November 2002
posts
Interesting thoughts on Andrew (spoilers and whatnot)
-- Mystery, 09:15:05 11/29/02 Fri
My brother made a pretty interesting observation:
They seem to making a pretty big deal of no one remembering
who Andrew is/was. He's referred to as "Whatshisname" and
"Tucker's brother" and people only seem to have vague
memories of the monkey summoning incident. It's almost like
they're trying to drive home a point.
My brother and I haven't been able to look into this but:
Has Andrew ever appeared or even been mentioned before
Dawn's appearence? What if Andrew is just an echo-effect of
the creation of Dawn from the Key?
I also noticed the parallels between Pre-Vamp William and
Andrew. Both kind of geeky and shunned by peers, making a
big deal of proving how big bad they are. Also it seemed
that Andrew and Spike were pretty interchangable in the
schemes of the First Evil. The First Evil made a point of
working with both of them, but had more luck with Andrew
because he was so malleble. Yet once Andrew proved to be a
liabilty, the FE activated the SleeperSpike and tried to
kill off Andrew. Then he went on to abandon Andrew
altogether and took Spike instead. Took the strongest
connection/lead that Scoobies had to the FE, and left in his
place, Andrew, who has all if not more of the information
Spike has, and while he might be more aware of what he
knows, he's rather incompetant.
Perhaps Andrew is to Spike, what Dawn is to Buffy: The
innocent and naive person they could have been, if not for
their respective callings. Both Andrew and Dawn have a kind
of respect-worship of their...siblings? templates?
JONATHAN: Spike.
ANDREW: (riveted) He is so cool. (glances at the others,
self-consciously) And, I mean, the girl is hot too.
(quote from Psyche)
Also notice one of Andrew's explanations for why he had the
blood "I fell in love with a beautiful lady vampire in
Mexico and we came back to Sunnydale to start a life on the
straight and narrow." Didn't Spike and Druscilla end up in
Mexico before the break up, or was it in S. America? Also, a
beautiful lady vampire changing Andrew's life, sending him
to the side of good? Druscilla changed Spike's life, and to
win her back from Angelus, Spike teamed with Buffy and saved
the world from Acathla.
And also, Dawn was going to be the sacrifice in Season 5,
but Buffy swapped placed with her.
"I was going to bleed Andrew, but you look much better
with your shirt off." -FE to Spike, kind of
paraphrased
The FE was going to use Andrew, but in the end, since the
Harbingers had to break into the Summer's home anyways, the
FE told them to just get Spike instead. Sort of how Buffy
was a substitute for Dawn.
What does everyone think? More thoughts? While it does make
sense, there's something about this theory that I'm not
comfortable with. It almost feels like it's the right
general direction, but something is off. Like I took a left
too early. *shrug*
"Hey, you're hair's not black anymore." Hehe...
[>
I agree -- very interesting idea. -- Sophist,
09:55:51 11/29/02 Fri
Wish I had something brilliant to add, but....
[>
Another Andrew-Dawn parallel -- HonorH, 10:53:01
11/29/02 Fri
They were, as I've been saying below, the only two the
Bringers went after with knives.
[>
Not sure where they're going with Andrew... (speccy &
spoilery) -- ZachsMind, 11:55:11 11/29/02 Fri
Not sure where they're going with Andrew, although he makes
a very useful weapon when wielded properly. I thought the
"Andrew Fu" that Buffy did, using Andrew as a weapon to
knock out two of the harbingers was simply inspired fight
choreography.
It would be nice if they made Andrew a key. I'd like them to
go back to that plotline. I still think it'd be cool if Dawn
started realizing glowing green energy powers. I've played
with that in my fan fiction. They do seem to be purposefully
revealing that Dawn HAS been paying attention and watching
her sister. That she's been picking up stuff from both Buffy
& Willow and could evolve into a combination of both, where
she can both kick butt and do spells with relative accuracy.
But they haven't even mentioned the whole Key thing about
her for this entire season.
I also still have hope that both Andrew AND Jonathan somehow
become a part of the Scoobies. I just like both of the
characters. I know they killed Jonathan, but they made a
point in the latest episode to show up his getting buried in
a shallow, unmarked grave. Awhile back I speculated they'd
bring Tara back as a ghost, because it's the one thing that
they've never really had among the Scoobies. They've never
had a ghost. They've had vampires and witches and werewolves
and even ex-demons. They've never had a ghost. Jonathan died
over a powerful sign. He also had dabbled in magicks and may
have had some residuals. It's sketchy at best, but I don't
see why they would have made a point to bring the principal
in to bury Jonathan's body, and show us that Jonathan was
buried near oil wells, if there wasn't some reason to bring
that up.
Danny Strong's been with the series since the very
beginning. I'd just hate to see his character written out of
the story in this way. He deserves better.
Is Andrew a fabrication just like Dawn? Is that why people
have difficulty remembering who he is? VERY possible, and
it'd be very cool if that's the direction they'd go.
However, there's just SO much going on, y'know? I'd love to
see them re-examine the whole Key plotline, but it might
just get in the way of everything else they've already got
happening.
On a different approach to the whole Andrew/Dawn thing, am I
the only one who thinks the two of them would make a cute
couple? I mean they're both quirky. It'd be ironic if they
got to know each other better. *smirk*
[> [>
Ooooooh! I like that idea! (Future Speculation) --
Wisewoman, 13:27:33 11/29/02 Fri
Jonathan joining the Scoobies as the resident ghost--
perfect! And there could be some sort of intrinsic link
between him and his murderer whereby Andrew has to atone for
his crime by carrying out any of the physical commands that
non-corporeal Jonathan gives him. Laurel and Hardy, Abbott
and Costello, Martin and Lewis, and now, Jonathan and
Andrew!
The reason we haven't seen Jonathan's true ghost so far, of
course, is because his body was left lying on the Seal of
Danzathar. Now that he's in a more "normal" grave he could
pop up and challenge the FE version of himself.
Ah, the possibilities are endless...and great fun.
(OTOH, I see more chance of an Andrew/Spike 'ship than an
Andrew/Dawn 'ship, but maybe that's just me.)
dub ;o)
[> [> [>
Yeah I think that's just you. =) -NT -- ZachsMind,
13:44:41 11/29/02 Fri
[> [> [>
Re: Ooooooh! I like that idea! (Future Speculation)
-- Tyreseus, 22:23:05 11/30/02 Sat
Much as I'd like to see Spike hit the hay with a gent
(preferably me), I don't think it's very likely.
I also don't see Andrew having much of a thing for Dawn,
either.
Maybe if they brought back Scott Hope.
[> [> [>
There is Spike/Andrew fic out there, but I haven't seen
any Andrew/Dawn -- Indri, who agrees that A/D is both
unlikely and awful, 00:04:11 12/01/02 Sun
[> [>
For God's sake, man, don't say things like that! --
HonorH (Dawn's ultimate defender), 14:49:03 11/29/02
Fri
Dawn/Andrew? In his dreams! And Buffy's nightmares! Not
to mention my own. Yuck! Surely Dawnie deserves better
that that. After everything Joss has put her through, I
can't imagine him inflicting the ultimate indignity of
Andrew upon her. Bite your tongue!
[> [> [>
Better than Conner and Dawn! -- Sophie, wondering
if HonorH needs a hug today..., 18:23:36 11/30/02 Sat
[> [> [> [>
At least Connor's pretty. -- HonorH, 20:01:03
11/30/02 Sat
Granted, his moody ways would wear even Dawn down quickly
(hey, I said she's not whiny, not that she's not moody--she
is sixteen, after all), and one thinks Buffy's
sister/offspring and Angel's son having a romance could be
positively apocalyptic, but I'd rather have Dawn dating him
than Andrew. At least Connor's got character, twisted
though it might be. Andrew's just a weak-minded little puke
with a queasy stomach and a dead conscience. Not that I'm
judgmental or anything . . .
[> [> [> [> [>
My eyes......my brain.....both dissolving at the
thought of -- Rufus, 05:06:11 12/01/02 Sun
Andrew and Dawn......I'd rather she date his
coat.....:):):)
[>
Re: Interesting thoughts on Andrew (spoilers and
whatnot) -- Darby, 12:12:19 11/29/02 Fri
I almost put up a suggestion that Andrew was the new housing
for Glory for reasons similar to yours, but even as an off-
the-wall theory it had too many holes. I like yours
better.
[>
Re: Interesting thoughts on Andrew (spoilers and
whatnot) -- Tess, 14:19:24 11/29/02 Fri
It struck me as odd that Buffy identified Andrew as Tucker's
brother. Why would Spike even know who Tucker was? And
wouldn't Andrew be more memorable as the other guy from the
supernerds group?
[> [>
I wondered the exact same thing! -- Sophie,
18:24:57 11/30/02 Sat
[>
Re: Interesting thoughts on Andrew (spoilers and
whatnot) -- frisby, 15:36:26 11/29/02 Fri
I agree that "something" is up with Andrew beyond his being
a simple plot device -- and I always wondered how the three
super-geeks really got so much accomplished -- maybe Andrew
really was the one behind the throne -- and we're all
fooled? Nah! But you're right that's there's something up
with regard to him and his links to Spike. I also can't add
anything brilliant to this. I think we'll just to wait for
more to be revealed. He "does" want to become a god.
[>
Disagreeing with some of your points -- alcibiades,
19:12:46 11/29/02 Fri
I also noticed the parallels between Pre-Vamp William
and Andrew. Both kind of geeky and shunned by peers, making
a big deal of proving how big bad they are. Also it seemed
that Andrew and Spike were pretty interchangable in the
schemes of the First Evil. The First Evil made a point of
working with both of them, but had more luck with Andrew
because he was so malleble. Yet once Andrew proved to be a
liabilty, the FE activated the SleeperSpike and tried to
kill off Andrew. Then he went on to abandon Andrew
altogether and took Spike instead. Took the strongest
connection/lead that Scoobies had to the FE, and left in his
place, Andrew, who has all if not more of the information
Spike has, and while he might
be more aware of what he knows, he's rather incompetant.
Perhaps Andrew is to Spike, what Dawn is to Buffy: The
innocent and naive person they could have been, if not for
their respective callings. Both Andrew and Dawn have a kind
of respect-worship of their...siblings? templates?
I don't get this at all.
You think Andrew the murderer, aspirant to multiple murder,
is an innocent and naive person? Huh? He went through all
last year, and unlike Jonathan, never got a clue.
In NLM, I think Spike and Jonathan were being paired. There
is one scene where we are in the basement with Wood viewing
Jonathan laid out on the ground, and then we cut to a shot
of Spike in Buffy's basement, laid out on the ground, his
hands in manacles. Their bodies are lying in very similar
positions, and in fact, Jonathan started the process of
opening the seal and Spike will finish it. I suspect that
Andrew's blood could never have been used because, if Frisby
and others are correct below, the seal was put in place by
the good guys to lock the primal vampire guy in, and in that
case, it might require the blood of people who are redeemed
in order to open the seal.
Also, pre-vamping, William never aspired to be the big bad.
Furthermore, Doug Petrie, the writer of FFL believes that in
his scene with Cecily, and the way he approached her,
William was emotionally brave.
I don't see Andrew as brave. I see him as weak and selfish
and petty and malleable way before the BB started playing
with his head.
[> [>
Well said alcibades. Agree on most points! --
shadowkat, 20:15:56 11/29/02 Fri
Except I'm not convinced Spike or Jonathan are entirelay
redeemed yet.
But I do believe unlike Andrew - both Spike and Jonathan
have shown a desire to be redeemed. And looking back? Both
Spike and Jonathan have actively tried to help - both at
different points are shown saving or trying to save one of
the Scoobies. And both show remorse for past acts. So maybe
they are? Or at least Jonathan is, and Spike is on his
way.
I don't have any hope for Andrew.
To add some fodder to your argument:
Andrew has not shown any desire to be redeemed except to the
extent of not being killed and in that sense, yes maybe he's
like Season 4 soulless chipped Spike, but past Season 4
Spike (Primeval?) it's a weak comparison - Andrew as a human
aspires to be the BB. (Another difference? Spike was far
cleverer in Season 4 and not really a henchman, he wasn't
even Adam's entirely. While Andrew aspires to be a god,
Spike just wants the chip removed.) And in no way has Andrew
shown remorse for his actions. Spike - goes and gets a soul
for his. The only remorse Andrew shows is his inability to
kill more people. So he gets blood instead. He wants to
kill. He just can't quite figure out how.
As early as Dead Things - we see Andrew enjoying the fact
that they got away with killing Katrina. Absolutely no
remorse. He gets off on the idea they are going to kill
Buffy in the fight sequence in SR. In Two-to-Go, Andrew
tries to kill Xander and if it weren't for Jonathan probably
would have. It's Andrew who convinces Jonathan to run. And
it's Andrew who suggests they continue to be bad guys. It is
also Andrew who comes back to Sunnydale with the hope of
being a "god" like Warren. Andrew is NOT niave, weak or even
entirely malleable. He is manipulating Jonathan in CwDP.
Don't underestimate Andrew's evil. If it weren't for the
Andrew's of the world - Warren wouldn't have been nearly as
bad. Warren needed a henchman and that was Andrew.
What I have a lot of problems with is the comparison of
Spike to Andrew - while it may make sense on a purely
surperficial level, both blond, somewhat tall, seemingly
effeminate in human form, with the leather jacket, it
doesn't work past that. (Hint - don't let appearences fool
you on the show...the writers are evil and like to play with
the audience's perceptions.) Regarding character
comparisons? I could work a far better and more in depth and
consistent comparison with Andrew and Xander. He certainly
fits Xander more in some characteristics than Spike.
Xander's hero-worship of Buffy, seeing no wrong, Andrew's
hero-worship of Warren, seeing no wrong.
Spike actually seemed to question Buffy more. And was NOT
agape - heroworship love, that was Xander. Nor did Spike
aspire to be like Buffy in the same sense Xander did. Spike
wanted to conqueor her. Xander wanted to be her henchman,
which he attempts to be in more than one episode.
Other comparisons - Xander is the one who summons the demons
in the SG - he summons Sweet in OMWF, and by hurting Cordy -
inadvertently summons Anya. Xander is the "butt-monkey" of
the SG, he's Drac's henchman. He's the comic relief, which
was Andrew's purpose in the Trioka. The team-member we don't
take seriously. Part of the reason, Andrew survives is to
complement Xander's survival. We have the B/X pairing in the
beginning of the year with Willow outside and we have the
W/A pairing. Buffy doesn't love Xander but does love him as
a friend. Warren doesn't love Andrew at all. The W/A which
should be friends becomes a twisted friendship. It's the
anti- B/X relationship. Just as Jonathan/Andrew is the anti-
W/X relationship. I've always seen each member of the Trioka
as being representative of one of the SG. In some ways
Andrew fits Xander even better than Jonathan does. Jonathan
actually fits Willow better - Jonathan like Willow is seen
using magic to change his environs and make himself
important. Andrew may be the darkXander side - which is
notably shown in the whole Andrew/Xander/Anya interrogation
scene.
Also both Xander and Andrew - have reacted to the movies in
the same way - often trying on what movie heros have.
No, I think a far better comparison is X/A - I just don't
have the time or patience to do it right now. People keep
trying to compare Spike with Andrew in the same way they try
to compare him to Xander - which while tempting, doesn't
work as well. Spike actually has more similarities in
character to Willow, Giles and Jonathan. (Which btw is
actually an in-joke. The writers wanted Tucker but the actor
wasn't available so they had to cast someone else - I found
this out with an online interview with actor playing
Andrew.)
[> [> [>
Agreeing with the agreement -- ponygirl,
07:49:44 11/30/02 Sat
The real question for me is why ME was trying to get us to
compare Spike and Andrew. The clothing, then the scenes in
the house which were almost a shot for shot match. Was it
to note the difference between the adult conversation going
on in Buffy's bedroom and the childish role-playing in
Dawn's? Or are we being set up to once again not take
Andrew seriously when he may pose a greater danger than
Spike? When Sleeper aired I looked up the word in the
dictionary and found that one of the meanings is something
insignificant which suddenly takes on greater importance.
Could Andrew be the real sleeper rather than Spike?
[> [> [> [>
Re: Agreeing with the agreement -- Arethusa,
08:04:59 11/30/02 Sat
Or is it also part of the deglamorization of Spike that
fills NLM? We have a bad blond guy in an expensive coat
swaggering around Sunnydale, but the effect is ludicrous
because it's weak, whiny Andrew. But I agree, right now
Andrew's the sleeper, since the extent of his involvement
with The First is not yet known to the Scoobies.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Agreeing with the agreement -- Dariel,
09:14:22 11/30/02 Sat
The real question for me is why ME was trying to get us
to compare Spike and Andrew.
I think you touched on the main reason when you noted the
two conversations, one adult, one childish, that were taking
place. One person, Spike, is attempting to grow up, to
embrace the light. He's had his stint as the Big Bad, but
it's lost it's lustre. Andrew is like the fledgling vampire
Willliam, someone who's tasted power for the first time in
his life and covets it. He wants to embrace evil, thinking
it will give him satisfaction and control, that he will get
to pay back all of those who've hurt him in life.
I also think they are being paralleled because Spike is the
obvious danger, whereas Andrew is not. The Scoobs take the
former very seriously, while they jokingly play good cop/bad
cop with Andrew. Here's hoping they get a clue soon!
[>
Re: Interesting thoughts on Andrew (spoilers and
whatnot) -- monsieurxander, 15:28:24 11/30/02 Sat
Maybe it's an inside joke... a reference to the fact that
(maybe) the actor who played Tucker was not available to be
the third member of the Trio, so they made up a character
and referenced him about a gazillion times. I mean, they
both have the same chief abilities (summoning demons, etc)
and the same insecurities, fears, inabilities to cope with
the outside world to a humorous extent... They are basically
the same character, just played by a different actor.
Kaboom Question (BTVS VII/9) -- Hemiola, 10:12:33
11/29/02 Fri
Everyone seems convinced that it is the Watchers Council
that goes boom at the end of the episode.
However, if you watch carefully, the building that is shown
just before the Council meeting and the building that
actually explodes ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
BUILDINGS!
This being the case, isn't it therefore logical that the
explosion we are shown is actually the first strike by the
Council in Quentin's "war"? Or, if not that, an attack on a
DIFFERENT Council office in a different location??
Am I missing something here???
[>
It is the same building. -- HonorH, 10:45:14
11/29/02 Fri
At least, IMHO. It's just a closer shot when we get the bad
CGI explosion.
[> [>
Uhm maybe not then again what would be the point? -
- shadowkat, 13:03:02 11/29/02 Fri
This confused me as well when I re-watched. The first
glimspe of the building shows a half rotunda with windows
curved at the top and indented with two wings further
out.
The second shot shows a building without a half rotunda and
more rectangular indention. Now it's possible this was just
an editing or post-production mistake and the writers
thought it was the same building. I don't know. But the
difference in the two buildings confused me and made me
wonder if it was another mislead.
If so? Why show us a building exploding? What's the
point?
[> [> [>
Confusion and misdirection is my guess. -- VR,
14:06:45 11/29/02 Fri
[> [> [>
Just to add to the confusion... -- alcibiades,
22:20:57 11/29/02 Fri
AFAICR, the ones constantly associated with the blowing up
of buildings and crypts are people from the Initiative.
I was really struck by this when watching FFL the other day,
post NLM. Riley, rather egregiously goes into the vampire
crypt, throws a grenade and explodes it. The Initiative is
the one with the heavy arms and war paraphernalia.
Just a thought. If they are tying off lose ends this
season, the Initiative's a biggee. It's got to reappear
sometime.
Although the idea of an undercover American agency blowing
up what is more or less the British ministry of magic is
rather disconcerting.
BTW, I too think the buildings are radically different once
you stop to look at them. And they could have used a still
of the exploded building before it explodes to show us that
building as the Watcher's Council, so it doesn't make much
sense.
[> [> [> [>
My confusion is usually at max -- oboemaboe,
22:58:51 11/29/02 Fri
As Travers gave his final words, did anyone else notice the
woman in the gray suit (Lydia?) standing behind him acting
very bizarre? It seemed like she was tightening her
shoulders inward and almost grimacing, with a weird tilt to
her head. It was so strange, for a minute I thought she was
about to morph into the First.
Am I completely making this up?
[ ] Yes, you're insane [ ] No, that really happened
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: My confusion is usually at max -- Cheryl,
08:04:03 11/30/02 Sat
When I rewatched the episode I had thought something similar
about her, too. Although it didn't occur to me that she was
going to morph, I thought since they showed that shot of her
alone that something was going to grab her. Or *something*
was going to happen - otherwise why show her like that? Did
seem deliberate, but I don't know why.
[> [> [> [> [>
I thought the same thing... -- Scroll, 10:21:55
11/30/02 Sat
...but we could be way off base. She could just be a poor
Watcher who got blown to smithereens. But the first time I
watched, I really thought there was something very fishy
about that shot of her in front of the bookshelves.
OTOH, here's a theory I pulled out of nowhere that might be
kind of nice. See, maybe she really was just a poor Watcher
caught in the crossfire. Maybe she managed to escape. Maybe
there was a secret passageway behind that shelve of books,
someplace she could've hidden in for protection when the
bomb went off. A Watcher building seems like the kind of
place for secret passageways and old hidden rooms people
have completely forgotten about. Then Lydia could escape to
Sunnydale to warn Buffy and help fight the Big Bad. Then if
and when "Buffy" ends, if and when ME makes a spin-off with
"Dawn the Vampire Slayer", she could be the new Watcher!
(Can you tell I've thought too much about this?)
[> [> [> [> [> [>
you just think she's cute -- Rochefort, 18:00:50
11/30/02 Sat
[> [> [> [>
magic bullet theory.... (the shadowy bugs bunny
viewer) -- Rochefort, 17:58:30 11/30/02 Sat
If the Council didn't blow up, how exactly will the
exposition for this go?
In walks Quintin... none of the characters are surprised,
because THEY didn't see the building blow up. We did. So
how does ME explain the misdirection?
They'll need one of those shadowy bugs bunny viewers to
stand up in the audience and shriek "But you're DEAD!"
Then Buffy will need to pull out an easle and a pointer and
show the video over and over, back and away, back and away.
CLEARLY two different buildings. Ah HA! "So the council
did not blow up after all, faithful viewer."
"Oh I see, carry on."
And then Xander can scream and go "PEEEOPLE! AAAAAA!"
[> [> [> [> [>
In my opinion, Rochefort has just had the final word on
the matter -- d'Herblay, 19:32:36 11/30/02 Sat
Proverbs 24:6 in context (speccy spoilery up to & incl.
"Never Leave Me.") -- ZachsMind, 13:18:42
11/29/02 Fri
For by wise counsel, you shall make your war.
BOOM.
Buffyradio.com pointed this out and I think it's interesting
to note here. Haven't seen it mentioned in this forum
elsewhere. Quentin Travers quoted from the Bible just before
the Watcher's Council's main headquarters in England blew
up. However, he didn't have the chance to finish the verse.
I went to The Bible
Gateway and checked the bible verse in context. Much of
the book of Proverbs deals with wisdom. The Watcher's
Council believes it to be the epitome of wisdom. So
naturally in a time of need, Travers would turn to that book
of the Bible among all others, but after the portion he
quoted is another revealing tidbit. Here's the full verse.
Proverbs 24:6 For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy
war: and in multitude of counsellors there is
safety.
That's the King James version. Another translation
interprets it this way: "for waging war you need
guidance, and for victory many advisers." Perhaps
Travers was not going to quote the entire verse, because the
Watcher's Council doesn't seem to follow the advice of the
second half of that verse. Consequently, in the past there
have been many failed Slayers who do not outlive their
Watchers. Before Buffy the survival rate of Slayers was
terrible, because they only had a single Watcher to mourn
their deaths. They did not have a gallant man like Xander to
breathe life back into them, or a witch like Willow to
petition Osiris on the Slayer's behalf.
In the past, the Watcher's Council has given each Slayer
potentiate ONE Watcher, as if that alone is enough. You'd
think that if their sole purpose for existence were to seek
out THE Slayer and advise and counsel her, when they found
Buffy in Sunnydale they would have uprooted their stakes and
moved to California. Instead they remained in England. I've
always found that rather curious. Conversely, Buffy HAS
taken the entire verse to heart, whether she's ever actually
read it or not. She has surrounded herself with many
counselors, making what is ultimately a Slayer's Counsel
that has been a more than sufficient substitute for the
Watcher's Council.
You might want to check out the whole chapter of Proverbs
24. Other parts of it are also quite revealing, when placed
in the context of Buffy. Coincidental of course, but
it still makes for interesting reading. For example,
Proverbs 24:1-2 reads, "Be not thou envious against evil
men, neither desire to be with them. For their heart
studieth destruction, and their lips talk of mischief."
Another variant is, "Do not envy wicked men, nor desire
their company, for their hearts plot violence, and their
lips talk of making trouble." This is advice Buffy has
been trying to accept, having desired the company of Spike
in the past but now fighting the temptation to use the
wicked man, but now that he's got a soul he's not quite as
wicked. The evil's now coming from The First, not him.
Granted though, Spike's still talking about making trouble.
"If I escape, someone's gonna die."
Proverbs 24:17 says, "Do not gloat when your enemy falls;
when he stumbles, do not let your heart rejoice," which
coincides with the conversation Buffy & Spike had about how
she needs the hate to do her job.
SPIKE: Don't do that. Don't rationalize this into some
noble act. We both know the truth of it. You like men who
hurt you.
BUFFY: No.
SPIKE: You need the pain we cause you. You need the hate.
You need it to do your job, to be the slayer.
BUFFY: No. I don't hate like that. Not you, or myself. Not
anymore. You think you have insight now because your soul's
drenched in blood? You don't know me. You don't even know
you.
Buffy was a fool in the past. She used Spike. She did get
off on the pain she was causing him, and it made her sick
when she realized what she was doing to him. She was
disgusted with herself. And we learned from her visit with
the therapyre in "CwDP" that she has an inferiority complex
about her superiority complex. Now that she sees the error
of her ways, she's learning from them. She's gained wisdom
about herself. As has Spike. They were fools before, but
it's knowledge and wisdom that is saving them now. Spike is
being honest with Buffy, as Buffy has been honest with Spike
from the beginning. On a cerebral level, they're being more
intimate with one another now than ever they were before.
Proverbs 24:26 reads, "An honest answer is like a kiss on
the lips."
There's also an interesting tidbit in this chapter of
Proverbs for Willow: "Do not say, 'I'll do to him as he
has done to me; I'll pay that man back for what he
did'." Elsewhere in the old testament it talks about
an eye for an eye but here it reveals that the wise
thing is not to strip someone of their skin for killing your
lover. It doesn't make it better.
But back for a moment to the fate of the Watcher's Council,
and what the writers may have in store for us. We do not
know whether or not the Council survived. We are probably
not supposed to know. When we return from the Christmas
break, Giles will no doubt return also with a few slayers in
training. Travers may or may not make appearances. We've
been led to believe these characters might be dead. This is
so that we question whether or not when they return, they
too are Big Bad disguises. In case you haven't noticed, The
First Evil can apparently only appear as people who have
died. That's why it can appear as Buffy towards Spike. She's
died twice. It can pose as Spike too, and any undead or post-
dead as well as all the Big Bads of previous seasons, all of
which have been dispatched by Buffy & the Scoobies. Buffy
killed The Master. She killed The Mayor. She killed Adam.
The whole gang took Glory down and Giles dealt the final
blow to Ben. Willow took out Warren. Andrew took out
Jonathan. Cassie died allegedly of natural causes. There's
never been a character that The First Evil has taken for ITs
disguise that's alive in the normal sense of the word. The
jury's still out about Joyce & Tara. Joyce may have been yet
another disguise of The First Evil but I don't think so. I
speculate (the politics behind the scenes notwithstanding)
that both Tara & Joyce died of unnatural, normal means. And
more importantly, they did NOT die having lost all hope. All
the other above-mentioned characters had turned to the dark
side or at the moment of death were stripped of their hope
that good would prevail. However, Tara & Joyce died quick
deaths. They didn't have time to fear the worst. That may be
why The First Evil could not take Tara's form, and if that's
the case, it gives further hope that Joyce was also the real
thing, and not a trick by the Big Bad Whatever.
And if the above is true, it means the Big Bad can't pose as
Quentin Travers or Rupert Giles, because they did not die
having lost all hope. They too died a surprise death.
...Provided they ARE dead. I speculate that Travers is very
very dead but Giles is not. But then again, I've been wrong
before.
Guess we'll find out January. =)
[>
Re: Proverbs 24:6 in context (speccy spoilery up to &
incl. "Never Leave Me.") -- frisby,
15:27:45 11/29/02 Fri
Interesting reading of Proverbs 24:6 with regard to Buffy
surrounding herself with counselors (A counselor's council
instead of a 'watcher's' council). Also with regard to Buffy
gaining wisdom and saying "not anymore" -- --
[>
I don't agree so much with the end of your post
(spoilers) -- Clen, 17:11:27 11/29/02 Fri
you said Tara and Joyce died quick with no time for fear.
Joyce struggled with it for a while, and probably had a lot
of fear when her brain wasn't being pressed into
incoherentness.
also, Jonathan died pretty quick and through unnatural and
normal means (as natural as being shot anyways) with no time
for fear of dying (from Andrew) and he also seemed to show a
lot of hope and maturity before dying. he had a borderline
breakthrough. Joyce died of natural and normal means.
really, most of that list died through nonmystical means:
stabbed through the heart, blown up, smothered, etc. If you
were petitioning Osiris for each of them, which would he
allow and which would he refuse?
[>
Surely 24:1-2 is more relevant to Andrew by your
quote? -- KdS, 03:50:29 11/30/02 Sat
[>
More on Proverbs 24 (spoilers up to 7.9,
speculations) -- Scroll, 10:14:35 11/30/02 Sat
I'm partial to the NASB (New American Standard Version),
it's the most accurate of the English translations though
not as poetic.
For by wise guidance you will wage war,
And in abundance of counselors there is victory.
I think you're spot-on about Buffy having surrounded herself
with counsellors: Xander with his loyalty and big heart,
Willow with her magic and intelligence, Anya with her vast
knowledge and no-nonsense attitude, Spike with his
experience and strength, and Dawn with her innocence and
love. Throw in Giles with his wisdom and maturity, spice it
up with a vamp detective agency in L.A., and you've got a
pretty formidable "council" fighting against the forces of
evil, IMHO.
And I find verse 3 interesting considering the house
metaphors ponygirl has pointed out:
By wisdom a house is built,
And by understanding it is established;
Perhaps the Summers' house must be broken up only so
that it can be built up again even stronger.
But I can't agree with you on why Joyce and Tara can't be
used by the Big Bad. Cassie's death was pretty sudden too,
and by natural causes. She had just escaped death twice and
was certainly not expecting to drop dead of heart failure.
Cassie had never even known her family had a history of
heart irregularity. So I don't think you could say Cassie
died without hope.
In keeping with that, I hope you're wrong about the FE not
being able to pose as Travers. I'm actually sorry to see
that irritating man dead and I'd love to see him again, even
as a ghost. I rather liked him in a love-to-hate kind of
way. Kinda like Snyder.
this is what you get for watching 14 straight hours of
BtVS -- leslie,
13:19:23 11/29/02 Fri
Last night I dreamed that I was with Spike in a huge library
rather reminiscent of the new Sunnydale High School but also
like the main libraries at Harvard (where I've taught),
UCLA, and Swarthmore (both of which I attended). But the
halls kept shifting like the basement in Sunnydale High this
season; they were shifting to keep moving us away from the
doors, so we couldn't get out. Wandering through endless
halls, up and down stairs. There was a sense that there was
something evil in the library that the library was trying to
keep from getting out. Finally Spike looked at me and said,
"Well, you know, writers are inherently somewhat evil."
[>
I like that! -- ponygirl, 13:39:32 11/29/02
Fri
Obviously your untapped prophetic powers are blossoming --
the somewhat evil writers part, sadly not you wandering
around with Spike!
[> [>
Re: I like that! -- leslie,
15:25:03 11/29/02 Fri
I should make it clear that the "somewhat evil writer" in
question was me, which was why the library wouldn't let us
out. Like, no matter what, I was always going to be
*somewhat* evil just by being a writer.
[>
Re: this is what you get for watching 14 straight hours
of BtVS -- frisby, 15:21:59 11/29/02 Fri
Are you sure the walls were keeping you from keeping out,
rather than making sure you didn't find that special room
(the one where Buffy first found Spike, and where Jonathan
was sacrificed), the one Andrew and Jonathan also could not
find until Morphy-Warren showed them?
Also reminds me of the labyrinth Theseus needed the clue
from Ariadne to get out of (Nietzsche's clue to such
labyrinths is that only when the hero has deserted the soul
does the super-hero approach her in a dream). Maybe the only
way to get out of such a library is to (be evil) and write a
book? Or maybe the clue from the dream is that the writers
of Buffy (Joss and Co) are the true first evil (pulling the
strings of our passions not for the purpose of art but for
pure wicked pleasure)? I wonder what would have happened if
you have woken up within the dream (a lucid dream)?
[>
Re: this is what you get for watching 14 straight hours
of BtVS -- slain (experimenting with lowercase),
16:03:49 11/29/02 Fri
I've had quite a few strange BtVS dreams - but I've noticed
that a nameless terror of some kind often appears, whereas
most of my dreams are rarely scary. They say the First Evil
gets you in your dreams, of course.
[> [>
Re: this is what you get for watching 14 straight hours
of BtVS -- yabyumpan, 16:35:27 11/29/02 Fri
"They say the First Evil gets you in your dreams, of
course"
And the 'First Evil' is actually Joss Whedon.......
7.8 shooting script now up in Psyche -- Doriander,
15:54:22 11/29/02 Fri
First shooting script of the current season
Sleeper
[>
Re: 7.8 shooting script now up in Psyche -- Slain,
16:00:45 11/29/02 Fri
For me this adds one significant thing so far - that the
girls are almost certainly prospective slayers. The ones
we've seen so far could have been in their early 20s (and
possibly were), but the shooting script says emphatically
that the dead girl in 'Sleeper' is 15.
Plus:
'The bustling city. Sure, what the hell. Haven't we seen
enough of the countryside? And if nobody recognizes it,
super in one of those "London, England" title cards. That's
the ticket. Anyway...'
Heh.
[>
Thanx! -- aliera, 16:21:36 11/29/02 Fri
[>
Re: 7.8 shooting script now up in Psyche --
ponygirl, 19:21:38 11/29/02 Fri
Cool! I was starting to despair of seeing shooting scripts
for this season. Interesting that the song was originally
"I'll Be Seeing You" -- despite the pleasant childhood
associations, now permanently scarred, I'm glad they made
the switch to "Early One Morning", much more cryptic,
definitely more creepy.
[> [>
Re: 7.8 shooting script now up in Psyche --
Doriander, 20:05:22 11/29/02 Fri
I think they deliberately put off releasing shooting scripts
until 7.9 aired, where in the identity of this season's big
bad was revealed/confirmed to the viewers. (Seeing as in
7.8, they've already identified IT as the First, I'm
guessing from 7.1 on, it's been spelled out as well. Had
they given out scripts early on, we'd have been spared the
anxiety of theorizing. Where's the fun in that?)
[> [>
No they only screwed with my childhood memories of
.... -- Rufus, 23:27:15 11/29/02 Fri
The Friendly Giant.........sigh.......those bastards..;)
[>
Awesom, Thanks! well worth reading (dangerous 7.8
spoilers) -- cougar, 19:30:38 11/29/02 Fri
Now that we are in the desert of no new episodes, all we can
do is reflect and anticipate. I found it facinating to read
the descriptions of motives and then compare them to how the
actors told the story. Interesting to see what is cut, like
the policeman, it was much spookier when Spike just slipped
away from Buffy by a hair's breath rather than the bumbling
street cop routine.
One of the things that keeps me glued to this board are the
insights int the writing process, from articles to all the
probing audience responce and speculation tangents you guys
have. Reading his script unveils the paring down to the
essential. I'm curious to know if Joss is the one who
directs much of this final editing.
I found it especially interesting that the Script called for
Buffy to hold Spike after he thought she was gonna stake
him. Yet in the episode she did't touch him. I wonder if
that direction they took with her contributed to the rewrite
of the church/ revalation scene with Spike in Benearth You.
Her motivation in the script is more transparent than what
we saw. Also I don't remember Spike asking her about what it
is going to take to make her believe in him.
Reading this before rewatching the episode is sure to shake
loose a few new insights
[> [>
Must say I'm rather glad (7.8, 7.9 spoilers) --
HonorH, 19:53:23 11/29/02 Fri
they didn't go with Buffy holding Spike in the basement. I
think that would be too much, too soon with these two.
Buffy's gentle cleaning of his face in NLM was a far better
step toward physical comfort for these two, and the ensuing
conversation brought them closer emotionally than they've
ever been. There's still a lot of damage between these two,
but if they can survive, I think they can build a true
friendship. At least, that's what I hope for.
[> [> [>
Re: Must say I'm rather glad (7.8, 7.9 spoilers) --
cougar, 20:36:57 11/29/02 Fri
I agree, the fact that she didn't touch hims howed just how
much control she exerts to deal with the emotional
intensities of living with both polarities of the spectrum
of good and evil. Definately built more tension. But if the
answer to "some day she'll tell you" was Buffy saying she
believes in him, as powerful as that was, that seemed to
come too easily. I hope there is more he will be told, and
think there is because the faith in him semed a starting
point to a new source of strength. Something to hold onto
in dark times. Finally some credit and aknowlegement and
something that he didn't have to deduce himself.
Yet the script shows that the question had occurred to him
before. If that was the moment Cassie prophesized, it seemed
to mirror Luke Skywalker becoming a Jedi, the force is with
him and welcome to celibacy. In the script he even tells
Anja that Buffy is the reason he won't dally.
But surely that is not resolved so early on.
[> [> [>
Re: Must say I'm rather glad (7.8, 7.9 spoilers)
Ditto. -- shadowkat, 07:04:25 11/30/02 Sat
You know - I've decided to go with what I see on screen and
not what's in the shooting scripts for intent, unless the
shooting script was written by Joss Whedon.
Why??? Because as Whedon has stated on more than one
occassion, a director and producer can change what is
written and that's the most valid piece. It's the reason he
insisted on creative control, produces the show, and usually
directs his own scripts with a few minor exceptions.
Marsters also has stated in Interviews - that the writers
original script gets changed at least twice: first in the
performances and direction and second in the editing
room.
The ONLY time a script or play as written tends to fit
exactly what the writer intended is when the writer directs
and edits and produces it. Even on stage - the writer's
intent can change once the actors get hold of it.
A Shooting Script is NOT like reading the first draft of a
book or a book. It's not the script writer's intent that is
important to understanding the characters. But we can learn
from it - because the changes show us what the other
collaborative parties disagreed with and the key to getting
the show is figuring out what is in Whedon's brain and the
consensus.
example - they clearly cut a lot of Xander's lines. Why?
Because we weren't supposed to be in Xander's pov in
Sleeper, Xander's lines about Webs took away from the scene
and the focus which was the povs of Spike and Buffy.
Also the song I'll Be Seeing You - doesn't really fit
William, Spike or Buffy. While Early One Morning really
does. I bet you money that Whedon added that one.
Whedon, from what I've seen in interviews and in the
changes, views his vampires a little differently than his
writers do. The difference is subtle, but pops up whenever
we see these shooting scripts. I personally prefer Whedon's
interpretation, it's less obvious and more layered.
I also think Spike hugging Buffy in that scene would have
been grossly out of character for Spike. My feeling is Spike
doesn't really want to be touched right now. He seems to
flinch away from it.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Must say I'm rather glad (7.8, 7.9 spoilers)
Ditto. -- auroramama, 07:27:43 11/30/02 Sat
I dunno. With people as good as ME, yeah, probably the as-
seen episode should be taken as the last word. But there
are plenty of shows where the writers' intentions are better
than anything the studio or the network will let you see.
And sometimes stuff gets cut for lack of time, not because
it wasn't good, but because other things were more
necessary. And sometimes even ME must miss a trick, make a
choice that wasn't perfect.
In this case, though, I agree with you about everything you
mention. The one thing I wish they'd left in is Spike
asking Buffy about believing in him. Because then her line
in 7.9 wouldn't have come out of nowhere as it did. I have
no problem with her change of heart -- it didn't seem sudden
to me, it just seemed like she had been making up her mind.
But "believe" is the kind of word William would use before
Buffy would. It's more in character for her if she's
answering a question that he asked aloud.
auroramama
[> [> [> [> [>
Question regarding reliability of internet shooting
script, etc -- shadowkat, 15:03:42 11/30/02 Sat
Okay - someone (my mother) asked me how did I know this
shooting script was the actual one and how did I know the
Original Draft posted at BAPS for Beneath You was the actual
one.
Someone has to scan it in and post to the internet. How do
we know some fan didn't do it? Didn't write it
themselves?
What's the reliability of the source? Because the sections I
read in the Shooting Script and in the Beneath You Original
Version - Rufus re-posted from BAPS in the thread below
don't fit the characters or what has gone before. They are
jarring in their errors. Particularly the Original Beneath
You draft which really doesn't fit the character of Spike
but does fit a heck of a lot of fan fiction writers views of
the character.
Did ME in ANY way come forward and admit to posting this or
give these items validity?
Do you have any proof outside of it was found on Psyche's
site or Baps?? Has any of the writers confirmed it's
validity? How do we know some fan writer isn't pulling our
collective legs?
SK (whose feeling skeptical today - my mother has this
effect on me ;-))
[> [> [> [> [> [>
I answered this already -- see below your other post on
this question -- alcibiades, 15:54:09 11/30/02
Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I answered this already -- see below your other
post on this question -- Dochawk, 23:08:55 11/30/02
Sat
Alcibiades,
Did you actually see the script or are you believing a
friend who told you? Because if someone actually gave out a
copy of a script that wasn't used, that person would most
likely have been fired. I have been on the set of many tv
shows (my best friend has been a first AD on two emmy award
winning shows and I dated an agent who represented many tv
writers) and for the most part actors, staff and crew guard
scripts carefully. Once an episode has aired they
frequently allow people to have scripts (they donate signed
ones for charity often), but to let someone have a script
before the episode airs? from a show that tries like hell to
keep spoilers out of the public domain? The person who did
it would be risking their job and their livlihood (Danny,
the first AD said that if you were fired for this reason
you'd never get another job in TV, noone would trust you and
jobs are incredibly competitive to get). One person at ME
may already have lost their job over this issue (the person
who told me that isn't close enough to the set to know for
sure). So lets say I am a little skeptical about your
evidence.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I answered this already -- see below your other
post on this question -- Dochawk, 23:23:26 11/30/02
Sat
I should add, since I do know that previously scripts have
been "available" before an episode airs, many revisions
occur for a reason and a scene not used doesn't imply
anything about what the writers are trying to get to, let
alone what the director and editors want.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Thank you. I agree -- shadowkat, 08:26:52
12/01/02 Sun
I read alcibades response below and strongly feel, partly as
a writer myself and as someone who has read movie scripts,
plays, etc - that drafts don't tell you that much about
intent.
Writers often change entire plots. Even characters.
And in television? We have collaborations. Jane Espenson
recently stated in an article she posted at Firefly site
that each script goes through four revisions before it even
gets to the shooting script stage. And prior to that?
They break the story down as a group. The scriptwriter forms
an outline. Then the outline goes back for revisions. No
script is shot until it gets Whedon and/or Marti, Minear's
approval. Then the shooting script is taken by the director
and actors who change it in small ways as well.
I remember directing a play years and years ago and learning
how you cut certain diagologue in order to move the story
along. And when I briefly acted - I remember memorizing
lines but giving certain ones more emphasis.
Christopher Walken in Inside Actors Studio says he usually
kills punctuation in scripts before reading them, so he can
figure out the right emphasis on his own.
Marsters stated in interviews found on Baps as well as
spikespotting.com that he does not improvise, but he does do
small things with his face to have some control over it.
He also stated that what the writer writes is sometimes
drastically changed by the producers and editors. The
director has his take of course, but Marsters found in
television that it's usually whoever is in the editing room
that changes the scene or script the most. It's not like the
theater - where you see what the director and actors do
live, uncut. On film - a whole scene that we may read in a
shooting script or screenplay - lies on the cutting room
floor. We'll never know why that happens. It could be for
any number of reasons.
1. Time - too long, have to cut it. (Audrey Hepburn had to
fight to get them to leave in the MoonRiver song in
Breakfast at Tiffany's b/c of time problems. Once Upon A
Time in America was ruined due to cuts made b/c of
length.)
2. Commercial breaks (OMWF has several lines cut from it on
rebroadcasts to make room for commercials.)
3. Dramatic scope - the scene looked fine on paper but does
not work on camera. (They dumped a scene in Spike's crypt
last year from the Smashed script b/c it did not play as
they thought on camera.)
4. Too dark or hurts the story and characters. (They reshot
the punching scene at the end of Dead Things b/c Whedon
thought Spike's face was way too damaged and that would
overwhelm the message and intent.)
We can learn from these things...but the problem is how
much? And we should be careful not to rely heavily on
information that the creators of the tv show deliberately
cut or removed from the show. If the network removed it for
time or commercials - that's a whole other issue. But if
Whedon reshot it or cut it, that means it's gone, it's not
part of his vision for the characters and it is NOT part of
his story. So it is literally no more than fanfic, except in
this case possibly, fanfic written by a writer of the
show.
One other point, (this is the copyright attorney in me
speaking) - I'm surprised ME hasn't gone after some of these
postings of scripts on the internet, it is an incredible
infringement of copyright and punishable by hefty fines.
Makes me wonder if maybe ME knows these scripts aren't the
real ones? Or maybe it's just too difficult and expensive
for the producers to go after everyone? (The same reason
they ignore fanfic). (shrug.)
Thanks for providing the proof though. Rufus appears to have
backed it up with her own spoilers so I guess we can assume
alcibades friend didn't write and pass it off as Petries
(which was what my friend thought). Doesn't change the fact
that I really prefer the one that was shot, more lyrical,
more metaphorical and far more true to both characters. It
also fits better with the episodes before and after it. But
then I prefer a little ambiguity in my television, I hate it
when everything is clearly shown. And the first version
still feels very wrong to me, very out of character for
Spike and Buffy.
JMHO. ;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Thank you. I agree -- Dochawk, 12:06:54
12/01/02 Sun
1. First I am still not convinced its real (did Rufus'
spoiler come from the same person who wrote it??) But as we
both agree it doesn't matter, because it means nothing.
2. don't be too sure that ME doesn't go after the people who
post these. AngelX at least got a threatenng letter as did
at least one other site. But ME doesn't want to antagonize
the fan community so what they would rather do is find the
source of the leaks (it amazes me that a costumer would risk
their entire career because a friend wants to be spoilt, but
thats what happens).
3. fanfic is a totally different question. First its
copywrited characters, not words and its not for profit.
Again ME doesn't want to anger the fan community. But, most
importantly ME can't read any fanfic because if they use a
similar idea THEY will be sued. The best defense is an
institutional policy against reading any of it. This is why
when Drew Goddard tries to get a job on Buffy, he writes a
spec script for Farscape (for example, I don't know what
show his famous spec script was written for that got him the
ME job). This is a constant thing in this city. protecting
yourself against being sued for "stealing ideas".
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[>
Oh I forgot to add -- Dochawk, 12:09:50 12/01/02
Sun
i forgot to add, Rah's transcripts of the commentaries truly
edge on a lawsuit for Masq and I am sort of suprised she
hasn't gotten a letter yet regarding them (suggests this
site is not on the radar of Fox Home Video).
[> [>
It looks like a LOT of things were changed/cut from the
shooting script -- Traveler, 11:24:51 12/01/02
Sun
Most of the changes seemed to be for brevity, but a few
seemed to be for content as well. For the most part, I think
they were an improvement.
Episode 13 AtS writer (spoilery for writers name
only) -- yabyumpan, 16:31:50 11/29/02 Fri
Tim Minear has posted over on ASSB that he will no longer be
writing Ep 13 AtS due to writing commitments on Firefly.
David Fury will now be penning the ep with a new director.
He thinks he'll be writing Ep 22 though.
http://www.voy.com/14810/130604.html
Also mentions the problems over on Firefly
Masq, if you wanted to check it out, there are no other
spoilers in the thread :-)
[>
Boards like that drive me crazy -- Masq,
17:12:41 11/29/02 Fri
Copious amounts of Angel discussion to content my soul. VIP
visits.
And big-time spoilers which mean I can't hang there!
[> [>
Why can't *we* get VIP visits? This is the coolest
board after all. -- ponygirl pouting, 08:03:21
11/30/02 Sat
[> [> [>
It takes a lot of time to keep up with this board.
-- Arethusa, 08:06:48 11/30/02 Sat
Other boards, people can just dip into with a few comments.
We practically give out reading assignments for
homework!
[> [> [> [>
It's worth it, dammit! (while admitting to skipping a
few things myself) -- ponygirl, 08:10:00 11/30/02
Sat
[> [> [>
Re: Why can't *we* get VIP visits? This is the coolest
board after all. -- yabyumpan, 09:28:42 11/30/02
Sat
If anyone's interested, there's a collection of post's by TM
from uk.media.tv.angel at
http://urchin.earth.li/~sax/mutant/angel/minear/
Covers 3 seasons of AtS including some interesting stuff
re:Billy.
I wouldn't be suprised if TM lurked here, I get the
impression that surfs around AtS sites fairly frequently.
TM groupie ;-)
[> [> [> [>
Re: Why can't *we* get VIP visits? This is the coolest
board after all. -- 'Joss Whedon', 09:56:48 11/30/02
Sat
I'm always suspicious that Joss reads more internet
criticism that we might think, and I wouldn't be surprised
if he's popped over here once or twice - certainly some of
plot ideas this season have been suspiciously familiar!
I guess part of the problem is that there's no way of
authenticating VIPs - so anyone could post here with a
famous name, and we'd have no way of telling if was really
them. I, of course, would never do anything as crass and
obvious as that.
~ slain
[> [> [> [> [>
Well, not necessarily -- Masq, 10:41:13 11/30/02
Sat
I have access to poster ISP numbers, so I can eliminate
anyone who's posted here before under other names.
That doesn't mean they are not Joss, but since Joss and
other VIP's post at places like the Bronze where their ISP
numbers appear under their names, I can compare ISP numbers
on our board to official posts at the Bronze, etc., and give
it a good likelihood it is an actual VIP.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
but the bronze is playschoool compared to this --
luna, 17:24:33 11/30/02 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I second that.. -- ZachsMind, 00:16:07 12/01/02
Sun
However, given that the people who actually make Buffy &
Angel are particularly busy, I'm surprised they respond on
the 'Net as much as they do. They may or may not lurk here,
but I doubt they'd have time to respond. They may need The
Bronze, y'know? They may need 'playschool.' Cuz Lord knows
this message board and ATPoBtVS as a whole, it's more like a
collegiate level approach to examining their works, and they
might be a little put off by that. Wanna keep it simple.
Keep it real. That kinda thing.
But just in case anyone at Mutant Enemy is lurking..
[raises his cup of coffee in a toast]
Thanks for the seven year cerebral roller coaster, gang.
It's greatly appreciated.
Who else thinks .... (Spoilers for 7x09) -- Wolfhowl3,
05:17:02 11/30/02 Sat
That when the UmberVamp starts to talk, it will have the
voice and personality of the Master?
(or is that just my wishful thinking?)
Wolfhowl3
[>
Not just you (spoilers up to 7.9) -- Scroll,
09:31:37 11/30/02 Sat
His movements, the clawed and gnarled hands, the black
leather jacket/tunic with that almost militaristic collar is
very like the Master's. The fact that the First Evil wanted
to bring some "authority" to its presence -- it all seemed
to suggest the Master, or at least a Master-like
vampire.
I think we've seen elements of all the previous Big Bads in
the past 8 episodes since "Lessons". We have Glory in
Cassie, Adam in Warren, Warren in Warren (natch), the Master
and Drusilla in Spike/Buffy, and (I think) even hints of the
Mayor -- though don't ask me to remember where exactly cuz
the impressions were *very* fleeting. I'm willing to bet
"Early One Morning" is a song Drusilla used to sing all the
time, one which Spike associates with his vamp self. Which
made it easy for the FE to use it to control him. That's my
theory, at least.
[> [>
Except that -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:35:08 11/30/02
Sat
The Uber-Vampire is played by the same guy who played the
lead Gentleman and Gnarl. If this performace is similar to
his previous two, than I'm betting we'll be in for a real
creepshow from the Uber-Vamp.
[> [> [>
I must concur.. (speccy) -- ZachsMind, 00:01:26
12/01/02 Sun
I don't think the UberVamp's gonna turn out to be The
Master. However, The First might morph into Master when it
communicates with UberVamp. I don't see this UberVamp
creature being very much more than death and carnage. If it
has much of a vocabulary, that's gonna take out the sting of
its creepiness factor for me. It should just be a
bloodthirsty, mindless thrall thing for The First to
control.
[>
I sincerely hope not. -- HonorH, 10:12:18
11/30/02 Sat
We've already had The Master. ME doesn't usually repeat, so
my guess is this guy won't be Master Redux (or Master
Prototype, to be more accurate). If I had to make a guess,
I'd say this guy'll be totally non-verbal. That would
certainly set him aside from Ol' Prophecy Butt.
[> [>
Re: I sincerely hope not. -- verdantheart,
07:16:54 12/02/02 Mon
Well, it certainly looked more impressive than the
Master.
[>
Re: Who else thinks .... (Spoilers for 7x09) --
Sophie, 15:39:13 11/30/02 Sat
My understanding was that the Master was pretty-thoroughly
dispenced with and (after the bone-smashing in "When She Was
Bad") unable to come back. Period.
I could be wrong, of course.
S
[> [>
Well... (speccy) -- ZachsMind, 00:04:26 12/01/02
Sun
I've always anticipated The Master's return. At the end of
"When She Was Bad" we see The Annointed One with a broom if
memory serves. He said something like, "I hate that girl" as
he was sweeping up The Master's remains.
Maybe he put the powdered bones of The Master into a jar and
it's still out there somewhere. Waiting for someone to pour
The Master's bone fragments into a vat of human blood so The
Master can return.
Okay. Maybe not, but anything's possible in Buffy's
World.
[> [> [>
Well, I suppose so... -- Sophie, 09:21:39
12/01/02 Sun
Maybe they could put Humpty Dumpty back together again while
they're at it. :)
S
[> [> [> [>
Except that Jenny Calender's dead -- Finn Mac Cool,
10:26:00 12/01/02 Sun
So they can't gather all the right sacrafices to raise the
Master.
[> [> [> [> [>
On this show, people are not as dead as they may
seem. -- Sophist, 11:17:37 12/01/02 Sun
Just a rule of thumb, not some secret about Jenny
Calendar.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Regarding Jenny-- -- HonorH, 12:28:50 12/01/02
Sun
We unfortunately will not be getting Jenny back, as Robia
LaMorte is no longer doing TV, if I've heard the story
straight.
[>
Re: Who else thinks .... (Spoilers for 7x09) --
trebor, 20:48:04 11/30/02 Sat
Personally, I think he should be voiced by James Earl
Jones... the greatest voiceover talent ever.
That, or Pee Wee Herman.
[>
Re: Who else thinks .... (Spoilers for 7x09) -- The
One with the Angelic Face, 16:18:25 12/01/02 Sun
It wouldn't be as menacing if the Uber-vamp spoke. It
should just be this primal monster with only predatory
instincts. Believe me, I get chills just from watching that
end scene. I would prob die of fright alone if I
encountered that thing alone at night.
[> [>
Re: Who else thinks .... (Spoilers for 7x09) --
PurpleMarrow, 17:32:19 12/01/02 Sun
I agree that the Uber-vamp will be a lot creepier if it
doesn't speak. However, they could do something similar to
what they did with the First Slayer in "Restless", where
Tara spoke for the First Slayer to Buffy in her dream. If
this happens then we'll also get a body to go along with the
voice. Based on the blood used on the seal, the likely
choice is Spike (or maybe Jonathan).
Question about DVD commentaries -- cougar,
18:45:33 11/30/02 Sat
I keep reading references to the backround info on the Buffy
DVD's. I havn't seen them and don't have a DVD player. I
figured that some dedicated enthusiast may have transcribed
those, does anyone know of a link for suchlike?
Thanks
[>
Which ones do you want? -- Rufus, 18:56:06
11/30/02 Sat
I have a bunch of them over at the Trollop Group...give me a
bit of time and I can link you to what I remember.
[>
Links to commentaries I can find -- Rufus,
19:08:18 11/30/02 Sat
Jane Espenson Rm with a Vu
Tim Minear Are you now or have you ever Been
Tim Minear AYNOHYEB pt. 2
Doug Petrie Bad Girls
Doug Petrie Bad Girls pt. 2
The above were all transcribed by Rahael....more to
follow.
[> [>
More Links -- Rufus, 19:17:22 11/30/02 Sat
Jane Espensons I Was Made to Love You
transcribed by Tchaikovsky.
Doug Petries Fool For Love transcribed by
Rahael.
[> [> [>
Re: Still More Links -- Rufus, 19:28:16 11/30/02
Sat
Joss Whedons The Body transcribed by
Rahael.
The Story of Season Five transcribed by
Rahael.
[> [> [>
Thanks to Rufus, Rahael and an OT to Tchaikovsky --
cougar, 19:38:19 11/30/02 Sat
My heart's desire is filled. I had actually been looking for
the one Tchaikovsky transcribed, but had forgotten where and
when I'd read it. I'd despaired of tracking it down and now
it has looped back to me so let me pass something on.
I am interested to learn about the develpoment process of
anything that combines words and images in a stirring way
(as Buffy does). I am also a devotee of picture books and
found one yesturday that I thought might particularily
interest Tchaikovsky. It is "Swan Lake" retold and
hauntingly illustrated by Lisbeth Zwerger, Published by
North-South Books 2002. It is in bookstores here in Canada.
Thanks again
[> [> [> [>
Re: Thanks to Rufus, Rahael and an OT to
Tchaikovsky -- Rufus, 20:07:09 11/30/02 Sat
So, you are Canadian?.....I take it a Canadian female of a
certain age?....;)
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Thanks to Rufus, Rahael and an OT to
Tchaikovsky -- cougar, 20:32:24 11/30/02 Sat
Not so much that kind of cougar! (although hmm, if I
happened upon JM those particular predatory instincts might
be aroused, but he's around my age so that wouldn't count)
I chose the name because I had a dream image of a cougar as
my spirit guide, and then a day or two later saw the episode
where Buffy was led to the First Slayer by the nice kitty
that Giles turned her over to. Also my neighbourhood had a
resident cougar BB this summer and I aways wondered if it
was lurking on my forest walks. Didn't lead me anywhere
though which is probably a good thing ; * >
[> [> [> [>
Sounds very interesting -- Tchaikovsky, 06:28:02
12/01/02 Sun
I wonder whether I can find it in Britain? I might have a
play on Amazon later. Thanks for bringing it to my
attention.
TCH
[> [>
Commentaries -- Rahael, 19:26:11 11/30/02
Sat
Hey cougar, I post all the transcripts I do, right here on
this board.
I believe Marie did one, and Tchaikovsky did another.
They should be available in the archives if you do a search
by name of poster and title of ep, and "commentary".
However, the archives are down.
Thanks for posting the links Rufus. Though I have to say
that I'm quite possessive about the credits for these
transcripts. Apart from all the work involved doing these, I
have started to buy very expensive dvds when I can't afford
them simply do them asap for the board. There will come a
time when I get much poorer, next year, and I'll be
seriously rethinking my decision to do this.
I know Masq likes to fly under the radar, so I wouldn't
exactly want to say that I want them associated with this
forum more than any other, but hopefully, in future, if
anyone asks where to find them, they'll know it's right
here.
[> [> [>
Re: Commentaries -- Rufus, 19:31:43 11/30/02
Sat
Yes, the hours that it takes to do a these transcripts must
be horrendous. I have them all over at the Trollop Board
like the gems that they are. I also have them on my hard
drive just to reference.
[> [> [>
Re: Commentaries -- cougar, 19:52:58 11/30/02
Sat
Thanks for the tip about the archives, I am still learning
my way around. I want to look through them for threads I
missed in my foolish youth of thinking a show with that name
must be... well, you know, I'm ashamed to admit my lack of
scope.
I despair of ever getting to the archive because of the
rapid pulse of the now on this board! I enjoy the show but
the passion and commitment of people on the board refines
the pleasure exponentialy. I'm taking your transcripts to
bed with a highlighter and note pad (speaking of passion..
;^}
[> [> [> [>
hehehehe! -- Rahael, 20:10:26 11/30/02 Sat
well, we're entering a long barren period of no new eps. The
pulse might slow down a little.
Archives are currently out at the moment, but I'm sure
they'll be up and running soon. And certainly worth a
perusal. I've spent many a dull hour (or 4, or 5 or 8) at
work reading them. Insightful commentary, passion, and
occasional bouts of Xander-Harmony style fighting. (Season 4
ep reference if you haven't caught that one yet.
Hilarious)
[> [> [> [> [>
I say, drag out the chocolate (I have mine),
highlighter of choice.... -- Rufus, 20:46:45 11/30/02
Sat
I wonder if anyone knew that these were the ingredients
needed for the typical Canadian Party Animal....:):):):) We
will survive this episode break.....before we know it
January 14th will be here and we will be highlighter stained
and ready. Sh*t....forgot about the cats.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Canadian Wildlife -- cougar, 20:57:55 11/30/02
Sat
OMG, How spooky, I was just having my ritual Lindt Extra
Dark Swiss (I try to stay away from that Band Candy
stuff).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Back!!!!!!!!!Evil consumer of Dark
Chocolate..........but then again.. -- Rufus,
21:54:38 11/30/02 Sat
means I get more of the Milk Chocolate.....you can go 10
rounds fighting OnM for dibs on any of the dark
stuff....he's a hairpuller....;)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Back!!!!!!!!!Evil consumer of Dark
Chocolate..........but then again.. -- cougar,
22:05:38 11/30/02 Sat
From it's wrapper, I devour
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
LOL......Chocolates of the World....Beware! --
Rufus, 22:45:39 11/30/02 Sat
The cougarbot will get you and your little wrappers
too....;)
[> [> [> [> [>
Archives -- The Second Evil, 09:30:51 12/01/02
Sun
They're out? Hunh, I was just testing them yesterday.
The Archives seem to be working okay,
although the past three months do not appear to have been
uploaded. (Standard; there's always a lag b/c we do have
real lives.)
;-)
[> [> [>
Question to Rahael -- Tchaikovsky, 06:31:02
12/01/02 Sun
Did you ever do a transcript of 'Restless'? Rufus didn't put
it up on his links, and I would be tempted to transcribe it
if it hasn't been done before. It's extremely
interesting.
TCH
[> [> [> [>
Yes, I did - Rufus should have it. -- Rahael,
06:33:19 12/01/02 Sun
It is very interesting isn't it? and shows how Joss' mind
works. At once literal, and metaphorical at the same time.
Metaphorically literal!!
[> [> [> [>
Link to what you desire -- Rufus, 07:19:44
12/01/02 Sun
Restless Commentary
[> [> [> [> [>
Thanks -- Tch, 07:47:56 12/01/02 Sun
[>
Question for Masq, mostly -- slain, 11:56:04
12/01/02 Sun
Is there any chance that the transcriptions could be put up
on AtPoBTVS, then, or in the Existential Scoobies, on a
permanent basis? I assume Raheal, Marie and Tch. would be
okay with that. Or might there be copyright issues?
The origin of the symbols on Spike's chest -
NLM/Bargaining parallels -- webdeb,
21:07:09 11/30/02 Sat
I was looking into finding what the symbols on Spike's chest
were and a really strange thought came to me.
Bargaining - Willow killed and used the blood of an innocent
(the fawn) in a vessel of the dead (Urn of Osiris) to raise
Buffy.
Never Leave Me - The First Evil uses the blood of the
innocent (the innocent people Spike bit) in a vessel of the
dead (Spike's body) to raise a vampire.
Each vessel had carvings on them.
Bargaining - The Urn of Osiris had hieroglyphs. Part of the
spell Willow uses to resurrect Buffy is from the Lesser Key
of Solomon. The spell calls upon an Angel to hear the
prayer.
Never Leave Me - Spike's body used what looks like a
Celestial Alphabet (magickal) symbols that are carved onto
his body. The triangle with the circles at the end of each
point is a symbol for the Hebrew letter "Yod." The other
symbols are harder to make out. Anyway, these symbols
represent the names of Angels. Also, the Hebrew word for
"Yod" is the "hand."
It looks like everything's "connected." :)
Deb
[>
Woah. That just hurt my head. =) -- ZachsMind,
22:34:21 11/30/02 Sat
[> [>
I'm sorry! :) -- webdeb, 22:54:00 11/30/02
Sat
There was a discussion a while back about at the Stakehouse
about the spell Willow used when she killed the Fawn in
Bargaining. Part of the spell was from a magickal text (I
think used by the Golden Dawn) called the Lesser Key of
Solomon. :)
Deb
[> [> [>
Oh no. It's okay.. =) -- ZachsMind, 23:52:37
11/30/02 Sat
It's just after trying to write that Christmas episode of
Buffy (see other thread), my brain's a bit befuddled. But I
like it when people make me think, and the similarities
between Willow's spell to bring back Buffy and The First's
spell to summon the UberVamp, I must say you make a powerful
argument regarding the similarities.
It's just... Ow. I need more coffee.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Oh no. It's okay.. =) -- aliera, 08:39:21
12/01/02 Sun
Just a sidenote the reference to the Lesser Key was in the
summoning spell that Willow used to call the deer
(Angel/higher being)unless I'm totally misremembering. She
also called on Asmodea in Grave (see redcat's post in this
in the archives for a really great bit of research on the
witch Asmodea) which is very close to Asmodeus, a demon also
closely associated with Solomon and who was exiled to Africa
eventually. Probably all irrelevant but I love the
minutae!
[>
Re: Thanks very on this WD... -- aliera,
08:30:10 12/01/02 Sun
I've asked in a couple of places about these; it's really
been niggling at me if you find out about the other two
could you post? I also wonder how it relates to the seal.
Was that ever identified?...goat's head...pentagram and the
symbols for taurus, libra and something else.
The long lost Christmas episode... -- ZachsMind,
22:28:04 11/30/02 Sat
No I'm not talking about Amends, although that was
technically the only Christmas episode of the series.
I don't know about y'all but I'm upset we're not getting a
Christmas episode, and that we have to wait until mid
January before we get any new episodes. So I took it upon
myself to make my own. I know some people frown on fan
fiction, but hopefully none of you do. Consider this link my
Christmas Gift to all of you.
I JUST wrote this. I mean it's hot off the presses. My
fingers are still stinging from all the typing. Took me
about eight hours, give or take. I tried to be very true and
sincere to the series as a whole and all the characters,
getting their voices down and all that. In fact I play with
that a bit. What word would Giles NEVER say in a million
years? Well maybe he would maybe he wouldn't. Yeah I have
fun with the voices of the characters quite a bit. I also
tried not to do anything that would make this fan fiction
outdated come next January, so that when the new episodes
start playing again, people can still read this and go..
"hmm... it could happen. Probably didn't but it coulda."
The storyline takes place immediately after the real Buffy
episode season seven number nine, "Never Leave Me" so if you
haven't seen that yet then the above link is either going to
be spoilage or it just won't make any sense to you at all.
The link also contains major speculation, but I made a point
to attempt to not introduce anything new into the whole
thing. I just took all the elements of Buffy's World up
until this point in time, threw everything into a blender
and let it sit and spin for awhile. Then I took out the bits
that looked inedible, and sprinkled a bunch of Christmasy
goodness all over it. I imagine the piece to be rather PG
level. At least not any more naughty than the show may
sometimes get. Anya's particularly feisty at some points
however, and it being about Christmas, there's some points
where people's dreams attempt to come true so it does verge
on naughty at points but never gets too raunchy.
And for the shippers and the slashers there's just a taste
for you too, but I tone it down quite a bit. Merry
Christmas. There's something in here for everybody.. Well
except for Spike fans. I just couldn't figure out how to
safely write him back in. There is a good moment there with
Spike at the beginning with his shirt off, but I'd hate for
Spike fans to read the rest thinking he was coming back and
he never does. I mean, he will no doubt in the real series,
but in this particular faux episode, I just couldn't figure
out how to work him in more. I'm sorry ladies.
Anyway. Let me know what you think. Share and enjoy. Happy
Holidays.
[>
Re: Thanks - nice job! -- Brian, 05:44:36
12/01/02 Sun
[>
Coolness! Great read! Thanks, ZM! -- Rob,
10:30:03 12/01/02 Sun
[>
Weird and wonderful -- Tchaikovsky, 11:18:20
12/01/02 Sun
Loved it ZM, and thanks for taking much more time over my
Christmas gift than I'll probably spend on my closest
relations!
Particularly loved the reference to John's Gospel- seems
kind of right for the original evil and 'beginnings'
concepts we're exploring this year. And did you really mean
to call Jesus 'Joseph's son'? Controversial.
TCH
[> [>
Guess I coulda said "adopted" maybe? =) -
- ZachsMind, 12:45:09 12/01/02 Sun
[NOTE to others reading. The following gives away the ending
a bit so if you haven't read Christmas Gift yet and plan to,
please don't read further yet. I'm responding to TCH here.]
Guess I coulda said "adopted" maybe? =) I'm a little partial
to Joseph. I guess you could say when comparing the Bible
story to Buffy, as is impossible not to avoid doing in this
exercise, I view Joseph as sort of the Dawn of the Tale of
The Baby Jesus. The First Good, figuratively speaking.
Joseph is there and yet he's not, just like Dawnie. Lemme
try to explain what I mean.
I wrote a poem several years ago.. Come to think of it I'm
not sure if I still have it on paper somewhere or what (the
end result wasn't very good), but I called it "Joseph's
Sacrifice" and it dealt with how it must have been for
Joseph to go through life knowing that his boy was really
not his boy. That Joseph was only the equivalent of an
adopted father. A surrogate. Must have been hard. Admittedly
the Christian religious doctrine just sorta glosses over
that. Catholicism particularly focuses on the mother Mary,
and Joseph is given less than lip service. I would imagine
things were a little difficult for him as well. I guess you
could say I feel for Joseph, so yeah if a bit of my personal
bias for Joseph's side of the story filtered into the stage
directions of Christmas Gift, I'm guilty. =)
I tried to make a point to show that the Scoobies didn't go
back in time to the actual Bethlehem. This was all a
fabrication of Dawn's mind. That alone was VERY tricky for
me, because Dawnie herself is a fabrication. The minds of
the Scoobies were being screwed with AGAIN. They already
have a memory of life without Dawnie, coupled with a more
prominent false memory that the monks put into them to make
Dawnie work in their lives. Add on top of THAT this new
altered perception caused by The First and you've got people
with swiss cheesed brains. I decided for the purposes of the
plot that Dawnie is as real as real can be for them, and
they wouldn't lose her battling with these new memories, but
I tried to squeeze in the confusion without losing the
ability to keep the reader from being confused. I needed to
acknowledge that, but I also needed the childhood memories
of Buffy & Dawn to make it work. Very tricky.
The Bethlehem they visit also wasn't intended to be a
manifestation of The Bible, but of the song Little Drummer
Boy. Coming from Dawn, this perception was a fabrication of
a fabrication. Rather than say that would make things
unstable, I went in the exact opposite direction. Being a
fabrication of sorts herself, it made sense to me that
Dawnie would be able to cope with the strangeness happening
to the Scoobies' relative perceptions of reality. She'd have
an unconscious "in" to the goings on, and be able to cope
with it better than the others. In a sense we were on HER
turf, being an anomaly of subjective reality herself, so it
was logical to me that Dawn would be the one to save the
day. Besides, she's my personal favorite character right
now. I think Dawn gets a bad rap. I'm a bit partial to
Dawnie. Again, my personal bias filtering into the piece.
Writing Christianity into Buffy in any way shape or form is
very tricky business. I didn't want the audience thinking I
was dissing Christianity and at the same time I didn't want
them thinking I was trying to purposefully validate "The
Christian God" inside the Buffy universe. Whedon has made a
point throughout the series to neither dismiss Christianity
nor give it credence. He's dealing with ALL religious
theology in a sense. Not just one. The conversation between
Buffy & Holden Webster in "Conversations With Dead People"
is about as close as Whedon's ever gone to answering that
question one way or the other -- and he DOESN'T. That's very
telling.
HOLDEN: Oh, my God!
BUFFY: Oh, your God what?
HOLDEN: Oh, well, you know, not *my* God, because I defy him
and all of his works, but— Does he exist? Is there word
on that, by the way?
BUFFY: Nothing solid.
I felt the religious ambiguity needed to remain in
"Christmas Gift" too, to stay true to Whedon's vision. At
the same time, this being a potential Christmas episode, I
couldn't avoid the temptation of tying The First Evil up
with "The First Good." It wrapped everything up in a nice
bow.
The Jehovah God may or may not exist in Buffy's World, but
for that moment to Dawnie, "He" was real. And that's what
saved them. And I purposefully used Willow to belay any
argument that Jesus Christ is not technically the FIRST
Good. There WAS Judaism and Paganism BEFORE Christianity. So
it was more logical for Willow to be unable to 'hang.' The
timing was critical. I couldn't have "The Two Wise Men." And
Xander & Anya neither of them fit as wise men metaphorically
speaking. You could say Willow's too smart for her own good.
So I got the mental establishing shot of the Witch, the
Watcher & the Slayer standing there in a laughable tableau
for entertainment purposes, without dismissing Willow's own
differing religious beliefs, or frankly, that of differing
members of the audience. Willow speaks in the piece on
behalf of all those people out there who tolerate Christmas
but don't observe its religious significance. Willow's also
the one who catches the stragglers, falling into the
alternating perceptions of reality between Xander & Anya to
save them, so though symbolically Baby Jesus is The First
Good, Willow actually steps in, in a pinch. She represents
the First Good that came BEFORE the Baby Jesus. That might
not work for people who only observe one theology, but in a
fictional reality like Whedon's where ALL theologies are
given lip service, I needed Willow to act as a second "First
Good" of sorts. Then I tied it back together by having
Xander the Carpenter, representing the conduit between these
theologies, save Willow in return.
The reference to "Joseph's son" was in the stage directions.
I don't think that would ever air literally but the spirit
of the intent might have been felt, if the piece were to be
produced (and of course it won't but I'm just saying). I was
imagining Mary on stage left of the manger and Joseph on
stage right. Mary's position visually would be a little more
prominent than his. In hindsight I probably should have
written into the stage directions that Dawn literally kneels
before the manger as she drums, so that when Buffy walks up
behind her at the end and puts her shoulders on Dawn, the
reader isn't trying to wrap its mind around that. Dawn's
almost half a foot taller than Buffy, so Dawn would have to
be on her knees to make that scene work. In the moment,
they've both reverted to little kids in a sense. Dawnie the
baby sister and Buffy the doting older sister of years gone
by.
Since the series of Buffy The Vampire Slayer deals so much
with female empowerment, I gave Mary most of the lines. The
baby was a symbol, and Mary's sort of the spokesperson on
behalf of that symbol. Still, I gave Joe one important line.
John 1:5. "A light shines in the darkness and the darkness
has never put it out." I guess I was saying with all this
female empowerment, guys still have a small place in the mix
too. =)
I almost didn't toss in the biblical reference, but Quentin
Travers had JUST quoted from Proberbs in the previous
episode so I figured what the heck. John 1:5 typifies the
Slayer's plight to me, just as much as Proberbs 26:4 can
apply to the Watcher's Council. Buffy's in the middle of the
darkness, and even her own powers may stem from the
darkness, but Buffy herself is the light and nothing has put
her out. That's the undying spirit of episodes like
"Dracula" and "Weight of the World." Buffy may flicker and
lose part of her glow, but just when things look bleak she
shines brighter than before.
Reading this faux episode over again, I'm concerned that not
enough action deals with Buffy herself. She's mostly the
focal point where everything else around her is happening.
Anya & Xander. Willow & Tara. Dawnie & Joyce. Maybe if I'd
brought in Angel, or was able to work Spike into it more
that would be one thing, but this faux episode focuses a lot
on the others around her, and at times Buffy seems just
along for the ride.
Maybe I'm being too critical of my own work. *shrug*
[> [> [>
Very interesting -- Tchaikovsky, 05:27:10
12/02/02 Mon
And I agree about both Dawn and Joseph. Both of them are, to
me, fascinating characters who are under-utilised. In the
Bible, we see so little of Joseph's struggle, and the
adopted doctrine ignores him almost entirely. I think we're
starting to see more of Dawn again this season, but I must
admit, despite being a great fan of the character, I was a
little queasy with her one-line act in the second half of
Season Six.
TCH
[>
Thanks, Zach. That was great! -- Wisewoman,
12:50:00 12/01/02 Sun
I especially appreciated the brief hommage to Beyond
Thunderdome!
One inconsistency, though--how come The First can suddenly
engage in physical acts, such as "Tara's" fight with
Willow?
Season's Greetings,
dub ;o)
[> [>
You're welcome. =) (spoilers for Christmas Gift) --
ZachsMind, 13:25:31 12/01/02 Sun
First off thanks to you & others for the kind words. They're
appreciated. =) As for the appearance of inconsistency, at
the risk of sounding defensive (I'm not, I'm just
clarifying) I do answer that within the piece. The First
can't engage in physical acts, but it can mess with people's
minds.
GILES: Curious. In all my reading I don’t believe The
First was ever able to actually affect reality, taking off
people’s clothes and what not.
BUFFY: Well here, wherever we are. If it’s not real, then
maybe all bets are off?
The First was not physically there, and in actuality none of
the faux episode actually happens. I establish in the Teaser
that the UberVampire brought with him this little orb
trinket thing and The First uses that to 'send a present' to
its enemies. The First focuses ITs energies into the trinket
which briefly accentuates ITs powers over human minds.
IT's messing with the Scoobies' heads literally, and the
entire episode actually takes place in the blink of an eye.
I purposefully started and ended the episode in the exact
same place, in that moment in time immediately after Buffy
says the words, "I know what we're dealing with. It's The
First" which is where the episode Never Leave Me ended.
Since the majority of the episode happens in their minds,
The First is able to affect what appears to be
physical reality, because it is really just the subjective
perceptions of reality in the minds of the Scoobies. The
entire time when the Scoobies think they're still in the
house, they're actually trapped in their minds, and The
First is creating this subjective reality to make them think
they won when they actually haven't even had the big battle
yet. That's what IT's trying to do. Make them think they
already won so they won't even fight IT. However, Willow's
too strong for IT so she's not as affected until Tara shows
up, and since Dawn is a living walking breathing subjective
anomaly of reality already, well The First's plans have
difficulty remaining intact.
I do keep true to The First's weakness in the Teaser. When
the UberVampire offers the orb to The First, IT tells the
UberVamp just to hold the orb for IT. IT also instructs
other people to bring Spike down off the hanging thingy,
because IT can't do it ITself.
[> [> [>
^^^ oh. Also a bit of a spoiler for "Never Leave
Me." Didn't catch that the first time.^^^ --
ZachsMind, 13:31:38 12/01/02 Sun
[> [> [>
Okay, gotcha! -- ;o) dub, 13:36:54 12/01/02
Sun
[>
Code it like a shooting script & I'll post it with the
rest of the Apocrphya! ;-) -- The Second Evil,
19:31:37 12/01/02 Sun
[> [>
Something I am considering, if I can find the time.
Thanks for the offer. -- ZachsMind, 11:19:33 12/02/02
Mon
[>
Superbly done, Zach. The only thing I would have
added... -- cjl, 09:45:56 12/02/02 Mon
...would be the cast singing "The Little Drummer Boy"
itself, with Dawn doing the first two lines, then Xander
and Anya, then Buffy, then the four Scoobs in harmony--and
then, swooping in like David Bowie to the gang's Bing
Crosby, GILES (my man!), kicking it to a new level.
Willow, of course, would stand uncomfortably to the side,
awkwardly adding a few, scattered ba-rump-a-bum-bums....
Current
board
| December 2002