September 2004 posts
Good news for "Astonishing X-Men"
-- Finn Mac Cool, 15:00:05 09/22/04 Wed
I just read that Joss's "Astonishing X-Men #4" was the
best selling comic book for the month of August. After two TV
shows cancelled on him in a row, it's nice to see Joss really
succeeding at a project (and hopefully "Serenity" will
be a hit as well).
The Buffyverse & the Roman
Catholic Church *POSSIBLE SPOILERS* -- Darkest Magics, 18:24:19
09/22/04 Wed
We have seen the influence of Roman Catholic beliefs, traditions
and dogma throughout various aspects of the Buffyverse, so how
much influence and how much of an active role does the Roman Catholic
Church play in the Buffyverse?
I am not referring to superficial influences like the use of holy
water as a weapon or the crucifix as a deterrent because I do
not believe those are good examples. Personally, from a chaos
magic perspective, such things work simply because the individual
believes them to work as opposed to any innate nature of the objects.
I would imagine that during the conception of these tools against
vampires, early clerics believed that their god would protect
them through the medium of his symbols (i.e., crucifix) and therefore
their unshakable belief in the power of these tools made these
tools effective defenses against vampires. Now, today, most Westernerns
are familiar with and have grown up with the idea that holy water
and the crucifix exhibit power over the vampire. They are beliefs
which have trickled down to us through the Church, then legend,
then folklore and then through the fantastic medium of entertainment
media. Thus, culture had armed the Westerners of the Buffyverse
with the power to use these tools simply because they had accepted
(even if only subconsciously) the power of these symbols over
their adversary.
Wow. Tangent much? Sorry. The original topic of this post was
the extent of the Roman Catholic Church's involvement in the Buffyverse.
It is as I understand it that with the Watcher's Council in shambles
at the very best, Buffy and Dawn have been taken under the care
of the Vatican and presumably her efforts have been funded by
the Roman Catholic Church?
So is this to say that the Roman Catholic Church knew of the existence
of the Slayer prior to BtVS Season 7? Why have they only now begun
to involve themselves with the Slayer? Assuming the Vatican has
a department similar to the purpose of the Watcher's Council in
that it is an organization created to quell the forces of evil
and darkness, what have they done in lieu of a Slayer? (That creates
many fanfic possibilites in itself.)
Any ideas or theories?
Replies:
[> No mention was made of the Vatican -- Finn Mac Cool,
21:08:49 09/22/04 Wed
We were only told that Buffy, Dawn, and Andrew (after a cultural
misunderstanding) were living in Rome. No mention was made of
the Vatican or the Catholic Church. We also know that Giles is
in England, Willow and Kennedy in South America, and Xander in
Africa (at least as of "Damage"), and that Slayers are
being recruited from all over. It's never mentioned how they're
funding all this (though, if Willow is back to not being afraid
of magic, teleportation and transmogrification could probably
solve most transportation and supply woes).
The only explicit mentions of the Catholic Church in the Buffyverse
that I recall are Angel's human family being Catholic, the tendency
of Angelus and Darla to slaughter convents, the priest and nun
who offered a Catholic exorcism book to Angel in "I've Got
You Under My Skin", and the one time Buffy saved a nun.
P.S. By your theory of crosses and holy water, would anything
happen if a vampire touched some holy water, but didn't know it
had been blessed, and no one else was around to have faith in
it?
[> [> Ahhh, THAT old head-scratcher... -- nibblet,
23:02:32 09/22/04 Wed
The old "If a crucifix falls on a vampire and no one is around
to have faith in it, does it burn?" conundrum ;-).
And what if the vampire believes it will burn?
And is that then considered self-harming?
(BTW, sorry if that sounded a bit mocking, I actually find this
really interesting!)
[> [> Re: No mention was made of the Vatican -- Darkest
Magics, 23:25:40 09/22/04 Wed
Hm. Well, that answers a lot of questions. I was so sure the Vatican
was mentioned, but it looks like my memory fails me.
There are two answers to the question as far as my idea goes and
both would state yes, but the mechanics of how the power is given
to the symbol is up for debate. If the vampire was raised in a
culture in which holy water was a traditional weapon against vampires,
then, yes, because the vampire himself would be empowering the
holy water. The second answer would be that when the holy water
was consecrated, it retained the empowerment despite no one physically
being there because it had been charged with such powers in the
first place.
Off the top of my head, I liken it to the use of sigils. The magician
focuses upon a symbol, usually of his own creation, and "charges"
it with his own will. It is the very power of the magician which
makes the magic work and it has been instilled within the sigil,
so, for instance, if you wanted to harm another person, the subject
need not even know of the sigil's meaning or existence beneath
their chair at work. However, though this concept is similar,
the crucifix works on a broader principle in that it is empowered
by social consciousness and culture.
[> [> [> But if the first answer is the case, the
vamp would need to KNOW it was holy water -- Finn Mac Cool,
23:33:21 09/22/04 Wed
The second answer would explain that, but not the first.
Also, my theory is that holy water works because a ritual to bless
something is really just a sort of spell. As for the crucifix,
my guess is some mystical hoozitz along time ago, probably done
by a Christian person, made vampires hurt when they touched a
cross.
[> [> [> [> Re: But if the first answer is the
case, the vamp would need to KNOW it was holy water -- Darkest
Magics, 23:41:04 09/22/04 Wed
This is true, so then, the first case will not hold up in the
court of logic and I would default to the second idea.
[> [> [> [> Re: But if the first answer is the
case, the vamp would need to KNOW it was holy water -- Tymen,
05:57:00 09/23/04 Thu
My take on why the Cross and the Holy Water effect a Vampire the
way they do is metaphorical.
The Cross is the easiest, in Christian theology the Cross is associated
with the crucifixion, and therefore Christ, Christ is the SON
of God. SON = SUN and therefore crosses burn vampires.
Holy Water is a little harder, but water is life, holy water is
pure life. Vampires are anti-life. Therefore, Holy Water burns
vampires.
Just my take on it.
[> [> [> Is there a 3rd possibility ? -- Rich,
12:47:24 09/23/04 Thu
Regardless of whether or not the vampire or the user believes
in the Cross ( Holy water, Star of David, or whatever), there
are still many other people who do. If the power of the symbol
comes from belief, then the actual presence of a believer may
not matter. The symbol could, in other words, be powered by people
who were not actually there, or aware of the event.
if someone pushed you into a downed power line, the fact that
neither one of you knows it's live would have no
effect on the outcome.
This could be considered a variation of your second possibility.
(I know that the Star isn't traditionally considered effective
in this context - IMO, according to this theory, it should be
).
[> [> [> [> Who says that belief is the key at
all? -- Majin Gojira, 13:05:34 09/23/04 Thu
We do have an example of a vamp being burned by a cross simply
on its own. Season 1, infact, "Nightmares". The master
touches a cross and it burns him in his lair. What does this mean?
Does it provide validity to Christianity?
Not really. All we know is that the shape of the cross burns and
repels vamps. How it does this is unknown, and why it does this
is also unknown. All we can do is speculate until some solid evidence
presents itself. All we have now is a quote, listed on this site,
infact, stating that there is bad blood between Christians and
Vamps (considering all of the blood-drinking Christians do cerimonially,
this is not surprising). The most likely explination is also listed
on this site: that someone binded Anti-Vamp power to the symbol.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The Master & the Cross
-- Rich, 05:27:49 09/24/04 Fri
Wasn't there an Angel episode in which the Master poses as a priest
when he turns Darla ? It's possible that this wasn't coincidence
- that he may have actually been a priest when he was human (
yes, I'm speculating again ). This would parallel the case of
Caleb, who seems to have been some kind of minister before joining
the First. If so, then he probably would believe in the power
of the Cross, even if he no longer gave allegiance to it.
[> [> [> [> Actually... -- Wizard,
02:53:01 09/24/04 Fri
This isn't traditional, but I know of one example where the Star
was as effective as the Cross.
(A lot of this is from memory, and I haven't read this story in
years, so the basic details are correct, but the specifics may
not be)
Way, way, waaayyy back in Uncanny X-Men one-fifty-something, our
favourite mutants first met Dracula, Lord of the Undead, who became
enamoured of Storm and tried to make her his queen (and came damn
close, too). Anyway, once they realized what they were up against
they went after him with the traditional weapons. During the fight,
Wolverine pulled a crucifix on an approaching Drac, who laughed
him off saying that because Wolverine wasn't a believer the power
wouldn't work for him. To prove it, he smacked the cross right
out of Wolverine's hand. Nightcrawler (a devout Catholic) heard
this, and said something like, "Then you are lost demon-
for I believe!" and he grabbed the crucifix, and drove Drac
off with it.
Where does the Star come in? Later in the story, with Kitty Pryde,
who is Jewish (for those that didn't know). While the others were
confronting Drac, she was trying to find Storm, who was already
in the process of becoming a vampire (traditional vampire, not
Whedonverse vampire). She finds the semi-undead Storm and confronts
her with a crucifix. Storm gives much the same speech as her fiance,
which makes Kitty try using the Star of David necklace she wears.
It works, and snaps Storm out of it, and Storm eventually proceeds
to show Dracula why making her angry is (in Giles-speak) 'profoundly
stupid.'
Ahem.
Anyway, this is just more evidence that the Star of David can
work.
[> [> [> [> [> yes--i remember that! and on
the other hand... -- anom, 23:16:47 09/27/04 Mon
...in Richard Matheson's I Am Legend, a vampire's susceptibility
to religious symbols depends on his or her own religious beliefs
prior to being vamped. (The main character's Jewish neighbor,
now a vampire, is unaffected by a cross but repelled by Jewish
symbols. I don't remember any mention of previously atheistic
vamps--were they immune to all symbols?--but I have a vague memory
of posting about this once before & getting a reply saying maybe
they'd shy away from copies of books by Madalyn Murray O'Hair.)
I remember the use of the cross & the Jewish star in the X-Men
comics differently, but it's been a long time since I read that
story--although the overly dramatic "For I believe!"
does stick in my mind. I thought Nightcrawler was going through
a crisis of faith & the cross didn't work for him, but the star
worked for Kitty. I may still have that issue, but I am not
gonna go digging through my stacks to find it. Not tonight, anyway.
But all it really proves is that the writers can decide whatever
they want. If having a vampire react to a Jewish star works for
the story, then the vamp will react to it--no matter whose belief
it's based on.
[> My Question about Holy Water: When does it stop being
Holy Water? ( With George Washington's breath) -- SS, 15:11:46
09/23/04 Thu
When I was a kid in science class my teacher told me that everytime
I took a breath, I would breathe in a number of molecules of oxygen
that George Washington had breathed at some part of his life.
So you would think that as much holy water that the Roman Catholic
Church blesses every year and day, that any water would have lots
of holy water molecules in it by now....
Unless something natural or unnatural could unbless it somehow.....
My wonder is what could unbless it?....
Humm.
SS
[> Empires -- Pip, 03:28:40 09/25/04 Sat
I think Buffy ended up in Rome because of its association with
empire. The Roman Empire formed much of modern Europe; the Vatican
followed on and built from that.
Buffy, in Rome, is covering Europe. Xander in Malawi is covering
Africa. Willow in Sao Paolo/Rio the Latin Americas. Giles in Britain,
probably the anglophone world (given that he seems to be the one
assigning Andrew to Los Angeles, and that Britain, like Rome forming
Europe, formed much of the anglophone 'new' world).
There isn't anyone for Asia, but we've run out of Scoobies anyway
[grin], Dawn being a minor, and Andrew probably on probation.
As to the Holy Water thing - in the Buffyverse, the Blessing seems
to be seen as a magic act in itself; priests in the Buffyverse
seem to be considered to have some power of their own. Hence the
slaughtering of nuns, and the use of the two Byzantium priests
against Willow's barrier in S5. So I'd guess that Holy Water is
a magic object, not requiring any faith for use after it's
been imbued with its holiness .
[> Re: The Buffyverse & the Roman Catholic Church *POSSIBLE
SPOILERS* -- O'Cailleagh, 20:33:58 09/30/04 Thu
To answer some questions on the whys and wherefores of crosses
and holy water.
Someone (I think it was Tymen) was close. The cross is a solar
symbol-it represents the sun. It is infused with the power of
the sun so affects vampires accordingly. The crucifix is an extension
of this idea, with Jesus taking the place of the Sun-God.
Holy water is water that has been blessed in some way. It is,
therefore, filled with (positive) magickal power. The reason that
not all water is holy is that it does not hold the energy indefinately.
Like anything else, the energy within holy water soon becomes
grounded and disperses back into the Universe.
O'Cailleagh
Souls in the Buffyverse **SPOILERS
Ats5** -- Darkest Magics, 23:38:28 09/22/04 Wed
Forgive me if this has been discussed before or if this seems
like a dumb question, but does Illyria have a soul?
What would be the arguments for and against Illyria possessing
a soul?
Towards the end of the series, she certainly seemed to have those
characteristics which are normally lacking in demons and generally
attributed to the virtue of possessing a soul. She did not seem,
to me, to have a warped sense of concern or grief for Wesley as
compared to Spike's Season 5 & 6 warped versions of human emotion.
How is it that such a supposedly horrible and ancient God-King
of demons could possess such lowly human qualities while vampires,
which are often referred to by demons of a caliber quite shy of
Illyria's as lowly and something less pure than demonic, do not?
Replies:
[> Re: Souls in the Buffyverse **SPOILERS Ats5** --
Haunt, 08:20:17
09/23/04 Thu
Y'know, if the question of what a soul is in the Mutant Enema
universe never came up again I'd be a happy man. Honestly, souls
are whatever the hell they need them to be for any given episode.
There's never been any consistency to what they are, how they
work, what they do or don't do for those that have them, who does
and doesn't have them, etc. They make the sh*t up as they go along.
Personally, I would love it if the glorious, shining all-importance
of the soul were downplayed, even "sullied" by the discovery
that some beings are capable of being "good" without
them (Spike, Illyria, Lorne). I'm sick of the debates that inevitably
arise between people that say if you don't have a soul you will
never be good and those that say anyone should be capable of anything.
I personally resist the notion that only those with a soul even
have the POTENTIAL to be anything other than "evil soulless
things"...
But I digress. To answer your question, there IS no answer. ME
makes it up as they need to, with no concern for continuity.
[> [> Re: Souls in the Buffyverse **SPOILERS Ats5**
-- Alistair, 15:27:53 09/23/04 Thu
Illyria was a trascendant organism, in that even moments after
its rebirth it was aware of human grief and it was sickening,
because it felt empathy for Wesley. I think its important to note
that Illyria is not the terrible evil being which the Old Ones
are described to be. She saw the humans as cockroaches, a plague
to be eradicated because they are so small and live so shortly
that they may not live at all. Its perspective is that of most
humans to a tiny ant, stepping on a whole colony of ants as they
are looking for food does not concern most humans and we feel
no remorse for the loss of hundreds because of a single footstep.
That is how Illyria saw the humans, fragile mayflies. Its purpose
was to conquer all, not from a belief in evil, but a belief in
its claim to rule over everything.
However, since it came to possess Fred's memories, perhaps some
of her actions were strongly influenced by the person Fred was.
In effect, they merged into one entity and Illyria became a little
bit human, with an ability to empathize greater then it did when
it was GOd King. Even its reaction to seeing its temple destroyed
and its army dead was not that of anger, but great sadness. After
all, it was feared and beloved.
i just saw Peace Out & i
STILL don't understand the point of The Beast! & the Rain of Fire
&such! -- ghady, 08:08:00 09/23/04 Thu
Replies:
[> Wesley said it in "Shiny Happy People": They
were birth pains. -- Rob, 08:48:06 09/23/04 Thu
Or in other words, the world had to be at its worst and most horrible
so that Jasmine could arrive and "save" the people from
the hell that had been experiencing the past few months. The fact
that she orchestrated these awful occurences was of course not
known by the populace, and those who did know were brainwashed
by her spell.
Rob
[> [> confused now -- Vickie, 09:30:48 09/23/04
Thu
Ok, I'm sure you're (probably) correct, but I'm confused. The
gang had already brought back the sun. In what way was the world
at its worst and most horrible when Jasmine was "born"?
[> [> [> but... -- ghady, 09:37:31 09/23/04
Thu
then that means that there was no master plan!?!? killing everyone
at W&H was pointless?? and why was cordy acting so *traditionally*
evil while being posessed by jasmine?? shouldn't she have been
more benevolent?? why was all memory of the beast wiped out? why
did EvilCordy want angelus to be brought forth? is it cuz she
knew angel would figure her out??
[> [> [> [> Re: but... -- DorianQ, 11:35:01
09/23/04 Thu
Yes, there was a master plan, but Angel screwed it up when he
killed the Beast (Jasmine was to do that when she was born). She
had the Beast kill everyone at W&H right away to prevent them
from stopping her emergence (she was trying to bring about world
peace, something I think they are vehemently opposed to). No one
else was close enough to stop her other than W&H and the Fang
Gang and, as she was already controlling FG, she didn't really
have anyother options than temporary total annihilation for the
Wolfram employees.
The memory of the Beast was wiped to prevent people from noticing
the inconsistency of his behavior that Angelus pointed out (then:
mindless brute. now: strategic mastermind capable of surgical
strikes).
She brought forth Angelus to distract the rest of the Gang from
what she was doing, to deprive them of their leader, and give
them another enemy which could take them out. I mean, think about
it; they discovered her and set a trap for Cordy in ONE episode
with the whole team focused on learning about the BeastMaster
(minus Gunn) in Players. I think that shows just how large of
a distraction Angelus really was. They spent five whole episodes
talking with him and then trying to get him back, and no one noticed
Cordelia's connection to EVERYTHING. Classic misdirection. Unfortunately,
it backfired when Angelus, not wanting to be anyone's lackey,
killed her star player and stole her thunder.
As for EvilCordy! acting, well, evil, isn't that what we expected
her to do after she killed Lilah? Isn't that what we focused on?
She was the Big Bad; of course she's evil! The Fang Gang can't
be wrong! But from her perspective, she was doing a lot of good
by coming here and just had to cause some pain to come down. She
probably viewed it like a spanking: they'll hate you now, but
it's for their own good. She wasn't being Evil; she was manipulating
people, which a lot of people, myself included, would view as
very evil. She couldn't drop the charade and lies before she was
born because she wasn't powerful enough yet (as she said in Orpheus)
and couldn't tip her hand yet and be all Messianic.
Hope all this made sense and helps.
[> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Dorian...Was just about
to type a response that I didn't have time to type... -- Rob,
12:19:56 09/23/04 Thu
...and you covered all the bases I was going to. So, thanks! Off
to class now. ;-)
Rob
[> [> [> [> [> This is great -- Masq, 15:54:50
09/23/04 Thu
I'm going to excerpt it on my website if you don't mind.
; )
[> [> [> [> [> [> Absolutely! -- DorianQ,
21:59:23 09/23/04 Thu
Thanks for all the complements!
[> [> [> [> [> THANKS!!! (but is the part abt
W&H speculation or was it stated? cuz that was my theory)
-- ghady, 16:54:33 09/23/04 Thu
[> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Dorian -- Jane, 17:37:38
09/23/04 Thu
That was the most logical and clearly laid out analysis of the
Beast/Jasmine arc I've read. It makes a lot more sense to me now.
[> [> [> [> [> Adding to this... -- Rob,
00:07:28 09/24/04 Fri
She brought forth Angelus to distract the rest of the Gang
from what she was doing, to deprive them of their leader, and
give them another enemy which could take them out.
I would also add to this that she needed a distraction,
pronto, particularly after she murdered Manny. That was the final
straw where she either had to frame Angel immediately, or run
the very high risk of being found out in the very near future.
Also note how important it was to Cordy for Angel's soul to not
be restored. If it was, he would be able to help point more towards
her direction if he were to tell them that he had not been the
one to kill Lilah, as well as remembering Cordy's manipulative
"take my body and use it as you want" speech from Soulless.
So much did she need Angel to remain Angelus that in Orpheus
she does her best to make sure that his soul is not restored,
by attempting to kill Willow and then battling her with powerful
magicks, and when that does not work, sends Connor down to kill
Angel.
Rob
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Adding to this...
-- Loki, 21:29:10 09/29/04 Wed
Who's Manny? I've only seen it once; my first time through season
4 (which was incredibly complex and beautiful, I might add).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Adding to this...
-- Rob, 16:31:06 10/01/04 Fri
Manny is Manjet, the "man" figure of the Ra-Tet.
Rob
[> [> [> [> [> Great Summary, Dorian --
Mr. Banagrabber, 09:05:42 09/29/04 Wed
In a post above, I gave the credit for this to Rob. Me bad. this
is an excellent summary/explanation of the Beast Master's plot.
As I said above, I never had any real confusion about the plotline
but you streghnthened a couple niggling point s for me.
[> [> [> [> It was all to by time, set up Jas'
body and remove obsitcals -- Majin Gojira, 12:54:55 09/23/04
Thu
The Reign of Fire was orchestrated to give Jasmine a Body.
The Destruction of WR&H removed a major obstical from Jasmine's
path.
The Darkness and Angelus were stalling tactics to keep everyones
attention focused AWAY from Cordelia. They were distractions,
nothing more.
After getting everyone she wanted to LA, and getting Connor concieved
in the first place, everything else just fell into place.
[> [> [> Angelus screwed that up... -- Rob, 10:28:44
09/23/04 Thu
...by bringing back the sun. Had he not, I think we are to assume
that Jasmine would have when she arrived. Otherwise, her shiny,
happy future wouldn't be very shiny or happy.
Rob
[> [> [> [> i had thought of these theories before..
but i just needed someone to validate them.. THX!! -- ghady,
16:58:24 09/23/04 Thu
[> [> [> Black Hole Sun -- q 3, 17:22:12 09/23/04
Thu
In addition to what's already been said, I got the impression
that blotting out the sun over Los Angeles may have been intended
to lure plenty of demons and vampires into the LA area, thus allowing
for a more efficient extermination of them upon Jasmine's birth.
Assuming, obviously, that one of Jasmine's goals would be fewer
demons in the world (and preferably none, at least none that she
couldn't enthrall).
From Shiny Happy People:
WOMAN
It's not important who gets the credit. What matters is that we're
winning.
WESLEY
If we keep going at this rate
GUNN
L.A.'s gonna be one big, fat no-demon zone. Hello, Garden City.
Agggh! Masq - Your Season
6 teaser is getting me pumped! -- Se7en, 21:57:22 09/23/04
Thu
Just wanted you to know that I am really interested to see what
you guys have come up with for the virtual season 6. The ad looks
great! What's with the sand, though? Will Angel be in the dessert
talking to the First...Angel? (I'm not actually being serious
just in case my sarcasm isn't seeping through.)
"The First Law" - is this the title of the first ep?
Sounds good.
Any idea when the ep will be ready? I'm jonsin' for some fang
gang!!
Replies:
[> I gotta second these sentiments.. -- ZachsMind, 07:55:22
10/04/04 Mon
The idea of a sixth season of Angel is intriguing. I wish I knew
how to participate in the story design. I could maybe whip up
a plot for one episode that could get squeezed in some time in
the middle of the season, but I'd need to see the 'bible' for
the project first and I can't find anything. I mean there's the
'when last we left our heroes' that leaves a lot of uncertainty
to who goes where in the next season. Does Lorne come back? Does
Wesley die? We must assume Angel survives that battle with the
dragon and other meanies on the streets of L.A., but does Gunn?
Does DeadFred and Spike? Where's the werewolf lady? Is she featured
in this virtual season six? Does the electricity lady come back?
I've had several false starts since Buffy ended, trying to tell
a story that takes place after Mutant Enemy leaves off. I wouldn't
continue Angel as a series so much as suggest the start of an
entirely new series, featuring characters from both Buffy and
Angel, but in an entirely new location. I wouldn't include Buffy
or Angel. I'd want to focus on characters like Xander, Ilyria,
Dawn, Willow, Giles, Spike and also entirely brand new characters
they'd encounter in the new setting. However, would Xander still
have just one eye? Would Willow still be with Kennedy? Would Giles
leave England? There's The
Watchers which took an AfterBuffy approach in an entertaining
way, but for me it's just too all over the place and convoluted.
Kinda hard to follow.
And I'd still like to see someone write OZ THE SERIES, where it's
present day, many years after Oz left Sunnydale, and after a lot
of intensive training and zen like meditation, he's become a polymorph
with a ragtag crew of outcasts that help him fight crime and stop
evil. They call themselves the White Hats and they also play grunge
rock music in seedy out of the way joints. Oz has complete control
of his morphing power, has taken lycanthropy further than any
other were in mankind's history, but in the first episode he learns
there's some force out there hunting him down and his band of
outcasts is killed or destroyed. So he's alone and he's on the
run and he heads for Sunnydale because he's got nowhere else to
turn, but when he gets there all that's left is a crater, and
he faces down this new enemy of his in the crater of Sunnydale,
and just as things look the bleakest for him, in the rubble he
finds someone/something that turns the tide.
Maybe someday I'll write that.
Empty Places.. what the hell??
-- ghady, 06:52:29 09/24/04 Fri
Ok, I understand why the Potentials (even Kennedy) would want
Faith to be their leader. Buffy sent them to the vineyard and
got some of them killed. Plus, they've been complaining about
her and her methods for a long time.
I understand why Principal Wood would rebel: he s still upset
with Buffy. Sure, he DID tell her in a previous episode that she
should go and test those girls in battle, but after the whole
"he'll kill you and I'll let him" diatribe in LMPTM,
I can see why he'd want someone else to be a leader. He s not
over it yet.
GILES' motives are understandable too; he has been questioning
Buffy s decisions for a long time now.
I understand Xander. Sure, he gave the potentials that rousing
speech about Buffy s greatness in Dirty Girls, but that was BEFORE
he lost an eye, which was technically Buffy s fault. He s half-blind
now because of her, and she was showing him very little sympathy
in the hospital.
Anya hasn't liked Buffy s actions from the start (I remember her
saying something like didn t you hear the everybody-sucks-but-me
speech? with disdain.) So, again, understandable.
BUT DAWN AND WILLOW!!!! What the HELL!?!?!?!? This just SCREAMS
plot device. Willow was not directly affected by any of Buffy
s actions. Sure, Xander was hurt because of Buffy. And sure, her
girlfriend was part of the whole mutiny thing. But did SHE lose
an eye??? NO! THAT'S the difference between her and Xander. With
him, it got VERY personal. Not with her. She should've at LEAST
stood up for Buffy instead of turning on her. Then, after the
election, which would've been 99% unanimous, she should've told
Buffy "im sorry but they need me here." Buffy would've
understood that, had willow only stood up for her! The same goes
for Dawn. She had NO reason for telling Buffy that this is her
house and for kicking her out!!! She, like Willow, should ve defended
Buffy, voted for her, and then remained at the house because it
s safest there, and that's where all the power is.
GOD how I HATED the writers when they made EVERYONE insurrect
against GeneralBuffy.
Replies:
[> It's all in the eyes -- Kansas, 07:07:21 09/24/04
Fri
When you get a chance to watch the episode again, pay careful
attention to Dawn... it probably will make a lot more sense then.
[> [> Re: It's all in the eyes -- shambleau, 12:10:05
09/27/04 Mon
I'm just going on memory here, but I remember how affected Dawn
was by Xander's injury in the ep. She'd had the childhood crush
on him before, and he was the only one who'd even noticed what
was going on with her in Potential. Also she's had issues from
being, in her mind, ignored by Buffy that go back to S5. She had
the warning from Evil!Joyce. All that going on and then she sees
all the others going after Buffy, including Xander. It didn't
feel unreal to me. And notice how she practically loses it with
Rona on the "Ding dong, the witch is dead" comment.
She was torn, but felt it was the best thing to do. I bought it
then, I buy it now.
Willow is harder for me to justify, but I don't see it as out
of the realm of possibility. It would have worked as well for
me if Willow had stayed loyal, though.
[> [> Willow -- manu, 14:55:34 10/02/04 Sat
I don't know about Dawn, but Willow has been disturbed over General
von Summers since "Get It Done" (which is when Buffy
really went into the generalissima act). Combined that with her
reaction to Buffy's reluctance to face Xander after the failed
attack against Caleb in "Dirty Girls", it's easy to
see why she finally rebelled against Buffy. But Dawn? I don't
know.
[> Re: Empty Places.. what the hell?? -- Evan, 07:51:37
09/24/04 Fri
I think the bottom line is that Buffy really was being careless.
She had distanced herself emotionally from the potentials in order
to protect herself from feeling guilt for getting them killed,
but she ended up too distanced and made reckless decisions. Because
of the extremity of the situation and the evil they were fighting,
she had to take her "I am the law" philosophy from Selfless
to the extreme.
Whether or not Willow was affected directly by her actions doesn't
stop her from seeing that Buffy was making decisions without consulting
her heart, the very opposite of what had in the past made her
the great slayer she was.
Dawn is understandable too, for the same reasons, but also because
she had Joyce's word from "Conversations With Dead People".
[> [> Re: Buffy's Hospital Visit - Empty Places.. what
the hell?? -- Can I Be Anne?, 09:41:02 09/24/04 Fri
Buffy was not mean to Xander in the hospital. You CAN see it in
her eyes. She was racked with guilt at what happened to Xander
- for what she percieves was her fault. Don't forget, Xander is
Buffy's "scarecrow" she loves him the most, to have
to see him hurt the way he was in that bed had to be one of the
most difficult things she ever had to see. So she blocked out
any emotion, which she had been doing all season basically. By
the time we got to End of Days, she was taking him out of the
fight, along with Dawn, to protect them.
So I definately take issue with the statement that Buffy was "mean"
to Xander in the hospital. She wasn't - just beyond feeling at
that point, and I honestly beleive that she "knew" she
would lose the battle this time.
[> [> [> I agree. -- Evan, 09:56:55 09/24/04
Fri
[> [> [> hmm.. interesting.. -- ghady, 10:03:51
09/24/04 Fri
[> Inevitable -- Ames, 16:08:17 09/24/04 Fri
Look, Buffy has zero experience leading a large group - and this
is a barely-stable group that's being held together solely by
the fear that they'll by killed if they don't stick together and
follow the Slayer. It's very likely to fall apart or mutiny at
the first setback - like falling into a trap and getting a bunch
of them injured and killed. But could anyone realistically have
done much better than Buffy under the circumstances? I think not.
Probably Buffy's biggest failing was not holding the loyalty of
her core group of "lieutenants", and that was due to
an unfortunate combination of circumstances.
Dawn's betrayal was certainly the worst and least expected - maybe
the point was that Dawn was the only one who could defuse the
confrontation by asking Buffy to leave. But Dawn must have had
some resentment for Buffy seething under the surface from Potential
- she isn't the type to shrug off her sister ignoring her in favor
of a bunch of more important people, and it must have especially
stung that they were girls her own age.
[> [> Re: Inevitable -- Rich, 13:34:58 09/26/04
Sun
I second the lack of experience. Plus: she had no "table
of organization" or "manual of standard procedures",
because she'd never needed them. She had to make it up as she
went along.
The usual method of handling a large group is to subdivide it,
delegating "nuts & bolts" management to subordinates,
but Buffy didn't do this. Given Giles' distrust, Anya's dislike,
& Willow's lack of confidence, I'm not sure Buffy had anyone besides
Xander to delegate to.
[> Re: Empty Places.. what the hell?? -- dlgood, 21:11:25
09/26/04 Sun
I'd felt that Buffy's performance as a leader was certainly subpar
for most of S7. In terms of her ability to identify threats to
the group, to determine and communicate a vision, to develop policies
that followed her vision, and to identify and mobilize the resources
she had at hand.
She'd undercut the people who should have been her lieutenants,
leaving them relatively powerless to help her even if they'd wanted
to. By the time Willow and Xander speak up, Buffy's already lost
the room. And when faced with questions from those she was supposed
to be leading, she couldn't articulate a coherent rationale as
to why people should do what she'd asked of them, or what it was
they should actually do.
Ultimately, in societies where leaders exist to serve the public,
Buffy's mid-S7 manner of leadership is going to fail. Asking Buffy
to leave, if she couldn't follow, is probably the best thing Dawn
has ever done for her.
[> [> Not really fair... -- Ames, 08:41:02 09/27/04
Mon
Saying that Buffy wasn't a great leader in S7 may be true, but
it isn't really fair.
The Slayer is supposed to work alone (ok, maybe with the help
of a single Watcher). It's her nature, and the nature of the job.
These people - meaning Willow, Xander, Dawn etc - asked to work
with her, and Buffy let them in. She may be the only Slayer ever
to work successfully with friends and family. She's tried hard
to make it work over the years. Sure, she failed sometimes, but
she stuck with it.
And lest we forget, Giles came to her with the Potentials to ask
for protection. Buffy didn't ask for them. But she put them up
in her home and did her best to lead them and train them, never
really expecting that they would be a lot of use to her. Even
when she took them to the vineyard, it was because she felt that
they needed to be tested, not because she needed them.
And what did she get for it? Attacked for failing to deal with
everybody else's personal issues in the midst of an end-of-the-world
crisis? Stabbed in the back by her friends and family? Kicked
out of her own home?
Who else among them would have been able to put all that aside
and get right back to work a few hours later?
People expect too much of their leaders sometimes.
I'm just sayin'
[> [> [> Life isn't fair -- Dlgood, 10:23:40
09/27/04 Mon
That's true. It's not fair. Life's not fair. Get a helmet. That's
the situation she was in. Those responsibilities weren't merely
dumped upon her -- she accepted them, packaged a new group order,
and ran with it. It may not have started as "her mess"
but she made it hers.
Buffy didn't ask for them. But she put them up in her home
and did her best to lead them and train them, never really expecting
that they would be a lot of use to her.
She didn't do her best to lead them. In fact, she did a particularly
poor job of leading them. Indeed, not expecting people to "be
of use to her" was one of her clearest failures in the season.
In the season opening scene in "Lessons", Buffy teaches
Dawn how physical might isn't her only resource in the combat
against the vampire. And yet, Buffy largely fails to lead the
Scoobies and the Potentials because she's erroneously come to
conclude that might is pretty much all that matters, and has great
difficulty in seeing other sources of power. Even though her foe
is incorporeal.
And because Buffy expected little of the Potentials, she never
trained them properly, and mostly farmed them off on a crop of
subordinates who were scarcely instructed on how or what they
were supposed to do.
Buffy wasn't stabbed in the back. Through her performance as a
leader, a group of people who very much wanted to follow her,
no longer could. She'd squandered her resources and lost their
confidence. She should have been fired.
Yes, sometimes people expect too much of others. But sometimes,
people expect too little of others and of themselves. For much
of S7, Buffy expects too little of her "army" and her
army demands too little from her. Figuring Buffy couldn't handle
it. Being fired, being told that she wasn't handling her responsibilities,
worked out very much for her own good -- because she has to re-examine
policies and leadership tactics that have been serving her constituency
so poorly throughout the season.
[> [> [> [> Re: Life isn't fair -- Ames, 11:27:05
09/27/04 Mon
I don't think either side is going to prevail in this argument,
because there's plenty of conflicting evidence both ways - but
that won't stop me from getting in another couple of shots. :-)
"She didn't do her best to lead them. In fact, she did a
particularly poor job of leading them" "And because
Buffy expected little of the Potentials, she never trained them
properly..."
Excuse me? Wasn't that Buffy giving the rousing Winston Churchill-type
speech at the end of Bring On The Night that inspired everyone
and gave them the mission statement? Wasn't that Buffy putting
on the show in Show Time for the sole purpose of bucking up the
Potentials and making them believe that they could defeat evil?
(and making effective use of the help of Xander and Willow to
do it) Wasn't that Buffy (and Spike) training the Potentials in
Potential?
And all this was while she was going without sleep to run a household,
hold down a day job, gather Potentials, deal with problems like
Spike and Andrew, and fight evil.
Seems to me that you're picking out the failings and saying that
not doing a perfect job amounts to doing a lousy job.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Life isn't fair -- Dlgood,
12:42:25 09/27/04 Mon
Wasn't that Buffy putting on the show in Show Time for the
sole purpose of bucking up the Potentials and making them believe
that they could defeat evil?
Buffy will accuse them of standing around and doing nothing, yet
her lesson in "Showtime" was that the potentials should
just stand around and let Buffy hammer the villain. (They don't
even know that Willow and Xander did anything.) How could that
have made the potentials feel like Buffy valued them as an active
part of Buffy's team? How could they feel like Buffy believes
they have a contribution to make? As far as they can tell, their
value to her is primarily that they might become slayers if the
Slayer dies.
And while her speech in "Bring on the Night" gives some
degree of a general mission, there's never any real connection
made between that speech, and the details of how one actually
goes about making the ideas a reality.
And all this was while she was going without sleep to run a
household, hold down a day job, gather Potentials, deal with problems
like Spike and Andrew, and fight evil.
Her harried, isolated, and burdened position is in no small part,
a reflection upon her failure to manage her work. She doesn't
seem to do much in the way of clear delegation or supervision.
She orders others to compile research she doesn't bother to read.
Willow, Xander, and Anya don't seem to know what they're supposed
to do - and Buffy undercuts them in front of the potentials -
negating their credibility as Buffy's lieutenants.
Seems to me that you're picking out the failings and saying
that not doing a perfect job amounts to doing a lousy job.
Unless one has very low standards for competence, Buffy's job
performance was way below perfect, and very much into lousy.
Buffy's job is both military and political. As a military leader,
she'd just had a major failure and couldn't communicate how she
would be able to turn things around. As a political leader, she'd
failed to generate cohesiveness or morale - she'd started off
with high "positives" through "Showtime",
but since then had done little to maintain that goodwill. Simultaneously,
she'd engaged in a pattern of leadership and policy that raised
her "negatives". And worse, when questioned, she proved
incapable of explaining herself, stooping to one specious argument
after another.
From the POV of a Potential Slayer, it's hard to understand how
or why Buffy values them, and based upon her recent performance,
why they should continue to follow her. It might be mean to "turn
her out", but she'd not given them much reason to feel confident
with her as leader.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Life isn't fair
-- shambleau, 14:20:58 09/27/04 Mon
I disagree with the first two parts of your reply to Ames. The
message the Potentials got in Showtime wasn't that they should
just stand around and watch Buffy. It was that you could fight
against seemingly insurmountable odds and win, and incidentally,
that Buffy could kick ass and was therefore not only trustworthy
as a leader, but could protect them while they learned to be fighters.
Up until then, they'd been getting more and more spooked and were
about to cut and run.
Also, you're leaving out the scene in the very next episode, Potential,
where Buffy lets the most experienced of the girls take on a vamp
alone, after which their confidence, morale and cohesiveness shoots
through the roof. If that isn't showing trust in them, and showing
that they have something to contribute, I'll eat bangers and mash.
Reheated.
As for undermining the Scoobs' authority, I can't recall any examples
until the argument that escalated into the rebellion, when Buffy
had been badly rattled by the failed raid. In fact, it was precisely
because they DID have authority that the rebellion got off the
ground when the Scoobs turned against Buffy.. It would have gone
nowhere if only the Potentials had instigated it.
As for not reading the research, they weren't coming up with anything,
so what was there for Buffy to read? Willow, Xander and Anya didn't
have a clear job to do because nothing was clear. After the fight
in Showtime, the First was laying low and Caleb had yet to show
up. Buffy knew that there was a giant army of Ubervamps in the
Hellmouth after Get It Done. That's all she knew and even that
was late in the game. How do you train a group of frightened girls,
connect your rousing speech to details for carrying out a specific
mission, or delegate authority clearly under those conditions?
It's during this time, when she doesn't have a purchase on what
to do, that Buffy's frustrations and lack of experience with large-group
generalship start to undermine the good work she'd done. Not coincidentally,
it's also when there were getting to be more and more Potentials.
I agree that she blew it badly in the confrontation, turning simmering
discontent into outright rebellion, but she was previously more
competent as a leader than you give her credit for. IMO, of course.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well put, shambleau
-- Mr. Bananagrabber, 15:18:00 09/27/04 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well said. --
Sophist, 17:06:45 09/27/04 Mon
Having re-watched S7, I even decided that there was a real problem
with EP: Buffy had done such a good job that there was insufficient
motivation for the rebellion. I'll be interested to see if others
share this view once the disks become generally available.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: possible
reasons for the mutiny -- Rich, 18:12:08 09/27/04 Mon
I also thought that the mutiny was an overreaction to the situation.
However, all of the characters had been subjected, in one way
or another, to manipulation or subversion by the First, over a
long period of time. As a result, nobody was thinking straight,
including Buffy ( in her case, sleep deprivation was also a factor
). It seems to me that the First was deliberately provoking dissension
at every opportunity, & it eventually worked.
There's a bit of a parallel here to the First's attack on Angel
in Season 2. Angel was driven to despair by the First, but saved
by Buffy's intervention (& the PTB). Buffy was driven to despair,
but saved by Spike's faith. Maybe this was the point ?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Good
point about the possible parallel with Amends -- Sophist,
20:01:56 09/27/04 Mon
I should say that some of the motivations were clear: Anya, Giles,
Faith and Xander. However, I thought Willow and Dawn were especially
opaque. In addition, and in retrospect, even the Potentials were
not shown as being that disillusioned with Buffy overall, though
you can understand their reluctance to follow her particular plan
after DG. That may have required re-thinking her plan (though
she was right), but it does not really justify a mutiny.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Good point about the possible parallel with Amends -- shambleau,
10:31:55 09/28/04 Tue
As far as the Potentials, we're basically talking about Kennedy
and Rona. Rona was a malcontent and griper from the beginning.
Kennedy was brash, arrogant and spoiled. She'd always gotten her
way and she resented Buffy, so, to me, there's sufficient motivation
there for those two to challenge Buffy. The rest weren't really
a factor.
Even though we're using words like "mutiny" and "rebellion",
it was basically an argument that got out of hand. With The First's
help, of course. I've been in a few of those over the years, minus
the UberEvil exacerbating things part. Words are said in anger.
The situation escalates into something that's not justified by
the original complaint. So there doesn't have to have been sufficient
justification on everyone's part for what happened. Nobody had
planned anything. If Faith hadn't been there as an alternative,
there would have been an airing of grievances and that would have
been that.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Good point wrt to Willow. I don't quite see it wrt Dawn.
-- Sophist, 15:05:27 09/28/04 Tue
I also agree about Rona. It was re-watching the episodes with
Kennedy where it really struck me that her original attitude toward
Buffy appeared to change after Showtime and never returned until
seemingly out of the blue in EP.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> More
speculation about motives in the Mutiny scene -- Rich, 11:41:50
09/28/04 Tue
Buffy could have defused the insurrection easily by agreeing to
a recon before any further attacks on the vineyard, probably a
good idea in any case. Instead, she reacts to every question as
if it were a personal attack. Some of the questions *were* personal
attacks, & defensiveness isn't completely OC for Buffy - but even
so, her behavior isn't completely reasonable.
IMO - Buffy's confidence was severely shaken by her 2 fights with
Caleb, as the First had intended ( more on this in the note below
). Her argument - "I'm the Slayer & I've always been right"
- is whistling in the dark. She isn't only trying to convince
the others, she's trying to reassure herself. Although she hides
it, she's as demoralized as the rest of them.
The potentials don't know her well enough to pick up on this,
but Dawn & Willow do (Xander, Faith & Giles are focusing on their
own issues). If we assume that Dawn & Willow realize Buffy's state
of mind, what are their options ? Should they support Buffy, even
though they know she may be on the verge of Meltdown ? Or buy
time, delaying a decision until Buffy recovers ( as she has in
the past, although sometimes it took a while ).
Kicking Buffy out of the house was a drastic solution, but it
ultimately worked. Spike's support & good night's sleep restored
Buffy's spirit, & gave her time to devise a strategy against Caleb
- a strategy which could only work if she faced him alone (if
anyone else had been present, she would have to engage him in
order to protect them).
Note - I think the Caleb-Turok Han-Armageddon was actually the
First's plan B. Plan A (IMO) was not to kill Buffy -Caleb could
have done that at the High School- but to subvert or recruit Buffy.
When Spike attacked Buffy under the influence of the "trigger",
the First told him to "take her" - it didn't say "kill
her". Had Spike not rebelled, I believe the FIrst would have
had him turn Buffy, thus recruiting her to its' own side. It was
still working toward this in later episodes - the torture of Spike
was an attempt to break down his resistance to attacking Buffy.
When Jonathon-slash-the First says it's not time yet, this was
what he meant; the First still had hopes that Spike would turn
Buffy.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Real
reason for the mutiny -- Ames, 14:12:01 09/28/04 Tue
Joss Whedon said last year in an interview about how the writing
team handled Buffy Season 7: "At one point they all mutinied
against me. That was strange." (quoting from memory, may
not be exactly accurate)
Assuming he wasn't kidding, that probably explains the mutiny
plot twist.
[> [> The Dawn of a different kind of leadership
-- manwitch, 13:40:25 09/29/04 Wed
I believe Buffy says, "Guys, we have to be together on this."
And Dawn says something akin to "Yes, we have to be together.
And that's why you can't be here. This is my house, too. I need
you to go."
Its not clear to me whether or not Dawn knows what she is doing,
or whether the ultimate success that results from this is just
an unintended consequence. But from a thematic standpoint, leadership
is the problem, and Dawn, the harbinger of things to come, at
some level intuits this. We have to be together. We can't have
someone set apart from us, better than us, different' from us.
We can't be servile. We can't be followers and we can't be leaders.
We have to do this, and we have to be together. That always struck
me as Dawn's message anyway, even though the group doesn't get
it right away.
Later Buffy agrees, in a complex way, with their decision. "I
don't want to be the one." Buffy doesn't want to lead.
And the ultimate success is in finding a new model, one that Dawn
had already prophecized. I mean, obviously Buffy continues to
show leadership qualities. But the idea seems to be one of inner
self-directed moral action as opposed to hierarchical models of
leadership. Having leaders means having followers. And that's
not entirely a good thing. One can't overcome evil by abdicating
one's own moral judgement or moral responsibilities to a leader.
One doesn't fight evil by replicating the model.
Not meant in opposition to your post. Just sort of a tangential
ramble.
[> Re: Empty Places.. what the hell?? -- abracapocus,
14:40:51 09/29/04 Wed
This has been a really good discussion.
For me, part of the problem in interpreting the "mutiny"
scene comes down to the directing and editing. As broadcast, there
is a bit too much disconnect between Dawn's quiet but (to me)
loving confrontation of her sister, and the dialog that really
sparks it. Also, we're "seeing" this scene largely through
Buffy's eyes. While this is SOP for the show, it contributes to
the feeling that this a huge betrayal.
Although Buffy was hard to like for much of season 7, the strain
she was under, and the reasons for her wrong decisions, are heartbreaking.
As others have pointed out, Buffy is melting down here, or close
to it. She's truly, bone-meltingly afraid of Caleb and the First,
and doesn't know how to fight them--she thinks all she *can* do
is fight, and that Everything Is Up To Her, and No One Else Can
Save Them. She thinks this (wrongly, IMHO) not because she is
a bitch and a bad leader, but because all her training as a Slayer
has taught her so (even if her experience has taught her that
she is always strongest when relying on her friends)--and because
Giles has been telling her so ever since he showed up on the porch
with the first three Potentials.*
Anyway: Buffy starts flinging venom at Faith ("Did you tell
them how you used to kill people for fun?"), to which Faith
gives the Right Answer: "I came here to beat the other guy,
to do right, however it works. I don't know if I can lead. But
the real question is...can you follow?"
Before Buffy can answer this, Robin interrupts and calls for a
vote. We have a longish pause while we see different reactions
from people in the room. Buffy can't stand it, protesting "I
know I'm right about this". The camera (and the audience)
is focused on Buffy and her enormous distress. Then Dawn is walking
towards her, and if you get caught up in the high emotions of
the moment (especially if, as the camera has led you to be, you're
feeling yourself in Buffy's shoes), all you hear Dawn say is,
"leave".
I know that was how I reacted the first time I saw the scene:
it all felt forced and strained. I think it felt like that to
me in part because the camera focused me on Buffy's feelings--but
I couldn't really side with Buffy at that point, either. I missed
the connections between Faith's Right Answer, Buffy's "I
can't stay here and watch you", and Dawn's "Then you
can't stay here."
This rejection was a devastating blow to Buffy. But it was also
true that she needed to get out of the saddle and stop brandishing
her sword. As others have pointed out in this thread, she really
needed a good night's sleep, for crying out loud! Faith was right
that Buffy needed a break. But it became more and more clear during
the confrontation that nobody knew how to talk to Buffy any more,
and she wasn't about to take that break unless forced. So Dawn
made the painful decision: "Buffy, I love you, but you were
right. We have to be together on this. You can't be a part of
it."
I don't think Dawn intended for Buffy to walk out the door and
go alone into the very dangerous night without so much as a toothbrush,
much less a weapon (which was what *really* threw me the first
time!!). That was Buffy's reaction, and nobody was either physically
or morally up to going after her (except Faith).
So that's what I know, at great length. Thsi is why I don't de-lurk
very often!
If you read this: thanks! :)
Thanks also to the
Buff-vs-Angel transcript for the quotes.
Ab
Aside:
*Giles' repeated insistence in S7 that It's All Up to Buffy, coupled
with his distrust of her judgment, could be called a bad move
by the writers, necessitated by the season's plot arc. I can spackle
it by thinking about Giles' understandable despair after the destruction
of the Council--and what I see as his disaffection with being
back in Sunnydale with these kids to stave off another Apocalypse
he wishes he didn't have to deal with, just when he was starting
to get his life back in England. But that's just me! At the very
least, Giles' attitude and his words to/about Buffy are decidedly
unhelpful, and make a major contribution to Buffy's problems as
a leader in S7.
A lot of people have complained about how out of character Giles
felt in S7. For me, some of that came from the "Is He the
First?" game ME tried to play (clunk!); and some of it came
from the writerly fact that the best way to build dramatic tension
on BtVS is to cut Buffy off from her friends. Ergo: distant, distrusting,
guilt-tripping Giles. Bah!
[> [> Excellent Thoughts on The "Giles" issue
in S7 -- Mr. Banangrabber, 22:45:11 09/29/04 Wed
Angel Season 2, eps 5-8
-- Masq, 13:27:11 09/24/04 Fri
Random meandering thoughts. Much of them of the swoony variety.
Dear Boy
How much do I *love and adore* Season 2 of AtS?? The Dargel(us),
the Lindsgel, and the Dindsey.
And of course, these were still the days of the little Angel/Cordy/Wes
family. Angel playing daddy to his two bickering children, except
the only reason he was the daddy was 'cause he was the oldest.
He was certainly no less screwed up. More so, actually.
On Cordelia: When I heard Cordelia was going over to the new Angel
spin-off, I thought that was the most bizarre thing I'd ever heard.
I mean, how much interaction did Cordelia and Angel have on BtVS,
other than a little drool escaping Cordelia's lips from time to
time? Never were there two characters more different from each
other, other than a shared taste for new clothes.
Which I guess was sort of the point. Angel was a sensitivebutdeep
butt-kicking brooder, Cordelia was a tactless and shallow (yet
insightful) cheerleader with an aversion to breaking her nails.
The way she and Angel clashed like stripes and plaids gave him
the metaphorical kick him in the butt he needed, and gave them
such interesting chemistry in the first few seasons (and I means
as friends. FRIENDS).
And it took an Angel to get Cordelia over her "girlsdon'tfightunlessthey'refreaks"
thing and make her pick up an ax. I guess the show was trying
to be progressive&all, it being the redheaded stepchild of
BtVS, but it would have been *nice* if they'd TRAINED Cordelia
first before throwing her into battle. Cordy didn't learn how
to ue a sword until Season 3 and how disappointed am I that *that*
story line got derailed.
No, Cordelia got invited to all the good brawls when all she was
really good for was getting in the way and becoming a potential
hostage so the manlymen had to bail her out (First Impressions,
Dear Boy).
On Gunn: Is this really the first episode where Gunn finds out
Angel is the way he is because he has a soul? Every vampire Gunn's
ever met, including his own sister, had been a vicious predator,
but he's been hanging with the gang for months now, side-kicking
for Angel on all his little Darla/W&H sojourns, and he doesn't
know *why* the 'good guy vampire' is good? That makes it hard
to believe that Gunn *ever* accepted Angel in the first place,
no matter how he acted. But of course later (s. 3) we discover
Gunn never did entirely accept Angel. He always had his doubts
about him in the back of his mind (see thoughts below on Shroud
of Rahmon).
On Angel/Angelus: How much do I *adore* Angelus? The first time
I ever got lured into writing fanfic, it was to have the opportunity
to write Angelus. He's Angel but he's not. His head is full of
a thousand artistic machinations, and with Darla by his side,
even more than that. This is the kind of psycho-sociopathic-head
I wanted to wander through, psychoanalytically speaking. To understand
Angel completely you need to understand Angelus: Liam's dark side
given free reign.
It's like that meme we did a long time ago - what kind of Jossverse
vampire would you be? What would *you* be like if you lost your
soul?
Dear Boy is definitely one of my favorite episodes
of Season 2. In one of the most chilling flashbacks of the entire
show, they fill in the details of Angel's confession to Buffy
in "Lie to Me". Drusilla and the convent. It's where
Darla really finally learns that her ignorant boy of "The
Prodigal" has become the Grande Artiste of Evil, seeing torment
and torture and death as a canvas for him to act out those artistic
urges he should have kept to drawings and graphite.
I don't think Dear Boy is my favoritefavorite of Season 2, having
to compete against eps like "Reunion" and "Darla"
and "Reprise", but damn, it's beautiful. The conversation
in the water tank between Angel and Darla about happiness and
their 150 years together and Buffy is pulled straight from a conversation
between ANY ex-husband and a wife jilted for a younger woman -
full of the same angry bitterness and blame.
This was the first episode where I finally realized that M.E.
was trying to use these two characters to talk about marriage,
to explore all the facets of a relationship between two lover-companions.
More on this when I get to "Darla".
One final thought before I leave Dear Boy. Watching a season in
retrospect is a much different experience than watching it in
first run. People have been commenting about this with their Angel
Season 4 DVDs, especially in relation to the whole "Who is
Cordelia?" question, because during Season 4's run, even
before "Calvary", volumes of pixels were spilled trying
to figure out what was going on with Cordelia.
The big mystery of season 2 was trying to figure out what Wolfram
and Hart was up to. They'd spent good time and money in Season
1 trying to kill Angel, and now they apparently had changed their
minds. Now they didn't want him dead, they wanted him... dark?
distracted (and out of their hair)? It wasn't quite clear for
the longest time, but sicing Darla on him was part of The Plan.
And M.E. made it murkier by having some characters claim W&H wanted
Angelus back, and other characters claim they just wanted souled
Angel dark.
Guise Will Be Guise
This is one of those episodes that in retrospect we look to for
The Making of Wesley. But at the time it aired, it seemed not
only a filler episode, but a comedy episode as well. Oooh, we
*all* know Wesley wants to be Angel deep down, or not-so deep
down. He played Rogue Demon Hunter in Season 1 all dressed up
in big brother's clothes. And now he's trying again.
Certainly we all knew at the time that M.E. was trying to develop
Wesley more, toughen him up as it were. But Wesley already had
a niche (bookman) unique from Angel's, and it seemed they were
just trying to make him more like Angel.
I don't know where M.E. was trying to take Wesley at the time,
but they certainly did not turn him into Angel in the long run.
What they eventually succeeded in doing was turning him into Wesley,
a character not so much like Angel at all, but more like the Wesley
we already knew, only dark and hardened.
The Wesley of seasons 4 and 5 - THAT would have been hard to imagine
when GWBG first aired.
And yet in retrospect, it seems such a natural progression.
I suppose at the time they were just beefing Wesley up for the
whole Noir Angel arc, when they put Wesley in de facto charge
of the Gang. Being forced to play Angel in GWBG and succeeding
was a boost to Wesley's self-esteem.
I have to admit that in the main, Wesley didn't interest me much
in Season 1 or 2. I didn't spend a whole lot of time thinking
about him (especially with all the distractions -- Hey! Darla
and Angel(us), ooh, shiny!)
So. Question. What would you say are the *key* episodes in
making Wesley into the Wesley we knew and worshipped in
seasons 4 and 5?.
Darla
Yo. Check it out:
http://www.ohbythewaywehavedarlastashedhere.com/
Season four will always be known as the season of the "turgid
supernatural soap-opera", but let's face it, once M.E. got
into the arc-groove with AtS (starting mostly in Season 2), it
got soapy. Angel is obsessed with Darla, Lindsey is obsessed with
Darla, Darla wants Angel, but really she wants Angelus, *and*
she wants to be a vampire again, 'cause that's all she's known
for 400 years. Meanwhile, Angel and Lindsey have some weird love-to-hate-you-baby
thing going on that doesn't exactly help them with their mutual
goal of helping Darla. And Cordelia and Wesley and Gunn and us
are the unwitting audience to all this drama.
I love it, but then I love soap opera.
So the episode starts out with Darla finally feeling the weight
of her soul. Took her seven episodes, but that's the nature of
Post Traumatic Stress, and 22-episode story lines. It takes time
for the wackiness to kick in.
Darla's crisis has both a moral angle and a metaphysical one.
I'm a big time sucker for identity crises ("Who am I?"),
which goes a long way to explaining why I adore the Family!Angel
(Angel(us), Darla, Connor)--they never know whothefuck they are
from one day to the next.
Darla wants to answer both the moral and metaphysical problems
she's facing with a nice vamping. A vampire doesn't have to deal
with the moral issues ("OMG I spent 400 years murdering,
pillaging, and torturing!!1!"), and being a vampire is the
most familiar, safe identity she's ever had.
And somehow she imagines Angel's going to help her with that.
That he's going to understand the torment of a soul (well of course
he will) so well that he'll plainly see the answer is to turn
her back into a vicious killer (huh?).
The source of all Darla's confusion and longing is explained in
a series of flashbacks, starting with her first human life as
a prostitute, disdained by her society and equally disdaining
of them. Then we see her as the rebellious daughter of the Master,
running off with the guy Daddy doesn't approve of.
In the gypsy camp memory, Darla is the abandoned mother. Well,
she dumped Angel(us), it's true, but she did it because she felt
she had to -- he wasn't "the man she married" anymore.
But that left her as the harried divorced mother with the unruly
kids, wanting to have her old love back, but unable to get him
back as he was.
Darla is one hundred shining archetypal facets, reflecting so
many of the passages of a woman's life.
And then there's China.
OMG. *squees*
How much do I ADORE the Fanged Four?
Each of these actors was hired on their own individual merits,
so who could know there'd be so much A/Da chemistry, Dr/S chemistry,
A/S chemistry, Da/Dr chemistry, and A/Dr chemistry (and probably
Da/S chemistry if they'd been given any scenes together). The
four of them rocked like a rocking thing.
Souled Angel returns to Darla because, like Darla longing to be
a vampire again, Darla is all Angel knows.
During the China scenes, Angel and Darla keep referring to "the
whirlwind". One imagines this is a euphemism for murder and
mayhem, but it's also the term they use for their relationship,
their companionship, their shared passion. They don't dare call
it "love". Not because it *isn't* love. These two were
not sentimental people when they were human, they were cynics,
and they're not going to change now.
Then we get Angel and Darla in the present. Darla cracking up,
and therefore becoming useless to Wolfram and Hart as a tool to
manipulate Angel. So they plan to kill her. Lindsey wants to help
Darla, but Darla runs to Angel. But Agel won't give her what she
wants. And so as Angel once ran out on Darla in 1900, Darla runs
out on Angel in 2000. An echo of one hundred years. We see the
epicness of these two. EPICNESS, people, EPICNESS.
One final note - This is one of those episodes where the gang
is clueless and Gunn cuts right through the crap with common sense.
How anyone, especially Gunn, thought he was just the muscle puzzles
the hell out of me.
The Shroud of Rahmon
OK, this episode brings up what is probably the single most important
issue of Season 2 - Cordelia's hair.
Honestly, for -- How Many Episodes -- ? CC used hair extensions
to hide her hair cut, which was shorter, but still attractive
and yeah! still dark. Then she started lightening it. *shudders*
You know, despite what you've heard, L.A. is not full of blondes,
and CC is probably one of the most gorgeous brunettes on television.
So *what* was HER DEAL??!!
The Hair definitely foreshadowed the downfall of Cordy.
On Gunn: This episodes helps reveal the basic distrust Gunn has
of Angel. He tries not to show it most days, but it's under there,
and I don't think I realized that when I watched this season the
first time through. Gunn seemed so buddy-buddy with Angel most
of the time.
So I found it confusing that Gunn and Angel were sniping at each
other in this episode long before they came under the influence
of the Evil Cloth. Yeah, some of that has to do with Angel being
a paternalistic jerk, and Gunn, who has taken care of himself
his whole life, not going for being patronized. But he doesn't
trust Angel-the-vampire, either, and that doesn't get revealed
until the Cloth kicks in.
On Angel: Angel as Jay-Don. You know, one of my pet peeves is
when a television or film character gets it into their heads that
they're going to try acting and then does a good job. *Of course*
they do a good job, 'cause it's not the character doing the acting,
it's the ACTOR!
I believe that David Boreanaz could pull off playing a character
like Jay-Don, 'cause he did. But I don't believe Angel could.
Or maybe it's just that we're so used to the morose, serious Angel
that we forget he has other facets to him Angelus that
he can draw on when he needs to.
And no one can dispute that Angel's a great big dork.
My other pet peeve in this episode? They have Angel drink human
blood and then hint that this might have ~reprecussions~ (ooooh).
But does it really? His Noir period really wasn't about fighting
the blood-thirst within. So maybe that oooooh! was just there
to make Wesley and Cordelia more cautious about him, to make them
more likely to think he was having trouble (as if they weren't
before).
On Kate: O.K., I can see why people didn't like Kate. She was
cranky, a LOT (which, frankly, turns me on, but that's just me)
and she didn't give Angel the benefit of the doubt as we do. But
she just had her own issues, see? And they didn't all have to
do with her father. She was a cop and that was in her blood, and
she was in love with keeping the peace and with justice and the
law and due process and official channels. Kate was a gal of the
System, and Angel was a (sometimes pretty arrogant) ousider to
the System.
And then she discovers that there's this whole side to crime in
L.A. that no other cop is paying attention to. Of course
she's going to become obsessed with it. That that obsession becomes
her downfall, the thing that ousts her from the only world she's
ever known, her family in Blue, is a resonance with the similar
fates of Angel(us) and Darla and the larger story of Season 2.
Replies:
[> can't wait till u get to AS4 (and the arcy S3 eps..)..
plus, to answer ur question abt wes: -- ghady, 15:17:31
09/24/04 Fri
Seven words: "the father will kill the son."
that was what started it all.
the darkness began there.
And then, there was the whole throat-slitting thing AND the COMPLETE
alienation from the FG.
and let's not forget sleeping with the enemy.
imo, these S3 events are what brought forth the wesley of S4 (and
im gonna say S5, tho i havent seen it yet)
[> [> lol i forgot to say "kidnapping connor"
too. silly me.. -- ghady, 15:18:39 09/24/04 Fri
[> [> *I* can't wait until I get to Season 3 -- Masq,
16:07:45 09/24/04 Fri
It's my favorite season. Love the dark!Wes!torment.
Love the baby Connor stuff.
Love Connor in general.
And my Season 4 DVD set is jumping on my bookshelf saying, "Watch
me!"
[> Wesley's downward spiral -- Seven, 23:06:21 09/24/04
Fri
I'd like to take this question a little differently. I won't chronicle
Wes' shift to darkness. We'll take a look at how he went from
goofy comic releif to rugged-grey-marlbro-man Wes.
Parting Gifts:
Wes shows up - against expectation - wearing black leather and
spouting about how he's a "ROGUE demon hunter." I emphasize
rogue because that is what he saw himself as now. We all knew
that Wes was stuck up and rules-driven, but why? He was looking
for approval. All he knew was the Council. (As far as we know,
most Watchers are born into the role) He behaved like they did.
He made sure that he acted as he thought was expected of him.
He thought about it so much so that he usually overthought situations
and couldn't be relied on to make decisions that he himself truley
felt were right.
When he was ousted from the Council, he was likely crushed, but
rationalized it within himself that "he didn't need them."
So he takes on the mantle of a rogue. He dresses in an atire unlike
what he used to. He makes a cosmetic change in order to make himself
believe he is who he says he is. When he comes across Angel in
this episode, he realizes that the role that he is trying to take
on is being done more efficiantly (and with more style) than he
is. He doesn't like this, but in the end submits his role and
becomes what is needed of him - the booksmart watcher - the thing
he no longer wants to associate himself with but will because
he will be accepted for it. Another cosmetic change later and
we immediatly have a very much more layered character than we
did befoe this episode aired. Wes now has depth and reason behind
his actions. Wes' desire to be like Angel (granted that at the
time he chose to act and dress similar to Angel, he didn't likely
have Angel in mind) is now put on the backburner because he found
a place to be accepted. But don't forget that this wasn't about
Angel. Wes wanted to be a rebel. It seems somewhat childish at
this point, but he was making a grown up decision. He consciously
wanted to not just appear, but be a certain way. However, the
reason for this, as we would only learn later, was a result of
an overbearing father (so much like Angel...and numerous other
Joss creations...).
Then we have numerous episode where Wes plays the comic relieif/exposition
guy and we forget about his layers. However, we get hints in
Expecting:
when he refers to himself and Angel as "two macho demon hunters"
or such. This reminds us of who he thinks he is. The booksmarts
and goofiness he expresses in this ep shows us who he is now,
and the amazing aim and focus he uses when he deadeye shoots the
liquid nitrogen container explains to us what he can be. I think
this episode gets overlooked in the progression of Wes. He shows
a lot of different sides here.
Next is
The Ring:
As we all know, this is when Wes shows his more utilitarian side
as he shows no remorse or ill will to the use of some some grey
area methods, like going in alone, using painful weapons with
precision and resorting to simple torture for information... on
humans. Are these Angel or Council traits? A combination? Seems
so.
Five by Five and Sanctuary:
Wes chooses which way he's gonna go. Is he leaning more to the
Angel side of things. But why? The Council rejected him. He was
always trying to fit into a mold that wasn't him. He doesn't want
to go back if he doesn't have to. If the Council gave him this
choice before he joinged AI, this would be different. He'd have
likely gave in in a heartbeat, but now someone else has taken
him in and he won't do it. See, Wes gave up his faux bad boy image
as soon as Angel and Cordy took him in. He no longer had to play
that new role. He could go back to a role that was more familiar
and took less effort because it was tried if not true. He still
wasn't himself. He didn't yet know what that was. In Sanctuary,
Wes makes his choice - he chooses Angel and loves every second
of it. This proves he's on the right team this time. ( I won't
really mention the 5x5 torture scene. It gets overplayed. He does
it well, but i think the most important thing to remember is the
dropping of the knife as he begins to understand to grey area
of the life he chooses in the next episode. )
Season 2
AYNOHYEB:
Paranoia demon points him out
Guise Will be Guise:
Maybe Wes is gettin the hang of this thing. This is also a set
up, as Masq mentions, to Wes taking over as leader
Angel is such a bigger focus in season 2, however, Wes manages
to get shot, lead the team and later on, lead many Pylean slaves
to their doom. Before, in the Pylea arc, we see Wes' more Utilitarian/Watchers
methods coming out. Remeber, at this time, he and the gang have
recently rejected Angel and made Wes the leader. He goes with
the anti-Angel flow but is conflicted because he made his choice
to stay with Angel but now that Angel has been rejected (or rejected
him depending on how you see it) he falls back on his Watcher
training to a degree. He's not sure which outfit to wear and evetually
does not do the best job as a leader because he is incapable of
making the right decisions regarding others when he can't seem
to figure out anything without regards to how it will be viewed.
Angel is a better leader because he makes the hard decisions without
answering to anyone. Whether he is right or wrong, Angel makes
the choice. This is when Wes is at his best, when focused and
unyeilding. In season two though, he is not ready.
Remeber though, that Wes, throughout his troubles, is actually
having these troubles because he wants to be a "good"
man. In the end of season three and the beginning of season 4,
he looses sight of that as he finally starts to like what he sees
in himself. He no longer answers to anyone so he looses some of
that good nature. He tells Lilah in AN though, that "there
is a line." Wes is extremely good hearted, he just always
makes the wrong desisions because he is too worried.
Season 3
Acttually, it's gonna have to be anther day, I'm beat and its
way to late...or early...oh crap...
write in if you guys want me to continue.
7
[> "Best actor in the world" "Second best"
-- Tchaikovsky, 03:37:55 09/26/04 Sun
Nice reviews.
I don't have any problem with Angel as a good actor. Remember
that Angelus' obsession is with the artistry of evil, with going
for the way that will truly mutilate and destroy the soul of the
people around him. He is into the manipulation of victims into
their darkest nightmares.
And when we get to see Angel manipulate, he is just as good. Playing
his Angelus alter ego in 'Enemies', he manages to hoodwink Faith,
(and the audience), and even completely unnerve his compadre Buffy.
So while the general habit of characters becoming actors is a
fragile and annoying trope, I think Angel has some background
established for such skill.
TCH
[> [> OK -- Masq, 07:20:11 09/26/04 Sun
Maybe I just *hate* it when he acts as over-the-top dorks. Herb
Saunders (Sense and Sensitivity) was like fingernails on a chalkboard.
; )
[> [> Re: "Best actor in the world" "Second
best" -- abracapocus,
14:55:59 09/27/04 Mon
An occasional de-lurker comes out to chime in re: Angel's acting
ability--
First, gotta say that Masq, as usual, knows of what s/he speaks.
An actor playing a character pretending to be someone else (i.e.,
acting) can induce the rolling of the eyes. How good an actor
do you have to be before you can convincingly portray someone
being a *bad* actor? Alyson Hanigan kind of got it in "Doppelgangland"--but
then, human Willow was so unconvincing as VampWillow that the
minions should have seen through her right away.
But the topic was Angel, esp. in Shroud of Rahmon. I can't help
but think of Buffy S2, and how Angelus played the deranged stalking
lover for Joyce's benefit; and how he played the nice guy for
a young victim (sorry, don't have the ep titles handy/brainy).
I think role-playing like that was an important strategy in Angelus'
m.o. of psychological torture, and he was pretty good at it. Masq,
you said it yourself: Angel draws on Angelus' skills (and pleasures)
to do many of the things he does as a "Champion" (OK,
I'll remove the spoon now).
"Would I knew a little more
or very much less." --Dorothy Parker
[> [> [> The ep name you don't remember was "Phases"
(NT) -- Duell, 17:03:25 09/27/04 Mon
Pack and Play (my first attempt
at fanfic) -- Ann, 19:58:48 09/25/04 Sat
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2070870/1/
If you ever wondered what happened to the kids from "The
Pack", well, here is my take on one of them.
Replies:
[> Re: Pack and Play (my first attempt at fanfic) --
Jane, 20:55:58 09/25/04 Sat
It's great, Ann. Go read it people!
how would the AS4 arc (yes,
that subject again) have been different had CC NOT gotten pregnant??
-- ghady, 12:51:36 09/26/04 Sun
How would the season have ended? Would Jasmine have taken over
Cordy completely, to the extent that the Jasmine arc would STILL
have taken place, yet w/ CC not GT playing the part?
And how would that have given us a good explanation for Connor's
existence?? I don't see any reason for Connor's birth, other than
the one that Jasmine provided in Shiny Happy People.
Any ideas?
Replies:
[> Word was that... -- Rob, 14:32:04 09/26/04 Sun
...Cordelia would have been Jasmine, or in other words
would have filled the role that Jasmine did at the end of the
season. No pregnancy mystical coma. Cordy would've come to embody
the "rogue" PTB herself rather than give birth to another
person to fulfill the role. What role Connor would have played
is not exactly clear, but that doesn't mean that the reason that
he was born--Angel winning a life for "Darla" in "The
Trial"--wouldn't still be valid.
Rob
[> [> Really? Darn. I think CC would have been great
at that... -- SS, 16:04:50 09/26/04 Sun
[> [> Re: Word was that... -- Mr. Bananagrabber,
07:05:40 09/27/04 Mon
You know, I've always wondered if Cordy would have had the same
messianic qualities Jasmine did when the plan was to have her
embody the fallen PTB or if she would have been a more straight-forward
big bad. The everyone-bow-before-me quality would have been very
intersting for our little Queen C, both from her Sunnydale High
days & her turn as Princess of Pylea.
[> [> The reason that he was born -- Ames, 08:08:18
09/27/04 Mon
"the reason that he [Connor] was born--Angel winning a life
for "Darla" in "The Trial"
I've heard that said before, but I must have missed the reference
- who said that? Was it in the show, or did one of the writers
say it?
[> [> [> It was in "Shiny, Happy People":
-- Rob, 09:09:04 09/27/04 Mon
WOMAN: I had to find a way back. But, first I needed a miracle.
And so I arranged one. (touches Connor's face) Through you, Angel,
through Darla. That is where my parentage began. Two vampires
creatures one human corrupted by darkness. And you with a soul
a miracle already.
ANGEL: But how?
WOMAN: Through Lorne.
LORNE: Huh?
WOMAN: The day Lorne sent Angel and human Darla into the trials
to earn a new chance at life.
ANGEL: I failed.
WOMAN: No, you earned that life. And there it is. (points to Connor)
Rob
[> [> [> [> My Compliments -- Mr. Bananagrabber,
12:18:15 09/27/04 Mon
Just a quick note to say how well-constructed your Jasmine plot
is below. I've never really had a problem with the plot but your
timeline really brings the whole thing together for me.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: My Mistake -- Mr. bananagrabber,
22:47:22 09/29/04 Wed
My "compliments" should have actually gone to Dorian
and not Rob. Sorry about the confusion that comes form posting
before morning coffee. However, this doesn't mean that you are
not super cool Rob. :)
a few questions on cordelia
and the beast -- ghady, 05:37:19 09/26/04 Sun
I'm rewatching AS4 on DVD after watching all the eps (except Home)
on tv..
So:
1) In Apocalypse Nowish, why did the beast rise where connor was
born? did jasmine/cordy position herself to be in that location
bcs she knew that the beast would rise where SHE was? and thus
she chose the alley where darla died in order to alienate connor
from the gang and bring him closer to HER?
2) why did the beast attack cordy and connor? they were both needed
in order for cordy to give birth to jasmine. is it because it
took the beast a while to realize that his master was actually
in cordelia's body?
3) why did cordy lose her memory? was it something that jasmine
intended, or was it an unforseen side effect of descending to
a lower dimension?
4) when i first saw the season, i was a bit confused as to why
cordelia ignored connor's advances in supersymmetry, but then
SLEPT w/ him in apocalypse nowish. it's bcs in the former, it
was actually HER controlling things, but in AN, it was jasmine,
right?
Replies:
[> another thing: why did the beast torture, not kill, lilah
when he had the chance? -- ghady, 06:57:05 09/26/04 Sun
[> [> It was getting around to killing her, just wanted
to do it in a very painful way -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:46:17
09/26/04 Sun
[> [> My theory is that it wasn't actually torturing
her -- KdS, 03:38:50 09/27/04 Mon
As well as massacring W&H to get rid of the competition, the Beast
was also collecting the Rah-Tet's internal talismans. My theory
is that the Beast didn't know what Mesektet looked like, and thought
Lilah, female and obviously in authority, was Mesektet. Hence
when he started digging around in Lilah's body he wasn't torturing
her, but looking for the non-existent talisman.
[> Re: a few questions on cordelia and the beast --
DorianQ, 11:49:45 09/26/04 Sun
I am not nearly as familiar with the first part of Season four
and the latter part, but from what I've seen and read:
1) To show himself to Cordy to let her know she arrived and, yes,
to freak out Connor and let himself be more vulnerable to her
advances.
2) It's been a while since I saw that attack, but I think I remember
a look between the Beast and Cordy, so I think he recognized her
but he didn't know anything about Connor's importance. He probably
thought Connor might have been attacking Cordy or something.
3, 4) That's exactly what happened, and it wasn't something she
planned to happen. In Supersymmetry, she rebuffed Connor because
she had no memory of her plan to have a kid with him. After Spin
the Bottle, she remmembers the plan and commences with the smoochies.
Remember that I'm writting this without having seen Slouching,
Supersymmetry, and Spin the Bottle at all and haven't seen Apocalypse
Nowish in a while. Any others who are more familiar have any additions
or corrections?
[> Re: a few questions on cordelia and the beast --
Ray, 14:51:50 09/29/04 Wed
1) ...."and thus she chose the alley where darla died in
order to alienate connor from the gang and bring him closer to
HER?"
That's my theory.
2) because the Beast attacked all its enemies. So that fake attack
(and then flying off suddenly) makes Connor and Cordy just two
more victims caught in the Beast's path.
3) unforseen side effect of descending to a lower dimension. The
Fang Gang actually released Jasmine when they restored Cordy's
memory.
4) because amnesia-Cordy was Cordy with swiss cheese memory. so
she would never have any sort of sexual relationship with connor.
but by Apocalypse Nowish Jasmine was in control.
ATPO Cooks -- Ann, 09:51:05
09/26/04 Sun
Hi all: The newest place for all of you who like food and Buffy
and Angel is here:
http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=atpo_cooks
Please join us here for more talk of great food. Buffy had her
cookies, and now we do too!
Enjoy! More later.
League of Extraordinary Gentleman
and The Order -- BuffyObsessed, 17:22:16 09/26/04 Sun
I watched the League of Extraordinary Gentleman and the movie
the Order and im confused about some things in it... hopefully
you can answer my questions.
1. In LoEG what exactly was Dorian Grey. I don't really understand
the picture thing so if you can explain it, thanks.
2. Also in LoEG, what was the whole thing about Sean Connery's
character coming back to life?
3. In the Order, what were the nightingales the girl heard in
her head? Was she crazy?
Replies:
[> Re: League of Extraordinary Gentleman and The Order
-- q 3, 18:41:52 09/26/04 Sun
Dorian Gray is the title character in a novel by Oscar Wilde.
Essentially, he had a portrait of himself that took on all of
the bad things that happened to him--aging, sickness, injury--leaving
him unscathed but the portrait more and more sinister-looking
(it even was affected by his various moral debaucheries).
[> Re: League of Extraordinary Gentleman and The Order
-- Wizard,
23:14:19 09/26/04 Sun
An African shaman put a blessing on him. He was so useful to Africa
and her people that Africa would not allow him to die. He wasn't
in Africa when he was shot, so he died, but he was buried there,
hence his resurrection.
O/T Need some advice
-- Jean, 06:43:37 09/28/04 Tue
Okay I am writing a story with vampires in it(more like rolling
the idea around in my head) but I was wondering should I use the
Buffyverse version of a vampire or more along the lines of an
Anne Rice creature
Replies:
[> Re: O/T Need some advice -- Ames, 09:29:58 09/28/04
Tue
Neither. Create your own version to serve the needs of the story.
The vampires initially created for the Buffyverse eventually proved
too superficial and inconsistent for such a long and complex tale.
The authors and the audience were barely able to retcon their
behavior and characteristics adequately to keep things creaking
along by the end of the dual series.
Anne Rice's vampires serve the needs of her dark romantic fiction,
but wouldn't necessarily work in other circumstances. She's never
bothered to give much in the way of complex technical or metaphysical
explanation of her vampires. They just are the way they are.
UPN's latest: Veronica Mars
-- Ames, 15:29:42 09/28/04 Tue
Hmmm, high-school girl who was once part of the "in"
crowd, now she's an outsider and fights evil with the help of
some quirky friends she's picking up along the way. Lives with
her divorced single parent - but it's her Dad instead of her Mom.
And no supernatural evil, just the regular human kind - so far,
anyway. The events in the opening episode were a bit far-fetched,
but Veronica has an edge to her that's remniscent of a certain
vampire slayer. Might be worth watching a few episodes since Tru/Faith
won't be joining us any time soon. Available on Suprnova.org for
those who don't get UPN.
Any other opinions?
Replies:
[> Re: UPN's latest: Veronica Mars -- Vickie, 16:00:26
09/28/04 Tue
I enjoyed the bit of Veronica I caught while making jewelry. You're
right, she has an edge. I enjoyed the dog's silly name (no spoilers
here!). But if I have to listen to her father ask her "who's
your Daddy?" one more time I may barf.
Not yet appointment TV, but worth a look.
[> Re: UPN's latest: Veronica Mars -- Gyrus, 13:14:19
09/29/04 Wed
Yes, I'm enjoying VERONICA MARS so far. The mystery aspects of
the story are interesting, as are the LAW-&-ORDER-like plot
twists (though I do wish they'd ease up on the flashbacks a bit).
Also, Veronica's lack of super powers and short supply of allies
forces her to be cleverer than Buffy: she has to play her enemies
off one another in order to survive. That adds to both the suspense
and the payoff.
[> [> Re: UPN's latest: Veronica Mars -- abracapocus,
13:23:46 09/29/04 Wed
I have to chime in to support "Veronica Mars", too.
I think it has very good appointment TV potential. Good casting,
interesting characters who spark off each other well, decidedly
not-dumb writing. Plus (big plus) it's more ethnically diverse
than Buffy, without putting up big flags about it, at least not
from where I sit. ("blond chick: check; black kid; check;
Latino tough guy: check").
It definitely has a Buffy-esque vibe, with the crew of unexpected
friends and sometime allies, all of whom have distinct quirks
and ambivalence toward the dominant social structure at their
school. I like the three-dimensionality to the adults, too. There's
potential for the plotting to get dumb and predictable as Veronica
pulls all the strings to make her version of justice happen each
week; but give it time.
Check it out, if you haven't yet. There's hope that UPN will let
it grow, since they've been promoting it fairly well & re-ran
the pilot to give more people a chance to see it. We shall see.
Very happy over non-dumb TV,
Ab
O/T: A petition to get Sharona
back on "Monk"... -- Rob, 08:22:53 09/29/04 Wed
For those of you who aren't aware, Bitty Schram, who plays Sharona,
has been fired from Monk due to a salary dispute. This
season, which has been very weak so far, the only reason I have
been watching is Sharona and Adrian's relationship, and I think
the producers are fooling themselves if they think she isn't
worth a raise and if they think the show can continue to thrive
without her. The only great episode this season, in fact, centered
around her character! I won't be coming back next season without
her.
Anyway, here's
a petition I found. Please sign!
Rob
Replies:
[> This is TERRIBLE news!!!! -- Evan, 14:07:37 09/29/04
Wed
[> A travesty!! -- matching mole, 17:24:34 09/29/04
Wed
I wouldn't be quite so hard on this past season (unimortant side
point - I was wondering why you said 'so far' when the season
finale was several weeks ago) although I certainly agree that
it wasn't up to the quality of previous ones. And Sharona is a
big part of the reason to tune in. In fact I can't really imagine
what the show would be like without her character in it. Kind
of like AtS without Cordelia only more so (will Sharona ascend
all dressed in white and then return without memories?).
Current board
| More September 2004