November 2003 posts
Let's see if you have a sense of self-preservation.....spoilers for Lineage. -- Rufus, 04:47:07 11/14/03 Fri
First off, the Ninja guys.....dollies of another kind they are. Fred says a few things about them....
Fred: "Oh, we're taking the cyborg apart in the lab right now. You should see how intricate it is...it's like an MC Escher picture, but with wires and flesh instead of geese."
Two Escher works come to mind when Fred said geese "Liberation" and "Day and Night" you can go look them up. Now back to the Ninja guys, Fred is cutting one up and has this to say about the corpse....
Fred: "We found cybernetics throughout the body in most cases, replacing entire organic systems..........
Angel: Was is human?
Fred: "We think so, the nervous system seems human at least, but the rest of the technology is so foreign to us, we can't be sure of anything right now. This thing really blurs the line between human and robot."
then she says....
Fred: "Um...the cybernetics require central processing to function wich means if we can crack its memory we may find a record of everything it's done till this point?
Memory and the blurred line between human and machine. I will store this "villian" or "good guy" for future reference. And talking about cracking memories, I wonder if it will be as easy as cracking eggs?
Angel: Fathers and sons - that can be torture sometimes. Look, you should see this, came from your department. Reports of assassins that sound a lot like our cyborg.
Wesley: Hmm a group of them took out a demon cabal in Jakarta, another group destroyed the Tanman Death Chamber. Sounds like they're doing our work.
Angel: These are good guys?
Wesley: I don't know. I should reference this with markings we found, tind some clue as to their origin.
Yeah, I'd want to know how these bits and bytes got put together too. A disturbing question comes to mind. I know that RoboPryce was trying to abduct Angel, take away his free will......make him one of theirs. So, who the hell are they? And as some of the Ninjas were human in origin, did some of them volunteer for the Borg-like upgrade.....just asking.
RoboPryce: In my days, we fought Werewolves, Vampires, the occasional Swamp Man. And now we have protohuman cybernetic chain fighters.
Funny something in The Matrix: Reloaded, made me think of that line......
Oracle: Because you didn't come here to make the choice, you've already made it. You're here to understand why you made it. I thought you'd've figured that out by now.
Neo: Why are you here?
Oracle: Same reason. I love candy.
Neo: But why help us?
Oracle: We're all here to do, what we're all here to do. I'm interested in one thing, Neo, the future. And believe me, I know, the only way to get there is together.
Neo: Are there other programs like you?
Oracle: Oh, well, not like me, but...look. See those birds? At some point a program was written to govern them. A program was written to watch over the trees, and the wind, sunrise and sunset. There are programs running all over the place. The ones doing their job, doing what they were meant to do are invisible, you'd never even know they were here. But the other ones, well, you hear about them all the time.
Neo: I've never heard of them.
Oracle: Oh, of course you have. Every time you've heard someone say they saw a ghost, or an angel. Every story you've ever heard about vampires, werewolves, or aliens. It's the system assimilating some program that's doing something they're not supposed to be doing.
Neo: Programs hacking programs. Why?
Not that the Matrix has anything to do with Angel the Series. So why the sudden addition of technology? Why did RoboPryce react to Wesley like he did. He could have killed him right off and he didn't, he was so convincing that Wesley reacted to him instinctually......the end result was Wes tossing his cookies after doing the overkill on dear dad. One thing there is a blur between, monster, man, machine, and memory....what next?
Replies:
[>
Do that reminds anyone of -- luvthistle1, 03:13:19 11/15/03 Sat
...Adam? and the ( the black-ops)"Initiative"?. hmm, interesting . the initiative was told to disband at the end of season 4. they was also told to seal up there headquaters . yet, whe Spike and Buffy went back. there were fresh demons bodies .
we all know that Dr.walsh had created Adam.( demon/human) But Adam had stated that he and Riley were brothers, and he implied that Riley was created as well ( hence, Riley stateing that he was a man: i'm a man!) Adam told Riley that he can review the disk that he had on Riley. ( Riley never revied the disk). In season 6, Warren ( the trio) had stolen some type of "disk". we are never told what was on the disk, nor "why" they wanted it. but we do know that Warren knew how to make realist robots. there might be a connection between the robots Warren made and the disk that Adam had.
...Do anyone else , now wonder rather or not that was Giles, or a cyberbot?
Doubting William (Angel Odyssey 5.4)(sp 5.6) -- Tchaikovsky, 10:13:14 11/14/03 Fri
Hello everyone. So Royal Mail are clearing the postal backlog in a nicely symmetrical but somewhat counter-intuitive way where the earliest post gets left until last. Luckily, that doesn't affect me any more, (except for the three week old gas bill, which I know nothing about), as this morning Hellbound landed on my front doormat. Actually, I don't have a doormat, and it wouldn't have fit through the letterbox. Am I making any progress at all here?
One thing which the whole little postponement did do was make me doubt a little bit. Not in a soul-searching, maniac-bound-forever-in-Minority-Report-box way, but just your usual stuff. And I think doubt is a key to this episode. It's certainly an important part in how I personally view Angel as a show in its fifth Season, and indeed how I view my life.
Oddly enough, the people and actions I find hardest to understand in my life are rarely the ones most different from mine. I don't believe I have a problem understanding or rationalising others' decisions based on their motives, opinions and so forth. What I find most alienating in people- what scares me sometimes, is an apparent complete lack of doubt.
As an atheist leaning agnostic, I live, when at my two family homes, in two wildly different spiritual atmospheres [not hankering for that phrase again any time soon]. One family are Christian, the other atheist. It's an interesting existence ping-ponging between the two. And I have a great deal respect for certain aspects of each of their beliefs. Their explanations, the stories they commit to the page of their life by actions. The person I have recently spoken to about belief most openly is Christian, whereas I'm virtually atheist. The thing we have in common, the thread which connects us while others stay further apart, is our doubt. The ability to question belief, to shore it up one way or another. Any belief worthy of a tome as beautiful as the Bible, the Koran or the Bhagavadgita must require not only faith, (though that may ultimately be the centre), but some kind of rational interpretation. Questions need to be asked and answered. And I personally belief that doubts have to be had. They can make belief stronger. The one-minded, never questioning believer is liable, at one painful harsh moment, to have the whole pack of cards fall on top of her. Similarly, the person who, devoutly atheist, never even considers faith- may end up in such superstitious desperation that he feels very insecure.
Sometimes, I think, the the appearance of certainty can mask very real doubts. I know two people, one of whom is familiar with the Bible and actually co-ordinates RE for a school, the other is unfamiliar with the Bible. Both are atheists. The less knowledgable one almost forbids mention of Christianity in the house, while the other is prone to long discussions. I believe the latter to be the more honestly atheist, more truthful about doubt, and searching, while the former, underneath may hone a fear of Truth- this being Truth with a capital T.
Of course, the ultimate logical extension of lack of doubt is fearsome- the terrorist so sure of Allah's reward for a display of solidarity against infidels that he flies an aeroplane meaninglessly, for him with ultimate Meaning, into a tower. Conversely, we have states so desperate to make one leader a religion in itself, that they sacrifice belief and persecute anyone who attempts to practice it. These aren't the shadows of self-doubt, but something larger, a monumental conspiracy that proves my argument only by dismissing individual and leaping straight to societal. That's not as simple as a lack of self-doubt.
But in the people we meet every day, in relationships, in beliefs, in education, are the more productive, the happier, the most self-honest people the people who have laminated their worldview and have copies for passing commuters, or those who are always searching, made to doubt assumptions and prejudices, changing their opinions not only as the facts change, but as they encounter humanity.
That's one message I've got from reading some Proust. I think it needs refining. Maybe as a person prone to doubt myself, I find it consoling to have my apparent weakness taken as a creed in itself- undermining at a pinch all the original argument. But it does kind of fit, in the haphazard, dynamic way the world spins- multiple epiphanies, contradictory realisations, shifting perspectives. If we never doubt that our life is not perfect, how are we to improve it.
5.4- 'Hellbound'
Oh, so, yes Angel. Quick, link it in. Well, I think that Spike's journey in this episode- as manwitch mentioned, a clear reflection of Angel's in this Season, is all about the value of doubt. At the end of the episode, we're left with Angel, with conviction, (doubt's opposite fascinatingly), but no mercy, locking Pavayne away, and introducing him to Hell. That's not the way of it. In meanwhile, Spike, never quite sure what to do, how to react, eventually is left with a two-pronged fork, either to skewer himself or others, and through a snap decision based on examination rather than blind conviction, makes the self-sacrificial action rather than the self-enhancing. This isn't a parallel, I don't think, it's a contrast. Although interestingly, and with the kind of parallelic twistiness one might expect from Steve DeKnight, we get Angel compared to Spike, and Spike to Pavayne, and then Angel contrasting to Pavayne at the end.
Fred is one of three unneglected characters so far this season. Gunn has been peripheral, Lorne indifferent, Wesley underused [5.7 coming soon!], Harmony criminally underused. Fred's been very interesting in her relationship with Spike, and the reflections she casts on others. One element of Hellbound which adds just a touch of extra resonance to Edlund's follow-up is the accusation that Fred should sleep more. She's being productive to the point of never stopping, just like Lorne, and hence Angel. And in being over-productive, she hasn't half spent a lot of money- a gentle nod to the oft-uncommented-on whizziness that Science Departments seem to have in television and film.
Here, to pick up my Big Red Anvil for a little while longer, Fred is the one with doubt, the person who is attempting to save Spike, not knowing whether it is possible, not quite sure of its effects or the cost. Angel has decided straight down the line, in one of the best moments of the episode that Some people can't be saved Goodness me, Connor central once again. He has to believe this, he has to belive that he couldn't have rehabilitated Connor, and Spike, the well-used outline of this argument in this Season, has proved the point. In Just Rewards, Angel's all too happy to kill Spike when he asks for it to happen, to repeat his deed with Connor but this time with Spike's affirmation. Here, Spike is again the pale shadow that isn't worth bothering with, the person who is too far gone to be brought back. In order to portray this assured, utterly certain attitude, Angel inside has demanded of himself that he become cynical. He's cut off from his mission, he is becoming disconnected from his staff (a resolution to which comes in 5.6), and he's desperate to divorce himself from all Connor and Cordelia references. It won't succeed for ever, while the guilt hangs still over his mind like a pall. While he acts with self-assuredness, doubt is nibbling away, eroding the wrong things rather than being made to question the right.
For Fred, more open-minded about Spike, the question is still about the ability to do good, or even Good. It's what Fred came here to do, and this bleach-blond saviour still has a chance of redemption, though currently slipping towards hell. There are several references to her big brain, the most visual being the very deliberate and double intended pretty scene where she writes on the shiny windows. A Pylea reference yes, but also a reference to A Beautiful Mind. At the moments where encouragement from Spike seem appropriate, she can't hear him at all, lost in self-reflection about how to go about re-corporealisation. Eventually, she fails what she thought she was trying to achieve, but the outcome is better. Chalk one up for changing attitude with circumstances and knowledge.
Gunn has a few (too few) little moments in this episode. He undercuts Wesley nicely, (the volcano line coupling with Fred's line about Hell as a pair of quirky little misdirects. And later, we get the panther, and Gunn talking about whether Angel was listening rightly. I got from this a refraction back to Cordelia as Vision Girl- the one who saw and whom Angel relied on. Maybe it's all just grist to my psychotic Mind Wipe is Crucial propaganda, but in any case, Gunn is important to Angel, and he mustn't forget it.
If Fear and doubt are the themes of this episode, what confirmation do we have? An obvious one. Steven DeKnight, the henchman of Whedon on more than one occasion, is drafted in here to spread the same brooding darkness that all of Blood Ties, Dead Things, Seeing Red, and Deep Down have had. And he decides to do it partly by filmic references. I'm don't know much about horror films, but I think three things are fairly obvious. We have the shower scene with Fred, the obligatory Psycho reference. We have an extremely The Exorcist type shot where the blood spurts over the executives at their table (projectile vomit possibly out of bounds on network television). And we have Pavayne, who, causing horror using the ghosts of other people, is a polyhuman, with those darkened eyes giving a definite feeling of Frankenstein's monster. Here the sociopathy is stronger though, because the motivation is entirely his own.
And so to the main two characters. They start, explicitly and literally, together, in a long scene which got the Angel-Spike chemistry crackling better than anything so far this Season, we get Angel and Spike as brothers, competing, but ultimately in the same home, coming from the same family background, and sharing the same outcome to their lives even if taken through a very different course. Angel is of course certain, like he is throughout the episode, that he's going to Hell. And he even manages to convince, for the moment, the Trickster Spike, the being who always tries to jump out of destiny. This is Angel's scene, and this episode is Angel's dilemma told through Spike. This is emphasised by some more excellent direction by DeKnight, where we have, for several shots, Angel dominating the foredground of the frame, with Spike crammed, as if into his fate, into the small portion at the top left of the screen. And at the end we get a re-affirmation, ephemeral and missable of the two's knowledge that they are, at least for now, colleagues rather than enemies. The line about Spike's poetry by Angel is funny, and considerably more truthful (because embarassed, almost unsure) than most of his other attitudes here. Spike, ever hunting the snark, comes back with Manilow. [Which incidentally reminds me, could someone please tell Westlife to stop singing the cover of 'Mandy'? It's confusing me hugely].
And so to Spike. From the teaser we know that he's feeling powerless. As if he can't be handy. A gruesomely literal rendering of which is the severed fingers. Shortly afterwards we get the hallucinations, where Spike is not sure what to believe- whether these people are ghosts, demons or just possibly something his over-taxed mind has constructed. And shortly afterwards, another telling parallel of Angel, the lift compels Spike downwards. This is a need rendering of 'Reprise'. We are right to be very unconvinced that Spike is in Hell, or indeed that the dimension where he finds himself with Pavayne is any different from real life. The Home Office, indeed.
The whole of Pavayne's monologue, sewing worry and resignation, is a little overwrought. To hit back on my repetitive theme, it is not self-doubt that Pavayne is trying to instil, but resignation, certainty of failure, of submittal to his power. And finally, Spike picks up something that Pavayne didn't mean to let slip. That reality bends to desire. That, if you search, if you identify what you want, what you need, you can start to regain power. In doubting Pavayne, Spike is on the road to saving himself. Back comes the duster, he resumes a role he is not wholly living, but for now inhabiting. The warrior. No longer is he the dazed, confused little ant scurrying from the flame, he's building the bonfire himself, with the help of his fellow ants- Fred, Wesley and Gunn.
In the end, Spike chooses to remain in limbo. He's discovered that the fear of Hell is to be balanced with the life gong on around him, rather than to be the reigning theme. He's going on living in a state of leashed-ness, his perpetual state, because it's in that cauldron of mixing influences that he can continue to change, with the dynamism that has always been a crucial part of his character. And meanwhile, he has made the best decision- to release the suffering from Hell, and to keep Pavayne well away from other spirits trying to establish truth from their own doubt.
Finally, Pavayne lies in what is, to all intents and purposes a forgotten coma. The same coma that Angel has left Cordelia in. Another suggestion to me that his path in this episode is significantly scrambled, and he must at all costs attempt to learn from those around him. Of course, all of this strengthens Jeffrey Bell's brilliant 5.6, but this episode is no slouch either- an interesting meditation Spike and Angel, and one which definitely shows the great potential of the parallel. All we need now is a little bit more of the under-used.
I'm not quite sure whether this isn't a rather radical reading of the text- that doubt is good and conviction can be dangerous, at least when based on false beliefs. But of course, my doubt in itself merely justifies the point of view, which makes me feel a little smug. Go ahead then, do your worst. And thanks for reading.
TCH
Replies:
[>
Very nice! -- Ponygirl, 11:32:41 11/14/03 Fri
[>
Re: Doubting William (Angel Odyssey 5.4)(sp 5.6) -- skeeve, 13:40:28 11/14/03 Fri
This one wouldn't want to rely on Pavayne staying locked up.
A better idea might be to find an uninhabited dimension and send him there.
Teleporting him to Venus might not be bad either.
[> [>
Perhaps the God of Love might cure him ;-) -- Tchaikovsky, 07:03:07 11/15/03 Sat
Angel's tough justice from Hauser through Hainsley to Parvayne is supposed to be discomfiting for the audience thoguh, I think. I don't think we're supposed to believe that he's necessarily doing the right thing, even to these genuinely unpleasant people. And it's when he starts wondering out loud, starts doubting and articulating that doubt rather than covering it, that he might start getting somewhere. Sorry, I'm like a dog with a bone!
TCH
[> [> [>
Re: Perhaps the God of Love might cure him ;-) -- skeeve, 07:55:50 11/17/03 Mon
With regard to Parvayne, I think Angel picked the best of all considered alternatives.
'Twasn't a matter of picking the best punishment for Parvayne; 'twas a matter of keeping him from doing more damage.
Once Angel thinks of it, Parvayne is off to Venus.
The guy they should have in cold storage is the one who shows up every fifty years.
Destroying his amulet wouldn't be a bad idea either.
If it can't be destroyed, it could take up residence on Mercury.
[>
Re: Doubting William (Angel Odyssey 5.4)(sp 5.6) -- s'kat, 16:20:53 11/14/03 Fri
I really enjoyed this and agree with what you said. (Of course it helps that I'm an agnostic at the moment myself - "have a very healthy sense of doubt regarding just about everything". ;-))
And finally, Spike picks up something that Pavayne didn't mean to let slip. That reality bends to desire. That, if you search, if you identify what you want, what you need, you can start to regain power.
Interesting. A clear theme this season - "if there's a will, there's a way". Actually this may be a theme that pervades all of ME's work to date. It's not whether God exists that's important - it's asking whether God exists and not depending on getting an answer before we act.
Isn't part of Buffy's m.o. the ability to "will it so" (as a twist on Captain Picard's "make it so"). She doesn't let the world or prophecy dictate her course - she dictates her own. And I think part of her frustration with first Angel then Riley - was they felt the need to let others dictate theirs. In Chosen - Buffy makes a point about it being her's and the potential SIT's choice. We will it so.
Just like Willow who uses her power to disperse the slayer gift by "willing it so".
Bend reality to our will. Will. William. Liam. Liam absence of Will. Angel is struggling with this issue. In effect he always has, which makes him an odd contrast to Angelus.
Angelus always balked against following anyone's dictates but his own or so we are lead to believe, yet, in S4 - he seems to kow-tow fairly quickly to the BeastMaster's. Oh he resists for a bit, but in Orpheus he mentions having powerful friends. Angel likes having someone else tell him what to do - whether it is the PTB through visions or Jasmine or Buffy. It's easier if we think on it. To give up our will...let our parents, teachers, authority tell us what to think, how to live, where to go, to provide the answers. Buffy herself desires to go back to that time with
Giles and Joyce - in S6 and S5, yet if she thinks about it, when did she ever really follow either Giles or Joyce's dictates? Buffy might have listened to what they said, but she always made up her own mind. (Sorry about bringing the Buffster into an Angel review.) Spike also struggles with it - it's easier to give in, to let hell take him, to let
things happen, but ...it's not what he's about. So he fights back, asserts his will. Angel similarly struggles.
The question is - has Angel reasserted his will or is he allowing W&H through EVE slowly suck at his will, make him into their unwitting puppet - just as Pavayne hoped to make Spike his? Has Angel resigned himself to Hell by signing the deal with W&H? Or does he only believe he has? Is the doubt that Spike asserts echoed by Angel in 5.6 when Angel picks up the Shanshu prophecy and reads?
Curious - what are your rankings so far this season?
(I think you've seen everything but 5.7 so far)
Mine:
1. Tale of Numero Cinquo (5.6)
2. Hellbound (5.4) (although I think Hellbound/Tale might be tied for first right now along with 5.7)
3. 5.7
4. Just Rewards
5. Conviction
6. Life of The PArty
7. Unleashed
[> [>
my list -- Seven, 17:19:31 11/14/03 Fri
1. Toss up. I loved "Numero Cinco" a lot as an all around episode but I can't let a great Wes episode out to dry... too much gun play and overall coolness to resist. ( I really like Wesley.) So 5.7 is the other.
3. Hellbound. Very cool Spike episode.
4. Conviction. This episode got me more into a season then any first episode before. It may be because of numerous reasons outside the actual story itself but none-the-less, i love it.
5. Just Rewards. i may like this episode better than this but it is the only one i haven't got on tape and therefore have only watched it once. This is an episode that has to be watched more than once to truley appreciate it. But until that happens, #5 (no pun intended)
6. Life of the Party. i know a lot of people didn't like this but i enjoyed the Wes and Fred parts along with the Gunn parts. Don't know why.
7. Unleashed. I enjoy this episode, but there is almost nothing in here dealing with the season arc. Well there is, but it is all metaphor and the better metaphors are not new (werewolves metaphor for Vampires) LOTP at least showed some corruption taking place because of W&H. And i swear to God (oops, sorry maybe that's god) if i ever see an episode end like thas again, all Dawson's Creekety, i will vomit.
[> [> [>
LOL! -- s'kat, 22:17:49 11/14/03 Fri
Your thoughts are very similar to mine. Until I rewatched Just Rewards - I also ranked Conviction above it. But Just Rewards is better on rewatching. Conviction not as great.
It's really weird.
Regarding Unleashed: And i swear to God (oops, sorry maybe that's god) if i ever see an episode end like thas again, all Dawson's Creekety, i will vomit.
Yep, my thoughts exactly. I keep hoping I read it wrong and it was supposed to be creepy and someday ME will revisit and show us that Nina ate everyone in the house. (evil grin)
[> [> [> [>
Happy Shiny Music -- alcibiades, 22:57:07 11/14/03 Fri
Seven: Regarding Unleashed: And i swear to God (oops, sorry maybe that's god) if i ever see an episode end like thas again, all Dawson's Creekety, i will vomit.
Shadowkat: Yep, my thoughts exactly. I keep hoping I read it wrong and it was supposed to be creepy and someday ME will revisit and show us that Nina ate everyone in the house. (evil grin)
Oh, that music was completely ironic. That is one of the things I like about Unleashed. Watch it over, you'll see. It is a complete jar, all upbeat while the final scene in Angel's apartment is extremely awkward and uncomfortable. Totally doesn't fit the scenario - another disjunction that is a dead giveaway.
Unleashed was all about the absence of Spike, how Angel finds himself so desperate to help someone, anyone, except the person fading away -- the true helpless and hopeless, under his very roof, the one person who is his family. Instead he helps the other blonde, sees Nina as a way to rescue himself. Unleashed pretends to be about Nina and Angel's need to help her, but its subtext just screams Spike outloud again and again. Just like the subtext of Hellbound screams Angel over and over.
And I'm almost positive that if Nina does make a reappearance, it won't be in a good way. She'll have done some very bad things. Don't forget, until we know bette, the Dinza's words to Angel are still in effect -- you have so much more to lose. And one of those things is his joy in helping the little people...we already saw that all complicated up for him in Conviction.
Revisit Unleashed after the end of the year, I bet there will be lots there.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Happy Shiny Music -- s'kat, 23:45:08 11/14/03 Fri
Oh, that music was completely ironic. That is one of the things I like about Unleashed. Watch it over, you'll see. It is a complete jar, all upbeat while the final scene in Angel's apartment is extremely awkward and uncomfortable. Totally doesn't fit the scenario - another disjunction that is a dead giveaway.
I felt the same thing, but am not sure to this day if it's wishful thinking on my part or actual. So I'm waiting to see. My hunch is that you're right...b/c that would make the most structural sense. ATS starts from a point in which Angel believes the image - the happy family, or "we're champions"...then as the season progresses...the layers peel back and he sees the horror underneath.
We forget at times, that ATS is a horror tale with redmeptive mythology/noir underpinings. Just as Jasmine appeared to be wonderful at first...we did get the twist that she ate people. As Nina - beautiful girl, but wants to rip her niece's throat out.
Unleashed was all about the absence of Spike, how Angel finds himself so desperate to help someone, anyone, except the person fading away -- the true helpless and hopeless, under his very roof, the one person who is his family. Instead he helps the other blonde, sees Nina as a way to rescue himself. Unleashed pretends to be about Nina and Angel's need to help her, but its subtext just screams Spike outloud again and again. Just like the subtext of Hellbound screams Angel over and over.
Isn't it interesting that it is Spike who inadvertently leads Fred to the Royce, when the AI team loses Nina?
But, when Fred confronts him, Spike has no idea what she's talking about, just as Angel seems to be unaware of Spike's danger. Yet the two intersect. It reminds me (and I know this is stretch b/c my understanding of string theory is zip) of Brian Green's explanation of string theory - the idea that we are touching other dimensions but not touching them, we remain out of phase with them. Angel can't see, touch or smell Spike - (remember Spike has a distinctive smell - Angel even mentions it to Buffy in Chosen) - so Spike, he ignores, and Spike being ignored in Unleashed...begins to phase even more out of the reality, so that while he leads Fred to the source, he's completely unaware of his surroundings when he does so.
[> [> [> [> [>
I agree -- Tchaikovsky, 05:04:32 11/15/03 Sat
I think Unleashed was one of those two-tier episodes with nothing particularly interesting on the surface, and a lot of interesting stuff going on underneath. Little Red Riding Hood. Monthly cycles. Spike, Angel and Nina with their monsters within. And that ending where both the three blonde females and the Angel Investigations gang in Angel's flat are supposed to be ever so happy, but are actually hiding some real unresolved issues.
TCH
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I agree with all of you guys. -- Arethusa, 08:41:36 11/15/03 Sat
I thought it a little odd that Angel was shown rescuing a young girl again. The first time this happened (Conviction), it showed how Angel's situation had changed, and how Angel hadn't quite caught up with the changes, especially emotionally. Perhaps the second time it happened was for a similar reason. I was also puzzled about the interactions between Nina and her sister. It's no small thing to leave a child alone overnight and come home obviously injured and spacey, than refuse to talk about it. Then she disappears again and returns with a guy in a very expensive car, and her sister just welcomes her happily. It would have been more realistic to show her sister extremely worried about what she was doing and with whom, if Nina was being hurt in some way, and if she was putting the little girl in danger and would no longer be a trustworthy babysitter.
There are many people who live to help strangers, giving up large parts of their lives to care for the troubled and less fortunate. But some are not so good at caring for those around them. Close personal relationships are often messy and complicated, with faults and mistakes on both sides. If the--let's call him a champion--champion feels guilty about how he has failed others, he might avoid dealing with the problem. Helping and dealing with problems in families and very close friendships brings up guilt and painful feelings. Helping strangers is rewarded with praise and respect.
When Angel looks at Spike, perhaps he sees Angelus, hears Dru's screams, smells Buffy, tastes blood. So he looks right through him.
[> [> [>
Re: my list -- Claudia, 12:37:43 11/17/03 Mon
1. Hellbound
2. Cautionary Tale of Numero Cinco
3. Life of the Party
4. Just Rewards
5. Convictions
6. Lineage
7. Unleashed
So far . . .
[> [>
The current list -- Tchaikovsky, 18:35:52 11/14/03 Fri
As always, I maintain the right to alter these depending on later events in the season:
Conviction 8
Just Rewards 7
Unleashed 6
Hellbound 8
Life of the Party 3
Tale 9
TCH
[> [>
S5 grades (episodes 5.1 -5.7) -- cjl, 21:36:27 11/14/03 Fri
Conviction 7
Just Rewards 7.5
Unleashed 6
Hellbound 8.5
Life of the Party 8
Cautionary Tale 9
Lineage 7
Unleashed is the only stinkeroo so far. I found Conviction and Lineage unsatisfying, but for entirely different reasons. Hellbound and Just Rewards are variations on a theme, but Hellbound strikes a better balance with the rest of the cast, and there's a sense of urgency Just Rewards lacks. Cautionary Tale of Numero Cinco is magical, and I reserve the right to raise the score after watching it again and assessing its true significance in S5 as a whole.
Life of the Party? I guess you either get it or you don't.
[> [> [>
We're doing grades, eh?(episodes 5.1 -5.7) -- s'kat, 22:12:53 11/14/03 Fri
Re-watching the episodes makes a difference by the way.
Tale became much more obvious and far less interesting the second time around. (It doesn't hold up as well on second viewing - I still liked it, just not as crunchy and not nearly as much subtext.) 5.7 on the other hand? Whoa. This is an episode that demands to be re-watched. I saw more and noticed more on second viewing. There really is a ton going on in the background, lots of subtext. And Spike? Definitely not a place-holder. But you have to re-watch to catch some of it. Tale on the other hand - seems to be more linear actually - very focused on one thing and not much going on in the background, not as busy. Again this is something I think you tend to see more on second viewing, not on first viewing. Of course this could just be a subjective view - everything is after all. ;-)
Conviction 8
Just Rewards 8.5
Unleashed 4
Hellbound 9
Life of the Party 8
Cautionary Tale 9
Lineage 9
Hellbound, Lineage, Hellbound, and Cautionary Tale I love for different reasons. They all succeed at very different things. So I have trouble ranking them against each other.
I do think, even though, upon rewatching - I liked Hellbound and Lineage more than Cautionary Tale - all three deserve the 9.
Cautionary Tale has a problem the others don't which may explain why the reactions to it have been so varied.
It's not a plot problem or a character problem. The problem is well contextual - if you have never in your life seen or been into Mexican Wrestling or the Spiderman comics - than you are not going to appreciate Tale. You just won't get it.
And no, it's not something someone can tell you about, I honestly think you had to have experienced this particular sub-culture in some way shape or form. For that reason I think the episode is both magical and problematic. OTOH - the fact that not everyone can appreciate the Luchadores or
even remembers them - is a perfect metaphor for Angel's situation regarding Connor, the mindwipe and being a vampire. The AI gang is never going to get Angel because they don't have his memories....either the vampire's or the one's of Connor. In some ways - Spike and Numero Cinquo understand Angel more than his closest friends. That's why I think Tale deserves a 9, even if I find it a little dull on second viewing. (How's that for a contradiction in terms?)
[> [> [> [>
Re: We're doing grades, eh?(episodes 5.1 -5.7) -- Akita, 22:19:55 11/15/03 Sat
Shadowcat writes:
"Cautionary Tale has a problem the others don't which may explain why the reactions to it have been so varied.
It's not a plot problem or a character problem. The problem is well contextual - if you have never in your life seen or been into Mexican Wrestling or the Spiderman comics - than you are not going to appreciate Tale. You just won't get it."
Lurker here (but Nancy T. of SunnydaleU, S'kat) has to come out to address this. Because the only thing I knew about luchadors before I saw this episode came from about 15 minutes of Web research I did after the spoilers first broke, and I've never even looked at a Spiderman comic or watched the WWF. Yet . . .I loved it. *Really* loved it. I've watched it 5 times now, and it still resonates with me (and it has been a couple of years since I've watched a new episode of BtVS or AtS that many times). I love the novel, for most of us, approach to an old chestnut of a theme. It had energy. It even had pizzazz. But mostly I love the deft touch Jeff Bell - and the actors - brought to the story. Serious themes are being presented, but there is none of the heaviness, the clunkiness, the anvilling, that has been all too frequent in ME's work in recent years and such as unfortunately marred "Lineage" for me (an episode I expected to blow me away, and it, well, didn't). Instead, "Cautionary Tale" veers from wry to cheeky to nearly slapstick to downright poignant. It honors an odd subgenre of popular culture without falling into either caricature or inflation.
And in so doing sort of validates AtS itself. "Hell, yes. We're a horror/drama/comedy show about a souled vampire - check that, two souled vampires - and their assortment of associates on a netlet that is grateful if we get 5 million viewers - and save the jokes, we've already heard them. We don't take ourselves too seriously. But pay a little attention: you might find something worth thinking about."
However much I've enjoyed some of ME's truly dark drama, I've really missed this side. I hate being anvilled or lectured to. Let me find it myself.
FWIW. I rank the aired episodes as follows:
Cautionary Tale
Hellbound
Just Rewards
Lineage/Conviction
Life of the Party (interesting concept clumsily done)
Unleashed
Akita
[> [> [> [> [>
Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 -5.7) -- s'kat, 11:29:02 11/16/03 Sun
Hmmm, you raise a good point, about making sweeping generalizations. The people who didn't like Tale, disliked it for many different reasons, not just the one I mentioned.
Some - see archives - saw it as "anvil heavy" and "obvious".
I didn't btw. But in reading their posts? I can see why they did. But, and this is important I think - none of them were spoiled. In fact most of the people I've read who "didn't" like tale weren't spoiled on it. I'm not saying "all", I'm just noticing an interesting trend. (I was slightly spoiled on Tale btw and was pleasantly surprised by it as were most who were spoiled - it sounded cheesy in the spoilers - it was one of those episodes if done poorly could be an absolute mess - so most people who went in spoiled - weren't expecting very much, now all I knew about Lineage was Roger was a robot and Wes killed him. ) So this raises an interesting question: how do reading spoilers affect your viewing and enjoyment of an episode??
Because the only thing I knew about luchadors before I saw this episode came from about 15 minutes of Web research I did after the spoilers first broke, and I've never even looked at a Spiderman comic or watched the WWF.
In other words you knew a heck of a lot more than most people, who weren't spoiled about it. You even did research on it.
marred "Lineage" for me (an episode I expected to blow me away, and it, well, didn't).
So, were you spoiled on Lineage? I'm curious because, several people I knew who disliked the episode - knew the summary before it aired. They had "very" high expectations going in based on what they had read. Some people expected it to be amazing and were eagerly anticipating it. From the "spoilers" they expected to be blown away. So that what was on screen did not live up to what was in their head. I have no idea what they were expecting, b/c I wasn't really spoiled for it and had 0 expectations.
I went into Lineage not expecting very much. Actually I expected it to be okay. And was amazed at the layers of hidden subtext. It was "much" better than I expected, just
as Tale was much better than I expected.
This makes me wonder how much being spoiled and our "expectations" regarding an episode affect our
viewing?
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 - 5.7) -- LittleBit, 17:15:53 11/16/03 Sun
Interesting question. I tend to be as completely unspoiled as it is possible to be, including not watching the trailers or the TV ads because they invariably show something I didn't want to know yet.
In Tales, when the five brothers were back together at the end and faded away, I realized that I was sitting there and watching with a happily satisfied smile on my face. Maybe it's because I'm a sucker for a happy ending; maybe it was just that the idea that the brother who was lost to the others had the chance to be a hero one more time, and got his reward. Perhaps I was less put off by the Mexican wrestling theme. Actually it was something I liked very much...presenting the culture in a way that said "we've been here a long time."
I liked Angel using all the arguments on Numero Cinco that he needed to hear himself, and that he recognized that irony and did hear himself talking. I liked that Angel's slip about the prophecy to Wes came so simply in a normal conversation. I liked the contrast between Angel and Gunn...the two very different tones in which each said "not bad for a day's pay"...and between Gunn and Wes when Gunn callously referred to the shriveled up piece of dried meat that was Angel's physical heart and Wes then spoke to Angel about having spiritual heart.
Regarding "Lineage" I was again completely unspoiled, so I was as surprised as Wes when his father walked in. I'm far less bothered by the Fred/Wes relationship than others seem to be. I don't see it as a backslide that Wes still seems to have feelings for Fred because he certainly seemed to have them last season after he stopped seeing Lilah. I don't think it's impossible to care strongly for more than one person at the same time. What I think about it, however, is that it works best for me when they're acting like friends; that's when they seem to truly click. Fred got angry at Wes saying he hadn't protected her not knowing that Angel had just raked Wes across the coals for that. Before Wes regains his equilibrium his father is there throwing him even further off balance. I liked seeing that. I liked seeing the interaction between Wes and his father, the way faint praise was always followed by the disclaimer and how Wes would just wait for the other shoe.
What I saw this episode being about wasn't whether or not Wes was weak or strong or dark, but that he has an ethical code that he doesn't really compromise. When he makes his choices he believes he is making them for the right reasons, and he takes responsibility for them and for the circumstances under which he made them; he doesn't allow an altered circumstance to water down his responsibility. He didn't accept that Billy's influence was the reason he acted the way he did with Fred; he saw the difference between his behavior and Gunn's. He didn't blame the altered prophecy for the way things turned out with Holtz and Connor; he accepted that he was responsible for his choice. What angered and alienated him was that no one had bothered to ask him why he did it. He took full responsibility for killing his father, even though it turned out not to be him...knowing and admitting to himself that he believed it was his father when he did it.
In some ways Wes and Angel make an interesting contrast. Angel has a fair amount of darkness within him, and while he has had a great deal of practice brooding about his past deeds and present situation(s), he doesn't really delve inside and come to know himself; he separates himself from his darkness and lives 'above' or perhaps 'alongside' it. Wes, on the other hand, seems to have come more to know himself, to recognize and accept the darkness and lives with it, making himself accountable for the choices he makes.
Anyway...much longer and more digressive than I intended. Just wanted to say that as a completely unspoiled viewer, I liked both episodes, perhaps because the only expectation I bring to the show is that I want to see the story they're giving me. And then figure out how that story goes together, what its message is, and what I can learn from it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 - 5.7) -- s'kat, 17:51:57 11/16/03 Sun
Anyway...much longer and more digressive than I intended. Just wanted to say that as a completely unspoiled viewer, I liked both episodes, perhaps because the only expectation I bring to the show is that I want to see the story they're giving me. And then figure out how that story goes together, what its message is, and what I can learn from it.
Which may be the best way of watching. To not be overly invested in one or another character. To allow the story to unfold and not project your own desires on to it. I've been wondering if fanfic can have an adverse effect in causing people to project a fantasy image obtained from the fic onto the show? (Sort of like reading the novel then going to a movie based on it?)OR even cause someone to become more invested in a specific character or ship than they may have been if they didn't read or write fanfic? I don't know the answer to those questions.
I know that I'm enjoying ATS much more than I enjoyed BTVS last season, why? I'm not entering each episode with high expectations. I'm also not reading any fanfic on it. Like you, Fred/Wes doesn't bug me that much. I prefer them as friends, but am not surprised or disgruntled to see Wes still caring for her - he certainly still seemed to be carrying a torch for her last year, even though he knew she didn't carry one for him.
Don't know. I do think our appreciation of an television show has a great deal to do with what we consider enjoyable.
Who we are. What our issues are. Etc. I'm not sure I completely understand why people didn't like Lineage or Tale or Life of The Party - the reasons I've read seem to have more to do with the individual posters "expectations/desires" regarding the episode and the characters than anything clearly wrong with the episode itself. The only episode I wasn't overly fond of was Unleashed, although alcibades and TCH are coming really close to changing my mind on that episode and convincing me that perhaps it's my "expectations/desires" getting in the way.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 - 5.7) -- jane, 20:36:53 11/16/03 Sun
Agree with both Little Bit and S'kat's posts for the most part. I am trying to remain unspoiled as much as possible. All I know before an episode is the little blurb in the tv guide, so I watch with no advance expectations. I find that by watching this way I appreciate the episodes more. I really loved Tale, even though I had no knowledge of the Luchadores at all. I liked Lineage and when Wesley shot his father I was stunned. I don't have any expectations about the characters; I am just enjoying watching their story unfold in Joss's own good time.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 - 5.7) -- CTH, 22:46:45 11/16/03 Sun
Occasional Lurker here. Just wanted to say that this is how I watch the stories. I find it so difficult to go into boards because posters seem to have all these expectations about the characters & stories (not to mention the expectations of the spoilers which I think really kills people when they are spoiled episodes in advance so getting through episodes is just a waiting game to the next big event). Anyway, if the writers don't match the posters expectations then it's wrong/bad, the writers don't get the characters and such. So often it seems as if the fans are fighting the show, wanting it to be what they want rather than just letting the story unfold.
Away now, and sorry if a bit ranty.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
"Lineage," spoilers, and audience expectation (spoilers 5.7) -- cjl, 09:19:17 11/17/03 Mon
I've been spoiled rotten for the past two seasons of Buffy and Angel, and I must confess--I miss experiencing some of the twists and shockers ME has pulled on the audience. It would have been nice to see the Xander/Willow finale in "Grave" or Wesley drilling his "Dad" in "Lineage" with fresh eyes...
But, given that, spoilers have not engendered any sort of false expectations on my part. Even when armed with a full summary, I'm as much in the dark as everybody else how all the elements of a particular episode will come together on the screen. Will the dialogue sound fresh? Will one of the actors slip up and botch a key scene? Will the F/X look cheesy? Will some of the elements of the plot not hold up under scrutiny?
I had a number of problems with Lineage, none of them involving false expectations. I don't think Angel's reaction to Wesley's ventilation of RoboDad was anywhere near in-character, especially this season. (See above for full explanation.) IMO, Sarah Thompson still isn't cutting it as Eve. And I'm bored to death with Fred/Wes. (The sooner that non-'ship moves off into the distance, the better.)
I also felt that Spike was off for the entire episode. I didn't find the jokes about robot luv and Wesley's head boy status very funny, or for that matter, well-delivered by the usually very dependable James Marsters. And, as Jenoff noted in his review, Spike's all-too-casual mention of his disastrous history with Mother takes away from his emotionally wrenching experience in "Lies My Parents Told Me."
I will admit one thing, though. If I hadn't been spoiled about the climax, I probably would have given the episode a higher grade. The shock of watching Wes pump nine bullets into Daddy might have left me less inclined to notice the episode's flaws. But eventually, on second viewing, those flaws would have been noticed, and my grade for the episode would be the same.
Again, JMO. YMMV.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Spike's "off-ness" quite illuminating, really (spoilers 5.7) -- Puss, 10:18:35 11/17/03 Mon
Lurker, usually, but feel the need to jump in here. Obviously, some of Spike's lines in "Lineage" were designed to draw in BTVS viewers, but for the most part (except for the exchange w/Eve) they seem to indicate his (somewhat ineffectual) attempts to participate in the action. I'm thinking especially about his explanation of the staking of his mom: "She tried to shag me." Not true. In "Lies," she tried to ditch him, not shag him.
In fact, after he vamped her, his mother was nearly as disparaging to Spike as Wes's dad is to Wes. Spike (as a brand new vamp) endured far less abuse from his parent than Wes from his before succumbing to the urge to eliminate her. Because he's in such a vulnerable incorporeal position to begin with, he chooses to show false bravado, obscuring the fact that he relates to Wes's situation more than he's letting on. Among other things.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Uhm correction on LMPTM bit (spoilers 5.7) -- s'kat, 10:37:00 11/17/03 Mon
I'm thinking especially about his explanation of the staking of his mom: "She tried to shag me." Not true. In "Lies," she tried to ditch him, not shag him.
Actually she tried to do both. First she threatened to shag him - telling him they should have sex because isn't that what he always wanted? When he denies this and throws her off. She reams him and tells him to get out, lifting a stake to kill him. He wrestles it from her, she goes into "game face" he stakes her, she becomes human again with a peaceful look and disintergrates. He says "I'm sorry."
Spike just short-handed it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You are of course right right right(spoilers 5.7) -- Puss, 10:53:24 11/17/03 Mon
Faulty recollection based on single viewing a few months ago of said ep. Still, Spike's selection of detail to reveal is quite in keeping with theme of kid dealing with parent going "kablooey!" in unanticipated way.
(back in lurk mode)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: "Lineage," spoilers, and audience expectation (spoilers 5.7) -- Doriander, 15:19:54 11/17/03 Mon
Observation. Either fans found Spike utterly funny or utterly off in this ep. I've to confess I'm in the former camp.
Though, I think the Pavayne shout out compromised that scene and Spike's characterization in the ep and should've been left out. I laughed at the Spike scenes here more than I have since...S5, but recognized how un-Spike like some of them were (that confrontation with Pa Pryce though was perfect), resigned myself to having Spike as comic relief in this installment, then that elevator scene happened. I took it the same way alcibiades did, and was intrigued by Spike's motive once again. Though I pissed myself laughing at that Pavayne line, it threw off what I hope was their intended portaryal of Spike, and unfortunately I've a niggling feeling Goddard added that in there simply because it's funny. Ultimate Drew has the tendency to be too cute sometimes, and much of Spike's non sequitirs here I feel should be jeered as they reek of Ultimate Drew's self indulgence (have you read his bronze beta posts?). Sigh. I laughed. I love them, guiltily.
I'm compelled to try and change your mind on a couple of things though...
Head boy joke, and Marsters' delivery, actually how the whole thing was framed...had me in stitches. Not for the joke itself (it was funnier in StB), but for more meta-reasons. They did a similar thing too in that car scene in 5-6. The writers are cognizant of fan rumblings about JM coming on board and getting second billing, taking over the show, and boy was there was some intense pre-premiere kerfuffles about him usurping
Wes as second lead. The "Dam dee dum! Installment of Spike steals Wes' line! :: pause :: We done?" "We done." "Done." way it that played out (bonus lingering shot of a blase Spike assuming his place in the sidelines, which may or may not be construed as JM/Spike having just done with this week's installment of a necessary evil) was just...tee...teehee! ::throws hands in surrender:: the connotation may or may not be what ME intended, though the blocking really is too purposeful. It's a perverse nod, which tickled me.
His "consoling" of Wes. Howled the first I saw it, but on rewatch, I absolutely disagree that it was done glibly. And it's that which makes it even funnier. The guy was sitting on the lobby, waiting for Wes to emerge from the big man's office. I swear, watch it again, and tell me you don't get the sense that Spike had been sitting on this one for a while, hence it came out way too...forward and concise, as he'd most likely been playing it over and over in his head, how he'd go about consoling Wes whom earlier he subjected to much teasing (didn't Vamp Anne hurl insult after insult on William? I'm sure Spike empathized to the gravity of what transpired with Wes, felt some guilt and tried to make it up with him), should he or shouldn't he tell the guy about his mum, how to phrase that without giving himself away, etc. And boy could I relate to that. If this wasn't that big a deal for him, hell he'd have been in that office, no regard for Angel, piping in. I'm reminded of that reherased speech he had with the Buffy mannequin, and Buffy's nonplussed reaction when he tried to confront her. Spike meant well, really. Him and Wes were just on dissonant frames of mind, Spike's on a roll and bracing for this...Wes is looking to rest and was taken aback when Spike suddenly came at him with something this loaded. His reaction when Wes walked away? He looked earnest, of two minds whether that helped or not, while trying to take Wes' acknowledgement at face value. It's endearing, perverse...funny.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Agree completely. -- Ixchel, 16:04:46 11/17/03 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: "Lineage," spoilers, and audience expectation (spoilers 5.7) -- punkinpuss, 22:31:13 11/17/03 Mon
Great points, especially about Spike "consoling" Wes.
Only disagree about the Pavayne shout-out in the elevator scene. Sure it's funny, but it's also very revealing about Spike's vulnerability. He doesn't want to show weakness around Eve, but he can't help it. It's a much more canny and pointed juxtaposition of his bravado and fear than anything else in this ep (but echoes moments from Hell Bound, not surprisingly). It's meant to undercut his moment of macho posturing. (S'kat made a great point in another post about how Spike seems afraid of the dark. Weird behavior for a vampire, but he's always been associated with light/sun visual metaphors. )
Some fans just don't want to see Spike all weak and kitteny or whiny & jerky, but I think he's one of the few characters that ME *can* take those sort of risks with. All these different aspects of Spike feel psychologically consistent to me as variations on the theme of William. "Spike" is a riff but you can still hear how it came out of who William was.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 - 5.7) -- Akita, 08:14:56 11/17/03 Mon
"I know that I'm enjoying ATS much more than I enjoyed BTVS last season, why? I'm not entering each episode with high expectations."
I agree. I also enjoyed AtS 4 - sometimes a mess, but a glorious mess - much more than I did BtVS 7. IMO, BtVS finally cracked, beginning in season 6, under the weight of that damned metaphor, which, sadly, became more of an author's agenda than a storytelling tool. Or so it sometimes seemed to me. AtS has a theme, but not an (apparent) agenda, and has seemed in recent seasons to have more room to breathe.
"Don't know. I do think our appreciation of an television show has a great deal to do with what we consider enjoyable.
Who we are. What our issues are. Etc."
Sure. That's true of all the performing arts and probably all art. What and how much we take from something depends on what we bring to it - everything from our own worldview to what kind of mood we are in on a particular night. The transcendental nights in a theater or opera/movie house or in front of your TV come when something is so fine that it jerks you right out of your current state of thinking or being.
As to whether there's a correct way to watch TV - spoiled or unspoiled - well, I became a spoilerwhore when I stopped trusting the story because I lost a great deal of respect for the storyteller(s). And even though I'm not nearly as obsessive about it as I was during the last years of BtVS, there's really no going back, I think.
FWIW, my experience is that reading a script or large chunks of a script in advance definitely affected my enjoyment of an episode - because I realized I was doing my own line readings and was disappointed when they weren't read onscreen like they played in my head. Reading wildfeeds probably affects my patience with an average or a subpar episode - so I don't do that very often these days. I don't think reading summaries or synopses has much effect at all. The experience of others may vary.
Akita
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Uhm you were "spoiled" for it though? (episodes 5.1 -5.7) -- Akita, 18:48:58 11/16/03 Sun
Shadowkat writes:
"In other words you knew a heck of a lot more than most people, who weren't spoiled about it. You even did research on it."
Not sure I would call 15 minutes of web surfing "research" , but I take your point. The fact that I did spend some time looking into luchadors indicates I was intrigued rather than put off by the idea.
I said I was disappointed in "Lineage" and Shadowkat asks:
"So, were you spoiled on Lineage?"
There wasn't all that much spoilage on Lineage - just a summary that came out late. I did skim that, but didn't read the wildfeed. I didn't feel I had to - thought I was in safe hands. Didn't, in fact, spend much time thinking about it beforehand at all.
"I'm curious because, several people I knew who disliked the episode - knew the summary before it aired. They had "very" high expectations going in based on what they had read. Some people expected it to be amazing and were eagerly anticipating it. From the "spoilers" they expected to be blown away. So that what was on screen did not live up to what was in their head. I have no idea what they were expecting,"
I don't think I had any specific expectations other than I admire AD as an actor, find Wes a fascinating character, and also am usually fascinated with the whole family fixation that AtS has.
Or perhaps I should say "found" Wes to be fascinating. Because, frankly, I came out of that episode with the sad realization that I am tired of Wes and his issues, which haven't changed a whit for more than two seasons now. I'd at least like some variations on his themes. (Lilah was an interesting variation, but I was ready for that to be over too.) I realize the same-old/same-old may be deliberate, given the mindwipe/memory alteration, but I hope it doesn't last long. I am one of those deeply weary of the whole Wes/Fred thing. (I was really hoping they'd stay away from 'ships altogether this season.) I am much more interested in Wes's relationship with Angel and what will happen when the truth about the last days before they came to W&H, and what was done to the FG, finally come out.
I thought what Angel said about him is patently wrong: Wes's emotional baggage often leads him to miss the big picture and to make wrong decisions. So I suppose there will be payoff for that down the road.
But I didn't learn anything new about Wes or gain any new insight into his issues. And that's probably the basis for my disappointment.
Akita
[> [> [> [>
Unleashed -- manwitch, 18:26:03 11/16/03 Sun
I just want to go on record saying that Unleashed, if its the episode with the naked girl werewolf, was in my opinion a great episode. And not just because of the naked girl werewolf.
Its vintage Angel. He helps people. He helps this girl. And he tells her that its a matter of choice whether or not we let the evil inside us take hold.
And then, at the end, he makes a truly horrendous trade, using a human being as a means to an end. And so what if the human being is a sorry corrup traitor. Angel claims to want to help the weak. Who is weaker than the McManusses of the world? And its not like he just killed the guy. That guy's fate is one of the grisliest we've ever seen.
I think what we saw in that episode is very important.
Plus there were several scenes of a naked blonde girl. I really don't understand these low scores.
[> [>
Judging judging -- Ponygirl, 09:51:03 11/15/03 Sat
I'll play!
In my current and sure to change order of preference:
Tale
Conviction
Just Rewards
Lineage
Hellbound
Life of the Party
Unleashed
I have a feeling Party is going to be looked back upon more fondly, and I wish I liked Hellbound more but I found Pavayne overwrought and the pace too slow. At the risk of jinxing everything I'd say it's a solid season so far, no true classics among the bunch, but the so-called standalone format (it's all connected bwahahah) is working for me. You may proceed [waves grandly]
[>
Different cognitions (re faith and doubt, Angel and Spike, Kant and Hegel) -- mamcu, 07:55:56 11/15/03 Sat
Loved your points about faith and doubt. Perhaps we could expand this outside the realm of religion to politics and life in general: there are minds which need black/white, clear-cut categories, and there are minds that thrive on ambiguities, shades of grey. These might correspond to your true believers (atheist or Christian, Muslim or Jew) and your doubters (whose beliefs are always being questioned, who are always open to the other side).
In a way, Spike's whole existence this season clearly puts him in the grey category, doesn't it? He's neither alive nor dead (nor even undead!), neither vamp nor human. He once had a body but no soul, now is a sort of weird blend of body and soul. Spike sees the world this way, too--he neither complete accepts nor completely rejects the Shanshu prophecy, but wants to learn more about it. Angel, on the other hand, embodies the dichotomy: Angel/Angelus, on/off, right/wrong. He needs to either live by the promises and problems of the prophecy, or reject it entirely.
And the whole situation with W&H is also so clearly in the realm of the ambiguous, and as TCH points out, Angel finds this intolerable, so he acts as if he were still in the clear-cut world of hero vs. villain.
manwitch, I THINK (will check and correct if wrong), had a wonderful post on Angel as the Kantian moralist and Spike as the Neitzschean. In terms of cognitions, too, Angel is perhaps more Kantian (I'm drawing here on some thinking of my husband's, to give credit where due)--Kant too was analytic in his thinking, whereas Spike's cognition is perhaps more like a Hegelian sythetic view.
[> [>
Agree -- Tchaikovsky, 09:40:56 11/15/03 Sat
Yes, I think the idea of doubt does extend beyond religion. For one thing, I think an always re-negotiating edging dynamic relationship can be more stable than a static one where each person knows his role. And I prefer politicians who take each situation as a new question to be toyed with, than those who have utter certainty about the question even before it's raised. I guess that's why I tend to have more sympathy with the oddball rebels in the British Houses of Parliament than those who slavishly toe the party line, as if their only faith is Labour, Conservative usw.
I think it is a bit of regression that Angel has experienced going in to Wolfram and Hart. After his dalliance with Beigeness in Season Two, I don't think he ever quite re-gained the good/evil right/wrong dichotomy so strongly, as Pylea, apparently his dream come true, showed us. But in Season Five, he seems back there, where some people categorically 'can't be saved'. Dangerous, fascinating times.
Would be interested to know more about Kant and Hegel if you have time or inclination!
TCH
[>
Re: Doubting William (Angel Odyssey 5.4)(sp 5.6) -- Caroline, 11:39:10 11/16/03 Sun
Very insightful post.
I'd like to add a bit of nuance to your view on Angel's behaviour. I think that I would posit Angel's behaviour not as surface self-assurance underlaid by doubt, but rather as desperation, or desperate obstinacy underlaid by doubt. Doubt that he has done the right thing with Connor and now every parallel situation must therefore work out his way, otherwise he will be so totally wrong that it would be devastating. I also think that this is paralleled in the words and behaviour of some atheists and believers that I know - explaining events and actions in such a way as to fit the cookie-cutter views they have. I'm fully expecting Angel's world and world-view to come crashing down on him sometime this season precisely because he clings so stubbornly to the view that made it right to do what he did to Connor, even though he knows underneath that it may not be so. The nagging guilt would then come into full play, causing a real existential crisis for him. At least that is my humble opinion.
[> [>
Good point -- Tchaikovsky, 04:00:34 11/17/03 Mon
And I completely agree- I see all these stories as variations on the theme of the loss of Connor- and I would be shocked and amazed at this point if the subject wasn't dealt with. I'm guessing February sweeps.
TCH
[> [> [>
I knew it! (C:tS spoilers, seasons 1-5) -- Masq, 14:50:01 11/17/03 Mon
Season 5 is really all about Connor. Brood, Angel, brood, while everyone else has a big ol' Connor-shaped hole in their brains!
Connor was also integral to the events of season 4, fathering and then serving as personal protector of unborn and then grown-up Jasmine.
And of course, there were very few episodes of season 3 that didn't revolve around Connor as unborn mystery child, infant, or teen-ager. Maybe a few of those early pre-"Billy" episodes that didn't include a scene with pregnant Darla.
And since the season-long dance of Angel and Darla in season 2 lead to their consumation in Reprise, season 2 was really all about Connor as well.
I am working diligently on figuring out how season 1 of AtS was really all about Connor, too. They might as well just change the name of the show to "Connor: the Series" right now.
[>
I was wondering your opinion about Pavayne (sp 5.4) -- Lunasea, 08:59:59 11/19/03 Wed
I see some parallels to Holtz. Pavayne was an 18th century European Aristocrat. Holtz also lived in the 18th century. The obvious comparison is Holtz brought Connor to Quortoth and Pavayne was trying to stick Spike in Hell. The difference is that Holtz was willing to damn himself for his revenge, first by working with a priest that had been excommunicated in "Offspring," then by accepting the offer of a demon, then literally by going there himself and finally having Justine kill him. Pavayne had no interest in Spike. He just wanted to save his own hide.
I think the doctor angle was interesting. It reminded me of Holtz' exchange in "Offspring" -- ""I don't want anything. My family is gone. I don't trust you to give me Darla, although I *will* find her, you know that. My only desire here - is to discover if a thing such as yourself can be made to pay for its sins. (Holtz digs the claw-thingy in somewhere below Angelus waist (off screen) and Angelus groans in pain) You're a demon. It is your nature to maim and kill. But you were also once a man. If we beat and burn the demon out of your living flesh, will there be anything left? (Holtz digs the claw in again and Angelus groans in pain) Anything at all? I doubt it. But I'm willing to spend the next fortnight of my life finding out. - In either event - you have no soul, you can not be saved."
Pavayne was murdered to deconsecrate the ground of a Spanish mission. His death turned the holy into the unholy. His essence stuck around through the dark arts, until Fred made it corporeal. Maybe the Senior Partners wanted him to stick around to clean up the ghosts that would have remained. They had to know he was there. Holtz survived into the 21st century through the dark arts as well. His sole desire was revenge. Going through a portal is like death and his death turned something pure (infant Connor) into The Destroyer. Sahjhan kept Holtz around to kill Connor for his own self-preservation.
I'm curious how you think Pavayne fits into the theme of doubt you saw in this episode.
[> [>
The Pavayne/Holtz parallel is interesting -- Tchaikovsky, 03:22:17 11/20/03 Thu
I do wonder whether it gives Stephen DeKnight rather a lot of credit for a character I essentially saw as worked out this way:
DEKNIGHT: What I really need is a character that Spike will be really scared of?
CRAFT:Really
FAIN: Scared
CRAFT: Of?
DEKNIGHT: Yes
EDLUND: Why don't you get somebody who is made entirely of forks, and then they could, like, throw forks at Spike?
BELL: Enough of the forks already. Sheesh.
DEKNIGHT: What we really need is-
FURY: Oooh, I know. Someone with a terrifying voice, and big scary eyes, and who keeps prattling on about murder. Possibly a serial killer joke?
BELL: The eyes could be a central part in the horror motif of the episode
DEKNIGHT: Ah, Frankenstein's monster.
BELL: What's that got to do with ghosts?
CRAFT:Why
FAIN:don't
CRAFT:we
FAIN: ask
CRAFT: Joss?
BELL: Good plan. Joss?
WHEDON: So then, River accidentally gets into Book's quarters, where she sees inside his Bible a self-defence kit. You know, the physicality of spiritual defence. And River, who on the other hand, is like, abstract nouns, being the ship, trees for guns, tells him there's much more than that. And Jayne overhears it and is reformed, and then we cut to Kaylee and Simon...Oh sorry. Um, yeah, Frankenstein.
BELL: Frankenstein it is then. We'll do a really scary voice...
I do think Pavayne was the man who embodies lack of doubt, much more so than Angel, he knows exactly what's going on, what his job is, and how he behaves. And it is the certainty that his life is the one that Spike would like, rather than Spike sacrificing himself for the ghosts, which finally undermines him.
TCH
Question concerning early season 4 Wes -- Seven, 17:48:18 11/14/03 Fri
Ok, i have not seen all of "Deep Down" or THAWs (which, from what i've read, makes me the envy of the board) but i feel that i may have missed something by not seeing the Lorne-ep. In "Ground State," we see that Wes is running his own crew. What happens to them from that episode to Apocolypse Nowish that makes Wes forget all about them?
It may be important to note that i have never seen Apocolypse Nowish either. Does Wes fire them? It seems that if he didn't, there should have been some explanation as to why he didn't call them in to deal with the Beast, or Angelus, or Evil!Cordy, or ...oh, yeah, they wouldn't really have helped with Lady J.
Any answers from ME? It's in "Apocolypse Nowish" isn't it? I knew it.
No really, if it is, someone let me know. Also, wouldn't it be nice if Wes got them all jobs at W&H? Ok, i'm just rambling now....someone please answer me and shut me up....
Replies:
[>
Re: Question concerning early season 4 Wes -- JM, 18:10:08 11/14/03 Fri
No, good question, I wondered about that myself. I figure that it just got lost as a plot point in the avalanche of intensity after "Apocalypse Nowish."
I fanwanked one of two solutions. One, they all died leading up to the apocalypse. Or two, they were never Wes's crew. I like this one best. We just assumed they were because Angel did. Wes never confirmed it. (It was a nice nod of continuity to meet Emile, who I always thought was a nerd for some reason, not a "businessman.") I decided that Wes wasn't in fact their boss, just freelancing as a field commander for the outift they all work for. It also helps explain, for me, why he never seemed to give a damn about any of them. They weren't his responsibility, they were coworkers. I've decide Diana (tell her to close out the case) was the real boss.
Straight fan-wank, but I like it, and we got to pay our way somehow.
[> [>
Uhm, Emile? Diana? -- Seven, 18:33:56 11/14/03 Fri
thanks for the answer but who are these girls?
I probably just don't remember but were they (or one of them) in the scene that you were descirbing? (From Ground State) i'm not sure who yur refering to.
[> [> [>
Re: Uhm, Emile? Diana? -- JM, 19:12:40 11/14/03 Fri
Sorry, I'm all obscure fan-girl tonight. I thought Emile's cameo had tiggered the question (I should have paid attention to your list of watched eps). Emile is the man Wes is negotiating with at the beginning of the latest episode "Lineage." In S4 he is the supplier of Wes's go-go gadget sword (though we never met him). For those of us, including me, who had forgotten, he drops the hint "To think, I used to supply this with guy collapsible swords." His name is mentioned in "House Always Wins," while Wes is negotiating for something. And again in "Spin the Bottle," when Wes receives delivery of the prototype wrist sword. (Sorry, didn't mean to be obscure was just excited about the continuity.)
In "Ground State," after Wes and gang kill the demon with the hotel key, Wes snaps to a lackey "Tell Diana to close out the case." In my psycho universe, I fanwanked her as the real boss. Sorry to be more confusing than helpful:-)
[> [> [> [>
thanks.... -- Seven, 19:23:17 11/14/03 Fri
actually, that makes things more interesting for me. I was wondering about the "collapsable swords" line and only understand it now.
Funny. I only saw STB on tuesday before this week's ep and I saw (at least two now) connections:
1. This Emile character who supplies weapons
and
2. Wes' being named "Head Boy" at the Watcher's Council.
Wonder if there is more Wesenticity (does that work?) in that episode than i realized.
but thanks for the info
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: thanks.... -- JM, 20:07:01 11/14/03 Fri
No problem. I love this stuff. And I think it's an example of Goddard doing his homework. Maybe he's the real head boy.
[> [> [> [> [>
maybe wes-centricity? @>) -- anom, 20:50:52 11/16/03 Sun
Joan vs. Tru -- Ames, 21:40:38 11/14/03 Fri
I have to say that Joan of Arcadia is improving from a fairly good start, while Tru is still going downhill after 3 episodes.
Aside from AmberT's loose connection to BtVS (appeared in All The Way), I notice one other interesting thing in common between JoA and BtVS:
BtVS: head writer - Joss Whedon, exec producer - Joss Whedon
JoA: head writer - Barbara Hall, exec producer - Barbara Hall
Replies:
[>
Gotta love retaining creator control! -- DorianQ, 02:11:55 11/15/03 Sat
[>
Joan's mom and Joyce -- mamcu, 07:37:58 11/15/03 Sat
I love the wit and pacing, the kids and the dialogue in Joan, but the family's just a little too good to be true. From having been both parent and child, I still think Joyce was a lot more like what a mom with a super-child would be like. Her frustrations, her occasional blindness and absorption in her own needs, made her deep love for Buffy more believable when it shone through. Joan's mom is ALWAYS able to be supportive when Joan screws up or acts weird. However, I haven't see every episode.
Or maybe I just have problems with traditional families and religions--which would be my problems, not the show's.
God the jogger was pretty good this time. And I really like the brothers and her friends--seeing Grace's family was great for insight into her (but another flawlessly supportive, traditional family apparently having no problems with the rebellious lesbian kid).
[> [>
Re: Joan's mom and Joyce (spoiler alert) -- Ames, 07:50:49 11/15/03 Sat
A lot of things in JoA still need work. I agree about the family - I don't think any of them have quite hit the right note yet, but they have potential.
What I really liked about this latest episode was finally seeing the uncertainty in Joan's mind about who's speaking to her when she's asked to do something apparently harmful, and the answer she was given. It was a bit too pat that she was reassured so quickly by events, but then her "failure of imagination" in reaction was a good touch too.
It looks like they're finally starting a bit of a story arc beyond the episode. Maybe some network execs have been convinced that the show will last beyond mid-season?
I wonder how long they can go before they have to deal with the bigger issue of why God is advising Joan in particular about minor stuff like the lives of her family and friends?
[> [> [>
Perhaps he has as sense of humor. -- skeeve, 07:48:17 11/17/03 Mon
Perhaps it's actually the devil doing good works just to keep God wondering what he's up to.
[> [> [> [>
Perhaps he has a sense of humor. -- skeeve, the typographically challenged, 12:42:08 11/17/03 Mon
Perhaps it's actually the devil doing good works just to keep God wondering what he's up to.
The mind wipe: Is there a paradox? what else is affected?( season 5) -- luvthistle1, 02:42:09 11/15/03 Sat
When Connor was born, he in a small way brought a little redemption to Darla, just by being born. Darla sacrificed herself in order for him to live. but since Angel had erase Connor from the world, did he also erase Darla redeeming moment?
What about Lilah and Wes? Wes relationship with Lilah only came about, because he was on the outs, from the group, for taking Connor. but if Connor didn't exist, Wes would have never taken him, therefore he would not have had a reason to turn to Lilah.
We know that Wes remembers chopping up Lilah and that they were lovers, yet he doesn't remember "the father will kill the son prophecy.
What about Fred and Gunn? Do they remember having a relationship? We know that Fred doesn't remember Wes expressing his feeling for her.
Cordy should no longer be a "higher being", or half demon.
What else do you believe "might", ( or should ) be affected by the mindwipe ?
Is the whole thing creating some type of "paradox"? :
Wes and Angel discover the shanshu prophecy scroll, when they had taken the scroll from W&H, who at the time, were raising Darla ( who was in the box). therefore, if W&H didn't try to bring Darla back, Angel would have never had got the scroll . ( nor was there had been a need for Angel to rescue "Billy" from hell, or meet Skip)
Replies:
[>
Re: The mind wipe -- Seven, 07:43:49 11/15/03 Sat
We know that Wes remembers chopping up Lilah and that they were lovers, yet he doesn't remember "the father will kill the son prophecy.
We are not entirely sure that the "girlfriend" that Wes "chopped up into little bits" was Lilah. We assume that was who he was referring to but we can't be sure.
We know that Fred doesn't remember Wes expressing his feeling for her.
We do? As far as we can see so far, at the very least the gang has some kind of memories of major events, just sans Connor. Actually, i'm pretty sure that Fred remembers Wes expressing his feelings in (Souless?) I say that because from "Hellbound":
Wes: On one condition.
Fred: What?
Wes: Dinner?
Fred: (looking down as if she knows where this is going and she doesn't have time for it) Oh, uhm...
Wes: I mean you. Eating something...
From this I infer that fred knows how Wes has felt because Wes has expressed his feelings.
Cordy should no longer be a "higher being", or half demon.
Why not? Cordy's ascending had little to do with Connor. It had much to do with the birth of Jasmine but not with Connor directly. There is no reason to believe that Cordy would have not accepted becoming part demon to deal with the visions.
Wes and Angel discover the shanshu prophecy scroll, when they had taken the scroll from W&H, who at the time, were raising Darla ( who was in the box). therefore, if W&H didn't try to bring Darla back, Angel would have never had got the scroll . ( nor was there had been a need for Angel to rescue "Billy" from hell, or meet Skip)
this isn't exactly right. I think you've gotten info confused. Angel stole the Shanshu Prophecy scroll the episode before Darla was raised. Plus, even if this was the case, Darls was still raised (we must assume) due to a hidden plan to birth Jasmine. The only thing we can know for sure concerning the past two seasons is that Connor wasn't in them according to the rest of the gang. Everything else had to remain the same. There have been numerous speculations on the board concerning this.
Here are some that I can remember right off the top of my head:
1. Everything is exactly the same as it was before, except the Connory parts are unavailable to the gang. When they try to think of it, thier minds wander and they forget about it much like the SG did when they saw that Glory was Ben.
2. The events in their heads were changed to a point where everything happened the way it happened---just without Connor. In this scenario, there is a whole lot of plot points that had to be rewritten. What those new memories are is something we will just have to wait for ME to reveal.
One way or the other, this seems to be the overhanging arc of the season. The mind-wipe is a set-up for this season. It is one of the last things we see last season and it is being drawn out this season. (that may read like it has a bad connotation---i don't mean it to) It is being drawn out because it fuels our philosophical fires. It is the one thing that we can theorize about with reckless abandon because the possibilities (and possible consequences) are far reaching. Soon, though, we will get fed up with not knowing, as some posters are obviously getting anxious to know the truth (yes Masq, this includes you) So ME will have to come up with some answers soon if not the whole ----ancholada?----wait, encholoda?--uhm, antcholada? Whatever---the whole thing.
7
[> [>
enchilada -- leslie, 20:07:21 11/15/03 Sat
[> [>
Re: The mind wipe -- luvthistle1, 01:34:35 11/16/03 Sun
We are not entirely sure that the "girlfriend" that Wes "chopped up into little bits" was Lilah. We assume that was who he was referring to but we can't be sure.
ohh, I never thought of it that way? so you think Wes could have killed another girlfriend?
Why not? Cordy's ascending had little to do with Connor. It had much to do with the birth of Jasmine but not with Connor directly. There is no reason to believe that Cordy would have not accepted becoming part demon to deal with the visions.
skip had stated that all those moves ( the vision,two vamps have a child,and Cordy being a higher being was so Jasmine can be brought into the world,. Connor played an big part in Jasmine 's birth. he played the role of "Father". therefore, if thing were set back, as if Connor never exist, then how could jasmine? so , it's back to my first question, "how far do the mindwipe go". If Cordy awaken , and remember giving birth to "Jasmine" , who would she think was the "Father"?
Darls was still raised (we must assume) due to a hidden plan to birth Jasmine. The only thing we can know for sure concerning the past two seasons is that Connor wasn't in them according to the rest of the gang. Everything else had to remain the same. There have been numerous speculations on the board concerning this.
..In that case, if Darla was still Raise, and Conner wasn't apart of it. there would be no reason for Darla to stake herself. therefore she "Should" still be alive.Hmm? maybe Darla will show up later in the season with Dru.
[> [> [>
Re: The mind wipe -- RadiusRS, 03:02:00 11/16/03 Sun
>>We are not entirely sure that the "girlfriend" that Wes "chopped up into little bits" was Lilah. We assume that was who he was referring to but we can't be sure.
>ohh, I never thought of it that way? so you think Wes could have killed another girlfriend?
I think the "girlfriend" line was more of a way to make things clearer for newer viewers so that they wouldn't be scratching their heads going "Who's Lilah?" Referring to her as "the girlfriend" gives new viewers the necessary backstory and allows older viewers to understand what Wes remembers. I think the "chopped up" part is a mistake on Drew Goddard's part since he has never written Angel before and probably saw the episode and just remembered Wesley with a big axe. Similarly, in the scene between Eve and Angel, Eve refers to Holtz as "your sworn enemy", so as not to have new viewers scratching their heads but getting the gist of it. Since Connor is still alive and that conversation seems to establish that those events DID happen, it is logical to assume that only memories of certain events have been altered, not the events themselves. In "I Will Remember You", it was also established that TPTB can only turn time back for twenty-four hours, so W&H probably can't reshape reality, only the perception of it (if they could, they would eliminate all their mistakes). ME IS being deliciously obtuse on some of these points, though I tend to agree that they got some 'splaining to do sooner rather than later.
>>Why not? Cordy's ascending had little to do with Connor. It had much to do with the birth of Jasmine but not with Connor directly. There is no reason to believe that Cordy would have not accepted becoming part demon to deal with the visions.
>skip had stated that all those moves ( the vision,two vamps have a child,and Cordy being a higher being was so Jasmine can be brought into the world,. Connor played an big part in Jasmine 's birth. he played the role of "Father". therefore, if thing were set back, as if Connor never exist, then how could jasmine? so , it's back to my first question, "how far do the mindwipe go". If Cordy awaken , and remember giving birth to "Jasmine" , who would she think was the "Father"?
Maybe the gang believes that Jasmine was conceived without a Father, like Jesus or Anakin Skywalker, or that the Beast was her Father. And maybe Cordy will be unaffected by the mindwipe, which would certainly be a catalyst for bringing Angel's deception to light if or when she wakes up (which will likely happen seeing as the fans NEED closure for the character).
>>Darls was still raised (we must assume) due to a hidden plan to birth Jasmine. The only thing we can know for sure concerning the past two seasons is that Connor wasn't in them according to the rest of the gang. Everything else had to remain the same. There have been numerous speculations on the board concerning this.
>..In that case, if Darla was still Raise, and Conner wasn't apart of it. there would be no reason for Darla to stake herself. therefore she "Should" still be alive.Hmm? maybe Darla will show up later in the season with Dru.
Maybe...but I don't think history has been rewritten, just the perception of it. And while I would love to see Julie Benz again, I think that will only happen if we see Connor again, as her character has completed her arc and bringing her back to life again would be redundant. Maybe the gang remembers that the baby (which hadn't been named yet) died with Darla.
I also think that most of the missing relationship between Gunn and Fred might also be so as not to confuse new viewers, and because their relationship really solidified the summer they spent caring for Connor after Cordy and Angel vanished, which would require MUCHO memory wiping. If so, no one probably remembers that Angel was even sunken, and they might remember that Wesley just made a deal with Holtz instead of handing Connor over. The mindwipe also probably includes small physical changes like Wesley's scar that would raise too many questions. If someone has a tape of "Home" as I currently don't have mine, I wonder if they could check if Wes' scar is present during the beginning of the episode and gone after Angel takes the deal?
[>
For what it's worth, I don't think there's a paradox -- Sgamer82, 08:43:36 11/15/03 Sat
The mind wipe didn't change history, only everyone's memories of that history. It's like the monk magic that brought Dawn or Jonathan's fame spell. They didn't change history. Everything before that still happened without Dawn, or without Jonathan, only now everybody's memories have been altered so that, to them, Dawn was there or Jonathan did all the great things.
Darla's redemption, Wesley's Lilah relationship, none of them were erased, just forgotten. So it's impossible for a paradox to exist.
But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
[> [>
I guess that's the question raised in "Cautionary Tale" -- Seven, 10:54:45 11/15/03 Sat
If no one remebers the deeds, the battles, the victories, the sacrifice --- did it happen? Did it matter?
[>
Re: The mind wipe: Is there a paradox? what else is affected?( season 5) -- sdev, 13:09:12 11/15/03 Sat
It occurred to me that some real life info on amnesia might be helpful here. There is something called Systematised Amnesia in which you lose memory of a particular category. The example I read was - missing all memories about one specific family member. Symptoms of all amnesia may include flattened affect (outward expressions are bland and unemotional), apathy, depression, lack of initiative, laconic speech, and social withdrawal.
Wesley seems to have a lot of these symptoms more severely than Fred, Gunn and Lorne. Missing memories of Connor would likely effect Wesley the most given his crucial role with Connor and how it altered his life. In real life amnesia the character is not regressed but there seems to be a disconnect created by the missing links. Memory recovery in amnesia usually begins with the oldest and progresses to the newest memories. Just a thought.
cordy info? -- aperitis, 20:29:51 11/15/03 Sat
i was wondering if anyone had heard anything about cordy and her coming back from her coma. does anyone know if she is coming back at all and if she is, is she coming back for only one eppy or is she back to stay? i hope she stays...did her being in a comatose state for most of the end of season 4 have anything to do with her departure from the show in early season 5? i mean...did they plan a coma cause they knew she wouldnt be on the show? Also it doesnt seem plausible for her to be in a coma throughout the rest of the show and not have it addressed ever again...any information?
Replies:
[>
Spoilers -- Nino, 23:28:43 11/15/03 Sat
It was confirmed that Cordy will return for 1 episode, most likely episode 12 (the 100th ep of the show). Joss's reason for Cordy's departure was that he felt that after seven years, her story had run its course. He said that he wanted to bring her back, possibly as a recurring character. But, alas, it was announced that she would be back for just the one ep. He says he has something in mind to give the charater closure. The ep shoots at the end of November, and will probably air in January. It comes right after Andrew arrives in LA in episode 11. I also read that around this time, a large arc will get started.
I love Cordy. I loved the Evil!Cordy storyline, but since she was possessed, we really havn't seen Cordy since season 3's finale "Tomorrow." So this ep means a lot to me as far as closure, and wrapping the character after they took her to such a dark place (or...took Charisma there anyway...Cordy was nowhere to be found!) So I have high expectations...and cannot wait for this ep.
[> [>
Yeah, but how is Dennis doing? -- skeeve, 08:08:40 11/17/03 Mon
[> [> [>
I've often wondered that :) -- Nino, 08:18:33 11/17/03 Mon
Wolfram & Hart and The First Evil (Spoilers up to Buffy S7 and Angel S5) -- RadiusRS, 02:27:52 11/16/03 Sun
I remember reading a comment in an interview with Joss in which he said that the Big Bads of both "Buffy" and "Angel" last season were somehow related. Seeing as how Wolfram & Hart finally got what has been it's stated purpose since the first season of Angel, namely to get Angel to work for them, at the end of "Home", and how the amulet was not only necessary for Buffy's side to win against the First Evil, separate Angel from Connor, but was also to get either Angel or Spike in some sort of compromising position, it seems to me they were the big winners of last season, not poor Jasmine. There was also a line in the first few episodes of Season 4 about W&H not wanting to let anyone else muscle in on their Apocalypse. I thought that the goat's head on the Seal on "Buffy" indicated some sort of relationship between the firm (the Ram part of the name) and the First Evil (after all, since they're evil, wouldn't it make sense that they have a connection to the Source of All Evil?), but it seems that they prevented the First's apocalypse so that it wouldn't interfere with their own. I don't think we've seen the last of the First Evil, seeing as it was apparently instrumental in returning Angel to the Whedonverse, therefore assuring that he would around to fulfill a few prophecies here and there and therefore also jibing with It being in cahoots with W&H. Maybe the "vampire with a soul" prophecy could be about Spike, but then there would be no reason why Wolfram & Hart wouldn't destroy Angel; they must need both of them and obviously know more than we do. I doubt they'll bring the FE back as a Big Bad for Angel (too redundant) and I believe Angel's final season will be about Wolfram & Hart's long-mentioned apocalypse, but I get the nagging feeling that there are connections there that have been subtly hinted at on Angel (seeing as Wolfram & Hart was never mentioned by name on Buffy) and I even thought until "Hellbound" that Spike was actually the First Evil in disguise attempting to become corporeal (think about it: annoying, can't touch anything, devious) and trying new tactics after failing miserably before. Spike would seem to be a prime target for the FE's revenge after his role in vanquishing it's army of Ubervamps. I'm sure my theory has plenty of holes but I'm intrigued if the rest of you folks have similar or contradictory theories and opinions.
Some more W&H thoughts:
Holland Manners has been mentioned twice this season, First by Friese in "Conviction" and then in Numero Cinco's flashback when he was handed W&H's card. Perhaps there's a reason for this? (Manners was by far the best of the W&H baddies; glasses guy from Season 2 just disappeared and Season 3 guy was entertaining but obviously not too good at his job. Lilah is the possible exception seeing as she and Manners are the only two back-from-hell people we've seen, which Lilah said was an expensive arrangement, and both appearances served to try to entrap Angel).
Seeing as the White Room was early on established to be pretty terrifying and first Mestet (or Mesket? The Little Girl in the Red Dress) and then the Big Cat (which Gunn referred to as the "Man" in the White Room in "Convictions") were the Conduits to the Senior Partners, it stands to reason that Eve is somehow more than she appears and could possibly be linked to the Conduits if she serves as liaison to the S.P. Her U.C. Santa Cruz comment in "Life of the Party" might be cover, but I think she might be human AND supernaturally evil somehow. Also, the Panther helped Gunn in "Hellbound" when they needed a key ingredient to recorporealize Spike and the Little Girl helped Angel and the Gang in "Habeas Corpses" to escape the Beast and find the Big Bad, so we can assume that in both cases, they were doing so on behalf of the Senior Partners. I wonder why that is?
Speaking of "Habeas Corpses", the Wolfram & Hart employees were all zombified in that episode. The gang probably permanently killed a bunch of them, including Gunn's Final Death of Gavin Parks. Lilah was killed by other means and then chopped up. So maybe the employees there WERE killed by the Beast but the zombification spell allowed for them to be revived as long as they weren't "permanently" killed, which would explain why some of the employees seem to remember things from last year and such. Also, the building has apparently been rebuilt seeing as they are using a different exterior shot from seasons past. Why not just keep the same exterior shot?
Hopefully, some of this makes sense. :)
Replies:
[>
Re: Wolfram & Hart and The First Evil (Spoilers up to Buffy S7 and Angel S5) -- David, 10:02:30 11/17/03 Mon
I agree that they are probably connected some how and I think that the FE might try and get revenge back on Wolfram & Hart but I don't think it should be Angel's big bad, it should remain Buffy's since it was on her last season.
About W&H being using new footage. I don't know since i'm in the UK and haven't seen Angel yet but I think it was rebuilt since in Home Lilah says 'it's been rebuilt and de-zombified' so maybe the beast destroyed the entire building although I don't know how it was rebuilt in a short time.
I also like your theory on the zombies being resurrected again and only the ones that didn't have their head chopped off.
[> [>
Re: Wolfram & Hart and The First Evil (Spoilers up to Buffy S7 and Angel S5) -- RadiusRS, 18:28:04 11/17/03 Mon
I agree that the FE shouldn't become Angel's Big Bad, but its introduction was linked to Angel's return to this world and its purpose in that episode was to do exactly what W&H has tried to which is get Angel evil.
Lilah does say that, but I don't remember a scene or line where they said the building was demolished, just parts of it when the Beast messed up the walls. I may be wrong though.
Thanks! I tried to somehow make sense of why the W&H employees aren't acting like they're new to L.A. and why the ME writers haven't addressed this obvious question and that idea seemed to make the most sense to me. It would be just like an evil Law Firm to turn it's employees into zombies and then revive them so as to save on training costs.
Heroism and Prophecy (**Spoilers to AtS 5.7 and mild speculation beyond**) -- manwitch, 18:14:52 11/16/03 Sun
Heroism has been discussed a lot recently. It seems to be a theme that is recurring this season. Of course, it has really been a theme throughout Angel and throughout Buffy. But what really is heroism? What is heroic?
Generally heroism has to do with the attempting of great deeds-deeds of bravery and nobility. The significant word to me in this standard OED definition is "attempting." Success is not relevant to heroism. The fact that the hero fails does not of itself keep an act from being heroic. The attempt is what counts. Buffy's attempt to flee Sunnydale with Dawn does not become unheroic simply because Glory finds them and takes Dawn away. Riley's attempt to free Oz is no less heroic for being unsuccessful.
But I find the OED definition insufficient, largely due to the words "great," "bravery,"and "noble." Unless those words are well qualified. The acts themselves don't have to be "great." They need merely to entail a great sacrifice. When Xander tries to disarm the bomb in The Zeppo, that's heroic. He is willing to give his life to try and stop this crime. That what he is doing is not terribly significant in the vast scheme of things is illustrated by the Apocalypse being fought one floor above. Yet his sacrifice is just as great. Spike may have "just stood there" in the final battle, but the sacrifice and what it was for render the act heroic. Bravery does not in and of itself mean heroism. I think Faith, for example, is brave in facing down Buffy in Graduation Day and in This Year's Girl, but I don't think she's heroic. In the latter she is after payback for herself and in the former she has no choice. Her sacrifices are either nonexistant or selfish.
I will offer my own definition. I think heroism is when one sacrifices oneself, or some aspect of oneself, in an attempt to preserve or create something else. By this definition, we have probably all had moments of heroism. Certainly all of the Scoobies have at one time or another.
What is noticable in my definition is that acts of heroism don't necessarily have to be acts that we like. I don't like that Angel dumped Buffy before her Prom, but I think it was heroic. He was giving up his own desire, his own happiness, for what he thought was good for her. In IWRY he did the same thing, only for the people they are trying to help as well. I hate that he took from Buffy the one perfect moment in her entire life, but I don't think that discounts the heroism of his act. He gave up an aspect of himself to help others, not to get his powers back.
I think ME has left open the question of whether or not "evil," by which is meant "that which we are against," can be heroic. I'm not sure that there is a single act of heroism on the part of an evil character while engaged in the perpetration of evil. But that doesn't necessarily mean it can't happen. Faith and Spike I think are the closest thing we have to evil characters who are prepared to sacrifice themselves for others or for principle while engaged in evil. But I'm not sure they ever actually do it.
Another noticable part of my definition is that an act is not heroic simply from being good. A sacrifice of self for something else is required. So its good that Buffy stops Jonathon when he has the rifle, but its not heroic. She sacrifices nothing to stop him. Its good of Spike to conspire with Buffy in Becoming, but he's doing it for himself, not something else. Sacrifice of self for something else. This is why the same act can be heroic at some times and just good at others. When Willow resouls Angel the first time, it is heroic. She is putting herself at great risk to help Buffy and possibly the world. The second time she is simply doing a good thing that she knows how to do. There is no sacrifice on her part the second time.
But by this definition there are clearly many acts of heroism in the Buffyverse. Buffy, of course leads the way. In facing the Master she is willing to give up her life in an attempt to preserve the world for Willow. By killing Angel she is willing to give up any chance she has at happiness to save the world for others. In sacrificing herself for Dawn she saves not only Dawn, but the world and its value. To preserve it again two years later, she is willing to surrender her defining characteristic to anyone who wants it. I'm sure she has many other acts of heroism.
Angel does too. I think Angel's destruction of the Gem of Amarra is heroic. He surrenders a chance to walk in the sunlight in order to help those in the dark. While I don't remember the episode well, I think Angel's freeing of Cordy and Fred from Pylea was heroic. He risked his own life to do it, and then surrendered another chance to walk in the sun in order to return. His sacrifice in IWRY is likewise heroic.
The "Cautionary Tale" offered an unresolved discussion of whether or not the telling of the tale is an essential aspect of heroism. I would say it is not, except to the degree that the living of life after the heroic act becomes a testament to the heroism itself. Buffy's ultimate act of heroism is surely her leap from the tower in The Gift. And her message to Dawn is "Live. For me." It's the "Saving Private Ryan" message. We must live our lives as a testament to those who sacrificed so much that we might live it. And that's where #5 had fallen off track. The forgotten memory of his brothers wasn't the idiocy going on in the ring, it was his own dissillusion. His despair was particularly egregious given that he knew first hand the sacrifice that had been made. Frequently the heroic act takes place in the dark, where no one knows and no one tells the tale. We all are the result of many such acts. I would offer as two of the most heroic acts in the Buffyverse, Giles's destruction of Anyanka's necklace and Spike's near death at the hands of Glory. In both cases the sacrifice they were willing to make was total. For Giles it was for faith in a better world. For Spike, it was love for another. But in neither case was anyone watching, was there any chance that anyone would ever know. But in both cases, life after the act, even in its ignorance, was a testament to that heroism. It is, in fact, what the sacrifice was for.
So I will suggest that this discussion tells us something about what to expect from Angel this season. The question of Angel's heroism is front and center. The San Shu prophecy, that a souled vampire who fought to stop an apocalypse will become human, has clearly resurfaced. There are only so many ways that it can be resolved.
1) The Prophecy could be a red herring and at some point just be dropped. Perhaps the accompanying message would be that there is no reward. We just do what we do. Perhaps. But thusfar the Buffyverse has taken its prophecies very seriously. And prophecies don't seem to be so much tellings of fortune as tests of character. The prophecy that Buffy would die turned out to be flexible, I think, depending on Buffy's character. Had Buffy resisted her destiny, her death would have been final. That fact that she went to it willingly, caused the Fates to activate the escape clause and turn the tables on the Master. So I think this Prophecy is real, at least as far as it will be a test of Angel's character.
2) The Prophecy could be fulfilled for Angel and he could become Human. While it would not be entirley uninteresting to see Angel struggle with life as a human, I think its pretty clear that this is right out. There is a marked difference between the heroism of Buffy and the heroism of Angel, and it is this: Buffy's acts of heroism cause her to develop and progress; Angel's cause him to stay where he is. When Buffy faces the master, she progresses from child resistant to her destiny to a wiling participant in her own spiritual life. When she kills Angel she progresses from immersion in her own selfish desires to service to others. When she leaps from the tower she goes from being unsure of what she is to understanding herself as in incarnation of the divine. When she surrenders her uniqueness she goes from being the one girl in all the world to being one with all the world. It's a constant progression.
But when Angel commits heroic acts of sacrifice, they invariably return him to where he was. His most heroic act is almost to remain in a sort of stasis. Lunasea has said that Buffy is like the Buddha and Angel like a Bodhisattva. Without claiming that she would agree with anything I'm saying, I would offer that I see that analogy here. While Buffy progresses to Bliss, or Nirvana for herself, like the Buddha, Angel by contrast remains in the world, renouncing for himself release from suffering, in an effort to help the other suffering beings of the world, in the way of the Bodhisattva. The Gem of Amara could cause him to progress, but he surrenders it to help others. Becoming human from the blood of the Morra demon could cause him to progress, but he surrenders it as well.
So for Angel to ultimately accept the fulfillment of the San Shu prophecy for himself would seem to go against his heroic character. Which leaves option
3) The Prophecy is fulfilled for someone other than Angel, by an act of self-sacrifice on Angel's part. This seems to be where we're headed, and the question is, will it be Spike, or is there someone else out there that we don't even know about yet? Or will Spike perhaps decline it as well? The Prophecy is yet another temptation. Angel must find a way to be worthy of it, without ever receiving or accepting it. Let someone else's life as a human be the testament to Angel's heroism. It doesn't seem to me that anyone can be a testament to their own. He can only keep trying to help people as best he can, without any thought of reward or even himself. And once again, I think that he will be the only one who remembers it.
Again, how it will happen is a total mystery. That it will happen seems a foregone conclusion.
Replies:
[>
We've seen cases of heroic evil, using your definition -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:33:14 11/16/03 Sun
We've seen vampires and demons on several occasions give up their lives in order to preserve/create evil ("Angel", "When She Was Bad", and "Doomed" to name a few). Clearly they sacraficed something of themselves (in fact, their whole selves) in order to help a cause they believed in, which does fall under heroic, using your definition.
[>
Angel and Film noir -- Ponygirl, 07:57:05 11/17/03 Mon
Great post!
I think that your points on Angel and stasis also reflect his nature as as a film noir character. The hero of a noir understands the darker aspects of society but still manages to operate under his own personal moral code, usually in the complete absence of a higher moral authority. The noir hero may restore the balance, solve the crime, etc. but may do so with the knowledge that his actions have not affected any change to his own life. The detective may have put all the pieces together but in the end he returns to his office or bar to await the next job usually with cynicism more firmly in place. The sacrifice is the hero's inner landscape.
The heroism of this kind of character is the burden of knowledge that he takes on. Often his only reward is a greater awareness of the suffering and corruption in the world. He may not have succeeded in his particular quest but he bears witness to it. Thus it is important that Angel remembers when no one else does. His actions may be questionable but an essential part of his make-up is this combination of awareness and self-denial.
Isn't today somebody's 'Big 4-0'? Um, Masq....? -- Marie, 02:42:34 11/17/03 Mon
Many happy birthday wishes to you, and is there any chance of you getting bladdered and posting something silly?!
Marie
p.s. Of course, if it isn't your birthday, please feel free to call me a twit!
Replies:
[>
Ahhhhhhhhh! -- Masq, 06:52:26 11/17/03 Mon
I'm
[> [>
Happy Birthday Masq -- Celebaelin, 07:32:30 11/17/03 Mon
Will be joining you in the fifth decade of existence shortly. I agree with Marie, get bladdered and write something silly, if only because with double vision it'll look like you've got loads of birthday cards.
C
[> [> [>
I tried getting bladdered last night -- Masq, 09:23:22 11/17/03 Mon
Dinner party. Good friends. Merlot to toast the birthday, champagne to toast the new condominium. Chocolate cake with Kalua.
Somehow, I stayed amazingly sober. But then again, last night I wasn't 40 yet. Stay tuned!
[> [>
yay!!! happy birthday, masq! -- anom, 08:11:49 11/17/03 Mon
Wow, yet another Big One on the board, this one for the Big One of the board! Welcome to the decade I just left! I hope you celebrate big time (whether you get "bladdered" or not), 'cause it's a big deal! And let me offer Pun Fun One tonight for the big chat party the occasion deserves! (It can be your berth-day too!) We'll lay on a big supply of cyber-chocolate...all aboard!
[> [> [>
Chat party -- Masq, 09:26:11 11/17/03 Mon
I'll be in chat around 4 pm pacific time/board time (I hope, I'll still be at work). Then I am going to spend a couple hours with my mom and sister (sister is in knee surgery as we speak). I hope I'll be able to get in chat after that (maybe 7 or 8 PT). So see you there?
And bring the generic tylenols!
[> [> [> [>
Re: Chat party -- anom, 10:18:21 11/17/03 Mon
I'll be in a class at 7 EST, but I'll try to come to chat earlier than usual to catch you in part 2. I hope your sister's surgery goes fine--my sis-in-law had knee surgery a little over a year ago & is doing well, getting around & everything. (No, that didn't take a whole year.) I guess a hospital visit isn't the kind of family time you want to spend on your birthday, but if that's how it works out, I guess you make the most of it, huh?
[> [>
Happy Birthday! Let us stamp the earth with a glad foot! -- fresne, 08:17:08 11/17/03 Mon
[> [> [>
That explains all the earthquakes in the Bay Area.... -- Masq, 09:28:00 11/17/03 Mon
[> [>
Happy Birthday, Masq. -- s'kat, 10:28:13 11/17/03 Mon
[> [>
Happy B'day Masq! -- punkinpuss, 21:53:41 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy birthday!!! -- Ponygirl, 07:58:27 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Many happy returns -- Tchaikovsky, 08:07:54 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy Birthday!!!! -- Sheri, 08:19:26 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Greetings, felicitations, libations and cake -- MsGiles, 08:49:57 11/17/03 Mon
As one shortly to leave the decade, I can testify, it's a good 'un! May yours be even better!
[> [>
Re: Greetings, felicitations, libations and cake -- Masq, 09:37:21 11/17/03 Mon
As one shortly to leave the decade, I can testify, it's a good 'un!
So I hear. I have yet to have a female friend over 40 who didn't enjoy that age a lot. More power, more money, more wisdom, who cares if everything droops just a bit.... ; )
[>
Happy Birthday! -- mamcu, 09:17:21 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy 40th, Masq!!!! -- deeva, 10:01:35 11/17/03 Mon
Will you be checking your personal email while you're packing and stuff? Just asking. ;o)
[> [>
I always check my personal email -- Masq, 10:25:55 11/17/03 Mon
About 20 times a day. Work + boredom = wonder if anyone's written me... you know how it goes.
[> [>
Thanks! -- Masq, 15:45:09 11/17/03 Mon
I got your email. That was so sweet!
You just gave me a season 5 BtVS DVD set! How did you know that's what I wanted for my birthday??
[> [> [>
I heard that you were a fan. ;o) -- deeva, 21:53:49 11/17/03 Mon
Your welcome! I hope that this day has been good to you and that the evening was/is even better. Sorry I wasn't able to drop into chat to say hey. Hope your sister's operation went well.
[>
Have a fantastic one! -- KdS, 10:20:44 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Have you ever thought about not celebrating your birthday? :) Have a good one! -- Nino, 10:27:01 11/17/03 Mon
[> [>
Oh next year, definitely -- Masq, 11:20:19 11/17/03 Mon
We'll skip next year. But this year, I wanted a party!
[>
Happy Birthday, Masq! -- Arethusa, 10:37:19 11/17/03 Mon
Although I'm trying very hard
To sound unlike a birthday card,
That's all this is: so you may find it
Full of all that lies behind it
Admiration; friendship too;
And hope that in the future you
Reap ever richer revenue.
(Philip Larkin)
[>
Happy Brithday, Masquerade! -- Cactus Watcher, 10:57:49 11/17/03 Mon
What to get you, that's a puzzle. It was easy to guess anom would like a pun-filled cyber-yacht, last week. But, you're harder to buy for.
I'd get you a big hug from Connor, but it's not mine to give. I'd get you a date with a gorgeous girl, but I'm kinda saving those for myself. ;o)
How about a virtual sweatshirt that reads "I may be 40, but my mental age will always be 39"? Or how about "Philosophy without Angel is like a chocolate sundae made with no fat ice cream"?
Well, anyway, a sweastshirt is pretty cheesy. Look through all the catalogs of extravagant, but free cyber gifts and pick yourself out one from me.
-------------------------------
Seriously, thanks so much for bringing us all together. Hope it will be a great year for you.
[> [>
That's a Jack Benny 39 -- Masq, 11:33:57 11/17/03 Mon
"Philosophy without Angel the Buffyverse is like a chocolate sundae made with no fat ice cream."
I like it.
[>
Happy Birthday, Masq! -- cjl, 11:15:05 11/17/03 Mon
40, huh? I feel your pain.
I know, I've been there.
It'll be all right.
Trust me.
Really.
[> [>
You don't sound convinced... -- Masq, 11:35:11 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy Birthday! -- Vickie, 11:43:26 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy B-day! Masq. -- neaux, 12:27:22 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Numfar, do the dance of celebration! -- Rob, 12:41:20 11/17/03 Mon
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MASQ!!!
Rob
[> [>
Oooh, complete with pom-poms and everything! -- Masq, 14:31:57 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy Birthday, Masq! -- pellenaka, 13:15:29 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy B-day, Masq!!!!! -- Miyu tVP, 13:56:31 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Wow! 20 for the second time!!! -- LittleBit, 14:10:06 11/17/03 Mon
It's definitely better this time around! Happy birthday and when you get the Keys to the Masqdom the world will be as it should be.
[> [>
"The Masqdom" -- Masq, 14:21:57 11/17/03 Mon
And here I was just gonna call it "my condo"!
[> [> [>
Happy Birthday! -- phoenix, 16:18:53 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy Birthday, Masq! -- dub ;o), 15:01:51 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy B-Day Masq -- sdev, 15:07:16 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happy Birthday! -- Alison, 15:20:08 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Happiest of birthdays, Masq! -- Ixchel, 15:43:24 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Have a great b-day and -- Ann, 16:49:45 11/17/03 Mon
40 is the only number whose letters are in alphabetical order. Just a little forty trivia! Have a wonderful day and year!!
[>
Wishing you all the best, Masq! -- Matlack73, 17:29:06 11/17/03 Mon
Have a great b-day! Thanks for the great site!
[>
Happy eleventh anniversary of your twenty-ninth birthday! -- DorianQ, 17:51:21 11/17/03 Mon
[> [>
Are you my brother? -- Masq, 18:42:30 11/17/03 Mon
'Cause he's made that joke twice already.
My dad's favorite one is the "Jack Benny 39".
[> [> [>
Nah, I just heard it from my cousin-in-law (Is that how you say that?) -- DorianQ, 19:44:45 11/19/03 Wed
[>
Happy Birthday o Masqed One! -- RadiusRS, 18:12:05 11/17/03 Mon
[>
Re: Isn't today somebody's 'Big 4-0'? Um, Masq....? -- skpe, 18:14:11 11/17/03 Mon
many more 4-0's (or 39's)
[>
Hee hee... 40... hee hee... so young, so young. -- OnM, 19:34:33 11/17/03 Mon
My very best wishes to you, and remember, you're only 28 in the hexadecimal dimension!
;-)
[> [>
The key to feeling younger -- Masq, 19:47:32 11/17/03 Mon
Hang around with people who are older than you!
[> [> [>
Huh. That's *very* good advice! -- Scroll ;o), 20:17:56 11/17/03 Mon
[> [> [>
40 looks very young from where I'm standing! Happy Birthday, Masq! -- jane, 21:54:07 11/17/03 Mon
[> [> [>
Yeah, but remember according to that quiz MY inner child is 10, try and match that....;) -- Rufus, 03:10:49 11/18/03 Tue
[> [> [> [>
Well... -- Masq, 06:11:31 11/18/03 Tue
When was little, my family used to joke that I had the mind and the emotions and the social preferences of a 40-year old. So now my body has finally caught up with my brain.
[>
Happy 40th, Masq -- Finn Mac Cool, 21:01:21 11/17/03 Mon
And here's hoping I'll die before I reach the big 4-0 and won't have to buy an unusually phallic shaped car.
[> [>
I haven't figured out what my mid-life crisis is going to be yet -- Masq, 21:37:46 11/17/03 Mon
But it might involve a big red truck, a gift certificate to Home Depot, and my Angel season 3 DVD set.
[>
Happy Birthday! -- grifter, 03:13:24 11/18/03 Tue
*insert something witty and/or poetic here*
[> [>
Re: Happy Birthday! -- Masq, 06:20:54 11/18/03 Tue
*insert thank you here* ; )
[>
Bloody 'puter wouldn't let me post on your b-day -- VR, 11:16:38 11/19/03 Wed
Sorry.
Here's what would have been up:
Better make sure the movers don't pack your presents away.
Happy Birthday Day!!!!!!
Make sure you eat waaaay too much cake.
[> [>
Thanks! -- Masq, 09:45:34 11/20/03 Thu
I had to pack my present for the move, but I can always play with them later, because right now I'm too busy playing with the present I bought myself, namely, my new condo.
My friend made me a great chocolate no-flour cake with kalua in the mix, but I when I left her house that evening, she was too tired to wrap me left overs. I haven't been back since (too busy with the packing and arrangments), and now the cake is all but gone (pouts).
[> [> [>
Just make an unbirthday cake and eat it all yourself -- VR, 17:35:58 11/20/03 Thu
Current board
| More November 2003