November 2003 posts

Previous November 2003  

More November 2003

Buffy on the cover of Commonweal -- skpe, 15:29:47 11/22/03 Sat

Noticed at the library that Buffy is on the cover of commonweal there is a short article on Buffy philosophy


[> The article is available on-line as well and is pretty good -- Lunasea, 15:43:02 11/22/03 Sat

I was going to post this Thursday, but didn't want it to get lost in "Destiny." I'll post it now instead.

I found this article yesterday from a Catholic magazine that says that Buffy is a good example for Pope's New Feminism. I thought some might find it interesting. Buffy is even on the cover as "The Girl with a Vocation."

The excerpt that made me decide to post was:

We are not called to retreat to Eden, but rather to move forward in pilgrimage toward the New Jerusalem. Redemption does not erase sin; it transfigures it. Redemption does not gesture distantly at brokenness; it conscripts it into the service of salvation and new life. To encourage young people to believe that with a lot of hard work and a little bit of suffering, they too can have a relationship like the one between prelapsarian Adam and Eve is deceptive and cruel. It is also the road to despair. Transfixed by the illusory promises of a return to the purity of creation, they may be blind to the possibilities for a gritty but real redemption in their own lives.

The vocation of Buffy is dealt with in a way that is often sidestepped.

The most fundamental dichotomy the series overcomes is between being chosen and choosing. Just as a brilliant scientist or a phenomenal athlete chooses to acknowledge and to accept responsibility for developing her innate gifts, Buffy chooses to accept her calling and the responsibilities involved. In this way, the show deftly calls into question our society's entrenched opposition between unchosen responsibilities and self-determination. It demonstrates how impoverished, how unimaginative it is to think that women who want to develop their talents and who prize their autonomy are merely self-regarding. We are each called to an individual vocation, not to the identical vocation.

Moreover, Buffy's true response to the vocation of the Slayer changes essentially - but also authentically - what it means to be the Slayer. Her commitment to her vocation, her embodiment of the virtues proper to it, enable her to develop to meet the changing needs of those whom she is called to serve. Like a woman lawyer, doctor, or minister, Buffy helps redefine her profession. According to ancient prophecy, the Slayer must forgo all connectionn to family and friends, all home of intimacy and warmth. Only then will she be able to fight the forces of darkness effectively. In other words, she must be the female equivalent of the Marlboro Man: strong, independent, and solitary. But over the course of the series, Buffy figures out how to get the job done in another way. She loves both her family and her friends. Far from being a hindrance to her work, they become indispensable in her fight against evil. For example, in one episode, Buffy allows her own physical strength to be combined with the superior mind, heart, and spirit of her friends, in order to defeat an otherwise invincible foe. Carol Gilligan could not have done a better job promoting the feminist value of collaboration. Still, Buffy recognizes that each of us is alone in responding faithfully to our call.

There is more to the article. I just wanted to draw attention to those two things.

What Women Want

[> Sister Buffy -- mamcu, 15:56:17 11/22/03 Sat

The article is very interesting, but Buffy's vocation is one she struggled to lose. "Chosen" is about being freed from the vocation, sharing it--no longer being trapped by it.

And mentioning contraception isn't enough--women aren't free without that choice.

[> [> Re: Sister Buffy -- MaeveRigan, 14:09:31 11/23/03 Sun

"Chosen" is about being freed from the vocation, sharing it--no longer being trapped by it.

I'm not convinced about this. Yes, Buffy resists being "the One," especially in the early seasons; she retains varying levels of ambivalence about her "vocation" throughout the series. But when the real crisis is upon her or the fate of her friends, family, and/or the world is really in the balance, Buffy always chooses to answer the call.

"Chosen" is indeed about finding a way to share the Slayer vocation, but Buffy isn't exactly "freed" from it. She's still a slayer. Just because she's not the only one doesn't mean that she no longer has any responsibilities. She may be able to take a vacation in Europe, but if I were a fan-fic writer, a likely plot would have even a vacationing Buffy encountering a few vampires, demons, etc. "It's not a job--it's what you are," as Kendra once told her.

[> [> [> Vocation vs. Calling (spoiler 7.22--also posts above) -- mamcu, 16:11:05 11/23/03 Sun

Your points are well taken, but I was responding to the comparison of Slayer's vocation to nun's vocation, where the vocation means that your whole life is committed, you're married to it, there's no time off or periods when you hand it over. True, there are others in the monastery or convent, but that doesn't lessen the totality of the commitment. But when Buffy shared the power, I think from the look on her face it was pretty clear that she will get to have at least some life that's not totally dominated by slayage. She was called to be a slayer, but I thought the end of Chosen meant that she got time off, at least sometimes, for good behavior.

[> [> [> [> Re: Vocation vs. Calling (spoiler 7.22--also posts above) -- Lunasea, 07:42:56 11/24/03 Mon

The article really wasn't comparing Slayer to nun. From the article "A true vocation is not an impersonal demand to conform to the cookie-cutter requirements of outdated conceptions of particular roles, whether nun, mother, teacher, or engineer." That is the only time a nun is mentioned.

Vocation is a very important concept to Catholicism. It form an entire section it the Catechism. My post on the Catechism was primarily from this section. The section is called "Man's Vocation: Life in the Spirit." From the Catechism:

1699. Life in the Holy Spirit fulfills the vocation of man (chapter one). This life is made up of divine charity and human solidarity (chapter two). It is graciously offered as slavation (chapter three)

1700. The dignity of the human person is rooted in his creation in the image and likeness of God (article 1); it is fulfilled in his vocation to divine beatitude (article 2). It is essential to a human being freely to direct himself to this fulfillment (article 3). By his deliberate actions (article 4), the human person does, or does not, conform to the good promised by God and attested by moral conscience (article 5). Human beings make their own contribution to their interior growth; they make their whole sentient and spiritual lives into means of this growth (article 6). With the help of grace they grow in virtue (article 7), avoid sin, and if they sin they entrust themselves as did the prodigal son1 to the mercy of our Father in heaven (article 8). In this way they attain to the perfection of charity.

1877. The vocation of humanity is to show forth the image of God and to be transformed into the image of the Father's only Son. This vocation takes a personal form since each of us is called to enter into the divine beatitude; it also concerns the human community as a whole.

1949. Called to beatitude but wounded by sin, man stands in need of salvation from God. Divine help comes to him in Christ through the law that guides him and the grace that sustains him:

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." (Phil 2:12-13.)

This is the vocation that the article is speaking about. It is a divine calling. It is being Chosen, though everyone is chosen.

Nuns do get vacations. There are many retreats around the world, where nuns can go for vaction. One is at Cape May, NJ and I will probably see it when I go to Cape May Point this weekend. I've seen nuns at amusement parks and museums and all sorts of places. You've probably seen them and not even realized it, since most orders don't wear the habit any more.

That doesn't mean they stop being nuns any more than I stop being a mother when I am on vacation. Can you stop being a human? The vocation that the Catechism and this article speaks isn't a job. It is who we are. Man's vocation in the spirit.

It reminds me of a scene from "Field of Dreams." One of the baseball player ghosts was a doctor. When the little girl was hurt, he stepped off the field and could no longer be a baseball player. He was doctor at heart. Playing baseball didn't change that. When the occassion arose, he accepted his vocation. Angel goes to Tibet on his "grief trip." While there, he encounters demon monks. He doesn't say "Sorry guys, I'm on vacation." No. He fights them.

For me the end of "Chosen" was about understanding the vocation in your heart. It wasn't about fighting demons. It was about protecting people. Buffy could protect the girls best by empowering them to protect themselves. As the article said, "Moreover, Buffy's true response to the vocation of the Slayer changes essentially - but also authentically - what it means to be the Slayer."

I think the article made some very good points about vocation, points that are often sidestepped by secular discussions. As the article said "The most fundamental dichotomy the series overcomes is between being chosen and choosing." This doesn't just mean called by God to become a nun, but any talents He has given us, such as intelligence or athleticsm. God calls us in many ways. The article ends, "Her parting words to her sister embody the ethos of the series. "I love you. I will always love you. But this is the work that I have to do. You have to take care of them now. You have to take care of each other. The hardest thing in this to live in it. Be brave. Live...for me."The pope himself might have said these words. The task of the new feminism that he has inspired is to show how they might be truly spoken by any woman who responds faithfully to God's call, no matter what the shape of her individual vocation."

I think it is a very valid point that doesn't get addressed often.

[> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Lunasea--you said it better than I could have! -- MaeveRigan, 09:05:24 11/24/03 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> [> Awwww shucks (blushing) -- Lunasea, 12:22:03 11/24/03 Mon

[> [> [> [> Re: Vocation vs. Calling (spoiler 7.22--also posts above) -- sdev, 14:36:37 11/25/03 Tue

I agree with you here. When I read this article on the Angel After Spike Board a couple of weeks ago I was struck by the fact that the comparison to Buffy seems to end at the Gift S5. I wonder why later comparisons, including Chosen, were omitted. Could it be because they no longer fit?

Joss and cribbing from the Bible -- HonorH, 18:35:33 11/22/03 Sat

I found this interesting passage while reading from the Book of Revelations chapter 13 yesterday (Eugene Peterson translation):

"I saw another Beast rising out of the ground. It had two horns like a lamb but sounded like a dragon when it spoke. It was a puppet of the first Beast, made earth and everyone in it worship the first Beast, which had been healed of its deathblow. This second Beast worked magical signs, dazzling people by making fire come down from Heaven."

Look familiar to anyone?


[> Revelations -- kisstara, 21:36:53 11/22/03 Sat

[> Yes and no -- Majin Gojira, 08:18:34 11/23/03 Sun

It does bear a superficial resemblence to the events of Angel season 4. However, the order of the beasts is wrong. that, and IIRC, a third beast later appears:

The first beinga multi-headed Leopard monster, the seocond being a single-headd version of the above and the third being the Scarlet Dragon of the Appocolypse.

I know too much mythology

Holland in "Blind Date" -- Nino, 21:43:05 11/22/03 Sat

He says to Lindsey...

"It's not about right or wrong. It's about who has the most power."

hmm...sounds familiar.

It may be that the First Evil and Holland were right. Maybe that's what Angel season 5 is all about. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

I've been doing a lot of Angel season 1 rewatching, and this line just popped out at me. Sorry if its been noted recently!

**Also...I was thinking. If this season is about the Fang Gang trying to avoid corruption, what kind of Joss show would it be if one of our main characters didn't go evil? If you had to pick one person to succumb to the evils of Wolfram and Hart who would it be? I'm not just talking a little evil...they have/will all let some evil slide, as we've seen so far this season, that's part of the deal. I'm talking full on, sell-their-soul, get-in-with-the-senior-partners evil.

My money is on Gunn. Fred's too cute, and as the sole female lead, I think its safe to say, nothing too drastic will be happening to her this year (ie no Evil!Cordy storyline or death or anything like that). Angel and Spike...been there done that. Lorne? Well...Lorne never does anything. Wes is a maybe...Who knows what will happen if/when he finds out about the mindswipe. He seems to be getting his edge back.

But something tells me that Gunn got more then he bargained for with the big kitty.


[> Re: Holland in "Blind Date" -- luvthistle1, 05:26:07 11/23/03 Sun

Gunn would be way too easy. the idea that he is the only one of the fang gang to undergo a complete change. so, there would be no surprise there. Wes, and Angel had walk on the dark side , many times. so, that wouldn't be much of a stretch.

I would have to say "Fred". last season they only hinted at Fred maybe having a dark side. i would like to see sweet little Fred, go over the top Evil, and give Lilah a run for her money.

[> Re: Holland in "Blind Date" (Spoilers for 5.8) -- Cheryl, 08:18:26 11/23/03 Sun

Funny you should bring that up, because I was just thinking the other day of another Holland and Lindsey conversation. Where Holland suggests Lindsey find *healthy* relationships. Eve and Lindsey don't seem like a healthy relationship to me, but I guess time will tell. ;-)

[> Re: going evil (spoilers to date) -- leslie, 10:06:18 11/25/03 Tue

This resonates with something that struck me last night, finally having a chance to watch all of 5.9 (I was at a conference last week--curses!). Okay, first we've had Wesley kill his father with all his heart even though--surprise!--it turned out to not be his father after all. Then we had Spike overthrow his "grandfather" with all his heart even though--surprise!--the cup turned out to be not the Cup of Eternal Torment but the Cup of Eternal Soft Drink. (Or, perhaps more appropriately, the Cup of Eternal Moonshine?) In each case, the younger man was proving to the older one that "you don't know the real me" and "I'm different than you," with the subtexts of "I'm tougher than you think" and "you are corrupt." In any case, it seems to me that Tattooed!Lindsey, Eve, and whoever else they may be in cahoots with are testing for the weak link, and then they'll hone in on that one. I think they're looking not so much for evil as for inability to live with one's evil. But in the long run, this parental-issues motif seems to be leading up to Angel having to come to terms with, not only his relationship with Connor, but with his own father.

Role reversal : Angel/Angelus-who will shanshu? -- luvthistle1, 03:15:21 11/23/03 Sun

I love DB as "Angelus". Angelus was smarter , and more insightful, then Angel. he knew how to read people.

Did anyone notice the role reversal between Angelus last season and Angel this season?
Last season Angelus fought/kill demons, kill the beast and became a hero. Angelus did not kill one human, and the only one he actually went after was Lilah, yet he did not kill her, or even try to kill Cordy.

...last season Angel ended world people, he had basically sides with evil, when he sign with W&H and he had already kill, or cause the death of 3 humans.

....souled angel is the one seeking redemption, but he is not responsible for the crimes committed by Angelus, considering most of the time Angelus is present, Angel is not,. therefore up until this season soul Angel was clean.... yet the soul, was create as a curse put upon Angelus. so, my question is, "IF" the shanshu is about Angel/Angelus. which one would actual be the one to shanshu? we all assume it will be Angel, but like Darla had once asked Lindsey, which one did they bring back, the demon, or the human.


[> Re: Role reversal : Angel/Angelus-who will shanshu? -- Greg White., 14:44:25 11/23/03 Sun

Angel,s desire to do good carries over to his alter-ego Angelus.We see this in season 2 of BTVS and last season on ATS.Angel does good even when he,s Angelus.

[> [> When did Angelus do any good in Season 2? -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:51:10 11/23/03 Sun

[> [> [> He didn't -- luvthistle1, 13:14:47 11/24/03 Mon

....Angelus , never did anything that could be consider "good", until season 4, when he kill the beast. that is where the reveasl comes in. he wasn't that bad in season 4. he was working to find out , who was behind the beast. he refuse to team up with the beast , when asked to. Angel, he even saved Faith's life, by killing the beast, "before" he kill Faith. which is a big different from the way "Angelus was in season 2. So,maybe being around people had change Angelus.

[> [> [> [> Re: He didn't (spoilers 5.8) -- TexasGirl, 13:30:48 11/24/03 Mon

I don't see killing The Beast as being inconsistent with Angelus still being completely evil. Angelus did it because he ALWAYS has to be top dog and he hated the Beast and the Beast's Master for trying to manipulate him.

It's the same reason Angelus had to reassert his control over Drusilla in the flashbacks in episode 5.8 when he thought he might be losing her to Spike.

Now I am really bummed spoiler AtS s. 1.9 Hero -- Ann, 07:18:43 11/23/03 Sun

Last night on Angel reruns I saw Hero. Blown away by the ending as I did not know Doyle dies so early in the series. So this morning I thought I would check out threads about him in the archives and find out that Glenn Quinn also died last year. I was looking forward to checking out what he is doing and has done. Just too sad for such a loss at such a young age. It will be a year on Dec. 3rd.

I think the effect that Doyle's death may have had on Angel might have been similar to the effect Kendra's death had on Buffy. Haven't seen the episodes yet so I will have to find out.

Gunn is a robot! (just speculation) -- Seven, 08:26:55 11/23/03 Sun

Ok, this is sorta on the comical side, but while re-watchng "Destiny" the other day,I had the vaguest notion that "couciler" could be a robot. I know that sounds strange and cheesy but---hear me out:

From "Home":

(Gunn walks out of the elevator from the White Room where he has just talked to the "Big Cat")

Fred: Did you get taller?

Hmm...a robot would be bigger, right?

In "Conviction" we see a machine plugged into Gunn's head to amplify his mind. Why not just mystically amplify his mind? Hmm, maybe because mystic stuff won't work on a robot? Hence the machinery.

Numerous times this season, we see that Gunn and Fred show little reference to their relationship, but that's because of the mind-wipe, right? Not nessacerily. We saw in "Lineage" and "Cautionary Tall.." that at least Wes knows some things about the last year and a half, including his relationships, so why wouldn't Gunna and Fred? Truth is, they do, or at least human Fred does. The thing is, Fred has been trying to distance herself from everything that symbolizes her weaknesses, including her tulmutuous relationship with Gunn. That is why she hasn't mentioned the relationship, but why not Gunn? It seems he wouldn't have a problem with that considering his new confidence due to the mind alteration. the reason is because he is a robot, who, while he has the information that he and Fred had a relationship, has no feeling associated with it making it a hard subject to bring up.

Also, in "Destiny," Gunn makes reference to a nooner, to which Fred makes her first (slight)reference to their relationship by saying:

I know what a nooner is Charles"

Hmm, calling him Charles brings back memories of thier relationship. But it was as if Gunn didn't have the information or the ability to process that he and Fred likely had nooners before.

Then we have the robots from "Lineage" making an appearence. We can possibly assume that the entire "Lineage" affair was set up by Tatooed!Lindsay to get Wes out of the picture so the Shanshu Cup of Perpetual Torment thing could be set up. So, robots are having a big part to play this season and why should we put it past W&H or Lindsay or whoever the real evil is to not turn Gunn into a robot?

Finally,Eve and Gunn, "Destiny":

Eve: I'm just a messanger.

Gunn: Right. And i'm just a mild mannered attorney.

(takle takes place outside)

Gunn: And don't be fingerin' the robots.


Note: i am not a complete moron, i simply saw a pattern that i found somewhat amusing. I don't honestly think they will go this way, but it would be the kind of cheesy curveball that ME would throw just because they can. anyone think it's crazy? how about right, do you think i'm right? eh, you all think i'm insane. Well you're right! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA.....



[> No not Gunn, but....(Spoilers to Angel 5.8) -- RadiusRS, 01:36:37 11/24/03 Mon

Eve! Eve is a robot!! Your train of thought got me thinking and I rewatched the Eve-Gunn scene in Destiny. Eve is an exposition machine, she gave Spike that look after his "sex with robots is more common than people think" line and the last place we saw her was in bed, she asks all those questions, she acts kind of mechanical, she picked up the robot in Gunn's office and if Lindsey WAS behind the cyborgs from "Lineage" (big if), wouldn't it make sense he would have a robot companion for those lonely nights hiding? Add to that the fact that Lorne hasn't sensed anything from her and Angel was fooled by Roger!Bot, then I think we definitely have a strong possibility here...

[> [> Very interesting... -- Seven, 05:23:38 11/24/03 Mon

Never really thought about it that way. Well, actually I didn't give the Robot!Gunn thing a lot of thought either but what you say intrigues (sp?) me. I can't believe I missed that. Of course she's a robot. Now her "How can you be sure I'm either of those things?" line to Wesley from "Conviction" has some possibilities. Heh, robots. Is ME going this way? With Fred and her science division and so much emphasis put on that, along with the technical instead of mystical explanations for recent events, could it be that ME will make the technology idea their next big arc?

[> [> [> Re: Very interesting... -- leslie, 16:05:04 11/24/03 Mon

I think that robots somehow being involved in the mix would be an interesting addition to the whole soul-having theme that is the basis of both Angel and Angel--you've got your evil yet soul-having humans, your good and soul-having humans, your evil demons and vampires, your soulless-yet-trying-to-be-clean bimbo vampire, your formerly evil vampires with souls trying to do good, and then... robots. One question that was never raised on BtVS was the relationship between non-soul-iness and doing good in the Buffybot. Presumably, the fact that she fought vampires and other evil things was simply a side effect of her programming (and interesting that Spike would want her programmed that way--the old Spike would probably have wanted her programmed to be an evil playmate with Buffy's face--he did, apparently, have her programmed for sexual activities that the real Buffy had not--yet--performed). But if doing good can be simply programmed, then what good is a soul after all? I think a robot or two could raise some very interesting issues.

[> [> [> [> Me likes the way you think;let's hope you're right -- RadiusRS, 18:17:11 11/25/03 Tue

Have Xander pay Angel a visit. -- Greg White., 08:39:10 11/23/03 Sun

I think Xander should pay Angel a visit.It would make a interesting episode.This season,s finale is episode 110.I hope that Angel gets a 6th season.Demon Bowling is quite good.I often play it.


[> Re: Have Xander pay Angel a visit. -- luvthistle1, 13:35:08 11/24/03 Mon

..well, there is really no reason for Xander to visit "Angel". he really do not know the fang gang all that well, beside Spike, and Angel, who he "hates". therefore, he has really know real reason to be on Angel. plus, Xander hates all demons, and only see things in black and white. people good,demons bad. so his attitude wouldn't fit with the L.A scene, where all the demons are not all bad. I wonder what Xander reaction would be upon meeting Lorne? he would probably response the same way Connor did. which was done before.

[> [> Not entirely -- Finn Mac Cool, 08:00:04 11/26/03 Wed

First, he doesn't simplify things down to "people good" (see his reactions to the frat boys from "Reptile Boy", the Initiative, and Warren). Also, while Xander does pretty much assume all demons are evil, on "Buffy" all but a small handful of demons have been evil, and those few can be explained away as part-human or opportunistic. Besides, remember his reaction to Anya? After being in love with and trying to defend a demon who had just killed a dozen people, I think Xander wouldn't be totally opposed to the idea of getting along with some demons.

[> [> Xander "grey-ed out" considerably in Season Seven -- cjl, 08:42:18 11/26/03 Wed

After six years as the leader of the "demons are bad" parade, Xander was hit with the dilemma of "Selfless" (the woman he loves is the evil demon in question) and the blow obviously knocked the demon-hating wind out of him. He worked with Spike in "Him." Three or four episodes down the line, he was noticeably contained when Anya herself questioned the value of keeping Spike undead and healthy.

So the basement was filled with bodies?


And Spike could've sired countless others and buried them around town. And we're waiting for him to do what, exactly? Do something crazy?

(sighs) It's not that simple.

Shouldn't we stab him through the chest? Isn't that what we do when these things happen?

Look, Buffy knows what she's doing.

Well, Xander, you know what we're all talking about. I mean, you've always been part of the "Spike is evil" faction.

I've got a house to put back together.

Fine. You guys keep your heads buried in the sand, but I think we should prepare ourselves for the possibility that William the Bloody is back.

No conspiracies with Giles or Wood. No rampages with axes and/or stakes. (Not much of a plotline at all, for that matter.) The only time he questioned Buffy was in Empty Places, and that had to do with Buffy, not Spike or demons.

So, Xander did mellow out in Season 7. It was a subtle, but noteworthy change in his character. And if Joss or any of the other writers would have bothered to give the guy something to do in the latter part of the season (besides fix the house), we might have seen how that affected his character in general...

[> [> [> & that could be built on if he went to la -- anom, 22:47:14 11/26/03 Wed

"So, Xander did mellow out in Season 7. It was a subtle, but noteworthy change in his character. And if Joss or any of the other writers would have bothered to give the guy something to do in the latter part of the season (besides fix the house), we might have seen how that affected his character in general..."

Having Xander visit Angel could give us a chance to see that. He may have mellowed out even more since Chosen, esp. if he's had to rein in some gung-ho new Slayers from killing off demons who aren't a threat (Clem was worried about angering the Slayer even when Buffy was the only one--wonder how feels now?). In addition to tam's q's., I'd like to see what Xander would make of Lorne (& vice versa, as in if he sings--we already know he doesn't sound anywhere near as bad as Cordelia!).

[> Re: Have Xander pay Angel a visit. (spoilers) -- tam, 13:52:16 11/24/03 Mon

how would xander react to cordy? cordy and angel? cordy and connor? cordy as the mother of jasmine? cordy in a coma and no one really caring? etc. would be interesting.

how was spike able to... -- angelverse, 12:08:21 11/23/03 Sun

hit buffy in the middle part of season 6? was it ever addressed...i know it wasnt cause buffy was part demon...


[> It was a resurrection fluke -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:25:27 11/23/03 Sun

Buffy's body had decayed over the summer between Seasons 5 and 6. As such, when the Scoobies performed their resurrection spell, their magic had to partially rebuild Buffy's body. For all intensive purposes she was and is human, but the subtle difference of her manufactured flesh from the real deal was enough to confuse the sensors that Spike's chip used to detect human life. Tara explained all of this in "Dead Things".

[> [> Re: It was a resurrection fluke -- luvthistle1, 22:56:48 11/24/03 Mon

I never really bought Tara reasoning, like i never did buy that joyce's death was natural. buffy wasn't all human. The shadow man had said that a slayer was a human girl, mix with a demon. they tried to give buffy more power in "get it done" by giving her more demon power. therefore, buffy was all human. plus, Spike was able to hit buffy in "fool for love" .

[> [> [> Re: It was a resurrection fluke -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:36:39 11/25/03 Tue

While Spike could hit Buffy before Season Six, it was only because he worked through the pain; the chip did still fire. He could also throw punches at her without pain as long as he knew she'd dodge out of the way: without intent to cause pain, the chip doesn't activate. So, clearly, the chip thought Buffy was human before she came back from the grave. It's not definitive proof that she is, but certainly shouldn't be ignored.

Tell me, why do you think Tara was wrong? What is there to contradict it?

Fox just picked up Tru Calling for a full season! Wha---? -- Rob (color me shocked), 16:09:29 11/25/03 Tue


[> With so many two-legged zebras -- Cleanthes, 20:08:45 11/25/03 Tue

the three-legged ones are spared by the lions.

Tru Calling benefits from Fox's copious mistakes elsewhere.

[> Not so shocking actually... -- s'kat, 20:14:04 11/25/03 Tue

While Tru Calling isn't pulling in the numbers, it does have a few things going for it that the expensive "Skin", "Tarzan" and "Firefly" didn't:

1. It's cheap to make. No expensive stars, effects, or locations. Heck it's being filmed in Vancouver which is a lot cheaper than LA. (Skin had Ron Silver, DW Moffet, Rachel Ticotin, John Anderson, and Laura Leighton - all heavy weights, and cool effects. Firefly similarly had expensive sets, effects and guest stars.)

2. It may be doing well in the demographics - it appeals to the young 12-24 crowd. See other fanboards, people on BC&S and ASSB actually seem to really like it and they are the demographic.(Understand - Nielsen's are a complicated business, unless you have had experience in Market Research? You won't get it. My current marketing class touched on it a bit, as does the book The Business of Television - what both taught me is yes, a show can survive with a 2.7 and dropping Neilsen rating and get cancelled with a 5.6. Why? Because along with that rating, the advertisers and network are looking at other factors we don't see - such as the demographics, what products people who watch the show buy, their behavior and purchasing patterns, other shows they watch, etc. Along with the information that boxes tabulate during sweeps periods, the Neilsen company also has people who keep journals and collects all sorts of personal information on the viewers.)

3. Fox doesn't have a lot in development right now and Thursday is a tough night. To get a 2.7 opposite Friends
and Survivor isn't bad.

4. There may be contractual issues with the production team that we aren't privy to.

So, even though the show isn't great, I'm not overly surprised it's been picked up. Cheap. The right demo, one that isn't being represented by anything else in that time slot (Friends is appealing more to 30 something now and is at it's tail end, WWF - male audience, Survivor - also an older demographic). Bad TV shows get picked up all the time, there's a reason some people believe tv will rot your brain. ;-)

[> [> and people like me need something to watch! -- neaux, 04:53:56 11/26/03 Wed

[> [> [> I'd watch but I've got some drying paint I need to catch up on. ;) -- Ponygirl, 06:56:43 11/26/03 Wed

I guess this means no Faith guest-starrage...

[> [> Maybe if Fox gives it a chance, the series can improve. (spoilers for TC 1.5) -- cjl (Mr. Generosity), 07:33:27 11/26/03 Wed

I know we all would have preferred if Fox had saved this sort of vote of confidence for Firefly, but let's not mentally throw out Tru just yet. I like some of the supporting cast (especially Tru's boss), and the concept, with a few interesting twists, could still bend a few minds. (There's at least 20 good ideas for The Dushku Variations in an archived thread somewhere.)

The main problem, though, is that the Davies family--Tru, Meredith and Harrison--isn't very interesting. There's too much emphasis on the formulaic plots, and not enough on character. I think what we have here is misplaced focus; rather than show us how Tru's retro-fitted presence affects the plot, the showrunners should focus on how the events of the plot affect Tru.

I believe we're going to get that shift in focus in the next new ep, "Haunted," co-written by Doug Petrie. Yes, it's a Flatliners rip-off, but we see Tru undercover as a medical student, for one day, living the life she wanted but can no longer have. I'm hoping Petrie can do something good with this.

[> [> [> Re: And never underestimate the power of a dark-haired hottie -- Pegleg Pete, 09:34:11 11/26/03 Wed

[> [> [> [> Re: But there's already "Charmed" for crappy writing -- Ames, 11:55:15 11/26/03 Wed

and it has 3 hotties.

[> [> [> The writing has noplace to go but up -- Cleanthes, 09:40:17 11/26/03 Wed

[> [> [> [> Sighs sadly and shakes head in abject disbelief. -- phoenix, 05:51:56 11/27/03 Thu

I'm guessing this means absolutely no chance of that Faith spin-off, that JW and MN have been making enthusiastic noises about, happening any time soon. Damn. Maybe Fox will change their minds. I can live in hopes...

[> [> Re: Not so shocking actually... -- Tymen, 11:07:30 11/28/03 Fri

And for us conspiracy minded-types, it's another way for Fox Television to stick it to Joss Whedon (which they seem to like doing, for some reason). I'm half-joking, but only half. :)

Fredless (spoilers Fredless obviously) -- Celebaelin, 07:52:28 11/26/03 Wed

Just seen this ep. for the first time; S4 was being bounced about on UK TV as well. The root idea of making your own life, or at least taking your life for what it is was good, a theme not handled enough in my opinion but the imperfect lives of Joss' characters allow this kind of exploration. My worry was that the fantasy element was almost a throwaway. That said there may have been an edit because of broadcast time but I'll carry on on the assumption that there wasn't. I'm a big fan of both escapism and deeper meaning so I'd like eps to work on (at least) two levels. That said, when the insecto-demons came to the Hyperion why didn't they either a) grab the head/nest and leg it (since they knew what was inside it, or b) still try to kill everyone anyway in revenge for the kidnap and the bus incident? Answer me that, huh, huh?

The bugs are intended as parallel for Fred's parents (What did she call them? A half species?) The dual 'rescue of the offspring' part of the story works but again I think some mention of, say, demonic spawn sacrifice or cannibalistic infanticide, not necessarily by that species, might not have gone amiss.

Whilst I found the re-union scene with Fred very moving the 'quirky comic horror' part didn't really come off for me. Six out of ten, must try harder!


Who's never been able to spell haematology, except (and possibly until) now.

Where is the power coming from? (Spoilers AtS 5-8) -- Ames, 10:52:43 11/27/03 Thu

If Eve and "L" are responsible for the packages with no return address, where are they getting that kind of power? Fred already scoured the resources of W&H looking for a way to recorporealize Spike, and failed. Even if Eve is secretly using W&H resources, how could she do any better? By her own words she's not getting help from the Senior Partners. And where would "L" get that kind of knowledge or power?

And how would anyone get hold of the amulet that was buried in the Hellmouth unless they had some pre-existing secret connection to it? The amulet was handed to Angel by Lilah, acting on behalf of the Senior Partners, so how could they be unaware of a secret connection?

Something doesn't add up here.

BTW, whatever happened to re-animated Lilah after the last ep of S4? Think we'll see her again?


[> Re: Where is the power coming from? (Spoilers AtS 5-8) -- David, 11:00:29 11/27/03 Thu

I'm not sure where they're getting the power from but I'm in the UK so i've only read spoilers for the episodes. But I think that Lindsay and/or Eve maybe working for the PTB and they gave them the power to recorpoalize Spike so Good would have a Vamp with a soul.

As for Lilah, I have no idea if we'll see her again but I really hope we do, she wasmy favourite bad guy ever. After Home, I think she just went to hell.

Hope that helps.

[> [> those spoilers include a major casting spoiler for "destiny"... -- anom, 11:49:02 11/27/03 Thu

...the one everyone's been so careful not to reveal to the unspoiled. I'm not even sure Ames' method (the character's initial in quotes) is obscure enough--I probably wouldn't have figured it out if I hadn't known already, but some of our posters who have such things at their mental fingertips might. Of course, I'm being extra careful since being spoiled for some other stuff before this season started; maybe Ames' approach is entirely adequate. But David went & spelled it out, so beware, ye unspoiled!

[> [> Re: Spoiler policy -- Ames, 08:37:29 11/28/03 Fri

I think it's usually sufficient to put "Spoiler ep x-xx" in the Subject and avoid any other hints on the Subject line.

But in cases where it's a major spoiler, where even the briefest glimpse of a name in the message would spoil someone seeing it accidentally, it doesn't hurt to use an abbreviation or circumlocution, at least in the first paragraph. I've sometimes inadvertently opened a message which contains a spoiler, and as soon as I realize it I try to close it without reading - but I can't help seeing key names and such.

Unfortunately it's hard to avoid most of the major spoilers if you read forums at all. Someone always slips up. :-(

At least in North America we can stay current, minimizing the opportunities for true spoilers (except for those annoying upcoming casting hints). If you live in one of the delayed-broadcast countries, I don't think there's much you can do except avoid forums completely.

[> [> I thinks she works for Angel (Spoilers AtS 5-8) -- skeeve, 12:46:50 11/28/03 Fri

Angel is in charge of the LA branch and Lilah does have a long term contract.
For that matter, there might be rather a lot of dead guys working.

[> [> Re: Where is the power coming from? (Spoilers AtS 5-8) -- Kenny, 06:31:21 11/30/03 Sun

As for Lilah, I have no idea if we'll see her again but I really hope we do, she was my favourite bad guy ever. After Home, I think she just went to hell.

Well, I think that's just a little harsh. I mean, yeah, sometimes ME doesn't treat characters as we'd like *cough*Giles*cough*, leading some to declare character assassination. But I don't think that really applies here. Yeah, Lilah showed a tender side, but she still got to do the manipula...

Oh, wait, you meant "went to hell" literally. Of course. I, uh, I knew that. It was just, um, bad lighting in the room. Muddied up the words you know...yeah, bad lighting.

Help needed! -- Flipke, 11:06:27 11/27/03 Thu

I'm trying to find answers to questions a friend of mine gave me. I hope you can help me.

1. In the Season 7 episode Him, what music do the gals hear when they see RJ Brooks?
2. Who kills Jenny Calendar?
3. What was Anya's original name?
4. What are Tara's last words before she dies?
5. Which episode of Buffy won a scriptwriting EMMY, despite having very little speech in it?
6. Who granted Cordelia's wish that Buffy had never come to Sunnydale?
7. Name the 3 Principals of Sunnydale High.
8. Name the Mummy girl who falls for Xander before trying to kill him.
9. Name Buffy's parents.
10. In which episode would you see The Cheese Guy?
11. How does Willow kill Warren?
12. In which episode does The First Evil (aka The First) first appear?

Thanks if you are willing to help me.


[> Not a fan, eh? -- CW, 11:16:53 11/27/03 Thu

I'll start you off.
2 Angel
5 Hush
6 Anyanka
7 Flutie (eaten), Snyder (eaten), Wood
8 Ampata. Actually she stole the name from a victim/excange student.
9 Hank and Joyce
10 Restless
11 Flays him alive
12 Amends

[> [> Re: Not a fan, eh? -- Flipke, 11:29:00 11/27/03 Thu

Well, I did watch the first few seasons, but then they shifted it to another day and time in the week and I couldn't follow it anymore. And it's been to long ago since I saw any episodes of them to have even a clue to what the answers could be.

Thanks for your input though!

[> [> [> Re: Beware, some wrong answers there -- Ames, 12:36:45 11/27/03 Thu

But I won't tell you which ones. :-)

It's more fun to find out for yourself with a little research at a site like or

[> [> [> [> Now that the answrs have been repeated what did you think was wrong? Or were you teasing Flipke? -- CW, 17:32:09 11/27/03 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> Re: what did you think was wrong? -- Ames, 08:18:27 11/28/03 Fri

2. Angel -> should really be Angelus

11. Flays him -> we don't know that flaying killed him, since she incinerated him a moment later (we know for sure he was killed because The First could appear as Warren in S7)

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: what did you think was wrong? -- CW, 13:46:21 11/28/03 Fri

11. As everybody says. Its hard to tell.

3, No, it was Angel or Angelus. The question was about BtVS not AtS. Angelus has only been used consistantly for evil-Angel since AtS began. In Buffy season two when he was evil he was usually called Angel by both the good guys and the bad. Even as late as Buffy season 3 ep 17 Enemies, the Mayor wants to call him Angel rather than Angelus, as if to prove their would-be friendship. I have the feeling the highfalutin "Angelus" is something the Watchers dreamed up, anyway. Evil-Angel, himself, mostly used the name Angelus on BtVS to intimidate, as good-Angel does in Enemies. In AtS though, Angelus has become sharply different than Angel in usage.

[> Additions and possible twists - -- Darby, 11:34:15 11/27/03 Thu

If your friend is going to be a real stickler - additions and possible amendments to Cactus Watcher's list...

1. The theme to A Summer Place. But they don't hear it, we do - there's no indication that it's anything other than a narrative device.
3. Aud, Anya's original Scandinavian Human Name.
4. "Your shirt..."
5. Buffy was nominated for but did not win a screenwriting Emmy for Hush - it has only won for Make-Up (twice, I think).
10. Cheese Guy also shows up at least one other place - Season 7 ep, during a series of flash images, not sure which ep though. And maybe Buffy v Dracula, but I don't think so, or the opening of The Gift.
11. If the flaying didn't kill Warren, the incineration did.

[> [> And -- CW, 12:59:39 11/27/03 Thu

11. If Willow hadn't been bored, the bullet she magically thrust into his chest would have done it as well. I think that's called overkill!

[> [> The Cheese Man also appeared in... (BtVS S7 spoiler) -- Rob, 19:37:17 11/27/03 Thu



[> I think these are all correct (I haven't seen every episode though) -- DorianQ, 17:05:26 11/27/03 Thu

1. The theme from 'A Summer Place'
2. Angelus
3. Aud (demon name: Anyanka)
4. "Your shirt" (I can't go into details: I still can't)
5. Hush (but I was pretty sure they hadn't won. Yeah for them if they did! About frickin time... grumble, grumble...)
6. Anyanka
7. Flutie, Snyder, and Wood
8. Ampata (she stole the name from the exchange student)
9. Hank and Joyce Summers (side question: when did things get sour between Hank and Buffy? They were friendly in 'Nightmares' and Buffy still wanted him and Joyce to get back together in 'Ted', but in CWDP, Buffy blamed their divorce on him.
10. Restless (possibly in the montage in 'The Gift')
11. Willow shot him, flayed him, and incinerated him. Wow.
12. Amends (weird that it can back to haunt Buffy and not Angel in season seven when you think about it)

If any of these aren't right, please tell. I only have the first two seasons on DVD and it's been a while since I've seen the relevant episodes.

[> Thank you all -- Flipke, 04:31:43 11/29/03 Sat

Thank you all for helping me!

Happy Thanksgiving USA! -- CW, 11:23:56 11/27/03 Thu


[> Thank you, UK! -- The U.S. ATPo Contingency (sounding suspiciously like Rob), 17:27:45 11/27/03 Thu

[> [> az is in the uk?? when'd that happen? (happy u.s. thanksgiving!) -- anom, 21:48:36 11/27/03 Thu

[> [> [> Oy, lol! I'm mixed up today. -- Rob (who knows better than to type with turkey in his brain), 21:55:41 11/27/03 Thu

[> [> You're welcome. On behalf of the UK, Happy Thanksgiving. Is it now, then? -- MsGiles, 01:14:19 11/28/03 Fri

[> [> [> officially, it was thursday...but it kinda expands to fill the whole weekend! -- anom, 12:00:32 11/30/03 Sun

[> Happy Thanksgiving USA! from Canada -- Rufus, 00:12:32 11/28/03 Fri

Current board | More November 2003