AOQ Review 3-3: "Faith, Hope and Trick"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Three, Episode 3: "Faith, Hope, and Trick"
(or "Rock a rhyme that's right on time")
Writer: David Greenwalt
Director: James A. Contner
F/H/T begins with our fourth- and fifth-year seniors waiting to enjoy
their off-campus lunch. Willow goes into a long ramble about the
significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
others drag her across the street. This was another "shut the fuck
up, Willow" moment for Mrs. Quality, but she accepted it once I
argued that our aspiring witch was, in fact, at least partially trying
to entertain her friends rather than being deadly serious. This bit
is symbolic of how I think of the whole episode (oh, come on, like you
regular readers didn't see that coming). It's fun and it works if
you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
We soon come to realize that the title comes from the names of several
new characters (although I didn't realize that Scott was the
"Hope" until afterward), which is kinda cool. Will these three be
of lasting significance to the series? Well, Scott is just some guy
(at least so far), Trick is immediately pegged as a main villain, and
Faith is central to this show and seems liable to stick around, so,
yeah. Let's meet the new guys.
Trick is first seen in the company of a rent-a-villains like Kakistos,
who just looks and talks like a moron. And the "kill random person,
cuz I'm evil" bit at the burger place lacks a certain, I don't
know, anything that makes it worth watching. So our modern vampire is
basically left to carry all villain scenes on his own with no help from
either the situations or his fellow deadmen. He comes off all right,
though; some people can pull off the stock-character of the educated
killer who loves the sound of his own voice, and Freeman can. Anyway,
both of us knew from moment one that if any of the new monsters
survived this episode, it'd be Trick. It's a decent debut, but we
can only wait to see if he ends up with a real personality we can get
into.
Scott Hope, which really sounds like a celebrity name, is pretty much
only around so Buffy can continue to not get over what she did to
Angel. As it turns out, you see, school issues are easier to take care
of ("I think what my daughter's trying to say is
'nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah!'"). But Buffy still hasn't talked
to anyone about certain other events from "Becoming," and despite
the other moving on she's done, it continues eating her up inside.
And why shouldn't it? If anything, the dream sequences are getting
worse (actually, I was wondering whether she was awake and
hallucinating; that might've been interesting). This one is one of
the more powerful scenes in the show, as we give ourselves over to
full-fledged melodramatic imagery. Angel stands there bleeding,
allowing no room for the slightest bit of understanding or forgiveness.
"C'mon, figment-dude," one wants to yell, "hasn't the girl
suffered enough yet?" No. Her own mind continues to be her harshest
critic. And the sequence from Bec2 itself shows up a few times too.
Buffy, months later, is quite literally reliving it, over and over and
over.
Knowing how messed up she continues to be, it's easier to sympathize
with Buffy even if one likes Faith, our third new arrival. And who
doesn't, among Buffy's friends and family? Faith seems almost too
perky to be real, keeping up a constant stream of chatter about the
joys of naked alligator Slaying and so on. Her scenes are fun to watch
(I especially liked Xander and Willow pointing out the various places
they've been attacked, and her amused reaction), but I can see some
people getting really annoyed by her routine really fast. She
doesn't seem too self-obsessed at this point, though, just exuberant
and genuinely friendly to our misfits. And so many of the scenes
revolve around introducing Faith that her personality dominates the
tone of the episode (Trick's helps shape things too, to a much lesser
degree). I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that how much
one is amused by these characters' antics may directly correlate with
how much one enjoys F/H/T. Are you in a good mood? It's easy to see
why the new Slayer and B don't hit it off right away - we've seen
over and over that Buffy doesn't take too kindly to people inserting
themselves into her life, personally or professionally. Plus, she's
most certainly not in a good mood.
Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
I generally don't notice that Charisma Carpenter is an attractive
woman by conventional standards, just because I don't like her
character. But Cordelia looks quite cute during the "what is it with
you and Slayers?" scene.
Lots of energy in the mid-show Slayers-vs.-vamps fight scene,
especially early on when Buffy ~totally flips out and kills vampires~,
presumably in response to having her competence questioned.
On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
"calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
Chosen One.
And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
retreats? Mrs. Quality and I were pondering this... given that Kendra
was raised by her Watcher, which seems to be traditional... is the
world full of eighteen-year-old potential Slayers out there, each in
sort of a professional limbo until someone dies? Do they still hunt
vampires for practice?
All right, anyway. It inevitably becomes clear that underneath
Faith's loud exterior she's suffering her own bit of trauma, and
Buffy lays into her in a nice scene. It's a strong piece of writing
since we empathize with Buffy's increasing annoyance with Faith, but
realize that she's being too hard on her (to the point of nastiness,
even), but can understand it given the Buffster's own state of mind.
Plus the bluntness continues into the action sequence, where it's
just the right thing for the situation: "scream later, escape now."
Easier said than done, but if it can be done, it's a good idea. The
subsequent fights with Kakistos and Faith's revenge are pretty
by-the-numbers stuff, but fun to watch, especially the Bigass Stake Of
Death.
The connection to Buffy is made unusually explicit this time around.
She actually says that Faith has "got it behind her" and then
immediately tries to do the same thing herself. This show usually
tries for a more subtle approach to such things; doing it this way once
in awhile is neither inherently good or bad, just different. On the
other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
didn't see that one coming.
Speaking of unusually explicit, this episode is filled with closeups of
the ring from "Surprise," And so the episode ends with a touching
scene in which Buffy leaves it behind, limiting her comments to
"goodbye" and trying to take that first big step towards moving on.
Awww. Comments from the Quality household at this point:
Mrs. Q: That's a nice way to end.
Me: It'd be kinda funny if this somehow caused him to come back.
Damn, I'm good.
So there's a curmudgeonly part of all of us that probably wants to
start yelling about cop-outs at this point. But most of us, even those
watching first-run, probably knew it was coming. Anyway, in the end,
Angel is interesting, the supernatural mechanisms involved in the
resurrection might be interesting (or not), and I'm sure his presence
can be used to keep the show interesting and pathos-filled too. So
I'll hold off on any real bile until I know whether it's deserved.
But after Season Two, where else can you go here? That was rhetorical.
This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
- Pretty much the whole opening sequence, especially "prepare to
uncouple" and "do that thing with your mouth..."
I've toyed with making Greenwalt and Noxon common targets of my
verbal wrath, but now they have one episode apiece this year that I
liked better than the last 'written and directed by JW' entry. Go
figure.
So...
One-sentence summary: A bunch of disparate elements that go
surprisingly well together.
AOQ rating: Good
[Season Three so far:
1) "Anne" - Decent
2) "Dead Man's Party" - Excellent
3) "Faith, Hope, and Trick" - Good]
Apteryx
news:1141794600.7...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 3: "Faith, Hope, and Trick"
> (or "Rock a rhyme that's right on time")
> Writer: David Greenwalt
> Director: James A. Contner
>
> F/H/T begins with our fourth- and fifth-year seniors waiting to enjoy
> their off-campus lunch. Willow goes into a long ramble about the
> significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
> others drag her across the street. This was another "shut the fuck
> up, Willow" moment for Mrs. Quality, but she accepted it once I
> argued that our aspiring witch was, in fact, at least partially trying
> to entertain her friends rather than being deadly serious. This bit
> is symbolic of how I think of the whole episode (oh, come on, like you
> regular readers didn't see that coming). It's fun and it works if
> you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
> annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
I think before too long you are going to have to explain to Mrs Q that when
Willow is being a geek, she is a caricature geek. Here she is acting out
fears that real geeks will bury deep down and torture themselves with in
silence.
> Trick is first seen in the company of a rent-a-villains like Kakistos,
> who just looks and talks like a moron. And the "kill random person,
> cuz I'm evil" bit at the burger place lacks a certain, I don't
> know, anything that makes it worth watching.
Because he's evil? I thought he made it quite clear its because he's hungry
> Knowing how messed up she continues to be, it's easier to sympathize
> with Buffy even if one likes Faith, our third new arrival. And who
> doesn't, among Buffy's friends and family? Faith seems almost too
> perky to be real, keeping up a constant stream of chatter about the
> joys of naked alligator Slaying and so on. Her scenes are fun to watch
> (I especially liked Xander and Willow pointing out the various places
> they've been attacked, and her amused reaction), but I can see some
> people getting really annoyed by her routine really fast. She
> doesn't seem too self-obsessed at this point, though, just exuberant
> and genuinely friendly to our misfits. And so many of the scenes
> revolve around introducing Faith that her personality dominates the
> tone of the episode
She's demonstrating another way of being the Slayer. She is the anti-Kendra.
While Kendra was far more responsible than Buffy, and didn't really have a
life apart from slaying, Faith is shown as differing from Buffy in
completely the opposite direction.
> Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
Well it's great sure. But this episode has so many great lines. How about
"I'm the one being Single White Femaled here"
> I generally don't notice that Charisma Carpenter is an attractive
> woman by conventional standards, just because I don't like her
> character.
Ah! Ah! Now I understand (personally I noticed CC was an attractive woman
"by conventional standards" in Welcome to the Hellmouth).
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
> Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity.
Well there's several schools of thought there (especially back then). I
quite liked the idea that the death of any Slayer would call a new one. So,
if you could hold both Buffy and Faith's heads under water till they stopped
breathing, then resucitated them, you'd have 4 slayers. Hold their heads
under water and you'd get 8. At this point you'd probably have to cut a deal
with 4 of the slayers that if they helped you hold the heads of the other 4
under water, you wouldn't try to hold their head under water. And so on and
do on. Pretty soon, vampires would be an endangered species. But there is
also the theory that only one death per slayer calls a new slayer, so that
the won't be a new one while Faith is alive.
> And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
> so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
> retreats?
If there are that many Watchers, you'd think the one with seniority as the
actual Watcher of the longest running Slayer would get invited to the
retreat. Maybe that explains why Giles is so miffed. But maybe the Watchers
Council figured he'd be too busy.
> All right, anyway. It inevitably becomes clear that underneath
> Faith's loud exterior she's suffering her own bit of trauma, and
> Buffy lays into her in a nice scene. It's a strong piece of writing
> since we empathize with Buffy's increasing annoyance with Faith, but
> realize that she's being too hard on her (to the point of nastiness,
> even), but can understand it given the Buffster's own state of mind.
> Plus the bluntness continues into the action sequence, where it's
> just the right thing for the situation: "scream later, escape now."
> Easier said than done, but if it can be done, it's a good idea. The
> subsequent fights with Kakistos and Faith's revenge are pretty
> by-the-numbers stuff, but fun to watch, especially the Bigass Stake Of
> Death.
You notice that when they compare their hardest kills, they both seem to
lie? I have the sstrong impression that the "big daddy vampire" Faith cites
is Kakistos (certainly in reality she "never had more trouble" than with
him), and at the time they are comparing notes, she hasn't killed him. The
audience know who Buffy's "hardest kill" really was, but she cites "The
Three" (who of course she didn't kill - Darla killed them on The Master's
implied order for having failed to kill Buffy).
> On the
> other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
> didn't see that one coming.
Giles is pretty smart.
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: A bunch of disparate elements that go
> surprisingly well together.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
Yeah. I'd pretty much agree with that (my 35th favourite BtVS episode, 7th
best in Season 3). My mind is still boggling that you rate it below DMP, but
that is pretty much a DMP issue.
Snaf znl graq gb birengr SUG orpnhfr bs vgf fvtavsvpnapr gb gur frevrf
(punenpgref vagebqhprq, punenpgref ergheavat), ohg Tbbq vf nobhg jung vg vf
va vgfrys.
--
Apteryx
hopelessly devoted
Apteryx wrote:
> Well there's several schools of thought there (especially back then). I
> quite liked the idea that the death of any Slayer would call a new one. So,
> if you could hold both Buffy and Faith's heads under water till they stopped
> breathing, then resucitated them, you'd have 4 slayers. Hold their heads
> under water and you'd get 8. At this point you'd probably have to cut a deal
> with 4 of the slayers that if they helped you hold the heads of the other 4
> under water, you wouldn't try to hold their head under water.
sick!
sick!
sick!
sick!
sick!
I can't stop laughing.
sick!
sick!
sick!
sick!
William George Ferguson
wrote:
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>threads.
I'll try real hard, while still answering some of your questions.
[about Buffy's Angel dream]
> "C'mon, figment-dude," one wants to yell, "hasn't the girl
>suffered enough yet?" No. Her own mind continues to be her harshest
>critic. And the sequence from Bec2 itself shows up a few times too.
>Buffy, months later, is quite literally reliving it, over and over and
>over.
As I pointed out back around Phases or KBD, Buffy excels at blaming
herself, she damned near got down to an art form.
>Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
>Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
>I generally don't notice that Charisma Carpenter is an attractive
>woman by conventional standards, just because I don't like her
>character. But Cordelia looks quite cute during the "what is it with
>you and Slayers?" scene.
>
>Lots of energy in the mid-show Slayers-vs.-vamps fight scene,
>especially early on when Buffy ~totally flips out and kills vampires~,
>presumably in response to having her competence questioned.
>
>On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
>answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
>Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
>"calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
>have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
>Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
>Chosen One.
A generation is from the birth of the parent to the birth of the child
(that's the actual original definition). It's been established that when
the Slayer dies, the new Slayer is called (see Buffy's "I'm sixteen..."
speech in Prophecy Girl), so one can look at a Slayer generation as from
when the Slayer is called to when the next Slayer is called.
>And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
>so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
>retreats? Mrs. Quality and I were pondering this... given that Kendra
>was raised by her Watcher, which seems to be traditional... is the
>world full of eighteen-year-old potential Slayers out there, each in
>sort of a professional limbo until someone dies? Do they still hunt
>vampires for practice?
Well, we don't know Kendra's age, but Buffy was 15 when she was called,
and Faith couldn't have been much older (Eliza Dushku was 16 when they
shot FH&T).
We also know that there is a very high turnover/mortality rate with
Slayers. Buffy only made it a year and a half before she was killed
(although she got a Get Out of Death Free card(, and Kendra only lasted a
year.
The speculation about the girls in waiting started after Kendra recounted
her upbringing, and really took off with Faith's arrival. We talked about
the subject a lot, with only a little general agreement. One of the few
things we generally agreed on from the beginning was that there are girls
out there that are, in effect, Slayers in waiting. The three terms that
were most commonly used from the beginning were Proto-Slayers,
Slayers-in-training (or SITs), and Potential Slayers. The one we used the
most, because it abbreviated into a nice short bit, was SITs.
The Watcher organization clearly must be doing more than just providing
the commisariat for the Slayer. Given SITs, and Kendra's story, obviously
one thing they do is train SITs, at least some of them.
Also, based on Buffy, we know that the Watchers don't know who is going to
become the next Slayer, and therefore, by inference, are not the ones in
control or responsible for calling the Slayer.
On an unrelated topic, when the episode first aired, there was a typical
segment of the audience ragging on Faith's fake Boston accent. The thing
is, after all the jokes about Kendra's accent, this time around Whedon
first determined where the actress was from and then made the character
come from there. Eliza Dushku was born and raised in Boston.
As for whether there will be 2 Slayers from now on, the label on that can
reads "Acme Genuine Worms".
--
HERBERT
1996 - 1997
Beloved Mascot
Delightful Meal
He fed the Pack
A little
hopelessly devoted
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Season Three, Episode 3: "Faith, Hope, and Trick"
YEAH!!!!
Loved, and still do, the new and imporoved, IMO, change for the opening
credits. I never really did enjoy the original synth sound and the
guitar and hard hitting drums sound very hard core and allowed me to
perfect the ever developing Buffy Dance. You will hear me refer to it
from time to time.
> F/H/T begins with our fourth- and fifth-year seniors waiting to enjoy
> their off-campus lunch. Willow goes into a long ramble about the
> significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
> others drag her across the street.
What I noticed right off the bat was the interesting use of camera
angeles. The slow pan and the appearance of X/C behind W/O I always
found to be a very nice shot.
> We soon come to realize that the title comes from the names of several
> new characters (although I didn't realize that Scott was the
> "Hope" until afterward), which is kinda cool.
Scott HOPE - You're never going to belive it, but I never got that
part. If I did it was so long ago that I forgot I got it. Not the
brightest crayon sometimes.
> And the "kill random person,
> cuz I'm evil" bit at the burger place lacks a certain, I don't
> know, anything that makes it worth watching.
The first time it aired, when Trick pulled the boy out the drive thru
window, my first reaction was a hystserical Happy Meals with Legs. Get
it. Whoo! Tough room. I also like the sound of what could be Trick's
stomach rumbling just before.
> Scott Hope, which really sounds like a celebrity name, is pretty much
> only around so Buffy can continue to not get over what she did to
> Angel.
Scott HOPE.
> ("I think what my daughter's trying to say is
> 'nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah!'").
Sorry just realized that I posted early about the mini-sword in
Snyder's office. Was a truely honest mistake I assure you and will try
to be more careful in the future. While trying to put down my thoughts
for the first 2 eps, I had to watch FH&T to keep my spirits up.
Snyder's reaction to "The Mayor on line one" had my Spidysense tingling
again.
> Her own mind continues to be her harshest critic.
and nothing but the truth.
> Knowing how messed up she continues to be, it's easier to sympathize
> with Buffy even if one likes Faith, our third new arrival.
There were so many things to love about the ep. Again all pertaining
to their ability their hide things in plain sight. The bronze scene I
thought was brilliant. On first viewing I saw the singer, X/C, W/O. I
may have noticed Faith but then again there were alot of people on the
floor and I was looking for familiar faces. The second scene with
Faith dancing, again I saw what they wanted me to see, Disco Boy but
not her. After Kendra died, I knew they would have to bring a new
slayer, but Faith's introduction was truely brilliant. After many
viewing I realize her "head up" just before the first battle was akin
CZJ's intro in Chicago. You never really saw her face until that
moment. And the "POW". Very nice.
> And who doesn't, among Buffy's friends and family? Faith seems almost too
> perky to be real .......
Her dialogue and just about everything about her was such a fresh
breath of air. First signs of life coming back to the show.
> Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
entirely too many to name.
> Lots of energy in the mid-show Slayers-vs.-vamps fight scene,
> especially early on when Buffy ~totally flips out and kills vampires~,
> presumably in response to having her competence questioned.
I did enjoy the stunt work and the fight scenes are definately getting
a little more elaborate. I tend to notice little things (the wig on
Faith's double) so if it gets annoying let me know.
Faith living large on the vamp was a fantastic commercial break. I sat
there eyes wide open for a few seconds.
Plus the new dusting was really getting my attention.
> especially the Bigass Stake Of Death.
I've learned to accept it and view it as art.
I did notice the little scene in the Motel and the B/F speech. B
lecturing F on the exact same thing that Buffy did to her friends.
The terror in F's face at facing the one who basically beat her watcher
to death I thought was amazing at the time and still do.
> On the other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
> didn't see that one coming.
I also didn't see it coming and ended up with a small lump in my
throat. Gotta love Giles. How to pry without prying. Also his
reaction during and immediately after the confession all underscored by
CB's Close your eyes. Nice moments.
> Mrs. Q: That's a nice way to end.
> Me: It'd be kinda funny if this somehow caused him to come back.
>
> Damn, I'm good.
Now he's in the game...
> So there's a curmudgeonly part of all of us that probably wants to
> start yelling about cop-outs at this point. But most of us, even those
> watching first-run, probably knew it was coming. Anyway, in the end,
> Angel is interesting, the supernatural mechanisms involved in the
> resurrection might be interesting (or not), and I'm sure his presence
> can be used to keep the show interesting and pathos-filled too. So
> I'll hold off on any real bile until I know whether it's deserved.
> But after Season Two, where else can you go here? That was rhetorical.
There's a great line that fits perfectly here, but unfortunately it's a
spoiler.
I was a little suprised when he dropped out of the ceiling all wet and
butt naked.
On first viewing, it was nice to see that my feelings for the first 2
eps did not interfere with my acceptance of this as being a nice season
opener. Buffy's not like other shows and doesn't play by the same
rules. And it took me the beginning of this season to figure that out.
I tend not to rank the eps unless I absolute love them, and even then,
I tend not to go past 10. Unfortunately, this one is not on that list,
but still a very nice 1-hour ride.
Happy Meals with Legs. LOL :->
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
> so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
> retreats?
I can't find it now, but I seem to recall that there was a line in the
script at one point where Giles explains that the actual Slayer's
watcher is never invited to the retreats, because he's supposed to be
busy actually *watching*.
There has been speculation that Giles himself wasn't really held in very
high regard by the Council (what with the Eyghon thing, and other
youthful indiscretions) which is why he didn't get invited before he
became Buffy's Watcher. The Council didn't really expect Buffy to last
very long, so they gave her a watcher that they didn't think was all
that good either, keeping their "better" people watching the girls that
they thought would most likely replace her.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Mike Zeares
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 3: "Faith, Hope, and Trick"
> (or "Rock a rhyme that's right on time")
> Writer: David Greenwalt
> Director: James A. Contner
There's a good combo, right there.
> F/H/T begins with our fourth- and fifth-year seniors waiting to enjoy
> their off-campus lunch. Willow goes into a long ramble about the
> significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
> others drag her across the street. This was another "shut the fuck
> up, Willow" moment for Mrs. Quality, but she accepted it once I
> argued that our aspiring witch was, in fact, at least partially trying
> to entertain her friends rather than being deadly serious.
I've always thought it was horrible overacting by Aly. Actually, I
thought that a lot in this ep. She was just "off." A bit too
self-consciously "Willowy," I'd say.
> is symbolic of how I think of the whole episode (oh, come on, like you
> regular readers didn't see that coming). It's fun and it works if
> you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
> annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
Greenwalt's episodes, which tend to be about giant bugs and snakes and
stuff, can be like that.
> I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that how much
> one is amused by these characters' antics may directly correlate with
> how much one enjoys F/H/T.
Faith was pretty controversial right off the bat. A lot of people
found her to be really annoying. Then there were those of us who
reacted like a wolf in a Tex Avery cartoon. I was right there with
Xander.
> Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
Mine was: "The girl's not playing with a full deck. She has almost no
deck. She has a three." I've used that a few times.
> I generally don't notice that Charisma Carpenter is an attractive
> woman by conventional standards,
Had your eyes checked lately? Heh. Just picking on you. I'm actually
mostly over Eliza Dushku (admitting that will probably get me a fatwa
or two) and am fully back on the Charisma Carpenter Lust Train.
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
> Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
> Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
> Chosen One.
It's pretty much like Cordy said: Buffy died so Kendra was called, then
Kendra died so Faith was called. Except Buffy came back, so now
wackiness has ensued. Will another Slayer be called if Buffy dies
again? Nobody knows, at this point. Everybody else was just as
confused over all this.
We could answer this. It isn't made really clear until late in the
series, but the series sort of acts as if it were clear all along, so
you might not find it spoilery. Let us know.
> subsequent fights with Kakistos and Faith's revenge are pretty
> by-the-numbers stuff, but fun to watch, especially the Bigass Stake Of
> Death.
I thought the fights in this ep were a step up. Multi-levels,
improvised weapons, lots of bodies flying around. Jeff Pruitt and his
team were starting to knock it out of the park on a regular basis.
This ep is one that I would rewatch when I just wanted to watch cool
fight scenes.
> Mrs. Q: That's a nice way to end.
> Me: It'd be kinda funny if this somehow caused him to come back.
>
> Damn, I'm good.
Heh. What was Mrs. Q's reaction to the naked, shivering Angel? That
was a pretty popular image in some quarters.
> I'll hold off on any real bile until I know whether it's deserved.
> But after Season Two, where else can you go here? That was rhetorical.
You're not alone in asking that question. It does smell of the Big
Reset Button. Well, we'll see.
-- Mike Zeares
shuggie
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Trick ... He comes off all right,
> though; some people can pull off the stock-character of the educated
> killer who loves the sound of his own voice, and Freeman can.
One of these days you're going to have to explain to me your criteria
for saying a character is 'stock'.
> Lots of energy in the mid-show Slayers-vs.-vamps fight scene,
> especially early on when Buffy ~totally flips out and kills vampires~,
> presumably in response to having her competence questioned.
Buffy flips out? Faith is the one beating up on the vamp when she could
just kill him.
>
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
> Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
> Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
> Chosen One.
>
Hmm. To spoil or not to spoil?
A question: If you were writing the show, what would be the reason for
introducing a second Slayer? What kinds of stories would it allow? What
would it allow you to say about being the Slayer that you can't with
just Buffy?
> The connection to Buffy is made unusually explicit this time around.
> She actually says that Faith has "got it behind her" and then
> immediately tries to do the same thing herself. This show usually
> tries for a more subtle approach to such things; doing it this way once
> in awhile is neither inherently good or bad, just different. On the
> other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
> didn't see that one coming.
Yeah it was cool.
>
> Speaking of unusually explicit, this episode is filled with closeups of
> the ring from "Surprise," And so the episode ends with a touching
> scene in which Buffy leaves it behind, limiting her comments to
> "goodbye" and trying to take that first big step towards moving on.
> Awww. Comments from the Quality household at this point:
> Mrs. Q: That's a nice way to end.
> Me: It'd be kinda funny if this somehow caused him to come back.
>
> Damn, I'm good.
>
Yes, your powers of prediction have not gone unnoticed.
> AOQ rating: Good
That's fair. Although FHT introduces one of my favourite characters
(Faith) and has some classic Buffy humour (I liked the uncouple moment
you mentioned as well as the image of Martha Stewart slaying) it
remains mostly setup and introduction of the eponymous characters. The
thing I do enjoy on re-watching is the moment with Giles where he
admits there's no spell.
kenm47
separate spoilers from it so I'm going to stay away from most of it.
IIRC, Whedon at the time explicitly lied to the fans during the
Season2/Season 3 break (making further writers' comments about plot
developments always suspect) insisting that NO NEW SLAYER would be
activated by Kendra's death. Let's just call them the Chosen Two, or
call Faith the Dark Slayer (because she's got dark hair compared to
Buffy's various shades of blonde, of course - but obviously she has a
darker history than even our formally dead Buffy), and see what
develops.
Kakistos is a bigger problem canon-wise out of your butt. Cloven hands
and feet? Why? Scars that don't heal? Or so it seems? So old yet so
stupid?
BTW, the random acts of Trick violence worked for me. The randomness
was IMO brutal and scary.
IMO, "There is no spell" and Willow's reaction remains my most poignant
moment of the entire series. As such I can't give the ep less than an
excellent, marred chiefly by Angel's resurrection (if he wasn't
getting that spin-off, who knows where the tale would have gone.)
Your review hints at it, but doesn't quite note the debt I've only now
realized (because of your review of DMP and the ensuing discussion)
this ep has to DMP, primarily Faith packing to run away and Buffy this
time getting in her alter-ego Slayer's face about it, until Faith gets
past her trauma to stake Kakistos which becomes the catalyst for Buffy
to get past hers. After all the DMP discussion, seemed to me FH&T is
almost like part 2 of a two-parter.
Other things we learned: vampires do not need an invite to get into a
newly occupied long term room rental (we learned last year no invite
was needed for Hotel rooms).
Things that bothered me then and now; well, one big one showing Buffy
can do wrong when not thinking things through. Why doesn't Buffy before
and especially after Kakistos dust invite Faith to stay at Casa
Summers? Not even a brief discussion with Joyce about why or why not?
Just because of Buffy jealousy when the second Slayer is not a meek shy
type like Kendra was?
Things that get me to say "I told you so" a little: Xander again cannot
control himself around a nubile lass giving off erotic vibes.
More as the conversation progresses, I expect.
Ken (Brooklyn)
jil...@hotmail.com
No, wait, you don't.
What I noticed, I remember, is that Willow was far more interested in
doing the spell than in Buffy's clear pain over having to kill Angel,
when he was innocent er... again.
shuggie
kenm47 wrote:
> Kakistos is a bigger problem canon-wise out of your butt. Cloven hands
> and feet? Why?
We've already been told, as in the case of the Master, that vamps that
live long enough out-grow human features.
> Scars that don't heal? Or so it seems?
Spike took a few months to heal from his injuries. We don't know
exactly but Faith probably fought Kakistos at most a few weeks before
FHT.
> So old yet so stupid?
You've got me there.
> Things that get me to say "I told you so" a little: Xander again cannot
> control himself around a nubile lass giving off erotic vibes.
That's Xander's head can be turned by a pretty girl is not the same as
saying all his motives, however apparently unconnected, must be viewed
through the lens of his hormones.
kenm47
That's a good point. At the time I attributed her eagerness to wanting
to do SOMETHING, but I see what you're saying.
And the Willow non-reaction? Not so non IMO. I saw the lingrering shot
to be Willow thinking about it all, how wonderful Giles was to get that
catharsis from Buffy. I had not considered it being Willow
disappointment in not being called upon to do a spell.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
saying all his motives, however apparently unconnected, must be viewed
through the lens of his hormones. "
Not my point. My point is his motivations are often questionable and
suspect, as in why he lied in Bec2.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
the vamp:
"My dead mother hits harder than that!"
Another big diff from B.
Ken
vague disclaimer
"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> until Faith gets
> past her trauma to stake Kakistos which becomes the catalyst for Buffy
> to get past hers. After all the DMP discussion, seemed to me FH&T is
> almost like part 2 of a two-parter.
Not sure this is necessary, but V graq gb frr guvf nf cneg guerr bs n
sbhe cnegre.
--
A vague disclaimer is nobody's friend
shuggie
kenm47 wrote:
Which I'd agree with, except you seem to be singling out Xander when I
think everyone has questionable motives at times.
Besides, I'm not sure Xander gleefully asking Faith to go into more
details about her (naked) exploits is questionable motives - he seems
to me to be wearing his motives on his sleeve.
hopelessly devoted
Jvyy xrrc guvf va zvaq nybat jvgu Tvyrf - V'z gb ybbx nsgre lbh obgu
hagvy
n arj Jngpure vf nffvtarq.
Zna lbhe fgngvbaf! Qba'g sver hagvy lbh frr gur juvgrf bs gurve rlrf!
Fgrnql!
Fgrnql!
Guvf vf tbvat gb or oehgny.
kenm47
FWIW, even Cordy sees Xander can't help it. Her willingness to put up
with his divided loyalties, so to speak, was always of interest to me
and showed Cordy's feelings for Xander were much deeper than his for
her. After all, she's still Queen C and presumably quite able to get
the attention of just about anyone she would want at Sunnydale High,
and it seems all she wants is Xander. He, however, seems to bend
whichever way the wind blows - with his big (only?) claim to
relationship dignity being his unwillingness to take advantage of
Willow or Buffy in BB&B.
Ken (Brooklyn)
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:We soon come to realize that the title comes from the names of several
:new characters (although I didn't realize that Scott was the
:"Hope" until afterward), which is kinda cool.
Don't feel bad. I saw it when it first aired, and
have seen it half a dozen times, and I didn't realize that
until this year.
--
They say there's air in your lungs that's been there for years.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Jeff Jacoby
Fb gung jura gurer ner *gjb* fynlref ba *gur* uryyzbhgu
(bxnl, bar bs gur uryyzbhguf), bar bs jubz unf abj fheivirq
sbe 3+ lrnef, gurl fraq gurve irel orfg: Jrfyrl!
And let's not forget that when one of the "better" watchers
(Mr. Zabuto) got Kendra the CoW neglected to tell him the
other slayer wasn't actually dead yet!
Or that when Kendra was called the CoW neglected to inform
Giles.
Or that when Faith was called the CoW neglected to inform
Giles.
The Council must have really hated Giles (rira orsber Urycyrfs)
Jeff
George W Harris
:> Scars that don't heal? Or so it seems?
:
:Spike took a few months to heal from his injuries. We don't know
:exactly but Faith probably fought Kakistos at most a few weeks before
:FHT.
Jr yrnea va "Sbby Sbe Ybir" gung gur fpne va Fcvxr'f rlroebj
vf n erfhyg bs uvf svtug jvgu gur fynlre va Puvan.
--
"The truths of mathematics describe a bright and clear universe,
exquisite and beautiful in its structure, in comparison with
which the physical world is turbid and confused."
-Eulogy for G.H.Hardy
Arbitrar Of Quality
> Your review hints at it, but doesn't quite note the debt I've only now
> realized (because of your review of DMP and the ensuing discussion)
> this ep has to DMP, primarily Faith packing to run away and Buffy this
> time getting in her alter-ego Slayer's face about it, until Faith gets
> past her trauma to stake Kakistos which becomes the catalyst for Buffy
> to get past hers. After all the DMP discussion, seemed to me FH&T is
> almost like part 2 of a two-parter.
Or Part 3. The first three episodes of S3 are about Buffy facing the
various dimensions of her traumatic experiences of S2, and tie pretty
strongly together thematically. This show is making the commonly-held
(by TV-drama writers, anyway) belief that as much strength as it takes
to make the big heroic sacrifices, it takes even more to live on
afterward and keep on giving. It took Buffy several months and several
mistakes, but she's quite the strong individual as protrayed in A, DMP,
and F/H/T.
> Things that get me to say "I told you so" a little: Xander again cannot
> control himself around a nubile lass giving off erotic vibes.
Agreed with those who don't think this alters any discussions about his
motives in Bec2 or DMP. But yes, as always, he wears his hormones on
his sleeve.
People seem to missing what I thought was a nice little Xander moment.
Look how he reacts to Cordelia's "maybe I should dress up [as a Slayer]
and put a stake to your throat." To me, it says "hey, I can see all
the Faith-love is making you uncomfortable; sorry, I'll pay more
attention to you." Except that Xander wouldn't actually say somethng
like that, so he lets his actions speak.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> Loved, and still do, the new and imporoved, IMO, change for the opening
> credits. I never really did enjoy the original synth sound and the
> guitar and hard hitting drums sound very hard core and allowed me to
> perfect the ever developing Buffy Dance.
Looks like you have the same weird version of the DVDs that Mike does.
For most of us, the new theme music debuted in "Anne."
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
Mike Zeares wrote:
> > Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> > Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
>
> Mine was: "The girl's not playing with a full deck. She has almost no
> deck. She has a three." I've used that a few times.
That's good too, didn't really notice it.
> We could answer this. It isn't made really clear until late in the
> series, but the series sort of acts as if it were clear all along, so
> you might not find it spoilery. Let us know.
Nah, let's have me experience the lack of clarity unclouded by any
future revelations.
> Heh. What was Mrs. Q's reaction to the naked, shivering Angel? That
> was a pretty popular image in some quarters.
I said "I bet you're enjoying this scene." She agreed with that, but
also seemed a little distracted by trying to figure out what was going
on.
-AOQ
kenm47
cannot
> control himself around a nubile lass giving off erotic vibes.
Agreed with those who don't think this alters any discussions about his
motives in Bec2 or DMP. But yes, as always, he wears his hormones on
his sleeve."
OK. I don't believe this discussion or subsections thereof is over
quite yet.
"People seem to missing what I thought was a nice little Xander moment.
Look how he reacts to Cordelia's "maybe I should dress up [as a Slayer]
and put a stake to your throat." To me, it says "hey, I can see all
the Faith-love is making you uncomfortable; sorry, I'll pay more
attention to you." Except that Xander wouldn't actually say somethng
like that, so he lets his actions speak."
How do you get there from: "Please, God, don't let that be sarcasm."?
Ken (Brooklyn)
shuggie
George W Harris wrote:
> On 8 Mar 2006 05:56:35 -0800, "shuggie" <shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> :> Scars that don't heal? Or so it seems?
> :
> :Spike took a few months to heal from his injuries. We don't know
> :exactly but Faith probably fought Kakistos at most a few weeks before
> :FHT.
>
> Jr yrnea va "Sbby Sbe Ybir" gung gur fpne va Fcvxr'f rlroebj
> vf n erfhyg bs uvf svtug jvgu gur fynlre va Puvan.
Vaqrrq. Fcvxr'f fpne vf na nabznyl naq gubhtu vg jnf arire rkcyvpvgyl
fgngrq gurer vf fbzr vzcyvpngvba gung gur Puvarfr Fynlre'f fjbeq jnf
abg na beqvanel jrncba.
vague disclaimer
Jeff Jacoby <jjaco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 04:16:46 -0500, Don <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
> > In article <1141794600.7...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
> >> so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
> >> retreats?
> >
> > I can't find it now, but I seem to recall that there was a line in the
> > script at one point where Giles explains that the actual Slayer's
> > watcher is never invited to the retreats, because he's supposed to be
> > busy actually *watching*.
> >
> > There has been speculation that Giles himself wasn't really held in very
> > high regard by the Council (what with the Eyghon thing, and other
> > youthful indiscretions) which is why he didn't get invited before he
> > became Buffy's Watcher. The Council didn't really expect Buffy to last
> > very long, so they gave her a watcher that they didn't think was all
> > that good either, keeping their "better" people watching the girls that
> > they thought would most likely replace her.
>
> Fb gung jura gurer ner *gjb* fynlref ba *gur* uryyzbhgu
> (bxnl, bar bs gur uryyzbhguf), bar bs jubz unf abj fheivirq
> sbe 3+ lrnef, gurl fraq gurve irel orfg: Jrfyrl!
Be gurve vqrn bs vg.
> And let's not forget that when one of the "better" watchers
> (Mr. Zabuto) got Kendra the CoW neglected to tell him the
> other slayer wasn't actually dead yet!
Which tells us something about the CoW (juvpu unfa'g npghnyyl orra anzrq
lrg, va fubj) way of doing things. The mushroom approach.
> Or that when Kendra was called the CoW neglected to inform
> Giles.
See above
> Or that when Faith was called the CoW neglected to inform
> Giles.
Ditto.
None of these *necessarily* comments on someone's competence, if an
organisation is sufficient and instinctively secretive....
> The Council must have really hated Giles (rira orsber Urycyrfs)
...but I think it fairly reasonable to believe that Giles is more
out-of-the-loop than is normal.
Jr ner bs pbhefr qrnyvat jvgu gur pbafrdhraprf bs gur Pbhapvy orvat
vairagrq ba gur ubbs.
Scythe Matters
> Willow goes into a long ramble about the
> significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
> others drag her across the street. This was another "shut the fuck
> up, Willow" moment for Mrs. Quality, but she accepted it once I
> argued that our aspiring witch was, in fact, at least partially trying
> to entertain her friends rather than being deadly serious.
I don't think that's it. I think Mike's right, and this ties into
something that's been said about Hannigan in relation to her current
career: she's a very broad, rubber-faced comedienne that sometimes needs
to be reined in by the director. With other types of acting, she seems
to need less guidance. When this reining-in is done, her comedy can be a
lot of fun (see, for example, the "thing you do with your mouth" scene
just a few moments later). When it's not, it can be overdone. This scene
rides the line for me, but it's redeemed by subtlety of the Oz/Xander
collaboration in hauling her off the curb. And the obviously deliberate
contrast between spaz Willow and ultra-cool Cordelia here helps the
scene, as well.
> It's fun and it works if
> you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
> annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
I admit I don't get this. I don't see how any part of the episode is
"annoying." More or less good, sure. But annoying?
Mrs. Quality's going to have some issues, going forward. At least,
that's my prediction. A lot of fans love Willow. but more important
*Joss* loves Willow.
> We soon come to realize that the title comes from the names of several
> new characters (although I didn't realize that Scott was the
> "Hope" until afterward), which is kinda cool.
Also, of course, there's the significance of his last name in regards to
Buffy's ongoing storyline. These things tend not to be coincidental.
(Trick, too, gets a meaningful name.)
> Trick is first seen in the company of a rent-a-villains like Kakistos,
> who just looks and talks like a moron.
It's interesting to look at this in contrast to The Master. You'll
remember that you found the whole "classic evil" bit overdone and
cartoony...though slightly less so when it was obviously played for
laughs later in the season. Spike came along and swept the ritualistic,
older stuff away, but then the entire Drusilla --> Angelus arc (from The
Judge right through to Acathla) was a bit of a return to the
ritualistic, Big Idea sort of evil.
So here, in the third episode of the season, we have Kakistos, who's
pretty much in the mold of The Master (except, obviously, somewhat
weaker and certainly dumber), and despite Faith's freak-out we deal with
him fairly quickly and easily...as a metaphor rather than an actual Big
Bad.* The hipper vampire -- the one with the nice clothes and all the
quips -- gets to live. The show is saying something about its intentions
here.
* A term that you might as well get familiar with, if you're not
already. The Big Bad is a "main" villian with a multi-episodic arc,
usually meaning the entire season or some large subset thereof. It's the
Master in season one. Season two had, at various points, three different
vamps playing this role...though, of course, by season's end the Big Bad
was Angelus.
> And the "kill random person,
> cuz I'm evil" bit at the burger place lacks a certain, I don't
> know, anything that makes it worth watching.
Paired with the pizza delivery scene, though, this serves to set off
Trick's "living in the world" from the archaic Kakistos "I want to kill
the Slayer" stuff. Why don't vampires make use of delivery services all
the time? UPS, FedEx, Dominos, bicycle messengers...
> some people can pull off the stock-character of the educated
> killer who loves the sound of his own voice
I, too, want to know how Trick is "stock."
> And why shouldn't it? If anything, the dream sequences are getting
> worse (actually, I was wondering whether she was awake and
> hallucinating; that might've been interesting). This one is one of
> the more powerful scenes in the show, as we give ourselves over to
> full-fledged melodramatic imagery. Angel stands there bleeding,
> allowing no room for the slightest bit of understanding or forgiveness.
> "C'mon, figment-dude," one wants to yell, "hasn't the girl
> suffered enough yet?" No. Her own mind continues to be her harshest
> critic. And the sequence from Bec2 itself shows up a few times too.
> Buffy, months later, is quite literally reliving it, over and over and
> over.
This finally makes explicit something the dream sequences have been
hinting at for a while. It's not just Buffy's completely understandable
pain and guilt that's paining her. She's also feeling the accusations
from her "interior Angel." In her subconscious, *he* blames her for
everything that's happened, including killing him and sending him to
eternal torment. Yet another element of Buffy's self-flagellating nature.
...which brings us to another point, that's useful to mention in the
context of this episode: *why* does Buffy internalize everything? Well,
it's just the way her character is, and some of it is probably tied to
being the child of divorced parents, but might it not also be bound up
in her existence as the Chosen One? She's verbalized this a few times,
though not recently, and as we go through the topsy-turvy arc of her
accepting and not accepting her destiny, we're now at a point where she
tends to bear the weight of the world, but bear it silently. She loves
and even needs her family, friends and Watcher, but as "Becoming" made
explict, in the end she believes she relies solely upon herself.
And hey, here's Faith! Interesting that she should appear now, isn't it?
> And so many of the scenes
> revolve around introducing Faith that her personality dominates the
> tone of the episode
Yes. That's deliberate, I think. She's intended to be the center of
gravity for all the episode's energy. We need to *feel* how Buffy's
being marginalized, not just hear or see it.
> It's easy to see
> why the new Slayer and B don't hit it off right away - we've seen
> over and over that Buffy doesn't take too kindly to people inserting
> themselves into her life, personally or professionally.
I don't think that's it. I think it's much more that Faith appears to be
everything that Buffy is not: confident, happy, secure in her role, able
to get past (or maybe not even feel) the deeper emotional traumas, and
comfortable with pretty much everyone around her. Buffy is none of those
things. Naturally, this annoys her...and naturally, she acts out at
first, and only realizes the core of the issue later:
----
Giles: I think you're being a little...
Buffy: No, I'm being a lot. (Giles sips again) I know that.
----
> Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
A surplus of great lines in this episode.
> I generally don't notice that Charisma Carpenter is an attractive
> woman by conventional standards
Baffling. I was always much more into Hannigan, and Carpenter's beauty
is certainly much more conventional, but...baffling.
> Lots of energy in the mid-show Slayers-vs.-vamps fight scene
As others have mentioned, the stunts and *especially* the fights this
season have been pretty terrific, though things were already getting
good at the end of last season.
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
Normally, yes. This is an exception...unprecedented, according to Giles.
> But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one?
Yes.
> That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity.
No, only for a half-dozen more decades. Assuming they both die of old
age...which, come to think of it, seems rather unlikely, doesn't it?
> Anyway, if Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
> Chosen One.
Emotionally? Well, yes, it will, won't it?
As a practical matter? Perhaps. Joyce sees this right away. But this is
yet another moment where Buffy is being given a potential "out" from her
Chosenhood -- we've seen it in WttH, Prophecy Girl, What's My Line and
Anne (probably among other moments I'm forgetting). Each of those
moments has given her opportunities for clarity and re-evaluation. Each
has changed her as a Slayer.
> And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
> so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
> retreats?
As others have said, there are obviously girls who are believed to have
the potential to be Slayers out there, and at least some of them have
Watchers (ref. Kendra). Also, there has to be a network of data and
analysis out there beyond Giles' personal ability to gather information,
and it's possible that the Watchers fulfill that role. Certainly
Kendra's Watcher did, more than once.
> is the
> world full of eighteen-year-old potential Slayers out there, each in
> sort of a professional limbo until someone dies?
Given the evidence of the show, I'd guess they'd have to be younger than
that.
> Do they still hunt vampires for practice?
They train, certainly. I don't think we know much more than that.
> All right, anyway. It inevitably becomes clear that underneath
> Faith's loud exterior she's suffering her own bit of trauma, and
> Buffy lays into her in a nice scene.
Everything that her friends and her mother said to *her* in the last
episode, in fact. And something that Buffy still needs to hear, herself.
> The connection to Buffy is made unusually explicit this time around.
> She actually says that Faith has "got it behind her" and then
> immediately tries to do the same thing herself. This show usually
> tries for a more subtle approach to such things; doing it this way once
> in awhile is neither inherently good or bad, just different.
Yet again, Gellar hits it out of the park with this scene. The look on
her face, the slow, hesitant way she starts the "A" in "Angel was
cured," the various looks on her face as she unburdens herself.
Brilliant, understated, and perfect. Head, too, is flawless here.
Someone else noted that Willow seems more interested doing in the
(nonexistent) spell than in Buffy's pain. That's one way of looking at
it. Here's another: Willow recognizes the extent of Buffy's pain, and
wants to help. What's her first inclination, in terms of helping? Well,
it's *not* to go to Buffy and console, which should point out that maybe
everything from DMP isn't fully resolved yet. But it should also point
out something else about Willow.
> On the
> other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
> didn't see that one coming.
Simply one of the great moments of the entire series.
> Speaking of unusually explicit, this episode is filled with closeups of
> the ring from "Surprise,"
The whole episode is a rather dramatic upswing in terms of lighting and
directing. It definitely raises the bar, and future episodes that are
shot much more simply will start to stand out. But if you ever rewatch,
pay attention to the lighting in this episode...especially the
half-shadows on faces at key emotional moments.
> And so the episode ends with a touching
> scene in which Buffy leaves it behind, limiting her comments to
> "goodbye" and trying to take that first big step towards moving on.
Also, the most beautiful variation on the Buffy/Angel musical theme yet.
> So there's a curmudgeonly part of all of us that probably wants to
> start yelling about cop-outs at this point. But most of us, even those
> watching first-run, probably knew it was coming.
By then, yeah, I think non-spoilage (for people participating in fandom)
was hard. Not impossible, though.
However, knowing something is coming and knowing how it's going to play
out are two very different things. There's an awful lot here that we
don't understand, and an awful lot of ways this could go. For example,
we don't even know *which* version we've gotten back: evil, ensouled, or
something else entirely. We don't know why he's back, or how. We don't
know what's going to happen.
Call it a "cop-out" if you must, but think about this: the easiest thing
for the show to do would be to now have Buffy "get on with her life" --
to get past the Angel trauma, to stop blaming herself, to let go of the
past and embrace the new season. Uh, I mean year. ;-) Maybe with, say,
Scott Hope.
Bringing Angel back, though? That's more difficult. A *lot* more
difficult. Not just for the writers to do well, but potentially for our
characters. Think about where they all were, in relation to Angel, the
last time we saw him. And think about what his reappearance will mean in
that context.
I leapt off my chair at this scene. Not because of the surprise of Angel
coming back -- though I did manage to be sorta unspoiled and I was a
little bit shocked -- but because of the way my head started spinning
all the possibilities.
> But after Season Two, where else can you go here? That was rhetorical.
Might as well ask "after Kendra, what use Faith?"
> AOQ rating: Good
I agree.
William George Ferguson
Which spun off several suppositions about Faith (taking also into account
her observed behavior and personality in this ep). One, she came from an
abusive household. Two, unlike Buffy she has been cut off from emotional
support (her mother, who appears to have been abusive, is dead, her
Watcher is dead, and she took the death very hard, so she must have
bonded with her to some extent). Three, she had no network of friends as
Buffy has (see her comments about dropping out of school).
Actually, the newsgroup built a pretty large background on Faith from the
little bit we go in this episode. (some of it was even right)
One of the things I worked out on Faith, just on what we were shown here,
Faith wasn't raised by her Watcher as Kendra was, but had been recruited
by her Watcher prior to be called as the Slayer. The reasoning:
We know when Faith was called, May of 1998.
We know when Faith arrived in Sunnydale, late September of 1998.
We know that Faith is a poor student.
We know that Faith knows more about the Watchers and Slayers than Buffy.
Sometime between May and September, Kakistos killed Faith's Watcher and
Faith went on the run, finally ending up in Sunnydale. This leaves a
fairly small window, as little as a month and as much as about 3 months,
for Faith the Slayer to be trained by her Watcher. I just don't see the
Faith we see in FH&T as absorbing all the 'book learning' in that time
(the physical training, sure). My read has always been that Faith's
Watcher located her and she had spent at least a little time as a SIT
before she was called.
kenm47
be
everything that Buffy is not: confident, happy, secure in her role,
able
to get past (or maybe not even feel) the deeper emotional traumas, and
comfortable with pretty much everyone around her. Buffy is none of
those
things. Naturally, this annoys her...and naturally, she acts out at
first, and only realizes the core of the issue later: "
Only later for Faith to fall apart in a way Buffy never did.
"> But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one?
Yes."
Umm. Seems to me for a long long time the speculation was that the
Slayer line no longer ran through Buffy, but through Kendra to Faith to
who knows? Without Buffy dying again, no way to really know.
Personally, I liked that. I also had a theory that while Two Slayers
was, as Giles said, unprecedented, what was also unprecedented was a
Slayer dying temporarily. We know Buffy came back in PG feeling
stronger -my theory there some virus or other thing passed with The
Master's bite. Buffy is now, IIRC how I looked at it then,
super-Slayer, something more than the Watchers ever foresaw or knew
what to do with.
"Yet again, Gellar hits it out of the park with this scene. The look on
her face, the slow, hesitant way she starts the "A" in "Angel was
cured," the various looks on her face as she unburdens herself.
Brilliant, understated, and perfect. Head, too, is flawless here."
Oh my goodness, yes. I think it was SMG's ability to sell these scnes
that kept me so firmly on Buffy's side assuming there were two sides to
whatever. She was so nastily overlooked by the Emmys every year.
"Someone else noted that Willow seems more interested doing in the
(nonexistent) spell than in Buffy's pain."
I noticed when looking for the fan transcript online that Willow's
reaction to the "no spell" was treated there as her dawning realization
of what Giles had achieved; I still see it that way. I'm just not
seeing any incipient evil Willow there.
"Bringing Angel back, though? That's more difficult. A *lot* more
difficult. Not just for the writers to do well, but potentially for our
characters. Think about where they all were, in relation to Angel, the
last time we saw him. And think about what his reappearance will mean
in
that context."
Well it's still a decision not driven by JW's vaunted conception of
Buffy, but from the need for the spin-off, which I believe we knew was
going to happen somehow at the time. Yes, they had to shoehorn him back
in. I still would like to know what the story was going to be if there
had been no Angel series in the works. I'm still waiting for that JW
tell all, the book I do not believe will ever be written.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
>And PS: I don't think I ever before noted Faith's line while beating on
>the vamp:
>"My dead mother hits harder than that!"
>Another big diff from B.
Which spun off several suppositions about Faith (taking also into
account her observed behavior and personality in this ep). One, she
came from an abusive household. Two, unlike Buffy she has been cut off
from emotional support (her mother, who appears to have been abusive,
is dead, her Watcher is dead, and she took the death very hard, so she
must have bonded with her to some extent). Three, she had no network
of friends as Buffy has (see her comments about dropping out of
school).
Actually, the newsgroup built a pretty large background on Faith from
the little bit we go in this episode. (some of it was even right)"
Funny, even with that line I never thought of Faith as coming from an
abusive home. Maybe urban and lower economic class than Buffy's middle
class suburban life, but not abusive. What I was noting was Faith
referring to her mother being dead, unlike Joyce of course. When
Faith's mom died is unknown. I don't recall any mention ever (IIRC) of
Faith's dad. The "hits harder" part I thought was just a general joke,
a sarcastic comment re a "mother" as a fighter.
Maybe something comes up later that I presently do not recall that says
somehing more about that "abusive" family?
The rest I agree with. A riff on Kendra, another Slayer without family
or friends. UNLIKE Buffy who has both, still.
"My read has always been that Faith's Watcher located her and she had
spent at least a little time as a SIT
before she was called."
Maybe as a pre-teen, recently then orphaned Faith?
Ken (Brooklyn)
vague disclaimer
"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> "> But is the trigger for
> > "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one?
>
> Yes."
>
> Umm. Seems to me for a long long time the speculation was that the
> Slayer line no longer ran through Buffy, but through Kendra to Faith to
> who knows? Without Buffy dying again, no way to really know.
>
> Personally, I liked that. I also had a theory that while Two Slayers
> was, as Giles said, unprecedented, what was also unprecedented was a
> Slayer dying temporarily. We know Buffy came back in PG feeling
> stronger -my theory there some virus or other thing passed with The
> Master's bite. Buffy is now, IIRC how I looked at it then,
> super-Slayer, something more than the Watchers ever foresaw or knew
> what to do with.
Or it could have been Slayer Strength Adrenalin - after all, she had not
only cheated death, she had cheated Prophecy (and yes, I realise there's
a whole bunch of metaphysical issues with that last statement, but in
her head.... ).
> "Yet again, Gellar hits it out of the park with this scene. The look on
>
> her face, the slow, hesitant way she starts the "A" in "Angel was
> cured," the various looks on her face as she unburdens herself.
> Brilliant, understated, and perfect. Head, too, is flawless here."
>
> Oh my goodness, yes. I think it was SMG's ability to sell these scnes
> that kept me so firmly on Buffy's side assuming there were two sides to
> whatever. She was so nastily overlooked by the Emmys every year.
>
> "Someone else noted that Willow seems more interested doing in the
> (nonexistent) spell than in Buffy's pain."
>
> I noticed when looking for the fan transcript online that Willow's
> reaction to the "no spell" was treated there as her dawning realization
> of what Giles had achieved; I still see it that way. I'm just not
> seeing any incipient evil Willow there.
I don't think there is any implication of evil at all. But - although I
entirely agree that part of her reaction was awe at how Giles conned
Buffy into opening up - her disappointment at not being able to play
with the new toy was also there.
> "Bringing Angel back, though? That's more difficult. A *lot* more
> difficult. Not just for the writers to do well, but potentially for our
>
> characters. Think about where they all were, in relation to Angel, the
> last time we saw him. And think about what his reappearance will mean
> in
> that context."
>
> Well it's still a decision not driven by JW's vaunted conception of
> Buffy, but from the need for the spin-off, which I believe we knew was
> going to happen somehow at the time. Yes, they had to shoehorn him back
> in. I still would like to know what the story was going to be if there
> had been no Angel series in the works. I'm still waiting for that JW
> tell all, the book I do not believe will ever be written.
Maybe there is no book. If the idea off a spin-off was mooted before
detailed work was started on S3, then the need for a transition of some
kind is in at the outset.
Scythe Matters
> Umm. Seems to me for a long long time the speculation was that the
> Slayer line no longer ran through Buffy, but through Kendra to Faith to
> who knows?
V guvax gung guvf vf n fcrphyngvba orfg yrsg sbe yngre, juvpu vf jul V
qvqa'g oevat vg hc.
> Oh my goodness, yes. I think it was SMG's ability to sell these scnes
> that kept me so firmly on Buffy's side assuming there were two sides to
> whatever.
I don't really get that way of looking at it. I mean, sure there are
different "sides," but why does one have to be preferable to another?
> I noticed when looking for the fan transcript online that Willow's
> reaction to the "no spell" was treated there as her dawning realization
> of what Giles had achieved; I still see it that way. I'm just not
> seeing any incipient evil Willow there.
Hzz, or pnershy.
What I'm talking about was the scene before that, just after Buffy
leaves and Giles is finally exhaling.
> Well it's still a decision not driven by JW's vaunted conception of
> Buffy, but from the need for the spin-off
That's an assumption on your part. There are any number of ways an
"Angel" series could happen. Far from all of them require Angel to come
back now and in this fashion. Some don't even require Angel's existence
beyond "Becoming" at all. And in fact none of them require Angel to come
back to BTVS.
Gur Ohssl/Natry nep vf evsr jvgu varivgnovyvgvrf. Vg cynlf bhg va sebag
bs hf, va frnfba guerr, ohg gur varivgnovyvgvrf ner whfg nf varivgnoyr
vs jr qba'g frr gurz. Sbe gurer gb or fbzr punatr va gurfr
varivgnovyvgvrf, bhgfvqr npgbef gung punatr gur sbhaqvat nffhzcgvbaf
jbhyq unir gb vagreirar: Funafh, sbe rknzcyr.
Qvq Snvgu ernccrne orpnhfr gurer jnf tbvat gb or n fcvabss? Jurgure fur
qvq be qvqa'g, gur snpg vf gung gurer jnfa'g n fcvabss. Naq lrg, gur
fgbel fgvyy jbexf jvgubhg gur fcvabss. Shaal, gung.
Scythe Matters
> Funny, even with that line I never thought of Faith as coming from an
> abusive home. Maybe urban and lower economic class than Buffy's middle
> class suburban life, but not abusive.
Well, why say it? Whose mind goes naturally to their mother and hitting
when there's violence in the air? It's not proof, sure, but it's an
indicator. Naq lrf, gurer'f zber va gur shgher, vs V erpnyy pbeerpgyl.
kenm47
Scythe Matters wrote:
> kenm47 wrote:
>
> > Umm. Seems to me for a long long time the speculation was that the
> > Slayer line no longer ran through Buffy, but through Kendra to Faith to
> > who knows?
>
> V guvax gung guvf vf n fcrphyngvba orfg yrsg sbe yngre, juvpu vf jul V
> qvqa'g oevat vg hc.
Jryy, V qvqa'g guvax vg ernyyl znggrerq nf VVEP vg'f abg hagvy Frnfbaf
fvk naq frira jr trg nalguvat shegure ba vg. Naq jung jr tbg arire
fngvfsvrq zr.
Abg frrvat ubj V'i fcbvyrq nalguvat. Qvq V?
>
> > Oh my goodness, yes. I think it was SMG's ability to sell these scnes
> > that kept me so firmly on Buffy's side assuming there were two sides to
> > whatever.
>
> I don't really get that way of looking at it. I mean, sure there are
> different "sides," but why does one have to be preferable to another?
I guess when I read or see a hero's tale, I empathize most strongly
with the main character and want to see her or him ultimately triumph
even if there are moments of less than sterling behavior. E.g., Frodo
under the influence of the Ring. (Maybe not a great example). Or Magnum
killing the Russian in cold blood.
>
> > I noticed when looking for the fan transcript online that Willow's
> > reaction to the "no spell" was treated there as her dawning realization
> > of what Giles had achieved; I still see it that way. I'm just not
> > seeing any incipient evil Willow there.
>
> Hzz, or pnershy.
BX. Qvqa'g ernyvmr ubj pybfr gung pnzr. Jnf ernpgvat gb gur sbyxf
qvfphffvat Jvyybj'f frysvfuarff rgp., flzcgbzf bs artngvir punenpgre
genvgf be gung'f jung V gubhtug sbyxf jrer fnlvat urernobhgf ba guvf
naq QZC.
>
> What I'm talking about was the scene before that, just after Buffy
> leaves and Giles is finally exhaling.
>
> > Well it's still a decision not driven by JW's vaunted conception of
> > Buffy, but from the need for the spin-off
>
> That's an assumption on your part. There are any number of ways an
> "Angel" series could happen. Far from all of them require Angel to come
> back now and in this fashion. Some don't even require Angel's existence
> beyond "Becoming" at all. And in fact none of them require Angel to come
> back to BTVS.
>
> Gur Ohssl/Natry nep vf evsr jvgu varivgnovyvgvrf. Vg cynlf bhg va sebag
> bs hf, va frnfba guerr, ohg gur varivgnovyvgvrf ner whfg nf varivgnoyr
> vs jr qba'g frr gurz. Sbe gurer gb or fbzr punatr va gurfr
> varivgnovyvgvrf, bhgfvqr npgbef gung punatr gur sbhaqvat nffhzcgvbaf
> jbhyq unir gb vagreirar: Funafh, sbe rknzcyr.
>
> Qvq Snvgu ernccrne orpnhfr gurer jnf tbvat gb or n fcvabss? Jurgure fur
> qvq be qvqa'g, gur snpg vf gung gurer jnfa'g n fcvabss. Naq lrg, gur
> fgbel fgvyy jbexf jvgubhg gur fcvabss. Shaal, gung.
Not following the coded comment. As to the uncoded, I still do not
think I knew about this NG at the time of FH&T. I'm not quite sure when
I first posted hereabouts (I think I used to "no archive" when I
started). Anyway, I was a fan and did gobble up say TV Guide tidbits. I
just don't call what we knew as publicly known and what we didn't in
those days. That frame of mind I cannot recapture.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
There are lots of things people say that don't really mean anything and
don't mean what they seem to mean. As I rewatch the eps for these
discussions, I'll try to note other comments supporting the abusive
mother theory.
Right now, nothing coming to mind.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Scythe Matters
> Jryy, V qvqa'g guvax vg ernyyl znggrerq nf VVEP vg'f abg hagvy Frnfbaf
> fvk naq frira jr trg nalguvat shegure ba vg. Naq jung jr tbg arire
> fngvfsvrq zr.
>
> Abg frrvat ubj V'i fcbvyrq nalguvat. Qvq V?
Jul jbhyq nalbar or zbirq gb nfx, ng guvf cbvag, jub gur "fynlre yvar"
ehaf guebhtu? Gung dhrfgvba zbfg boivbhfyl trgf nfxrq orpnhfr fbzrbar'f
tbvat gb qvr, naq gung unfa'g unccrarq lrg. Shegure, lbh fnvq "sbe n
ybat ybat gvzr gur fcrphyngvba jnf," lrg Snvgu whfg nccrnerq va guvf
rcvfbqr. Jul jbhyq gurer unir orra ybat-gvzr fcrphyngvba? Svanyyl, vg
whfg frrzf gung gurer'f ab jnl gb unir guvf qvfphffvba jvgubhg oevatvat
va nyy gur frnfba svir guebhtu frira zngrevny. Orggre gb nibvq guvf
zhpu-nohfrq onggyrtebhaq hagvy vgf eryrinag gb NbD'f erivrjf, ar p'rfg cnf?
> I guess when I read or see a hero's tale, I empathize most strongly
> with the main character and want to see her or him ultimately triumph
> even if there are moments of less than sterling behavior. E.g., Frodo
> under the influence of the Ring. (Maybe not a great example).
No, since Frodo fails. No triumph there.
> BX. Qvqa'g ernyvmr ubj pybfr gung pnzr. Jnf ernpgvat gb gur sbyxf
> qvfphffvat Jvyybj'f frysvfuarff rgp., flzcgbzf bs artngvir punenpgre
> genvgf be gung'f jung V gubhtug sbyxf jrer fnlvat urernobhgf ba guvf
> naq QZC.
Lrf, guvf jnf gur qverpgvba bs gur qvfphffvba, ohg vg'f nyy ceryhqr ng
guvf cbvag. Ab oynpx unve naq irvaf lrg!
> Not following the coded comment.
O/N *pna'g* or gbtrgure va nal zrnavatshy jnl. Fur pna'g znxr uvz unccl,
orpnhfr ur'yy ybfr uvf fbhy ntnva. Ur pna'g znxr ure unccl, orpnhfr gurl
fvzcyl pna'g unir nal fbeg bs ebznagvp shgher gung qbrfa'g fgnyy va
svefg trne. Gur ragver frnfba guerr nep sbe gubfr gjb vf nobhg
qrzbafgengvat gung, bire naq bire ntnva. Naq vg'f nobhg obgu bs gurz
npprcgvat gur varivgnovyvgl bs vg. Ohg gur varivgnovyvgl nyernql rkvfgf;
jvgubhg n znffvir punatr gb gur cerzvfrf (yvxr Natry & Funafuh), jr
qba'g *unir* gb or fubja nyy guvf, orpnhfr vg'f nyernql boivbhf. Gurer'f
ab ernfba Natry unf gb pbzr onpx ng nyy, ng yrnfg abg abj. Gung ur qbrf
freirf gur pheerag fgbel nf ZR jnagf gb gryy vg, abg gur arrqf bs gur
fcvabss. Vs Natry qbrfa'g pbzr onpx hagvy "Pvgl bs..." engure guna abj,
naq chggvat nfvqr uvf cbfg-uryy erpbirel gvzr, jung punatrf nobhg jurer
uvf punenpgre vf ivf-à-ivf Ohssl naq yvsr va trareny? Abg bar guvat.
Guhf, gur ybtvpny pbapyhfvba vf gung Natry'f cerfrapr urer vf zber
OGIF-eryngrq guna NGF-eryngrq. Ur'f oebhtug onpx gb pnhfr Ohssl rira
zber cnva naq fhssrevat, naq gb zbir *ure* punenpgre cnfg gur grrantr
"svefg ybir" naq gb ure zrgncubevpny tenqhngvba. Uvf punenpgre vf, va
znal shaqnzragny jnlf, gur fnzr va "Pvgl bs..." gung vg vf urer (ntnva,
vtabevat gur orfgvny cbfg-uryy fghss).
Nf sbe gur Snvgu pbzzrag, vg'f n cnenyyry rknzcyr gb fubj jul gur
ernccrnenapr bs n punenpgre jbexf qrfcvgr gur cbgragvny rkvfgrapr bs n
fcvabss.
vague disclaimer
Scythe Matters <sp...@spam.spam> wrote:
> kenm47 wrote:
>
> > Funny, even with that line I never thought of Faith as coming from an
> > abusive home. Maybe urban and lower economic class than Buffy's middle
> > class suburban life, but not abusive.
>
> Well, why say it? Whose mind goes naturally to their mother and hitting
> when there's violence in the air?
Certainly at football matches in the UK someone might shout "My mum can
pass better than that" without implying she is a former professional.
Faith's comment could equally imply the mum was a bit frail and unable
to look after her properly (for example).
kenm47
Scythe Matters wrote:
> kenm47 wrote:
>
OK. Thanks. I'll try to keep that all in mind.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
Exactly. Thank you.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > It's fun and it works if
> > you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
> > annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
>
> I admit I don't get this. I don't see how any part of the episode is
> "annoying." More or less good, sure. But annoying?
I'm just saying that although I personally quite liked Faith here, I
would totally understand (and demand no further explanation) if someone
said that they found her, and therefore the episode, annoying. That
personality type has that effect on some people.
[snip the stuff about "Big Bad" - I already use that term, actually.
You'll see it in my "Homecoming" review (yeah, I got two eps ahead
again).]
> I, too, want to know how Trick is "stock."
Okay. Anytime I see a character whose personality I feel like I've
seen often enough that I don't need to cite a source, I label him
"stock." In this case, it's the guy who looks like he has a university
education and the Gift Of Gab, strings together complex sentances flll
of long words just because he loves the language, and randomly "shocks"
us with his casual brutality (killing random people) or grossness
(biting a rat's head off or something). He's usually paired with a big
dumb guy who supplies the brute force in their team, and is often
written by British authors. Recent examples of such teams that I can
think of are Pin and Tulip from Terry Pratchett's _The Truth_ and Croup
and Vanderwhatever from Neil Gaiman's _Neverwhere_.
> > It's easy to see
> > why the new Slayer and B don't hit it off right away - we've seen
> > over and over that Buffy doesn't take too kindly to people inserting
> > themselves into her life, personally or professionally.
>
> I don't think that's it. I think it's much more that Faith appears to be
> everything that Buffy is not: confident, happy, secure in her role, able
> to get past (or maybe not even feel) the deeper emotional traumas, and
> comfortable with pretty much everyone around her. Buffy is none of those
> things. Naturally, this annoys her...and naturally, she acts out at
> first, and only realizes the core of the issue later:
That's a good reading of things, but I also think that Buffy just
doesn't take kindly to people casually expecting to just waltz in and
disrupt the dynamics of her personal ("Ted") or professional ("What's
My Line") life.
> > That means we'll
> > have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity.
>
> No, only for a half-dozen more decades. Assuming they both die of old
> age...which, come to think of it, seems rather unlikely, doesn't it?
Wouldn't either of them dying still call up a new one? (Although I do
like the idea that others have brought up that the succession passed on
to Kendra after PG, and Buffy is the sole anomaly.)
Re: Angel's return being "harder": you don't think it's easier to work
with the existing popular characters than to let them stay dead and
introduce new ones to fill their roles? Fortunately BTVS seems
interested in doing some of each...
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> especially early on when Buffy ~totally flips out and kills vampires~,
> presumably in response to having her competence questioned.
"Buffy flips out? Faith is the one beating up on the vamp when she
could
just kill him."
Faith is just like sitting there and unching which is kinda kewl I
guess but Buffy is all over the place and FLIPS OUT on them. It's
totally cool and by totally cool I mean totally sweet!
OK, fine. www.realultimatepower.net
-AOQ
~at least it wasn't a Zero Wing reference~
Arbitrar Of Quality
And doesn't he follow that up by grinning and putting his arm around
her? I just see it as Cordelia, cheesed off at being ignored all
episode, getting increasingly less subtle with the annoyance... and
knowing Xander well enough to realize that (for better or worse) the
way to his heart is through kinky references. And then he tells her
(non-verbally) not to worry - she still has that effect on him, and
doesn't have anything to worry about from Faith. That's just my read
on the scene.
-AOQ
kenm47
I guess I'm more literal - part of him would like Cordy to play dress
up, particularly dress up as the Slayer (either one). Never having
played the dress up game myself (as entertained or entertainer), I'll
accept that others can find it fun. In Xander's case? Something else.
IMO, of course.
ROT 13 for others:
V unq sbetbggra guvf zbzrag. Bqq gung gurl erivfvgrq vg yngre jvgu
Fcvxr/Unezbal. V nyfb guvax xabjvat bs gur yngre Fcvxr bofrffvba
rpubvat Knaqre'f orunivbe va pregnva jnlf vf abj shegure pbybevat zl
creprcgvba bs Knaqre naq uvf zbgvingvbaf.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Don Sample
> Or that when Faith was called the CoW neglected to inform
> Giles.
>
We don't really know that the Council neglected telling Giles anything
about Faith. There is no evidence one way or the other. They may have
been a little slow getting news of her Watcher's death to him, but we
don't really have a timeline on when she died, or when the Council
itself found out about it.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
One Bit Shy
news:1141794600.7...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Three, Episode 3: "Faith, Hope, and Trick"
> (or "Rock a rhyme that's right on time")
> Writer: David Greenwalt
> Director: James A. Contner
>
> F/H/T begins with our fourth- and fifth-year seniors waiting to enjoy
> their off-campus lunch. Willow goes into a long ramble about the
> significance of the moment that somehow keeps going on, even as the
> others drag her across the street. This was another "shut the fuck
> up, Willow" moment for Mrs. Quality, but she accepted it once I
> argued that our aspiring witch was, in fact, at least partially trying
> is symbolic of how I think of the whole episode (oh, come on, like you
> regular readers didn't see that coming). It's fun and it works if
> you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
> annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
I'll go along with that. My feeelings about this episode tend to jump
around a bit. Maybe it's just mood.
As for Willow, well, I get sucked in right away with the pan up from her
shoes (which she's rocking in) to her head and then, "I'm giddy."
Unbearably cute. And she caps her spoken riff with a little snort that I
can't help but laugh at and get further drawn into her mood.
> Trick is first seen in the company of a rent-a-villains like Kakistos,
> who just looks and talks like a moron. And the "kill random person,
> cuz I'm evil" bit at the burger place lacks a certain, I don't
> know, anything that makes it worth watching.
Gee, I kind of like the set up line of, "Now I'm hungry." Deflates the
"moron" talk of Kakistos, and gives at least an excuse for having a little
fun with the fast food guy.
But forget that. What'd you think of the lines about Sunnydale's death
rate? Isn't that an interesting take on the town's forgetty-itis? Instead
of fixing the problem, the problem creates its very own consequence.
> Her scenes are fun to watch
> (I especially liked Xander and Willow pointing out the various places
> they've been attacked, and her amused reaction),
Sweet too. I realized then that they never get the chance to brag to
anybody about their exploits.
> Probably my favorite line from the episode is Buffy re: Faith re:
> Giles: "raise your hand if 'ew.'"
Mine is definitely, "Isn't it crazy how slaying just always makes you hungry
and horny?" Followed by everybody turning and looking at Buffy. Cracks me
up every time. (Also a nice setup for Buffy's later, "You hungry?")
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
> Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
> Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
> Chosen One.
A point of some controversy. At this point it can't really be answered
because you don't know if Buffy's eventual death will trigger a new slayer
again, or if she used up her part in the link when Kendra was created. Lots
of debate about that.
> And if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers, enough
> so that the Watcher of the fucking *Slayer* isn't invited to their
> retreats? Mrs. Quality and I were pondering this... given that Kendra
> was raised by her Watcher, which seems to be traditional... is the
> world full of eighteen-year-old potential Slayers out there, each in
> sort of a professional limbo until someone dies? Do they still hunt
> vampires for practice?
I don't recall what about that is known at this time. So I'll defer to
others.
> All right, anyway. It inevitably becomes clear that underneath
> Faith's loud exterior she's suffering her own bit of trauma, and
> Buffy lays into her in a nice scene. It's a strong piece of writing
> since we empathize with Buffy's increasing annoyance with Faith, but
> realize that she's being too hard on her (to the point of nastiness,
> even), but can understand it given the Buffster's own state of mind.
Two additional notes about that scene. First is to observe that Faith had
lied about her watcher and what brought her to Sunnydale. She came to
Sunnydale utterly alone after seeing her watcher die. What's her motivation
for coming there, and why did she hide the truth from Buffy and Giles?
Second, after the lengthy discussion about DMP, I'm really surprised you
didn't focus on Faith running away and what Buffy said about that.
Especially, "What about dealing? Is that just something you're going to
dump on me?" Whoa. I guess Buffy got the DMP message so much that she's
turned into the gotta' deal enforcer. Or is she projecting? Or what?
That's a pretty blatant connection.
> The connection to Buffy is made unusually explicit this time around.
> She actually says that Faith has "got it behind her" and then
> immediately tries to do the same thing herself. This show usually
> tries for a more subtle approach to such things; doing it this way once
> in awhile is neither inherently good or bad, just different. On the
> other hand, Giles' closing "there is no spell..." hey, cool. I
> didn't see that one coming.
That was handled really well dramatically. And you're seeing Giles at his
sharpest.
But just to be devil's advocate for the moment. Wasn't that kind of
manipulative? Deceiving Buffy to push her into the place he wants her?
One other thing about that scene. Willow gets to hear straight from Buffy
that her spell worked. A really self affirming moment for Willow. (Notice
how animated she got right after about helping Giles with his spell.)
> Speaking of unusually explicit, this episode is filled with closeups of
> the ring from "Surprise," And so the episode ends with a touching
> scene in which Buffy leaves it behind, limiting her comments to
> "goodbye" and trying to take that first big step towards moving on.
> Awww. Comments from the Quality household at this point:
> Mrs. Q: That's a nice way to end.
> Me: It'd be kinda funny if this somehow caused him to come back.
>
> Damn, I'm good.
LOL. Well, my reaction to that moment was, "Aaaargh!!" I might as well get
it out of the way and confess right now that I was quite content to leave
Angel dead. This is purely a personal reaction to the character. As much
as I admire the great gothic romance of S2, I just don't like Angel, the
character.
Be that as it may, I reluctantly say that the ring was a pretty decent
mechanism for this plot element. In part because it encapsulates both yours
and Mrs. Q's reactions.
It also made for a nice visual.
> One-sentence summary: A bunch of disparate elements that go
> surprisingly well together.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
I don't have much more to say at the moment. No rating of my own. My
feelings about this show jump around. I'm curious to see what others have
to say.
OBS
Don Sample
vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:
> In article <1JCdnfLRz5-Xa5PZ...@comcast.com>,
> Jeff Jacoby <jjaco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> > The Council must have really hated Giles
>
> ...but I think it fairly reasonable to believe that Giles is more
> out-of-the-loop than is normal.
Or they are so wrapped up in tradition, that they haven't updated their
procedures since the 19th century.
Back when the fastest way to get a message across an ocean was to put a
copy of it on a boat going the right general direction, and hope it
didn't sink, it would have been pointless to send regular updates to the
people in the field.
Don Sample
"kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Kakistos is a bigger problem canon-wise out of your butt. Cloven hands
> and feet? Why? Scars that don't heal? Or so it seems? So old yet so
> stupid?
We saw it before with the Master. Really old vampires stop looking
human and start taking on permanent animalistic features.
We've also seen that vampires don't heal instantly. How long did it
take for Dru to recover from the mob in Prague? Spike spent months in a
wheelchair, after getting that pipe organ dropped on him. Kakistos'
injury was recent. If he'd lived, it might have gone away in a few more
weeks.
Don Sample
Scythe Matters <sp...@spam.spam> wrote:
> Jul jbhyq nalbar or zbirq gb nfx, ng guvf cbvag, jub gur "fynlre yvar"
> ehaf guebhtu? Gung dhrfgvba zbfg boivbhfyl trgf nfxrq orpnhfr fbzrbar'f
> tbvat gb qvr, naq gung unfa'g unccrarq lrg. Shegure, lbh fnvq "sbe n
> ybat ybat gvzr gur fcrphyngvba jnf," lrg Snvgu whfg nccrnerq va guvf
> rcvfbqr. Jul jbhyq gurer unir orra ybat-gvzr fcrphyngvba? Svanyyl, vg
> whfg frrzf gung gurer'f ab jnl gb unir guvf qvfphffvba jvgubhg oevatvat
> va nyy gur frnfba svir guebhtu frira zngrevny. Orggre gb nibvq guvf
> zhpu-nohfrq onggyrtebhaq hagvy vgf eryrinag gb NbD'f erivrjf, ar p'rfg cnf?
Sbe fbzr bs hf, gur fcrphyngvba ortna jura Ohssl qvrq va Cebcurpl Tvey.
"V erzrzore gur qevyy. Bar Fynlre qvrf, arkg bar'f pnyyrq. Jbaqre jub
fur vf?" Jura Ohssl qvrq, jr ortna jbaqrevat.
Gura jura Xraqen qvrq, jr ernyyl fgnegrq jbaqrevat. Fcrphyngvba jnf fb
evsr gung Wbff sryg gur arrq gb yvr nobhg jurgure nabgure Fynlre jbhyq
or pnyyrq gb ercynpr ure.
One Bit Shy
news:1141826510.3...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> jil...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Don't you mean Willow's non-reaction to finding out there is no spell?
>> No, wait, you don't.
>>
>> What I noticed, I remember, is that Willow was far more interested in
>> doing the spell than in Buffy's clear pain over having to kill Angel,
>> when he was innocent er... again.
>
> That's a good point. At the time I attributed her eagerness to wanting
> to do SOMETHING, but I see what you're saying.
>
> And the Willow non-reaction? Not so non IMO. I saw the lingrering shot
> to be Willow thinking about it all, how wonderful Giles was to get that
> catharsis from Buffy. I had not considered it being Willow
> disappointment in not being called upon to do a spell.
>
> Ken (Brooklyn)
>
I think there was some of both. She put on a couple of expressions before
settling on the slight frown.
OBS
Scythe Matters
> That's a good reading of things, but I also think that Buffy just
> doesn't take kindly to people casually expecting to just waltz in and
> disrupt the dynamics of her personal ("Ted") or professional ("What's
> My Line") life.
She doesn't, but it's not the primary motivation here.
> Wouldn't either of them dying still call up a new one?
Leave those worms in that can.
> Re: Angel's return being "harder": you don't think it's easier to work
> with the existing popular characters than to let them stay dead and
> introduce new ones to fill their roles?
You're talking about making a show, I'm talking about writing
emotionally compelling drama. It's definitely harder to re-introduce
Angel and then go somewhere with it than it is to just let Buffy start
dating Scott Hope.
Scythe Matters
> I just see it as Cordelia, cheesed off at being ignored all
> episode, getting increasingly less subtle with the annoyance... and
> knowing Xander well enough to realize that (for better or worse) the
> way to his heart is through kinky references. And then he tells her
> (non-verbally) not to worry - she still has that effect on him, and
> doesn't have anything to worry about from Faith. That's just my read
> on the scene.
I think a slightly better read is that she realizes where she fits vs.
the Slayer (now Slayers) and uses it to her advantage, but that there's
not necessarily realization of this fact by Xander. But more anon.
Scythe Matters
> Sbe fbzr bs hf, gur fcrphyngvba ortna jura Ohssl qvrq va Cebcurpl Tvey.
> "V erzrzore gur qevyy. Bar Fynlre qvrf, arkg bar'f pnyyrq. Jbaqre jub
> fur vf?" Jura Ohssl qvrq, jr ortna jbaqrevat.
>
> Gura jura Xraqen qvrq, jr ernyyl fgnegrq jbaqrevat. Fcrphyngvba jnf fb
> evsr gung Wbff sryg gur arrq gb yvr nobhg jurgure nabgure Fynlre jbhyq
> or pnyyrq gb ercynpr ure.
Gung'f abg jung V zrna, gubhtu. V'z gnyxvat nobhg gur fcrpvsvp "qbrf vg
eha guebhtu Ohssl be Snvgu" nethzrag gung'f orra unq fb znal gvzrf, sbe
juvpu zhpu bs gur narpqbgny nzzhavgvba pbzrf sebz shgher frnfbaf. Fvapr
vg'f varivgnoyr gung gur qvfphffvba jvyy erne vg'f rkprrqvatyl htyl urnq
gura, jul abg yrnir vg hagvy gura?
gree...@gmail.com
Dude, you are working overtime to make Cordy the bad guy here. All of
Xander's naked drooling over Faith in Cordy's presence is just plain
rude. There's no excuse for it, it's just rude. Cordy had a right to
express her dissatisfaction about it.
Terry
One Bit Shy
news:l64o-1rj5-36095...@mercury.nildram.net...
> Jr ner bs pbhefr qrnyvat jvgu gur pbafrdhraprf bs gur Pbhapvy orvat
> vairagrq ba gur ubbs.
Lrnu, ohg gurl pbooyrq gbtrgure fbzrguvat gung xvaq bs znqr frafr naq jnf
sbezvqnoyr va vgf jnl... Hagvy Jrfyrl. Nnnnetu! V pna'g gnyx nobhg gung
lrg. Fhssvpr gb fnl, gung gur Pbhapvy jnf arire nalguvat ohg fghcvq gb zr
ntnva.
OBS
Jeff Jacoby
> In article <1JCdnfLRz5-Xa5PZ...@comcast.com>,
> Jeff Jacoby <jjaco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Or that when Faith was called the CoW neglected to inform
>> Giles.
>>
>
> We don't really know that the Council neglected telling Giles anything
> about Faith. There is no evidence one way or the other. They may have
> been a little slow getting news of her Watcher's death to him, but we
> don't really have a timeline on when she died, or when the Council
> itself found out about it.
Okay, granted there's no direct verbal confirmation Giles
didn't know. But since Giles has said *nothing* about the
existence of another slayer, throughout his interaction with
the Scoobies during the first two episodes, it's reasonable
to infer he didn't know.
It's not that big a thing. Just interesting how the Council
is treating the most important Watcher they have.
With regard to them being hidebound to traditional methods of
communication, they do have phones and are willing to answer
a call. It would be beyond bizarre if their traditions don't
allow them to initiate a phone call.
Jeff
One Bit Shy
news:261u02t6q6d5j52ho...@4ax.com...
> On 8 Mar 2006 06:11:34 -0800, "kenm47" <ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> We know when Faith was called, May of 1998.
> We know when Faith arrived in Sunnydale, late September of 1998.
> We know that Faith is a poor student.
High school dropout actually.
> We know that Faith knows more about the Watchers and Slayers than Buffy.
hopelessly devoted
I would love to add a couple of comments regarding the Xander arc, but
will have to save those for a later date. Too many to go into right
now. Although One Bit Shy has already had a taste of my mind in
overdrive.
One Bit Shy
How about some of both?
OBS
Jeff Jacoby
Their relationship has consisted of *both* of them being,
at turns, rude to each other (e.g. "Go Fish"), sickingly
sweet with each other (e.g. DMP), and everything in between,
including a genuine kindness and compassion (e.g. When Cordy
first enters Willow's hospital room in BecII).
That's not meant to excuse his behavior (or hers, at other
times), but I think they both realize what they have in each
other, the good, the bad, and yes, the ugly, and are willing
to make allowances.
Jeff
One Bit Shy
news:Eb6dnftLve4...@rcn.net...
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> > It's fun and it works if
>> you're in the mood for it, but I can see how it might leave one
>> annoyed if one is having a bad day or something.
>
> I admit I don't get this. I don't see how any part of the episode is
> "annoying." More or less good, sure. But annoying?
As one who alternately likes and dislikes the episode, let me try. (Well,
not really dislike, but definitely not fully on board.) One thing this show
does is dramatically change the mood from the previous two. It's very
upbeat. A lot of humor. And most of the down moments get happy payoffs. I
assume that mood change was a very concious choice for this point in the
season. Which is fine - even commendable. But sometimes when I watch it
I'm really concious of that intent and it feels like I'm being shoved into
upbeat mode by a pair of burly stevedores. It's not subtle. So sometimes
it feels artificial and I rebel against it.
Other times I go right along on the ride.
Maybe, AOQ is right about the mood you're in.
> * A term that you might as well get familiar with, if you're not already.
> The Big Bad is a "main" villian with a multi-episodic arc, usually meaning
> the entire season or some large subset thereof. It's the Master in season
> one. Season two had, at various points, three different vamps playing this
> role...though, of course, by season's end the Big Bad was Angelus.
Damn. I never had time to comment much on Becoming. But one thing I wanted
to float was the idea that maybe Drusilla was the real Big Bad through the
entire season. Spike and Angelus made the big noise and did a few things on
their own. But how much of that was the macho posturing side? An awful lot
of what happened is S2 was triggered by Drusilla or at her direct behest.
Both raised Demons were at her request. The object of What's My Line? was
to cure her. And her numerous visions routinely sent her "boys" out to do
mayhem. Finally in B1 we see her power in full flower - and it's damned
impressive. I have a feeling that everything from School Hard on - at least
from the evil vamp side - was a dance to her weird tune.
Yes, I know there's some over statement there. Angel, at least, had his own
overriding compulsion. But even there, Dru can be seen as manipulating his
blind spot to suit her desires.
Anyway, I wanted to get that out some time.
> Yet again, Gellar hits it out of the park with this scene. The look on her
> face, the slow, hesitant way she starts the "A" in "Angel was cured," the
> various looks on her face as she unburdens herself. Brilliant,
> understated, and perfect. Head, too, is flawless here.
Boy, I hope one of the batch of movies in production with her finally brings
that talent out again. Her technique is so amazing.
> Someone else noted that Willow seems more interested doing in the
> (nonexistent) spell than in Buffy's pain. That's one way of looking at it.
> Here's another: Willow recognizes the extent of Buffy's pain, and wants to
> help. What's her first inclination, in terms of helping? Well, it's *not*
> to go to Buffy and console, which should point out that maybe everything
> from DMP isn't fully resolved yet. But it should also point out something
> else about Willow.
Now you've got me wondering. I have a couple of guesses... but you're the
one making the tease.
OBS
Stephen Tempest
>Funny, even with that line I never thought of Faith as coming from an
>abusive home. Maybe urban and lower economic class than Buffy's middle
>class suburban life, but not abusive. What I was noting was Faith
>referring to her mother being dead, unlike Joyce of course. When
>Faith's mom died is unknown. I don't recall any mention ever (IIRC) of
>Faith's dad. The "hits harder" part I thought was just a general joke,
>a sarcastic comment re a "mother" as a fighter.
>
>Maybe something comes up later that I presently do not recall that says
>somehing more about that "abusive" family?
There's this (sebz 'Rarzvrf'):
"Frr, jura V jnf n xvq, V hfrq gb ort zl zbz sbe n qbt. Qvqa'g znggre
jung xvaq, V whfg jnagrq, lbh xabj, fbzrguvat gb ybir. N qbt'f nyy V
jnagrq. Jryy, gung naq gblf. Ohg Zbz jnf fb ohfl, lbh xabj,
rawblvat gur qevaxvat naq cnffvat bhg cnegf bs yvsr, gung V arire
ernyyl tbg jung V jnagrq."
Plus, you could wonder how a *sixteen-year-old girl* reaches this
conclusion about men:
"Rirel thl unf fbzr junpx snagnfl. Fpengpu gur fhesnpr bs rira gur
zbfg pehapul tenabyn qhqr? Anhtugl ahefrf naq ubeal purreyrnqref. V
svther - lbh pna'g orng 'rz..."
(Nqzvggrqyl, fur fnvq gung yvar va frnfba 7, ohg pbafvqrevat fur'q
orra rvgure va n pbzn be va n jbzra'f cevfba sbe zbfg bs gur
vagreiravat gvzr, V nffhzr gur rkcrevrapr fur onfrq ure ivrjf ba jnf
tnvarq orsber fur zrg Ohssl.)
The best suggestion I saw to describe Faith's early life is that:
Ure zbgure jnf n qehax - snpg.
Fur arire zragvbaf ure sngure - snpg
Fur arire *xarj* ure sngure - fcrphyngvba.
Ure zbgure unq n fgevat bs pnfhny oblsevraqf - fcrphyngvba onfrq ba
gur nobir.
Snvgu nffbpvngrf frk jvgu cbjre, pbageby naq eriratr, abg ybir - snpg.
Fbzr bs gubfr oblsevraqf frkhnyyl nohfrq gur lbhat Snvgu, naq ure
zbgure qvq abguvat gb fgbc vg - fcrphyngvba.
Snvgu qebccrq bhg bs fpubby ng na rneyl ntr - snpg.
Snvgu ena njnl sebz ubzr nf fbba nf fur jnf byq rabhtu gb fheivir
nybar, zbfgyl gb trg njnl sebz gubfr oblsevraqf - fcrphyngvba gb
rkcynva gur nobir.
Snvgu'f Jngpure sbhaq ure yvivat ba gur fgerrgf naq gbbx ure va,
fgnegrq gb genva ure, naq tnir ure gur ybir fur'q arire unq... hagvy
Xnxvfgbf xvyyrq ure oehgnyyl juvyr Snvgu jngpurq. - snpg zvkrq jvgu
fcrphyngvba.
Seem reasonable?
Stephen
vague disclaimer
Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
> In article <l64o-1rj5-36095...@mercury.nildram.net>,
> vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:
>
> > In article <1JCdnfLRz5-Xa5PZ...@comcast.com>,
> > Jeff Jacoby <jjaco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The Council must have really hated Giles
> >
> > ...but I think it fairly reasonable to believe that Giles is more
> > out-of-the-loop than is normal.
>
> Or they are so wrapped up in tradition, that they haven't updated their
> procedures since the 19th century.
>
> Back when the fastest way to get a message across an ocean was to put a
> copy of it on a boat going the right general direction, and hope it
> didn't sink, it would have been pointless to send regular updates to the
> people in the field.
Yep. Fair point.
vague disclaimer
hopelessly devoted
Fbeel gb vagreehcg, ohg V zhfg.
Juvyr V haqrefgnaq gur jubyr onpxfgbel gurbel, vg svgf evtug hc gurer
jvgu zvar.
Pcy. Qjnlar Uvpxf - Irel erfcbafvoyr, abg dhvgr gur zbqyr fghqrag ohg
arire rkcryyrq. Unf nyjnlf xabja ubj gb gnxr pner bs uvzfrys ohg
nyjnlf pbagrag jvgu uvf bja ybg va yvsr. . Ragrerq gur zvyvgnel va
beqre gb znxr fbzr zbarl naq frr gur havirefr ohg qvqa'g gnxr vg nf
frevbhfyl nf fbzr gubhtug ur fubhyq. Qvq uvf wbo, xrcg uvf abfr pyrna
naq ng gur raq bs uvf fuvsg jrag ubzr naq unq n abezny yvsr. Jura
guvatf fgnegrq tbg frevbhf ba YO-426 Uvpxf tbg frevbhf jvgu gur
xabjyrqtr gung vs ur pbhyq znxr vg guebhtu guvf ur jbhyq bapr ntnva or
noyr gb erghea gb uvf erthyne dhvgr yvsr.
Pnegre Ohexr - Yrnearq rneyl va yvsr gung va beqre gb znxr vg va yvsr
lbh unir gb oernx n srj ehyrf. Unf orpbzr ernfbanoyl jryy-bss ol
znxvat pbzcebzvfvat qrpvfvbaf ng gur "evtug" gvzrf. Zbarl vf
hygvzngryl gur tbny naq nalbar naq rirelbar gung qbrf abg frr vg gung
jnl pna or onegrerq bhg.
Cig. Uhqfba - Pynff pybja nyjnlf naq sberire. Hfrq pbzrql gb uvqr gur
snpg gung ur jnf nsenvq bs uvf bja funqbj. Nyy zbhgu naq ab npgvba.
Unf arire unq n svtug va uvf yvsr. Jura gur perngherf fgneg penjyvvat,
Uhqfba vf gur svefg bar gb syvc bhg.
Yg. Tbezna - Cebonoyl gur bayl znyr va n ybat yvar bs zvyvgnel zra.
Znlor unf fvfgref ohg zber guna yvxryl na bayl puvyq. Qnqql vafvfgrq
ur wbva gur zvyvgnel naq fvapr gur evqr jnf rffragvnyl serr, ur qvq.
Ur unf arire npghnyyl rnearq nalguvat ba uvf bja, zbfgyl evqvat gur
qbbef bs uvf irel cbjreshy sngure. Uvf vapbzcgrarapr uvqqra ol uvf
neebtnapr naq gur snpg gung "qnqql" jvyy gnxr pner bs nalguvat gung ur
pna'g unaqyr. Jura gur pbybavfgf ner sbhaq naq gur jnyyf fgneg zbivat,
ur vf snprq jvgu, sbe gur svefg gvzr, univat gb znxr n qrpvfvba ba uvf
bja naq ur serrmrf. Uvf qrpvfvba gb tb bhg (jvgu "Infdhrm) gur jnl ur
qvq jnf uvf jnl bs qbvat fbzrguvat evtug "ba uvf bja".
Cig. Infdhrm - Pbagenel gb cbchyne oryvrs, fur vf abg n yrfovna. Fur
vf gur syvc fvqr bs Tberzna, gur bayl srznyr va n ybat yvar bs Zvyvgnel
Zra. Qrgrezvarq gb sbyybj va ure Sngure'f, Oebguref'f, Tenaqsngure'f
sbbgfgrcf naq gb orng gurz nyy ng gurve bja tnzr. Fur gnxrf ure wbo
irel frevbhfyl naq unf yrnearq gb or gur orfg bs gur orfg. Jura guvatf
tb ahgf, fur xrrcf ure pbby fb gung ab znggre jung unccraf, ure sngure
jvyy svanyyl erpbtavmr ure naq tvir ure gur cenvfr fur unf jnvgrq gb
urne. Ure qrngu jvgu Tberzna jnf fbzrubj irel cbvtanag.
Tvivat gurz onpxtebhaq vf irel rnfl naq nf jvgu Snvgu pna tb va znal
qvssrerag qverpgvbaf. Hasbeghangryl gurer ner bayl pregnva snpgf gung
ner tvira naq nyy gur erfg vf fcrphyngvba.
> Ure zbgure jnf n qehax - snpg.
> Fur arire zragvbaf ure sngure - snpg
Fur nffbpvngrf frk jvgu grafvba eryrnfr - snpg
Frk rdhnyf cbjre, pbageby be eriratr vf fcrphyngvba
> Snvgu qebccrq bhg bs fpubby ng na rneyl ntr - snpg.
Gur onpxfgbel vf jbaqreshy naq abg jvgubhg tebhaqf be zrevg, ohg
hasbeghangryl vf bayl bar ivrj naq gur snpgf qb fhccbeg bgure gurbevrf
nf jryy. Ubjrire gur onpxfgbel nyjnlf znxrf sbe zber vagrerfgvat
ivrjvat. Bs pbhefr sbe zr gb gel naq cebir Infdhrm jnf abg n yrfovna
jbhyq cebonoyl fgneg jbeyq jne VVV.
Stephen Tempest
>Of course for me to try and prove Vasquez was not a lesbian
>would probably start world war III.
Hey, go for it... :)
(Coincidentally, I just re-watched that film the other week... and my
impression was that we never saw enough of her or the others to form
any conclusions about her sexuality either way.)
And I know my thoughts on Faith contained a lot of speculation -
that's why I said so in the original post. :)
Stephen
BTR1701
"hopelessly devoted" <cry...@cinstall.com> wrote:
> > LB-426
FYI: That's LV-426.
And why did you scramble all the ALIENS stuff?
hopelessly devoted
Sorry, I thought I was interrupting a much longer thread. Still
reeling from the 230 from DMP. Yes you did say speculation, in fact
quite a few times.
As for the movie, I think I have both the original and the director's
cut committed to memory. Though, I'm still working on a background for
Drake and Frost.
:->
hopelessly devoted
Because it seemed too "off topic" to not scramble the parts about
Aliens but then to scramble the references that are pertinent but not
yet explored. If that makes sense.
George W Harris
<steph...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:Ure zbgure unq n fgevat bs pnfhny oblsevraqf - fcrphyngvba onfrq ba
:gur nobir.
:Snvgu nffbpvngrf frk jvgu cbjre, pbageby naq eriratr, abg ybir - snpg.
:Fbzr bs gubfr oblsevraqf frkhnyyl nohfrq gur lbhat Snvgu, naq ure
:zbgure qvq abguvat gb fgbc vg - fcrphyngvba.
Ohg jr xabj gung Snvgu unq n fgevat bs ybfre
oblsevraqf urefrys (vapyhqvat - tnfc - n *qehzzre*), fb
gung pna rnfvyl or jurer fur trgf ure vqrnf bs gur
angher bs eryngvbafuvcf. Jr qba'g arrq gb erfbeg gb
fcrphyngvba gung fur jnf nffnhygrq ol ure zbgure'f
ybfre oblsevraqf.
--
/bud...@nirvana.net/h:k
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > And doesn't he follow that up by grinning and putting his arm around
> > her? I just see it as Cordelia, cheesed off at being ignored all
> > episode, getting increasingly less subtle with the annoyance... and
> > knowing Xander well enough to realize that (for better or worse) the
> > way to his heart is through kinky references. And then he tells her
> > (non-verbally) not to worry - she still has that effect on him, and
> > doesn't have anything to worry about from Faith. That's just my read
> > on the scene.
>
> Dude, you are working overtime to make Cordy the bad guy here. All of
> Xander's naked drooling over Faith in Cordy's presence is just plain
> rude. There's no excuse for it, it's just rude. Cordy had a right to
> express her dissatisfaction about it.
Um, there was no quality judgment towards Cordelia there, positive or
negative (unless you count the mention of how well she understands
Xander). We were talking about Xander. (For the record, I think it's
a nice moment for both characters.)
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > Re: Angel's return being "harder": you don't think it's easier to work
> > with the existing popular characters than to let them stay dead and
> > introduce new ones to fill their roles?
>
> You're talking about making a show, I'm talking about writing
> emotionally compelling drama. It's definitely harder to re-introduce
> Angel and then go somewhere with it than it is to just let Buffy start
> dating Scott Hope.
Ah, we're talking about ease of doing it *well*? Agreed, then.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> Damn. I never had time to comment much on Becoming. But one thing I wanted
> to float was the idea that maybe Drusilla was the real Big Bad through the
> entire season. Spike and Angelus made the big noise and did a few things on
> their own. But how much of that was the macho posturing side? An awful lot
> of what happened is S2 was triggered by Drusilla or at her direct behest.
> Both raised Demons were at her request. The object of What's My Line? was
> to cure her. And her numerous visions routinely sent her "boys" out to do
> mayhem. Finally in B1 we see her power in full flower - and it's damned
> impressive. I have a feeling that everything from School Hard on - at least
> from the evil vamp side - was a dance to her weird tune.
>
> Yes, I know there's some over statement there. Angel, at least, had his own
> overriding compulsion. But even there, Dru can be seen as manipulating his
> blind spot to suit her desires.
>
> Anyway, I wanted to get that out some time.
She's the manipulative type, but I don't really see her running the
show prior to "Surprise." And the partnership between Angelus and her
is more about mutual goals rather than one using the other outright.
Elsewhere:
> I might as well get it out of the way and confess right now that I was quite content to leave
> Angel dead. This is purely a personal reaction to the character. As much as I admire the
> great gothic romance of S2, I just don't like Angel, the character.
So did you bother trying his spinoff?
-AOQ
burt...@hotmail.com
> ROT 13 for others:
> V unq sbetbggra guvf zbzrag. Bqq gung gurl erivfvgrq vg yngre jvgu
> Fcvxr/Unezbal. V nyfb guvax xabjvat bs gur yngre Fcvxr bofrffvba
> rpubvat Knaqre'f orunivbe va pregnva jnlf vf abj shegure pbybevat zl
> creprcgvba bs Knaqre naq uvf zbgvingvbaf.
Knaqre'f orunivbe unf nyzbfg ab fvzvynevgvrf ng nyy gb Fcvxr'f. Gurer'f
n uhtr qvssrerapr orgjrra znxvat n pbhcyr bs cbffvoyl vanccebcevngr
pbzzragf va n fbpvny fvghngvba naq npgviryl fgnyxvat fbzrbar. Knaqre
arire oebxr vagb Snvgu'f erfvqrapr naq fgbyr ure haqrejrne gur jnl
Fcvxr qvq jvgu Ohssl. Naq ur qvqa'g fcraq gur orggre cneg bs n frnfba
bofrffrq jvgu ure. Va snpg, ur qvqa'g chefhr ure ng nyy - fur vavgvngrq
gurve frk va "Gur Mrccb" naq guerj uvz bhg jura gurl jrer qbar, naq
gung jnf gung.
kenm47
BUT he's right, it was rude, at the least.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
Hard to stay a Buffyverse fan without it. Maybe we'll get to those
later? At least the crossover episodes of Angel S1.
Ken (Brooklyn)
kenm47
V'z abg ernql sbe n ovt pbzcnevfba abj. Lrf, V nterr gung jnf fgnyxre
bofrffrq rivy Fcvxr.
V'z whfg cbvagvat bhg gung V unq abg erpnyyrq guvf trg gur fdhrrmr gb
qerff hc nf gur Fynlre snagnfl pbzvat hc svefg jvgu Knaqre. Gurer ner
fbzr fvzvynevgvrf - creuncf vg'f nyy Znegv'f fhopbafpvbhf?
Naljnl OBGU Knaqre naq Fcvxr jrer vaibyirq jvgu srznyrf gurl jrer
univat frk jvgu (zber fb, bs pbhefr, va Fcvxr'f pnfr), srznyrf gurl
gbyrengrq ohg ernyyl qvq abg "ybir." Obgu srznyrf jrer zber qribgrq gb
gurve znyrf guna gurl tbg va erghea.
SJVJ, ng guvf cbvag va Ohssl, ONGO, V qba'g xabj vs Fcvxr jnf rkcrpgrq
onpx sbe zber guna gur frnfba guerr bar fubg. Znlor jura gurl qvq
qrpvqr gb oevat uvz onpx nf n frnfba sbhe erthyne, Znegv jnf whfg tvira
serre erva ba ure cebwrpgvbaf bs anfgl znyrf.
Ken (Brooklyn)
gree...@gmail.com
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Um, there was no quality judgment towards Cordelia there, positive or
> negative...
"I just see it as Cordelia, cheesed off at being ignored all
episode, getting increasingly less subtle with the annoyance..."
That's not a qualitative judgement? 'Cause it sure sounds like it to
me. And a negative one at that.
Don't get me wrong; I get not liking Cordy is your thing, but can't she
just be rightfully PO'd that Xander is tripping over his own tongue
over another woman in Cordy's presence?
Terry
One Bit Shy
Not just running things. Spike and Angelus both are too strong and self
driven for that. I mean it more as recognition of how much revolves around
her. In B1 and B2 we saw her apply her mesmerizing power directly - to
enormous effect. To me that was illuminating, to realize that was an actual
power of hers, and a very big one. Looking back then it occurred to me that
her mesmerizing ability was part of her nature and to some extent always
turned on. She just drew people to her.
Now, obviously, Angelus had independent motivation regarding Buffy. And
even Spike had gotten a bit obsessed with the Buffy problem earlier. (Maybe
the Slayer has some mesmerizing ability herself. Ask Xander what he thinks
of that proposition. heh-heh) Not everything was about Dru. But in the
vampire power structure I think she is more prominently placed than often
recognized.
I could go on, but this is Season 3 now. I relly should have gone into this
back at Becoming.
> Elsewhere:
>> I might as well get it out of the way and confess right now that I was
>> quite content to leave
>> Angel dead. This is purely a personal reaction to the character. As
>> much as I admire the
>> great gothic romance of S2, I just don't like Angel, the character.
>
> So did you bother trying his spinoff?
<sigh> Not yet. I've resisted for the above reason - and some I can't
explain yet. But I realize (and others have pointed out to me) that I'll
probably have to in order to properly fill in some blanks.
OBS
William George Ferguson
Where did he say that Cordy was wrong to be PO'd? It seemed pretty clear
to me that he was saying Cordy had every right to be upset with Xander
(and actually was much less physical and verbal about it than she could
have been), and that Xander picked up and responded properly to the vibe.
You've become too attuned to the fact that AoQ doesn't like Cordy. In
this case, right from the start, he said he actually liked the
Cordy/Xander interplay.
(sort of like Xander snapping back at Cordy in Becoming, only to realize
in mid-snap that she had actually supported and agreed with him)
--
HERBERT
1996 - 1997
Beloved Mascot
Delightful Meal
He fed the Pack
A little
burt...@hotmail.com
Knaqre naq Pbeqryvn jrera'g univat frk, gubhtu. Va "Gur Mrccb," vg'f
znqr pyrne gung Snvgu vf Knaqre'f svefg. Tvira gung ur naq Pbeql
jrera'g univat frk, uvf "Cyrnfr qba'g yrg gung or fnepnfz" pbzzrag
pbhyqa'g or nalguvat zber guna n wbxr.
V nterr gung Knaqre jnf orvat fbzrjung ehqr gb Pbeqryvn urer (gubhtu va
gur K/P eryngvbafuvc, gur ehqrarff qrsvavgryl jrag obgu jnlf). Ohg
pbzcnevat uvz gb Fcvxr fgnyxvat Ohssl?
As Samuel L. Jackson said, it ain't in the same ballpark, it ain't in
the same league, hell, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport.
kenm47
That's not what I'm doing.
Ken (Brooklyn)
alphakitten
Ur jnf pbzcnevat gur fcrpvsvp vafgnaprf bs Knaqre & Fcvxr vaqhytvat (be
gnyxvat nobhg vaqhytvat va K'f pnfr) gurve fynlre snagnfvrf jvgu gurve
npghny tsf. Abguvat zber.
~Angel
gree...@gmail.com
William George Ferguson wrote:
> Where did he say that Cordy was wrong to be PO'd?
Forget it. It's really not important at all.
Terry
burt...@hotmail.com
Well, that's what it sounded like when you talked about "echoing." If
you meant it a different way, feel free to disregard what I said.
Arbitrar Of Quality
> > So did you bother trying his spinoff?
>
> <sigh> Not yet. I've resisted for the above reason - and some I can't
> explain yet. But I realize (and others have pointed out to me) that I'll
> probably have to in order to properly fill in some blanks.
A "year" from now (minus four episodes), care to explore a new TV show
together?
-AOQ
One Bit Shy
I'd entertain the possibility. Ask me then. (Though please understand that
I do know some things about the show. Not enough to give a particularly
coherent description of it. But certainly not spoiler free.)
OBS
hopelessly devoted
While I understand your reluctance to tackle both series at once,
please keep in mind that there are certain works at play that may make
it easier for you in the long run to examine them together when the
time comes.
AtS certainly stands on it's own but also mixed, at times, with sister
show and may be very hard to separate and discuss certain aspects of
the Buffyverse without crossing into spoiler territory for the other
(and vice versa). Especially in it's earier seasons.
You may wish to reconsider. The workload definately a burden, but
still.
Hope this doesn't cross into spoiler territory.
KenM47
I'll go further. IMO, you have to see at the very least season one of
Angel to stay up on the Buffyverse.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Eric Hunter
> Trick ... He comes off all right,
I really liked the, "Now I'm hungry" bit.
> On a more plot level, there's a lot I don't get, so if you can
> answer without the spoilage... one generation, one Slayer, right?
> Kendra was an anomaly that made sense. But is the trigger for
> "calling" a new Slayer the death of an old one? That means we'll
> have two Slayers at all times for the rest of eternity. Anyway, if
> Faith sticks around, it'll kinda weaken Buffy's status as The
> Chosen One.
Buffy died in "Prophecy Girl"; Kendra was called.
Kendra died in "Becoming"; Faith was called.
Therefore when Faith dies, another Slayer will
be called. (This isn't spoiling anything, Slayers
are mortal girls, and they all die of old age, if
nothing else.) Yes, the death of the current
Slayer does call the next one. What happens
when Buffy dies again? That's undefined.
Another Slayer might be called, or Faith might
technically be the Chosen One, now, so only
her death will call another Slayer. Like "Xander
Lied", this was a hotly debated topic in the
newsgroup, once Faith appeared. (Up until that
point, it wasn't clear if Kendra was an anomaly
whose death had no impact on the Slayer line,
or not.)
> if there's one Slayer, why the need for so many Watchers,
To train young potential Slayers, to watch over mystical
hot-spots like the hellmouth, to research and document
information on vampires and demons, and to have enough
of an old-boys club to make going on a retreat to the
Cotswold fun. ;-)
> given that Kendra was raised by her Watcher, which
> seems to be traditional... is the world full of
> eighteen-year-old potential Slayers out there, each
> in sort of a professional limbo until someone dies?
> Do they still hunt vampires for practice?
It is, at this point, unclear. "Into every generation, a
Slayer is born. One girl in all the world, a Chosen One,
one with the strength and skill to hunt the vampires, to
stop the spread of their evil ways, to cease their
destructive manners, to prevent the end of the world.
When one Slayer dies, the next one is called." How
long is a generation? We don't know, but the fact that
Buffy, Kendra and Faith were all between 15 and 20
when they were called suggests that if generation has
any meaning at all, it is "all the people of approximately
the same age". How is the one girl chosen? The fact
that Buffy was called before she had a Watcher pretty
clearly shows that the Watchers don't do the choosing,
and the super-powers of a Slayer suggest that some
sort of magic is involved. How are potential Slayers
selected? Again we don't know, but my pet theory is
that each time a Slayer dies, all the girls born in that
minute (125), hour (7500), or day (180,000) are
magically given the potential to become the Slayer,
and the Watchers use magic or birth records to find
them and train them.
Eric.
--
One Bit Shy
news:1141959543.5...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
I said I'd entertain the idea.
Watching both at once wouldn't be a burden. (Assuming I don't outright hate
AtS.) I mean I'm pretty familiar with Buffy already, so it's really just
one extra. Writing about it... I couldn't say yet. But I don't own the DVD
collection and I don't know where my head will be at when we get to it.
We'll see.
OBS
hopelessly devoted
Understood :->
I did however have to go back through the Open Discussion Threads to
make sure that I hadn't already spoiled anything for you. I had just
assumed you had already been through both series.
hopelessly devoted
I would say at least the first Two seasons
(Sbby sbe Ybir/Qneyn) va beqre gb nccerpvngr gur ragver snzvyl yvar
ortvaavat gb raq.
One Bit Shy
Don't worry about it. I've already seen tons of stuff about it. Sometimes
it even sort of makes sense. It's too late for me to be unspoiled. It'll
be fresh anyway.
OBS
KenM47
OK. I can go with that (up to a point that is).
Ken (Brooklyn)
BTR1701
KenM47 <Ken...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> "hopelessly devoted" <cry...@cinstall.com> wrote:
Naq Frnfba 4 bs NATRY. Bgurejvfr gur jubyr "Jvyybj tbvat gb Y.N. naq
fubjvat onpx hc va Fhaalqnyr jvgu Snvgu" guvat jba'g znxr zhpu frafr,
rvgure.
kenm47
BX, gung'f sbe sbyxf gung pner nobhg Ohssl frnfbaf fvk naq frira. V
fgvyy qba'g rkcrpg gb rire or va gung tebhc.
Ken (Brooklyn)
John Briggs
> hopelessly devoted wrote:
>
>> Loved, and still do, the new and imporoved, IMO, change for the
>> opening credits. I never really did enjoy the original synth sound
>> and the guitar and hard hitting drums sound very hard core and
>> allowed me to perfect the ever developing Buffy Dance.
>
> Looks like you have the same weird version of the DVDs that Mike does.
> For most of us, the new theme music debuted in "Anne."
I though all R1 sets were affected?
--
John Briggs
Scythe Matters
> I though all R1 sets were affected?
Mine is.
hopelessly devoted
Not sure what R1 is?