May 2002
posts
Go check
out the latest updates at my "Annotated Buffy"
site... -- Rob, 19:28:24 05/03/02 Fri
I have done a great deal of work on my site over the past
week or so, and it is now an honest-to-goodness truly
annotated "Buffy," because there is now a Welcome to the
Hellmouth transcript, with links to each note, and each note
links back to the transcript. It's a very, very cool new
layout...and I want to thank d'Herb very, very much for
helping me work it out...and help make the site even
better!
The new WttH page is at
http://www.ivyweb.com/btvs/annotated/wtthmaster.html
Check out the Site Updates page for the other updates.
Enjoy...and please give me feedback! :o)
Rob
[>
Btw, I'm currently working on the "Harvest"
update...Should be up by the weekend. -- Rob,
19:29:55 05/03/02 Fri
[>
Well, I think it's cool! -- d'Herblay, 04:58:11
05/04/02 Sat
But I would, wouldn't I?
It is important to note that the current layout requires
frame-enabled browsers. I will make a suggestion for
something Rob can put between <NOFRAMES> tags sometime
this weekend.
[> [>
Thanks...that would be great! -- Rob, 06:39:45
05/04/02 Sat
Also, you'll notice that I forgot to put the coding to break
out of frames on the top navigation bar from the WttH page,
but I'll target it to the _top thingy and fix a few more
glitches over the weekend. ;o)
Rob
[>
Re: Go check out the latest updates at my
"Annotated Buffy" site... -- redcat,
10:40:39 05/04/02 Sat
Rob, the annotations are great! Thanks for all the hard
work (and to d'H as well.)
[>
Re: Go check out the latest updates at my
"Annotated Buffy" site... -- Slain,
13:23:10 05/04/02 Sat
Excellent, Rob! I've linked to you on my site. I'm pleased
that you've got the DVD commentary quotes, too, as Joss
always says so many valuable things in then. 'Innocence' is
also a great commentary, as he talks about feminism in great
detail.
[> [>
Thanks, guys! Glad you're enjoying! :o) -- Rob,
23:07:09 05/04/02 Sat
[> [>
Oh, and Slain... -- Rob, 23:42:48 05/04/02
Sat
Yeah, I am so happy for the DVD commentaries...they are such
a wealth of information! I only wish Joss did one for every
episode! I can't wait to get my greedy little hands on the
season 2 set for the commentary goodness of
"Innocence"...!!! I read the transcript of it here, but I
really can't wait to hear it coming right from the
horse's...I mean, the Joss', mouth!!
Rob
P.S. And thanks for the link! :o)
Joss Talks Buffy
Season 7 / Angel Season 4 (no spoilers)!! -- Rob,
20:19:03 05/03/02 Fri
I got this from Watch with Wanda at E!Online.com here:
Buffy Creator Joss Whedon Talks Climaxes, Criticism and
Angel's Fate
Wanda: Sounds like you've been insanely busy with all
your projects this season. [Buffy producer] Marti Noxon said
you're like a pig in poo...
Joss: [Laughs.] Sounds like Marti. And yeah, I am like a pig
in poo.
Has it been hard to be less involved with Buffy?
I haven't been as hands-off as people like to think. This
season, I was there, except when I was shooting the Firefly
pilot. But yeah, everything I saw that I could have made
better or had a different vision for, I go, "Aaaarrgh!" But
then, I've always done that.
This season has been fantastic, as usual, but it has had
a darker tone. To be honest, some of the episodes depressed
the hell out of me.
This is where we wanted to go...into the dark of the woods.
But next year is going to be very different. We're going
back to our original mission statement. Back to the positive
view of the joy of female empowerment. This year was about
adult life and relationships--and making really, really bad
decisions. Next year will still be scary and different and
strange, but it will be more of a positive outlook. People
will stop abandoning Dawn. Willow won't be a junky anymore.
Buffy won't be dead.
Your theme for this year was: "Oh, Grow Up." Do you have
one for next year?
Yes. It's: "Buffy Year One." It's let's get back to the joy
of this very simple concept, that this silly woman no one
takes seriously is actually the most powerful woman in the
world.
How long do you see Buffy lasting? How far have you
planned ahead?
We basically plot every year as a natural ending point of
the show. I loathe stories that end in the middle, so we
wrap it up at the end of the year. Every year. So, next
season, we've figured out the whole arc--who the bad guy is,
what the general message is. Next year will be the end. And
if there's another season, that will be the end, too.
What about Angel? Are you worried about it being picked
up?
No. The WB will pick it up again. I absolutely think so.
We'll be staying on the WB for at least another year.
Obviously, if the WB drops it, we could do more crossovers.
But apart from that, it doesn't really matter.
Speaking of crossovers, any hope for Buffy and Angel
diehards?
What I always say is: Guys, they're on two different
networks. There's no way. Buffy and Angel physically could
not exist. If they were on the same network, we would have
done the Buffy-Spike thing anyway. But we probably would
have had a crossover moment when they would go, "You're
sleeping with whom?!" It became difficult in the third year
to truly bring change to Buffy and Angel. People want to
watch change. Growth. They want climax.
And we've certainly gotten "climax" with Buffy and Spike.
Let's talk about Angel, which has been so great this season.
Can you talk about the motive for giving him a son?
We wanted to put him in an emotional space. To give him
something that is less about day-to-day living. He needed
something to connect to emotionally. Plus, I just love the
idea of this embarrassing effect of a one-night stand.
Why did you decide to make Connor grow up at lightning
speed?
What are you going to do? Have a baby running around? I
don't think so. There were advantages. He got to have a
baby. He got to have his child taken away. And then he got
to have a full-grown son. That's the beauty of it being a
fantasy show.
Buffy and Angel fans seem to be more critical than ever
this season. Does that affect you?
It always affects me. At the same time, I need to give them
what they need, not what they want. They need to have their
hearts broken. They need to see change. They hated Oz, and
then they hated that he left. These things are inevitable.
If people are freaking out, I'm good. If people are going,
"Hmmm...well, that was fine," I'm fucked.
Rob
[>
thanks again, rob. much appreciated! -- Can I be
Anne?, 20:26:55 05/03/02 Fri
[>
Who hated Oz??? -- MayaPapaya9, 22:36:22
05/03/02 Fri
Dude I fell in love with Oz the moment he first showed up
onscreen! But anyways, I'm really happy with what Joss said
would be the message of season 7, Buffy Year One. I'm
excited. Okay back to SAT studying now :(
[> [>
Re: Who hated Oz??? Not Me!! -- Sloan Parker,
06:27:49 05/04/02 Sat
Come on it was a really cool character! Ok he wouldn't talk
much but that's just the way he was! I don't know anybody
that hated him, really so I wonder where Joss saw that fans
couldn't stand him. He was the best, and the beast! lol
Anyway I'd like to see him back on the show for at least one
episode. Could it be possible for him to come back and help
Willlow going on the right side again? I wish!
Sloan
X
[> [>
Willow/Xander 'shippers -- Cleanthes,
07:43:24 05/04/02 Sat
[> [> [>
Really?!?!?! -- Valhalla, 20:16:22 05/04/02
Sat
Xander always treated Will so badly. Even if Oz hadn't
become the epitome of laconic coolness, he treated Willow so
well, and acted like a grown-up from the beginning. Ah,
well, different strokes...
[> [> [> [>
Re: Really?!?!?! -- Claire, 20:33:30 05/04/02
Sat
In an interview with Dreamwatch Joss said he got some
comments from fans asking what Oz was doing in the show and
saying they wanted to see Willow with Xander. Apparently
that was the reason Joss wrote the scene in Innocence with
Willow and Oz in the van with Oz refusing to kiss Willow to
make the audience fall in love with Oz. He commented that he
tried to do the same with Riley (I assume that is in
reference to Riley punching Parker?) but the audience became
too cynical and complained ME were just trying to make Riley
likeable. In response to that he asked "what exactly do you
expect me to do" regarding new characters (lol good
question). Anyway I doubt there was that much critisicism of
Oz as I have never heard it. Perhaps Joss just got a few
complaints from the same people a lot? He could have been
more sensitive to critisicism in season 2. I think he's
become a bit more jaded since than and is taking the
attitude that he'll write his story as he sees fit and it's
up to the audience whether they follow it or not.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Really?!?!?! -- Cleanthes,
05:37:48 05/05/02 Sun
Thanks for explaining, Claire. I think your speculations
are correct. Back years ago, I only read the usenet group,
and I'm thinking it only started between seasons 2 & 3?
(anyone remember?) No matter - unfortunately for the bulk
of the fans, the producers & writers are most likely to hear
from the loudest and shrillest fans, by the nature of
things. And the loudest and shrillest are not
representative.
With regard to Riley and trying to make him "likeable" to
fans of the shrill sort - :_:_: - I hope that's not true
because it would represent a tremendous lack of
understanding of the concept of Irony on Joss's part. The
artist must be related ironically to his writing. If not,
the objective (in this case, the "likeability of Riley")
could not dominate. The shrillest of critics absolutely do
not understand irony whatever. So, doing anything at all
except mockery in response to them will always fail.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Really?!?!?! -- Miss Edith, 17:06:42
05/05/02 Sun
I think the difference in successully making Oz popular and
not so much with Riley was all about subtly. The Oz/Willow
scene in the van was cute and charming. The scene with Riley
punching Parker insulted my intelligence as it made its
point wiht a sledgehammer. The Parker romance was obviously
intended so that the audience would cheer on Buffy getting
it together with a nice normal guy who punched out nasty
Parker and was Buffy's hero. They just tried to make Riley
heroic. Unfortunately I could never accept Riley becasue of
MEs unbelievable stuppidy in airing IWRY during season 4
when Buffy was supposed to be moving on with Riley. Not only
did it remind us of the intensity of B/A it also concluded
with Angel deciding Buffy couldn't be with a human. Riley
eventually proved this in season 5 when he was jealous of
Buffy's superior strength just as Angel thought he need to
protect Buffy in IWRY. Perhaps Riley was never meant as a
long-term boyfriend but was always planned as the rebound
guy?
[> [>
the anti-werewolf faction -- skeeve, 07:54:26
05/06/02 Mon
Some folks think that werewolf Oz needs a silver bullet the
same way that Xander thinks that Angel needs a stake.
[> [>
Re: Who hated Oz??? -- maddog, 08:43:32 05/06/02
Mon
I don't see why anyone would have hated Oz at first. He
wasn't impeding on any relationship Willow was having. I
see someone put "Willow/Xander Shippers" and that's nice and
all, but it was clear that while Xander was ignoring her in
favor of the Buffster, she finally got the clue on moved on.
As for the anti wolf faction...that's just sad. It made his
character unique.
[> [>
I sure didn't. And I hope SAT's went well, I had a lot
of friends taking those on Sat... -- yuri, 21:10:01
05/06/02 Mon
My friends that are fellow seniors and I all burned our SAT
study books and extra SAT papers and whatnot in a big
bonfire on the beach after we took our very last ones in
November. Beautiful sight. Now that I think of it, we
probably should have donated the books or something. Huh. Oh
well, hindsight's a bitch.
[>
:: Buffy Season 6 and Angel S3 references in that
article, BTW ;-) :: -- Slain, 08:08:03 05/04/02
Sat
Many thanks for that article - Joss interviews are worth
their weight in chocolate.
When Joss said 'everything I saw that I could have made
better or had a different vision for, I go, "Aaaarrgh!"' I
couldn't help but think of 'Wrecked'. While Joss does say
that he's been involved this season, it seems to me that
around the time of 'Wrecked' he let things slip, and that's
effected, or possible affected, the whole season.
So the idea of Buffy Year One does excite me, because that's
what I'd hoped for - that they'd get back to the original
ideas of the show, and stop getting too involved in the soap
opera. I think that's a fairly universal feeling among fans,
even those, like myself, who've been enjoying most of Season
6.
[>
what's your definition of spoilers Rob? -- mucifer,
09:42:20 05/04/02 Sat
so how is this not a spoiler??
Next year will still be scary and different and strange,
but it will be more of a positive outlook. People will stop
abandoning Dawn. Willow won't be a junky anymore. Buffy
won't be dead.
am i missing something? sounds pretty spoilery to me.
[> [>
Re: what's your definition of spoilers Rob? -- Rob,
23:05:57 05/04/02 Sat
I don't see anything spoilery about that statement, because
it doesn't make specific references to anything in
particular. That was all basically a sum-up of the direction
the show is going in. I don't see "scary, different, and
strange" or "positive outlook" as a spoiler, not any more or
less than Joss announcing last year that "Oh, Grow Up" would
be the theme of the sixth season.
Joss hates spoilers....HATES spoilers, and he revealed this
stuff. If Joss deems it not spoilery enough to give to his
viewers, I gotta concede to him. You basically have to
figure that anything any of the ME people say in an
interview about the future of the show will not be that
exact. Last season, we were told this season would be
lighter...Well, uh, that didn't happen, did it? ;o)
"People will stop abandoning Dawn."
Not too spoilery.
"Willow won't be a junkie anymore."
Only one that could be interpreted as a little spoilery, but
what exactly does this sentence mean? Does this mean she
stops using magic all together? Learns to only use it in
moderation? Remember, this is a drug metaphor, but it parts
in the respect that magic can have good things that help the
world...And, again, Joss reveals this now, I would say it's
fine.
"Buffy won't be dead anymore."
Again, not a spoiler.
Rob
[> [> [>
Well, they *could* be interpreted as spoilers (Warning:
Potentially Interpreted SPOILERS!) -- mundusmundi,
12:40:47 05/05/02 Sun
For those who had heard the rumor of a Scooby death this
season, they do narrow down the list of possibilities.
Unless of course Whedon's choosing slippery language again:
"Willow won't be a junky anymore (because she's dead!
Mwahahahaha.)"
[> [> [> [>
Re: Well, they *could* be interpreted as spoilers
(Warning: Potentially Interpreted SPOILERS!) -- Rob,
15:11:28 05/05/02 Sun
LOL...and his repeated statements, from the start, that he
would *never* kill Willow.
Dawn, also...maybe they stop abandoning her because she is
also...dead!!! Mwahahahahahahaha!!!
Rob
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: This is spoiler! (Warning: Not Potential It is)
-- Dochawk, 16:06:36 05/05/02 Sun
from what he is doing to Willow, he would be better off
killing her
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: This is spoiler! (Warning: Not Potential It is)
-- Rob, 22:42:55 05/05/02 Sun
Until next year of course, when, Joss seems to indicate, the
characters will be a little bit happier than this year.
;o)
Rob
[>
Re: Joss Talks Buffy Season 7 / Angel Season 4 (no
spoilers)!! -- Rattletrap, 09:44:05 05/04/02 Sat
Thanx Rob. A great pleasure to read, as are all of Joss's
interviews. I especially love his last statement.
[> [>
I agree...The last 2 lines are very quote-worthy! -
- Rob, 14:26:54 05/06/02 Mon
[>
Re: Joss Talks Buffy Season 7 / Angel Season 4 (no
spoilers)!! -- maddog, 08:39:26 05/06/02 Mon
I find it amusing that he says if they have a good story to
tell for an 8th season that they'll do it while I read
articles about Sarah and Nick and they both say, "contracts
run out, we're done after season 7".
[>
Re: Joss Talks Buffy Season 7 / Angel Season 4 (no
spoilers)!! -- mundusmundi, 15:56:05 05/06/02 Mon
Nice interview. Not sure I buy this part though:
We basically plot every year as a natural ending point of
the show. I loathe stories that end in the middle, so we
wrap it up at the end of the year. Every year. So, next
season, we've figured out the whole arc--who the bad guy is,
what the general message is. Next year will be the end. And
if there's another season, that will be the end,
too.
I can see the season finales of S1, S3, and especially S5 as
"natural ending points," whereas S2 and S4 conclude more
open-endedly. If this trend continues, S6 will end on a
slightly ambiguous note. I have always liked the fact that
each season is complete in and of itself.
[> [>
While 'Angel', on the other hand, always leaves'm
hanging... -- Masq, 16:18:20 05/06/02 Mon
Classic Movie of
the Week - May 3rd 2002 -- matching mole & OnM,
21:43:50 05/03/02 Fri
*******
Hey! Where’d he go??
............ anonymous
*******
Note:
This is usually the spot where your regular movie man does
his best to open the weekly flick pick with
some witty or thought provoking excerpt or quote from
someone far more clever than he, but this time
around he’s just too doggone tired to do so. Tired or not,
he did at least plan ahead, and besides, who
needs witty precedent when you have talent like matching
mole available?
So as you did before, please do again, and give a warm
welcome to a fellow Buffyphile/cinemaniac who’s
once again gracing my space.
My sincerest thanks to mole for helping me out here, and for
this fine review he’s written for a truly
classic Classic Movie. If you haven’t viewed this
film for a long time, just like yours truly, it’s time
to visit the video store and correct that injustice. And if
you’re a noir newbie, then are you in for a
treat!
Enjoy!
~~~~~~~
In a week that has apparently been filled with discussions
of the latest (and not re-runnest!) from BtVS, get
ready for a Buffy-free Classic Movie of the Week column!
Instead, your humble guest reviewer intends to
relate his choice for movie of the week exclusively to
Angel: the series. Although a tendency to root for
the underdog may have influenced this decision, the primary
reason is far more pragmatic. I haven’t seen
‘Entropy’ yet, nor will I until the USPS brings me a certain
package from the east coast. So if you were
expecting a discussion relating a classic of the silver
screen to whatever happens in ‘Entropy’ you will be
disappointed, your hopes dashed by my spoiler free status
and lack of cable TV.
I have come across statements about the ‘noir’ nature of AtS
many times in the months since I first
discovered ATPoBtVS. This isn’t too surprising-- the
superficial resemblances between AtS and classic
film noir are fairly obvious and act to accentuate the
fundamental thematic similarities. Angel is a show in
which the hero frequently commits un-heroic acts, and
further, is placed in the most stereotypical of noir
settings, a detective agency in California. Despite the sun
drenched reality of the locality, most of the show
is filmed in dim, gloomy light. In a part of America that
is typically associated with trendy newness, we are
constantly confronted with old and often decrepit
architecture that often dates back to the 1930s, 40s,
and
50s-- the ‘golden’ (?) age of noir. There are no strip
malls, freeways, and parking lots in Angel’s LA, or at
least we don’t see them in other than the high-speed
‘flyover’ shots the photographers use as scene intros
or transitions.
But these are merely surface similarities. Film Noir
is an almost entirely American-originated genre
tied to a particular historical period. It started in the
late 1930s, towards the end of the depression,
flourished in the 1940s and the early 1950s, then slowly
faded away with the passage of time. Noir’s
shady, violent, obsessive, uncertain world was a response to
the social upheavals caused by the Great
Depression and WW II. A world of stable, small towns and
neighborhood life is replaced by drifting
populations and big city anonymity. The ‘standard’ themes
of Noir include: the power of women to
manipulate men, the capricious nature of social forces that
can doom an individual through no fault of his
own, the uncertainty of personal relationships, the strong
possibility of betrayal by those closest to you,
how well intentioned actions can go awry, and the
destructive power of personal obsession. Does any (or
how about all?) of this remind you of AtS?
It is surely not an accident that the far more ‘personal’
big bads of BtVS are replaced in AtS by the
‘impersonal’ evil of Wolfram and Hart with its mild-mannered
and constantly changing supervisors. Darla
and Lilah are powerful, manipulative women who dominate
their more timorous male counterparts in the
proud tradition of Barbara Stanwyck. Angel’s actions in the
service of good are constantly being
sidetracked and misdirected both by his obsessions (Darla,
the desire for revenge on W&H, Connor) and
by random events from an apparently uncaring universe. And,
the relationships between the AI staff and
Angel himself are constantly affected by the knowledge that
the ultimate betrayal is ‘one moment of perfect
happiness’ away.
Recent events on AtS relating to the character of Wesley
form a classic film noir plot. Wesley is cut off
from his society and his friends at AI. He sees events
unfold around him-- the loss of Fred to Gunn, the
prophecy predicting Angel’s infanticide, the tightening of
Holtz’s plot around Angel-- but he is helpless to
change them. He becomes singularly obsessed with the
prophecy and his obsession prevents him from
averting a tragedy. Instead, he becomes one of its prime
instigators. He sees himself forced to choose
between two evils, to betray Angel in one way or another.
His obsession prevents him from seeing any
other option.
Which brings me to the film under consideration: The
Third Man, released in 1949 and
directed by Carol Reed. This film is not, strictly
speaking, an example of film noir. My reference
material
(Film Noir: An Encyclopedic Reference to the American
Style by Alain Silver and Elizabeth Ward)
defines film noir as a strictly American form, including
only films made in America with American settings.
The Third Man is a film produced by an American
studio, and its two lead actors (Joseph Cotton
and Orson Welles) are indeed American. But the film is set
in Vienna, the screenplay was written by the
decidedly non-American Graham Greene, and all of the
characters other than those played by Cotton and
Welles are European. Still, it contains many classic noir
elements and imagery and its themes of conflicted
loyalty, obsession, betrayal, and the consequences of
actions would fit in well in any ‘true’ film noir as
well
as AtS.
A brief warning for those of you who have not seen
this film: It is impossible for me to discuss it
without revealing its central plot development. If you wish
to remain unspoiled (and in my opinion the plot
is definitely worthy of being seen spoiler free) then read
no further-- just go out and rent or buy it and take
a look for yourself, I can all but guarantee it’ll be worth
your while.
The Third Man is set in Vienna immediately after WW II, a
time when the city is controlled by four
occupying forces: the French, British, Americans, and
Russians. Each force has its own zone, along with a
central zone under joint administration. The city is a
complex stew of cultures, institutions, and
economies, both official and unofficial that exist somewhat
independently. There is no single authority to
appeal to or to fear, there are instead many. Does
this sound similar to the LA of AtS with its
pervasive demon influence and ongoing interaction among many
different species?
Joseph Cotton plays a naïve and economically desperate
writer of western novels with the improbable first
name of Holly. He arrives in Vienna with the promise of a
job in advertising from his boyhood friend
Harry Lime. Upon arrival, he discovers that Lime is dead,
having been killed in an auto accident. The
British authorities also tell Holly that Lime was a
racketeer and they consider his death a blessing. Holly
is
horrified by their indifference and pursues his own
investigation into Lime’s death with the intent of
discovering the truth and clearing his friend’s name. His
suspicions deepen after discovering that a
mysterious ‘third man’ was present at the accident-- a man
who was not mentioned by any of the official
witnesses. The first two-thirds of the film present a
gripping portrayal of Holly’s investigation, driven by
his obsessive loyalty to his friend.
At this point Holly makes two key discoveries that turn his
world upside down. The first, surprising to
him, but not to the viewer, is that Lime was every bit the
evil racketeer that the British made him out to be.
His dilution of stolen penicillin has already killed many
and doomed many others to lingering illness and
even madness. The other, as much as surprise to the viewer
as to Holly is that Lime is still alive. Holly’s
friend faked his own death, Lime himself was the’third man’
at the accident scene. At this point the themes
of loyalty, betrayal, and the price of actions that we have
seen in AtS over the past few months are played
out in the final 30 minutes or so of The Third
Man.
Lime has betrayed both his friend Holly and his (Lime’s)
Czech lover Anna (Alida Valli) by hiding his true
nature from them even to the extent of trying to get them to
help him in his penicillin racketeering without
their knowledge. On the other hand he is motivated by a
genuine desire to help them both as long as he
isn’t inconvenienced too greatly. He doesn’t see what he
has done as betrayal but his actions have turned
their worlds upside down. The investigation into his death
has endangered Anna’s tenuous status in
Vienna and triggered Holly’s obsession.
Holly and Anna are each faced with the prospect of betraying
Lime, both to the authorities and with one
another. Which is the greater crime: allowing the monstrous
Lime to go free and unpunished or the
betrayal of a friend/lover who has reached out to help you?
Should you deny yourself love with someone
truly good out of loyalty to someone who deceived you? The
cost of Holly’s betrayal is the blood of his
friend on his hands and the loss of Anna from his life.
Anna loses the promise of safety and security by
rejecting the help of the man who betrayed her former
lover.
Holly and Harry Lime can be seen as mirror images of one
another, much like Angel and Angelus. This
relationship is accentuated by the similarity of their first
names. Anna calls Holly Harry at several points,
emphasizing the close relationship of the two men and her
conflicted feelings about them. Holly is also
Wesley, seeking to prevent Lime’s destruction and causing it
in the end. He also seeks the love of a
woman whose heart belongs to another.
I would rate this as one of the greatest films of its type
that I have ever seen. The plot, dialogue, and
characterization are as magnificent as one would expect from
an author like Greene. Vienna comes alive
as a fragmented universe of crumbling buildings and
anachronistic elegance. The night scenes on the
cobblestone streets are evocative of menace. Faces appear
out of shadows, shadows move without
apparent association with bodies, the population vanishes
leaving an empty world looking only too ready
for some demon casinos and brothels. Instead we get
something far worse, Harry Lime as played by Orson
Welles. Welles doesn’t appear until the film is well over
half way through and actually has less screen time
and dialogue (there is only one scene in which he has more
than a couple of lines) than many minor
characters. But he fully lives up to the expectations
placed on his character in the first hour or so of the
film. Welles creates a figure of menace, a monster, whose
evil is generated merely by a bland indifference
to everyone’s welfare but his own and the initiative to act
upon that indifference. Lime would have made
an excellent chief executive at Wolfram and Hart.
The film also has a certain wry humour to it. The film’s
theme music is played on a zither, a most
un-noirlike instrument. It is almost, but not quite,
jaunty. Holly’s adventures in Vienna are punctuated by
bursts of absurdity. For all the tragedy of his situation,
Holly is also a ridiculous figure and we are never
completely allowed to forget this. Again, does this seem
reminiscent of a certain vampire with a soul with
hair that sticks straight up?
E. Pluribus Noirus, Unum,
matching mole
*******
Technical Key Lime:
The Third Man is available on DVD. (Mole didn’t say
what kind of media his review copy was on,
but if you’re gonna make an issue of it, ya big mook, then
I’ll just have to get out the brass knuckles and...
oh, wait, that’s a gangster movie cliche, sorry.
Never mind! ;-) )
The film was released in 1949, and running time is somewhere
between 93 and 104 minutes (depending on
the version, it seems). I don’t know what the original
theatrical aspect ratio was, but considering the time
period in which it was made, it is likely either 1.33:1 or
1.66:1. The IMDb lists the original theatrical sound
mix as ‘Western Electric Recording’. (Yeah, it is that long
ago). Writing credits go to Graham Greene and
Alexander Korda for the main story, apparently with some
contributions by Carol Reed and Orson Welles,
the latter two uncredited. The film was shot in black &
white (I certainly hope so! Genuine Noir in
color??) with cinematography by Robert Krasker and
film editing by Oswald Hafenrichter.
Cast overview:
Joseph Cotten .... Holly Martins
Alida Valli .... Anna Schmidt
Orson Welles .... Harry Lime
Trevor Howard .... Major Calloway
Paul Hörbiger .... Porter
Ernst Deutsch .... 'Baron' Kurtz
Erich Ponto .... Dr. Winkel
Siegfried Breuer .... Popescu
Hedwig Bleibtreu .... Old Woman
Bernard Lee .... Sergeant Paine
Wilfrid Hyde-White .... Crabbin
*******
A little info on Graham Greene, courtesy of the IMDb::
Birth name: Henry Graham Greene
Date/location of birth: October 2nd 1904, Berkhamsted,
Hertfordshire, England
Date of death: April 3rd 1991
Sometimes Credited As: Henry Graham
Writer - filmography:
Quiet American, The (2002) (novel)
Donnie Darko (2001) (story-- The Destructors)
Double Take (2001) (story-- Across the Bridge)
End of the Affair, The (1999) (novel)
This Gun for Hire (1991) (TV) (novel-- A Gun For Hire)
Strike It Rich (1990) (novel-- Loser Takes All)
Tenth Man, The (1988) (TV) (novel)
May We Borrow Your Husband? (1986) (TV) (story)
Monsignor Quixote (1985) (TV) (novel)
Dr. Fischer of Geneva (1985) (TV) (novel)
Heart of the Matter, The (1983) (TV) (novel)
Honorary Consul, The (1983) (novel-- The Honorary Consul)
Shocking Accident, A (1982) (story)
Human Factor, The (1980) (novel)
England Made Me (1973) (novel)
Travels with My Aunt (1972) (novel)
Yarali kurt (1972) (novel-- A Gun for Hire)
Comedians, The (1967) (novel)
Stamboul Train (1962) (TV) (novel)
Power and the Glory, The (1961) (TV) (novel)
Our Man in Havana (1959) (also novel)
Fallen Idol, The (1959) (TV) (story-- The Basement Room)
Quiet American, The (1958) (novel)
Short Cut to Hell (1957) (novel-- A Gun for Sale)
Saint Joan (1957)
Across the Bridge (1957) (story)
Loser Takes All (1956)
End of the Affair, The (1955) (novel)
Heart of the Matter, The (1954) (novel)
Stranger's Hand, The (1952) (story)
Third Man, The (1949) (story)
Fallen Idol, The (1948) (also story)
*******
Miscellaneous & The Question of the Week:
OK, this last weekend was the first time since seeing
Lord of the Rings back in late January that
I’ve actually gotten out to see a movie in an actual movie
theater, but it was a really good one, so I’m
going to pass it along.
I highly recommend that you check out Changing Lanes,
with Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson.
This is not at all what you may expect it to be, and that’s
what makes it so great. The ending was just a
little on the unrealistic side, considering what comes
before for nearly all of the rest of the film, but
please
don’t hold that against it, 95% of Changing Lanes is
wonderful.
Now, odds are that I may be back at the helm in my entirety
next Friday, I even have a pretty good idea
what film I am going to review based on some spoilery info I
innocently stumbled upon (yeah, right!) at the
Trollup board and the C&S last month. This is a film I’ve
wanted to cover for over a year now, but it just
never seemed to be a perfect match up with any eps. The
decision won’t be final until after next weeks eps
of course, but... well, you’ll just have to wait.
Now the usual suspects.. err, Question:
Do you get time to get out to watch all the movies that you
are interested in seeing in theatrical release, or
do you find that you have to really pick and choose because
of seemingly endless time constraints? Do you
make up for it with video, or just not get to see all that
many movies in a year’s time?
So, give one more big ol’ thanks to mole for his able
assistance in keeping the CMotW afloat for yet
another week, and then post ‘em if you’ve got ‘em, as
always.
Thanks, and take care!
OnM
*******
[>
An addendum -- matching mole, 05:36:42 05/04/02
Sat
First thanks back to OnM who did, as always, an excellent
job of editing and packaging the review.
I watched a cheap videotape of the film, one the few tapes
of a film that I actually own. I bought it in Phoenix
because the video store I frequented at the time didn't have
a copy to rent and I wanted to rewatch it. It lists only
Graham Greene as writer so my apologies for neglecting
Alexander Korda. In his foreword to the novel of The Third
Man, I believe that Greene does mention this as being the
only fiction he produced primarily for film but I could be
misremembering as it has been many years since I read the
book.
My main reason for writing this addendum is that OnM's list
of Greene's works that have been filmed reminded me of a
comment that I had intended make in the review and forgot
while actually in the process of composition. In the early
part of his writing career Greene's long fiction was divided
into two distinct and clearly labelled categories: novels
and entertainments. The novels emphasized psychology and
character development, the entertainments plot and suspense
(although all of his works had all these elements) Greene's
first entertainment was Stamboul Train his fourth published
novel-length work and the first to be really financially
successful. For some time thereafter Greene wrote
entertainments to pay the bills and novels to say what he
really wanted to say. He applied his talents equally to
both but it seems clear that he regarded the entertainments
as inferior.
However in later years Greene looked back on his
entertainments much more fondly (as did the critics). And I
would propose a parallel to AtS and BtVS over the last
couple of seasons. If BtVS is a novel then AtS is an
entertainment and, at least in my humble opinion, that is no
reason for rating one above or below the other except in
terms of personal preference.
[>
Re: Classic Movie of the Week - May 3rd 2002 --
Cactus Watcher, 13:01:36 05/04/02 Sat
The title theme from "The Third Man" was a huge hit single.
(All the music in the film is played on a solo zither.) In
those days the preferred medium for singles was the very
breakable, 78rpm record. For those to young to remember
them, you may recall Donna Read breaking one of 'Buffalo
Gals' in disgust over Jimmy Stewart's apparent disinterest
in her in "It a Wonderful Life." Yep that's a single she
breaking.
When "The Third Man" was playing regularly on TV, I was too
young to stay up late enough to watch it. I was told by
everyone who had see it, it was not as good as the
popularity of the record made it seem (A few years later the
movie "A Summer Place" got the same kind of reviews).
I didn't see the movie until recently, when like mm I bought
it here in Phoenix. It was at a drugstore and at a steep
discount.
Frankly, the movie does drag quite a bit, and it is
certainly not one of Joseph Cotton's best films. But, it
does have rememorable moments, especially when Valli or
Welles are the center of the camera's focus. The scene on
the ferris wheel is one of the best. The sewer scene at the
end was considered a triumph at the time it was filmed, but
now it seems more than a little dated.
[>
Great choice, other mm -- mundusmundi, 17:23:16
05/04/02 Sat
Its non-American mise-en-scene notwithstanding, I'd argue
that The Third Man is a true noir. Rich in
Viennese atmosphere, steeped in postwar disillusionment, it
may be the truest ever.
I also agree that AtS has many elements of neo-
noir: a hero with a dark side; a seedy milieu; a femme
fatale (Lilah); and enjoyably convoluted plots that
frequently don't make sense. It seems to weird to say this,
but Angel is really far more hopeful than most
noir. The final shot of The Third Man is more
wrenching than any season-ending episode of the series.
[>
Thanks for your comments -- matching mole,
05:59:09 05/05/02 Sun
Mundus - I think your point about AtS being more optimistic
than most Film Noir is very well taken. The rathe dramatic
shifts in tone in AtS are a big part of what makes it so
appealing to me.
CW - your comments about the Third Man not aging well
reminded me of a very funny little bit of satire I once came
across (no idea where now) in which film students and
amateur film afficionadoes were lured to their doom by film
critics heaping lavish praise on 6 hour long silent film
epics. I've certainly been there and I've learned that I
can't really appreciate silent films (with a few
exceptions). My favourite critic may rate something a
masterpiece but what I see is a bunch of exagerated gestures
and a certain amount of difficulty in figuring out what the
heck is going on.
Now with the films of the 30s and 40s the position is
reversed. I love those films so much (in general more than
current mainstream Hollywood productions) that I have lured
people into watching them who were completely baffled by my
praise. Having said that I would still hold with my
personal opinion of The Third Man as being one of the best
films I've ever seen.
[> [>
Re: Thanks for your comments -- CW, 08:22:47
05/05/02 Sun
Some of my favorite films are old Russian 'classics' like
the silent "Battleship Potemkin' and "Alexander Nevsky." If
I watch them too closely the acting is hammy and the story
line a tad silly. But, I tend to be more tolerant of the
limitations of the silent era, in general, and earlier non-
English-speaking talking films. Not fair, but that's life
(grin). I have some quibbles with "The Third Man," but I
haven't thrown it out, either. And considering what I paid
for it, I could well afford to.
[> [> [>
My copy of the third man -- matching mole,
08:35:49 05/05/02 Sun
I bought it at Target (for non-Americans a relatively 'high
class' bargain department store if such a conflicting
description makes sense) for about $5 I think. I wonder if
Phoenix is flooded with cheap copies of The Third Man.
[> [> [> [>
Must be. Mine was $2. -- CW, 08:39:30 05/05/02
Sun
[> [>
Having just purchased the DVD yesterday... -- OnM,
08:37:40 05/05/02 Sun
I may be able to chime in with an updated opinion in some
future column-- it's been decades since I saw The Third
Man, and my memory of anything other than the overall
mood and very general plot outline is very fuzzy.
It does happen that something you saw once and really liked
doesn't hold up with the 'test of time', but OTOH there are
those films (TV shows, music, art, etc.) that you aren't all
that impressed with when you first see them, and then
sometime in the future you experience them again, and
something just clicks-- Oh, I get it! Cool!!
Musically, I remember Pink Floyd's epic album The
Wall was like that. It was very late and I was tired
when I heard it for the first time, and I can remember
thinking, gee, how disappointing for Floyd. (I was a big-
time Floydian in the day, still greatly admire the early to
later-middle works).
So I shelved the album for several months, but kept hearing
all these rave reviews, so one afternoon I put it on again
and sat down to listen.
Click...
I generally like the Noir motif, although like anything it
can be overdone. Mole is right in the way Angel plays around
with the conventions of the genre, while simultaneously
paying homage to them. I also liked the comments about
Greene and the 'serious works' vs. the 'entertainments'.
Buffy may be the 'serious work' and Angel the
'entertainment', but it's a false division-- it's like
saying 'apples' and 'oranges'.
They're both tasty in their own right, aren't they? Why
should it be either/or?
Anne Rice is certainly best known for her Vampire novels,
but many people think highly of the erotic fiction she wrote
years ago under various pseudonyms.
So, distance gives perspective, although as always you will
have personal tastes entering the mix. I recall Siskel &
Ebert giving a huge thumbs up to The Great Santini. I
hated it, still do. I just couldn't identify with the
character, and perhaps that's because the lead actor did
such a good job bringing the character to reality.
(Uh-oh, rambling alert... better stop now!)
;-)
The Lawyers of
Wolfram & Hart -- SableHart,
11:52:49 05/04/02 Sat
I'm new to the board, so please forgive me if you guys have
already discussed this. I noticed a while ago that most of
the lawyers working at Wolfram & Hart have the initials LM:
Lindsay McDonald, Lilah Morgan, Linwood Murrow, Lee Mercer,
Holland Manners (a stretch). The only two who don't are
Nathan Reed and Gavin Park. Does anyone have any theories
about the possible symbolism behind LM? I thought that it
might be an allusion to Lucifer and Mephistopheles, Satan
and his lackey in Faustian legend. Does anyone else have an
idea, or am I way out in left field?
[>
Welcome to the board -- vampire hunter D,
12:31:16 05/04/02 Sat
Let me be the first to welcome you to the board. We always
love hearing from new people. Post as often a you like, and
be sure to try and join us in the chatroom sometime.
As for the LM thing, it has been noted and dicussed, but
none of us know what it means (if it means anything at all.
It is possible that it is just a big coincidence). I have a
theory that the initials LM may have some sort of personal
meaning to either Joss or David Greenburg, and are not
symbolic of anything in literature or mythology. But that's
just my theory
Entropy--and a
parallel in Middlemarch (spoilers for Entropy) --
J.Nina, 15:14:41 05/05/02 Sun
I've been reading the amazing commentaries on this board for
a year now, but haven't posted before. Thank you, all, for
providing such an imaginative and intelligent forum! I've
saved many of your commentaries and am trying to figure out
how to use them when I teach (literature, of course). The
commentaries on this board are some of the best critical
essays that I've read in the past decade, and some--the best
I've ever read! (If only academic writing were always this
enlightening and alive and passionate--and readable.)
I just finished reading/teaching Middlemarch, so that was/is
still on my mind thinking about Entropy. On another board
last year I participated in a few discussions about the
similarities between the S/B relationship and
Elizabeth/Darcy in Pride and Prejudice, their initial
aversion and the dawning awareness of their attraction, and
how much aversion each has to overcome in order to connect,
and the complexity of the "dance" they engage in as their
relationship develops. Though there are some interesting
parallels to other literary couples, for me, the
Elizabeth/Darcy relationship still offers a relevant
parallel, despite how dark and sad Spike and Buffy's
relationship has become. What is still evident to me is how
much their verbal play embodies their ongoing dance, even
when Buffy insists it's over.
So, now, Middlemarch--and Entropy. One of the most amazing
scenes in Middlemarch occurs when Dorothea suddenly sees
Will and Rosamond together looking like lovers in an
embrace. Dorothea is devastated, much the way Buffy looks
after she's seen Spike and Anya. Dorothea goes home and
cries, and acknowledges for the first time how much she
loved Will, and rages and grieves for the loss and betrayal.
The reader sees the scene between Will and Rosamund, after
Dorothea leaves, in much the same way we see the scene
between Spike and Anya. The reader/viewer sees what really
motivates both sets of characters. Will has told Rosamond
how much he loves Dorothea and now has no hope his love will
ever be returned. He feels he must now leave Middlemarch and
Dorothea forever. He feels cursed that he can never explain
the moment to Dorothea, for many reasons--he doesn't want to
correct Dorothea's misunderstanding by betraying Rosamond,
and he thinks that any excuse or explanation will seem
shabby, will sound like nothing more than a selfish
rationalization for an inexcusable affair.
I don't think Spike can explain himself to Buffy either; he
has sought to comfort and be comforted in a moment of
sadness and grief, has shown the kind of humanity and
restraint that we admire and sympathize with. But from
Buffy's perspective, Spike's version of what happened would
sound like nothing more than a shabby and selfish excuse for
sex. She still doesn't believe he's capable of profound
feeling. In Middlemarch, it's Rosamond who tells Dorothea
what really happened; Rosamond is so tormented by Will's
rage (and Dorothea's goodness) that she confesses to
Dorothea what really happened. I haven't read spoilers, so I
don't know what will happen in the next episode--I hope Anya
will tell Buffy what happened, since Spike can't. I think
Anya still has a lot of credibility. (It'd be ironically
fitting for Anya to confirm Spike's humanity, since it was
Xander who challenged Buffy about Riley and the meaning of
love last season, at the end of Into the Woods.) And I'm
still hoping it's not too late for Buffy to recognize that
she does love Spike. It's when she thinks she's lost Will
for good that Dorothea realizes how much she loves him;
perhaps this will wake Buffy up.
Back to the less real task of grading!
J.Nina
[>
fresne, please read! -- Vickie, 18:19:25
05/05/02 Sun
Welcome to the board, J. Nina, and thanks for your
thoughtful post.
I enjoyed your comments regarding P&P very much. Last spring
some time, fresne posted a link to a satiric P7P with all
the Whedonverse characters substituted in for the Austen
ones. I hope fresne will see this and give us the link.
I'll be very surprised if Anya or Spike say anything at all
to justify their moment. Anya's not in the habit of
confiding in anyone but Xander (well, maybe Halfrek), and
Spike seems to talk only to Buffy. Time will tell.
A better parallel to Middlemarch, imho, might be if Spike
tells Xander what really happened (as I think Xanya is the
more solid relationship). I think you'll agree that has
almost no possibility of ever happening.
[> [>
Re: The link is... -- LittleBIt, 18:52:30
05/05/02 Sun
Joss
Whedon's Pride and Prejudice
[> [> [>
Re: The link is... -- J.Nina, 21:08:56 05/05/02
Sun
Many thanks for this link. It looks wonderful.
j.nina
[>
Nicely done. Welcome to the Board. -- Sophist,
18:21:15 05/05/02 Sun
[> [>
Thank you for the welcome! -- J.Nina, 07:46:05
05/06/02 Mon
[>
Re: Other parallels with Middlemarch -- dream of
the consortium, 08:18:36 05/06/02 Mon
Though there is no real Causabon figure in Buffy (I suppose
I could really anger some people and claim it's Angel), I do
think that the Will/Dorothea relationship has some
interesting parallels. After all, Will represents
Dorothea's acceptance of her own imperfection and, more
importantly, her own carnality. Initially she chooses a man
for abstract reasons, for the chance to become, through him,
a better person, to devote her life to service. There has
never been that sort of self-sacrifical idealism in Buffy's
relationships, except perhaps in the name of true love with
Angel. But with Spike, she allowed herself to be physically
free in way she had not with earlier relationships - her
desire ruled over her common sense, which is very much what
Dorothea finally allowed herself with Will. Also, one could
say that Dorothea does actually lower herself. Will is a
good man, but hardly a paragon, and I think many readers
have been a bit disappointed to find that the perfect
Dorothea winds up with just...Will. He doesn't seem to
deserve her. Well, he may not, but she loves him and is
happy - and she has taken the pressure to be perfect off
herself. I don't believe that that is the route ME is going
to take with Spuffy, and Spike certainly has much deeper
flaws than Will, but you never know. And I certainly hope
that the revelation of the Spuffy relationship will bring
about something of the same sort of self-acceptance in Buffy
that Dorothea ultimately found.
By the way, Middlemarch is my favorite novel.
[> [>
Re: Other parallels with Middlemarch -- J.Nina,
19:23:31 05/06/02 Mon
I think those are important parallels that you mention, the
ways in which Will helps Dorothea to feel freely, to become
herself more fully. (Is this what G.H. Lewes did for M.A.
Evans?) Will is always the one who challenges her with
painful truths, especially about Casaubon. Most of the time,
he's a more gentle truth-teller than Spike, and Dorothea is
more receptive than Buffy has been (even though it often
hurts a lot).
My students aren't disappointed that she ends up with Will;
they love Will (and so do I). Dorothea's family/friends are
the ones who are most troubled by her choice; they're the
ones who have demonized Will, but they come around, as I
hope/expect the scoobies will do, when/if Buffy accepts
herself and Spike, with all their imperfections.
I love Middlemarch, too. I think Eliot's insights into
courtship/marriage and relationships, art and politics, and
hypocrisy and human nature are profound. I was so worried
that my students would find her philosophical reflections
boring, but they were mostly amazed at how fresh and
relevant she is, and really loved the novel.
J.Nina
how was that the
price? (spoilers) -- anom, 22:20:44 05/05/02 Sun
I've been thinking (too much?) about this for much of the
week, & the more I think about it the less I get it: how was
what we saw in The Price actually the price for what Angel
did in 2 episodes ago? A plague of shrimp, losing
(permanently) a new client, the threat of losing Fred...&
the return of Connor. What do any of these have to do
w/Angel's trying to kill Wesley, kidnapping & threatening to
torture Linwood, & invoking the darkest of dark magics to
solidify Sahjhan?
Apparently the shrimp-things' presence, & therefore all the
events related to it, had to do w/Connor's impending
arrival. They were there because he was going to come back
anyway. Now, everything Angel did in Forgiveness was to try
to bring him back, but none of it was a direct attempt to do
so. As far as we can tell, he's back because Holtz sent him
back--nobody at AI or even W&H opened the portal (or
whatever it was) he came through. It's more like a case of
"be careful what you wish for (or betray your principles
for), you might get it." Angel did get what he betrayed his
principles for (& classically, not in the form he wanted),
but not because he betrayed them.
So how was any of the events of The Price either a direct
consequence or a side effect of Angel's actions? And if none
of it was, is the real price still to come?
[>
Re: how was that the price? (spoilers) -- Dochawk,
07:49:46 05/06/02 Mon
This is the same question I had about Afterlife. Was the
appearance of that demon really the price of Buffy being
brought back to life? These two episodes are truly very
similar and someone with more talent than I have should be
comparing them.
[> [>
Re: how was that the price? (spoilers) -- maddog,
08:33:31 05/06/02 Mon
I think Afterlife was completely different. The point of
the "price" in that case was that it was much more
personal(as this whole season has been). The point was that
the real price was how it affected Buffy, and the way that
destroyed the group chemistry because they were all walking
on egg shells and she kept her secret from them. This whole
season's about the choices we make and living with the
consequences. And that's no more apparent than in this
situation.
[> [>
don't think it's the same -- anom, 09:28:25
05/06/02 Mon
"This is the same question I had about Afterlife. Was the
appearance of that demon really the price of Buffy being
brought back to life?"
Well, as Anya said, technically it was a gift with purchase.
But at least in that case, it was explicitly related to the
use of magic to bring Buffy back.
I don't think that's the case in The Price, despite what
maddog says below. Did Angel open a portal to Quortoth?
According to Lorne, that's not possible. And Sahjhan was
already in this* dimension, so any portal would have been
local, so to speak. I suppose we can't rule out that his
material substance was in some other dimension, but I also
don't see any basis for that, & even if that's the case,
there's no reason to think it was in Quortoth. Of course, we
can't assume Connor came directly from Quortoth either--he
could have been somewhere else in between--but portals we've
seen so far have been pretty specific, from one place to
another, or at least one dimension to another. (Yes,
Cordelia & Lorne's cousin went through the same portal to
different locations, but they still went to the same
dimension.) For Connor to have been brought through the same
portal as Sahjhan (who didn't go to the same location), he
would already have had to be in this dimension.
*Meaning Earth, even though Angel & co. don't exactly live
in the same world we do. (my first footnote foray!)
[> [> [>
Re: The Price is Right or What's Behind Portal
#1?(Spoiler for The Price) -- SpikeMom,
11:02:41 05/06/02 Mon
In regards to prices for magic use:
In Superstar, Jonathan's price for his glamour spell was the
appearance of a rather nasty demon who was determined to
destroy the caster of the spell.
In Wrecked, Willow's price for her magic "high" was another
rather nasty demon determined to destroy the person who
"called" it.
In Afterlife, the price for the Scoobies' resurrection spell
is a "hitch-hiking" demon looking to destroy the
spellcaster(s). When it appears to Willow and Tara in the
form of Buffy, the accusations it makes seem to refer to the
death of the fawn.
In Angel's Price, the jelly shrimp don't seem to be playing
the demon role. To me they are more like rats deserting a
sinking ship, or in this case getting out of the way of the
Destroyer. They aren't attacking people in this dimension
as punishment, they are just trying to find a host to help
them survive in a dry and hostile environment. My guess is
they haven't seen the true Price for solidifying Sahjan yet.
And will there be a Price for whatever it was the Destroyer
had to do to open his portal?
Oh and what about Holtz's and Sahjan's Prices for the
incredibly dark magics they have been harnessing? So far
Holtz is still in a hellish (we assume) dimension by his own
choice and Sahjan is just stuck in a jar.
Re the portal question:
It's been made pretty clear (by Sahjan if you believe
him)that no one can open another portal INTO Quortoth, but
what if it's possible to OPEN a portal (as often as you
like) out of Quortoth? None of the characters that I can
recall have stated that's not possible.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Possible Metaphor in The Price (Spoilers) --
Age, 16:54:29 05/06/02 Mon
The shrimp-like creatures are the demon equivalent of the
snow in the snow globe. There is a dichotomy/conflict
between Angel's world/the hotel cracking up(as the walls are
and the people do when they get dried out) and the
hotel(snowglobe) being shut tight(although the cracks mean
that no matter how tight Angel shuts the hotel/globe, the
water will still get out and the snow/shrimp-like creatures
will still dry out). One of the biggest cracks in the
hotel/globe is the portal through which Connor arrives.
The creatures are trying to do two things: get back to their
wet world, ie get back to the snow globe environment; and,
escape something. They express what Angel is trying to do:
he is trying to patch up his world, getting back to what it
was without Connor, and thus at the same time trying to
avoid the pain that is the memory of his son. His moving on
is a form of moving back, and puts everyone in danger. He
has brought everyone this darkness through his actions, and
so it is he who orders the hotel lights to go out.
I assume that Cordelia's deus ex machina bright resolution
of the shrimp problem may signify the restoration of the
connection to the Powers that Be after the reiteration of
her role to Angel(the demon powers represent her having
accepted for the rest of her life this role); and/or Cordy's
bringing the lights back on may simply represent her
influence in Angel's life, bringing him out of his darkness
through the influence not only of his love for her, but of
her strong character. She simply makes that much difference.
The reference to the Powers that Be(from season three of
'Buffy') in regards to the snow of the snow globe may
indicate that indeed Cordy and the shrimp-like creatures
becoming one to send them off somewhere(?) represents the
intervention of the Powers.
When the shrimp-like creatures attempt to get back to what
they had, ie get back metaphorically to the water world of
the snow globe, they dry out their human hosts. That way
lies death, a death very much like what a vampire would
experience, except much slower, ie turn to dust.
Hope that helps the discussion.
Age.
[> [> [> [> [>
welcome back! haven't seen you in (you know i have
to...) an age! -- anom, 22:29:55 05/06/02 Mon
Interesting thoughts, as always. Maybe I'll have time to
actually respond to them sometime when it's not so late.
[>
Re: how was that the price? (spoilers) -- maddog,
08:27:44 05/06/02 Mon
That plague of "shrimp" were a direct result of Angel
opening up the portal...and I think the problems they
caused(including Gunn having to go to Wesley to find a cure
for Fred is a big relation to that) are all what make up
"The Price". So he had a direct price to pay(infestation)
and an indirect one(putting the whole group in danger).
[> [>
Re: how was that the price? (spoilers) -- pr10n,
12:54:27 05/06/02 Mon
I'm thinking along these lines, too -- that whoever works
the mojo will pay the Price. That idea points to Angel as
the Payer, and therefore to Willow as the Payer on the Buffy
side of things. INCOMING, Angel and Willow?
But what happened to Cordy? Filled with light-booming power
because she held a glowing shrimp? Mayhaps more there than
we've seen, too.
[> [> [>
Re: Cordy and Price (spoilers) -- SpikeMom,
13:29:02 05/06/02 Mon
Why indeed did the jelly shrimp disappear when one of them
touched Cordy? Were they able to use her (some demon
aspect) to open a portal to another safer dimension? Did
they actually manage to open a portal BACK into Quortoth
because of her? Does that mean the appearance of the demon
and the Destroyer immediately after that was because
Cordy/jelly shrimp opened the portal, and who's paying the
price for that? Was the demon with the Destroyer the
"Price"? Oy, my head hurts. Only 7.5 hours til the next
Angel episode, thank the Powers That Be!
[>
Re: how was that the price? (spoilers) -- Cecilia,
07:59:08 05/07/02 Tue
The price that is often referred to when contemplating dark
magic seems to me to be a cosmic realignment or balancing of
the scales. There needs to be equal parts dark and light,
good and evil (the PTB's are all about balance not the
inherent need for good).
I don't think we've seen the price yet for either Angel or
Willow. I personally think Willow's is going to be higher
as I think resurrection is very strictly verboten. I also
think the price will be very, very personal.
The appearance of the see through squid or the hitchhiker
demon are, as Anya put it, gifts with purchase, a side
affect of the spell as opposed to the cost of doing the
spell.
The WC and the
other Slayers -- skeeve, 08:57:21 05/06/02 Mon
Just rewatched part of Kendra's coming out party on FX this
morning. For some reason, the WC never told Giles about the
new Slayer. Did the memo get lost? Also, either another
memo got lost or the WC wasn't exactly waiting with bated
breath for the report on Buffy's death. The WC would know
there was a new Slayer and they know what causes new
Slayers.
Another thing. Why isn't the WC trying to kill Faith? It's
clear that they want a new Slayer and they know how to get
one.
BTW what would Kendra think of Buffy's Class Protector
award?
[>
Re: The WC and the other Slayers -- SingedCat,
10:24:08 05/06/02 Mon
For some reason, the WC never told Giles about the new
Slayer. Did the memo get lost?
That's probably what they told him; I find it as
unconvincing as the first time. It has seemed to me many
times that the WC is a bureacratic dinosaur that allows
political infighting(i.e.they don't like Giles) to get in
the way of their efficient operation. What a bunch of
stuffed shirts. (that last was just an editorial comment.
:))
Another thing. Why isn't the WC trying to kill Faith? It's
clear that they want a new Slayer and they know how to get
one.
Either they have decided it would be too overtly evil to
kill Faith while she's in rahb, or they're taking the long
view that another will come up eventually-- or maybe the
paperwork just hasn't come through yet. :D
BTW what would Kendra think of Buffy's Class Protector
award?
She'd tell her it was a flagrant violation for the SLayer to
be publicly recognized, vain & self-aggrandizing besides (if
she knows that word) and then tell her it was a sweet thing
for them to do, and be happy for her. SHe was by the bok,
but she was (eventually) cool about it.
[> [>
Duplicate Slayer Problems -- DickBD, 11:06:07
05/06/02 Mon
I think the writers got themselves in a little trouble in
regard to consistency with the duplicate slayers. My
understanding is that there is only one slayer in all the
world. But Faith comes on the scene as though she has been
doing it for a while. (The same with Kendra.) Of course,
we can blame it on the WC; none of us likes them anyway.
And we don't want to admit that JW is infallible--or his
writers! (Hey, I'm kinda getting with this acronym thing.
I say that with a self-effacing grin, as I am usually
puzzling over them.)
[> [> [>
Re: Duplicate Slayer Problems -- MikeJ, 13:06:38
05/06/02 Mon
Well, Faith could have technically BEEN doing it before she
became a Slayer, depending on how you look at it. It's been
suggested in the past [mostly during episodes with Kendra]
that the Council becomes aware of girls who have the
possibility of being a Slayer should the current one perish.
Faith did originally have a Watcher, and she could have been
training Faith on how to fight, kill Vampires/Demons, etc.
up to and through the point when Kendra was killed by
Drusilla, which caused Faith's latent slayer abilities to
come to fruition. Then of course, Faith's Watcher got
killed, and she ended up in Sunnydale, yadda yadda
yadda.
[> [> [> [>
pre-slayer training -- skeeve, 14:52:12 05/06/02
Mon
My recollection is that sometimes, it might even be the
norm, the WC can identify the particular next slayer before
she is called. In Buffy's case, she wasn't even on their
list, although Whistler knew about her.
It just occurred to me that that might be why they don't
kill Faith. They don't know who, if anyone, will replace
her.
The first memo problem was probably accidental. I see no up
side to it, even for some petty person with a dislike for
Giles.
On the other hand, sending another slayer to Sunnydale
without telling the local watcher does seem to be a bit of
petty rudeness.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: pre-slayer training -- AgnosticSorcerer,
15:54:40 05/06/02 Mon
If you recall though in the original Buffy movie, Buffy
possessed many instincts of a trained slayer. Perhaps
training is simply the honing of innate abilities for the
slayer?
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Some answers from the comics and timing of the
slayers -- Dochawk, 18:27:57 05/06/02 Mon
Regarding Kendra and faith having some practice before cming
to Sunnydale, Remember that Both had at least 4 or 5 months
of being slayer before they show up (Buffyverse works in a
warped real time, the three month hiatus is the three month
summer vacation). After the master killed Buffy it was 6
months before Kendra showed up in Sunnydale (and obviously
her watcher didn't know of Buffy's resurection) and Faith
had even longer.
Also the WC often knows who the potential girls are before
they are called. They have some special abilities as they
are developing and according to the comics, if the WC knows
of a potential slayer, they send a watcher to develop
her.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: pre-slayer training -- Simon A,, 16:21:09
05/07/02 Tue
Perhaps training merely convinces the slayers that not all
of their powers are innate, and that therefore they need the
WC?
Of course, my theory has been that due to unspecified, off
camera internal WC politics, when it was overdue for Giles
to get a slayer, they gave him a raw untrained one with an
even shorter than average projected life expectancy.
Something akin to the habit of the college of cardinals
naming somebody realy OLD to be pope when they can't come to
agreement. One suspects that they were quite disapointed
that Buffy didn't stay dead . It is concievable that Giles
may not have disabused them of the notion that Buffy
remained dead, perhaps to give himself a freer hand.
[>
Re: The WC and the other Slayers -- LittleBIt,
14:40:19 05/06/02 Mon
Actually I've often wondered just exactly what the Watchers'
Council does. There have been a few hints dropped throughout
the seasons.
They definitely identify and train potential slayers, though
their mechanism for identification is never described, nor
is at terribly efficient since they never picked up on Buffy
until she was Chosen, yet Kendra was in training since she
was very young. Which means there's probably several young
women brought up in societal isolation on the off chance
that may be Chosen to battle the forces of evil and die
young. No actual time-frame is ever offered for Faith,
although the bits of background she does give would indicate
that she was found later rather than sooner.
The council also has vast research resources, probably
networked worldwide to assist the slayer in her duties. Not
that they are very forthcoming with it unless they are also
in control of it, but possibly just the gathering of
information makes them feel powerful.
There may also be some kind of WC academic training, at
least I hope that a thesis on Spike or William the Bloody
wasn't the usual presentation at Oxford or Cambridge. They
must also provide physical training in a range of fighting
techniques from hand-to-hand to martial arts to classic
dueling skills. It's not clear at what age the WC brings
their students in, although it does seem to be a family
business (both Giles' father and Wesley's father were/are
Watchers). Not certain if self-righteousnes and arrogance
are a special class or just taught as an overall
attitude.
Within the council it appears there may be areas of
specialization. Some may excel at research, others at
physical training, yet others are trained as a special ops
unit for handling the council's 'trickier' jobs. It is not
clear just what the qualifications are for one to be
assigned as a Watcher to a Slayer.
There are disciplinary measures within the WC. Giles is
fired when he fails to keep his distance during the
cruciamentum; Gwendolyn Post is dismissed when she dabbles
too far into teh dark arts; Wesley is ultimately fired as
well. It seems that the WC is willing to just toss out
anyone who fails to meet their standards without much care
for the knowledge they have.
With their excelling at self-importance, political in-
fighting and rigid adherence to an archaic rules system, the
WC is finding itself more at odds with the Slayers than they
ever have. One Slayer has rejected their authority, another
has rejected everything they stand for.
Any other thoughts on the WC?
[> [>
The WC and the other Slayers -- Fred, the obvious
pseudonym, 17:37:17 05/06/02 Mon
By the way, Little Bit, my apologies for the excess
unacknowledged spoilers in previous entry.
Regarding this topic, I've worked for a major bureaucracy
(which will remain nameless.) One of the most realistic
parts of BtVS is that the Watcher's Council has been able to
convince itself that what is really for the institution's
own good is essential for the world's welfare. It's all too
easy for intelligent people to fool themselves into
believing that their own interest is identical with the
ostensible mission of the organization. Kudos to JW &
Co.
[> [>
Excellent post, LittleBit. -- Ixchel, 19:17:07
05/06/02 Mon
I completely agree with your assessment of the CoW. The
only thing they ever really did for Buffy was send her Giles
(a watcher who cared about her and didn't treat her like a
clever attack dog). And then, when they discovered what
they had done (and apparently other watchers had made the
"mistake" of having a bond with their Slayer), they tried to
take him away from her. I think the CoW's policy of finding
potential Slayers, isolating them from family, prohibiting
friends and ensuring a detatched watcher was completely to
_its_ benefit. The psychological wear and loneliness of
their lives without the support (and important help) of
loved ones seems to guarantee Slayers a short life. An
endless sequence of naive, confused, and (most importantly)
_isolated_, teenage girls (who live one to two years and are
then replaced by the next girl) are (in theory) far easier
to control than a confident, knowledgeable, woman.
Ixchel
[>
Re: The WC and the other Slayers -- Cecilia,
07:46:00 05/07/02 Tue
I would assume that Giles would make regular reports to the
WC and that would include Buffy's untimely death and
resurrection. Of course they are aware of Kendra's calling
as well as Faith's, again because Giles probably reported
Kendra's death to them.
By the very fact that Buffy was able to be drowned then be
revived and still retain her Slayer strength and abilities
while the lineage of Slayers passed on to Kendra and then to
Faith shows that all "potential" slayers must have some
abilities prior to being chosen.
This is how I see it: Some girls have the potential to be
Slayers and the WC is able to indentify some (but clearly
not all in Buffy's case), contact and work with them. But
the passing on of the true Slayer power is beyond their
knowledge, control and probably their comprehension. In
their "pre-chosen" state these girls likely have some
strength and ability to fight vampires and becoming "chosen"
means some kind of spiritual awakening of the total power
they hold within. Kind of like a key. If this was not the
case then logically after Buffy drowned she would not be
able to regain her strength and "Slayerness", so it must
have been something innate within her that, once realized,
can never be undone.
I find the statement "There is only one Slayer" less than
credible because you have to look at the source: The
Watcher's Council. They are rather well known for taking a
stand on a subject and not changing their opinions, ever!
(For instance, their attitude towards Angel-if they were
truly interested in fighting evil instead maintaining their
bureacratic control over slayers, they would jump at the
chance to at least study him-don't you think?)
Alexis Denisof
answers a few questions-- character/actor paralells?(spoil-
free speculation!) -- SingedCat, 09:20:54 05/06/02
Mon
Just found this, and really enjoyed reading about AD. Very
charming. It's neat that he's dating Allison Hannigan.
(or was last time I checked)
Denisof did this questionnaire almost a year ago. As I read
it I can't help but remember that the writers on both shows
tend to work the issues of the actors themselves into the
scripts. Which makes his comments on Hamlet, and Wesley's
sense of right,(at least) kinda stand out, whaddya
think?
What word best describes you?
Sensitive.
What is your all-time favorite line of your character?
"Dear God... that's...yummy." (After drinking blood as
Angel).
What aspect of your character would you like to have?
His intelligence and his certainty of what's right and
wrong, good and bad.
If you could play any other role on The WB, who would it
be?
No, I like Wesley, I'll stick with him.
If you could have one superpower, what would it be?
Ability to breathe underwater- you get two for one because
it feels like flying when you swim underwater, plus you get
to hang out with fish and dolphins and sea lions and
stuff.
Define the perfect day?
The perfect day must include:
Wake up with the person you love.
Something good to eat.
Somewhere cool to go.
Something cool to see.
Something cool to do.
A hug.
A nap.
Which person - living, dead or fictional - do you most
identify with?
Hamlet. We both think about things too much and try to make
decisions in the present that will determine the future. It
doesn't work, the future is unknown.
What quality in yourself would you like to improve?
I really can't think of one - hey! I must be perfect! Just
kidding, there's too many to list.
What book or movie title best describes your life so
far?
Everybody Poops.
If you could only eat one type of food for the rest of your
life, what would it be?
Bread.
What's your favorite movie of all-time?
That's impossible to answer.
What's your biggest complaint in life?
The 24-hour day is a little too short.
Who are your favorite actors?
Marlon Brando, Alec Guinness, and Peter Sellers.
Name your greatest achievement.
Admitting when I lied.
Name your greatest regret.
When I lied.
What do you like most about Hollywood?
Palm trees.
What do you deplore most about Hollywood?
Air quality.
If you weren't in show business, you would be?
A glass blower.
What's something in the world you'd like to see
outlawed?
Rudeness.
What do you like most about the holidays?
My family being together - it feels safe somehow.
its just TV -
- 110v3w1110w, 10:53:24 05/06/02 Mon
i just watched seeing red and it deeply upset me and i came
to realise that i actualy care about and get upset when
things happen to them which is what worries me. is it normal
to care about and feel emotions about fictional characters ?
its not as if i am totaly lacking other things in my life
buffy and angel is the only thing i watch on TV apart from
the news and some MTV and that is it. i have a job that i
quite like and have a good social life and other shows that
i have watched in the past never made me care it was just
entertaining. i was just wondering if anyone else feels
anything about the characters or maybe i need to stop
watching i am thinking about seeing a shrink. hope this
isn't to off topic if it is then sorry
[>
Vague Spoiler in above Post -- DickBD, 11:17:20
05/06/02 Mon
You know, I think part of the charm of the show is that
there is depth to the characters. You get so you feel like
you know them. You're normal (again!), or we're all crazy.
I have personally grown so attached to the Scooby Gang that
I don't think I would care to meet the actual actors. I
think I would have really been upset about Oz leaving if I
had been watching then. If they can upset us by killing off
a character (like Joyce), they've done a good job. And we
know that is true. I think the depth of the characters is
the reason for all the shippers.
[>
Vague Spoiler in above Post -- DickBD, 11:17:31
05/06/02 Mon
You know, I think part of the charm of the show is that
there is depth to the characters. You get so you feel like
you know them. You're normal (again!), or we're all crazy.
I have personally grown so attached to the Scooby Gang that
I don't think I would care to meet the actual actors. I
think I would have really been upset about Oz leaving if I
had been watching then. If they can upset us by killing off
a character (like Joyce), they've done a good job. And we
know that is true. I think the depth of the characters is
the reason for all the shippers.
[>
Re: its just TV -- Deeva, 11:54:07 05/06/02
Mon
Anytime you involve yourself with anything it will affect
you. The degree of feeling depends on how much you actually
like the show, character, movie or book. And people who
don't have a"full" life aren't necessarily the "victims" of
such feelings. Like you said, "It's just tv." That can be
said to just about anything. It's just a car. It's just a
dog. It's just "fill in the blank". But it'll still
touch you in someway.
I love this show and its characters. I could talk about it
till...the cows come home. Even then I would still talk
about it. (Hey, Bessie, you're stepping on my foot there.)
You're not imagining things, nor are you alone, when you
feel a little crazy over the fact that you care about these
characters. We all feel it, just some do more than
others.
[>
There's nothing wrong with feeling deeply attached to
fictional characters... -- Rob, 11:59:26 05/06/02
Mon
A well-written piece of literature or television show can,
and should have that effect. That means that the author and
actors are doing their job...Convincing you that these are
three-dimensional, fully realized, flesh and blood
characters, who you can care deeply about, and feel profound
sadness when they get hurt.
The only psychological danger can be if one substitutes this
fictional world for true socialization in the real world, as
a crutch, and that doesn't seem to be a problem for you. I
think it's good and healthy to be be so in love with a work
of art that truly inspires and touches you. I have not yet
seen "Seeing Red," but there are episodes of "Buffy" that
have truly affected me..."The Body"..."Becoming"..."The
Gift"..."Tough Love"...to name a few...
And I'm already buying extra supplies of Kleenex for
tomorrow night!
Don't worry about it. It's no coincidence that most popular
shows, most popular movies, and most popular books out there
are fictional. Through fiction, one can examine one's owns
trials and tribulations by watching them be played out for
others. One can, in short, gain a greater grasp and
understanding of one's own humanity by surrendering to a
piece of art as profound and moving as "Buffy."
Rob
[> [>
Agreed! It's not only normal, it's what every artist
hopes for. -- Dyna, 13:28:53 05/06/02 Mon
Rob said it best, so I'll just add a little bit: It's
totally human and normal to respond to characters in a story
in a personal way. It's the hope of every artist that their
work will touch others like that, and we love it when it
happens--it's what keeps us reading and rereading literary
classics, crying when characters die and thrilling when they
succeed. We see ourselves in them, and them in ourselves.
It's true that not everyone will respond in the same way to
a story, and what's deeply affecting to one person will be
uninteresting to another. But you're not alone in having a
strong emotional response to the characters in "Buffy"--I
think the existence of this forum and many, many others
devoted to spirited discussion and appreciation of the show
and the characters is testament to the power of this
particular creation over its audience.
I see it as a very positive thing, a blessing, to be so
affected by a work of art. In fact, I think it's pretty
much the whole point!
Dyna :)
[> [> [>
More agreement -- cynesthesia, 14:33:50 05/06/02
Mon
The playwright John Osborne once said something along the
lines that when people saw his plays he didn't want them to
think, he wanted them to feel.
I'm still not sure how I got so emotionally invested in this
show that honestly isn't even my usual genre of choice. (Not
knocking any particular genre, it's just personal
inclination.) As has been said, I think it's because the
characters are so compelling and alive, er, even when some
of them are technically deceased.:)
There are books and movies that continue to haunt me years,
sometimes decades, after the fact. I feel like I've been
given a gift when I encounter something that powerful.
Cynthia
[> [> [> [>
and more... -- redcat, 16:02:32 05/06/02 Mon
This is a bit of a personal reply and I hope it doesn't
sound maudlin, or an attempt to elicit sympathy, as that's
not my intention. But I empathize with the intensity of
110v3w1110w's emotional relationship to the show and its
charcters.
I missed a big chunk of season 5 because I was taking care
of my best friend, my older sister who raised me, as she
went through the final stages of aggressive, predatory bone
cancer. I thus missed the story arc about Joyce’s illness
and death the first time those episodes played. “The Body”
was telecast just three weeks after my sister died and I was
not yet back into watching TV then. When I tried to watch
the episode later in re-runs, I found that I couldn’t sit
through it. I have it on tape now and, although it’s been
over a year, I still find it difficult to watch. Every
single thing about Joyce’s illness and death is different
than that of my sister -- except the emotions.
The line that always hits the hardest for me is Tara’s last
line to Buffy in the following exchange, during the scene
where just the two of them sit in the hospital waiting room
(thanks to Psyche’s transcripts):
BUFFY: Was it sudden?
TARA: What?
BUFFY: Your mother.
TARA: No. (thinks) Yes. (pauses) It's always sudden.
I don’t think this is the only reason, but perhaps good
literature and art can touch us because they say something
real, something that captures and expresses a truth that we
know, or one that we need to know. And if we’re not
affected by that, perhaps it’s because we’re not listening
hard enough. So celebrate your humanity! And be glad that
you can still feel, cry, laugh, grieve and chuckle - it
means you’re paying attention. (Or as Spike would put it,
you're "other than dead.")
[> [>
Well, how deep are we talking here? -- SingedCat,
16:48:03 05/06/02 Mon
...Because about a week ago it was pretty intense for me. I
know that a lot of this has to do with your own definitions,
but at least one episode had me preoccupied the whole next
day, and on and off for the rest of the week. I actually
started writing a fic, and that's intense for me.
Of course you factor in that I recently moved to a new city
and it's been hard making new friends, maybe that could
count as mitigating circumstance... I just don't want to be
one of those people who gets all wrapped up in TV because
they're low on human company. But I guess as long as its
temporary, I can deal. :)
[>
Re: its just TV -- Drizzt, 12:31:16 05/06/02
Mon
110v3w1110w
Your name is WEIRD!:)
What does it mean???
RE your emotional reaction to the show, I have you beat; I
watched The Body from season 5 multiple times. I cried when
watching the scene where Buffy discovers Joice's body and
vowed "I will find you Buffy, I will heal your mom"
Several posters here have recomended I see a shrink, wich I
currently am. I have mentioned my goal to find Buffy to him
several times; he does his best to change the subject,
instead of actually talking about my goal. I will not
mention it to him anymore.
enderbyparanormal.co.uk
Dear Sub
Existential Magical Theorist
Hope this makes you feel less upset about how much the show
afected you...
[> [>
Never give up, never surrender ! :) -- Ete,
13:06:57 05/06/02 Mon
Courage, Drizzt, I trust that somewhere, even far far away,
Buffy is waiting for you to find her and help her !
[> [>
Re: I think her name is the liscense plate version of
"I LOVE WILLOW" -- dochawk, 15:49:29
05/06/02 Mon
[> [> [>
Re: I think her name is the liscense plate version of
"I LOVE WILLOW" -- 110v3w1110w, 17:03:38
05/06/02 Mon
well first i am a guy which is why i am worried cause i
don't want to turn into a big girl :) just kidding about the
big girl but it is worrying secondly Drizzt i guess you must
have once played ultima online :)
also sorry about the overuse of smileys
[> [> [> [>
Re: I think her name is the liscense plate version of
"I LOVE WILLOW" -- Drizzt, 19:54:59
05/06/02 Mon
You think I must have played Ultima Online?
True, but I do not know what that has to do with
anything?
To clarify my goal; I intend to learn how to travel to
another universe where Buffy exists as a physical REAL
person...I do not see what an RPG game has to do with
that.
Unless you were answering my question about your name; then
I am still confused because I did not get the reference
either way...
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: I think her name is the liscense plate version of
"I LOVE WILLOW" -- 110v3w1110w, 21:15:30
05/06/02 Mon
7h15 15 c001 d00d 741k 1n u0
at least that is where i picked it up i guessed that is
where u did to wasn't having a go at you or anything btw did
you play on europa as Drizzt fishing ?
[>
It's literature: spoilers: MASH (TV), books, including
All Quiet on the Western Front and Bambi -- Fred, the
obvious pseudonym, 17:32:38 05/06/02 Mon
Concur with those who acknowledge the goals of an artist; to
make people FEEL about the fates of non-living
characters.
I still remember the episode of MASH (1975) when Col. Henry
Blake well, left the show. He never existed. (In fact, in
many ways, the character was a caricature.) But people in
my own family had similar results from their military
service. Resonance equalled impact.
In Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front" the fate of
his hero, Paul Baumer, had a massive impact not only on
casual readers but on pacifist movements of the 1920-1939
era. And BAUMER NEVER EXISTED! But the fact that similar
events happened to real people had an impact; ties between
fictional characters and real people create resonance.
Drizzt, below, refers to loss in his own family; that's
where many of these feelings come from. Resonance.
Hell, the death of Bambi's mother affected the views of
millions of people regarding hunting and ecology. And not
only did Bambi's mother never exist, she was NOTHING LIKE A
REAL DEER! Anthropomorphic resonance.
So let yourself feel; and remember that while these
characters are fictional, there are enough real people
around who suffer similar fates to justify real feeling.
[> [>
Great examples, Fred! -- Rob, 18:46:16 05/06/02
Mon
[> [>
Bambi's mother -- matching mole, 19:46:34
05/06/02 Mon
is one of my earliest memories (or at least earliest
memories of a movie). Very upsetting. And the final scene
of that episode of MASH had a similar although somewhat less
traumatic effect on me (difference between 5 or 6 and 14 I
guess).
Great examples
[> [> [>
Re: M*A*S*H -- LittleBIt, 19:51:23 05/06/02
Mon
I remember seeing Radar's face and not wanting to know, yet
already knowing.
[> [> [> [>
Re: M*A*S*H -- mundusmundi, 20:18:20 05/06/02
Mon
Reportedly, the writers didn't tell the cast in that scene
what was going to happen. Only Gary Burghoff knew, so what
we see are the spontaneous reactions of the
actors/characters in the moment. Very effective.
[> [> [>
Re: Bambi's mother -- sTalking Goat, 21:08:25
05/06/02 Mon
Everyone says they cried when Babmi's Mom was killed.
This may be strange but I distinctly remember seeing Bambi
at the age of 5, and I distinctly remember not crying
(because my cousin who was with me did) when Bambi's mother
gets shot.
I don't know if I've always understood the distinction
between fantasy and reality or if I've always been
emotionally detached.
[>
Re: its just TV -- Dedalus, 19:13:29 05/06/02
Mon
I personally wouldn't watch a television show that didn't
involve me deeply and cause me to care about the
characters.
Buffy has made me cry on at least five different
occasions.
Like many people have said, like Joss has said ... you know,
kind of the point.
O/T Thank
You -- Wisewoman, 19:56:57 05/06/02 Mon
I've reached the point in my recuperation where I can look
back with at least a touch of objectivity, and I absolutely
marvel at the support and affection I received, on a daily
basis, from the members of this community.
I discovered this discussion board just over a year ago and
didn't lurk for very long before I started putting my $.02
(US) in, and I was impressed then by the warm and gracious
reception I received. No other experience I have had on the
'net has come close to matching my experience here. I found
my fellow posters to be welcoming, polite, intelligent,
rational, erudite, exciting, hilarious, and inspiring. I
came to depend on my daily hit of the ATPo-experience. In
fact, as soon as I regained consciousness in the hospital
ICU I began agitating for some sort of 'net hook-up so I
could again make contact and find out what I'd missed--okay,
obsess much?
I feel blessed that the concern and support expressed by my
family and friends in the Realverse was echoed so profoundly
by my fellow Buffybuffs. There's a discussion in a thread
below about the extent to which we are willing to invest
emotion in fictional characters. I just wanted to report
that, after my recent experience of what might be labelled
the quintessential "mid-life near-death wake-up call," I was
somewhat surprised to find that Buffy and her world were
still very important to me, but not surprised that
the show is not nearly as important as are all of you.
I'm well enough to keep up with the show and the Board now,
and happy to put the last six weeks behind me, but I wanted
to say, one more time, thank you all so very much.
dubdub ;o)
[>
It's we who should be thanking you, dubdub --
mundusmundi, 20:12:13 05/06/02 Mon
You are what this board is all about. I'm glad you're
back.
-mm
[>
I'm so glad you're feeling better and back with us :-
) -- cynesthesia, 20:54:56 05/06/02 Mon
[>
You're part of why this board is awesome - it wasn't
the same without you. Great to have you back! -- The
Second Evil, 21:40:32 05/06/02 Mon
[>
Re: O/T Thank You -- yuri, 21:46:18 05/06/02
Mon
You embody completely what you admire. (That's you/dubdub,
not you/general you.) The concern and support you received
reflected the warmth and (heh) wiseness you've imparted upon
us.
thanks for the thanks and then thanks again.
;o)
[>
Re: O/T Thank You -- Aquitaine, 04:43:05
05/07/02 Tue
Some people just get what's coming to them;)
I'm so glad you are feeling well and philosophical again.
LOL. Welcome back!
- Aquitaine
[>
Thank you, WW; good to have you back! --
verdantheart, 06:31:37 05/07/02 Tue
[>
Your presence is one of the graces of this board.
We're all glad you're back -- Kimberly, 06:58:55
05/07/02 Tue
[>
dubdub! -- Marie, 07:22:43 05/07/02 Tue
I was going to 'e' you today, and here you are! So good to
see you back and fit again. You have been missed!
Marie
[>
'We few / We happy few / We band of Dubb-ed'... ;-) ...
Welcome back! :-) :-) :-) -- OnM, 08:18:57 05/07/02
Tue
How many cheers do the Pyleans offer their champions? Well,
we'll add some extra ones!
There is no place
Like this place
Near this place
So this must be the place
[>
I'm so glad to see you back! I'm looking forward to
some more of your wisdom... -- Dichotomy, 08:19:02
05/07/02 Tue
...and more Clem goodies, too!
[>
Re: I feel much the same way about this place, despite
current SW obsession -- Dedalus, 12:09:26 05/07/02
Tue
[>
Welcome back, WW, you were missed! -- Masq,
16:22:33 05/07/02 Tue
[>
Welcome home Dub .... missed you! xo -- Liq,
09:39:55 05/08/02 Wed
[>
Glad you're feeling better! -- Humanitas,
17:42:54 05/08/02 Wed
A New World -
Initial Thoughts (and therefore AtS spoilers) --
matching mole, 20:09:07 05/06/02 Mon
The most striking thing about this episode was its look.
The world is suddenly made fresh again for Angel by the
arrival of Connor/Stev(ph?)en. Connor of course is in a
literal new world for him, a place in which he had only
spent a few days/weeks as an infant. And Wesley faces the
prospect of a new world in the employ of W&H.
And the appearance of the show changes to accentuate this
newness. Combat occurs in slow motion making the combat
seem more grim, more deliberate, and more devastating.
Aside from Angel (and the atypically hapless Groo) the rest
of the combatants are humans ordinary and otherwise. LA is
revealed as a city of bright sunshine, wide boulevards, and
seamy underpasses rather than the usual dark alleys,
warehouses, etc. The decaying elegance of the Hyperion
Hotel is replaced by the more squalid decay of an abandoned
apartment complex.
The 'monsters', human drug dealers are distinguished mostly
by their banality. And Angel seems suddenly, shockingly at
home in this new world. Is it just me or did he get a
balanced perspective on life awfully darn fast. Connor
comes back as a teenager who wants to kill him, gets mixed
up with drug dealers, and then is caught in a shootout with
the police. The normally obsessive Angel seems to take all
this pretty much in stride. Doesn't even try and stop
Connor from leaving in the end.
The rest of AI seemed mired in the past, worrying about
contacting Wesley (do you think thoughts of Wesley crossed
Angel's mind even once?) and closing the dimensional rift
(although that does seem kind of important) rather than
letting their imaginations get around the fact of Connor's
return. The lack of Wesley hurts them in more ways than one
- not only did he have knowledge he had an imaginative mind
which is what did him in, in the end.
My first impression of this episode was very positive. I'll
have to sleep on it now. Maybe I'll hate it tomorrow - but
I doubt it. Sure wish they'd give Lorne something to do
though.
[>
My little comment before I write much
more.......Spoiler for A new world... -- Rufus,
20:31:24 05/06/02 Mon
Wesley.....stop!!!! The evil woman just gave you a copy of
Dante's Inferno.....can that be a good thing? Next thing you
know she will ask you if you would like a bite of her
apple.....;)
[> [>
Re: My little comment before I write much
more.......Spoiler for A new world... -- sTalking Goat,
21:02:11 05/06/02 Mon
I'm sorry, if I understand correctly, her arguement is.
"You've already done the worst imaginable thing and reserved
yourself a stay in the worst place in Hell for an eternity,
so whats the harm in coming to work for us?"
I am I the only one who finds this incredibly stupid?
[> [> [>
Reminds me of a certain Spike/Buffy scene --
Traveler, 21:19:51 05/06/02 Mon
"You've already done the worst imaginable thing and
reserved yourself a stay in the worst place in Hell for an
eternity, so whats the harm in coming to work for
us?"
I recall someone saying "you belong in the darkness, with
me" to Buffy. It worked then, at least for a while. Who's to
say that it can't work on Wesley, now that he is in exile
and not liking his friends too much?
Besides, Lilah's said something to the effect of "just
thought I would try." She didn't think Wesley would really
betray his friends so easily, but she had nothing to lose
from approaching him, and everything to gain.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Reminds me of a certain Spike/Buffy scene --
Ian, 22:09:50 05/06/02 Mon
You're forgetting. They have 401(k) plan AND dental. How
can Wesley resist? He's only human.
[> [> [> [> [>
401(k) -- skeeve, 07:45:02 05/07/02 Tue
W&H's 401(k) plan consists entirely of W&H stock that one
can only sell to W&H designated buyers.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: 401(k) -- CW, 08:28:00 05/07/02 Tue
Sort of like Enron, but even more evil. ;o)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: 401(k) -- Dochawk, 17:08:28 05/07/02 Tue
After reading about what Enron did to California today, I
don't think W & H could be more evil.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Or a certain other Angel scene -- Valhalla,
22:10:33 05/06/02 Mon
By going to Holtz, Wes showed that he would even approach
Angel's worst enemy if he thought he was preventing
something horrible.
Lilah, maybe, can't quite understand the distinction between
dealing with an enemy to get what you want and dealing with
an enemy to avert a terrible fate to your nearest and
dearest, but Wes did deal with one person intent on causing
great harm (and that was when his friends were still his
friends), so what's the harm in trying to get him to deal
with another? Especially when he's so shunned and feeling
like hell (no pun intended).
[> [> [> [>
A Good First Step for W&H -- Malandanza,
12:05:20 05/07/02 Tue
"Besides, Lilah's said something to the effect of "just
thought I would try." She didn't think Wesley would really
betray his friends so easily, but she had nothing to lose
from approaching him, and everything to gain."
While it's almost impossible to imagine Wesley working for
W&H, Lilah's offer was a good first step for W&H. The fact
that the Inferno was a Tuscan version written in the 1500's
guarantees that a bibliophile like Wesley won't just throw
out the book to get the message off his mind. The book will
remain with him as a constant reminder of his betrayal of
Angel, a person who had taken him in and helped in out when
he needed assistance most.
If Lilah continues to visit Wesley, making herself useful to
him, we could see Wesley gradually slide towards evil. He
has demonstrated adequately in his dealings with Holtz that
he thinks he can make a deal with the devil and get the
upper hand. I could see him eventually working with them,
intending to get more from them than he gives them, only to
discover (as Lindsay always did) that he has been used from
the beginning.
W&H has been pretty effective at getting Angel to do some
very dark things. I don't think Wesley's character is any
stronger -- and, in fact a great deal weaker with the sense
of his own self-importance he frequently exhibits and his
willingness to make greater good sacrifices (as long as he's
sacrificing someone else, as he did in Pylea). He is
fertile ground for a subtle attempt at corruption --
fortunately, Lilah's specialty isn't subtlety, so Wesley may
get a break.
[> [> [> [> [>
Wesley and Lilah's Dueling Mind Games -- cjl,
12:30:28 05/07/02 Tue
Although Lilah's offer of employment to Wes looked like a
non-starter, the potential relationship between the two
could develop into a fascinating erotic duel.
Malandanza noted Wes' sense of self-importance and his
propensity to deal with the devil under certain conditions.
Suppose Lilah, armed with a complete portfolio on Mr.
Wyndham-Price and his tendencies, deliberately lobbed an
easily-rejected offer to lull Wes into a false sense of
superiority? Wes tries to go undercover at W&H, in order to
pull them down and redeem himself in the eyes of his former
comrades. But once he's in, Lilah and W&H manipulate events
to pit him against Angel and the Gang. He becomes Judas
Iscariot--for real, this time--and he's set up for another
Angel attack, the one that finally turns Angel to the dark
side.
[But wait: suppose Wes knew that she knew he wouldn't accept
the offer. And suppose she knew that HE knew that she knew
he wouldn't accept it. And suppose...]
This could be fun in a twisted way. Add in AD & SR's
obvious physical chemistry, and this could be a LOT of
twisted fun in MANY ways....
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Wesley and Lilah's Dueling Mind Games --
Arethusa, 12:52:03 05/07/02 Tue
There's a bit of a parallel here between Lilah and Wes, and
Willow and Amy. Amy knew Willow well enough to go straight
for Will's jugular-infer Willow's the same unpopular, uncool
geek as she was in high school, so Amy can easily manipulate
Willow. We know the W&H background on Wes must be very
extensive, and Lilah is more than smart enough to figure out
how to control or manipulate Wes-or at least try to.
Wes is a bundle of contradictions-insecure about his self-
worth, and overcompensating to hide his insecurity. Lilah's
trying to attack his precarious sense of worth. But
remember Wes in "Birthday"-bitter, angry and sad, but still
fighting evil.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Bitter, Angry and Sad, But Still Fighting Evil --
cjl, 13:35:25 05/07/02 Tue
Yes, Arethusa, your description of Wes is spot on--but this
is what makes the mind games so interesting. Wes thinks
he's working undercover at W&H to help Angel and his crew,
while Lilah monitors everything he's doing "on the sly" and
manipulates events so that Wes screws himself over even
worse than before. He goes into the devil's den to fight
evil, but he winds up repeating the same mistakes--this time
with W&H pulling the strings instead of Sahjhan.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Reminds me of a certain Spike/Buffy scene --
pr10n, 13:30:27 05/07/02 Tue
>Besides, Lilah's said something to the effect of "just
>thought I would try." She didn't think Wesley would really
>betray his friends so easily, but she had nothing to lose
>from approaching him, and everything to gain.
Au contraire, Lilah is using Devil Tactics 101 on Wesley:
whacking him with guilt while he's down, and then suggesting
the "sin" wasn't that bad really, and then casually offering
comfort and acceptance with folks who live that sinny
lifestyle. If there's a vote, I'm in the Iron Apple in the
Velvet Glove camp.
[> [> [>
Re: My little comment before I write much
more.......Spoiler for A new world... -- SpikeMom,
03:35:55 05/07/02 Tue
Hope Wesley gets this straight:
Inadvertently putting Conner in Holtz's hands = horrible
mistake.
Joining W&H = the true betrayal
Doublecrossing W&H = Go Wesley!
[> [> [>
Re: My little comment before I write much
more.......Spoiler for A new world... -- maddog,
08:39:55 05/07/02 Tue
Stupid to those of us that think what Wesley did wasn't the
unforgivable thing that Angel assumes. But she only knows
Angel's side, so she thinks he's done the worst possible
thing and is willing to capitalize off the fact that Wes
thinks himself lower than low...which isn't the case if you
ask me.
[> [>
Literature + Spoilers for A new world -- fresne,
22:09:39 05/06/02 Mon
Okay, when he opened the book and it was hello, Dante, I
about keeled over. Of course when he didn't comment on the
level reserved for barristers I felt a little less psychic,
but whatever. I'm filled with a literary after glow.
Not much to say just yet other than that was of the
coolness. And yes, young Connor/Stephen did a good job
picking up the Holtz speech patterns. Although, interesting
that alt dimensions make cute/peter pan boys and desicated
corpse like adults. And loving the sarcasm Gru. "Angel is
our leader."
Yeah, not much philosophical to say. Woo Who Dante.
Ahem...I'll just go over there now. Yeah.
[> [> [>
Re: Literature + Spoilers for A new world -- anom,
22:23:32 05/06/02 Mon
Oh yeah, thought of you when he opened the book, fresne. But
when Lilah said she "couldn't remember" who was in the
middle mouth, the worst of the worst, lowest of the low
(which she overplayed, btw), I thought Wes was gonna hand
her back the book & say, "Here, why don't you look it
up?"
[> [> [>
Groo -- Rufus, 22:33:12 05/06/02 Mon
I had to laugh at the way Groo is talking about Angel now.
When Groo first arrived on the scene, it was Angel looking
just a little bitter and insecure, now poor Groo is in the
same place, reduced to talking about his competition in a
sarcastic way.....I wonder how Groo would feel if Angel
touched his weapon....;)
[> [>
lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate -- Cleanthes,
06:05:17 05/07/02 Tue
[> [>
"Abandon hope all who enter".......spoilery
for A New World... -- purplegrrl, 10:04:40 05/07/02
Tue
I loved the reference to Dante's "Inferno."
And I think Lilah coming to Wesley's apartment was a two-
sided plan, or double-edged sword if you will. One was to
rub Wesley's nose in his falling out with Angel (hence the
book with references to lowest level of hell, Judas
Iscariat, betrayal, etc.), and two, that if Wesley had truly
"abandoned all hope" of reuniting with his friends, to get
him to switch sides (W&H would certainly be able to use an
excellent researcher like Wesley). Sort of like twisting
the knife that is already sticking out of Wesley's gut.
Also, the famous epitaph above the gate of Dante's Hell
could refer to those who join Wolfram & Hart. Yeah, Lindsey
got out, but I think he's the one exception to a really big
rule. W&H is known for "disappearing" employees who don't
tow the company line.
The Wesley we saw last night is an interesting contrast to
the Wesley of BtVS season 3 or even AtS season 2. Despite
being abandoned by his friends, Wesley is not trying to make
amends. He is angry when they try to contact him, insisting
that they leave him alone. He's angry, in a possibly-
leaning-to-the-dark-side sort of way, not grieving. I
suppose this is why Lilah thinks he would be susceptable to
her offer of employment. But despite being pompous or silly
or darkly angry, Wesley has strong moral fiber. He may not
be allied with Angel Investigations any longer, but I don't
think that means he's going to convert to the other side.
Besides, Wesley doesn't see his actions as a betrayal --
more of a necessary evil, that unfortunately wasn't really
necessary. Even knowing the truth about the fallacy of the
prophecy hasn't changed Wesley's convictions of his actions.
And he's angry that the others can't appreciate that.
[>
Re: Initial Thoughts (Spoilers) -- Wisewoman,
20:38:25 05/06/02 Mon
However it came to pass, and whoever is responsible, whether
Joss, Greenwalt, casting agent, or director, I was impressed
that Connor/Steven looks like Darla and sounds like Holtz. I
really appreciate that attention to detail, even if it's
unintentional, LOL!
;o)
[>
This was by far my favorite AtS episode of the
season -- Traveler, 21:13:09 05/06/02 Mon
I agree with everything that MM wrote and I also thought
that the new actors did amazingly well, especially
Connor/Steven and Sunny. And the camera work was amazing.
The Matrix effects were very very good. And there was some
real, juicy plot! And foreshadowing, and... did I mention
that I really liked this episode?
[> [>
Me, not so much -- JBone, 21:53:23 05/06/02
Mon
I've said it before here, and I'll say it again, I am not a
fan of the rapidly aged offspring storyline. I guess it
started in college watching soap operas, a six year old one
year would disappear and turn up a year later 16 years old.
This would drive me nuts. I'd feel better if AtS was doing
something original or advancing the shtick. But they're
not. Xena and Gabrielle alone did this type of thing to
death. Where the rapidly aged offspring shows back up right
away with a mission to kill his/her parent. Hopefully the
writing gets less lazy.
I really didn't mean to be so critical. What they are doing
right is with the special effects/stunts, they are making
the story very entertaining. And, uh, the high point of the
season this year was Wesley's downward spiral in Loyalty and
Sleep Tight. They need to get back to that explosive
dynamic.
[> [> [>
Re: Me, not so much -- Lilac, 07:06:17 05/07/02
Tue
At least Angel offers a plausible (kind of reason) for rapid
offspring growth. I don't believe I've ever heard of a soap
opera explaining a rapid growth spurt on a hell dimension --
but maybe those well coiffed folks have more problems than
they realize. My point is, I guess, that in this context,
the kid shooting up to adolescence doesn't bother me.
[> [> [> [>
If it's any help-- (buffy s3 spoilers) --
SingedCat, 07:52:12 05/07/02 Tue
The different times of hells dimensions were established in
Buffy--
Buffy Episode 3.1 Buffy goes to a hell where the time delay
is so extreme that in a day or two our time a boy becomes an
old man.
Same season, a few eps later, Angel returns from a hell
dimension a few months after his disappearance, having spent
a hundred years in torment (by Giles' estimate). So it
malkes good sense, excpt for Connor being able to come back-
- where did he get that mojo?!
On the flip side, I'll agree it's not the most original
device, but this show manages to avoid most of *my* pet
peeves, so I'll go with it for now. :)
[>
Re: A New World - Wow -- Valhalla, 22:04:05
05/06/02 Mon
Whoooeee! That was tense. And fabulous referential
fodder.
Ok, so I admit all I know about Judas Iscariot comes
straight from Andrew Lloyd Webber (despite 6 years of
catechism -- what was I doing with all that time?). Maybe
other versions of the Judas/Jesus story are different. But
I was struck by how dead-on Lilah's reference was.
Judas believes (or convinces himself) that his betrayal of
Jesus was necessary to stop worse things hapening to Jesus
(They think they've found the new Messiah/And they'll hurt
you when they find they're wrong ... But every word you say
today/Get's twisted 'round some other way/And they'll hurt
you if they think you've lied).
Judas went to Jesus enemies – people clearly afraid of Jesus
and bent on destroying him., just as Wes went to Holtz. As
with Judas, things didn't go quite as Wes planned. Judas'
actions result in a greater tragedy than he tries to avert
(My God! I saw him. He looked three-quarters dead!/And he
was so bad I had to turn my head./You beat him so hard that
he was bent and lame). Wes thought he was averting danger
to Angel of destroying his son, but ended up bringing on a
fate for Angel and Connor (possibly) worse than death –
Angel's loss of Connor and Connor's growing up in a hell
dimension (sorry, not going to call him Steven even if Angel
does).
Just like Judas, everyone hates Wes for it (Damned for all
time; dragged throught he slime and the mud). Of course,
Judas didn't have a Fred trying to bring about a
reconciliation (in JC Superstar, Judas dies before the end
of the show). The AI gang is much more concerned with
Angel's fate than the Apostles were with Jesus in JCS. I
hadn't really thought of Angel as a Jesus-figure before
(perhaps a lack of imagination), but he was reborn in a
sense when he got his soul. And Angel's got plenty to do
trying to redeem his own sins, nevermind taking on the
world's.
The Judas reference was also interesting because again, the
ME crowd focused on Hell (well, Judas in hell), without
really implicating heaven or Christianity.
Unconnected to Judas -- When Angel was throwing Connor
around trying to get him to just calm down for a minute and
listen, I thought of the scene(s) in 'The Miracle Worker',
where Annie Sullivan battles with Helen Keller to get her to
learn how to communicate, and Helen's resistance is
ferocious, virtually feral. But maybe that's too much of a
stretch!
Finally – A soap opera! Does that count as
metanarration?
[> [>
Re: A New World - Wow -- maddog, 09:20:16
05/07/02 Tue
How do we know this is worse? How do we know that Angel
wouldn't have killed Connor because of the specific blood
he'd been slipped. At least with Connor alive there's a
chance. The sooner Angel realizes that, the sooner he'll be
able to make peace with Connor.
[>
Small things in actors' craft (spoilers for ANW) --
Solitude1056, 22:08:56 05/06/02 Mon
So I finished two finals today, and treated myself to
watching AtS while it actually broadcast - woo, and may I
add, hoo! That minor bit o' excitement aside, had a few
things to add myself, while I process the past two weeks
fury (no pun intended) of plot twists and developments on
AtS.
First, hats off to, uh, Victor, or Vincent? What is
that actor's name? It's hard to do "stand perfectly silent
and look attentive" without ending up looking like you're
just doing your best impersonation of fungi on a log. (Just
as hard as it is for most less-than-stellar actors to do
crazy without chewing the scenery.) There's a particular
body position that I look for when watching such scenes,
although I never really realized it before watching
AtS/BtVS, where watching rewards you with seeing your
expectations (or greatest fears) confirmed, but without
sacrificing to the god of Mainstream Mediocrity. I got it,
in spades, in tonight's young guest star.
See, SMG does something most few warriors/fighters I've
known would never do - she puts her hands in her
pockets. Okay, you argue, that's because it's cold.
Well, wear some freakin' gloves, Buffy! *cough* Constant
fighting and/or training (which, btw, we've seen Buffy do
none of since Giles left) pushes a person towards a certain
level of hyper awareness. Even in today's controlled
atmosphere of illusory city safety, someone who's skilled -
at performing physical acts that really could incapcitate or
kill - is going to be aware of two things at all times. One,
that this knowledge may eventually be needed. Two, that the
last thing they ever want to have happen is to use the
skill, so they're constantly prepared ahead of time to
defuse/prevent such. That means they don't get caught off-
guard. On top of that, many of the higher martial arts
incorporate training where one is blindfolded, or training
that begins with one's back to the opponent. The last thing
you want is to waste precious seconds struggling to get your
hands out of your jeans pockets, pushing you closer to the
point where you won't have the option to just de-arm the
attacker but will be forced to use stronger force.
Why all that mini-lecture about such tiny details? Cause
Connor/Stephen didn't put his hands in his pockets - even
when he was wearing a coat. Not once. He didn't fold his
arms over his chest, as far as I could tell. Always hanging
loose by his sides, hands open, palms facing his body. And
he walked hung from his shoulders, not moving with his hips
forefront and his shoulders slugging a half-beat behind like
the usual teenagerly slouch. And most importantly to me, the
kid didn't walk with that gawdawful on-the-toes walk that
some folks use when trying to say "I am like a cat, light on
my feet." Apparently those folks have never watched a cat,
who really does plant their feet solidly, and balance their
weight, before taking a leap. You can't get a huge leap like
my cats do if you're busy prancing around light-footed. So
it was with some great relief to see someone acting the part
of a warrior/fighter, who had obviously some direction (and
most likely training, cause it's hard to fake that) in how
to appear hyper-alert without looking like he's about to
burst at the seams or boosting for the Overacting Emmy
(TM).
It only helped that the actor was able to look sullen
without looking cross, by keeping his face quietly reticent.
(And yes, he does look a lot like the actress who played
Darla.) Like someone commented about Nicholas Brendan, this
actor also has eyes that do a great deal of the work, and
his eyes were attentive and alert. It's always been a
drawback for DB, IMO, that when he's trying to play
"listening quietly" he just ends up looking like he's
thinking of his grocery list. I mean, for all I know, that's
exactly what he's thinking of, but dammit, I'm watching a
television show, I want them to at least not remind me that
they have lives! ;-)
As for Cordy... I admire that ME doesn't want to make it
seem like "oh, she's demon now, she can solve everything
with her powers" - but I'm not so sure I can handle even a
single more instance of "wow, look what she's done" and then
she's not able to duplicate it. Why float during her first
post-almost-death vision? Why not do it again afterwards?
Why glow out the shrimp - whether that achieved shrimpy
heaven or return-to-home, I couldn't tell - but then not be
able to do it again? Could someone at ME please stand up and
tell us what she is? Hell, does anyone at ME even
know?
And finally, Groo grows on me more and more every week. His
dorkiness is still dorkness, but it's additionally more
endearing now that he's discovered - gasp! - sarcasm. The
only real laughter point for me was his comment about Angel
being the boss. No, I don't want Groo to "go bad" when he
decides that hero-worship (or even princess-worship) isn't
the right route, but it's nice to see that he's perfectly
capable of putting two and two together and deciding for
himself. That, and it was also good to see he's become a
member at least temporarily, given how he and Gunn worked
quickly and efficiently side-by-side when originally going
after Connor/Stephen.
Besides, few can do silent facial expressions as well as the
guy playing Groo, but he may've met his match in the new kid
on the block. We'll have to see, and I still need to finish
processing... Wesley is a whole separate post, and I'm
waiting to hear what other folks have to say about the
latest development (although it makes logical sense that
Lilah would take that step, and I'm only surprised I didn't
think of it until she knocked on his door).
[> [>
Re: ANW Maybe Wes will... -- Cydney, 05:20:29
05/07/02 Tue
go to work for WR&H in order to spy on them or undermine
them and redeem himself to Angel. What will WR&H do if they
discover Connor is alive and he and Holtz are back?
Question is, who will replace Wes' knowledge at AI. They
need him.
I thought the scene with the dimensional portal lady was a
hoot. "Sometimes I get smutz in my eye" and safety glasses!
Egad!
[> [> [>
Re: ANW Maybe Wes will... -- Darby, 07:23:06
05/07/02 Tue
...But I wanted the incantation to be in Yiddish after that.
Maybe they were afraid of having to research the Cabbalah,
or of pissing people off.
And Sol, thanks for focussing me on something I noticed in
the episode while not seeing through to the techniques
beneath - this new kid and DB have definite chemistry.
Their scenes are charged with that sublimated energy that's
just perfect for what's going on. I'm a firm believer that
most chemistry isn't accidental, but generated by good
actors, and he's a find.
Part of me is dying to know if this Angel-Connor rift will
be resolved by the finale, as much as I want to remain
unspoiled. Guess I'll remain appropriately undead.
[>
It just occurred to me... -- cynesthesia,
02:24:46 05/07/02 Tue
that the triangle of Angel-Connor-Holtz strikes me as a sort
of weird inversion of the Darth Vader-Luke-Obi Wan triangle
of Star Wars. I haven't really thought about this at all,
it's just an immediate reaction. It's certainly not an exact
parallel by any means, but there is the mentor/surrogate
father (Holtz/Obi Wan) who rears the son (Connor/Luke) who
must meet his eeevil father (Angel/Darth Vader), or so
Connor beleives his father to be in this case. Only where we
saw the other story from the point of view of the son, we're
oriented more towards Angel's POV in this one. Hmmm....
Did anyone else have this reaction?
[> [>
How bout this?? Tic Toc Tic Toc (spoil) -- neaux,
04:44:05 05/07/02 Tue
If anyone remember a chat from last week where I said Connor
looked like a Lost Boy.. I cant believe they used the
PeterPan reference.
anyway.. So while Connor might have been lost in the Hell
dimension (Neverneverland), He really was lost in LA. or was
he? When Holtz reimurges, you get the impression that Connor
might have been instructed by him. I dunno. I've only seen
it once.
But.. imagine this reverse scenario. Holtz is Captain Hook,
Connor is a Lost Boy and Angel is.. err.. um.. Wendy? You
could call it Peter Pan with a reverse twist?
Now if they could get a mutant alligator with a ticker or
something in a closing episode.. that would be keen!
[> [> [>
Re: How bout this?? Tic Toc Tic Toc (spoil) --
pr10n, 14:25:47 05/07/02 Tue
[preparing for potential flaming newbie death]
Doesn't this whole bit shriek of John Connor of Skynet
fame?
NB: Terminator = Destroyer, lightning, dropped from ceiling
(sans nude Austrians), hey the future sucks, have you seen
my dad?
I'm just saying.
[>
Re: A New World - Initial Thoughts (and therefore AtS
spoilers) -- Cactus Watcher, 07:22:33 05/07/02
Tue
Really enjoyed the episode on first viewing, and again this
morning on tape. Thinking about it, there are some flaws,
or perhaps more accurately, points where believability is
sacrificed to keep the story rolling. But, generally they
are forgivable flaws.
My one pet peeve with Angel has always been the way
extremely interesting new female characters (played by fine
actresses) pop up only to disappear forever. Usually in TV,
the guest stars are pretty forgetable. But, not on Angel.
The first woman Angel tried to help in the very first
episode, the actress who wanted to be young forever,
Wesley's girlfriend last year, and others all were more
interesting to me than Darla or even Groo. This episode,
just about the time you begin to wonder what Sonny is all
about, when she's gone. I hope our blue-haired, dimension-
doctor will be back sometime. I think she has promise,
too.
[> [>
question about that.. -- neaux, 08:04:53
05/07/02 Tue
Who is the actress that played Sonny? I know I have seen her
in other roles.. but cant think of them.
Also I want to see the bordello mistress make a return.
^_^
[> [> [>
Answer my own question: CAST INFORMATION.. --
neaux, 09:16:12 05/07/02 Tue
Turns out Sunny was played by Erika Thomahlen who can
normally be seen on NBC's Saturday Morning Pre-teen show
"Just Deal". yes that is where I have seen her before but
I didnt make the connection.. and yes I am fessing up that I
watch NBC on Saturday Mornings.
Meerna (the blue faced lady): is played by Deborah Zoe.
Deborah Zoe is listed at Hollywood.com as playing Sean Scott
(Stiffler)'s girlfriend in the movie Road Trip.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Answer my own question: CAST INFORMATION.. --
maddog, 09:49:18 05/07/02 Tue
I did right away, though this character is a far cry from
the A+, never do anything wrong, student on that show. I
too was upset she bit the big one...though it had storyline
purposes.
[>
Wesley's replacement -- skeeve, 08:15:40
05/07/02 Tue
As noted by others, AI needs a magic person. Lorne is from
out of town, but doesn't seem to have much other magical
knowledge or ability. The portal lady is a possibility, but
she already has a job. I think Fred is the most likely
prospect. She is the smartest of the group and Wesley would
probably be willing to teach her, though house calls are out
of the question.
BTW Cordy really should have a talk with Skip about her
current biology. Cordy apparently knows neither how her new
demonness affects her, nor whether it is hereditary.
[>
Re: A New World - Initial Thoughts (and therefore AtS
spoilers)- Brain Sweepings -- Calluna, 09:48:59
05/07/02 Tue
Just some brain sweepings about last night's episode-
1-Okay, could they just give Wes a break? The man did what
he could with the information he had. It would be nice if
someone let him explain that he wasn't giving the kid to
Holtz. Even better, it'd be interesting (escpecially for a
crossover fan like me) if Wes at some point would tell AI
that he was taking the kid to Sunnydale. Makes sense. If you
had to choose a bunch of protectors for Conner would you go
with a vampire whose been drinking the kid's blood,a demon,
two half demons (one without a clue to what she can do) and
two humans OR the Slayer and two very powerful witches (I'm
assuming Wes wouldn't know about Willow's whole addicted to
magic thing)?
2-Speaking of crossovers, I'm still hoping for Connor and
Dawn to met.
3-Was it my imagination or was someone watching a little too
much "Evil Dead" and "Army of Darkness"?
And finally
4-Is there some sort of "Black leather coat" gene in Angel's
DNA? Geez, the kid's in LA for half a day and already he's
looking like his dad.
It was one of the cooler Angel eps of the season. Can't wait
to see more.
[> [>
Re: A New World - Initial Thoughts (and therefore AtS
spoilers)- Brain Sweepings -- purplegrrl, 10:24:20
05/07/02 Tue
***4-Is there some sort of "Black leather coat" gene in
Angel's DNA? Geez, the kid's in LA for half a day and
already he's looking like his dad.***
LOL! I'm glad someone else was thinking the same thing.
[> [> [>
Hell if he looked like Holtz he would need some
intensive moisturization..;) -- Rufus, 14:23:48
05/07/02 Tue
Is Mark Lutz a
regular for season 4? -- ComShuck me anytime!,
00:34:30 05/07/02 Tue
Please no spoilers, just a yes/no if you happen to know.
I'm loving Groo more and more.
[>
Re: Is Mark Lutz a regular for season 4? -- maddog,
08:19:38 05/07/02 Tue
I'm seriously doubting it. Take a look at the current
storyline. And that quote from last night when he's
patronizing Cordy, "yes, cause when Angel needs help we all
go running" or something to that affect. He's on his way
out. The story's just heading that way. He's going to
realize that no matter how much Cordy seems to like him, her
heart's with Angel.
[> [>
the sad thing is.. -- Kitt, 08:26:07 05/07/02
Tue
that as goofy and dumb as Groo seems to be, I'm starting to
like him. Of course, now he's Groo with a clue, so that
helps.
[> [> [>
Re: the sad thing is.. -- maddog, 08:46:51
05/07/02 Tue
Yeah but now that he's got a clue he's seeing the big
picture and is realizing just where Cordy's heart lies.
He's a little too doofy for me anyway.
[> [> [> [>
doofiness -- purplegrrl, 09:25:17 05/07/02
Tue
Aah, but that was part of his charm -- being so single-
mindedly stalwart, always there to protect his princess and
ensure her happiness. Oh, wait, that's the fairy-tale part
and this is the reality that is A:tS. Darn it! I suppose
that means he *is* on the way out. Angst abounds!!
(A friend of mine has a theory that Mark Lutz was added to
the cast to give DB an incentive to keep in shape -- she
thinks DB is starting to get a little chunky!)
[> [>
Hey, maybe he'll hook up with Lorne! They'd be
adorable! :D -- SingedCat, 11:17:06 05/07/02 Tue
[> [>
Re: Is Mark Lutz a regular for season 4? -- vampire
hunter D, 12:53:08 05/07/02 Tue
Just because he and Cordy can't possibly last, doesn't mean
he's out for S4. He could still stick around and help out
at the Agency. Hey, maybe he could hook up with Faith when
she gets out of Jail.
[> [> [>
Re: Is Mark Lutz a regular for season 4? -- maddog,
13:02:35 05/07/02 Tue
Come on, face it...he's only there for Cordy. I'm not
saying he couldn't stick around, but if you were in love
with someone who was in love with someone else...would you
stay? I'm doubting it.
[>
From a Mark Lutz interview dated today -- Dochawk,
16:28:23 05/07/02 Tue
According to an interview from today with mark Lutz from
Zap2It:
Mark Lutz has reason to be optimistic.
Although he hasn't been attached to a series for the fall
(yet), and his character on "Angel" appears to be living on
borrowed time, the actor had a really good year TV-wise"
So I guess he aint signed yet.
Current
board
| More May 2002