationships between and among characters. It's off the air, but now out on DVD.


[> [> [> I adore Sports Night, even though I don't like sports, which says a great deal about its quality. -- Rob, 16:46:52 06/21/04 Mon



[> [> But don't mistake it for the West Wing... -- Dochawk, 17:30:46 06/21/04 Mon

Which is showing new episodes on NBC. Aaron Sorkin is no longer writing the episodes and its really obvious. The stories are there (well except for the lousy way they concluded the kidnapping), but there isn't one writer on staff who is the quality of Drew Goddard, Tim Minnear or any of the ME writers, let alone Aaron Sorkin or Joss Whedon, the two best writers on tv (well who used to be on TV! :( )


[> [> Re: The West Wing -- Jane, 18:00:06 06/21/04 Mon

I loved the West Wing until Sorkin left. Then it seemed to turn into soap opera ala ER, and I gave up on it. Too bad, cause the first 3 seasons were great. It's true, nothing holds my interest like Joss's stuff does. :(


[> I'll give praise to The Shield... -- Seven, 11:43:16 06/21/04 Mon

Shawn Ryan's The Shield is (by default stemming from a certain cancellation) my new favorite show. My friends and I cannot miss an episode. They just wrapped up the 3rd season and have been picked up for a fourth, so no worries on that front.

Some key points to see if it's a show for you:

The show is created by Shawn Ryan, a former writer on Angel

It is a cop show, but it's not. That would be like saying Taxi was about driving people around the city. The show deals with really great characters who take a more realistic (yet highly dramatic) approach to fighting crime.

My favorite aspect of this show, however, is the characters. Here's a run-through:

Captain Acevada: Latino Police Captain of the Farminton District. He is hard at work trying to push his political aspirations and often doesn't perform well at his current position, one he attained through paperwork, not street cred.

The Strike Team:

Vic Mackey: The star of the show. A bulldog of a man. Fierce yet likeable, Mackey has bent the rules to the point where even he can't decipher which way is up. Every episode sees him in a precarious position, his lies and deceptions almost catching up with him.

Shane Vendrell: The Redneck from Hot-lanta and Vic's best friend. When the strike team (four or five plain clothes detectives who "knock down the doors other cops don't want to") was formed, Vic chose 3 of his running buddies. Shane is hot-headed and rascist and often gets the team in trouble. He represents the darker side of Vic.

Curtis "Lemonhead" Lemansky: The heart and consciouse (sp?) of the group. he is the other reflection of Vic. He is a true SoCal surfer guy but a baddass to boot. One of my favorite characters.

Ronnie: The quiet member. Ronnie delivers hardley any lines and is rarely questioned on matters, but this makes his character interesting because no one has any idea what he is ever thinking. He'll make a great character down the line.

Detectives:

Holland "Dutch" Wagonbach: A genious when it comes to figuring out serial killer patters but a social moron. Obviously harrassed as a teen, he is looking for acceptence and finding it nowhere, even after showing off his impressive detective skills. he gets respect from no one. He is my absolute favorite character. It has got to be hard to make such an unlikable person so likeable.

Claudette Whims: Played by the magnificent CCH Pounder, Det. Whims is the most by-the-books detective in the district ... AND she still manages to get results, even if she occasionally manages to piss off the rest of the force. She is incredibly smart and moral. She was after the Captains job, but life threw her a curve.

Officer Danny Sulpher: Training officer to Julian. She often gets unfortunatly caught up in everyone else's dramas because of her position and allegiance the the cop brotherhood.

Officer Julian (I can't remember last name): early on, he's still training. He is a devout christian, yet homosexual, something that conflicts with his strong beleifs and often gets him into trouble.

that's all for now, write back if you'd like more info, or better yet, do yourself a favor and just by the season 1 dvds. I promise they are worth it.

7


[> Re: What other shows are there to watch? -- Dan, 22:54:39 06/21/04 Mon

My Recommedations:

Joan of Arcadia is an interesting family drama that plays more real that you would expect.

I second the Sports Night recommendation which is just great fun and works for both the sports fan and those who could care less.

Coupling, the original british version, is good for outrageous laughs with detailed plotting that is comparable to Seinfeld. Its first three series are all available on DVD.

The Office is very funny but is painful to the point of being difficult to watch for me.

Fawlty Towers is great as well if you haven't seen it.

And if you are willing to branch out to something like an anime series. I would recommend Cowboy Bebop to you.

Dan


[> [> Re: I can't believe I forgot to mention Arrested Development -- Dan, 08:58:28 06/23/04 Wed

One Additional Recommendations:

Arrested Developmet is great comedy. It is very well written and has a excellent cast.

Dan


[> Re: What other shows are there to watch? -- Grant, 14:30:02 06/22/04 Tue

First, since you specifically asked about it, I would probably recommend Deadwood. I really love the show, and only throw probably in there because it is very rough. There is lots and lots and lots of cursing, with some characters using a curse word more or less every other word. I've never seen Oz, but I've heard from some people who have that it pales in comparison to the language used on Deadwood, so there's that. Deadwood also does a lot to show why, despite how much fun it seems to be in the movies, noone in their right mind would actually want to go live in the Wild West.

If you can get past that, it is a great show. It is very well-plotted, and has a number of interesting characters. It also deals a lot with some of the topics focused on in the last few seasons of BtVS and AtS, particularly whether it is all about power. The closest thing to a main character on the show is Seth Bullock, who is more or less the standard Western good guy. He is a former US marshall, who moves to the illegal camp of Deadwood (which is in Indian territory and thus not part of or protected by the United States) to get out of the difficult job of being the law in the Wild West and open a hardware store with his friend, Sol Star. So he begins the series as a character with strong ideas about right and wrong, yet a desire to stop being the guy who is there to enforce those ideas, and also a dangerous temper to complicate matters. The protrayl of his journey this season has been a lot of fun. Meanwhile, the guy who originally seemed to be the main bad guy, Al Swearengin, has had perhaps the most interesting evolution of the series. He is the owner of the Gem Saloon, which is like the one stop shop for vice in Deadwood, as well as being something of a local crime boss running various road agents and other illegal enterprises. He lives in a world in which power really is everything, and you learn throughout the series that he has more or less never met anyone, from his own mother on, who actually believed in anything different. And yet he has turned out to be quite the complicated character, and has even shown some attraction towards a world with strong standards of right and wrong. This is just a brief description of two major characters, but there are literally dozens of others withint the Deadwood world including some notable historical figures like Wild Bill Hickock and Calamity Jane. So Deadwood really has a lot to offer, along with a plot that moves quickly and is very enjoyable. I would definitely recommend the show if you don't mind the sex, violence, and very, very, very bad language. It's first season has just ended, but you can probably find reruns on HBO throughout the summer.

I enjoy Dead Like Me, though I probably would not recommend it quite as strongly as Deadwood. It is a fun show, that somehow manages to make death humorous and also has a lot of fun characters played by capable actors. Chief among these is Mandy Patinkin as Rube, the leader of the group of reapers. All-in-all it is a well-written show that may not have the tremendously deep universe of a BtVS, but otherwise presents some interesting discussions of issues of life and death. It also succeeds in being funny and enjoyable throughout, so you should catch it if you get a chance and give it a try.

One show not on your list that I would recommend is Scrubs. It is simply a hillarious show, and pretty much the only sitcom I can take. It has great dialogue, great acting, and really there is little bad I can say about it. Unlike other sitcoms, it also has character development, and each episode has meaning because they actually deal with issues in the growth of the characters rather than just being about the humor. It also occassionally treads into the dramatic, usually with surprisingly good results. I would probably call Scrubs the BtVS of sitcoms, just for its ability to not only excell at the standard aspects of the genre but to also subvert them in various ways and thus take the entire genre to a new level. So I would very strongly recommend it.

One final recommendation of a show on DVD is A&E's Nero Wolfe. Nero Wolfe, if you don't know, is one of the more famous American detectives created during a series of novels and stories by Rex Stout from the 1930's to the 70's. The epnymous detective is a fat, lazy genius who refuses to leave his home/office on business. The legwork is left to the narrator of the books, Archie Goodwin, who seems like he would fit better in a hardboiled detective novel. One of the central appeals of the book is Archie's enjoyable and wise-cracking narrative, so I would also recommend readin them if you have a chance because only a small amount of it can filter into the television show. Otherwise, the appeal of the series is largely in the interaction between the very different personalities of Wolfe and Archie, and the further interaction of these two with the characters they meet in the course of their investigations. One caveat is that although the Nero Wolfe mysteries belong more to the old-fashioned, puzzle based form of say Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot, the way they actually play out reminds me more of hardboiled mysteries, in that the challenge of the mystery often seems more of an excuse to give the characters something to do and get them moving around, commenting on various things, and interacting with other characters. So don't go in to these mysteries expecting, say, Agatha Christia style puzzles that make you go "Aha!" at the end. Instead, simply sit back and enjoy the characters and you won't be disappointed, particularly because all of the major and recurring characters were cast perfectly, from Timothy Hutton's Archie to Maury Chaukin's Wolfe to Bill Smitrovich as their rival/ally Inspector Cramer. The DVDs of both seasons are now available from A&E, and I strongly recommend them.



What if Joss wrote Peanuts? -- dmw, 15:50:58 06/19/04 Sat

Since Joss is going into an existing comic franchise, what would happen if he started writing something a bit more classic, say Peanuts? How would the Snoopy gang compare to the Scoobies?

Click here and find out.


Replies:

[> OK, now that was just... -- OnM, 19:45:58 06/19/04 Sat

... all too likely.


[> [> I am making an icon of cartoon JW -- Ann, 20:16:49 06/19/04 Sat






Current board | More June 2004