November 2002
posts
Of Spike and Basements in the Buffyverse --
alcibiades, 16:59:05 11/22/02 Fri
This year, like last year, we have spent some time with
Spike and Buffy in a basement. But there is a profound
different in the two experiences.
Last year, the basement we visited through the experiential
and sensory perception of Buffy was Spike's. It was a
sensuous space hacked out of the rock walls and the ground,
covered with richly colored carpets, books, lamps, records.
The last time we visited the basement, it was filled with
demon eggs, little bits of uncontrollable resentment about
to burst from their shell because of the entropic state the
Spike and Buffy relationship created.
Buffy's solution, egged on by Riley, was to torpedo the
basement whole. For Buffy this meant there was no longer a
physical space she could go to to indulge her id. Since she
had destroyed the physical place whole, she was safe from
desires she could not otherwise control, her own desires
which scared her intensely even as she disowned them as
Spike's.
In the next episodes, however, Spike wandered dispossessed
of his own whole self. Unable to sublimate his dark urges
into loving Buffy, yet disconnected from the evil web that
is his inheritance as a vampire because of the chip, his
rage and pain eventually burst forth in the AR. Yet, when
Spike saw his behavior subjectively, not through his own
eyes but through Buffy's, and then his own flashbacks where
he experienced Buffy's pain, he sublimated his enormous rage
and pain into fighting strength enough to attain a greater
spiritual level. He used his demonic animus to power his
quest for an ennobled state born from his eros of the good
(Buffy).
As Buffy inhabited Spike's idroom -- his basement -- as a
way of denying her own id while fully indulging it, putting
the blame on their mutual actions fully on Spike and not on
herself, Spike borrowed Buffy as his superego. He blamed
her for that as well. [It shouldn't be this way. Vampire,
slayer. Vampire kills slayer, uses her bones to pick his
teeth.]
This year, too, Spike has been inhabiting basements. But
the situation is totally different than it was last year,
because of the two basement we have seen him in this year,
neither of them is his. The first is the place of the
hellmouth -- a basement he was drawn to from some reason we
don't know yet. Perhaps summoned by Morphy or perhaps to
stand guard over it as Cereberus -- a task he was
fulfilling, because it is not until he leaves that Jonathan
can be sacrificed in that spot to empower Morphy to rise fed
by the power of human blood.
The second basement, which Spike urges Buffy to descend into
on Hoffman Street in Sleepers, is an interesting case.
Spike knows it is the seat of shameful behaviour on his
part, but he doesn't know why.
Yet here is the twist. This basement is not properly his
basement. This is not the playground of his id anymore --
so he doesn't much recognize the geography. The sins he
committed and buried there are truly denatured since he did
not commit them volitionally, and if he were to revert to
inhabiting his id at this point, this is not how he would be
wallowing.
He does have buried bodies in his past, but they create the
desire in him, not for more victims, but to help prevent
more victims from being created.
This is not to say that Spike does not still have a darkside
he has to deal with. I think he does. But it is no longer a
darkside that is drawn to killing. Perhaps his darkside
will center on the fact that he is still not his own man and
that he will still have to fight the strings and
compulsions, his present love or his past love, in his past
in order to become one.
So, I think, as with Willow where Morphy made a mistake by
trying to induce her to committ suicide, here, too, in this
basement that belongs to someone entirely else, a basement
that Spike can enter but does not inhabit, Morphy made a
mistake. Spike will reluctantly own these deeds as
something he disconnectedly recognizes he did. He will
recognize he deserves death for them. But since killing
humans is no longer the playground of Spike's id, by showing
his hand this audaciously with Spike, his best suborned
weapon to date, Morphy has unwittingly provided the means of
rescuing Spike from the compulsion he is under.
Because the pieces don't fit, because these are no longer
crimes that Spike would dream of committing on his own
volition, Spike can ask for help, and this time Buffy will
recognize he needs it. Buffy has a familiarity with Spike's
idground from long usage last year, and she realizes in the
basement on Hoffman St., that Here is not Home. This is no
longer ground that Spike inhabits.
[>
^ Oops. Spoilers through BTVS 7.8 above ^ --
alcibiades, 17:47:45 11/22/02 Fri
[>
Thanks, alcibiades. I enjoyed that. -- Dead Soul,
18:49:51 11/22/02 Fri
[>
Re: Of Spike and Basements in the Buffyverse --
Caroline, 19:44:01 11/22/02 Fri
Great post alcibiades. I like to add a couple of thoughts
and play devil's advocate to help to clarify my own views on
this (and I hope I'm not misinterpreting what you say).
I've also been thinking about the structure of souledSpike's
psyche and wondering about its current orientation. I see
your point about Spike no longer being drawn to killing but
wonder if he really has transmted this yet. His manipulation
by Morphy to kill in an unconscious way is symbolic, in my
interpretation, of a psychological state where the impulses
and drives are still there within but the conscience that
his ensouled state gives him compels him to repress those
impulses.
Do our darker impulses and drives go away? Once we are aware
of them and have contained and transmuted them, they
certainly lose their compulsive power over our behaviour.
But Spike was acting out his dark impulses in the most
unconscious way. Perhaps what is really going on is that his
new conscience has so strongly repressed this vampiric drive
to kill and feed that it has just erupted unconsciously into
being, thus providing him with a convenient defence
mechanism of forgetfulness. This is definitely a plausible
explanation, given how devastated Spike is about his past
behaviour, yet it also acknowledges the immense compulsions
that our unconsious drives can have over us. (This also fits
in with my argument that the big bad of the season is our
characters' darker sides that are made manifest in Morphy).
I think that Spike in Sleeper has begun the process
necessary to contain and transmute those impulses. While
initially denying his behaviour to Buffy, he conscience
nevertheless would not allow the denial to continue when the
evidence started mounting. He made a full confession of his
sins in an attempt to gain not only some absolution but an
end to his existence - a stake through the heart from the
slayer. He didn't just want to stop his darker impulses, he
wanted to negate his entire existence. The eruption of his
repressed drive again in the Hoffman Terrace basement - and
his awakening after tasting the slayer's blood - symbolize
the desire to live of the psyche, the desire of Eros to rise
above Thanatos. While Spike subsequently fully expected to
due, the tasting of the blood and his self-awakening from
his unconsious behaviour mean that the basic drive in his
psyche is to live and learn and overcome and transmute the
darkness within himself. In this case, the desire for death
is a copout and the individual must choose the more
difficult path of conscious development.
The tasting of the blood was a very Christ-like image, with
Buffy shedding her blood so that the souledSpike could live.
It awoke him from his unconscious thrall and challenged him
to change. Once again we have Buffy shedding blood so that a
souled vampire could live. I am encouraged by the progress
made by both Buffy and Spike in this episode in dealing with
their issues and concerns. They faced their problems and
pain with courage and dignity which gives great hope about
their capacity to handle what the Big Bad throws at them.
I hope to hear your thoughts and this and look forward to
continuing the discussion.
[> [>
Re: Of Spike and Basements in the Buffyverse --
Dariel, 20:43:54 11/22/02 Fri
I think you are right about Spike's repression of his
vampiric drives. His William self/soul is so horrified by
the vampire nature that he must separate from it, repress
and deny it. That is one of the reasons that, in BY, he
talks about the voices in his head as if they were different
beings: "him, it and the thing beneath..." Well, the last IS
separate, but the "him" I take to be William, and the "it"
is the demon.
Now that the vampire self has seen the light of day, so to
speak, Spike/William will have to learn to integrate, to
live with his dual nature.
[> [>
Re: Of Spike and Basements in the Buffyverse --
alcibiades, 21:56:34 11/22/02 Fri
Thanks Caroline.
I've also been thinking about the structure of
souledSpike's psyche and wondering about its current
orientation. I see your point about Spike no longer being
drawn to killing but wonder if he really has transmted this
yet. His manipulation by Morphy to kill in an unconscious
way is symbolic, in my interpretation, of a psychological
state where the impulses and drives are still there within
but
the conscience that his ensouled state gives him compels him
to repress those impulses.
Well in truth, I don't think we know yet definitively. We
won't really know until we find out just how Morphy is
getting to him.
There are a few possibilities.
One is as you say. He has repressed his vampiric nature,
but not entirely successfully, and its compulsion is still
exercising its pull on him. That is how Morphy is working
through his vulnerabilities. That is more or less what
Dariel is also arguing by bringing up the fractured
identity.
If however Spike has transmuted his compulsion for "killing
for kicks" as he put it in the original version of BY, then
it seems to be that Morphy is operating in another way.
One possibility, given the extent to which Spike is
clutching his head lately at moments when it seems he might
be seeing visions, is that Morphy might be working through
reverse chip pain. IOW causing him pain through his chip
until he accedes to Morphy's wishes. In which case, it is
reconditioning him to kill against his instincts. This does
explain the extent of the head holding we have seen, which
occurred once again in Sleepers in the basement when we were
seeing Spike through Buffy's eyes, not his own, which might
have revealed Morphy/Spike to us.
Another possibility is that Dru has him in a kind of thrall.
One interesting point is that although we saw Spike bite
several victims who rose, we didn't see him actually sire
anyone. Maybe that happened behind the scenes, or maybe Dru
is in league with Morphy. Dru is certainly appearing to
him, enough for him to comment about it to Morphy/Buffy in
Selfless. And in Lessons, Dru did tell him, we'll always be
together, singing our little songs. Here the trigger to act
unconsciously is being controlled by the little songs. That
seems to me a great big indication that Dru is likely
involved.
In either of these two cases, I don't think we can see the
process of Spike biting humans as his repressed self re-
emerging because there are too many complicating factors.
And FREX when Dru had Giles in thrall and he told Angel how
to end the world, we would also not chalk that up to Giles
having a repressed desire to end the world, but rather being
in a deep state of hypnosis, and subject to suggestions.
A fourth possibility, one which I alluded to but did not
spell out in my post, is that Spike's compulsion here is not
rising because of his repressed vampiric urge to bite, but
through the dark side of his love for Buffy. The one time
we do see his rationale for biting -- in Sleepers -- it is
because Buffy -- the model of his super-ego -- has urged him
to do it. So the compulsion could be a twisted dark form of
his desire to please Buffy arising -- and that is the thing
he has to exorcise, the all about Buffy tendency he just
fessed up to Buffy in Sleepers, not a continuing desire to
bite humans. In which case, the solution is to learn to be
his own man.
I am finding this the most interesting possibility,
particularly if Dru is involved, because what is going on is
the inversion/perversion of the yearning to be good to
please Buffy which ended in ensoulment. Here, this desire
is being twisted and perverted in a way which Morphy might
feel sure would rupture any connection between Spike and
Buffy. It also turns Buffy very much into a Dru figure --
the guiding star for whom he turned himself into a monster
in order to attain her. As a friend of mine likes to say,
Dru is the one who got Crushed when the House fell on Spike
and Buffy. The perfect revenge is to turn him back into a
monster so that she can once again be his lodestar.
I AM taking heart from the fact that Spike does not return
to familiar ground to bury those bodies. He goes to a
stranger's house to operate -- a nice upper middle class
house in Sunnydale. If he had taken his victims to the
tunnels in the Initiative or anywhere near his former crypt,
on the symbolic level, I'd be more worried that these
desires belonged to him, because I think that would signify
clearly that the desires were his own repressed ones.
In a stretch, we could say that the upper middle class house
might have a connection to William's upper middle class
status, but that seems remote. Likewise, the middle aged
woman whose house it was -- she didn't look particularly
like a mother figure, she seemed random to me.
So, to summarize, my feeling is that there is too much
manipulation of Spike going on just now for it to be clear
that his killing really is his own repressed desires. If he
is being fiddled with externally, then that argues against
suppressed desires working their way up through unconscious
fissures or breaks in the personality.
I think the thing that will help him with integration is to
get him fighting again. Once no one is messing with his
head and he has an outlet, a path of sublimation for his
vampiric fighting urges that is healthy, it will be easier
for him to be whole.
[> [>
Good post, Caroline -- Rahael, 10:01:21 11/23/02
Sat
And I totally agree with you about Morphy.
Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his performance
of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) -- ZachsMind,
21:15:07 11/22/02 Fri
People are always asking me why I like Buffy so much. What
follow is just one of many examples. I really enjoy the
acting. Particularly James Marsters. I don't necessarily
like Spike, but I LOVE how Marsters presents the character
and has developed Spike into a very complex individual who
is so filled with conflicting paradoxes and yet manages to
function (at least when a BBW isn't screwing with his head)
tolerably well in the environment given him. Marsters makes
Spike real, in an unreal fashion.
The following is risky. I'm making the foolish assumption I
can get inside Marsters' head. I may be wrong at times. I
certainly can't call the guy up and verify any of this, but
his performance is so flawless and brilliant I believe it
will stand up to this scrutiny. It should also be pointed
out that no man is an island. Marsters couldn't begin to do
this without the impressive writing and the direction, but
in anyone else's hands all the efforts in all the world
couldn't make the character of Spike simultaneously this
despicable and this lovable without the portrayal being
corny or pathetic or both. Marsters rises to the challenge
and above the pitfalls that a role of this nature would
derail any other performer.
From an acting standpoint, Spike is a very difficult role to
play right now. Actually, if you go back as far as season
four, it's amazing for me (someone who once was a young,
aspiring, struggling actor and is now just a bitter old
bastard) to watch Marsters perform his role. Spike would
fall flat and unbelievable in the hands of perhaps any other
actor living today. Yet it's one that fits Marsters like a
glove. Like a well-cut suit.
There is a book by Michael Shurtleff which as far as I'm
concerned is the actor's bible. Published back in 1978 it is
quite literally everything an actor needs to know to play a
part. It breaks it down beautifully, and in Shurtleff's
work, AUDITION, one of the important points he makes
is that an actor needs to know twelve things about his
character before he even gets on the stage or before the
cameras.
James Marsters has got these DOWN for Spike!
Here's the breakdown in a nutshell.
GUIDEPOST 1: RELATIONSHIP
Is there ever a time when you see Marsters on screen with
another individual, and you don't know his relationship with
that person? No. Never. Whether he's talking to Clem or
fighting with Buffy, you know at a glance what's going on,
and there's scores of things that must be on Marsters' mind
in some scenes, that brings him to do the smallest of things
to bring to the audience's mind what his relationship is to
others in the room. Marsters knows both what the
relationship is between Spike and any other given character,
and he understands how Spike feels about that relationship.
This comes out sometimes through dialogue delivery, and
sometimes even when he's just standing there, seemingly
doing nothing.
In the episode "Him" we learn that Xander's gonna have to
house Spike again, like he did back in season four, and
Marsters plays Spike very low key. He is thankful for the
gesture but he doesn't think he's going to work. His head is
down. His voice is lowkey. It's very subtle but we see his
pain and discomfort having to accept the graciousness of
Xander, and Xander's just rubbing it in which makes it
worse. However, we also sense in that simple scene that
nothing Xander can say compares to what Spike's already been
through in his life. And yet later in the same episode,
Xander & Spike are working together almost as if they're
plainclothes policemen working on a case. The partnership
seems so natural and they even work up a 'plan' together
that works well. Marsters manages with such grace and
subtlety to make this strange dichotomy work flawlessly. We
buy it. Xander & Spike are both actually friends, but
there's also an unspoken enmity between them, because even
though the both won't admit it, they're competing for Buffy.
This subtlety inside Marsters' presentation of Spike carries
on to characters that we never see. What is his relationship
to God? The very small stage business in "Him" where Spike's
turning the figurines of angels around so that they're
looking away from him. He can't stand to see even statuettes
of angels looking at him. That tells VOLUMES. Whether it was
a writer's decision, a directorial choice, or an improv of
the actor, the moment is brilliant, and it tells us so much
about what's going on with Spike and yet tells us NOTHING.
Sheer genius and Marsters pulls it off so subtly that the
director had to go back and focus on it for a couple seconds
because he didn't want us to miss that moment.
GUIDEPOST 2: CONFLICT
"What are you fighting for?" is a question Shurtleff would
often ask his students. It's the most important question
from the perspective of bringing an immediacy to any scene
for the audience. One cannot just stand there and deliver
the lines, there's gotta be a force behind them. There's
gotta be a strategy in the dialogue.
Marsters must know that Spike doesn't just fight when he's
in 'game face.' Spike fights in every scene. There's a scene
in season six when he tells Dawn that he will protect her.
Spike gets a pack of cards out of the drawer, pulls a
chair over to the coffee table opposite Dawn.
DAWN: But I'm fine alone. It's not like anyone's coming
after me. I'm not the key. (Spike sets the chair down) Or if
I am, I don't open anything any more. It's over.
Remember?
SPIKE: (softly) I'm not leaving you here by yourself, so
forget it.
He sits in the chair.
DAWN: Well, I'm just saying-
Spike slams the cards down hard on the table. Dawn jumps.
SPIKE: (not looking at her) No. I'm not leaving you ... to
get hurt. (softly) Not again.
They look at each other. Spike points to the cards.
SPIKE: Now deal.
Dawn picks up the cards.
He's fighting in every scene. He's fighting to be a
gentleman, despite the evil that still rages within him.
He's fighting internally (Man VS. Self). He's sometimes
fighting externally (Man VS. Man). He's often fighting to be
properly understood (Man VS. Environment) and he fails more
often than he succeeds, yet he never stops trying.
And in the episode "Beneath You" the battle which wages
internally through Spike comes out. Marsters jumps through
the various Spikes that we've seen through every season
since the second one. He does so with seemingly little
effort, and we see glimpses of personalities that are
entirely new which may be William the Bloody or something
else. Yet it's not so blatant that we think he's becoming a
split personality. They're all Spike, but they're different
tactics that he's used in the past with varying success.
He's trying on the different 'masks and costumes' that Spike
has used in the past, and by the end of the episode Spike
realizes that everything he knows up until now, everything
he's tried before the soul to use for survival - to fight
the fight that is his existence - it all fails him.
BUFFY: What the hell are you—?
SPIKE: It didn't work. Costume. Didn't help. Couldn't
hide.
BUFFY: No more mind games, Spike.
SPIKE: No more mind games. No more mind.
For the first time since we first met him in season two,
Spike is giving up. He's giving in. He can't do this alone
anymore. Back in season four when Spike attempted to kill
himself by falling on a stake, that was a cry for attention.
Even then he was fighting. We see through Marsters brilliant
performance this season with "Beneath You" and "Sleeper"
that he's losing the battle. He's run out of tricks. So when
he turns to face Buffy and bares his chest to her, he asks
her to make it quick. He's done, but she's not.
SPIKE: Do it fast, OK? He said you'd do it.
BUFFY: Who said?
SPIKE: Me. It was me. I saw it. I was here the whole time,
talking and singing. (sobs) There was a song.
BUFFY: What are you talking about?
SPIKE: I don't know. Please, I don't remember. Don't make me
remember. (to invisible person) Make it so I forget again! I
did what you wanted!
BUFFY: There's something here. (throws away the wooden tool
handle)
SPIKE: Oh, God, no, please. I NEED THAT! I can't cry the
soul out of me! It won't come. I killed, and I can feel 'em.
I can feel every one of them.
BUFFY: There's something playing with us. All of us.
SPIKE: What is it? Why is it doing this to me?
BUFFY: I don't know.
SPIKE: Will you... Help me. Can you help me?
BUFFY: I'll help you.
Never before has Spike asked for assistance without there
being a catch of some sort. He's giving himself no out this
time with Buffy. Before he'd barter with Giles and only help
if there was something in it for him. He'd tolerate the
assistance given him before but only if there was an escape
route somehow. Only if he could worm his way through and get
what he wants at someone else's expense. NOW he's accepting
the being tied up and put away from the table. He doesn't
argue when they talk about him as if he weren't there as
they do in the last scene of "Sleeper." Compare this to the
Thanksgiving episode of season four when the tied up and
newly chipped Spike would never shut up. Even when he was
tied up before, even when arrows were hitting him, he was
still fighting, with his mouth cuz it was the only thing not
tied up.
Now, Spike has lost the battle. His conflict has left him
fallen. He's got nothing left but the kindness of strangers.
This is the worst place for any actor to work from, because
there's no longer a conflict. There's nothing to fight,
which means Spike's down to feral survival. Next episode
should bring about a performance from Marsters unlike any
other, to have to come from such a dark place as an actor to
portray a character so broken and undone. Is there any other
actor on the planet who could believably pull off playing a
role from such a dark place? I think not. Not like Marsters.
GUIDEPOST 3: THE MOMENT BEFORE
In the scene of season four's "Lessons" when we first meet
the new Spike, when he opens the door and sees Buffy,
Marsters is not just a face with the expression of someone
from Laugh-In. The moment before is evident on his face. We
know that from the end of season six, he got his soul. We
don't know yet when we see this scene the first time that
he's been tortured mentally by a relentless evil spirit.
However, we see and are communicated within seconds, even
before Marsters gives off that blood curdling laugh, that
Spike is for some reason, completely and utterly insane.
Marsters communicates this to the audience with again,
subtlety. He doesn't roll his eyes or jump up and down
manically. He doesn't use mannerisms that are hokey and
fake. The portrayal comes out of him naturally and
organically, as if one might suspect Marsters himself has
experience with mental aberrations. So that by the episode
"Beneath You" when Buffy finally puts to words his
condition, Spike's response is one that we the audience
share.
BUFFY: Spike, have you completely lost your mind?
SPIKE: (lucidly) Well, yes. Where've you been all
night?
And this brings us to --
GUIDEPOST 4: HUMOR
Especially when one is playing such a tragic character as a
man who's become a vampire and then retrieves his soul of
his own accord thinking it will help him win the battle with
his enemy, his lover, and even himself, only to find that
the soul causes even more heartbreak than when Buffy shunned
him.. A guy who's this melodramatic and weighted down with
past crimes and present mistakes -- you gotta find the
funny. You gotta show the audience that it's okay to laugh
at this guy too, otherwise there's just too much here for
anyone to stomach. It brings to the audience the humanity of
the inhuman creature before them. It gives them something
they can share. When the mad Spike looks lucidly at Buffy
question about his sanity and goes "DUH!" we the audience
are with him. We're on his side in that moment. We FEEL
where he is and empathize on such a level that we find
ourselves laughing WITH him, not at him. Although there's
moments when the newly chipped Spike was pretty damn funny
to laugh AT.
Spike : I don't understand. This sort of thing's never
happened to me before. (He's sitting on Willow's bed.)
Willow : Maybe you were nervous.
Spike : I felt all right when I started. Let's try again.
(He leaps on her and draws back immediatly. He tries again
and the same thing happens.) Ow! Oh! Ow! Damn it! (He gets
up and kicks the dresser. He starts to pace around the
room.)
Willow : Maybe you're trying too hard. Doesn't this
happen to every vampire?
Spike : Not to me, it doesn't!
Willow : It's me, isn't it?
Spike : What are you talking about?
Willow : Well, you came looking for Buffy, then settled. I--
I... You didn't want to bite me. I just happened to be
around.
Spike : Piffle!
Willow : I know I'm not the kind of girl vamps like to sink
their teeth into. It's always like, "ooh, you're like a
sister to me," or, "oh, you're such a good friend."
Spike : Don't be ridiculous. I'd bite you in a heartbeat.
Willow : Really?
Spike sits on her bed again.
Spike : Thought about it.
Willow : When?
Spike : Remember last year, you had on that... Fuzzy pink
number with the lilac underneath?
Willow : I never would have guessed. You played the blood-
lust kinda cool.
Spike : Mmm. I hate being obvious. All fang-y and "rrrr!"
Takes the mystery out.
Willow : But if you could...
Spike : If I could, yeah.
Willow : You know, this doesn't make you any less
terrifying.
Spike : Don't patronize me.
But even in these moments, Marsters is careful not to turn
Spike into a joke. And in some times in seasons four and
five that was quite a dangerous prospect. Again, in someone
else's hands, the above dialogue may have been presented in
a way which made the failed vampire a flat joke that had no
empathy. However, Marsters portrays Spike in the moment,
knowing where he's been and knowing what he's fighting for,
so even when we're laughing at Spike, we're still laughing
with Marsters. Spike's never been a stereotypical "a vampire
walks into a bar" kind of joke. There's always something
meatier going on.
GUIDEPOST 5: OPPOSTIES
One of the things that brings out the depth of this
character is the opposites that dwell within him. Spike was
evil in season two, yet he was also a gentleman. He wanted
to have fun, but he also wanted to fight for what he
believed in. He's twisted, but in episodes like season
four's "Yoko Factor" we see he can take a complex plan to
its conclusion. He can manipulate. He can goad. He can test
the waters delicately and he can dive right into the foray.
Yet at all times he's still a gentleman.
Now that he has his soul, this dichotomy is reaching sharp
relief, because the gentleman in him now wants more. It is
no longer willing to accept any more suffering. It will no
longer tolerate what the soulless Spike was willing to
accept. The soulless Spike could kill and still be a
gentleman. The soulled Spike realizes it is this very
antisocial behavior which has robbed him not only of being a
proper man, but being a man at all. Without the soul, he
didn't see the dichotomy, and could be Jekyll & Hyde
simultaneously. Now, that's no longer possible.
It is this blaring opposite that made Spike what he was up
until now, and it's facing the lie of his existence for the
past century which is causing his psyche to unravel, moreso
than the Big Bad Whatever, which is only helping to pull at
the frayed edges of his mind. He was already losing it
before the BBW came along.
And nothing brought this forward like the attempted rape
scene. She would have sex with him before. Why won't she
now? The soulless Spike couldn't understand why this was
being denied him. Why had things changed? The spark was
gone. So he went to get it. Made perfect sense to the
soulless Spike, but now that he's soulled, he wishes he
could take it back. Another Opposite.
Spike is filled with paradoxes and contrasting beliefs &
actions. He's killed two Slayers, yet couldn't bring himself
to kill this third one. As Spike says in "Sleeper," "God
help me Buffy, it's still all about you." And it is, it
seems he was fine living in this dichotomy for over a
century, until Buffy came along to show him why he's been
living a lie.
GUIDEPOST 6: DISCOVERIES
Every time Spike punches somebody, the searing pain of the
chip is like something new. Even when Spike knows it's
coming, Marsters plays the pain so believably. It hits him
like a ton of bricks to his cerebellum. It's believable
because of how Marsters plays the discovery. As if every
painful shock from the chip feels worse or different than
the one before. That's the most obvious example of
Discovery.
In the last scene of "Beneath You" it's filled with Spike
discoveries.
Buffy reaches for his chest, where the scars seen in
episode 7x01 "Lessons" are healing.
BUFFY: Tell me what happened to you.
Spike flinches, recoils violently, and looks her into her
eyes.
SPIKE: Hey, hey, hey! No touching.
Watch the tape. The look on his face. Here's a discovery. He
looks at Buffy as if he thought she'd never touch him again,
yet here she is touching him. What does this mean? Does this
mean she still sees him as something other than an object?
It can't be. So the confused Spike goes through a plethora
of mental processes. We see it on Marsters face, as well as
in the delivery of his lines.
SPIKE: Am I flesh? Am I flesh to you? Feed on flesh. My
flesh. Nothing else. Not a spark. (nods) Oh, fine. Flesh
then. Solid through. (starts unzipping his pants) Get it
hard; service the girl.
Spike shrugs and starts undressing. This must be what the
girl wants. Okay. I'll serve. I'll do what worked before
maybe it'll work again. He says service but Marsters
delivery seems to be be just as much 'please the girl.' I'll
do whatever she wants, but it doesn't work.
Buffy is disgusted and smacks his hands away from his
pants.
BUFFY: Stop it!
Spike reflexively reaches up and grabs her by the throat.
Yet another discovery here. One of pain, shock & surprise,
because his mental processes were faulty. He's failed yet
again.
Buffy grabs his shoulder and throws him across the room.
Spike lands on top of some pews, breaking them into pieces.
He sits up a little, propped on his elbows behind
him.
And here we get realization. Yet another discovery, in the
dark. We can barely see his face, but we hear him thinking,
because of how Marsters says the words.
SPIKE: Right. Girl doesn't want to be serviced. Because
there's no spark!
One could take any scene between Spike & Buffy and while
sometimes (God love her) it appears to me that Sarah
Michelle Gellar is just phoning it in, I've NEVER seen
Marsters phone in his performance. He's always in there. And
there are even times when Marsters performance DEMANDS
attentive response, and SMG rises to the occasion. Marsters
brings it out of people. He brings out the best of his
fellow performers.
Watch the scene between Riley & Spike in "Into The Woods."
Marsters brings the very best out of Marc Blucas. Whether
you like Blucas or Riley, everyone's got to admit that this
is one of the best moments Blucas had on screen in the tv
series, and Marsters is the one who brings that best out of
him. Because he makes the perfect foil for Riley Finn's
discovery.
Fade back in on Riley holding the stake in Spike's chest.
SPIKE: (yelling) Ow! Bloody hell! Oh god! (quieter) Hey.
He looks down at his chest as he realizes he hasn't been
dusted yet. Riley yanks the stake out. Spike grabs his chest
in pain, and stares at the stake.
RILEY: Plastic wood-grain. Looks real, doesn't it? (Grabs
Spike's shirt again) Don't think I don't know what's goin'
on with you, Spike. (They glare at each other) Stay away
from her. Or we'll do this for real next time.
He pats Spike on the cheek and walks away. Spike leans
against the pillar panting. He's still clutching his chest,
but he begins to chuckle, and Riley turns back.
SPIKE: (chuckling) Oh, man. You are really under it, aren't
you?
RILEY: (angrily) What?
SPIKE: Look at you. All afraid I'm hot for your honey.
RILEY: (walks back toward Spike) Because you are.
SPIKE: Well ... yeah. But that's not your problem. Even if I
wasn't in the picture, you're never gonna be able to hold
onto her.
Riley puts his hand over Spike's hand that is covering the
wound. He pushes his hand deeper into it.
SPIKE: Ow, bloody hell!
RILEY: Maybe I didn't almost kill you enough.
SPIKE: (in pain) Come on. You're not the long haul guy and
you know it.
RILEY: Shut up.
SPIKE: You know it. Or else you wouldn't be getting suck
jobs from two-bit vampire trulls.
Riley looks annoyed, lets go of Spike. Spike continues
panting.
SPIKE: The girl needs some monster in her man ... and that's
not in your nature... (He pushes away from the pillar, still
holding his chest, and goes to sit in his chair) ...no
matter how low you try to go.
Spike sits back with an expression of pain. Riley paces
around restlessly. Spike reaches for his bottle and begins
to remove the cork again.
RILEY: You actually think you've got a shot with her?
SPIKE: No, I don't. (removes cork) Fella's gotta try,
though. Gotta do what he can. (Drinks) RILEY: If you touched
her... you know I'd kill you for real.
SPIKE: I had this chip outta my head, I'da killed you long
ago. (Replaces cork) Ain't love grand?
Spike tosses the bottle to Riley, who catches it and removes
the cork again. He sits on a nearby coffin and takes a sip.
SPIKE: (quietly) Sometimes I envy you so much it chokes me.
(They exchange a look) And sometimes I think I got the
better deal. (sighs) To be that close to her and not have
her. To be all alone even when you're holding her. Feeling
her, feeling her beneath you. Surrounding you. The scent ...
(louder) No, you got the better deal.
Riley looks over at Spike, takes another drink.
RILEY: (bitterly) I'm the lucky guy. (shakes his head) Yeah.
Long shot of the two of them sitting together. Riley tosses
the bottle back to Spike.
RILEY: I'm the guy.
Spike takes another swig. They sit there together.
Riley's the guy. The lucky guy. Unlucky. What a discovery.
And it's Marsters who helps him get there. Riley already
knew Buffy didn't love him the same way he loved her. He
didn't understand WHY until this very moment.
Okay. I'm tired. I could go on but I doubt anyone read this
far. Here's the rest of Shurtleff's Guideposts. I could
write a mile on each of them too, but I won't.
GUIDEPOST 7: COMMUNICATION AND COMPETITION
GUIDEPOST 8: IMPORTANCE
GUIDEPOST 9: FIND THE EVENTS
GUIDEPOST 10: PLACE
GUIDEPOST 11: ROLE PLAYING
GUIDEPOST 12: MYSTERY AND SECRET
My point is when people ask me why I enjoy Buffy so much,
this is just one of many reasons why. Marsters makes the
show worth watching, because his portrayal of a character
that's so hard to portray is something that could fill
volumes of interpretive criticism. It's rich and vibrant and
filled with emotion and energy. In a world where sitcoms
like "Just Shoot Me" actually get renewed, it's rare and
precious to find such fantastic acting as Marsters' on the
little screen.
If you have read this far, I humbly thank you, but you're
not off the hook. Who is your favorite actor in the
series and why? Okay. You don't have to write THIS much
but just write enough to get your point across and let me
know I didn't type all this blabber out in vain. =)
[>
Oh crap! I missed a tag! Sorry! (& this is spoilery up
to "Sleeper") -- ZachsMind, 21:16:26
11/22/02 Fri
[>
Who I like. A little this and that. -- Deeva,
22:13:13 11/22/02 Fri
Well, I'm not going to try and follow your example and wax
on about why I like JM but I'll cop out and say that I
pretty much agree with the points that you hit upon. I don't
know if I would care as much about Spike if he were played
by another actor not of his caliber. JM's ability and
involvement make me care about Spike's journey. I don't hold
Spike up on any altar but I am interested in his role in
Buffy's world.
For the very lack of sheer brain power or equal parts
laziness, I can't really decide, I can only possibly compare
this to some what like my admiration of Colin Firth's acting
ability. I have always loved Jane Austen's Pride and
Prejudice but was never a big fan of Mr. Darcy, until I
caught the mini series. In that series I saw another side of
Mr. Darcy that I couldn't imagine. One with more feeling
than I was willing to give him credit for. Now don't think
that my esteem for Colin Firth is frozen in his portrayal of
Mr. Darcy, not the case at all. It made me interested in the
rest of his filmography, so I went and looked for it. Gotta
say not disappointed in the least.
So getting back to the real subject at hand, I really do
like all of the actors on Buffy but picking one or four, I
would say that it's JM, SMG, ASH & AH.
I actually caught SMG when she was on All My Children (I
think?) She made a great little b****y trouble maker, look
at who her "mother" was. I liked her a lot in Cruel
Intentions.
As for ASH, the man appears to be quite fearless. From the
Rocky Horror Picture Show (I caught his performance on MTV
for Halloween a while back. I'll not soon be forgetting the
image of him in fishnets and lipstick!) to the Tasters'
Choice stuff to ManChild on BBC America. And hey, I've got a
thing for accents.
I haven't seen much else that she might've been in but I
loved AH in American Pie. And she is a far better Wicca than
any of those chicks on Charmed.
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) --
Wisewoman, 22:29:16 11/22/02 Fri
Yikes! I used to prepare for auditions using Shurtleff. What
an odyssey!
I admire Marsters' acting every week, but I think Emma
Caulfield is right up there with him. The character of Anya
is such that it's at times difficult to see the actor as
fulfilling all of the guideposts. I think it's because
Shurtleff has given actors a way to replicate authentic
human behaviour while acting, and Anya seldom displays
authentic human behaviour in any event!
Thanks for the blast from the past.
;o)
[> [>
I couldn't put Caulfield under the same
microscope... -- ZachsMind, 08:30:43 11/23/02 Sat
I'm not saying Caulfield is bad. I guess I'd have to say
she's average. I also admire Nicholas Brendan's performance
in Buffy, but this is apples & oranges. Marsters performance
is one that can be dissected and analyzed through Shurtleff.
I don't believe Caulfield or Brendan's performance can
withstand similar scrutiny. If I attempted, I fear they'd
fall short.
Anya's a difficult character as well but for dramatically
different reasons. While Spike is IN the world wallowing in
the muck, Anya feels separate and above it. Similar to S2
Cordelia, but while Cordy was spoiled in the mallrat sense,
Anya was spoiled ten times worse as a millenium old child of
D'Hoffryn. Talk about Daddy's money. So long as she did as
D'Hoffryn asked, not even the sky was the limit.
This is just a slice of what Caulfield had to ascertain as
an actress to play this role, but where does one come from
as an actress to play such a role convincingly? From the
early performances, I doubt Caulfield put a lot of thought
into answering that question. She took the lines given her
and lived in the moment, but I don't personally believe
she's an ex-vengeance demon in "The Wish" or
"Doppelgangland." It's not until somewhere around "Fear
Itself" that I start to accept the character is a thousand
years old, and it's not the fault of the writers. Caulfield
simply has no real frame of reference.
Compare Caulfield's big entrance into the series (The Wish)
to that of Marsters' (School Hard). Caulfield hits her mark
and says her lines, but we don't feel the sense of urgency
and the thrill of the kill that we get from Marsters right
off the bat. Marsters hits the ground running with his
performance and rare if ever could I find a scene where he's
not on top of things as an actor. Caulfield? I can't say
that about Caulfield. She fumbles and wallows in the first
few appearances, and it takes her almost a year to find her
footing. Somewhere around the time when she becomes a semi-
regular playtoy for Xander's sexual fantasies, ironically
that's where Caulfield finds Anya. Caulfield seemed nervous
and uncertain in her first appearances and she incorporated
that into her character, or maybe a lack of confidence was a
character choice? I have trouble believing a thousand year
old ex-demon would be that unsure of herself.
Don't get me wrong though. I adore Caulfield, however her
power is in her comic timing. She knows how to disarm you
with a smile at the most inopportune time. She can get a
laugh from a glance. She can play Anya in such a way to
where the other characters don't know if she's kidding but
the viewers do, and it's immediately believable both ways.
That's tough to do. She says the given dialogue with such
deadpan accuracy that you do sincerely believe every social
faux pas Anyanka commits. It's raw and fresh and comes from
a place of naivette that is hard not to love. And every time
she hugs a character in the show, it's like every time Spike
punches someone. It's a new discovery. Anya sincerely loves
to hug. It's always a new experience for her and Caulfield's
eyes just light up and her face warms the heart of the
viewer every time. Caulfield hugs as Anya in a way similar
to how a child looks at a delicious double scoop ice cream
cone for the first time. It's where we see that in a way
Anya has NEVER grown up.
And maybe that's Emma Caulfield's choice as an actor, to
play a thousand year old ex-demon as a child. She's Peter
Pan. It works sometimes, but again I can't see how she could
survive the Shurtleff scrutiny like Marsters' performance
can.
[> [> [>
I don't put much stock in Shurtleff, personally. --
Rob, 08:54:03 11/23/02 Sat
I've read his work before, and I always found it to be
pretentious, and in many cases, unrealistic. It depends
whether one is the kind of actor who just says his lines,
and eventually finds the character, or one who feels like
they have to know everything about the fictional person's
childhood in order to utter a simple line. I admire those
actors who research and spend hours cultivating every line,
but those same people also come off as a little crazy.
Just because one cannot judge her performance based on his
guidelines does not keep it from being brilliant. She is in
the situation of playing a very different type of character,
whose emotions, by definition, are not normal human
emotions. Spike, as a vampire, was still more in touch with
his humanity than Anyanka, making it easier to analyze his
performance in such a way. I would definitely rank her high
up there on the list of best actress on "Buffy."
But I still believe, and this is not just because I feel
like I have to, that SMG is the best actress on the show. I
think people far too often underestimate her talent. I have
never found her to be "phoning in her lines," and the only
times she might be accused of it (in the sixth season), I
would call more an artistic decision. Buffy was depressed.
The whole point was that she was just going through the
motions. She is a very striking actress. She has had such
moments of brutal intensity in the run of the show, such as
"The Body," the last few minutes of "The Gift," "Prophecy
Girl," etc. and some great comedic highs, the Magic Box
sequence of "Life Serial" being one of my personal
favorites. I think the show's success largely revolves on
SMG's shoulders. She has never been anything less than
utterly convincing as Buffy. I also adored her performances
in "Cruel Intentions," and, yes "Scooby Doo." She is a great
comedian, great dramatic actress, great everything.
[> [> [>
Re: I couldn't put Caulfield under the same
microscope... -- alcibiades, 09:42:54 11/23/02
Sat
And maybe that's Emma Caulfield's choice as an actor, to
play a thousand year old ex-demon as a child. She's
Peter
Pan. It works sometimes, but again I can't see how she could
survive the Shurtleff scrutiny like Marsters'
performance
can.
Can't comment on the text because I have never read it, but
I do think that playing Anya as a child does make sense in
the Jossverse where the demonic impulse is symbolizes living
in a world governed by id and never moving past that
developmental moment. As Anyanka, she never evolved past
the moment where she learned Olaf had betrayed her and she
sought revenge. Her whole existence is a paean devoted to
the "purity" of her feelings and the preservation of that
moment of empowerment, where she took revenge.
As for Anya's other ticks -- well her name was Aud/Odd.
[> [> [>
Re: I couldn't put Caulfield under the same
microscope... -- Rook, 12:34:17 11/23/02 Sat
Have to totally disagree about Marster's performance in
School Hard...I really disliked the character at first
because all he was was a standard generic villain
caricature, so much so that he might as well have pantomimed
twirling a mustache. It wasn't until he got into the
wheelchair that he had to stretch himself as an actor, a
task to which he rose admirably. But his performances prior
to that weren't any more interesting or skillful than Anya's
in The Wish and Doppelgangland.
[> [> [>
It's not the comedy that stretches her... --
Wisewoman, 16:06:42 11/23/02 Sat
I can't see how she could survive the Shurtleff scrutiny
like Marsters' performance can.
Maybe if you scrutinize The Body or Hell's Bells? Those are
places I know she shines, and there are others, but I'd have
to do an episode check. It's Anya's dramatic moments where
we get to see the full range of EC's talent.
;o)
[> [> [> [>
Okay maybe I'll do a Shurtleff dissection of Emma AFTER
I'm done with James. -- ZachsMind, 18:26:45 11/23/02
Sat
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (Response to your
question) -- frisby, 06:57:27 11/23/02 Sat
That's a very hard question. When push comes to shove I'll
still have to go with SMG, but it's the relation of Buffy
and Spike that is my favorite, and still, those who play
Giles and Willow and Xander, not to not mention the others
like Anya, bring very very much to the mix also. I will
contend that it is the synergetic emergence from the
original four (SMG, AH, AH, and NB) that has been the real
key to the wonderful success of this show. Angel was okay
but Spike has been a delicious desert or spice making each
of the others even better. I'm not articulate enough to
really review the performance of these actors, but I will
argue they've done a magnificent job -- both they personally
and the characters they depict will likely be with me
always, maybe like those from a really good novel or friends
from childhood. So there's one response, and hats off to
those (not meaning to forget Joss and Co -- the writers etc)
who "turn out a really good product" (each season has
improved and this one will be the best ever).
[>
I agree that JM is great as Spike/William/BB --
Deb, 09:44:39 11/23/02 Sat
You are 17? And you've given up on acting? Or do I have
you confused with someone else?
[> [>
Ya got me confused with someone else. I gave up around
30. -- ZachsMind, 15:28:45 11/23/02 Sat
[> [> [>
Sorry 'bout that -- Deb, 10:42:32 11/24/02
Sun
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) -- Spicywings,
10:44:05 11/23/02 Sat
Have to thank you for such an insightful and thought-
provoking post, and would very much appreciate reading the
remainder of your thoughts on the last six guideposts, no
matter the length. E-mail me or find me at Crumbling Walls.
thanx very much. Discussions concerning James' portrayal of
the character are extremely interesting to me.
Spicywings
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) --
Changeling, 15:00:14 11/23/02 Sat
Please finish Guideposts 7-12. This is the best critique of
James Marsters acting and analysis of the character of Spike
I've seen. Thank you for some fascinating insights.
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) -- Rowan,
09:09:37 11/24/02 Sun
This is a really fascinating post. Thank you! When I was
at Shore Leave this summer, James talked about how he has
created a 'widdle Sunnydale' in his head where 'Spike wubs
Buffy.'
Okay, pausing for the giggling and groaning. ;)
Anyway, he said that as long as he understands how Spike
inhabits this Sunnydale, then he can't go wrong in any
particular scene. It sounds as if what you've quoted is how
he goes about figuring how Spike inhabits the widdle
Sunnydale in his head.
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) --
Cheryl, 09:18:20 11/24/02 Sun
Interesting, thought-provoking analysis. Please continue
with the rest of the guideposts.
As for my favorite character, I do love all of them
(including Jonathan), but my favorite is Spike, for many of
the reasons you've mentioned. When he's on screen I'm always
riveted and the gamut of emotions he's succesfully had to
play over the years is impressive. Spike is a fascinating
character and kudos to JM for making him real.
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) --
klytaimnestra, 09:42:59 11/24/02 Sun
Thanks very much for posting this; I knew nothing about
acting, except that whatever JM does seems to work so well.
I now have a much more acute sense of how brilliant he is
and why. (File under "Discovery".)
For me I especially like how he makes anyone he's playing a
scene with look great too. Not all actors are so
generous.
[>
Please, PLEASE finish this....... -- rabbit,
14:40:43 11/24/02 Sun
You just explained so very much, you can't stop now! it
would be cruel not to finish!
[>
Re: Marsters under the microscope (dissecting his
performance of Spike with Shurtleff's Guideposts) -- mushmouse,
15:09:33 11/24/02 Sun
ZachsMind, this was so fascinating, I had to delurk for
this. I don't know anything about the technical aspects of
acting so this was just...neat!
I'm reminded of some of the dvd commentaries by MN and JW
about JM's effectiveness with other actors, with everyone
clamoring for more scenes with him. Some of that is credited
to Spike being a "reactive" character (as opposed to
Drusilla who is interesting but severely limited because
she's in her own little world), but now I'm more inclined to
credit Marsters with making Spike's reactiveness so
compelling and watchable.
By the same token, I'm giving SMG more leeway in her
performances since season 6. Buffy is now the *least*
reactive in emotional terms, but the most reactive on a
superficial level (slaying 'em left & right). Just because
Marsters is able to play Spike with ambiguity to spare
doesn't mean that SMG has that kind of room to play with
Buffy, the hero of the piece and thus constrained by the
demands of the stories in a way that Spike is not.
Buffy is still a mystery to herself and all of her circle,
and to us as well. Her little couch session with Webs
allowed some of that mystery to be revealed, but there's a
whole season's worth of Buffy revelations to come, so who
knows what they'll do with her? What's so remarkable about
Marsters' performance is that while he can appear to be so
transparent that we "see" everything about Spike's thoughts
& feelings, he still retains a degree of mystery that keeps
us coming back for more.
[>
Fascinating post...thanks for this -- shadowkat,
17:42:03 11/24/02 Sun
Very impressed. Did some studying acting myself ages
and ages ago, mostly Uta Hagen and some of that method guy.
From what I've read of Marsters interviews (he really likes
to explain the acting process to people btw - so check out
www.spikespotting.com for articles that do this), the actor
is a "method" actor with a little old school. He says
"method" doesn't work as well on stage - because you need to
project your facial expressions etc to the back of the
theater, but for the camera? Method is the best approach
he's found.
From what numerous actors have said on INSIDE ACTOR's STUDIO
as well as what I've read from Hagen and that Russian guy -
starts with Stans...?? the method is a process where the
actor builds a character from inside out.
What James basically does is he roots around deep inside
himself for experiences similar to Spike and builds the
character from that. For instance - if Spike killed someone?
He would act out in his head what that would feel like and
maybe connect it to an experience he had where he hit
someone over the head. (Because he obviously isn't a
killer). Or say your character loses someone? You reach back
and remember your mother's death. Method-acting is naked
acting - the actor literally exposes his core to the
audience. Because the emotions we see are what JM would
literally feel as Spike - it takes his head to the ultimate
what if? To stay sane while doing this approach - the actor
creates a box to put all these emotions and feelings in - a
place where the character lives - Scean Penn called it the
cage or box, Merly Streep also uses it. Dustin Hoffman has
been known to be a pain to work with because of his
insistence on knowing every little detail of the character
before doing a scene - he's almost anal about it.
A method actor normally does not want to know anything
his/her character doesn't know. So unlike the other
actors?
Marsters deliberately avoids spoilers or finding out what
comes next for his character. Adam Busch who plays Warren
commented last year in an interview that he went to the
internet to find this stuff out ahead of time. Marsters
avoids it. Marsters view is? If Spike doesn't know, I don't
know. When asked how he was going to deal with the guilt
inflicted by the soul in Shore Leave? His response was
typical "method" - "I'm going to have to dig really deep"
and as an actor "you often go places most pyschiatrists
would advise you to avoide". Method actors also often change
their physical appearence to fit a role. Robert Deniro put
on 100s of pounds to play lead in Raging Bull without being
asked. Dustin Hoffman insisted on waxing his legs for
Tootsie. Marsters has similarily lost weight to portray
Spike. (Compare to David Boreanze who hasn't lost weight nor
changes any aspect of his appearence.) When Marsters stops
playing Spike - you probably won't recognize him.
Acting is an interesting art form - because it is such a
physical one. Your body and speech are your tools and
product and limitations. The writer gives you the words, the
director the moves, the makeup guys the look, but you as an
actor? Control speech inflection, tone, accent, small
twitches in the face, a blink of the eyes...
Examples:
Beneath You: Nancy asks has anyone in this group not slept
together. Marsters does a subtle blink of the eyes when he
is directed to look at Xander. He blinks and sort of shakes
his head, it's very subtle and Xander looks flushed. That is
an example of the subtilites of body language which no
director can really get an actor to do.
Another example? The clenching of the facial muscels to get
across MorphSpike's grin. Or the look of horror and tears at
the corners of the eyes when he realizes what he's done in
Sleeper.
Also the swagger, how he treats that long duster like a cape
in Crush, moving almost with a catlike ease through the
Bronze.
Or the cheek to cheek moment he and Juliet Landau created in
their audition and were instructed to keep in School
Hard.
These look easy guys, but they aren't. I remember doing an
eye contact exericise once in acting class where we were
expected to convey such subitilies and it was close to
impossible.
An actor - a good actor - looks at a script and usually
tries to build a character from the words, creating back and
front story and writing out histories of the relationships.
This is far easier to do if you have the entire play or film
script in front of you, but if you have an evolving
character whose back story wasn't revealed yet? You have to
be careful. As Marsters puts it - I don't know if he was a
jerk or a choir boy. In an early interview circa 1997, he
assumes Spike was a theiving jerk but admits now that he
says that Spike was probably a choir boy. Turns out that's
sort of what they did. But the writer's were clever, they
took Marsters own background and used it.
Stuff Marsters told them about himself when he was in Junior
High. This helps - both actor and writer - particularly
when you have a five year tv show and evolving character
that you can't say everything about ahead of time or know
everything about.
The brillance of Btvs - is it works. The evolution of Spike
tracks back to the beginning, to the extent that we as an
audience can't really tell outside of a few minor foibles
that Whedon hadn't planned this trajectory for Spike and the
other characters from the beginning. (The foible of course
is who sired Spike - but it's a minor one and easily
spackled.)
What interests me most right now is if the writers and actor
can pull off something - I've never seen anyone else
successfully pull off with a popular anti-hero villain.
When Han Solo got less snarky in Return of the JEdi - Star
Wars lost it's edge as an example. But you can't keep Spike
evil and snarky all the way through - he becomes two-
dimensional and after a while a caricature of himself. He
must evolve to be interesting to the writers or anyone else.
Otherwise his character is in a sense nothing more than
window dressing or allegory. I know, I know there are quite
a few people out there who prefer fun caricatures or Wile E.
Coyotes...but this is more interesting and richer.
To take a character into a very dark place, have the
character give up and be dissolved in a state of depression,
is risky, and to convincingly pull them back out of it
again, reconstruct the character in the process and keep it
strong? Never seen it done effectively on TV or genre.
Usually the writers cop out. Be curious to see if they can
pull it off now.
Spike and Marsters are one of the major reasons that I am
obsessed with BTVS and write about it. I'm not invested in
whether or not the show demonstrates or pushes a particular
philosphy - mostly becomes I don't subscribe to just
one.
I pick pieces from several. I think I'm interested in how
these characters have evolved and changed and
interacted.
The psychology of them and their individual emotional and
mental journeys and how it relates to our own.
Anyways...just my ten cents.
PS: Wasn't planning on posting this week, but Zachsmind's
interesting take on acting methods was too hard to
resist.
Besides, needed a break from the family. ;-)SK
[> [>
Re: Fascinating post...thanks for this -- Rufus,
20:50:36 11/24/02 Sun
When asked how he was going to deal with the guilt
inflicted by the soul in Shore Leave? His response was
typical "method" - "I'm going to have to dig really deep"
and as an actor "you often go places most pyschiatrists
would advise you to avoide". Method actors also often change
their physical appearence to fit a role. Robert Deniro put
on 100s of pounds to play lead in Raging Bull without being
asked. Dustin Hoffman insisted on waxing his legs for
Tootsie. Marsters has similarily lost weight to portray
Spike. (Compare to David Boreanze who hasn't lost weight nor
changes any aspect of his appearence.) When Marsters stops
playing Spike - you probably won't recognize him.
Yes, and that is what may keep him employed over the years.
I'm glad he was smart enough to realize that the character
of Spike could only wear the coat and swagger about for so
long before he would become a parody. When Buffy was at the
door in the basement in Lessons it was clear when she saw
Spike that this was a different guy. The easy thing to do
would be have Spike be what he has always been from season
two, but that just isn't consistant with people, we all
change and evolve as we interact with others, to keep this
character hobbled with a persona that is trapped in the
Season 2 moment, would become boring and laughable.
[> [>
Re: Fascinating post...thanks for this --
Doriander, 02:06:58 11/25/02 Mon
I love reading about these stuff!
You know it’s odd as I’ve read in some places, not here,
describing JM’s current performance namely his mad scenes as
scenery chewing. It’s a case of YMMV, I suppose. Now JM is
not perfect, and in BY, knowing beforehand his love of
Shakespeare, I can’t help but recognize him slipping into
Shakespearean mode in some of his line delivery, which
worked magnificently in the church scene, but quite
discordant in the alley, particularly with “This, just the
beginning, love...” up to “...screaming, horror and
bloodshed”. I know he was switching personas in that scene,
but the knee-jerk "Oh god, he's doing Shakespeare" kinda
took me out of the moment. Otherwise, I think his current
portrayal is the most compelling, raw, and I like the
adjective you use, naked, that its cringe inducing, painful,
and hence not a excatly pleasure to watch (“service the
girl.” nuff said). And I’m glad we’ve progressed from that
because I agree that it could get old easily.
If anything, and I think JW and JM concur, his most over the
top portrayal was back in S2. I’ve read virtually every
article in Spikespotting myself and came away with the
notion that one big factor which informed JW’s decision on
the twist in Spike’s story in FFL, in addition to what
you’ve stated, was JM’s early-S2 portrayal. Spike is
a put-on persona. Look at SH-WML. That Spike was showy,
theatrical, his intonation and moves choreographed,
telegraphed, practiced, in a way that’s effortfully
effortless, unnaturally natural. Didn’t JW admonish JM
sayiing something along the lines of “a little more Tim
Roth, and a little less Olivier”? Seeing as his prior
experience was primarily stage acting, it’s understandable.
And oddly? Few people, if none, complained. Because it
worked, IMHO, due in large part to him playing off of Juliet
Landau. When those two do a scene, they are on, they’re in
their own little world, they may be over the top but they’re
over the top together, and it’s compelling to watch. Dru’s
crazy was endearing due in part to how Spike reacts to her;
coos her, humors her, occasionally loses patience but amends
it seconds later (and conversely, Spike’s crazy post BY
verged on grating because the other characters react to him
with discomfort or impatience).
Marsters deliberately avoids spoilers or finding out what
comes next for his character. Adam Busch who plays Warren
commented last year in an interview that he went to the
internet to find this stuff out ahead of time. Marsters
avoids it. Marsters view is? If Spike doesn't know, I don't
know. When asked how he was going to deal with the guilt
inflicted by the soul in Shore Leave? His response was
typical "method" - "I'm going to have to dig really deep"
and as an actor "you often go places most pyschiatrists
would advise you to avoide". Method actors also often change
their physical appearence to fit a role. Robert Deniro put
on 100s of pounds to play lead in Raging Bull without being
asked. Dustin Hoffman insisted on waxing his legs for
Tootsie. Marsters has similarily lost weight to portray
Spike. (Compare to David Boreanze who hasn't lost weight nor
changes any aspect of his appearence.) When Marsters stops
playing Spike - you probably won't recognize him.
Interesting conjecture I read from another board (band of
buggered forums), on why Spike appears to look healthier and
meatier: he’s been unknowingly feeding on humans. Conscious
choice on Marsters’ part you think? Someone there also
posted a link to an Adam Busch interview, which included a
funny anecdote about JM holding his breath during takes in
that bitty scene in “Smashed” (the one with Warren running a
scanning device over Spike’s head), because “vampires don’t
breathe”. I’m simultaneously amused and scared ;)
[> [> [>
Interesting points, Doriander, and I agree --
alcibiades, 10:51:18 11/25/02 Mon
And oddly? Few people, if none, complained. Because it
worked, IMHO, due in large part to him playing off of
Juliet Landau. When those two do a scene, they are on,
they’re in their own little world, they may be over the top
but they’re over the top together, and it’s compelling to
watch. Dru’s crazy was endearing due in part to how Spike
reacts to her; coos her, humors her, occasionally loses
patience but amends it seconds later (and conversely,
Spike’s crazy post BY verged on grating because the other
characters react to him with discomfort or impatience).
Very interesting Doriander. I think you are right there.
And it also has a strong effect, at least on some audience
members, of wanting the others to react with him with
compassion.
Otherwise, I think his current portrayal is the most
compelling, raw, and I like the adjective you use, naked,
that its cringe inducing, painful, and hence not a excatly
pleasure to watch (“service the girl.” nuff said). And I’m
glad we’ve progressed from that because I agree that it
could get old easily.
I agree with this too, precisely. I have found many of the
recent episodes, in the Spike scenes, not pleasurable at all
to watch -- they are really, really difficult, because Spike
is naked and raw and everyone else is buckled up. So this
is really the antithesis of his SchoolHard performance. He
has come full circle.
This is one reason I could not enjoy Him, frex, even though
many people thought it was comic. Yet, mixed through the
light tone was a very painful, cringe inducing performance
which I found too disturbing so as to be able to view the
episode as comic.
I also agree with you about the OTT Shakespeare note in BY
in some of the lines. It did jar me out of the scene to
some extent the first time through, as such a paean to
Shakespearean acting, but now, after a few viewings, it
bothers me less.
[> [>
Re: Fascinating post...thanks for this -- aliera,
14:30:26 11/25/02 Mon
Well I'm very glad you did post...didn't see this until
today but it made my day.
One of the things that caught my attention (whether true or
not I don't know) is when he said he kept putting "more"
into the character than the writers were intending and the
he was surprised by how much they were keeping in. Maybe
I'm reading to much into this (probably)but I'll put my
money on this actor. ;-)
[>
Putting in a word for Michelle Trachtenberg --
Tchaikovsky, 04:51:50 11/26/02 Tue
There's been a development of Dawn's character as profound
as any other (except perhaps Spike) in the last two and a
half years.
Michelle Trachtenberg does the comic scenes extremely well.
She also has the depth of emotion to bring off the startling
scenes in 'Blood Ties' and 'Dead Things'. I think that the
latter is brilliant and highly underrated, largely because
it was categorised as one of the 'Whiny Dawn' scenes that so
many people disliked. The complete despair of Buffy turning
herself in leaks transparently out of her face, in a very
beautifully lit scene.
Transition from the endearing little brat of 'Real Me',
through the self-discovery of 'Blood Ties', to the trauma of
'Bargaining', the empowerment of 'Grave' and the maturity of
'Beneath You' and 'Same Time, Same Place' has been handled
really, really well. This is why, for me, Trachtenberg is my
favourite actor on the show.
Incidentally, however, Alyson Hannigan and Sarah Michelle
Gellar have the knack of making me cry. Emma Caulfield and
Nicholas Brendon make me laugh. But it's Trachtenberg,
Marsters and Head who really leave me intrigued by their
characters. I believe that a spin-off on any of the three
would work superbly.
TCH
Marti's comment on the future of S8 from Entertainment
Weekly -- Deeva, 21:39:39 11/22/02 Fri
Buffy Branches Out? From Entertainment Weekly’s On the
Air by Lynette Rice
Sarah Michelle Gellar may be ready to pull up stakes, but
that hasn’t stopped UPN from imagining life without Buffy
the Vampire Slayer. Says UPN entertainment president
dawn Ostroff: "The franchise is important to us, so
obviously we’re going to do everything we can to keep the
show." The net has already begun talks with Buffy
exec producers Joss Whedon and Marti Noxon about the show’s
future is Gellar decides to walk in May-a direcion that
could require a major overhaul of the plot and title. "A
show with no Sarah is a spinoff," says Noxon, who believes
fans should brace themselves for life without Gellar. "We
can’t call it Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Her Friends
and Family or Buffy’s Vampire Ex-Boyfriend."
Don’t expect Dawn the Slayerette, either. While the drama
has highlighted Dawn (Michelle Trachtenberg) and her
Scoobyish pals at Sunnydale High, Noxon’s not that
interested in making a vampire 90210. "This season
feels really strong-we feel like we’re hitting all
cylinders. But I have mixed feelings about going on," admits
Noxon. "I want to do work I feel proud of before the idea of
killing vampires is like sticking a hot poker in my eye." As
is typical for most Buffy plotlines, tension is sure
to mount, because a decision on an eighth season and
Gellar’s participation isn’t expected until late winter.
Predicts Noxon, "No matter what happens, Buffy will
look different if it comes back-on camera and behind the
scenes."
************************
For lack of something to do at the moment, I typed this up.
It's from the Nov. 29th issue of the mag. I particularly
like the titles Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Her Friends
and Family or Buffy’s Vampire Ex-Boyfriend. That
last one got a smile out of me. *g*
[> Re: Marti's comment on the future of S8 from
Entertainment Weekly -- Alvin, 01:57:43 11/23/02
Sat
Isn't that last one also know as "Angel"?
[> [> LOL! -- yez, 07:15:32 11/23/02 Sat
[> Re: Marti's comment on the future of S8 from
Entertainment Weekly -- fearshade,
06:51:12 11/23/02 Sat
Well, if SMG doesn't sign on for S8, I hope the show does
continue. The title doesn't need a huge change, but a simple
one. Just call it 'Slayers'.
Do any of the other actors want to sign on for another
season?
[> [> Re: Marti's comment on the future of S8 from
Entertainment Weekly -- Deb, 08:20:39 11/23/02
Sat
I get the impression from what I read that she is sick and
tired of doing the vampire slaying bit, which is ok with me.
We all move on, grow up. I don't see any reason SMG would
want to stay -- careerwise. But I'm certainly up for a spin-
off with those who have signed three-year contracts to
date.
[> [> Do any of the other actors want to sign on
for another season? -- ZachsMind, 12:07:15 11/23/02
Sat
I remember reading somewhere that Nicholas Brendan, Alyson
Hannigan & James Marsters all have contracts that do NOT
expire the same time SMG's does. They each have at least one
more season where, IF the ME studio wants to continue
producing and IF the network wants to continue broadcasting,
those three are contractually obligated to show up. Neither
Caulfield, ASH, nor SMG have this same obligation.
So if there's a spinoff, it will most definitely include
Willow, Xander & Spike, at least on the outset. Michelle
Trachtenberg? Well, what else is she doing right now? My
guess is ultimately, the next season will somehow involve a
new Slayer (either Dawnie, Faith, or a new character they
introduce later this season) and Willow will take it upon
herself to be the new Slayer's Watcher. Xander, Spike, and
maybe Dawn will come along for the ride.
I still prefer my ROAD TRIP idea though. Throw them in a van
and do Scooby like mysteries with'em. I'd tune in.
[> [> [> ^^^ Oops. Forgot. That might be
spoilery up there. ^^^ -- ZachsMind, 12:29:09
11/23/02 Sat
[> [> [> Re: Do any of the other actors want to
sign on for another season? -- wiscoboy, 12:37:54
11/23/02 Sat
What else is M.T. doing right now? The bigger question is
what else is SMG doing right now other than dreaming of a
movie career? She needs to take a look at what she's done up
to this point and realize her film choices have been less
than memorable. The sinkhole of failed acting careers is a
very deep one. I believe she should take BTVS to an absolute
conclusion(on a better note than S5), then walk away.
[> [> [> Contracts aren't as air tight as all
that. -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:14:16 11/23/02 Sat
I'm not sure how this works, but Brendon, Hannigan, and
Marsters are contracted for three more seasons of Buffy the
Vampire Slayer, right? But, if Gellar leaves, it won't be
Buffy the Vampire Slayer anymore, they'll most likely change
the name and officially make it a spinoff, which they are
not contractually obligated to work on, I'm assuming.
Also, my personal hope is a Faith spin-off that brings
Xander along for the ride, but leaves the others out of it
except maybe for guest appearances (Willow, Spike, and Dawn
have too much bizarre backstory for them to work well as
secondary character is a new show).
[> [> [> [> Re: Contracts aren't as air tight
as all that. -- wiscoboy, 14:32:08 11/23/02 Sat
I don't think that Faith thing everyone is hyped about is
going to happen. Eliza seems determined to make a go for the
movie scene, which doesn't leave any room for a Faith
spinoff(which is why you haven't seen more of her the last
couple of seasons). My personal feeling is that when SMG is
done with this(and what I've read recently she has started
to waffle on this being the last season for her), that
should end the series for good(or move it to movie
sequels).
[> [> [> [> [> Yet another possibility...
(Speccy Spoilery) -- ZachsMind, 15:15:00 11/23/02
Sat
According to all spoiler reports I've recently read, they're
gonna bring in some Slayers in Training. That's what that
Robson guy meant by "gather them" when he breathed his last
words to Giles. Three to be exact. This is over and above
Faith, who's scheduled to make an appearance late in season
seven, after a brief stint over at Angel.
One of these S.I.T's will most probably die before the
season finale. One of them will probably be gay - a love
interest for Willow. The third slayer will probably become
THE Slayer after a final big blowout battle at the end of
season seven with Buffy, Faith, and the Big Bad. Faith will
die. Buffy may or may not die. Again. Buffy doesn't have to
die and since she's already died twice it'd be overkill, but
they have to kill Faith, because so long as Faith is alive,
Eliza Dushku would be the one to head things up in season
eight, and all signs point to Dushku hoping the same thing
Gellar's hoping for. What MAKES these women think silver
screen is better than a steady paycheck?
The end result will be the passing of the torch. A new
slayer will be born.
Who will the Slayer be? An actress who Mutant Enemy signs on
to contract who will cost less than Gellar and not be
allowed this political B.S. five to seven years from now. I
don't know how they could legally do it, but they could have
the actress sign a contract basically saying she's the
Slayer until the writers say she's not. The name of the show
can remain "The Vampire Slayer." They simply drop the
"Buffy." UNLESS of course the other girl just happens
to also be named Buffy. *smirk* It could happen!
[> [> [> [> [> [> Actual, FUTURE
spoilers in above post, not just speculation!! --
Dariel, 20:58:49 11/23/02 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hey! I SAID
Speccy Spoilery didn't I? -- ZachsMind, 07:25:26
11/25/02 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yeah, but
no one else knows what 'speccy spoilery' means! --
Slain, 11:45:37 11/25/02 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yet another
possibility... (Speccy Spoilery) -- B, 06:13:40
11/25/02 Mon
You can't force someone to continue to play a part,
regardless of what the contract says. A contract that says
"you're the slayer until we say otherwise" is unenforceable.
It's involuntary servitude and we fought a Civil War to
eliminate slavery. They could prevent someone from taking on
other roles for the duration of the contract, but it could
only be for a limited, specific time period, not "until we
say so."
[> [> [> [> [> We can all fantasize about
some things -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:25:00 11/23/02
Sat
If the B/A shippers can dream of Buffy and Angel getting
together once more, I can dream of the Faith Saga. And there
is some potential hope for my dream, considering that Eliza
Dushku doesn't seem to exactly be drawing in big name
movies.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Eliza Dushku should
go for the steady paycheck! -- ZachsMind, 18:25:04
11/23/02 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Same argument
can be said for SMG -- wiscoboy, 09:49:59 11/24/02
Sun
She has visions of big screen grandeur, but hasn't made a
film worth seeing yet(unless you're under 11yrs old and love
Scooby Doo).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> SMG's
career -- Finn Mac Cool, 12:11:22 11/24/02 Sun
Of course, Sarah Michelle Gellar may feel that the reason
she hasn't been able to make a truly successful movie is
that she has to spend so much of her time making BtVS. And,
if she wants to quit, I don't think she'll need to worry too
much about the steady paycheck. Odds are she's made enough
money to last the rest of her life.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Somewhere
else! -- luna, 10:59:36 11/25/02 Mon
[> [> That name's taken, but good idea -- egak,
15:52:45 11/23/02 Sat
The "Waiting in the Wings"/"Apocalypse,
Nowish" parallel (spoilers for both eps) -- Rob,
22:11:18 11/22/02 Fri
I just saw "Waiting in the Wings" for the first time, and I
was struck by the similarity of the situation to Angel
discovering Cordy and Connor in bed together.
In WITW, Cordy is temporarily "possessed" by the ballerina,
while Angel becomes her lover, Stephen. The two original
lovers were discovered together by the jealous Count Kurskov
(although Cordy and Angel don't get to that point in the
scene).
In A,N, Cordelia (possibly possessed or influenced, maybe
not) has sex with Connor, whose alternate name is Stephen.
They are discovered by the jealous Angel.
I'm not exactly sure what is being said here, but I was at
first struck by the choosing of the name "Stephen." We have
to wait to see the fallout from these events to make better
sense of what these two parallel scenes are saying...but I
find it interesting that in the second case, (a) Cordy is
being romantic with someone of the same name as in the first
scene and (b) that someone of the same name is the son of
the person in the first scene. The image of Angel watching
in the next room is reminiscent of Wesley, possessed by
Count Kurskov, jealously staring at Fred and Gunn.
Anything I'm saying make any sense, or am I seeing links
that aren't there?
Rob
[>
How 'bout that ballerina? -- oboemaboe, 22:59:46
11/22/02 Fri
To my dismay, this is the only S3 ep I haven't seen. Does
the exquisite Summer Glau have a big role, or just a brief
cameo?
I'm tempted to whip out my Kazaa just to see her. (OK, that
came out grosser than I meant it. Sorry.)
[> [>
She only has one speaking scene... -- Scroll,
08:58:15 11/23/02 Sat
But it's a very well done scene, and I was impressed
considering it was Glau's first acting job (I think). And
she's a wonderful dancer! I for one am glad Joss hired her
for "Firefly".
[>
Hmm, would be interesting (Apoc, Nowish spoilers) -
- Scroll, 08:56:47 11/23/02 Sat
I think you could probably parallel Angel with Count
Kurskov. Both were Cordy/Ballerina's employer and had
previous claim on her. They are both jealous by nature, and
more dangerous than the lovers realise. I'm not saying Angel
is going to pull Cordy out of time and trap her in a Giselle
performance, but I think Angel might see Cordy's sleeping
with Connor as a direct betrayal - especially since she'd
only told him she loved him a few hours earlier.
So perhaps Angel will parallel Wesley and start withdrawing
from the group and isolate himself by focusing on stopping
the Beast. Maybe this will open up a new understanding of
Wesley. All speculation of course, and not very well
supported speculation at that. :)
Where do we go from here? (Assuming the worst) --
Drew the Lurker, 22:43:12 11/22/02 Fri
((Not trying to diss any shows, or people, just curious for
thoughts on what I'm thinking))
I've been thinking lately about what comes next. I mean, if
this is Buffys last season (and it seems like it could be),
and Angel doesn't really grab me much, and Firefly is likely
to be somewhat less than an instant hit (if it lasts even
two more episodes I'll be surprised) I seem to be facing a
Joss-free tv future. I know it sounds a little over
involved, but there isn't much else I even watch tv for. (I
could always put a stake through my tv set, i suppose).
For my part, I think I'm ready to let Buffy go. I mean
the last season really was almost painful to watch (I know,
I know, Whine doesn't taste good with that) and I nearly
quit watching when Tara died. (I was unspoiled, too!) I
remember thinking this hurt so much I should just quit
watching because it was too painful. I wanted to just let
the whole show go, but couldn't.
The current season has restored my hope/optimism about
Buffy and Crew from a character point of view, but I really
feel like I could let it go more easier than after the
season were Buffy jumped of the tower (and the frog).
Would I jump to Angel? Would any of the Scoobies move
over to that series and take up shop? Well, Angel hasn't
done much for me up till now. It is a good companion show,
and has had some wonderful episodes but its always been sort
of borrowed glory (In my opinion). A non-self centered
Cordelia has never really been all that woo-woo. I don't
think Charisma can pull it off acting wise. (I like the
actress, I just think she is a bit ...bland, for lack of a
better word). Angel is ok, but he seems to lack some of the
sparkle of his Buffy stuff. Wesley, Fred, and Gun are ok but
the Buffy's characters have more energy just sitting around
and talking about the baddy of the week.
And if the scoobies jumped ship to L.A., I doubt that
would make the show any more appealing. And besides it would
be really unfair to the Angel crew which deserve to rise or
fall on their own merits.
Firefly? Sorry, Joss. Even if I could past the Western
aspects (which I've never cared for), and the sci-fi stuff
(which has been done better)I just don't care about it. I'd
rather watch Twin Peaks:Firewalk with me backwards while
going through a Klingon Age of Ascension ritual. It just
sounds dull. I've tried to watch it (I've got it all on tape
and will force myself sometime to do so, but all I can think
is that this dreck is what he wants to do?) Maybe if I had
seen the original pilot I might have cared more. (Perhaps if
its cancelled, it can go to UPN-perhaps that network would
give it more of a chance (i.e. interfere less).
I guess I've said all this mainly to see what everybody
thinks a post-buffy existence will be like? Would you be
able to accept it passing? (Man, I sound like an obessed
fanboy!)
[>
Zachie looks into his crystal ball... (VERY speccy
spoilery S7 - 8) -- ZachsMind, 09:40:10 11/23/02
Sat
The following is based on a lot of guestimation, but at this
point it seems the most logical future for the series. This
opinion will change with the breeze but at this moment in
time, looking ahead, I think it's the best bet. First off,
Joss Whedon is presently juggling three tv series and is
trying to keep his hands in all three of them. It's
obviously taxing on his physical and mental well being.
Don't count on this happening again. Had he been able to
focus on any one of his three babies totally, its success
would have tripled. However he's spread too thin.
Let's assume Firefly won't make it. So next season if Buffy
ends completely, he's only got Angel left. Being the
workaholic that he is, Whedon SHOULD just devote all his
time to making Angel more successful but he won't do that.
Instead, he'll spend most of his time in airplanes between
California and England. And maybe he'll make the same
mistake he made this year -- three series simultaneously.
Old habits die hard.
Anticipating The Beginning of The End
Where I think Whedon's team is going with the end of season
six of Buffy is major upheaval. By the end of the season,
there will be no more Sunnydale High. Again. There will be
no more Sunnydale. From beneath you it devours.
That's both metaphorically and literally. Whedon likes
having a final and conclusive end to any given season (last
season being perhaps one exception). He's going for a BIG
finish this year. There's only one way to do that. Close the
hellmouth once and for all. That's only gonna happen with a
big no-holds-barred, lock-your-doors and hide-your-daughters
blowout finale war type battle.
By the end of season six I'm assuming there will be nothing
left of Sunnydale California but a crater. If there is
anything left of Sunnydale by the end of season six I'll be
very disappointed. I wanna see it BURN. So whether there's a
season eight for BtVS, or if the storyline moves permanently
to Angel or elsewhere, it won't be in Sunnydale. I think
they've told all the tales in Sunnydale that they can. The
gang has grown out of that small town. It's time to move on
to bigger and better things.
So will Buffy continue in some form, will characters move to
Angel, or will there be no Buffy at all? I think the answer
might very well be YES to all the above.
First, let's look at ANGEL.
We already got Cordy & Wesley, as well as Angel himself.
Faith has made an appearance on the show. It's not a great
stretch to think that one or more characters from Buffy's
present cast could make at least special guest appearances
next season on Angel, provided after season seven of Buffy
we see the Buffy characters have been scattered to the four
winds. Would any of them make permanent residence in Angel's
world? Doubtful. There's nothing Xander has which Gunn can't
already offer in abundance and better. Willow would compete
with Fred in ways I personally would rather not see
explored. It'd be interesting to see Giles & the new
improved Wesley face-off, but I'd tire of the banter
quickly. So for most of the Buffy gang, L.A. would be a nice
place to visit but I'd hate to watch them live there.
Angel's not Buffy. The shows are remarkably different.
Willow's modern techopagan angsty nervousness wouldn't play
well in a cityscape of modern gothic industrial eat-or-be-
eaten subterfuge. It'd be like seeing Sailor Moon painted
into a sequel of Lethal Weapon. I mean think "cello rock" in
Buffy's world and you'd see the contrast. They just don't go
well together. Angel stands alone now. Doing more than
special guest appearances with any of the major Buffy
characters would be kinda like trying to stuff a baby chick
back into its cracked egg. However, I'd like to see some
characters that didn't have a chance to blossom in Buffy
transplanted into Angel. I think Amy would stir things up in
L.A., and Clem would be the perfect foil for Lorne.
Next let's look at RIPPER.
I personally think the rare times we saw ASH & Amber Benson
on screen together, it was magic in every sense of the word.
Especially in "Once More With Feeling." There's a chemistry
there that ASH & SMG have never had. So y'know what I'd like
to see? RIPPER produced for BBC America but with a twist.
After season seven when all the Scoobies go their separate
ways, Giles returns to England. While there, he is forcibly
removed from membership with The Watchers' Council because
they do not approve of however things went down at the end
of Buffy S.7, so Giles loses all ties to everything but the
coven. They take him on as a sort of Paladin Knight of their
mystic order. And in the process of accepting that mantle,
he learns he gets a spirit guide in the form of Tara. She
appears before him as if she were still alive but no one
else can see her. Kinda like that scene in "Halloween" when
Giles was with Willow who was just a ghost and couldn't even
turn the pages of a book? Sorta like that.
No other characters. Maybe a special guest appearance by AH
as Willow, but Willow can never see Tara. Maybe. Actually
no. Just let ASH & Benson build an entirely new series off
the ashes of the old one. A father daughter sort of
relationship where she keeps him alive by being his
spideysense and he makes her feel like she's alive. Two
tortured souls taking on the world. I think it'd be
brilliant.
And finally, AFTERBUFFY.
Is there life after Buffy? I think so. I think Sarah
Michelle Gellar will move on to substandard motion pictures
and may be able to etch out a good place for herself on the
silver screen. She'll want to steer as far from Buffy as she
can though if that's the route she's chosen. She's already
risked typecasting. Whether she (or we) want her back as
Buffy, her agency will probably recommend she not do so as
soon as her contract is up. She has her career to consider.
Emma Caulfield's moving on too. So if we're going to have a
tv series after season seven, we can't assume it will
involve either Buffy or Anya.
This leaves us with Dawn, Spike, Xander & Willow. Now, if
you can't come up with a spinoff series that involves such a
powerhouse combination of acting talent I don't know what I
can do for you. Personally what I'd love would be ROAD TRIP!
They find a van and start driving. Then they find out too
late that the van is actually a temporal anomaly and every
drive takes them somewhere new. Literally.
A modern Scooby-Doo Mysteries, with a vampire instead of a
great dane. A cross between Sliders & Doctor Who, with a
witch, a vamp, a ball of energy disguised as a girl, and a
very normal guy who doubletakes a lot and always has
something funny & poignant to say.
You can't go wrong with that. It's a sure bet.
[>
Spinoff. Oh and I like the idea of spiking your tv.
lol -- Deb, 09:41:00 11/23/02 Sat
And I do not like "Firefly." Never will. I do not identify
with any of the characters, and the context of the story is
nothing new. I hate westerns, and I hate bad sci-fi.
[>
You sound like someone I know in KC... -- rabbit,
16:48:24 11/23/02 Sat
But then, he always was a cynic.... ;-))
Me, I'm an optimist...
What do you think about how Buffy's death was
incorporated into Angel? -- Jules,
23:32:28 11/22/02 Fri
I'm curious, did anyone else have a problem with the way
Buffy's death and resurrection was integrated into
Angel???
At the end of series two, when Willow told Angel of Buffy's
death, all we got to see, was his devastated facial
expression before the season ended. One of many things I
really love about David B is his beautifully expressive
eyes. He does pain, amazingly well.
For example the way he looked when Buffy staked him, before
he was sent in to the Hellmouth, ...and the poignancy when
he finally returned to her,... as well as during Angel when
they parted after he turned back time and he knew that she
would never remember their time together... Of my god I
digress.
My point is that David as an actor, had a perfect
opportunity to do some pretty powerful acting re her death,
let alone her resurrection, if the scriptwriters had let
him. The beginning of series three had him spending three
months in a monestry, before being attacked by killer monks
and returning, apparently relatively rejuvenated to LA and
Angel investigations.
Cool, however as usual he got to play the aloof,
introspective, moody Angel that we all know and love,
holding his true feelings inside and getting on with it.
Whatever it is. Consistent yes, oh yes, but also a enormous
waste of an opportunity to tap into some pretty great raw
emotion.
Over the last three plus series Angel/David has got to show
different elements of his character, from dark and brooding
to comedic, to tragic. However while Angel/David does pain
brilliantly, I haven't seen another actor use his eyes so
powerfully to convey pain and agony, he doesn't often get
the chance to really go really deep inside himself to
express that pain verbally. Perhaps to expect him to do so
would be unrealistic.
Nevertheless, considering that there may well never be any
more romantic, or even any true crossovers between the two
series and that Angel and Cordelia are now the "unrequited
couple", rather that Angel and Buffy, it seems to me to be a
profound waste of opportunity.
The brief scene between him and Cordie on the train, where
he felt guilt for not wanting to die after Buffy's death,
left me unconvinced.
I assume that it was meant to represent a closure around
Buffy's death, so it didn't need to be mentioned again (am I
being cynical) and the powerfull theme of "Is love healthy
if you don't want to go on living if the person you love
dies", was dealt with I thought too quickly and flippantly
for my taste.
It's great that Angel has evolved enough, not to think, that
his life has to end because Buffys has, as I have mentioned
before, "Wuthering Heights "is not a healthy way to go,
despite being incredibly romantic on the surface.
I supsect that if most of us, even if just for a moment,
were honest, we could imagine how incredibly seductive the
idea is of someone loving us so much that they wouldn't want
to live without us.
We cope better with the idea, of someone being prepared to
risk their live to save their loved ones, it is not an
unusual notion, but to not want to go on living, especially
for an eternity, in Angel's case, because you lose the one
you love, I get that.
It seems to me, that he came to that mature place a little
too easily and quickly. It is almost as if the scriptwriters
were foreshadowing a new relationship. If his feelings for
Corelia where developing, it might explain his reluctance to
let go of life. Once again, I think a great opportunity for
some deep acting was missed.
Finally, while I know why we didn't get to see the Angel and
Buffy's reunion after her resurrection, it would have been
cool to have more than "I don't want to talk about it" when
Angel returned to LA. Consistent I know with his character
and the scriptwriters uncertainty about all things Buffy and
Angel.
When I look at it this way, it makes more sense to my why
there has been a consistent Buffy byepass, in all the Angel
storylines, since Cordelia and Angel became the new couple.
I recon that noone know where anything is heading, despite
the fact that the story arcs are created well in advance.
Looks to me like all bets are off and anything can
happen.
[>
I completely disagree. -- Rob, 09:11:00 11/23/02
Sat
I got the sense that Angel was incredibly torn up by Buffy's
death, and that is why he left for three months to sort
things out. He wouldn't have had to leave if it didn't hit
him hard. Remember, however, that three full months have
passed between the season 2 finale and the season 3
premiere. You are not going to be as emotionally wrecked by
that point. Also, remember that Angel had gone on a
spiritual journey for this time, too, helping him reach the
place where he can live without Buffy. I think the point
that was being made by not going the route of showing him
completely wrecked, as Buffy would have been, is to
reinforce the fact that Angel has grown and changed a great
deal since his time in Sunnydale. Although Buffy still has
the same feelings for him, and somewhere he will probably
always have them for her, he has been able to move on with
his life. If she had died during their BtVS Season 2-3 time
period, he might have been destroyed emotionally. But he's
been on his own a while now. He's lived a long time, and
further, in episodes such as "I Will Remember You," realized
that a future with himself and Buffy could probably never
truly be possible.
And then Buffy comes back...and he goes to visit her, and we
don't learn much about the visit from either one of them. I
think, though, we can infer that this visit brought closure
to Angel, but not so much to Buffy. After that point, we
never really hear him refer to her much and soon after falls
in love with Cordelia. And I think the thing is that he has
realized that he can live with her not in this world. He is
thrilled that she is no longer dead, but the thing is that
he, having come to grips with losing her and emotionally got
himself to the point where he has dealt with that, no longer
NEEDS her when she comes back to life. He has made his
peace with the end of their romance. I think the reason
neither of them talked about it is that it was more of a
goodbye than a romantic meeting.
As long as Buffy was alive before, there was always
something holding Angel back from moving on. After she died,
he had to, and her resurrection did nothing to change the
fact that he had moved on.
I'm also glad we didn't get too much raw darkness from him
at this point. He had just recently come off his dark period
from the mid-second season and was soon to encounter all
more sorts of darkness in the third. Mourning is a private
thing, and I'm happy with the way they presented it on the
show.
Rob
[> [>
Re: I completely disagree. -- myra, 10:46:33
11/23/02 Sat
*de-lurks*
Have to agree with Rob on this one, I really liked the way
they handled Buffy's death on Angel in a quiet non-dramatic
way.
It shows that Angel has really built a life of his own in
L.A. and that it isn't All.About.Buffy anymore (personally,
I thought Angel was kinda 2-dimensional on BtVS, the only
times I really like(d) him are when he went all 'grrr, argh'-
Angelus and ever since he has his own show).
And I always saw their little post-resurrection meeting as
closure for what they had together, like Rob says, not so
much with the romance, but more like a goodbye.
Ofcourse, all this might have something to do with the fact
that I've really really had my share of B/A Romantic Agony™
;).
So, yeah, this post could be summed up as "What he said.",
my apologies :).
[> [> [>
Re: I completely disagree. REPLY TO MYRA -- Jules,
14:31:02 11/23/02 Sat
Hi Myra no apologies needed, I love getting the feedback,
see my response to Rob, it pretty much sums up where I'm
at.
I also especially enjoy Angel when he goes Angelus on his
mates, and agree Angel's character development has broadened
considerably now he has his own show.
However in my opinion, I would rather deal with more of the
B/A romantic agony, as you call it, then the C/A agony, that
it sounds like I'm install for when I get series Four of
Angel.
What's worse and I imagine more prolonged agony, than seeing
your son sleep with the woman of your dreams?, no matter
what the motivation. As far as I can see Cordie has just
notched up the agony anty considerably.
[> [>
Re: I completely disagree. REPLY TO ROB -- Jules,
14:17:51 11/23/02 Sat
Thanks Rob, what you said made a lot of sense and made me
really think, which is one of the great aspects of these
boards. I agree with a lot of what you said about Angel's
process, however...
You won't convince me that the scriptwriters didn't take the
easy way out. They could have produced the same result in
three months time, but still showed the audience some of the
process of how Angel got there. I still think it was a lost
opportunity. They didn't have to spend a huge amount of time
on his grieving, but a little insight, might have produced
closure for the audience, as much as for Angel.
Clearly everyone has a different perspective on whether
Angel and Buffy should eventually end up together and a
whole new perspective on whether Angel and Cordelia should
even be a couple, but I, "the audience", for want of a
better word, also need closure on their relationship, before
seeing Angel embark on a new one with someelse. Especially
one that involves "falling in love". For all intense and
purposes, expecting us to believe that Cordelia is replacing
Buffy in his affections.
This is alot for people, I'll speak for myself, alot for me
to buy, considering not that long ago, Buffy was the love of
his life. I for one, needed to experience that psychological
jump, but that's me.
So for me that means reaching that place (his closure?, if
that is indeed what it was) through understanding Angels
process.
In the end all we have is our own personal conjecture as to
what was going on in Angel's/scriptwriters heads when they
wrote those scenes involving Angels integration of Buffy's
death and finding out about her resurrection. A romantic
reexploration of their feelings for oneanother or a poignant
goodbye? Who knows?
In conclusion all we have is conjecture, because issues of
cross-overs aside, I really trulely don't think the
scriptwriters know themselves what is going to happen and
are leaving all their options open.
[> [> [>
IMOO - Mars vs. Venus writing.... -- Briar Rose,
15:06:45 11/23/02 Sat
It would seem to me that the difference between what a woman
(Marti) would see as appropriate grieving and what a man
(David and Joss. etc.) would see as appropriate
grieving.....
In a wide generalization (and i know there are some
outstanding role reversals.*L), most men do not love
the same way most women do, they don't react to separation
the same way most women do and they sure the heck don't
discuss feelings or show emotions in public as most
women do.
The character of Angel on AtS is a "normal" male in the way
they portray him, where on BtVS he was always less so, he'd
seen the softer side of emotions, where Angel in LA has not
(yet) and IMO, it's because the writers are generally
divided between male for AtS and Female BtVS.
Sad to say that most people in general (of either sex) don't
see love as an all consuming emotion anymore.... Most see it
as something to "move on" from and "get over" and "Life's a
Bitch and then you marry one...." or "One fight and it's all
over....." all of which is sad for the human race.
And that's what I see in the way that LA Angel handled the
death and resurrection of Buffy. It was handled more
sensitively by the BtVS writers the first time she died than
by than the Angel writers when she really died. And watching
both shows seems to show a conflict between the two Angel
characters, to me. On BtVS, he is more tender, more open and
romantic and sensitive. On Angel he is closed, more moody,
stoic, quiet and generally the stereotypical "John Wayne"
archetype "hero."
To me it's all in the difference bewteen the sexes of the
writers. Ever notice that once Joss wasn't the primary
writer on BtVS that Angel got a sense of humor? That he got
a softer form of melodrama? And that Cordy got more quiet
and "strong" and less feminine in the AtS writer's
hands?
Same thing.
[> [> [> [>
Re: IMOO - Mars vs. Venus writing.... REPLY TO IMOO
-- Jules, 19:56:46 11/23/02 Sat
Maybe your right, I hadn't really seriously considered that
it might go down to the sex of the particular writer, as to
how a character was written, particularily the way that
character expresses their emotions.
Food for thought, if that is the case maybe it explains
alot. I always figured Angel as pretty moody and stoic,
under the best of circumstances, but also believed that was
the culmination of dealing with a lot of accumulated shame
and the agony of ending his relationship with Buffy.
The more I ponder, the more I think that there may be a lot
more to the mix than trying to write a meaty storyline or
even a consistent and realistic one.
Whose reality are we dealing with? A man writing for a man
or a woman writing for a man in the case of Angel? Which
writer knows the character better, and how do we, with such
changes, begin to comprehend consistency?
Should we kill any of the Spikes in there? -- Rufus,
01:14:16 11/23/02 Sat
Much has been said this season about Spike and his potential
Multiple personality disorder and then Manchurian Candidate
Candidate mind screw that made me attempt to find an
explanation of Multiple Personality that could help me in
explaining what is going on........so I did some casual
surfing to find the definition I feel describes it best.
Although MPD patients are, by definition, diagnosed as
having more than one personality, they in fact don't.
The different 'personalities' are fragmented components
of a single personality that are abnormally personified,
dissociated from each other, and amnesic for each other.
We call these fragmented components 'personalities' by
historical convention: much of the scepticism about MPD
is based on the erroneous assumption that such patients have
more than one personality, which is, in fact,
impossible.
Adult patients with MPD experience a number of core symptoms
that should be enquired about in psychiatric assessments.
These include voices in the head and ongoing blank spells or
periods of missing time. The voices are the different
personalities talking to each other, and to the main,
presenting part of the person who first comes for treatment.
The periods of missing time occur when different
personalities take turns being in control of the body, and
are attributable to the memory barriers between the
personalities. Colin A. Ross, M.D. author of the
Osiris Complex http://www.rossinst.com/osiris.htm
I can hear people now going "how the hell can a vampire have
MPD?" and I think that is an easy answer. In the beginning
the Vampire was created from a bite that infected and
possessed a human subject.....this human lost the soul and
became predisposed to the preference of evil. And to those
who feel that the soul is what makes you......I don't think
that is the case in the Buffyverse so save the theological
stuff on the soul cause it's Joss's world an his rules....we
have to kinda work around them. In the Buffyverse it's been
clear that the soul operates as a compass that points a
person in the right direction.....doesn't mean they will
stay the course but it's a start all the same. The
personality and memories of a vampire are the person that
once was.....and still is...just possessed, infected. I'd
also have to add in CURSED....who would want to wake up from
a long dream and find out you are a killer of many many
people? How does one cope?
This is where Spike/William comes in. We saw what happened
to Angel, he has had a hard journey and has occasionally
lost interest in the destination. With Spike/William we have
a front seat to the beginning. If anyone doubts that Spike
is William all you have to do is watch Tabula Rasa......all
the characters were wiped of their immediate memories and
identity so what was left were the tendancies that make them
who they are or could be. Buffy didn't know she was a
Slayer, and Randy had no idea he was anything but a hard
done by fellow who had a father with a penis car. And when
he found out he was a vampire it became clear that he didn't
much want to bite Buffy (didn't test him on the others). So,
what does all this mean? Spike got himself a soul, but along
with the soul came the ability to really feel compassion,
feel the consequences of what he had done....and we don't
know what happened to him til we see him again in Sunnydale.
And what Buffy found was a mess...an insane, talking to
himself....mess.
In "Beneath You" Buffy finds herself confronted by a
seemingly confident, back to business, Spike....until he
does something that triggers his guilt and that is hurting
Ronnie Spike thought he was fighting a demon and is pained
in more ways than one when the worm turns into a man. He
again reverts back to insane Spike causing Buffy to tell him
to go away, but soon she follows him into a church there
Buffy finds out that Spike got a soul, and it's killing him.
Buffy feels that she is no help or in fact makes things
worse for Spike and for the most part leaves him alone,
despite his cries for help. Buffy doesn't know what to do
with a mentally ill vampire.
I found the scene with Spike confronting the creeps who
wanted to use Cassie as a ticket to riches, in Help one that
bears revisiting.......
BUFFY
Is there something evil in the school? Down here, maybe.
Spike, please, do you know anything?
SPIKE
(defeated sigh) Yes. (beat) There's evil. Down here.
Right here. I'm a bad man. William is a baaad man. I hurt
the girl. (cries)
Spike starts punching himself violently in the face.
BUFFY
(grabs his wrist) Spike, stop it! What did you do?
SPIKE
I hurt you, Buffy, and I will pay. I am paying because I
hurt the girl.
BUFFY
(tenderly) Spike. No. (lets go of his wrist) It's not me.
It's a different girl, OK? Her name is Cassie Newton.
Please, do you know anything specific? any transcript
quotes from Buffyworld.
No kidding Spike hurt the girl, but we now know that he not
only hurt Buffy, but as she said in Help...a different girl,
a few different girls and a guy or two thrown in.
Spike shakes his head "no", and Buffy sighs. She turns to
leave, when Spike calls out softly after her.
SPIKE
Don't—don't leave me. Stay here, and help me be quiet.
BUFFY
(turns to face him) I think it's worse when I'm here. (walks
away)
SPIKE
Don't let him hurt the girl.
Who is him? Does Spike mean the creeps trying to off Cassie,
or is he talking another him....the other part of himself.
Buffy takes the torch from Spike and points it at the
demon. Spike walks to Cassie. Buffy sweeps the torch in
front of the demon's face. Spike punches Peter, knocking him
to the ground. Buffy jabs the torch into the demon's abdomen
cavity. Spike's on top of Peter, pummeling him ferociously.
After each punch, Spike pauses to hold his aching head, then
he punches Peter again.
PETER
Who are you?
SPIKE
I'm a bad man.
Yes, part of Spike is a very bad man, but I don't think he
was totally conscious of that other man til Sleeper, when he
finally woke up.
BUFFY
I did follow you last night, and you know what? You didn't
look lonely or casual to me. You looked like you were on the
prowl.
SPIKE
You can't know that.
BUFFY
So, then, tell me. Tell me what happened. You talked to her,
then what?
SPIKE
We talked. That's all I remember.
BUFFY
All you remember?
SPIKE
I don't know. I go out. I talk to people or I don't. It's
boring. It all bleeds together.
BUFFY
Well, if you seem to forget that much, then—
SPIKE
Not that. The taste of human blood. That, I'd remember.
BUFFY
You were camped out on the hell mouth talking to invisible
people. Recently. How can you be sure of—
Buffy is right....Spike has been talking to invisible
people, she just hasn't been aware that they are in fact
real, and have been messing with Spike's mind. The fact that
Spike got a soul is a good thing, but it is so traumatic
that it left him open to be manipulated by a being that made
him forget. Then got him to kill over and over again like
Shaw in The Manchurian Candidate. But, his dreams his
thoughts were troubled, he understood that someone hurt the
girl and most of the time I'm sure he still thought it was
Buffy he was referring to....but he still seemed very intent
of making sure no one hurt the girl in Help.
21 INT. SPIKE'S BEDROOM AT XANDER'S APARTMENT - NIGHT
Spike's getting ready to go out, when he puts on his jacket.
He feels something in his pocket—it's the pack of cigarettes
one of the young women gave him earlier. Holding it, he
flashes back to meeting her at the bar and killing her. He
stares at the cigarettes, shocked.
Spike's memory is accessed by a trigger, that of the
cigarette package that a girl gave him....the girl he
killed. He went off looking to see what else he could find
and found out he'd rather not know, but the cat was out of
the bag and even though the Evil being got him to dance to
"Early One Morning" one last time, that dance was with
Buffy, and it was her blood that clarified things for
him......and we are now left with the man huddled under the
blanket.
So, do we kill Spike because he is a threat? Do we help
him.....I find a little section in a book I read makes the
most sense to me and applies to any of the folk in the
Buffyverse.......from Karma 101 by Joshua Mack
"For negative karma to achieve full force, an act
must:
1) Have been done intentionally.
2) been completed;
3) have been committed without remorse; and
4) been done without a promise to never repeat the act
again."
For those going WTF has Karma got to do with it all, Spike
is a killer and should be dead, dead, dead. Well, Spike
without a soul may have been a killer, but Spike with a soul
is still a bit of a question mark. Also the killings Spike
did after getting a soul back were done without him knowing
of them at first remember the quote above about multiple
personalities being one personality fragmented, and in Spike
for awhile he wasn't aware of what he was doing, and when he
spoke to Buffy it was clear he didn't intend on killing
people. Spike simply thought he was insane and wasn't quite
sure of what was real or not. So traumatized by his ability
to feel after all those years, Spike simply tried to forget,
and the Being in the basement with him seemed to want to
help, at a small price. The being was so sure that Buffy
would kill Spike after the attack, it told Spike as
much.....but Buffy pulled the fast one of taking him
home...we are yet to find out if that was such a good idea.
So, killing Spike.....I find that those four aspects of
negative Karma make it easy for me to say why we shouldn't
kill Spike or beat Buffy up for not being compassionate
quick enough.....and for that matter continue to rant and
insist Willow gets punishment or Angel, because all the
parties mentioned....hell throw in Anya too......aren't
doing things that point to them being a threat. Willow is
trying to atone the best way she knows how, Spike has only
just found out he has been used and may need some rehab
quick, and Angel..Angel is a whole other show but he is
trying to do the right thing too. It's that constant call
for retribution, blood for blood, punishment that makes me
believe more than ever that if any of the people I've
mentioned can do good, can help instead of harm, then who
are we to mete out anything? So, for now I look to not the
kill but the cure for Spike and all the others who for
whatever reason fell down when we and they least expected
it. Now I just want to know if that song will ever work
again?
[> Link to book about mind control -- Rufus,
03:05:47 11/23/02 Sat
Search for the Manchurian Candidate
[> That's the rub,isn't it? -- AurraSing,
06:16:50 11/23/02 Sat
I think Buffy did not kill Spike because of reasons too
complex for her to even vocalise but the fact remains that
the FE rode Spike like a pony through those murders. Until
such time as the Scoobies can sever the connection,Spike is
a loaded weapon against them all.
And that is just damned scary.Unless he is back to the
chains and ropes of early season 4, how can he be trusted
since the FE can override the chip's effects with ease?
Wonderful article-I'm appreciative of the definition of MPD
you have found since it clarifies some of the arguements I
have been readin about Spike's condition.
[> Spike needs more help than any of them can give
-- Deb, 09:34:12 11/23/02 Sat
or so it appears at this point. In the end, he will be
fortunate to end this thing with just William. This "it's
still all about" Buffy thing has got to end. It's got to be
all about William and all about everyone else too. If the
focus remains on Buffy, then she might as well dust him for
his sake and everybody elses' sake.
[> [> Re: Spike needs more help than any of them
can give -- Rufus, 13:31:50 11/23/02 Sat
You are going to have to explain the "all about Buffy"
comment. My feelings are if she thought everything was just
"all about her" she would have dusted Spike long ago, she
would have no friends, and saving the world would have a
lower priority. If Spike is suffering we have to remember he
is suffering partially due to things done by him. I see the
vampires as partly a metaphor for self involvement, killing
for sport as well as food. But they aren't totally to blame
because of the loss of the soul. Spike has a challenge
either find it within himself to get past the trauma of his
vampire past and become a help, or decide he can't live with
his memories of killing and withdraw into a place where he
can forget what he has been. In blaming Buffy or anyone else
for his current situation is to keep him where he is right
now as blame sets up resistance to change.
[> [> [> I think you missed Deb's point --
Dariel, 20:52:30 11/23/02 Sat
I could be wrong, but I think Deb is referring to
Spike's "it's all about Buffy" problem, and not to
some board dispute. Something that was illustrated nicely
when the fake Buffy urges him to bite the girl. It confuses
him, he's upset afterwards, but he still does it. The point
here is that Spike needs to get an (un)life and develop his
own sense of right and wrong that doesn't depend on
Buffy's.
[> [> [> [> Re: I think you missed Deb's
point -- Rufus, 23:21:25 11/23/02 Sat
The first part of my reply was asking Deb what she meant.
The second part were thoughts of my own based upon the "all
about Buffy" nature of the show. So, I didn't miss a point
as much as Deb hasn't clarified to me what her point
was.
As for Spike getting past the "all about Buffy" phase I
think it has so far served him well to think of someone past
himself or Drusilla. Even though Buffy hasn't always treated
Spike well, it was as much his fault as it was hers. Buffy
wouldn't have gone as far as she did if it weren't for Spike
telling her she came back wrong....she then instead of
checking things out (cause she did fear he was right) she
ended up in a destructive relationship with Spike. Spike has
some good qualities but his love for Buffy was on the
selfish side, where he needed to isolate her from her
friends. So both contributed to the freak show that ensued.
I agree that at this point Spike will have to think past his
obsession with possessing Buffy and more to getting a life
of his own where each person has the choice to resume a
relationship if they decide to. As bad as Spike's obsession
has been, it did have many unforseen consequences that have
been great to watch.
[> [> [> [> [> Deb clarifying Deb's point
(Spoiler 6.2 and 7.8 and 7.9 trailer) -- Deb,
10:34:54 11/24/02 Sun
Dariel's intrepretation is correct (thank you!). This is
about Spike, not anything else.
Yes, Spike's "All about Buffy" obsession has served him well
in the past. A motivation to change, but he has a soul now,
and it is unhealthy, and a miserable life too, for a person
to "live" for another person. This is the type of situation
that leads to murder-suicides amongst "romantic" couples. If
a person does not want to live (represented by soul) for
ones' self, then there is a problem -- a severe problem. If
this person "uses" someone else as a reason to live, it is
beneficial only for the short-term. A person has to want to
live for one's self. The consequences of Spike's getting
"souled" for Buffy have not been all good. They have been
very entertaining, illuminating, metaphorical, but they have
not been *good* completely (though I think Spike and Buffy
are beginning to grow up a bit here.) He's possessed, which
happened when he went to the *underworld* to get his soul.
He knew there would be negative consequences. He said that
bringing Buffy back with *bad* magic would have
consequences, "It always does."
The fact he was still talking about it still being "all
about Buffy" in "Sleeper" was a very pointed comment. I'm
not sure if it will be "all about Buffy" now that he
remembers what he did while "sleeping." He told Buffy to
"make it fast" in spiking him because the BB in his form
told him it would be that way. Just watching the trailer for
this week, it appears that he, himself, is aware that in his
current state he realizes that he needs to be dusted, or he
needs to do something that "makes things right."
And I am sorry that you feel that "Buffy and Spike" --
together -- was a freak show, whatever that means. Was it
the actions themselves that made it a "freak" show or the
motivations of the characters and their reactions during and
afterwards that made it a "freak" show?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Deb taking some of
her own advice -- Deb, 11:01:33 11/24/02 Sun
I come to this board for several reasons, but then, after it
has served these purposes, something creepy settles in. Not
just this board, please! I'm not talking about this board,
it makers, maintainers, posters, etc. Posting becomes a
prominant part of my day, and, to be truthful, that's rather
sad. It has reached this point again, so I need a vacation.
I'm not going to look forward to the next day simply to see
what people have posted and so I can post. So, everyone,
what ever holidays, or not, that you have approaching, may
it be fulfilling and prosperous and may you receive what you
need.
Deb
(yes, drama queen, but if I say it I will feel really bad
about myself if I return too quickly.)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Deb taking
some of her own advice -- Rufus, 19:21:59 11/24/02
Sun
So, you are cheating on us with other boards? Bad very
bad.....
Posting can become an emotional thing and when you come up
next to posts that are rather blunt like mine I'm sure it
must feel like you are being attacked. I'm blunt....the
written word is a hard thing for me to use so I try to get
to the point. I should have made it clear that my reply to
you was in 2 parts, first the attempt to clarify what you
meant and second some thoughts over and above that I had.
Take a rest, even if it's only 10 minutes, we'll be here
when you come back....:)
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Deb clarifying
Deb's point (Spoiler 6.2 and 7.8 and 7.9 trailer) --
Rufus, 18:50:12 11/24/02 Sun
Yes, Spike's "All about Buffy" obsession has served him
well in the past. A motivation to change, but he has a soul
now, and it is unhealthy, and a miserable life too, for a
person to "live" for another person. This is the type of
situation that leads to murder-suicides amongst "romantic"
couples.
Spike's obsession was a catalyst for transformation and it
was only when he got his soul back did he gain the last
spark needed for a real fire. The thing about transformation
is it isn't always pretty or comfortable. Spike as a vampire
without a soul was capable of love and even a certain amount
of sacrifice for love but that isn't enough to bring the
wolf together with the lamb. Spike loved but it was somewhat
immature and selfish in nature because he still wanted Buffy
for himself to the exclusion of the light and her friends.
And the clincher being that Buffy couldn't love him back
because she always feared having to kill him like she had to
Angel.
A motivation to change, but he has a soul now, and it is
unhealthy, and a miserable life too, for a person to "live"
for another person. This is the type of situation that leads
to murder-suicides amongst "romantic" couples.
I saw more of a potential for a murder suicide when Spike
didn't have a soul because he was getting more and more
desperate near the end of the season, and that is why the
mislead about the chip worked so well. We don't as of yet
really know the Spike with a soul because the Evil one got
it's hooks into him and turned his mind into a carton of
Eggbeaters. I don't see Spikes current pain to be as much
from Buffy as a result of having been influenced by
something that has no interest in Spike other than to use
him against Buffy.
[> Glad you posted this here too.... -- rabbit,
16:40:20 11/23/02 Sat
I tried to respond to this in that other place you posted
it, but it got killed or disappeared into cyberspace, who
knows... let me say thank you for posting this here and in
that other place.... I suggested something like this early
on and it was poo pooed... you've done a beautiful job of
connecting the theory to the plot points, much better than I
did and this field is part of my background! ;-))... and I
also like the negative Karma points.. well done. Don't know
if you got much reponse on that other place, but I'm
impressed and I hope you do know who this is... ;-))
[> [> Re: Glad you posted this here too.... --
Rufus, 18:49:53 11/23/02 Sat
Yes, give a girl a search engine and poof!!!!! I think you
know that it's not my area of expertise and I'm just
connecting a few dots but some of what I found made sense,
so I had to write something about it. The negative karma
stuff at the end was thrown in because I see a tendancy to
demonize characters who aren't acting in a timely fashion
towards Spike as they aren't in the know like the viewers
are. So, to fairly judge Spike I have to look at everyone
around him. Spikes situation is complicated and he is around
a group of people who are young enough that they are
learning as they go. To see goodness in one at the expense
of the other isn't fair.
I was thinkin this was perhaps McFreud?
[> [> [> Re: Glad you posted this here
too.... -- rabbit, 19:12:13 11/23/02 Sat
:-)) Excellent search skills. And that unfairness you refer
to is, I think, one of the lessons Joss wants the "scoobies"
to learn. His situation is very complicated and to me, seems
to be the benchmark against which the whole gang can measure
their own individual journeys. Does that make sense?
Sometimes we meet people who are so different from us that
we look at them in puzzlement and then look at ourselves
with a slightly different perspective. It can sort of push
us outside our little boxes so to speak. Paridigm shift and
all that.
[> Re: Should we kill any of the Spikes in there?
(spoilery) -- Rowan,
09:18:54 11/24/02 Sun
Very interesting, Rufus. My personal opinion right now is
that Spike doesn't have MPD or any form of multiple
personalities. There is no William and Spike within him.
There's just Spike with a soul, which has activated some of
the *parts* of William, like his conscience, and which has
made Spike *feel* William's memories in a way he couldn't
before.
I think that the MPD was ME's little deception to cover up
what they were doing with Morphy. I think Spike came back
from Africa attempting to process the grief, guilt, and
remorse of his soul. During that time, he was vulnerable and
Morphy got hold of him. I think what has appeared as
multiple personalities is Spike interacting with Morphy or
being confused as to what's real and not real.
I think the Morphy storyline for Spike is not simply about
Spike being controlled a la the Manchurian Candidate. It's
not solely about Spike being a victim. It's about choice.
Spike got the soul. That's great. He exercised some free
choice (a choice that should have been impossible for a
soulless demon). But once he got the soul, what did he do
with it? Well, he sat around huddled in a basement,
overwhelmed with remorse and...evil got to him. He let it
in. It's not enough in the Buffyverse to not be actively
doing evil. You have to fight it. It's everywhere.
People with souls can do evil; we've seen that. Now that
Spike has a soul, he has to make another choice -- to
consciously be on the right team, the team striving always
for good and always fighting against evil, even within
themselves. He has to do this of his own free will, which
can now truly be free since he has a soul that helps him
understand things in ways being unsouled prevented. He also
needs to be effectively 'chipless' so it's a free choice. As
of the end of Sleeper, the question is, how will Spike react
to knowing he's being preyed up on to do evil? Will he fall
and let it consume him, or will he fight it?
That's how this story, IMO, is operating on a metaphorical
level. Spike has to reject Satan and all his works. ;) Hee!
Just kidding with the religious imagery.
[> [> Re: Should we kill any of the Spikes in
there? (spoilery) -- Rufus, 19:13:22 11/24/02 Sun
Very interesting, Rufus. My personal opinion right now is
that Spike doesn't have MPD or any form of multiple
personalities. There is no William and Spike within him.
There's just Spike with a soul, which has activated some of
the *parts* of William, like his conscience, and which has
made Spike *feel* William's memories in a way he couldn't
before.
I have to disagree.....the definition of MPD as I have in
the quote makes it clear for the discussion of Spike or
vampires as a whole that they are what they once were, the
same person with a demon supplement.....they are only
missing the soul, and in the Buffyverse the soul isn't the
only thing that makes a person what they are. Spike is
William and William is Spike. What has happened as a result
of the ensoulment is that with the ability to care about
what he has done as a vampire, Spike is feeling all the pain
and remorse he couldn't before. This is quite the trauma and
because of that he is open to manipulation. I see his mind
as a whole that has fragmented somewhat to allow him to
exist.
Although MPD patients are, by definition, diagnosed as
having more than one personality, they in fact
don't. The different 'personalities' are
fragmented components of a single personality that
are abnormally personified, dissociated from each
other, and amnesic for each other. We call these
fragmented components 'personalities' by historical
convention: much of the scepticism about MPD is based on the
erroneous assumption that such patients have more than one
personality, which is, in fact, impossible.
Adult patients with MPD experience a number of core symptoms
that should be enquired about in psychiatric assessments.
These include voices in the head and ongoing blank spells or
periods of missing time. The voices are the different
personalities talking to each other, and to the main,
presenting part of the person who first comes for treatment.
The periods of missing time occur when different
personalities take turns being in control of the body, and
are attributable to the memory barriers between the
personalities. Colin A. Ross, M.D. author of the
Osiris Complex http://www.rossinst.com/osiris.htm
I think that the Spike that hit town before the Evil got him
was in a mode where he was trying to reconcile the former
schism of his self that was caused by the loss of the soul.
Unfortunately he also could feel the intense pain of knowing
what he had done while a vampire. This may have caused him
to attempt to forget the trauma of killing many many people.
Remember in the basement Spike pleaded to be able to again
forget, forget what he had been because the pain of it was
too much to cope with. So, you have Spike with a profound
desire to forget trauma in a state where he is already
trying to dissociate parts of his mind in an attempt to
forget. The Evil used this to it's advantage by using that
tendancy or need to forget to further fragment Spikes mind.
That is why you would get a competant Spike that would
dissolve into an insane Spike....the competant Spike was
able to for a period of time supress the pain of the
memories that were to intense for him to feel. When Spike
struck Ronnie, his self he wanted to forget again asserted
itself and competant Spike retreated. But then there is the
Spike that the Evil got ahold of, that Spike was unknown to
the rest of him until an appropriate trigger opened the door
and he could remember what he had been induced to do. I see
the fragmentation of the mind that Spike had done is the
consequence of the trauma of knowledge....I also think it
would have been something that could have been overcome with
time and may have been exactly what Angel did at first as
well. But Angel never met up with the Evil at a time when
most emotionally vunerable. So Spike is still Spike/William
that never changed the infection of the vampire doesn't add
a new identity and personality it just warps what is there
as there is no conscience/soul there to say "bad dog". As
Spike was already fragmenting parts of his personality as a
coping mechanism, it was easier for the Evil to take that
one step further.
Questions about "Morphy" (spoilers from previous eps)
-- Quentin Collins, 10:28:21 11/23/02 Sat
If the entity affectionately (or unaffectionately) known as
"Morphy" is the First Evil (which seems likely), I have so
many bloody questions about it. Given how lame FE seemed in
"Amends", I am guessing that some major retconning will be
necessary to make it particularly interesting compared to
previous big bads.
1. How does it manifest as those who have previously died?
Is it merely doing a good acting job? If so, how does it
gain access to speech patterns and personalities of those it
manifests as? Or does it somehow actually use the spirit of
those such as Warren and the others?
2. Who is actually in control? Does the FE control the
Harbingers or do they control it? In terms of "the power",
it seems to me that the Harbingers are the ones who have
it.
3. What weapons does it actually possess? If it is not
material in form, then what can it actually do? If all that
it can do is taunt, tempt, and maybe brainwash, how
dangerous is it really? Can it do anything more than be a
sophisticated version of "The Yoko Factor"?
4. Can it manifest in more than one place at the same time?
Was it both Warren and Cassie in "CwDP"? Was it also the
demon and Joyce at the Summers home? Such split
consciousness threatens to overcome my ability to suspend
disbelief. And if it was also Cassie, why was its M.O. so
different? Cassie seemed quite solid. She had footfalls and
made sounds when she sat in the chair and touched the table
at the library. And her disappearance seemed quite different
than the way FE "morphs". And since when was the FE
interested in balancing the scales between good and
evil?
5. What exactly are its ultimate plans for Spike? If it
wanted the newly sired vamps to kill or sire Buffy, then its
plan is just a fancier variation on the lame "lure the
Slayer into a trap" plan. If it wants to take Spike out of
whatever battle it is planning, a bunch of Harbingers could
have bum rushed him and staked him. If it wants Spike on its
side, why bother? As much as I love Spike, he tends to get
knocked out of fights against tough opponents fairly
quickly.
6. And why snuff Slayers in training? It is like trying to
put a sport team's benchwarmers out of commission while
still leaving its star players to pummel you. Killing any of
them is like cake compared to killing or gaining control of
Buffy or Faith. A run of the mill vamp could probably have a
sporting chance of killing a slayer in training.
I am hoping that in the next few episodes things can cleared
up a bit and maybe "Morphy" will start to feel like a real
threat to me. So far compared to Glorificus and Dark Willow,
I am not impressed.
[> Counterpoints -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:58:51
11/23/02 Sat
1) Who's to say that the Shapeshifter hasn't been watching
over the events of Sunnydale for years now? Plus, it isn't
the best actor in the world, anyway.
2) We can't know until we find out whether this is the First
Evil or not.
3) The Shapeshifter got Andrew to kill Jonathan, got Spike
to kill eleven people, and has sown the seeds of discontent
in Dawn. While it may only work through minions, so did the
Master and the Mayor, but they were still pretty dangerous.
Plus, it has the advantage that, while it can't directly
attack the Scoobies, the Scoobies can't directly attack
it.
4) The beginning of "Conversations with Dead People" said
the episode began at 8:00 PM (whether that's Eastern Time
Zone or California/Pacific time zone is uncertain). Yet,
when Buffy shows up at Xander's to tell him about what she
heard from Holden, he says it's after four in the morning.
So the Shapeshifter had at least eight hours that night. It
could do its job trying to get Willow to go off magic/kill
herself and still have time to go over to the high school to
manipulate Andrew.
5) I think that the Shapeshifter had two objectives in mind:
first, get Spike to kill Buffy. If he resists, fine. She'll
realize he's dangerous and is killing again, she'll kill
Spike and her soul will be tarnished for killing a souled
creature in cold blood.
6) "It is like trying to put a sport team's benchwarmers out
of commission while still leaving its star players to pummel
you. Killing any of them is like cake compared to killing or
gaining control of Buffy or Faith. A run of the mill vamp
could probably have a sporting chance of killing a slayer in
training." The answer to this seems fairly obvious: if you
take out the benchwarmers, there's no one left to take the
star players' places if they get killed. Maybe the Big Bad
wants to take out Faith, but won't do it until it can
guarantee that no new Slayer will replace her. Also, we
can't be sure the Shapeshifter is behind the robed assassins
antics.
Lastly, on a whole new point, I'm not too sure that the
Shapeshifter is the First Evil. Just a gut reaction. But,
even if it is, there's no guarantee it will be the Big Bad
of the season. It may only be the little bad, like Warren,
Mr. Trick, or Spike.
[> [> Re: Counterpoints -- Sophie, 17:58:20
11/23/02 Sat
got Spike to kill eleven people
Curiously, how did you come up with this? I was trying to
figure it out earlier this afternoon and gave up.
The beginning of "Conversations with Dead People" said
the episode began at 8:00 PM (whether that's Eastern Time
Zone or California/Pacific time zone is uncertain).
I assumed that 8p was local time for Buffy in California.
Hmmm...
S
[> [> [> Re: Counterpoints -- Finn Mac Cool,
21:00:23 11/23/02 Sat
Willow found ten reports of people who had recently gone
missing, and then there's the girl that Spike killed in the
alley, who didn't have time to be reported by the time
Willow went looking through the records. Thus, Spike killed
eleven people.
[> [> [> [> Interesting. I was trying to
count the vamps in the basement. Oh well. -- Sophie,
12:20:36 11/24/02 Sun
[> Not impressed? You will be. (speccy spoilery) -
- ZachsMind, 14:18:36 11/23/02 Sat
First, let's rewind to the end of season one, beginning of
season two. Buffy dies for the first time.
BUFFY: "Only a little!"
She then remarks that she feels great. Better than great.
Like a whole 'nother person. She then trounces THE MASTER,
and proceeds to alienate herself from her friends, her
father, everybody. As if she were someone completely
different. Then she learns the Master's bones have been dug
up and he's trying to make a comeback, and the pummeling of
The Master's bones appears to be a cathartic experience for
her. A feeling of closure. Buffy appears to come back to us.
Fast forward to five years later. She dives into the
dimensional portal after telling her sister and her friends
to live for her. Three months later the Scoobies, led by
Willow, bring Buffy back from the dead, but on an almost
imperceptable level, we know she 'came back wrong' and
though after a year of time Buffy manages to learn to live
after death & reincarnation, to shrug off the experience
as best as she can and then move on, she still doesn't feel
completely comfortable in her own skin.
She's been dead TWICE, m'kay? For all intents and purposes
she is the living dead. We assume she's the Buffy we know
and love, but one can make no assumptions in Whedon's world.
If SMG doesn't sign on for another contract, all bets are
off. Buffy can turn evil, and there's five or six years of
precedence. A few simple plot elements added to tie up loose
ends and suddenly the Buffy we've known all this time has
been a wolf in sheep's clothing, waiting for the right
moment to strike.
The First Evil? Buffy could be its Kermit. A husk of a
slayer, fighting to keep up the pretense. Destroying other
evil to hide the fact that the body of Buffy is like a
ventiloquist dummy. Pay no attention to the one behind
the curtain cuz it's just pulling her strings.
It would explain why Buffy's been acting the way she has
been. It would explain a lot of things. Like Spike &
other vampires, Buffy could believe she's really herself
from a conscious perspective, but from beneath you, it
devours. This First Evil could have been like a cancer
eating away at Buffy's soul since the first time she died,
until there's nothing left on a spiritual level. Maybe she
only thought she was in heaven, when Willow pulled her back
from Osiris' grasp. Maybe.
You think you know.
What's to come.
What you are.
You haven't even begun.
Why? Because when things get bad.
When it's bad.
Buffy won't choose you.
She'll be against you.
When She Was Bad. She's always been
a little bad. Just a little.
*Twilight Zone music*
[> [> You are truly scary! -- Robert,
19:39:01 11/24/02 Sun
Prewriting the Giles Scene (speccy spoilery for Sleeper
& Never Leave Me) -- ZachsMind, 11:48:20 11/23/02
Sat
For those of you who saw the final scene of the episode
"Sleeper" (& if you haven't I already WARNED you this is
speccy spoilery so go run away and don't read any further)
you are probably wondering the same thing I am:
INT. FLAT IN ENGLAND - DAY
Giles enters the flat, looking around. He sees the young
woman lying dead on the floor.
GILES: Oh, dear God! Robson, are you here? Robson!
Giles gets up and starts looking for Robson, who's found
near a chair in the next room. Giles goes to his side.
GILES: You too? (takes off his glasses and starts to cry)
Dear God, I thought you—
ROBSON: (eyes flicker open weakly) Gather them. It's
started.
GILES: It's all right. I understand. I'll take care of
it—
One of the robed men sneaks up behind Giles wielding a
battle-axe. He swings it at Giles.
How the hell is Giles supposed to survive that?
Okay. Well. I got a couple possible outcomes. Let's rewind
the tape a bit and play out the scene with my own special
fluorish of imagination tainting things just a bit.
ZACH PREWRITE TAKE #1
ROBSON: (eyes flicker open weakly) Gather them. It's
started.
GILES: It's all right. I understand. I'll take care of
it—
One of the robed men sneaks up behind Giles wielding a
battle-axe. He swings it at Giles.
Close up of Giles' spectacle-less face, still tear-stained
with the axe inches away from it. The axe is close enough
almost to give Giles a shave. His eyes look down at the
blade emotionlessly.
Camera pulls back to show a bright flash between Giles &
the hooded figure. The monk flies across the room with a
powerful wind.
Camera cuts to show Giles stand up slowly, facing the
direction his mind threw the axe-wielding warrior. Giles'
physicality is almost like that of a caveman, stooped over
the fallen body of his commrade. Giles' eyes are jet black.
We see a brief pulse along his temples of veins. For a
fleeting moment his posture & demeanor are like that of
The First Slayer from the episode "Restless." But just as
quickly as the shadow of a more powerful being was there
within him, it's gone. He stands there and his feet meet
again. His posture returns to normal. He fumbles with his
glasses & puts them back on his face.
Giles looks back down at ROBSON soberly.
GILES: Gather them? So I shall, dear old friend.
END SCENE
Don't like that one? How about this?
ZACH PREWRITE TAKE #2
ROBSON: (eyes flicker open weakly) Gather them. It's
started.
GILES: It's all right. I understand. I'll take care of
it—
One of the robed men sneaks up behind Giles wielding a
battle-axe. He swings it at Giles.
Whereas last week the scene cut off unceremoniously just
before the blade struck Giles in the head, this time the
scene doesn't cut away. We see the robed man's axe go right
through Giles, and the result is that of sparks & a
small explosion. Smoke erupts out of the place where Giles'
had been kneeling.
Camera cuts to show the robed figure coughing and using a
free hand to try to swipe the smoke away from his now
impaired vision. When the smoke clears a little, we get a
surprise bust shot of a very whole and head-connected-
perfectly-well-to-neck Giles looking chipper and friendly at
the confused warrior whose back is to us.
GILES: (to the robed figure - big smile) Thought you had me
there, eh you bloody bastard?
Camera cuts to a broader view. There's still a bit of smoke
in the room. The fallen body of Robson can still be seen.
Next to him is the headless body of a Giles which was most
certainly a RipperBot - Willow's handiwork undoubtedly. The
other "real" Giles is standing next to a still confused
looking robed figure.
Giles disarms the gentlemen, stomps on his foot with a
Buster Keaton fluorish. This causes the robed figure to now
be trapped due to Giles' foot holding his hooded garb to the
floor. Giles then punches the ever loving daylights out of
the cloaked man, forcing the gent to retreat by lifting his
arms over his head and trying to get out of the robe, with
Giles still punching the robe like a bag of potatoes. The
now disrobed gentlemen back pedals and falls bloodied and
bruised against a nearby wall, causing some ancient looking
antique furniture to be upset.
Camera cuts back to Giles with a wistful look as he rolls
his eyes a bit and looks to the ceiling.
Giles: (sorta to himself or almost prayerfully) You were
right, Willow. I owe you some Bangers & Mash.
Giles then proceeds to finish beating & browbeating the
disrobed cretin & pounds some pertinent information out
of him. Very Ripperesque scene proceeds with a sly, smiling,
rather deliciously disturbing Giles. We learn something
important from the disrobed cretin, which causes Giles to
realize he must get together the remaining S-I-T's &
head for Sunnydale.
END SCENE
Don't like that one? I got more. Just say the word I'll whip
up another one, or share your own prewrite.
[> Re: Prewriting the Giles Scene (speccy spoilery for
Sleeper & Never Leave Me) -- Wolfhowl3, 12:08:35
11/23/02 Sat
I like the Gilesbot idea, but I don't think ME will do
anything that we could prodict.
Here is Wolfhowl's Prewrite
ROBSON: (eyes flicker open weakly) Gather them. It's
started.
GILES: It's all right. I understand. I'll take care of
it—
One of the robed men sneaks up behind Giles wielding a
battle-axe. He swings it at Giles
Giles wakes up in his own flat with a jump, then calles his
friends to find out that they are dead, and that he must do
as his dream insturted.
Wolfie
[> [> The way it really went down (heavy spoilers
from repeated viewing) -- black_eyed_veiny, 12:45:59
11/23/02 Sat
Giles: Robson, are you here...
Giles runs into the study, we see a shot of the interior.
There is a couch, against one leg of which Robson is propped
up, Behind him is a bronze-looking metal Vase (or perhaps
umbrella holder).
Giles move's to Robson
Giles: Dear God, I thought you were...
Robson:Gather them, it's started...
Giles squints, as he looks PAST ROBSON at the
reflection in the brass-vase behind him
Giles: it's alright, I'll take care...
The axe-man cometh, cut to black.
Re-watch your video of that last seen and you will see that
Giles looks past Robson, and his voice changes ever so
slighty as he udders the last line. Either he will duck, and
fight his way out of the house, or, he will perhaps use some
residual "magic-on-loan-from-a-very-powerful-coven-in-
devon." to get out.
It's all on the film folks, the film don't lie.
[> Zachie Prewrite #3 (speccy spoilery blahblah) -
- ZachsMind, 13:10:48 11/23/02 Sat
ROBSON: (eyes flicker open weakly) Gather them. It's
started.
GILES: It's all right. I understand. I'll take care of
it—
One of the robed men sneaks up behind Giles wielding a
battle-axe. He swings it at Giles...
Camera cuts to a different angle in midswing. We see the axe
swing by Giles' head, missing him by about an inch and a
half. Giles looks up at the suprised robed man with a smile.
GILES: You missed.
Giles stands up imposingly. The robed man takes a step back
and makes to swing again. Giles grabs the handle of the axe
with one arm, then twists the weapon out of the man's hands.
We see a shade of Ripper on Giles' smiling face as Giles
other hand punches into the man's ribcage, sending him
sprawling. Giles now has the axe in his hands.
He walks over to the fallen robed figure. This new camera
angle shows us looking up at Giles from the robed figure's
perspective. He looks quite imposing and wields the axe as
if he knows precisely what to do with it.
GILES: This is where you say something menacing and fiendish
just before I chop you into kindling.
ROBED MAN: (fearful) From beneath you it devours!
GILES: (sarcastic) Yes, so I've heard. Bloody shame that, eh
wot?
Giles swings the axe flawlessly. It lands smack dab in
between the robed man's legs, still partially hidden under
the robe. He's now pinned down by the axe, which is firmly
embedded into the floor and is holding down the robe. The
blade is painfully close to the robed gentleman's naughty
bits.
The robed man gives a baby yelp.
GILES: Did I take a leg?
Camera angle changes. The robed man shakes his head, now
cowering in fear and trapped helplessly.
GILES: Oh. Damn. Looks like I missed.
The robed man gives another baby yelp. Giles puts his finger
to his lips like a mother scolding a child.
GILES: Strange thing about us Watchers. We don't like to
kill. Unlike you. We don't like taking advantage of people
unprepared. Unlike you. However, we've this nasty habit of
making people like yourself wish to hell and damnation that
they WERE dead. With that in mind, you're going to tell me
everything I want to know.
Robed man is shaking with fear. Giles towers over him. Then
slowly kneels, kneeing into the man's ribs. Pinning him down
further and more painfully.
Close up of Giles. Smiling. Enjoying this a bit much.
GILES: comprende, mi amigo?, Sie begreifen, mein Freund?
Comprendete, il mio amico?
Camera pulls back to show Giles reveal that he has one of
the robed figures' sacrificial daggers and it is now aimed
at the man's eyes.
GILES: ...Kapish?
Man screams. Fade to black.
END SCENE
..can ya tell I really like it when Giles goes into Ripper
mode? They just don't do that enough, but this moment seems
ideal for it.
[> [> Re: Zachie Prewrite #3 (speccy spoilery
blahblah) -- 110v3w1110w, 14:47:17 11/23/02 Sat
personal i don't think they will resolve the issue of if
giles is alive or dead because i think they want to create
an atmosphere of distrust they want to audience not to trust
any of the characters so IMO we will be left guessing if
giles is really giles or is he the big bad.
[> [> [> Right! -- luna, 17:44:46
11/23/02 Sat
[> I'd say the first one is the more likely. --
OnM, 19:12:06 11/23/02 Sat
Also, there is precedence-- Willow stopping the giant demon
spider in Selfless. The spider's leap was probably
just about as fast as the axe would be swinging towards
Giles. What would be even funnier is if the axe got 'stuck'
as if it was buried in some invisible wall inches from
Giles' head, and as the robed figure is struggling mightily
to get it unstuck, Giles slowly gets up and makes his
move.
Good idea, ZM!
[> [> OnM, there you are! (O/T) -- Wisewoman
, 20:22:55 11/23/02 Sat
Hi! I was thinking about you the other day as I was
listening to Meat Loaf's Bat Out of Hell II cd, and
thinking I should send you the lyrics to Objects In
The Rear View Mirror, by Jim Steinman, and if you e-
mail me, I will.
;o) dub
[> [> [> Mmmm... Meatloaf! =) (still O/T) --
ZachsMind, 23:21:10 11/23/02 Sat
The Bat Out of Hell albums are incredible. The best work
Meatloaf & Steinman ever did. Separately or
together.
[> [> [> [> Oh, YEAH!! -- dub ;o),
09:25:58 11/24/02 Sun
Current
board
| More November
2002