November 2002 posts

Previous November 2002  

More November 2002

Changing tack -- Tchaikovsky, 12:24:40 11/17/02 Sun

I've been feeling slightly out of the loop recently, as a result of all the speculation after 'Conversations with Dead People'. It's fascinating to hear all your speculations, but obviously from the UK, I can't really add or detract from them in any meaningful way.

So I thought I'd try to float another subject to keep me amused for a while.

I was re-watching 'Who Are You?' again yesterday. Obviously it's famous for the body switch which happens at the end of the previous episode, ('This Year's Girl'). This got me thinking. What exactly changes when the two bodies switch?

It's a funny premise really. Anyone- any casual viewer of the show can appreciate the idea that Buffy's body contains Faith, and Faith's body contains Buffy. But what ARE these essences exactly?

So, trusting to the power of Atpo, I went to Masquerade's page for enlightenment. 'Transmigration of souls', it beamed happily. This confused me further. I was thinking along the same track as the discussion we had last week. There's a soul thing- a moral compass, which allows people to differentiate between right and wrong. It is still possible to override it, if a person is strong-willed and sociopathic? (generic usage, please don't worry about psychopathic etc). It's the superego in Freudian analysis. The bit which makes us human, because without it, we lose some special instinct into our surroundings. Wittgenstein contended that moral decisions were merely an intuition, because it is impossible to define exactly what 'right' and 'wrong' are. I think it was G E Moore who contended that 'Good is the thing it is right to admire'. Wittgenstein tore apart this argument, claiming neither of the three key words were clearly enough defined. He was right.

But it can't just have been the conscience which was transferred between Faith and Buffy. This is a fascinating idea in itself, but clearly Faith's body inherited Buffy's memory, and so forth, as well.

So was it both conscious and conscience which were transferred? Or did the souls actually stay in the same place, with only the memories and personality, (the 'spirit' we had in our discussion) changed? Or are both of these things wrapped up in a larger idea of self? It's certainly important to future, as well as past, storylines. William, anyone?


[> I think the confusion results. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:11:05 11/17/02 Sun

Because conscience seems to be the primary difference when a vampire gains or loses a soul. However, what must be remembered is that the human soul and the vampire demon ARE two seperate entities, not just capability to feel guilt and inability to do so. The reason that conscience seems to be the only difference is that when the demon replaces the human soul during the process of vamping, it has no memories of its own and absorbs all the life experiences of the human soul it is replacing. If it were a human soul instead of a demon and it gained all of the human's memories, it would act like an exact duplicate of the previous person. But demons, or at least the demons that form vampires, are different. They are naturally drawn to do evil in the same way human beings are naturally drawn to do good, so they they look back at the human soul's memories (which have now become their own memories) in a totally different light.

[> Many kind of souls -- Etrangere, 13:40:37 11/17/02 Sun

My opinion on this matter is that "soul" in the Buffyverse described only moral conscience, a capacity to look forward "good".
The identity is not in the soul.

But many cultures says that humans have several kind of souls, I think Egyptians had 5 souls for exemple !
So maybe, in the buffyverse, there is another kind of soul than the moral one which conteins the identity, let's call it katra which was what was exchanged in that episode.
Sounds sensible to you ?

Reply to Haeccity (sp?) now archived -- alcibiades, 13:02:37 11/17/02 Sun

“The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside [the person] AS FATE. When the individual…does not become conscious [recognize, grant the effect of] her inner contradiction, the world [in her perception usually, but we are in a story ‘verse here] must perforce *act out the conflict and be torn into opposite halves*.” --C.G. Jung

This is quite a brilliant quote and I love it not least because it embodies the very thing I have been trying to articulate about Buffy's path at the moment -- her split into two sides and the way her inner contradiction enables the world around her to reflect it back at her AS her fate.

Buffy will not be able to escape "her fate" either, until she does something to overcome the antinomies in her own soul -- which comes down to becoming conscious of her inner situation and acting to resolve it in some way.

I think there is also a question of what has made her this way at this point. She was never split like this before.

I think that NA can be understood as the template for this inner contradiction. There, the template was induced by a drug, so that the switches from one world where she was a normal girl, albeit insane, to another, where she is the Slayer were "not natural." Furthermore, she was actually inhabiting two worlds. Here there are two essential Buffy selves but both are inhabiting the same world, so the contradiction, as in RL, seems less clear.

But this year we have seen Buffy swing from one personality trope to another, without any reconcilation between them. And just as in NA, her universe is beginning to reflect back that contradiction in that she keeps on being presented with situations she tries to solve with pure slayer "logic." In both Help and STSP, we have seen her try to pursue those kinds of solutions, and in neither one of them was the slayer solution sufficient to see to the heart of the matter. Buffy surely helped Cassie, but she couldn't wrap her mind around what Cassie's true situation was because she went into instant slayer mode. That is how she knows how to respond to situations. In Selfless, she also applied slayer logic to a situation that could be resolved in a better way for everyone because she was locked into that mode, not looking past it.

Someone else at some point has already made the point that this was also true in T2Go through Grave. Dealing with Willow as the slayer did not help matters. It needed an altogether didn't approach to solve the problem. Xander used the heart rather than the hand to win the day.

Every time Buffy relies purely on her "pure" slayer understanding of how to solve problems wihtout letting the other Buffy come through, I think it only confirms the pattern she has created and means that she will have to deal with it again. It is not until she has insight into this central contradiction that Buffy will begin to move past it and it will no longer define this part of her life.

For Buffy, the world will be torn into opposite halves until this problem is healed.

And in a season when it is not about right, it is not about wrong, it's about power -- that is kind of scary.

[> Back to the Beginning, Back to the End (Spoilers/Spec Season 5-7 future) -- Haecceity, 14:17:46 11/17/02 Sun

Great post!

In writing my probably too long replies to other posts this weekend, I found myself continually drawn into a re- examination of Season 5, particularly “The Gift” No wonder, as it was the last episode where all the cards were played, the last ep that could have been a Series finale. In some ways I think the series really did start over again with the move to UPN. In Season six, everyone seemed to be re-cast completely—they all came back from Buffy’s death as different people. The only difference is, they didn’t have a “coming back from the dead” thing to cast doubt upon the process. Which turned out to be both a blessing and a curse, since they weren’t traumatized consciously as Buffy was, but *were* blindsided later on when they seemed to change “overnight”. There was quite a lot of “Where could this have come from?” last season.

Death of The Slayer:
When I first saw ”The Gift”, I thought that in her sacrifice Buffy was reclaiming a bit of her Prophecy Girl self—I’m the chosen—she gave up her dreams of a normal life and embraced Slayerhood. But they brought her back, and I’m starting to wonder if she’s not the Slayer anymore. That this desperate, grasping hardness of her behavior isn’t just that of a person who doesn’t think she has an identity to hang on to any longer. The normal girl role is taken—Dawn, all pretty young thing and allowed to concentrate on High School traumas, The best friend (to Willow) thing is pretty much Xander’s now that he saved the world with his mouth while she hacked at some weeds and dirt clods, she’d identified her relationship as a bad thing last season, but now Spike’s back, and he doesn’t seem to love her as devotedly any more (note how she keeps referring to him with other people? My boyfriend, my ex, hottie vamp I used to date—revision, much?).

But the thing about Prophecy Girl is—with her actions she came out through the other side of prophecy and seemed to free herself from Fate. She did this as an acceptance of her role as Slayer, and it saved her. I wonder if all this flailing of persona is Buffy’s wish to latch on to the comfort of destiny, to justify her decisions as beyond reproach, because she has the power of Chosen-ness. Trouble is, I’m not sure Buffy is the chosen One any longer, a point of contention we’ll no doubt get to see when Faith shows up.

And did being the Slayer really bring Buffy much happiness anyway? The thing is, Jung knew that the be-all, end-all wasn’t happiness, but I think Buffy’s always thought it would be. One of her conflicts right now is seeing one choice that she was never fond of and a lot of locked doors. She hasn’t quite sorted out the whole Giles’ “make a door with a chainsaw” thing of real adulthood yet.

But you’re right, the whole inevitability of the coming conflict certainly screams Fate! Doom! Apocalypse! at the moment, and the world might need a Buffy that is not a Slayer.

A little poem that makes me think of Conflicted!Buffy:

“No one told me
It would lead to this

No one said
There would be secrets
I wouldn’t want to know.

No one told me about seeing.
Seeing brought me
Loss and a darkness I cannot hold

I unsheathed the sharp edge
Of experience that led me here.

No one told me
It could not be put away.

I was told once, only
In a whisper,
“The blade is so sharp
it cuts things together
--not apart.”

This is no comfort.
My future is full of blood
From being blindfold
Hands outstretched,
Feeling a way along its firm edge.”

---David Whyte “No One Told Me”

---Haecceity (Who spells her own name wrong when she types too fast ;)

[> [> Alone-ness and Connection (Spoilers for Conversations) -- Rahael, 14:33:49 11/17/02 Sun

Today, I read "Tales of the Slayer". I was struck by the parts that Joss Whedon had written, which emphasised what an outcast the Slayer is - and how many times the Slayer is not accepted in normal society, and how by her very existence she invites punishment and persecution.

She is alone. But also connected.

She is connected to every other Slayer who has ever lived. This is Melaka Fray's conclusion at the end of the Tales. The Tales are bookended by the First Slayer's feeling of alienation, and Melaka's realisation that she is alone, and yet, not alone.

I also watched Conversations with Dead People today. It struck me very forcefully that Buffy feels alone.

I also watchd "Selfless". What a great ep.

I had some thoughts about Buffy as death. She was dressed all in black, and carried a sword. In the Vampire World, she is the Reaper/Slayer. She is part of the order of the world, the immutable law of life. Everything must die.

Death is, after all, her gift.

She keeps the balance between the demon world and the human world. She doesn't go after demons maliciously. She acts whenever the balance is threatened.

Evil Cassie told Willow that she was done with balance. I think Buffy and her slayer nature are going to battle with something fundamentally against her. I think she is still very much the chosen one. I think her Slayer nature is more important than ever, after reading Tales of the Slayer.

I really think that is the real theme of "everything is connected".

[> [> [> Well said! -- Briar Rose, 15:03:05 11/17/02 Sun

[> [> [> Re: Alone-ness and Connection (Spoilers for Conversations) -- alcibiades, 15:02:26 11/18/02 Mon

She is alone. But also connected.

She is connected to every other Slayer who has ever lived. ...

I also watched Conversations with Dead People today. It struck me very forcefully that Buffy feels alone.

But until Buffy lets herself be conscious of the dark origins of the Slayer, she is going to continue to cut herself off from it to some extent, through fear. So her natural state of connection to the line of slayers will not function quite right.

I am a little worried about the upcoming Buffy reaction to Spike's ongoing siring activities. I think because Buffy hasn't resolved her inner contradiction, and thus at this point, her slaying side is so cut off from her other compassionate side, when she finds out that Spike is acting as a vampire again (for who knows what reason), she is going to be so transfixed by the duality of her world, since the world is reflecting back her inner contradiction AS her FATE, that perforce her response to him will cut off other paths of the imagination and will be DEATH.

I suppose it will always be possible Buffy'll have an epiphany at that moment, when she faces up to the fact that she has to kill him and realizes whatever it is that she will realize, but frankly I'm not expecting it. I think, among the Scoobies, it will be Willow who will reach for the pathways of spirit and imagination -- the same pathways which Drusilla recognized in Spike -- and, as with Anya, come up with a third way.

Buffy has to have an epiphany at some point that takes, however, about what is cutting her off from her friends and why she keeps on ending up in situations where she has to kill them, even if she doesn't want to. It is true that she is the hand, but having been individuated as one type of consciousness to the extent that she has, I think she now needs reintegration particularly with her heart, but also with her spirit and her mind. It is the reintegration which will provide her with the clarity.

“A more fully differentiated nature, in Jungian terms, means being more conscious of each of the four functions of consciousness; Thinking (Mind/Giles), Feeling (Heart/Xander), Intuition (Spirit/Willow) and Sensation (Hands/Buffy)…Once a more differentiated consciousness has been attained, however, another process takes over whereby life and life activities become more directly driven by the Self. It is as if to say, the initial task of individuation is to develop a more complete, less one-sided consciousness and then the task becomes being an instrument of the Self.

It sure is interesting rewatching Season 4 and Season 5 and knowing now, post Selfless, why Buffy has no hope of really falling in love with Riley. And perhaps more callously why when she comes back from the Grave, she doesn't go back to school and her spirit seems so depleted, despite her having been in heaven.

Instead, she falls back into pure sensation in her affair with Spike. Or, she wants it to be about pure sensation, not something that touches her in her mind, her spirit or her heart. That is not what he wants, because spirit (in the sense of imagination, not soul) and heart are his strengths.

[> Lovely posts alcibiades, Haecceity and Rahael! -- ponygirl, 07:55:54 11/18/02 Mon

I think ultimately Buffy is going to have to heal this split within herself by reconciling the two statements of Lessons: "it's all about power", and "it's all connected". It seems to me that the power comes from connections: to the earth, to other people, to the dark, and to the light. If Buffy can see this as her source, and indeed the source of everyone around her, perhaps then she will be able to feel that she is not alone.

[> [> Re: Lovely posts alcibiades, Haecceity and Rahael! -- Rahael, 08:21:21 11/18/02 Mon

I feel compelled once more to quote Blake's "Tyger" and "Lamb". It's about Power. And it's connected. This is how I see the Slayer.

The Tyger
William Blake

Tyger Tyger, burning bright,
In the forests of the night;
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry

In what distant deeps or skies.
Burnt the fire of thine eyes!
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand, dare sieze the fire!

And what shoulder, & what art.
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand! & what dread feet!

What the hammer! what the chain,
In what furnace was thy brain
What the anvil, what dread grasp,
Dare its deadly terrors clasp!

When the stars threw down their spear
And water'd heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see
Did he who made the Lamb make thee!

Tyger Tyger burning bright,
In the forests of the night:
What immortal hand or eye,
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry.

The Lamb
William Blake

Little Lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee?
Gave thee life, and bid thee feed
By the stream and o'er the mead;
Gave thee clothing of delight,
Softest clothing, woolly, bright;
Gave thee such a tender voice,
Making all the vales rejoice?
Little Lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee?
Little Lamb, I'll tell thee,
Little Lamb, I'll tell thee:
He is called by thy name,
For he calls himself a Lamb.
He is meek, and he is mild;
He became a little child.
I a child, and thou a lamb.
We are called by his name.
Little Lamb, God bless thee!
Little Lamb, God bless thee!

Link to Tim Minear on Season Three....spoilers for Season three -- Rufus, 13:11:23 11/17/02 Sun

Trollop Group

Spoilers for all of season three.

[> Thanks for the Tim M quotage--he's a god -- Masq, 13:38:24 11/17/02 Sun

[> Answers to some mysteries -- Masq, 13:58:41 11/17/02 Sun


The mystery of Holtz' inaction in Lullaby: "...Angel left holding the baby in the pouring rain. Then Holtz steps aside and lets him walk by! The impression is that he's feeling compassion for Angel, but in reality he's not ready to kill Angel because he sees a way to make Angel suffer in the same way that he has suffered."

The person really responsible for Darla's gift of grace/redemption: "I had pitched the idea that perhaps Darla is captured and staked. Of course Joss Whedon took it to the cool Whedon place in which she stakes herself."

Quote of the week: "we do tend to get almost masturbatory in our giant arciness on Angel."

A major plot point/part of Connor's destiny invented on the fly to fill up an episode? "So we talked about the idea that Sahjhan had faked these prophecies, which in fact does not mean that the prophecies are fake. Just because a guy writes a fake prophecy, if it becomes a prophecy it could be that he was somehow used as an instrument be some greater power in order to write a true prophecy. "

Cordelia's absence, the real reason and the story line reason "Charisma Carpenter shot a movie, but we also took her out of the mix for as long as we thought we needed to. If Cordelia's there, it creates a lot of problems in terms of why wouldn't she know about Wesley or what was going on? There are certain things that really couldn't have happened had she been there, so we did that for the story. "

I love symmetry, on Gunn and Double or Nothing: "What do you do when you suddenly realise you've got a future and you never expected to have one? The counter of that is that Angel for a moment believed he would have a future with this kid, and now he no longer has it."

The mystery of Holtz' motives in Benediction: ''if you look at the episode, you'll see that he never lies in the whole episode. Even though he is completely tricking Connor into thinking Angel murdered him, everything he says is true. He realises that Angel and Connor are destined to somehow be together; that the kid has found his way here and if that's the case, then they have some kind of destiny."

Echoes of the Past (Spoilers C w/ DP) -- Rattletrap, 14:54:50 11/17/02 Sun

Just saw the new episode. Wow! This New!Drew guy can really write. I haven't been looking this forward to a new episode since the final days of S5.

My apologies if this has already been discussed, but I didn't see it in the archives:

Drew Goddard loves to pepper his episodes with references to past installments. Some seem to be simple winks to the fans, reminding us that the writers remember what happened before. Others are specific points of plot and continuity. Still others play with past ideas in a new way, often foreshadowing things to come. Two references really jump out at me after viewing "Conversations . . ."

1.) "Listening to Fear" -- The S5 episode at the height of the Joyce-illness story arc, when Buffy's life is consumed with worry over Joyce's chances for survival and over her own inability to carry own without her mother. This episode contains a particularly poignant moment with Buffy washing dishes in the kitchen and breaking down. To cover the sound of her own crying, she turns on the radio. The upbeat salsa music that pours out of it powerfully counterpoints Buffy's breakdown--her loneliness, her feelings of inadequacy, and the happy facade that she shows the world concealing the mounting despair underneath.

In CWDP, Dawn turns on the radio, again pouring out zesty, up-tempo salsa music (it appears to be a different piece, but I wouldn't swear to it). We are treated to a montage of Dawn dancing around the house, playing with the weapons, and generally behaving as if no one is watching her (MT physical comedy, yay!). Despite their obvious differences in mood, in both situations the characters are operating in very private space. LTF gave us an insight into Buffy, does CWDP give us a similar insight into Dawn?

The subsequent conversations with ghostly Joyce (whether real or not, I can't say) seem to reveal some of Dawn's underlying insecurities: fear of abandonment, she is alone in the house and forced to deal with her mother's absence and news of her sister's eventual betrayal; feelings of inadequacy, consider how ineffective she is at using the weapons, the house was well on its way to ruin before the demon attack; and finally an underlying strength and confidence. After she realizes she's alone and that no help will be forthcoming she takes on the demon and resorts to some pretty powerful magic to fight against it. Ironically, the intercut scenes that show Buffy's conversations with Holden reveal a very similar tension--feelings of loneliness and inadequacy coupled with a strange and powerful sense of inner confidence and self-reliance.

What are your thoughts on the music? Can anyone else offer a better reading than I have? I just saw the episode, so this is still pretty unrefined stream of consciousness stuff.

2) "Earshot" -- The classic S3 episode that reveals Jonathan's inner struggles. The Jonathan that we see in CWDP is an older, more self-assured Jonathan--one that is thinking of others more, one that is less preoccupied with what they think of him. In the great Jossian twist, Andrew does to the well-adjusted Jonathan what despairing Jonathan couldn't do to himself.

Ahh, but there's more: Buffy might benefit from taking some of the advice she gave to Jonathan in "Earshot." Her conversations with Holden reveal a similar sort of despair, a kind of inferiority, the fear that no one can relate to her, and a preoccupation with why her friends love her.

Thoughts? Any other good parallels this week?

Just my $.02


[> Re: Echoes of the Past (Spoilers C w/ DP) -- CW, 16:19:02 11/17/02 Sun

As I posted in reply to someone earlier, I thought of Joyce as soon as the music came on. (It's not the same piece) I think the link between the music and Joyce and her daughters is far from coincidental, but I don't know if it goes any deeper than you've already suggested. Joyce was the icon of comfort and togetherness for the family. With her gone each daughter feels out of touch and adrift in her own way.

I like your connection of 'Earshot' with 'Conversations.' Maybe that's the key to this year, remembering all those earlier lessons.

Are we going to discuss the latest news on Charisma? -- Wisewoman, 15:39:26 11/17/02 Sun

Or am I the last one to know, as usual? Her offical fan site announced today that she is indeed pregnant, as I expected, and due in March.

She's also apparently married. Did we know that?


[> You aren't the last one to know -- Masq, 15:43:27 11/17/02 Sun

Since I never read stuff about the actors, this is news to me!

Maybe they'll pull a Be'lana Torres ("Voyager") and hide her pregancy so that she can give birth during summer haitus. They sorta kinda did the same thing with Scully in X-files, too.

[> [> Re: You aren't the last one to know -- dub ;o), 15:49:24 11/17/02 Sun

I got the site wrong though--it's an fan site: www.charisma-


[> Re: Are we going to discuss the latest news on Charisma? -- Q, 16:16:32 11/17/02 Sun

News to me too, although...

My wife and I have been assuming that she already had a child, and that was why she took some time off last season, and why we saw only head shots for the first few episodes this season. Her body looks pregnant, OR, like a new mom. We thought there was a grand cover up conspiracy, but I guess we were premature!

[> [> Charisma did a movie -- Masq, 23:32:23 11/17/02 Sun

As explained in the post Rufus did from the Tim Minear interview

[> I've been sitting on that info but you can find posts about CC on the Trollop Board -- Rufus, 17:41:41 11/17/02 Sun

For me it's old news.

[> Re: Are we going to discuss the latest news on Charisma? (spoiler Angel 4.7) -- frisby, 20:31:36 11/17/02 Sun

You might have known Charisma is pregnant but my bet is now that Coredelia is pregnant too (by Connor)! I'm even giving odds. Or is the Oedipal thing primary instead? Does Connor "really" want the truth? Oedipus did, at any costs, and and and

[> I started wondering during second ep. -- Deb, 08:02:22 11/18/02 Mon

If she was pregnant or just had a kid. It had to one or the other.

End of all things (Buffydammerung); speculation and spoilers for Seasons 5, 6, and 7.7 -- Fred the obvious pseudonym, 17:02:30 11/17/02 Sun

Just a few points to ponder as possibilities.

Hints are that the Hellmouth will apparently become more active; it may be the thing that "beneath you it devours."

Dawn is the Key, despite all her human growth over the last two seasons.

We have seen her as the Key that can unlock dimensional portals, as the late (or is she?) Glory can attest. But a Key can lock as well as unlock, close as well as open. It may be that by the end of the season the only way to close the Hellmouth and save the planet (if not universe) will be for Dawn to close and bar the door.

Such an act would probably be rather hard on the Key. She may HAVE to sacrifice herself for the good of the rest of existence.

As we know from 5.21 and 5.22, Buffy will refuse to let Dawn do so -- if she has the power to intervene. This may well explain Joyce's comment in CwDP -- that at the end Buffy will oppose Dawn.

I hypothesize another "downer" ending to the Buffyverse. Dawn somehow evades or defeats Buffy and sacrifices herself. In the process, she reverts to the Key -- (see under green glowing ball of energy) and not only ceases to be Buffy's sister -- she dispells the magic that the monks cast on her before the beginning of 5.1. She not only stops being Buffy's sister -- she now never has ever been Buffy's little sister and Buffy and the Scoobies never have any memory that Dawn ever existed.

It may well be, if this should prove to be the case, that Buffy at least would have some shadow of recollection -- not a real memory, but a sense of terrible loss without any perceivable cause.

But that might be too depressing for us fans to bear.

[> Re: End of all things (Buffydammerung); speculation and spoilers for Seasons 5, 6, and 7.7 -- Tyreseus, 17:15:53 11/17/02 Sun

But that might be too depressing for us fans to bear.

Except for those fans who don't much care for Dawn. Some people find Dawn "whiny" (not trying to push your button, HonorH, just commenting that *some* people find her to be so).

I think your spec would be an interesting angle to take if it is confirmed that there will be no season 8, but I'm not ready to speculate about that happening just yet. If the series is to live on (with or without SMG), I doubt they'll do away with the scoobies' best tie to Sunnydale High.

[> Oh, but I'd cry! -- HonorH (Dawn Defender Extraordinaire), 22:13:36 11/17/02 Sun

That really would be too sad. What would be even sadder, of course, is if Buffy still had the memories of Dawn, but no one else did.

Without Hiding - Thoughts on *Conversations w/ Dead People* - ( *Spoilers 7.7* ) -- OnM, 17:38:18 11/17/02 Sun


Doctor, my eyes have seen the years / And the slow parade of fears
Without crying / Now I want to understand
I have done all that I could / To see the evil and the good
Without hiding / You must help me if you can

'Cause I have wandered through this world / And as each moment has unfurled
I've been waiting / To awaken from these dreams
People go just where they will / I never noticed them until
I got this feeling / That it's later than it seems

............ Jackson Browne


Though the years give way to uncertainty
And the fear of living for nothing strangles the will
There's a part of me
That speaks to the heart of me
Though sometimes it's hard to see
It's never far from me
Alive in eternity
That nothing can kill

............ Jackson Browne


And while I'm asking questions, why was it important for ME to present us with the title of the ep.? Are we
starting some kind of countdown?

............ yez - ( 08:56:57 11/13/02 Wed )


What’s in a name? Or, for that matter, a title?

Quite a lot, at least potentially. Names have power, which is why I normally don’t use my real one when I’m on
the net. Not only can it present unintended power to unscrupulous persons who thenceforth could fleece me
royally, it can also give then an even greater form of leverage to use against me.

Namely, they can feel free to make assumptions based on the contextual or conventional meanings that a
particular name conjures up. The same is true with a title.

I’ve been hanging out at this site for over two years now, and as a result there are a number of other members of
the ATPo community that know at least a little more about me than the text that I tap out on a regular basis.
Even so, I remain largely a mystery, and this is probably for the best, because mysteries have an inherent
fascination attached to them, an intrigue which draws others to you, hopefully engendering at least a little
wonder and a lack of complacency. All of which is desirable to me, because in reality, I’m pretty damn ordinary
and boring. “Objects in Mirror, Buffyverse Analyst” sounds far more fetching than “Plain Name Here, appliance
repair geek”.

Oh, I don’t mind-- the fact of the matter is that 98% of us are ordinary and boring 98% of the time. Day after
day, we live out our lives, getting up and doing it again, amen, ad infinitum, until death us do part from the ol’
mortal coil. Is there an afterlife? I don’t know, and actually don’t really care. Like Buffy comments re: God, the
jury’s still out. It doesn’t change the present for me. But every new beginning was some other beginning’s end,
as the song says, and the present day occasionally coincides with one of those end/beginnings. I think that such
was very much the case with the opening moments of Conversations with Dead People, so far the best
episode of an already excellent season. So, yez, I think it is the start of a countdown.

From beneath you, It devours. But what exactly is ‘It’? At the end of this episode, we know a
little more than we did before, while still leaving us with a vast multitude of unanswered questions-- as
good an example of a non-cliffhanger cliffhanger as we’ve seen the show produce since the events of
Becoming, Part II. Will next week’s intrigue be Anne? Have to wait, of course (sigh)-- but not so
very long, fortunately. I do strongly believe that the nearly unprecedented case of openly displaying the show’s
title and then the further inclusion of the date and time were an indication of the start of something big, not
merely a little sly metanarration or an allusion to another TV show, such as 24. Did CwDP finally
reveal the Big Bad of the Seventh? Not sure, but I have some ideas, and since I’m pretending to be mysterious
also, I’m not afraid to reveal them!

Before I do that, I would like to take a few paragraphs and comment on how truly magnificent the show’s
production values were this time around. I’ve spoken before on how often Buffy goes beyond the traditions and
stylistic conventions of ‘normal’ TV and becomes ‘cinematic’, despite its tiny picture and squarish aspect ratio.
Size and shape aren’t what dictate artistry, of course, it’s all intent and execution.

The opening montage got my attention immediately. The specific styles of framing, composition, lighting and
editing coupled with the story itself in a seamless and powerful blend to evoke some intense emotions and
impressions. This opening sequence presents the rest of the hour and very likely the rest of the season in
microcosm, and does so with minimal dialog. I don’t recall an opening sequence this evocative since Joss’s
prolog to The Gift, with its ‘Day in the Life’ musical allusions and the “But you’re just a girl! / That’s
what I keep saying” concluding spoken ironies.

The singer at the Bronze (Angie Hart, best known for her past work with the band Frente!) sings “I fell
into the moon” and the stage lighting immediately turns cool blue, transforming her outer appearance. I
immediately flash back to the scene from The Harvest where Buffy has just defeated Luke, ‘The Vessel’
of the Master, and is still up on the stage of the Bronze. She turns a cold, determined gaze towards the remaining
vampires in the room-- the very first time we get to see the ‘Slayer Warrior Stare’, and the lights bathe her in the
same blue moon shadings. The vamps turn and run for their lives, and in his buried church, the Master cries out
his rage at his failure. Cinematic then, and more so now. There are a number of other moments like this in
CwDP, but the style never overwhelms the substance. It is always a delight to see such excellent technical
craft at work, but now back to some observations on the characters and what appears to be happening to them.

In The Harvest, the Master is momentarily defeated, but just temporarily. This very old and very
intelligent vampire doesn’t give up so easily, as we all know, and even manages to (briefly) kill our heroine
before finally meeting his dusty demise in Prophecy Girl.

An ever recurring theme in the Buffyverse dictates that dead is not always gone, and enemies defeated in the past
sometimes appear to have a future after all-- the cycle of death and rebirth does not apply only to the righteous,
but to the demonic as well. I am beginning to believe that this may be one of the intended multiple meanings in
ME’s ‘Back to the Beginning’ working thesis title.

Who is the season’s Big Bad? For now, it seems to pretty clearly be the entity we knew previously as the ‘First
Evil’. It also appears that this creature is manifesting itself in various physical forms in an attempt to
disarm/deceive the Scooby crew. But I am not quite sure of this, and trying to get a handle on what is actually
taking place depends to a tremendous extent on knowing what the ‘First Evil’ really has in the way of powers.

To date, we know that the First Evil can metamorphose into/appear as the physical image of a person. Is it
possible that the First cannot appear corporeally in the visage of a living being? Think-- who have we
seen the First impersonate? There was Jenny C. and several other of Angelus’ victims, who collectively tried to
tempt Angel into killing Buffy, or failing that, himself. When Buffy thwarted this plan, the First seemed to vanish
without any additional attempts to attack anyone, and has only resurfaced now, years later. Since the
reappearance, the First has impersonated Warren (dead), Glory (supposedly dead), Adam (dead), Mayor Wilkins
(dead), Drusilla (undead), The Master (also undead) and finally Buffy (who has died twice, the latter time for
over three months). While we aren’t sure yet, there seem to be indications that the FE is also impersonating
Spike (again, undead).

If this is indeed a limitation on the FE’s powers, it could be significant. For example, it may not be able to
(directly) impersonate Xander or Dawn, or even Anya (although there could be a ‘mystical’ caveat for demons or
green energy balls we aren’t yet aware of). Xander has already been shown as being the Scooby ‘in control’
when others have lost their own. Will he continue to be so as the season progresses, a sort of anchor to ‘reality’?

The other big question about the FE is to what degree does it appear directly to other beings, as a manifestation,
or does it in fact depend almost entirely on the work of ‘minions’ or assistants to realize its will? When I first
viewed this episode, I assumed that the (wonderfully visualized) self-consuming toothy monster that briefly
appeared before Willow was in fact the First Evil, and that it had finally come out into the open, declaring itself
to be the ‘devouring’ beast of the ‘prophecy’ everyone’s been quoting. Now, several additional viewings and
muy mucho TTM-ing later, I am not so sure. I think the First hasn’t shown itself yet-- and what we are seeing is
the work of its servants. And who are they? I think we know them, having already been told in the very first ep
of the season.

The creature that appears before Willow is Glory. Study the mannerisms, the words it uses, the body language.
Look familiar? The big giveaway is the part of being ‘done with the mortal coil’. Glory detested being trapped in
the body of a ‘mere’ human, and also was intensely self- involved and ego-driven. Back in season 5, I kept
wondering that if Glory had all this power, why didn’t she just ‘squash’ Buffy (or the others) ‘like a bug’, as she
threatened to do? Buffy came up with her own answer to that conundrum, but the question still had merit. I
eventually came to the conclusion that it was simple ego-- ‘gods don’t pay’, as Glory said. They get others to do
it for them, so the god doesn’t have to ‘soil’ themselves with anything that smacks of actual effort or work.

But Glory is dead, you say. Giles killed Ben, and according to the information we were given at the time, that
meant Glory died when he did. But was Giles’ information correct? Glory was a god, and maybe it’s very hard to
kill a god, even one cast under a mystical death spell. Perhaps the First Evil rescued Glory as Ben lay dying.

Some longer term boarders may recall that shortly after the airing of The Gift, I posted a thread asking
the question of whether or not Giles did the right thing by killing Ben, not because of the moral issues it
presented, but because Buffy’s ‘mercy’ in not killing Ben/Glory was what was supposed to
, and Giles’ action derailed that ‘cosmic’ intention. Is it possible that if Glory had lived, she may not
have returned for vengeance as Giles seemed assured she would? Small possibility, I freely admit, but just
suppose? If she did return, the memory of her defeat would have to undermine her confidence, much as it did
Spike’s whenever his ‘best laid plans’ came crashing down again and again at the hands of Buffy and the
Scoobies’. (“This is the crack team that defeats my every plan? I am deeply ashamed.”)

Instead, Giles counters Buffy’s implicit wishes and ‘kills’ Ben/Glory. Glory, already greatly humiliated by her
defeat at the hands of a mere ‘Slayer’, has her baseline hatred of mortals further enhanced by the ‘murder’
perpetuated by one of them, one who claims to be a ‘righteous’ individual, a force for the side of ‘good’. And as
she was about to depart the universe for good, in steps the First Evil, with a ‘rescue’ and a plan for revenge.
Anyone think Glory wouldn’t jump at the chance, even if it meant being a minion for the FE? Thought so.

So Glory, who surely bears a particular hate-on for Willow* for being the ‘big gun’ of the final battle and even
taking back the deliciously brain-sucked Tara from her, would logically be assigned Willow as the target of the
FE’s plans regarding her demise. Willow is in some ways more of a danger to the dark side than Buffy is, and the
FE must know this. Taking Willow out of the picture ASAP would be a huge, perhaps even critical advantage.
Ironically, Minion!Glory again underestimates human weakness, and goes too far in suggesting that Tara wishes
Willow to committ suicide and ‘join her’ in the afterlife. I was very pleased to see Willow instantly understand
that she had been tricked, and that it wasn’t Tara who was ‘communicating’ with her. This moment in the scene
reminded me of the real-life story of magician Harry Houdini, who, desperate to contact the spirit of his beloved
mother, became an energetic enemy of the ‘mediums’ who he found had always fraudulently deceived him with
their seances and ‘spirit channelings’.

( * No, it wouldn’t be Buffy, necessarily-- Glory has to have some element of respect for Buffy, despite
being loathe to admit it. Buffy is, after all, a designated ‘champion’ of the forces of good, and as such gets a pass
to a certain degree. Also, Buffy didn’t renege on her ‘mercy’, so pending other evidence, she was a woman of
her word.)

Now on to Jonathan, Andrew and Warren. This series of events was also pretty obviously the work of the FE or
a First minion, the most likely one being (duh-uh!) Warren. Warren would love to think he has an opportunity to
be ‘moving up’ in the hierarchy of evil-ness, and would be willing to deal with the FE, no question. Andrew is
still the weak-minded sychophant, and so is in turn perfectly willing to follow Warren. Jonathan doesn’t have a
chance, unless he is even smarter than I give him credit for, and planned for the contingency that Andrew might
betray him. If he did, his ‘death’ may turn out to be a ruse, although I’m not counting on it. Killing off a
character that fans care about is classic Jossian perversion, so poor Jon may be out of the picture for real. On the
other hand, there is that SW ref, ‘If you strike me down...’, etc. Wait and see, yada-yada. Finishing out the
Jonathan/Andrew/Warren section of my ramble, we have a nice thought from Traveler here, that at least puts a
good spin on a sad event, and a nifty observation by Vickie, whose Spanish is obviously better than mine:

~ ~ ~

Traveler - 20:55:05 11/12/02 Tue

Yeah, I miss [Jonathan] too. I comfort myself by saying that right before the end he became a zen master and
was too good for this world. Very American Beauty- esque.

Vickie - 09:36:09 11/13/02 Wed

Thing is, "una cuesta" is not a quest, but a slope or hill. Throwaway joke, or implication that our lads were on a
slippery slope?

~ ~ ~

The picture of whether trickery by the First was involved in the battles fought by Dawn and Buffy is far less
clear, which I believe was quite intentional on ME’s part. I suspect that the First Evil was involved in both cases,
but it is much harder to prove, and maybe because the minions employed by the FE were less foolish and
ego-driven than Glory.

In Dawn’s case, the main question is whether or not that was really Joyce’s spirit communicating with Dawn.
The logical choice for FE minion here would be Adam. Adam was a fusion of human and demon, magic and
technology. He understood that ‘programming’ your enemies to destroy themselves is a process that can take
time, and that setting one faction of humanity against another (or for that matter, demon against demon) is an
effective ‘quiet’ form of destruction. The use of technology in the attack is obvious--humans tend to trust
technology, and it is disconcerting to them when it abruptly fails or even turns lethal. The images on the TV and
sounds on the stereo and radio are the ‘techno/human’ part of Adam. The demon summoning and visual
subsequent appearance of Dawn’s mother hammer at her from the demonic/magic side. He plants the knowledge
that in the future, Buffy will ‘betray’ Dawn, although the words presented don’t actually state that. The question
here is whether or not Dawn will believe them, or reject them after hearing of the experience Willow had.

Telling a ‘half-truth’ is a classic means for evil to get the upper hand. I suspect that what Joyce said to Dawn will
turn out to be literally true, but that the meaning will be different then expected. My own speculation tends to
lean towards the idea that during the S7 endgame episodes, Dawn will come up with a plan of action or critical
observation that Buffy (and possibly other Scoobies) will either ignore or disregard. I also expect that whatever
Dawn’s idea is will turn out to be correct, and the day may only be saved because she has the strength to go
against her sister and press forward with her own ideas/actions.

This is part of the beauty of the way this segment was handled, since the advice could be real-- it really could be
Joyce, and the ‘creature’ who menaced her could be a manifestation of the FE. The end results of the season
could therefore hinge on Dawn ultimately trusting her feelings (as Buffy has so many times over the years, in
defiance of ‘logic’ or doing the ‘sensible thing’) and saving the day in ep 22. Or-- it could all be a deception,
designed to place deadly doubt at a pivotal moment, driving the sisters apart.

Ah, ME.

Hardest of all to figure is the encounter with Holden, the clever, funny psychiatrist vampire that chats it up with
Buffy. Is he actually an FE minion, or just a ‘lucky’ happenstance? I find it puzzling that if this was supposed to
be some kind of subtle attack on a Scooby in the fashion of the other encounters, that it failed miserably. Buffy
appeared to be genuinely grateful for this opportunity to (as several other posters correctly put it) ‘have an
honest talk with herself’. I think this encounter provided Buffy with some very valuable insight, and that having
that insight will make her a more formidable force this season, not a lesser one. If this was evil intent, it was a
very bad design.

Sarah was really wonderful here, as was the actor who played Holden. I loved the crypt/couch with Buffy laying
her head on a stone book of some kind (a Bible?) and getting ‘shrunk’. I loved the stunning photgraphy and
lighting work, especially in the physical placement of persons and object to suggest hidden contexts, such as with
the little statue of the Virgin. The intimacy of the ‘sessions’ with Holden was in perfect contrast to the shot at the
opening of the show where Buffy was just a tiny figure, moving slowly, almost lost in the immensity of the
graveyard. I don’t recall any other graveyard scenes in the history of the show (please do correct me if I’m
wrong) that used this particular camera height and location. It really drives home the point that Buffy starts out
‘tiny and alone’, has some brief moments of power and intimacy, then returns to what? The hope for more? The
knowledge that ultimately we are all alone, as Holden said? Both? This was really skillfully done, and again, very

Now for Spike. The one item in the Buffy/Holden encounter that sheds at least a small doubt on the ‘innocence’
of the whole affair is the name-drop by Holden as to Spike being his ‘sire’. This seems just a little convenient, but
maybe it’s not the FE that is exploiting this moment, but someone or something else, maybe even the PTB. Buffy
is now confronted with the possibility that Spike is back to killing humans, and that she was mistaken in allowing
him to leave the school basement, or in trusting him or his chip to not harm anyone. Was the whole ‘shrink’ thing
just a means to get at Spike, through Buffy? Is the FE actually afraid of Spike for some reason, perhaps the
Shanshu or other prophecy about the ‘vampire with a soul’?

As viewers, we get to see what Buffy does not-- Spike feeding on a young woman that he met at a bar,
apparently killing her after walking her home. But is this really Spike, or is it yet another FE manifestation?

This scene, and my subsequent thinking about it, is really what got me to thinking about the ‘minion’ concept,
which later was reinforced by what I saw as very ‘obvious’ Glory-like behaviors from the Cassie Newton
manifestation. I began to wonder how, if the First Evil itself were taking on a Spike appearance, it could manage
to sire a human into vamphood? Wouldn’t that take an actual, real-unlifey vampire to do so? We know the ability
of the FE to act directly is limited, so not only directly killing a human, but then effecting a
demon-breed-specific magick such as vamp-siring simply doesn’t make sense.

So, if it isn’t Spike himself, and it isn’t a direct FE manifestation, then-- how about The Master as an FE minion?
The Master is a vampire, so he could both kill and sire. He is also very clever, and I would not put it past him to
hatch a scheme to deceive Buffy in a way that gets the real Spike dusted. His motivations would make sense--
Buffy killed him originally and later prevented his resurrection, and Spike is a ‘disgrace’ to demonhood in general
and the vamp community in specific. I doubt the FE would even have to promise him much of anything in
exchange for his assistance-- he’d do it gratis, or as a simple thank you for the FE rescuing him from eternal
nothingness as it (possibly) did to Glory.

OK, so we have now accounted for the manifestation/minionage of Warren, Glory, Adam, and The Master. That
leaves only two of the images presented to Spike back in Lessons unaccounted for-- Mayor Wilkins and...

I think Mayor Wilkins is being held back for a while, because he will be used to deal with a certain other Slayer
who will show up later this year. The delightfully perverse spin that could go along with this encounter would be
that so far, all of the ‘minions’ are serving the FE by acting on their hate of the humans who ‘defeated’ them.
Wilkins was different, however. He didn’t show evidence of ‘hating’ humans so much as seeing that they were
not too important in the total scheme of things, as regards his own desires to become a powerful being. A human
could be a friend or an emeny, whatever served his own fancy. He planned to become a full demon, and leave
those considerations behind.

But he loved Faith, loved her like a daughter. And from his perspective, he would be saddened and disappointed
in her current rejection of the ‘evil ideals’ she previously ‘joyously’ embraced. He would likely see it as his
fatherly duty to get her to turn away from the ‘bad influence’ of her new ‘friends’ and get her back to the dark
side ‘where she belongs’. In his mind, he would do this out of love for her-- after all, ‘from beneath, it devours’,
and ‘this isn’t a good time to be a good guy’.

Thus, the traditional ME tactic of warping convention is perfectly served. Faith thinks she is finally on a straight
track to genuine redemption-- perhaps even Buffy (the only human person who even partly understands what it is
like to be her) seems to be slowly and grudgingly accepting her again, and then-- the appearance of the
one and only person in her life who truly seemed to care for her, unconditionally.

This leaves only Buffy, and this is the manifestation that I think the FE will leave for itself to occupy. Doing so
could accomplish several things. The first would be to continue to undermine Spike’s mental stability, which by
all appearances it has already been working on since Lessons. The second would be to portray Buffy as
The Master has been doing with Spike-- someone who is a danger to others, and who must be stopped. While
the rest of the Scoobies would certainly become suspicious or at least give Buffy the benefit of the doubt if it
appeared that Buffy was engaged in evil doings, the general public of Sunnydale might not. To date, Buffy has
pretty much escaped the attention of the Earthly legal realm, the closest cases being her experiences with the
Initiative, the incidents of Bad Girls, and when she ‘accidentally’ killed Ted, the robot who was dating her

Many fans, myself included, have noted that Buffy seems far less willing to hide her Slayage related activities
than she has in the past. While on the one hand this seems reasonable and proper-- I mean, just how much total
denial can there be in Sunnydale, fer cryin’ out loud?-- one the other it could be arranged for Buffy to get
in real trouble with the law, and have it inhibit her actions at a critical moment. I tend to assume that the FE (and
most of Buffy’s other enemies) see Buffy’s unwillingness to kill humans, or openly defy most human law (as
Faith wanted to, by the way) as idiotic or hypocritical. It is therefore properly ironic if she could be ‘dealt with’
by such a tactic.

So, that’s my thoughts at this point in time. I confess to really enjoying the multiple opportunities for speculation
this episode and the ones before it have made possible. I am always pleased when I really don’t know what the
writers are up to, and I am more willingly ‘lost’ this year so far than in most of the previous seasons of Buffy.
This all bodes very well for some very exciting stories to come.

I’ll close out the ramble this week with a few items I saw on the board earlier this week that caught my eye, and
that I either agree with outright or feel have significant merit as observations/possibilities:

~ ~ ~

yez - Posted: 08:56:57 11/13/02 Wed

Whatever ‘It’ is, it seems to be omniscient and omnipresent, maybe. It either can see into people's hearts and
minds, allowing it to exploit fears, desires and weaknesses -- or it's familiar with the Scoobies' recent histories,
going back to Joyce's death.

So I'm wondering, particularly with the ‘tipping the scales’ reference, whether we could be getting the ultimate
Big Bad this season -- Satan himself? Was the vampire's and Buffy's passing joke about the existence of God (...)
[a tipoff] ?

(...) Whedon has been quoted recently as saying this season's climax is going to be ‘epic’ -- what's more epic than
the God vs. the Devil battle? Isn't Satan often characterized as being a shape-shifter and also being quite
charming and silver-tongued when necessary? Being a liar? And isn't he also characterized as sowing dissent and
turning people against one another?

~ ~ ~

Darby - 06:45:01 11/13/02 Wed

Is there anything to be made of the fact that the three thwarted love-spellees from Him were the [primary]
participants in the Conversations With the Dead?

-- Dawn, whose spell played out as family drama, who was betrayed by Buffy?
-- Willow, whose spell led to her looking to use magic to ‘replace’ Tara?
- Buffy, whose conversation seemed unrelated to this season's Big Bad, but who was also sure that she wasn't
under any spell (...) ?


Darby - 19:27:48 11/12/02 Tue

Why Dawn, Willow, and Andrew? Did there have to be a strong connection, a love connection, with a dear
departed human? And if the entity could get some sort of valuable service from Andrew and Willow, what was it
trying to get from Dawn, or was it all to set something up for later, to place the asp in the bed?

~ ~ ~

neaux - 12:12:37 11/13/02 Wed

The interesting thing about the Joyce/Dawn scene. Yeah.. it is really tough to say if Joyce is telling the truth
or telling lies. Here are two different views.

Joyce is Bad: The fact Joyce was all glowy and Angelic really looks out of place.. like it was indeed the
Big Evil playing up how Good Joyce was.

Joyce is Good: Her statement goes along with my theory/speculation that the end of the season there is
a huge battle and Buffy must choose between Dawn and Faith. Because Buffy has never felt the true reward in
helping Faith, she will choose Faith over Dawn. The reason? To help Faith on the path towards good. Buffy will
NOT choose Dawn because Buffy' will realize that Dawn has enough strength to handle whatever predicament
that befalls Dawn.

(OnM-- This is interesting, and of course possible, but as I mentioned above I think it will be an idea, not
a person that Dawn finds Buffy going ‘against her’ about.)

~ ~ ~

cjl - 21:40:26 11/12/02 Tue

Holden, a freshly minted vampire, doesn't know about his physical limitations. He feels he can wear Buffy
down mentally until he can gain the advantage and kill her. Smug jerk has no idea how outclassed he is. Buffy
knows she's--ah, there's that word--superior, and doesn't consider Holden a serious threat. Therefore, the
encounter is essentially an interior dialogue with Holden acting (literally) as her devil's advocate.

Buffy finds out a lot about herself this episode, not to mention a crucial piece of information about Spike. Holden
tells her you can only say these things to a stranger, and Buffy tells him he's not a stranger. But Holden IS a
stranger. His intimacy was an illusion: he was simply a mirror, a way for Buffy to delve into her own psyche. This
was the first meaningful conversation Buffy has had with herself in a long, long, time.

~ ~ ~

The Chip. I think it still works. But I have a question for everyone? What makes us think that "IT" can't use the
chip to do work its will or control it? Because it's technology? Think about what happened in the house? It
turned on the TV set without power, it worked the microwave, it worked the tape player and the boom box. If it
can work those objects why not the chip??

........... shadowkat


Closing time / Time for you to go out / Go out into the world.
Closing time / Time for you to go back / To the places you will be from
Closing time / You don’t have to go home / But you can’t stay here
Closing time / Every new beginning / Comes from some other beginning's end

............ Semisonic


I sit before my only candle / Like a pilgrim sits beside the way
Now this journey appears / Before my candle
As a song that's growing fainter / The harder that I play
That I fear before I am / I’ll fade away
But I guess I'll get there / Though I wouldn't say for sure

............ Jackson Browne


[> Future spoilers above too -- Rahael, 17:52:14 11/17/02 Sun

Has everyone been spoiled for this now? I thought the unspoiled did not know this!

But then I'm not in America and exposed to actor's interviews......

[> [> Attn: Well-known 'Spoiler' for future character appearance in my post. -- OnM, 20:26:21 11/17/02 Sun

Sorry, forgot to mention that again like I did last week, but it's true that this is so well known at this point that there is likely no one here at the board that doesn't know about it.

Nevertheless, I'll try to be careful until it actually happens.

There is no other spoilage of any kind in the post that is for events after CwDP. All else is pure speculation.

[> [> Yes, it appeared in a lot of news articles, so it was hard to avoid that "spoiler." -- Rob, 22:09:38 11/17/02 Sun

P.S. Rah, the WSWB annotation thread's begun farther down on the page. ;o)

[> [> [> I have tons of annotations! I have posted my initial thoughts -- Rahael, 06:17:49 11/18/02 Mon

and they tie up to Conversations too....

[> [> [> [> Oooh! Excitement! -- Rob, 08:55:13 11/18/02 Mon

[> If "I'm done with the mortal coil" is an example of Glory-speak coming from the form of Cassie. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:54:35 11/17/02 Sun

Than what do you make of Warren/The Shapeshifter saying that everything was within "mission paramaters"? This sounds very much like something Adam would say. I think we've been given some clues this season that the Shapeshifter (while it likes to talk big) isn't the best actor in the world. In "Lessons" it came off as overdoing its roles to me, and it was totally cheesy when it appeared to Spike as white-shirt-Buffy in "Selfless". Now it is accidentally using dialouge that would make sense for one of its personas while still in a different form. All in all, I'm very curious where ME will go with this.

P.S. Something in my gut tells me that it isn't the First Evil that we've been seeing so far. Can't really explain why, though.

[> [> Re: Not necessarily -- Philistine, 20:44:59 11/17/02 Sun

I'd say that line fits Warren just fine, too - maybe even better than it would fit Adam. Sounds to me like just the sort of thing a Geek who's seen waaaaaay too many Hollywood- style war movies would say.

[> [> I thought so about the Glory speak in BBW Cassie's mouth -- alcibiades, 20:59:12 11/17/02 Sun

[> Aha! New Joyce-Dawn idea! -- HonorH (just brimming over with theories), 18:40:43 11/17/02 Sun

What if Joyce was real, and did see Buffy going up against Dawn--but it wasn't the real Buffy? If what Joyce saw in Dawn's "path" was BBW-as-Buffy being against Dawn, that could explain the warning.

[> [> Oooh! Good one! -- Rob, 22:00:57 11/17/02 Sun

[> What about Drusilla? -- vh, 09:49:54 11/18/02 Mon

When you were doing your big-bad count-down as shown in "Lessons," you seem to have forgotton Drusilla as one of the "unaccounted for" forms. Any thoughts?

[> Re: No, there is another -- lenair, 09:53:30 11/18/02 Mon

Re: "That leaves only two of the images presented to Spike back in Lessons unaccounted for-- Mayor Wilkins and...

And Drusilla. Three unaccounted for.

Very cool ideas, though.

[> Re: Without Hiding - Thoughts on *Conversations w/ Dead People* - ( *Spoilers 7.7* ) -- grifter, 12:03:15 11/18/02 Mon

First of all, OnM, it´s always a pleasure to read your reviews.

Second, I´ll try to expand the BBW-recruiting-idea for the left-out Drusilla:
After I read your theory about Glory, I immediatly thought: aha! And Dru was posing as/manipulating Spike! I was rather surprised you gave the Master that position.
Maybe the Master was really Holden. Remember, Mr. Fruit Punch Mouth was a very insightful fella. The whole talk about fear in season 1 (Nightmares?) was bloody brilliant. He also figured out Buffy´s fear of becoming a vampire in Nightmares. He would make a good vampire-shrink.

On the other hand, if Holden really was just a normal vampire and the Master really posed as/manipulated Spike, the BBW could be holding Dru back much like he does the Mayor to influence Spike later on (or send her over to screw with Angel).

As for "Warren´s" "all is within perimeter": wasn´t that exactly what "Adam" said in Lessons?

Is there any significance in this line? (7.7 spoilers) -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:57:57 11/17/02 Sun

Andrew mentioned that destroying the seal in the school basement as a way to "save Sunnydale". Not the world, specifically Sunnydale. This sheds a new light on what the Big Bad's master plan may be.

[> Re: Is there any significance in this line? (7.7 spoilers) -- frisby, 20:37:35 11/17/02 Sun

Interesting point. I had assumed that was just manipulation of Jonathan on Andrew's part, but maybe you're on to something with regard to Sunnydale specifically?? Maybe the beast had to emerge in LA because it could no longer emerge where Jonathan was sacrificed?

"The sparrows are flying again." (Spoilers for Angel 4.7 and Stephen King's "The Dark Half") -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:19:38 11/17/02 Sun

"The sparrows are flying again."

This line comes from Stephen King's novel "The Dark Half". In this book, a flock of otherworldly sparrows served as the means to right the balance of the world by removing George Stark, a fictional creation come to life.

King uses sparrows because, as is pointed out in the novel, they are traditionally called psychopomps in mythology, a creature that aids in the passing of spirits between this world and the afterlife. Of the three types of birds identified as psychopomps, sparrows have a specific purpose: they are the harbingers of the living dead.

I know, I know: lots of animals were turning up in odd places and behaving oddly due to the whole coming apocalypse on tonight's Angel. But the others mentioned were snakes, rats, and insects, animals with largely understood connotations for evil. Sparrows, however, aren't generally viewed as being evil by the public at large, and yet a flock of them flying into the Hyperion's windows was one of the apocalyptic portents. I just found it a subtle and pleasing reference to Stephen King that Stephen DeKnight (he was the writer of this ep, right, or did I get it messed up again?) threw in a flock of sparrows/harbingers of the living dead.

[> Re: "The sparrows are flying again." (Spoilers for Angel 4.7 and Stephen King's "The Dark Half") -- Haecceity, 22:07:50 11/17/02 Sun

Very nice bit of info, always up for learning new symbolism :) Thanks!

When the first sparrow hit, though, all I could think of was Hamlet--"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow."


[> [> Re: "The sparrows are flying again." (Spoilers for Angel 4.7 and Stephen King's "The Dark Half") -- Rattletrap, 05:15:54 11/18/02 Mon

I believe the Shakespeare line is a reference to the bible verse: "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father." --Matthew 10.26

That was my first thought upon seeing the scene last night, but I think the Stephen King reference makes more sense in context. Anyone want to speculate on a connection with Angel here? I've got nuthin'


[> [> What about a Hitchcock influence? -- Rahael, 06:30:55 11/18/02 Mon

I mean, I haven't seen the ep, but from the description, it sounds like it was a reference to the Birds.

Plus, didn't someone else comment on another Hitchcock reference this season? I forget whether it was on AtS or Buffy.

[> [> [> I felt it and saw it -- Deb, 10:47:45 11/18/02 Mon

I'm wondering if we are seeing a "North by Northwest" in Buffy.

[> [> [> [> yes -- Rahael, 11:00:55 11/18/02 Mon

North by North West and Vertigo are two of my favourite films!

Please elaborate about the NbyNW connections!

[> [> [> I Probably Would Have Thought That Too. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:06:10 11/18/02 Mon

Except that Gunn had a brief line after the first bird hit the window where he said it was a sparrow. With the wave of sparrows that followed, it conjured up The Dark Half (if you've never read it, it's got Hitchcock beat in the army of birds department). I just felt a Stephen King reference seemed to fit better than a Hitchcock one considering the specific mention of sparrows.

You in? (spoilers for Apocalypse, Nowish - AtS 4.7) - - Jay, 20:12:21 11/17/02 Sun

Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor

Wow! ME dropped a KABOOM on us. I found the episode highly enjoyable. Cordy's dream. Swarms of snakes, rats, birds, and bugs. Bleeding walls. Connor and Angel. Angel and Cordy. Wes and Lilah. Lilah and Angel. Gunn and Wes. Lorne's attempts to get Angel and Gunn to bring in Cordy and Fred to help out with office work. Models and actors. Connors birthplace. The four musketeers uneasy alliance and battle action. Do you really think she's safe, with him?

Must re-watch.

[> Totally agree. -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:22:00 11/17/02 Sun

This new Big Bad reminds me of Glory in some ways. Did he do that for anyone else?

And what's up with the alley where Connor was born? Is that like the LA version of the Hellmouth or something?

And will all this commotion make the supernatural public knowledge?

Awesome ep all the way through.

[> [> The alley where Connor was born -- Masq, 23:24:44 11/17/02 Sun

Don't forget--it's behind Lorne's bedroom. In other words, it's the alley way behind Caritas.

[> Re: I'm in! (spoilers for Apocalypse, Nowish - AtS 4.7) -- frisby, 20:26:54 11/17/02 Sun

Wow. Me too, More than I anticipated and I was ready for the big stuff. How Connor fits in with his parents and birthspot, and the Oedipal enactment of sorts. Great actor to play the beast. It looks like what Andrew sacrificed Jonathan to. How will Buffy deal with it Tuesday -- they can't ignore events like this in LA. I still think Joss and Co. are pulling a devil thing, the devil being the function wherein Lucifer hopes to become Satan, involving the trinity of beast, false prophet, and antichrist. That First Evil being a stand-in for Lucifer, and this beast was quite the beast. Tuesday's Buffy (the very end of it anyway) is going to blow the history of television into two. Great episode. Got to go watch it again.


[> Re: You in? (spoilers for Apocalypse, Nowish - AtS 4.7) -- Rob, 21:59:43 11/17/02 Sun

I loved how, once again, ME has completely pulled one over on us. The prophecies stolen from Lorne's head a few weeks ago, where we thought uh-oh, Wolfram & Hart has them and the AI gang doesn't...and now not only do we find out that W&H hasn't been able to decipher them, but that if they hadn't taken them out of Lorne's head, he would have in a way, they kind of unintentionally helped him when they burrowed into his skull! Also the fact that Lilah is actually helping Angel now, b/c the Apocalypse happening now is in fact not the one W&H are interested in creating. This one's just as much a surprise (and nuisance) to them as to the good guys.

This episode raised tons of questions. Is Connor perhaps right? Could the Beast's rising somehow be tied in to his unnatural birth? Why did Cordy lose her "higher being" status? And what good is she doing here on earth? And why is the Beast so interested in her? And why didn't he kill her when he had the chance?

I loved just about everything in the episode, except for the Cordy/Connor sex. I think my major problem with it is not that it happened, but Cordy's reasonings for it happening. She said she wanted to give him something real. Now, funnily enough, if she had just put it that she didn't want to let him die a virgin, I would have been less irritated by it than how she actually worded it. Is this really "something real" because I didn't see it as being any more "real" than Buffy & Spike's escapades. Actually, I would argue that B/S was even more real than this. There was a real connection between them, ever since the mid-fifth season, a bond that grew even stronger in "After Life." Although Buffy did not love him, I could understand her desire to be with him more than Cordy's for Connor. I understand why Connor wants her, and, if Cordy were still amnesia-addled, I might understand her wanting him. But now that she has her memory back, I just can't see why she'd sleep with Connor. Unless she really is meant to have feelings of that kind for him, and, apologies to Charisma because I usually love her acting, but I just didn't sense that in her performance. It might just be the chemistry between the two actors, which I really don't think is there, at least not in a romantic sense.

In "Spin the Bottle," I really loved seeing the old Cordy. I miss the old Cordy. I'm pretty new to "Angel" and haven't seen the full third season yet, but I am really not understanding Cordy as a character this season. Now, granted, this is the first episode where she's really back, as in all there...but still, she seems to me to be a totally different person. I'm having a bit of trouble believing it's the same character. Now, maybe when I finish watching Season Three I'll understand the changes more, but now I find it very perplexing. Since when has she become so humorless? Even Buffy, back from the dead, was able to crack a few jokes as soon as "Flooded," (and even perhaps a few quips in "After Life") even though they were of the morbid variety.

Hope it doesn't sound like I'm getting too down on the episode. Because I kind of went from praise to going on and on about the one thing that bothered me...the Cordy/Connor sex...but I just want to restate that I thought this was a fantastic episode. Great story, great production values, and tons of suspensey goodness. This break is going to be torture...and makes me really fear the upcoming Buffy break!


[> [> You will understand more when you see 3rd season Cordy -- Masq, 23:29:25 11/17/02 Sun

Especially the episodes after "Birthday"

Still, Cordy having sex with a boy whose diapers she changed less than a year ago? She must see something very different when she looks at him now. Maybe a less evil version of his dad?

Maybe the sex was a transference thing for Cordelia?

[> [> [> Yeah....a bit of a rant...sort of - - Rufus, 00:23:00 11/18/02 Mon

He has graduated from side tabs to pullups.......neat..;)

But honestly, I brought this up on the Trollop Group, isn't there a bit of a double standard going on here. We have Angel who slept with Buffy when she was a year younger than Connor is now. Now he is hot for Cordy who is a character that is only 21. I said it before and I'll say it again, why can a guy get away with sleeping with a much younger girl, but a woman.....and I still swear a womans age in years is calculated in dog years (7).....and multiplied resulting in the extra ick factor. My problem is one of not being able to get the looping Huggies commercial that goes on while I see Connor and Cordy onscreen, I wonder if Angel had fed and burped an infant Buffy if we would feel the same way?

[> [> [> [> Re: Yeah....a bit of a rant...sort of -- Tess, 01:25:30 11/18/02 Mon

The 18/21 age difference doesn't bother me as much as the fact that Conner was originally presented as being 16 and now he's aged 2 more years. But can anyone really know Conner's true age? Maybe Cordelia is saying 18 to make herself feel better about sleeping with him. Poor Cordy, going from Groo to Conner.

In RL I would have a big problem with a 21 year old woman messing around with my 16/17 year old minor son, but I imagine my son would be giddy at the thought.

As far as Angel and's not like there are a lot of centuries old women who aren't totally evil running around out there.

To give Angel a little credit, he did hold back a lot with Buffy, letting the relationship progress at the pace she set and even than cautioning (if only sooo briefly) that maybe they shouldn't. Their night together was presented in a much more subdued manner than the older Buffy's trysts with Spike. And because she loved Angel, I didn't see anything wrong with it. But if she'd slept with him "just because the world is ending and even though I'm not really attracted to you, I don't want to die a virgin, so lets get it on"...that woulda been gross.

[> [> [> [> Connor's age -- Masq, 04:00:48 11/18/02 Mon

I also noticed all of a sudden Connor's 18. In "Tomorrow" he was 16. That's less than a year ago. His birthday was sometime in late November/Early December, so he would be turning 17 this year.

I wonder if they did that to make it seem less *ick* that he's having sex with a (albeit slightly) older woman, that is, not technically statuatory rape?

[> [> [> [> [> They keep mentioning Connor's age, and Cordy's -- Rufus, 04:31:56 11/18/02 Mon

I still say if we put the Connor/Cordy and Buffy/Angel age difference side by side then we have to remember that Angel is waaaay older than Buffy, where Cordy is only three years older. But I do remember he was supposed to be 16....oh well.

With the sex overall.....I feel that not many people will get past the fact that Cordy has only recently changed Connors diapers.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: They keep mentioning Connor's age, and Cordy's (spoiler spec) -- Lilac, 06:10:02 11/18/02 Mon

The other thing that factors into this, for me, is that, while Cordelia is supposed to be 21, the actress is 30 and looks it. This really hikes up the ick element. I know that the actor who plays Connor isn't really 16-17-18 either, but he looks a lot closer to it. I am finding the whole scenario hard to believe -- it really doesn't feel like something Cordelia would do. Since when do these people give up and say "Oh well, the world is ending, that's it"? They never have before. Sexual contact with a child you have helped raise is never a comfortable scenario.

I can only think that this is a way to give Cordelia a child of Angel's. He can't (again) create a child of his own, but this could give Cordelia as close to a child of his as she can come. Why? Who knows?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: They keep mentioning Connor's age, and Cordy's -- J, 06:16:00 11/18/02 Mon

I feel that not many people will get past the fact that Cordy has only recently changed Connors diapers.

I'm certainly having trouble! However, I'm also having trouble with the fact that Cordy proclaimed her love for Angel at least twice during the episode, but was coy and flirty with Connor as well. All I can say to that is eew . . . .

I guess this is as close as as you can come to an incest story on primetime. Is Connor just a walking Freud joke?
Anyway, I know that Joss ain't giving me what I want, but I sure didn't need to see that!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> THAT was my problem with it...(AtS spoilers 4.7) -- Rob, 08:51:28 11/18/02 Mon

...not the age thing, so much. Although there is a bit of an ick factor. And I don't see it as a double-standard with Angel/Buffy, because not only did Cordy change his diapers; she did it less than a year ago.

What I didn't like is how I can't understand Cordelia's motivations at all in this episode. Just like you said, she "proclaimed her love for Angel at least twice during the episode, but was coy and flirty with Connor as well." Now, granted, she thought that this might be the END, but still having just told Angel she loved him, it is only hurtful to then sleep with his son, not to mention the fact that if it isn't the end, it will be also be hurtful for Connor when she has to tell him that this was a one-time thing. Unless it wasn't. And if it wasn't, I don't get even more what's going on in her head.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Me too!! (AtS spoilers 4.7) -- ponygirl, 09:29:27 11/18/02 Mon

There just seemed to be a total lack of desire on Cordelia's part. That what was bothering me more than anything else. She just didn't seem as fearful or as guilty or as vulnerable as a situation that required her to sleep with the estranged son of the man she is in love with would call for. It makes me wonder if Cordelia is more of a puppet in this scenario than she realizes.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> ?? spec -- J, 09:42:12 11/18/02 Mon

It makes me wonder if Cordelia is more of a puppet in this scenario than she realizes.

I wonder too. I speculated in another thread that the Connor/Cordy sex might cause her visions to pass to him (perhaps this was the plan the PTB's had in mind all along?), because that's the only phlebotinous plot-point I can think of that could come from it. I can't see them incorporating Charisma's real-life pregnancy into AtS, since they just did the magical baby-thing. However, ME constantly surprises me and everybody else in the western world, so who knows?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Me too!! (AtS spoilers 4.7) Spoilers Buffy season 6 too. -- Deb, 09:46:36 11/18/02 Mon

The diaper thing bugs me too, but someone mentioned how C. looks her age. She does, and all the characters look older than they are presented as being. I think that is one reason I don't take Angel for anything but as entertainment, and I agree with whomever said they didn't "need" the C/C thing just like I didn't "need" the attempted rape scene last season on Buffy. They could have used their imagination and come up with a more acceptable metaphor to spur Spike on to make a change.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> There's that too... (AtS 4.7) -- Rob, 09:59:33 11/18/02 Mon

You hit on something else I didn't mention...the seeming "lack of desire" on Cordy's part. As they were going through the love-making, I didn't sense any passion, desire, etc. from her. It seemed like she was going through it, gamely, because she had to. Maybe, then your "puppet" theory is right and the PTB, or whoever, is controlling her at this moment. She didn't know why she had to sleep with Connor, but she felt like she had to, kind of like hypnosis, where someone might feel like they need to say "Hello" every time they hear a bell ring, or whatever, but not know why. I think either she might have been controlled here by external forces, or those external forces planted the idea in her head.


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Puppet show (AtS 4.7) -- ponygirl, 10:37:10 11/18/02 Mon

I haven't had a chance to go through all the threads so I don't know if this has been gone into yet, but what really struck me about the Beast's behaviour was the little smile he gave to Cordie when he let her go, and his comment to Angel. These were the only non-apocalypse-y actions on his part. The only time there was a sense of an agenda besides the killing and the raining down of the fire. That coupled with Cordelia's remarks that she knew she should be warning Angel or explaining her visions, and her detached behaviour, makes me think that she's being manipulated. And not for a heavenly purpose. Aside from the all the flash and the bloodshed the Beast really accomplished two things: he got Cordelia and Connor together and he got Angel to see them together. The question is why.

[> [> [> [> [> [> I said that wrong... -- Masq, 09:41:54 11/18/02 Mon

My ick factor isn't the older woman thing. No problem there. It's the I-was-so-recently-your-mother thing. I would prefer a mother-son relationship for Cordelia and Connor, or possibly a good friends in the apocalypse thing.

But there's always aspects of these Buffyverse stories we don't like. I didn't like Buffy/Spike, either. You gotta sit back and let me tell the story they want to tell, and I guess this time it's Oedipus.

[> [> [> [> [> Connor's age is indeterminable -- Doug the Bloody, 09:14:41 11/18/02 Mon

The characters have no way of being certain of Connor's age, not even Connor. Even if Holtz had counted off the days and nights on Quartoth it's hard to keep upo a counting system alone over 15+ years. This of course assumes that the day/night cycle of Quartoth (the "Darkest of all Dark worlds") is similar to that of Earth. Quartoth may not even have days and nights, it might not even have a sun. All that anybody has to go on is Conner's apparent physical age, which is probably why estimates of his age vary; all they characters can do is estimate.

[> [> [> [> So completely agree with you!! -- shadowkat, 07:59:33 11/18/02 Mon

I wish I'd read this before I posted my response to dubdub
above. Yep this is annoying me too.

There are still fans clamoring for B/A and think B/A was the most wonderful thing. Yet these same fans? Can't deal with C/C. Granted it may be how it was filmed, but still...

Why is it we can handle the 22 year old girl marrying the 50 year old guy, but not the 22 year old boy marrying the 50 year old woman? Why do we have troubles with C/C and not B/A?

I remember reading that the actor playing Connor is actually 22 years of age. Gellar was barely 21 when her character slept with Angel. Actually she started the series at 19. So she may have just been 20. Carpenter is in her late 20s as was Boreanze at the time he and Buffy did the deed. But on top of this? Let's look at the age difference?

Cordy - Connor = 18 and 21. Uhm that's maybe four years if that. Somehow I doubt Cordelia will turn evil and try to kill Connor.

Angel - Buffy = 245 and 17, hmmm...Buffy's even younger and gee, look what happened, Angel turned evil and tried to kill her.

So if C/C icked you? Ask yourself why B/A didn't?
Maybe it is because we remember Cordy burping Connor and never got that image with Angel and Buffy?? Or maybe it's because Angel was the mysterious alluring guy and they built up the romance first? Is the filming the only reason though? Or is it something deep in our subconscious that makes it okay for the young girl to be with the older guy but not the reverse? If so? Maybe we should rethink that.

[> [> [> [> [> I think it's a combination. -- Dichotomy, 08:30:28 11/18/02 Mon

I also wish I'd read this first, but anyway I think there are multiple factors adding up to the "ewww."

1) The unfair double standard
2) The Oedipal aspect
3) The fact that although Angel and Spike are both hundreds of years old, they are physically, by appearances, in their 20s
4) Cordy's reasoning for sleeping with Connor seems a bit off and out of character for some

That's what I'm thinking, anyway.

[> [> [> [> Going on the record here. -- The Second Evil, 08:21:23 11/18/02 Mon

Am I the only person who didn't ick, but looked at it in context? The world is raining fire, there's a demon who can't be beaten, with no clear purpose except total destruction, and it's almost a done deal that this is The End for our dear characters. And I was thinking, how come the world never threatens to end while I'm standing next to someone quite hot who'd never look at me twice in any other circumstances? Sheesh. Life isn't fair.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Going on the record here. -- Jay, 09:03:24 11/18/02 Mon

It didn't ick me. I didn't comment on this earlier because wasn't sure how I felt about it. But it wasn't because of some ick factor. It was because I wasn't sure if I liked how it worked with the story. But I do like your context. It works for me.

Noooooo! It's (low guttural voice) "The Beast"! (Spoilers Apocalypse Now-ish) -- cjl, 20:27:02 11/17/02 Sun

Much happening in this Angel cliff-hanger (we'll be back in 2003--seeya, kids!), so I wanted to throw out a number of first impressions in order to clear my head and piss everybody off who has more cohesive thoughts...

1. The Magnolia fetish pops up again. (Except it's raining sparrows, not frogs.) We get the various intersecting plotlines, and desperately lonely people reaching out to each other as a quasi-apocalyptic moment comes nigh. (Nigh? Who uses that word anymore?) If Joss and ME are going to keep doing this, I want to see Philip Seymour Hoffman and William H. Macy in the Buffyverse. I'd ask for Aimee Mann, but we're getting her on Tuesday.

2. Dudes! The men of Angel Investigations are back together again, and I must say, they're a nice-looking ass-kicking ensemble. Wesley looks unbelievably cool with a pair of pistols in his hand--and that shotgun! Whoooeee! Unfortunately, looking good doesn't equal "effective"... Nice Xander moment from Gunn when the untrained shlep of the group realizes the interconnectedness of the printouts. (Awww. He's learning puzzles from Fred. Isn't that cute?)

[Now that I've mentioned Xander, does anybody else think that the S5 Scoobies would have clobbered (low guttural voice) "The Beast" with no problem? Buffy and Spike and maybe Xander would have done the ass-kicking, Giles and Willow would do the research, and our favorite Wiccans, Willow and Tara, would have done the high-powered mojo..]

3. Oedipus complex now in full effect. "Gross out" noises permissable under the circumstances.

4. So (l.g.v.) "The Beast" was born in the same place Connor was born? Interesting. Is there a connection between the two? Did the same theological loophole that created Connor give the green light for (l.g.v.) "The Beast" to return to Earth? (Think Kevin Smith's "Dogma." The mystical gateway in New Jersey allowing Ben Affleck and Matt Damon to re-enter heaven technically invalidates all of creation...It's thaumatogenesis again. Every spell has a price--or, in this case, a gift with purchase.)

5. Nice speech from Cordy about Angelus. The writers are listening, after all...

[> Re: Noooooo! It's (low guttural voice) "The Beast"! (Spoilers Apocalypse Now-ish 4.7) -- frisby, 20:35:33 11/17/02 Sun

Nice summary. But what is to be made of these points? And can Sunnydale "NOT" know about this? Joss and Co are going to cross the boundaries between the WB and UPN in one way or the other and no power on earth will stop them. The possibilities are immense! go go go. really great stuff. how long must we wait till angel 4.8????

[> [> Transgesssions! Getcha red hot transgressions right here! (Spoilers) -- Thomas the Skeptic, 09:40:28 11/18/02 Mon

Joss has made a regular cottage industry out of establishing what a particular convention is (be it literary, cultural, religious, etc.,) and then finding of ways to circumvent it, usually through inversion, subversion or transgression. He seems fascinated with boundaries and ways of overstepping them. As a matter of fact, I read an article years ago that said one of his inspirations in creating "Buffy" was a book he had read that dealt with how settlers on the american frontier who lived closest to American Indians were often confused about just what their real identities were because they could shift back and forth from one world to the other. They were part of both but fully at home in neither, just like Buffy with the natural and supernatural worlds. Now, with the whole Connor/Cordy thing, I'm wondering whether his newest form of transgression is to start letting his characters behave in (seemingly) uncharacteristic ways. If so, I just hope that ME is artful enough to make it all aesthetically convincing in the final analysis.

[> Re: Item #3 **SPOILERS** -- Wisewoman, 20:40:46 11/17/02 Sun

Major eeeewwwww factor there. And how about that Buffyverse double standard? Consider the Angel-Cordy-Connor triangle as comparable to the Buffy-Xander-Dawn triangle. After all, Dawn has had a well-documented crush on Xander.

Now suppose Morphy-IT-BBW goes to Xander and lets him in on a little secret: it's all over now, Baby Blue.

Can you really adjust to Xander doing the right thing by Dawn and introducing her to the joys of carnal knowledge? Even in the light of impending doom? Would it be considered the right thing? By anyone?

I'm lovin' this season on AtS and tonight was a special treat. The shot of Beasty's hoofs (hooves?) sent a shiver down my spine. But the noble sacrifice of Saint Cordelia the Unchaste? Not so much.

Are we sure that really is Cordy? Maybe the PTB sent back a ringer? Hey! Maybe Cordy is really Morphy-IT-BBW!!

dub ;o)

[> [> Re: Item #3 **SPOILERS** -- frisby, 20:55:48 11/17/02 Sun

Everything I read says "the beast" but surely we are forced to think of the devil, or at least the beast as a face of the larger devil. And how can they not cross over to Buffy with this? Parallel story arcs? And the Oedipal thing? The whole creation of Connor -- great stuff Joss and Co! This is monumental television in the making -- stuff of history. Will there be a third special spot (the first being where Jonathan was sacrificed and the second where Connor was born)? Cordy will give Angel a granddaughter? As Kianu (misspelled) says -- wow.

[> [> [> Another possibility -- Finn Mac Cool, 21:19:22 11/17/02 Sun

Or maybe there won't be plot crossovers, but consider this:

ME realized that people would complain about why the characters on Angel and Buffy wouldn't be exchanging notes and helping each other what with all the evil looming. The answer: give both shows Apocalypses so big that they won't have time to help each other, they'll be too busy with their problems at home.

[> [> [> Re: Item #3 **SPOILERS** --
Mackenzie , 07:32:42 11/18/02 Mon

I love the idea of Cordy having Conner's baby. While I watching Conner do the horizontal mambo with Cordy I was thinking, could she get pregnant from this?

[> [> [> [> Not me (spoilers 4.7) -- Masq, 10:16:42 11/18/02 Mon

?al baby out of nowhere thing has already been done with Connor himself. I'm hoping they just find a way to hide CC's pregnancy until she can take off and have the baby. Sort of like they did with B'lanna Torres on Voyager or Scully on X- files.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Not me (spoilers 4.7) -- Tyreseus, 22:18:59 11/18/02 Mon

But this time it wouldn't be a baby out of nowhere. For all we can tell, Connor didn't inherit his parents' demons - but he's not quite human, either. Just like Cordy is not quite human any longer.

And maybe a baby is what AtS really needs? I mean, Connor went from infant to 18 so quickly, maybe the PTBs want to give Angel a grandson/daughter so that he has a chance to "do it right."

And speaking from some real life experience (not mine, but in my family), a grandchild sometimes has the power to overcome the problems between dad and son. Son starts to "get" where dad is coming from and all. Maybe its a way for that Connor/Angel ship to sail.

Don't know, just thinking.

[> [> [> [> [> [> another possibility -- anom, 23:01:52 11/18/02 Mon

"But this time it wouldn't be a baby out of nowhere. For all we can tell, Connor didn't inherit his parents' demons - but he's not quite human, either. Just like Cordy is not quite human any longer."

Which raises another possibility. It's not too likely Connor had normal prophylactics around...or that Cordelia had the paranormal kind! What if Connor is demon enough to end up w/the visions?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: another possibility -- Tyresius, 23:08:38 11/18/02 Mon

Great catch. I nearly forgot about how the visions are passed in the first place.

Interesting story angle:
Cordy has been made part demon, but has the visions no more.
Connor has the visions, but has to cope with the reality that he's part-demon after all.
Angel Investigations is forced to reconcile with Connor or find a way to work without the visions (not a big problem as long as the apocalypse related work rolls in, but if they kill the big bad, they're likely to hit a slump.)

[> [> The Double Standard?!! Disagree. (Spoilers Btvs Season 2 and last night's Ats episode) -- shadowkat, 07:47:19 11/18/02 Mon

Okay this is annoying me. Sorry - not necessarily directed at you dub - but wasn't sure where to put it. ;-)

So I'm going to point out a slight flaw in your double standard logic.

When Buffy and Angel did it in Season 2 - Gellar was approximately 21. Buffy was 17. David Boreanz was approximately 25, Angel was 245.

When Connor and Cordy do it in last night's episode - the actor playing Connor, although he doesn't look it - is 22
and Charisma is also in her twenties. Connor is 18 and Cordy is 21.

Yes - it's icky if you still think of Connor as the baby from last year. But he's not. Spent 18 years in another dimension.

So I ask you which was more ick worthy?? B/A? Or C/C?

Double Standard? Perhaps. But I'm beginning to wonder if maybe it's not ME, but us, the fans who have one?

Now granted Dawn seems younger when we first meet her, but she is younger than Connor after he returns from his hell dimension. Dawn is 14 when she's introduced with a crush on Xander. And yes, a 14 year old doing it with any guy is well
something I don't want to see on TV. Particularly with a 21 year old. Also the actress playing Dawn is actually only 14 at the time. Connor returns at the ripe old age of 17, the actor playing him is actually in his twenties. He is physically only four years younger than Cordy.

Yes, C/C made me squirm a bit. But hey, it was supposed to.
But what makes me curious is why I didn't squirm when Buffy was having sex with Angel at the ripe old age of 17.

Personally - I like the dramatic consequences of it. It causes more distrust, fuels Angel's pain and jealousy, and makes Cordelia a tad more interesting. And I have zip idea where they will take it.

[> [> [> Where the ick factor comes in... -- Dichotomy, 08:03:30 11/18/02 Mon

...I think is not so much the age thing (and they did make a point of Cordy mentioning Connor's age, in case anyone was unclear), but the slightly Oedipal undertones. Cordy was the closest thing infant Connor had to a mother, even if it was for only a short time. Sort of like the whole Soon-Yi, Woody Allen ickiness. It's legal, but still a little bit off, somehow.

That being said, I agree with you: I like the dramatic consequences and have no idea where this is going

[> [> [> The Squirm Factor (spoilers for AtS 4.7 and BtVS S2) -- cjl, 08:24:02 11/18/02 Mon

"Squirm factor," as with everything else in BtVS and AtS is all about presentation. When Buffy and Angel had their little love affair in BtVS S1 and S2, it was a drawn-out process, with Angel showing admirable restraint (remember, he didn't even know about the happiness clause) and an enormous respect for Buffy. We didn't feel that Dead Boy was taking advantage of a 17 year-old girl. He was willing to wait. (After all, the man went to Elvis and Priscilla's wedding. He knows the routine...)

On the other hand, I did get feel a definite squirmy/squick- iness when we had the flashback in Becoming I, and baby Buffy was skipping around her high school grounds, looking very Lolita-ish with girly friends and huge sucker--uh, I mean, lollipop. Real Humbert Humbert moment there, and I'm not sure if Joss intended it that way. (One instance where subtext might have gotten away from him...)

The Cordy/Connor mess, on the other hand, has developed within the space of about three or four episodes, and has two main squirm-worthy factors:

1) The "Baby Connor" factor. A major one for a lot of fans-- but strangely enough, it doesn't bother me that much. (This is the Buffyverse folks, and there are weirder things to wrap your mind around.) I think A.I. has made the emotional adjustment that they simply missed Connor's childhood, and they've moved on. I think I did too. (I can understand if many fans haven't, though.)

2) "I love you Angel, so I'm going to have sex with your son." I'm having more problems with this one. Yes, I sort of understand why Cordelia wanted to comfort Connor on what appears to be their last night on Earth, but part of me thinks this is way out of character. If Cordelia loves Angel (and BTW, Joss still hasn't come close to selling me on C/A), why wouldn't she want to be with HIM at the end? And another thing--since when is Cordelia Chase, queen bitch of Sunnydale and (ugh) a "champion," so fatalistic?

I know we're not supposed to speculate on personal lives of our actors, but I think Joss got "Joss-ed" by Real Life. JMO, but they probably had to re-write the plot to adjust to CC's circumstances. I hope they can make it work.

[> [> [> [> Re: The Squirm Factor (spoilers for AtS 4.7 and BtVS S2) -- shadowkat, 09:07:26 11/18/02 Mon

Agree on this one. And yeah the sex scene made me squirm too, just trying to figure out why this one made me squirm when B/A didn't. Don't remember how old Boreanze was at the time? 26? 28? Not that it matters. Real life ages of actors shouldn't really factor in. Poor actors - to be unable to plays roles just b/c of ageism. ;-)

Anyways - I think what bugged me about the scene was this:

"2) "I love you Angel, so I'm going to have sex with your son." I'm having more problems with this one. Yes, I sort of understand why Cordelia wanted to comfort Connor on what appears to be their last night on Earth, but part of me thinks this is way out of character. If Cordelia loves Angel (and BTW, Joss still hasn't come close to selling me on C/A), why wouldn't she want to be with HIM at the end? And another thing--since when is Cordelia Chase, queen bitch of Sunnydale and (ugh) a "champion," so fatalistic?"

Agree with everything in this paragraph btw.

In addition? By sleeping with Connor - she really burns Angel in a major way. Tells him she loves him and then burns him by seducing and having sex with his son? Makes one wonder what is going on with Joss? I mean first HIM, now Apocalypse Nowish??

And you're right - it did seem as if Angel respected Buffy, they loved each other or at least that's what we saw. In this one - got no love, just sex. And I'm not completely sure why. I keep coming back to the vision thing. Maybe something Cordy saw in her vision prompted this? Maybe it's her vision that made her fatalistic?

[> [> [> [> My squirm factor is number 2, not number 1 -- Caroline, 09:08:21 11/18/02 Mon

I can accept that Connor is an adult and that as he is legal and only a few years younger than Cordy, it's not icky that they hook up. But, she has just told Angel she loves him and then goes off to ensure that Connor is no longer in park? It's not only squirmy but I can't make it make sense. Maybe I'll have to watch all of season 3 but I just don't understand this. Can anyone explain?

[> [> [> [> [> Re: My squirm factor is number 2, not number 1 -- JM, 15:14:58 11/18/02 Mon

I got the feeling that Cordy was trying to seek comfort herself if the end was nigh. Her life has been pretty hard lately. But if it wasn't the end, she was also deliberately shutting the door on the possibility of her and Angel ever. Maybe he's still too much of a temptation and she doesn't want to go there ever.

[> [> [> [> [> [> It's Anya and Xander under the Magic Box... -- Humanitas, 18:26:10 11/18/02 Mon

I got the impression that this was end -of-the-world-so-it- doesn't-matter-anyway sex.

Hey, at least Connor didn't propose...


[> [> [> Re: The Double Standard?!! Disagree. (Spoilers Btvs Season 2 and last night's Ats episode) -- dub ;o), 08:26:16 11/18/02 Mon

One quick note: according to a recent press release, Charisma is 32.


[> [> Weighing In -in general -- Spike Lover, 09:23:17 11/18/02 Mon

The raised eyebrow response to last night's angel...

I would say that the whole, one month season has been less than gripping for me.

I continue to love the softer side of Lilah. I like the whole, professional women w/ lots of power are not necessarily evil man-haters. (No offense intended to evil man-haters.) I really loved the whole Texas twig act w/ pig tails and red bra.

I continue to not understand why they write Gunn so opposed to Weslie, the man who took a bullet for him.- Perhaps it is an insecure jealousy thing or something- but he got the girl, not Wes. (Unforturnately, Wes probably will never appreciate the woman he did get- til it is over.) Am not liking that the killing of that low down professor is going to be such a big issue (See reruns of Millenium.)

Am hating Cordy's low cut blouses. Can't she wear anything modest, now that she is a double d cup? She looks like she could breast feed Conner right now.

I am agreeing that maybe they are going to have Cordy pregnant at the same time she actually is, and Conner was the natural choice. And there are evil implications of conceptions during apocalpyses: See any number of horror movies about evil conceptions needing to take place at certain times. (Likely, this is why the thing allowed Cordy and C to live. (-Rosemary's Baby?)

What I hated about the scene was Cordy to be laying there under C like a dead body, resigned to her fate, of either not being able to stop some unknown evil or that she has to be the practise doll for a teenager. Ick. I have never envisioned Cordy as victim. She was always take control girl and do what ever she could. I am hating the don't remember, ineffectual Cordy we have this season.

Lilah & Wes are much more fun to watch in bed. Even Fred & Gunn are more fun to watch. But that was horrible.

I also liked the Cordy who does not like Angelus thing. Kudos for saying that.

Also, yes, if it is raining fire, the media is going to be reporting it everywhere, including Sunnydale. In fact, are we to assume the apocalpse is only affecting LA, and not the rest of the world. If that is so, then it is not really apocalpse but the end of Sodom/G.

Just some thoughts.

P.S. One shocker while I was watching it. When Angel was fighting the thing, and I heard it say, "Do you really think she is safe, William?"

I was so stunned, I rewatched it w/ closed caption and found him to say 'with him.'

By the way, if Conner is evil (which he is suspicious about,) perhaps that old prophecy of Angel killing his son may still come true?

[> [> [> Re: Weighing In -in general -- Jay, 09:41:53 11/18/02 Mon

P.S. One shocker while I was watching it. When Angel was fighting the thing, and I heard it say, "Do you really think she is safe, William?"

I was so stunned, I rewatched it w/ closed caption and found him to say 'with him.'

Before I rewound, I thought it said 'Liam'.

[> [> [> Re: Weighing In -in general -- Dariel, 18:06:45 11/18/02 Mon

Good point about the ick factor of the actual sex, not just the idea of it. Cordy, I thought, was offering Connor a physical and emotional connection. Which implies that both people be involved. But what we were shown looked, as you said, like Cordy giving herself away. Not really there, just being a practice doll.

They could have just split a bottle of wine and had a better connection.

I think Cordy is seriously messed up. Possibly from seeing things from Angelus' point of view. Maybe Cordy's dark side got a bit tweaked there.

[> #3 with a future spoiler -- Deeva, 23:29:31 11/17/02 Sun

Through out the entire scene, from kiss to under the covers to Dad watching them, all I do was think "Ick!". So I think the world is going to end. I know that you kind of like me. Let's sleep together! Oh, the wrongness of this is astounding. Couple that with the fact that CC's pregnancy will be written into the show and we have the ick factor go way up. Shades of Jenny Jones, Ricki Lake, Jerry Springer & Sally Jesse Raphael. Boy it's late. Me tired.

[> [> Conor may not be able to spread his seed and make babies... still not sure if hes 100% human =/ (NT) -- kurisu, 02:13:35 11/18/02 Mon

Another wild, wicked, & weird end-of-series theory! (7.7 spoilers) -- HonorH (who thinks she must secretly be on crack), 21:36:22 11/17/02 Sun

Okay. We've got "Fray," which says a Slayer sacrificed herself to seal the Hellmouth. We've also got Joyce's warning that Buffy "won't be there" for Dawn. And we've got this whole "Slayer/vampire kinship" thing. Put 'em together, and what have you got?

Buffy will become a vampire. She'll be all set to sacrifice herself, body and soul, to seal the Hellmouth, but Spike comes up with a different idea: he'll sire Buffy, so her sacrifice will be in body only while her soul flies free. They conspire this way, secret from the Scoobs.

Unfortunately, not all works out according to their plan. The sire/childe bond can't overcome Buffy's inherent personality and her still-present Slayer abilities, and she fights Spike and allies with the BBW. So the Scoobies and Spike, with Faith, are forced to fight VampBuffy to the point that she can be used to seal the Hellmouth.

In the end, it works. Xander and Anya get married, Faith and Willow get together, both couples raise Dawn, and Spike is either killed or made human when the Hellmouth slams shut. Buffy's vampire self, meanwhile, is stuck in a constant state of battle, but her soul is back in its rest.

So. Am I as nuts as I think I am?

[> I had a similar thought (spoilers for Him and Conversations, speculations.) -- anneth, 23:08:29 11/17/02 Sun

I think it's a good idea, and takes a great deal of the sacrafice-foreshadowing of S7 into account - but I can't help but feel that you're missing an element. What struck me about "Him" was Buffy's incredulous line to Dawn: "Never sacrafice yourself for a *guy*!" (Well - something like that) at the train-tracks. It made me wonder, will Buffy end up sacraficing herself for a man, somehow? (or, at least, for another person.) Buffy's chat with Holden in "Conversations" fed my suspicion, especially when he noted that she doesn't feel that any man is "worth it" - worth love, respect, dying for? Will something happen to change her attitude, to make her believe that a man might be worth the ultimate sacrafice? Will she face a decision where she is forced to chose between sacraficing herself and watching someone - a man? - die? Her previous two deaths have been basically in the line of duty, to save humanity. They haven't been personal but professional decisions.

All right, that's not quite true. In "the Gift" she had to choose between letting Dawn die and dying herself. But still, it was for a greater purpose. I imagine Buffy will end up sacraficing herself somehow, or at the very least be faced with the decision - but I think it will be different from her previous deaths because it will be for an individual *alone*. So first she will have to rediscover the inherent worth of the people around her, the people who love her.

Ah, gooey speculative goodness!

[> Now tell me, why do you think you must be on crack? :) -- Deb, 08:36:22 11/18/02 Mon

Insane and very unlikely theory for AtS (spoilers 4.7 and 7.7) -- parakeet, 22:29:06 11/17/02 Sun

OK, this is really nuts, but it occured to me and I want to bother you with it.
Skip the demon first brought Cordelia to half-demonhood and then to higher-beinghood. Now, many people have voiced concerns about Cordy's transcendence. It doesn't make much sense that they would remove her so quickly after going through the trouble to allow her to continue having the visions for Angel, Inc. Also, despite her progress and immense reserves of character, it doesn't really make sense that Cordy would be a top candidate for becoming a higher being.
Others have theorized that this might have been a trick and that Skip might have been the perpetrator. Now, what if he was behind it? Why? What if the purpose was to create a cosmic imbalance, one that could be righted by creating a "higher-lower-being"? Like Skip, maybe.
Once again, I want to say that I don't think I'm right. However, I was struck by an odd resemblance between the Big Scary Demon and Skip (no good reason for this, and I'm sure that you fine, observant folks will help me out by telling me why this can't be so).
There is, obviously, a connection between this demon and Cordy, and it relates to her recent turn as cosmic power. The demon didn't destroy her; maybe it couldn't because she is crucial to his being?
Then there is the Conner connection. The demon came up in the alley where Conner was born. Conner is convinced that this is because he shouldn't have been born at all. The demon's opening, a glitch in the order of things? Maybe a way to counteract whatever power Cordy and Angel may have over this demon is to set them against one another; hence, the demon all but sent Angel to observe Cordy and Conner.
Now, back to Skip. He is familiar with the various personalities at play here. He is a demon apparantly on the side of the Powers That Be and perhaps best suited in this to exploit a cosmic loophole. He is a key player in what is, to me, a strange character development that still hasn't been properly explained. He is also a popular character who hasn't been explored, really.
Besides, wouldn't it be cool? Skip isn't necessarily good or evil, but may be in search of power. Power is the theme of BtVS, and a Big Bad is brewing that may have the Powers That Be's attention all wrapped up.
Ok, enough with this; as I said, it's nuts. Thanks for indulging me.

[> You're not alone in seeing a resemblence -- Sheri, 22:42:36 11/17/02 Sun

I think it was their chins and the horns... was it the same actor?

[> [> not same actors, but....... (plus some insane speculation) -- Sheri, 22:57:13 11/17/02 Sun

Beasty-Man was played by Vladimir Kulich and Skip was played by David Denman... but I still think they look similar enough that the characters could be connected... you got the big frame, the horns, the funny chin... maybe Beasty-man is Skip's evil doppelgänger? maybe they're brothers? Yup, Beasty-Man wants to destroy the world 'cause "Sniff, you had it so easy Skip! Mom always loved you better!"... Ah, poor Beasty-Man. I think he just needs a hug *sniff*

[> [> [> Spoilers again, 4.7 and 7.7, plus insane spec -- parakeet, 23:03:44 11/17/02 Sun

Maybe their mom came back and told them they'd be set against one another? Oh, the pathos. :)

[> [> [> Kulich..... -- Rufus, 00:26:40 11/18/02 Mon

I didn't recognise the name but the face I did from The 13th Warrior, a hack and slash movie with Antonio Bandaras as a Muslim man out of his element up north with Norsemen.....they made fun of his horse (called the little guy a dog).

[> [> [> [> Re: Kulich..... -- Dochawk, 06:56:14 11/18/02 Mon

Until I saw a picture without his makeup, didn't realize he lives down the block from me. Seen him at Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf occaisionally. The "advantages" of living near Hollyweird I guess.

[> Re: Insane and very unlikely theory for AtS (spoilers 4.7 and 7.7) --
Mackenzie , 07:08:51 11/18/02 Mon

I don't think you are totally off on this. They are leading us to believe there is a connection between Cordelia and the Beast. Having it rise where Conner was born also leads us to belive they have a connection. How did the beast know that Conner could not be "trusted" with Cordy? I wanted more info on that. It left me with a weird feeling to have the world ending and the show to end. P.S. Did anyone else feel like the Cordy/Conner thing left NOTHING to the imagination?

Just curious...Schedule-wise, how many new Buffy eps are there till the break? -- Rob, 23:02:32 11/17/02 Sun

And does anyone know how long the break is?


[> For sure ep 9, not so sure about 10 -- Rufus, 23:22:12 11/17/02 Sun

[> Re: Just curious...Schedule-wise, how many new Buffy eps are there till the break? -- Sophie, 06:17:28 11/18/02 Mon has a list of the ep titles and air dates. i don't know how reliable they are and they seem to be down this morning.


I have the answer! *speculation, ATS* -- Corwin of Amber, 00:30:44 11/18/02 Mon

Cordy's purpose for being sent back to Earth is to make damn sure that Angel doesn't have a moment of perfect happiness! Why else would she give Angel the "I love you, but I can't be with you..." speech, and then sleep with his son later on that night? :) Next she'll give Conner the "Let's just be friends..." speech and the circle of misery will be complete!

[> Re: I have the answer! *speculation, ATS* -- Tess, 00:58:52 11/18/02 Mon

Actually I've been speculating something like that myself. Cordy's Angelus excuse seemed like something she just threw out there because she knew she had to do something to break them apart. And her 'end of the world' gift to Conner seemed forced on her part, as if it was something she'd been told she had to do and not something she wanted to do. Most of all it just seems a bad way to explain her real life pregancy. I woulda preferred they write the baby in as Groo's.

The questions I have now is what is the beast's interest in Cordy? And his connection to Conner? And wasn't it interesting that he knew of Angel and his connection to C/C.?

Totally off that subject it was cool seeing Lorne actually fighting the good fight this epoisode.

[> [> Re: I have the answer! *speculation, ATS* -- J, 06:26:47 11/18/02 Mon

I woulda preferred they write the baby in as Groo's.

Actually, that gives me a thought -- will Cordy's com- shuking with Connor cause her to 'pass the gift'? If not, why not? I checked out the AtS pages on Masq's site and couldn't get a definitive answer there.

[> [> [> Re: I have the answer! *speculation, ATS* --
Mackenzie , 08:47:20 11/18/02 Mon

Is Charisma Carpenter preggers in real life? I have been trying to decide that all season. She used to have a cute little body and now it looks sort of matronly. Has she had the baby or is she pregnant now?

[> [> [> [> Re: I have the answer! *speculation, ATS* -- stealing a march on Rufus -- LadyStarlight, 09:08:15 11/18/02 Mon

According to a press release (that I could go find on the converse Buffyverse board, but I got ouchies), CC is pregnant and is due in March.

If you look very carefully during the scene at Connor's where she's wearing the purple shirt, you can tell. There's some deft camera work around candles, but there's one shot where she's in profile & it shows.

I was watching that scene & said to my husband "this must be making the WB's male 18-49 demographic very happy, because they seem to be shooting her from the cleavage up most of the time".

Yeah, shallow. Sue me. ;)

[> [> [> [> [> So that explains all the distracting cleavage shots... -- sTalking Goat, 09:50:15 11/18/02 Mon

for a moment there I thought Aaron Spelling was Directing this episode.

A scene I'd like to see... -- Corwin of Amber, 00:42:02 11/18/02 Mon

A nice evening in L.A., sometime after apocalypses in both L.A. and Sunnydale have been averted. GILES, WILLOW, XANDER and ANGEL are standing in the back alley of Caritas, examining a HUGE SCORCH MARK.

GILES: So this is where it all started for you, eh?
ANGEL: And ended. The place where Conner was born, the Beast rose and died. Kinda fitting, I guess.
WILLOW: Major scorchage.
ANGEL: The thing is, I haven't figured out what to call it. Biggest victory in my life, and I don't know how to tell people about it.
XANDER: It's the heckmouth.

[> Re: A scene I'd like to see... --
Cleanthes, 12:37:19 11/18/02 Mon

Oooh, very good. Sent by the prince of insufficient light himself!

Too bad the demon wasn't carrying a giant pitch-spoon.

Cordelia's dream (spoilers 4.7) -- Masq, 04:12:23 11/18/02 Mon

Cordy's watching TV at Connor's. He brings home snacks. They have an entire conversation about her memory, the evil thing that's coming, bonding goes on.

Then all of a sudden, Cordelia looks up where Connor is and sees the beast. She wakes up.

So was all of that interaction supposed to be a dream? How much stock should we put into what went on in that dream? I mean, certainly Cordelia's feelings and fears in it are real, but nothing else was. Does Connor really even have a TV?

[> the TV -- neaux, 04:50:01 11/18/02 Mon

Cordy's things might still be at Angel's.. but I bet Connor could have fetched a few things for her like her television and some clothes.

[> [> Re: the TV -- Tess, 06:56:55 11/18/02 Mon

Where does Conner get the money to pay for a place that has electricity and hot water? Can'imagine the owners abandoned the building but left the utilities on. Makes a person wander if he's been hunting drug dealers as well as demons.

[> [> [> Ummm (questionable taste warning) - - KdS, 07:08:12 11/18/02 Mon

Well, I can think of a less violent way a young man with Connor's slightly waifish good looks could make money in downtown LA...

[> [> [> [> There's a Midnight Cowboy parody out there, with Connor and Whistler... -- cjl, 08:52:04 11/18/02 Mon

...but I'm not touching it.

[> Re: Cordelia's dream (spoilers 4.7) -- shadowkat, 07:24:19 11/18/02 Mon

Interesting dream sequence. (Bit of a ramble bear with me.)

What fascinates me is the parallel between her vision of the beast when she looks at Angel and in the dream, she sees the Beast when she looks at Connor.

Then of course the Beast rises right where Connor was born.

Also what's on the tv? "a movie where people are changing into monsters or aren't what they appear or pod people, I've seen it before, but can't remember, no i have my memory back, just in fog over this..."

The movie is Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Someone else may have noted it, but I have the book by Jack Finney and there's two versions of the film - the first is a black and white one and focuses on the idea that everyone is being replaced and you can't trust anyone. It dealt with the fears of communisim during the MacArthy era of studio blacklisting. Now here's an interesting aside in Whedon's favorite Ats episode , which he mentioned in the most recent interview in aol chat - "If you were or ever were" - the title of the episode and the time period is the MacArthy hearings. The episode itself deals with mistrust of each other boiling up into a lynching of Angel. The Hyperion demon feeds off the individuals mistrust. And on the tv screen in the background of this episode? Is the MacArthy hearings.

Now we have a reprise of that in Cordy's dream with the horror movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers - a movie she can't remember the name of. She can't tell Angel her vision or warn him. Connor is the one who goes and gets Angel and still Cordy doesn't reveal everything. The most she reveals is that she can't deal with what Angel did, who Angelus is. She loves him, but she can't deal with Angelus. So Instead of telling Angel more about the Beast - she hunts it down herself and almost gets Connor and herself killed. Instead of telling Angel what she and Connor found or warning him - she stays with Connor, reassuring him. And when the sky rains fire? She sleeps with Connor.

Why? What did Cordy see in her vision with Angel? What is Cordy not telling us? And Why didn't Cordy get Angel's help? Was she protecting him? Or was she protecting herself, Connor and others from him? Does Cordy know something about Angel, that she isn't revealing?

People with visions in these shows appear to see non-linear paths - they can see the future and the past and the present simulataneously. What has Cordy seen?

This episode reminded me a little of If you were or ever were(I think that's the title) - were people are struggling to trust each other while a beast is feeding off their insecurities. In order to defeat the Beast they must join together. The men in this episode do, well four of them, assuming we count Lorne as a man. But the women? Are somewhat isolated. We have Lilah alone at W&H and Fred alone with strangers in a diner. Both by the choices they've made. Cordy is also somewhat isolated - she's with Connor - who as the Beast tells Angel does not make her safe. (Clearly not - they are sleeping together ;-) ).
So at the end of the episode, we have Wes carrying Gunn in his arms. While Fred is outside - far from home. We have Cordy in Connor's arms - with Angel wounded outside looking in.

Back to MacArthy and Invasion of the Body Snatchers - and here by the way is a link to Btvs. Mistrust. Deception. Misperception. These lead to splits in relationships. Fred no longer trusts Gunn, she knows what he is capable of now and it scares her. Wes no longer trusts, assuming he ever did, Lilah. Cordy no longer trusts Angel, she knows what he is capable of now and it scares her to death. Gunn doesn't trust Wes. And on Btvs? Dawn no longer trusts Buffy. Buffy no longer trusts Spike, assuming she ever did. Willow no longer trusts herself. Our fears create monsters - beasts that threaten to devour us.

CJL in another thread mentions that the Season 5 BTVS gange could have killed it. Yes - but not for the reasons he states - but because they were a solid unit, they trusted each other's capabilities. Season 3 AI may also have done it prior to Wes' leaving - because they trusted each other.
Their fears weren't splitting them apart.

Is the beast the result of Darla's death? Or the result of the built up fears, doubts, pains, and resentments of inhabitants - demons and humans?

Again - what does Cordy really know that she isn't saying and no longer understands? And for that matter - what if anything does Spike know that he isn't saying and doesn't understand?

[> [> Battling the Beast and Fighting as a Unit -- cjl, 09:20:41 11/18/02 Mon

We're not that far apart on the logistics of battling the Beast. The reason I think the S5 Scoobies could have beaten "The Beast" was not that they're more powerful, but they would have taken the time to sit down and figure out a rational battle strategy before they charged in and gotten their asses kicked. Granted, Angel and the guys didn't have a lot of time; they thought they had to save the rich 'n' snooty members of that club, so they had to move fast.

But before they went charging out, I was waiting for Wesley to stop them and say: "You realize, gentlemen, that this is no ordinary demon. He is the harbinger of the apocalypse, a Beast of biblical legend--and those swords you're carrying and these lame-ass shooting pistols I've got stuffed up my sleeves will be pitifully inadequate. We need powerful magic as back-up--otherwise, club management is going to have to wash us out of the carpet."

Did Wesley say that? No. Just like our own beloved Miss Hacks-a-lot, the guys charged in, waving pointy things, and got their butts kicked. They got back together in this episode, but they still don't trust each other enough to draw on their respective strengths. If Giles could've seen that battle, he would have been very disappointed in Wes and Angel...

[> [> [> The New Wes -- sTalking Goat, 10:41:10 11/18/02 Mon

The New Wes doesn't plan.
The New Wes doesn't talk.
The New Wes doesn't consider.

The New Wes is all about Where's the demon get my sword and the wrist sheiths, get on with the gunplay like I just stepped out of a James Cameron movie got my throat cut and my friends abondonded me got to kill this demon so I can go home and f**k Lillah Morgan on my sofa I hope she dresses up like Fred.

All in all I think he a vast improvement over I'm a rogue demon hunter whats a rogue demon Wes. But what he's acquired in brass balls he seems to have lost in gray matter.

[> [> [> Now there's something I would pay to see -- ponygirl, 13:51:34 11/18/02 Mon

The Scoobies vs. The AI team! Talk about a grudge match. Too many variables to consider: the amount of magic Willow's using, if Wesley can use his brains and go John Woo at the same time, Buffy's emotional state; but when all is said and done I'd say the AtS team would get their butts kicked. Love to see it though. Maybe Jay should set up another poll!

[> [> Does that mean Cordelia's a pod person? - - Masq, 09:51:24 11/18/02 Mon

Cause that could possibly explain her behavior with Connor. Either that, or she's still totally out of touch with herself, regained memory or not.

I'm actually being serious in the second sentence above. Does anyone else get that impression. It really IS Cordelia, but she's left half her mind in the higher realms and is quite with us down here in the land of the living?

[> [> [> Didn't say I wouldn't post about Angel again ;o) -- CW, 11:12:14 11/18/02 Mon

Either that or when the demon moved over her at the end of that fight, he corrupted her. I cannot see pre-ascension Cordy ever sleeping with Connor.

[> [> [> This isn't the first time things have changed (Angel spoilers) -- VR, 13:19:44 11/18/02 Mon

Back when Cordy first got her visions, she hated them. Then, she had a run in with Vocah. She felt the pain of all those she had visions about. The effect? She turns around and reinvests herself in the good fight.

Skip comes back at the end of last season and says she's gotta go to other dimensions to fight the good fight. While she's up there, she sees Angel's past, along with the emotions. The emotions of pleasure Angelus got from causing pain to others and the pain of his victims. She knows about his target's deaths causing the lose of "real" connections and the resulting pain caused from it.

As for Connor, she doesn't know about his past like she does Angel's, but she knows the regular way. She's already got the feelings of pain of Angelus' victims and the guilt she's feeling of knowing what it was like to be Angelus. Connor was beating himself up over not being able to stop whatever it was that came through the ground behind Caritas. I see her as being rather empathic right now.

She says that he's "never had anything that's real". I take this as meaning the things people should have growing up. The main thing he's had was the hatred Holtz instilled into him growing up, which wasn't real. Just the subjective opinions of a hurt man. Quor-toth wasn't his real home, like Holtz said. Connor never grew up with his real father, just a self-righteous man out for vengence. Connor's childhood was spent fighting creatures children shouldn't have to face.

And as she said, "...I don't think it matters anymore. And if this is the end, I want you to have something that's real." She knows how he feels about her. She thinks of how and where he grew up and can only imagine a little bit of what it must have been. She also felt his pain and confusion when she was giving him his "soul colonic". And she does care about his well being, both physical and emotional.

I think what she wanted to do was to make him feel better not only about himself, but to give him something that was real. The copulation was just the best way she could think of to express that she was worried about how Connor was feeling about himself. I don't think it was so much as making sure he didn't die a virgin, so he could experience the pleasures of the flesh with another person. I think it was more about taking care of someone she truely cared about.

Sex just happens to be a common way to express feelings. As anyone who has felt it, making love with someone you feel you have an emotional connection to is so much better than just having sex with someone to feed instinctual urges. And I think Codrelia wanted to give him this. Connor's realtionship with Angel has always been not a good one from the start. I believe she wanted to give him at least one "real" connection with another that he was denied his entire life because without it, it would seem kind of a waste of a life.

DEVIL MAY CRY and Angel (Spoils Apoc Nowish) -- neaux, 04:20:59 11/18/02 Mon

Wow... I've never seen an episode that resembled a video game before.. but this episode was down right spooky.

I dont know how many gamers are out there but if last night's episode wasnt screaming DEVIL MAY CRY.. then heck I really do look to much into these shows.

The Beast.. Is almost the spitting image of NELO ANGELO of DEVIL MAY CRY. The only major difference that I see is that Nelo's horns point down and The Beast's point up.

Unfortunately, I cannot find any good pictures of Nelo Angelo on the net to show you guys.

But if that wasnt the obvious, you have Wes in full force with his 2 guns, which is Dante's staple weapons in Devil May Cry. And just like Dante (the main character in Devil May Cry), Wes switches to the shotgun in a badass manner and kicks some major ass.

This was one cool scene, and I honestly believe that someone at ME played this legendary game and said that we gotta put this in the show.

[> found a link -- neaux, 04:45:14 11/18/02 Mon

Here is a image link to Nelo Angelo. icture=30


[> Re: DEVIL MAY CRY and Angel (Spoils Apoc Nowish) -- Mackenzie , 06:56:03 11/18/02 Mon

That is Exactly what I said last night. I am not a big gamer but I am a fan of your Super Mario brothers type games. I told my husband that the rock dude was just like an end guy in a video game!

Parting of the ways -- Cactus Watcher, 05:31:20 11/18/02 Mon

Even before this season started I had a bad feeling about Angel the series, this year. I decided not to tape this season for reasons I can't explain. Two years ago and last year there were points in the season when I was ready to quit watching altogether. Last night it all came to a head. I'm not going to try to convince anyone else, but last night's Angel ep exceeded my ick limit. I can think of any number of good reasons why things happened the way they did. But, I can't think of any good reason for me to watch it. I am offcially no longer watching Angel.

If you want a reason, as someone already posted the things (not just Cordy and Connor) that went on last night belong on one of those daily afternoon scandal shows. Being retired, I could watch that kind of thing every weekday afternoon if I wanted to, But, I don't. And I'm not going to make a special effort to watch it in the evening either.

[> I understand your position! -- Robert, 07:38:29 11/18/02 Mon

>>> I am offcially no longer watching Angel.

I dropped out of viewing Angel about a third of the way into season two. I didn't think it was bad. Rather, Mutant Enemy was telling a story that I didn't want to hear. I subsequently resumed watching the show near the end of the season, and I've generally stayed with it since.

I know that a number of people who post here prefer Angel to BtVS, but I don't. The stories told via BtVS are much more interesting to me. Though, with the recent story lines which have been focusing on Cordelia's travails, I've become considerably more interested.

All I can suggest is that you take a look at Angel again after the 2/3 point in the season. The story may have evolved enough to re-capture you interest.

[> Got to disagree. (Apocalypse Nowish spoilers) -- Darby, 07:58:18 11/18/02 Mon

I'm finding Angel the more compelling of the two shows, for some of the things that seem to be bothering you. I like how the characters are being threaded through what could be some Springer-worthy plots.

But the Fred-Gunn dynamic was fascinating - quiet Gunn just treading water, kinda bothered yet accepting about what he/they had done, but willing to talk it through while motormouth Fred wants to avoid talking. It feels right that they had been avoiding the issue for a while, too. This retains aspects of what the characters are while deepening them, while still sustaining questions about who they really are and where they're headed. Loved the rat reactions, too.

How can the Wesley-Lilah relationship compare to the shallow titillation of soaps? Lilah as Fred, not to force a confrontation but rather a frank discussion about Wes' priorities, her acceptance of the current status quo (while being assured that she can alter it), his willingness to not evade the division of his feelings, but rather to take them on, is not typical tv.

The way that the group is working is also fascinating, and the rising apocalypse is treated as matter-of-factly as Buffy tries to but often can't quite manage. These are people at work with a life-or-death job. Waiting for the rematch, with Angel wielding a jackhammer. I'm thinking, in keeping with a subtheme this season, a bath in liquid nitrogen would work, too.

Okay, the Connor-Cordy stuff is both way too obscure (why would she consider it?) and too heavy-handed (Connor as Accessible!Angel) at the same time, but Cordy's inability to substantively link this teenager to the baby she cared for just a year ago - is that so unbelievable? And the "We're all gonna die, so what the f***?" I think could have been workable, but they didn't set it up well.

- Darby, absolutely respecting your opinion but taking the opportunity to chime in with an alternative.

[> [> Totally agree with you Darby. On all points. -- shadowkat, 08:12:07 11/18/02 Mon

[> [> Re: Got to disagree. (Apocalypse Nowish spoilers) --
Mackenzie , 08:39:41 11/18/02 Mon

I agree with Darby. I think the first poster is missing the bigger picture. This is not your regular average TV, we have plots, subplots, subsubplots, character developments, etc. I mean really, this is not Dallas or something! :)

[> [> I just turn by brain off during Angel -- Deb, 09:16:49 11/18/02 Mon

So I just sit there going "Oh aren't Fred and Gumm such a cute couple?" "Oh wow, love that bathroom!" before the rats. And "God it's 'The Birds'"! When I see the Beast, "He doesn't look nearly as fearsome as I thought he would," and "Skippy? What happened to you?"

But the biggest reaction:

"Yuck, Yuck, Yuck, Yuck!!!" to C&C at the end, and it was so sad to hear what Cordie said to Angel, 'I love you BUT"

I think Buffy is the only show I have any emotional investment in, and at times, I tell myself that I should just stop watching it until the show is completely over and I know how it ends. But all those allusions just hit sore spots from my entire life, and a few happy ones. Then I stop and think about life before 1880. What was it like living in a society with no mass media except the newspaper and other literature? People talked and families told stories about ancestors to their kids. Since this is rather buried in posts, I'll share one little superstition I hold (and it's rather ironic since I've worked in the media.) Sometimes I think there might be some kind of truth to the belief that a picture, drawing, image of a person does indeed capture something of the soul. Figuratively this makes sense to me, but its the literal part that I just can't seem to shake. Why did ancient Pharoahs have so many liknesses of themselves made, and would destroy the likeness of those rulers they hated, feared, etc? Political reasons yes, but I just feel there is something else, something spiritual there like "ties that bind."

Yes, I'm on medication.

[> [> [> Totally disagree...AtS has just as much the same complexity and depth as BtVS... -- Rob, 09:24:37 11/18/02 Mon

...although I still think BtVS is the superior show. I'm a new fan of AtS, but I have been fascinated by the complex metaphors and symbols. I really don't understand why people have been comparing this season of "Angel" to a soap opera, disfavorably, whereas they applauded the soap operaish tendencies of Buffy and Angel in BtVS Seasons 1, 2, and 3. Heck, the show even mocked themselves about it in "The Zeppo."


[> [> [> [> Replying to Rob and Deb! (Spoilers for Conversations) -- Rahael, 09:55:45 11/18/02 Mon

Rob, yes, thank you!!

Angel is packed with metaphor!

I mean, Dante !

Though I think what Deb was saying was that she had an emotional connection with Buffy which made it more meaningful. I do think that Buffy hits hard with the emotional metaphors.

OT to Deb - sorry I didn't get a chance to reply to your post yesterday. I was travelling home from Paris! And then it got archived.

Anyway, I wasn't so much saying that some women have it harder than others etc, but that, your initial message as I read it seemed to criticise ME for showing Buffy as struggling with life, but also not struggling realistically enough. I pretty much think that ME deal with plot in an organic way. Joyce dies, so of course Buffy has to look after Dawn (and Joyce dies because Kristin Sutherland leaves). And it seems logical that she'd have to drop out of university, and have to struggle to earn money, since one of the continuing themes of being a slayer is that it's not valued superficially by society. (Bit like being a single mother/father, really).

So I think that the story has a narrative integrity. And as for future worries, which is what I read in your reply to Pr10n, well, I'm spoiled and I'm not in the least worried for the future in terms of feminism. It's because I trust the narrative integrity. It will win out! This isn't based on spoilers or anything. I'm as lost as anyone else about future direction. I'm just trusting Joss. He always seems very conscious about the politics of the thing.

And I draw hope from "Him" - one of these days, Buffy's going to live for the world not die for it.

As for emotional investment? I hear you. I don't think I'm going to get over Conversations for a long time. How many times have I been, emotionally in the position of Dawn? Believe me she wasn't whiny. There are very few people who would not be reduced to a child when faced with the emotional reality that their mother is a corpse. That's one of the hardest lessons, one of the most mystifying and gut wrenching realisations that the bereaved have to face. She was strong like an amazon!

Dawn never touched the body of her mother in that last scene in the Body. Neither did I. I circled the body, laid out for people to pay their respects for three days, getting closer and closer. I reached out so many times to try to confront that physicality, which is simultaneously a complete absence. And I couldn't do it. And on the day that I was sure that I was going to, before I knew it, they were closing up the coffin and taking it away.

Oh, I meandered on to Conversations because I was trying to say that pretty much all my reactions to life/posts at the moment have been influenced by reading that wildfeed.

Buffy sometimes does get me in the emotional gut, directly. But I love Angel too!! It's got my favourite character, Cordelia.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Replying to Rob and Deb! (Spoilers for Conversations) -- Deb, 10:39:05 11/18/02 Mon


First I need to say this for others: I have never watched soap operas so I can't campare anything to them.

Okay. I so agree with something you said. I so want Buffy to live for the world and not die for it. You obviously have more confidence in JW than I, but I sincerely hope you prove me to be the pessimist. As for Dawn, I don't see her as weak either. At her age, I lost it a few times just from the degree that I had to live my life as an adult, and had done so since the age of 11. I've dealt with it with humour. I try to find the ridiculously tragic things in my life as so ridiculous that it is hysterical. I've had a few moments when I've gone from laughing as hard as I can and then all the sudden ending up crying just as hard. At that point, I'm dealing with it and I know everything will be just fine. I see this in Dawn. She really tries to be her age, but then. . . . how is she supposed to behave? She gets the "crank out" and moves on.

You just got back from Paris? *sigh*

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Replying to Rahael/on metaphors and symbols on Angel -- alcibiades, 12:39:19 11/18/02 Mon

Though I think what Deb was saying was that she had an emotional connection with Buffy which made it more meaningful. I do think that Buffy hits hard with the emotional metaphors.

So does Angel. It is all about trying to build a family and how difficult that is because of emotional baggage from prior experiences.

This episode seems to be about experiencing things from both sides of the fence, just as Cordy mentions to Angel. She felt his prior experiences not only from the POV of the victims, but his joy in causing the pain as well.

Since Angel imploded his last family for kicks and because he could, he now gets to watch the implosion of his dream family and have the ability to do nothing about it -- because of who he once was. The extent of his previous gusto for evil now determines the extent of his powerlessness. He feels he has no standing to step in and stop it.

And Angel has all those window frames showing us who feels isolated and outside of the family at any one moment that show up everywhere. I love the consistency of it on Angel. It is something that Buffy doesn't have, a consistent symbol that reappears. (Well, we had the ascension/descension bit last year -- from the Gift to Grave -- but that seems to have gone away now. That was great when they were using it. Spider webs this year maybe as a symbol of connection to good or evil??? but it seems less clear.)

I take it you haven't seen the episode yet, Rahael, but the final shot is the camera hovering over Cordy and Connor in bed, slowly distancing itself from them, back and back, and then the camera angel switches and we see Angel looking downward (!!!) at the same angle as the camera just showed us Condy in bed.

It is an amazing last shot because everyone else we have seen has been staring up at the sky, but Angel is looking down. I wonder if it is not going to foreshadow his trajectory as a result of Condy.

But I love Angel too!! It's got my favourite character, Cordelia.

Got to admit she is my least favourite.

I'm still hoping they write a Xander/Cordy spinoff.

Two birds, one it were.

[> [> [> [> [> [> ROFL re the last line -- Sophist, 12:48:25 11/18/02 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Replying to Rahael/on metaphors and symbols on Angel -- JM, 16:22:08 11/18/02 Mon

Thankfully some one else still loves Cordy. She seemed so damaged by finally really getting Angel and Angelus. Her discussion about what she saw and felt had the same sense of resignation that she treated the apocolypse. It seemed to me a very logical line was drawn from that conversation to her final one with Connor. I think she's deliberately closing that book in a very final way. And if she's making a horrible mistake, she's suffered enough to earn a few.

About framing, can't remember clearly, but were Wes and Gunn the only characters not reflecting through frames and windows in the final scene? Does that signify anything? Lilah is reflected against her window. Cordy and Conner kiss against the window backdrop. I think that Lorne was knocked down one story and is looking out the window on that level. Fred peers out the diner window. Angel seems to be in some sort of window or doorway. Wes seems to be looking up, probably through the remains of the roof, while he holds Gunn's apparently unconscious form. Does it mean anything, or did they just run out of motifs?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> A bit more on framing in Rain of Fire -- alcibiades, 19:55:57 11/18/02 Mon

About framing, can't remember clearly, but were Wes and Gunn the only characters not reflecting through frames and windows in the final scene? Does that signify anything? Lilah is reflected against her window. Cordy and Conner kiss against the window backdrop. I think that Lorne was knocked down one story and is looking out the window on that level. Fred peers out the diner window. Angel seems to be in some
sort of window or doorway. Wes seems to be looking up, probably through the remains of the roof, while he holds Gunn's apparently unconscious form. Does it mean anything, or did they just run out of motifs?

I think it means that Lorne, Fred and Lilah are all alone -- they have all alienated themselves, or in Lorne's case have become alienated we don't know how -- but in this context it is important to remember the empty narrative frame for all of Spin the Bottle and that the story seemed to evolve away from Lorne -- the story within the story started with Lorne as an integral player, but by the time it ended, he was no longer integral but outside the framework.

About Lilah and Fred both being alone -- I find that interesting because there has been some overt and covert pairing of the two in the last few episodes. In Supersymmetry, Wes declines to accept armour from Lilah when she offers him the helmet -- he won't play knight to her queen. Fred declines to ask Gunn to be her knight but Gunn usurps the position and Fred doesn't like it. Lilah and Fred are both wearing the same deep red color outfit in Supersymmetry, Lilah in the beginning and Fred when she goes to deal with Professor Seidel. In Rain of Fire, Lilah is dressing as Fred in order to get Wesley to make love to her. At the end, both Fred and Lilah are alone in the apocalypse through choices they made. Lilah chose to betray Wesley's loyalty to his friends, Fred can't deal with Gunn's actions. One wonders if Wesley hadn't been betrayed, he would have had thoughts of helping Lilah in the Apocalypse instead of leaving her to fend for herself.

The two pairs who are together are a reunited Gunn and Wesley -- although Gunn seems somewhat unconscious -- and Connor and Cordy.

As I mentioned in some other post, the shot of Connor and Cordy is as much to show that they have now become the essential family unit that Angel craved to center around him, as to show that Angel is excluded from it -- because the camera angle is his POV. He is looking down on them, outside, removed, excised. It is interesting that he wanted his family to center on him -- really much more of a child's view of a family than that of a patriarch. And now he finds that it doesn't center on him at all.

In the Wes and Gunn scenario, I find it interesting that Wes does all the work to repair the breech. He, like Connor, keeps coming back to the hotel despite insults and threats and identifying his mission with his former friends. In this final shot, he also physically drags Gunn along with him and then protects him with his body. It is noteworthy, that he like Fred, wants to protect Gunn, Fred morally and Wesley physically.

Actually, although C/C is filmed from an angle which must be a window, since it is from Angel's POV and he is standing outside, we never see the reflection, just the reality. And as you mention Gunn and Wesley are outside of any structural framework at all, face to face with the sky. Not sure what that means -- just a guess here, but I'm wondering if it means that the forces that have reunited them temporarily cannot hold, despite appearances?

Or maybe it was just a cool shot?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> More clothing crossover symbolism/Lilah-Fred-Gunn - - alcibiades, 09:40:55 11/19/02 Tue

In RofF, both Fred and Lilah are once again wearing red.

To dress like Fred, Lilah wears a black and white suit, a red bra, red glasses, and red nail polish, whereas Fred sports a red jacket over a dark gray top, with bright red lipstick, unlike anything she has worn before. The red jacket,
now her protective armor -- like Spike's black jacket, I think is very significant, as is the dark gray.

Lilah, previously wearing gray in Slouching Toward Bethlehem over a red slip may be back to seeing the world in black and white (and identifying with the black -- but only on her terms).

But at the end of the episode she switches to a black suit and light blue/gray blouse, which oddly enough pairs her with Gunn who is wearing black pants and a gray/blue shirt.

This is interesting in terms of what it might imply about future Fred/Gunn/Wesley/Lilah interactions. Maybe Gunn and Lilah will both be on the outside.

It's a new color for Lilah this season. Much more positive.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Replying to Rahael/on metaphors and symbols on Angel -- Rahael, 07:01:40 11/19/02 Tue

Oh, yes I can see how Angel can be emotionally compelling - it's just that Buffy (the character) is even more compelling than most.

Also, I've barely seen more than a handful of Angel eps this season, but I've seen quite a few Buffys, so that may be affecting my current thoughts.

I'd be interested in your other thoughts about Cordy/Connor.

What are the metaphors here?

I'm just thinking about Angel who killed his natural mother and made love to his Vampire mother.

Also there was the whole incest storyline in Greenwalt's earlier series, Profit.

There certainly seems to be a parallel with Cordy sleeping with Connor when she really wants Angel, and Wes sleeping with Lilah when you know he'd rather have Fred.

Cordy also slept with Groo while simultaneously making him look like Angel. But Groo and Angel were kind of two sides of the same coin.

[> [> [> [> [> [> On turning off the ol' brain -- Deb, 11:12:35 11/19/02 Tue

I know Angel is full of metaphors that are just as valid as Buffy's. The point I was making was that I'm emotionally envolved with Buffy because it presents life situations as metaphores that really click at this point in my life. I'm not building a family right now, and to be honest, I cannot be emotionally involved in more than one program at a time. I'm not sure if I should allow myself to be involved at all. It forces me to think about my issues, and encourages me to take action. It's my weekly pep rally when nothing in the world is allowed in for one hour. Nothing. It is my time. That is the difference between Buffy and Angel for me. I know this is not how it is for everyone, and I'm sure there are some of you who view Angel in the very same manner I view Buffy. And that's OK. I do watch Angel, much more than I used to. But at this point, I just can't put the energy into it that I do Buffy. And where is Buffy on my list of life priorities? Not in the top 25 nor the top 100. It's just number one in my tv ratings.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: On turning off the ol' brain -- JM, 16:13:47 11/19/02 Tue

Love, Buffy, always will. So excited about each DVD release. But Angel's the show that I tremble about taping. Did I put set the timer right, does the tape have a flaw (not a little worry, I actually broke two VCRs trying to rewatch "Sleep Tight")? I worried even while I watched it at the same time. This season watching the "Sopranos" while taping "Angel" has me nearly frantic. So far . . . knock on wood.

[> Welcome to the club -- Sophist, 09:04:54 11/18/02 Mon

I've tried several times, but AtS can't hold my interest. I'm not really sure I can point to one definitive reason, but here are some:

1. The acting is just not up to the standards of BtVS. I don't expect another JM, but is it too much to ask for another SMG or AH or EC or ASH?

2. Watching AtS occasionally spoils me for BtVS. This annoyed me a great deal last year when The Price caused me to realize Tara would die and completely took away the dramatic impact of that scene in SR.

3. The plotlines seem forced, and forced in ways that I don't see the need for. I felt this way about A/C and C/C is the same.

4. Goofy Angel just plain bugs me.

Don't get me wrong, there are some good points to the show. The W/L scenes are great (though I still say Wes should be dead, another point of annoyance). Some of the humor is good. But there never has been even one single episode to match the quality of the top 15-25 of BtVS (well, maybe Epiphany).

Sorry, but I just can't find enough there.

[> [> I find AtS absolutely compelling -- Rahael, 09:24:00 11/18/02 Mon

Asking to say which series has better eps is like saying "Which season is superior?"

I find AtS adult, sophisticated, dark and funny. It has some extremely fine episodes. It's exploration of the idea of evil and of souls has often had a notch of complexity and sophistication sometimes missing on BtVS.

In fact, there are times when I've preferred to dig out my AtS eps than Buffy, and I often find more to comment on in terms of metaphoric goodness in Angel than on Buffy.

I just don't often get an opportunity to, because I tend to reply rather than post new thread (that's a tip to those who get worried about people not responding! Don't take the risk! Join me in the land of cowardice and not risk taking!)

In fact, there are characters on Buffy that have bugged the hell out of me so much I fast foward through scenes and miss out entire arc heavy eps. Whereas Angel - I like all the characters! I love them!

[> [> [> It all boils down to personal taste... -- Blood Luvin Girl, 09:46:10 11/18/02 Mon

...and everyone having different life experiences. We don't control what we like or dislike, and one person liking something more that another thing doesn't make it better.

I love Ats but unlike Buffy I haven't connected as emotionally with the characters, so I can enjoy the show without the emotional rollercoaster. They both have great stories and writing, the actors are great, both have humour and angst. It just ends up being a matter of what manages to connect with you and what doesn't. So there isn't much of a point to argue over it. It just like the "I liked/hated season 6 of BtvS", there will be people who never agree on things like that.

[> [> [> [> Agree -- Masq, 09:57:19 11/18/02 Mon

For me, it is "Angel" that has more emotional resonance. I can identify more closely with the characters, I care about their lives more. I am enthralled by the emotional levels the seasonal arcs take.

No, I'm not fond of the angle the Connor-Cordelia story line has taken, but I am completely compelled by Connor as a character and where they are taking him.

And I have faith in ME that this Connor-Cordy thing is much more than it seems.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Agree -- Rufus, 17:47:43 11/18/02 Mon

I'm in a position of liking both shows for different reasons. I find that I prefer Buffy but that is because Buffy is my favorite character, I love her flawed, sometimes almost bumbling shot in the dark, hero tactics. She is a hero yet very much like any young girl.

Angel is a different story altogether, I have moments of intense dislike for the lead character and that is because I see him as this big goodlooking guy who was too self- involved to make the best of what he had. But then again I identify with his father issues and just how screwed up the family situation can make one. Buffy I give a break to because she is always the hero who only flirts with the darkside, Angel was at one point all dark. His soul restoration has made it clear that many of his problems originate before he became a vampire, now they are still playing out, he is still growing up, in a way proving it's never too late to change who you are for the better.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Oh and Masq, don't even get me started on Wesley, and the Texas Twig -- Rufus, 17:50:12 11/18/02 Mon

[> [> [> [> Agree - well said. -- shadowkat, 12:08:13 11/18/02 Mon

I'm finding myself agreeing with most of your posts Blood Luvin Girl.

"I love Ats but unlike Buffy I haven't connected as emotionally with the characters, so I can enjoy the show without the emotional rollercoaster. They both have great stories and writing, the actors are great, both have humour and angst. It just ends up being a matter of what manages to connect with you and what doesn't. So there isn't much of a point to argue over it. It just like the "I liked/hated season 6 of BtvS", there will be people who never agree on things like that."

I find that I agree even on the shows. Far more emotionally involved with BTVS - watching it has literally become a rollercoaster ride complete with restless nights. ATs on the other hand? Is a relief free of such turmoil. I love it but am not emotionally invested in it. Thank god. One tv show is enough. I also watch firefly with relief - I can be objective on it. When I find myself often anything but on Btvs.

The rest of your statement is also very true. When we get into discussions about why we love and hate certain characters we are saying far more about ourselves than the show. Our likes/dislikes have a lot to do with our upbringing, emotional/mental/physical experiences, and biology. We will never agree.

It's pretty much the old I say tomato while you say tamota debate. Is it any wonder that human beings don't always get along? LOL!

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Agree - well said. -- Tyreseus, 21:41:37 11/18/02 Mon

When we get into discussions about why we love and hate certain characters we are saying far more about ourselves than the show.

Now I'm worried because I find myself insanely drawn towards Wesley and Connor in the current story arc.

I agree that the different strokes for different folks philosophy is true. For me, I'd hate to have to choose between AtS and BtVS, because I watch them for different reasons. It would be like asking me "which of your children do you love more?" They both do things that speak to me at different levels, they both do things that bother me at different levels ... but in the end, I'm glad to have both in my life.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Don't worry...about being drawn to complex characters (ATS Rain of Fire spoilers) -- shadowkat, 08:04:05 11/19/02 Tue

"Now I'm worried because I find myself insanely drawn towards Wesley and Connor in the current story arc."

You aren't alone. So am I. I'm not sure what it is about a dark character that draws some of us so. It's Anthony Burgess' belief that our original sin draws us to that sin in others - we get off vicarously on what they do. I don't know how true that is.

For myself? I'm drawn to the idea that someone can climb out of the chasm and find the light again. I remember reading something in a Joss Whedon article - where one of his first screenplays (don't look for it - it was never produced) was about an ex-convict who had been inprisoned for killing a cop - being forced to help cops overcome terrorists on a bridge. Whedon was fascinated with the concept of the tainted/dark hero. The mercernary who seems cowardly on the surface yet unwittingly is capable of nobility. So am I.

I find myself far more intriqued when Spike suddenly saves the girl than when Riley did in Season 5. Or when Spike stops Buffy from hurting someone, than say Xander. Why?
Because I expect it from Riley and Xander - I can predict it. I don't expect it from Spike. One of my favorite scenes from Btvs is the scene at the end of FFL where Spike comes to kill Buffy, but ends up comforting her instead.

In Angel - I find myself more interested in Wes' decision to help and his great final stand against the "beast" than Angel's fight with the beast. Why? Because I knew Angel would fight the beast. But I didn't know exactly what Wes would do. I'm less certain of where Wesely is going this season than Angel. I know where Angel is headed. I could literally give you a blow by blow spec and be more or less correct - actually could do that in every season. But Wes?
No, I can't. The same thing with Connor. I don't know where Connor will go next. I don't know if Wes and Connor will do the right thing or the wrong thing or something in between so I'm in suspense every week wondering. I wasn't sure if Wes would help the gang this past week nor was I positive that Connor would ask his father for help with Cordy.
I feel the same way about Lilah and Willow - not sure what they will do.

So am I really drawn to the darkness? Not really. I'm drawn to the hope that these characters will somehow redeem themselves, that we can climb out of the muck or depression or nasty behavior. I'm also drawn to why we end up or fall into the muck to begin with - possibly to find a way to prevent myself from inadvertently doing so??

So in that sense, yes, my love of certain characters over others does tell you quite a bit about me. But since what it tells you is filtered through your own likes and dislikes, it really tells you more about yourself than me at all. So much of our judgements about others are in a sense projections of what we feel about ourselves and how we desire to view the world or rather need to view it in order to live in it. But by sharing these judgements, perceptions, and feelings - we begin to better understand each other as well as ourselves, we begin to better understand why we hate what we hate or like what we like, instead of act like Pavolov's dogs regarding it, we think about it, and through that understanding? Possibly learn how to tolerate one another's likes and dislikes, maybe change some of our own, and live together in some type of harmony?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> (Don't) Lie To Me. -- Arethusa, 09:06:13 11/19/02 Tue

I've been wondering a great deal lately about why I love AtS so much, especially after the disturbing "Apocalypse, Nowish" and CW's post. I think the reason is that I've seen some dark sides of humanity and what people do to get by in the world, and I'm not satisfied with the usual pattern of fiction, as it's usually presented. Life is often cruel and unpredictable, and I want what I watch to take that into account. Most tv shows, I can predict the dialogue seconds before they say it, and guess the plot of the episode within minutes, just like you and many others. But AtS is willing to go where other shows won't go, and many don't like it for that reason. The point of view is too dark, and the hero isn't really a hero at all. But that's why I like the show. I'm not a hero either, and I can relate to Angel much better than Buffy. BtVS is a show about a girl (now woman) who happens to be a superhero. AtS is about a man who happens to be a villain, and how he lives with that knowledge. What do you do after you realize that you're one of the bad guys? How do you control it, harness it for good, live with the consequences, relate to other people? I don't want a tv show to lie to me, tell me that everything's going to be okay, that people are basically good and will do the right thing. I want to see what happens after they make the all- too-human bad decisions we all make.

I've been watching "Charmed" lately, because when I insult a program I feel obligated to know what I'm talking about. It's like someone looked at BtVS and said, "I can do that, only I'm going to do it right." Problems won't linger for months or years. The girl won't have to kill her boyfriend. The deadbeat dad will come back and make everything okay again. The girl who can't have the supernatural boyfriend will get him anyway, and become pregnant, too. Dark impulses are conquered and everyone learns her lesson. It's the Anti-Buffy. And it's incredily uninvolving.

I didn't think Wes would take Lilah back, but there they are, polishing the table again. I can't believe Lilah the Bitca Goddess would reveal her vulnerability by trying to buy Wes' affections or dressing up like the girl her lover really loves. The ruthlessly honest Cordy tears out Angel's now-beating heart by telling him she can't and won't excuse away his actions as Angelus, than deceives herself into thinking that sleeping with Connor is the right thing to do. They're all a train wreck waiting to happen, a mess of fears and contradictions, love and hate, and I can't tear my eyes away.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well said and agree. -- shadowkat, 12:05:36 11/19/02 Tue

Especially on Charmed, which I too have tried and find lacking for the same reasons you state. It is the Anti-Buffy and as such it is uninvolving and predictable and at times incredibly patronizing.

But most of all I like this paragraph:

I think the reason is that I've seen some dark sides of humanity and what people do to get by in the world, and I'm not satisfied with the usual pattern of fiction, as it's usually presented. Life is often cruel and unpredictable, and I want what I watch to take that into account. Most tv shows, I can predict the dialogue seconds before they say it, and guess the plot of the episode within minutes, just like you and many others. But AtS is willing to go where other shows won't go, and many don't like it for that reason. The point of view is too dark, and the hero isn't really a hero at all. But that's why I like the show. I'm not a hero either, and I can relate to Angel much better than Buffy. BtVS is a show about a girl (now woman) who happens to be a superhero. AtS is about a man who happens to be a villain, and how he lives with that knowledge. What do you do after you realize that you're one of the bad guys? How do you control it, harness it for good, live with the consequences, relate to other people? I don't want a tv show to lie to me, tell me that everything's going to be okay, that people are basically good and will do the right thing. I want to see what happens after they make the all-too-human bad decisions we all make.

While I generally prefer Btvs - but only because of some of the characters, I just identify more with some of the characters. But this does explain very well why Season 6 Btvs was amongst my favorites. Because the super-hero couldn't save the day, she was barely able to save herself. This fits my world-belief, I've learned in life that often it is enough to be able to save ourselves and try to make the best of our bad mistakes.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Ditto. Very much ditto. :) -- Scroll, 07:07:03 11/20/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yeah! Fellow Connor fans! -- Masq, 10:35:18 11/19/02 Tue

What fascinates me about the character is his innocence, vulnerability and strength. Also, all his questions about his identity. His life is one huge question mark--why was I born, what is my purpose. And they aren't meaningless questions like they might be for you and me, after all, his was a miricle birth. Someone wanted him to be born, to be here.

And since he still doesn't know who did it or why, it's an open question whether his purpose is for good or ill. The great thing about the Jossverse is that Connor's own moral nature will decide the outcome just as much as prophecy and destiny, if not more. When he discovers who put him here and why, he can either fight it or work with it, depending on whether he is letting his heroic, decent side rule his actions, or his hostile, volitile side.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yeah! Fellow Connor fans! -- Tess, 16:07:33 11/19/02 Tue

""why was I born, what is my purpose... And since he still doesn't know who did it or why, it's an open question whether his purpose is for good or ill.""

This kinda reminds me of what Angel went through when he returned from the hell dimension Buffy sent him to. He didn't know how he got back or why. In fact these questions were what made him vulnerable to the first evil in the first place.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Disagreeing on a point (ATS Rain of Fire spoilers) -- alcibiades, 12:29:32 11/19/02 Tue

Hmm. I take your point in general and agree but:

In Angel - I find myself more interested in Wes' decision to help and his great final stand against the "beast" than Angel's fight with the beast. Why? Because I knew Angel would fight the beast. But I didn't know exactly what Wes would do. I'm less certain of where Wesely is going this
season than Angel. I know where Angel is headed. I could literally give you a blow by blow spec and be more or less correct - actually could do that in every season. But Wes?

On this point I disagree.

I think that Angel was confused about which fight that Wesley was fighting. I don't think that Wesley ever was despite the fact that he went darker this year. His darkness has not come anywhere close to actually confusing him on which side of the fight he is on. And that is why when Angel says wtte of "are you coming?" he is met by the trademark Wesley stoical look which means again you misunderstand me, even though I came here to help. WesHe is continually frustrated by the extent to which the members of AI keep on seeing him as someone who won't help, when all he has done for episodes is to help.

Wes even signalled that in his sex scene with Lilah. She dresses as Fred. It is not until Lilah tells him that she knows him better than Fred ever will and by implication still wants him that Wesley responds passionately, but wants Lilah still to play Fred. And Fred, though she has been paired symbolically through her clothing with Lilah recently, is still on the side of good overall. SO Wes wants someone who can see all of him and still very much want him and he also still wants Fred. By implication, he wants a Fred able to see him clearly and still want him. And he prefers that to Lilah.

But Wes currently believes Fred will turn to him to help, but loves Gunn who is not dark enough to help her do something dark to Professor Seidel.

Anyway, to get back on track. I wasn't confused about what Wes would do, but Angel was. Disappointingly, I thought.

I wouldn't be surprised if now that Angel is alienated from Condy, Wes becomes the one he can most rely on, because they both know the darkness of being in a triangle and having the woman choose the other man.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Don't be so sure. -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:01:28 11/19/02 Tue

I agree there was little to no doubt that Wesley would fight the end of thr world. However, it was in doubt whether or not he would fight with Angel and Co. So far, he's tried to retain a great deal of autonomity, and has kept his help of AI in a strictly advice giving capacity. I don't think he's actually gone into battle with them since he kidnapped Connor. So it was a legitimate possibility that Wesley would try to remain independent despite the impending apocalypse and fight the Beast in his own way.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hmm -- alcibiades, 16:13:25 11/19/02 Tue

Since Wes was the one who came over to pool resources, I doubt that meant in his own mind he wasn't going to fight with them. He also offered to fight with Fred, she said no, although that of course is a slightly different case.

To repeat myself, I think the doubt was in Gunn and Angel's mind, but not in Wes'. He didn't exile himself. They exiled him. So they were the ones still seeing him as external.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hmm -- JM, 16:28:40 11/19/02 Tue

I thought the pause was Angel and Gunn doubting, and Wes thinking, "But we don't have a plan." He was skeptical, "I see you've given this a lot a thought" and being ready to stop with the staring at paper. I thought it fed later into the less than coordinated attack. He's not against them, but even yet they're not functioning as a unit on any level.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hmm -- yabyumpan, 23:34:19 11/19/02 Tue

"He didn't exile himself. They exiled him"

Totally disagreeing on this. I think he did exile himself and it was he who abandoned them. I would imagine their doubt comes from a/ not knowing who he is anymore and wesley not letting on b/ still acting in a very dubious way, i.e. sleeping with someone who has spent the last 3 years trying to destroy them c/ the continued self-rightousness and lack of obvious contrition or remourse about what happened last year. I personally wouldn't trust him to feed my cats.

[> [> I know what you mean -- Spike Lover, 09:51:28 11/18/02 Mon

Actually, I think the acting is ok. And in seasons past the writing has been (for me) gripping to say the least, but less so year after year.

1) The death of Doyle. Thru the entire season he was wondering if Cordy could ever grow to love a half-demon, and later she becomes one.

2)Killing all the lawyers. Brilliant. Followed by the firing of the gang.

3) Lindsey's love of Darla. Questions of whether Lindsey will stay true to the firm or do the right thing. (Hard for a lawyer.)

4) The intense friendship between Wes and Gunn particularly when Wes is shot.

5) Darla the vampire.

6) 'Epiphany'- wow, what an ep!! I so did not see the sex w/ Darla coming. I so enjoyed it.

7) The Pregnancy of Darla & the Birth of Conner. Absolutely gripping.

And then it stopped. For me, ever since the birth of Darla, nothing interesting has actually happened. The plot has seemed forced. The Holtz thing was not compelling for me. The summer on the ocean floor was not compelling. The summer in Vegas was not compelling. The 'new and improved' Cordy's summer in la-la land was not compelling. The new apocalypse was not compelling. Gunn & Fred trying to run AI was not compelling. Cordy not remembering who she was-not compelling. (She has not been who she was in a season or 2.) Even Cordy's sympathy sex w/Conner was not set up
right and therefore, not terribly compelling.

I suppose there has to be an element of real risk for a character, but their response can not be out of the blue. There has to be some sort of foundation there that makes it possible. Maybe if Cordy had been more attracted to Conner. I suppose that is why I really like the W/L stuff. It is so risky on so many levels for both of them.
The chemistry is good too.

Just my thoughts.

By the way, when they have good writers, those Soaps (General Hospital was what I used to watch) can be very compelling and highly addictive.

[> [> [> Also... -- Spike Lover, 09:56:23 11/18/02 Mon

Something else troubling about last night's ep.

Angel has almost always peaked at mid-season. Killing the lawyers, Birthing Conner, all happened at mid-season.

If last night is as good as it is going to get this year, (this season has really flopped around a lot, no real direction**), then I don't know if I should bother watching the rest of the year. (I will watch it anyway. I watched every ep of the X-Files despite the fact if went from cutting edge to terribly dull.)

[> [> [> Dwarfing the Apocalypse -- Malandanza, 23:23:34 11/18/02 Mon

You named most of the areas I've like in AtS -- except I never liked Doyle and haven't missed him (Wesley was a much better addition to AI). Also, while I didn't like the Darla gives birth then Connor grows to adulthood overnight episodes, I have enjoyed some of the results -- Angel in the White Room, Connor and Justine sinking Angel into the Pacific, Justine as the slave girl. I have enjoyed Angel so far this season (for the most part) but in this episode, I thought the ending was awful.

I loved the battle scene and the beginning of the Apocalypse. What I didn't like was that the Apocalypse was dwarfed by Cordelia's mothering instincts go horribly wrong scene. I suppose it's possible that a demon bent on destroying the world would take time out of his busy day of murder and mayhem to chat with Angel about his almost girlfriend, but it's not that plausible. I would have preferred to have the last scene have been the guys looking about at the destruction they had failed to prevent, or even Lilah, Fred or Cordelia & Connor watching the rain of fire in horror -- instead we got statutory rape with incestuous overtones (leaving little to the imagination) while Angel watched from the window.

[> [> A quote from Joss Whedon which explains everything -- Slain, 18:53:00 11/20/02 Wed

Answering the question of which show was hardest to write:

"Everything is equally hard to write. Writing is hard. They are hard for different reasons. 'Buffy' is hard because it is completely grounded in human experience. Every episode has to be about what, you know, what it feels like to go through a certain period in your life, in the rite of passage that is your life. We can never do an episode that is purely fantastical and exciting, because the show is about growing up.

"'Angel' is not like that. It has become a noirish melodrama of action. We can tell stories in itself. We are not slavish to 'What does it feel like to do that?' like on 'Buffy.' Although that is a limitation on 'Buffy,' it is more grounding. On 'Angel,' it is more difficult to find a story line that is truly compelling and feels true to the universe. So they are both hard. It is all hard. It's work. I'm sorry. Do they have a complaining font?"

This sums up, for me, how I feel about the two shows - and it's nice to see I agree with Joss!

BtVS is about how things feel, how it feels to be the Slayer. Whereas AtS isn't so much; it's more about the plot, rather than about how it feels to live that life. Emotional resonance is vital to Angel, of course, but in practice I find it's less significant. BtVS can do whole episodes which are just about the characters - witness the last two. But AtS doesn't seem to do that - it's a melodrama of action. Both shows have metaphorical layers, but BtVS is also about a deeper allegory, whereas AtS strikes me as almost always literal in this way.

'Apocalypse Nowish' was the perfect example of this, for me. Its plot was markedly more interesting than its emotional side; and I think even those who prefer the show would agree. Gunn and Fred and Connor and Cordy are very much second fiddle to the fire and brimstone and action of the episode. For me, AtS always seems distant, like a Coen Brothers' film. Great to watch, and very entertaining and intelligent - but it doesn't grab your stomach and twist around with it for fun.

I do think there's more to this than just the differing styles; AtS suffers, I think, from underdeveloped characters. Angel, Wesley and Cordelia are developed; we saw how much they'd changed in 'Spin the Bottle'. But Gunn and Fred, to me, seemed to arrive ready formed. They seem to me to be empathically secondary characters, recurring characters who were kept on.

That's served well in BtVS - Spike, after all, was once a bit player. But I don't feel that Fred, and to a lesser extent Gunn, were kept on because they were compelling characters. They were constructed as new regulars from scratch: resulting in two okay characters who, aside from mellowing a little, don't really change. Unlike Spike or Anya, they don't have that spark which makes them characters that have to stay, and AtS isn't written in such a way that gives them much leeway to develop - they're just too damn busy saving the world.

I'm looking forward to the next episode of AtS more than BtVS. But that's not because I'm interested in the characters, but the story, and it's story which makes me want to watch the next episode, whereas characters seem to make me want to look back as much as forward. I really want to see what's Slouching Toward Bethlehem, while I'm happy to let From Beneath You It Devours take its time about doing so - even though they're almost certainly the same thing. But ultimately it's BtVS that I'll rewatch, because for me its allegory and layer of irony makes it more interesting. Which is a long way of saying "I like Buffy better, but each to their own".

[> Sort of get it. -- yez, 09:08:00 11/18/02 Mon

For me, something about the show started feeling weird last season. I can't quite explain it, but it just got so that I didn't really care about it and didn't look forward to it. I'd watch out of habit, wouldn't give it a second thought all week, then tune in again out of habit -- or not. I was sick to my stomach of the cutesyness of Gunnifred and thought the whole Cordelia as higher being thing was ridiculous; and I thought there was just something flat about CC's performances. And while I still am not enjoying Cordelia/CC, and also am uninterested in the Cordy/Connor/Angel triangle (I'm finding it very hard to believe and very cheesy), this season, the subtleties of what we're seeing in the relationships between Wes and Lilah and Fred and Gunn are fascinating and wonderfully complex. And as far as Wes and Lilah go, incredibly sexy, I must add. I think those actors are really carrying the show right now, at least for me.

As far as last night's ep., I thought it was good (ignoring Cordy and Connor's scenes). While the monster wasn't as scary as I'd imagined, the ep. did give me some bad dreams and I'm thinking about it today. But I can definitely see how you could've gotten soured on the show. The whole Cordy/Connor/Angel thing definitely, IMHO, is leaning strong into the Springer rather than the epic category.


[> [> I love Ats but, ... -- Thomas the Skeptic, 12:10:56 11/18/02 Mon

... Buffy is and will always be my "girl". I think both casts are equally talented and the stories, at least in seasons past, have been equally compelling. But, this year, I think "Buffy" has reached a new pinnacle of brilliance while Ats is only hitting the heights sporadically. Heresy of heresies, last week I even liked an episode written by Jane Espenson better than one written by the Man Himself (no aspersions on Espenson intended. I usually love everything she writes but ordinarily, Whedon can not be outdone. By Anyone.). Aside from the relative merits of the two shows, though, I just respond more to Buffy than anyone else. Because she killed Angel to save the world, because she sacrificed herself to save Dawn and the world, and because of dozens of other occasions where she made the hard choice and did what was right over what she wanted, she's my hero. Now, if I can just count on ME (the sadistic bastards) not to turn her int the Big Bad this year:).

[> [> [> Actually -- DickBD, 13:38:17 11/18/02 Mon

...They sort of did that last year, didn't they? In a small way of course. For those of us who looked upon her as something heroic, she really sank to depths we wouldn't have imagined. (And I'm saying that as someone who much preferred Spike to Riley.) It's just that Buffy had a nobility to her. You wouldn't suspect her of having sex in the Bronze above her friends' heads.

But here she is this year, pretty much like her old self, only older. More mature, but absolutely dependable. Still the Buffster. There is enough depth to her character that males and females can idolize her, to greater or lesser degrees. I don't know what the actress is like, but Buffy just seems like someone you would like to know. And would automatically trust. I can see why she would always have a special spot in Whedon's heart--irrespective of what he does from here out. And, so far, I like all his stuff, as I watch all three shows, to the exclusion of everything else if need be. But Buffy is special.

[> [> [> Agree -- yez, 14:40:04 11/18/02 Mon

I respond more to Buffy, too -- and the other characters on BtVS -- more than those on AtS. I think it's because the emotions and the symbolism for real-life challenges strike closer to home than they usually do on AtS. For me, anyway. And, last season and the Hellmouth aside, there's generally more hope to be had on BtVS, I think. I mean, you just know that season in, season out, ep. in, ep. out, Angel is always going to be broody and closed off and unable to have a well- rounded romantic relationship without all the evilness. It's too predictable. Even when he seems happy, you just know that it's just the rollercoaster ride up the hill so you can get dropped down the other side. I know he's supposed to get a chance to win back his humanity at some point, but it seems that storyline just never progresses.

And while Buffy's relationships also inevitably end badly, we can see how she's young and still maturing and there still seems to be hope (Whedon's meddling aside), that she's going to have moments of tra-la-la, however brief. I just generally find the BtVS characters to be more fun, all around, with equal parts intensity.


[> [> [> [> Got to be Angel all the way for me -- yabyumpan, 22:33:53 11/18/02 Mon

For me it's definatly AtS and Angel the character. It's the constant battle with the internal demon, the sense of being outside, of being other, of trying to figure out what it means to be human, how the f*** do you do it and the screwing up as much as he gets it right. (yeah, over- identify much!!!!)

Not going to get into a bash but I absolutly detest the character of Buffy, she just makes me want to slap her, the present incarnation of Wesley comes a close second.

[> [> [> So you're a fan of Buffy the character, as well?... -- imp, 15:22:30 11/18/02 Mon

Me, too! I have been in her corner from the beginning and will be there for the end. Although some of the speculation about her on this, and other, boards has me worried. Should fans of her character form a support group for her this season [just kidding, I think]?

Buffy, to me, seems to be one of the most put-upon characters ever shown on television. There have been times during the course of BtVS where I have felt that she could not win for trying, where she could not win for not trying; where she could not win for winning, where she could not win for losing. This is extremely aggravating for me as a fan of her character; even though there have certainly been times where I wished I could jump into my TV screen and yell at her or dope-smack some sense into her [sarcasm warning for this sentence].

I, for one, was pleasantly surprised to learn that she has an inferiority complex about her superiority complex. But when I think about her journey thus far, it does make sense. This explains much of her contradictory statements, decisions, and behavior to me. I hope ME does not do something absolutely horrible to her character to end the season/series. At the end, I want her to triumph but I am not sure how I want her to triumph.

I am quite willing to go where ME is taking me this season for BtVS (and AtS). However, if it’s the scenic route—as the most recent episode of AtS shows (Apocalypse Nowish/Rain Of Fire)—perhaps I should go looking for a support group now [lame attempt at humor].

Anyway, it is reassuring to know her character has more fans than just me. After S6, I thought I was the only one left. Alone. Like her.

[> [> [> [> Me, too! Without a doubt, Buffy is my favorite character on either show. -- Rob, 20:31:04 11/18/02 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> What Rob and Thomas said. -- tomfool, 21:57:16 11/18/02 Mon

[> Re: Story arcs in BtVS and AtS -- Sang, 11:21:45 11/18/02 Mon

Even though I always prefer Buffy than Angel, I should agree that is matter of taste in some degree.

I personally like the acting and charactors in Buffy. I don't feel so much for Angel charactors. But they are good compared with other shows.

Interesting thing is that in Buffy, we don't know what will happen since it is Joss' grand plan and he is wickedly smart.

In Angel, we don't know what will happen, since the writers doesn't know, too exactly.

I remember some interviews of writers in both shows, that Joss doesn't give story lines to Angel. It was improvised year by year. Like the Conner idea came after they made Angel have sex with Darla, which means that they wrote entire S3 storyline almost ending of S2.

I think we are watching two shows which take two completely different way of creating. One was carefully designed and planed to make a big epic. Other was improvised and more random.

I kind of feeling lost sometiems while I was watching Angel, they lost consistancy and continuity occasioanlly. Too many new charators were introduced and too many change of their personalities happened in short period of time. But it is the way it is.

Improvised art occasionally surpass the carefully designed art, because it gives freedom to creators and invoke vivid momentum for them to enjoy their work more.

I still think Buffy is a better show, but that is just my opinion.

[> [> Re: It's like dark chocolate and darker chocolate - - Brian, 11:28:18 11/18/02 Mon

[> [> Actually, "Angel" is *very* tightly plotted ahead of time -- Scroll, 08:33:31 11/20/02 Wed

Joss knows exactly how the season is going to go a year in advance. Tim Minear has made it clear that they "script [Angel] backwards". In other words, they plot out the big arcs first -- i.e. they need Wesley isolated from the group, so they need a love triangle, therefore Wes and Gunn both fall for Fred. Personally, this "backwards" writing has pros and cons. It allows for a tightly written epic feel (I'd argue Angel is actually more operatic than Buffy, which is more soup opera), but it also makes for straining believability (Fred isn't that hot).

While I am more emotionally connected to more of the Buffy characters (Buffy, Dawn, Willow, Anya, Xander) than I am to the Angel characters (Wes, Angel, Connor), I find Angel much better at pushing the boundaries of the dark and ugly. I like Brian's analogy of dark chocolate and darker chocolate. And I can't tear my eyes away from Wes/Lilah -- I find this pairing so much more satisfying than Spuffy. Wes and Lilah are so twisted together, but also cute and almost happy. I'd go so far as to call them fluffy if it weren't for the fact that Lilah is evil.

[> [> [> Re: well.. I don't know.. -- Sang, 10:58:18 11/20/02 Wed

But that was what the writers told at the interview..
David told that he and Joss had no stroy arc when they started Angel, they wanted it as a show which has an independent story for each ep.

And I think it was Tim who told to interviewer that they didn't have S3 story until the middle of S2. Someone just brought idea after they shoot 'Reprise' that it would be a great story if Darla get pregnant. What kind of story arc could they have if they didn't plan about Conner?

[> [> [> [> Re: well.. I don't know.. -- Rahael, 11:21:09 11/20/02 Wed

"David told that he and Joss had no stroy arc when they started Angel, they wanted it as a show which has an independent story for each ep

That i believe, was the plan at the beginning, that the eps would be stand alone, but the writers have talked about how by Season 2, they had gone for thematic arcs.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: well.. I don't know.. -- Arethusa, 12:34:34 11/20/02 Wed

Right, they were going for an anthology-type series, but they said they fell in love with their characters, and switched to BtVS-style arcs.

[> [> [> Defending Fred -- Sophist, 12:53:10 11/20/02 Wed

I suppose that I should now refrain from commenting about AtS in light of my post above, but I did want to say that Fred is too that hot. Ok, I feel better now.

Oddly enough, my wife brought up the AtS/BtVS comparison Monday night without me having said a word about this thread or my views on the subject. Her opinion was that the episodes on AtS lacked continuity and were hard to follow. Just another sign, I guess, that so much of our reaction is a matter of taste.

I agree with you about W/L, but, then, I liked Spuffy too.

[> [> [> [> Re: Defending Fred -- JM, 16:46:33 11/20/02 Wed

I'm not much a judge of hotness, but I personally think she is the most beautiful actress on either show. There have been a number of shots that just take my breath away in an aesthetic sense. Many of them were in WiTW, but there have been plenty since. She's extremely slender, but her features are almost ethereal, but at the same time very warm.

[> Mixed bag -- matching mole, 12:40:37 11/18/02 Mon

During most of S5/S2 and S6/S3 I generally found AtS more interesting/enjoyable than BtVS. This season the roles have definitely switched. Of the last five episodes of BtVS I would rate four of the them as excellent (with Help being OK) - perhaps as good a run (in my humble opinion of course) as the show has ever had. However I can't think of a single episode of AtS this season that I would rate anything close to that highly.

I will admit to a personal bias here. Like Rahael, Cordelia has long been my favourite character in the Buffyverse. She was a walking mass of contradictions, skillfully fused into a coherent and very entertaining personality. Through 'Birthday' the evolution of her character seemed subtle and uncontrived. I haven't really been able believe in a single thing she's done since then.

With regards to the soap opera - I think that soap operatic elements have been present throughout both series. The high points in the shows have been when the soap opera seems (in my humble opinion again) to flow naturally from the events of the story. When the manipulations of the writers are less obvious and therefore I don't feel as though the characters are being manipulated when I watch it (of course the characters are always being manipulated). S1 and S2 of BtVS were stellar examples of this. S3 had some elements that seemed manipulative (the Xander/Willow romance and its discovery for example) but quite a lot that seemed to flow naturally from the events of the narrative (the marvellous relationship between the Mayor and Faith).

S5 and, to a lesser extent, S6 of BtVS seemed to me to have more obviously manipulative storylines. S2 of AtS and S3 (up to the point where Holtz took Connor into Quortoth) didn't (again I'm not saying that the writers weren't manipulating the characters just that they were doing in a way that didn't appear manipulative). Since Holtz's abuduction of Connor AtS just hasn't been able to hold my interest. Some things have been great - Holtz's return and his manipulation of Angel and Connor springs to mind. But too much seems forced. Would write more but am too busy.

[> I'm a little shocked... -- CW, 05:55:52 11/19/02 Tue

that this thread got so many replies. I'm very glad it didn't turn into flame wars. I think it's very important for those of you who still enjoy Angel to make yourselves heard about what you like about the show, to encourage ME to continue making a product you like. Of course, I also believe that it's important for ME to know that some long- term viewers, like me are losing patience with the direction the show is headed. And I'm not sure that will help. I can't help but believe that ignoring both viewer complaints and the declining professional critical opinion of Buffy last season, resulted in the lower ratings we see this year for that show. Many people who gave up on Buffy last year, would be happy with the show this year. But, asking people to "trust in Joss" simply isn't a realistic business strategy. I hope ME will not target Angel for an increasingly narrow audience.

[> [> Angel is not doing poorly this season -- Dan The Man, 23:40:23 11/19/02 Tue

Increasingly Dwindling Audience? Not Really.

Joss has been quoted on several times as saying that if he expected any of his shows to struggle that Angel would be the one, however; Angel is actually doing the best of the three.
Angel is actually setting WB records for Sunday night performance against incredibly popular and quality programming alternatives like The Sopranos, Alias, and Malcom in the Middle. As far as critical opinion, I don't think Joss should care what the critics think because I don't want a show that is made to please the critics. I want a show that is a product of creative and intellectual drive. (Just as a side most popular critics are also giving favorable reviews to Angel)
Also, in regards to Buffy's declining viewership, I think that it is a productive of the dark narrative turn of Season 6, however; I don't think that the declining viewership means that Joss and Co failed. I believe that the writers went territory that most other shows would avoid and they lost viewers because a lot of people didn't want to deal with that darkness. Buffy is not a safe show where the writers make decisions based on demographics, they make choices based on where the characters are going. Season Six is a great example of that.

[> [> [> Also -- Finn Mac Cool, 04:30:38 11/20/02 Wed

Having truly sucky promos probably doesn't help the Buffy ratings too much, either.

[> Re: Parting of the ways -- fresne, 17:20:39 11/19/02 Tue

I may as well chime in on the ever popular Crunchy Peanut Butter or Smooth Discussion as I wait for fresh Buffster.

It’s funny the things that you’re drawn to and what you aren’t. What bugs you and what doesn’t

BtVS, for the first few episodes I thought it was pretty cool, nothing mind bending. Then I saw the Pack. Oh, so it’s that kind of show. Uhm, hmm, oh the actor who plays Xander is my age, well that’s okay then. Now that I don’t feel quite so Mrs. Robinson, let the love affair begin. PG just sort of cemented the deal. As BtVS is so multilayered, every year there’s just more for me to love.

I pretty much only connect with AtS intellectually. So, while I’m fully prepared to acknowledge its art, etc. I just don’t love it. Both in Seasons 1 and 2, I stopped watching for a period. AtS has this habit of building up these plot lines that I really like and then, nothing. Well, actually worse than nothing, serious disconnect. Like a bucket of cold water. It’s shivery. I get an ear infection. Last year I stuck it out, because gall durn it, I hate having to play catch up after I read all these great posts on this board. Also, I fell in love with Wesley’s plot line. Then Connor leaped on through, and hey, I can put up with dresses of glowyness as long as I have my people.

I guess basically it’s very hard for me to watch a show when I don’t particularly want to spend time with any of the characters. A show is like a party. If I can’t imagine myself chatting with someone, it’s me standing in the corner all bored and wilted wall flower. Not that they’re not nice people I hasten to add. Just don’t want to hang out with them. Or perhaps, it’s the difference between being lost on a road trip with your best friend (kind of fun) or an acquaintance (oh, the stress, the humanity of it).

I’m actually a little worried. Last week’s Firefly felt like the Pack. Too bad Firefly didn’t start midseason. Then the worry that we won’t make it to Prophecy Girl wouldn’t be so wearing.

Come to think of it, I’m glad that I don’t connect to AtS quite so much. I just might spontaneously combust.

[> [> Re: Parting of the ways -- yabyumpan, 23:47:04 11/19/02 Tue

"I guess basically it’s very hard for me to watch a show when I don’t particularly want to spend time with any of the characters. A show is like a party. If I can’t imagine myself chatting with someone, it’s me standing in the corner all bored and wilted wall flower. Not that they’re not nice people I hasten to add. Just don’t want to hang out with them."

I feel the same way but in reverse, I wouldn't want to spend anytime with the characters on BtVS, they pretty much all annoy me intensly but I feel very connected to and would love to hang out with the AI crew (except for Wes in his present incarnation).

I wonder if it's an age thing. I'm 43 and left high school/college/first job etc a long time ago. I'm also a city girl and there does seem to be a small town sensability to BtVS at times, all white picket fences etc. I recognise LA, with the homeless and gangs and crackheads beating on their girlfriends, Sunnydale just looks like Oz to me.

[> [> [> Re: Parting of the ways -- Masq, 07:41:26 11/20/02 Wed

Well, I'm 39 and I prefer AtS, but I'm not sure it's an age thing, necessarily. I used to relate quite well to BtVS during the gang's high-school years, and then after that things started to change for me.

I was an AtS fan from episode one, and prefered the AtS seasons to their corresponding BtVS seasons. In retrospect, I think it might be because I always related best to Angel as a character, and enjoyed BtVS when he was on it and naturally prefered AtS when he moved to that show. Not that I don't still love Buffy, but it's a matter of which show makes your hands start shaking when you program the vcr, fearing you'll screw it up and miss the ep. That's AtS, all the way.

[> [> [> Re: Parting of the ways -- fresne, 09:20:06 11/20/02 Wed

Well, I don’t know if it’s an age thing. That would imply that I’ll have an epiphanic moment later. Take off AtS’s horn rimed glasses and fall in love. What can I say, I like Fred Astaire. Fluid grace in well dressed motion. But as good as “Singing in the Rain” is, Gene Kelly’s just okay for me. Elvis or the Beatles. Or perhaps you prefer a little Helter Skelter.

Tastes do change of course, but by the 30s, I’m inclined to think that things are set for a goodly bit.

I don’t think it’s setting. I grew up in L.A. I rode my bicycle along the Los Angeles river. Okay, I didn’t live in Compton, but I’ve shopped in supermarkets with armed guards.

Partially, I’m just fascinated by the story of becoming. It’s the journey that I see myself upon. Just at a different point.

But really, I’m always character driven. Angel is Gene. Great dancer, but as I watch “Cover Girl”, I just want to smack him. Whereas, I should be annoyed by Fred in “Easter Parade”, but I’m not, which in context is pretty funny.

To show just how tastes vary, Wesley is the AtS character that I’d want to chat with at a party. It’s the rakish yet squishy frontal lobes. He’s the reason, after the previous season finale, that I came back to the party.

The VCR metaphor is perfect, because I did in fact screw up taping Angel this week. I have an hour of beautiful static. I shrugged, resolved to call my friend who tapes the episodes and then did some sewing, which I try not to do when in a bad mood. You end up with some very interesting garments. Picasso instead of Renoir.

Current board | More November 2002