[7x20] Early morning musings
Gunnar Harboe
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I'm trying to pinpoint the moment the episode went from embarrassingly
bad to ridiculously bad. Was it when Giles killed the Bringer in a fit
of pique? Was it with the interminably long Spike/Buffy scene? The
painfully dull sex scenes? Or was it simply when the nausea kicked in
from the shaky handheld camera?
I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
errors all over the place. For a while during the teaser, I was
convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled up
some fanfic on the Internet. Say what? Rebecca Rand Kirshner? Well, she
did write one of the worst episodes ever ('Hell's Bells'), so I guess I
shouldn't be surprised. But FFS! Didn't anyone read this crap before
they handed it over to the actors?
OK. Whatever. Vi is back, and that cheered me up a bit. The Mayor pays a
visit (nicely telegraphed in the opening credits), and gives me a chance
to go "Hah!". I suggested months ago that The First doesn't just
impersonate dead people, it *is* really them. Would have worked better
if he was more in character, though.
David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
the end.
Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
very much genius at all.
I'm not impressed.
Andrew Cameron
news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
Wow, that *was* early morning, I've only just woken up. Any idea what
happened? It wasn't out when I went to bed. Oh, and damn you for being all
bizarre and awake and having it first this week :-)
--
Andrew Cameron
"Got my hand on my heart, I know no better location..."
Andrew Cameron
news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
Right, seen it now. Phew.
I didn't think this was too bad, to be honest. I consistently don't like
how everyone is better at kicking ass than they should be when it's
required, but that's been a complaint I've held since at least season 4.
Buffy's jumping around technique was a nice idea but a bit dull to watch, as
was the yes, way too long Spike/Buffy scene.
> I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
> addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
> errors all over the place. For a while during the teaser, I was
> convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
I have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with the directing.
> I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled up
> some fanfic on the Internet. Say what? Rebecca Rand Kirshner? Well, she
> did write one of the worst episodes ever ('Hell's Bells'), so I guess I
> shouldn't be surprised. But FFS! Didn't anyone read this crap before
> they handed it over to the actors?
It was a million times better than "Hell's Bells" and certainly better than
a lot of the mid-season eps this year; I felt that it fitted the arc - what
were your biggest issues with the ep? Were they really so big as to make
you compare it to a fanfic?
> David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
> comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
> have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
> the end.
I sense Arc Extreme! and I would ask, but I fear the answer is a
metaspoiler. No more talk of this without spoiler space, please.
> Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
> moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
> plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
> very much genius at all.
Well, I'm not entirely sure what led them all there, and it was a total "24"
moment, but if most of the characters are dead then that leaves Buffy to
wield the thing by herself. For two episodes. I'm thinking they're just
going to wimp out and have most of them survive it somehow. Magicky Willow
spell maybe? *straw clutching*
> I'm not impressed.
I'm plodding along just fine - not not impressed, but not impressed either.
dieter
Wow, so not gonna read the rest of your post. Things like this
simultanuously depress and amaze me. Depress, because I DO love the show
and can't wait for the finale, and amaze because when you get to this
bitching level you should probably just stop watching.
When a show I love stirs up comments like the ones you just made, I give
it one chance to redeem itself. Another stinker? That's the end of that
then. Life's too short. Only Doublemeat Palace deserves such a trashing.
Dieter
Gunnar Harboe
<use...@tags2k.co.uk> wrote:
>"Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
>news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
>> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>
>Wow, that *was* early morning, I've only just woken up. Any idea what
>happened? It wasn't out when I went to bed. Oh, and damn you for being all
>bizarre and awake and having it first this week :-)
I was up all night, working. Took a break to watch it and write it up.
It became available around 1 or 2 am.
Gunnar Harboe
wrote:
>Wow, so not gonna read the rest of your post. Things like this
>simultanuously depress and amaze me. Depress, because I DO love the show
>and can't wait for the finale, and amaze because when you get to this
>bitching level you should probably just stop watching.
You're right. After just 142 episodes, it's not like I've got anything
invested in seeing how it all ends. Tell you what: I'll give it a couple
more eps, and if it doesn't improve I'll stop watching.
>When a show I love stirs up comments like the ones you just made, I give
>it one chance to redeem itself. Another stinker? That's the end of that
>then. Life's too short. Only Doublemeat Palace deserves such a trashing.
It's only four episodes since the last episode I loved. Only two
episodes since the last episode I thought was good. Only one episode
since I the last episode I thought was OK.
Yes, 'Touched' was awful, but it has been the exception this season. The
generally high level of quality just underscores how bad it was.
And 'Doublemeat Palace' is not nearly as bad as people say. It's not a
classic by any stretch, but it's a perfectly decent episode. Now 'Hell's
Bells'; there's a stinker.
Gunnar Harboe
Are you talking about the Potentials? They've handled themselves in
fights before. I thought their abilities were pretty much as expected.
I do think it's ridiculous how some monster has been all unbeatable in
combat, then the hero just alters their tactic slightly, and it's a
piece of cake to defeat them. That goes for both 'Buffy' and 'Angel'.
But this didn't bother me much.
>> I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
>> addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
>> errors all over the place. For a while during the teaser, I was
>> convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
>
>I have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with the directing.
Notice the handheld camera during the teaser. Yes, it's obviously a
deliberate device to make is seem more confused, but it's not only very
heavy-handed, it's a complete break with the visual style of the show.
That kind of jarring effect is great for gimmicks ('Storyteller' had a
lot of it), but merely distracts attention from the material when it's
used "straight".
Somehow, there was more light by night than there was by day. I'm
wondering whether this covers up some time-discrepancy in the script.
How much time passed for Buffy vs. the rest of the gang?
There's a lot of shoddy editing in the dialogue scenes, with reaction
shots that seem out of place or from different takes.
>> I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled up
>> some fanfic on the Internet. Say what? Rebecca Rand Kirshner? Well, she
>> did write one of the worst episodes ever ('Hell's Bells'), so I guess I
>> shouldn't be surprised. But FFS! Didn't anyone read this crap before
>> they handed it over to the actors?
>
>It was a million times better than "Hell's Bells" and certainly better than
>a lot of the mid-season eps this year;
No, I think this was the worst episode of the season. Not quite as bad
as 'Hell's Bells', but still...
> I felt that it fitted the arc - what
>were your biggest issues with the ep? Were they really so big as to make
>you compare it to a fanfic?
Yes.
I didn't mind the beginning and the ending so much, but there's a twenty
minute (!) segment in the middle where the plot grinds to a halt and
we're treated to utterly pointless and dull intimate conversations.
That's what I mean by fanfic. A thousand so-called stories have been
written by various 'shippers where characters talk about their emotions
and make sweet love. You can't do a search on Google without coming up
with dozens of them.
I get it. I really do. This is the last chance for tenderness before all
hell breaks loose. Like Oz "panicking" in 'Graduation Day'. In that
episode, it was packed into two or three lines of dialogue and some
looks.
Spike/Buffy: That scene, in two segments, lasted for 7 minutes total.
After half a minute, it was obvious where it was going: Spike comforts
Buffy. But no, we have to sit through endless monologues of things we
already know.
Faith/Wood: We *know* where that is going as soon as he appears. Same
with Willow/Kennedy and Xander/Anya. Is there *any* point to those
scenes that a ten-second montage couldn't have got across?
And don't *any* of the Scoobies take off their clothes to have sex?
>> David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
>> comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
>> have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
>> the end.
>
>I sense Arc Extreme! and I would ask, but I fear the answer is a
>metaspoiler. No more talk of this without spoiler space, please.
I don't think there's much more to say, really. You saw it, I'm sure you
can figure out what it was. It appeared in Fray. That's about it.
>> Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
>> moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
>> plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
>> very much genius at all.
>
>Well, I'm not entirely sure what led them all there, and it was a total "24"
>moment, but if most of the characters are dead then that leaves Buffy to
>wield the thing by herself. For two episodes. I'm thinking they're just
>going to wimp out and have most of them survive it somehow. Magicky Willow
>spell maybe? *straw clutching*
I don't think there can be any happy solution to the bomb. If it doesn't
kill them, it's been a really cheap cliff-hanger of a kind the show used
to be above. If it kills them, it makes the whole Potentials storyline
more pointless and unsatisfying than "Giles is The First" ever was.
Maybe it'll kill some of them. But that will just make it seem like
shoddy work by The First. Its plan depended on them all standing really
close to the bomb at the moment it goes off?
Benefit of the doubt for the moment, though.
dieter
Maybe that's the difference. I never feel like I "invest" time in the
shows I love. If, at the end of an ep I feel I want and need to know what
happens next, I'll watch it. But I have no problem whatsoever cutting a
show loose if it starts to stink up the place, even if I watched it
almost seven years religiously (eg.x-files, don't need to know what
happened after fox's abduction, that ending 's just fine with me)
>>When a show I love stirs up comments like the ones you just made, I
>>give it one chance to redeem itself. Another stinker? That's the end
>>of that then. Life's too short. Only Doublemeat Palace deserves such a
>>trashing.
>
> It's only four episodes since the last episode I loved. Only two
> episodes since the last episode I thought was good. Only one episode
> since I the last episode I thought was OK.
Ah, keeping score, didn't know that :)
> Yes, 'Touched' was awful, but it has been the exception this season.
> The generally high level of quality just underscores how bad it was.
Suffice to say I don't agree. I don't think there was a single "awful"
episode this season, which ain't too shabby.
> And 'Doublemeat Palace' is not nearly as bad as people say.
Oh yes, it IS as bad as people say. People that say DP is awful are
right. I applaud those people. I will have those people over for dinner
and a beer.
It's not a
> classic by any stretch, but it's a perfectly decent episode. Now
> 'Hell's Bells'; there's a stinker.
Well, let me quote you by saying that HB is "not a classic by any
stretch"
By the way, my post was never intended as an attack or something. I just
made the mistake of visiting the aint-it-cool bitch-session and I had to
vent :)
Mattia Valente
Giles killing the Bringer was incredibly 'eh, what the hell?', very
sudden, almost suspiciously so. Spike/Buffy? Worked a charm for me,
thank you muchly. Steadycammage early on fit the situation, IMO, so no
complaints there, either. Sex scenes....rather 'meh'. But there ya go.
> I didn't think this was too bad, to be honest. I consistently don't like
> how everyone is better at kicking ass than they should be when it's
> required, but that's been a complaint I've held since at least season 4.
My complaint isn't so much that they're kicking ass, but that nobody
there seemed to get their ass kicked enough in return. We needed at
least one more fatality, folks. Start killing people off left and right.
It's more fun that way.
> Buffy's jumping around technique was a nice idea but a bit dull to watch, as
> was the yes, way too long Spike/Buffy scene.
Oh, I found it fun to watch, but good GOD could the rip it out of the
matrix s'more? Complete with matrix-y musical accompaniment and jumping
off walls and slight slow-mo spins and jumps and the like.
>>I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
>>addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
>>errors all over the place.
...such as?
>>For a while during the teaser, I was
>>convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
>
> I have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with the directing.
Quite.
> It was a million times better than "Hell's Bells" and certainly better than
> a lot of the mid-season eps this year; I felt that it fitted the arc - what
> were your biggest issues with the ep? Were they really so big as to make
> you compare it to a fanfic?
I'm a bit tapped out as well, y'see.
>>David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
>>comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
>>have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
>>the end.
Or alternately, go 'RAWK!!!!'. As you should do. Fray == of the good.
> I sense Arc Extreme! and I would ask, but I fear the answer is a
> metaspoiler. No more talk of this without spoiler space, please.
The thing. 's in Fray. That's all, really.
>>Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
>>moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
>>plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
>>very much genius at all.
It might be a rather brutally efficient way of thinning the herd, don't
you think? And if we waste Faith, we've got a new slayer comin' right
up, potentially.
> Well, I'm not entirely sure what led them all there, and it was a total "24"
> moment, but if most of the characters are dead then that leaves Buffy to
> wield the thing by herself. For two episodes. I'm thinking they're just
> going to wimp out and have most of them survive it somehow. Magicky Willow
> spell maybe? *straw clutching*
Or simply lots of running. I'm underwhelmed by that bit, that's for sure.
>>I'm not impressed.
>
> I'm plodding along just fine - not not impressed, but not impressed either.
> :-)
Well, quite. It wasn't bad, really. It was just kind of...hollow.
Unimportant. Going not very far at all in terms of plot, and we only got
some nice character moments going on to compensate.
Mattia
Saskia
Tsk
> Wow, so not gonna read the rest of your post. Things like this
> simultanuously depress and amaze me. Depress, because I DO love the show
> and can't wait for the finale, and amaze because when you get to this
> bitching level you should probably just stop watching.
> When a show I love stirs up comments like the ones you just made, I give
> it one chance to redeem itself. Another stinker? That's the end of that
> then. Life's too short. Only Doublemeat Palace deserves such a trashing.
Phew, thanks Dieter. You restored my faith in humanity :))
I loved this episode to bits. Couldn't care less how it was directed or
why it was written or what it looks like, or what 'works' or what anyone
could possibly have meant or what it all looks like under an analytical
microscope, I just love the show and I love what Buffy, Faith, Willow,
Spike, Giles, Dawn and everyone is doing with me and I'm gonna cry for at
least a week after the last episode.
--
Saskia
I haven't been the same since that house fell on my sister.
Major ChrisB
"Mattia Valente" <mae.v...@std.vu.nl> wrote in message
news:b98sf2$gio8q$1...@ID-74630.news.dfncis.de...
Angel's been doing that all season....I thought the way they did it on buffy
was certainly a lot less of an obvious rip off than a couple of the angel
episodes I've seen them do it...
> >>I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
> >>addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
> >>errors all over the place.
>
> ...such as?
yeah I never noticed many
this is what annoys me....people keep saying this....only faith can call a
new slayer. While it may be true, the only reason we have to think so is
coz joss said it in an interview. It's never, to my knowlage, been in the
show...I'm 99% sure it's not been stated in the show. It has been stated
that a new potential will only be called when buffy dies.....yet people
disagree with this as a continuity error....Joss is not the only writer on
this show....in fact he's one of the lesser writers in terms of the amount
he acctually write - ok he has final approval on all scripts but if someone
decided no slayer is called when faith dies then theres nothing been said in
the show that would say thats an error short of the fact kendra's death
called Faith.....
the only things we know about slayer liniage are things talking about
outwith the show which, as far as I'm concerned, are not cannon till they've
happened in the show.
> > Well, I'm not entirely sure what led them all there, and it was a total
"24"
> > moment, but if most of the characters are dead then that leaves Buffy to
> > wield the thing by herself. For two episodes. I'm thinking they're
just
> > going to wimp out and have most of them survive it somehow. Magicky
Willow
> > spell maybe? *straw clutching*
>
> Or simply lots of running. I'm underwhelmed by that bit, that's for sure.
I liked the obvious homage/rip off of 24....same type of beep sound as we
closed the show and everything......it was excelent....
> >>I'm not impressed.
> >
> > I'm plodding along just fine - not not impressed, but not impressed
either.
> > :-)
>
> Well, quite. It wasn't bad, really. It was just kind of...hollow.
> Unimportant. Going not very far at all in terms of plot, and we only got
> some nice character moments going on to compensate.
>
I liked it....one of the best buffy episodes for a while....
ChrisB
Major ChrisB
"Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:btkfbv0rdjcbuutlg...@4ax.com...
I don't see how you can class that as awful......I thought it was excelent
in many respects. I thought the monologues (or at least spikes) were very
good. I didn't like the Robin/Faith bit but I thought Alyson did a good job
of being a lesbian for a change and the Anya/Xander scene was very good - I
didn't like their acctuall sex scene though.....and for fuck sake get rid of
that patch and give him his god damn eye back....
> And 'Doublemeat Palace' is not nearly as bad as people say. It's not a
> classic by any stretch, but it's a perfectly decent episode. Now 'Hell's
> Bells'; there's a stinker.
I agree....there's not many buffy episodes I think suck beyond all
exception....the two I can think of off hand that I really dislike have
their moments and are other people's favourite...
Major ChrisB
"dieter" <diete...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9373C67382...@195.114.230.35...
Not me....I'm a fan till the end. I cut loose X-Files quite early on and
became an occational viewer. I'm an occational viewer of CSI: Miami, Angel
and Boomtown but I invest time and money in shows life Buffy, Friends, ER,
CSI: Vegas, Red Dwarf and others....I'm bloody pissed at only have 2 to go
of buffy before no more buffy....Last year when mark died in ER I was very
upset and a friend of mine was in tears for days after it aired.....she,
like me, had spent 10 years watching that man develop each week. I saw Mark
Greene more than I see my grandparents and, while a fictional character, you
get to know them. It is an emotional investment in a TV show too.
> >>When a show I love stirs up comments like the ones you just made, I
> >>give it one chance to redeem itself. Another stinker? That's the end
> >>of that then. Life's too short. Only Doublemeat Palace deserves such a
> >>trashing.
> >
> > It's only four episodes since the last episode I loved. Only two
> > episodes since the last episode I thought was good. Only one episode
> > since I the last episode I thought was OK.
>
> Ah, keeping score, didn't know that :)
>
> > Yes, 'Touched' was awful, but it has been the exception this season.
> > The generally high level of quality just underscores how bad it was.
>
> Suffice to say I don't agree. I don't think there was a single "awful"
> episode this season, which ain't too shabby.
>
> > And 'Doublemeat Palace' is not nearly as bad as people say.
>
> Oh yes, it IS as bad as people say. People that say DP is awful are
> right. I applaud those people. I will have those people over for dinner
> and a beer.
it's not....Beer Bads not awful, Ted's pretty good and Go Fish has it's
moments....I don't think there's any truly awful moments and I wouldn't put
DMP2 in the mix if there were....short of the monster there's plenty of very
good moments in the episode....
Gunnar Harboe
>I loved this episode to bits. Couldn't care less how it was directed or
>why it was written or what it looks like, or what 'works' or what anyone
>could possibly have meant or what it all looks like under an analytical
>microscope, I just love the show
Swell. If you don't care about the quality of the writing, directing or
plotting, what exactly is it you love about the show? The theme tune?
Could the actors just stand in front of the camera and chew bubble gum
and you'd be just as happy?
Gunnar Harboe
wrote:
Aye. But one bad episode doesn't mean the show has started to stink. And
giving up on a show two episodes away from the end is a bit pointless.
If I was reading a book, and enjoying it up until the second-to-last
chapter, I wouldn't give up on it with just the last chapter left.
>> Yes, 'Touched' was awful, but it has been the exception this season.
>> The generally high level of quality just underscores how bad it was.
>
>Suffice to say I don't agree. I don't think there was a single "awful"
>episode this season, which ain't too shabby.
Not until this episode, there wasn't.
>> And 'Doublemeat Palace' is not nearly as bad as people say.
>
>Oh yes, it IS as bad as people say. People that say DP is awful are
>right. I applaud those people. I will have those people over for dinner
>and a beer.
I really can't see any reason for hating 2XMP. Sure, the comedy doesn't
quite sparkle where it ought to, and that makes it somewhat mediocre.
But it has a cheesy mystery plot, jokes about cows, and Buffy being
WRONG for once. How can you dislike that?
>It's not a
>> classic by any stretch, but it's a perfectly decent episode. Now
>> 'Hell's Bells'; there's a stinker.
>
>Well, let me quote you by saying that HB is "not a classic by any
>stretch"
HB still has the power to piss me off, well over a year since the last
(and only) time I watched it.
>By the way, my post was never intended as an attack or something. I just
>made the mistake of visiting the aint-it-cool bitch-session and I had to
>vent :)
That's OK. I handle verbal abuse well.
Personally I don't mind when AICN bitch about stuff, it's the gushing I
can't deal with.
Mattia Valente
>>matrix s'more? Complete with matrix-y musical accompaniment and jumping
>>off walls and slight slow-mo spins and jumps and the like.
>
> Angel's been doing that all season....
No, Angel's been more general John Woo kind of movies here and there
than Matrix stylee stuff. It was the music that underlined it for me.
Just a vive I got.
> I thought the way they did it on buffy
> was certainly a lot less of an obvious rip off than a couple of the angel
> episodes I've seen them do it...
Angel does it full-on homage style, IMO, and conciously so. This...not
so much, but a little too close for pleasure, and not good enough to be
a proper homage. Not like 'Primeval' was, in terms of FX.
>>It might be a rather brutally efficient way of thinning the herd, don't
>>you think? And if we waste Faith, we've got a new slayer comin' right
>>up, potentially.
>
> this is what annoys me....people keep saying this....only faith can call a
> new slayer.
Are you saying killing Faith won't call a new slayer? Not that I'm
saying killing Buffy will, mind you.
> While it may be true, the only reason we have to think so is
> coz joss said it in an interview.
In several interviews. I even heard him say it in person, right after S5
aired, at a convention.
> It's never, to my knowlage, been in the
> show...I'm 99% sure it's not been stated in the show.
It hasn't, out loud; it's open for happening a different way, if Buffy
dies 'naturally' as opposed to 'mystically' (one assumes that if a new
slayer had been called when Buffy died in 'The Gift'; the Council,
Giles, everyone would've known. And if said slayer wasn't dead, she'd
have shown up, wouldn't you say?)
> It has been stated
> that a new potential will only be called when buffy dies.....yet people
> disagree with this as a continuity error....
No, it's simply an assumption they make that may or may not turn out to
be true. What people say they think will happen (because slayer dead =
new slayer, simple rules) doesn't make it reality.
> Joss is not the only writer on
> this show....in fact he's one of the lesser writers in terms of the amount
> he acctually write - ok he has final approval on all scripts but if someone
> decided no slayer is called when faith dies then theres nothing been said in
> the show that would say thats an error short of the fact kendra's death
> called Faith.....
True. And the only 'someone' who would be able to decide that,
ultimately, is Joss Whedon. He doesn't only have 'final approval' of
scripts, as I understand it he's in there breaking pretty much every
single story, scene by scene, which then goes to the writers to actually
write, to flesh out, to create. The stories, ultimately, are Joss'
responsibility and vision, for better or worse.
> the only things we know about slayer liniage are things talking about
> outwith the show which, as far as I'm concerned, are not cannon till they've
> happened in the show.
Well, DUH. Note the fact that Joss has, in the past, tended to word
things as follows: "The slayer line runs through Faith. Unless I get a
really cool idea, in which case I never said that." The options are
open, but, de facto, logically, and because of what Joss has repeatedly
said, we're relatively safer assuming there won't be a new Slayer when
Buffy dies than we are assuming there will be.
But, er, why the heck bring that up now? The issue here isn't Buffy
biting the bullet, it's Faith kickin' it. I can't particularly think of
a reason for Faith's death not to create a new slayer.
>>Well, quite. It wasn't bad, really. It was just kind of...hollow.
>>Unimportant. Going not very far at all in terms of plot, and we only got
>>some nice character moments going on to compensate.
>
> I liked it....one of the best buffy episodes for a while....
Well...no. Not quite. 't was rather good, but nowhere near 'best'.
Mattia
Saskia
Not what I meant at all. Don't feel like explaining, if you don't want to
get it. Just ignore me, that was me being cranky.
I'll just be going again.
Dan Milburn
Connor fighting the Beast in 'Long Days Journey' certainly had jumping off
walls and slo-mo spins and jumps..
Dan
Dave Emberton
I agree for the first part. After last week I was so hoping it was going to
turn out to be a big improvement, and the even more boring emotional talky
scenes plus that irritating as hell shakey cam (the only bad thing about
Firefly IMO) and it really was looking poor. But then the sex scenes kind of
moved things up a bit - especially Willow and Kennedy (first lesbian sex
scene on US network TV apparently), although Wood and Faith really doesn't
add up for me. But once that action started it wasn't half bad. Not great,
but kind of okay.
So what's the fancy weapon thing that Buffy's found? Looked like a sort of
big syringe?
The First longs to be able to touch, and she/he/it called Caleb her vessel.
So does that mean The First is going to become one with Caleb to take
corporeal form? And can it then be killed? This is sounding a lot like the
end of S3, coupled with the end of S5.
If Faith and Wood are having sex in one room, Willow and Kennedy are having
sex in another, and Xander and Anya are having sex in the kitchen (which is
near the living room), then that must mean everybody else is in Dawn room?
What's going on in there? Giles, Andrew and 20 teenage girls? Ewwww. ;-)
Dave
dieter
news:1b06pe5r80i1w$.l7o0tqig...@40tude.net:
Don't worry Saskia. I think I know exactly what you mean :)
Iain Clark
wrote:
When did it get bad? It was just after the end credits rolled, for
me. I liked more or less everything up to that point :-)
I'd give it a 4.4.
>I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
>addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
>errors all over the place.
Didn't notice a single problem, personally.
>I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled up
>some fanfic on the Internet. Say what? Rebecca Rand Kirshner? Well, she
>did write one of the worst episodes ever ('Hell's Bells'),
She also wrote "Help", one of the best of the season.
>so I guess I
>shouldn't be surprised. But FFS! Didn't anyone read this crap before
>they handed it over to the actors?
>
This was *far* better than last week for me. Where last week felt a
little tired, contrived and obvious, the script this week really took
things up a notch. A lot of what I've really loved about S7 has been
sensible, intelligent conversations with genuine substance that
actually illuminate facets of the characters. I'm willing to forgive
quite a bit if I get that.
Too often in TV you know where a conversation is going when it starts.
That was one of my beefs with last week's episode - each scene felt
like it was written to get from point A to point B, with little real
spark or sense of depth, and certainly not much sense of the natural
flow of a conversation.
Here, as with Beneath You, Selfless, Conversations With Dead People,
and Never Leave Me to name but a few, we got some really good
character interaction.
The initial disarray after Buffy's departure was well-scripted and
acted. It felt like the kind of things people would say under those
circumstances. Giles was a bit ineffectual, perhaps, but otherwise
this was good. Faith's gradual assumption of command during this and
following scenes was also nicely handled.
Spike and Buffy's heart-to-heart was well up to their previous
encounters this year. *Finally * Buffy admits that she was wrong -
not just about her recent behaviour but for repeatedly distancing
herself from her friends over the last 7 years. Spike's contribution
was funny, heartfelt, touching, and not preachy. I'm oddly pleased
that Buffy and Spike didn't have sex. It was just right for the
scene.
The Mayor and Faith was great - partly for nostalgia, but not only.
Unlike Spike and Dru in 'Bring on the Night', which squandered every
last iota of potential the characters had together, here the script
was firing on all cylinders. Nostalgia with a point - to sow dissent,
but also to remind us (and Faith) of the past, and to give the First a
nice jolt of interestingness. (Hey, it's a word. Well it's my word,
anyway.)
Faith and Wood - well, inconsequential but nice meeting of minds.
It'll never last, though ;-) A one-night stand for both parties.
Kennedy and Willow. Not quite so fond of this. Don't let Chapman
hear me but this is one of the few times a lesbian kiss on Buffy did
seem slightly flat. Shame that Kennedy's increasingly prickly persona
takes the edge off their fuzziness as a couple. I have no problem
with her being that way, it's just hard to see what Willow sees in her
at times. Except for the 'gorgeous' thing, obviously. However, I
liked the main theme of the scene which was Willow saying she feared
to let go.
Caleb and the First was nice too. The First has really lacked someone
to "confide" in this year, to give it some personality of its own.
Aside from that, the script had some nice little asides. I liked
Kennedy's "method" acted disgruntled minion <g>. Predictable scene,
though.
>OK. Whatever. Vi is back, and that cheered me up a bit. The Mayor pays a
>visit (nicely telegraphed in the opening credits), and gives me a chance
>to go "Hah!". I suggested months ago that The First doesn't just
>impersonate dead people, it *is* really them. Would have worked better
>if he was more in character, though.
>
I thought he was perfectly in character. That's part of what I liked.
(Thought: does the First know everything Buffy knew when she died, or
everything Buffy knows now?)
>David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
>comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
>have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
>the end.
>
Ah! Not read Fray, yet.
>Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
>moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
>plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
>very much genius at all.
>
Well... no. surely that was just the latest attempt to knock off the
Slayerettes?
>I'm not impressed.
You hide it well :-)
I love the character based bits this season. They're insightful
without being stale or soapy, and the characters say all the things
you've been thinking. This did them well.
Other good bits were the Bringer interrogation (creepy more than
useful) and Spike and Faith butting heads.
The bad bit, for me, was the song over the couples, er, coupling. Not
really bad (except possibly Kennedy and the tongue thing) but just
taking things one step too far when the point had already been made.
Also, the episode was perhaps slightly too much talk, not enough
action. Then again, that was really the point - the calm before the
storm. The sex before the death.
Iain
--
"Could you learn to read minds?
In the case of mine do you read in the dark?"
Major ChrisB
"Dan Milburn" <daniel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.05.06....@hotmail.com...
yeah I can't remember exactly off hand but I remember an episode filled with
bits like this and there was one scene where someone ran up a wall and
backfliped over the person they were fighting and landed behind
them....almost exactly as happened in the kung fu training scene....
Iain Clark
Pretty standard move in TV and film fights, these days, surely? They
use it more or less weekly on Alias! Dark Angel used it loads, as
well.
Iain
--
JOSH: "I drink from the keg of glory, Donna. Bring me
the finest muffins and bagels in all the land."
DONNA: "It's going to be an unbearable day."
Mark Evans
Thing is very little of the episode is about "ass kicking" a lot
of it's about the characters.
This includes the sex scenes. "Maneater Faith" is defintly still there.
Kennedy finally manages to seduce Willow, which she was been trying to
do ever since she met her. Willow is still cautious and timid when
it comes to sexuality. Anya is "I don't know the meaning of subtle"...
Not all of the potentials went with Faith. So either Faith manages to
stop the bomb going off with seconds to spare or it's new slayer next
week.
Dan Milburn
I wouldn't go that far. Average, not outstanding, but certainly not as
bad as Gunnar seems to think..
>>I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
>>addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
>>errors all over the place.
>
> Didn't notice a single problem, personally.
I noticed the shaky camerawork inside the house. I'm not sure whether I
liked it, but it was definitely deliberate.
>>I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled up
>>some fanfic on the Internet. Say what? Rebecca Rand Kirshner? Well, she
>>did write one of the worst episodes ever ('Hell's Bells'),
>
> She also wrote "Help", one of the best of the season.
Or one of the worst, if you're me. Then there's 'Tabula Rasa', which is
also very popular for no good reason I can discern. Only ep of hers I
like is 'Tough Love'.
>>so I guess I
>>shouldn't be surprised. But FFS! Didn't anyone read this crap before
>>they handed it over to the actors?
>>
>>
> This was *far* better than last week for me. Where last week felt a
> little tired, contrived and obvious, the script this week really took
> things up a notch. A lot of what I've really loved about S7 has been
> sensible, intelligent conversations with genuine substance that actually
> illuminate facets of the characters. I'm willing to forgive quite a
> bit if I get that.
I preferred last week myself. In general, the character stuff is good,
but the plotting has been poor. Two episodes left, and things are still
dragging somewhat.
> The initial disarray after Buffy's departure was well-scripted and
> acted. It felt like the kind of things people would say under those
> circumstances. Giles was a bit ineffectual, perhaps, but otherwise this
> was good. Faith's gradual assumption of command during this and
> following scenes was also nicely handled.
Especially her finally telling Kennedy to shut the hell up.
> Spike and Buffy's heart-to-heart was well up to their previous
> encounters this year. *Finally * Buffy admits that she was wrong - not
> just about her recent behaviour but for repeatedly distancing herself
> from her friends over the last 7 years.
Also, of course, she was right about the wine cellar, as I predicted she
would be. Just wrong in her approach.
> Spike's contribution was funny,
> heartfelt, touching, and not preachy. I'm oddly pleased that Buffy and
> Spike didn't have sex. It was just right for the scene.
I'm not oddly pleased at all, I saw far more Buffy/Spike shagging last
season than I would ever want to. Still, it does seem to indicate that
their relationship has developed somewhat.
> The Mayor and Faith was great - partly for nostalgia, but not only.
> Unlike Spike and Dru in 'Bring on the Night', which squandered every
> last iota of potential the characters had together, here the script was
> firing on all cylinders. Nostalgia with a point - to sow dissent, but
> also to remind us (and Faith) of the past, and to give the First a nice
> jolt of interestingness. (Hey, it's a word. Well it's my word,
> anyway.)
And as was pointed out, the First has actually been telling them the truth
on some level.
> Kennedy and Willow. Not quite so fond of this. Don't let Chapman hear
> me but this is one of the few times a lesbian kiss on Buffy did seem
> slightly flat.
It actually did feel slightly cheap in a way it's never done before, I
thought. I mean, it wasn't actually any more graphic than Wood/Faith, but
it kind of seemed like "Quick! Let's get some lesbian sex on-screen while
we still can".
> Shame that Kennedy's increasingly prickly persona takes
> the edge off their fuzziness as a couple. I have no problem with her
> being that way, it's just hard to see what Willow sees in her at times.
Especially in this episode. Still, I'm a Willow/Fred shipper since
'Orpheus'. They're *so* more suited to each other. :)
> Except for the 'gorgeous' thing, obviously. However, I liked the main
> theme of the scene which was Willow saying she feared to let go.
Although it kind of played like an Angel curse type thing. Interesting
however that Willow still has to be constantly fighting to stay in
control.
>>OK. Whatever. Vi is back, and that cheered me up a bit. The Mayor pays a
>>visit (nicely telegraphed in the opening credits), and gives me a chance
>>to go "Hah!". I suggested months ago that The First doesn't just
>>impersonate dead people, it *is* really them. Would have worked better
>>if he was more in character, though.
>>
>>
> I thought he was perfectly in character. That's part of what I liked.
Absolutely.
> Also, the episode was perhaps slightly too much talk, not enough action.
> Then again, that was really the point - the calm before the storm. The
> sex before the death.
The problem was, they've *done* that before, twice - Willow/Oz in
'Graduation Day', and Xander/Anya in 'The Gift'. Did we really need it
again, and did it have to take up quite so much screen-time?
Dan
Mark Evans
> So what's the fancy weapon thing that Buffy's found? Looked like a sort of
> big syringe?
Appeared to be some kind of battle axe made out crystal.
> The First longs to be able to touch, and she/he/it called Caleb her vessel.
> So does that mean The First is going to become one with Caleb to take
> corporeal form? And can it then be killed? This is sounding a lot like the
> end of S3, coupled with the end of S5.
Maybe the weapon can kill the first even in incorporeal form.
> If Faith and Wood are having sex in one room, Willow and Kennedy are having
> sex in another, and Xander and Anya are having sex in the kitchen (which is
> near the living room), then that must mean everybody else is in Dawn room?
> What's going on in there? Giles, Andrew and 20 teenage girls? Ewwww. ;-)
Maybe some of them were at Xander's or Anya's apartment. Given that
the rest of the population of Sunnydale appears to have left accomodation
is hardly likely to be an issue.
Jonathan Dupont
> I'm trying to pinpoint the moment the episode went from embarrassingly
> bad to ridiculously bad. Was it when Giles killed the Bringer in a fit
> of pique? Was it with the interminably long Spike/Buffy scene? The
> painfully dull sex scenes? Or was it simply when the nausea kicked in
> from the shaky handheld camera?
I liked it. Wasn't stunning, but I'm not expecting it. I came to terms a
while ago that they weren't planning to do anything particularly amazing
at the end of the season and so the lack of big stuff doesn't really
affect me.
Good
- Buffy Matrix stuff. Best fight scene I've seen off the show for
aaaages
- Faith & the Mayor. Could have been better, and annoyingly telegraphed
as usual by guest stars, but stil fun
- Buffy & Spike. I'm finally convinced by the two of them. I thought it
was a good scene
- Cliffhanger ending. Was exciting at least.
Bad
- Shaky camera work
- Some jokes fell very flat. I mean Faith not knowing Achille's Heel -
honestly...
- Weapon seems awfully convenient
So - probably about a 4ish. I enjoyed it more than I have Angel since
... 4x17, maybe 4x15.
> I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here,
in
> addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and
continuity
> errors all over the place. For a while during the teaser, I was
> convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
The rest of the directing was fine (by Buffy standards) but this was
awful. Okay, we get the point - some more subtlety next timr please...
> I swear they didn't have a script for this week, so they just pulled
up
> some fanfic on the Internet.
Nothing wrong with fanfic...
> David Chapman finally got something out of reading all those Fray
> comics. Yes, if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
> have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!"
at
> the end.
Wasn't aware of that. Cool stuff :)
Oh, and was anyone else thinking that by the end of this that the First
was going to reveal it could actually touch stuff? It's obviously
heading that way in any case, but apparently the title wasn't as simple
as it could have been.
Jon
Tafka
>> Yes, 'Touched' was awful, but it has been the exception this season. The
>> generally high level of quality just underscores how bad it was.
Bah. I liked it.
I really liked last week and hated all the crap before it (bar
Storyteller, tho) since The Killer In Me & Selfless.
>I don't see how you can class that as awful......I thought it was excelent
>in many respects. I thought the monologues (or at least spikes) were very
>good. I didn't like the Robin/Faith bit but I thought Alyson did a good job
>of being a lesbian for a change and the Anya/Xander scene was very good - I
>didn't like their acctuall sex scene though.....and for fuck sake get rid of
>that patch and give him his god damn eye back....
His eye is gone. That is good. he can not just "regrow" an eye.
Willow & kennedy looks 'real' and, well, Robin/Faith was just kinda
weird.
-Tafka-
Today's fish is trout ala crème, enjoy your meal.
Jonathan Dupont
news:um799b...@anacon.freeserve.co.uk:
> Not all of the potentials went with Faith. So either Faith manages to
> stop the bomb going off with seconds to spare or it's new slayer next
> week.
Let's be honest - never, ever going to happen. Kennedy was with Faith, and
Kennedy is innulverable. Well, not going to be killed anyway. Especially after
just having had sex with Willow...
Okay, so maybe Faith could die and Kennedy miraculously survives. Would seem a
bit unrealistic though.
Shuggie
wrote:
>SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>
Ok. I guess I'm somewhere in the middle between Gunnar and Saskia on
this one. Didn't hate it, but thought it was very weak in places.
I think one of the biggest problems this ep has is last ep. So much
hinges on the decision to oust Buffy making some kind of sense, and it
just doesn't. Last week I could mostly forgive that because of the nice
character moments we got. This week as they played out the repercussions
it fell apart. I didn't feel what I should have felt because I still
couldn't really believe in what they'd done.
Giles was particularly dumb in this ep. I have no real problem with him
killing the bringer from a moral point of view, they are pretty much
demonic I think, but it was just stupid strategy. Let's kill the guy
when we don't know what it'll do to Andrew, when we don't know if we've
got all the information out of him.
(If it turns out that Giles is working for the First then I'll take this
back cos then it makes more sense - squeaky shoes my arse!)
Faith's plan looked like a walk into a trap from the beginning. I don't
blame her, she's new to this planning stuff, but Giles should have
caught it.
Then there's all the sex. I don't have a problem with all the sex, it's
the fact that almost none of it was actually sexy. Making Eliza not sexy
takes some doing but they managed it here.
In fact the only couple I felt any heat between them were Xander and
Anya - which is all down to Emma Caulfield's performance (I'm not
knocking NB but acting sexy with an eyepatch is quite a challenge) - and
we got ooh about 2 secs of them together versus about 5 minutes of
Willow and Kennedy.
It's pretty clear that some of Faith's gang are going to survive because
otherwise why have a timer? If you wanted to just kill them all, it
would just explode as she opened it. But I'm guessing we'll lose another
SiT or two.
There was stuff I did like. It was nice to see the Mayor again, although
he's not written quite up to S3 standards - but then neither is Faith.
Faith's internal struggles played well - her insecurity about Buffy, her
lack of confidence in her leadership skills. Giles' line about "you're
doing well" would have played a lot better if we hadn't just see him be
such a complete idiot. Plus nice to have someone put Kennedy in her
place. Also kinda funny to see the hurt expression on Wood's face after
she dismissed him so easily even after spending the night together.
(More than a little of the old "use 'em and lose 'em" Faith in there
huh?)
Spike letting the gang know what he thought of them was good too -
though again tinged by the fact that it's so implausible that they've
even done it. They all look kinda sheepish, like they really know,
already, that it was the wrong decision.
Wasn't too happy about Spike/Faith fight - not sure why.
I like the Spike/Buffy scenes. It was slightly over-done, but no more so
than the scenes in say, Sleeper or Never Leave Me. Plus it was a speech
that actually achieved something. It gave Buffy what she needed.
One of the ways in which Buffy works really well is when we see her
succeed for no other reason than she truly believes in herself (which is
the core of the female empowerment metaphor) Becoming, Anne, Checkpoint
are just 3 examples off the top of my head. She gets beaten back and
starts to lose that confidence but when she gets it back, that's what
makes her such a successful Slayer. Even Faith used to have a bit of
that, in fact I think she even taught Buffy a thing or two -
Faith: Well, when I'm fighting, it's like the whole world goes
away and I only know one thing: that I'm gonna win and
they're gonna lose. I like that feelin'.
Buffy: Well, sure. Beats that dead feeling you get when they
win and you lose.
Faith: I don't let that kind of negative thinking in.
Joyce: Right. Right. That could get you hurt. Buffy can be
awfully negative sometimes. See, honey, you gotta fight
that.
Buffy: I'm working on it.
(from Faith, Hope, Trick)
So when I see Spike giving her the "you're one hell of a woman" speech
and next we see her going it alone against Caleb, I feel like it's
getting back to the spirit of what the show is. It's not executed as
well as in say Becoming but it's hitting the same themes.
As for the Caleb fight, I think once she got her confidence back she
figured out two things, then it was easy -
1) If Caleb wanted her dead she would be already (we know the First
doesn't want her dead first, I think she's getting that now)
2) She was right about the vineyard and together with Spike's new info
that means powerful mojo/weapon she can use is there.
So like I say once she realises that the strategy is simple, just gotta
keep Caleb running around long enough to give her a chance to get to
whatever the weapon is.
Having said earlier that I liked the Buffy/Spike scenes, I did find
myself shouting at the screen telling them not to have sex. It's almost
exactly a year since the attempted rape and it would just be icky. Even
the cuddling didn't sit well with me - though I've been resigned to some
sort of muted romantic attachment between them since Sleeper/NLM.
In terms of 5-star I'm probably looking at a 3 +/- 0.25 - need to
rewatch it (though not til I get a better encode, the sound on Grace's
was awful!)
--
Shug
"Well that's ok except of course that none of it is true"
- Tonio K, It Ain't Worth Nothing Without Love
Ian Shuttleworth
iain...@dragonhaven.plus.com (Iain Clark) wrote:
Iain, you've pretty much said most of what I was thinking myself. And now
watch the room clear as I once again get narratological on Gunnar's ass
:-)
I wonder if maybe part of the problem is looking at this as a stand-alone
episode rather than as part of the season arc. Because I think of _Henry
V_, of _Richard III_, of _Antony And Cleopatra_, of all sorts of things,
and I accept this as the trope of night-before-the-big-one bonding,
sharing and confiding fears and strengths and feelings.
And of course, I don't just accept it, I embrace it as fitting in with
what I've been saying here and on u.m.t.b. about this season's
back-to-basics approach being an adherence to the classical elements of
story. where Gunnar says he'd have been perfectly content with a brief
clip-and-montage indication that these events were going on, for me it's
the telling that's an integral part of the story, both necessary and to be
relished.
In particular, the Spike/Buffy scene: at this point in the narrative,
not just of this season but of the whole seven-season series, it's both
necessary and pleasing for Spike to recapitulate his feelings and at the
same time to see in full the evidence that they have progressed and
matured. Continuity and development at once. It's always better to show
than to tell, and for me - though this may seem paradoxical - a montage
would have been merely telling, just indicating that this is what's gone
on, whereas the big wordiness is properly showing.
In addition to all of which, I allow myself a smug smirk that, as you say,
Iain,
> *Finally * Buffy admits that she was wrong - not just about her recent
> behaviour but for repeatedly distancing herself from her friends over
> the last 7 years.
More, about alternately running away and being defensive-aggressive-chippy
about her Slayer status. Again, coming to the end of the whole saga, such
long-term self-recognition is especially pleasing, not just in a
ha-I-always-said-so way but in the delight it gives by being made part of
the explicit story. If it's always been about growing up, then this is
the getting of wisdom.
So yeah, I wouldn't call it a great episode, but it's an immensely strong
and immensely satisfying one, as long as what you want is The Story, not
just a story that chimes with your own preferences. As Joss has said,
telling the story is not about giving what the viewers want. This episode
gives what the story wants.
--
Ian S.
Ian Shuttleworth
cgbra...@ntlworld.com (Major ChrisB) wrote:
> > >>SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> people keep saying this....only faith can call a new slayer. While it
> may be true, the only reason we have to think so is coz joss said it in
> an interview. It's never, to my knowlage, been in the show...I'm 99%
> sure it's not been stated in the show.
But it's been explicitly shown. We've seen the Slayer line pass through
not-Buffy, and we've also seen it *not* pass through Buffy. Or was she
somehow not as dead at the end of S5 as in "Prophecy Girl"?
Yeah, yada yada alternate dimension. But in the world of Sunnydale, there
was an inert, decaying body in a grave. For me, it would take a
prodigious amount of glossing to class that as something other than death,
especially after a mere minute or so out of it in S1. Buffy herself has
repeatedly referred to it as dying and death, right up to the last couple
of episodes, and I think in this case we can assume that she's in a
position to know.
It's there. It's canonical. Live (ha!) with it.
--
Ian S.
Linda
> On Tue, 6 May 2003 10:01:06 +0100, "Andrew Cameron"
> <use...@tags2k.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >"Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> >news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
> >> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
> >
> >Right, seen it now. Phew.
> >
> >>
> can figure out what it was. It appeared in Fray. That's about it.
For those of us who haven't and probably won't read Fray, can you elaborate?
--
Best regards
Linda
Mmmmmm. Angel
Gunnar Harboe
Fray is Joss Whedon's comic book about a Slayer a couple of hundred
years into the future. After some random quest-type things, the Slayer
Fray gets ahold of this shiny piece of metal. It's a combination
axe/stake, and apparently something of a Slayer heirloom.
Like the sword Excalibur, it also makes the owner King of England... or
at least Boss Slayer. I'm not sure how much of that is just because the
one with the axe is *naturally* the boss.
I think it's meant to be like the coolest thing ever, but I found it a
bit naff. Then again, I'm not a fan of Fray. With a bit of luck it will
look good on the show.
John Briggs
the unaired pilot) and has always been the second-unit director. (Except
presumably for 7x01 !)
John Briggs
Linda
Thanks for the info. Sounds like something that might move on to a spin-off.
Ian Shuttleworth
shu...@SPAMMENOTaceypace.freeserve.co.uk (Shuggie) wrote:
> I don't have a problem with all the sex, it's the fact that almost none
> of it was actually sexy.
Is that what it was for? Is that what sex scenes are for in general? One
of the greatest sex scenes I can think of is in _Don't Look Now_, and its
power is precisely because it's so cold - the Sutherland and Christie
characters believe in the passion, or delude themselves about it, but
we as viewers are clearer on the matter.
Not saying that the bonks in "Touched" are meant to be anerotic, just that
eroticism isn't, I think, their purpose. We never lose sight of the fact
that this is night-before desperation manifesting in a craving for
what may be final fleshly companionship.
--
Ian S.
Ian Shuttleworth
m...@anacon.freeserve.co.uk (Mark Evans) wrote:
> >> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>
>
> >>
> Kennedy finally manages to seduce Willow, which she was been trying to
> do ever since she met her.
Is that how people read this, as their first consummation? I know
problems of privacy and all, but I'd always assumed they'd been at it
when possible since the end of "The Killer In Me"... I mean, was it really
only a cup of tea they were going indoors for at that point? Boy George
much? :-)
--
Ian S.
Dan Milburn
If they had done it before, why would Willow be so worried about it now?
Dan
Gunnar Harboe
...the hell?
On <http://thedvdforums.com/> there was recently a discussion about the
most erotic sex scenes in cinema. "Don't Look Now" was mentioned by
several because it is so *warm*. In the words of one poster: "still the
best because it conveys love and joy as well as passion."
It is the very opposite of the scenes in 'Touched'.
Shuggie
shut...@cix.co.uk says...
In fact, when I discussed the ep with my work colleague this morning he made a
similar point. He felt that a contrast was being made, that the couples were
looking for comfort in the sex and that ironically the one couple that really
found comfort was the one not having sex (i.e. Buffy and Spike)
Which still leaves me feeling those scenes were a little long if that's all they
were trying to achieve.
Andrew Hogg
wrote:
It's simple, Kennedy will know of action movie physics. Jump in the air *
just before* the explosion goes off and you'll be fine but a bit sooty.
Andrew Hogg
It's shiny but not entirely metal. Axe on one end, stake on the other.
I'm not sure that it has any powers of itself.
Ian Shuttleworth
daniel...@hotmail.com (Dan Milburn) wrote:
Yup, sorry, my bad. I'd misinterpreted Willow's worries as about the
impending conflict; just wasn't listening closely enough, I'm afraid.
Still surprised, but I can't deny that's what it says.
--
Ian S.
Ian Shuttleworth
(Gunnar Harboe) wrote:
> ...the hell?
> On <http://thedvdforums.com/> there was recently a discussion about the
> most erotic sex scenes in cinema. "Don't Look Now" was mentioned by
> several because it is so *warm*. In the words of one poster: "still the
> best because it conveys love and joy as well as passion."
Well, I'm afraid I can't quote chapter and verse, but I have firm
recollection of at least one analytical TV Roeg-retrospective (may
have been a South Bank Show) where the coldness was held up as an
exemplar, and I'm pretty sure there was interview footage with Roeg to
back it up.
In the context of the film, to me it's clearly desperation, a vain attempt
to delude themselves about their continuing togetherness after the loss of
their daughter than a successful affirmation.
--
Ian S.
Shuggie
I think it is though a very affecting scene which may explain some of
these reactions to it. I saw Donald Sutherland on "Inside the Actors
Studio" talk about it and they discussed the fact that a lot of people
thought that he and Julie Christie really had sex shooting that scene.
Of course they didn't, in fact he felt it wasn't even particularly that
explicit compared with many movie sex scenes. However it feels more real
because it resonates with people's real sexual experiences, where there
is a much wider variety of emotions, motives and desires than we're
often given a chance to see on screen.
But I don't think those scenes in Touched were anywhere near that kind
of standard, sadly.
--
Shug
The Dude abides.
Tony Gowland
> Andrew Cameron wrote:
>> "Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
>>
>>> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>>
>>
>> Right, seen it now. Phew.
>>
>>
>> like how everyone is better at kicking ass than they should be when
>> it's required, but that's been a complaint I've held since at least
>> season 4.
>
> there seemed to get their ass kicked enough in return. We needed at
> least one more fatality, folks. Start killing people off left and
> right.
> It's more fun that way.
But who cares? Killing off a few nameless Potentials would be pointless. Who
cares? And they're not likely to kill off "proper" characters so close to
the end - as someone else said, the grieving period would take the edge off
the finale.
>> Buffy's jumping around technique was a nice idea but a bit dull to
>> watch, as was the yes, way too long Spike/Buffy scene.
>
> Oh, I found it fun to watch, but good GOD could the rip it out of the
> matrix s'more? Complete with matrix-y musical accompaniment and
> jumping
> off walls and slight slow-mo spins and jumps and the like.
They're just finishing what they started at the end of S4, and have been
doing in Angel for two seasons now. Shitty Matrix ripoffs. Thanks, ME, but
there's a proper Matrix just around the corner - I don't need your poo
attempts at the effects, thanks.
> >>For a while during the teaser, I was
>>> convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
>>
>> I have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with the directing.
>
> Quite.
Shakycam bleurgh. Or were they just afraid that their script / actors
wouldn't be able to convey a proper sense of disorder without gimmick camera
effects?
--
Tony Gowland
http://www.planethalflife.com/freakyzoids/
"Remember, I AM NOT LYING!!! This is all official information."
Neil Hopkins
<ga...@gavinclayton.co.uk> wrote:
>This is what Gunnar Harboe <gh...@cam.ac.uk> just wrote:
>
>>SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>>
<snip>
>
>So anyway. Final thoughts before I go. The last two episodes had
>*better* be full of action, because the last couple have been all
>talk, and they've pushed the limits of how much "arc filler" they can
>have before I get pissed off. I really liked the fight scene between
>potentials and Bringers, because of the total darkness and flashlights
>all over the place. It was also good to see how far the potentials
>have come... Vi now kicks ass, who'd have thought? The scenes between
>Caleb and the First suggest that the First is going to physically
>inhabit his body for the final fight. I'm in two minds about the
>Matrix fight between Buffy and Caleb... it was cool, but we've never
>seen Buffy fight like that before, and it seems illogical at a time
>when she was at her lowest point emotionally. What, all of a sudden
>she can win a fight with Caleb just because she *wants* to? Weird.
She won that fight by the simple expedient of not getting hit. In her
previous fights with Caleb she went toe to toe with him and got her
lights punched out. The tactic in this one was to goad him until he
slipped up and revealed where the magical wotsit was hidden.
--
neil h.
Anya : "I provide much needed sarcasm"
Gunnar Harboe
>>I'm fairly certain David Solomon used to be a decent director. Here, in
>>addition to the StumbleCam(TM), we had god-awful editing and continuity
>>errors all over the place.
>
>I didn't pick up on any of them. There was sometimes too much ambient
>light when there was supposed to be darkness, but that's not Solomon's
>fault, that's the DP and lighting guys.
As director, Solomon is supposed to tell those people what to do. He may
not be the person who made the error, but he's responsible because he
didn't catch it.
>>if you'd followed Joss's funnybook output, you too would
>>have had the chance to go "OH NO, it's that piece of junk from Fray!" at
>>the end.
>
>I've never seen Fray, so I have no idea about it. But I can't believe
>you even criticise something like this, in your desire to hate every
>second of the episode. It's got continuity with a spin-off project...
>great... continuity... nice. Why do you even want to hate that?
I don't "want" to hate it. And it's not continuity with "Fray" I
dislike. It's the weapon itself.
I like comics. I really do. Read them all the time. But there are good
comics and there are bad comics. There are fantastically imaginative
comic book ideas, and there are embarrassingly stupid comic book ideas.
"Fray" is not a very good comic. And the axe/stake is one of the worst
things about it.
Iain Clark
<ga...@gavinclayton.co.uk> wrote:
>This is what Gunnar Harboe <gh...@cam.ac.uk> just wrote:
>Doublemeat Palace. Hmm. I'm sure I've already given my opinion before:
>worst. episode. ever.
>
>It's 144th out of 144. It's a pile of utter shit. I gave it a zero in
>the five-star polls. Buffy -- the hero of this show -- is put into a
>costume that she admits makes her look like a tool. She gets the
>dumbest of jobs, when there are so many other quick part-time jobs
>that are less demeaning. The first half of the episode is spent
>*teaching* Buffy (and therefore us) how to work at the Palace, which
>quite frankly is something I don't care to learn.
Every single bit of her experience in that first half of the episode
is satirical, darkly funny, and also deeply paranoia inducing.
I've come to the conclusion that a lot of people simply didn't "get"
where this episode was coming from - it's not about what's happening
on the surface. It's about what's clearly going on in Buffy's (and
our) mind at the time. It's about how deeply, amusingly horrible
every aspect of the job is, and at the same time how all the clues are
leading to a very sinister conclusion.
> The comedy is
>pitiful. The penis-monster is just ridiculous (and not in a camp funny
>way... just lame).
Yep, lame to the nth degree.
> There's only one funny moment in the whole episode,
>when Xander eats the burger.
>
The whole episode is funny. This is a fact. :-)
It's still one of the weakest S6 episodes, but even so. Funny.
Iain
--
"Oh, go away. Repress someone else."
Iain Clark
<ga...@gavinclayton.co.uk> wrote:
>This is what Gunnar Harboe <gh...@cam.ac.uk> just wrote:
>
>Hello!
>
>Before I get with the replying, I'll state my stance on this episode:
>I think it's deeply average. I'd give it a 2.8 on the five-star polls.
>So I'm not going to be too hard on the ep, but I'm not going to sing
>its praises either. The main problem is that nothing happens until the
>end. This would be okay, if not for the fact that "Empty Places" was
>also a "bridge" episode where nothing much happened to progress the
>plot. After counting all these "arc filler" episodes, it feels like
>half of season 7 has been wasted... too loose... too empty.
>
I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again <g>) what is this
fixation on "arc" and "filler"? - and now, "arc filler"?
If an episode is meaningful, tells us something about the characters
that we didn't already know, moves us, and has revelations, and
confrontations - then why is it judged "filler" and therefore "bad"
simply because there isn't a rollercoaster of twists and turns
advancing the plot in external terms?
For me this show is about the characters. Yes, there's as certain
minimum amount of incident and conflict that's needed to make the
characters' interactions meaningful, but we've got that. The
discussions and interactions all stem directly from the story that's
being told. Whether it's Wood facing off against Spike, or Spike
facing off against Faith, or just people in desperate times revealing
their innermost thoughts to each other, it's all "arc" to me.
>>Was it when Giles killed the Bringer in a fit
>>of pique?
>
>I really liked Andrew speaking for the bringer, though it wasn't
>explained why or how it spoke through him. Then, as you say, Giles
>cuts its throat when it may very well have had more to say! Um, Giles?
>What if it was about to tell you everything you need to know? What did
>you do that for?
>
I think the idea was that the Bringer had given up all the useful info
it had to give, and was clearly doing nothing more than ranting vague
threats and hyperbole. It was scaring people with empty threats.
Which is why Giles put an end to its ramblings.
>But while I'm thinking about Giles, I like the way Spike was correct
>in his observations: Giles went against Buffy because she has outgrown
>him. And it's kind of pathetic to see him now nurturing Faith, just
>because he's still got something to work with there.
>
I don't think that's 100 percent true. Certainly he stood against
Buffy last week, but they all did, and for good reason. Is there a
part of him that resents her rejecting him? I'm sure. But it seems
to me that he's driven by a desire to do what he thinks is
appropriate.
Faith does have things to learn from him, and he's comfortable in that
role, but it's a huge leap for me to say that he went against Buffy
simply because he could no longer fulfil that role for her.
>I can't decide whether it's intentional for the season, or whether
>it's just crappy characterisation... but for the first time, I really
>don't like Giles :-(
>
I'd argue with some of his decisions lately, but I don't dislike him.
>>Was it with the interminably long Spike/Buffy scene?
>
>Yes it was too long, when you pretty much know how it's going to turn
>out. But at the same time, it was *beautifully* written. Hell, I
>almost wanted Spike to hold *me*!
>
<g> Very good scene, I thought. As were most of the heart-to-hearts.
>>The painfully dull sex scenes?
>
>I didn't think they were dull. They weren't arousing either... in
>fact, I can't tell why Willow/Kennedy rumpus didn't turn me on. They
>were both acting okay. I guess I was sat there thinking, "Wow, this
>show is getting bold, they wouldn't even let Willow and Tara kiss for
>over a season, and now we get *this*!" It was just kind of weird.
>
The sex scenes hardly lasted any time at all - they were significant,
but only in the context of the scenes that went before.
>The sex scenes made sense though. As soon as Wood met Faith in the
>previous episode, I could tell they clicked. So I'm fine with them.
>Willow being worried about losing control was good, but as you said,
>the dialogue lasted too long. I liked the parallel with Angel, though:
>Willow too scared to have sex, because that "perfect moment" brings a
>lack of control, and she could turn evil. I like that.
>
I liked that too.
>Oh, one more observation... I wouldn't really like someone with a
>tongue piercing licking my neck. I'd be like, "Ow, that's annoying,
>take out your metal crap!" Not that anyone will ever be licking me, or
>doing anything with their tongue on me, for the forseeable future. But
>still.
>
*shrug* I hadn't even noticed she had a pierced tongue!
>>Or was it simply when the nausea kicked in from the shaky handheld camera?
>
>I was fine with that. It's not really a "novelty". It's a perfectly
>acceptable way of shooting a scene. There's been lots of handheld work
>in the last couple of seasons, though not as wobbly as this.
>
I didn't notice this, but thinking about it I'm sure it's because it's
such a common technique for a scene with lots of people and
overlapping dialogue. It fits that style of scene. Its not something
we see a lot of on Buffy, but it's not a bad or unusual thing either.
>>The Mayor pays a visit (nicely telegraphed in the opening credits)
>>Would have worked better if he was more in character, though.
>
>I agree here. I don't think Harry Groener nailed his character here.
>He was just a bit off.
>
Seemed fine to me. Looked quite a bit older, though.
>And I don't know what to make of the concept that these manifestations
>really *are* the dead people, not just the First imitating them. Don't
>know if that's just a throwaway line or something really interesting.
>
It's an interesting idea even if we hear nothing more of it .
Certainly it's something that's been implied before in how intimately
the First imitates people - it seems to have access to their memories
in a similar way that a Vampire accesses it's human host's memories.
>So anyway. Final thoughts before I go. The last two episodes had
>*better* be full of action, because the last couple have been all
>talk, and they've pushed the limits of how much "arc filler" they can
>have before I get pissed off.
I don't want action, necessarily, but I do want drama, and conflict.
I think that's an important difference. But yes, I do want big things
to happen that mean a lot to the characters, and I'm pretty sure
that's what we're going to get.
> I really liked the fight scene between
>potentials and Bringers, because of the total darkness and flashlights
>all over the place.
I thought that was very nice, stylistically. It's the kind of visual
we see more on Angel than Buffy.
> One
>last interesting point: the First in the last act really looked like a
>Season 2 SMG... Season 2 hair and stuff. There's no significance to
>that; I'm simply saying it's the first time I've found SMG attractive
>for years.
>
I noticed that too. There was another episode earlier in the year
where I thought her "look" was very much the same as the early
seasons.
Iain
--
BARTLET: "hooked on a bad soap opera
that's passing itself off as important."
Iain Clark
>They're just finishing what they started at the end of S4, and have been
>doing in Angel for two seasons now. Shitty Matrix ripoffs. Thanks, ME, but
>there's a proper Matrix just around the corner - I don't need your poo
>attempts at the effects, thanks.
>
Hmm. This really didn't feel like an obvious Matrix riff to me,
(unlike, say Primeval). Martial arts wire work is everywhere, and it
was around long before the Matrix. The jumping around was standard
stuff from half the TV shows on the air these days. The only vaguely
matrix-y bit for me was Buffy dodging, but since that was the point of
the scene, and quite a neat concept, it didn't bother me.
>> >>For a while during the teaser, I was
>>>> convinced we were seeing things through Andrew's camera again.
>>>
>>> I have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with the directing.
>>
>> Quite.
>
>Shakycam bleurgh. Or were they just afraid that their script / actors
>wouldn't be able to convey a proper sense of disorder without gimmick camera
>effects?
Camerawork and direction is one way of telling a story - part of the
show, along with acting, writing etc. Why is it a gimmick to use a
camera style that's appropriate to the scene? It's not even an
uncommon style. It complements the other elements, but doesn't
replace them.
Iain
--
"When things get rough he
Just hides behind his Buffy"
Gunnar Harboe
<ga...@gavinclayton.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>>If an episode is meaningful, tells us something about the characters
>>that we didn't already know, moves us, and has revelations, and
>>confrontations - then why is it judged "filler" and therefore "bad"
>>simply because there isn't a rollercoaster of twists and turns
>>advancing the plot in external terms?
<snip>
>So yes, lots of stuff happened in this episode on a deep introspective
>character level.
See, that's where I disagree. There was lots of characterisation, but it
was characterisation *going nowhere*. It *didn't* tell us anything about
the characters we didn't already know. There were no confrontations,
really, or revelations.
OK, so Buffy/Spike maybe to some extent. But it suffered because
a) It was so looooooooong
b) We knew all this stuff already
We knew Buffy was depressed (last ep, and this), we knew she had grave
doubts herself about her ability to win this battle ('Get it Done'), we
knew she felt disconnected from her friends (CWDP). And we knew Spike
loves Buffy. Getting them to verbalise these feelings means something,
but it's not enough to sustain the entire scene when there are no
surprises.
As for the Faith/Wood and Willow/Kennedy scenes, they were utterly
pointless. We could just as well have had ten minutes of the characters
watching TV for all the insight into their characters and exciting
interaction they provided.
Dan Milburn
> This is what Iain Clark <iain...@dragonhaven.plus.com> just wrote:
>
>>I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again <g>) what is this
>>fixation on "arc" and "filler"? - and now, "arc filler"?
>
> Well, in the early days a "filler" episode was one that did not advance
> the season arc at all. Monster Of The Week episodes that contained
> perhaps a brief line of dialogue about, "And Faith is still on
> walkabout", or "Angelus hasn't done much lately", or "Adam is still out
> killing small boys."
Here's the problem. "Filler", as it's used in this context, is
essentially pejorative, and implies that what we get is only there to make
up the numbers because they couldn't come up with anything better. But by
your given definition, 'Hush', 'Doppelgangland', 'Lie to Me', 'The Body',
to pick a few examples, are all filler. This is, frankly, insane.
> "Arc filler" is when we get episodes that are all about the main season
> arc, yet they don't do much to progress that arc. Episodes that act as a
> bridge between one major plot development and another. Filler between
> more important episodes, yet even less satisfying than MOTW filler,
> because at least MOTW fillers have satisfying self-contained narratives.
But again, it makes the assumption that any episode to do with the arc
that doesn't contain major plot developments automatically has no right to
be there; that if there only 21 episodes a season, this is the one, or a
candidate to be the one, that would go. But it doesn't tell us anything
about the *quality* of the episode. 'Bring on the Night' had plenty of
plot developments, it's still rubbish. This episode does what it does,
not because the writers couldn't think of anything more interesting to put
there, but because they *chose* that this is what they wanted it to do.
And it does it quite well, I think, although I concede that not everyone
agrees on this point. So, call it boring, crap, any other negative terms
you like, if that's how you feel, but I really don't think it can be
called "filler".
Dan
Ian Shuttleworth
shu...@SPAMMENOTaceypace.freeserve.co.uk (Shuggie) wrote:
> >> most erotic sex scenes in cinema. "Don't Look Now"
>
> it feels more real because it resonates with people's real sexual
> experiences, where there is a much wider variety of emotions, motives
> and desires than we're often given a chance to see on screen.
I thought I'd be sharing too much if I were to start talking about a
sexual experience of my own where the cold desperation kept screaming to
me, "Don't Look Now" :-/
--
Ian S.
Ian Shuttleworth
iain...@dragonhaven.plus.com (Iain Clark) wrote:
> >Doublemeat Palace. Hmm. I'm sure I've already given my opinion before:
> >worst. episode. ever.
> I've come to the conclusion that a lot of people simply didn't "get"
> where this episode was coming from - it's not about what's happening
> on the surface. It's about what's clearly going on in Buffy's (and
> our) mind at the time. It's about how deeply, amusingly horrible
> every aspect of the job is, and at the same time how all the clues are
> leading to a very sinister conclusion.
No, that's fine, but the grimness has nevertheless to appeal to an
audience, in whatever way, in order for it to work. I really admire the
thought and deliberation of the pitch, but in the end it doesn't work for
me because it doesn't give me enough incentive to stick with it.
I suppose I sort of feel the same way about _Eraserhead_...
--
Ian S.
Ian Shuttleworth
iain...@dragonhaven.plus.com (Iain Clark) wrote:
[spoiler space removed, and this is only a sample quote of a fair bit
more]
> For me this show is about the characters. Yes, there's as certain
> minimum amount of incident and conflict that's needed to make the
> characters' interactions meaningful, but we've got that. The
> discussions and interactions all stem directly from the story that's
> being told.
Iain, I love you and I want to have your babies.
--
Ian S.
pikelet
news:GISta.4467$Yc2...@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net:
>
> "Mattia Valente" <mae.v...@std.vu.nl> wrote in message
> news:b98sf2$gio8q$1...@ID-74630.news.dfncis.de...
>> Andrew Cameron wrote:
>> > "Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> > news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
>> >
>> >>SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>> >
>> >
>> > Right, seen it now. Phew.
>> >
>> >
y's jumping around technique was a nice idea but a bit dull to
> watch, as
>> > was the yes, way too long Spike/Buffy scene.
>>
>> Oh, I found it fun to watch, but good GOD could the rip it out of the
>> matrix s'more? Complete with matrix-y musical accompaniment and
>> jumping off walls and slight slow-mo spins and jumps and the like.
>
> Angel's been doing that all season....I thought the way they did it on
> buffy was certainly a lot less of an obvious rip off than a couple of
> the angel episodes I've seen them do it...
Oh, be off with you. When have you ever seen anybody in 'Angel' do a
full-on Neo and lean waaaaaaaaay back whilst waving their arms? Nowhere,
that's where. And it's the first damn thing Buffy does in that scene, and
thus it made me want to laugh and cry at the same time with the sheer
obviousness of it all.
Like Mattia said, 'Angel' is more Jon Woo - fighting with style. I think
there's a difference between that and the 'bullet time' idea of just
making at least one adversary seem slower than the other. Bullet time
emphasises the speed and reactions of one participant in the fight, as
'The Matrix' employs it, and that was the purpose in 'Touched' too. Woo's
stuff just tends to be a visual treat - more often than not used to show
just how evenly matched two adversaries are. The latter is what 'Angel'
goes for.
Tim.
Dan Milburn
Bizarrely, when something like that *does* happen in _Angel_ - Angelus and
the Beast in 'Salvage' - it's about the only time all season when they
*don't* use slo-mo in a fight scene.
And personally, Matrix, schmatrix, my favourite use of that trick is in
'Spiderman'.
> Like Mattia said, 'Angel' is more Jon Woo - fighting with style. I think
> there's a difference between that and the 'bullet time' idea of just
> making at least one adversary seem slower than the other. Bullet time
> emphasises the speed and reactions of one participant in the fight, as
> 'The Matrix' employs it, and that was the purpose in 'Touched' too.
> Woo's stuff just tends to be a visual treat - more often than not used
> to show just how evenly matched two adversaries are. The latter is what
> 'Angel' goes for.
Or so we can really savour that moment when the Beast throws Connor out of
the window.
You can argue all you want about exactly to what effect slo-mo is or
should be used, but the fact is, _Angel_'s been overdoing it ever since 'A
New World', and _Buffy_ hasn't done anything similar for 3 seasons.
Dan
Iain Clark
lol
Now, see, who says this episode wasn't sexy? ;-)
Iain
--
"Now, unlock his cell, unstrap him,
and bring him to the telephone immediately."
Andrew Hogg
> Like Mattia said, 'Angel' is more Jon Woo - fighting with style. I
> think there's a difference between that and the 'bullet time' idea of
> just making at least one adversary seem slower than the other. Bullet
> time emphasises the speed and reactions of one participant in the
> fight, as 'The Matrix' employs it, and that was the purpose in
> 'Touched' too. Woo's stuff just tends to be a visual treat - more
> often than not used to show just how evenly matched two adversaries
> are. The latter is what 'Angel' goes for.
>
Um...bollocks. Bullet time is never used to show anyone is faster than
their opponent. See when Neo dodges the bullets, when Neo and Smith leap
at each other etc. When someone is faster, like Smith punching Neo
repeatedly they blur the motion. Angel DOES use what is known as bullet
time. See A New World and Magic Bullet. It's when everything is in slo-
mo but the camera can move around much more. The fight between Faith and
The Beast didn't use this, instead slowing down and then speeding up,
which isn't really a Woo trick either.
But whenever Wes pulls out his guns, there should be doves on screen.
Niall Harrison
> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
> .
> I'm trying to pinpoint the moment the episode went from embarrassingly
> bad to ridiculously bad.
It didn't. But it was certainly one hell of a mixed bag.
> Was it when Giles killed the Bringer in a fit of pique?
It's enough to make you believe Giles is evil and trying to stop the
Bringer from saying too much.
> Was it with the interminably long Spike/Buffy scene?
I can't believe I'm saying this, but...That actually worked for me.
Mostly. Buffy's acknowledgement that she pushes people away, Spike's
speech about why he loves her...yeah. Worked for me.
> The painfully dull sex scenes?
They were dull. Didn't like any of them. Didn't really *believe* in any of
them, either.
> OK. Whatever. Vi is back, and that cheered me up a bit. The Mayor pays a
> visit (nicely telegraphed in the opening credits), and gives me a chance
> to go "Hah!". I suggested months ago that The First doesn't just
> impersonate dead people, it *is* really them. Would have worked better
> if he was more in character, though.
The Mayor was a definite highlight. But the First should have been doing
that sort of thing all season long...
> Were those glowing LED numbers supposed to be The First's Kevin Spacey
> moment? The point where we suddenly realise the full genius of its
> plans? Because from where I'm standing, its full genius amounts to not
> very much genius at all.
It was a very weird moment, because it was a much more 'instant'
cliffhanger than _Buffy_ normally does. Normally, we get the emotional
cliffhanger, rather than the in-mortal-danger cliffhanger.
I liked it more than the last two, though.
Niall
--
I feel like dancing on my own/Where no-one knows me and where I/can
cause offence just by the way I look.
Tan Coul
<jonatha...@hotblahmail.com> wrote:
>Mark Evans <m...@anacon.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
>news:um799b...@anacon.freeserve.co.uk:
>
>> Andrew Cameron <use...@tags2k.co.uk> wrote:
>>> "Gunnar Harboe" <gh...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:5vcebv86tpl9sgg9l...@4ax.com...
>>>> SPOILERS for Buffy 7x20
>>
>>> Right, seen it now. Phew.
>>
>>>>
>> Not all of the potentials went with Faith. So either Faith manages to
>> stop the bomb going off with seconds to spare or it's new slayer next
>> week.
>
>Let's be honest - never, ever going to happen. Kennedy was with Faith, and
>Kennedy is innulverable. Well, not going to be killed anyway. Especially after
>just having had sex with Willow...
'Cos that vibe just worked so well for Tara ;-)
--
www.oscartelos.co.uk
The best Chester Zoo photo website ever made by a cat (probably.)
Last updated March 13th 2003
Tan Coul
Plus, previously she was weighed down with the burden of command yadda
yadda yadda, while after being cut loose and having her cares soothed
away in Spike's arms the Bitch is Back.
Not that I'm saying the show presented it in such clichéd terms, but
it's close enough to being my interpretation of events to be much
easier to put that way.