AOQ Review 3-2: "Dead Man's Party"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
(or "They groaned, they stirred, they all uprose/Nor spake, nor moved
their eyes/It had been strange, even in a dream/To have seen those dead
men rise")
Writer: Marti Noxon
Director: James Whitmore, Jr.
So Buffy's back in Sunnydale at the end of the premiere. She
hasn't fully integrated back into her life yet, or even met up with
anyone besides her mom. Wouldn't it make sense to take a whole show
to deal with the aftermath of the summer rather than jumping back into
things with the next vampire overlord? Obviously Joss et al recognized
how badly a show like this was required.
The first thing we expect when Buffy reunites with the Slaypack is a
little humor and fun, which is delivered when Buffy first meets
Nighthawk and friends, especially the little part with Cordelia: "Oh,
hey, Buffy" [shove]. The vampire proves a little tougher that
usual to someone who's spent three months getting pasty. So, Joyce
is ready to accommodate her, her friends and Watcher know she's
back... what's next?
There's a lot of unresolved tension in these early sequences, making
them feel a little "off." It's more obvious with Joyce, but with
everyone else I think it's subtle enough that it's not as clear at
first. But there are unresolved issues, and of course no one wants to
bring them up right away. The writers are taking the risk that
audiences will tune out before they realize things are "supposed"
to be wrong. Hey, it looks fine to us DVD viewers. Also on Joyce,
good to see her back to being written like a real person again after
the (hopeful) aberrations of Bec2 and "Anne." She still doesn't
always know what to say, and tries too hard with the parenting, but
those are the flaws she's always had, the problems that spring
naturally from a character rather than a change made to accommodate the
script.
Meanwhile there a nice pair of scenes involving Snyder and his petty
(OR IS IT?!) enjoyment of the fact that Buffy's not coming back to
SHS on his watch. I'm a bit hard pressed to explain exactly why I
sometimes complain that Snyder scenes are too broad and sometimes like
them, but I think the difference is that here the humor comes entirely
from the joy in being thoroughly unpleasant that Shimerman gives the
character. He's just being a jerk for no (apparent) reason, so even
when more sympathetic people suffer for it, it's fun to watch for the
same reason that _House M.D._ is. But what's strange is that I had
to look again to remember how the final Snyder/Giles confrontation
ended. Great scene, and I always like seeing Tony Head put on his
Menacing Face, I just had no recollection of where it went the first
time. Odd.
Speaking of Giles, his sarcastic sense of humor is getting more acidic.
Which I love. "'Do you like my mask? Isn't it pretty? It
raises the dead!' Americans."
And speaking of that, yes, there's an ancient artifact (of course)
that's making zombies out of people, after a strange detour that Mrs.
Quality says is a lot like _Pet Semetary_. We were worried at first
because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back"). But DMP
does the next best thing and pushes the zombie stuff firmly into the
background, letting it exist only to give our heroes a chance to fight
something together at the end. I shall thus say no more about it,
except that I say the single masked demon is actually less intimidating
than the zombie horde.
What the episode is primarily building to, of course, is the party in
Buffy's house. I wasn't so happy with the leaps of logic required
to set it up (yeah, I always invite live bands over to my friends'
houses without asking them). Even Oz's dissertation about the
different types of gatherings falls strangely flat. But then once we
actually start the sequence, it's one of best tours de force the
series has managed yet. It's pretty clear where things are going
(even before Buffy makes things explicit with "it seems like people I
don't even know missed me"), but actually watching it play out,
well, wow. Seeing Buffy exchange hollow trivialities with the one or
two people she actually wants to see, and then drift away... it hurts,
a lot. And then to overhear her mom expressing (the very real
phenomenon) that having her daughter back hasn't exactly lived up to
the everything-will-be-all-right expectations...
This takes us to Buffy's room, where, in what kids tend to imagine is
a mature decision, she decides to run again. And then Willow, after
refusing to give her the welcome she really needed, is yelling at her
about that too. That's what it finally takes to make our normally
fearless hero break down in tears, and I have never felt more empathy
for her. And yet we're also sympathetic to those getting in her
face, as the episode turns things around and confronts Buffy with what
she's done to these people ("we were doing *the best we could*!
It's not like we had a lot of choice in the matter!"). For once I
didn't mind Joyce demanding an explanation this very moment...
she's waited long enough. The scene loses a little momentum once
they go out in public and we take things to slight excess (even though
I liked the bit with Jonathan - "anyone else wanna weigh in
here?"), but a lot of the right notes continue to be hit. And then
it transitions back into more standard monster-killing with an
absolutely killer bit of contextual humor ("I was being
sarcastic!").
Every episode must remind me at some point that Cordelia is really
annoying. This time it's the "in her shoes" scene. But then she
actually gets a little AOQ goodwill for her sincere attempts to be
useful during the big zombie attack.
The closing Buffy/Willow exchange is reminiscent of the end of "When
She Was Bad." Now, as then, I'm willing to accept a little
reconciliation. They've earned the chance to be a little bit happy.
It looks like Sunnydale is now a one-SBC town to go along with the
Starbucks.
Now that it's been two episodes, I'm going to say that they should
have put together a Boreanaz-free version of the opening credits;
it'd build more mystery. (Yes, I know that in real life there are
agents to argue semantics with, and there's public knowledge about
who's signed what kind of contract, but still...)
This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
- "[Brie] smells like Giles' cat," "It's NOT MY..."
So...
One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
AOQ rating: Excellent
[Season Three so far:
1) "Anne" - Decent
2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
EGK
wrote:
>So...
>
>One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>
>AOQ rating: Excellent
>
>[Season Three so far:
>1) "Anne" - Decent
>2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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)
Espen Schjønberg
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
> (or "They groaned, they stirred, they all uprose/Nor spake, nor moved
> their eyes/It had been strange, even in a dream/To have seen those dead
> men rise")
> Writer: Marti Noxon
> Director: James Whitmore, Jr.
>
> good to see her back to being written like a real person again
Actually, I have tryed making posts about Joyce being demonised in this
episode, which of course makes people ask whether I noticed what
happened to Jouyce's friend.
"You made some bad decisions?" is what she is saying to Buff. I think
this is really low. Like, the really stupid adult so many shows got.
Buffy has not made any decisions an intelligent Joyce would not respect.
Her hatred agianst Giles is very on it's mark: her hatred against Buff
is totally wrong.
The "you have to pay the price" additude is way off any relevant mark.
The episode is stinking, rotten horrible bad because of this.
Also, it annoys me how cheap it ends: all those zombies has walked
around due to animation. Now, the animation is gone, and I would expect
them to drop down dead again. But not disappair. This is Marti
Noxon-writing, we don't need them, so they disappear. They should be
spread in he house! Of course, a problem, but not my problem: the
writers problem.
> [Season Three so far:
> 1) "Anne" - Decent
> 2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
Weird. Did I mention, weird? Anne, being great, DMP being crap.
--
Espen
kenm47
EGK wrote:
> On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >So...
> >
> >One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
> >
> >AOQ rating: Excellent
> >
> >[Season Three so far:
> >1) "Anne" - Decent
> >2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>
> Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
> often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
> don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
> rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
> --
Yup. I'm one of them.
I consider it the mostf orced, artificial and absurd episode of the
first three seasons. I like parts of it, but the confrontations at Casa
Summers come out of nowhere. I tru;y thought then this show has had it.
Next week better reover or I'm done; I disliked it that much.
Willow comes across more selfishly concerned for herself than for
Buffy:
"Buffy: I know that you were worried about me, but...
Willow: No! I don't just mean that. I mean, my life! You know? I,
um...
I'm having all sorts of... I'm dating, I'm having serious dating with a
*werewolf*, a-and I'm studying witchcraft and killing vampires, and I
didn't have anyone (starts sobbing) to talk to about all this scary
life
stuff. And you were my best friend.
Xander comes off here and earlier as an absolute dislikeable creep,
more upset that Buffy was away when his "rival" Angel has been "killed"
than anything else. (His concern for Giles has a slight ring of
sincerity, but nothing said at the party does).
"Look. I'm sorry that your honey was a demon, but most girls
don't hop a Greyhound over boy troubles."
And Willow shuts Oz down when he tries to get Xander under control?
"No, let them go, Oz. (gets a look from him) Talking about it isn't
helping. We might as well try some violence."
Totally NOT a Willow thing to say.
And the inserted humor in the big confrontation scene seems unduly
forced, and is not funny, including Jonathan.
And of course we also have the huge wreckage at the Summers home and
the deaths of innocents (Pat and the obnoxious party guy). And yet here
the Sunnydale forgettyitus doesn't get a mention?
And let's not forget Buffy had wanted a "gathering" to talk, and
instead she gets a hootenanny. And then soap opera conveniently
overhears only the tail of the Joyce/Pat discussion, missing the "While
Buffy was gone, all I could think about was getting her
home. I just knew that if I could put my arms around her and tell her
how much I loved her, everything would be okay."
Which puts a different tone spin on: "Having Buffy home, I-I thought it
was gonna make it all better, but in some ways, it's almost worse."
And it all seems to come down to they welcome Buffy back ONLY because
of her superior "superhero" skills in defeating the big bad of the
episode.
Bah! Humbug. #56 of the first 56 episodes. A tremendous disappointment
in oh so many ways. Yet, enough other good things, including the home
schooling line, that keeps it one notch above "Bad."
Ken (Brooklyn)
vague disclaimer
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> We were worried at first
> because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
> how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
Sometimes things really are a simple as they seem.
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>
> AOQ rating: Excellent
>
> [Season Three so far:
> 1) "Anne" - Decent
> 2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
As EGK says, this may just provoke quite a lot of discussion. The most
common complaint about this ep (I think) is the way characters are 'out
of character', especially unsympathetic Willow. Not an argument I
subscribe to, but it might be time to get your asbestos underpants back
from the cleaners.
--
A vague disclaimer is nobody's friend
Espen Schjønberg
>
> As EGK says, this may just provoke quite a lot of discussion. The most
> common complaint about this ep (I think) is the way characters are 'out
> of character',
I would say most of them have lost character totally, than being merely
out of it.
--
Espen
kenm47
merely
out of it.
--
Espen"
Or the worst aspects of those personalities being brought to the fore
and making that their personalities. Almost like the characters we
learned to love for a year and a half had been killed and zombies put
in THEIR place (except Giles, who muddles through admirably, and Oz who
tries to be Oz but gets shut down).
Ken (Brooklyn)
Steve Schaffner
> EGK wrote:
> > On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >So...
> > >
> > >One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
> > >
> > >AOQ rating: Excellent
> > >
> > >[Season Three so far:
> > >1) "Anne" - Decent
> > >2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
> >
> > Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
> > often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
> > don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
> > rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
> > --
>
>
> Yup. I'm one of them.
>
> I consider it the mostf orced, artificial and absurd episode of the
> first three seasons. I like parts of it, but the confrontations at Casa
> Summers come out of nowhere. I tru;y thought then this show has had it.
> Next week better reover or I'm done; I disliked it that much.
I find it tolerable and mildly enjoyable, but only if I skip
everything non-Giles from the start of the party until the killing
begins. That's just godawful dreck.
I can understand not being wild about Anne, but rating it lower than
this muddle of incoherent interpersonal relationship mush? I second
your bah. (I did like the dead cat, though.)
With Anne, I remember being uncertain until the "I'm Buffy" line. I
hadn't seen season 3, and I wasn't sure that I'd spent my money wisely
in springing for the DVDs. With that line, I decided the purchase was
worth it. Then I backed up and watched the scene again, and again,
just watching SMG's face in the lead-up to that line. She really
nailed that one.
--
Steve Schaffner s...@broad.mit.edu
Immediate assurance is an excellent sign of probable lack of
insight into the topic. Josiah Royce
Jeff Jacoby
>
> EGK wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >So...
>> >
>> >One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>> >
>> >AOQ rating: Excellent
>> >
>> >[Season Three so far:
>> >1) "Anne" - Decent
>> >2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>>
>> Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
>> often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
>> don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
>> rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
>> --
>
>
> Yup. I'm one of them.
I wouldn't regard it as one of the worst, but on the
other hand there's no way (except in a bizarro world)
this deserves an Excellent.
> I consider it the mostf orced, artificial and absurd episode of the
> first three seasons. I like parts of it, but the confrontations at Casa
> Summers come out of nowhere. I tru;y thought then this show has had it.
> Next week better reover or I'm done; I disliked it that much.
The confrontation did not come "out of nowhere". The issues
were real and always present (re. some of the conversations
among the Scoobies in "Anne"). However, I thought the
execution (no pun intended) was very very poor.
> Willow comes across more selfishly concerned for herself than for
> Buffy:
Agreed.
> "Buffy: I know that you were worried about me, but...
> Willow: No! I don't just mean that. I mean, my life! You know? I,
> um...
> I'm having all sorts of... I'm dating, I'm having serious dating with a
>
> *werewolf*, a-and I'm studying witchcraft and killing vampires, and I
> didn't have anyone (starts sobbing) to talk to about all this scary
> life
> stuff. And you were my best friend.
>
> Xander comes off here and earlier as an absolute dislikeable creep,
> more upset that Buffy was away when his "rival" Angel has been "killed"
> than anything else. (His concern for Giles has a slight ring of
> sincerity, but nothing said at the party does).
A few points here (one I've been meaning to make since Becoming II)
- While he may be very undiplomatic about it (a "dick") he's
more able or willing than the others to face up to Buffy
and tell her she's wrong about something. I think this
only adds to the depth of their friendship.
- During his angry diatribe, he was concerned about the
effect of her apparent abandonment on others, not himself.
Very unlike Willow, as noted above.
- His rival was not killed by Buffy (at least as far as he
knows). Angelus was.
- She's his hero. Or course he'd be upset if his hero
abandoned them and the cause. Again, from his POV his
does NOT know what happened at the end of Becoming II,
except that the world is saved and she's nowhere to be
found (and didn't die heroically, because... here she is).
> "Look. I'm sorry that your honey was a demon, but most girls
> don't hop a Greyhound over boy troubles."
>
> And Willow shuts Oz down when he tries to get Xander under control?
>
> "No, let them go, Oz. (gets a look from him) Talking about it isn't
> helping. We might as well try some violence."
>
> Totally NOT a Willow thing to say.
It's been shown Willow can be all over the map at unexpected
times (re. "Bppnfvbanyyl, V'z pnyybhf naq fgenate.")
> And the inserted humor in the big confrontation scene seems unduly
> forced, and is not funny, including Jonathan.
>
> And of course we also have the huge wreckage at the Summers home and
> the deaths of innocents (Pat and the obnoxious party guy). And yet here
> the Sunnydale forgettyitus doesn't get a mention?
> And let's not forget Buffy had wanted a "gathering" to talk, and
> instead she gets a hootenanny. And then soap opera conveniently
> overhears only the tail of the Joyce/Pat discussion, missing the "While
> Buffy was gone, all I could think about was getting her
> home. I just knew that if I could put my arms around her and tell her
> how much I loved her, everything would be okay."
>
> Which puts a different tone spin on: "Having Buffy home, I-I thought it
> was gonna make it all better, but in some ways, it's almost worse."
>
> And it all seems to come down to they welcome Buffy back ONLY because
> of her superior "superhero" skills in defeating the big bad of the
> episode.
I agree with you here. The big problem for me with this episode
is issues that have built up and festered over the summer can not
simply be resolved with a few lines ("I've got your back."
"Good moves") or a discussion over mochas.
Jeff
kenm47
hadn't seen season 3, and I wasn't sure that I'd spent my money wisely
in springing for the DVDs. With that line, I decided the purchase was
worth it. Then I backed up and watched the scene again, and again,
just watching SMG's face in the lead-up to that line. She really
nailed that one. "
Absolutely. Yet, I feel with the party in DMP, pretty much from
overhearing Joyce up to the Zombie invasion, Marti and Whitmore had no
idea what mood they wanted, or what was to be revealed, and SMG looking
sieriously vulnerable about to burst into tears just seems all so wrong
like no one told her what they wanted from her in that scene, and all
so weak after the "I'm Buffy" declaration of "Anne."
Can anyone point to a link where Marti tries to explain what she wanted
here? It's a horrible muddle. It could be she did the best she could
with a tough assignment: bring Buffy back into the group but show some
rough edges to the harmonious unit that once was. An episode better
thought of as a time filler moving some things along, even if done
poorly.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
> more upset that Buffy was away when his "rival" Angel has been "killed"
> than anything else. (His concern for Giles has a slight ring of
> sincerity, but nothing said at the party does).
A few points here (one I've been meaning to make since Becoming II)
- While he may be very undiplomatic about it (a "dick") he's
more able or willing than the others to face up to Buffy
and tell her she's wrong about something. I think this
only adds to the depth of their friendship.
- During his angry diatribe, he was concerned about the
effect of her apparent abandonment on others, not himself.
Very unlike Willow, as noted above.
- His rival was not killed by Buffy (at least as far as he
knows). Angelus was.
- She's his hero. Or course he'd be upset if his hero
abandoned them and the cause. Again, from his POV his
does NOT know what happened at the end of Becoming II,
except that the world is saved and she's nowhere to be
found (and didn't die heroically, because... here she is). "
This seems to be the Xander split. Too often I see him as still
functioning from lust and jealousy, with his affections for the ladies
all over the place (Cordy, Buffy, Willow, etc). I have trouble seeing
the more noble Xander others see at this point. Sure, he has his
moments, and sure there would be no Buffy without his breath in PG, but
really he comes off as hormonically imbalanced at too many times.
BTW, one nit to pick: "killing" Angelus, as far as Xander is concerned,
would be killing Angel. 2 for the price of one. Besides, as Becoming
demonstrated, Xander repeatedly holds Angel responsible for the acts of
Angelus, including Jenny's death.
Ken (Brooklyn)
EGK
>
>EGK wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >So...
>> >
>> >One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>> >
>> >AOQ rating: Excellent
>> >
>> >[Season Three so far:
>> >1) "Anne" - Decent
>> >2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>>
>> Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
>> often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
>> don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
>> rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
>> --
>
>
>Yup. I'm one of them.
>Bah! Humbug. #56 of the first 56 episodes. A tremendous disappointment
>in oh so many ways. Yet, enough other good things, including the home
>schooling line, that keeps it one notch above "Bad."
Repeat after me. "There are no bad episodes in seasons 1-3. Just some less
good than others". :)
The one I disliked the most in this season (which I thought was the best).
Ornhgl naq gur Ornfgf
kenm47
EGK: LOL
This one comes as close to "Bad" as any IMO in Seasons 1 to 3. It's
certainly the least of the "less good." I still can't see it as Bad
since as far as I'm concerned things never descend to this level again
and there are moments. The one you ROT13'd is better IMO and when we
get to it I'll say why again.
Ken (Brooklyn)
gree...@gmail.com
> Every episode must remind me at some point that Cordelia is really
> annoying. This time it's the "in her shoes" scene.
No points at all for her being the only person in the room even
attempting to see things from Buffy's perspective? You're hardcore.
> AOQ rating: Excellent
Bold choice. I've always liked this episode better than most, but even
so, DMP doesn't stand well with the truly excellent episodes.
Terry
Espen Schjønberg
> Also, it annoys me how cheap it ends: all those zombies has walked
> around due to animation. Now, the animation is gone, and I would expect
> them to drop down dead again. But not disappair. This is Marti
> Noxon-writing, we don't need them, so they disappear. They should be
> spread in he house! Of course, a problem, but not my problem: the
> writers problem.
Nice to see people seem to think the same as me: The heros closest
friends are way off, with the exception of Giles. (And possibly
Cordelia. But then again, she is not really close.)
But to comment the zombie-problem: In WTTH and The Harvest, something of
the same happens, and JW comments something like: we don't need the
corpses anymore, so they are gone.
It may seem like MN here just copies the trick. But it still feels more
of a problem to have a _home_ full of dead bodys, than to have some
corpses at a nightclub.
Regarding the corpses in The Harvest: it could look, for a casual
wiever, as if they just was unkilled by how Buffy slayed the Vessel.
What do you think, anyone any theories? I know, I did never see them as
unkilled, but still...
--
Espen
Scythe Matters
> The first thing we expect when Buffy reunites with the Slaypack is a
> little humor and fun, which is delivered when Buffy first meets
> Nighthawk and friends, especially the little part with Cordelia: "Oh,
> hey, Buffy" [shove]. The vampire proves a little tougher that
> usual to someone who's spent three months getting pasty. So, Joyce
> is ready to accommodate her, her friends and Watcher know she's
> back... what's next?
Two scenes with Giles -- first at his front door, and then again when
he's alone in the kitchen -- are extraordinarily acted by ASH. Absolute
perfection on his part, saying more with three words and two facial
expressions than paragraphs of dialogue otherwise might.
> The writers are taking the risk that
> audiences will tune out before they realize things are "supposed"
> to be wrong.
Hey, AoQ, I've got a news flash: not everyone is as impatient as you.
(feel free to assume an emoticon if it helps)
> Also on Joyce,
> good to see her back to being written like a real person again after
> the (hopeful) aberrations of Bec2 and "Anne." She still doesn't
> always know what to say, and tries too hard with the parenting, but
> those are the flaws she's always had, the problems that spring
> naturally from a character rather than a change made to accommodate the
> script.
"Real person" is debatable, but yes: this is Joyce, with all her flaws.
Major flaws, actually.
> Meanwhile there a nice pair of scenes involving Snyder and his petty
> (OR IS IT?!) enjoyment of the fact that Buffy's not coming back to
> SHS on his watch.
Two more clues to the mystery in this episode:
----
Joyce: This isn't over. If I have to, I'll go all the way to the Mayor.
(follows Buffy out)
Snyder: Wouldn't that be interesting.
----
Snyder: If that word is Buffy, then I have two words for you: 'good'
and 'riddance'. Now, if you don't mind, I have an appointment with the
Mayor.
[...]
Giles: Buffy Summers is a minor, and is entitled to a public education.
Your personal dislike of the girl does not legally entitle you to...
Snyder: (interrupts) Why don't you take it up with the city council?
He grabs the files and his briefcase and heads for the door.
Giles: I thought I'd start with the State Supreme Court.
Snyder stops and faces him.
Giles: You're powerful in local circles, but I believe I can make life
very difficult for you, professionally speaking. (confidently) And Buffy
will be allowed back in.
Snyder: Sorry. I'm not convinced.
He tries to go again. Giles grabs him by the lapel and shoves him back
into his filing cabinet.
Giles: (grining) Would you like me to convince you?
Snyder shakes his head ever so slightly and looks back nervously.
----
Here, again, more references to the Mayor, which isn't necessarily
anything new. But in the second exchange, there *is* something new: it's
possible to intimidate Snyder. So far, that hasn't been possible. One
wonders why this particular lever works, given the direction all the
other clues are pointing.
> He's just being a jerk for no (apparent) reason
You've been given plenty of apparent reasons. None of them confirmed,
but definitely quite apparent.
> But what's strange is that I had
> to look again to remember how the final Snyder/Giles confrontation
> ended. Great scene, and I always like seeing Tony Head put on his
> Menacing Face, I just had no recollection of where it went the first
> time.
Yes, a terrific scene. You've seen the face before in reference to Ethan
Rayne. And, also, Angelus in "Passion."
> We were worried at first
> because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
> how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
That's one. Here's another: what characterizes the zombies, as
opponents? They can't be killed; no matter what you do to them they keep
coming and coming and coming. To beat them, you can't ignore them or
fight them or take them on one by one. You've got to address the source
of the zombie-ism -- a metaphor for the root of the problem -- and deal
with it to make the zombies go away.
In this episode, Buffy's problem isn't her friends' seeming weirdness,
nor is it her mothers' difficulties having her back, nor is it Snyder
and the school. It's her having to realize a few fundamental truths:
running away doesn't solve a problem, and friendship isn't a one-way
street...even if you're the Slayer. Everything that upsets her in the
episode is a symptom, not the cause; much like the zombies are symptoms,
not the cause.
> Even Oz's dissertation about the
> different types of gatherings falls strangely flat.
Oh, man. That entire scene, from the encounter with the cat, through
Cordy's "I'm the dip," to Oz's tripartite party essay, is absoutely
hilarious. It *almost* redeems the episode. Almost.
> It's pretty clear where things are going
> (even before Buffy makes things explicit with "it seems like people I
> don't even know missed me"), but actually watching it play out,
> well, wow.
Fubhyq jr gryy uvz nobhg gur pbaarpgvba orgjrra fzbxvat naq qrngu ng
guvf cbvag? ;-)
> Every episode must remind me at some point that Cordelia is really
> annoying. This time it's the "in her shoes" scene.
I agree with Terry: she's the only one who seemed to see the heart of
the problem.
> Now that it's been two episodes, I'm going to say that they should
> have put together a Boreanaz-free version of the opening credits;
> it'd build more mystery.
But why? Angel's in this episode, too.
Part of the problem here might be what you're used to. On Babylon 5, for
example, the credits were sometimes changed episode-by-episode to
reflect rather dramatic plot surprises. Nothing that happened in the
credits could be relied upon to presage something in the episode.
> AOQ rating: Excellent
"Fair" at best, but that's probably too high. You respond positively to
the *oddest* things...
One Bit Shy
news:1141660132.8...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
> There's a lot of unresolved tension in these early sequences, making
> them feel a little "off." It's more obvious with Joyce, but with
> everyone else I think it's subtle enough that it's not as clear at
> first. But there are unresolved issues, and of course no one wants to
> bring them up right away. The writers are taking the risk that
> audiences will tune out before they realize things are "supposed"
> to be wrong.
I must preface my comment here by saying that to me this is the single most
surprising review from you so far. I would never have dreamed such a high
rating from you. Or really from anybody. That's not a criticism. For I
think you really found here just what Marti was going for. You may have
earned a hug from her. (Hmmm. I wonder if Marti Noxon hugs.)
Your last sentence above really nails something that I think a lot of people
didn't get or refused to accept. I confess I still struggle accepting some
of it myself. Xander's lecture especially annoys me. He's yelled at Buffy
before - and before I've been very supportive of his feelings - even if his
sentiments weren't entirely deserved. He was under great stress then -
emotionally running on empty. Here, I've never been as comfortable with
that explanation. His lack of compassion for Buffy bothers me.
I may be wrong though. I do have to remind myself that when he jumps in to
support Joyce, he's not really speaking about Joyce. It's his own hurt that
is speaking. Xander, self styled protector of Buffy, who mainly had to
endure repeated beatings in that seemingly futile pursuit, yet also once
breathed life into Buffy and perhaps saved Buffy at least once more. Maybe
his sense of abandonment is the greatest of all? I don't know. But your
enthusiastic acceptance of this episode gives me pause.
There is a paradox in creating a show with this kind of feel. It may be
dead on in an artistic sense, but the penalty is enduring that "off" feeling
that you refer to. At times it's down right unpleasant. It's funny, come
to think of it, because you did the same thing to me with Ted - another show
where my main criticism is how unpleasant it feels to go through the ugly
parts. In any case, the feel of this episode makes it impossible for me to
rate it so high. By your system, I would normally rate it decent.
But I admire your choice any way. Back in Season 1, one of my first
comments to you was concern that you weren't letting yourself accept the
premise of the show. Well, here you zoomed past me and did that in spades.
OBS
kenm47
comments to you was concern that you weren't letting yourself accept
the
premise of the show. Well, here you zoomed past me and did that in
spades. "
Boy. I wish I could get that.
I am appreciating all the Xander chat. I always reacted much more 2
dimensionally to him in this episode. Didn't see the nuance Still not
sure it was there. From Marti?
Ken (Brooklyn)
hopelessly devoted
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
Place me firmly in category "What the......?"
On the heels of Anne, DMP did nothing to make me feel better about the
show that gave us Passions, IOHEFY, B1 & 2. It was my initial fear
that the S3 would somehow succeed in proving me right by FAILING just
when I thought the show was proving me wrong.
Still reeliing from the shock of Anne, the opening scene of Buffy
unpacking and mom's reaction to no longer being alone in the house were
actually a very warm introduction. The discomfort and distance is
visible from the start. Joyce's questions showing her need to
instantly become a part of her daughter's life where she missed
originally while ALSO showing her need to "get back to normal" are
obvious and confusing for both J and B.
> The first thing we expect when Buffy reunites with the Slaypack is a
> little humor and fun, which is delivered when Buffy first meets
> Nighthawk and friends, especially the little part with Cordelia: "Oh,
> hey, Buffy" [shove].
I've always wondered about the look on Xander's face when he first sees
Buffy. Even to this very day, it is a very interesting expression but
I have never been able to get over the many questions that it probed.
Was there some guilt about "The Lie"? Just plain shock at seeing
Buffy? The expression seemed to say a lot more than they explained.
One by one revealing the new scoobs including Cordelia and Oz and I
love the look on Willow's face as she comes charging in after the first
vamp.
I found Giles' face when he opens the door the only honest reaction to
her reappearance. And his reaction possibly the only one who
understands??? However Buffy expecting to just rejoin the fold is
clearly unrealistic. Her own bout with denial without a doubt. The
conversation with everything just peaches and cream on the couch did
nothing to set up the ensuing scenes. Cookies and tea and everything's
great and I did not sense any real avoidance. I know that Marti Noxon
tried, but for me, it just wasn't there.
> So, Joyce
> is ready to accommodate her, her friends and Watcher know she's
> back... what's next?
Joyce's revelation that Mr. Giles and friends have already been invited
to the party after the "I blame you speech" was a complete shock and
there was a very small part of me that started to believe that maybe
she had a little split personality thing going. Ok, a bit of an
exaggeration, but you get the point. Along with the "No, she can go
with you" after Giles picks up the really pissed off dead cat was just
a little jarring. Everythiing between Anne and DMP just seemed very
disconnected. I thought it was a nice touch to have Buffy addressed
just out of the blue by her mother's "support group" a nice touch.
Although Pat annoyed even me.
> There's a lot of unresolved tension in these early sequences, making
> them feel a little "off." It's more obvious with Joyce, but with
> everyone else I think it's subtle enough that it's not as clear at
> first.
Agreed. I thought the tense moments between mother and daughter to be
the only real moments of the show but I did not get a sense of Uh-oh
with the others until much later. Although, I don't know if it would
be a viewer or a writer issue. I "knew" the tension was there but it
wasn't obvious from the screne. More in a minute.
> She still doesn't
> always know what to say, and tries too hard with the parenting, but
> those are the flaws she's always had, the problems that spring
> naturally from a character rather than a change made to accommodate the
> script.
Agreed.
> Meanwhile there a nice pair of scenes involving Snyder and his petty
> (OR IS IT?!) enjoyment of the fact that Buffy's not coming back to
> SHS on his watch.
More later. It is an "on first viewing" statement that I could include
here but probably better to wait until a later date. Although I did
find it amusing that Snyder would carefully remove the mini-sword from
Buffy's hands, especially after B2.
> Obviously Joss et al recognized
> how badly a show like this was required.
Part of the reason I had (and still do have) such a HUGE problem with
DMP is just as you said. A show like this was required. It had to
happen. There was no way around it. They just couldn't figure out how
to make it happen so they did. They made it happen. Forced IMHO.
Buffy's "What if he's mad" followed by Xander's comments were not an
indication of something argument to come. Xander has always been the
voice of "speak now, think later". Buffy waiting for Willow, we again
only get to see Buffy's perspective which also makes the blow up
initiated by Willow an out of nowhere scene because W/X/C reactions had
no support. The gang planning the party as if everything is fine,
Willow being "party girl", Xander's typical negative voice. Everything
was completely unrealistic. Where were the questions? If they didn't
want to deal with it with Buffy, the questions of where was she? what
happened? what do we do now? should have been there. Instead they
played an undiscussed group-denial thing that just didn't fit.
Especially for a "new tight group" of people who learned to fight
together without our superhero. Where was the newly found group trust?
The without-the-slayer bond.
Everything just seemed to be completely off. Personalities were, IMO
thrown by the wayside in order to "make it happen". Willows character
and aversion at the party completely out of the blue. The faking deaf
and first visible signs of discomfort and avoidance. Again, no setup
beforehand. Xander who normally speaks his mind, playing the role of
"everything's ok" with his "guess a lot of people are glad to have you
back." Xander? Is that you?
> Seeing Buffy exchange hollow trivialities with the one or
> two people she actually wants to see, and then drift away... it hurts,
> a lot. And then to overhear her mom expressing (the very real
> phenomenon) that having her daughter back hasn't exactly lived up to
> the everything-will-be-all-right expectations...
While I felt Buffy's pain, for me it was part of the problem. For a
show that normally does a very good job at allowing the viewer to see
all sides, they, in this instance, neglected to include the W/X/C side
of it. This is mainly what I missed in Anne. It is this part that I
waited all haitus to see. How how would the fold, the everyday
ordinaries deal and what issues would be cause by the absence of "our
hero". Anne pretty much said none and DMP said "there were issues and
we have to deal with them" without revealing the issues first. So I
felt blindsided by issues that I hadn't seen. Maybe that was the
intent of the writer, putting us in Buffy's shoes. But as a viewer, I
didn't feel in Buffy's shoes, I just felt cheated out of part of the
story.
Again, the drinking scene with Joyce seemed to be the only realistic
thing about the show. Her comments here are very honest as well as
Buffy's reaction to re-run away prompting the ever explosive arguement
from the rest of the fold. That I understand.
> For once I
> didn't mind Joyce demanding an explanation this very moment...
> she's waited long enough. The scene loses a little momentum once
> they go out in public and we take things to slight excess (even though
> I liked the bit with Jonathan - "anyone else wanna weigh in
> here?"), but a lot of the right notes continue to be hit.
The J/B fight was understandable and expected. The W/B argument was
fine even though the setup was not there. They didn't establish any
real loss in Anne and there was no build up to lead to the explosion.
The arguement seemed very contrived. Willow's "It doesn't make it ok
that you didn't", Xander again being a jackass jumping in where he was
not needed and the complete "stare-down" only made me want to smack him
(especially after "The Lie") and suddenly the Mother/Daughter fight
takes a complete backseat.
> "'Do you like my mask? Isn't it pretty? It
> raises the dead!' Americans."
> Mrs. Quality says is a lot like _Pet Semetary_.
This along with a few wonderfully funny moments (I liked the hootenanny
part) keep the ep from being a complete bore. (I know. Ouch!)
The Pet Semetary reference also came to mind.
> Great scene, and I always like seeing Tony Head put on his
> Menacing Face
With that smile on his face was a very cold and enticing moment. Once
again reminding us that there is indeed another side of Giles that
earned the name Ripper.
> But DMP
> does the next best thing and pushes the zombie stuff firmly into the
> background, letting it exist only to give our heroes a chance to fight
> something together at the end.
Saving grace. Plus Joyce beating the zombie with a baseball bat (Go
Joyce!)
> The closing Buffy/Willow exchange is reminiscent of the end of "When
> She Was Bad." Now, as then, I'm willing to accept a little
> reconciliation.
My two ep take at the time and still to this day......
Anne - Buffy's gone so let's get her back
Dead Man's Party - big fight, big battle, and big group hug.
> Obviously Joss et al recognized
> how badly a show like this was required.
Forced, contrived and disappointing. I don't know what they could have
done. I have my theories like everyone else. While neither Anne or
DMP is a complete waste of time they are also two of my least often
viewed eps in the season.
Having said all of that, at the time of airing, I still did not
understand the format of he show. S1 began mid-season and S2 was the
only substantial basis I had to form a theory about the show. My
appreciately for the ep has not really grown over time, but I did have
to learn how the Buffy rollercoaster actually takes off.
One Bit Shy
news:1141668695....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> This seems to be the Xander split. Too often I see him as still
> functioning from lust and jealousy, with his affections for the ladies
> all over the place (Cordy, Buffy, Willow, etc). I have trouble seeing
> the more noble Xander others see at this point. Sure, he has his
> moments, and sure there would be no Buffy without his breath in PG, but
> really he comes off as hormonically imbalanced at too many times.
I don't like the feel of this show, but I think the way people act in it
still makes sense and isn't as unfeeling as it appears on the surface.
Xander - I think we tend to take Xander for granted and miss his emotional
turmoil until it suddenly boils up in a seemingly inappropriate manner.
Remembering his hurtful rant at Buffy about Angel in Becoming, it might be
useful to note that we'd seen everybody mourn Jenny in their way. Willow
bawled her head off right away. Buffy was crushed with guilt. Giles
grasped at fantasy hopes of her continued presence. But not Xander. That
rant was the surprise expression of a grief we didn't know he had before.
Think about it. Xander was in a bad spot. His first real romantic
experience is with his life long enemy and has driven a rift between he and
his life long best friend. So there he is stuck in a somewhat abusive
relationship that never once has really made sense to him while he watches
Willow drift away into her own life with Oz. Meanwhile the world is going
to hell around him with one friend (Jenny) dead, and another (Kendra) soon
to become dead. The man he most admires - Giles - is in a personal hell
over it. And the anchor in his life, the one he really depends on (Buffy)
appears to be abandoning all her senses and all her responsibilities in
favor of an insane attempt to "redeem" her murderous boyfriend.
What's important about Xander having breathed life into Buffy is not his
nobility. It's the link between them. Xander feels it like a physical
bond. He chases Buffy around "protecting" her and getting the snot kicked
out of him over and over not because of hormones, but because he feels he
has to. Because every once in a great while he's the difference that keeps
her alive. Emotionally he literally thinks she'll die if he's not there.
To Xander, the whole Angel thing was Buffy abandoning him and everybody else
that loved and cared for her. And it brought into question everything he
had hung his life on for the past year since breathing life into her.
That's the context for his outburst at Buffy in Becoming. Add to it seeing
Willow in a coma and you've got the context for him not telling Buffy about
Willow trying the ensouling spell again. Emotionally running on empty. And
now, upon Buffy's return (from what looked like literal abandonment to him),
he's still got most of those issues unresolved and they burst forth again.
Xander's still got a lot of growing up to do. He may never get there. He
has a tendency to get right to the surface of the matter, invariably
understanding far less then he thinks he does. Here, he knows nothing of
what happened at the end of Becoming, nor what that meant to Buffy. His
outburst is hurtful, largely undeserved, and I hate it too. I hate how it
must make Buffy feel and how it makes me feel. But it's not indicative of
Xander's cruelty or lack of feeling. Hell, half the problem is he feels too
much.
There's a variation of this story for Joyce and Willow too.
I sometimes puzzle about BtVS's ongoing friendship theme. How they're
stronger together than apart. They came together naturally - even easily -
at the start. Built a bond and a seeming sensitivity to each other. But by
this point - which isn't the first time they've diverged - maybe we're
seeing that their bond isn't really that naturally solid. That they tend to
take things for granted, let wounds fester, and too often miss where each
other's heads are at by country miles. Yeah, they still get things right
sometimes too. And it's magic when they're on the same page. But maybe it
takes more work than they realized.
OBS
jil...@hotmail.com
episode. Nothing the characters did came out of the blue for me. We'd
already seen a very few times how self-absorbed Willow can be, this was
just the first time it was directed at Buffy.
However, as another point, Willow and Xander, along with their extras
(but not Cordy) had been staying up late and not sleeping well through
the summer as they tried to keep lesser vampires in check. They have a
very minor example of what Buffy has to do all the time, and they
resent it because they aren't the Slayer and this is something they
shouldn't have to do. They should be entertained by it, not having to
suffer from actually fighting unless she's there to take the main hits.
As for the tension with Joyce, heh, it's not over yet. You'll see.
And while most girls don't leave town over boy problems, some do.
Murdering the man you love (in Buffy's mind it was murdering) when he
has no memory of what happened that caused this, that's severely
traumatic. Of course, none of them know what really happened.
You'll see more Willow-selfishness come up later on just this subject.
Arbitrar Of Quality
> As EGK says, this may just provoke quite a lot of discussion. The most
> common complaint about this ep (I think) is the way characters are 'out
> of character', especially unsympathetic Willow. Not an argument I
> subscribe to, but it might be time to get your asbestos underpants back
> from the cleaners.
Yeah, we have indeed been seeing that a lot. Particularly Willow's
outburst. I thought you people were supposed to be the ones reminding
me that "out of character" is a pretty meaningless phrase given that if
it happens on the show it's done by a character? Or that these people
are interesting *because* they're flawed?
Willow's behavior definitely has an air of selfishness in this episode.
And so what? She's only human. I'm actually led to think back to
another time we saw Willow have an outburst of this magnitude -
Xander and Cordelia. What had Xander done that was so wrong, and
deserving of long-term bitterness? His main crime was making out with
someone she didn't approve of. Sure he kept it hidden, which she
wasn't used to from him, but why was it "wrong?" She doesn't
just yell at him, she also begins thinking about *revenge*. What had
he done to deserve vengeance? It only makes sense from Willow's
perspective if what she cares about is herself, and her feelings.
This is the way I've seen Willow over these past 2+ seasons. Under
her demureness she's capable of keeping a lot of strong feelings
bottled up, often because she wants to put other people before herself.
But stuff will fester and accumulate. And then when that moment comes
that pushes her over the edge, she will absolutely explode. Real
lashing out, no regard at all for the damage she's causing. In that
respect, her behavior in DMP is entirely consistent with her character,
or at least what I think her character is like.
The other problem most people seem to be having (which is again tied to
not allowing characters to be selfish sometimes) is that they side
entirely with Buffy on this particular issue, and not at all from
Xander or Willow's perspective. Let me repeat that, having watched
everything she's gone through, I empathize very much with Buffy in
both this episode and the ones leading up to it. So I think her point
of view is pretty clear here, and I understand where she's coming
from.
But now I'm going to take a look at it from the perspective of one of
Buffy's friends: I've followed Buffy into this crazy world she's
part of, and I've accepted her completely, Slayer and all. Everyone
else abandoned her at some point, but I didn't; we four Slaypack
types were trying to have her back, help her until the bitter end.
That didn't stop her from walking out on us. Hell, I even risked my
life to cover for her with the Slaying duties that she abandoned,
despite being patently not supernaturally qualified for it. Well, now
she's back, and it's great to know that she's all right. I was
worried to death. Would it have killed her to call? Not even a
postcard. And it'd be nice to hear an apology, or a word of thanks
for what we've done for her. Is she really going to just act like
nothing's happened? Well, I guess it's an uncomfortable topic, and
the most important thing here is that I love Buffy and care about her.
So I'll force a smile, give her time to ease back into things, and
I'll try to ignore this hollowness in all our interactions. And now
I discover that she's decided to leave again, just like that. You
*bitch*. You unfeeling ungrateful bitch. How could you treat us like
we're so inconsequential?
I feel for everyone involved. Not everyone handles themselves with
grace, but their emotions make sense to me.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> The big problem for me with this episode
> is issues that have built up and festered over the summer can not
> simply be resolved with a few lines ("I've got your back."
> "Good moves") or a discussion over mochas.
I can see why people would have that problem. I guess I'm willing to
allow that the characters value their friendship enough that they're
very forgiving of each others' flaws. People who really really like
each other can get over a lot. Like I said, the end of this one
reminds me of the end of "When She Was Bad;" it seems to be a recurring
trend on the show.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
"I consider it the mostf orced, artificial and absurd episode of the
first three seasons. I like parts of it, but the confrontations at Casa
Summers come out of nowhere. I tru;y thought then this show has had it.
Next week better reover or I'm done; I disliked it that much."
Ah, I have the sinking suspicion that you were one of those people who
were always thinking that the show was in danger of Jumping The Shark
(though I don't think that term had been coined yet).
> Absolutely. Yet, I feel with the party in DMP, pretty much from
> overhearing Joyce up to the Zombie invasion, Marti and Whitmore had no
> idea what mood they wanted, or what was to be revealed, and SMG looking
> sieriously vulnerable about to burst into tears just seems all so wrong
> like no one told her what they wanted from her in that scene, and all
> so weak after the "I'm Buffy" declaration of "Anne."
But isn't it clear by now that Buffy's most vulnerable to the people
she cares about the most? I haven't been keeping an exhaustive list of
the episodes in which she cries, but I do know that it's pretty rare,
and that three of them have been "Nightmares," "Innocence," and now
"Dead Man's Party."
-AOQ
hopelessly devoted
Scythe Matters wrote:> Joyce: This isn't over. If I have to, I'll go
all the way to the Mayor.
> (follows Buffy out)
>
> Snyder: Wouldn't that be interesting.
>
> ----
>
> Snyder: If that word is Buffy, then I have two words for you: 'good'
> and 'riddance'. Now, if you don't mind, I have an appointment with the
> Mayor.
Going back to my "not sure I should bring it up". At this time, ofv,
along with the comments regarding the Mayor in IOHEFY and B2, my spidy
sense was really tingling.
hopelessly devoted
Juvyr ba bar unaq V guvax lbh unir n irel tbbq gnxr ba Knaqre, V nyfb
ungr gb guvax gung ur jvyy bayl ernyvmr gung va gur ynfg srj zbzragf ba
uvf qrngu orq, znlor gurer vf fbzrguvat gb gung jubyr guvax orsber lbh
fcrnx cuenfr. V'ir whfg arire haqrefgbbq gur snpg gung ur unq fb zhpu
snvgu va uvf bja ivrjf gb pbzcyrgryl vtaber gur enzvsvpngvbaf bs uvf
jbeqf naq npgvbaf. Nygubhtu V nterr gung, ng guvf cbvag va gvzr, ur
unf zhpu tebjvat hc gb qb.
One Bit Shy
I felt very much the same way towards Xander. This was - and may still be -
the absolute low point for me with him
But my feelings about Xander are evolving. I'm having real doubts about my
initial feelings. I still hate what he says - how it makes me feel and how
it must make Buffy feel. But I think I may be understanding it better. AOQ
reminded me of the obvious that everybody can't help but feel abandoned by
Buffy and can't just let go of the feeling when she walks in the door. One
way or the other it's got to be dealt with. I'm struck now by how the blow
up occurs essentially with the kind of trite sentiment of how could you do
this to your mother. In real life that's just as stupid... And just as
unavoidable. None of this is really rational. It's just pent up feelings
bursting forth. To a significant degree just letting them out releases
everybody from their binds. And one of the reasons why things can be mostly
ok after the work out of a good monster fight. (The other reason is that
the monster fight paradoxically brings order back to their world. A relief
in itself.)
OBS
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > We were worried at first
> > because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
> > how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
>
> That's one. Here's another: what characterizes the zombies, as
> opponents? They can't be killed; no matter what you do to them they keep
> coming and coming and coming. To beat them, you can't ignore them or
> fight them or take them on one by one. You've got to address the source
> of the zombie-ism -- a metaphor for the root of the problem -- and deal
> with it to make the zombies go away.
>
> In this episode, Buffy's problem isn't her friends' seeming weirdness,
> nor is it her mothers' difficulties having her back, nor is it Snyder
> and the school. It's her having to realize a few fundamental truths:
> running away doesn't solve a problem, and friendship isn't a one-way
> street...even if you're the Slayer. Everything that upsets her in the
> episode is a symptom, not the cause; much like the zombies are symptoms,
> not the cause.
That's great! I like the episode even more now.
[re: credits]
> But why? Angel's in this episode, too.
Given that BTVS has thus far kept the same opening titles all year, you
don't think that this strongly suggests that he'll somehow come back, a
development which might have been better as a surprise? It's of course
possible that he'll appear only in dream or flashback for an extended
period of time, but that's the less likely explanation.
-AOQ
Michael Ikeda
news:duhok1$qaf$1...@readme.uio.no:
> On 06.03.2006 16:48, Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these
>> review threads.
>>
>>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
>> (or "They groaned, they stirred, they all uprose/Nor spake, nor
>> moved their eyes/It had been strange, even in a dream/To have
>> seen those dead men rise")
>> Writer: Marti Noxon
>> Director: James Whitmore, Jr.
>>
>> Also on Joyce,
>> good to see her back to being written like a real person again
>
> Actually, I have tryed making posts about Joyce being demonised
> in this episode, which of course makes people ask whether I
> noticed what happened to Jouyce's friend.
>
> "You made some bad decisions?" is what she is saying to Buff. I
> think this is really low. Like, the really stupid adult so many
> shows got. Buffy has not made any decisions an intelligent Joyce
> would not respect. Her hatred agianst Giles is very on it's
> mark: her hatred against Buff is totally wrong.
Joyce doesn't express any hatred toward Buffy here. And yes Buffy
did make a very bad decision. Specifically, running away for several
months without even telling anyone that she was still alive.
--
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
Michael Ikeda
> On 06.03.2006 16:48, Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these
>> review threads.
>>
>>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
>> (or "They groaned, they stirred, they all uprose/Nor spake, nor
>> moved their eyes/It had been strange, even in a dream/To have
>> seen those dead men rise")
>> Writer: Marti Noxon
>> Director: James Whitmore, Jr.
>>
>> Also on Joyce,
>> good to see her back to being written like a real person again
>
> Actually, I have tryed making posts about Joyce being demonised
> in this episode, which of course makes people ask whether I
> noticed what happened to Jouyce's friend.
>
> "You made some bad decisions?" is what she is saying to Buff. I
> think this is really low. Like, the really stupid adult so many
> shows got. Buffy has not made any decisions an intelligent Joyce
> would not respect. Her hatred agianst Giles is very on it's
> mark: her hatred against Buff is totally wrong.
>
Joyce doesn't express any hatred toward Buffy. And Joyce is right
about the bad decisions. Running away and staying away for several
months without ever telling anyone she was even alive were very bad
decisions.
Michael Ikeda
news:120pap7...@news.supernews.com:
The Scoobies have a tendency to be avoidy about emotional issues
until they explode in their faces. Which means that their
arguments tend to get angrier than they might have been otherwise.
That said, I think Xander was mostly right in what he was saying,
although he could have said a lot of it in a better way.
Jeff Jacoby
> "kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:1141668695....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>> This seems to be the Xander split. Too often I see him as still
>> functioning from lust and jealousy, with his affections for the ladies
>> all over the place (Cordy, Buffy, Willow, etc). I have trouble seeing
>> the more noble Xander others see at this point. Sure, he has his
>> moments, and sure there would be no Buffy without his breath in PG, but
>> really he comes off as hormonically imbalanced at too many times.
>
> I don't like the feel of this show, but I think the way people act in it
> still makes sense and isn't as unfeeling as it appears on the surface.
>
[snip Xander stuff I mostly agree with]
> Xander's still got a lot of growing up to do. He may never get there. He
> has a tendency to get right to the surface of the matter, invariably
> understanding far less then he thinks he does. Here, he knows nothing of
> what happened at the end of Becoming, nor what that meant to Buffy. His
> outburst is hurtful, largely undeserved
Only we (and Buffy) know it's undeserved. He and the rest of
the gang very well might have thought/reacted differently had
they known more, even if only a tiny bit.
Recall his comment "Did you even try talking to anybody?"
Whether her reasons for not telling anyone were good or bad
is another debate. But you can't expect much understanding
if you keep your friends completely in the dark.
Jeff
Michael Ikeda
(snipped)
> AOQ rating: Excellent
>
> [Season Three so far:
> 1) "Anne" - Decent
> 2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>
Don't have any major comments on the review right now. Just didn't
want you to think that all of fandom except yourself disliked this
episode. Probably wouldn't rate it quite as highly as "excellent".
It's a good solid show both as an arc episode and a stand-alone. And
has a number of memorable lines. Still don't think it quite ranks
with the very best of the episodes. So "good" rather than
"excellent" for me...
Rowan Hawthorn
>
> Yeah, we have indeed been seeing that a lot. Particularly Willow's
> outburst. I thought you people were supposed to be the ones reminding
> me that "out of character" is a pretty meaningless phrase given that if
> it happens on the show it's done by a character? Or that these people
> are interesting *because* they're flawed?
Yes, unfortunately that seems to be forgotten quite a lot when the flaw
in discussion happens to be one that one or another poster finds
particularly disturbing. I promise to avoid actual spoilers, but I have
to say: "You ain't seen nothin' yet." :-)
>
> This is the way I've seen Willow over these past 2+ seasons. Under
> her demureness she's capable of keeping a lot of strong feelings
> bottled up, often because she wants to put other people before herself.
> But stuff will fester and accumulate. And then when that moment comes
> that pushes her over the edge, she will absolutely explode. Real
> lashing out, no regard at all for the damage she's causing. In that
> respect, her behavior in DMP is entirely consistent with her character,
> or at least what I think her character is like.
Personally, I think you've probably nailed Willow's character better
than perhaps any of the others. Willow *means* well, mostly, but yes,
she does have... issues. And not all of her personality traits are
admirable, even when they're understandable.
>
> I feel for everyone involved. Not everyone handles themselves with
> grace, but their emotions make sense to me.
Me, too. They remind me a lot of *real people*, who don't always deal
well with stress and hurt.
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
Michael Ikeda
By the time this episode aired, most people who were interested
would already have known that Angel would be returning.
One Bit Shy
news:pc-dnUv2edQ...@comcast.com...
I'm not going to dispute that. I thought I was mostly agreeing with it.
"...he knows nothing of
what happened at the end of Becoming, nor what that meant to Buffy."
OBS
Arbitrar Of Quality
> The Scoobies have a tendency to be avoidy about emotional issues
> until they explode in their faces. Which means that their
> arguments tend to get angrier than they might have been otherwise.
Agreed.
> That said, I think Xander was mostly right in what he was saying,
> although he could have said a lot of it in a better way.
Seems to be a trend with this character, yes?
-AOQ
One Bit Shy
news:1141686254.3...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> Juvyr ba bar unaq V guvax lbh unir n irel tbbq gnxr ba Knaqre, V nyfb
> ungr gb guvax gung ur jvyy bayl ernyvmr gung va gur ynfg srj zbzragf ba
> uvf qrngu orq, znlor gurer vf fbzrguvat gb gung jubyr guvax orsber lbh
> fcrnx cuenfr. V'ir whfg arire haqrefgbbq gur snpg gung ur unq fb zhpu
> snvgu va uvf bja ivrjf gb pbzcyrgryl vtaber gur enzvsvpngvbaf bs uvf
> jbeqf naq npgvbaf. Nygubhtu V nterr gung, ng guvf cbvag va gvzr, ur
> unf zhpu tebjvat hc gb qb.
Jub gnhtug uvz ubj gb rkcerff uvf srryvatf? Uvf cneragf.
Ur'f fcrag zbfg bs uvf yvsr ercerffvat uvf srryvatf jvgu jvfrpenpxf.
Uvf gjb vagvzngr eryngvbafuvcf jrer jvgu gur gjb uvturfg znvagranapr tnyf
bar pbhyq vzntvar. Arvgure bs jubz ner zbqryf bs fhogyrgl jura vg pbzrf gb
rkcerffvat srryvat.
Vg'f n punenpgrevfgvp bs Knaqre gung V flzcnguvmr jvgu. Ur'f qrnyg jvgu vg
bire gvzr znvayl ol fuhggvat hc be znxvat wbxrf. Jura gung'f abg tbbq
rabhtu, ur fgehttyrf. Ohg V guvax bire gur pbhefr bs gur frevrf ur qvq fubj
fvtaf bs znghevat. Abg nyy gur jnl, ol nal zrnaf. Ohg trggvat gurer.
Gurer ner fbzr jbaqreshy zbzragf jvgu Naln jurer ur anvyf vg. Uvf yrpgher
gb Ohssl nobhg Evyrl, juvyr fgvyy unefu, jnf sne zber pbafgehpgvir guna ur
unq orra va gur cnfg. Naq fbzr zbzragf va F7 jrer cbfvgviryl bofreinag.
Fb V unir ubcrf sbe fbzrguvat fubeg bs uvf qrngu orq. <t>
BTR1701
I'm having the same sort of confusion over the fact that John Schneider
is still in the opening credits of "Smallville", despite his character
having died four or five episodes ago. And unlike Boreanaz, he hasn't
been making appearances in flashbacks or dreams. He's just gone, yet
he's still in the opening sequence.
BTR1701
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> vague disclaimer wrote:
>
> > As EGK says, this may just provoke quite a lot of discussion. The most
> > common complaint about this ep (I think) is the way characters are 'out
> > of character', especially unsympathetic Willow. Not an argument I
> > subscribe to, but it might be time to get your asbestos underpants back
> > from the cleaners.
>
> Yeah, we have indeed been seeing that a lot. Particularly Willow's
> outburst. I thought you people were supposed to be the ones reminding
> me that "out of character" is a pretty meaningless phrase given that if
> it happens on the show it's done by a character? Or that these people
> are interesting *because* they're flawed?
>
> Willow's behavior definitely has an air of selfishness in this episode.
> And so what? She's only human.
Exactly. I think it makes her a more realistic character. It's good to
see some of these people acting real for once. Keeps them from turning
into caricatures.
hopelessly devoted
Jnf gelvat gb or vaqverpg rira jvgu ebg13. Qba'g nfx zr jul.
Gur Knaqre "vffhrf" lbh oebhtug hc jrer abg sbetbggra be vtaberq,
nygubhtu nyfb abg nqqerffrq va zl cbfg. Sbe zr, V nyfb unir vapyhqr
guvf cnegvphyne "oehfu" jvgu gur Knaqre nep.
Va ergebfcrpg, Knaqre frrzrq gb zryybj bhg va gur urnq gb urnq
qrcnegzrag bayl nsgre ylvat ba uvf qrngu orq, jvgu Snvgu fvghngrq
fdheneryl ba gbc va Pbafrdhraprf. Gung vf gur gur cbvag (be engure
nsgrejneqf) jurer V abgvprq gung Knaqre frrzrq gb qb n yvggyr yrff va
gur "fcrnx-npg svefg, guvax yngre" qrcnegzrag. V qba'g erzrzore nal
oybj hcf rira pybfr gb gur rneyvre frnfbaf nsgre gung cbvag jvgu Knaqre
orvat fb "jvgubhg ertneq" nf ur jnf cevbe gb gung cbvag. Sbe zr, gur
Knaqre nep, juvyr yrff fhogyr, vf qrsvangryl cerfrag guebhtubhg gur
frevrf.
One Bit Shy
V qrsvavgryl zvffrq gur qrngu orq nyyhfvba. uru. Gung unqa'g bppheerq gb zr
orsber. V'yy unir gb guvax nobhg gung ntnva jura jr trg gb vg - abg gbb sne
njnl.
V'q nggevohgrq vg gb gur eryngvbafuvc jvgu Naln zlfrys. Ohg arj sbbq sbe
gubhtug.
Nf gb ercrngrq... Ubj nobhg Ragebcl/Frrvat Erq? Cerggl unefu ba Ohssl. Bs
pbhefr ur jnf bire vg ol gur raq bs Frrvat Erq. Cneg bs uvf znghevgl V
thrff.
One Bit Shy
news:1141685690.8...@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
That's a heck of an analysis.
Mike Zeares
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 2: "Dead Man's Party"
Back in the day I decided I was going to jump on the review train. I
called them my Knee-Jerk reviews, the intent being to run to the
computer right after the show aired and bang out my first impressions.
I ended up only doing a few of them, but DMP was the first. So here it
is:
************begin block quote*******************
I read the Canadian reviews of this, which were largely negative, so I
was pleasantly surprise when I found myself enjoying the episode.
There
were a few Marti Moments (like the old "Giles looks away just as he
turns to the page with the pertinent information" cliche), but overall
I
thought it was very well done. SMG was fantastic, of course, in her
portrayal of a Buffy who may be ready to resume being the Slayer, but
maybe wasn't quite ready to come home yet. I've been in her situation.
You can't just go back to normal right away, if ever, and I applaud
Marti and Joss for not hitting the Big Reset Button.
A lot of the initial reaction has been to the big fight at the party
(which probably seemed like a good idea at the time) where everybody
lays into Buffy. This was a very intense and realistic scene.
Obviously, while they are glad she's back, the gang has a lot of
repressed resentment, and it all came out in this scene (with Willow
egging them on, and interesting role for the formerly meek one). I
liked how the others sort of retreated to their stereotypes (for lack
of
a better word); Joyce was in Non-Accepting mode, Xander was in Rudely
Truthful mode (otherwise known as Jerk mode, which is necessary
sometimes), Oz was the referee. It was interesting that Cordelia stood
up for Buffy. The poster child for self-absorbtion is the least
selfish
in this scene. This was the heart of the episode, and it was very well
done.
Followed by a cool zombie fight. Heh-heh, zombies are cool, heh-heh.
And it accomplished what the big yackity-yack session couldn't: brought
them all together. Nothing like the heat of battle to foster bonding.
I wonder how the SPD will handle this. "Gang on PCP," no doubt. But
there are at least two dead (Pat and the Phone Dude). Maybe a "gang
fight" with only two dead is too minor to notice in Sunnydale.
[random comments section deleted for space]
I said last week that I might look at this episode as the "real" season
premiere, and that's sort of what I've done. "Anne" was a transition
episode, which had the sole purpose of getting Buffy back to Sunnydale.
Now the "real" season has started, with the characters in their
expected
places, yet everything is different. Should be an interesting ride.
************end block quote*********************
As you can see, I was initially about as positive as you were. I
really liked the episode. But then I rewatched it. Multiple times.
And each time, the Stupid Plot Tricks and bad direction in the fight
scene bugged me more and more, until I started hating it. However,
I've gotten over a lot of that now, and I'm back to mostly liking it.
Marti's idiot plotting still bugs (she may not be entirely to blame --
they broke stories together, with Joss, after all), and the fight scene
still has some of the series' worst shots ever. The end of th ep has a
really cavalier attitude towards the people who just died, too. But
the underlying theme is solid. As I mentioned in my review, I found
the issues between Buffy and her friends/family to be dead on.
Watching the argument was like watching many real life arguments, where
everybody is a little right and a little wrong, because no one is
thinking rationally. It's all raw emotion, and it's awesome and
painful to watch. Or, in my case, fast-forward through while
remembering how great it was (I often can't listen to the dialogue in
those intense scenes. What's the opposite of a heart of stone?).
Another episode whose whole is greater than the sum of it's parts.
Plus, I'll forgive a lot for zombies. Zombies rule.
-- Mike Zeares
hopelessly devoted
V fgnegrq gb abgvpr n erny punatr jvgu uvz guvf frnfba. Gur Knazna
gung va tqV&VV jnf abg gur fnzr va Naar naq QZC.
Ubj nobhg Ragebcl/Frrvat Erq? Nterrq. Gurer ner qrsvangryl gvzrf
jurer ur erterffrf, ohg gura ntnva qba'g jr nyy. Jnf gelvat gb svaq
bhg gur svefg zragvbaf bs uvf snzvyl. V qba'g unir zl qiq ba unq evtug
abj. Qvq gurl cerqngr guvf frnfba?
vague disclaimer
I see absolutely nothing there that I would argue with one bit. Well,
maybe the slighty snarky "you people".
I am curious that you don't cut Joyce and Cordelia the same kind of
slack though (especially Joyce).
--
A vague disclaimer is nobody's friend
Wes <>
>
>EGK wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2006 08:41:59 -0800, "kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >EGK wrote:
>> >> On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >So...
>> >> >
>> >> >One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>> >> >
>> >> >AOQ rating: Excellent
>> >> >
>> >> >[Season Three so far:
>> >> >1) "Anne" - Decent
>> >> >2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>> >>
>> >> Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
>> >> often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
>> >> don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
>> >> rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
>> >> --
>> >
>> >
>> >Yup. I'm one of them.
>>
>> >Bah! Humbug. #56 of the first 56 episodes. A tremendous disappointment
>> >in oh so many ways. Yet, enough other good things, including the home
>> >schooling line, that keeps it one notch above "Bad."
>>
>> Repeat after me. "There are no bad episodes in seasons 1-3. Just some less
>> good than others". :)
>>
>> The one I disliked the most in this season (which I thought was the best).
>> Ornhgl naq gur Ornfgf
>> --
>
>EGK: LOL
>
>This one comes as close to "Bad" as any IMO in Seasons 1 to 3. It's
>certainly the least of the "less good." I still can't see it as Bad
>since as far as I'm concerned things never descend to this level again
>and there are moments. The one you ROT13'd is better IMO and when we
>get to it I'll say why again.
>
>Ken (Brooklyn)
#144 out of 144.
Although AoQ's review sounds like a decent/good ep.
Wes
vague disclaimer
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> Jeff Jacoby wrote:
>
> > The big problem for me with this episode
> > is issues that have built up and festered over the summer can not
> > simply be resolved with a few lines ("I've got your back."
> > "Good moves") or a discussion over mochas.
>
> I can see why people would have that problem. I guess I'm willing to
> allow that the characters value their friendship enough that they're
> very forgiving of each others' flaws. People who really really like
> each other can get over a lot. Like I said, the end of this one
> reminds me of the end of "When She Was Bad;" it seems to be a recurring
> trend on the show.
>
> -AOQ
Actually there is an important difference: In WSWB the scoobies let
Buffy vent on her own and then very conspicuously held the friendship
door open for her.
Here, that was never going to work because (as you have summarized
superbly elsewhere) they *all* needed to vent. Thanks to the Ugly Mask
they then got a very quick reminder that they are a very good team, that
they are somewhat more than the sum of their parts.
vague disclaimer
"hopelessly devoted" <cry...@cinstall.com> wrote:
> Ubj nobhg Ragebcl/Frrvat Erq? Nterrq. Gurer ner qrsvangryl gvzrf
> jurer ur erterffrf, ohg gura ntnva qba'g jr nyy. Jnf gelvat gb svaq
> bhg gur svefg zragvbaf bs uvf snzvyl. V qba'g unir zl qiq ba unq evtug
> abj. Qvq gurl cerqngr guvf frnfba?
Frnfba bar - "qb lbh thlf rira unir n fgbir" (be jbeqf gb gung rssrpg)
Mike Zeares
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Scythe Matters wrote:
>
> > > We were worried at first
> > > because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
> > > how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
> >
> > That's one. Here's another: what characterizes the zombies, as
> > opponents? They can't be killed; no matter what you do to them they keep
> > coming and coming and coming. To beat them, you can't ignore them or
> > fight them or take them on one by one. You've got to address the source
> > of the zombie-ism -- a metaphor for the root of the problem -- and deal
> > with it to make the zombies go away.
> >
> > In this episode, Buffy's problem isn't her friends' seeming weirdness,
> > nor is it her mothers' difficulties having her back, nor is it Snyder
> > and the school. It's her having to realize a few fundamental truths:
> > running away doesn't solve a problem, and friendship isn't a one-way
> > street...even if you're the Slayer. Everything that upsets her in the
> > episode is a symptom, not the cause; much like the zombies are symptoms,
> > not the cause.
>
> That's great! I like the episode even more now.
Holy crap, so do I. I never really saw that angle before. I always
saw the zombies as 1) a convenient way for the gang to rebond through
communal violence (tv characters often have to move faster emotionally
than people do in reality), and 2) and end in themselves, just because
I like zombies. I never saw how tight the metaphor was in this ep.
This may be a case of my being influenced too much by others'
negativity. Happens a lot, unfortunately.
You know, I wanted to resist your "excellent" rating, because I spent
so long a time disliking this episode. But it's sucking me in. The ep
is flawed, but I think the flaws are mostly directorial. They really
do go "clunk," though. Can an "excellent" ep have parts that go
"clunk?"
-- Mike Zeares
Mike Zeares
> I agree with you here. The big problem for me with this episode
> is issues that have built up and festered over the summer can not
> simply be resolved with a few lines ("I've got your back."
> "Good moves") or a discussion over mochas.
This would be true in the real world, but as I mentioned in another
reply, in TVland characters often have to move faster emotionally, just
to keep the show moving. The gang got to a place by the end of DMP
that it could have taken them months to get to in reality. Which is
fine with me. I don't know about you, but I don't think I would have
wanted to watch half a season or so of the gang barely speaking to each
other. Other things bugged me, but I never really had a problem with
the end of the episode.
-- Mike Zeares
Mel
kenm47 wrote:
> EGK wrote:
>
>>On 6 Mar 2006 07:48:52 -0800, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>So...
>>>
>>>One-sentence summary: Exactly what the series needed.
>>>
>>>AOQ rating: Excellent
>>>
>>>[Season Three so far:
>>>1) "Anne" - Decent
>>>2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent]
>>
>>Wow. It should be amusing to read the responses since Dead Man's Party is
>>often regarded as one of the worst episodes of the series by many people. I
>>don't personally find it that bad but have to admit I'm amazed you would
>>rate it higher than an episode like Becoming Part II or even Anne.
>>--
>
>
>
> Yup. I'm one of them.
>
> I consider it the mostf orced, artificial and absurd episode of the
> first three seasons. I like parts of it, but the confrontations at Casa
> Summers come out of nowhere. I tru;y thought then this show has had it.
> Next week better reover or I'm done; I disliked it that much.
>
> Willow comes across more selfishly concerned for herself than for
> Buffy:
>
> "Buffy: I know that you were worried about me, but...
> Willow: No! I don't just mean that. I mean, my life! You know? I,
> um...
> I'm having all sorts of... I'm dating, I'm having serious dating with a
>
> *werewolf*, a-and I'm studying witchcraft and killing vampires, and I
> didn't have anyone (starts sobbing) to talk to about all this scary
> life
> stuff. And you were my best friend.
Isn't Xander her best friend? Apparently only on his end of things.
>
> Xander comes off here and earlier as an absolute dislikeable creep,
> more upset that Buffy was away when his "rival" Angel has been "killed"
> than anything else. (His concern for Giles has a slight ring of
> sincerity, but nothing said at the party does).
>
> "Look. I'm sorry that your honey was a demon, but most girls
> don't hop a Greyhound over boy troubles."
>
> And Willow shuts Oz down when he tries to get Xander under control?
>
> "No, let them go, Oz. (gets a look from him) Talking about it isn't
> helping. We might as well try some violence."
>
> Totally NOT a Willow thing to say.
>
> And the inserted humor in the big confrontation scene seems unduly
> forced, and is not funny, including Jonathan.
>
> And of course we also have the huge wreckage at the Summers home and
> the deaths of innocents (Pat and the obnoxious party guy). And yet here
> the Sunnydale forgettyitus doesn't get a mention?
>
> And let's not forget Buffy had wanted a "gathering" to talk, and
> instead she gets a hootenanny. And then soap opera conveniently
> overhears only the tail of the Joyce/Pat discussion, missing the "While
> Buffy was gone, all I could think about was getting her
> home. I just knew that if I could put my arms around her and tell her
> how much I loved her, everything would be okay."
Plus it was _Joyce_ who invited Buffy's close circle over for dinner
(not sure how Pat rated an invite, but still) so when the invite comes
from the parent, you don't just jump on board with a giant party
complete with band and total strangers. And yet somehow Joyce didn't
seem to mind???? Very strange.
>
> Which puts a different tone spin on: "Having Buffy home, I-I thought it
> was gonna make it all better, but in some ways, it's almost worse."
>
> And it all seems to come down to they welcome Buffy back ONLY because
> of her superior "superhero" skills in defeating the big bad of the
> episode.
>
> Bah! Humbug. #56 of the first 56 episodes. A tremendous disappointment
> in oh so many ways. Yet, enough other good things, including the home
> schooling line, that keeps it one notch above "Bad."
>
> Ken (Brooklyn)
>
I just re-watched this ep over the weekend to be ready for AOQ's review.
Didn't like it any better than before. No sympathy for the hero is
horrible, and could Xander be any more of a jackass? Well, Becoming
comes to mind.
Mel
Jeff Jacoby
> Jeff Jacoby wrote:
>
>> I agree with you here. The big problem for me with this episode
>> is issues that have built up and festered over the summer can not
>> simply be resolved with a few lines ("I've got your back."
>> "Good moves") or a discussion over mochas.
>
> This would be true in the real world, but as I mentioned in another
> reply, in TVland characters often have to move faster emotionally, just
> to keep the show moving. The gang got to a place by the end of DMP
> that it could have taken them months to get to in reality. Which is
> fine with me. I don't know about you, but I don't think I would have
> wanted to watch half a season or so of the gang barely speaking to each
> other.
Your point is well taken...and neither would I. But another
short scene or two, or perhaps just have the situation not
quite so cleanly resolved at the end of DMP.
> Other things bugged me, but I never really had a problem with
> the end of the episode.
Also, for no reason I can explain, I *really* hate the
expression "nice/good moves". :)
Jeff
kenm47
"Anne," I appreciate your thoughts on DMP. Much better said than my
hurried effort.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Don Sample
wrote:
>
> Plus it was _Joyce_ who invited Buffy's close circle over for dinner
> (not sure how Pat rated an invite, but still) so when the invite comes
> from the parent, you don't just jump on board with a giant party
> complete with band and total strangers. And yet somehow Joyce didn't
> seem to mind???? Very strange.
You're assuming that Willow et al. didn't consult with Joyce about
turning their gathering into a hootenanny. We know that there was some
consultation about what people were to bring. (Cordy's the dip.)
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
kenm47
He
has a tendency to get right to the surface of the matter, invariably
understanding far less then he thinks he does. Here, he knows nothing
of
what happened at the end of Becoming, nor what that meant to Buffy.
His
it
must make Buffy feel and how it makes me feel. But it's not indicative
of
Xander's cruelty or lack of feeling. Hell, half the problem is he
feels too
much."
Wow!
Ken (Brooklyn)
Wes <>
wrote:
>"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:1141668695....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>> This seems to be the Xander split. Too often I see him as still
>> functioning from lust and jealousy, with his affections for the ladies
>> all over the place (Cordy, Buffy, Willow, etc). I have trouble seeing
>> the more noble Xander others see at this point. Sure, he has his
>> moments, and sure there would be no Buffy without his breath in PG, but
>> really he comes off as hormonically imbalanced at too many times.
>
>I don't like the feel of this show, but I think the way people act in it
>still makes sense and isn't as unfeeling as it appears on the surface.
>
>Xander - I think we tend to take Xander for granted and miss his emotional
>turmoil until it suddenly boils up in a seemingly inappropriate manner.
>Remembering his hurtful rant at Buffy about Angel in Becoming, it might be
>useful to note that we'd seen everybody mourn Jenny in their way. Willow
>bawled her head off right away. Buffy was crushed with guilt. Giles
>grasped at fantasy hopes of her continued presence. But not Xander. That
>rant was the surprise expression of a grief we didn't know he had before.
>
>Think about it. Xander was in a bad spot. His first real romantic
>experience is with his life long enemy and has driven a rift between he and
>his life long best friend. So there he is stuck in a somewhat abusive
>relationship that never once has really made sense to him while he watches
>Willow drift away into her own life with Oz. Meanwhile the world is going
>to hell around him with one friend (Jenny) dead, and another (Kendra) soon
>to become dead. The man he most admires - Giles - is in a personal hell
>over it. And the anchor in his life, the one he really depends on (Buffy)
>appears to be abandoning all her senses and all her responsibilities in
>favor of an insane attempt to "redeem" her murderous boyfriend.
>
>What's important about Xander having breathed life into Buffy is not his
>nobility. It's the link between them. Xander feels it like a physical
>bond. He chases Buffy around "protecting" her and getting the snot kicked
>out of him over and over not because of hormones, but because he feels he
>has to. Because every once in a great while he's the difference that keeps
>her alive. Emotionally he literally thinks she'll die if he's not there.
>
>To Xander, the whole Angel thing was Buffy abandoning him and everybody else
>that loved and cared for her. And it brought into question everything he
>had hung his life on for the past year since breathing life into her.
>That's the context for his outburst at Buffy in Becoming. Add to it seeing
>Willow in a coma and you've got the context for him not telling Buffy about
>Willow trying the ensouling spell again. Emotionally running on empty. And
>now, upon Buffy's return (from what looked like literal abandonment to him),
>he's still got most of those issues unresolved and they burst forth again.
>
>Xander's still got a lot of growing up to do. He may never get there. He
>has a tendency to get right to the surface of the matter, invariably
>understanding far less then he thinks he does. Here, he knows nothing of
>what happened at the end of Becoming, nor what that meant to Buffy.
Disagree.
By this point he, and the gang, should know just about everything that
happened.
They know Buffy was expelled from school, wanted for murder and kicked
out of her house (unless Joyce lied about that part).
They know Acathla was activated but that the world didn't end which
means Buffy sent Angelus to hell.
They strongly suspect that the restoration spell worked so the only
thing they really don't know is whether that was before or after Buffy
defeated Angelus.
Before means Buffy had to sent her lover to hell for eternity with his
human soul intact (and all the personal issues that brings up for
Buffy).
After means that Willow/Oz/Cordelia restored the human soul after
Angel was in hell and maybe they shouldn't mention that to Buffy if
they don't trust her.
Trust is what this ep boils down to for me.
Buffy made the decision to leave without consulting the gang so it was
automatically a bad one because they don't trust her decisions.
Wes
>His outburst is hurtful, largely undeserved, and I hate it too. I hate how it
>must make Buffy feel and how it makes me feel. But it's not indicative of
>Xander's cruelty or lack of feeling. Hell, half the problem is he feels too
>much.
>
>There's a variation of this story for Joyce and Willow too.
>
>I sometimes puzzle about BtVS's ongoing friendship theme. How they're
>stronger together than apart. They came together naturally - even easily -
>at the start. Built a bond and a seeming sensitivity to each other. But by
>this point - which isn't the first time they've diverged - maybe we're
>seeing that their bond isn't really that naturally solid. That they tend to
>take things for granted, let wounds fester, and too often miss where each
>other's heads are at by country miles. Yeah, they still get things right
>sometimes too. And it's magic when they're on the same page. But maybe it
>takes more work than they realized.
>
>OBS
>
Mel
Don Sample wrote:
> In article <yPednRa3oMR...@uci.net>, Mel <melb...@uci.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Plus it was _Joyce_ who invited Buffy's close circle over for dinner
>>(not sure how Pat rated an invite, but still) so when the invite comes
>>from the parent, you don't just jump on board with a giant party
>>complete with band and total strangers. And yet somehow Joyce didn't
>>seem to mind???? Very strange.
>
>
> You're assuming that Willow et al. didn't consult with Joyce about
> turning their gathering into a hootenanny. We know that there was some
> consultation about what people were to bring. (Cordy's the dip.)
>
Well, Joyce told Buffy she invited them over for _dinner_. I don't get
"mega-party ok with me if that's what they come up with" out of that
conversation.
Mel
Don Sample
Mel <melb...@uci.net> wrote:
The invite that Buffy's told about happened the day before the decision
to have a hootenanny. We don't know what communication took place
between Willow and Joyce, after the hootenanny decision was made. After
the conversation in the library, Willow could have called Joyce back,
and asked her if it was okay to invite more people, and Oz's band, at
which point Joyce decided to add Pat to the guest list too. Joyce
inviting Pat to the gathering, if she didn't know that it was being
expanded, makes about as much sense as Willow inviting the band, without
telling Joyce.
Don Sample
"Wes <>" <swap...@atomic.net> wrote:
> They know Acathla was activated but that the world didn't end which
> means Buffy sent Angelus to hell.
How would they know that?
Arbitrar Of Quality
Mike Zeares wrote:
> You know, I wanted to resist your "excellent" rating, because I spent
> so long a time disliking this episode. But it's sucking me in. The ep
> is flawed, but I think the flaws are mostly directorial. They really
> do go "clunk," though. Can an "excellent" ep have parts that go
> "clunk?"
An "Excellent" episode can be flawed as long as the most important
scenes hit the right notes. I don't know about outright clunking,
though; that's a little tougher. If all else fails, the
signal-to-clunk ratio (in terms of running time) might help. That's
part of why "Ted" got an "Excellent" from me but "Becoming II" didn't,
even though both episodes have amazing moments and weaker ones (but
also, the bad stuff in Bec2 bothered me more, so...).
Or decide for yourself how to rate things. I'm just the sole arbiter of
what's good and what's bad here, what do I know?
-AOQ
Scythe Matters
> Xander's still got a lot of growing up to do. He may never get there. He
> has a tendency to get right to the surface of the matter, invariably
> understanding far less then he thinks he does.
I think this whole analysis was very insightful, and I mostly agree with
it. Xander acts from gut instinct, a lot. He's often right, but not
always indisputably so and certainly not always via justifiable paths.
> I sometimes puzzle about BtVS's ongoing friendship theme. How they're
> stronger together than apart. They came together naturally - even easily -
> at the start. Built a bond and a seeming sensitivity to each other. But by
> this point - which isn't the first time they've diverged - maybe we're
> seeing that their bond isn't really that naturally solid. That they tend to
> take things for granted, let wounds fester, and too often miss where each
> other's heads are at by country miles. Yeah, they still get things right
> sometimes too. And it's magic when they're on the same page. But maybe it
> takes more work than they realized.
And this one as well. Nicely done.
Scythe Matters
> This is the way I've seen Willow over these past 2+ seasons. Under
> her demureness she's capable of keeping a lot of strong feelings
> bottled up, often because she wants to put other people before herself.
> But stuff will fester and accumulate. And then when that moment comes
> that pushes her over the edge, she will absolutely explode. Real
> lashing out, no regard at all for the damage she's causing. In that
> respect, her behavior in DMP is entirely consistent with her character,
> or at least what I think her character is like.
Interesting.
Of course, that's all you're going to get from me on this subject. ;-)
kenm47
were always thinking that the show was in danger of Jumping The Shark
(though I don't think that term had been coined yet)."
Well, that would be ... just wrong. I was very unexpectedly
disappointed by this ep. FWIW, it would be a long time after this
before I felt that way again.
"But isn't it clear by now that Buffy's most vulnerable to the people
she cares about the most? I haven't been keeping an exhaustive list of
the episodes in which she cries, but I do know that it's pretty rare,
and that three of them have been "Nightmares," "Innocence," and now
"Dead Man's Party." "
I didn't express myself well, it's not the emotion but the scene,
including the "humor" inserts that doesn't work for me. If anything SMG
again sells the turmoil, but all around her the action seems artificial
compared to SMG's projection of Buffy's turmoil.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Scythe Matters
> That's great! I like the episode even more now.
I'm desperately sorry. ;-)
>
> Given that BTVS has thus far kept the same opening titles all year, you
> don't think that this strongly suggests that he'll somehow come back, a
> development which might have been better as a surprise?
Ummm. Hmmm. Uhhh...
Nope. Can't say it. No spoilers allowed.
Scythe Matters
> Holy crap, so do I.
I'm starting to regret ever posting. ;-)
I think the episode is probably tighter than the real naysayers (hi Ken)
to, but I think it's a writing problem. I find many scenes to have the
right emotional core and a good setup, but stifled execution.
kenm47
is another debate. But you can't expect much understanding
if you keep your friends completely in the dark. "
But the great irony is we know that Buffy wanted a gathering, wanted to
talk, and got an overdone party instead. So, IMO, the party planners
are the ones who come off oafish, not Buffy.
Why? Well let's look at what Xander says earlier about that:
"Xander: And what'll we talk about at a gathering anyway?
'So, Buffy, did you meet any nice pimps on your travels? And oh, by the
by, thanks for ruining our lives for the past three months.'"
I'm still having trouble seeing Xander as caring for more than his own
still unrequited lust. Unrequited despite Buffy owing her life to him.
He selfishly sees no respect from her and gives none in return.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <1141686812.3...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > We were worried at first
> > > > because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
> > > > how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
> > >
> > > That's one. Here's another: what characterizes the zombies, as
> > > opponents? They can't be killed; no matter what you do to them they keep
> > > coming and coming and coming. To beat them, you can't ignore them or
> > > fight them or take them on one by one. You've got to address the source
> > > of the zombie-ism -- a metaphor for the root of the problem -- and deal
> > > with it to make the zombies go away.
> > >
> > > In this episode, Buffy's problem isn't her friends' seeming weirdness,
> > > nor is it her mothers' difficulties having her back, nor is it Snyder
> > > and the school. It's her having to realize a few fundamental truths:
> > > running away doesn't solve a problem, and friendship isn't a one-way
> > > street...even if you're the Slayer. Everything that upsets her in the
> > > episode is a symptom, not the cause; much like the zombies are symptoms,
> > > not the cause.
> >
> >
> > > But why? Angel's in this episode, too.
> >
> > Given that BTVS has thus far kept the same opening titles all year, you
> > don't think that this strongly suggests that he'll somehow come back, a
> > possible that he'll appear only in dream or flashback for an extended
> > period of time, but that's the less likely explanation.
>
> I'm having the same sort of confusion over the fact that John Schneider
> is still in the opening credits of "Smallville", despite his character
> having died four or five episodes ago. And unlike Boreanaz, he hasn't
> been making appearances in flashbacks or dreams. He's just gone, yet
> he's still in the opening sequence.
I think that's because Martha keeps staring at old photos of him, and a
video IIRC.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Apteryx
news:7JKdneccr8blOZHZ...@rcn.net...
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>> We were worried at first
>> because this plot seemed really dumb, and try as I might, I can't see
>> how it reflects on Buffy (beyond "buried things coming back").
>
> That's one. Here's another: what characterizes the zombies, as opponents?
> They can't be killed; no matter what you do to them they keep coming and
> coming and coming. To beat them, you can't ignore them or fight them or
> take them on one by one. You've got to address the source of the
> zombie-ism -- a metaphor for the root of the problem -- and deal with it
> to make the zombies go away.
>
> In this episode, Buffy's problem isn't her friends' seeming weirdness, nor
> is it her mothers' difficulties having her back, nor is it Snyder and the
> school. It's her having to realize a few fundamental truths: running away
> doesn't solve a problem, and friendship isn't a one-way street...even if
> you're the Slayer. Everything that upsets her in the episode is a symptom,
> not the cause; much like the zombies are symptoms, not the cause.
I like that analogy. Although I don't think the root of the problem for
Buffy here is the need to realise that friendship isnt a one way street and
that running away doesn't solve a problem - they are a step up from the root
problem, which is the whole sending her boyfriend to Hell deal. To its
credit, the episode shows that not everything has been dealt with, in the
look Giles gives as he watches Buffy and Willow hug at the end (for all its
weaknesses, this is a great Giles/Ripper episode). And that (taking your
ananlogy) shows that Buffy is better about dealing with the monsters than
with her life, because she does get to the root of the zombie problem, but
not all the way to the root of her life problem.
>> Even Oz's dissertation about the
>> different types of gatherings falls strangely flat.
>
> Oh, man. That entire scene, from the encounter with the cat, through
> Cordy's "I'm the dip," to Oz's tripartite party essay, is absoutely
> hilarious. It *almost* redeems the episode. Almost.
Everyone is down on Xander and Willow and Joyce for their reaction to Buffy
in this episode. Xander's reaction is OTT, but then that is not untypical of
Xander. I don't have a problem with Willow telling Buffy off, although I do
think her coolness jsut before Buffy starts packing is just not Willow (even
granted that Willow can sometimes be callous and cruel). But the character
that seems really off here is Oz. Whatever gave Oz, of all people, the
arrogance to suggest turning Joyce's dinner party, with "company plates"
into a hootnanny? It's all Oz's fault!
>
>> AOQ rating: Excellent
I think we have a new winner for the biggest Surprises from the AOQ
discussions thread. As with Ted, I am used to thinking that everyone rates
DMP lower than I do. I can't readily comprehend someone rating it so high.
Although it has sneaked up a little in my ratings most times I watch it,
gaining almost a full point on my 1-9 scale since I first saw it, it is
still only 111th best BtVS episode for me, and 22nd best in Season 3. But
22nd best in Season 3 is no shame.
--
Apteryx
Kevin
I remember watching DMP for the first time... When we got to the scene
with Buffy in her nice dress, setting the dining room table for the
dinner guests, was anyone besides me eagerly anticipating a
tension-filled dinner scene? I guess I didn't realize the hootenanny
conversation would lead straight to a big party... But when that
doorbell rang, and in walked the guy from the band, I was thrown way
off by the ensuing hullabaloo. From then to the end, everything felt
wrong. Maybe I just lamented never getting the dinner scene I wanted
-- it would be the first time (I think?) for all the characters
including Joyce to share a scene. They got that, of course, but in a
loud and bizarre public fight. Thank goodness for the zombies crashing
in.
One big terrible thing not yet mentioned (this time 'round): At Giles'
place, someone says that the police have dropped the murder charges
against Buffy, and she replies "Oh great, that was such a drag" --
glibly glossing over the death of Kendra. That would be Kendra THE
VAMPIRE SLAYER. This kind of writing is stupefying.
One wonderful scene I have to mention: Buffy's uncomfortable moment
with Pat at the front door ("Ugggghhhhhhh, it's $@#!@#$% Pat...", she
must be thinking), with an awkward silence followed by "So..... do you
want to talk to my mom?" "Yes, thanks!" <Sudden get-me-out-of-here
scream> "MOMMMMMM!!" Face and delivery utterly hilarious.
--Kevin
kenm47
Giles'
place, someone says that the police have dropped the murder charges
against Buffy, and she replies "Oh great, that was such a drag" --
glibly glossing over the death of Kendra. That would be Kendra THE
VAMPIRE SLAYER. This kind of writing is stupefying. "
I knew there was something that bothered me about that scene. You hit
that nail on the head!
"One wonderful scene I have to mention: Buffy's uncomfortable moment
with Pat at the front door ("Ugggghhhhhhh, it's $@#!@#$% Pat...", she
must be thinking), with an awkward silence followed by "So..... do you
want to talk to my mom?" "Yes, thanks!" <Sudden get-me-out-of-here
scream> "MOMMMMMM!!" Face and delivery utterly hilarious. "
But why is it awkward? I never got that. Pat has not said or done
anything warranting Buffy's discomfort IMO. Is it Marti and the at
times suggested weak implication of a "relationship" between Joyce and
Pat? I don't get it other than Buffy has no use for any of Joyce's
adult friends.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Mike Zeares
Scythe Matters wrote:
>
> Interesting.
>
> Of course, that's all you're going to get from me on this subject. ;-)
Uru. Uvf haxabjvatyl npphengr sberfunqbjvat vf *xvyyvat* zr. Vg jvyy
or irel vagrerfgvat gb frr uvf ernpgvbaf gb F6. Nffhzvat ur ynfgf gung
ybat.
-- Mike Zeares
One Bit Shy
news:1141684171.1...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> I found Giles' face when he opens the door the only honest reaction to
> her reappearance. And his reaction possibly the only one who
> understands??? However Buffy expecting to just rejoin the fold is
> clearly unrealistic. Her own bout with denial without a doubt. The
> conversation with everything just peaches and cream on the couch did
> nothing to set up the ensuing scenes. Cookies and tea and everything's
> great and I did not sense any real avoidance. I know that Marti Noxon
> tried, but for me, it just wasn't there.
Hmmm. Before Giles opens the door Xander lays out in shorthand how Buffy
abandoned everybody. Usual foot in mouth or not, there's an additional
element to that. It was delivered because Buffy was getting cold feet about
knocking on the door. She was almost ready to turn away. Maybe it's just
me, but that comes across to me as Joss's usual method of presaging the
future with a mini-rehearsal scene. Isn't that what gets repeated in large
at Buffy's house later?
Once inside, I note that Giles asks Buffy how she found her mom. First
answered with a joke. Then interrupted by the steam kettle and Buffy's eye
motion for Giles to go take care of it - with no real answer coming from
Buffy.
Then Cordelia (of course) actually asks Buffy what happened, but this time
Giles suggested they not go there, which Buffy eagerly agrees with.
Finally Buffy asks the others to spend some time with her the next day.
Xander says no. Willow resists. Then Buffy pushes. "Friends don't let
friends browse alone." Willow says yes, and doesn't visibly react then, but
that couldn't have been the right thing for Buffy to say. And Willow
doesn't show the next day.
Seems like some real avoidance to me and some set up for what's to come.
> Buffy's "What if he's mad" followed by Xander's comments were not an
> indication of something argument to come. Xander has always been the
> voice of "speak now, think later".
Answered above.
> Buffy waiting for Willow, we again
> only get to see Buffy's perspective
But you know Willow didn't show. And you know Willow didn't want to go in
the first place.
> which also makes the blow up
> initiated by Willow an out of nowhere scene because W/X/C reactions had
> no support.
Willow came into Buffy's room with a smile on her face. If there was time
to back pedal through what brought her to the room, one might conclude that
Willow realized she hadn't been fully honest in their recent conversation
and came to really talk alone. Or maybe it was just chance. But either
way, what she saw was shocking in its own right. No more set up was
required to trigger Willow's blow up. Prior to that, Willow was mostly
going along with Buffy's desires (and Giles' recommendation) - or at least
what she thought they were. I don't think she was especially comfortable
with it. (She didn't seem so to me during the party planning. Seemed kind
of nervous. And didn't know what to say to Buffy at the party.) But she
was willing. Until she saw Buffy packing and instantly all of that is
thrown out the window.
Willow-did-not-initiate-the-blow-up. Buffy did. It's not out of nowhere at
all. Willow's standing there watching Buffy pack to run away again. That's
a really big somewhere.
> The gang planning the party as if everything is fine,
> Willow being "party girl", Xander's typical negative voice.
I don't see that. Oz is fine. But he's always fine. Cordelia's fine. But
she's not scared of the issue. Willow strikes me as a bit nervous and
definitely pushes back when Giles suggests that something more intimate is
called for. And Xander - well, typical or not, he spells it out. Nobody's
willing to talk about the problem. Isn't that setup?
> Everything
> was completely unrealistic. Where were the questions? If they didn't
> want to deal with it with Buffy, the questions of where was she? what
> happened? what do we do now? should have been there. Instead they
> played an undiscussed group-denial thing that just didn't fit.
> Especially for a "new tight group" of people who learned to fight
> together without our superhero. Where was the newly found group trust?
> The without-the-slayer bond.
Not really there perhaps? The whole premise of the group as a group had
been built around Buffy - even around Buffy in abstentia. Weren't they kind
of faking it? And how good would they be at talking out their inner
feelings? Cordelia is never thrilled to hear Xander talk about Buffy. And
I suspect there are still some bruises between Xander and Willow. (She acts
like it in the party planning conversation when she essentially tells Xander
to be quiet.) As far as I can tell there has always been a lot of running
and hiding from feelings for the group as a whole.
The friendship theme is a big deal in this series. But part of that is the
fragility of it.
> Everything just seemed to be completely off. Personalities were, IMO
> thrown by the wayside in order to "make it happen". Willows character
> and aversion at the party completely out of the blue. The faking deaf
> and first visible signs of discomfort and avoidance. Again, no setup
> beforehand. Xander who normally speaks his mind, playing the role of
> "everything's ok" with his "guess a lot of people are glad to have you
> back." Xander? Is that you?
The more I look into this show, the more I'm coming around to AOQ's
viewpoint. Yes, there's a lot of forced conversation. But that's real.
Even necessary. It's the nature of the situation. Haven't you ever engaged
in a forced conversation? Sometimes - a lot of times really - people are
convinced they have to put on a face. Even if they aren't very good at it.
So they toss out a platitude while inside they want to yell or run away.
Being off is part of the point. The balance in their lives is missing and
none of them (except maybe Giles on a good day) has any skills at working
stuff like this out. They have to take the hard way.
I struggle with this show because it's so damned uncomfortable watching
everybody not know how to talk to each other and then hurfully lay into each
other. It just feels bad to watch it. I don't think I'll ever get over
that. But the more I see it (and I've watched it a couple extra times now
because of this conversation -ha-ha-) the more real it feels to me. The
feelings, the manner, and the flow all feel natural to me. Don't require a
lot of spelling out.
OBS
Kevin
> "One wonderful scene I have to mention: Buffy's uncomfortable moment
> with Pat at the front door ("Ugggghhhhhhh, it's $@#!@#$% Pat...", she
> must be thinking), with an awkward silence followed by "So..... do you
> want to talk to my mom?" "Yes, thanks!" <Sudden get-me-out-of-here
> scream> "MOMMMMMM!!" Face and delivery utterly hilarious. "
>
> But why is it awkward? I never got that. Pat has not said or done
> anything warranting Buffy's discomfort IMO. Is it Marti and the at
> times suggested weak implication of a "relationship" between Joyce and
> Pat? I don't get it other than Buffy has no use for any of Joyce's
> adult friends.
>
> Ken (Brooklyn)
Well, I think the silence was just Pat expecting Buffy to say "Hi. I'll
go get my mom," as a teenager normally would, but she didn't right
away. As for Buffy's discomfort, I perceived that as "I go away for a
while, and now mom has these weird friends, and My God, Pat is so
annoying! and I just want things like they used to be." I loved the
actress who played Pat, I thought it was good casting -- she's so damn
nice, but if I'm the teen girl, then maybe <WHAP> I just wanna slap
her.
--Kevin
Wes <>
wrote:
>In article <n8rp0292629mqpbhr...@4ax.com>,
> "Wes <>" <swap...@atomic.net> wrote:
>
>> They know Acathla was activated but that the world didn't end which
>> means Buffy sent Angelus to hell.
>
>How would they know that?
Giles checked up on Acathla and should have noticed that the sword had
been removed. Although not expressly stated, I don't think it's a
stretch for someone like Giles to figure that out.
Wes
One Bit Shy
news:n8rp0292629mqpbhr...@4ax.com...
> They know Acathla was activated but that the world didn't end which
> means Buffy sent Angelus to hell.
>
> They strongly suspect that the restoration spell worked so the only
> thing they really don't know is whether that was before or after Buffy
> defeated Angelus.
>
> Before means Buffy had to sent her lover to hell for eternity with his
> human soul intact (and all the personal issues that brings up for
> Buffy).
>
> After means that Willow/Oz/Cordelia restored the human soul after
> Angel was in hell and maybe they shouldn't mention that to Buffy if
> they don't trust her.
I'm sorry. I don't see how they know all of that. Starting with Acathla
being activated. Nobody saw that. Which makes for a whole lot more
possibilities. Plus the possibility that the spell didn't work - they don't
really know what happened with that either. Willow, after all, had never
attempted a spell of that magnitude before. For all she really knew, she
may have ensouled Spike by accident. <g>
OBS
Scythe Matters
> I like that analogy. Although I don't think the root of the problem for
> Buffy here is the need to realise that friendship isnt a one way street and
> that running away doesn't solve a problem - they are a step up from the root
> problem, which is the whole sending her boyfriend to Hell deal.
V jnf gelvat gb nibvq qryivat gbb sne vagb gung hagvy ur'f frra gur arkg
rcvfbqr.
Mike Zeares
hopelessly devoted wrote:
>
> I found Giles' face when he opens the door the only honest reaction to
> her reappearance. And his reaction possibly the only one who
> understands??? However Buffy expecting to just rejoin the fold is
> clearly unrealistic. Her own bout with denial without a doubt. The
> conversation with everything just peaches and cream on the couch did
> nothing to set up the ensuing scenes. Cookies and tea and everything's
> great and I did not sense any real avoidance. I know that Marti Noxon
> tried, but for me, it just wasn't there.
It was for me. Xander and Willow both showed reluctance at Buffy's
desire for "mindless fun." As you said, her bout with denial. Trying
to pretend the whole summer never happened. They (or at least Xander)
wanted to hear all the juicy details and were put off, by Buffy and
Giles. Plenty of avoidance there.
> Buffy's "What if he's mad" followed by Xander's comments were not an
> indication of something argument to come.
Sure they were. They were an indication of *Xander's* argument to
come, though, not Giles'. Xander was projecting his own feelings.
I'm going to skip over all your examples of "no setup" and just say
that I disagree with you on every one. If anything, the party argument
was one of the best set-up scenes in the series. It was set up with
anvils. IMHO, of course.
> Having said all of that, at the time of airing, I still did not
> understand the format of he show. S1 began mid-season and S2 was the
> only substantial basis I had to form a theory about the show. My
> appreciately for the ep has not really grown over time, but I did have
> to learn how the Buffy rollercoaster actually takes off.
I don't get this paragraph. What was it about the show that you didn't
understand after watching all of the first two seasons?
-- Mike Zeares
One Bit Shy
Why thank you sir. I'm so glad I chose to look in on this group just as
these reviews started. I came here looking for some fresh insights, and boy
have I found them. You've provided more than your share yourself. Which I
also thank you for... And everyone really. A whole lot of ideas to mull.
OBS
Arbitrar Of Quality
> I am curious that you don't cut Joyce and Cordelia the same kind of
> slack though (especially Joyce).
Well, Joyce's behavior makes perfect sense to me in this episode.
With regard to teh question, I could hem and haw a lot, but I think the
ultimate answer is that I don't like Cordelia much, and I don't
entirely understand Joyce, so I'm less inclined to identify with their
viewpoints. A little bit of a circular argument, granted, but it's how
I feel.
-AOQ
Rowan Hawthorn
> Scythe Matters wrote:
>
>>Interesting.
>>
>>Of course, that's all you're going to get from me on this subject. ;-)
>
>
> Uru. Uvf haxabjvatyl npphengr sberfunqbjvat vf *xvyyvat* zr.
V'z fgvyy abg ragveryl pbaivaprq vg'f nyy gung "haxabjvat." Naq gurfr
sberfunqbjvatf ner jung *xrrc* zr abg ragveryl pbaivaprq. F'bxnl,
gubhtu, V'ir orra gubebhtuyl rawblvat univat *fbzrguvat* gb ernq va gur
arjftebhc bgure guna cbybvgvpny guernqf naq gur enzoyvatf bs n pbhcyr bs
penpxurnq gebyyf...
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
Arbitrar Of Quality
> Place me firmly in category "What the......?"
What One Bit Shy said.
-AOQ
One Bit Shy
Buffy put the sword back in.
Wes <>
wrote:
And wouldn't that make for some rabid fanfic, lol.
But anyway, it wasn't expressly stated so there is some supposition in
this (I don't think it's on the level of fanwank but I may be biased).
Giles had seen Acathla before and knew what the ritual involved. Then
he saw Acathla at least once after the sword fight:
Becoming II:
Giles: Well, we, uh... we went back to the mansion. I-it was empty,
um... and Acathla was, was... dormant.
If there was no sword sticking out when Giles went back to the mansion
it means Angelus removed it and activated the demon. If that happened
then 1) the world should have ended or 2) Buffy must have sent Angelus
to hell to stop it.
It's also just a guess that Giles gave the gang this information
sometime over the summer.
Nothing about that part of what I was saying is definite and is not
all that relevent IMO to why Buffy left town but at least at the start
of the summer they thought the spell worked.
Wes
>
>OBS
>
Ian Galbraith
[snip]
> Plus, I'll forgive a lot for zombies. Zombies rule.
LOL, thats a large part of why I've always liked the episode. It was the
first time they ever did zombies. I wouldn't rank the episode as excellent
though, the confrontation is over the top especially given we know what
trauma Buffy went through.
--
You can't stop the signal
Wes <>
wrote:
>"Wes <>" <swap...@atomic.net> wrote in message
She put the sword in Angel. I don't think it was left sticking out.
One Bit Shy
Uh. There *was* a sword sticking out of Acathla. Buffy put it there.
Remember?
And Giles didn't know that Angelus was the key to closing the vortex. (Open
yes. Close no.) That piece of information came from Whistler. So even if
he deduced that Buffy closed the vortex, he still doesn't know Angel's fate.
Dead or alive. Ensouled or not. What could not occur to him or any of the
gang is that Buffy would have to kill an ensouled Angel to close the vortex.
Until Buffy explains, there's no way for any of them to grasp Buffy's pain.
One Bit Shy
Don Sample
"Wes <>" <swap...@atomic.net> wrote:
The sword went through Angel, into Acathla. After Angel disappeared the
sword was left sticking out of the demon.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
hopelessly devoted
One Bit Shy wrote:
> "hopelessly devoted" <cry...@cinstall.com> wrote in message
> news:1141684171.1...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I found Giles' face when he opens the door the only honest reaction to
> > her reappearance. And his reaction possibly the only one who
> > understands??? However Buffy expecting to just rejoin the fold is
> > clearly unrealistic. Her own bout with denial without a doubt. The
> > conversation with everything just peaches and cream on the couch did
> > nothing to set up the ensuing scenes. Cookies and tea and everything's
> > great and I did not sense any real avoidance. I know that Marti Noxon
> > tried, but for me, it just wasn't there.
>
> Hmmm. Before Giles opens the door Xander lays out in shorthand how Buffy
> abandoned everybody. Usual foot in mouth or not, there's an additional
> element to that. It was delivered because Buffy was getting cold feet about
> knocking on the door. She was almost ready to turn away. Maybe it's just
> me, but that comes across to me as Joss's usual method of presaging the
> future with a mini-rehearsal scene. Isn't that what gets repeated in large
> at Buffy's house later?
To me it was just Xander being Xander. Since when does Xander not fly
off the handle speeking his mind? I understand what you're saying and
I understand how it fits into the context of the show and It Did Work,
just not for me.
> Once inside, I note that Giles asks Buffy how she found her mom. First
> answered with a joke. Then interrupted by the steam kettle and Buffy's eye
> motion for Giles to go take care of it - with no real answer coming from
> Buffy.
>
> Then Cordelia (of course) actually asks Buffy what happened, but this time
> Giles suggested they not go there, which Buffy eagerly agrees with.
>
> Finally Buffy asks the others to spend some time with her the next day.
> Xander says no. Willow resists. Then Buffy pushes. "Friends don't let
> friends browse alone." Willow says yes, and doesn't visibly react then, but
> that couldn't have been the right thing for Buffy to say. And Willow
> doesn't show the next day.
>
> Seems like some real avoidance to me and some set up for what's to come.
Understood, but not for me.......It's really hard to explain. There's
probably some technical term but I can't think of it. The could have
done better (writers, not the actors) and have shown this before as
well as........ Here it just seemed like they were getting it done.
> > Buffy's "What if he's mad" followed by Xander's comments were not an
> > indication of something argument to come. Xander has always been the
> > voice of "speak now, think later".
>
> Answered above.
>
>
> > Buffy waiting for Willow, we again
> > only get to see Buffy's perspective
>
> But you know Willow didn't show. And you know Willow didn't want to go in
> the first place.
Still not convinced. Not that I need the Sesame Street version with
the big flashing neon sign that says "Willow mad at you Buffy" but
again the writers have done better. N pbairefngvba nsgre n yninaqre
fpragrq cebgrpgvba fcryy va Onq Tveyf fcevatf gb zvaq. Rkpryyrag
rkrphghvba.
> > which also makes the blow up
> > initiated by Willow an out of nowhere scene because W/X/C reactions had
> > no support.
>
> Willow came into Buffy's room with a smile on her face. If there was time
> to back pedal through what brought her to the room, one might conclude that
> Willow realized she hadn't been fully honest in their recent conversation
> and came to really talk alone. Or maybe it was just chance. But either
> way, what she saw was shocking in its own right. No more set up was
> required to trigger Willow's blow up. Prior to that, Willow was mostly
> going along with Buffy's desires (and Giles' recommendation) - or at least
> what she thought they were. I don't think she was especially comfortable
> with it. (She didn't seem so to me during the party planning. Seemed kind
> of nervous. And didn't know what to say to Buffy at the party.) But she
> was willing. Until she saw Buffy packing and instantly all of that is
> thrown out the window.
Granted the "re-run" was a catalyst for the argument, but again, it
felt contrived, the actual fight not beginning until the words "and
don't forget to not write".
> Willow-did-not-initiate-the-blow-up. Buffy did. It's not out of nowhere at
> all. Willow's standing there watching Buffy pack to run away again. That's
> a really big somewhere.
>
>
> > The gang planning the party as if everything is fine,
> > Willow being "party girl", Xander's typical negative voice.
>
> I don't see that. Oz is fine. But he's always fine. Cordelia's fine. But
> she's not scared of the issue. Willow strikes me as a bit nervous and
> definitely pushes back when Giles suggests that something more intimate is
> called for. And Xander - well, typical or not, he spells it out. Nobody's
> willing to talk about the problem. Isn't that setup?
For me, at that time and even on rewatch, Willow was always a bit
nervous and Xander always spells it out regardless of who wants to hear
it or not.
> > Everything
> > was completely unrealistic. Where were the questions? If they didn't
> > want to deal with it with Buffy, the questions of where was she? what
> > happened? what do we do now? should have been there. Instead they
> > played an undiscussed group-denial thing that just didn't fit.
> > Especially for a "new tight group" of people who learned to fight
> > together without our superhero. Where was the newly found group trust?
> > The without-the-slayer bond.
>
> Not really there perhaps? The whole premise of the group as a group had
> been built around Buffy - even around Buffy in abstentia. Weren't they kind
> of faking it? And how good would they be at talking out their inner
> feelings? Cordelia is never thrilled to hear Xander talk about Buffy. And
> I suspect there are still some bruises between Xander and Willow. (She acts
> like it in the party planning conversation when she essentially tells Xander
> to be quiet.) As far as I can tell there has always been a lot of running
> and hiding from feelings for the group as a whole.
>
> The friendship theme is a big deal in this series. But part of that is the
> fragility of it.
Here's where I think the issue lies. Again with the Anne/DMP hiatus
deal. It always felt like Buffy was the catalyst in their lives. The
softer side of Sears and Xanman. Their lives changed once she came
into the picture. Changes that in two seasons (1-1/2) were very
obvious and different from where they started. Stumble through Willow
now teaching class and working mojo. Xander "can't get a date" Harris
now dating the most popular girl in school. With those kind of changes
at the onset of Buffy, I wanted to see the obvious (or unpredictable)
changes her absence would present. While I agree with the fragility of
friendship being a big deal in the series, it seems to me that they
only wanted to touch on it instead of diving in....if that makes any
sense. I know they had places to go and people to see, and they
couldn't have spent all of their time on this one issue, but could it
have hoit.
> > Everything just seemed to be completely off. Personalities were, IMO
> > thrown by the wayside in order to "make it happen". Willows character
> > and aversion at the party completely out of the blue. The faking deaf
> > and first visible signs of discomfort and avoidance. Again, no setup
> > beforehand. Xander who normally speaks his mind, playing the role of
> > "everything's ok" with his "guess a lot of people are glad to have you
> > back." Xander? Is that you?
>
> The more I look into this show, the more I'm coming around to AOQ's
> viewpoint. Yes, there's a lot of forced conversation. But that's real.
> Even necessary. It's the nature of the situation. Haven't you ever engaged
> in a forced conversation? Sometimes - a lot of times really - people are
> convinced they have to put on a face. Even if they aren't very good at it.
> So they toss out a platitude while inside they want to yell or run away.
> Being off is part of the point. The balance in their lives is missing and
> none of them (except maybe Giles on a good day) has any skills at working
> stuff like this out. They have to take the hard way.
I don't think I've worded it correctly. Where was THEIR pain. I
wanted to see it before the fight. Technically, all the aspects of
everything you're saying is there 100%. It just I wanted to not only
feel for Buffy, but also for Willow, Xander and yes even Cordy but I
couldn't because the writers possibly only wanted me to feel for Buffy.
I'm being a very hungry angry baby, I know. But the setup I mean I
think is more emotional than I can express. The anger. The hurt. The
fear. The loss. Where was it? Technically you and AOQ are correct,
but after so many truely heart pull your heart out moments at the end
of S2, I got to watch two very technical shows. If that helps to
explain it any better.
> I struggle with this show because it's so damned uncomfortable watching
> everybody not know how to talk to each other and then hurfully lay into each
> other. It just feels bad to watch it. I don't think I'll ever get over
> that. But the more I see it (and I've watched it a couple extra times now
> because of this conversation -ha-ha-) the more real it feels to me. The
> feelings, the manner, and the flow all feel natural to me. Don't require a
> lot of spelling out.
>
> OBS
I don't know what else to say. I wanted and waited to feel along with
W/X and C because I spent the last half of S2 feeling for Buffy and
understanding her and everything she had been through. I never got the
opportunity to feel their side, their loss, go through their pain
because of Buffy's decision to run away. And the blow up that did
INDEED have to happen was a payoff for that hole. There's a word for
it. I just can't think of it.
hopelessly devoted
Posted upthread to One Bit Shy that might also answer some of your
questions. Except for one......
Juvyr zbfg fubjf bcrengr ba gur OVT bcravat naq gur OVT pyvssunatre
raqvat, "ghar va arkg frnfba jura lbh pna svaq bhg jub fubg WE Rjvat"
glcr bs guvat. Guvf fubj qvq whfg gur bccbfvgr. Guvf cnegvphyne
ebyyre pbnfgre fgnegf bss fybj, jbexf vg'f jnl gbjneq gur ohvyq, naq
gura qebcf lbh qbja ng oernxarpx fcrrqf, juvcf lbh nebhaq hagvy lbh
pna'g fgnaq vg nal zber, lbh unir gb guebj lbhe unaqf va gur nve naq
fpernz ba gur svany ovt qrprag nf lbhe fgbznpu yrncf vagb lbhe guebng
naq lbh nyzbfg crr lbhe cnagf orsber vg jencf rirelguvat hc naq pbzrf
gb n fperrpuvat unyg. Gura nyy lbh pna qb vf fnl, V JNAG GB QB VG
NTNVA!
hopelessly devoted
Figured out a better way to say it. Emotion. It was an emotional
outburst and while the technical aspects were all there, it was the
emotions that I wanted to see before hand. It was the emotions
regarding losing Buffy, even for a little while, that I wanted and
waited to see. I got the emotional part with Buffy, but then again we
got to travel that road with her. We didn't with the others. Without
the emotional setup from them, the emotional fight didn't work for me.
I understand the scene and the ep and what it was trying to do. It,
along with Anne, just lacked emotion from the rest of the fold and it
was that emotion that I waited all hiatus to see.
Mike Zeares
Rowan Hawthorn wrote:
> V'z fgvyy abg ragveryl pbaivaprq vg'f nyy gung "haxabjvat." Naq gurfr
> sberfunqbjvatf ner jung *xrrc* zr abg ragveryl pbaivaprq. F'bxnl,
> gubhtu, V'ir orra gubebhtuyl rawblvat univat *fbzrguvat* gb ernq va gur
> arjftebhc bgure guna cbybvgvpny guernqf naq gur enzoyvatf bs n pbhcyr bs
> penpxurnq gebyyf...
V xabj jung lbh zrna. V'z fhfcvpvbhf gbb. Fbzr bs uvf "fcrphyngvba"
vf n yvggyr gbb ba-gnetrg, lbh xabj? Gur jubyr guvat pbhyq or fbzr
fbeg bs Hfrarg rkcrevzrag. Ohg V qba'g pner vs vg vf, V'z rawblvat vg
n ybg, naq V'z ernyyl tynq V pnzr onpx.
-- Mike Zeares
Mike Zeares
hopelessly devoted wrote:
>
> Juvyr zbfg fubjf bcrengr ba gur OVT bcravat naq gur OVT pyvssunatre
> raqvat, "ghar va arkg frnfba jura lbh pna svaq bhg jub fubg WE Rjvat"
Ah, gotcha. Yes, S2 and to an extent S3's premieres were like codas to
the previous season and dealt with fallout from the finales. The
seasonal arcs didn't really get started until a few eps in. Although
S3 worked a little differently, which I'll have more to say about
later.
-- Mike Zeares
alphakitten
>
> "One wonderful scene I have to mention: Buffy's uncomfortable moment
> with Pat at the front door ("Ugggghhhhhhh, it's $@#!@#$% Pat...", she
> must be thinking), with an awkward silence followed by "So..... do you
> want to talk to my mom?" "Yes, thanks!" <Sudden get-me-out-of-here
> scream> "MOMMMMMM!!" Face and delivery utterly hilarious. "
>
> But why is it awkward? I never got that. Pat has not said or done
> anything warranting Buffy's discomfort IMO. Is it Marti and the at
> times suggested weak implication of a "relationship" between Joyce and
> Pat? I don't get it other than Buffy has no use for any of Joyce's
> adult friends.
>
> Ken (Brooklyn)
>
Buffy was tense and vulnerable. She was expecting an evening with the
people closest to her. Then it turns out her mom has invited someone who
is a complete stranger to her. I had no trouble understanding Buffy's
discomfort (which I also see as hurt and irritation). Buffy was not in
New People mode.
~Angel
Mike Zeares
One Bit Shy wrote:
>
> Why thank you sir. I'm so glad I chose to look in on this group just as
> these reviews started. I came here looking for some fresh insights, and boy
> have I found them. You've provided more than your share yourself. Which I
> also thank you for... And everyone really. A whole lot of ideas to mull.
What you said. I'm a bit amazed that I have been given some new
insights to these episodes that I had never thought of or seen
expressed before, after all these years. I'm also struck by the fact
that I left this group in S6 in favor of a moderated forum partly in
order to find the high level of discussion that we once had here,
before all the wars and trolls and such. And now the discussion on
that forum is mostly going around the same circles of negativity and I
have to come back here for good discussion. Sometimes you CAN go home
again.
-- Mike Zeares
Espen Schjønberg
> But you can't expect much understanding
> if you keep your friends completely in the dark.
And what do we learn from this?
No, I wont start with politics here;-)
Anyway, true friends accepts there may be things they didn't get.
It is obvious after Buffys loss of Angel and her sending Angelus to hell
she has lost her love, and the hardest possible way: she destroyed him
first, by an accident, and then she killed him, on purpose.
Only idiots wouldn't understand how hard this must have been for her.
Xander may be an idiot, but not Willow.
And her mother has now finally found out exactly how much weird is going
on. She should welcome her daughter with open arms, and love, and
nothing else.
--
Espen
Espen Schjønberg
>
> Joyce doesn't express any hatred toward Buffy. And Joyce is right
> about the bad decisions. Running away and staying away for several
> months without ever telling anyone she was even alive were very bad
> decisions.
No, running away is a tough decision, but (in a Slayers case) not
necesarilly a bad one. She might have her reasons. The people around her
would realize they are relating to a larger-than-life entity here. And
the most recent decision on the field of running-away-or-not, is by the
way the one she took when she came home. And that decision was to come
home.
What Joyce is doing here, is to punish her for coming home.
An actual mother would never do that, and a loving, clever mother -like
Joyce- would never never do that.
And about the bad choices: they are talking about wether Buffy has to
attend a girls' school. Joyce defends this result with "Buffy, you made
some bad choices. You just might have to live with some consequences."
So this was not about running away at all, but totally insane defending
of Snyders throwing her out.
--
Espen