January 2002 posts

Previous January 2002 

More January 2002

Australian fan -- Fi, 07:15:01 01/10/02 Thu

What a fantastic site! After weeks of looking for interesting Buffy discussion I have finally found a site that validates and complements my watching of Buffy! I am very jealous reading all the comments and discussion points raised by people as series six has not yet started in Australia. I would love it if anyone can shed any light on when it might be shown on australian tv. Thanks.

[> Welcome! -- matching mole, 10:51:31 01/10/02 Thu

Most people on the board are distracted right now discussing the first new episode in a month. I don't get to see it until Saturday. This is a great place, full of intelligent, friendly, and polite people.

You could add your name and a more specific location to the monster 'where are you from' thread at the bottom of the board if you like - give the list a bit more geographical diversity.

Unfortunately I have no idea about when season 6 will make it to Australia.

[> Welcome -- vampire hunter D, 13:07:35 01/10/02 Thu

Cool, we don't get many Aussies here (I have a friend in Queenslnd who used to lurk, but I havn't heard from her in a while). Be nice to get our input on the show.

And I believe season 6 will begin in March for you guys. Or at least that's what my friend said.

Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- Darby, 07:46:36 01/10/02 Thu

I'm just a posting fool today.

I'm watching When She Was Bad again, the scene where Buffy "dances" with Xander at the Bronze. This is a 17-year-old boy with the hots for a girl he hasn't seen for months, and she's enacting one of his dream sequences (see Teacher's Pet). Has she seen the light, realized that he's the one, that Angel is just one big brooding hunk of trouble? At that age, that's what I'd be telling myself (I don't know that I've gotten any more insightful since). But it's obvious from the start that Xander doesn't accept the "new" Buffy as anything but an aberration (Oh no! She came back "wrong"!). This ability to see into people's real motivations has been an established part - one of the great values - of Xander ever since.

So we're supposed to buy that he doesn't know what's going on with Spike's levitation and earlobe tricks? He's not that dumb, and he does NOT ignore the obvious, no matter how much he might want to. If we don't see him at least telling Anya what's going on in the near future, then someone's lost serious contact with this character.

Funny how writing this stuff down raises other ideas. It just occurred to me that our most insightful characters are Xander and Spike (a bit of the common Buffyverse role reversals-?), and then I got to wondering how those two are different from each other. Both are deep, brave, funny, willing to risk rejection to say what need to be said. But Spike's obsessive and dangerous. And Buffy is definitely attracted to him.

That's what Season 7 needs. Forget Riley, let's turn Xander!

[> Normally, I'd agree... -- Lilac, 08:14:00 01/10/02 Thu

with no hesitation. BUT what really makes me think that Xander is ignoring what is right in front of his face is that he had news about Buffy's being in danger, and chose not to tell Spike and the invisible Buffy about it. Either he deliberately withheld important information from her, knowing she was there, or he ignored some pretty compelling evidence that the invisible girl he was looking for was right there -- which would make him look pretty stupid, which he normally isn't. Either way, it seems out of character -- maybe it's bad writing for the sake of the "joke" of embarrassing Spike, or it's an aberration in Xander's character. I do have to say it was not a scene that worked for me for these very reasons.

[> Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) . . . but in this case it made perfect sense -- Randy G., 08:39:17 01/10/02 Thu

Xander usually is quite perceptive, but acknowledging a Buffy-Spike relationship would threaten a very fundamental part of his belief system. Xander is not the moral relativist of the gang -- Spike is still an evil thing to him, and (as Anya suspects), Buffy is still the polar star of his life -- even more so than back in "When She was Bad," when Xander had just saved her and she a few hundred progressively grander acts of heroism to come. How could he begin to acknowledge something so world-view shattering as his Buffy in bed with Spike? Frankly, having decided to get married to a woman he clearly has grave doubts, Xander may be trying to cultivate denial a little bit. Long-term relationships and other permanent commitments almost seem to require people not to notice everything every time, don't they? This may be one more aspect of growing up.

[> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) . . . but in this case it made perfect sense -- Darby, 08:56:03 01/10/02 Thu

Back in Prophecy Girl, Xander acknowledged that he thought the same thing about Angel ("At the end of the day, I think that pretty much you're a vampire"), and he knows that Buffy has horrible taste in guys (it probably comforts him, that if she really knew who was good for her, she'd have picked him). Since Angel, there's been Parker, Initiative-guy (Xander eventually got to know Riley, but he wasn't crazy about the relationship at first), Ben-who's-also-a-Hellgod-bitch, Dracula (sort of), so Spike is what kind of change??? In a consistent world, Xander would be kicking himself for not seeing it sooner when it wasn't as obvious. In fact, that's also what he should be doing soon.

[> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) . . . but in this case it made perfect sense -- listening, 11:07:28 01/10/02 Thu

After he finishes kicking Spike.

[> [> [> [> *pictures Xander beating the hell out of Spike and rubs his hands together with glee* : D -- AngelVSAngelus, 01:33:33 01/11/02 Fri

[> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) . . . but in this case it made perfect sense -- maddog, 10:15:32 01/11/02 Fri

Wile I agree overall your point doesn't help his cause...because as you pointed out Xander hates it whenever Buffy goes out with anyone...long term or not. He practically tries to follow her on all dates. That's just his jealous nature when it comes to her.

[> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- Little One, 12:51:36 01/10/02 Thu

I was actually thinking the same thing. When Xander walked in on Buffy and Spike in the kitchen, he would have to be blind to interpret Buffy's expression as one of fury and disgust. Yet he told Spike to stop hitting on her. Perhaps this was a way out of walking into an embarrassing issue as well as a rebuke to Buffy. Therefore, after seeing what he did, his denial cells would have to be working overtime to misinterpret Spike's "exercising". I saw his final comment "Spike, you need a girlfriend" as more of a comment to Buffy than to Spike. He not only realizes the Buffy-Spike ship but accepts it as well. By ignoring her obvious presence, he is inferring that he will wait until Buffy accepts and comes clean to him. He isn't going to force her to confess because not only is she not ready but also because it is too easy for her. He might realize that she needs to be the one to tell people about the relationship. If Spike does, Buffy will emotionally run from him again and if anyone else does, she will feel shamed and feel forced to end it with Spike. The only way she and Spike have a chance is if she is the one to tell everyone about him. Xander realizes this. Also, his comment about Spike needing a girlfriend is a way of telling Buffy that she is being unfair to herself by not becoming Spike's girlfriend.Xander left the message about Buffy's potential pudding-ness on her machine and I believe would have left it with Spike as well if he had believed him to be alone. By not telling Spike, confirmed, to me, that he knew Buffy was there. He told her instead to contact him asap. Forgive me if my ramblings don't make any sense. I have 2 large purring cats fighting for supremacy on my lap as I write.

[> [> good points, LO! -- Solitude1056, 14:12:08 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Aw shucks *blushing* ;-p -- Little One, 22:16:25 01/10/02 Thu

Missed ya, Sol! Hey, any new fan fic's starting up? Don't mean to give you a spontaneous neurological episode in case you're still traumatized...just wondering if I should start thinking up characters!

[> [> [> [> sequels, schmequels! -- Solitude1056, 21:26:12 01/11/02 Fri

Dunno about fic - I'm taking hiatus, so I'm only around every now and then, just checking in at random points. I figure we can do a sequel (or a completely separate round-table overly ambitious full-length novel) again this summer, if folks are up for it... I'll have an easier class schedule during the summer semesters. ;-)

[> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- pagangodess, 21:34:59 01/10/02 Thu

I like your interpretation. This, however, raises the question of why Xander said that only the lowest of lifeforms would ever go out with Spike (or something to that affect). If he knew Buffy was there, why would Xander be so cruel. Yes, we all know he does not like Spike, but why hurt Buffy this way?

Just thoughts


[> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- Little One, 22:10:27 01/10/02 Thu

Hmmm...good question. He said that in the kitchen didn't he? I would assume that this is when Xander first realized the burgeoning relationship and it shocked him that Buffy was returning Spike's gropes, oops, I mean affection. He lashed out and said some mean things. Yet not forcing Buffy to out herself in Spike's crypt was perhaps Xander's way of apologizing. And by saying that Spike needed a girlfriend was a means of telling Buffy that he has accepted it and perhaps she should accept it as well. Or perhaps I'm just reading way too much into this! ;-p

[> [> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- pagangodess, 10:23:51 01/11/02 Fri

Xander said it in Spike's crypt. After the 'exersices'. Which kind of screws up this theory. Sorry.


[> [> [> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- Traveler, 15:49:00 01/11/02 Fri

Ok, I've kind of gotten lost on this thread.

"He lashed out and said some mean things. Yet not forcing Buffy to out herself in Spike's crypt was perhaps Xander's way of apologizing."

"Xander said it in Spike's crypt. After the 'exersices'. Which kind of screws up this theory. Sorry"

Xander put Spike down in the kitchen before the crypt, when he made the "girlfriend" comment. I'm not sure that I buy the "Xander knows" theory, but the timing of his comments do fit the theory above. Also, was what Xander said really so hurtful to Buffy? If he somehow knew what was going on between them, he could have just been giving her a hard time. She looked embarassed, not hurt.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- maddy, 19:11:55 01/11/02 Fri

A few theories about Xander knowing:

The insults in the kitchen were aimed at the women he chooses, not Spike, that's why Buffy reacted, and not Spike. Notice he didn't respond at all.

In the crypt, Xander doesn't tell Spike about Buffy dissolving because that would have caused major awkwardness. Would Buffy have jumped up and revealed she was there? To avoid this, he plays it as he thinks that Spike is a perv, and that is what Buffy would expect Xander to think about Spike. Also, if she had not been there, Spike surely would have jumped to the rescue and went out looking for her with Xander. X knows that Buffy isn't ready to admit it, even if everyone else is. She is still acting immature by hiding the relationship. She has to grow up and face this with the rest of her other problems. It is inevitable that Xander will tell her that he knows, and that it is okay.

[> [> [> Re: Xander doesn't DO denial (Spoilers for Gone) -- maddog, 10:33:34 01/11/02 Fri

Bait....maybe he thinks Buffy's there and wants her to prove it...so he says something inderectly mean about her, then about Spike(the get a girlfriend) line...hoping that she'll get all defensive and forget she's invisible

Drew z. Greenberg interview transcript -- Liquidram, 09:00:24 01/10/02 Thu

Surgery was postponed, and we're out of the hospital. I'd like to thank everyone for the kind wishes, messages and emails! You guys are great.

Here is the Succubus Club interview transcript for Drew z. Greenberg


[> This was just great! -- Rahael, 10:28:25 01/10/02 Thu

Thanks liq! And welcome back.

[> I loved reading that... -- Rob, 11:02:21 01/10/02 Thu

That interview gives me great hope for the future of this season. I love this season, just as the others, but more than any other season in memory I've had some qualms...about the lack of interaction between some of the characters, mostly. I am very glad to hear that the writers realize, also, that more of that is needed. I'm very glad to hear that Xander and Anya will be playing a large role in February. I'm glad to hear that Joss is still extremely involved with every episode, unlike what many people at this site have feared.

It's funny, because, individually, I've loved every episode this season, but on the whole, there has been something missing. This interview gives me hope that that something will be reclaimed soon. Sometimes I wish I could fast-forward in time to the end of the season, because any of my doubts about the year's story arc are always allayed by the season finale. I then rewatch all episodes from that season, and realize how brilliant it all was to begin with (even the stuff I didn't like the first time around.) Of course, the great conflict is, by the same token, I don't want the season to be over...I need a steady supply of new eps each week to be happy. Oh, well!

Anyway, I really enjoyed reading Mr. Greenberg's interview, because I was a big fan of "Smashed." I hope his next episode is as entertaining.


[> [> Re: I loved reading that... -- maddog, 10:58:23 01/11/02 Fri

You bring out a great point that a lot of people are talking about...that even when the lack of faith creeps in during mid season...by the end, you always get it...then you rewatch the season episodes and realize how brilliant it really was. Too many people forget that.

[> Quote of the week -- Masquerade, 12:20:09 01/10/02 Thu

"There's always going to be somebody who's not going to be happy. And the truth is, I love that. Because you should be finding that there's certain things you don't like about it, you should be thinking with a critical mind, you should be saying to yourself `This really works for me, this really doesn't.' Because then, you're really thinking about what you're watching...."

Drew Z. Greenberg, BtVS writer, 9 january 2002

[> [> Re: Quote of the week -- maddog, 11:21:44 01/11/02 Fri

A very good choice...he just validated the existance of a message board such as this...and you love to hear that from someone on the show.

[> house metaphore -- Kerri, 12:57:31 01/10/02 Thu

Drew: I'm loathed to get too specific about what the metaphor stands for, but I will say a house fell down on them. It's not good!

Humm....it's interesting....my take on this was quite different. I din't see the house as falling on them, more around them. I saw the house as represnting components of Buffy and Spike that were falling down, leaving them bare and leaving room for new growth. And in my book that is a good thing.

[> [> Re: house metaphor - my reading of his comments -- Dyna, 14:00:38 01/10/02 Thu

DG certainly doesn't seem to want to give away much about what Joss had in mind with the house metaphor--he won't actually say what it's a metaphor *for.* Which makes sense, if the house metaphor is as important as we think it is. I mean sure, on this forum it's been discussed and analyzed deeply, and a strong case has been made for the idea that the destruction of an abandoned house can be a metaphor for rebirth, regeneration through destruction. But the average viewer on the street will probably not see what we see, and for DG to elaborate on what may be "hiding" there would be spoilery for many viewers, right? So when he says "it's not good," I can't help feeling that he's expressing what's on the surface, what the appearance is.

The comments he makes after that kind of support the idea that he believes the obvious meaning of the house destruction is negative--because he goes on to say that it might be other than it appears, and the "other than" sounds like potentially positive stuff to me.

Candy: With the house falling down being the metaphor... for what? Explain all that.

Drew: I'm loathed to get too specific about what the metaphor stands for, but I will say a house fell down on them. It's not good!

Kitty: Foreshadowing, perhaps?

Drew: I don't know. It raises the question of is this good or is this bad. I'm not saying it is one or the other, I'm just saying, you know, I'm just saying... and also, that doesn't mean that it's not gonna change ever. That doesn't mean that Spike won't change, it doesn't mean that Buffy won't change...

Candy: Well, change is the nature of the show.

Drew: Absolutely. So just because maybe something's not great at the time doesn't mean that it won't lead them to a place where they say `Hey wait a minute, there's more here.'

Candy: Do you know how much speculation you are causing right now?

Kitty: You are so evil.

Drew: Who, me?

Kitty: All the Spike fans, including me, are just freaking out now.

Drew: There's every chance in the world that the interaction that they're having now will make them ask questions about themselves and about each other and about their relationship and maybe even make them want to change their attitudes about each other. You never know, you never know.


On an unrelated note, Drew Greenberg must marry me immediately.

[> [> [> LOL! -- rowan, 14:38:17 01/10/02 Thu

"On an unrelated note, Drew Greenberg must marry me immediately."

I'm planning to have Joss's baby, so maybe we can all hang out together outside of work. ;)


[> [> [> [> I don't mind standing with you two but I'll be damned if I'm.... -- Rufus, 16:40:31 01/10/02 Thu

getting married....AGAIN....or having anyones baby...;)

[> If you would like to listen to a recording of the show -- Rufus, 13:08:05 01/10/02 Thu

someone at Tabula Rasa was kind enough to tape the show....


[> [> That recording is definitely worth a listen! -- Dyna, 20:14:52 01/10/02 Thu

There turn out to be lots of fun bits of chat that aren't in the transcript--probably better for the transcript, since meandering chat when transcribed often reads like the participants were stoned. :) But there's also useful info not in the transcript, such as that Doug Petrie is writing and directing episode 15, and that Joss is writing an Angel episode. For the full flavor of the interview, I highly recommend a listen.

Existential Scoobies site - Character Posts Updated -- Liquidram, 09:05:02 01/10/02 Thu

The First Anniversary Character Posts have been updated on the Existential Scoobies Website.


Jonathan Joyce The Host The Master Warren

If you have never taken the opportunity to read these essays, I strongly recommend you do so now. They are excellent character studies written by members of this board.

[> Here's the full list... anyone's summer '01 analysis missing? -- Masq, 09:15:42 01/10/02 Thu

These are all the analyses I saw in the archives that needed prettying up for the Ex. Scoobies page:

Angel Angelus Anya Buffy Cordelia Darla Dawn Drusilla Faith Giles The Host Jonathan Joyce The Master The Mayor Riley Spike Tara Warren Wesley Willow Xander

[> [> Only Linsday & Doyle from your flaky webMistress whose muse did fail -- ShamedLiq, 09:16:53 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Well, I was refering to ones that were written and posted on the board... : ) -- M, 09:19:27 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> Okay, then delete my confession so that my sterling reputation remains intact -- L, 09:30:10 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> It's my new year's resolution to stop procrastinating everything : ) -- Masq, 11:53:46 01/10/02 Thu

I, too can be a flaky WebMistress...

[> Many thanks for the update! -- verdantheart, 11:42:25 01/10/02 Thu

I was hoping to see the laggards added (not just my own ...).

- vh

*hits in head in bewilderment Question -- Neaux, 09:28:48 01/10/02 Thu

I was reading the info on Warren just now and they show Katrina? I think.. the robot he built...

Is this the same girl from NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE who.. ahem... *coughs.. appears as the foreign exchange student??

[> Katrina was his human girlfriend; the robot was April -- Source, 09:32:19 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> Re: Katrina was his human girlfriend; the robot was April -- Neaux, 09:34:37 01/10/02 Thu

Thanks... ok.. lemme rephrase...

was April the girl from NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE?

[> [> [> And to Answer My Own Question -- neaux, 09:47:54 01/10/02 Thu

The is answer is No. Doh! two different actresses.

[> [> [> [> But the trivia answer is... -- Darby, 20:48:46 01/10/02 Thu

...the April-bot was supposed to be protrayed by Britney Spears, who dropped out for some reason.

[> [> [> [> [> NSYNC too -- neaux, 05:03:11 01/11/02 Fri

Thanks goodness that never happened... It would be like the whole N'SYNC in STAR WARS FIASCO.

think of the backlash....

[> [> [> [> [> I thought so -- vampire hunter D, 13:53:57 01/11/02 Fri

I figured that wasthe role Britney was going to play. The April bot just needed to look good and could have been done by a girl with even the most limited acting ability. Hmm, looks good, limited acting ability, Britney Spears!

Buffy: Season Two DVD Set Date Announced!!! Holy crap, it feels like Christmas all over again! -- Rob, 09:40:14 01/10/02 Thu

I was surfing the net today, and stopped by at http://www.dvdfile.com and was too excited for words when I read the official news that, even though the first set of Buffy has not yet come out, the second is already slated to come out THIS MAY!!! 4 months away isn't so bad! It's gonna be a six disc set. I'm so excited, since now we don't have to wonder how long until we get the 2nd season into our greedy little hands! DVD rules!


[> Happy, happy! Joy, joy!! -- Deeva, 10:49:56 01/10/02 Thu

Now my friends and relatives will truly see the scope of my obsession with BtVS! If the 2nd season dvd's actually come out in May, then I'm hitting them up for either an early b-day gift or a "just-cause" gift.

Does this mean that season 3 will show up around November or sooner? How awesome would that be?!?! 3 seasons in one year! The mind just boggles.

[> [> Re: Happy, happy! Joy, joy!! -- Rob, 11:08:18 01/10/02 Thu

"Does this mean that season 3 will show up around November or sooner? How awesome would that be?!?! 3 seasons in one year! The mind just boggles."

I really hope so! Maybe then we can catch up with the UK...No offense to any British people on this site, but how unfair is it that you guys got the first three or four seasons of one of our TV shows on DVD before we did?!? Grr aargh!

I wish they'd just put out all the seasons immediately. In fact, I hope in the near future, every television show puts out a DVD set of the previous season during the summer hiatus. How great would it be to get a DVD boxed set of the 6th season of "Buffy," for example, this May, and be totally caught up? Yeah, I know, most people wouldn't buy all the sets in such a short amount of time, but...maybe they could reduce the price to $10 a set?


[> [> [> Re: Happy, happy! Joy, joy!! -- Deeva, 11:20:34 01/10/02 Thu

$10 a set?! But where's the capitalism in that? No, I would gladly fork over the asking price. Joss & co. have given me something that I enjoy so much that paying up is not a problem. And I would buy all the sets in such a short amount of time. When I start something, anything, I become very "one-track". I knew that resisting the temptation from buying the VHS sets would pay off somehow. I just didn't like the fact that it was just some of the eps. and not all of it.

[> [> [> [> Re: Happy, happy! Joy, joy!! -- Rob, 12:28:48 01/10/02 Thu

Believe me, I'd gladly fork over the asking price also. Maybe even a little extra if they'd put out all the eps immediately. ;o)


[> This will save us from the summer rerun hell! Woo-Hoo! -- pagangodess, 10:56:46 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> And it saves us from all that cuttng they do to the shows on FX. -- Deeva, 11:08:33 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Re: Not to mention not having to see that Sins of the Father commercial ever again!!!. -- B, 13:41:37 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> I know!! It's getting so bad that I immediately switch the channel! -- Deeva, 14:04:42 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> Oh, God, I know... -- Rob, 15:12:20 01/10/02 Thu

F/X totally blew any shot of me ever being interested in watching that movie. I have never been so sick of a movie before it has even come out! And why did they start advertising a movie airing in January, last May? I respect the subject matter, but I just wish the damn movie would air already so we can be over with it.


[> The delaying has already begun...The date's been changed to June now...Grr aargh! -- Rob, 22:09:05 01/10/02 Thu

If this ends up being pushed back a year like the last one, I may just "Kill...Kill everybody!"


[> [> Mr. Moo-moo mug? Is that you? ;o) -- Deeva, 23:13:33 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> LOL...All work and no play makes Doris a dull girl... -- Rob, 10:15:05 01/11/02 Fri

[> [> Re: The delaying has already begun...The date's been changed to June now...Grr aargh! -- Deeva, 23:22:04 01/10/02 Thu

But Tensai says that it sounds like season 3 might be out around Christmas. June's not so bad but we'll see. As of right now it still looks like 3 seasons in 1 year. "Woo" and "Hoo"!

[> [> Re: The delaying has already begun...The date's been changed to June now...Grr aargh! -- Rattletrap, 06:23:37 01/11/02 Fri

Actually, a June release date might be better (*I know, I know, heresy to say this*) because we'll have a whole run of new episodes all through May, probably culminating in an intense season finale around the end of the month. How cool would it be for S2 DVDs to come out the next week or something, it would be almost like having new episodes for the first few weeks of the summer.

Just as long as they don't push it back any farther than June.


[> [> [> I guess it's not that bad, but... -- Rob, 09:26:58 01/11/02 Fri

I read that Star Trek: The Next Generation is going to be released in DVD sets, starting in March, and get this...the ENTIRE SERIES...all 7 seasons...will be released by the end of 2002. They're gonna put out one boxed set every other month. Now, I know that Buffy doesn't have as many seasons yet, but why can't they release a set every other month like that? I think it would be a great idea, especially to hook in some new viewers who don't want to start in the middle...and then they could be all caught up for the 7th season.(And also, then, I could get a DVD copy of OMWF a lot sooner!)

Fox has been releasing X-Files at a rate of 2 seasons per year. The first 3 sets sold well, but the 4th, while it did sell, did not do as well, and I think it's because people lose interest...there's too much of a break between the seasons. I guess if Buffy stays at a rate of 3 per year, for the next two years, I can live with it...but I just don't get why they can't release all the eps the way "Star Trek" is doing it. I think the studios really underestimate how much true DVD collectors will buy (and how fanatic true Buffy fans are!). If they put all "Buffy" seasons out at once, many people (including me) would buy all of them at once. I would forego food for a week if I could have all the seasons out now. You heard me. I'm not fooling around, people!



[> [> [> [> Re: I guess it's not that bad, but... -- JM, 12:05:47 01/11/02 Fri

I'm pretty sure that the release schedule is connected to syndication. The show is sold to both a cable station, which airs it daily, and a broadcast station in each market, which airs it weekly on weekends. Some broadcasters were airing both a first and a third season episode each weekend, but some, like Baltimore I think, were only airing one ep.

The broadcasters just wrapped up season one a few weeks ago. Which is why they can now market the DVDs. If DVDs came out before the first syndication run was complete, it would detract from the value of the broadcasters' product. Just like movies have to leave the discount theater before they hit Blockbuster.

Broadcasters will need at least 22 weeks to finish up season two, and some will need more because the show will occassionally be preempted due to delays caused by sports coverage, etc. Probably some of the customers asked Twenthieth Century Fox to hold off on the release a little longer. At least I think this is how this all works.

I loved ST:TNG but it has definitely had its syndicated run multiple times. No broadcaster or cable station will loose money because of that DVD release. Plus that series finished six years ago. Happily we won't have to wait that long for Buffy merchandise. (I was disappointed too though when I saw this post.)

[> [> [> [> Re: I guess it's not that bad, but... -- maddog, 12:08:02 01/11/02 Fri

Well isn't "Next Generation" off the air? That would give the cast more time to do the extra stuff for the DVD's. Remember, they don't exactly have a lot of free time during the taping of the season to go out and do commentaries and worry about Special Edition DVD's.

[> [> [> [> Re: I'm with you, Rob -- squireboy, 13:17:05 01/11/02 Fri

I'm even going to be buying copies of the north american dvds to replace the ones I ordered from Australia, so that my friends here who only have a R1 player can watch them too.

FOX, we have disposable income and we want to spend it NOW on your product -- get with the program! ;)

JM, your post makes a ton of sense, but as the fans prove every week, following this show doesn't have much connection to sense or logic. :P


[> [> [> [> Re: I guess it's not that bad, but... -- Andy, 04:50:43 01/12/02 Sat

I'm actually thinking the X-Files took a sales hit because of the quality of the product. A lot of people love the first 3 seasons, but the longer it goes on the fewer people are going to keep buying just because the show didn't maintain quality. The sales are really going to get hit after they get to season 5. A lot of folks are just going to cap off their collections right there, reasoning that the show went to hell after the movie came out, and then it's going to be down mostly to the completists :)

The Star Trek dvd's are coming out so quickly because the show has been on the air a lot longer than Buffy. It doesn't have to worry about the legal entanglements that syndication causes because every season has rerun multiple times. Fox isn't delaying these sets because they don't want money. They do. But what the left hand of the company wants (Fox Video) isn't what the right hand wants (Fox Television) and it's the right hand that gets what it wants. The dvd people would love to release Buffy really fast and get all our money and but they are flat out legally barred from doing so because of those damn syndication contracts.

As for Buffy season 2 being delayed, I was under the impression that it always was scheduled for June? I could have sworn I read that on one of the dvd news sites. I was actually surprised when people starting saying it was coming out in May *shrug*


Buffy's men -- manwitch, 09:53:51 01/10/02 Thu


After two hundred fifty some-odd years, Angel had acquired the emotional maturity to date a 16 year old girl. That relationship, at the time, seemed wonderfully romantic, like they were destined for each other, the way first highschool romances do. But looking back on it now, he was just a vampire. Figuratively. The whole relationship was about his melodrama. Him him him. And Buffy was supposed to, and did, get sucked into it over and over again. But her role (to him) was simply to sustain his brooding. He acted like he was there to protect her, but she didn't need his protection. He wanted her to help him appease his own guilt. He basically sucked her dry, which he actually did at the end of season three, before he ran out on her for good. I think a lot of young women can remember a relationship like that. An extremely immature self centered older man who saps all your strength while making you think the measure of your success is your support for him in all his trials and tribulations.

don't get me wrong. I like the guy.


Riley was a nice enough guy, but he was hyper-masculine. Like Arnold. Chemically and technologically enhanced masculinity. And consequently he was always threatened by Buffy. "Give me a couple of weeks, and I'll take you down." When Buffy first revealed who she was to Riley and Walsh, Riley's reaction wasn't, wow you're cool, it was "man, I'm embarassed that a girl does more than me." He was always troubled by that. He DID want an equal relationship with Buffy ("how about we agree to take care of each other") but that could only happen if Buffy agreed to be less than she is. And she new it. I think a lot of young women can probly relate to that too.


Spike, whose carnal desire for Buffy starts way before the chip gets put in (watch School Hard again), wants Buffy to reach her fullest potential. Spike seeks out slayers, as a measure of himself. I'm reminded of a quote from Nietzsche's Geneaology of Morals, "The noble soul has no better enemy than one in whom there is nothing to despise and much to esteem." The better the slayer, the better the Spike, for seeking her out. Plus, spike wants to protect not Buffy, but Dawn FOR Buffy. Its like Spike is saying, hey, I understand that you have a kid and I like that. Spike alone wants and can have a relationship of equality with Buffy. He wants her to be all she can be. Spike was "a bad poet" but "a good man." And Buffy makes him "feel like a man" even though he's a monster. And now the chip is not preventing him from killing her, but he seems to have no interest in killing her anyway. Spike's attitude towards her is really like Giles's in a way, except with romantic interest included.

I think there is an interesting connection there between Giles and Spike. Xander's dream in Restless foreshadowed the whole Randy Giles thing. Spike was dressed as Randy swinging on the swing with Giles and Giles said "Spike is like a son to me." Then they had some mindless banter about a land shark.

Then as Randy, it was suggested again that he was Giles son. Perhaps that suggestion is because he has the same hopes and attitudes towards buffy (even when he is her enemy he wants her on her game) as Giles does. But Giles, recognizing as Angel does not, that he is not an appropriate romantic match for a young developing girl, has no romantic interest. Spike, being sort of "captured" in his twenties, does have the potential to be a romantic interest for buffy. So its like Spike is Giles, only a younger generation of him (even though he's older).

After some rough relationships and a few pallette cleansers, Buffy has finally found "the one." Its not who she expected, and it freaks her out.


[> I agree with a lot of your points,but.... -- AurraSing, 10:30:28 01/10/02 Thu

I'm not completely convinced that Spike is "the one".Unless something really significantly happens to him (*NOT* a soul,thank you) I don't think they can last.A Slayer cannot convincingly keep fighting evil if she is sleeping with it on a daily basis..notice how little slayage has been happening the past few episodes?? Something has got to give and it will have to be Spike. Of course I don't have the answer to this dilemma but I am sure there is a bigger plan out there than just "Buffy getting some".Isn't it great to have this to think about???

[> Re: Buffy's men -- Deeva, 11:06:42 01/10/02 Thu

I see a lot of your points on Angel, Riley & Spike and agree with most of them. As much of a fan of Buffy/Spike that I am, I don't think that Spike is "the one" (makes me think of The Matrix. Neo, choose the red or blue pill. ). Well, maybe "the one" for now but not the end-all & be-all of her relationships.

And as for "It's not who she expected, and it freaks her out. Maybe?" Who, of any of us, having found "the one", ended up with who we thought it should be? It probably wouldn't be so dramaticaly opposite as Buffy & Spike but, really, did you ever think that you would be with the person you're with now? I know that I can say that I never thought I would be with the person I'm with now but here I is! ;o)

[> Re: Buffy's men -- Liz, 14:16:43 01/10/02 Thu

I've noticed that Buffy tends to inspire a kind of total and obsessive love. When something goes wrong in the relationship, the guy usually isn't together enough to alter things or just break up with her. He has to flee. They can't just stay away from her, or treat her differently. One could throw Giles into that description, as well. He didn't think he was doing her any good, but he could not manage to deny her anything so he removed himself from the situation.

Spike might just have a shot at overcoming this. In a way, Spike might be her first equal. When he threw her out of his crypt, he was doing something that no one else had been able to do: demanding his own terms and still sticking around to see if she'd give them.

Then again, it's unclear whether Spike will really be able to do this. It looked like his attempt at throwing her out was rather subverted. But he's trying--he is at least seeing the situation clearly.

[> [> That's an interesting point... -- Moose, 16:00:41 01/10/02 Thu

Buffy's love burns her like fire and it consumes those around her. How often have her friends risked their lives for her? Buffy desperately wants stability and normalcy but she gets it through the sacrifices her friends/lovers make for her.

I always found Buffy's reaction to Parker a bit of a mystery. Why in the world would a strong person such as Buffy still desire a creep like Parker after his true colors are apparent? Well, my theory is that Parker didn't respond to the fire. Buffy is used to people jumping through just about any hoop to merely be her friend, to be near the fire. Buffy never had any real feelings for Parker. She never got to know him in any significant way. So why the desperate reaction? Why the question of "What's wrong with me?" Answer: The fire should have burned Parker to a crisp, he should be willing to die for her. Xander would and she doesn't even sleep with him...

Buffy is a bit used to the world revolving around Buffy, and her friends are used to it. It's not a bad thing necessarily, since she is a generous and loving person and the job of Slayer demands leadership. But how long can it last? How long will her friends and lovers move mountains just to bask in her radiance?

S6 has shown a very self-involved Buffy, which "Gone" really brought to the surface. Buffy has a light romp being invisible while having others make sacrifices for her--Xander/Anya/Willow research for her, Spike gets humiliated for her, the social worker gets an unwanted vacation and maybe worse because of her, and Dawn can't talk to her and is worried about losing the last of her family. Of course Dawn is freaked! Tara gone, Willow just betrayed her and Buffy seems blissfully unaware of anything she does.

Funny thing is, even her enemies are consumed by her and drawn to her. The Troika define themselves by being her "nemesis..es." No one can escape the lure of Buffy without drastic measures being taken--like Giles returning to England, or Riley going to the jungle, Angel L.A.

Very few people get to know Buffy without being drawn into orbit around her. Maybe this season of "oh grow up" Buffy's sphere of influence is reduced to that of normal person?

:-) Not likely...

[> [> [> Spike vs. Giles -- leslie, 21:00:06 01/10/02 Thu

There are parallels between Spike and Giles in both directions--Spike as a human was decidedly Gilesesque, but at the same time Giles, when he reverts to his adolescent Ripper persona, is basically a human version of Spike.

In Honor of the Season 1 DVD Release -- B, 09:55:17 01/10/02 Thu

What are your favorite moments from Season One? (Great way to get excited for the DVD to arrive).

Mine: (in no particular order) 1) The scene in The Pack when Xander and the other "hyenas" are walking in slow motion toward the camera, looking evil and animal . . . 2) Buffy's "I'm Sixteen, I don't want to die" speech in Prophecy Girl. 3) Buffy's cross burns Angel's chest in "Angel" 4) Giles finds out that Jenny Calendar knows the end is near in Prophecy Girl 5) Xander following the chocolate path in Nightmares 6) Xander and Willow showing up at the Bronze to warn Buffy that she's needed at the funeral home in "Never Kill a Boy on the First Date."

Anyone else?

[> Re: In Honor of the Season 1 DVD Release -- Rob, 10:10:43 01/10/02 Thu

The performance of "Oedipus" by Buffy, Xander, and Will during the end credits of "The Puppet Show"...

And, a perfect companion, Will's "opera nightmare" in "Nightmares."


[> [> Re: In Honor of the Season 1 DVD Release -- Rattletrap, 12:32:03 01/10/02 Thu

Xander's "Can I have you . . . umm, help you" from WttH and Buffy's "You forgot about sunrise . . . its in about 9 hours, moron" from The Harvest

[> [> [> Re: In Honor of the Season 1 DVD Release -- zargon, 15:49:27 01/10/02 Thu

1) Buffy and Giles in "Welcome to the Hellmouth", the reluctant vampire slayer: Giles: I really don't understand this attitude. You, you've accepted your duty, you, you've slain vampires before... Buffy: Yeah, and I've both been there and done that, and I'm moving on.......first of all, I'm a Vampire Slayer. And secondly, I'm retired. Hey, I know! Why don't you kill 'em?

2) Buffy and Angel in "The Harvest", tell me about the Master Buffy: I don't suppose you've got a key on you? Angel: They really don't like me dropping in. Buffy: (faces him) Why not? Angel: They really don't like me. Buffy: How could that possibly be?

Buffy: I've got a friend down there. Or at least a potential friend. Do you know what it's like to have a friend? That wasn't supposed to be a stumper.

3) Giles in "The Witch" carrying Buffy oh so carefully in his arms to the Sunnydale HS Science Lab and laying her down on the table with his coat for a pillow where he tries to reverse Amy's Mother's spell. Its the 3rd ep and he already loves her.

4) Xander in "The Pack"...once out of the hyena spell he goes to rescue Willow from being tied up: "No one messes with MY Wilow".

5) Angel in "Angel"..."Why not? I killed my family. And their friends, and their friends' children. For a hundred years I offered an ugly death to everyone I met and I did it with a song in my heart.....You have no idea what it's like to have done the things I've done... and to care."

6) Xander in "The Puppet Show": "Okay, next time we split up someone else is on Cordy detail. Five more minutes with her and we woulda had another organ donor."

7) "Nightmares"...Buffy being buried alive and coming back a vamp.....Giles' nightmare of seeing Buffy's grave...

8) Cordy in "Invisible Girl", it's all about me: Cordelia: Somebody is after me! They just tried to kill Ms. Miller? Uh, she was helping me with my homework. And Mitch! And Harmony?! This is all about me! Me, me, me! Xander: Wow! For once she's right! Buffy: So you've come to *me* for help. Cordelia: (nods) Because you're always around when all this weird stuff is happening. And I know you're very strong, and you've got all those weapons... I was kind of hoping you were in a gang.

Giles summs up Buffy and Angel's relationship succiently: "A vampire in love with a Slayer! It's rather poetic! In a maudlin sort of way."

9) Buffy in "Prophecy Girl"..."Giles, I'm sixteen years old. I don't want to die."

Shrimp and Salutations -- Little One, 12:20:51 01/10/02 Thu

Wow, that was strange! I was just about to reply to WW, Rufus and Sol's heart-warming messages about my absence and the thread went to the archives in mid-reply! What did I touch? Anyway, just wanted to say "Thanks, guys!!!" for the welcome back. You have warmed the cockles of my heart and what's better than toasty cockles? My computer is finally allowing me not to only to enter this site but to actually post a message! Life is good! Yup, all moved in and am embracing small-town life again (just moved from Toronto to a town with about 500 people).

Um, guess I should say something about Buffy in this completely O/T post so I don't get punished by any of the resident Evils.;-p Aha, here's one. Do you think they'll be serving shrimp at Anya's wedding? Do you think the Big Bads' (or at least Slightly Naughty Trio's) building of an invisibility ray can be translated to mean that their consciences are catching up with them? In Andrew and Jonathon's case, it could be tangible evidence that they are fighting their feelings of guilt and yet still want to carry on with the fun they are having. By becoming invisible, it doesn't count. Buffy felt this as well in her, ahem, interlude with Spike. It didn't count because she wasn't visibly doing anything. However, in Warren's case, it was more of a case of being able to use his considerable genious as a means to more power without getting caught. This became evident by the end of Gone. Perhaps the episode title could also infer to the demise of the trio's shared reign. I have no doubt that Warren will continue his path towards serious Big Badshipness but will Andrew and Jonathon become mere flunkies? Gone is the innocent fun (grand theft and guard insto-freeze aside). Warren can now blackmail/demand that the other two lend their support of his mad romp into murder and mayhem. Sorry if this was already discussed in an earlier thread! I haven't caught up yet with the board (but it's so much fun!)

[> Re: Shrimp and Salutations -- luminesce, 12:39:26 01/10/02 Thu

My guess is that Anya would rather have rabbit.

[> [> Coney Stew? -- Little One, 12:56:07 01/10/02 Thu

Preferably well chopped up and cooked well-done so as to prevent any bunny resurrections by a mischievious demon.

Hmm...do you think they'll do the bunny dance? ;-)

[> [> [> Re: Coney Stew? -- luminesce, 13:10:52 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Re: Coney Stew? -- luminesce, 13:10:52 01/10/02 Thu

Exactly. I suspect there are some lovely recipes for rabbit terrines and pates and such.

And Anya would be so pleased to have her wedding combined with the joyous slaughter of so many of those *&*^$& bunnies.

[> Quick tangential question/comment bout Warren -- yuri, 20:05:29 01/10/02 Thu

He obviously didn't make that invisibility gun to check out nekkid chicks, so what did he make it for? I'm sure the other two had simple, low-scale plans for it, but obviously Warren wanted it for a reason. What is he preparing for? What does he seem to want? I really don't know, and can't rightly figure out where all his incentive to be evil is coming from. He's the most level-headed and amiable, sheeit he even had a decent seeming girl! (though he did treat her wrong.) It seems like he'd do fine if all he really wanted was to fit in. I definitely do not understand yet.

[> [> Re: Quick tangential question/comment bout Warren -- MrDave, 21:16:24 01/10/02 Thu

a "Warren" is what happens to people who are angry at the world.

Warren (unlike his fellow nemeses) has done the Work hard in school, achieve something, make a name for himself (Who else is better at building robots?...only Ted's creator knows for sure!), and have some measure of happiness (with Katrina).

And he lost it all. Granted, it was his own fault. He set up the situation by being cowardly and stupid. But frankly, he is pissed off about it.

He wants it all back and he is going to get it all. Everything. I think he is going to try to take over the whole world. I think his experiments in mixing tech and magick (the inviso ray was such a device) are going to be used to make a device to directly tap and harness the energy of the Hellmouth. Heck the HS is still abandoned and they could work practically undisturbed.

WHAT he would do with all that primal/evil energy is still a mystery. But D'Hoffryn (who is invited to the X/A wedding) is certain to take notice of the "vengence" scenario being played out. Warren the Vengence Demon? Hmm...

Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- Rob, 12:35:28 01/10/02 Thu

Anya thought D'Hoffryn should be at Table One, and thus move Buffy to the dreaded Table Four, with Xander's family. Bad idea! I think D'Hoffryn would be a much better match with Xander's family. Willow and Buffy should definitely be seated together, so Buffy should return to Table One and Willow should be seated next to her. The big question, though, is, besides family members, and the infamous Uncle Rory, how many more people would actually be coming to this wedding? All of Anya's family is long dead, so nix them. And all of Xander and Anya's friends are comprised of Willow, Buffy, and Dawn. Can we count Spike? Maybe to fill up the guest list a little. And if Giles can come back from England, he can be there. Another great friend of theirs is Tara, but with the weirdness with Willow, that probably wouldn't work out, unless the two get back together.

As you guys can probably tell, I am going nowhere fast with this subject. I'm sitting at work now, very bored, and I thought I'd do a little brainstorming. Feel free to respond if you want about this...or about something completely different. This could be the "post anything whatsoever while you're bored out of your skull" thread! Yeah!


[> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- cat, 12:52:42 01/10/02 Thu

Ok, all of Xander's family at one table, demons: D'Hoffryn, Spike, any other demon friends of Anya's at another table, Willow, Buffy, Dawn, Tara, Giles, Riley (if he's invited and can actually make it) at a third. Kinda have to wonder if the demons are going to be disguised as humans, given the presence of Xander's family. And, wouldn't that be a grand scene, with Riley at Buffy's table, and Spike there, but no one knowing about him and Buffy? If glares were lethal, Riley would be a pin cushion!

[> [> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- Deeva, 13:27:21 01/10/02 Thu

Also, are Xander and Cordelia on speaking terms? Would Xander invite Cordy? Would Anya let him? I know that Xander would probably not invite Angel, as he dislikes him more than he does Spike.

I don't think that all the demon friends should be lumped all together unless they knew each other, which by most appearances on the show, it's a small circle and everybody pretty much does know everyone else.

[> [> [> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- Rob, 15:10:10 01/10/02 Thu

Actually, I thought about Cordy...Maybe by now, she'll have gotten over the betrayal. Then again, it is Cordy. Maybe not...


[> [> [> [> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- zargon, 15:19:15 01/10/02 Thu

I can just see Cordy..."You are inviting me to WHAT? In what universe do you live that you would even think that I would want to see you who I am so over get married to a vengence demon? 7:00? Yeah, I'll be there..."

ps. Given Anya's total bunny-phobia, I would think she wouldn't want them anywhere near her wedding....no hide nor hair of them so to speak.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- MayaPapaya9, 16:15:05 01/10/02 Thu

Well it was my impression that at the end of "The Prom" Xander and Cordelia had come to a sort of truce. I think it would be awesome if Cordy and Angel and Wesley showed up. When is this wedding supposed to be taking place again?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- Deeva, 16:54:04 01/10/02 Thu

And don't forget about baby Connor!

[> The Wedding Party -- Lilac, 16:19:20 01/10/02 Thu

I think, actually, that as a bridesmaid, Buffy would sit at the head table with Xander and Anya and the rest of the wedding party. Their talking about seating her at table 4 is kind of rude, and would sort of being like adding insult to the injury of making her dress is sack cloth and blood larvae (or what ever the traditional demon outfit is).

[> [> Re: The Wedding Party -- SingedCat, 17:14:43 01/10/02 Thu

Now there's a question-- whos will the bridesmaid be?! She's supposed to be Anya's best friend...and who will the best man be???

Anyone want odds on who gives Anya away..D'Hoffryn or Giles? :D

[> [> [> Re: The Wedding Party -- Lunarchickk, 20:24:38 01/11/02 Fri

Actually, at some weddings, the bride and groom sit at a separate table by themselves (can't think of what it's called, a Sweetheart Table maybe?) and the bridal party either gets their own table or are mixed in with the guests, I guess. We thought about doing this as I felt bad separating my sisters from their families. (Am I actually posting this on a Buffy board?? :) ) Anyway, we haven't taken into consideration what odd demon customs may be associated with wedding seating arrangements, either...

Speaking of the wedding party, my guess on who would be in it would be Willow standing up for Xander as "best woman" (yes, some people do that, so it's not entirely unheard of) because she's his best friend since childhood; Buffy as Anya's maid of honor, because the maid of honor has so many duties to fulfill, and Anya would deem Buffy capable of them; and other than that, I'm really just hoping we get to see Spike in a tux. Just for the very odd mental image that inspires. :) Although I cannot for the life of me figure out how any of the Scooby Gang other than Willow and Buffy would wind up in their wedding party... except that who else would be in it?? :) (Maybe a friend or two of Xander's from work, but I don't buy that. Not close enough to force a tux rental on. :) )

As for giving Anya away, my money's on D'Hoffryn. *grin* I'd love to see the reunions that will inevitably take place. "Willow, nice to see you again. You're looking very... vengeance-driven." "Me? No, not me. I'm, uh, magic-free these days." "Ah. Pity." :)

[> [> [> [> Re: The Wedding Party (Just my wacky speculations) -- Isabel, 00:16:24 01/12/02 Sat

I agree that Willow would be best as Xander's Best 'Man.' As for Maid of Honor, I'd think Tara, not Buffy. Tara actually gets along ok with Anya, and Anya and Xander can pick whomever they want to stand up with them. It's up to their guests to behave as adults. (Yes, I know. It's a set up for failure, but it adds drama and comedy.) Plus, I think Anya is a little jealous of Buffy because of Xander. OR Anya would have Buffy as her bridesmaid BECAUSE of the extra cachet of having the Slayer be HER bridesmaid.

As for who gives Anya away, I think there's an excellent choice to consider: Spike. I have given this thought. (Alright, I've been thinking about this for 6 months or so. It's not like I'm obsessive or anything. ;-))

Anya has said she doesn't want to turn her back on her demon traditions. But she's human now and marrying a human and hoping to produce human babies. She will be symbolically entering the human world and turning her back on her demon life forever.

The bride is given away by her father, who in Anya's case would be best represented by a demon. D'Hoffryn is the demon who made Anya a demon in the first place, but he's also the one who flatly refused to reempower her when she lost her powers. He's not only her ex-boss, he FIRED her. I'm frankly not expecting him to come to the wedding. I think he'd find it distasteful. Spike is a demon. He represents a blend of human and demon. She also knows him very well.

And last but not least, this way we get Spike in a Tux. Isn't that reason enough? ;-)

As for Giles, he never had that father/daughter relationship with Anya. She definitely sees him as a peer and partner, not a father. He could be Xander's best man if Willow doesn't do it.

Other invitees to the wedding? Dawn, if she's not being a bridesmaid. Riley, if he can be found. Definitely Cordelia, since Anya might want to rub in that SHE'S marrying Xander. (I can see Cordy bringing Wes and Angel along as moral support, because it sucks when your ex-boyfriend gets married.) Xander's work buddies; Willow's parents, because they were Xander's second parents. Oz, if he's in the hemisphere....

[> [> Re: The Wedding Party -- Vickie, 17:19:30 01/10/02 Thu

I've attended a wedding where the wedding party sat at various tables with the guests, and acted as host/hostess, introducing people and making sure people weren't left out of conversations and such. It worked well.

Of course, can't really see either Willow or Buffy doing that.

Xander is also inviting his work friends, so there are more "civilians" to worry about in this equation.

[> [> [> Re: The Wedding Party -- Lilac, 17:35:01 01/10/02 Thu

That would be interesting, in which case they would have to be careful not to put Buffy at a table where she would feel obligated to slay one of the other guests.

[> What about the Batchler Party? -- Wolfhowl3, 19:40:19 01/10/02 Thu

There would have to be a Batchler Party, so this is my guest list for that night.

Xander (Of course)
Giles (who would fly in for the wedding, and to collect his money from the Magic Box)
Angel (who Anya forced Xander to invite to allow him to have it in the first place)
Wesley + Gunn (because they had nothing else to do)
and Finally Tara as the Striper. (Who Anya allowed because she knew that Xander would have no chance with her)

So we have 2 Vampiers, 2 British guys, 1 Gangster, 1 Lesbian and the Zeppo himself, that sounds like a Party!



[> [> Re: What about the Batchler Party? -- vampire hunter D, 22:48:18 01/10/02 Thu

I think Tara will be there, bt to watch the stripper not be the stripper. Besides, Anya can't control who the stripper is. She's the bride. They're to have nothing to do with the bachelor party. The best man hires the stripper. Of course, this is SD, so expect the stripper to be some sort of monster.

[> [> [> How about the demon prostitute from "War Zone"? -- Marie, 03:26:21 01/11/02 Fri

"Look, Xander, no hands!"


[> [> Re: What about the Batchler Party? -- neaux, 08:18:42 01/11/02 Fri

a more likely scenario... entitled "Dusk 'till Dawn"

Xander invites Giles and his friends from the construction site... Giles plane wont come in until the day of the wedding and the construction dudes bail on him..

Xander gets depressed.. Ol' Spike shows up with some hooch.. and the two get doused and wind up at an unlikely strip club..... full of vampires.... A la Dusk till DAwn.

Buffy must come to save the day.. and all the girls wind up showing up to stake vampies...

and then a side story involving Dawn.. hence the title.

[> [> [> Bachelor Party, Dusk Til Dawn style -- Whisper2AScream, 16:17:10 01/11/02 Fri

Hehehe, I'll bet Xander would love to be the one to suck Selma Hayek's toes. ;) Though he might have to fight Spike for it.

[> DOOM -- Shul, 03:55:00 01/11/02 Fri

The marriage may last, but this wedding is freaking doomed!Lets be serious, i dont think they will get past the bachelor party without a body hitting the floor (or being dusted).

[> Re: Really bored, so....Where would you seat Buffy and Willow at the X/A wedding? -- Rattletrap, 06:33:23 01/11/02 Fri

Custom and tradition aside, I'm not sure Xander and Anya would want Buffy anywhere near the wedding. Let's face it, the girl is a trouble magnet, having her in the wedding is like asking for a demon infestation or a vampire uprising.

[> [> Kind of like Jessica Fletcher from "Murder, She Wrote"...Everywhere she goes, someone dies! -- Rob, 09:17:47 01/11/02 Fri

Buffy DVD's -- Liz, 14:05:02 01/10/02 Thu

In the archives of this board I found a transcript of a DVD commentary by Jane Esperson for the show "Earshot." Apparently there are DVD's out there for the other seasons (I think someone said Britain has them). Are there other DVD commentaries that have been typed in and archived somewhere findable? How many shows got commentaries?

Spike as Jungian Trickster Archetype -- Mark Gelineau, 15:20:40 01/10/02 Thu

I've noticed that amidst all the philosophical discussion on this board, my boy Spike has come out on the sharp side of things a few times. So then this is my defense of the character of Spike, in as much as he absolutely adheres to the traits that characterize a classic trickster figure. Trickster figures were first explored in American Indian myth and folklore, but Carl Jung and his theory of archetypal characters quickly embraced the universality of this figure. A trickster is defined by certain traits. One of the hallmarks of a trickster is that they are creatures of opposites; they do not exist in black or white but in shades of grey. Neither good nor evil, but instead a mix of both. A trickster can be both successful and a failure at the same time. This idea of a contradiction made flesh is perfectly illustrated by Spike Another fundamental trickster trait is an obsession with the more base aspects of nature. Spike is a creature of need and desire. Blood, violence, sex, all these are constantly . Trickster is a very sexual being and Trickster stories are often bawdy and usually fairly comical. One need only catch a recent episode of Buffy to see the sexual aspect of Spike's trickster nature being brought to the surface. Tricksters are associated with differentiation and the naming of created things. It is Spike who often is responsible for the naming that goes on in the show, and these names even expand into the fan community. Dawn as a character is now defined in the fan community by the names Spike gives her. In "Gone", Spike refers to Buffy as goldilocks, prompting her radical change of hair. A very important role of the Trickster is as the inadvertent benefactor of mankind, often through the breaking of taboos or the inversion of situations. Is inadvertant benefactor of mankind not the ultimate definition of our boy Spike or what. Trickster also appears often as a cultural hero, using his cunning and tricks to help the people of a tribe. The Nez Perce have a story where Coyote saves the people from a monster by allowing himself to be eaten and then cutting his way out from inside the monster's belly. The figure can also be a cultural villain, playing tricks on the people and tormenting them. Often the same cultural Trickster will be both hero and villain. This is an almost perfect description of Spike's actions through the course of season four. It is for this reason that the Trickster is of such interest to scholars: the figure by its very nature defies categorization. It is a creature whose opposites are at the same time its complements, a figure both hero and villain at the same time. Spike also adheres to a number of other salient trickster traits: the breaker of taboos, the situation inverter, the role of namer and inventor, the cunning mind, and the role of inadvertent benefactor of mankind. Perhaps the most interesting aspect though is something i found when looking at trickster figures in the literature of the Vietnam War. Tricksters in this context experience a traumatic event or series of events that marginalizes them to a great degree. It is in this marginalized state that the Trickster figure changes. For Spike this is especially true. His traumatic event is the chip in his head. This begins an intense process of marginalization where, in season 5, we see Spike seperated form both his usual demonic kind and the scooby gang as well. It is in this period of marginalization that tricksters begin a change, and the same can be said for Spike. Here he begins the change from villain to hero, from Buffy hater to Buffy lover. This is where Spike stands now, focusing on the heroic side of his nature. Is he a hero? No. No more so than he is a concrete villain. He is a trickster, and thus will defy such description.

[> forget spike what about buffy? -- Shul, 15:59:14 01/10/02 Thu

In Gone, when buffy gets blinvisibled by the quartet-1, she seems to embrace a "trickster ethic". Her reactions to the state of invisibility seemed to suggest that underneath her public face lies the heart of a trickster. As when she played the "shining" trick on the social worker. This argument could be further enforced by examining the morals and ethics that buffy has displayed in her ten-year at the hellmouth. For example her inability to kill basically anything that is not a "Clear and Present Danger", for instance Glory. More then that she has occasionaly saved the lives of evil creatures because they were not currently engaged in evildoing. I do not mean to imply that she is the living embodiment of the "trickster" merely that she posseses some of those same traits. This is just a thought, though i would appreciate your input =).

hmmm.....after thinking about the above for a bit i have to say that she is probably not in anyway a trickster but infact she is best described as a fireman. Or perhaps a doctor.

As for spike i would describe him as the Questing Knight. Perhaps a fool (as in the taro) but not a trickster, but where a trickster is a creature of chaos and seems to have no direction or purpose except to have fun. Spike has always had a purpose, a goal (usually not a very nice one).

ACK!!!!! im rambling....sorry...ill stop now goodbye for now! =)

[> [> "Spike has always had a purpose, a goal (usually not a very nice one)." -- Stranger, 16:49:47 01/10/02 Thu

I tried to find the exact quote and where it was from, and could find it, but don't u remember the moment when Anya said something about Evil having always things to do, plans to make then we being cut to Spike pacing aimlessly in his crypt ? I think it was a plan that provided a good answer to what u said :)

[> [> [> additional -- Shul, 03:22:07 01/11/02 Fri

heres even more for you to chew over...or maybe its digest?

Spike always had a plan or perhaps it would be more appropriate to call it a quest. That is up until the time he got the chip in his head. Once that happened he was physically prevented from performing his heroquest (or antihero quest as the case may be). He only truly became spike again when he accepted his situation and adapted, for lack of a better term, he engaged in personal development. Personal development is definately not a characteristic of "Tricksters". At least in my 3/4 humble opinion.

[> Re: Spike as Jungian Trickster Archetype -- Rufus, 16:20:26 01/10/02 Thu

Comment by Joseph Campbell on the trickster..

Campbell: There sure is. Heraclitus said strife is the creator of all great things. Something like that may be implicit in this symblolic trickster idea. In our tradition, the serpent in the Garden did the job. Just when everything was fixed and fine, he threw an apple into the picture. No matter what the system of thought you may have, it can't possibly include boundless life. When you think everything is just that way, the trickster arrives, and it all blows, and you get change and becoming again. Power of Myth

Of course this is exactly why I love this show so much. Spike is a classic trickster. His character is evolving and changing, bringing unexpected change to everything he meets. He spreads strife amongst the SG (have a look at the Yoko Factor), at the same time causing changes that make life worth living. In BTVS, if everything was just so, just happines, no pain, we would very quickly become bored with it all. We may have thought that Buffy sleeping with Angel caused problems, just wait til the apple falls on Xanders head and he figures out Buffy is sleeping with another vampire. Spike may have changed his attitude towards the SG, but they still see him as an unpredictable wild card.

[> [> Another view of the Trickster.... -- AurraSing, 17:58:58 01/10/02 Thu

Now that we are discussing the Trickster,I'd like to add this little tidbit...... Trickster's identity changes by geographical area.Loki was the Norse Trickster was a god-like figure,the Plains natives called Coyote their Trickster.

In the mythology of the Northwest First Nations peoples,the Trickster character is portrayed by the Raven.Raven is smart,cocky and very prone to doing things that can get his feathers singed.He also can be a figure of death,in that he scavenges offal in the forms of dead fish,animals,etc.Ravens are well known for being mocking to both people and animals(I've known ravens to imitate cats and dogs in an effort to tease them)act bravely when they are protecting their young and their curiosity is boundless.Need I add further that they are also skilled thieves??

I can certainly see Spike as Raven,with his cunning tongue and that devilish gleam in his eyes,gleaming hair (ravens are *much* more handsome than crows) and the long,black duster he so loves to wear.Coyote is too scruffy,Loki too far removed from our reality.Raven seems just right!

[> Disagree strongly. -- Moose, 18:15:22 01/10/02 Thu

Spike is not a trickster. He is the TRUTH TELLER. The one that exposes the most uncomfortable truths to the light of day. He destroys denial--well, in others anyway. He causes change through confrontation with the truth. He did it as an enemy and also as a friend.

Even when aligned with Adam, which is the strongest case for "trickster" perhaps, he splits the SG by exposing their inner thoughts against them, which in turn allowed them to face what they were denying and grow strong again.

Now WILLOW on the other hand I think you can make a MUCH stronger argument for. Just her involvment with magic--Something Blue, Tabula Rasa, etc., have her acting as a trickster more than anyone.

Spike's affinity for the truth makes him the antithesis of the trickster in my book.

[> [> Again with a quote from "A Writers Journey" -- Rufus, 18:55:26 01/10/02 Thu

Trickster Heroes

The Tricksters of mythology provide many examples of the workings of this archetype. One of the most colorful is Loki, the Norse god of trickery and deceit. A true Trickster, he serves the other gods as legal counselor and advisor, but also plots their destruction, undermining the status quo. He is firey in nature, and his darting, elusive energy helps heat up the petrified, frozen energy of the gods, movine them to action and change. He also provides much-needed comic relief in the generally dark Norse myths.

Loki is sometimes a comical sidekick character in stories featuring the gods Odin or Thor as heroes. In other stories he is a hero of sorts, a Trickster Hero who survives by his wits against physically stronger gods or giants. At last he turns into a deadly adversary or Shadow leading the hosts of the dead in a final war against the Gods.

Tricksters are often catalyst characters, who affect the lives of others but are unchanged themselves. Eddie Murphy in Beverly Hills Cop displays Trickster energy as he stirs up the existing system without changing much himself.

Spike was at first more of a Shadow type, he was out to kill himself another slayer. It was when he was outfoxed by the Military(they did catch and chip him), that he has been forced to change. Now we got to see him turn into more of a Trickster, who sometimes got change started in the group by messing with their minds. He could now evolve into a Hero of the Trickster type as he still stays much the same as he always was and never let anyone see. Who says and archetype can't evolve, change as he causes so much change around himself......note he is the only one to get Buffy to thaw...:):):)

[> [> [> Re: Again with a quote from "A Writers Journey" -- leslie, 20:54:29 01/10/02 Thu

Oh my. This is my first post here, but I can't resist Tricksters....

The point about Tricksters, it always seems to me, is that they do cut to the truth by their acts of creating chaos. They stir things up so that the masks are shed and the real face is seen, so to say. (So to mix my metaphor.) Spike as a Trickster sure works for me, especially since Tricksters usually end up doing good completely by accident. Just watching the rerun of Spike's first appearance this evening, it strikes me that he shows up in town threatening to kill the Slayer, but what does he actually accomplish? He proves to Joyce that Buffy isn't the screw-up Snyder is trying to make her out to be. Then, as an encore, he administers the coup-de-grace to the "Annoying One." And it just goes on from there.

We can only hope, however, that unlike the Winnbago Trickster, Wakdjunkaga, he does not develop a detachable penis. Folklore is not pretty....

[> [> [> [> Re: Again with a quote from "A Writers Journey" -- Rufus, 21:19:48 01/10/02 Thu

I agree, even if unintentional, Spike's actions frequently force a truth upon the SG that they never considered before. Even though he is in love with Buffy, Spikes ability to expose the truth is still there. He may have changed "sides", but Spike is basically has the same qualities he always had but no one could see because of his position as a Big Bad. Tricksters are all about change without preference to which side the trickster is on. I ain't touching the "detachable penis" line.....I'll let someone else....:):):) Nice first post. Certainly got my attention....

[> [> [> Still don't agree. -- Moose, 21:23:13 01/10/02 Thu

Loki was a deceiver and master at lies. Spike, not so much. Spike's intent has rarely been hidden and tricksters aren't the only character types that act as catalysts.

If you look at it, Spike stirs up things only when he tells the truth. Loki and characters of the trickster type move stories forward through lies and deception. Their comedic appearance often disguise their true agenda.

Spike never struck me as being comedic (as in cause of comedy--not that funny things don't happen to him), he seems more portrayed as tragic and sometimes the fool.

His story has been one of change and steadfastness. He changed his goals from killing a Slayer to loving one. Yet he is still perceptive, honest (mostly) and full of snark. :-)

Actually since the roles of the characters often change to fit the story lines it is hard to assign a permanent label to any of them. However, I simply don't think there is enough there to call him a trickster character. Like I said, you can argue Willow easier than Spike, especially this season.

There are plenty of character types that force the protagonists to stop, change, reflect, etc... Tricksters are merely one type--of which truth is an anathema, unlike Spike. Which is why I raised the objection.

I see tricksters as causing change through chaos, forcing the status quo to adapt from it. Spike isn't chaotic. Passionate, yes. Complex, yes. Conflicted even...but not chaotic.

Willow though, has at times been a walking storm of chaos and upheaval.

Just my opine. :-)


[> [> [> [> ARG! DOUBLE POST, IGNORE THIS ONE ABOVE--SEE BELOW -- Moose, 22:00:40 01/10/02 Thu

[> [> [> Still not with you on that... -- Moose, 21:59:09 01/10/02 Thu

Loki was a deceiver and master at lies. Spike, not so much. Spike's intent has rarely been hidden.

If you look at it, Spike stirs up things only when he tells the truth. Loki and characters of the trickster type move stories forward through lies and deception. Their comedic appearance often disguise their true agenda.

Spike never struck me as being comedic (as in cause of comedy--not that funny things don't happen to him), he seems more portrayed as tragic and sometimes the fool.

His story has been one of change and steadfastness. He changed his goals from killing a Slayer to loving one. Yet he is still perceptive, honest (mostly) and full of snark. :-)

Actually since the roles of the characters often change to fit the story lines it is hard to assign a permanent label to any of them. However, I simply don't think there is enough there to call him a trickster character. Like I said, you can argue Willow easier than Spike, especially this season.

There are plenty of character types that force the protagonists to stop, change, reflect, etc... Tricksters are merely one type--of which truth is an anathema, unlike Spike. Which is why I raised the objection.

I see tricksters as causing change through chaos, forcing the status quo to adapt from it. Yet Spike for all his claims of being a rebel, is one of the more consistent characters and actually fights for the status quo at times--end of season 2 for example. He seems to have little interest in breaking up the SG until Adam bribes him. The chaos he creates is the result of telling the truth, which actually helped to restore the status quo instead of changing it!

I also find it interesting that he is the one to be bringing Buffy "back to life" hoping also to win her heart. You could say he is seeking to undermine her current condition of lifelessness through chaos (as a trickster). But I don't see that. Instead he hits her with the truth "you came back wrong" and that is the catalyst for the change in their relationship.

So what's the diff? In my mind, anyway, Spike is more a guide to the existing truth that is hidden in plain view, rather than a chaotic figure that forces characters to find new truth by destroying the old. Maybe that isn't much of a distinction... Regardless, the truth aspect and the fact that Spike often supports the status quo and even attempts to integrate himself into it contradicts the trickster character.

Just my opine. :-)


Just my imagination? (spike) "gone" -- Shul, 15:37:32 01/10/02 Thu

Mild spoilers for "gone" unless your a b/ser

In "Gone" when we got to see Spike shirtless after his bout of buffy, it seemed to me that he appeared healthier then in previous episodes like "wrecked". Meaning he looked more living, less pale dead-like. I cannot go back and check myself because i accidently recorded over "gone" dohh! I would appreciate it if someone could go back over the episodes and let me know please. =)

Im going to be a fireman when the floods roll back. Restless

[> Re: Just my imagination? (spike) "gone" -- Deeva, 16:38:43 01/10/02 Thu

I looked and he does look a little healthier but not dramatically so. I think someone else mentioned that earlier in the season, James came down with a stomach flu and couldn't keep anything down, the cause of his less-healthy look. I do like, for the sake of continuity, the fact that they put in faint scratches on Spike's chest when invisiBuffy rips off his shirt. Nice touch. Nice abs, too!

Significance of Spike's lighter-"Gone" Spoilers -- DustyMama, 16:25:13 01/10/02 Thu

I've been lurking for a while and have finally decided to join in the discussion.

I really enjoyed "Gone." It was a nice break from the angst of the last two eps.

Anyway, one of my favorite scenes was the kitchen scene where Spike comes bursting in. I found it really interesting that Buffy took his lighter. It fits in nicely with the symbolism of her wanting the "fire," and getting it from Spike; this was further hit home when he appeared in his burning blanket. And does anyone think her pocketing the item represents her literally carrying a torch for him?

Some other random thoughts: Has Spike readjusted his hours to match Buffy's? He was over there at 8 a.m., his bedtime, so to speak. And he was awake for the entire ep, all of which took place during the day. Also, this may be my imagination, but I could swear that when Spike accuses Buffy of "cheating," it cuts right to a scene where Willow is working. A utility-type worker then walks by wearing a jacket with "Pump" written in large letters on the back. *g* Those writers sure aren't subtle!

Any thoughts about this?

[> Re: Significance of Spike's lighter-"Gone" Spoilers -- Lilac, 16:33:14 01/10/02 Thu

Your thinking about the lighter went deeper than mine. My thoughts were that first it went into the discarded magic item box, temptation to be swept out, but at some point (out of our sight) Buffy picked it up again -- giving in a little to the temptation? So then I saw it as wanting to keep something belonging to the object of her (still denied) affections. She could have given it back to Spike right away when he asked about it, taking away his excuse for being there, but that would have taken away his excuse for being there. Not that he would have left then, because it doesn't really seem that he needs it anymore since he hasn't been seen smoking in a long time. So the whole thing is more of a courtship dance than anything else.

[> [> I don't think she intended to give it back. -- Moose, 17:51:14 01/10/02 Thu

I think Buffy wanted to keep it as a reminder of the night she and Spike had and was potentially embarrassed that he might find out she had it, which seemed to be the subtext when he took it from her.

Also, I got the impression that Buffy was expecting some more of Spike's "touch" when he went in her pocket and instead he took back the symbol of their passion and left, which forshadowed Spike kicking her out of his crypt later on.

Ah, Spike with his rocks is a sight to behold... :-)

[> [> [> She can't lie to Spike and get away with it. -- Spike Lover, 19:43:15 01/10/02 Thu

I thought it was rather odd. She discards it in the box and ends up retrieving it and putting it in her front pocket. Is that where he keeps it? Front or back pocket?

Then he asks for it and she lies and says she doesn't know anything about it.

I am reminded of the ep where Spike returns to SunnyD drunk and upset about Dru. At the end of the ep, Buffy admits that she can't lie to herself (?) or to Spike.

When Spike finds the lighter and takes it, he seems to be stating tacitly that her lies don't fool him. Though Buffy may have been wrong about the other part. She, I think, is very good at lying to herself.

[> [> [> Re: I don't think she intended to give it back. -- cynesthesia, 09:38:06 01/11/02 Fri

I think you're right Moose. It happens very fast but that last little bit where Spike leans in close to her face, she closes her eyes as if she thinks he's going to kiss her. By the time she opens them, he's already walking away. Darn his sinister charm!


[> [> [> [> Re: she didn't want him to know she kept it -- Valhalla, 11:42:35 01/11/02 Fri

I think Buffy lied about having it because she didn't want Spike to realize she attached any importance to it. If she'd left it, say on the counter, and Spike asked for it, she probably wouldn't have been THAT put out by him taking it back. I think she's still more in 'I'm not REALLY into Spike' mode than not, at least consciously. Her little flirt with Spike at the sink and fishing his lighter out of the box means she's coming around, but I think she still wants Spike to think she's Ms. Aloof.Btw, I thought it was weird she threw it in the box in the first place - a decent Zippo (that's what it looked like) is handy to have around, and I don't think lighters, per se, are that connected to witchcraft.

[> Do you want to delete this show now? -- Shul, 03:33:50 01/11/02 Fri

I had not noticed half of the stuff you pointed out.I would watch it again but.....stupid delete button....=(

[> [> by the way -- Shul, 03:52:18 01/11/02 Fri

By the way, buff is one extra-ordinary girl. It would be reasonable that she would suitably extra-ordinary courtship rituals. I dont think Angel and Riley qualified.

Thoughts on Angel: When she was with angel, she was inexperienced and new to the whole true love thing. Consequently she seemed to me to be almost fixated on pleasing angel. I dont recall her having many desires (relationship wise or sex wise). Sure she lusted, but her lust or desire for love was not specific or focused. Meaning she didnt know what she wanted except that she wanted angel. Buffy and Angel was all about Angel. Just a thought.

Riley: Rebound guy.....to be honest i wasnt totally happy with how the riley relationship was ended. To me it seemed forced and inconsistent. Basically i figured that the actor playing riley just decided to leave the show so they wrote him off (but not dead). Thats what it felt like to me. On a side note i thought Riley was perfect for buffy, but not for Buffy the Vampire Slayer. She could never completely be herself with him (her full buffy/slayer). There would always be the slayer in between them

darn i liked him =(

Spike: Spike is the perfect choice for Slayer portion of buffy, though it remains to be seen if he can tame the savage heart of the human Buffy Summers (or is it Sommers?).

P.S. No puns where harmed in the writing of this post.

[> I was wondering if anyone would bring this up ... -- verdantheart, 06:10:52 01/11/02 Fri

New Reflections on season arc -- words of doom & hope -- SingedCat, 18:25:48 01/10/02 Thu

I'm reposting this from the bottom of the board becaue I didn't want it to get lost. Good thred, by the way!

Here's what I think,briefly:

This season isn't about the death of magic (although I hate that facile, clumsy, magic/drug-addiction metaphor as much as the rest of you), it's about growing up. Joss has chosen one of the most glaring and disappointing truths we must embrace as we grow, the dissolving of black & white by endless shades of gray. There is no infantile topping of last year's bad guy with this year's Bigger Bad Guy. There is a lull at last in Sunnydale, and the silence is deafening to Buffy; The Woman Who Does Too Much is most terrified of the times when there is nothing to do, because it leavs her (and us) to confront her life.(AAAAAAUUUUUUUGGGGH!) Existential angst, indeed!

Even Buffy's righteous judgementalism (the part of her I am most frustrated with at times) is at long last meeting its Waterloo. These guys-they aren't demons; they aren't even all that evil. Willow has been a greater danger than any bad guy this season. Buffy, and the show, must face maturity or demise. Other solutions must be found, ones that exist outside the universe they have been living in.

Next:Spike and Buffy are completely wrong for each other, much as I love and feel for them both, and even entertain the doomed wish that they could be happy together. I'm sorry.


there is something here, something hovering over them, more in heaven and earth if you will...something that has a lot to do with Joss. He has told us over and over again that this show is all about love. (not happiness, love). Being wrong for each other doesn't keep people from falling, or even winding up together. Buffy considered Spike 'beneath' her, and from a moral standpoint she is so right. Although a vampire, he has a human mind, and from that viewpoint he is a conscienceless mass muderer many times over. Given the chance he would gladly return to his true nature, that of feeding on people.

Stop here--regroup. The show isn't about redemption either. It's about love. The vital part of the relationship between Buffy and Spike--and the point which I believe will be developed-- is that both of these characters are full of love. Faulty, messy love. Spike, selfish and self-serving, desiring Buffy without much thought as to what it would do to her life or who she would become; Buffy terrified of being hurt by her love and vainly trying to conceal, disguise or deny, even as she admits how much loving means to her.

Seen this way-- the fallen hero and the fallen villain, now seperated from their polarity by the shades of gray that seem to be turning up everywhere-- these two, I say, who could never love in the world of black and white that they are leaving, perhaps in that cold, scary adult world, where close examination incites compassion of the heart--

why then, perhaps in a world like that two faulty, difficult people might teach each other how to love,...Buffy, passionately; Spike, purely.


[> Re: New Reflections on season arc -- words of doom & hope -- Liz, 21:54:35 01/10/02 Thu

I think I have to take back a bit of my earlier conclusions. I've been following this show regularly for about two years, with interest, and then when it came out in syndication I watched them all. Then for the past month I've been seriously analyzing the show and I'm quite enamored with it. The problem here is that I've done so much thinking about everything that it makes me nervous to see new shows. It's possible that I would be worried or disappointed by anything that they did. So I'm going to overreact a bit.

But still: I think it's correct to say that this year's Big Bad isn't going to be the same kind of thing as before. I think that this is an aspect of Buffy growing up. The thing is, oddly, the show is growing up as well. I'm just not sure what this will imply. I'm not sure how drastically the whole thing will change. Now the show has never shied away from change before, and that has been one of its strengths. But I'm nervous about all this. But, as I've just said, I'm going to be nervous no matter what. :)

I think what I'm afraid of is not that the problems are more adult and more complicated, or that the demons are no longer just Bad Guys (_Angel_, for instance, got increasingly more complicated in terms of who's a good guy and who's a bad guy, and I found all of that great). I think what I fear is that the characters are becoming normal. That's an inadequate wording. I had said before that the main characters had always been the losers. That is a closer wording but still not quite right.

The main characters and especially Buffy had always been on the edge of their social system. So in high school they were the losers. After high school they became something else, and I'm not sure what to call it.

Perhaps being different and not accepted is an adolescent sort of thing. Perhaps growing up means coming around to making yourself fit. The mythic hero returns and is now a valued and integral part of society. Hell, maybe that's true. But there's a certain clarity that comes from being on the edge of things. That pain and clarity is what I saw in the show Buffy, and I will miss it if it goes.

Not that they're done with pain. And you can argue that everyone has lost their clarity for other reasons. I don't know. The trouble here is that I really can't say anything until the season ends. I can't seem to help trying, though. :)

I've never heard Joss saying that the show was primarily about love, but it makes a great deal of sense to me. There have certainly been explorations of all different kinds of love. Happiness and redemption are certainly in the mix, but only as they are related to love. Blanket statements like that are usually never good, but this one makes many things clear. And it's certainly connected to something that I've seen the show explore over and over, never solving it but just continuing to ask: when is it OK to ask for help? When is it OK to depend on someone? When is it necessary to be alone and stand by yourself? The show asks these things again and again.

I really like the Spike&Buffy relationship. I've liked the dynamic from the moment that Spike shot up in bed after dreaming of her (there was a dynamic before that, but I hadn't really noticed it). No, I don't think they're going to live happily ever after, but I think that both characters are changing each other profoundly and accurately--meaning that this is exactly as it would go. Maybe it'll end horribly. Maybe it'll have disasterous consequences for Buffy in the end. But it seems to all be going exactly as it must, and to me that means the show is still alive and kicking.

I also liked your description of Buffy as the fallen hero. Those words actually make several things fall into place for me. This is the part of the story where the hero falls--maybe just a continuation of the problems she was starting to have at the end of season five. See that was really the problem I was having with this season. Buffy was no longer a hero--and I don't mean in the I-can-kill-anything-that-stands-in-my-way sense. I mean in that undefinable sense that made her Buffy. A kind of strength and humor. Something that made her very admirable. She's lost that. But maybe that's not just a part of growing up. Maybe it's that she has, for now, fallen. And maybe she'll regain it in some way that makes her even better.

[> [> Re: New Reflections on season arc -- words of doom & hope -- Me in DE, 03:52:26 01/11/02 Fri

I, too, am a recent fan. I sort of watched the show, never getting in until I moved to Germany and starting watching it dubbed. Weird, I know, but being abroad always refocuses my attention to my own culture and what I love about it. After all, one of my favorite things about watching TV shows here is how much the translations just DON'T get at the point. A tangent, but whatever.

The thing about a hero and his/her fall is the tragic flaw. If this is where Buffy falls, what it is - what is driving her to this?

The shades of grey thing is a good insight...the bad guys so far are human, not demonic, while her relationship with Spike, the changes in Willow, etc., are all pulling the 'good guys' more the other way. So does a Slayer, who doesn't kill humans, go after a human bad guy, albeit with one that messes with the demonic?

And the relationship with Spike. Personal experience speaking here a bit, but there are some relationships that no matter how doomed they might see you just have to go through. And the train wreck is necessary...it opens you up to things that you wouldn't/couldn't see for yourself otherwise. That's part of the thrill, after all. And they always seem to be the ones full of raw passion, too.

Just some thoughts...

[> Re: New Reflections on season arc -- words of doom & hope -- Conor MacManus,
09:06:50 01/11/02 Fri

Wow. That was beautiful and eloquent. That was the best speculation on the arc of this season i have seen yet. I think you are absolutely right in the case of this season being all about the transition from black and white to shades of grey. For me, Buffy's past romances have all been tinged by Angel. Angel was the ultimate expression of that black and white dualism. Angel is good, Angelus is evil. Dream and nightmare seperated into two different personas. SInce Angel, Buffy has continually sought this same ideal in her men. The problem is that no one else is Angel. No one else is so perfectly seperated along those dualistic lines. Parker and Riley both appeared ideal, yet both were deceivers in their own way. With Spike, Buffy for the first time has found someone who is not an apparent ideal. SHe has seen the worst side of Spike and continues to fall for him. She is embracing the shades of gray that her worldview is evolving to encompass.

[> [> Riley a Deceiver? -- Vickie, 14:28:46 01/11/02 Fri

"Parker and Riley both appeared ideal, yet both were deceivers in their own way."

Huh? Parker is obvious, but how was Riley a deceiver? He was the original what-you-see-is-what-you-get guy, at least in terms of the relationship.

Ok, he was part of the secret Initiative. But he didn't even keep that secret very long. Other than that, he was pretty up front until he went off the deep end and started seeing vampires for kicks.

[> Doom & Gloom -- Spike Lover, 16:22:36 01/12/02 Sat

Ok, enough preaching doom and gloom about the potential "lasting-ness" of a Spike/Buffy pairing. I have to notice that no one else on this board does long posts that say "Xander and Anya are doomed. They are fooling themselves. Their marriage is going to break up in 6 months." No one says, "Willow and Tara or Willow and Oz were doomed from the start. I don't know why they bothered."

One thing I know that Joss does try to do, is reflect reality. The reality is that some marriages/relationships end and some survive. Who would have thought when Riley & Buff initially were attracted to each other, that part of the ending of that relationship would be over Riley "seeing" vampires and feelings of boredom and inadequacies? On the other hand, how many relationships have you seen out there where the couple seems totally wrong for each other, and yet the relationship survives and thrives? Who is to say what the writers will do? They changed their minds before about JMarsters. They may well have him wake up from a dream and realize he is over Buffy and now gay and wild about Giles.

It is fiction!

The Voice of Reason (spoilers on "Gone") -- MrDave, 21:05:21 01/10/02 Thu

"She heard the message on an _answering machine_ so she could have pretended like she didn't know at all."

I read this on a prior post and suddenly was struck by the concept that an answering machine is a disembodied voice...much like inviso-Buffy was.

If I had half a brain I'd have remembered to change the tape in the VCR, but it seems to me that there were plenty of phones...off camera voices and POV shots in this Ep. to see a pattern of this idea of the "disembodied voice" being carried throughout.

Just as JW and the ME folks have stated that speech gets in the way for real communication (which is why eps like Hush and OMwF show such powerful communication) here we have a situation where Buffy can ONLY communicate with this innefficient tool. It means that for her to make herself understood she must REFLECT (hard to do when you are invisible) and make others SEE her point by speaking CLEARLY. Practically impossible...so instead she acts out. and discovers she is running the risk of fading away.

Once her opacity is restored, she can now look back at her TRANSPARENT motives in a new light.

Now I know it looks like I just took a few cheap puns, but it is obvious that the irony (the stock in trade of ME) wasn't lost on the writers. Little things like an invisible person has no shadow...they are not followed by darkness.

Okay, it's late and my mind is wandering... I'd like to hear more analysis of these observations.

Thanks for the welcome -- Fi, 21:18:52 01/10/02 Thu

Thanks for the welcome guys, I look forward to many interesting discussions - my friends really don't get it!

the annoying one-what was the point? -- yabyumpan, 22:24:30 01/10/02 Thu

Just watched season 1 through 1-12 and it really struck me that i couldn't figure out what the Anointed One was there for. He didn't do anything apart from be by the Master's side and make the odd useless comment. Why was he so important? If he'd held any real inportance for Vampirekind surely something bad would have happen when Spike sent him to the light in season 2. Did I miss something, feedback on this would be greatly appreciated

[> Re: the annoying one-what was the point? -- Rob, 22:31:21 01/10/02 Thu

He really wasn't important to anyone but the Master and the Order of Aurelius. When Spike and Dru came to town, they killed him and took over as the (albeit temporary) Big Bads of Sunnydale. He was really the last vestige of the Master's order, which was a very superstitious, ceremonial one, steeped in prophecy and lore. He had no place and was really seen as important by other vamps only because he had been named the Anointed One by their master.


[> [> Re: the annoying one-what was the point? -- Liz, 22:33:59 01/10/02 Thu

The anointed One served the purpose of bringing Buffy to the Master. He was supposed to be there, prophecy and all that. I think that actually he was supposed to be very powerful and that it was just an extreme character note of Spike's that he said 'screw this' and just killed him.

[> [> [> Re: the annoying one-what was the point? -- Nevermore, 06:02:57 01/11/02 Fri

As well as having that tiny amount of Buffy/Master significance, the A.O was probably one of those strange traditions that are so old nobody knows the point of them anymore, yet they stick with them because they are sort of sentimental. Morris dancing - for example ;-)

[> [> [> [> According to the rumor mill... -- Darby, 08:06:06 01/11/02 Fri

...there were plans for Colin, but the kid actor had grown so much between Season 1 & 2 (and vamps don't age) that they wanted to get rid of him before it became too obvious. You can see it if you look for it.

I believe there may have been other problems as well. The actor must have had some sort of problem with the vamp make-up, because he was supposed to have it in his first appearance (the teeth, at least) but it didn't happen in the ep, and from there on he was the only vamp to never "vamp," as if the writers knew to not even suggest it.

And another thing I think they found out quickly - the kid had zero presence (why would any demon defer to him?) and probably no acting ability. Did he ever have a line more than three words long? (If you're out there, I'm sure you just needed a while to develop, many of us were late bloomers...)

One more - Spike was brought in as a "disposable" villain, but was quickly recognized as a great nemesis (good thing I don't need the plural of that!), so it probably was easy to take parts of the Season 2 arc that were going to be instigated by the Anointed One (leading into Angel - how lame would the Angel-Anointed One "conflict" have been compared to A/S?) and substitute Spike and Dru as the prime movers. Isn't it funny how many series' most endearing characters were initially supposed to be minor/disposable players?

[> [> [> [> [> The Annoying One -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 12:57:44 01/11/02 Fri

Concur regarding legacy of obsolete traditions. Case in point -- the Electoral College.

Also concur regarding odd originally-minor characters that become big players. Case in point -- Arthur Fonzerelli from the 1970s "Happy Days." (Unfortunately). Spike much more profitable to expand role.

[> Re: the annoying one-what was the point? -- yabyumpan, 22:31:47 01/11/02 Fri

Thanks for the responses folks, just wanted to check I wasn't missing something significant, cos if i was I know you wonderful posters here would be able to enlighten me.

Little Miss Muffet -- Liz, 22:31:17 01/10/02 Thu
Ok, here's an old one but it's new for me:

In Graduation II, Buffy and Faith share a dream. At one point Buffy looks around, distracted, and says, "there's something I'm supposed to be doing." Like dealing with the mayor and everything. Buffy is disoriented, Faith is not. Faith says, "Oh, yeah, miles to go. Little Miss Muffet counting down from seven-three-oh." Buffy: "Great. Riddles."

I hadn't bothered to figure this one out but a week ago I ran across the meaning in an interview with Joss. I was suitably blown away. There are seven hundred and thirty days in two years. It's a countdown from the season finale of season 3 to the season finale of season 5. For I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep.

Gaaa. However: I had assumed that Little Miss Muffet was Buffy. That would make sense in the sentence, since it is obviously Buffy who is counting down and it's Buffy who has miles to go. Also, Faith sometimes talked to her in a patronizing way, and 'Muffet' is similar to 'Buffy.' I had seen one person say that 'Little Miss Muffet' was supposed to be Dawn. Faith had referred to Dawn in that dream sequence and in the one in 4th season. But still, in that particular sentence it makes more sense for Little Miss Muffet to be Buffy.

However. Then I took at look at "Real Me" from season 5. In the first glimpse that something is wrong with Dawn you've got a crazy man coming up to her outside the Magic Box. He says some bizarre things about cats and then he says, "I know who you are. Curds and whey. You don't belong here."


Then there's the complication that the monks did indeed make Dawn out of Buffy. So perhaps none of it makes sense.

[> Re: Little Miss Muffet -- Rufus, 22:43:34 01/10/02 Thu

I thought that Miss Muffet was Dawn, because of the line Glory said about wishing that ? "would sit on the tuffet and make this birthing stop".....of course I could be wrong. In the end it was indeed Buffy that closed the portal, and Giles that made the birthing stop when he killed Ben, ending Glory with him.

[> Re: Little Miss Muffet -- Rattletrap, 06:51:53 01/11/02 Fri

I remember an inverview a while back with David Fury saying that he wrote the "Curds and whey" line in "Real Me" as a deliberate reference to the Buffy/Faith dream sequence in GD2, supposedly to help clue viewers in to who Dawn was. I'm not sure how many got it, but I'm sure it was intentional just the way you describe.

[> Re: Little Miss Muffet -- Raccoon, 08:57:35 01/11/02 Fri

I think little miss Muffet is a reference to Glory; Dawn is 'curds and whey' as suggested by the man in "Real Me" and Buffy is the spider, frightening Glory away. There have been some references to spiders during the the past seasons - Riley tells Buffy (in A New Man?) that she is "strong. Like Spiderman-strong." In the shooting script for "Hush" here was also a line in the teaser, eventually cut, where Riley says, "Along came a spider."

[> [> And don't forget.... -- vampire hunter D, 13:38:55 01/11/02 Fri

When Buffy was at the hospital pickig up Joyce's pills, she ran into ben, who asked her if she had been bitten by a radioactive spider.

[> [> [> Spiderman?? -- Emcee003, 01:34:28 01/12/02 Sat

This is a bit O/T but look at the links of the story of Buffy and Peter Parker

Now I don't know the whole Spiderman story, (my knowledge is from the few Spiderman cartoons I've seen) but isn't Peter Parker a lot like Buffy. He got bitten unwillingly by the radio active spider. He'd previously lived a some what normal live then he changed. At first he didn't accept his fate. I think he used his powers to join the WWF or something. Then he accepted that he had to be a hero, although every chance he got he liked to moan and bitch about having to be the super hero.
I've no idea what this means other than the writers are hinting to the links of the similarities of Buffy to Spiderman.

[> [> [> [> Oh my God - plagiarism, plagiarism! -- Darby, 10:51:06 01/12/02 Sat

I probably know more about Spider-Man than is healthy for an adult (can I admit that I actually own the comic he premiered in?), and the more I think about his story "arc," the more parallels I see in Buffy. The basic set-up is quite different (no Scooby Gang parallel, although parallel characters exist), but the high school, the "will I, won't I, I quit!" stuff, the romantic relationships (that's stretching, though - but isn't that what we do here?), the failed college experience, the adult-problems phase, this is getting kinda scary here...

Just kidding. But the basic, underlying approach - let's put a kid with special powers in a "real world" (not the MTV kind) setting and run with it - is very much the same. Also, the Buffyverse has followed an overall arc similar to comics since Spider-Man's invention in the early 60's, with later writers (thanks to Alan Moore) addressing, "Okay, what if these things really did exist in a world very much like ours?" Buffy is the older style, Angel is the newer style.

And does anyone really think that most of the writers were not at some point comics nerds?

[> [> [> [> Re: Spiderman Argument -- Spike Lover, 16:12:36 01/12/02 Sat

There may be something to this- Remember in maybe Flooded? that Anya and someone had an arguement about whether Spiderman charged for his services. Xander had to give answer, and Anya was angry that Xander never takes her side.

[> [> [> [> [> I get back to u in 2 weeks -- Emcee003, 03:11:28 01/13/02 Sun

Am in the UK so I don't get to see Flooded till 24/01/02

[> [> [> [> [> [> Spiderman never charged for his services -- AngelVSAngelus, 01:52:30 01/14/02 Mon

and what made Anya say THAT anyway? What the hell does she know about Spidey?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well, she knew the truth about Santa Claus - why not Spiderman?! -- Marie, 06:01:16 01/14/02 Mon

In the Buffyverse, anything is possible...


[> [> [> [> Re: Spiderman?? -- matching mole, 06:52:29 01/13/02 Sun

My knowledge of Spiderman is somewhere between Emcee003's and Darby's and mostly based on quarter century old comic books. But I would say that the parallels between Buffy and Peter Parker are very apt. I remember reading something once by Marvel Comics guru Stan Lee in which he said that he created to Spiderman to show how being a Superhero would cause serious problems in the rest of your life. The key difference is that Spiderman is a solitary figure, he has friends but none of them know his secret they can only participate in one aspect of his life. Of course this may have changed since the mid seventies.

[> Re: Little Miss Muffet -- Sophie, 14:24:37 01/11/02 Fri

My memory is fuzzy these days...

When I was watching the Season 5 re-runs last summer, I got the impression that the crazy people (people whose brains Glory had stolen) could see the truth - about Glory/Ben and about Dawn. But they could not communicate to the sane people this info - and/or didn't know that the info was valuable to the sane people.
Ok, that has nothing to do with spiders or tuffets, but it does have to do with crazy people seeing that Dawn is not properly human.

[> Re: Little Miss Muffet (another tid bit) -- Tirtzah, 19:10:57 01/11/02 Fri

Also in the episode "Blood Ties" in the scene where Dawn comes up to Tara and Willow who are casting a warning spell around the magic box Dawn is wearing a shirt that says "Little Miss ". I don't remember exactly what it was, only that it wasn't Muffet. But it caught my eye.

Current board | More January 2002