AOQ Review 6-11: "Doublemeat Palace"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
(or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
Writer: Jane Espenson
Director: Nick Marck
For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
(she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
And while we're on her opinions, she commented a few times during
this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
see that.
Does it seem like I'm trying to pad out the space to make it look
like I have anything at all to say about "Doublemeat Palace?"
Well, pretty much. I have stunningly few thoughts about this episode.
It more or less speaks for itself. There's a bunch of mocking on the
world's hamburger giants which is neither masterful nor painful.
There's a plot in which even if one doesn't know who the killer is,
one knows the rhythms of things - given how the show works, there's
no doubt that Buffy will develop a suspicion that "it's PEOPLE!"
(I still haven't seen the movie that spawned all those jokes. One
day...), act on it towards the end, she'll be wrong, and her boss
will be a red herring who ends up dead. Very few scenes stand out in
any way, and other than Buffy getting a low-income job, all the major
stories continue to tick along on standby. It's not the finest
moment of the series.
But, just like I'm sometimes too harsh, I'm sometimes too gentle.
I can't muster up any real dislike for DmP, even though I feel like I
"should" kinda hate it. I didn't get bored - it was a bit
slow, sure, but the show's done worse - and nothing's actively
offensive. I wouldn't want to do this every week, but a side-trip to
dwell on something mundane yields the same tolerance that I also gave
"Living Conditions" (that was a slightly better episode than this
one, though).
The remainder of this review will consist of ten random thoughts:
1} The opening scene actually is quite good, supplying about 90% of the
episode's quotables ("hey, respect the narrative flow much?"
"Please continue the story of failure"), and providing its biggest
Money Moment, the reveal of Tool-Buffy.
2} "So ... what's the secret ingredient?" "It's a meat
process." "Well, what does that mean?" "It's a process, they
do it to the meat." "But, what *is* it?" "It's just the name
of the process." Heh.
3} As a vegetarian, I got a kick out of the revelation of what the
secret ingredient was. They do such impressive things with soy and
seitan and such nowadays.
4} It's my job to not be possessed by the spirit of "shipper-ism"
that causes certain people to lose all perspective when it comes to B/S
scenes, but I like the dynamic this week. Last episode does seem to
have had an effect, happily. This also marks the return of discussions
about Buffy having come back "not roit" (_Rock Star_ joke) and I
also like Spike being the tempter, the one to say that she's better
than this - which she more or less is. I'm not watching the
non-episode stuff until the series is done, but I've heard secondhand
that Doug's commentary for "Bad Girls" dwells on the sexiness of
the image of Faith calling Buffy outside - "come play with me!"
I think this has some of the same vibe to it.
5} Avoiding one fast-food trap, our hero seems to have found a way to
ensure that she won't get bored during her mini-breaks.
6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my scorn.
Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah ha, the other
demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was just invited to the
wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is the way that every single line
of dialogue will lead around to giving one of them misgivings about the
wedding. And they already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't
require a manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
finish.
7} Not sure about Amy's role in all this. She seems a little more
malevolent than I'm used to, but we don't really know her that
well. The general idea of this outside influence appealing to Wil's
self-identity is a good one, but there are some execution and mechanics
problems, not the least of which is that I have no idea whether melting
all the stuff is voluntary. The idea of magical fire dancing on
Willow's hands that she can't will away, or even the concept of
"giving" someone tangible magic so that they can cast spells but
not cast spells... I don't get it. No wonder she doesn't answer
the question of whether she enjoyed it - she may have been as
confused over whether she actually did anything as I am. By the way,
did anyone else think of Tara during the "what you did to me was
wrong" speech? Maybe Willow will.
8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of non-magical
badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru confessional.
Here I was expecting the more obvious route of a particularly nasty
threat forcing her to break out every weapon she had... that could
still very well happen, of course.
9} Xander eating the suspected hu-fu burger would seem like a standard
butt-monkey premise, but the scene is played a little differently than
usual, and it's a vast improvement. Check out his delivery on
"then you come in and hand me a burger, blah blah blah, five minutes
later 'oh and by the way, it happens to be hot delicious human
flesh!'" Subdued exasperation, if that's not a contradiction in
terms, directed at the whole ridiculous world that conspires to make
these kinds of things happen to him.
10} Having Buffy end up with the job, under the same circumstances and
a similar kind of boss, is a bit unexpected. And she refuses to use
blackmail; insert sarcastic quip about the evil writers sabotaging her
moral fiber.
That's all I've got, but hey, it's taken up enough space to look
like a real review.
So...
One-sentence summary: Fast food, of course.
AOQ rating: Decent
[Season Six so far:
1) "Bargaining" - Decent
2) "After Life" - Good
3) "Flooded" - Decent
4) "Life Serial" - Good
5) "All The Way" - Good
6) "Once More, With Feeling" - Excellent
7) "Tabula Rasa" - Good
8) "Smashed" - Decent
9) "Wrecked" - Good
10) "Gone" - Decent
11) "Doublemeat Palace" - Decent]
Dwayne Johnson
MBangel10 (Melissa)
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
> (or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
> Writer: Jane Espenson
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
I'm pretty sure most women are very sensitive to violence against women
but yes, Spike and Buffy do have a sizzling chemistry that just works
incredibly well. Now enough about that....
>
> And while we're on her opinions, she commented a few times during
> this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
> in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
> institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
> see that.
I don't have a whole lot to say about this episode other than making
mention of it giving a whole new meaning to the term "dickhead".
Seriously, could the little evil old lady's head be any more of a
phallic symbol?
>
> That's all I've got, but hey, it's taken up enough space to look
> like a real review.
I'm impressed that you gave it a decent. I sort of feel you're almost
being overly generous here. It's the one episode this season that I feel
deserves a weak. But then again, I never worked in fast food so that
whole joke does not seem like such a good one to me. Maybe the ones who
have can find more humor in it.
burt...@hotmail.com
>
> Does it seem like I'm trying to pad out the space to make it look
> like I have anything at all to say about "Doublemeat Palace?"
> Well, pretty much. I have stunningly few thoughts about this episode.
I don't have too much to say about this one either. I can't really work
up a lot of dislike for it. I think "Wrecked" was much, much worse
because of the damage it did to one of the major, long-term storylines
of the show. This episode can pretty much be safely ignored.
One thing, though - the very premise of this episode is flawed. Why
would Buffy go to work in a fast-food joint when she could make quite a
bit more money as a waitress - a job she actually has experience at?
IMO, this is just one more example of the writers doing everything they
can to make Buffy's life as crappy as possible this season, no matter
how little sense it makes or how much it goes against previous
characterization. It comes off as totally forced.
EGK
wrote:
>this is the one buffy EP that i have never seen...
Lucky bastard. :)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
(Calvin and Hobbes)
William George Ferguson
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>threads.
>
>
>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
>(or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
>Writer: Jane Espenson
>Director: Nick Marck
I have even less than you to say about this one. Just one thing, Joss
Whedon said that he only got a network 'standards and practices' type memo
from UPN, during seasons 6 & 7, for one episode. Was it 'spread beneath
my Willow-tree', various Spike and Buffy interactions, Willow's bambicide?
Nope it was for the portrayal of fast food businesses in this ep. Turns
out that UPN really courts them as advertisers.
--
I have a theory, it could be bunnies
Apteryx
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
> in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
> institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
> see that.
It is like the MOTW episodes in the early seasons. Maybe that's why I
like it better than many people do. However, they clearly are out of
practice at writing episodes like that. While it's within the range of
early season MOTW episodes, its a lot closer to Bad Eggs than to The
Puppet Show.
> Does it seem like I'm trying to pad out the space to make it look
> like I have anything at all to say about "Doublemeat Palace?"
> Well, pretty much. I have stunningly few thoughts about this episode.
> It more or less speaks for itself. There's a bunch of mocking on the
> world's hamburger giants which is neither masterful nor painful.
> There's a plot in which even if one doesn't know who the killer is,
> one knows the rhythms of things - given how the show works, there's
> no doubt that Buffy will develop a suspicion that "it's PEOPLE!"
> (I still haven't seen the movie that spawned all those jokes. One
> day...), act on it towards the end, she'll be wrong, and her boss
> will be a red herring who ends up dead. Very few scenes stand out in
> any way, and other than Buffy getting a low-income job, all the major
> stories continue to tick along on standby. It's not the finest
> moment of the series.
It's significant that she got the job now though. Her parlous finances
were established early on, but she hadn't really done anything about it
till now. Last week in Gone she decided she might as well live. Now she
starts to do something about it. But I agree with burt1112 that she
ought to have been able to get a better job. The job she gets is part
of the degredation being piled on her this season.
>
> The remainder of this review will consist of ten random thoughts:
>
> 1} The opening scene actually is quite good, supplying about 90% of the
> episode's quotables ("hey, respect the narrative flow much?"
> "Please continue the story of failure"), and providing its biggest
> Money Moment, the reveal of Tool-Buffy.
Some great lines there. I especially liked Tool-Buffy. The rest of the
episode didn't have the lines, but it had some great situations - I
liked the training video Buffy was watching - right down to the
"harvesting of these two special meats".
> 5} Avoiding one fast-food trap, our hero seems to have found a way to
> ensure that she won't get bored during her mini-breaks.
She might not be bored, but she doesn't seem altogether happy.
>
> 7} Not sure about Amy's role in all this. She seems a little more
> malevolent than I'm used to, but we don't really know her that
> well. The general idea of this outside influence appealing to Wil's
> self-identity is a good one, but there are some execution and mechanics
> problems, not the least of which is that I have no idea whether melting
> all the stuff is voluntary. The idea of magical fire dancing on
> Willow's hands that she can't will away, or even the concept of
> "giving" someone tangible magic so that they can cast spells but
> not cast spells... I don't get it.
Me neither really, but part of it seems to be that the writers have
been reading that D&D manual Xander was reading a while back. Magic in
the Buffyverse now seems to require "mana", or "magic hit points", or
"power" as I think they call it. Amy seems to think that if the "power"
is hers, rather than naturally genrerated by Willow, then its OK. But
then there's the thing where the "power" seems to overflow and does
random magic without Willow choosing to do it. Whatever.
> 8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of non-magical
> badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru confessional.
> Here I was expecting the more obvious route of a particularly nasty
> threat forcing her to break out every weapon she had... that could
> still very well happen, of course.
And just the right girl for the job. Buffy has previously defeated more
random monsters than she's had hot dinners, but now is powerless before
the penis monster. Willow, fortunately, is immune to the powers of the
penis monster :)
>
> 10} Having Buffy end up with the job, under the same circumstances and
> a similar kind of boss, is a bit unexpected. And she refuses to use
> blackmail; insert sarcastic quip about the evil writers sabotaging her
> moral fiber.
I don't know that she refuses. Basically she blackmails them into
giving them her job back - there had been no suggestion that they would
until she reveals what she knows. Some blackmailers ask for riches,
others for the release of prisoners - Buffy's demand is a job at a
burger joint. Just not very bright.
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Fast food, of course.
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
Decent for me too. There is a lot of good stuff here, but the monster
is weak. The story would probably have been better if the secret
ingredient had been people, in a BtVS standard demon-run operation.It's
my 105th favourite BtVS episode, 13th best in season 6.
Apteryx
Carin
And I get Mrs. Q saying it could have been an episode in an earlier season
as it has that monster-of-the-week(MOTW) X-Files thing that we saw so much
more of in the earlier seasons (the Hyena Kids, Mantis teacher, the swim
team from the black lagoon.)
I also liked that Buffy ended up keeping the job in the end. It made the
whole thing more credible that the job was not just a device to deliver the
MOTW but part of the overall season-arc. And hey, we've all (or most of us
anyway) have had crappy jobs in our youth.
I am a Spike fan, so that scene against the wall - well, it was brief, but
it was hot. People often talk about the balcony scene in Dead Things (which
you probably haven't seen yet but I don't think I am really spoiling
anything)- for me, this one was just a bit sexier than that. Dunno why.
It's not high art, but something about it makes it impossible to hate.
Maybe it's just that Buffy looks so dang cute in that ridiculous outfit.
I rate it PG for Pretty Good.
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155613144.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
ruken
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
I used to like them together, until they actually got together. Then
the writers went and ruined it for me. I was first and foremost a fan
of Buffy the character and the expression on her face during the
dumpster sex scene was just heart-breaking. It was so sad to see what
once was a vibrant, strong, powerful girl become such a sad, detached,
powerless woman. The writers did have it in for her during this season.
Paul Hyett
:
>
>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
BTW, your episode numbering has gotten screwed up somewhere - this is
6-12, not 6-11.
>
>But, just like I'm sometimes too harsh, I'm sometimes too gentle.
>I can't muster up any real dislike for DmP, even though I feel like I
>"should" kinda hate it.
Most of the rest of us had no trouble expressing such feelings at the
time, IIRC. :)
>
>AOQ rating: Decent
Paul's rating : it sucked!
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
jil...@hotmail.com
supposed to be something she can stand more than working for Anya at
The Magic Box?" Then again, thinking about how Anya can be....
jil...@hotmail.com
The fact is, as the characters were set up there was no way to get
Buffy and Spike together without destroying her first, so to speak. So
the Spuffy fans get their wish, except it's in the "real" terms of
Whedon's story. "You want Spike and Buffy together? Fine! But this
is the only way it could happen that doesn't involve a magic spell.
Why? Because he's an evil soulless vampire held in check by a chip,
and she's the heroine held in check by actually knowing what he is.
The only way to get them together is to change one or both of them.
We'll do Buffy first."
Elisi
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Doublemeat Palace"
> (or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
> Writer: Jane Espenson
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
She would appear to be a woman of taste! ;) But - speaking of the B/S
relationship, I've been meaning to post this excerpt from one of my
favourite essays, speaking of the dynamics of 'Spuffy':
"You cannot generalise the Buffy/Spike relationship. It is a story
about a reformed vampire legend with a chip in his head and a newly
resurrected Slayer. It is a story about _a_ relationship, not a
statement about relationships in general. You can't pull abstract ideas
out of it, and apply them to any other situation, and judge it on that
basis. Even the tidiest analogy in the world will never prove a point,
only illustrate it."
Which is also why the violence doesn't bother me either - the opposite
in fact. They're both violenent creatures with super powers, and have
different standards than ordinary people. Also Buffy is stronger than
Spike - and this bears remembering. For an example look no further than
Olaf's hammer. (Of course strength isn't everything, but still. In many
ways Spike is 'the girl' of the pair - she wants sex, he wants love
etc.)
> And while we're on her opinions, she commented a few times during
> this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
> in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
> institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
> see that.
Yes, that has also struck me. Now I'm one of those people who actually
*likes* DMP. It's fun entertainment, and nicely 'old fashioned'. But
opinion generally puts it waaaay down the bottom alongside 'Bad Eggs'.
Although I think everyone who has ever worked in fast food loves it. (I
haven't, so I guess I'm the odd one out!)
> 4} It's my job to not be possessed by the spirit of "shipper-ism"
> that causes certain people to lose all perspective when it comes to B/S
> scenes, but I like the dynamic this week. Last episode does seem to
> have had an effect, happily. This also marks the return of discussions
> about Buffy having come back "not roit" (_Rock Star_ joke) and I
> also like Spike being the tempter, the one to say that she's better
> than this - which she more or less is. I'm not watching the
> non-episode stuff until the series is done, but I've heard secondhand
> that Doug's commentary for "Bad Girls" dwells on the sexiness of
> the image of Faith calling Buffy outside - "come play with me!"
> I think this has some of the same vibe to it.
Poor Buffy. The only one to say the right thing ("You're better than
this!"), is the one person she can't take that advice from.
> 6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my scorn.
> Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah ha, the other
> demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was just invited to the
> wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is the way that every single line
> of dialogue will lead around to giving one of them misgivings about the
> wedding. And they already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't
> require a manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
> finish.
You didn't like Halfrek? Awwww. Not that I don't get your point, but
Xander appears to try to forget about Anya having been a demon very,
very much. Seeing what she used to look like was obviously a shock...
(Nothing to say about the Willow stuff... sorry.)
> Subdued exasperation, if that's not a contradiction in
> terms, directed at the whole ridiculous world that conspires to make
> these kinds of things happen to him.
That's very well put! :)
> 10} Having Buffy end up with the job, under the same circumstances and
> a similar kind of boss, is a bit unexpected. And she refuses to use
> blackmail; insert sarcastic quip about the evil writers sabotaging her
> moral fiber.
Well she needed money - and she's already done the training. I'm sure
she (and we) wouldn't want to repeat 'Life Serial' every week, fun
though it was!
Speaking of money, I don't know if anyone has mentioned The Council
yet, and how they ought to provide for her. Of course they *should*,
but I'm not sure Buffy would want to receive money from them - in
return they would probably want to re-gain some control over her, and
that is not something she would ever accept.
> AOQ rating: Decent
Seems fair.
Elisi
> The only way to get them together is to change one or both of them.
> We'll do Buffy first."
I'm sure you meant to write Spike - the chip and falling in love with
Buffy changed him from wanting to kill her, to willing to die for her.
That's HUGE!
Elisi
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> One thing, though - the very premise of this episode is flawed. Why
> would Buffy go to work in a fast-food joint when she could make quite a
> bit more money as a waitress - a job she actually has experience at?
> IMO, this is just one more example of the writers doing everything they
> can to make Buffy's life as crappy as possible this season, no matter
> how little sense it makes or how much it goes against previous
> characterization. It comes off as totally forced.
I get your point, but I'm not sure it would have worked - could she
have earned enough as a waitress? And she would have no way to prove
that she had experience. She worked for a few months in LA under a
different name, aged only 17, having run away from home. Really not
much of a CV.
jil...@hotmail.com
*snicker* I knew someone'd say that. However, the chip and Buffy
haven't changed him from wanting to slaughter human victims if he
doesn't have it anymore. Some serial killers are married with
children, and even seem like decent fathers.
Except for the part where they might, say, start killing and mutilating
(or vice-versa) young women to get their jollies.
Arbitrar Of Quality
Yeah, I think getting the job would've been the issue (or maybe
waitressing is associated with bad memories), but clearly young people
do indeed find ways to break into the hosting/waiting/busing industry.
And once she had a job, the base salary isn't much, but the tips would
quickly add up to way more than she'd get working minimum-wage at the
Doubleveggie.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel did to her. In
S6 so far. the monsters seem less of a threat to her than ever; it's
the other stuff that's the problem. For what it's worth, this plays a
lot better for me than the helpless-Buffy moments related to Glory did.
-AOQ
ravimotha
Carin wrote:
> Good review. I ended up liking this episode more than I expected I would.
> And I get Mrs. Q saying it could have been an episode in an earlier season
> as it has that monster-of-the-week(MOTW) X-Files thing that we saw so much
> more of in the earlier seasons (the Hyena Kids, Mantis teacher, the swim
> team from the black lagoon.)
The Motw was a device, to make the seemly sinister job seem more
sinister than just working in a "helhole".
I did , and still do like the issues that are raised, here and in
flooded, which are to do with the actual real world and how this is
encroaching on Buffy in subtle ways she hadn't anticipated, and how
suddenly she now has these issues to deal with.
>From the insurance, to the repairs (How much money must have Joyce
been making (or getting in the split from buffy's dad))???
It also chimes with that thing, when I was younger all my elders used
to constantly go on about "school being the time of your life"
(ignoring those who experienced bullying and so forth...)but I look
back on it fondly because it was the last time I truly had no
responsibility.
no mortgage , no job, money wasn't a huge issue..
and for Buffy this is the watershed moment.
> I also liked that Buffy ended up keeping the job in the end. It made the
> whole thing more credible that the job was not just a device to deliver the
> MOTW but part of the overall season-arc. And hey, we've all (or most of us
> anyway) have had crappy jobs in our youth.
crappy Jobs and mcJobs in particular parts the same all over the
world, and they suck wherever..
I have to say , I think I may have worked for this boss, a vicious life
sucker.. he works as the head of IT at a medium sized city law firm
based in the City of London...
> > 11) "Doublemeat Palace" - Decent]
I think this is a generous , it's spotty.. somewhere below decent but
not far off it...
One Bit Shy
news:1155613144.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
When I started exploring BtVS commentary online one of the first things I
noticed was how often this episode was picked as worst ever. Folks around
here seem to tolerate it a little better, though I don't think I've seen
anyone really in love with it. I'm not sure why some people pick it as the
worst. Offended that Buffy would take such a menial job? Possibly the
stupidest monster in BtVS history? Nobody even wants to think of looking at
the grease in that guy's ears?
There are some lousy and scuzzy things about the episode. (I feel kind of
covered in grease myself every time I watch it.) But there are some funny
things too and a couple story advancements, so I don't mind so much and am
happy with your Decent rating. Still, it's one of the weakest of the season
IMO - and coming right after Gone, which is the bottom for me, makes for an
unusually poor pairing - kind of the season's dead spot.
> For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
The violence doesn't bother me simply because he's a vampire and she's a
slayer. Violence means something different to them to begin with - and
pairing them... well, it's inconceivable to me that it could be done without
violence. They're not normal and their relationship is as abnormal as it
gets.
> I have stunningly few thoughts about this episode.
> It more or less speaks for itself. There's a bunch of mocking on the
> world's hamburger giants which is neither masterful nor painful.
I like some of the fast-food humor - the training film is fun and, in spite
of the grease, the frycooking portion really is pretty good. But the one
thing I really like is Manny, the manager. (It's not a joke. It's his
name.) They do the stock stuff to set him up as creepy, possibly a killer,
and keeping Buffy away from the things she's not supposed to see, which is
really a misdirect (also stock), and so on. But there's a silliness to his
act that tickles me. Pointedly telling Buffy she doesn't need to go into
the walk-in freezer because... well, because she really doesn't need to go
in there. There's nothing there. Wetting the dehydrated pickles. I loved
the little bit with the file cabinets that Buffy tries to open even though
they have visible padlocks on them and then Manny barking, "Those are
locked!"
It works for me anyway.
> 1} The opening scene actually is quite good, supplying about 90% of the
> episode's quotables ("hey, respect the narrative flow much?"
> "Please continue the story of failure"), and providing its biggest
> Money Moment, the reveal of Tool-Buffy.
This is why demons are better than people. Heh. But a little discomfiting
too. I suppose after 1000 years as a demon it's hard to stop identifying
with them, but still... She's human now. Get over it. (I think I may be
starting to identify with Willow's view of Anya.)
> 4} It's my job to not be possessed by the spirit of "shipper-ism"
> that causes certain people to lose all perspective when it comes to B/S
> scenes, but I like the dynamic this week. Last episode does seem to
> have had an effect, happily. This also marks the return of discussions
> about Buffy having come back "not roit" (_Rock Star_ joke) and I
> also like Spike being the tempter, the one to say that she's better
> than this - which she more or less is. I'm not watching the
> non-episode stuff until the series is done, but I've heard secondhand
> that Doug's commentary for "Bad Girls" dwells on the sexiness of
> the image of Faith calling Buffy outside - "come play with me!"
> I think this has some of the same vibe to it.
Glad you liked it. Alas, for some reason I didn't much like the play of the
Spike scenes at the counter and against the wall. But I do appreciate the
idea for both. Especially the tempter role you noted.
> 5} Avoiding one fast-food trap, our hero seems to have found a way to
> ensure that she won't get bored during her mini-breaks.
But she's all covered with grease. Eeuuw!
> 6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my scorn.
> Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah ha, the other
> demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was just invited to the
> wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is the way that every single line
> of dialogue will lead around to giving one of them misgivings about the
> wedding. And they already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't
> require a manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
> finish.
Hey! Halfrek's scene is my favorite of the episode. She's so cheerfully
nasty. I loved her, "Hmm," as she toyed with Anya. And I thought that
toying was pretty well executed. "Who told you that it isn't easy to love
you?"
> 7} Not sure about Amy's role in all this. She seems a little more
> malevolent than I'm used to, but we don't really know her that
> well. The general idea of this outside influence appealing to Wil's
> self-identity is a good one, but there are some execution and mechanics
> problems, not the least of which is that I have no idea whether melting
> all the stuff is voluntary. The idea of magical fire dancing on
> Willow's hands that she can't will away, or even the concept of
> "giving" someone tangible magic so that they can cast spells but
> not cast spells... I don't get it. No wonder she doesn't answer
> the question of whether she enjoyed it - she may have been as
> confused over whether she actually did anything as I am. By the way,
> did anyone else think of Tara during the "what you did to me was
> wrong" speech? Maybe Willow will.
I take it as Amy continuing the role of bad influence, this time trying to
draw her back in. I once read a biography of Janis Joplin written by a
girlfriend of hers who claims to be the one who got her back on heroin
before she died. Described it as payback for Janis getting her hooked.
Really nasty book. Anyway, it's kind of a traditional story for the
continuing addict to resent the reformed one and to try to corrupt him/her
again.
It's done kind of mucky though - especially the magic Amy gives Willow.
(Though the effects were cute to watch.) I think the series is struggling a
little figuring out how to depict the recovering addict element and how the
various magics fit into it. Rack's magic was the hard stuff, but what about
the rest? Last episode and some of this we see Willow struggling with a low
level withdrawal centered around her pervasive use of magic for the little
things like reaching for the book on the other end of the table. Not the
shakes, but something along the lines of quitting smoking.
Which, incidentally, tells me that the series really does see general magic
as addictive, just not all on Rack's level. (The rationale for no signs of
withdrawal before would be that she was doing the little stuff daily - like
smoking cigarettes. So no withdrawal.) And now there's Amy's magic, which
is what? PCP instead of crack? Something. It's all a bit clumsy
> 8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of non-magical
> badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru confessional.
Heh. I like that.
OBS
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Speaking of money, I don't know if anyone has mentioned The Council
> yet, and how they ought to provide for her. Of course they *should*,
> but I'm not sure Buffy would want to receive money from them - in
> return they would probably want to re-gain some control over her, and
> that is not something she would ever accept.
most slayers die as teenaged girls
and wouldnt be expected to take care of a house or household
i suspect the usual pattern is for the watcher to be paid
and for the slayer to live with or near the watcher until she dies
buffy would be outside their salary system because shes lived so long
and shes watcherless and fancy free
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
George W Harris
<mban...@comcast.net> wrote:
:> That's all I've got, but hey, it's taken up enough space to look
:> like a real review.
:
:I'm impressed that you gave it a decent. I sort of feel you're almost
:being overly generous here. It's the one episode this season that I feel
:deserves a weak. But then again, I never worked in fast food so that
:whole joke does not seem like such a good one to me. Maybe the ones who
:have can find more humor in it.
I've never felt the scorn given DP was deserved. I
thought the scenes in the Doublemeat Palace were
masterfully done; the lighting, color, and sound all combine to
give an incredibly creepy ominous atmosphere (I especially
liked the prison-door-closing sound of the timeclock). Sure,
it's not great, but it succeeds at creating a distinctive flavor. Like
Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, but minced.
:>
:>
:> So...
:>
:> One-sentence summary: Fast food, of course.
:>
:> AOQ rating: Decent
--
"If you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce, they taste more like
prunes than rhubarb does" -Groucho Marx
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
George W Harris
:> 8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of non-magical
:> badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru confessional.
:> Here I was expecting the more obvious route of a particularly nasty
:> threat forcing her to break out every weapon she had... that could
:> still very well happen, of course.
:
:And just the right girl for the job. Buffy has previously defeated more
:random monsters than she's had hot dinners, but now is powerless before
:the penis monster. Willow, fortunately, is immune to the powers of the
:penis monster :)
:
Giving the lie to Xander's warning "Nothing can
defeat the penis!"
--
Doesn't the fact that there are *exactly* 50 states seem a little suspicious?
George W Harris
:"You cannot generalise the Buffy/Spike relationship. It is a story
:about a reformed vampire legend with a chip in his head and a newly
:resurrected Slayer. It is a story about _a_ relationship, not a
:statement about relationships in general. You can't pull abstract ideas
:out of it, and apply them to any other situation, and judge it on that
:basis. Even the tidiest analogy in the world will never prove a point,
:only illustrate it."
:
:Which is also why the violence doesn't bother me either - the opposite
:in fact. They're both violenent creatures with super powers, and have
:different standards than ordinary people.
It reminds me somewhat of the relationship between
Worf and Dax on DS9 in that regard; pretty much every
date would be followed by both of them visiting Dr. Bashir.
--
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV!
EGK
wrote:
I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
than to our taste? Also why we felt they turned BTVS in to the Friends
version of Buffy The Vampire Layer.
ravimotha
Suffering is what makes the hero, it's about the journey, so for her to
suffer is the right way, then when she gets to be heroic , we
understand the sacrifice.
In many ways it's the reason so many people like Batman over Superman
One was brought up by loving parents and believes in the symbols of
good,
the other lost his parents traumatically and took the dark road.
despite this he continues to fight for good though his methods are
sometimes suspect.
In regards to Glory it's about the overcoming , previously she has
leant on her ability to beat up anything , now she realises that this
is not th eonly way to achieve something , and it's about her changing
, and embracing that to find another way!!
regards
Ravi
burt...@hotmail.com
> ruken wrote:
> > Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> >
> > > For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> > > Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> > > she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> > > (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> > > finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> > > incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
> >
> > I used to like them together, until they actually got together. Then
> > the writers went and ruined it for me. I was first and foremost a fan
> > of Buffy the character and the expression on her face during the
> > dumpster sex scene was just heart-breaking. It was so sad to see what
> > once was a vibrant, strong, powerful girl become such a sad, detached,
> > powerless woman. The writers did have it in for her during this season.
>
> See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
> why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
> seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
> be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
> nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
> later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel did to her.
Buffy's passivity in S2 lasted *three episodes* ("Phases" through
"Passion"). Here, it's dragged on for half a season so far, and shows
no signs of letting up anytime soon....
> In S6 so far. the monsters seem less of a threat to her than ever; it's
> the other stuff that's the problem.
I remember an interview with Marti Noxon where she said that she always
saw the show as "Party of Five with monsters." Well, she's certainly
turned it into that for this season - with Joss's help and his
blessing, of course.
> For what it's worth, this plays a
> lot better for me than the helpless-Buffy moments related to Glory did.
For me, the issue wasn't even so much the unrelenting misery. It's that
the writers were warping everything else about the show to make it
happen. They decided early on to make Buffy's life as crappy as
possible this season (and thus enable the Spuffy relationship) and they
didn't care how much other aspects of the show were damaged as a
result. This manifested itself in both small ways, like sticking Buffy
in a fast-food job instead of having her find work as a waitress (which
would have both made more sense for the character given her past
experience and paid her more money), and big ways like Giles abandoning
Buffy when she needed him most (what happened to her being so important
to him that he was willing to quite literally die for her?) and Xander
firing her from her construction job when he knew full well that what
happened at the site wasn't her fault (what happened to the guy who
always stuck up for his friends, no matter what?) and the pièce de
résistance, turning Willow into a crack whore (which wasn't so much
about misery, but it did provide a parallel to the Spuffy
relationship).
I still probably wouldn't have *liked* it, but I would have been a lot
more receptive to the "Buffy is miserable all season" storyline if Joss
& Co. hadn't employed so much clumsy, forced, and frankly just plain
*bad* writing to make it happen.
burt...@hotmail.com
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > One thing, though - the very premise of this episode is flawed. Why
> > would Buffy go to work in a fast-food joint when she could make quite a
> > bit more money as a waitress - a job she actually has experience at?
> > IMO, this is just one more example of the writers doing everything they
> > can to make Buffy's life as crappy as possible this season, no matter
> > how little sense it makes or how much it goes against previous
> > characterization. It comes off as totally forced.
>
> I get your point, but I'm not sure it would have worked - could she
> have earned enough as a waitress?
Waiting tables, even in a truck stop or someplace similar, would pay
more than working fast food when you factor in tips. Probably quite a
bit more, depending on the place. Fast food jobs almost always pay
minimum wage, or very close to it.
> And she would have no way to prove
> that she had experience. She worked for a few months in LA under a
> different name, aged only 17, having run away from home. Really not
> much of a CV.
It's not about what Buffy would put on her application, it's about the
fact that she's done that kind of work before, has a good idea of what
to expect, and could settle into the job quickly.
Elisi
We obviously have very different views of the show, and I'm sorry that
you didn't like where they took it. But that's your perspective, and I
can see where you're coming from.
The thing with S6 is that the monsters are all internal (well not *all*
obviusly, but you know what I mean). And that isn't easy to show. Yes
the writers screwed up sometimes, and I wish they hadn't, but then it's
not like the show had layers and layers in the early years. Buffy/Angel
until 'Surprise' could be any young couple in love, Xander is a funny
guy who's a good friend, and Willow is the smart, cute one. I love the
early season dearly, but I don't go there for depth. Or at least not
the same sort of depth as here.
But about the internal monster thing - internal demons are a lot harder
to fight than external ones, and that's why it takes so long. Yes Buffy
moped less in S2 than she does now, but in S2 it was an outside force
causing the hurt, now it's internal.
Willow doesn't have to choose between two lovers, she has to try to
hang on to who she is. Which incidentally leads me onto something I
like about S6 Willow - she gets in touch with 'early Willow' again,
which is nice to see. :)
Xander (always the one most rooted in reality) has proved Snyder wrong
- he's succesful and has a beautiful fiancee that he loves. How he
copes with that remains to be seen, but it's a much bigger thing than
just woorrying about grades and getting a date.
Going back to Buffy, I want to quote a part of this essay by Anna,
which echoes my own thoughts perfectly. I doubt it'll change your mind
at all, but just maybe you'll see why we like her:
****************************
"I love Season 6 Buffy. I love her in a way I didn't love any of the
other Buffys before her. I see in Season 6 Buffy somebody braver than
the teenage girl who had to kill the love of her life and could still
find it in her to come back and announce to the world "I'm Buffy. The
Vampire Slayer. And you are?" I see somebody braver than the big sister
who has to hold everything together when her mother dies. I see
somebody braver than the girl who gives her own life to save the world.
And I see somebody fight harder than she has ever had to fight before,
because she's fighting for the will to go on fighting, and I don't know
that she's ever had to fight a battle more alone.
<snip>
What Buffy says to Spike in Afterlife is real. "Everything here is
hard, and bright, and violent. Everything I feel, everything I touch
... this is Hell. Just getting through the next moment, and the one
after that ... knowing what I've lost." We don't see that Buffy very
often in Season 6. She gets by. She slays physical demons competently
enough for us to believe she can take on a few personal ones. She
offloads responsibility often enough for us to believe she doesn't
particularly care. And she asks for help and rejects it - even abuses
it - when it's offered.
But she loves enough to go on, cares enough to fight to care, cares
enough to fight to care less when she knows that caring is killing her.
Some of her actions are harsh, and selfish - even cruel - but I
don't know that she acts that way in self-preservation. Or - there's
the irony, I guess - she does. But surviving, in her case, isn't
something she does for her own sake. She is the Slayer. Survival is in
her job description. She doesn't get to indulge in falling apart. If
she doesn't keep going the world ends, sooner or later. She let go
once, gave up her own life because there was no other option she could
live with, and the consequences of that have turned out to be
overwhelming. This time she doesn't get to let go; she knows that. She
has to hold on, because she's come back to find that the people around
her are losing the stability they held onto through apocalypses and
demon onslaughts and invasions by hellgods. Ohg ubyqvat ba va fcvgr bs
rirelguvat pbzrf ng na rabezbhf pbfg, naq abg whfg gb Ohssl.
I know people have different opinions of SMG's performance of Buffy in
Season 6. I think it's simply one of the definitive performances in
recent TV history. I don't know that I've seen a better or more
effective portrayal of emotional shut-down on screen. I saw the
bubble-gum!Buffy of the unaired pilot not so long ago, and I see this,
and I sit there in awe that any actress hired to do the one can pull
off the other. It's a performance in which ennui and listlessness
become more unbearable than tragedy, and for an actress who was always
outstanding at showing us tragedy, that's something quite special."
**************************
Stephen Tempest
>Yeah, I think getting the job would've been the issue (or maybe
>waitressing is associated with bad memories), but clearly young people
>do indeed find ways to break into the hosting/waiting/busing industry.
>And once she had a job, the base salary isn't much, but the tips would
>quickly add up to way more than she'd get working minimum-wage at the
>Doubleveggie.
While I accept the point that Buffy could probably have got a better
job, I don't mind this plot development for a couple of reasons - one
in-story and the other meta.
First, she's in a state of clinical depression at the moment. One of
the symptoms of that is that you frequently lack the motivation, or
even the physical energy, to do anything challenging or difficult or
out of the routine.
It's pretty clear that the Doublemeat Palace is always hiring, and
they'll accept just about anyone. You can practically fall into
working for them just by showing up. To get a better job, though
would require regular reading the local paper, or making the rounds of
local businesses. Not to mention risking personal, face-to-face
rejection by going up to strangers and asking them for work. Deciding
what to say about her LA experience would be a problem too.
No, much easier and simpler to just settle into a fast-food job than
try for anything more challenging, and risk rejection. (Again.
Remember the bank manager?) There may also be a sense that in her
current state Buffy doesn't feel she's entitled to a better job.
On a meta level - the writers have decided that at this point in the
storyline, Buffy will get an unskilled job. Sure, they could have come
up with any number of alternatives... but a job in fast food is *the*
classic unskilled job. There's a reason they call them McJobs, after
all. It's iconic: it says in shorthand what otherwise they'd have to
spend an episode or two explaining about her new workplace.
It's also an experience that a huge number of the audience will be
able to relate to, and so they'll understand the jokes and the
situations. According to 'Fast Food Nation', one in 8 Americans in the
workforce will work for McDonald's at some point in their life: they
hire a million people every year, more than any other employer in the
country.
Stephen
Michael Ikeda
news:1155629978.7...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Six, Episode 12: "Doublemeat Palace"
>> (or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
>> Writer: Jane Espenson
>> Director: Nick Marck
>>
>
>> 6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my
>> scorn. Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah
>> ha, the other demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was
>> just invited to the wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is
>> the way that every single line of dialogue will lead around to
>> giving one of them misgivings about the wedding. And they
>> already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't require a
>> manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
>> finish.
>
> You didn't like Halfrek? Awwww. Not that I don't get your point,
> but Xander appears to try to forget about Anya having been a
> demon very, very much. Seeing what she used to look like was
> obviously a shock...
>
And, of course, it's one thing to know that your fiancee used to be a
demon. It's an entirely different thing to personally come face to
face with what she used to be.
--
Michael Ikeda mmi...@erols.com
"Telling a statistician not to use sampling is like telling an
astronomer they can't say there is a moon and stars"
Lynne Billard, past president American Statistical Association
Eric Hunter
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
>
>> Yeah, I think getting the job would've been the issue (or maybe
>> waitressing is associated with bad memories), but clearly young people
>> do indeed find ways to break into the hosting/waiting/busing industry.
>> And once she had a job, the base salary isn't much, but the tips would
>> quickly add up to way more than she'd get working minimum-wage at the
>> Doubleveggie.
>
> they'll accept just about anyone. You can practically fall into
> working for them just by showing up. To get a better job, though
> would require regular reading the local paper, or making the rounds of
> local businesses. Not to mention risking personal, face-to-face
> rejection by going up to strangers and asking them for work. Deciding
> what to say about her LA experience would be a problem too.
There is also the fact that Sunnydale is not a big place.
The majority of the bars and restaurants are probably
small, family businesses that don't hire non-relatives,
so there may not be that many waitress jobs available.
Eric.
--
drifter
> On 14 Aug 2006 22:30:10 -0700, "Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> 8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of
>>> non-magical badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru
>>> confessional. Here I was expecting the more obvious route of a
>>> particularly nasty threat forcing her to break out every weapon she
>>> had... that could still very well happen, of course.
>>
>> And just the right girl for the job. Buffy has previously defeated
>> more random monsters than she's had hot dinners, but now is
>> powerless before the penis monster. Willow, fortunately, is immune
>> to the powers of the penis monster :)
>>
> Giving the lie to Xander's warning "Nothing can
> defeat the penis!"
I think the shooting script included, "...except a meat grinder."
Oh, man, that was just wrong! Why didn't somebody stop me?
--
Kel
"I reject your reality, and substitute my own."
drifter
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155613144.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> 5} Avoiding one fast-food trap, our hero seems to have found a way to
>> ensure that she won't get bored during her mini-breaks.
>
> But she's all covered with grease. Eeuuw!
She didn't look all that into it. Maybe the grease . . . helped.
Ian Galbraith
[snip]
> It's done kind of mucky though - especially the magic Amy gives Willow.
> (Though the effects were cute to watch.) I think the series is struggling a
> little figuring out how to depict the recovering addict element and how the
> various magics fit into it. Rack's magic was the hard stuff, but what about
> the rest? Last episode and some of this we see Willow struggling with a low
> level withdrawal centered around her pervasive use of magic for the little
> things like reaching for the book on the other end of the table. Not the
> shakes, but something along the lines of quitting smoking.
> Which, incidentally, tells me that the series really does see general magic
> as addictive, just not all on Rack's level. (The rationale for no signs of
> withdrawal before would be that she was doing the little stuff daily - like
> smoking cigarettes. So no withdrawal.)
But it could be equally valid to compare it a gambling addiction, which
plays better and would be in line with the rest of the series. Willow's
actions aren't necessary indicative of a physical withdrawal but could be
seen as a sort of psychic withdrawal because she has become so reliant on
magic for everything, it's become a crutch for her. And this isn't
recognising and dealing with her real problems, the insecurities which
the magic acts as a crutch for, and which need proper counselling to fix.
[snip]
--
You can't stop the signal
Ian Galbraith
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
[snip]
>> See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
>> why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
>> seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
>> be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
>> nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
>> later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel did to her.
> Buffy's passivity in S2 lasted *three episodes* ("Phases" through
> "Passion"). Here, it's dragged on for half a season so far, and shows
> no signs of letting up anytime soon....
Yeah because being brought back to life, being dragged kicking and
screaming out of heaven, should be equally as easy to recover from as
having a boyfriend turn bad.
>> In S6 so far. the monsters seem less of a threat to her than ever; it's
>> the other stuff that's the problem.
> I remember an interview with Marti Noxon where she said that she always
> saw the show as "Party of Five with monsters." Well, she's certainly
> turned it into that for this season - with Joss's help and his
> blessing, of course.
And what was Buffy/Angel? Days of our Lives with monsters?
>> For what it's worth, this plays a
>> lot better for me than the helpless-Buffy moments related to Glory did.
> For me, the issue wasn't even so much the unrelenting misery. It's that
> the writers were warping everything else about the show to make it
> happen. They decided early on to make Buffy's life as crappy as
> possible this season (and thus enable the Spuffy relationship) and they
> didn't care how much other aspects of the show were damaged as a
> result.
Maybe because they didn't feel there was any damage. I certainly don't.
> This manifested itself in both small ways, like sticking Buffy
> in a fast-food job instead of having her find work as a waitress (which
> would have both made more sense for the character given her past
> experience and paid her more money),
But wouldn't necessarily have made sense given her depression.
> and big ways like Giles abandoning
> Buffy when she needed him most (what happened to her being so important
> to him that he was willing to quite literally die for her?)
Why not try actually refuting some of the excellent analysis on this
issue (see One Bit Shy's post in the Tabula Rasa thread) rather than
harping on the same old tired line.
[snip - more of the same old tired arguments]
> I still probably wouldn't have *liked* it, but I would have been a lot
> more receptive to the "Buffy is miserable all season" storyline if Joss
> & Co. hadn't employed so much clumsy, forced, and frankly just plain
> *bad* writing to make it happen.
IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad
writing.
Ian Galbraith
[snip]
> I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
> than to our taste? Also why we felt they turned BTVS in to the Friends
> version of Buffy The Vampire Layer.
Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
Rowan Hawthorn
>
> IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad
> writing.
>
That's the whole thing in a nutshell, right there.
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
EGK
I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
the depressive tone , dark and cathartic.
To me each season has certain things that resonate and there are individual
episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
against a dumpster.
If you or anyone had said that was going to happen even as far along as
season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
One Bit Shy
news:uaszuhu2sf7t$.hmsqpw6fv9cy.dlg@40tude.net...
Conceptually it could, and I personally don't care which concept is closer.
(My own internal solution to that is to stick with it as withdrawal from
using magic, with its own unique mix of characteristics. We don't have to
be totally ruled by metaphor.) I'm just saying that the show does seem to
be showing some addictive quality to magic generally - not just Rack's
magic. Though his is clearly much worse. With that distinction being made
between types of magic, and the intrusion of whatever it is that Amy dosed
Willow with, I think it gets kind of confusing what all's going on.
OBS
Arbitrar Of Quality
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:13:07 +1000, Ian Galbraith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:01:24 -0400, EGK wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >> I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
> >> than to our taste?
Well in your particular case (you're the one who primarily got into the
show around its sense of fun, right?), your tastes don't match with the
writers', which is one reason for the divide among fans. I feel like
even in the lighter, fluffier, days, the show resonated most with me
when it exposed its dark, twisted undertone. t helps that I knew going
in that Joss Whedon is not a nice man, and that his characters
distinguish themselvs in large part by how much they can withstand.
> >Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
>
> I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
> the depressive tone , dark and cathartic.
>
> To me each season has certain things that resonate and there are individual
> episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
> represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
> against a dumpster.
>
> If you or anyone had said that was going to happen even as far along as
> season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
That's the beauty of what S6 has done so far; come up with scenarios
that wouldn't have made sense at any other point in the show's life,
and made the viewer ("the viewer" in this case meaning "me") believe
them. That's another major ingredient in why some like the later years
better than others - whether or not one buys the path from Point A to
Point B.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
Elisi wrote:
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
> > > why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
> > > seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
> > > be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
> > > nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
> > > later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel did to her.
> >
> > Buffy's passivity in S2 lasted *three episodes* ("Phases" through
> > "Passion"). Here, it's dragged on for half a season so far, and shows
> > no signs of letting up anytime soon....
Different situations, as many have said. I'll leave it at that. But
as an aside, I'm also going to throw in another reminder that the
(off-screen) time between "Becoming II" and "Anne" was almost as long
as that between "Bargaining" and now.
> Willow doesn't have to choose between two lovers, she has to try to
> hang on to who she is. Which incidentally leads me onto something I
> like about S6 Willow - she gets in touch with 'early Willow' again,
> which is nice to see. :)
As a big Willow fan, agreed. In "Smashed," I agreed with what was said
on screen when she pulled out the computer - good to see her doing that
again, even if just as a link between the character we started with and
the one we have now. And S6 has shown a lot of how fundamentally the
former has shaped the latter...
> Xander (always the one most rooted in reality)
???
> Going back to Buffy, I want to quote a part of this essay by Anna,
> which echoes my own thoughts perfectly. I doubt it'll change your mind
> at all, but just maybe you'll see why we like her:
>[snip]
>It's a performance in which ennui and listlessness
> become more unbearable than tragedy, and for an actress who was always
> outstanding at showing us tragedy, that's something quite special."
I quite like that sentence.
-AOQ
Carin
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155630769....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> jil...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> The only way to get them together is to change one or both of them.
>> We'll do Buffy first."
>
> I'm sure you meant to write Spike - the chip and falling in love with
> Buffy changed him from wanting to kill her, to willing to die for her.
> That's HUGE!
>
I get that Spike has this huge reputation as this vicious killer. But even
pre-chip Spike was never like Angelus. He didn't seem to revel in the
cruelty so much. It was like the time he told Buffy "We like to talk big,
vampires...it's tough guy talk." Meaning perhaps his bark was worse than
his bite (although obviously his bite was pretty bad.) William seemed like
quite a decent guy. Gentle, thoughtful, romantic. When he was turned he
became a killer - but he always retained quite a bit of "William" inside
Spike.
On the other hand, Liam seemed like a selfish, hedonistic ass. When he
became Angelus those "qualities" were magnified. It was not enough for
Angelus to kill, to feed - he wanted to hurt, to destroy. I always kinda
wondered where "Angel" came from. He certainly doesn't seem anything like
Liam.
Ian Galbraith
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:13:07 +1000, Ian Galbraith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:01:24 -0400, EGK wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>> I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
>>> than to our taste? Also why we felt they turned BTVS in to the Friends
>>> version of Buffy The Vampire Layer.
>>Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
> I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
> the depressive tone , dark and cathartic.
Fair enough.
> To me each season has certain things that resonate and there are individual
> episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
> represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
> against a dumpster.
Heh, I will say that personally this season as a whole does resonate with
me more than the others. I've said before that I like dark night of the
soul type stories.
> If you or anyone had said that was going to happen even as far along as
> season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
Yeah probably.
One Bit Shy
news:FLwEg.9480$0e5....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
I think it mostly it comes from guilt. All consuming guilt. Perhaps
accented with remnants of old religious teachings about seeking redemption.
But even so, he didn't find the personality we know for a hundred years.
Not until he saw Buffy and realized that he could transform his guilt to
purpose.
OBS
Carin
"George W Harris" <gha...@mundsprung.com> wrote in message
news:clc3e29utepvtfso0...@4ax.com...
> On 15 Aug 2006 01:19:38 -0700, "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> :"You cannot generalise the Buffy/Spike relationship. It is a story
> :about a reformed vampire legend with a chip in his head and a newly
> :resurrected Slayer. It is a story about _a_ relationship, not a
> :statement about relationships in general. You can't pull abstract ideas
> :out of it, and apply them to any other situation, and judge it on that
> :basis. Even the tidiest analogy in the world will never prove a point,
> :only illustrate it."
> :
> :Which is also why the violence doesn't bother me either - the opposite
> :in fact. They're both violenent creatures with super powers, and have
> :different standards than ordinary people.
>
> It reminds me somewhat of the relationship between
> Worf and Dax on DS9 in that regard; pretty much every
> date would be followed by both of them visiting Dr. Bashir.
Another of my favorite TV couples. Hhhhmmmmm, wonder what this says about
me?
Carin
> Elisi wrote:
>> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > One thing, though - the very premise of this episode is flawed. Why
>> > would Buffy go to work in a fast-food joint when she could make quite a
>> > bit more money as a waitress - a job she actually has experience at?
>> > IMO, this is just one more example of the writers doing everything they
>> > can to make Buffy's life as crappy as possible this season, no matter
>> > how little sense it makes or how much it goes against previous
>> > characterization. It comes off as totally forced.
>>
>> I get your point, but I'm not sure it would have worked - could she
>> that she had experience. She worked for a few months in LA under a
>> different name, aged only 17, having run away from home. Really not
>> much of a CV.
>
> waitressing is associated with bad memories), but clearly young people
> do indeed find ways to break into the hosting/waiting/busing industry.
> And once she had a job, the base salary isn't much, but the tips would
> quickly add up to way more than she'd get working minimum-wage at the
> Doubleveggie.
>
>
And it is always possible that no such job was availible that week and she
needed a job NOW.
EGK
wrote:
>EGK wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:13:07 +1000, Ian Galbraith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:01:24 -0400, EGK wrote:
>> >
>> >[snip]
>> >
>> >> I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
>> >> than to our taste?
>
>Well in your particular case (you're the one who primarily got into the
>show around its sense of fun, right?), your tastes don't match with the
>writers', which is one reason for the divide among fans.
I don't think i'm the only one by a long shot but I understand what you
mean. I started watching the show when season 2 was in reruns. The WB
network was showing both season 2 and season 1 on different nights of the
week so I got a crash course. A girlfriend at the time and her niece
actually got me in to it. It was funny. Her niece was so wrapped up in it
and would give me a blow by blow account and like a lot of kids she talked a
mile a minute. Can you imagine a 12yr old girl trying to tell her aunt's
boyfriend about Spike screwing Buffy up against a dumpster in an alley? :)
I'm glad she was over the show by that time.
The writers were different too. Joss wasn't writing much of season 6.
That's when he left for Firefly which I enjoyed a hell of a lot more than
the last two years of BTVS. The smart dialog in that reminded me much more
of early Buffy. Joss actually came under a lot of criticism at this time
for not paying enough attention to BTVS. This was Marti Noxon's baby and
she reportedly was using a lot of things from her own life on the show.
Things like the bad boyfriend, the drugs and the shitty jobs as in DM
Palace.
> I feel like
>even in the lighter, fluffier, days, the show resonated most with me
>when it exposed its dark, twisted undertone. t helps that I knew going
>in that Joss Whedon is not a nice man, and that his characters
>distinguish themselvs in large part by how much they can withstand.
>
>> >Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
>>
>> I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
>> the depressive tone , dark and cathartic.
>>
>> To me each season has certain things that resonate and there are individual
>> episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
>> represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
>> against a dumpster.
>>
>> If you or anyone had said that was going to happen even as far along as
>> season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
>
>That's the beauty of what S6 has done so far; come up with scenarios
>that wouldn't have made sense at any other point in the show's life,
>and made the viewer ("the viewer" in this case meaning "me") believe
>them. That's another major ingredient in why some like the later years
>better than others - whether or not one buys the path from Point A to
>Point B.
One main point that people who dislike it always mention is they made the
main characters unlikable to a lot of us. Like you, Willow was always my
favorite but I liked them all. During season six, I felt they were all so
selfish and self absorbed I wouldnt want to know any of them. The show
itself became very insular.
I posted at the time that I thought it would be awfully interesting and
entertaining to have Cordelia come back for a visit. I don't know how far
you are in Angel since i'm not following that but her character grew up and
became a better person. I'd have loved to see her come back to Sunnydale
and tell all these self-absorbed heroes to get over themselves already.
Apteryx
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I remember an interview with Marti Noxon where she said that she always
> saw the show as "Party of Five with monsters." Well, she's certainly
> turned it into that for this season - with Joss's help and his
> blessing, of course.
I think she said on one of the S6 extras (or maybe its in a commentary)
that she was aiming for My So-Called Life with monsters - its
referenced in this article -
http://www.tvshows.nu/article.php3?id_article=4984
That was at least a worthy ambition, if she could have managed it
Apteryx
Arbitrar Of Quality
> "George W Harris" <gha...@mundsprung.com> wrote in message
> news:clc3e29utepvtfso0...@4ax.com...
> > It reminds me somewhat of the relationship between
> > Worf and Dax on DS9 in that regard; pretty much every
> > date would be followed by both of them visiting Dr. Bashir.
>
> Another of my favorite TV couples. Hhhhmmmmm, wonder what this says about
> me?
And I feel about them the way some do about Buffy and Spike; I didn't
have a violent objection to the couple or anything, but until well
after they were married (I liked "Change Of Heart"), it almost always
played to me like they were together because the writers said so,
rather than because of something that came out of the characters.
-AOQ
ruken
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> ruken wrote:
> > Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> >
>
> See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
> why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
> seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
> be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
> nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
> S6 so far. the monsters seem less of a threat to her than ever; it's
> lot better for me than the helpless-Buffy moments related to Glory did.
>
For me I think the problem is an over identification with the
character. I absolutely hated it whenever she was miserable and to be
quite candid I could never find anything enjoyable in something that
made her so terribly unhappy. In the past her misery was always
balanced out by some joy, her weakness by her strength. Here, it seemed
to me she was striped of everything that made her Buffy. In a purely
intellectual way I understand what the writers were allegedly trying to
do (although even in a purely intellectual level, I am not certain they
were successful in their attempt) but in an emotional
"it's,all.about.Buffy" level I can't find any enjoyment in her
degradation. Plus, this show was marketed as a show about strong
womanhood. I didn't sign up for a show about how horrible and scary
life as a twenty something is (mostly 'cause in my personal experience
life as a twenty something was a lot better than life as a teen)
I am willing to admit that my opinion of the last 2 seasons is also
influenced by factors unrelated to the actual pain Buffy was
experiencing. It is very fortunate that you're watching the show
relatively free of spoilers and in a way somewhat shielded from the
cult of Spike hysteria that gripped (and to some level still grips) the
fandom at that time. I'm sure all those elements influenced the way I
felt and feel about the regression of most of the characters.
George W Harris
wrote:
:
:"George W Harris" <gha...@mundsprung.com> wrote in message
:
What does it say about me that from season 2 of
TNG I was lobbying for a Worf-Troi hookup?
Troi don't need no SNAG.
--
They say there's air in your lungs that's been there for years.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Arbitrar Of Quality
George W Harris wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 04:20:47 GMT, "Carin" <wave...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> :
> :"George W Harris" <gha...@mundsprung.com> wrote in message
> :news:clc3e29utepvtfso0...@4ax.com...
> :> It reminds me somewhat of the relationship between
> :> Worf and Dax on DS9 in that regard; pretty much every
> :> date would be followed by both of them visiting Dr. Bashir.
> :
> :
> :Another of my favorite TV couples. Hhhhmmmmm, wonder what this says about
> :me?
> :
> What does it say about me that from season 2 of
> TNG I was lobbying for a Worf-Troi hookup?
If they had kids, they could beat you up and feel your pain while doing
it.
-AOQ
ruken
I think some of us are just more emotionally involved with the
characters and don't find any joy in seeing them denigrated and in such
despair that they believe they are in hell. I am convinced that if I
were able to look at Buffy in a purely analytical way I would find
season 6 to be as brilliant as its admirers claim. Well, perhaps not as
brilliant but at least not as a slap in the face to the fans that liked
the scoobies and the Buffy/Giles relationship of the early seasons.
PS the Buffy/Angel ship was melodramatic but I will admit that it was
easier to swallow than the melodrama+Buffy denigration of the later
seasons.
Mark Jones
>
> Elisi wrote:
> > burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see
> > > > now why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in
> > > > later seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to
> > > > always be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon
> > > > is not a nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly
> > > > passive in the later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel
> > > > did to her.
> > >
> > > Buffy's passivity in S2 lasted *three episodes* ("Phases" through
> > > "Passion"). Here, it's dragged on for half a season so far, and shows
> > > no signs of letting up anytime soon....
>
> Different situations, as many have said. I'll leave it at that. But as
> an aside, I'm also going to throw in another reminder that the
> (off-screen) time between "Becoming II" and "Anne" was almost as long as
> that between "Bargaining" and now.
True, but consider two novels in which the hero gets shot. In one novel,
the hero's recuperation is handled in a few pages giving us the gist of what
happened: hospital stay, physical therapy, etc. A second novel is _all
about_ the recovery. Exactly the same experience for the character, very
different experiences for the reader.
Some readers will like one, some will like the other. Some will enjoy both
in different ways. But I think it's safe to say that if a reader is
expecting the former based on early novels in the series, the sudden change
in focus and tone is going to turn off a lot of them.
Mark Jones
> IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad writing.
The same applies to the fans of S6: because you like it, it must be good.
Arbitrar Of Quality
Within the analogy, agreed. Tying it back to the show we're supposed
to be discussing, I don't think it's a perfect mirror since the change
isn't so sudden for me. Your point is close enough that I'll let it
stand without argument, though.
-AOQ
(Harmony) Watcher
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155613144.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
> (or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
> Writer: Jane Espenson
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> For those who're curious about the newbies' thoughts, this is from
> Mrs. Quality on the Buffy/Spike relationship: in any other show,
> she'd be disturbed by the stalkerish nature and violence involved
> (she's very sensitive to violence against women). But here, she
> finds that the way they talk to each other makes things between them
> incredibly erotic. So, there ya go.
>
Just remember this: now the Slayer stinks of grease from head to toe. I
myself can't find that very erotic unless the grease is not vegetable but
lard.
> And while we're on her opinions, she commented a few times during
> this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
> in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
> institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
> see that.
>
> Does it seem like I'm trying to pad out the space to make it look
> like I have anything at all to say about "Doublemeat Palace?"
> Well, pretty much. I have stunningly few thoughts about this episode.
> It more or less speaks for itself. There's a bunch of mocking on the
> world's hamburger giants which is neither masterful nor painful.
> There's a plot in which even if one doesn't know who the killer is,
> one knows the rhythms of things - given how the show works, there's
> no doubt that Buffy will develop a suspicion that "it's PEOPLE!"
> (I still haven't seen the movie that spawned all those jokes. One
> day...), act on it towards the end, she'll be wrong, and her boss
> will be a red herring who ends up dead. Very few scenes stand out in
> any way, and other than Buffy getting a low-income job, all the major
> stories continue to tick along on standby. It's not the finest
> moment of the series.
>
>
I don't know. I see it differently. I was entirely amused and entertained by
this episode, and laughed throughout. Even the guy who flipped the greasy
burgers and said his ears were clogged up by the grease made me laugh. It's
the way he said it with his crackling voice that was funny. It was simply
consummate acting by *everyone* in the episode in my opinion. I rate this
episode as one of the top five *funniest* episodes in BtVS myself.
> But, just like I'm sometimes too harsh, I'm sometimes too gentle.
> I can't muster up any real dislike for DmP, even though I feel like I
> "should" kinda hate it. I didn't get bored - it was a bit
> slow, sure, but the show's done worse - and nothing's actively
> offensive. I wouldn't want to do this every week, but a side-trip to
> dwell on something mundane yields the same tolerance that I also gave
> "Living Conditions" (that was a slightly better episode than this
> one, though).
>
> The remainder of this review will consist of ten random thoughts:
>
> 1} The opening scene actually is quite good, supplying about 90% of the
> episode's quotables ("hey, respect the narrative flow much?"
> "Please continue the story of failure"), and providing its biggest
> Money Moment, the reveal of Tool-Buffy.
>
> 2} "So ... what's the secret ingredient?" "It's a meat
> process." "Well, what does that mean?" "It's a process, they
> do it to the meat." "But, what *is* it?" "It's just the name
> of the process." Heh.
>
> 3} As a vegetarian, I got a kick out of the revelation of what the
> secret ingredient was. They do such impressive things with soy and
> seitan and such nowadays.
>
But the chicken still cross the road everyday to meet the cow, and they will
both end up meeting a secret ingredient on a bun.
> 4} It's my job to not be possessed by the spirit of "shipper-ism"
> that causes certain people to lose all perspective when it comes to B/S
> scenes, but I like the dynamic this week. Last episode does seem to
> have had an effect, happily. This also marks the return of discussions
> about Buffy having come back "not roit" (_Rock Star_ joke) and I
> also like Spike being the tempter, the one to say that she's better
> than this - which she more or less is. I'm not watching the
> non-episode stuff until the series is done, but I've heard secondhand
> that Doug's commentary for "Bad Girls" dwells on the sexiness of
> the image of Faith calling Buffy outside - "come play with me!"
> I think this has some of the same vibe to it.
>
> 5} Avoiding one fast-food trap, our hero seems to have found a way to
> ensure that she won't get bored during her mini-breaks.
>
Bloopers during one of her mini-breaks:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gAYS2ONDXW0
> 6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my scorn.
> Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah ha, the other
> demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was just invited to the
> wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is the way that every single line
> of dialogue will lead around to giving one of them misgivings about the
> wedding. And they already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't
> require a manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
> finish.
>
> 7} Not sure about Amy's role in all this. She seems a little more
> malevolent than I'm used to, but we don't really know her that
> well. The general idea of this outside influence appealing to Wil's
> self-identity is a good one, but there are some execution and mechanics
> problems, not the least of which is that I have no idea whether melting
> all the stuff is voluntary. The idea of magical fire dancing on
> Willow's hands that she can't will away, or even the concept of
> "giving" someone tangible magic so that they can cast spells but
> not cast spells... I don't get it. No wonder she doesn't answer
> the question of whether she enjoyed it - she may have been as
> confused over whether she actually did anything as I am. By the way,
> did anyone else think of Tara during the "what you did to me was
> wrong" speech? Maybe Willow will.
>
> 8} Still on Willow, she has an exceedingly rare moment of non-magical
> badassery, after a stupid but mildly amusing drive-thru confessional.
> Here I was expecting the more obvious route of a particularly nasty
> threat forcing her to break out every weapon she had... that could
> still very well happen, of course.
>
Simply describing it as "an exceedingly rare momoent of non-magical
badassery" is, I think, a bit of an under-statement. To me, it's one of the
show's silliest yet funniest metaphorical moments of all time. I mean, to
have Willow, *of all people*, chop off Wig Lady's secret weapon and have it
come out as "ground beef" is simply hilarious! I ROFL so hard the first time
I watched it. And as silly as it is, I laughed every time I watched it
subsequently.
Also, IIRC the way Wig Lady's secret monster attacked, I thought there was a
bit of homage paid to the queen monster in Aliens.
>
> 9} Xander eating the suspected hu-fu burger would seem like a standard
> butt-monkey premise, but the scene is played a little differently than
> usual, and it's a vast improvement. Check out his delivery on
> "then you come in and hand me a burger, blah blah blah, five minutes
> later 'oh and by the way, it happens to be hot delicious human
> flesh!'" Subdued exasperation, if that's not a contradiction in
> terms, directed at the whole ridiculous world that conspires to make
> these kinds of things happen to him.
>
If you think about it, it is entirely possible that Wig Lady did indeed use
the ground beef machine to dispose of some of her victims.
> 10} Having Buffy end up with the job, under the same circumstances and
> a similar kind of boss, is a bit unexpected. And she refuses to use
> blackmail; insert sarcastic quip about the evil writers sabotaging her
> moral fiber.
>
You know, those two are lifers (I mean Spikey and Buffy)!
<rest snipped>
--
==Harmony Watcher==
burt...@hotmail.com
> On 15 Aug 2006 10:19:34 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >> See, I'd tend to view "heartbreaking" as a good thing. I can see now
> >> why some people felt that Buffy was too much of a victim in later
> >> seasons for their taste. I don't see a need for the heroes to always
> >> be triumphant in life, though, especially since Joss Whedon is not a
> >> nice man. We've seen Buffy suffering and distressingly passive in the
> >> later parts of the always-beloved S2 after what Angel did to her.
>
> > Buffy's passivity in S2 lasted *three episodes* ("Phases" through
> > "Passion"). Here, it's dragged on for half a season so far, and shows
> > no signs of letting up anytime soon....
>
> Yeah because being brought back to life, being dragged kicking and
> screaming out of heaven, should be equally as easy to recover from as
> having a boyfriend turn bad.
There was no holy writ handed down from the heavens that required Joss
& Co. to make Buffy depressed this season. It was a writing decision
like any other. She didn't have to have been pulled out of heaven, and
she didn't have to be depressed as a result of that (she could just as
easily have been at peace, knowing that she's going to a better place
when she dies).
Joss & Co. CHOSE this storyline.
> > I still probably wouldn't have *liked* it, but I would have been a lot
> > more receptive to the "Buffy is miserable all season" storyline if Joss
> > & Co. hadn't employed so much clumsy, forced, and frankly just plain
> > *bad* writing to make it happen.
>
> IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad
> writing.
No, IOW if it makes sense and fits within the well-established
characterization of the show, it's good writing. If it doesn't make
sense and forces the characters to behave in ways that go against the
core of who they've been for the past five seasons just to achieve a
plot goal, it's bad writing.
And there was far too much of the latter in season 6.
burt...@hotmail.com
> For me I think the problem is an over identification with the
> character. I absolutely hated it whenever she was miserable and to be
> quite candid I could never find anything enjoyable in something that
> made her so terribly unhappy. In the past her misery was always
> balanced out by some joy, her weakness by her strength. Here, it seemed
> to me she was striped of everything that made her Buffy.
Just as an aside, SMG felt exactly the same way.
ruken
Heh, somehow I'm not surprised. If I felt so bad for the character and
I was just a fan I would imagine it would have been worst for SMG as
she actually brought life to the character for so many years. Jung
znxrf vg rira jbefg vf gung guvf jnf whfg gur orthvavat.
ruken
Stephen Tempest wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
>
>
> It's also an experience that a huge number of the audience will be
> able to relate to, and so they'll understand the jokes and the
> situations. According to 'Fast Food Nation', one in 8 Americans in the
> workforce will work for McDonald's at some point in their life: they
> hire a million people every year, more than any other employer in the
> country.
>
> Stephen
It is also an experience most of us go through during High School. I
find it interesting that teenage Buffy was able to obtain and mantain a
"better" job than adult Buffy.
Ian Galbraith
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> Different situations, as many have said. I'll leave it at that. But as
>> an aside, I'm also going to throw in another reminder that the
>> (off-screen) time between "Becoming II" and "Anne" was almost as long as
>> that between "Bargaining" and now.
> True, but consider two novels in which the hero gets shot. In one novel,
> the hero's recuperation is handled in a few pages giving us the gist of what
> happened: hospital stay, physical therapy, etc. A second novel is _all
> about_ the recovery. Exactly the same experience for the character, very
> different experiences for the reader.
> Some readers will like one, some will like the other. Some will enjoy both
> in different ways. But I think it's safe to say that if a reader is
> expecting the former based on early novels in the series, the sudden change
> in focus and tone is going to turn off a lot of them.
I personally think thats what happened with Buffy, but that doesn't
necessarily make the latter bad writing as some assert.
Ian Galbraith
> Ian Galbraith wrote:
>> On 15 Aug 2006 10:19:34 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
[snip]
> > > I still probably wouldn't have *liked* it, but I would have been a lot
> > > more receptive to the "Buffy is miserable all season" storyline if Joss
> > > & Co. hadn't employed so much clumsy, forced, and frankly just plain
> > > *bad* writing to make it happen.
> > IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad
> > writing.
> I think some of us are just more emotionally involved with the
> characters and don't find any joy in seeing them denigrated and in such
> despair that they believe they are in hell. I am convinced that if I
> were able to look at Buffy in a purely analytical way I would find
> season 6 to be as brilliant as its admirers claim. Well, perhaps not as
> brilliant but at least not as a slap in the face to the fans that liked
> the scoobies and the Buffy/Giles relationship of the early seasons.
I can dig that :-).
> PS the Buffy/Angel ship was melodramatic but I will admit that it was
> easier to swallow than the melodrama+Buffy denigration of the later
> seasons.
Not for me, the first half of S2 was an ordeal whenever those 2 were
together.
Elisi
> > Xander (always the one most rooted in reality)
>
> ???
As in, no super powers or special skills. He fights evil because he's
Buffy's friend.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
presidential fodder
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> pre-chip Spike was never like Angelus. He didn't seem to revel in the
they differed in their style of killing
but theres no reason to assume they differed in their rate of killing
spike was rape and pillage berzerker
angelus was the cold and methodical sociopath
they both killed a lot of people
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
action and adventure are his only rewards
Rowan Hawthorn
Of course, teenage Buffy found that "better" job in a city several times
the size of Sunnydale...
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
peachy ashie passion
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:13:07 +1000, Ian Galbraith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:01:24 -0400, EGK wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>
>>>I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful rather
>>>version of Buffy The Vampire Layer.
>>
>>Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
>
>
> I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
> the depressive tone , dark and cathartic.
>
> To me each season has certain things that resonate and there are individual
> episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
> represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
> against a dumpster.
>
> If you or anyone had said that was going to happen even as far along as
> season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
Hmm.
That might be a big signpost for the difference of opinion too.
As far back as season 3, I would have thought that could happen.
Not with SPIKE, mind you. But the alley and the dumpster, yeah.
peachy ashie passion
*sigh* I loved Worf-Troi.
I WANTED Worf-Troi. Bad.
EGK
SMG mentioned this in one of the big articles in Entertainment Weekly if I
recall correctly. It was near the end of the series when she was deciding
whether to come back for another year or not. It may have even been the
article where she announced she wouldn't be back. Joss gave the typical
kneejerk comment that a lot of people in here do to those who didn't like
it. He said she just didn't understand it, <rolling eyes>
It wasn't so much misery that SMG minded. It was what she felt was the
degradation of the character. Mostly in the scenes with Spike.
EGK
I think you're mistaking Buffy for Faith. :)
As I just mentioned in another post, even SMG felt they took the degradation
of Buffy way too far in season 6 and she didn't care for it either. I'm not
trying to force my opinion on anyone else. Just explaining why I hated it.
If Buffy being screwed next to a dumpster represents season 6 to me, a scene
to represent season 3 might be, "I'm Buffy the Vampire slayer, and you
are...?"
Elisi
Incidentally there was (at least) one other version of the dumpster sex
filmed. It is a lot more... vigorous shall we say, and has SMG and JM
laughing their heads off at the end. Don't know why they went with the
subdued one.
As for S3 Buffy and alley sex - well if Angel hadn't had that pesky
clause in his soul curse I can't see why not. I re-watched 'Surprise'
recently and Buffy _definitely_wants to get laid. There are a lot of
'up against the wall kissing' at the start - it's just chance that
they're *in* Angel's apartment and not in the alley outside! ;)
EGK
>
>Incidentally there was (at least) one other version of the dumpster sex
>filmed. It is a lot more... vigorous shall we say, and has SMG and JM
>laughing their heads off at the end. Don't know why they went with the
>subdued one.
>
>As for S3 Buffy and alley sex - well if Angel hadn't had that pesky
>clause in his soul curse I can't see why not. I re-watched 'Surprise'
>recently and Buffy _definitely_wants to get laid. There are a lot of
>'up against the wall kissing' at the start - it's just chance that
>they're *in* Angel's apartment and not in the alley outside! ;)
The point wasn't the sex. Going with Buffy's own penchant for metaphors,
that's what represented season 6 to me. The alley and the dumpster are what
create the metaphor.
I actually thought one of the darkest scenes (which was also a metaphor for
sex) in the show was in season 3. That was Buffy having Angel feed off her
in order to save him.
One Bit Shy
news:0ZidnW910b-RiH7Z...@giganews.com...
> ruken wrote:
>> Stephen Tempest wrote:
>>> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>
>>> It's also an experience that a huge number of the audience will be
>>> able to relate to, and so they'll understand the jokes and the
>>> situations. According to 'Fast Food Nation', one in 8 Americans in the
>>> workforce will work for McDonald's at some point in their life: they
>>> hire a million people every year, more than any other employer in the
>>> country.
>>>
>>> Stephen
>>
>> It is also an experience most of us go through during High School. I
>> find it interesting that teenage Buffy was able to obtain and mantain a
>> "better" job than adult Buffy.
>>
>
> Of course, teenage Buffy found that "better" job in a city several times
> the size of Sunnydale...
I don't understand why it's even an issue. It's not like it's some weird
job nobody would take - not as if millions of Americans of all ages don't
get jobs just like it. Buffy only has a high school diploma and has had
just one summer job (which she can't even put on her resume) in her entire
life. Buffy herself said that she needed money fast and didn't want to go
through a hard interview process. And remembering that she's already tried
for a couple other jobs that didn't work out, this would look exactly like
the sure thing she was after. It fits the circumstances, and the show put
in extra effort to explain and justify it.
OBS
Rowan Hawthorn
Yeah, and I suspect that the folks who are complaining the loudest about
how she "should go get a better job" don't have a whole lot of
experience at trying to *find* a "better job" in a small-town
environment. There ain't a whole lot of those "better jobs" around,
especially for someone with virtually *no actual work experience*. The
ones that are are generally filled by somebody's brother-in-law...
One Bit Shy
news:wslw4ofi08ne$.1loagizov9y3i$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On 15 Aug 2006 22:07:26 -0700, ruken wrote:
>> Ian Galbraith wrote:
>>> On 15 Aug 2006 10:19:34 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> > > I still probably wouldn't have *liked* it, but I would have been a
>> > > lot
>> > > more receptive to the "Buffy is miserable all season" storyline if
>> > > Joss
>> > > & Co. hadn't employed so much clumsy, forced, and frankly just plain
>> > > *bad* writing to make it happen.
>
>> > IOW if you like it its good writing, if you don't like it its bad
>> > writing.
>
>> I think some of us are just more emotionally involved with the
>> characters and don't find any joy in seeing them denigrated and in such
>> despair that they believe they are in hell. I am convinced that if I
>> were able to look at Buffy in a purely analytical way I would find
>> season 6 to be as brilliant as its admirers claim.
I attempt to be analytical and write about it because it's interesting and
maybe can help explain. But that's not why I like it. The analysis comes
second. I'm drawn in to these stories specifically because of my emotional
involvement with these characters. It's like seeing dear friends taken
through some very hard times. I cry for them, appreciate their best
qualities all the more for being drawn away from them, and ultimately feel
closer to them than I did before. At core they're still good people with
good hearts - in spite of their vulnerabilities, their failures, the things
they succumb to. All of those failings are built from the same
characteristics they always had, but had mostly avoided getting in too much
trouble over. (Except maybe Buffy, who is always being dragged through one
hell or the other.) Now the luck has turned against them, and emotionally
that makes me feel like I need to love them all that much more because of
it, need to pray that much harder that they find their way through it.
To me this is a kind of payoff for the emotional investment that the series
has encouraged so well across the seasons. The kind of drama being played
now has an extra kick, gets me to better appreciate it, because I have that
emotional investment. It could never work the same way with people I had
just been introduced to. This is the big advantage TV has over movies.
OBS
Elisi
Another point is that I'm sure a fast food job was a lot easir to fit
in around her slaying. She could work late, patrol, and then sleep in
the next morning.
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 11: "Doublemeat Palace"
> (or "No Doublemeat Medley, cheezeborger")
> Writer: Jane Espenson
> Director: Nick Marck
.
It's nice to see that a lot of other people are confessing to liking
Doublemeat Palace. It seems to be one of the least popular episodes
of the whole series, but I've always kind of liked it.
I love the atmosphere in the scenes where Buffy is working. Someone once
compared them to David Lynch's movies, and while I don't think that's a
perfect comparison, I'm hard-pressed to come up with a better one. I also
liked all the minor characters, especially Phillip the greasy-eared guy.
And the matter-of-fact way she picks up Manny's severed foot always
startles a laugh out of me, no matter how many times I see it. The demon
turns out to be a little too blatantly penislike for me, but no biggie
(heh).
> And while we're on her opinions, she commented a few times during
> this episode that it seems like it could've been a show from earlier
> in the series. There's a fairly direct parody of a real-world
> institution with a single monster, and the good guys kill it. I can
> see that.
It would have fit well in, say, early season 2. Buffy decides she
needs more money than her mom is willing to give her and decides to get a
part-time job. It's a common teen experience, just like dating or
dealing with bullies or having your boy/girlfriend turn into a homicidal
maniac after your first sexual experience.
> 1} The opening scene actually is quite good, supplying about 90% of the
> episode's quotables ("hey, respect the narrative flow much?"
> "Please continue the story of failure"), and providing its biggest
> Money Moment, the reveal of Tool-Buffy.
"Welcome to today's episode of 'Go Money Go!' I hear it daily." "Yeah, for
the rest of your life." There's actually a little parallel here between
Xander, looking forward to hearing "Go Money Go!" for the rest of his
life, Buffy, who will never again in life be able to say she doesn't know
how to grill, and Willow, who (Amy points out) will never again feel the
way magic made her feel.
> 6} At least the Xander/Anya sideshow is a fitting target for my scorn.
> Every joke is telegraphed about two hours in advance (ah ha, the other
> demon thinks she's here for vengeance but was just invited to the
> wedding! Komedy!). Also telegraphed is the way that every single line
> of dialogue will lead around to giving one of them misgivings about the
> wedding. And they already had perfectly good misgivings that didn't
> require a manipulative script too. Worthless subplot from start to
> finish.
I agree that the Halfrek part was a little heavy-handed. Well, a lot
heavy-handed. However, I liked the aforementioned "Yeah, for the rest of
your life" bit from the teaser. And it's interesting that Anya (prompted
by Halfek -- what are friends for?) is expressing doubts for the first
time since OMWF. For the past four or five episodes, we've only seen that
from Xander.
Speaking of Anya, it's also interesting that she wants to remain friends
with her old demon buddies, and even invite them to the wedding. She
shows as little remorse or regret for her demonic past as ... wait for it
... Spike.
> 10} Having Buffy end up with the job, under the same circumstances and
> a similar kind of boss, is a bit unexpected. And she refuses to use
> blackmail; insert sarcastic quip about the evil writers sabotaging her
> moral fiber.
Her new boss seems a bit more human and reasonable than Manny was. Maybe
because she only has a 5 Years pin, while Manny had a 10?
Everyone should read Eric Schlosser's _Fast Food Nation_.
> AOQ rating: Decent
What the hell, I'll give it a Good. Very fun, with only minor problems.
--Chris
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
Arbitrar Of Quality
One Bit Shy wrote:
> To me this is a kind of payoff for the emotional investment that the series
> has encouraged so well across the seasons. The kind of drama being played
> now has an extra kick, gets me to better appreciate it, because I have that
> emotional investment. It could never work the same way with people I had
> just been introduced to. This is the big advantage TV has over movies.
Serialized TV, when done well, is one of the best mediums for that kind
of emotional resonance in a story. The disadvantage is that you'll
never find the same consistency in writing that you would in a single
novel or a tightly-written movie, but I can accept that if there are
enough high points.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote:
> Everyone should read Eric Schlosser's _Fast Food Nation_.
Indeed.
-AOQ
ruken
Elisi wrote:
>
> Incidentally there was (at least) one other version of the dumpster sex
> filmed. It is a lot more... vigorous shall we say, and has SMG and JM
> laughing their heads off at the end. Don't know why they went with the
> subdued one.
Because the point was that Buffy wasn't having fun. She was miserable
and the zombie-like look in her eyes was needed in that scene to
demonstrate how much she was 'not' enjoying herself.
>
> As for S3 Buffy and alley sex - well if Angel hadn't had that pesky
> clause in his soul curse I can't see why not. I re-watched 'Surprise'
> recently and Buffy _definitely_wants to get laid. There are a lot of
> 'up against the wall kissing' at the start - it's just chance that
> they're *in* Angel's apartment and not in the alley outside! ;)
Season 3 Buffy would have enjoyed the sex because she wasn't using it
to punish herself. Her character was denigrated in season 6 not because
she was having public sex with Spike, it was denigrating because she
was having public sex that made her look miserable. The balcony sex
scene in DT is denigrating for the same reason. She is just looking
down on her friends while tears roll down her face. She looks
remarkably similar to the was she looked when the Master was killing
her.
As a fan of Buffy the character my focus is on her, the hell on earth
expression on her face, the vacant look on her eyes. Spike (or whoever
is screwing her) has nothing to do with it. To me he is completely
irrelavant.
PS Season 3 Buffy was too strong and had too much self-respect to have
sex with a souless vampire whethe that souless vampire called himself
Angelus or Spike. Once again, for me was not about the screwer...It was
all.about.Buffy for me. Buffy in pain, and I just can't enjoy that.
ruken
Ian Galbraith wrote:
>
> Not for me, the first half of S2 was an ordeal whenever those 2 were
> together.
>
> --
> You can't stop the signal
:) Then I offer my congratulations. Lbhe snibevgr irefvba bs gur
punenpgre raqrq hc orvat gur svany bar.
V sryy va ybir jvgu unccl, fgebat Ohssl.Ubjrire, V unir ernq rabhtu
cbfgf bayvar gb ernyvmr gurer ner znal (gur znwbevgl?) snaf gung pbhyq
arire fgnaq gur punenpgre jura fur jnf unccl naq jrer bayl noyr gb
"rawbl" ure jura fur jnf qbja naq bhg.
ruken
And watch "SuperSize"
ruken
She is better than that job and thus it is only fitting in the season
of "kick the Buffy" that she is only fit for minimum wage job that is
not going to pay her enough to support herself, her sister and the
normal household expenses. So no, it doesn't make sense that she's
aspiring to a macjob fit for teenagers or retired seniors when she may
as well be a middle-aged, single mother with a teenage at home and an
suv in the driveway and a mortgage payment.
ruken
As I said, if I could look at the story as a literary project, without
feeling for Buffy, I am sure I would be able to recognize the
brilliance of this season (or maybe not, the way the scoobies grew up
feels more like characters following the story than the story following
the characters -see Willow's aborted "power" story arch).
Sorry, still can't enjoy Buffy being denigrated and in pain it's
something I have come to accept about myself :)
Rowan Hawthorn
Horse puckey. Lots of people are "better" than the job they're stuck
with. Quite possibly *most* people, outside of politicians, lawyers,
and CEOs of major corporations. What doesn't make sense is the way so
many comic-book superheroes are independently wealthy (Spider-Man being
a notable exception,) successful, high-society types who don't *need* to
worry where their mortgage payment is coming from. Oh, wait! I'll bet
that's why they're *written* that way...
Real World superheroes would be faced with exactly the same issues as
everyone else. What a person *has* in this world rarely has a damn
thing to do with what they *deserve*.
Ian Galbraith
[snip]
> PS Season 3 Buffy was too strong and had too much self-respect to have
> sex with a souless vampire whethe that souless vampire called himself
> Angelus or Spike. Once again, for me was not about the screwer...It was
> all.about.Buffy for me. Buffy in pain, and I just can't enjoy that.
I don't enjoy it in the normal sense, I've said in the DT thread that I
find the balcony scene desperately sad for the same reason you don't like
it, but I guess I just find it cathartic or something.
Ian Galbraith
> One Bit Shy wrote:
>
>> To me this is a kind of payoff for the emotional investment that the series
>> has encouraged so well across the seasons. The kind of drama being played
>> now has an extra kick, gets me to better appreciate it, because I have that
>> emotional investment. It could never work the same way with people I had
>> just been introduced to. This is the big advantage TV has over movies.
>
> Serialized TV, when done well, is one of the best mediums for that kind
> of emotional resonance in a story.
Its the big advantage TV has over movies or even other artforms. Its only
just starting to become more common though and I think its the advent of
DVD that is driving it.
> The disadvantage is that you'll
> never find the same consistency in writing that you would in a single
> novel or a tightly-written movie, but I can accept that if there are
> enough high points.
Its essentially a production limitation. The trick is to find the best
balance between the advantages of serialisation and the production
limitations. Buffy and Angel have shown the way in this regard with their
seasonal arcs. Babylon 5 went to the other extreme with its 5 year story
but I just don't think this is possible to do except in extraordinary
circumstances.
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
> I attempt to be analytical and write about it because it's interesting and
> maybe can help explain. But that's not why I like it. The analysis comes
> second. I'm drawn in to these stories specifically because of my emotional
> involvement with these characters. It's like seeing dear friends taken
> through some very hard times. I cry for them, appreciate their best
> qualities all the more for being drawn away from them, and ultimately feel
> closer to them than I did before. At core they're still good people with
> good hearts - in spite of their vulnerabilities, their failures, the things
> they succumb to. All of those failings are built from the same
> characteristics they always had, but had mostly avoided getting in too much
> trouble over. (Except maybe Buffy, who is always being dragged through one
> hell or the other.) Now the luck has turned against them, and emotionally
> that makes me feel like I need to love them all that much more because of
> it, need to pray that much harder that they find their way through it.
>
> To me this is a kind of payoff for the emotional investment that the series
> has encouraged so well across the seasons. The kind of drama being played
> now has an extra kick, gets me to better appreciate it, because I have that
> emotional investment. It could never work the same way with people I had
> just been introduced to. This is the big advantage TV has over movies.
EXCELLENT comment! I agree totally.
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
>> > Everyone should read Eric Schlosser's _Fast Food Nation_.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> -AOQ
>
> And watch "SuperSize"
One of the extras on the DVD of Supersize Me is a short but interesting
discussion between Morgan Spurlock and Eric Schlosser.
Carin
"mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges"
<mair_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mair_fheal-92026...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>> I get that Spike has this huge reputation as this vicious killer. But
>> even
>> pre-chip Spike was never like Angelus. He didn't seem to revel in the
>
> they differed in their style of killing
> but theres no reason to assume they differed in their rate of killing
>
> spike was rape and pillage berzerker
> angelus was the cold and methodical sociopath
>
> they both killed a lot of people
>
Yeah, I get that. But with Spike it was never "personal" - to a vampire like
Spike people are cattle. A food source. Angelus needed to inflict pain on
his victims, enjoyed the torture before the kill. For him it was about
damage, not sustenance. And yeah, I know Spike had a little fun with it at
times (like the Boxer Rebellion) but it was almost more like the kid trying
to fit in. To impress Dru. To live up to Angelus. To be a part of the
gang. He just never showed the kind of cruelty that Angelus did.
Carin
"EGK" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:57a6e2l6ke6dd7hub...@4ax.com...
> It wasn't so much misery that SMG minded. It was what she felt was the
> degradation of the character. Mostly in the scenes with Spike.
Again I ask - is this the same SMG who made Cruel Intentions and Harvard
Man?
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Carin" <wave...@earthlink.net> wrote:
im sure its more comforting to be kill as food
then as an art project
what about little girl in the coal bin
and othger little girls spike had met
did they all end up being taken to foster families?
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
Carin
Carin
"peachy ashie passion" <exquisi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eSEEg.7368$Ji1.6031@trnddc05...
> EGK wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:13:07 +1000, Ian Galbraith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:01:24 -0400, EGK wrote:
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm wondering if you're getting why some of us found it distateful
>>>>rather
>>>>than to our taste? Also why we felt they turned BTVS in to the Friends
>>>>version of Buffy The Vampire Layer.
>>>
>>>Can you and Burt see why some of us like it?
>>
>>
>> I've always seen that. One regular poster who liked it told me she found
>> the depressive tone , dark and cathartic. To me each season has certain
>> things that resonate and there are individual
>> episodes or scenes that represent a season. You know what scene best
>> represents season 6 to me? Buffy getting screwed in an alley while up
>> against a dumpster. If you or anyone had said that was going to happen
>> even as far along as
>> season 5, people would have thought you needed your head examined.
>
> Hmm.
>
> That might be a big signpost for the difference of opinion too.
>
> As far back as season 3, I would have thought that could happen.
>
> Not with SPIKE, mind you. But the alley and the dumpster, yeah.
Did anyone else see Season 2's "When She Was Bad" - It was the first time
Buffy really showed her dark side (it was also the first time she came back
from the dead, however brief that first death was.)
The Buffy in that episode was VERY MUCH like the Buffy of Season 6.
Don Sample
"Carin" <wave...@earthlink.net> wrote:
While Angel might spend weeks tormenting one person, Spike would go out
looking for a mob, and kill them by the dozen. He loved a good brawl
more than anything.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Arbitrar Of Quality
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote:
> ruken <ru1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Everyone should read Eric Schlosser's _Fast Food Nation_.
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >>
> >> -AOQ
> >
> > And watch "SuperSize"
>
> One of the extras on the DVD of Supersize Me is a short but interesting
> discussion between Morgan Spurlock and Eric Schlosser.
Based on its central gimmick, I wrote off SSM as a sensationalist
garbage "documentary" and never had any desire to see it. Should I
reconsider?
-AOQ
ruken
If I understood (and remember) correctly it wasn't about the sex it was
about the characterization of Buffy. I have never watched Harvard Man
but I know that her character in Cruel Intentions was cold,
manipulative, a user. The fact that she would use her sexuality to
obtain what she wanted fit (IMO) that character. I don't think Buffy
was ever meant to be weak, powerless, a victim and I think that may
have been what those sex scenes (with the zombie like stare and the
tears rolling down the face) showed to me. I can honestly say that that
was not the show I signed up for. I was more interested in exploring
how a strong girls can grow up into strong women. I think Joss and
Marti got bored with that story and switched gears on me towards the
end. TV is littered with women as victims I was hoping Btvs, the show
about female power would be different.