July 2003 posts

previous July 2003  

More July 2003

"Never Kill a Boy on the First Date" Revisited -- Darby, 12:26:36 07/10/03 Thu

We start with an important scene - Giles and Buffy working the cemetery together, as they will so many times. He also indicates that he's beginning to realize that the Slayer on paper and the Slayer in practice are pretty different. He will get used to the Buffy Banter, and we'll all get hooked on it.

This is also where the Master becomes more integrated into the season, as a force from afar, but exploring his personality as well. The Whedonesque evil-but-accessible touch is strongly present.

The blood pool is still in the Master's lair - at some point, I suspect, it will become Buffy's watery drowning pool.

Physically, Owen is very much of the Riley type. The actor (Christopher Wiehl) is not quite as adept at Buffyverse dialogue, though - a trait that Marc Blucas doesn't get enough credit for, I think.

Buffy suspects Giles of being snooty about Dickinson over gender, but it's just the bloody colonials. Giles as a feminist model patriarch, a neat trick, is developing.

"...In that case I won't wear my button that says, 'I'm a Slayer -- Ask Me How!' There are a bunch of classic Buffy quotes in this episode.

In the script, the shuttle bus is supposed to pass behind Giles-in-the-cemetery. Guess they couldn't make that happen, but the fade almost makes it look like it happens.

The nutjob who becomes the bait-and-switch Anointed One is a variation on Caleb - would we want this guy as a real Big Bad?

Interestingly enough, Xander's Tweety watch is described in the script as having Scooby Doo on it. Which makes that the earliest Scooby reference, sort of, I think.

The Bronze has a huge mirror reflecting the dance floor - is it there in any other episodes?

When Owen goes to get Buffy something to eat, she asks for "something fattening." I'm not sure of what's being hinted at here; in the script it's, "My only rule is no raisins." And Buffy's scripted, "Damn" becomes the infamous "Bite me!"

Interesting that Giles and Owen both see Buffy as "the strangest girl" (and Angel assents). But Xander doesn't.

I'm always amazed, rewatching, how non-participatory Angel is in these early episodes. And who is giving him all of this information?

I guess newly-risen vampires are as articulate as the plot needs them to be. The nutjob certainly regains his faculties (and personality) right away. Maybe it wasn't much of a transition...?

It's tough to make out some of the nutjob's dialogue, but the script is an eerie foreshadowing of Holden Webster's descriptions: "He fills my head with song!...I'll suck the blood from your hearts. He says I may...[To Giles, but maybe about Buffy?] They told me about you. When I was sleeping."

I never quite got what happened at the Funeral Home door with the Brethren outside until I read in the script that the vampires were shutting and barring the door. But if the nutjob is NOT the Anointed, why would they do that - they were supposed to kill the Slayer-?

Giles' father and grandmother were both Watchers, but apparently never (that we are ever told) actually had Slayers under their charge. This is the first hint at a fairly large (and somewhat egalitarian - Giles' grandmother would have been active in what, the 1920s?) organization behind the Slayer

It's great that Giles won't let Buffy be responsible for him. Is that why he lied about not having an instruction manual? (Warning, fanwank in progress!)

Is it just me, or is this episode less subtext and mostly text? The monsters are kinda about duty and twisted devotion, but it doesn't seem that purposeful. It does firmly address the emotional arcs that underlie all of the seasons, though - for Season One, the process a normal girl goes through coming to grips with her Special Gifts.

[> Preserving this thread.. -- Random, 20:21:56 07/10/03 Thu

[> The mirror is also in "Harsh Light of Day" -- Scroll, 20:37:47 07/10/03 Thu

Buffy uses the mirror to ascertain that her new love interest Parker is, indeed, one of the living. But that's about the only other time I remember this mirror, probably because "Harsh Light of Day" actually made a point to integrate it into dialogue.

The fact that Giles' father and grandmother were both Watchers -- and while we don't know if they actually cared for a Slayer, it seems they were at least active and working Watchers -- always gave me the suspicion that the Watchers weren't always intended to be the lame, pseudo-evil, patriarchical institution it later became. While I like the idea of the Watchers being out-of-date and kind of patronising, I never agreed/enjoyed Joss' stance that they were so hopelessly impotent and condescending that they needed to be destroyed (thematically, I mean, not "destroyed" as one would destroy an evil demon). I saw the Watchers as ordinary men and women, bookworm types who studied hard and sucked at actual muscle-work, but who were still dedicated to saving lives and protecting the world. Strong, noble, if a bit tweedy.

So yeah, I like Giles' admiration of Emily Dickinson, who was really quite a good poet, for an American : )

[> Interesting question, re Angel... -- Random, 22:21:12 07/10/03 Thu

The conceptualization of his character obviously evolved over the first season. Early on, he was a likable -- in an obnoxious sort of way -- character that hinted at far more dimensions than we actually see. When the dimensions are exposed, in "Angel," they aren't consistent with his early character...it seems as though we are being treated to the introduction of an newer-and-broodier Angel, much like Darrin in "Bewitched" suddenly changing a foot in height for no apparent reason except, you know, different actor. In essence, we can trace the current Angel from that episode. I suspect we're looking at a minor writing slip-up (conceptual slip-up, really) but not one so radical as to ruin the continuity completely. Of course, I have theorized that EarlyAngel is an example of a deliberate mask intended to prevent getting too close to the Slayer. Whether he had inklings of the danger she represented to him emotionally or whether it was just common sense for a vampire, even a vampire with a soul, to keep the Slayer at an arm's length...I can't guess. I'd be in danger of ret-conning, really.

[> [> Re: Interesting question, re Angel... -- manwtich, 07:32:25 07/13/03 Sun

As far as the Angel personality, I like to read more complexity into early Angel, although I readily grant that it is probably just my imagination. But I see him as simply a social misfit. He is Angel, but he hasn't interacted with real people for years, not since he was Angelus. So part of what he's doing all season is learning how to interact with her. He wants to, he already cares for her, as I think is visible at the end of Teachers Pet and in this episode, but he's still learning how to do it. His only experience with people is as a selfish and sadistic vampire-in-charge. Its interesting though that what Buffy likes and finds attractive about Owen includes his ability to brood silently for long periods of time.

I thought it was funny when Owen says to Angel, "she's the strangest girl," and angel doesn't really respond. But next thing you know, he's at the funeral home. I always pictured an omitted scene of Angel, with a little angelus smile on his face, saying, "You know Owen, you should go with them."

[> The subtext in Never Kill a Boy -- Rahael, 05:09:54 07/11/03 Fri

I thought the ep had some interesting subtexts about death and sex. The bee references re Emily Dickinson's poetry - well, bees could be seen as symbols of fertility. And of course, this episode revolves around the idea of Buffy's romantic life and work life colliding.

And the prominence of the funeral home. The idea that Watches measure time, and therefore the span of human lives. Death. Xander and Owen's watches. Owen is morbid,

It's also a little joke that Buffy have such an inappropriate date - the funeral home, only of course, it's not inappropriate at all. For Buffy, sex and death appear to be intimately connected, and this seems to bear out for the whole series!

Giles' job, 'Watching', is a family tradition we learn in this episode. A duty.

So I guess I think the real monster of the episode revolves around the idea of sex, procreation, family, duty and death. The passage of time, the passing of generations, falling in love, having children, dying. A natural normal thing that Buffy is not going to have. She falls in love with the wrong people. She probably won't have children cos she'll die too young.

I should look at the script. I may have more thoughts later.

[> [> Wow... -- Darby, 06:02:01 07/11/03 Fri

I do like the connections you've made, but I have strong doubts that the episode was structured that way purposely, as so many of them are. In fact, this episode seems to break a lot of the thematic structures of the early seasons - the monsters are weak metaphors, and for things which are themselves metaphors (Anointed = Chosen One, Brethren = Watchers?), and the "reflection" of the real lives and supernatural peril is vague.

[> [> [> Season 1 -- Rahael, 06:33:31 07/11/03 Fri

is a lot like that - the ideas are great, just the execution is a little less polished and together than the following ones and the eps tend to have uneven moments. I rate Hotel and Batali (apparently they write for Futurama now).

Some of my connections are my own fanciful likings and resonances, but we have to note that Owen is strong and silent and likes poetry (Angel type alert!) is unsuitable for Buffy (don't date normal boys Buffy! Don't date Vampires Buffy! Don't date anyone at all, Buffy!) and the fact that there's the whole funeral home setting for the date which is the usual Buffy macabre juxtoposition thingy.

It just reiterates the narrative sweep of Season 1 - how Buffy's duty is her torment and how she can't be like other girls. She is the sacrificial lamb, but also the predator. I like how we have the mislead between the Beast that is the mad vamp in the funeral home and the little boy. Both seem to also allude to Buffy's two sides - the hunter and the lamb. Showing that Buffy's nemesis is a mirror of herself.

Anyway, NKABTFD is a funny funny ep, and it mentions poetry so it's up there for me!!

[> [> [> [> The funeral setting -- lunasea, 09:30:41 07/11/03 Fri

I didn't see it as a funeral home being the setting of her date. She tried to have it at an appropriate place, the Bronze. She tried to have a normal date. She got sucked back into Slayerland and the date got moved to the funeral home. It was another example where Buffy tried to have a normal life, but the as Angel told her in WttH, "Do you really think that's an option anymore?" That is the interplay in every episode this season. Buffy tries to have a normal life, but keeps getting sucked into the supernatural.

The Witch: Cheerleading. That seems like a nice normal, non-slayer thing. What could possibly go wrong?

Teacher's Pet: A teacher finally doesn't think she is a delinquent. She starts to apply herself to her school work. Nothing bad could result.

NKABOTFD: A date. A normal date with a normal guy. Where's the harm in that?

The Pack: A school field trip. What a great thing that students all over the country look forward to. How could that go wrong?

Angel: So I can't date a completely normal guy. That really cute guy who has been helping me, maybe he can give me a little fun non-Slayer action. Yeah right

And it just goes on. Joss takes normal things and just uses them to suck Buffy deeper and deeper into her calling. It is more than Buffy's torment, but an incredibly skilfull way of taking her to acceptance. The more it happens, the harder it is to run away from.

[> [> [> [> [> Good points -- Rahael, 04:48:59 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks and preserving thread -- lunasea, 11:48:07 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> Dulce Et Decorum Est -- Cleanthes, 14:28:48 07/11/03 Fri

I agree with these death images as having been part of the show even in season one. Even if unintentional, all this stuff about going to funeral homes for dates surely links sex and death.

I can't see the name Owen without thinking of Wilfred Owen. I doubt that's why they chose the name, but it certainly has its morbid attributes in my mind because of this linkage.

[> [> [> [> [> Yes, that's it! -- Rahael, 04:53:07 07/12/03 Sat

I was wondering why I was getting certain vibes off 'Owen' but I couldn't quite place it.

Also, I think Season 1 is very compact in theme. Every episode reminds us of the Master, lurking underneath. Every episode alludes to Prophecy Girl.

[> Re: "Never Kill a Boy on the First Date" Revisited -- CW, 07:40:48 07/11/03 Fri

I always like to bring this episode up as one of the few times SMG has a weak scene of physical acting; pretty amazing there were so few even in the first year. When Cordy bumps into Buffy in the cafeteria at Owen's table. Buffy is supposed to lose her grip on her lunch tray. Instead SMG grips it firmly through the collision then carefully dumps it over using both hands. I think of a scene like the one in Restless where Buffy reaches into her satchel and smears mud on her face as one of those times when we take SMG's abilities for granted. With all the mess from the mud it was pretty much do it right the first time or live with it. I think Joss basically says on the DVD's the mud wasn't nasty enough looking which led to showing it in negative form. But, SMG was right on.

Andrew Vorba the non-Anointed one, is pretty much a season one villain. His style fits with the speechifying style of the Master, better than any of the later big bads. Caleb leans a lot more toward the Angelus-Spike school of bad guys, were as Vorba unfortunately relates closer to the forgetable Gorch brothers. I guess it's just to easy to hate thuggish bad guys.

[> Award for best foreshadowing -- Sophist, 09:12:31 07/11/03 Fri

Buffy's line, "Nothin to see here, pal, move it along" (spoken in the presence of Xander) clearly foreshadows Xander's lines in OMWF, "Nothing to see, move it along". I'm sure this also foreshadows that Xander's obsession with Buffy, to the point of remembering her exact words 5 years later, will destroy his relationship with Anya.

I think I'm kidding here, but you never know.

[> [> Re: Award for best foreshadowing -- DEN, 09:47:26 07/11/03 Fri

Good point, Soph. It's worth noting that Xander's insight in Hell's Bells is played out accurately in the balance of s6-s7. Whenever it comes to a crunch, his bonds to Willow and Buffy are in fact consistently shown as stronger than any ties to Anya

[> [> Re: Award for best foreshadowing -- Darby, 10:32:54 07/11/03 Fri

Could be, but I just saw it as a re-use of the old NYC policeman mantra. Maybe it's not so well-known outside the Northeast.

[> "Owen" is on "Monk" this week -- Darby, 06:14:53 07/12/03 Sat

...and seems even more Rileyesque than he did back in the day.

The episode was first broadcast Friday night, but they show them many many more times - check USA Network if you've got it. It's a cute episode, one of the better ones from a wildly uneven series.

[> [> Oh, my. I didn't even notice. But you're right -- fresne, 08:16:20 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> Is he the paramedic love interest on CSI? -- WickedBuffy, 20:47:17 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> Yup. -- Darby, 07:10:24 07/13/03 Sun

Response to lunasea's just archived post -- Alison, 11:10:12 07/11/03 Fri

Yes, I know your response wasn't rude, as I said in the beginning of my post. However, your overall attitude comes off as rudeness towards anyone who disagrees with you.
As for the shows writers- I am interested in what they have to say. However, I feel the purpose of art is two fold. One, to express the message of the artists/writers. Two, to be filtered through each veiwers own perceptions and experiences, in a way which reaches each veiwer on an emotional level. Each perception of the art/TV show/ poem, what have you, is valid, and whats more, IMO just as valid as the artist's. So for me, while the veiws of the writers can be enlightening, I have to base my assessment of the show on my own emotional response. If you choose not to do that, that's your choice.
Personally, I tend to disregard some of Fury's more extreme statements. He responds very defensively sometimes- I don't blame him for that-, and has recently changed some of his veiws regarding Spike- so which statement of his is more valid...depends on how you see the show.
If you want evidence that the writers want Spuffy to be considered to be a ship, I know you read all the writer's interveiws, or so you say, so I point you towards one of the more recent Jane Espenson interveiws. Spuffy is her favorite couple. I'd say Jane's opinion is just as legit as Fury's.
I can't change your mind- but you cannot change my mind, no matter how forceful or negative your agruments. The purpose of my post was not to get into a dicussion of the show's writers, but rather to ask you to refrain from making statements like : "I am tired of seeing Spuffy lumped in with other ships. It isn't the same thing. It isn't even Lilah/Wes. It is more Cordy/Connor, VampDarla/Lindsey or VampDarla/Angel (actually it is EXACTLY VampDarla/Angel. Lucky for us, neither lost their souls)."

[> agree with you Alison. Fury has said a lot of conflicting things. -- curious, 11:25:15 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> Re: agree with you Alison. Fury has said a lot of conflicting things. -- curious, 11:42:19 07/11/03 Fri

I have also have more trouble with B/A than B/S precisely BECAUSE Angel had a soul when he was Buffyís ìcradle robbing creature of the nightî boyfriend. Theoretically, he should have known better. Buffy was not a legal adult when she was with Angel. I found the relationship with Spike much more compelling, interesting and less potentially dangerous than Angelus. It wasnít a healthy relationship that should have continued - but a lot of that had more to do with where Buffy was coming from than Spike. Season 6 was exploring BUFFYís abuse of power and sexuality. Spike was genuinely surprised when she returned his advances.

[> [> [> Re: agree with you Alison. Fury has said a lot of conflicting things. -- Alison, 11:47:26 07/11/03 Fri

Personally- I loved each relationship. Both had a lot of darkness (though in Spuffy, the darkness was more overt, since it was the focus of the season). On a side note, the discussion of whether or not Buffy would have kept Angelus' drawings of her really caught my interest. It wouldn't surprise me if she had. She loved all of Angel, including Angelus - I think Faith had it right when she said Buffy was into him even when he was evil. And I think that's part of why he left- she accepted a part of him he's still not yet ready to deal with, and it terrified him.

[> [> [> [> The problem I have with B/A is... -- curious, 13:42:23 07/11/03 Fri

that I canít see what they have in common. I guess I got tired of the angsty gothic romance stuff and then only saw the squicky Daddy issues. It just kind of burned itself out for me. The two characters seemed to regress around each other after Angel got his own show. I also think Buffy was somewhat of a Darla replacement for Angel. B/A both have major issues.

I have no problem with posts that analyse/criticize characters or relationships. I have a problem with posts that bash posters or fans who have differing opinions. I donít respond to posters who do that. Those kinds of exchanges just raise your blood pressure. ;-)

[> [> [> [> [> Raising the blood-pressure is right, and a note Angel/Spike hypocrisy -- s'kat, 15:02:26 07/11/03 Fri

My difficulty with B/A shippers and Angelshippers who bash Spike using the following:

Spike is a misogynst
You only like him because he's hot
Spuffy was an unhealthy relationship we weren't supposed to like
The *attempted* rape scene

is that without missing a beat you can and I have seen posts that have applied every single point to the B/A relationship and Angel.

So for one fan to bash one relationship or the other as the bad one - is in one word hypocritical and makes me despise the poster not the relationship, not the characters, but the person writing the argument. And brings out the troll in me which wants to bring out all the arguments on B/A and Angel *and* I really resent feeling that by the way, b/c I loved B/A and Angel and want to continue to feel that. But when you push my *hypocrisy* button - I can barely restrain the desire to do it. I get furious. Partly b/c I've been taught the argument style of forcing someone to walk a mile in someone else's shoes.

So here's an example - so I can FINALLY get it out of my system and go back to enjoying my ATs tapes.

Excuse me - B/A, great ship? The guy stalks her for a year, b/f showing himself. He lusts after a pig-tailed girl sucking a lollipop. Gives into his overpowering desire for her, has a happy, loses his soul and goes about destroying her, her friends, her mentor, her family and the world. Because of that relationship - Buffy has been emotionally constipated ever since. Course doesn't help that Buffy has Daddy issues up the gazoo and had subsconsiously subplanted angel as psuedo father figure - the whole Freud view of wanting to marry your father b/c you never really had one. And Angel fits the bill - doing to Buffy everything Hank did to Joyce - cheating with Dru, losing his soul, leaving town.

As Buffy herself stated in Chosen:
"And what was the highlight of our relationship? You breaking up with me? Or me killing you?" And patronizing much? Angel also has troubles with women - going back to Darla dumping him - which is analyzed in Guise Will Be Guise.

This is your idea of a marvelous relationship? Look I loved it. As I just finished telling a friend over the phone. I still do love it in S1-5. It's over now in my humble opinion , but I did love it and look back on it fondly. Just as I loved B/S and consider it over now and look back on it fondly. But I by no means want to be in either relationship in real life or consider either relationship marvelous. Please. It's fantasy.

If Spike's a misogynst - then Angel's the king of it. Man oh man - what a patronizing bastard Angel can be at times.(I don't believe either are by the way. They seem to treat all humans the same in my perspective, they bite all of them and taunt all of them. I think there are a couple people on this board you need to look up the meaning of the word misogynst or re-read one of Finn Macool's posts. I honestly think that's how silly the argument is.)

And regarding the AR? Excuse me but we've seen Angelus rape people. (The scene in Dear Boy with Drusilla...yep he raped her before he turned her and yes she was a virgin, he also raped and murdered Holtz's wife.)So uhm if the soul doesn't matter? How can you stand the character of Angel?? Angel was the worst and most vicious vampire before getting a soul - according to canon. (Clearly the soul does matter - in the show as seen by the fact that they had Spike win one before saving the world.) We have not seen Spike *actually* rape. Just attempt it. But from NLM - it's clear he did it in the past and it torments him. ALL SOULLESS VAMPIRES RAPE. Another canon. Canons: ALL VAMPIRES without souls ARE EVIL, Rape, murder, pillage when given the opportunity to do so. To be *good* or get redemed, a vampire must have a soul. Souls MATTER. With a soul you can be forgiven for your sins.

Spike is the only one after an *attempted*
assault to go and get a soul and to apologize. Hmmm. Hyena Xander attempted to rape Buffy in The PAck - and he *never* apologized - he blamed it on the hyena. Faith attempted to rape Xander in Consequences. And she *never* apologized.
Instead she joined the mayor in an attempt to kill everyone.
(Yet silly viewers seem for reasons that escape me to think Spike "raped" buffy or is a "rapist", sorry you can't be a rapist if you haven't done the crime, you nits. She hit him across the room. Xander and Faith are more of a rapist than Spike - they got further. And had to be put out of commission to stop. And yes I know the one scene was filmed harsher - but look at what happened before and after factually... And no, I don't consider Xander and Faith rapists either - since they didn't complete or get very far either. I really wish TV shows wouldn't do this story line, I don't think audiences are capable of handling it for a range of very good reasons.)

IF you can forgive Faith, Xander, Angel - then you should be able to forgive Spike. IF you just happen to hate the character of Spike? Fine. I hate the character of Wood. Can't bloody stand him. Have admitted it more than once. I'm honest enough to do that. I also try not to critically post on him - b/c I know I can't be objective. Same with Andrew (who I'm not crazy about either.)
That's your right to hate a character. But don't bash Spike's fans and don't bash the character and say we're nuts for liking him. That just makes you come out to be hypocritical and pisses others off.

It's one thing to write a critical post about why the AR scene disturbed you (it disturbed me too - I still think it was poorly done) or about sexual violence or issues raised on the show or why the Spuffy relationship bugged you. But to take that and bash fans of the relationship over the head - is well just mean. How would you feel if someone went after your favorite characters and ships? (From what I've seen, not so great.) And believe me there is NOT one relationship seen on these two shows that I could not successfully assainate and show you why it is dysfunctional and disturbing. Actually I think I already did that in one of my essays for critical/intellectual purposes. But I didn't bash the fans of them. I didn't come out and say people only like Angel b/c he's hot. I happen to know for a fact that's not true. There's quite a few lesbians and heterosexual men who love the character. (The same with Spike.)

Also the whole you just like Spike b/c he's hot view is hilarous when we consider that all the other characters on both shows are hot. I started watching Btvs for AHS (hot)
and Boreanze(hot) and you honestly can't tell me that 50%
of Angel's fans aren't into the character b/c of his looks?
He sells more posters and pin-ups then most cult tv stars.
Spike? HE grew on me. I didn't think he was really hot until mid-season 6 to be honest. And I've seen polls on B C &S where the majority of posters ranging in age from 10-50
said exactly the same thing. But what we all forget is about 50% of the fan base is men, and no, sorry they aren't all gay, and a good percentage of those men love both Angel and Spike - and not suffice it to say because he's hot. Also there's a good percentage of gay women out there who watch these shows and love Angel and Spike - somehow I doubt it's for their looks.

I honestly wish certain posters would check their prejudices and presumptions at the door. It's beneath us all.

[> [> [> [> [> [> I can't believe I am responding and please ignore this -- lunasea, 15:44:20 07/11/03 Fri

Excuse me - B/A, great ship? The guy stalks her for a year, b/f showing himself. He lusts after a pig-tailed girl sucking a lollipop. Gives into his overpowering desire for her, has a happy, loses his soul and goes about destroying her, her friends, her mentor, her family and the world. Because of that relationship - Buffy has been emotionally constipated ever since. Course doesn't help that Buffy has Daddy issues up the gazoo and had subsconsiously subplanted angel as psuedo father figure - the whole Freud view of wanting to marry your father b/c you never really had one. And Angel fits the bill - doing to Buffy everything Hank did to Joyce - cheating with Dru, losing his soul, leaving town.

That's how you saw B/A and you consider yourself a shipper?

1. Angel didn't stalk Buffy for a year. He trained with Whistler.

2. Point of lollipop is to show innocense. Not little Lolita. What he says in "Helpless" doesn't remotely constitute "lust." Angel didn't lust after Buffy, he identified with her. They made a point of showing more than lust. Even with Marti's wonderful twisted sexuality, the real love came through. Angel on BtVS is played closer to DB actual age. Over on AtS everyone, even Cordy got aged to separate the two shows. But you know this.

3. Blaming Angel for Buffy being "stunted" makes about as much sense as blaming either of them for losing his soul.

4. Buffy's psuedo Father figure is Giles, not Angel.

This is your idea of a marvelous relationship? Look I loved it. As I just finished telling a friend over the phone. I still do love it in S1-5. It's over now in my humble opinion ,

So over that Buffy said "sometimes." Like Joss is EVER going to close the book on that one. He kept it alive for how many years? He even managed to put it into Angel's perfect day and had them meet when there were no crossovers. Look for shippers hearts to be toyed with even more in the movies.

In "Guise will be Guise," an evil demon suggests that Angel do what you think Angel does. Angel doesn't think this is such a good idea. To suggest that he did that with Buffy totally screws with the star crossed lovers and their moment of perfect happiness, both the one Buffy remembers and the day in IWRY.

Canons: ALL VAMPIRES without souls ARE EVIL, Rape, murder, pillage when given the opportunity to do so.

And Spuffy shippers are pre-soul when Spike is EVIL. I don't see B/A shippers advocating Buffy with Angelus. The point of the post that started all this is we weren't supposed to want Buffy together with an EVIL soulless vampire. It is supposed to be an anti-ship, used to show how bad Buffy is feeling.

Shippers aren't just people who think a certain relationship is fun to watch. They actually want the characters together. There is an emotional attachment there. There wasn't anything unhealthy about Buffy/Angel. It was just starting out. They both had issues, but they could have worked those through together. They weren't ripped apart because it was unhealthy. They were because it was BORING. They were because where it was going was nice, happy and healthy.

I am tired of people that want to drag this relationship down reading all sorts of things there that just weren't there. If they were, then Angel leaving wouldn't be such a big deal. It would just be an unhealthy relationship that Buffy was now freed from. If it was such a bad thing, Joss wouldn't have made sure to reopen the door when his series concluded. He said that he would remind us why they couldn't be together. In the shooting script Buffy says that she has been trying to complete herself with other people, when what she really needs to do is complete herself. Once she does that, there is no reason that sometimes won't happen.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I can't believe I am responding and please ignore this -- Miss Edith, 16:02:30 07/11/03 Fri

"There wasn't anything unhealthy aout Buffy/Angel". Aside from the fact that Angel was an elderly vampire when making out with a sixteen year old?

And sorry but stalking was involved. The scene from Becoming is not all that favourable for the ship IMO. Buffy was sucking a lollipop outside a school, Angel was a dirty unwashed tramp at that time lurking in a darkened car outside a school. People will see that negatively, ME must have been aware of that.

When Buffy was in LA we were clearly shown that Angel was following her. He is lurking outside her bedroom in the scene we see, in their first introduction in Sunnydale, Buffy is being followed by Angel. Throughout the first season he was obsessed with Buffy, and constantly there. She had a date with Owen, Angel pops up. In When She Was Bad Angel was lurking outside a young girls bedroom, that is not respecting her privacy. He was carrying over behaviour that Angelus was known to indulge in IMO. He wished to possess Buffy, but his focus is on protecting her, whilst as Angelus his interest was in destorying his obsessions (Drusilla for example).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You canít have it both ways -- curious, 16:18:39 07/11/03 Fri

Sorry lunasea. I am going to break my rule and respond to you - and try to be more respectful than you have been to others recently.

You are doing what you continually accuse B/S shippers of with B/A. You like something about that ship and donít want to look at the problematic parts of that ship. According to Joss in interviews and commentaries - the audience was supposed to see B/A as problematic - thatís what made great drama. They drove the point home with the lolipop.

I can see drama in both relationships, love in both relationships, and pathos in both relationships. I donít think you can have it both ways and have say that B/A=GOOD and B/S=BAD. I think the most you can say is that you like B/A and hated B/S. Fair enough. Many other thoughtful, intelligent people feel differently.

Fortunately, I have never seen anyone call B/A shippers pedophile sympathizers. I really donít understand all the antipathy toward ìSpuffyî shippers. You may not mean to but your posts do come off as unusually rude (by this boardís standards).Maybe you are more protective of B/A than you realize.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Has a Buffy/Angel supporter EVER called Buffy a bitch -- lunasea, 16:28:16 07/11/03 Fri

Or any of the other derogatory terms that get hurled at our hero because she didn't properly appreciate the Platinum God that deemed her worthy to even talk to, let alone share his bed?

Yes, Buffy/Angel have lots of problems. The curse comes to mind. That is all that was needed for the tension. If there was anything else, it would have made the curse irrelevant. They can't be together? So what? He isn't the right guy for her any way.

They worked the jealous angle rather well with Faith. Buffy didn't have enough faith in herself to believe that Angel would want her over a bad girl like Faith. It was a great story, but it doesn't make it unhealthy. Just says they have things to work out. All couples do.

That's how a narrative works. If Angel was so bad, then sending him to hell loses a lot. So does the curse and him leaving. If Spike is good for Buffy, then she does become an ungrateful bitch. You are supposed to like B/A and all the other ships. You are supposed to be repulsed by B/S and C/C. Those reactions are required to make what follows mean something.

That was my point of the original post, which got lost somewhere in there.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> This isnít about B/A. Itís about respect for other posters. -- curious, 16:33:05 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Has a Buffy/Angel supporter EVER called Buffy a bitch -- Miss Edith, 16:33:54 07/11/03 Fri

The reason some Spike fans call Buffy a bitch is because in DT she beat him up, and then left him crawling in an alley which she showed no remorse for in the following episode. At the beginning of DT Spike talks of Buffy generally kicking him in the head after sex and running off virtue fluttering. Many Spike fans had problems with this.

And actually I have known B/A fans to call Buffy a bitch from the episode Sanctury when she threw her relationship with Riley in Angel's face.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Has a Buffy/Angel supporter EVER called Buffy a bitch -- curious, 17:06:27 07/11/03 Fri

That's how a narrative works. If Angel was so bad, then sending him to hell loses a lot. So does the curse and him leaving. If Spike is good for Buffy, then she does become an ungrateful bitch. You are supposed to like B/A and all the other ships. You are supposed to be repulsed by B/S and C/C. Those reactions are required to make what follows mean something.

That is how YOU interpreted those relationships. People who disagree with you are not defective or stupid. They disagree with you for perfectly legitimate reasons. I didnít see Buffy as a bitch, I saw her as a depressed, immature young woman who was in pain and didnít know what she wanted.

Personally, I was a LOT more repulsed by B/A in S3 than I ever was by B/S. But I donít write post after post about how other people should have seen it my way.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I've seen B/A Shippers call her much worse -- Doug, 19:35:38 07/11/03 Fri

Hang around the Ducks board a bit; you'll see what I mean.

[> [> [> [> [> [> And Joss also said.... -- curious (limping along until my new keyboard arrives), 15:58:34 07/11/03 Fri

Angel is the WRONG guy for Buffy in the DVD commentary (S2, I think). Vampires were not supposed to stick around on BtVS. B/A was not concieved as a healthy relationship originally. The fans loved it in the early seasons - just like they loved B/S later.

Good thing it sort of thing happens fairly rarely on this board síkat Very few posters push my buttons here. Even those I disagree with are almost always respctful and thoughtful.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Buffy and Xander were the original plan. -- Miss Edith, 16:08:41 07/11/03 Fri

B/A were pursued when the audiences found that couple more dramatically interesting. The same occured in season 6, but the fans were punished for not seeing the wrongness of the B/S relationship. Obviously B/S were highly dysfunctional, I believe the point of the majority of fans was that it made good television, it was entertaining for them to watch. Havig writers self-righteously scold us for getting the wrong message, and having David Fury sneer that Spike fans should continue writing to real life serial killers was not helpful.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> See síkatís post below about Fury -- curious, 16:30:06 07/11/03 Fri

I think Fury has changed his mind so many times itís hard to tell what he thinks. I think he was lashing out at fans because of some of the hate mail he got. I think he probably likes Spike more than he likes some of the fans.;-)

I think the biggest difference in audience perception between Angel and Spike is that people say Good!Angel first and Bad!Spike first. In terms of what we saw on screen, including AtS, we saw Angel do MUCH worse things than Spike - with and without a soul. But Angel rarely gets the strong reaction that Spike does.Maybe thatís a compliment to JM!

I like both Spike and Angel as characters and hope they have both moved on from Buffy.

And B/X would have been boooooring. (sorry to B/X shippers out there). Iím glad they went with Angel and Spike instead.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> True...thank you -- s'kat, 20:40:43 07/11/03 Fri

Good thing it sort of thing happens fairly rarely on this board síkat Very few posters push my buttons here. Even those I disagree with are almost always respctful and thoughtful.

It's rare for me as well. And I have to admit that I'm especially vulnerable right now - hunting a job and all, so the frustration thing is coming into play. I told a friend tonight I was in an especially bitchy catty intolerant mood. (Went to my Lovely Bones book club and refrained from saying anything on the book, I hated it - they loved it. Saw no reason to comment too much or mess up their love. We all see the world differently after all - that's what makes it such a wonderful and interesting place.) I honestly think fresne and Rob responded far better and less emotionally in their threds on this topic and I admire their restraint. I usually try not to respond at all - because it does bring out a beast in me. I also usually refrain from reading this poster's posts. (But I think she has a right to her opinion, so I just don't read.) I made the mistake of reading one, b/c I'd read one just before it that I actually agreed with, so I thought okay she's mellowed, she's no longer mean. Whoops! that's when I read the post on ships, bad idea. That post made me so furious - not the content understand, but the tone - and the post on ships was in reponse to a neutral comment I'd said to reassure and commisserate with another poster, a poster I felt was fairly new to the board and reaching out - that's what enraged me so much. I was so angry I couldn't type. Which is why I didn't respond to the original post - which you and goose and Alison had. (The post was in direct response to a ship neutral one I'd written. The rudeness and meaness of that response...ugh.)

What I said was something to the effect of: "It's hard to be a B/S shipper isn't it? Sort of painful. My heartfelt sympathies. This is why I'm no longer a shipper. I'm ex B/S, ex B/A, ex W/T, ex...etc."

If I had any idea someone would go and prove my assertion right - I'd never would have said it. It's ironic in a way.
But this poster did just that - they proved just how painful it can be.

And this poster responded to that comment, which was NOT addressed to her, with a scathing critism of B/S and the anyone who followed the ship (counter-acting my intent completely to further her own ends) particularly after the original poster (ECH), who had bravely spoken of his own sexual experiences and had asked repeatedly in that thread not to make this about who is worse Buffy or Spike or to be about bashing B/S. All the poster wanted to know was what Buffy meant by calling Spike -William. I feel and I still feel that this person who posted that scathing, obnoxious,
and below the belt criticism is mean. I will NEVER make the mistake of reading another one of their posts or mentioning them by name again. I don't tolerate that level of meaness in anyone. So I have not read any of that poster's posts since that one and I had to wait a VERY long time before I was calm enough to post the response I did. Again it was not the criticism of B/S - I objected to, if you've read my essays or my posts - I'm critical of B/S, but I also loved them, it was the tone and meaness behind it. As well as the hypocrisy. Which was why I decided to do a B/A criticism to see if I could make that poster walk a mile in someone else's shoes. I thought if they could see what it felt like to be harassed in that way...Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. Oh well. I give up. I probably shouldn't have even tried.

Anyways...thanks for understanding. I'm sorry if I offended any innocent lurkers out there.

I've missed your posts curious. Would like to see more, so hope your desktop gets repaired soon. ;-)


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Absolutely agree with you SK.....I'm fed up -- Rufus, 14:37:30 07/12/03 Sat

The poster we are talking about would like it if we would all just see things her way only. She is rude and admits she doesn't care how people feel about her behavior. I'm going through a personal thing right now that has made me impatient with the way this person wastes so much energy trying to bash one character. I feel the result will be that other posters who aren't rude, won't feel threatened by a differing point of view will get just as fed up as I am and give up posting here....it will be a shame.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Glad you got that out of your system síkat. I had to lurk for a while. -- curious, 17:27:01 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I left the board entirely for awhile. a long while. -- s'kat, 21:24:49 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> So Buffy can die to save the world, but she can't have sex? -- lunasea, 11:52:44 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> Well *I* think she oughta be allowed to have sex! Hopefully something in the B/F tradition -- Random, 14:18:40 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> Actually I was hoping for B/X or maybe Buffy/Lindsey. -- s'kat, 15:25:56 07/11/03 Fri

Wouldn't it be great if Buffy married Lindsey off-screen?
Or Xander, her steady friend?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Who cares if Buffy gets a shag? Bring on the X/L! :p -- O'Cailleagh, 15:44:47 07/11/03 Fri

Although..a wedding would be nice....


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> For some reason that made me think of Dru...bet she'd like a wedding.... -- Alison, 15:50:29 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Would agree why oh why can't we have L/A, S/A, W/L, W/G? -- s'kat, 21:22:56 07/11/03 Fri

W= Wes, in case you're confused.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> And G? Giles or Gunn?...'cos, both would be good! -- O'Cailleagh, 12:24:22 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> Buffy/Lindsey is one I would LOVE to see -- lunasea, 15:53:42 07/11/03 Fri

We almost did but the actor was cast for Lindsey and not Riley. Talk about creating maximum angst for Angel. Only thing that would top it is Buffy/Connor.

To get into a romantic relationship with Xander at this point would say that guys and girls can't just be friends. I don't think they are going to go there.

But Lindsey. We need Lindsey back. He fits the story so well. We need an actual lawyer at the formerly evil law firm.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Buffy/Lindsey would be far too weird. -- HonorH, 00:48:45 07/12/03 Sat

I mean, just think about Lindsey's thing for Darla and Angel. If he was to get together with Buffy, it'd be more of the same for him, since Buffy's a Darla analogue, and really, Lindsey wants Angel most of all anyway. Maybe a threesome would work. Well, except for that pesky curse thing.

Eh, forget it.

[> You can ask -- lunasea, 11:46:40 07/11/03 Fri

but I won't. Joss has said point blank and we even discussed it fairly recently that the difference between season 6 and 7 was that season 6 Buffy didn't want her power and got into a very unhealthy relationship because of this. Season 7 isn't so dark because it is about Buffy sharing power (the exact quote would have to be retrieved).

So in order to see season 6, Spuffy is unhealthy. Pretty simple to me. They were doing with Spike the EXACT same thing they did in Reprise/Epiphany with Vamp Darla and I will say so. Yes, the actors are extremely hot and boy did they have chemistry. Still doesn't mean I am supposed to hope that Vamp Darla and Angel have an actual relationship. Angel wakes up and has an OMG moment. Buffy does the same thing several times season 6.

When Jane says that Spuffy is her favorite couple, she isn't saying that she is rooting for them to get together. She is talking about writing them. She loves their complexity. It is something fun for her to write and watch. ME did a great job, perhaps too good as evidenced by the plethora of Spuffy shippers.

As for the shows writers- I am interested in what they have to say. However, I feel the purpose of art is two fold. One, to express the message of the artists/writers. Two, to be filtered through each veiwers own perceptions and experiences, in a way which reaches each veiwer on an emotional level. Each perception of the art/TV show/ poem, what have you, is valid, and whats more, IMO just as valid as the artist's. So for me, while the veiws of the writers can be enlightening, I have to base my assessment of the show on my own emotional response. If you choose not to do that, that's your choice.

If you really believe that then neither defend yourself or get offended. It's really that simple. If you are secure in your interpretation, then there should be no button to push. There is no reason to refute what I or the writers say. Just go with what you feel you see.

A TV show that goes on for 7 seasons is a bit different than other art forms. When I look at a painting, I am seeing the finished work. My interpretation doesn't affect much of anything. I have used this analogy before, but it bears repeating. When my husband navigates across Long Island Sound, a 5 degree course deviation isn't a big deal. When he goes from Massachusetts to the Caribbean, it would put him at Africa instead. What the writers have said throughout the series are course corrections so that we can get to the place they want.

If you don't want to go there, then stick with your interpretation. That isn't what I am talking about, so just ignore what I say.

I have a question for you (well several actually): why do you even ask me to refrain from saying anything? Why do you care? Why even click on my posts about the topic? There are people that like them and even say things about them to me in private because they don't feel comfortable sharing in an atmosphere that would attack anyone that doesn't worship on the Spuffy shrine. As much as you think my posts are an attack, others consider them to be incredibly supportive and have shared some amazing things with me.

All I said was that Spuffy doesn't fit with other ships and I was tired of seeing it this way. I was expressing my frustration. Not telling Spuffy shippers to shut up.

So like I said, you can ask. I gave my answer. Whether this discussion continues is up to you.

[> [> Re: You can ask -- Alison, 11:55:32 07/11/03 Fri

Why do I read your posts? Good question. In all honesty, I have very little self control- I know they're likely to make me angry, but they often contain great insights into the characters you do like. I can't resist..what can I say.
No, I'm not perfectly secure in my interpertations..I don't believe that I am always right. And your tone offends me. Even when you say things I agree with. I tend, over all, to just let it go. But today, it bothered me. Just as you have those who enjoy your posts, there are just as many people who find them offensive. I honestly don't care WHAT you think- I'm just asking to to phrase your opinions a tad more politely...and I'm done now. This post is chock full of holes for you to point out if you choose....but I stand by my basic point.

[> [> [> Re: You can ask -- lunasea, 12:27:44 07/11/03 Fri

1. I like Spike as a CHARACTER. He makes a great plot device to get Buffy to do things and has some of the best lines. In terms of development, I would rather see screen time go to Willow, Dawn or Andrew.

If you want some insight, I was in a conversation with someone else off-board and I figured out what to me is key to Spike. Angelus lashes out to stop the pain. He even says so in "Release." Spike is in the same boat. When he opens his mouth, it is to make himself feel better. Everything about him is because he is a character in extreme pain. I think this is what attracts many to him. His character lies in pathos (hence he is known as a pathetic character). Should he ever get what he wants, I'm not sure there would be any emotional pull with him.

To be honest, I find Spike Shippers to be the ones that are degrading his character. To give him all these noble intentions that a vampire is incapable of takes away from the brilliance that is the character Spike. What ME did with OOMM and FFL is totally amazing and deserves to be studied by any serious student of writing. They worked within limitations that they had previously set themselves in order to get Spike to do the desired actions with motivations he is capable of. Rather impressive.

And with all of that, they kept the pain as the center point of his character. This season we got to see where that pain came from more. I'm not sure if I said this on board or not, so I will repeat myself, or not. I think the most important thing that informs a vampire is their last thought as a human being. The vamping of the four main vampires does show us what informed them.

Liam's: My father was right. He said I would find trouble and wouldn't amount to anything.

William's: She really understands and likes me.

Spike is about the very human desire to be understood and loved. Spike wants to be someone, but not in the same way that Angelus does. For Spike, he proves his worth by being loved. How this carries through human, unsouled and souled would make an interesting essay, but it isn't worth it to me, since it would be met with accusations of being a Spike hater. Right now Wolfram and Hart are much more interesting to me.

2. There is no tone in cyber space. 9 times out of 10, what someone perceives to be an insult is a joke. Tone is more a case of projection than the intention of the author. It isn't WHAT you say, but HOW you do seems to be the main argument against something that someone can't say anything what is said. You don't know my tone. You don't know me.

3. I really don't care if I offend people. That should be obvious after 6 months on the board. I would rather risk offending some in order to really connect with others.

4. You asked, I answered. Now what you do is up to you.

[> [> [> Good try, Alison -- dub ;o), 12:28:23 07/11/03 Fri

Believe me, I feel for you. I'm one of those who has tried, more than once in the past, to take lunasea to task for her condescending attitude and inflammatory remarks. Believe me, it's no use. Someone finally put an end to my campaign by pointing out that lunasea really doesn't care what people think, so I was getting myself into a state for no reason, and that the majority of posters do the sensible thing and manage to ignore her posts. I hope that you'll be able to do so as well. I sometimes still read replies to her posts, like your own, and it's fairly simple to see that nothing has changed. It's worth missing the occasional insightful remark to spare yourself the aggravation.

Reasoning with lunasea, as Blackadder might say, is like a broken pencil...

dub ;o)

[> [> [> [> You have my support, Lunasea! (and respect) -- Q, 12:59:45 07/11/03 Fri

I agree with most of what you say about Spuffy, though you give the character far more credit than I would.

I haven't read enough to comment on the "being offensive" part of this argument-- so I won't mark you guilty or innocent-- but I do know how hard it is to keep your temper when people worshipping the most unhealthy relationship in the history of TV get mushy about how it's great-- pretty much just because they think James Marsters is hot.

I don't get as angry now, because the writers eventually copped out and gave Spike a soul, which negated much (definately not all) of my arguments against Spuffy-- but the most infuriating era in Buffy history was during season 6, when Spike was the symbol for misogeny. Right after he tried to brutally rape Buffy, I thought for sure all of the Spike apologists would finally quit "shipping" this horrible thing. But on the contrary, they used the same excuses that are used to defend rapists in real life-- "He had been drining" "He didn't know what he was doing, and when he realized it he REALLY did feel sorry!" "She had given him false signals so long-how was he supposed to act?"-- "Did you see how that slut was dressed?"

OK, they didn't do the last one, but they may as well have, because they used EVERY other cliched defense of a rapist known to man. This was SO infuriating! Now that he has a soul, they don't need excuses, and can pretend that they really were against it all in season 6, but now think it is OK. Truth is, all the Spike/Buffy shippers now, were also Spike apologists in season 6 as well-- they just realize now that they didn't, at the time, have a leg to stand on.

One last thing-- calling it a "ship" trivializes the hell out of it. It's not a fun, romantic story as seen in most teen dramas-- It is a very serious story, that was told symbolically to show the misuse of male power, and Spike, the rapist, was one of the MAIN symbols to show that abuse in season 6. I would not be any less comfortable to have had Warren stay alive, and then Willow fall in love with him before season 7 ended-- Spuffy and Willow/Warren have equally offensive connotations, to me.

I guess Atwoods "Rape Fantasies" is way off the mark-- with this many Spuffy shippers-- it kind of puts the feminist movement back about 60 years.

[> [> [> [> [> I could spend time detailing all the ways you've pushed my buttons in this post... -- Rob, 13:29:01 07/11/03 Fri

...but I'm not going to, because this is an argument that will just go around in circles.

I will say, though, that I find it incredibly unfair how you lump fans into pro-Spike or anti-Spike. And if you're pro-Spike, you have to think (a) (b) (c), and if you're anti-Spike, you have to think (d) (e) (f). Spike is one of my favorite characters. Do I apologize for the attempted rape, though? No. Although your mixed signals answer, despite the fact that it was dipped in snark and you don't agree with it, did have some merit. Nevertheless, not everybody who loves Spike thinks the AR was okay. I resent people trying to lump me into a group. I'm tired of having to defend Spike at the expense of Buffy, or defend Buffy at the expense of Spike. And I cannot tell you how condescending your "I do know how hard it is to keep your temper when people worshipping the most unhealthy relationship in the history of TV get mushy about how it's great-- pretty much just because they think James Marsters is hot." line was. I loved Spuffy. I do not think James Marsters is hot. Sorry. For the non-psychological interpretation of their relationship and for why I liked it so much, check Existential Scoobies for my "Beauty and the Beast" essay. I do not have warm, mushy feelings for their relationship, but I do love it. And the soul is not just a non-issue, as you try to make it seem. Having a soul is of huge importance in the Buffyverse. Spike reached the lowest point of his life and in response went to seek out a soul. And he did it for Buffy. That is an enormous accomplishment. The soul was not later used as an excuse to whitewash the rape, but to delineate the difference between an souled and unsouled being, a being with a moral compass and one without. And most significantly, Spike may have went to get a soul, but he didn't need one to know that trying to rape Buffy was wrong. He knew it as it was happening, and knew it right afterwards, which is why he left for Africa in the first place.

And as for you calling Spike a symbol of misogyny, that is your own interpretation. If anything, Spike became a symbol for all Buffy loved, craved, and hated about herself. The misogyny angle is hardly valid, except for the AR, which was not a case of misogyny, but extremely mixed signals.

Huh, seems like I responded after all.


[> [> [> [> [> [> Agree completely Rob. You stated how I feel far more concisely than I ever could. -- Alison, 13:31:53 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Well put. Thanks, Rob. -- Anneth, 13:32:11 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Good job, Rob. You stated my feelings completely. -- fidhle, 13:49:55 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Another ìatta boyî to Rob! Glad I donít have to respond to this. -- curious, 13:58:18 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Ooh, Rob...you've joined HonorH on my "New Heros" list. Well said. -- Random, 14:05:59 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Not that I necessarily agree with you on everything, but well-said anyway, heheh -- Random, 14:09:27 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> Marry me, Rob! -- HonorH, 14:09:59 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Get at the end of the line, HonorH! -- Random, 14:14:21 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Those weren't the type of responses I was expecting while I was writing the post, but... -- Rob, 14:44:31 07/11/03 Fri

Cool!!! Can I accept both of your proposals? ;o)

Oh, btw, Ran, now I guess I can assume that the part of my post you "didn't necessarily agree with" was the not thinking JM was hot right, huh? ;o)

And thanks to everybody. Glad I'm not the only one who agrees with me, and that I was able to help you guys with your venting. Heh heh.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I suppose. -- HonorH, 00:23:47 07/12/03 Sat

Whaddya think, Ran? Are you attractive? Male? Female? Both? My Super-Evil Alter-Ego's skanky and bi, so I'm sure we can work out some accommodation.

Cut this out immediately. Sharing is for wimps, and I refuse to allow you to marry that cheerleader.

Go kiss a Balrog, H. This isn't about you.

This is the thanks I get for trying to look out for your best interests? You sorry little ingrate!

*My* best interests? This is all about you not wanting to face the fact that Rob has better legs than we do. Deal with it, Queenie.

*mutter* You'll get yours, you know.

Yeah, yeah--hey, where'd Rob go? Come back, Rob! Don't let her chase you away!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Actually... -- Random, 08:24:22 07/12/03 Sat

I'm a straight male. And my attractiveness is not for me to judge (you can see a pic of me in the BehindATPo icon, if you wish to judge.) But, as you well know, Rob's just too adorable to resist. We can work out some sorta time-share agreement -- can your alter-ego be bribed with something chocolate. Or maybe the fleeting fame of additional cameos in the BehindATPo LJ?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> There are two things H can never get enough of -- HonorH, 11:23:19 07/12/03 Sat

. . . yea, three she'll never turn down:

1. publicity for herself
2. chocolate
3. Giles (or her other lust objects du jour)

Works for me.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> No, no no!!! I'm a Rob/TCH shipper! -- Caroline, 15:08:00 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Heh heh. But we're twins. That would be...wrong. ;) -- Rob, 15:17:31 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Is this one of those "It sounds wrong but it feels so, so right" deals? -- Random, 08:25:36 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Does "no comment" make the situation better or worse? ;-) -- Tchaikovsky- attempting to giggle nervously, 10:57:56 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> [> [> [> [> Keeping things in perspective... -- dub ;o), 14:14:53 07/11/03 Fri

Goooooooooo, Rob!!

I've just been perusing merchandise from the Bloody Awful Poet Society. Think I'll buy one of their stickers:




[> [> [> [> [> [> thanks for the reminder of the B&B essay as well -- MsGiles, 14:22:10 07/11/03 Fri

one of the things that first got me hooked on the board, Cocteau's B&B film being a total all time favourite of mine, and your linking of B&B with B&S here really switched some nice lights on.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Bravo Rob! -- O'Cailleagh (wishing he'd waited til 2morro to quit smoking), 14:33:34 07/11/03 Fri

I *do* think James Marsters is hot...but I disliked Spuffy. I suppose it reminded me of similar decisions I have made in my long and murky past, and so I related to the bad relationship angle of it.
We all know, B/S shipper or not, where they went wrong, why it should probably never have happened, and that rape is bad, etc. But then, Spike *was* evil so it follows that he might commit the occasional evil act. Should Buffy have forgiven him? Should we have forgiven him? I truly don't know, and am beginning to be past caring, its all dragged on for so long.
We forgave Xander though, back when he tried to rape Buffy...most people, on both sides of the argument, seem to forget that.
You know, I really don't know what it is I'm trying to say here....just that I am sick of this constant bickering (and I'm pointing no fingers and mentioning no names) and I really wish it would stop..(looks round for Anya or Hallie..no? Oh well then..no wishes for me..) When I first found this board, I thought it most refreshing that there was little to no flameyness, healthy debate yes, but pointless to-and-fro-ing was apparently unheard of. It could still be like the 'old days', its not too late is it?!?

Hmmm...maybe I should have just said "Bravo" and left it there....


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> sorry o'c... -- Alison, 14:39:33 07/11/03 Fri

I do feel bad- I lost my temper, and now the board is taken up with yet another thread that comes down to "Good Spike, Bad Spike"....and Ran's great post on Xander is being ignored. Talk about your circular logic: stop the bashing by starting a post about bashing, which lead to more bashing....maybe I should just not post anymore.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hey! Do you want *me* to lose *my* temper?? -- O'Cailleagh, 14:50:08 07/11/03 Fri

'Cos I will, if you stop posting!
I guess I'm a little easier to agitate today is all, my vitamin 'N' levels are dropping dramatically which brings on the cranky.
I wasn't having a go at you, or anyone else (as individuals anyway!) I just thought that I should pop my POV in there...after all, silence seems to be considered approval most of the time..and I totally do not approve of the unfriendliness that appears to be plaguing the board of late.
So..I hope I've clarified my point a bit...I doubt it though, whenever I try to clarify I tend to ....whats the opposite of clarify again? (damn nicotine-free brain!) Anyhoo..I do that thing!


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hey! Do you want *me* to lose *my* temper?? -- Alison, 15:05:22 07/11/03 Fri

whether I post or not, I'll be sure to stick around...I love this board, no matter what...I love it when we all get along, and I love it even when it's not all puppies and giggles. And who knows...I've even been thinking about writing a real post- you know, the kind where I don't just re-iterate someone else's point...well, we shall see.
Anyway, I'm sure the board will become friendlier again..what's that saying about how life is a wheel...and both the ups and downs of it are experienced...lord, this is making no sense at all.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Bravo Rob! and Hear! Hear! o'c!! -- LittleBit, 14:49:05 07/11/03 Fri

Well, first... we did forgive Xander, but then he was possessed by a hyena (whose souled or unsouled status has yet to be debated). So, y'know... circumstances.

About your other point, may I just say I'm in total agreement? I've missed the posts that first brought me here. Posts about philosophy, about mythology, about hero's journeys and Buffy. And you're right, there was discussion and disagreement, but not the gleeful jumping in and going at it that seems more common in the posts today. Not saying discussion and disagreement aren't welcome, they're the lifeblood of the Board, but that at some point there's a natural end, and we seem to be ingoring that now.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Absolutely! -- Rob, 15:21:14 07/11/03 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> It's the time of year -- Doug, 15:41:51 07/11/03 Fri

In my experience TV-show based boards go nuts early in July and continue being that way till sometime in early-to-mid August.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> just do what i do, o'c -- anom, 17:14:09 07/11/03 Fri

Don't read those threads. Or at least, just the subthreads where the sense of humor shows up, or the ones that get hijacked to something less flamy & more fun &/or thoughtful.

For example, the only post I opened in this thread was yours, & that was to congratulate you on quitting smoking, offer support, & wish you success. Not reading the rest. Hope you make it, & if you don't this time, don't give up on giving it up--most smokers need to quit more than once before it really takes.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanx anom! -- O'Cailleagh, 20:18:13 07/11/03 Fri

Yeah...I don't usually look at this type of thing...but it was taking up so much room, I think it must have it's own gravitational pull or something.
Thanx for the words of support, this is about the 9th time this year that I've tried to quit, since the beginning of January, and also the best I've managed so far. (About 40hrs without smoking now!).
8 hours to go and all the nicotine will be gone from my body...a scary thought..I think nicotine is what keeps it going!
Okay, this is getting way more rambly than I planned, so I'm gonna go and not smoke...


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> tips you've probably already heard... -- sloan, 02:52:22 07/12/03 Sat

I used to smoke (admittedly for only two-three years) and was IMO addicted and the only way for me to quit was to cut back very very methodically. I used to smoke a pack a day and every week or couple of days I would smoke one less than the period before that. It got so bad that I'd smoke half a cigarette and save it for later when I was down to one a day. Extremely pathetic--but that's what it took.

Also, someone (yes, I know, very vague) told me that cravings only last for five minutes. Whether or not this is true I operated on the belief that it was and would distract myself for at least that length of time. Or force myself to wait until I could smoke my allotted number of cigarettes for that day. And I still employed this method after I had offically quit.

Oh! And buy individual packs, not cartons or buy one get one free offers. That way you have to make the conscious choice every time you buy a pack. It starts to matter after a while...and not just because it dents your cash flow.

You probably don't really need or want this advice, and maybe you can't use it, but I found that the more support I got the easier it was to wait, to put off and to finally quit.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: one second, one minute, one hour, one day at a time -- Brian, 06:35:50 07/12/03 Sat

Good luck! I'm rootin' for ya.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Wholeheartedly agree. Rob. See my post under curious above. -- s'kat, 15:08:48 07/11/03 Fri

I think I'm a tad more adversarial then you are, not towards curious of course, who I agreed with.

These arguments have a tendency to raise my blood pressure
and bring out the troll in me. And it doesn't help when my main reason for coming to these boards is as a fun release from the frustration of looking for a job.

So thanks for the post rob. Good one. Wish I could be nearly as polite and clear on this topic. ;-)


[> [> [> [> [> Hmmmmmmmmm -- Rufus, 03:14:17 07/12/03 Sat

Without a soul Spike attempted to rape Buffy. His reaction to what he did was to seek a soul. Spikes journey to becoming soulled was long and painful.

Without a soul, Angelus raped and murdered a gypsy girl and was cursed with a soul. Each subsequent loss of the soul created a monster who tried to destroy a victim by killing everyone they loved before finishing them off....with Buffy the plan didn't work so he decided to use Acathala to destroy the world.

The difference in each vampires story is how they got a soul....both found the experience painful...only one was capable of making the choice to get a soul. I like both characters and feel that they afford us the opportunity to see that there isn't just one way to stuff a soul into a vampire.....;)

We could piss around for the rest of the summer trying to argue which vampire is hotter, or better than the other. I feel that the argument is a waste as personal preference is going to dictate how one sees a character. Don't even waste my time bitching about misogyny as both have acted in a way that could be interpreted in a negative light.

Remember......."Spike does not negate Angel and Angel does not negate Spike" --shadowkat

[> [> [> [> Thanks dub :) -- Alison, 13:23:43 07/11/03 Fri

You're right- and honestly, I don't know why her posts got to me more than usual today. Thanks for the support though.

[> Regarding David Fury -- s'kat, 14:13:11 07/11/03 Fri

Here's the succubus club interview I transcribed where Fury and Minear discuss Spike and Angel. This interview took place long after city of Angel's interview. And was in response to emails Fury had received from Spikehaters.

Tagged on at the end is a very informative post I saved from Angel's Soul Board where a poster there discusses her own interaction with Fury and his website and experience with his interviews. My take for what it's worth is that Fury had a bad experience once on line and realized not to take any one on the internet seriously - hmmm, not bad advice when you think about it. So I'd take half of what he's said about the shows with a grain of salt.


Listening to it now and here is a semi transcript:
[]= mine and () mine or summaries
Tim Minear (TM) and David Fury(DF). Commentator (C)
Angel (ATS) and Firefly (F)

Lots of typos and mistakes I'm sure. It's late and this was hard.

TM: David F has very deep and sultry voice, smoked bunch of cigs to help.

Had a hand in breaking stories to ep .7, after Firefly, got back at ep .15 and wrote that story with Mere and came back for finale. [so he co-wrote Orpheus]

TM: Left for F for ep.7, before started production after DG, there was much involvement, then F took over completely and I was accused of abandoning, not naming names, came back, quality spiked then dropped when I returned, strang

DF: offices over at there were comfortable, all F/Btvs/Ats
were together. Ats = WB, Btvs=PAramont, F= Fox.

(Voices hard to figure so excuse mistakes)

[huge section regarding a joke on pretzel keg...can't possibly transcribe it all. And other silly writers jokes and geeky stuff. ]

I spent more time on Ats this year - lots of time downstairs, disenfranchised from Buffy, he went to Ats b/c of TM. Not involved on breaking on Buffy this year.
First time. spent more time on Ats. TM - kept saying come on to ats, you and me buddy...then tM left and he went you suckered me!! But he was there in the beginning of season at least breaking stories, so we felt he was there.
It was okay, fine. Weird year - started out with someone new and thrown in a position couldn't possibly follow. We become sort of a machine. Lot of growing pains. (joke about the show Growing pains) Bell clicked in to do the day to day.

And picked up.

C= that's the big news, talk about later... b/c there's talk and like to talk about the talk.

[Break - 2.5 minutes - Bif Naked's - no clue what it is but I don't remember it from Buffy. Not that good IMHO. Something about banging my head and not hearing a word I said in the chorus. ugh. Ah Moment of Weakness is the name. And the song goes out to Jasmine, AlexisWEb from HLOD. Uhm sorry it wasn't - that's Lucky. ugh ]

C= Down to the wire and we thought we were going to lose both shows...did you know?

DF= Ats was always a bubble show, the network waits until last minute. We didn't know this year, really didn't know.

Sat down with and editor and did all the cool stuff we did the last two years and didn't assume for a moment that network saw it. 20th sent us a tape of another show they'd sent and their's was lame clip packet and said do something like this. So we said we'll do something cool. (The clip package was roswell).

TM - went in there with a movie like one. DG, JW, JB and TM
and decided season finale was really a pilot for next year.
AI offered LA branch of W&F and had to go in pitch it and they have to do it every year. But this season was more drastic. Last year they did a major cliffhanger. But this year was far more serious - major question mark. The direction we're taking was to entice us. Joss pitched it early in the year to writers and they realized they had to change it. Is it too arcy, too soapy, too dark, can new viewers get into it? Can we get more sunlight.

C= was it you

TM= Joss

C= connor coming back?

TM= we decided this before we even cast the role. We had the prophecy that the father would kill the son - but we wanted to go to the Stella Dallas place and decided it way before we cast it. Didn't know exactly how. didn't want to kill him exactly, wanted to do a twist on it.

Don't remember whose idea it was to do - probably Joss, but we all discussed and really loved it. The whole notion of taking away free will for happiness and Angel fighting that and then doing that for his son really felt right.

DF= we knew CC was the Big Bad for A4. But CC was pregnant so how are we going to do Angel doing a fight with the big bad pregnant lady.

it was Tim's idea for both Willow and Darla back, not all Joss. What we came up with CC's pregnancy was that the child - Jasmine would be the true Big Bad. And not big evil guy - no a woman, and it's not an evil woman, but someone who'd bring peace.

TM= we were so bored with the big evil kung fu fighting bad guy.

Jasmine - had a garden of evil element - except there are rules.

TM= CC - initially wanted her to come out of her coma and put her fist through Jasmine's skull. But didn't work b/c CC couldn't work those hours at that point in her pregnancy, all she could do was be in a coma for a part of the period. So we had to work around her. Sometimes things just are the mother of necessity.

C= Why Cordelia as the BB ?

DF=[they always planned it] There's no drama in a love that can be. It creates an emotional resonance for the good mother to turn.

TM= when we had her ascended into heaven...we hated that turned us off, gave wrong thing

DF= actually we didn't know where to go with her there. So we had to figure out where to go from there.

[This was confusing section - voices overlap]

It was her - her body used by this thing. The C/C wasn't supposed to be sexy. It was supposed to disturbing and creepy. TM =No way sexy fun, creepy goodness

DF = no way to bring her back the way she was before, I loved the original Cordy, but since we wrote her out of that, we couldn't

TM= we did erase her memory and tried to bring her back with old Cordy. But we want them to grow

The problem this year was we had an actress who was pregnant...if she hadn't been pregnant we'd never have done it.

Reason I wanted to bring Darla back in Inside Out to bring the closure. But our hands completely tied b/c Cordy got pregnant and had to put it in.

C= she'll be back?

TM/DF = she'll be back in some way, we need closure. She needs to come out of the coma and she is part of Angel and important to his arc. He's longing for her. Always hanging over him. Cares about her as his love.

TM = don't want to see him pining for her.
Talked about not finding her - but a complete repeat of last year.

TM= wrote as a season final, not series final, wrote it as a pilot for next season.

c= would new season include Connor

DF = not in the capacity we had. They'll be an episode where he'll be. Too familiar to Dawn scenerio.

TM= wants to do the episode where possibly these parents have a kid with super-powers and come to Angel for help.
Always try to write from Angel's pov. There's this kid and here's this guy really cool - but he doesn't get him as a dad and that kills Angel because he is the dad, and the father keeps killing the son over and over again.

(Okay this was hard - so will try to fill in gaps, apparently Connor had been written to always exit in a manner like this - either to be killed directly by Angel or in a twist. Also Cordelia was always meant to be S4 big bad because of the emotional resonance of having Angel deal with his love becoming evil and the surrogate mother of his son being so. But CC got pregnant and screwed up the story line - so they had to write around it. And came up with the JAsmine arc which Whedon pitched. Sounds like they really do work collaboratively on this and Whedon throws ideas out and everyone comes to a consensus and plays with it. At any rate I think they were very focused on the theme that Angel is dealing with the father killing the son. Also the whole free will idea of - Angel fighting for it - then as a twist removing it from his son)

[Break song is Pavlov's Bell by Aimee Mann. YES!! My favorite song. Thank you.]

DF = Sleeper - wrote teaser in first act

c= how does getting credited work?

DF = whoever's really up, gets first crack. Story didn't break until half way through it and I was writing Angel 10 at same time. LMPTM - had to prep my episode, 3 kids , and couldn't do it - went to Goddard and asked if he would write it with him b/c had no time

Peace-Out - he didn't write the fourth act, SDeknight wrote the fight scene, Craft and Fain wrote the last scene.

Sleeper - glad to have name on. Doug Petrie actually wrote second act. Aimee Mann wrote the song.

C= Firefly - what's the sit with that.

TM = cancelled, but airing in UK - hello, watch the Sci-Fi channel where it's airing. Sci-Fi channel in US? Not big on Sci-Fi. The whole season, with three unaired episodes, and the gag reel and commentary is coming out on DVD. Beyond that, all can say is Firefly not yet dead.

Going to write a show for Fox called Wonder Falls - so sort of leaving. (Originally called Maid of the Mist but bad title.)

DF = Tim will always have place to go.
C= no more Angel?
TM =I'm gone. I'm executive producing and writing the new series.
DF = Twin Peaks like. about a girl who works in sovenire shop in Niagra Falls and they talk to her and don't know if TM:it's god or what. Or if she's insane. Todd Harland who directed pilot and Malcom in Middle is with it. Going to happen after World Series. talking about mid-season and launched off of American Idol.

Sunday night is the most watched night of TV. So will be put there. Very high profile show. Mid-season very good time.

C= What will be doing? (lots of joking about Buffy ending)
DF = Not sure if he will be staying with Angel
SDeknight, Drew Goddard, JBell, (if angel hadn't been picked up TM would have picked up DGoddard), Mere has left - she's completely gone, Ben Edlund is there and was a huge part of firefly and we wanted him, Craft and Fain definitely staying. Fury has some offers - I'm officially an consultant, if I come to Angel - they'd have to make a whole new deal with me and Angel is operating on a smaller budget next season and Buffy was very low budget and 1st season was shot on 16 mm of buffy. Anyways...they had to cut back on expenses.

TM = DB went out of his way to get the show renewed. He promoted it. Went to all the talk shows. Went out of his way. Really is on board for next year and Really Really excited to be back.

DF = WB wanted more out of Buffy World, WB never gave its due until this year. This year more than ever - were responding. Gave calls - great episode.

TM = the Execs at the network love the show, but not in charge of picking it up. Decisions made by people in NY. Had to crunch numbers. Show saved itself.

DF = Doing very well on Sunday. Best in that slot of anything. Numbers go up in 2nd half hour. Which is a big deal. New for the season. Good reviews. Great demographics.

TM = moved it to Wed's after Smallville, finally realized put Superman and Batman on same night.

DF = Know where Smallvill comes out, (ours we don't)

(jokeing about Dawnson's Creek season finale)

[Break. Song: Mrs. Xander Harris - the song from Selfless.
Cool!!! ]

(Filling in gaps - apparently DF may or may not be on Angel next year. He didn't sound like it though. Tim Minear definitely isn't. Nor is Mere Smith. The definites are: Joss Whedon, Drew Goddard, Craft and Fain,Steve Deknight, Jeff Bell, and Ben Edlund)

(lots of joking about Drew Goddard.)

C= when does it start breaking

DF = starts in June. Something we've done before, we often break one or two before go off. But didn't do it this year. So come back a little early to do it. Last year late soon.
Joss will be writing and directing first episode of next year.

C= JM - what was decision

DF?TM = No brainer. James was always. We're going to keep James employed b/c he's great. We love him dearly.

Now getting hatemail Spike or I'm ruining Buffy. Silly.

James is coming back as Spike. We really haven't worked out what he'll be. He'll be a foil.

TM:Faith spin-off, I was going to do it with JM and Faith.
After that fell through and definitely bring him over for some episodes not make a regular, but was one of the things network wanted. we like James so decided to bring him in.
He's terrific. But we don't know what he'll be. Except definitey a foil

C= Second Billing?

DF/TM= we don't know.

We did NOT push anyone out to make room for Spike. Connor story ended the way we wanted it to. We love Vincent but that was the way the story wanted to tell itself. We did not in any way push aside characters or push them out to make room for Spike

DF= there will be more female characters, some seen before and some new ones.

TM/Df = Jonathan Woodward - who played Holden was in the last unaired Firefly. He is wonderful and was in Tim's Firefly episode. He's a star.

C= Gwen?

DF = yeah we love Gwen. The thing about Gwen is run the risk a little bit - take away a little bit from the main character.

TM = originally designed to come back. Look for a female protoganist/antogaonist in the mix. Lilah will be back.
Not sure what they'll do.

(TM - mentions that Angel did do statutory rape on Buffy, since she was 16 at the time not yet 17, turned it just after and it's not legal. )

(okay filling in the gaps during the music break - they talk so fast - apparently, there's been a lot of comments that Spike pushed out the other characters - and that is simply NOT true. Connor's story was written before he was cast. They had decided it would end at the end of S4. They always planned on keeping James MArsters - whether the spin-off was slayer school (male lead) or Faith - he'd be there.
When that didn't happen they decided to bring him on for a few episodes on Angel. The network made it clear that they wanted James as part of the series and it was the clincher.
So they compromised and agreed to make him a regular to get the series picked up by the network, but this really wasn't a problem since they adore James Marsters and think he's a terrific guy. What his role will be? They aren't sure yet, but he will be a foil. The commentary asked if he'd be a villain and they said that wasn't really it and no, more a foil. Damn! Now I'm going to be searching for spoilers all summer. Also Joss Whedon is writing and directing the first episode of the season. Please note that these guys aren't still with Angel so - while they may not know what is coming, joss definitely appears to.)

[Music - selection from When She Was Bad]

(still joking about Drew Goddard - now about Buffy)

DF = She'll be gone regardless. She's on to movies now.
(joking about Scooby Doo now)
C= Talk about the run?

DF = still freelancing, didn't come on permanent until the 4th season. Joss always thinks of me being around since the begining , met him when Joss was in development first year.
Great experience to be part of something so meaningful to people. Once in a lifetime thing to find a show like Btvs that changes face of entertainment. Alias inspired.

TM = Joss' joke, only show on WB not trying to be Buffy is Angel.

Df = wistfullness, knowing part of it, great thing JW gave me. Hope can live up to it and other work can mean as much.

C= What are your thoughts on this season?

DF = The season's been - we struggled a little with the arc, b/c FE's inability to do any harm itself and the new girls potentials became very crowded and diffused. Did good work within that. It gets to the heart about what Buffy means. When people take a step back from it after the season is over - will have more affection for it.

Anyone who really thought about last season - very dark and compelling - but necessary if tell the story telling. We had to earn her coming back from dead and it's difficult story - too quickly feel cheated. Characters grow and change need to do it. As much as have affection for early years - is false for us to go back and recreat it, creates pain but also creats interesting stories.

(Commentators go on about their opinions)

TM = trace back to an episode when Spike ruined the show
DF = was school hard.
I got this hate mail about how Spike was the Fonzi. He was the cool character with leather jacket which we wrapped the show around and that's NOT how we write our shows. Spike provided Buffy with an emotional through line she wouldn't have and Angel was gone, own show, making him her nemesis and mortal enemy at first was interesting way to go.
now I wasn't for B/S but I rationalized that.

LMPTM - they thought we were changing the whole vampire mythology - Spike is an anamoly in the vampire world. We tried to say it in the very beginning in Surprise, his mother, he is something special, he retained some part of his soul or compassion that was always there that allowed him to fall for Buffy. Whatever we told was always there.

TM = don't have to rationalize it at all - the vampires retain the human personality, of course they'd care.

DF = with Spike, there's something different about him.
A vampire without a soul was able to fall for a slayer.

(Agreeing he was a sensitive bad poet not a jerk like Liam.)

TM = always amuses me when people say that people can't love without a soul. They can love quite well. Evil people can love even with souls.

Love and obsession not necessarily a force for good.

DF = chip triggered things from consciousness, all emotions from human side came forth and he was suddenly able to care about Dawn and Joyce.

(Lots of spec on the finale and the writers trying to say zip and the commentator is driving them nuts. ugh)

((Joking about the hate mail and fan response on Spike. TM and DF really joking about these fans.)

(Filling in the gaps - apparently Spike took over Angel's place in Buffy for the emotional arc. They state how he's always been different - that he retained a portion of his humanity and how they've gone out of their way to distinquish each vamp. There is no indication btw that Spike won't go evil before the end and won't be a villain on Angel next year. Nor is there any indication that he won't be a good guy and turn good. They really don't paint it one way or the other. Fury says he had problems with the Spike story, because he felt it was off-track but has reconciled himself to it, early on he felt need to justify, but now he gets it, Minear seems really confused by Fury's reaction and said he didn't see why he ever had to rationalize it.)

C= asking Tim about Buffy.

TM = I never worked on Buffy. She was in one of my episodes of Angel.

DF = I'll talk to Tim about Buffy story.

TM = to me its bigger than Buffy, working with Joss, David and crews, writers - incredibly rich experience, no ennui b/c my relationships will always continue. Goes beyond job.
This was the best film school and got to direct, first directing on Angel. First time directed network tv show. Been making films since a kid. Better than a movie, because get to write, direct and constantly change things as I'm directing. I didn't work on Buffy.

(Lots of chit-chat and annoying joking.)

David Fury - I got so much hate mail from singing. Really.
TM - can't imagine getting the hate mail for singing.

(He sang the mustard song with Tim Minear.

Okay it's wrapping up. And I'm exhausted it's 1 am.

Tried to keep objective.


Date Posted: 17:20:13 06/24/03 Tue
Author: Lisa
Author Host/IP: 216-83-228-25.wan.networktel.net /
Subject: Re: Batten down the hatches, take cover :-) (spoilers)
In reply to: RJA 's message, "Batten down the hatches, take cover :-) (spoilers)" on 17:14:57 06/24/03 Tue

He did the interview with this person before the end of the season (she was posting about it on another board) and this was prior to his Succubus Club interview where he basically changed his opinion. So... take with several grains of salt. He apparently had some sort of "epiphany" when LMPTM actually *aired.* On Succubus he said he sat down and looked at it again and changed his mind.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


[> [> [> I tend to take all interviews that way -- RJA, 17:22:44 06/24/03 Tue (cache-loh-ad06.proxy.aol.com/

Otherwise I'd be too confused trying to reconcile them all.

Although his comments about Angel most interested me. Hope he sees a little more ambiguity in the character soon, because I think the character is more interesting when written that way

[> [> [> I hope you're right. -- lele, 17:23:55 06/24/03 Tue (0-1pool76-54.nas4.augusta2.ga.us.da.qwest.net/

[> [> [> [> About the timing of the interviews? -- Lisa, 17:31:44 06/24/03 Tue (216-83-228-25.wan.networktel.net/

You can ask her yourself. But I remember discussing it on another board at the time she did the interview and it was several weeks before the Succubus Club interview where he spoke about how his entire concept of the character changed when he had to sit down and re-examine what he had written when a bunch of Spike haters started writing to him saying he'd screwed up in writing LMPTM (never taunt the Fury. He's not a people person and he'll turn on you). Then he went on the Succubus club mocked the Spike haters, and put foward his all new "Spike is special, too" theory. Got to love how Fury has to have everything simply divided and how any criticism can have him turn on that fan faction. Spike haters probably shouldn't have criticized Fury. He then probably wouldn't have gotten defensive that he's never wrong and therefore William was special which made Spike special which led to the Succubus Club interview. If the link is up, you can ask the author herself when she did the interview and check the timing of it. It was prior to his Succubus Club interview.

[> [> [> [> [> I believe you -- lele, 17:34:41 06/24/03 Tue (0-1pool76-54.nas4.augusta2.ga.us.da.qwest.net/

I'm saying I hope you're right about DF's 'epiphany'. We know those don't always stick in the buffyverse....we'll see how it goes in the angelverse.
I heard the succubus club interview and I was surprised, but not convinced. I guess we'll find out more next month.

[> [> [> [> [> [> I do not pretend to have any concept about how Fury's mind works :) -- Lisa, 18:07:20 06/24/03 Tue (216-83-228-25.wan.networktel.net/

I wouldn't post my unexpurgated opinion of Fury and his opinions. I don't know what he really believes. But I can verify the timeline and the content of various interviews.

This interviewer and I posted back and foward about what Fury had said to her a couple of months ago on another board. She said she's be posting it on the website this summer but we were discussing what her interviewing him around the time she interviewed him. I was guessing what I believed he had said (based on nothing but guessing) and she was teasing that I must be psychic where Fury was concerned. This was several weeks before his Succubus Club interview where he spoke (okay, somewhat cruelly mocked) Spike haters mail that was sent to him and he spoke about how he had gone back and looked at it again and changed his opinion.

A few weeks after that another poster on another board wrote to Fury about his Succubus Club interview and he was equally as snarky in that letter (which was posted on yet another board) saying that he had NOT changed his stance on soul canon so if you're discussing unsouled Spike his feelings are unchanged, yadda, yadda, yadda queue Fury rant. What he had said about souls on Succubus was being misinterpreted. His stance on souls hadn't changed. Yadda, yadda, more Fury rant. BUT...when Spike got a soul he supports Spike's redemption. Spike is worthy of being loved, yadda, yadda.

I can't say what he really believes. I gave up figuring Fury out when I accidentally ended up in a posting war with him on a message board several years ago. (I thought there was no WAY a writer for the show could behave as unprofessionally as he was behaving on that board and accused him of being a troll..unfortunately it really was him. ) At any rate, who knows what Fury *really* believes, but, unless the interviewer has done another interview, the order of the interviews are.

This interview. Later Succubus Club Interview. Later the letter "I did not back off soul canon but souled Spike is worthy of being loved."

I leave everyone to make their own judgements about him. I have no clue what makes the man tick and after dealing with him on the message board, I can admit that I really don't *want* to.

[> [> [> [> [> Which is why Fury is quite the unusual person -- Lisa, 18:53:20 06/24/03 Tue (216-83-228-25.wan.networktel.net/

I know that the interview was done prior to his writing his final episode of AtS...but seeing the "unambiguous" Angel and contrasting it to what he WROTE when he wrote Angel it's just. . .so very odd. I also found it curious when Fury was quoted saying he probably had no business writing Showtime because he was so out of the loop on BtVS at that point that he didn't know what was going on (I wonder if that factored into his changes between this interview and Succubus. Did he actually *watch* GiD?) At any rate, he actually does write Spike well. And he doesn't WRITE Angel as unambiguous so... well... whatever my personal feelings about his behavior. He's a competent writer. I tend to believe he likes to play agent provacateur [sp]. He actually wrote a very nice letter to one Spike fan about the character that she posted on another board.

I know I certainly can't figure the man out."

I saved and shared this with you all b/c I think it points out that any one who uses Fury to support their hatred of a character is well...a nit. Fury clearly doesn't like it when people do. He loves the character of Spike and actually writes him very well. (Now if only he wrote Angel/Angelus better. sigh. I honestly think Tim Minear wrote Angel the best. Although Craft/Fain, Deknight, and Bell did a wonderful job with the character - scripting some of my fav's with Soulless, Deep Down, and Inside Out.
Also that last speech in PEace-out - Deknight!)

Hope that helps Alison.

[> [> Thank you.... -- Alison, 14:22:00 07/11/03 Fri

I'd never have the patience to dig up all those posts. :)

[> Riely and Buffy 4ever *run away and hides* :) -- lakrids, 03:37:57 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> Buffy and Xander 4ever, too *runs away and hides while throwing water baloons* -- Rochefort, 16:33:54 07/12/03 Sat

[> [> LOL. The only appropriate response in this thread, lakrids -- Sophist, 16:39:32 07/12/03 Sat

More July 2003 | Current board