Revisiting AOQ Review 1-1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
Apteryx
> Date: Jan 2 2006, 4:08 am
> Subject: AOQ Review 1-1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
> To: alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer
Now that I have just finished watching all 254 episodes of the
Buffyverse,
the next thing to do was, naturally enough, to start watching them
again.
But as I did, I remembered that I didn't comment on your reviews of
BtVS 1
episodes (except at the end, in a season wrap up). So I thought, never
too
late (even if Google don't appear to agree, not allowing me to reply
directly to your original post).
Regarding spoilers, I started rot-13 spoilers because I was
attempting to
reply to your original post, and I thought not doing so might impact
on a
hypothetical new viewer who read the whole of the original thread
relying on
it not having spoilers, and find this on the end. But that (replying
to your
original post) turns out to be impossible, so this is a new post, and
I will
not rot-13 spoilers for any later reviews I might comment on. However,
I
haven't de-roted the spoilers I had already roted. Some comments that
might
be regarded as mild spoilers are not roted here either.
Ordinarily I would have snipped any of your review that I was not
commenting
on, but here I have quoted it all (except for whatever bits I
accidentally
snipped while adding my own comments) for the benefit of anyone else
who
might want to comment on those parts of your review.
> [Hi. I'm the Arbitrar Of Quality, and I'll be reviewing _Buffy The
> Vampire Slayer_ here, in the dying remnants of Usenet, where Google
> Groups will archive my words forever and ever.
Which, in internet terms, could be as long as 10 or maybe even 12
years,
before Google's successor company decides it wants the disk space for
something else.
> I've just picked up
> the first season of the show, and I intend to give my comments on each
> episode as I watch it. And naturally, if I like _Buffy_ enough, I'll
> buy more DVDs and review the rest of the series too. I won't read
> any other comments or opinions before writing mine, so my reactions in
> these reviews will be pristine and uncontaminated.
>
> So, why? Why spend hours writing verbose reviews for a show that's
> been off the air for years, especially when there's no guarantee
> anyone will even care about reading it? Simple answer: I thought it
> would be fun. But there's bound to be someone who'll enjoy living
> vicariously through someone seeing the series for the first time.
I guess that could happen...
> And
> for the disinterested, well, I won't write them nearly fast enough to
> flood the NG or anything.
>
> A few more notes - first of all, I'm coming in more or less
> completely cold. I'm a big _Firefly_ fan, but have seen a grand
> total of maybe five minutes of Buffyverse material in my life. I know
> virtually nothing about it other than that it's a well-regarded show
> that my fencing comrades-in-arms used to watch, created by the guy
> behind _Firefly_. (I haven't seen the original film either.) I
> can't even say whether these reviews will turn out gushing or
> bile-filled, since, you know, I have no prior knowledge about the
> show.
> For that reason, I would profusely request that anyone who bothers to
> respond to my posts should please avoid spoiling anything that happens
> in any episode after the one I'm reviewing.
>
> As is contractually obligated, I'll be assigning each show an overall
> rating. I use one-word evaluations rather than numbers, but it's
> basically a five-point scale: my ratings are "Excellent,"
> "Good," "Decent," "Weak," and "Bad." (The special
> ratings of "SUPERLATIVE" and "ABOMINATION" are reserved for
> only the most extreme of circumstances.)
>
> That's about it. Be nice and welcome the new guy, won't you?]
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season One, Episode 1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
> (or "what is it about the gates of Hell that compels people to wander
> into them?")
> Writer: Joss Whedon
> Director: Charles Martin Smith
>
> "Welcome To The Hellmouth" has a lot of ground to cover in 45
> minutes: it's trying to introduce a core cast of characters, set a
> storyline in motion and throw in some fight scenes for the ADD crowd.
> Actually, it's not that easy since "Hellmouth" basically has to
> give us two stories - a high-school story and a supernatural story
> - and convince us that they're inherently related. On most counts,
> I think we can say it's a success and lays the groundwork for what
> will hopefully be an interesting show.
>
> The combination of teens and vampires might indeed make BTVS an
> unusual
> show, especially since it's based on an unpopular movie, but it
> doesn't have to be particularly different. I mean, suspiciously
> attractive teenagers and vampires... those can easily cover the
> "sex" and "violence" demographics respectively. If you're
> trying to please a TV exec, the show writes itself. Fortunately,
> Whedon and company don't seem interested in going the most obvious
> route. Take the opening sequence as an example: you've got a
> strapping young lad with confidence and a bit of a rebellious edge,
> and
> you've got a nervous, ditzy-looking blonde. If you're a new
> viewer, which of these kids do you think will be dead within a minute?
Yrg nybar juvpu bar jvyy fgvyy or gheavat hc va gur 3eq gb ynfg
rcvfbqr bs
gur fcva-bss frevrf
> You'd probably be wrong.
Even though everyone must know going in, from the title of the series
alone,
that this is a series which turns around expectations, they still
succeeded
in surprising me the first time around with an overturned expectation.
>>From there it's time to meet our principals while dumping exposition
>
> into the viewers' laps as unobtrusively as possible. At times it
> seems a little forced - Buffy's mom giving us lines like "you
> don't want to be late on your first day" and "you're sixteen"
> come to mind, but most of the time it's nicely buried in the
> dialogue. Making Buffy a new kid makes it easy for us to meet all the
> other characters are as she does, and gives an excuse for her to give
> us her backstory by means of introducing herself to her new friends.
> Even some of the supernatural exposition is camouflaged by having
> Buffy
> blow off Giles by finishing his sentences and saying yeah yeah, she
> knows all this. So, mission accomplished there.
>
> I've heard _BTVS_ compared to _Veronica Mars_... and I'm one of the
> four people in the universe who doesn't get the obsession everyone
> (including Whedon) has with _VM_,
Make that five
> so my biggest worry coming in was
> that the show would be filled with artificially "snappy' dialogue
> that thinks it's a lot more clever than it is. I shouldn't have
> worried. It's hard to explain objectively why it works, since
> "Hellmouth" is indeed full of lines that're clearly the work of
> Hollywood Writers Trying To Be Clever rather than any reflection of
> the
> way kids talk. But all I know is that Whedon's dialogue has that
> rhythm that separates "fun and clever" from "trying too hard."
For a long time BtVS was an episode I tended to turn on when I noticed
it
was on, but since I didn't watch much TV (still don't) I didn't make
time to
see it every week. I liked what I saw, but I still only saw a handful
of
complete episodes, and rather a lot of fragments of episodes. One of
the
main turning points that got me to eventually buy the DVDs of all
seasons
and see it all was a radio film review of the Preston Sturges movies
"Sullivan's Travels" and "The Lady Eve", two of my all time favourite
movies, and which together with "The Maltese Falcon" push "Citizen
Kane"
into only 4th place for best movies of 1941, officially the best year
ever
for movies. The reviewer played a clip of great snappy dialogue from
"Sullivan's Travels" and the radio show host wistfully commented that
"you
don't hear dialogue like that anymore". The reviewer commented that
you
still can, but today you only hear it on TV, in shows like BtVS and
The West
Wing. And I had a "Ping!" moment where from what I had seen of BtVS, I
knew
he was right, that BtVS was the successor to the great dialogue movies
of
the '30s and '40s.
I was probably lucky that BtVS was off air at the time, between
seasons 6
and 7. If I had rushed off to test that theory against the then
current
offerings, I'd have been disappointed. The dialogue in the later
seasons
doesn't have that same "snap". And that is because very few writers
can
manage the trick, and Whedon was writing very little of the later
seasons
(although the commentaries indicate a common theme that when fans
congratulate the writers of the later seasons, and single out a line
that
they particularly liked, it always turns out to be the one line that
Whedon
added to that episode).
> The scene with Principal (?) Flutie isn't just an info-dump about
> Buffy's past, it's also genuinely funny.
And gets out the fact of just how bad Buffy has been, when he tears up
her
record and does his speech on how whatever she may have done is
unimportant,
and then reads some of it and immediately starts taping it together
again.
> And besides the great
> timing, the wordplay itself in "Hellmouth" is quite nice too:
> "What's the sitch?" would prove catchy enough to eventually be
> assimilated by at least one other teen heroine, and we should all do
> whatever possible to work the phrase "one-Starbuck's town" into
> more conversations.
>
> So how about our cast? A mixed bag so far, but mostly promising.
> Unfortunately, one of the losers thus far is Buffy herself. She's
> not so much a character here so much as a constant stream of
> one-liners.
I really have no idea where that thought might have come from. Great
name
for a Slayer of the Vampyres BTW, lest we forget from over
familiarity. Even
if Aphrodisia does wonder what kind of name it is (actually one of 30-
odd
variants and diminutives of Elizabeth, so it could be what her close
friends
call HM ER II in private).
> The one real moment where she becomes interesting is the
> amount of bitterness she displays when telling Giles how her night-job
> as a Slayer has affected her personal life. So at least we know where
> she's coming from with the reluctant-hero routine... but the
> reluctant-hero story is so old, and Buffy's hand is (predictably)
> forced so quickly that one wonders why they even bothered with it.
Ooh! Ooh! I know! I know! :)
> The
> ending makes it clear that she could use some backup, but none of her
> friends seem inclined to develop any superpowers...
And a good thing too. This isn't an all live action version of Power
Rangers, with a group of friends each of whom has their own super
powers.
Not yet, anyway...
> Easily the standout character of the premiere is Willow, thanks to
> some
> outstanding work by both the script and by actor Alyson Hannigan.
> This
> character would be difficult one to get right working from a sketch;
> she has to be awkward enough that we buy her as a social outcast while
> still delivering the show's stylized dialogue and generally being
> engaging enough that we can buy Buffy wanting to hang out with her.
Yep. That very tricky engaging social outcast look. AH does well,
right out
of the blocks.
> (Her habit of interrupting herself with comments like "am I the most
> boring person in the world or what?" is endearing.) The fact that
> Willow is so likable goes a long way towards making the second half of
> the episode work; we already care about her enough that seeing her
> being led away by a vampire gives the episode the dramatic tension it
> needs.
>
> I'd cite Giles as my other favorite character based on the pilot;
> he's got potential despite being used mostly as an
> exposition-fountain (and straight-man to Buffy's quips). The
> combination of devotion to duty and dry humor are going to make him
> worth watching. Xander also has his moments; I do have a little
> trouble seeing him as the loser he's apparently supposed to be. Sure
> he says a few stupid things, but his good looks and relaxed confidence
> in both dialogue and body language tell a different story about him
> than the show does. (Contrast with Willow: also quite cute, but
> convincingly a geek.) Still, Xander just seems _fun_ to be around.
> On
> the other hand, I don't know how much staying power Cordelia will
> have; she seems too shallow to be a central character on this kind of
> show.
Clearly she'll never last :)
I never had a problem with season 1 Cordy. The chief antagonist in
season 1
is always in theory The Master. But sometime he's busy, or just can't
get
away. So each episode has another supernatural villain, the MOTW. But
generally they don't go to school. So the school stories need another
antagonist. And that's Cordy's role. She's drawn in broad strokes as
the
Bitch Queen. Her Special Power is to undermine Buffy's social
aspirations,
and mock her friends. She wouldn't be enhanced in that role by Hamlet-
like
depth any more than The Master would. Ohg Pbeql'f nep va guvf frnfba
vf bar
bs erqrzcgvba, fb fur pna'g erznva nyy bhg ivyynva. Urapr gur arrq gb
yngre
vagebqhpr Falqre gb cvpx hc fbzr bs gur fynpx Pbeql yrnirf
ol tenqhnyyl orpbzvat n orggre crefba.
> Maybe they'll make her intentionally annoying... but you gotta
> avoid annoying the audience too. Speaking of shallow, Jesse is
> basically a waste. Dense enough to not get it when a chick isn't
> interested in him, dense enough not to notice getting _bitten by a
> fucking vampire_... plus what does it say about him that Cordelia is
> the object of his affection? Well, he's not in the opening credits,
> so hopefully he won't be a major player in the series.
Well maybe not. And maybe that (not being in the opening credits) will
always be a guide to that...
> Of course, no vampire show would be complete without a constant stream
> of fight-scenes, and "Hellmouth" is decent in that regard. It
> seemed a little weird to see Buffy suddenly defying gravity and
> swinging around on a beam to attack Guy Whose Name Isn't Given,
She's certainly limber.
> but
> the later action sequences are entertaining and well directed. The
> general look and feel of the show I'd also classify as "decent."
> Even if some scenes come from the _Se7en_ school of "does no one here
> believe in light switches?"
I don't think they had the budget in season 1 to leave lights on.
> You've got your random occult images
> in rapid montages, you've got your creepy music occasionally
> interrupted by rock guitars... nothing too earth-shattering, but
> effective enough. Smith throws in an occasional visual gimmick but
> doesn't overdo it - I liked the spinning-camera scene (when
> Buffy's searching the club for Willow).
>
> The biggest flaw of "Hellmouth" is its villains. I laughed out
> loud when the Master first emerged from his pool of Nair.
Never a bad reaction to the introduction of a new BtVS character. But
The
Master is the principal villain. Since the concept of the show, at
least at
this point, is to make the traditional little blonde schoolgirl in the
traditional monster stories turn out to be the slayer of the
traditional
monsters, you really
can't do it without a traditional monster. You can't give him much
depth and
still have him be the stereotypical monster for Buffy to play off.
You can
make him more interesting than the original traditional monsters by
giving
him quirks, but there is no need to allow the quirks to appear the
first
time he does. For the moment he's just the monster.
> Lucas's
> speeches would be cheesy on almost any show, but here, on a show
> that's gone out of its way to try to be all witty and self-aware and
> stuff, the character sticks out like a sore thumb. The younger
> vampires, despite the fact that I've forgotten their names, work much
> better, especially the blonde chick.
The blonde chick done good. Lets hope we see some more of her.
> Her dialogue does have that
> _BTVS_ snap to it; causally-delivered lines like "I got a little
> hungry" and "[other young vampire] was young and clumsy," spoken
> by someone who looks so innocent, are nicely menacing. More of that
> kind of thing and less of B-Movie Villain and B-Movie Henchman,
> please.
>
> Well, obviously this very first episode ends on a cliffhanger, with
> our
> heroes totally out of their league. Will the show do this kind of
> thing every week? Tune in next week to find out!
>
> One last comment: audiences just don't rock out that much at local
> gigs. It'd have made more sense for the crowd to be doing the
> head-nodding "beers in both hands" dance.
>
> So...
>
> One-line summary: Promising. The Force is strong with this one.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
The first of the first. It shows in spades the pros and cons of the
early
part of a series' life. It is raw and primitive. The first season of a
creative show is the closest we get to the creator's pre-show concept
of the
show, before the servants of Satan get to do viewer surveys and start
to
whisper in his ear suggestions of little changes to this and that to
improve
the ratings with this or that demographic. It's the story Whedon would
have
told if, as would have been quite likely, this had been his only
chance to
tell the story of Buffy, the Slayer of Vampyres, as he wanted it told.
And
WTTH is the start of that story. It is very close to the source. OTOH
technically it is rough round the edges. The director and crew (and
for that
matter Whedon) don't have the advantage of first seeing an episode in
which
everything is done
right. There is that thing with the lighting, and some of the scenes
seem
rushed. Significantly the director, Charles Smith, never worked on
BtVS
again.
But, in a first episode, that can be forgiven. It massively achieves
its
objective of showing how this series is going to work. It faces up to
threat
of failing as miserably as the movie did, stares it down, and hits it
out of
the park. This could work! So for me its Excellent. It's my 16th
favourite BtVS episode, 3rd best in season 1.
Apteryx
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> > Season One, Episode 1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
> > (or "what is it about the gates of Hell that compels people to wander
> > into them?")
My first of many alternate titles that no one got (many of which were
obscure MST3K references).
Take the opening sequence as an example: you've got a
> > strapping young lad with confidence and a bit of a rebellious edge,
> > and
> > you've got a nervous, ditzy-looking blonde. If you're a new
> > viewer, which of these kids do you think will be dead within a minute?
>
> Let alone which one will still be turning up in the 3rd to last
> episode of
> the spin-off series
Well, no one including Joss could've predicted that one.
Just left that whole block in because it was interesting, but I never
noticed much of a fall-off of snappy dialogue, particularly in the
Anya era. As much as I love ATS, it got swept up in its own melodrama
fairly often, but BTVS almost always has that "snap," except for a
handful of truly dreary episodes.
> Great name for a Slayer of the Vampyres BTW, lest we forget from over familiarity.
It's weird; I was young enough when the movie came out and sat staring
at me from the video store shelf that I got used to the name before I
could register the incongruity.
> > The
> > ending makes it clear that she could use some backup, but none of her
> > friends seem inclined to develop any superpowers...
>
> And a good thing too. This isn't an all live action version of Power
> Rangers, with a group of friends each of whom has their own super
> powers.
> Not yet, anyway...
Rewatching made me appreciate that feel. One girl in all the world,
and a few people who're important to her and anchor her to the mortal
world because of friendship/love, not superpowers. They're not the
Scoobies (or even my term, "Slaypack") yet, they're Buffy & Her
Slayerettes. I don't feel as strongly about this as you do,
especially given how much I dug Willow's ultimate arc, but early
_Buffy_ has its charm, and is interesting because it's unlike any
other Joss show in that regard.
> > Easily the standout character of the premiere is Willow, thanks to
> > some
> > outstanding work by both the script and by actor Alyson Hannigan.
> > This
> > character would be difficult one to get right working from a sketch;
> > she has to be awkward enough that we buy her as a social outcast while
> > still delivering the show's stylized dialogue and generally being
> > engaging enough that we can buy Buffy wanting to hang out with her.
>
> Yep. That very tricky engaging social outcast look. AH does well,
> right out
> of the blocks.
Compare WTTH to the original pilot, and the big difference is how well
we get a chance to know and grow to love Willow. I'm stating the
obvious here, but I'm thinking once Joss decided to make Buffy already
the hero rather than a new Slayer in the TV version, he recognized
that it would distance her from the audience a little. Hence the
normals, and who could be more of a target for a geeky fanbase's
affection (and lusting. for some) than early Willow?
> > The fact that
> > Willow is so likable goes a long way towards making the second half of
> > the episode work; we already care about her enough that seeing her
> > being led away by a vampire gives the episode the dramatic tension it
> > needs.
Looks like I picked up on that ingredient immediately...
> > On
> > the other hand, I don't know how much staying power Cordelia will
> > have; she seems too shallow to be a central character on this kind of
> > show.
>
> Clearly she'll never last :)
>
> I never had a problem with season 1 Cordy. The chief antagonist in
> season 1
> is always in theory The Master. But sometime he's busy, or just can't
> get
> away. So each episode has another supernatural villain, the MOTW. But
> generally they don't go to school. So the school stories need another
> antagonist. And that's Cordy's role. She's drawn in broad strokes as
> the
> Bitch Queen. Her Special Power is to undermine Buffy's social
> aspirations,
> and mock her friends. She wouldn't be enhanced in that role by Hamlet-
> like
> depth any more than The Master would.
Ah, another chance to complain about Cordelia, like old times. Well,
she doesn't really stand out as much of a villain for me. She's not
an adversary for Buffy for much of S1, except maybe in NKABOTFD.
Buffy's a social outcast, but it's not a big battle for her, because
she's so at home being herself and gets herself a group of close
friends. Furthermore, I'd argue that although Cordy helps things
along, the Slayer gig is and always will be the main reason Buffy
doesn't fit in with the cool kids.
In his commentary, Joss makes it clear that he was aiming for his
ultimate message early by introducing the sterotypical teen-comedy
villain with the intention of making her one of the heroes. The
problem is that once she accepts what she's seeing, she loses her
resemblance to the Bitch-Queen archetype completely. And soon she's
regularly making comic book references.
That being said, I have no real problem with WTTH Cordy. In this
episode, she's perfectly intelligent, except for being interested in
stupid things. She reacts in a way that resembles a human being to
being attacked by a psycho wielding a stake. Her dialogue sparkles
like anyone else's, and we see through Buffy's eyes how friendly she
can be to those who meet her standards, and then what kind of
visciousness lurks underneath. "The Harvest" Cordy, on the other hand
is practically a different character. ("Not because it's expensive,
but because it *costs more*!")
> > The biggest flaw of "Hellmouth" is its villains. I laughed out
> > loud when the Master first emerged from his pool of Nair.
>
> Never a bad reaction to the introduction of a new BtVS character. But
> The
> Master is the principal villain. Since the concept of the show, at
> least at
> this point, is to make the traditional little blonde schoolgirl in the
> traditional monster stories turn out to be the slayer of the
> traditional
> monsters, you really
> can't do it without a traditional monster. You can't give him much
> depth and
> still have him be the stereotypical monster for Buffy to play off.
> You can
> make him more interesting than the original traditional monsters by
> giving
> him quirks, but there is no need to allow the quirks to appear the
> first
> time he does. For the moment he's just the monster.
I see the intent. All I can say is that it doesn't work for me, and
it continues to not work every time I watch WTTH. You have this
clever, tongue-in-cheek show, and suddenly you have this guy talking
in cliches that we are expected to take at face value, and as a
convincing threat. And in the first half of the season, he's mostly
alone (except for the vampire cocktail parties in WTTH/TH), so we
don't see characters we respect acting scared of him, which would give
the audience permission to take him seriously.
> But, in a first episode, that can be forgiven. It massively achieves
> its
> objective of showing how this series is going to work. It faces up to
> threat
> of failing as miserably as the movie did, stares it down, and hits it
> out of
> the park. This could work! So for me its Excellent. It's my 16th
> favourite BtVS episode, 3rd best in season 1.
It's an impressive start, and does a great job of establishing a world
and a feel right off the bat. But the rough edges also presage
everything that'll be wrong with the show early on. Still Good for
me, though a high one.
-AOQ
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
I missed AOQ's season 1 reviews too, so I think I'll hop on to Apteryx's
thread to reply to AOQ. And to Apteryx too, when the mood strikes me.
Apteryx <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
>> Date: Jan 2 2006, 4:08 am
>> Subject: AOQ Review 1-1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
>> To: alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer
.
>> As is contractually obligated, I'll be assigning each show an overall
>> rating. I use one-word evaluations rather than numbers, but it's
>> basically a five-point scale: my ratings are "Excellent,"
>> "Good," "Decent," "Weak," and "Bad." (The special
>> ratings of "SUPERLATIVE" and "ABOMINATION" are reserved for
>> only the most extreme of circumstances.)
I'm not usually one for ratings, so as time went on it became a little
disturbing how thoroughly AOQ's system seeped into my thinking.
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season One, Episode 1: "Welcome To The Hellmouth"
>> (or "what is it about the gates of Hell that compels people to wander
>> into them?")
>> Writer: Joss Whedon
>> Director: Charles Martin Smith
.
>> The combination of teens and vampires might indeed make BTVS an
>> unusual
>> show, especially since it's based on an unpopular movie, but it
>> doesn't have to be particularly different. I mean, suspiciously
>> attractive teenagers and vampires... those can easily cover the
>> "sex" and "violence" demographics respectively. If you're
>> trying to please a TV exec, the show writes itself. Fortunately,
>> Whedon and company don't seem interested in going the most obvious
>> route. Take the opening sequence as an example: you've got a
>> strapping young lad with confidence and a bit of a rebellious edge,
>> and
>> you've got a nervous, ditzy-looking blonde. If you're a new
>> viewer, which of these kids do you think will be dead within a minute?
>> You'd probably be wrong.
The opening scene was explicitly intended as a "mission statement" by
Joss, to promise us a fresh take on all the old horror show cliches, and
all the teen show cliches too. It also shows us that this will a show
where small blonde girls are active and powerful characters, who bear
watching for more than their skimpy clothes and screaming ability. But
there's only so much statement that can be wrung out of that one scene.
New viewers should expect more than the simple gender role reversal that
we see here. Buffy's new take on its genre(s) is less predictable,
subtler and more interesting than that.
As a side note, the spinoff Angel also starts with a mission-statement
scene; so does Firefly, some extent (at least if you count Serenity the
episode as the start, and count its whole teaser as one scene). But the
mission statement in WTTH reminds me most of the very first shot of
Freaks and Geeks, where we open on a football player and a cheerleader
sitting in the bleachers having the type of melodramatic relationship
conversation you'd expect on a teen soap opera ... and then the camera
pans *off* of them and onto a group of freaks sitting under the bleachers
shooting the shit about Led Zeppelin, showing us in one smooth motion who
will be the focus of the show and who will not. In both cases the intent
is not just to introduce the show but to set it apart from its peers.
>> dialogue. Making Buffy a new kid makes it easy for us to meet all the
>> other characters are as she does, and gives an excuse for her to give
>> us her backstory by means of introducing herself to her new friends.
Making her a new kid is also important to Buffy's character as reluctant
hero. She's already been the Slayer for a while now, but sees Sunnydale
as a chance to start over and have a normal, slayage-free life.
>> Even some of the supernatural exposition is camouflaged by having
>> Buffy
>> blow off Giles by finishing his sentences and saying yeah yeah, she
>> knows all this. So, mission accomplished there.
Exposition in the guise of characters avoiding exposition. It's a nice
trick if you can manage it.
>> I've heard _BTVS_ compared to _Veronica Mars_... and I'm one of the
>> four people in the universe who doesn't get the obsession everyone
>> (including Whedon) has with _VM_,
>
> Make that five
Hmph. Without going off on a long Veronica Mars tangent, I'll just offer
my opinion that season 1 of VM got quite good after the first few
episodes. The second season was a little weaker, and the third has been
weaker still, but it's still very watchable. However, it has never
really been all that Buffy-like, except in the sense of starring a
young, petite blonde woman who has unusual abilities.
>> assimilated by at least one other teen heroine, and we should all do
>> whatever possible to work the phrase "one-Starbuck's town" into
>> more conversations.
That phrase is *so* 1997. Nowadays every American town has at least
three Starbuckses.
>> So how about our cast? A mixed bag so far, but mostly promising.
>> Unfortunately, one of the losers thus far is Buffy herself. She's
>> not so much a character here so much as a constant stream of
>> one-liners.
>
> I really have no idea where that thought might have come from.
Me neither. Buffy shows character from the beginning. Behind the
one-liners we see a young woman struggling none too successfully to
forget recent trauma, easily angered and bitter when fate conspires to
put more such trauma in her path; and behind *her* we see the remains of
a formerly cheerful, gregarious, good-natured if somewhat vapid teenage
girl still struggling to get out. (Arb does rightly call attention to
her bitterness in the "What's the sitch?" conversation, but I think comes
through in many other scenes almost as well. See the balcony
conversation, for example, or her complaints to Darla as she beats the
crap out of her.) Her anxious and slightly forlorn hopefulness at a
second chance in high school, her anger and sadness when her destiny
reappears, and her brief pleasure in taking out her frustrations on a
couple of vamps all come through very well. She doesn't just talk about
these feelings, they're clear in her expressions and intonation as well.
In my opinion Buffy was a well-rounded character from the start, and SMG
was great at portraying her from the very beginning of the series.
(And as the series progresses we'll see that one-liners and serious
character development can work together very well.)
> if Aphrodisia does wonder what kind of name it is (actually one of 30-
> odd
> variants and diminutives of Elizabeth,
In origin, yes, but Buffy's parents apparently named her Buffy and not
Elizabeth. Similarly, Principal Flutie appears to have been named Bob
and not Robert, since his name plate says "B. Flutie"....
>> as a Slayer has affected her personal life. So at least we know where
>> she's coming from with the reluctant-hero routine... but the
>> reluctant-hero story is so old, and Buffy's hand is (predictably)
>> forced so quickly that one wonders why they even bothered with it.
Because it's more than just a starting point. As you later learned,
Buffy *remains* a reluctant hero. Or if not exactly reluctant, she
remains determined to have a real life outside of heroism, to keep the
person from being swallowed up in the Slayer. The struggle to reconcile
the two halves of her life is one of the main themes of the series.
>> Easily the standout character of the premiere is Willow, thanks to
>> some
>> outstanding work by both the script and by actor Alyson Hannigan.
>> This
>> character would be difficult one to get right working from a sketch;
>> she has to be awkward enough that we buy her as a social outcast while
>> still delivering the show's stylized dialogue and generally being
>> engaging enough that we can buy Buffy wanting to hang out with her.
>
> Yep. That very tricky engaging social outcast look. AH does well,
> right out
> of the blocks.
Agreed, though IMO it's in season 2 that she *really* starts to shine.
Willow displays a certain lively nervous energy that hints at great
untapped personality potential. She's shy, self-deprecating and a little
awkward, but not a loner by nature, as we see in her eager response to
Buffy's friendship. Of course taking Buffy's advice to heart almost gets
her killed by a vampire....
>> Xander also has his moments; I do have a little
>> trouble seeing him as the loser he's apparently supposed to be. Sure
>> he says a few stupid things, but his good looks and relaxed confidence
>> in both dialogue and body language tell a different story about him
>> than the show does.
The thing about Xander is that unlike Willow, he isn't shy. In fact he's
a frustrated extrovert. But he remains a social outcast for two reasons:
First, he simply lacks the social skills to realize his dreams. Second,
he simply *hates* the popular kids and their bullying ways, and they
return the hatred. The latter mostly comes through in subsequent
episodes, but his sniping at Cordy in WTTH (the "So he's not just a
little dead?" line) hints at a long-running animosity.
>> On
>> the other hand, I don't know how much staying power Cordelia will
>> have; she seems too shallow to be a central character on this kind of
>> show.
She's shallow at this stage, but I'm sure Joss always planned to
gradually give Cordelia more depth. Cordy was the first of many
instances where an initially one-note character develops some real
personality.
>> You've got your random occult images
>> in rapid montages, you've got your creepy music occasionally
>> interrupted by rock guitars... nothing too earth-shattering, but
>> effective enough. Smith throws in an occasional visual gimmick but
>> doesn't overdo it - I liked the spinning-camera scene (when
>> Buffy's searching the club for Willow).
There weren't *enough* visual gimmicks for me, leaving WTTH looking too
much like, well, a normal TV show. Some of the pacing was off too.
Apteryx mentions some scenes feeling rushed, but others felt too slow.
In particular, the first scene inside the Hellmouth, with Luke chanting
"the sleeper shall wake," was less creepy than drawn-out and tedious.
And the Master rising from the pool of blood felt quite anticlimactic.
However, I did like at least three directorial touches (though maybe the
credit should go to someone else): the sunlight behind Giles and slanting
across him during the "You are the Slayer" conversation; Angel stepping
back into the darkness at the end of the aley conversation; and the
balcony scene at the Bronze, when we can see the band playing behind and
below Buffy and Giles.
>> The biggest flaw of "Hellmouth" is its villains. I laughed out
>> loud when the Master first emerged from his pool of Nair.
>
> Never a bad reaction to the introduction of a new BtVS character.
I have to say I'm fond of the Master. Without ever joking or getting too
campy, he's actually a pretty amusing take on the old traditional master
vampire. I think the credit for that goes to Mark Metcalf's delivery
rather than the script. Of course this comes out in later episodes more
than WTTH.
Note that in the very first fight scene of the show, Buffy encounters a
vampire who's stronger than her. She's not going to cruise through the
whole series physically outmatching every opponent.
>> One last comment: audiences just don't rock out that much at local
>> gigs. It'd have made more sense for the crowd to be doing the
>> head-nodding "beers in both hands" dance.
The band onstage is called Sprung Monkey. A year or two ago I picked up
a used copy of their album _Swirl_, simply because they appeared in WTTH.
While it didn't quite rock my world, it's perfectly serviceable mid-90s
post-grunge. I still listen to it every once in a while.
>> AOQ rating: Good
It's hard for me to judge WTTH on its own merits, since all I can really
think about is that this is where it all started. We get the first
appearances of the Core Four, Angel, Joyce, Cordy, Darla, the Master, the
high school and the library, the Bronze, and the Hellmouth, not to
mention vampire dusting -- there's no way I could not love it. But love
it or not, it doesn't feel like Excellent material to me. Good seems
about right. (This is just one of many ways in which WTTH parallels the
series finale.)
--Chris
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
One Bit Shy
to piggyback on this with a few of my own observations.
The only part of AOQ's original review that I want to comment on is this:
> So at least we know where
> she's coming from with the reluctant-hero routine... but the
> reluctant-hero story is so old, and Buffy's hand is (predictably)
> forced so quickly that one wonders why they even bothered with it.
Obviously that turned out to be the centerpiece of the series, with Buffy's
final solution revealed in the very last episode 7 seasons from now. But
there's no reason for AOQ to catch onto that here - or anyone. He's right
that it initially comes across as an old story with a predictable outcome.
But even here at the start, Buffy's predictably forced hand has more
implications than it might seem. The following is a related essay that's
part of a way too big Word document I have about WTTH. There will be a
follow-up in my comments for The Harvest that picks up from the same spot.
---
Minstrels
-------------
The scene in the Bronze features Sprung Monkey performing "Believe".
Oh, I just want to believe
Can you hear me?
Can you see me?
What's inside of me?
Oh, I just want to believe
If my life can have a purpose
Help me to believe
Oh, I just want to believe
Can you hear me?
Can you see me?
What's inside of me?
Oh, I just want to believe
If my life can have a purpose
Help me to believe
This starts a tradition for BtVS music - especially that performed in the
Bronze - offering thematic ties to the series and episode. Here we might
imagine the song speaking to Buffy's struggle to accept her calling.
Everybody wants to find the circle
The line of truth that has no end
Because so many nights I've slept with the feeling of empty
And I say, right now I'm ready to believe
Is Buffy ready to believe? The scene at the Bronze starts by showing Buffy
on the outside, alone, failing to see anyone she knows - more importantly,
perhaps, failing to find anyone who knows her. Until she sees Willow,
another outsider, who seems to look upon Buffy as the cool one, the one to
know. Buffy is naturally drawn to her budding friend.
Then she spies Giles, the reminder of her calling that gets in the way of
her friendship, the calling that she's trying to reject. Willow and Giles
at the Bronze represent the conflict within Buffy. She's torn - not ready
to believe in her calling. She and Giles argue until Buffy sees Willow
being spirited away by a vampire.
This is a magic moment for the series. It's first. Right then Buffy's
calling becomes linked to her desires. Willow is just about the only friend
Buffy has right now. She is the representation of Buffy's desire to belong,
to be with people - with friends. And that friend needs the Slayer.
I feel love with my friends
I feel love in my songs
If I could just hold love
Then all the answers might come
I said, oh, if we're all children of God
And we just turned away
I got a lack of belief
I said a world without faith
It's time we turn back around
"If I could just hold love, then all the answers might come." Buffy will be
beaten down many times and have her internal faith (not religious in this
case) challenged. But her most striking character trait will prove to be
her stubborn determination to put her heart first; to refuse to sacrifice
her friends and family on the altar of expediency; to offer redemption that
others cannot find. Many of her greatest moments will be built on this
trait.
-----
I have some more thoughts about that magic moment that I'll get to with The
Harvest. It really is the first pivotal moment of the series
More generally about WTTH - It's defining characteristic is its
extraordinary success in establishing the baseline for its central
characters. Buffy, Xander, Willow & Giles will all go through some amazing
experiences before the run is done. And go through lots of changes - even
Giles to some extent. But at any point in the series - including the very
end - you can go back to this beginning and clearly recognize them as the
same people. Their essence is anchored throughout - even as they grow in
amazing ways.
Tied into that is how this episode (in combination with The Harvest for this
purpose) also establishes some of the core tensions within each character.
Tensions that will also carry forth through the series.
In WTTH that combines with witty dialogue and an engaging story to make for
an Excellent.
OBS
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
>
> It's hard for me to judge WTTH on its own merits, since all I can really
> think about is that this is where it all started. We get the first
> appearances of the Core Four, Angel, Joyce, Cordy, Darla, the Master, the
> high school and the library, the Bronze, and the Hellmouth, not to
> mention vampire dusting -- there's no way I could not love it. But love
> it or not, it doesn't feel like Excellent material to me. Good seems
> about right. (This is just one of many ways in which WTTH parallels the
> series finale.)
the production values really arent that impressive
especially after coming back after the chosen or not fade away
(and boreanez is so -skinny-)
its the actors and dialogue that carried the series at first
whats also more obvious is that while giles is the father figure
he actually isnt much older or more mature than they are
he does a lot of growing up outside the focus
meow arf meow - they are performing horrible experiments in space
major grubert is watching you - beware the bakalite
impeach the bastard - the airtight garage has you neo
Arbitrar Of Quality
anges <mair_fh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> whats also more obvious is that while giles is the father figure
> he actually isnt much older or more mature than they are
> he does a lot of growing up outside the focus
I guess I didn't think of him growing up so much as the viewer (and
him) learning about the holes in his facade. You're not wrong,
though.
-AOQ
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
he doesnt get the highlight
but as seen later with olivia in the background
or some of the references to england in early season six
he has been struggling with his place in the world
he accepted the definition of his life as a slayers watcher till she died
but i think he still yearns to be a jet fighter pilot
or grocer
Exp315
...
> Behind the
> one-liners we see a young woman struggling none too successfully to
> forget recent trauma, easily angered and bitter when fate conspires to
> put more such trauma in her path; and behind *her* we see the remains of
> a formerly cheerful, gregarious, good-natured if somewhat vapid teenage
> girl still struggling to get out. (Arb does rightly call attention to
> her bitterness in the "What's the sitch?" conversation, but I think comes
> through in many other scenes almost as well. See the balcony
> conversation, for example, or her complaints to Darla as she beats the
> crap out of her.) Her anxious and slightly forlorn hopefulness at a
> second chance in high school, her anger and sadness when her destiny
> reappears, and her brief pleasure in taking out her frustrations on a
> couple of vamps all come through very well. She doesn't just talk about
> these feelings, they're clear in her expressions and intonation as well.
> In my opinion Buffy was a well-rounded character from the start, and SMG
> was great at portraying her from the very beginning of the series.
Now Apteryx is making me watch again from WTTH, damn! I thought I was
through for the moment after AOQ finsihed. :-)
Regarding the above, one of the few comments SMG has made about the
character of Buffy was about this "anger". She said that when the
initial shooting for WTTH has finished, Joss felt that she had come
across as too angry in her scenes with Giles, and they had to re-shoot
them with a slightly different spin.
Apteryx
news:1174006199....@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
The fact that characters (Cordelia and Xander maybe more than the others)
are treated differently by differerent writers is an inevitable consequence
of
the fact that the writers and actors don't know the characters well enough
to be entirely consistent, although it never entirely goes away. But I don't
expect total consistency from my friends, and I certainly don't from TV
characters. I'd agree that WTTH Cordy is more realistic than The Harvest
Cordy, but both are fun for me.
--
Apteryx