AOQ Angel Review 1-2: "Lonely Hearts"

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
episodes in these review threads

ANGEL
Season One, Episode 2: "Lonely Hearts"
(or "...is much better than/The owner of this ep-i-soooode")
Writer: David Fury
Director: James A. Contner

I was thinking that the theme song sounded familiar, and I just figured
it out. I keep getting it confused with two other string-driven songs,
both from my younger days in the late '90s: pro-wrestler Sting's
entrance music, and "Scars Of Time," the theme song for the video
game _Chrono Cross_. Strange.

Okay, it's time to check out the singles scene. I have a friend who
often asks how lonely people in a city are supposed to meet others,
particularly romantic matches, and I never really know what to tell
him. After all, singles bars tend to be noisy, superficial, and
ultimately sad places to be. But above all, at least judging from this
episode, even with the drinking, music, and casual sex, the world of
lonely singles is boring. Really really boring. Not the kind of place
that one can spend even forty-four minutes in and stay entertained.

The first half of "Lonely Hearts" is about as uninterested as
I've been in a Buffyverse show in, well, ever. The second half is
better, but not by much. LH is not offensively bad or anything, except
for being so lifeless, and having nothing that stands out as
interesting or funny in retrospect. The first scene in D'oblique in
particular is so... long... We meet a bunch of characters who all blur
together, and one of the generic-looking blonde chicks, Kate, strikes
up a conversation about loneliness. Angel's not good with the
talking thing. Hey, didn't we see scenes like this last episode?
But this is new and different, because it's longer and duller.
Meanwhile, Doyle's interest in/defense of Cordelia causes him to
(very slowly) start a bar fight that's pretty much irrelevant to
everything else.

This episode keeps us in the dark about what exactly is going on for
some time. Thematically it makes sense for both the characters and We
The Audience to get lost in the maze of anonymous people as we try to
find something to latch onto. This is where the difference between
"thematically appropriate" and "watchable" comes into play. An
idea can only take one so far; it's how you present it that counts.

Angel eventually stumbles across something he can fight in Sharon's
place. How does he get into the apartment without being invited?
Kate, of course, turns out to be a cop who's been on this case for
awhile, and provides the skeleton of what could've been an
interesting story had it been fleshed out. In a cliff-notes version of
a typical storyline, she suspects Angel of being the killer, then
learns to sorta trust him. If she were more interesting, we'd been
inclined to speculate over how much of the character she was playing in
D'oblique was drawn from her real personality. Yet another
potentially clever idea buried in "Lonely Hearts" that doesn't
really amount to anything.

The quest for the solitary demon continues. A good summary of what's
wrong with the episode other than the stuff I've already bitched
about is the montages of the monster moving from host we don't care
about to other host we also don't care about. (Apparently it kills
its victims except when it doesn't; doesn't the last girl that gets
infected show up in the background of the last act, alive? I could be
mistaken about that, though.)

The bartender-demon's increasingly desperate search for someone to
use, and finding itself rejected at every turn is an okay image.

LH occasionally seems to remember that it's a Whedon show, something
wittier than a generic detective show, but it's trying way too hard.
Cases in point include the business card logo, and our hero's failed
attempt to use a grappling gun.

Moving on to a more series-wide concern, this episode, like several
BTVS S3 shows, also equates sex with True Happiness for Angel. Sure
Cordelia could be wrong, but so many characters have now suggested that
getting pelvic, specifically, is the difference between Angel and
Angelus, where a less clear-cut boundary would make for much better
stories. No me gusta.

This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after
only two episodes. Get it together, show.

So...

One-sentence summary: Pretty much a misfire.

AOQ rating: Weak

[Season One so far:
1) "City Of" - Good
2) "Lonely Hearts" - Weak]

[Mike Zeares]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after
> only two episodes. Get it together, show.

The show had a bit of trouble finding its direction. The original
conception was that, as Buffy was a metaphor for teens, Angel would be
a metaphor for twenty-somethings. Then they remembered that Angel is
actually a 240 year old vampire. So the next idea, which became the
early promo slogan, was that Angel would help people fight their own
personal demons (while also fighting actual demons). The idea was that
it would be an anthology show, with the episodes built around guest
stars. Basically, your typical detective show, with a supernatural
twist.

The exact point at which they remembered that their show was in fact
produced by Joss Whedon is left as an exercise for the viewer.

-- Mike Zeares

[Don Sample]

In article <1144728658.1...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:

> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
> episodes in these review threads
>
>
> ANGEL
> Season One, Episode 2: "Lonely Hearts"
> (or "...is much better than/The owner of this ep-i-soooode")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: James A. Contner

> This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after

> only two episodes. Get it together, show.

They were still feeling their way at this point. The originally planned
second episode was a very different thing, titled "Corrupt" which the WB
pulled the plug on two days before they were supposed to start filming
because the WB thought it was too dark, so they had to scramble write
something "less dark."

The original version had a Kate who had been undercover as a hooker for
much too long.

You can find a copy of the script for it here:

<http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/Stuff/corrupt.html>

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>

[jil...@hotmail.com]

Actually, my opinion became that Angel helped people with real demons,
and then left almost everyone on their own to be slaughtered by their
personal problems.

[Apteryx]

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144728658.1...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
> episodes in these review threads
>
>

> LH occasionally seems to remember that it's a Whedon show, something
> wittier than a generic detective show, but it's trying way too hard.
> Cases in point include the business card logo, and our hero's failed
> attempt to use a grappling gun.

I liked the running gag of the card and the genre subversion with the
grappling gun. It's not much, but sadly there are episodes that give you
less.

>
> This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after
> only two episodes. Get it together, show.
>
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Pretty much a misfire.
>
> AOQ rating: Weak

Maybe I'm being generous because the series is still young, but I give it a
passport to Decent territory on condition I don't have to watch it again in
a hurry. For me its the 92nd best AtS episode (out of 110), 18th best in
Season 1

--
Apteryx

[Kermit]

Good news: It gets better
Bad news: Not anytime soon it doesn't

I have a roommate who I watch movies on DVD with all the time and
occasionally TV shows. I tried a few times to get her to watch Buffy or
Angel, but she would always say something to the effect of "It's really
not my kind of show" (of course she had never watched a single episode,
but never mind).

Anyway, one day we were out of things to watch, and for whatever reason
(desperation I think mostly), she decided to give Buffy a try. And
quickly she was hooked, we went through 7 seasons of DVD's in less than
4 months, and neither of us exactly have oodles of free time lying around.

So, we finish Buffy and start on Angel and not only was she not enjoying
the episodes, a lot of the time I was having a hard time remembering why
I kept watching them. Oh, don't get me wrong, there are some memorable
episodes in season one, but on average... . So we skipped at least 6 eps
in season 1, and we started season 2 ready to pull the plug on watching
the show unless things got better fast.

We watched the last episode of Angel about a week and half ago, so for
her anyway, the show did eventually get it together.

Kermit

PS We spent the last week and a half watching Firefly, culminating in
the movie Serenity tonight. What we do tomorrow night, I can't imagine.
It's like a giant hole has opened up in our lives. :(

Someone needs to light a fire under Joss's butt and get him back making
TV shows ASAP.

[eli...@gmail.com]

There is a lot of truth in that, but then Angel isn't a psychiatrist...
and a great deal of the show revolves around _Angel's_ personal
problems, and I don't know if you can help others before you've sorted
out your own.

[eli...@gmail.com]

Until I read this, I had honestly no recollection of how this episode
went. I think that's the main problem of S1 - the episodes are very
much 'monster of the week' (or 'case of the week') types, and sometimes
they work and sometimes they don't. Some of my favourite - and my
all-time worst - epsiode(s) of Angel are in S1. So bascially - dismiss
those you don't like and move on.

[kenm47]

My recollection is this was supposed to be the pilot and a LOT darker.
I'm sure others will provide details.
Its saving graces, be they what they are, are the introduction of Kate,
and Cordy's "lobster" business card.

He got into Sharon's apartment because she was dead. Death kills the
invite rule, so to speak.

The "sex = true happiness" thing needs refinement. Doyle said "perfect
happiness" in "City of ..." although that's not the canon from Buffy.
We know the sex between Buffy and Angel on her 17th birthday was about
a lot more than mere orgasms.

I think, not sure, that part of the "groundbreaking" part of the show
was that the last victim we had seen before the bartender was a guy -
thus implying a male homosexual coupling. Kind of a big deal to even so
imply in those days.

Decent works for me. A new show with this heritage deserves some time
and some clunkers or near so.

Now to read what others say.

Ken (Brooklyn)

[eli...@gmail.com]

Um, that script is a teensy bit spoilery...

[chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu]

In alt.tv.angel Arbitrar Of Quality <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
> episodes in these review threads
>
>
> ANGEL
> Season One, Episode 2: "Lonely Hearts"
> (or "...is much better than/The owner of this ep-i-soooode")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: James A. Contner

This seems to be widely forgotten episode. (Is that better or worse than
being hated?) But despite its very real flaws, I've always really liked
Lonely Hearts. It's one of my favorites in season 1, and on some days I'd
rank it among my favorites of the entire series.

What I liked: First of all, I thought the metaphor of the week, while
obvious, worked really well. And while some Jossverse metaphors work much
better on the literal than the metaphorical level or vice versa (OOSOOM,
Band Candy), this is one of the ones that works equally well on both
levels. I liked the way the demon's method is only gradually revealed
(even though this contributes to the slowness of the first act), with a
couple of misdirects. And I was happy that when the truth is finally
revealed, they *show* us rather than just *telling* us. Doyle and Cordy's
research talk just fills us in on the details. The whole episode
continues the process of differentiating Angel the Series from BTVS. It
also further develops Angel's character, showing us not just that he's a
loner who longs for human contact deep down inside, but also that the
conventional human ways of making a connection just won't work for him.
(They barely work for humans.)

Some problems I had: The first act moved too slowly, and the bar brawl got
more attention than necessary. After the bartender-demon knocked her over
the head, Kate was too stunned to intervene in the demon-Angel fight, but
a minute later she's perfectly fine. And how did Kate find Angel's lair,
anyway?

> interesting or funny in retrospect. The first scene in D'oblique in
> particular is so... long... We meet a bunch of characters who all blur
> together, and one of the generic-looking blonde chicks, Kate, strikes
> up a conversation about loneliness. Angel's not good with the
> talking thing. Hey, didn't we see scenes like this last episode?
> But this is new and different, because it's longer and duller.

Admittedly this scene dragged a bit, but I liked Cordy's overly pushy
marketing technique, her ability to size up everyone in the place at a
glance, and Angel's awkward first attempts at starting conversations. I
also liked how Kate, though a cop pretending to be just another lonely
heart, clearly means everything she says. (A good TV cop is a cynical,
bitter TV cop.) I've never been entirely sure if she was hanging out at
the club because she suspected a serial killer was hunting there, or if
that was actually her off-duty social life.

> Meanwhile, Doyle's interest in/defense of Cordelia causes him to
> (very slowly) start a bar fight that's pretty much irrelevant to
> everything else.

It does serve at least one plot purpose, getting Angel on the bartender's
good side so he will answer Angel's questions about Sharon later.

> Angel eventually stumbles across something he can fight in Sharon's
> place. How does he get into the apartment without being invited?

Because Sharon was dead, of course. When Angel bursts in, you can see the
energy drain from him as he realizes that his easy entrance means that
he's already too late.

> Kate, of course, turns out to be a cop who's been on this case for
> awhile, and provides the skeleton of what could've been an
> interesting story had it been fleshed out. In a cliff-notes version of
> a typical storyline, she suspects Angel of being the killer, then
> learns to sorta trust him. If she were more interesting, we'd been
> inclined to speculate over how much of the character she was playing in
> D'oblique was drawn from her real personality.

I think the answer to that would be "very much indeed" (see above). I
clearly found Kate more interesting than you did, but then, I've always
been a sucker for tough, cynical chicks with blue eyes.

> The quest for the solitary demon continues. A good summary of what's
> wrong with the episode other than the stuff I've already bitched
> about is the montages of the monster moving from host we don't care
> about to other host we also don't care about.

We get to know two of the victims, Sharon and the "screech" (did we ever
hear his name?), at least a little. Getting to know more of the victims
would have increased the emotional impact, but would also have slowed
things down too much. And they needed the demon to go through multiple
hosts to make it harder for Angel to track it down.

> (Apparently it kills
> its victims except when it doesn't; doesn't the last girl that gets
> infected show up in the background of the last act, alive? I could be
> mistaken about that, though.)

I don't recall seeing her. From what we saw and from Doyle's research
results, it seems clear that none of the victims survive. Whoever you saw
must have been someone else.

> Moving on to a more series-wide concern, this episode, like several
> BTVS S3 shows, also equates sex with True Happiness for Angel. Sure
> Cordelia could be wrong, but so many characters have now suggested that
> getting pelvic, specifically, is the difference between Angel and
> Angelus, where a less clear-cut boundary would make for much better
> stories. No me gusta.

Agreed. But on the other hand, if Angel thought he was able to have, umm,
safe sex, then he might look at finding a girlfriend as his ticket to
reconnecting with the human world. Right now the focus is on him learning
to deal with people in general. Anyway, it's too early for him to get
over Buffy. How will this develop in the future? Stay tuned....

--Chris

______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.

[chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu]

In alt.tv.angel Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
>
>> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
>> episodes in these review threads
>>
>>
>

>> This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after
>> only two episodes. Get it together, show.
>
> They were still feeling their way at this point. The originally planned
> second episode was a very different thing, titled "Corrupt" which the WB
> pulled the plug on two days before they were supposed to start filming
> because the WB thought it was too dark, so they had to scramble write
> something "less dark."

Shades of The Train Job!

[Vanya6724]

Kermit wrote:
> Good news: It gets better
> Bad news: Not anytime soon it doesn't
>
> I have a roommate who I watch movies on DVD with all the time and
> occasionally TV shows. I tried a few times to get her to watch Buffy or
> Angel, but she would always say something to the effect of "It's really
> not my kind of show" (of course she had never watched a single episode,
> but never mind).
>
> Anyway, one day we were out of things to watch, and for whatever reason
> (desperation I think mostly), she decided to give Buffy a try. And
> quickly she was hooked, we went through 7 seasons of DVD's in less than
> 4 months, and neither of us exactly have oodles of free time lying around.
>
> So, we finish Buffy and start on Angel and not only was she not enjoying
> the episodes, a lot of the time I was having a hard time remembering why
> I kept watching them. Oh, don't get me wrong, there are some memorable
> episodes in season one, but on average... . So we skipped at least 6 eps
> in season 1, and we started season 2 ready to pull the plug on watching
> the show unless things got better fast.

I thought Season 1 of Angel was pretty dull, Season 2 is a big
improvement, Season 3 & 4 were even better. I actually like Season 5
the best - if you're primarily a Buffy fan, Season 5 is closer in tone
to Buffy than the rest of Angel

[One Bit Shy]

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144728658.1...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
> episodes in these review threads
>
>
> ANGEL
> Season One, Episode 2: "Lonely Hearts"
> (or "...is much better than/The owner of this ep-i-soooode")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: James A. Contner
>
> I was thinking that the theme song sounded familiar, and I just figured
> it out. I keep getting it confused with two other string-driven songs,
> both from my younger days in the late '90s: pro-wrestler Sting's
> entrance music, and "Scars Of Time," the theme song for the video
> game _Chrono Cross_. Strange.

Speaking of music, I really liked the song played during the late montage
where Angel is hunting for the demon and Kate has broken into his apartment.
I think it's Touched by Vast. The regular score doesn't thrill me as much
as City Of, but it's still pretty good.

> Okay, it's time to check out the singles scene. I have a friend who
> often asks how lonely people in a city are supposed to meet others,
> particularly romantic matches, and I never really know what to tell
> him. After all, singles bars tend to be noisy, superficial, and
> ultimately sad places to be. But above all, at least judging from this
> episode, even with the drinking, music, and casual sex, the world of
> lonely singles is boring. Really really boring. Not the kind of place
> that one can spend even forty-four minutes in and stay entertained.

The sad desperation of the singles meat market has become a standard
depiction of human lonelyness turned especially sour - and horribly over
used to the point of cliche. (I feel compelled to point out that a lot of
people seem to enjoy themselves just fine at such places.) Between the
repetition and the depression I can see why it might bore.

None the less, it suits the early hard cycnical view of L.A. the show seems
to be going for, and Angel's own difficulties connecting, and his own search
for hope, and the particular plot device of the episode. I went along with
this ok. More on that later.

> The first half of "Lonely Hearts" is about as uninterested as
> I've been in a Buffyverse show in, well, ever. The second half is
> better, but not by much. LH is not offensively bad or anything, except
> for being so lifeless, and having nothing that stands out as
> interesting or funny in retrospect. The first scene in D'oblique in
> particular is so... long... We meet a bunch of characters who all blur
> together, and one of the generic-looking blonde chicks, Kate, strikes
> up a conversation about loneliness. Angel's not good with the
> talking thing. Hey, didn't we see scenes like this last episode?
> But this is new and different, because it's longer and duller.
> Meanwhile, Doyle's interest in/defense of Cordelia causes him to
> (very slowly) start a bar fight that's pretty much irrelevant to
> everything else.

My impressions went rather differently...

Angel brooding in the dark - likes the solitude, but needs to connect.

Hey look - another blonde... And another one? I confess I was confused for
a bit. Were they the same gals? I wasn't sure until they put the two in
the same scene. Well, confused identity is part of this episode. Who's the
hunted? Who's the prey? Who's the distraction? Roles switch all over the
place. And I suppose it makes an odd kind of sense for Kate, the cop, to
play her role of desperately seeking a connection a little better than her
job of investigator probably really requires. "I'm a self flagellating
hypocrite slut."

That first scene of hers with Angel really is quite good. A lot of
cynicism, but that does let Angel say, "People can surprise you." And it's
generally strange in a fascinating way to watch Kate wallow in the futility
of the date scene while Angel is looking for somebody to rescue. In an odd
way they make a connection while simultaneously not connecting at all.

> This episode keeps us in the dark about what exactly is going on for
> some time. Thematically it makes sense for both the characters and We
> The Audience to get lost in the maze of anonymous people as we try to
> find something to latch onto. This is where the difference between
> "thematically appropriate" and "watchable" comes into play. An
> idea can only take one so far; it's how you present it that counts.

And again, my impression differs...

Meanwhile the first blonde turns into the predator - initially presented as
if it were her all along and we had been misdirected into thinking it was
the guy. But in a double switch we later find it really was the guy and
you've got some kind of parasite demon moving from body to body. It's a
nice plot device, but boy is it a disgusting monster.

I really like the confusion of identity throughout the episode. Right down
to the sinister guy hitting on Kate near the end who turns out not to be
part of it. (And what a great sinister look by him as Kate walks away.)
And the slightly uncomfortable last scene with Kate when she reveals to
Angel that she broke into his place. Saying, "I guess so we can start
fresh. No secrets." Which then puts Angel on the hook for the secrets we
know he has but can't tell. In the end we still can't show our true selves.

> Angel eventually stumbles across something he can fight in Sharon's
> place. How does he get into the apartment without being invited?

She's dead.

> Kate, of course, turns out to be a cop who's been on this case for
> awhile, and provides the skeleton of what could've been an
> interesting story had it been fleshed out. In a cliff-notes version of
> a typical storyline, she suspects Angel of being the killer, then
> learns to sorta trust him. If she were more interesting, we'd been
> inclined to speculate over how much of the character she was playing in
> D'oblique was drawn from her real personality. Yet another
> potentially clever idea buried in "Lonely Hearts" that doesn't
> really amount to anything.

Curious. Because I'm still speculating how much of that was true Kate, and
now I'm curious to see more of her to find out. I'm assuming she'll return.
Probably the best part of this episode for me was the manner in which Angel
and Kate somehow related to each other in spite of their repeated misfires
in conversation.

> The quest for the solitary demon continues. A good summary of what's
> wrong with the episode other than the stuff I've already bitched
> about is the montages of the monster moving from host we don't care
> about to other host we also don't care about.

Aside from the music, I really like this montage. The look on that last
girl's face is so sad. I also held my breath when Kate opened Angel's
refrigerator - would there be a bottle of blood inside?

> (Apparently it kills
> its victims except when it doesn't; doesn't the last girl that gets
> infected show up in the background of the last act, alive? I could be
> mistaken about that, though.)

I didn't see her.

> The bartender-demon's increasingly desperate search for someone to
> use, and finding itself rejected at every turn is an okay image.

It's also morbidly funny with that flap of skin hanging from his forehead.

> LH occasionally seems to remember that it's a Whedon show, something
> wittier than a generic detective show, but it's trying way too hard.
> Cases in point include the business card logo, and our hero's failed
> attempt to use a grappling gun.

Grappling gun. Batman moment #2. Though this time as a joke. I'm not sure
what to make of the gadgets. I guess I'll see if they become a staple of
the show.

I enjoyed the business cards myself. Having Cordy run around the club
handing out cards was quite amusing. "You look troubled. Are you
roubled - or is that just your lazy eye?" And then there's Kate's reaction
to the card. "What is this, a lobster?"

> Moving on to a more series-wide concern, this episode, like several
> BTVS S3 shows, also equates sex with True Happiness for Angel. Sure
> Cordelia could be wrong, but so many characters have now suggested that
> getting pelvic, specifically, is the difference between Angel and
> Angelus, where a less clear-cut boundary would make for much better
> stories. No me gusta.

I don't much care. People think it's sex because the one time it happened
was with sex. That's what they know.

What I saw in that scene was another Cordy moment - recapping Angel's story
(in an especially Cordy fashion) in about 15 seconds. Now if only they had
thought of that in the first episode. LOL

> This is really not the place you want your fledging series to be after
> only two episodes. Get it together, show.
>
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Pretty much a misfire.

From the reactions I've read from others so far, you're not much more
critical than them. So I guess this time I'll be the one departing far from
the norm. I think this episode is very good. Maybe not quite enough
special to push it to excellent, but I'm not even sure of that. I suspect
another watching would push it up another notch.

I loved the way that Angel and Kate interacted - and hope that bodes well
for the future. I enjoyed the confusion over who and what people were - the
uncertainty was part of the tension. Though the desperately seeking a
connection story is a bit worn out now, transforming that into a MOTW and
positively wallowing in it isn't quite so ordinary. That engaged me. As
did it's utility in putting Angel and Kate together. And how it portrays
Angel as comparatively innocent in some ways.

I very much liked the camera work and editing. Kate showing up with the
gun, for example, is nicely done. The quick change in focus to the gun and
then to her face is quite effective. And I love Angel's escape out the
window, crashing onto the hood of the car, and then running down the dark
street with his long coat flapping.

The episode has a nice selection of Cordy moments. "Cordelia wears bras.
Ooooh, she has girl parts!" And leave it to Cordelia to think of the
wreath of intestines on a demon's head as a fashion statement - though it
really feels like she's toying with Doyle there. I wonder if she secretly
knows he's a demon. (half)

I think it's a nice taut episode, and I like it a lot.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:1144755499.7...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

> I think, not sure, that part of the "groundbreaking" part of the show
> was that the last victim we had seen before the bartender was a guy -
> thus implying a male homosexual coupling. Kind of a big deal to even so
> imply in those days.

I'm pretty sure the last victim shown before the bartender was a girl - the
one the "screech" had been chatting up and then slept with.

OBS

[kenm47]

Has anyone mentioned that the demon is an AIDS metaphor, BTW?

Ken (Brooklyn)

[Lord Usher]

chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote in
news:123ndj0...@corp.supernews.com:

>> They were still feeling their way at this point. The originally
>> planned second episode was a very different thing, titled "Corrupt"
>> which the WB pulled the plug on two days before they were supposed to
>> start filming because the WB thought it was too dark, so they had to
>> scramble write something "less dark."
>
> Shades of The Train Job!

The difference being that "Serenity" was a masterpiece that should never
have been replaced by a so-so effort like "The Train Job," whereas the
script for "Corrupt" was just awful and *deserved* to be shelved.

--
Lord Usher
"I'm here to kill you, not to judge you."

[One Bit Shy]

"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message

news:1144767990....@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...

> Has anyone mentioned that the demon is an AIDS metaphor, BTW?

You're the first for me. I didn't think of that. I suppose it could be any
VD too. But AIDS would be more likely.

It makes sense to a point, but I'm struggling to see what's done with it.
Anything?

OBS

[kenm47]

That's what I thought they were doing in heavy handed TV fashion when
such things are difficult to talk about at 9 p.m. on a Tuesday.

The deadliness the demon that passes in connection with a sexual union
(a metephor that they conveniently abandon for the attempt by demon
possessed dying bartender to pass itself on to Kate - rape, perhaps?),
as well as the promiscuous singles scene coupling for connection, and
the suggestion of the coupling being hetero- and homosexual (again,
IIRC, the "vic" before the bartender was male, suggesting bartender
became possessed/infected after a homosexual coupling).

I do not recall if there was ever any official word on the metaphor.

Ken (Brooklyn)

[chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu]

In alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer One Bit Shy <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:

>>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later _Buffy_ and _Angel_
>> episodes in these review threads
>>
>>
>> ANGEL
>> Season One, Episode 2: "Lonely Hearts"
>> (or "...is much better than/The owner of this ep-i-soooode")
>> Writer: David Fury
>> Director: James A. Contner

>

> Speaking of music, I really liked the song played during the late montage
> where Angel is hunting for the demon and Kate has broken into his apartment.
> I think it's Touched by Vast.

That's right. They also used bits of Vast's music in the 6-minute
presentation that ME made for the network, and in the WB's promos for the
Angel premiere. I actually shelled out a few bucks for a used copy of
Vast's album, Visual Audio Sensory Theater, but nothing else on it really
appealed to me as much as those bits.

"Touched" is also on the Angel soundtrack CD. NOTE FOR AOQ: Don't even
look at the track names for this CD, there's some spoilery stuff there.

I also liked at least one of the montage songs, "Emily Says" by Chainsuck.

And OBS, I really liked your points about Angel and Kate failing to
connect on one level while connecting on another, and about Angel being to
really reveal himself. I had one of those "I wish *I* had written that"
moments.

[Xande...@gmail.com]

My daughter and I are doing the same thing. We have the kids every
other weekend and we watch one episode of Buffy and one of Angel each
time they're up. Currently we're on Buffy 6/Angel 3 and we really
enjoy watching it together. We'll probably move on to Lost once we're
finished with the Buffyverse. As for Season 1 of Angel, they truly did
take quite awhile to find their rhythm and figure out what they wanted
the show to be. There are excellent episodes in Season 1, but I think
Season 2 is really where the excellence that Angel is began. Is there
anyone else out there that think Angel turned out to be better than
Buffy ever was?

[HeKS]

<chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu> wrote in message
news:123ndf9...@corp.supernews.com...

If I recall correctly, it also serves another important plot purpose. The
fight makes some other woman attracted to him who comes up to talk to him
and he starts asking her the same things he asked Kate. Kate sees him
talking to her from across the bar and figures he's a creep trying to hit on
everyone. This starts not only her professional distrust toward him but her
personal biterness at being rejected for someone else and this informs their
relationship through the episode ... which is at least partially resolved
when she finds out he's good at the end.

At least that's my take on it.

HeKS

[(Harmony) Watcher]

<eli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144743354....@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

IIRC, it turned out that Angel helped Cordy without even knowing that she
needed help--not only saving her from killer vamp Winters who was about to
bite her, but also saving her from her consent to "sell" herself in the
hopes of landing "stardom" opportunities, or at least her credulity in
thinking that she was going to meet a philanthropist.

==Harmony Watcher==

[BTR1701]

In article <Xns97A26AB29C...@216.40.28.76>,
Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Well, I would have loved to have seen this scene. Seeing Hooker Cordelia
would have been both hilarious and yummy.

Two STREETWALKERS are standing near a corner, engaged in conversation.
One
notices something offscreen and gestures for the other to look.

ANGLE ON - A lovely pair of legs strolling down the sidewalk. In fact,
it's
much the SAME SHOT as in the teaser. Only this time the lovely ankles
occasionally BUCKLE, strapped into high HIGH platform pumps.

TRAVEL UP the gams to reveal, yes, it's Cordelia, dressed and made-up
like
some Hollywood B-movie version of a hooker: feather jacket, leather
micro-mini, a lot of rouge and a big blonde wig.

She comes upon the two streetwalkers.

CORDELIA
So, how's tricks, fellow hookers?

STREETWALKER #1
Who or what the hell are you?

CORDELIA
I'm Cookie. You've probably never seen
me before since I usually work in a
different part of town.
(points indiscriminately)
Way, way over there.

STREETWALKER #1
Bitch, if you're living the life, I'm Julia Roberts.

CORDELIA
Well, hello, Julia. Cause you're
looking at the real deal here, sister.

A car pulls up next to them, and a MIDDLE-AGED GUY in glasses sticks his
head out.

MIDDLE-AGED GUY
(to Cordelia)
Hi, there. I'm looking for a date.

CORDELIA
Ye-ah. Like I'd date a fogy who
drives a Dodge Dart. Get real.

The flustered guy drives away as Cordelia turns back to her "co-workers."

CORDELIA
So... hear any good gossip lately?

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

Lord Usher wrote:

> The difference being that "Serenity" was a masterpiece that should never
> have been replaced by a so-so effort like "The Train Job," whereas the
> script for "Corrupt" was just awful and *deserved* to be shelved.

I've never understood the disdain for "The Train Job." Both my brother
and I (watching independently on DVD) found that "Serenity" was slow in
places, which we chalked up to the need to introduce nine characters.
In either case, "Serenity" intrigued us, but TTJ hooked us. Don't know
how well TTJ would've worked without seeing the pilot first, though...

-AOQ

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

Kermit wrote:

> PS We spent the last week and a half watching Firefly, culminating in
> the movie Serenity tonight. What we do tomorrow night, I can't imagine.
> It's like a giant hole has opened up in our lives. :(

Heh, I know the feeling. The fianceê and I have speculated on what
we'll do with our lives without new _Buffy_. Well, there are other
shows in the sea, even if they're not ME...

-AOQ
~and there's rewatching, and commentary tracks...~

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

One Bit Shy wrote:
> "kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message

> > Has anyone mentioned that the demon is an AIDS metaphor, BTW?
>
> You're the first for me. I didn't think of that. I suppose it could be any
> VD too. But AIDS would be more likely.
>
> It makes sense to a point, but I'm struggling to see what's done with it.
> Anything?

Yeah, I think if the parallels are intentional at all, they don't
really go anywhere with it. And LH isn't just a simple cautionary
tale.

BTW, I'm glad a first-time viewer liked it, even if it wasn't me.

-AOQ

[One Bit Shy]

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message

news:1144804637....@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> One Bit Shy wrote:
>> "kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>> > Has anyone mentioned that the demon is an AIDS metaphor, BTW?
>>
>> You're the first for me. I didn't think of that. I suppose it could be
>> any
>> VD too. But AIDS would be more likely.
>>
>> It makes sense to a point, but I'm struggling to see what's done with it.
>> Anything?
>
> Yeah, I think if the parallels are intentional at all, they don't
> really go anywhere with it. And LH isn't just a simple cautionary
> tale.

I agree. And it you go the tragic route instead, then you need to be
invested in the victims. I don't see that either.

> BTW, I'm glad a first-time viewer liked it, even if it wasn't me.

I confess that I've watched it a few times now. (I was waiting for you to
start up the reviews again.) It grew on me.

OBS

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

I'm STILL looking for a show on TV that captures my attention like Buffy
did. I'm a LOST fan, but it doesn't even come close. I adored FF too,
and it's funny because I didn't watch the show until after I saw
Serenity. However, it was like the 13 episodes were just a great big
tease. FF is a show I would have loved to watch for years. :(

[AngelsGirl81]

.I think some tweaked stuff from the original pilot made it into this
ep. The "darker" pilot.

[benj...@hotmail.com]

I do I don't like Buffy very much, Angel, from the end of season 1 was
100 times better, smarter, darker, and funnier. The strenght of the
show was mostly in the character's building and evolution - the best I
have seen on TV. And of course the ending, almost unique in the history
of TV.

[Rae D Stabosz]

In article <123om79...@news.supernews.com>,

I am very surprised that so many people think of Lonely Hearts as just a
so-so episode. I have always loved LH, it was the episode that hooked me
on ATS. But then, I am a big fan of Kate. I wish Elisabeth Rohm could
have
stayed, I thought the relationship between the two characters was
fascinating. It did not follow an expected trajectory of sexual
tension/love interest, it went all over the map.

I thought Lonely Hearts was strong during the bar scenes. I did not find
them drawn-out or boring, I found them oddly touching. I am one of those
who is also not sure whether Kate was there on duty or there because she
too is a lonely heart, or a bit of both. I love her cynicism and her
barely concealed desire to be proven wrong in it.

A wonderful episode.

Rae

[chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu]

AOQ, if you're reading this, Rae's post contains general spoilers for the
future of AtS and some of its characters.

Rae, in case you missed the note at the beginning, all of these "AOQ"
threads are supposed to be spoiler-free. Don't post anything that reveals
what happens later in the series; or, if you really really want to post
something like that, use rot-13.

[Randy Money]

I really have nothing to offer that OBS hasn't said. I don't think, on
Arbitrar's scale I'd rank it as "good," but I certainly wouldn't rank it
as "weak," either. "Decent," with some good moments.

Randy M.