AOQ Review 6-12: "Dead Things"

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
threads.

BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
(or "Sometimes they come back")
Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
Director: James A. Contner

The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
slowly digest.

Since it's so important and divisive and stuff, the first thing I'd
like to mention is that, after having been left cold by some of this
season's action, most of the interactions between Buffy and Spike
work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
willing to admit out loud to having some affection. And then of course
that leads her to question herself both immediately and in the
long-term, cuz, you know, confusion.

If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up. The
fiancée loved it, though. This particular pairing just seems to have
this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
Rasa."] Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
wasn't? Otherwise, though, the scene plays out pretty well, although
I obviously can't say I enjoyed watching it. Totally called her
death about a minute before it happened.

>From there comes the attempt to frame Buffy for the murder, coming
after the moody montage. It's one of those dizzying scenes that
works well if we don't do it too often, with time on the blink and
such, and Buffy never sure that she's not attacking Spike or
"Katrina" instead of the monsters. That flows into one of the
better dream sequences in awhile, which follows the same patterns and
of course nicely incorporates "do you trust me?" and the handcuffs
from earlier. I tend to like this stuff.

The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
"what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
nothing to do with you.

But back to trusting Spike, Buffy finds that she doesn't after all,
and it shifts her back into "you're a thing" mode. This time it
seems like she might believe it, though, since there's some amoral
behavior precipitating it. It seems somehow appropriate that the issue
that creates this conflict doesn't have to with pure vampiric evil,
but with the kind of selfish behavior that some souled humans would
also engage in to keep a loved one around. The scene is a little
confusing to the viewer, as I guess it's supposed to be, since one
now has to try to distinguish the two of them hitting and trying to
drag each other around as part of an actual fight as opposed to the
usual foreplay. As I keep saying, this episode is all about confusion,
for me.

Last episode I mentioned the parallels between S6-Spike and S3-Faith.
Then I saw this week's show. Damn, I'm good.

FAITH: Buffy, I'm not gonna *see* anything. I missed the mark last
night and I'm sorry about the guy. I really am! But it happens!
Anyway, how many people do you think we've saved by now, thousands?
And didn't you stop the world from ending? Because in my book, that
puts you and me in the plus column.
- "Consequences"

SPIKE: Why are you doing this to yourself?
BUFFY: A girl is dead because of me.
SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
- "Dead Things"

Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
"Wrecked."

As for the end, yeah, it's yet another show that ends with someone
breaking down crying, but there are some interesting moments, including
the reversal of the standard kind of ending: "please don't forgive
me." Well, that's different. I like how it re-casts the earlier
parts of the show, since it reveals a new coping mechanism and layer of
denial that colors Buffy's earlier behavior regarding her
relationship with Peroxide Boy. By telling herself that she's
physically "wrong," she can sorta explain and sorta excuse how she
could be involved with Spike, and even like him. From a writing
perspective, the malfunctioning chip thus ends up being not so much a
plot device but a character/emotion device.

Random thoughts:

Good to see Xander and Anya acting like themselves again in their
scenes together, after last week.

I was going to compliment Wanker on the interesting and atypical music
that plays during Buffy's stroll through the cemetery. Then it
turns out it's just a Bush song. That'd explain it. As per usual
with that band, sounded much better before the guy started singing.

Jonathan's designated role appears to be disguising himself as things
and getting beaten up.

The misgivings Jonathan has about Warren's modi operandi are welcome,
and not resolved by the end of the episode. That'll be important.
After this episode, I'm going to suggest that maybe it's time for
the Geek Trio to split up, and argue that it's definitely time to at
least change things. After an episode like this, we can never return
to the status quo of the funny dorks who wrestle all the time and argue
about Bond movies.

This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
- "I thought I was Mad Dog Two." "Mad Dog *Three* to Mad Dog
One..."
- "She's your ex?" "Dude, that is messed up."
- "Being exposed to the Rwasundi for more than a few seconds can
cause, uh, vivid hallucinations. And a slight tingly scalp."

So...

One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
the right ways.

AOQ rating: Good

[Season Six so far:
1) "Bargaining" - Decent
2) "After Life" - Good
3) "Flooded" - Decent
4) "Life Serial" - Good
5) "All The Way" - Good
6) "Once More, With Feeling" - Excellent
7) "Tabula Rasa" - Good
8) "Smashed" - Decent
9) "Wrecked" - Good
10) "Gone" - Decent
11) "Doublemeat Palace" - Decent
12) "Dead Things" - Good]

[stev...@earthlink.net]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"

>snip<

>...this particular pairing just seems to have

> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.
>

So that explains what I become when watching this show!

>
> AOQ rating: Good
>

Works for me!

[lili...@gmail.com]

This particular pairing just seems to have
> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

It's kinda like Faith, her 'tough girl' act turns some people into
squealing fanboys, while leaving the rest of us cold. (sorrry, but you
really asked for that one by putting it like that)

It's also important to note, symbolic as well as actual event, that
it's not Spike who asks her on the balcony, it's Buffy who seperates
herself from her friends and Spike just joins her when she's alone. He
doesn't make her leave her friends, it's Buffy who does that, who
seperates herself, Spike just uses the chance she gives him, the only
thing she's willing to give him.

It's the main difference between being seduced and seeking out
seduction.

> >From there comes the attempt to frame Buffy for the murder, coming
> after the moody montage. It's one of those dizzying scenes that
> works well if we don't do it too often, with time on the blink and
> such, and Buffy never sure that she's not attacking Spike or
> "Katrina" instead of the monsters. That flows into one of the
> better dream sequences in awhile, which follows the same patterns and
> of course nicely incorporates "do you trust me?" and the handcuffs
> from earlier. I tend to like this stuff.

It's esp. interesting when you see the scene between Tara and Buffy
later on and we find out from the way Buffy is rubbing her wrists, that
she did let Spike put her in those cuffs.

>
> The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
> because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
> with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
> with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.
>

Doesn't it? Buffy is willing to give up her life, which means that if
Buffy is arrested, Dawn will mostly likely have to go into a
fosterhome. And Dawn is just a kid, she's so mature a lot of the time
that I'm willing to forgive her about thinking about herself here

> But back to trusting Spike, Buffy finds that she doesn't after all,
> and it shifts her back into "you're a thing" mode. This time it
> seems like she might believe it, though, since there's some amoral
> behavior precipitating it. It seems somehow appropriate that the issue
> that creates this conflict doesn't have to with pure vampiric evil,
> but with the kind of selfish behavior that some souled humans would
> also engage in to keep a loved one around. The scene is a little
> confusing to the viewer, as I guess it's supposed to be, since one
> now has to try to distinguish the two of them hitting and trying to
> drag each other around as part of an actual fight as opposed to the
> usual foreplay. As I keep saying, this episode is all about confusion,
> for me.

I mostly think of this scene as Buffy who's clearly the stronger and
more powerful of the two, beating Spike up when he's trying to save her
from herself. That and that moment where she basically asks him why he
can't understand why something like this is killing her and he tells
her: "Then explain it to me."

Because 'he' doesn't understand. He's a vampire, he has no moral compas
other than her. And that's the main problem, he's been hanging on her
for a moral compas and unlike last year, she's no longer providing it.
And that shows the problem between them at this point. Buffy can't be
his moral compas, that's unfair on her. But that doesn't keep him from
needing it.

He's doing everything he can to help her, but because of his lack of
moral compas, of a soul, he can't grasp issues that seem self evident
to the rest of us. Like trying to make a tiger understand why eating
people is bad.

Spike is developping morality, but because of his being a vampire he's
handicapped in that regards. Right now he's stuck in the moral
development of a child. Doing something is wrong, because
mother/father/teacher says it is. Which is just a mere step beyond
seeing something as wrong because you get punished for it. (aka the
chip)

And the big question is, will he ever be able to move beyond that...

>
> Last episode I mentioned the parallels between S6-Spike and S3-Faith.
> Then I saw this week's show. Damn, I'm good.
>
> FAITH: Buffy, I'm not gonna *see* anything. I missed the mark last
> night and I'm sorry about the guy. I really am! But it happens!
> Anyway, how many people do you think we've saved by now, thousands?
> And didn't you stop the world from ending? Because in my book, that
> puts you and me in the plus column.
> - "Consequences"
>
> SPIKE: Why are you doing this to yourself?
> BUFFY: A girl is dead because of me.
> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
> - "Dead Things"
>
> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

Actually it's not the magic that's bad. It never was. It's Willow's
lack of respect for magic and it's consequences. Tara in Tabula Rasa
didn't say Willow had to stop using magic, she just wanted Willow to
understand that magic isn't a tool. And that's something that Willow at
this point, still hasn't grasped.

Lore

[One Bit Shy]

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"

> The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it

> inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
> because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
> slowly digest.

No kidding. An awful lot of moods and ideas wrapped into what's actually a
pretty narrow story. But it makes you re-evaluate a lot of stuff, and
there's a strong sense that something's changed - even if it is confusing as
you say.

> Since it's so important and divisive and stuff, the first thing I'd
> like to mention is that, after having been left cold by some of this
> season's action, most of the interactions between Buffy and Spike
> work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
> that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
> whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
> willing to admit out loud to having some affection. And then of course
> that leads her to question herself both immediately and in the
> long-term, cuz, you know, confusion.

It starts out with them seeming almost content. It's like Spike almost has
his dream... and then he kind of blows it by wanting to talk about their
relationship and steadily making Buffy a little more uncomfortable with each
step until asking her if she trusts him leaves the mood wrecked. Still, the
scene almost makes them look like they really do belong together. Buffy
seems to be entertaining the notion - which comes a little clearer later
when we realize that she had started buying into Spike's claim that she had
come back wrong.

> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
> one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
> whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
> with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up. The
> fiancée loved it, though. This particular pairing just seems to have
> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

Honestly, I'm not terribly fond of the depiction of any of the standing sex
scenes from a realism perspective. They seem to routinely sacrifice that
for the sake of other contextual imagery. But leaving the sex aside other
than knowing it's there, I love the scene for the juxtaposition between them
and the dancing Scoobies (Anya is having so much fun) - Buffy's two worlds.
And especially for Spike's word play. It's not that the elements of his
message are really new, but the content and the context bring Spike's
seduction to it's most powerful moment yet.

"You see ... you try to be with them... but you always end up in the dark
... with me. What would they think of you ... if they found out ... all the
things you've done? If they knew ... who you really were?"

And then he makes Buffy look at them while he screws her.

This is when, I believe, Spike's vampire nature - or at least personality -
really steps forward. And in a way rather unusual to BtVS history. This is
the dark seduction of traditional vampire stories - not that far from a
Dracula kind of approach. It is utterly appalling in content - certain to
repel a part of Buffy inside. But it's most appalling element is the way
that it draws her in - has to draw her in - because it feels and sounds so
true at that moment. Vampire seduction. Dark. Evil. Hopelessly
appealing.

If anyone had doubts about how much a vampire Spike still was, this should
be illuminating, for he's pure predator here. But he's preying on
emotions - not blood. Perhaps that's what the chip has ended up doing.

I'd wager that right then Spike thought he totally had Buffy. That he'd
won. Their next scene is the curious dreamy love through the door moment at
his crypt. Spike is so fully attuned to her now that he senses her outside
and simply luxuriates in the feeling for a moment - the door not a barrier
but an entry ripe to be breeched. But when he does open it she's not
there... and it all goes wrong from then on. Poor Spike. Sooo close.

That then leads to my favorite line of the episode.

"Don't think about the evil bloodsucking fiend. Focus on anything but the
evil bloodsucking fiend."

> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
> that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
> them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
> over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> Rasa."]

It probably hasn't been quite so obvious until now, but all along they've
served as parallels to Willow and Buffy - especially Willow. They too have
been dangerously indulging their desires and getting trapped by them.
Willow ended up at Racks. Buffy ended up in Spike's crypt. But the Trio's
childish plans have somehow led them to barely avoid rape by replacing it
with murder. They seem so dopey, but the things they play with can only
destroy. It's kind of a there but for the grace of god go I message for
Willow and Buffy, though it's unlikely that they can see it that way. Buffy
at least is so shook by the possibility of having killed (which you rightly
associate with the S3 story IMO - something Spike wouldn't get) that it does
make her question anew what she's doing with Spike on a core moral level.

> Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't?

I take it as an ongoing obsession since she left, and when he confirmed that
she really won't come back voluntarily, then he simply reverts to the
methods he knows. Yes, of course it would be doomed to the same failure
that the robot was. But it's not like people don't repeat their mistakes.

> The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
> because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
> with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
> with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

You're hardly alone with being annoyed with Dawn, but I disagree with your
conclusion. It has everything to do with Dawn. This would be the ruination
of her life from her point of view - straight to Social Services - the final
end of anything she knows as family. It's not only about her, but she's
bloody well impacted big time.

> As for the end, yeah, it's yet another show that ends with someone
> breaking down crying, but there are some interesting moments, including
> the reversal of the standard kind of ending: "please don't forgive
> me." Well, that's different. I like how it re-casts the earlier
> parts of the show, since it reveals a new coping mechanism and layer of
> denial that colors Buffy's earlier behavior regarding her
> relationship with Peroxide Boy. By telling herself that she's
> physically "wrong," she can sorta explain and sorta excuse how she
> could be involved with Spike, and even like him. From a writing
> perspective, the malfunctioning chip thus ends up being not so much a
> plot device but a character/emotion device.

Denial. Denial. Denial. Buffy's persistence in finding an excuse to
somehow make what she's doing not real or excusable is kind of impressive in
its fashion. One senses that she's running out of them though. This really
stung. Evidently she'd come to almost hope that she really had come back
wrong. Now she has to face her own behavior. Notable in this exchange is
how she now thinks that she's using Spike. (Though I think it remains
rather in the air who's using who how much.)

And poor Tara. There she is coming back with what she assumes is great
news, only to find that it devastates Buffy. There's also a bit of irony
that she first met Buffy thinking that Willow had fallen off the wagon.
Little did she know that it was all about Buffy falling off a different
wagon. So she leaves to escape Willow's addiction, and finds herself being
leaned on by Buffy in her own sort of addiction that Tara is probably even
less able to relate to - and being asked not to forgive.

> The misgivings Jonathan has about Warren's modi operandi are welcome,
> and not resolved by the end of the episode. That'll be important.
> After this episode, I'm going to suggest that maybe it's time for
> the Geek Trio to split up, and argue that it's definitely time to at
> least change things. After an episode like this, we can never return
> to the status quo of the funny dorks who wrestle all the time and argue
> about Bond movies.

Did you notice the switch in internal dynamics at the end? Previously
Andrew and Jonathan were aligned against Warren over killing people.
(Mainly Buffy.) But here we see Andrew is actually taken with the idea of
literally getting away with murder. Jonathan sees that and now knows he's
outnumbered - by killers.

> So...

> One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> the right ways.

> AOQ rating: Good

I'm very curious to see other people's reactions. There are some very
disturbing things in this episode.

But it's one of the most dramatic episodes I know and a big favorite of
mine. It earns an Excellent from me.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

<lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155709157.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

> I mostly think of this scene as Buffy who's clearly the stronger and
> more powerful of the two, beating Spike up when he's trying to save her
> from herself. That and that moment where she basically asks him why he
> can't understand why something like this is killing her and he tells
> her: "Then explain it to me."

One little nit. She doesn't really ask him why he can't understand. She
simply observes that he can't - and goes on to tell him why he can't - with
a few extra punches as punctuation. I think Buffy has always understood
this pretty clearly, even if she likes to imagine otherwise once in a while.
I think it's an essential component to her guilt over the affair.

> Because 'he' doesn't understand. He's a vampire, he has no moral compas
> other than her. And that's the main problem, he's been hanging on her
> for a moral compas and unlike last year, she's no longer providing it.
> And that shows the problem between them at this point. Buffy can't be
> his moral compas, that's unfair on her. But that doesn't keep him from
> needing it.

Excellent point. I wish I had written that. (Next time I probably will.
<g>)

OBS

[Rowan Hawthorn]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner
>

> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
> one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
> whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
> with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up. The
> fiancée loved it, though. This particular pairing just seems to have
> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

No! (I think that just qualified as the understatement of the year...)

> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

<snicker> There'll be voodoo dolls with your name on'em all over usenet.

--
Rowan Hawthorn

"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"

[Ian Galbraith]

On 15 Aug 2006 21:47:01 -0700, Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:

> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.

> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner

> The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
> inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
> because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
> slowly digest.

Its amongst the deepest episodes the show has done IMHO. Outstanding
writing from DeKnight that stamped him as one of ME's best writers.

[snip]

> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
> one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
> whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
> with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up. The
> fiancée loved it, though. This particular pairing just seems to have
> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

I find it..........desperately sad I guess, just like the alley scene in
DMP, but thats a 'good' thing, its Buffy coming close to the bottom.

> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
> that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
> them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
> over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> Rasa."] Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't? Otherwise, though, the scene plays out pretty well, although
> I obviously can't say I enjoyed watching it. Totally called her
> death about a minute before it happened.

This is the moment where they cross the line from pretend evil to real
evil, the moment where reality intrudes on their fantasy.

[snip]

> The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
> because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
> with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
> with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

But thats a pretty typical teen reaction.

> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

Duh! :-).

[snip]

> One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> the right ways.

> AOQ rating: Good

Excellent for me, as I said above it's got a lot of depth in the themes
and character interactions and it's one of the hardest hitting episodes
dramatically. Plus it was a well done turning point in the direction of
the Trio.

[snip]

--
You can't stop the signal

[ruken]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:

But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

For the longest time I thought it was power. But then, I think the
writers changed their mind...I never did figure out what the issue was.

PS I can't believe that Giles was going to move back to England and
leave Tara and Willow in charge of Dawn. As it is, Dawn should not be
with Buffy right now. Since she is now an orphan (and a normal
teenager) she should be with a foster family. I can understand Buffy
being irresponsible (given her regression) enough not to think about
what's best for the annoying one v2, but that even Giles would just
leave without a care for what happened to Dawn is, well, weird.

[ruken]

LOL, I think for a lot of Buffy (the character) fans is not spuffy but
how the writers felt that Buffy's character had to literally be dragged
through hell to make it happen.

[lili...@gmail.com]

>
> This is when, I believe, Spike's vampire nature - or at least personality -
> really steps forward. And in a way rather unusual to BtVS history. This is
> the dark seduction of traditional vampire stories - not that far from a
> Dracula kind of approach. It is utterly appalling in content - certain to
> repel a part of Buffy inside. But it's most appalling element is the way
> that it draws her in - has to draw her in - because it feels and sounds so
> true at that moment. Vampire seduction. Dark. Evil. Hopelessly
> appealing.
>
> If anyone had doubts about how much a vampire Spike still was, this should
> be illuminating, for he's pure predator here. But he's preying on
> emotions - not blood. Perhaps that's what the chip has ended up doing.
>

I actually have to disagree on that one. It's basically conditioning
that Buffy put on Spike, turning him into her sexbot in a way, like
Warren tried to do to Katrina. She tries to limit him to just something
she can use. And it's one of the things most wrong about Buffy. She
forces Spike outside of the group, she refuses to let him into the
light, so he takes all she's willing to give him, the dark and runs
with it in the hope to find something that she'll like enough to stay.

This isn't what Spike wants from her, from what we saw before, Spike
would be happiest to just be a part of her life, to watch tv with her
and Dawn, to fight alongside her, have a nice round of sex, then go for
a drink with the mates, her at his side, have another fight, more sex.
That'd be Spike's dream.
But she won't let him have that. She's in controll at all points, she's
conditioned him that the only way she'll let him get near is if he's
dark and dangerous. She doesn't want the nice guy who'll listen to her.
In fact, she doesn't want to talk at all. She wants the dangerous
vampire because she wants death and she feels that being close to Spike
will give that to her. And it's slowly destroying Spike bit by bit.

I guess one of the most interesting things about Buffy to me is that
she's a total uber dom. She's on top at all points, she's the one doing
the beating, doing the using and it's interesting that it's the male
char who's the girl of the relationship. The one who wants to talk
about what they have, who wants the emotions, while Buffy as the
stereotypical male just wants the act, the little death that he can
give her.

And no I don't think all males just want sex, just saying that she's
written as the typical, stereotypical actually, male, where as the
story goes, Spike is playing the equivalent of the film noir femme
fatale.

It's really a very interesting twist on gender expectations.

Lore

[Elisi]

Holidays with broadband are great! Just sayin'! :)

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:

> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 13: "Dead Things"

> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner
>
> The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
> inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
> because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
> slowly digest.

Oh yes. If I had a Top 5 list of Buffy episodes, DT would be on it. I
know a lot of people (around here esp) disliked what they did with
Buffy this season. I love it - she breaks so utterly beautifully.
Whether she ever gets put back together is of course another issue...

> Since it's so important and divisive and stuff, the first thing I'd
> like to mention is that, after having been left cold by some of this
> season's action, most of the interactions between Buffy and Spike
> work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
> that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
> whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
> willing to admit out loud to having some affection. And then of course
> that leads her to question herself both immediately and in the
> long-term, cuz, you know, confusion.
>
> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been

> able to buy it as a fantasy. This particular pairing just seems to have

> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

I guess I *am* a squealing fangirl in some measure, but that's not why
I like the pairing. It's the layers and layers and layers to their
interactions that just never fail to fascinated and delight. Who's in
control? Who's seducing whom? What does Spike want from Buffy and she
from him? What about trust?

One thing about the balcony scene - it's a victory for Spike, but I'm
not sure it was the victory he was looking for. He started out trying
to 'be better', to become 'good enough' for her. She gave him something
to strive toward. And instead of that ("I know I'm a monster. But you
treat me like a man, and that's..."), she's become more like him. I
donøt think that's what he wanted. But he'll take what he can get,
because he knows that he got lucky. Also notice that he's never bitten
her. It would be so very easy for him to turn her, because she
obviously *does* trust him in some measure (did you see how she rubbed
her wrists when talking with Tara? She totally wore those handcuffs!),
and keep her with him forever. But he doesn't.

> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
> that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
> them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
> over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> Rasa."] Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't?

Oh but that's the interesting thing - he'll settle for an illusion, if
he can't have the real thing. A bit like Spike and the BuffyBot...
except creepier. Warren has turned a very, very dark corner. And we saw
how disgusted Spike was with the Bot after Buffy died... it would seem
that Warren has become less human, and Spike more.

> That flows into one of the
> better dream sequences in awhile, which follows the same patterns and
> of course nicely incorporates "do you trust me?" and the handcuffs
> from earlier. I tend to like this stuff.

This is also the point where the show gets really fascinating. Because
Warren/Katrina are a mirror of Buffy/Spike. Except it's not clear-cut.
It would seem that Spike parallels Warren - the 'bad guy' taking
advantage of the girl. But later in Buffy's dream, we see that she sees
herself as the abuser, and Spike as her victim. "Do you trust me?" It's
all shades of grey.

> But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

But don't you know that the world revolves around teenagers? Sorry -
but Dawn has a point, even if it's badly put across: Buffy wants to
leave. 'Doing the right thing', turning herself in, is just another way
of giving up.

Well spotted! But there's more to it than that. Buffy in DT is
terrified (I think) of turning into Faith. She feels disconnected
enough, but behaving like Faith would be awful. From Katrina's 'death'
and until the beating up of Spike, the whole sequence is like a fast
forward of Faith/Buffy from 'Bad Girls' and up til (and including) 'Who
Are You': The accidental killing, the dumping of the body in the river,
the police finding it, the confrontation that you've already quoted,
and finally - the beating. You see Buffy isn't beating up Spike - she's
beating up herself. She looks at Spike, and she sees who she's becoming
and she loses it. A lot of people hated Buffy for what she did to
Spike. But my heart bleeds for her, because it's not about him at all.
Here's some quotes:

BUFFY: You don't ... have a soul! There is nothing good or clean in
you. You are dead inside! You can't feel anything real! I could never
... be your girl!
'Dead Things'

FAITH: (screaming at herself) You're nothing! Disgusting! Murderous
bitch! You're nothing! You're disgusting!
'Who Are You'

It's been mentioned before that we're seeing internal conflicts this
season. This would be a prime example. Buffy is (literally) fighting
her inner demons.

And finally about Spike's "You always hurt the one you love", then I
don't think he takes the beating as a sign of love particularly, but as
a sign that Buffy 'cares'. From 'Lovers Walk':

Spike: She wouldn't even kill me. [...] She just left. She didn't even
care enough to cut off my head or set me on fire. (sniffs) I mean, is
that too much to ask? You know? Some little sign that she cared?

Incidentally those words are also the title of a song:

You always hurt the one you love
The one you shouldn't hurt at all
You always take the sweetest rose
And crush it till the petals fall
You always break the kindest heart
With a hasty word you can't recall
So If I broke your heart last night
It's because I love you most of all

I wouldn't mention it, except it plays on the radio in 'Rm w/a vu' as
Dennis' mother walls him in... people do terrible things to those they
care about.

> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

Magic is bad _for Willow_. I think that's the only message that can be
inferred. :)

> As for the end, yeah, it's yet another show that ends with someone
> breaking down crying, but there are some interesting moments, including
> the reversal of the standard kind of ending: "please don't forgive
> me." Well, that's different. I like how it re-casts the earlier
> parts of the show, since it reveals a new coping mechanism and layer of
> denial that colors Buffy's earlier behavior regarding her
> relationship with Peroxide Boy. By telling herself that she's
> physically "wrong," she can sorta explain and sorta excuse how she
> could be involved with Spike, and even like him. From a writing
> perspective, the malfunctioning chip thus ends up being not so much a
> plot device but a character/emotion device.

Very well put. And we see that Buffy blames herself for the
relationship. Which is interesting...

> I was going to compliment Wanker on the interesting and atypical music
> that plays during Buffy's stroll through the cemetery. Then it
> turns out it's just a Bush song. That'd explain it. As per usual
> with that band, sounded much better before the guy started singing.

You can't mean that! The lyrics are very important:

when we die
we go into the arms of those who remember us

we are home now
out of our heads
out of our minds
out of this world
out of this time

are you drowning or waving?
I just want you to save me
should we try to get along?
just try to get along

so we move
we change by the speed of the choices that we make
and the barriers are all self-made
that's so retrograde

> The misgivings Jonathan has about Warren's modi operandi are welcome,
> and not resolved by the end of the episode. That'll be important.
> After this episode, I'm going to suggest that maybe it's time for
> the Geek Trio to split up, and argue that it's definitely time to at
> least change things. After an episode like this, we can never return
> to the status quo of the funny dorks who wrestle all the time and argue
> about Bond movies.

*nods*

> AOQ rating: Good

Definitely an excellent for me. :) Oh and I have (at home) a clip of
the under-the-rug scene that we never saw from the beginning of the
episode... I though maybe Mrs Quality might be interested? Complete
with biting...

[Apteryx]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner

Hey! It's only been a day! Ordinarily I could cope with reviews as fast
as you can write them, but I'd got used to there being at least two
days between reviews. After watching DP, I popped Das Rheingold into
the player, intending to alternate BtVS episodes with Ring Cycle
operas. Now Rheingold's barely more than 2 hours, a piece of cake,
hardly even counts as Wagnerian. But once I get into the proper RC
operas, its going to be hard to manage one of them plus an episode of
BtVS every evening :)

> Since it's so important and divisive and stuff, the first thing I'd
> like to mention is that, after having been left cold by some of this
> season's action, most of the interactions between Buffy and Spike
> work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
> that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
> whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
> willing to admit out loud to having some affection. And then of course
> that leads her to question herself both immediately and in the
> long-term, cuz, you know, confusion.
>
> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy.

Well yeah, but fantasy's OK. The whole thing is fantasy. You can tell
by the vampires and stuff. But arguably it makes sense anyway because
its the game Buffy wants to play right now. The chance of discovery is
part of the excitment.

> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
> that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
> them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
> over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> Rasa."] Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't?

Yep. I guess he's... no. Maybe it's because... um. Well I guess you
could always take it as the triumph of hope over experience.

> Otherwise, though, the scene plays out pretty well, although
> I obviously can't say I enjoyed watching it. Totally called her
> death about a minute before it happened.

It get even more predictable when you are rewatching it. In the sense
that this is the episode that they made the Nerd Trio embrace the Dark
Side. And even though in the past they have done things that ought to
have killed people (like freezing the museum guard), they got away with
it. But in a series with female power figures, they chose the most
obvious and formulaic means of showing them choose evil, killing a
woman while trying to make her their sex slave.

> >From there comes the attempt to frame Buffy for the murder, coming
> after the moody montage. It's one of those dizzying scenes that
> works well if we don't do it too often, with time on the blink and
> such, and Buffy never sure that she's not attacking Spike or
> "Katrina" instead of the monsters.

Doesn't work for me. Partly because it makes it difficult for me to
fast forward to the end of the action sequence. But mainly because it
doesn't seem to make sense. How could the trio control the ending with
all that confusion. And with all that confusion, why was Buffy so sure
that her single backhander of "Katrina" had killed her. It doesn't come
close to killing Jonathon, disguised as Katrina. I'm thinking that by
now Buffy should know what is and isn't a killing blow. It must be
particularly annoying for those who believe in Slayer Instincts
(although those instincts make a triumphant return when Buffy "knows"
Warren must have done it when she learns the dead girls identity).

> That flows into one of the
> better dream sequences in awhile, which follows the same patterns and
> of course nicely incorporates "do you trust me?" and the handcuffs
> from earlier. I tend to like this stuff.

Good dream.

> The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
> because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
> with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
> with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

One of the DVD extras shows MT very upset at all the whining they made
Dawn do. It's much easier to believe her pain than Dawn's After all,
she was much closer to all that whining than we are. Won't anyone think
of the actresses?

>
> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

I wish! If "Magic is bad" had been the message of Wrecked (with some
sort of promise not to do it again) it would be one of my favourite
epsidodes. But unfortunately it's only that magic is addictive, and
Willow is addicted. Tara isn't addicted, because she's aware of the
risk, and careful, respectful of the power involved. It's a pity, but
what can you do? - the show's already written and screened.

> The misgivings Jonathan has about Warren's modi operandi are welcome,
> and not resolved by the end of the episode. That'll be important.
> After this episode, I'm going to suggest that maybe it's time for
> the Geek Trio to split up, and argue that it's definitely time to at
> least change things. After an episode like this, we can never return
> to the status quo of the funny dorks who wrestle all the time and argue
> about Bond movies.

No, and that's a shame this early in the season. Because God knows that
this season could always use some comic relief.

>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> the right ways.
>
> AOQ rating: Good

Kinda agree with the summary, but I like it much less than you. It is
hard to rate because it is such a mix of good stuff and utter dreck. My
rating varies from a low Decent to a low Weak. When its a low Weak, it
features in my Bottom 10. Which is a bit unfair because it is important
and a lot of it is well done (at least I think it's unfair now, but
next time I watch it I may think it's perfectly fair, depending on much
the dreck gets to me). The worst scenes are near the end - the
pumelling of Spike and the scene with Tara. They are meant to show us
that Buffy is unhappy about her feelings for Spike (which we would know
already, if we'd been watching) but having shown us, they go on and on
and on and on and on - wallowing in it. They belong in a soap opera,
not BtVS. They always leave me feeling bad about the epsisode when it
ends, and I have to remember to allow some time before rating it
afterward, to let the episode's better qualities come back to mind.
Currently its a low Decent, my 124th favourite BtVS episode, 18th best
in season 6.

Apteryx

[Rincewind]

<lili...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I mostly think of this scene as Buffy who's clearly the stronger and
> more powerful of the two, beating Spike up when he's trying to save her
> from herself. That and that moment where she basically asks him why he
> can't understand why something like this is killing her and he tells
> her: "Then explain it to me."
>
> Because 'he' doesn't understand. He's a vampire, he has no moral compas
> other than her. And that's the main problem, he's been hanging on her
> for a moral compas and unlike last year, she's no longer providing it.
> And that shows the problem between them at this point. Buffy can't be
> his moral compas, that's unfair on her. But that doesn't keep him from
> needing it.
>
> He's doing everything he can to help her, but because of his lack of
> moral compas, of a soul, he can't grasp issues that seem self evident
> to the rest of us.

I mostly agree with you except for that last sentence.
At this point this particular issue is NOT self evident to me and the
parallel that the writers are trying to make with S3 Faith is just wrong for
lots of reasons.
Maybe my moral compass is as defective as Spike's, but I firmly believe that
turning herself in would have been very wrong.
If she had called the Council of Watchers and asked to be judged by them I
would have approved, but a normal court cannot judge a slayer, they lack the
requisite knowledge of of the existence of demons and vapires and
supernatural threats, they cannot properly evaluate the mitigating
circumstances. So she would not be subjected to a fair trial.

But the most important thing is: she has responsibilities. She has to save
the world. Who will protect innocent people from vapires and demons while
she is in jail? The Council of Watchers would take this into consideration,
a normal court wouldn't.

So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.
But the writer chose to hide this aspect of the problem by putting exactly
the wrong words in Spike's mouth:

SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.

misleading the viewer into a wrong parallel with S3 Faith, when really what
Spike should have said is:

And how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them?

Rincewind.

--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:
BUFFY: Willow! Oh my god, is that...?
WILLOW: No! No, don't worry Buffy, it's not sage. It's just regular crack.

[mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges]

> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it

the three nerds have a lot in common with willow and xander
they went to school together
they all got abused by the same bullies in that hell dimension called high school
they all took similar escapes

previously and subsequently we are shown all five understand each other
a lot better than they would be comfortable admitting

willow and xander met buffy and found love and grew up
the nerd trio stagnated (xander left the basement they didnt)
and curdled and soured like old milk

its unfortunate that warrens first love was someone as jealous as katrina
but he never got over her instead became obsessed with her
and its twisted him into a evil thing

> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as

giles is gone to restart his life in england
(tony heads contract was up and he wanted to go back home)
you might as well as ask when is larry coming back

> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

like most addictions the problem isnt the substance but a persons control
tara can control herself but willow cant
let willow start again and she can again reduce people to sock puppets
performing and transforming for her amusement
(luckily for her she was able to restore the bronze
but warren was unable to restore katrina)

> Jonathan's designated role appears to be disguising himself as things
> and getting beaten up.

jonathon is the one who can do glamours

Oh yeah
It's been ten years, half my life
Just getting ready but then it was time
Warpage in the figures, radios appear
Midnight was the barrier, back in 1963

Each night, the covers were unfolded
Each night, It's Susy's turn to ride
While Charles, the one they call her brother
Covers on his eyes, murmurs in the background
It will be time...

Oh yeah
Susan and her brother, Charles the grinning boy
Put me in the backseat, and they took me for a ride
Yeah, the radio was on, can't you dig the locomotion
Kingdoms of the radio, 45 RPM
Too much revolution then...

Each night,
Each night, It's Susy's turn to ride
While Charles, the one they call her brother
Covers on his eyes, murmurs in the background
It will be time...

It's past midnight said Charles the grinning boy
And looking at me greedily, said it's 1964

In times square now, the people do the polka
Dominance....Submission...radios appear
New Year's eve, it was the final barrier
Dominance....Submission...radios appear
We took you up and put you in the back seat
Dominance....Submission...radios appear
From year to year we looked out for the venture
Dominance....Submission...radios appear
Dominance....Submission (repeat ad nauseam)

arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him

[jil...@hotmail.com]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.

> Last episode I mentioned the parallels between S6-Spike and S3-Faith.
> Then I saw this week's show. Damn, I'm good.
>
> FAITH: Buffy, I'm not gonna *see* anything. I missed the mark last
> night and I'm sorry about the guy. I really am! But it happens!
> Anyway, how many people do you think we've saved by now, thousands?
> And didn't you stop the world from ending? Because in my book, that
> puts you and me in the plus column.
> - "Consequences"
>
> SPIKE: Why are you doing this to yourself?
> BUFFY: A girl is dead because of me.
> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
> - "Dead Things"

You're good, son. But I think I'm better. There's something that, to
me, you lost.

Buffy, in attacking and screaming at Spike like that, has become Faith
when wearing Buffy's body, attacking herself. She isn't capable of
laying it on him, that's not Buffy's character. Remember?

Faith/Bbody grabs Buffy/Fbody and throws her down, then sits on top of
her
and starts punching her. "You're nothing." Punch. Punch.
"Disgusting." Punch. Punch. Grabs Buffy/Fbody's hair with both hand
and bangs her head. "Murderous bitch. You're nothing. You're
disgusting." Faith/Bbody is crying.

For her, being with Spike and abusing him is a sign of what's so
terribly wrong with herself. Buffy is not the type to use a person...
and that's why she can't bear this. Yes, she says "You don't ... have

a soul! There is nothing good or clean in you. You are dead inside! You

can't feel anything real! I could never ... be your girl!" But except
for the soul part, that's how she feels about herself. Dead inside,
can't feel anything real.

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner
>
> The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
> inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
> because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
> slowly digest.

DT is still being discussed in fandom and there are essays aplenty that
delve into the various metaphors and parallels being thrown at us. The
obvious being Spike/Faith, Spike/Katrina, and Buffy/Warren and are the
most prevailant essay topics. After having read various ones on this
episode, I tend to look at it quite a bit differently than I used to
and that is actually a good thing. I loved it before but you're right,
it's one that seems to require a lot of pondering and it will keep you
thinking of new things every time you watch it. I adore episodes like
that.

>
> Since it's so important and divisive and stuff, the first thing I'd
> like to mention is that, after having been left cold by some of this
> season's action, most of the interactions between Buffy and Spike
> work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
> that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
> whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
> willing to admit out loud to having some affection. And then of course
> that leads her to question herself both immediately and in the
> long-term, cuz, you know, confusion.
>
> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
> one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
> whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
> with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up. The
> fiancée loved it, though. This particular pairing just seems to have
> this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> fangirls, while leaving others untouched.

Ahhh, the power of the Spuffy relationship. It's like none other in the
Buffyverse. It's dark, desperate, sexy, uninhibited, and everything
naughty. But the one thing it is that seems to tug at my heartstrings
is that it's overwhelmingly sad. I just feel for those two characters
struggling to define themselves while being just so, so lost. It's like
I want them to pick each other up and for things to get better but how
can that really happen? Buffy is hanging on by a thread and DT proves
that to all of the viewers. The only one that she can turn to for help
is a soulless vampire with a moral compass equal to that of a prize at
the bottom of a cracker jack box. Spike is trying to be what Buffy
wants but now he doesn't even know what that is anymore, and he's doing
this while battling his own, literal, demon. Is it even enough that he
is trying because he doesn't have a soul? Buffy needs the light and
Spike's stuck in the dark, it's all just heartbreaking.

>
> Paired with this story of self-chosen abusive relationships is the Geek
> Trio and their mind-control ray. Havin a sex slave is a common fantasy
> among those types, but it becomes a lot creepier when brought into
> reality. It's a telling moment when Jonathan and Andrew double-take
> on "this is rape," like it never occurred to them to think of it
> that way. They're not cut out to be supervillains, but have it in
> them to be an example of people who should never be given any power
> over anyone. [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> Rasa."] Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't? Otherwise, though, the scene plays out pretty well, although
> I obviously can't say I enjoyed watching it. Totally called her
> death about a minute before it happened.

Did you notice how quickly Warren went from recognizing her as still
Katrina to a thing once she died? I didn't rewatch this one yet but I
believe he quickly starting referring to the body as "it". It's
amazingly creepy.

>From there comes the attempt to frame Buffy for the murder, coming
> after the moody montage. It's one of those dizzying scenes that
> works well if we don't do it too often, with time on the blink and
> such, and Buffy never sure that she's not attacking Spike or
> "Katrina" instead of the monsters. That flows into one of the
> better dream sequences in awhile, which follows the same patterns and
> of course nicely incorporates "do you trust me?" and the handcuffs
> from earlier. I tend to like this stuff.

That dream sequence is definitely one of those things to ponder about.
In Buffy's mind, Katrina is her victim, Spike is her victim and she is
asking them, "Do you trust me?" - That is one pretty deep, dark
dream... what exactly it means is still in discussion but others here
have posted some great insight on it.

>
> The one part that falls apart for me is the Buffy/Dawn story, mostly
> because the latter is incredibly annoying. Things start out okay, what
> with Buffy coming home out of feeling that she "should" hand out
> with her sister, only to find that she's looking more like a parent
> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

I felt bad for Dawn here. No, it isn't about her but think what Dawn
has been through in the last year and I have to feel sorry for her. She
just got Buffy back, and not only is Buffy never around but now she is
telling Dawn that she is going to go away for good, again. Poor kid.

>
> But back to trusting Spike, Buffy finds that she doesn't after all,
> and it shifts her back into "you're a thing" mode. This time it
> seems like she might believe it, though, since there's some amoral
> behavior precipitating it. It seems somehow appropriate that the issue
> that creates this conflict doesn't have to with pure vampiric evil,
> but with the kind of selfish behavior that some souled humans would
> also engage in to keep a loved one around. The scene is a little
> confusing to the viewer, as I guess it's supposed to be, since one
> now has to try to distinguish the two of them hitting and trying to
> drag each other around as part of an actual fight as opposed to the
> usual foreplay. As I keep saying, this episode is all about confusion,
> for me.

Buffy pummeling Spike's face in while screaming that he's "Disgusting"
etc... is a crucial moment for Buffy. Everything she feels about
herself is pouring out of her and Spike's the one taking it. Spike
didn't fight back here, he just let her do it and took the beating so
she could get it out. Elisi has already pointed out the comparisons
with "Who Are You" so I don't need to get into that but I agree with
her analysis.

>
> Last episode I mentioned the parallels between S6-Spike and S3-Faith.
> Then I saw this week's show. Damn, I'm good.
>
> FAITH: Buffy, I'm not gonna *see* anything. I missed the mark last
> night and I'm sorry about the guy. I really am! But it happens!
> Anyway, how many people do you think we've saved by now, thousands?
> And didn't you stop the world from ending? Because in my book, that
> puts you and me in the plus column.
> - "Consequences"
>
> SPIKE: Why are you doing this to yourself?
> BUFFY: A girl is dead because of me.
> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
> - "Dead Things"
>
> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

It is, isn't it.

>
> As for the end, yeah, it's yet another show that ends with someone
> breaking down crying, but there are some interesting moments, including
> the reversal of the standard kind of ending: "please don't forgive
> me." Well, that's different. I like how it re-casts the earlier
> parts of the show, since it reveals a new coping mechanism and layer of
> denial that colors Buffy's earlier behavior regarding her
> relationship with Peroxide Boy. By telling herself that she's
> physically "wrong," she can sorta explain and sorta excuse how she
> could be involved with Spike, and even like him. From a writing
> perspective, the malfunctioning chip thus ends up being not so much a
> plot device but a character/emotion device.

Buffy now knows that it's all on her. She has no excuses for her
actions and what she is feeling for Spike, so what will she do now? How
will she handle it? How will Spike?

<snip>

> One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> the right ways.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
>

This one gets an excellent from me. It's definitely in my top 10 of the
series.

[lili...@gmail.com]

> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.
> But the writer chose to hide this aspect of the problem by putting exactly
> the wrong words in Spike's mouth:
>
> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
>
> misleading the viewer into a wrong parallel with S3 Faith, when really what
> Spike should have said is:
>
> And how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them?
>
>
> Rincewind.
>
>

But see, no matter how much those words might have fit the situation
better, the problem is that Spike couldn't be the one to say those
words.

Spike, much as I love him, has this huge lack of concern over innocent
people. And his first thought wouldn't be about the innocent people
that'd die while Buffy is gone. He cares about Buffy, and through her,
about her friends. So at most he might mention something about Dawn or
Buffy's friends getting hurt while she's in jail. But it wouldn't enter
his mind that other people would be in danger as well.

Lore

[burt...@hotmail.com]

Apteryx wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> >

> > One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> > the right ways.
> >
> > AOQ rating: Good
>
> Kinda agree with the summary, but I like it much less than you. It is
> hard to rate because it is such a mix of good stuff and utter dreck. My
> rating varies from a low Decent to a low Weak. When its a low Weak, it
> features in my Bottom 10. Which is a bit unfair because it is important
> and a lot of it is well done (at least I think it's unfair now, but
> next time I watch it I may think it's perfectly fair, depending on much
> the dreck gets to me). The worst scenes are near the end - the
> pumelling of Spike and the scene with Tara. They are meant to show us
> that Buffy is unhappy about her feelings for Spike (which we would know
> already, if we'd been watching) but having shown us, they go on and on
> and on and on and on - wallowing in it. They belong in a soap opera,
> not BtVS.

Yeah, I agree. "Dead Things" actually had a pretty good plot - but
that's because they lifted it body, soul, and some of Spike's lines,
from "Consequences," which did almost this exact same story and (IMO)
did it much, much better.

Oh, and we again have Buffy expressing amusement when Spike jokes about
killing people. "I ate a decorator once." Ah, those wacky serial
killers, they're just so darned amusing!

[Rincewind]

<lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155739389....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

But wasn't one of the points of your post that Spike is learning morality
from Buffy, in a childish this-is-wrong-because-she-says-so way? By now he
has certainly learned how important saving innocent people is FOR HER. Since
his goal is to convince Buffy it doesn't matter if he really believes it or
not: he is not stupid, he must know that this is an argument that can
penetrate Buffy's stubbornness.
And of course he could also have played the Dawn card, like you suggested.

For me the "One dead girl doesn't tip the scale." approach is not more
characteristic of Spike than a subtler attempt to manipulate her by
appealing to HER sense of duty (like he did, for instance, in Becoming: "He's
got your Watcher. Right now he's probably torturing him.").

Rincewind.

--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:

WILLOW: Faith's like this cleavage-y slut-bomb walking around "Ooh, check me
out, I'm wicked-cool, I'm five-by-five."
TARA: Damn! Why can't I ever meet any girls like that?

[vague disclaimer]

In article <1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:

> Not everything
> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't?

And then she dumped him.

> squealing
> fangirls

That's "tidal wave of squeeing drivel".

Someone on the DP thread described the dumpster fuck as hot. Someone who
has never been in an alley behind a fast food joint (mind you, in
Sunnydale at least the vamps might keep the rats down).

> sex scene at the Bronze

And here he again does all he can to keep her away from her friends.
Nope. Nothing predatory there. He's just a horny little devil.
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls

[Stephen Tempest]

"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> writes:

>So she leaves to escape Willow's addiction, and finds herself being
>leaned on by Buffy in her own sort of addiction that Tara is probably even
>less able to relate to - and being asked not to forgive.

Buffy is sexually attracted to a soulless vampire. Her upbringing and
education tell her that's unnatural and abhorrent. She's terrified
her friends will hate her if they find out. She thinks there's
something badly wrong with her - she tries to stay away from Spike,
but every time she ends up being drawn back to his bed.

Tara is a lesbian.

Starting to see where Tara might be able to relate to Buffy's
experiences? In fact, her very first question is "Do you love him?",
which definitely suggests that she's seeing this through the filter of
her own experience.

Stephen

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Apteryx wrote:
> > Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> > >
> > > One-sentence summary: When it's "on," it's disturbing in all
> > > the right ways.
> > >
> > > AOQ rating: Good
> >
> > Kinda agree with the summary, but I like it much less than you. It is
> > hard to rate because it is such a mix of good stuff and utter dreck. My
> > rating varies from a low Decent to a low Weak. When its a low Weak, it
> > features in my Bottom 10. Which is a bit unfair because it is important
> > and a lot of it is well done (at least I think it's unfair now, but
> > next time I watch it I may think it's perfectly fair, depending on much
> > the dreck gets to me). The worst scenes are near the end - the
> > pumelling of Spike and the scene with Tara. They are meant to show us
> > that Buffy is unhappy about her feelings for Spike (which we would know
> > already, if we'd been watching) but having shown us, they go on and on
> > and on and on and on - wallowing in it. They belong in a soap opera,
> > not BtVS.
>
> Yeah, I agree. "Dead Things" actually had a pretty good plot - but
> that's because they lifted it body, soul, and some of Spike's lines,
> from "Consequences," which did almost this exact same story and (IMO)
> did it much, much better.

There is a big difference between mirroring a scene in an earlier
episode and copying verbatim. They did not copy the scene. How is it
exact, do tell.

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

I agree that Spike was being a bit predatorial, but how exactly did he
keep her from her friends? She did a pretty good job of making herself
distant on her own, he just had a habit of showing up when she was
already away from them.

[lili...@gmail.com]

Actually no, he doesn't keep her away from her friends. She keeps
herself away from her friends. There's a huge difference between
joining her when she seperates herself from her friends, and seperating
her from her friends. He doesn't ask her to join him up on the
balcony, she goes there all on her own, of her own free choice, without
any suggestion from him.

Should he have told her to go downstairs and have fun with her friends,
probably. But remember, he looks to her for moral guidance. Not the
other way around.

Lore

[Elisi]

Oh and in the original script, Tara says something like "Honey, I'm a
fag." Which is such a completely un-Tara-esque line that I'm glad they
cut it, but it was certainly the intention that Tara would be able to
relate directly.

[burt...@hotmail.com]

I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
doesn't buy it....

Sound familiar? The big difference is that in "Consequences," Buffy
(and Faith) did accidentally kill a human being, and Buffy had to live
with that, while in "Dead Things," she got an easy out when she
discovered that she hadn't actually killed Katrina after all.

[Stephen Tempest]

lili...@gmail.com writes:

>It's kinda like Faith, her 'tough girl' act turns some people into
>squealing fanboys, while leaving the rest of us cold. (sorrry, but you
>really asked for that one by putting it like that)

Faith fanboys don't squeal. We drool instead.

Stephen

[Elisi]

burt...@hotmail.com wrote:

> I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
> almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
> innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
> that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
> doesn't buy it....
>
> Sound familiar? The big difference is that in "Consequences," Buffy
> (and Faith) did accidentally kill a human being, and Buffy had to live
> with that, while in "Dead Things," she got an easy out when she
> discovered that she hadn't actually killed Katrina after all.

Of course it's familiar - that's why it's so terrifying for Buffy. It's
'Ted' all over again, but this time she's afraid she's turning into
Faith. From 'Bad Girls':

Faith: (looks at Buffy) There's nothing to talk about. I was doing my
job.
Buffy: Being a Slayer is not the same as being a killer.

This was explored in-dpeth in S5, and there Buffy found a way out. But
going back to 'Intervention':

BUFFY: Training. Slaying. All of it. It's just ... I mean ... I can
beat up the demons until the cows come home. And then I can beat up the
cows ... but I'm not sure I like what it's doing to me.
GILES: But you've mastered so much. I mean, your strength and
resilience alone-
BUFFY: Yeah. Strength, resilience ... those are all words for hardness.
(pause) I'm starting to feel like ... being the Slayer is turning me
into stone.
[...]
BUFFY: I don't know. To slay, to kill ... i-it means being hard on the
inside. Maybe being the perfect Slayer means being too hard to love at
all. I already feel like I can hardly say the words.

And in S6 this is magnified hugely. She looks at herself and she sees
Faith, sees Spike. It's devastating. As Giles said back in
'Consequences':

Giles: The Slayer is on the front line of a nightly war. Now, it's,
it's tragic, but accidents have happened.
Buffy: W-what do you do?
Giles: Well, the Council investigates, um, metes out punishment if
punishment is due. But I... I have no plans to involve them. I mean,
it's the last thing Faith needs at the moment. She's unstable, Buffy. I
mean, she's utterly unable to accept responsibility.

So Buffy goes off to do what she did in 'Ted'. She'll take
responsibility, because if she doesn't, what has she become? It's
heartbreaking, but in an utterly different way from S3.

[One Bit Shy]

"Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5vDEg.21711$ZJ6....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...

Whether Buffy really should turn herself in is a complex logical issue, but
this isn't being worked out on an intellectual plane. It doesn't matter if
the comparison to S3 is precise. Because of Buffy's experience with Faith,
any accidental killing is going to raise screaming red flags for her, and
anything even hinting at expediency in response will look like the path to
total corruption to her. She was already in that mode before Spike uttered
a word - it's why she's going to the police. Spike's words, aside from
possibly reminding the audience of the parallel, serve mainly to get Buffy
to focus on the moral bankruptcy of Spike himself and what she's doing with
him.

Also, changing Spike's words as you suggest wouldn't make a difference.
It's still the same argument, and the point to Buffy isn't totting up
numbers to see what comes out ahead, but rather the corruption of her own
soul to take the expedient route with innocent life.

This moment is, among other things, part of Buffy's recovery - though I
wouldn't count on it being terribly visible for a while. She re-affirms a
core principal she has stood for repeatedly across the years - that she
won't give into expediency when it comes to people's lives. She's fought
Giles on this. She's fought Wesley on this. She's fought Faith on this.
You can argue forever about whether she's right, but it is who she is. And
here she reclaimed that part of her. Bit by bit she's finding again what
she cares about.

OBS

[burt...@hotmail.com]

Elisi wrote:
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
> > almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
> > innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
> > that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
> > doesn't buy it....
> >
> > Sound familiar? The big difference is that in "Consequences," Buffy
> > (and Faith) did accidentally kill a human being, and Buffy had to live
> > with that, while in "Dead Things," she got an easy out when she
> > discovered that she hadn't actually killed Katrina after all.
>
> Of course it's familiar - that's why it's so terrifying for Buffy. It's
> 'Ted' all over again, but this time she's afraid she's turning into
> Faith.

I understand that Buffy is in a different emotional place in this
episode than she was in "Consequences." But did we really need yet
another episode telling us how bad Buffy feels and how much she hates
herself? Hasn't that been beaten into our heads over and over again
for, oh, about half a season now?

And if it was so all-fired important for the writers to tell us this
again, don't you think they could have found a way to do it without
rehashing "Consequences," an episode which, in my opinion, did a better
job of telling the same basic story?

[One Bit Shy]

<lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155718475....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

>
>>
>> This is when, I believe, Spike's vampire nature - or at least
>> personality -
>> really steps forward. And in a way rather unusual to BtVS history. This
>> is
>> the dark seduction of traditional vampire stories - not that far from a
>> Dracula kind of approach. It is utterly appalling in content - certain
>> to
>> repel a part of Buffy inside. But it's most appalling element is the way
>> that it draws her in - has to draw her in - because it feels and sounds
>> so
>> true at that moment. Vampire seduction. Dark. Evil. Hopelessly
>> appealing.
>>
>> If anyone had doubts about how much a vampire Spike still was, this
>> should
>> be illuminating, for he's pure predator here. But he's preying on
>> emotions - not blood. Perhaps that's what the chip has ended up doing.
>>
>
> I actually have to disagree on that one. It's basically conditioning
> that Buffy put on Spike, turning him into her sexbot in a way, like
> Warren tried to do to Katrina. She tries to limit him to just something
> she can use. And it's one of the things most wrong about Buffy. She
> forces Spike outside of the group, she refuses to let him into the
> light, so he takes all she's willing to give him, the dark and runs
> with it in the hope to find something that she'll like enough to stay.

Buffy certainly is using Spike, but that doesn't mean that Spike is
completely without volition. I think you underestimate how much Spike
chooses his own play - and are confusing Spike's own poor understanding of
how to achieve his ends (or even quite what they mean) with Buffy's
manipulation. And Spike has always been the outsider of the group based on
his own nature and actions and the consequent developed understanding of the
other Scoobies. Buffy hasn't had to actively do anything with that, let
alone force Spike to be outside. The primary reason they've ever tolerated
him is because Buffy has insisted on it.

In any case, all of that I think misses what I was getting at. Whether he's
being used or not or wherever inbetween he is, with this scene we see that
his method for dealing with the situation is emotional preying. Personally
I think he's largely been at sea without the kind of active guidance she
provided late in S5, and being left to his own devices in that sense, he's
pulling from his vampire instincts. He acts like a vampire here - except
for the blood. He still isn't reaching for her neck. That's what I meant
about what the chip may have ended up doing. It's effectively altered his
behavior away from that action, but perhaps in doing so, redirected his
nature to prey in other ways.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

"Stephen Tempest" <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aul6e2h5u2t36nfbp...@4ax.com...

Oh, sure - and that's an excellent point to make. Tara is an outstanding
choice for Buffy to turn to. (And another quiet piece of healing hard to
see amidst the pain. But Buffy just yanked up her friendship with Tara a
couple notches.)

I was being a little ham handed there. I'm just trying to sympathize with
Tara for having her good news turned to bad and getting away from one
problem (Willow), only to be dumped upon with another, possibly stranger
one. And the relating part was, in my mind, aimed at not having the same
kind of intimate familiarity with Buffy that she does with Willow.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

"Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155725771....@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...

> Doesn't work for me. Partly because it makes it difficult for me to
> fast forward to the end of the action sequence. But mainly because it
> doesn't seem to make sense. How could the trio control the ending with
> all that confusion.

Jonathan has just one job, get hit by Buffy and roll down the hill. The
confusion, in whatever form, runs its course and a body at the bottom of the
hill is left.

> And with all that confusion, why was Buffy so sure
> that her single backhander of "Katrina" had killed her. It doesn't come
> close to killing Jonathon, disguised as Katrina. I'm thinking that by
> now Buffy should know what is and isn't a killing blow.

She didn't think she killed her with that blow. She only knew she hit her,
sending her rolling down a hill. So she went to help and found her dead -
presumably from the fall, not from her blow. The coroner's report said
injury consistent with a fall.

> It must be
> particularly annoying for those who believe in Slayer Instincts
> (although those instincts make a triumphant return when Buffy "knows"
> Warren must have done it when she learns the dead girls identity).

She doesn't just "know". She remembers Katrina's face from having met her
with Warren. And she already knows that Warren uses strange magics,
considers her his arch nemesis, and has tried to kill her. That's not all
that much of a deductive leap.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

"MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155751538.1...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Buffy's doing her part, yes, but look at Spike's words. They're totally
about pulling Buffy away from them. He's doing his best to convince her
that she belongs with him - not them. This is probably the starkest example
of it, but it's not new. He's been playing that card ever since he found
that she "came back wrong". Buffy didn't believe that initially, but at
this point pretty much does. That's feeding Buffy's separation from her
friends and Spike's feeding that notion with everything he's got.

OBS

[One Bit Shy]

<lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155752653.6...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Good lord, please don't make Spike into some kind of miquetoast. Yes, she
went up there on her own, but that doesn't change one smidgeon what Spike
did with it. He didn't just join her, he pounced. He was lurking there
just waiting for the chance which he grabbed in the most predatory fashion
I've ever seen Spike do with Buffy. And his message to her was all about
seperating her from her friends - a message that resonates in considerable
part because of Spike's own machinations, seduction, and preying on Buffy's
vulnerability.

This isn't a one or the other proposition. Both of them are contributing
mightily to the fall, and neither get absolution for what the other does.

OBS

[William George Ferguson]

On 15 Aug 2006 21:47:01 -0700, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
wrote:

>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review

>threads.
>
>
>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
>(or "Sometimes they come back")
>Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
>Director: James A. Contner
>
>The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
>inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
>because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
>slowly digest.

This isn't the most beloved, or most hated, episode of Buffy for the vast
majority, but it is indeed one of the most discussed.

One thing, when this ep was initially shown on BBC2 in England, an
incredible 5 minutes and 31 seconds of its 42 minutes was cut for content
(sex and violence), the largest amount of cuts for any Buffy ep during the
entire run of the show on BBC2. From descriptions by UK viewers over on
uk.media.tv.buffy-v-slayer at the time (Ian Galbraith can speak to this)
Warren walked into the room where Kristen was, immediately followed by
Kristen storming up the steps, and then appparently dropping dead of an
aneurysm or something.

>If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze...

I believe you will need to take a number. Yours is 1,284,321 ("now serving
number 109") :)

You're bound to have seen people mention that SMG was unhappy with the way
Buffy's characterization went in season 6. This is the specific scene she
would cite when talking about it after the fact (she didn't talk about it
publicly during season 6, and, although both Whedon and she have said that
she talked to him about her problems with the characterization at the time,
it seems fairly clear that she did not let it affect her performance).

>But back to trusting Spike, Buffy finds that she doesn't after all,
>and it shifts her back into "you're a thing" mode. This time it
>seems like she might believe it, though, since there's some amoral
>behavior precipitating it. It seems somehow appropriate that the issue
>that creates this conflict doesn't have to with pure vampiric evil,
>but with the kind of selfish behavior that some souled humans would
>also engage in to keep a loved one around. The scene is a little
>confusing to the viewer, as I guess it's supposed to be, since one
>now has to try to distinguish the two of them hitting and trying to
>drag each other around as part of an actual fight as opposed to the
>usual foreplay. As I keep saying, this episode is all about confusion,
>for me.

The key where it's not foreplay is when she keeps right on pounding on him.
This is about the worst beat-down we've ever seen Buffy give someone who
survived it.

>Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
>that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
>coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
>Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
>very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
>neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
>into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
>almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
>"Wrecked."

To play Devil's Advocate (or Whedon's Advocate, same thing), Sam Malone is
an alcoholic, but Cheers had other characters drinking without a problem
(no, Norm doesn't count as one of them).

>As for the end, yeah, it's yet another show that ends with someone
>breaking down crying, but there are some interesting moments, including
>the reversal of the standard kind of ending: "please don't forgive
>me." Well, that's different. I like how it re-casts the earlier
>parts of the show, since it reveals a new coping mechanism and layer of
>denial that colors Buffy's earlier behavior regarding her
>relationship with Peroxide Boy. By telling herself that she's
>physically "wrong," she can sorta explain and sorta excuse how she
>could be involved with Spike, and even like him. From a writing
>perspective, the malfunctioning chip thus ends up being not so much a
>plot device but a character/emotion device.

And, because someone is bound to bring it up, Tara doesn't say that Buffy
has a molecular sunburn, she just uses 'sunburn' as an analogy for a minor
surface change that doesn't affect the core reality.

>Random thoughts:

>The misgivings Jonathan has about Warren's modi operandi are welcome,
>and not resolved by the end of the episode. That'll be important.

Gee, ya'think?

>After this episode, I'm going to suggest that maybe it's time for
>the Geek Trio to split up, and argue that it's definitely time to at
>least change things. After an episode like this, we can never return
>to the status quo of the funny dorks who wrestle all the time and argue
>about Bond movies.

Plus, Katrina's murder has moved the Geek Trio's spot on Buffy's 'To Do'
list, it's bound to have. Think of how long Harmony would have survived if
she had, say, killed Devon in front of Buffy. Yes VampHarm killed people,
but she didn't kill people that made a loud 'Ping' on Buffy's radar. That's
selfish, but people are that way. It's now personal.

--
"Timothy Dalton should get an Oscar and
beat Sean Connery over the head with it!"
-The Other Guy (you know, Tucker's brother)

[BTR1701]

In article <1155734083.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ahhh, the power of the Spuffy relationship. It's like none other in the
> Buffyverse.

You can say that again. No other relationship made me want to heave
quite as violently-- for many reasons, not the least of which is that it
seemed to have spawned the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
combining two characters names into one.

> Did you notice how quickly Warren went from recognizing her as still
> Katrina to a thing once she died? I didn't rewatch this one yet but I
> believe he quickly starting referring to the body as "it". It's
> amazingly creepy.

It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again...

[BTR1701]

In article <5vDEg.21711$ZJ6....@tornado.fastwebnet.it>,
"Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> If she had called the Council of Watchers and asked to be judged by them I
> would have approved, but a normal court cannot judge a slayer, they lack the
> requisite knowledge of of the existence of demons and vapires and
> supernatural threats, they cannot properly evaluate the mitigating
> circumstances. So she would not be subjected to a fair trial.

Slayers are not above the law. Having a special ability doesn't give you
carte blanche to do what you please-- professional athletes
notwithstanding.

> But the most important thing is: she has responsibilities. She has to save
> the world. Who will protect innocent people from vapires and demons while
> she is in jail? The Council of Watchers would take this into consideration,
> a normal court wouldn't.

The Council would probably just kill her and be done with it, knowing
they'd get a fresh new Slayer without any of that bothersome baggage.

> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.

She not only has the right, she has a duty to do so. Not only could
Faith turn herself in, she could just quit slaying any time she wanted
to. So could Buffy. So could any of them. None of these girls lose their
inherent rights to personal autonomy, self-determination and freedom
just because some supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on them
without their consent.

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <1155734083.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ahhh, the power of the Spuffy relationship. It's like none other in the
>> Buffyverse.
>
> You can say that again. No other relationship made me want to heave
> quite as violently-- for many reasons, not the least of which is that it
> seemed to have spawned the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
> combining two characters names into one.

Um no, the combining of names started long before Spike and Buffy
brought the building down. I take it you've never once glanced at a
National Enquirer headline at the checkout? Also, there are other
combining of names in the fandom that came before Spuffy... Bangel, anyone?

>
>> Did you notice how quickly Warren went from recognizing her as still
>> Katrina to a thing once she died? I didn't rewatch this one yet but I
>> believe he quickly starting referring to the body as "it". It's
>> amazingly creepy.
>
> It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again...

It's been a long time since I've seen someone make reference to TSOTL.
Kudos.

[Stephen Tempest]

"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> writes:

>Oh and in the original script, Tara says something like "Honey, I'm a
>fag." Which is such a completely un-Tara-esque line that I'm glad they
>cut it,

You're right. Tara would never call anyone 'honey'! However, in my
copy of the script the line is "Sweetie, I'm a fag. I been there."
which is much more in character - 'sweetie' is an expression Tara
often uses, and 'I been there' has just the right touch of Buffyverse
ungrammaticalness.

Not sure why she's calling herself a cigarette, though?

Stephen

- Hel'! I 'hink 'y 'ongue i' caugh' in 'y 'heek!

[vague disclaimer]

In article <v007e25lv9konf3fh...@4ax.com>,

William George Ferguson <wmgf...@newsguy.com> wrote:

> On 15 Aug 2006 21:47:01 -0700, "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> >threads.
> >
> >
> >BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> >Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> >(or "Sometimes they come back")
> >Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> >Director: James A. Contner
> >
> >The review for the previous episode was hard to write because it
> >inspired so few thoughts. I think this one will be hard to write
> >because "Dead Things" is positively loaded with stuff to ponder and
> >slowly digest.
>
> This isn't the most beloved, or most hated, episode of Buffy for the vast
> majority, but it is indeed one of the most discussed.
>
> One thing, when this ep was initially shown on BBC2 in England, an
> incredible 5 minutes and 31 seconds of its 42 minutes was cut for content
> (sex and violence), the largest amount of cuts for any Buffy ep during the
> entire run of the show on BBC2. From descriptions by UK viewers over on
> uk.media.tv.buffy-v-slayer at the time (Ian Galbraith can speak to this)
> Warren walked into the room where Kristen was, immediately followed by
> Kristen storming up the steps, and then appparently dropping dead of an
> aneurysm or something.

Yup. That's about the size of it. They cut so much they had to put a
short film in to plug the gap in the schedules. (The discussion of which
led Andrew Poulter to truly inspired East European Animated Feature to
go with a certain S7 episode)

The uncut version as also show much later than the usual late night
reruns (1:30am iirc).

[vague disclaimer]

In article <1155751538.1...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote:

I believe the modern term is 'grooming'. Usually applied to kiddy
fiddlers, but really applicable to any who play the faux friend to the
vulnerable for their own ends. And given that Buffy is showing all the
(undiagnosed, untreated) signs of clinical depression, I'd say she
counts as vulnerable.

She'll end up in a funny farm at this rate.

[vague disclaimer]

In article <btr1702-C3DAD0...@news.giganews.com>,
BTR1701 <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
> combining two characters names into one.

You watch Veronica Mars don't you? Surely after that there is nowhere
for this habit to go - if LoVe isn't the ultimate shippers wet dream I
don't know what is.

[George W Harris]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:54:28 +0100, vague disclaimer
<l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:

:In article <btr1702-C3DAD0...@news.giganews.com>,

: BTR1701 <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
:
:> the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
:> combining two characters names into one.
:
:You watch Veronica Mars don't you? Surely after that there is nowhere
:for this habit to go - if LoVe isn't the ultimate shippers wet dream I
:don't know what is.

Do you mean LoRonica?
--
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'.

[George W Harris]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:28:29 +0100, vague disclaimer
<l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:

:In article <v007e25lv9konf3fh...@4ax.com>,

: William George Ferguson <wmgf...@newsguy.com> wrote:

:
:> One thing, when this ep was initially shown on BBC2 in England, an

:> incredible 5 minutes and 31 seconds of its 42 minutes was cut for content
:> (sex and violence), the largest amount of cuts for any Buffy ep during the
:> entire run of the show on BBC2. From descriptions by UK viewers over on
:> uk.media.tv.buffy-v-slayer at the time (Ian Galbraith can speak to this)
:> Warren walked into the room where Kristen was, immediately followed by
:> Kristen storming up the steps, and then appparently dropping dead of an
:> aneurysm or something.
:
:Yup. That's about the size of it. They cut so much they had to put a
:short film in to plug the gap in the schedules. (The discussion of which
:led Andrew Poulter to truly inspired East European Animated Feature to
:go with a certain S7 episode)

"Worker and Parasite"?

--
"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

[ruken]

Rincewind wrote:
> <lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:1155739389....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

> >
> >
> >> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.

> >> But the writer chose to hide this aspect of the problem by putting
> >> exactly
> >> the wrong words in Spike's mouth:
> >>
> >> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
> >> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
> >>
> >> misleading the viewer into a wrong parallel with S3 Faith, when really
> >> what
> >> Spike should have said is:
> >>
> >> And how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them?
> >>
> >>

> >> Rincewind.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > But see, no matter how much those words might have fit the situation
> > better, the problem is that Spike couldn't be the one to say those
> > words.
> >
> > Spike, much as I love him, has this huge lack of concern over innocent
> > people. And his first thought wouldn't be about the innocent people
> > that'd die while Buffy is gone. He cares about Buffy, and through her,
> > about her friends. So at most he might mention something about Dawn or
> > Buffy's friends getting hurt while she's in jail. But it wouldn't enter
> > his mind that other people would be in danger as well.
>
> But wasn't one of the points of your post that Spike is learning morality
> from Buffy, in a childish this-is-wrong-because-she-says-so way? By now he
> has certainly learned how important saving innocent people is FOR HER. Since
> his goal is to convince Buffy it doesn't matter if he really believes it or
> not: he is not stupid, he must know that this is an argument that can
> penetrate Buffy's stubbornness.
> And of course he could also have played the Dawn card, like you suggested.
>
> For me the "One dead girl doesn't tip the scale." approach is not more
> characteristic of Spike than a subtler attempt to manipulate her by
> appealing to HER sense of duty (like he did, for instance, in Becoming: "He's
> got your Watcher. Right now he's probably torturing him.").
>
>
> Rincewind.
>
> --
> Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:
> WILLOW: Faith's like this cleavage-y slut-bomb walking around "Ooh, check me
> out, I'm wicked-cool, I'm five-by-five."
> TARA: Damn! Why can't I ever meet any girls like that?

This is very interesting and something I hadn't thought about. Spike
has never been stupid, impulsive and not a very good planner? yes but
not stupid. If anything he has demonstrated an uncanny skill to be able
to find out the best way in which to manipulate others into his way of
thinking. My guess is that Spike didn't use that reasoning because that
would have actually been somewhat helpful to Buffy, and I don't think
that's what they were going for in this season.

[Ian Galbraith]

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:12:44 -0700, William George Ferguson wrote:

[snip]

> One thing, when this ep was initially shown on BBC2 in England, an
> incredible 5 minutes and 31 seconds of its 42 minutes was cut for content
> (sex and violence), the largest amount of cuts for any Buffy ep during the
> entire run of the show on BBC2. From descriptions by UK viewers over on
> uk.media.tv.buffy-v-slayer at the time (Ian Galbraith can speak to this)

Sorry I'm in Australia. I do recall hearing about it though. In Australia
the series was screening at 10.30 by then so it was uncut.

[snip]

--
You can't stop the signal

[Ian Galbraith]

On 16 Aug 2006 00:53:08 -0700, ruken wrote:

> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:

> But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
>> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
>> "Wrecked."

> For the longest time I thought it was power. But then, I think the
> writers changed their mind...I never did figure out what the issue was.

Fgvyy cbjre gurl trg onpx gb vg ng gur raq bs F6 naq vgf rira zber
rkcyvpvg va Jvyybj'f nep va F7

> PS I can't believe that Giles was going to move back to England and
> leave Tara and Willow in charge of Dawn. As it is, Dawn should not be
> with Buffy right now. Since she is now an orphan (and a normal
> teenager) she should be with a foster family. I can understand Buffy
> being irresponsible (given her regression) enough not to think about
> what's best for the annoying one v2, but that even Giles would just
> leave without a care for what happened to Dawn is, well, weird.

I doubt that Dawn would really want to be with a foster family.

[Ian Galbraith]

On 16 Aug 2006 11:48:13 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:

> MBangel10 (Melissa) wrote:
[snip]

>> There is a big difference between mirroring a scene in an earlier
>> episode and copying verbatim. They did not copy the scene. How is it
>> exact, do tell.

> I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
> almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
> innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
> that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
> doesn't buy it....

FFS there was so much more going on in this episode beyond this that to
call it a copy is ridiculous. DT has many more resonances than
Consequences and far more depth as a result.

> Sound familiar? The big difference is that in "Consequences," Buffy
> (and Faith) did accidentally kill a human being, and Buffy had to live
> with that, while in "Dead Things," she got an easy out when she
> discovered that she hadn't actually killed Katrina after all.

Or maybe they have different aims.

[Ian Galbraith]

On 16 Aug 2006 03:56:11 -0700, Apteryx wrote:

> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
[snip]

>> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
>> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
>> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
>> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
>> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
>> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping

>> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's

>> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
>> "Wrecked."

> I wish! If "Magic is bad" had been the message of Wrecked (with some
> sort of promise not to do it again) it would be one of my favourite
> epsidodes. But unfortunately it's only that magic is addictive, and
> Willow is addicted. Tara isn't addicted, because she's aware of the
> risk, and careful, respectful of the power involved. It's a pity, but
> what can you do? - the show's already written and screened.

If all magic is physically addictive like people think Wrecked implies
then she should be physically addicted. Willow is addicted like a
gambling addict which is a reasonable analogy.

[snip]

[chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu]

Arbitrar Of Quality <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:

> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 12: "Dead Things"
> (or "Sometimes they come back")
> Writer: Steven S. DeKnight
> Director: James A. Contner

.
> work for me here. Their first conversation taps into the confusion
> that's so central to the episode, with Spike not able to decide
> whether he's the dark seducer or the lovestruck poet, and Buffy being
> willing to admit out loud to having some affection.

I liked the way they reverse stereotypical sex roles, with Spike wanting
to define their relationship and Buffy happy to leave at "it is what it
is." I also like Buffy's startled and unhappy reaction when Spike calls
her an animal -- she's pretty sensitive about her human status right now.

> If I can briefly complain about the sex scene at the Bronze... the
> music and the atmosphere do a little for it, but I'd only have been
> able to buy it as a fantasy. Otherwise it's pretty stupid. It's
> one of those times where I can't buy into metaphor at the expense of
> whatever passes for realism on this show. Also, I have been in clubs
> with balconies. People on the floor do occasionally look up.

Admittedly it's not entirely believable, but actually I thought this was a
great scene ... just not in a squealing sort of way. It really brings out
the unhealthy side of Buffy-Spike relationship. Spike's "you belong in
the shadows" speech is great. I don't think there's any question that he
is trying to lead Buffy away (or *further* away) from her friends. "What
would they think of you ... if they found out ... all the things you've
done?" Of course from Spike's POV this is perfectly reasonable, indeed
good for Buffy; but I beg to disagree. Buffy's close ties to her friends
and family have always been a core part of her character. Moving in the
direction Spike wants her to go would definitely change Buffy, and IMO it
would not be a healthy change for her. But it might be a change that
Buffy just can't resist. Spike's comments about the dark and the shadows
would have seemed ludicrous to Buffy just a year ago, but now, he has
reason to think they might fall on fertile soil. This is one of the most
intriguing Buffy-Spike scenes we've seen since Smashed, and you don't have
to have "B+S 4 eva" drawn on the back of your Algebra notebook to think
so.

The fight outside the police station is also revealing, though maybe not
as much. Clearly a lot of what Buffy yells at Spike as she beats the snot
out of him -- "You are dead inside! You can't feel anything real!" -- is a
projection of what she fears about herself.

> Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his
> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything

> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> wasn't?

It still fits. He initially fell for her because of her non-robotic
qualities, but after a.) she dumped him and b.) he moved a few blocks
farther down villain street, he's determined to get her back in any way he
can. Cerebrally dampened Katrina might not be the girl he first fell for,
but the important thing to him is that she's technically still Katrina and
he now possesses her. It's part compensation for what he wanted and
couldn't have before, and part revenge.

I like how the fledgling murderers are immediately worried that Buffy will
find out, but don't spend a single second fretting about the Sunnydale PD.

> every day. And I laughed at Dawn responding to "I love you" with
> "what's wrong?" That's how I'd have reacted too. But from
> there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> nothing to do with you.

She did react a little to the news of Katrina's death, in that she saw how
upset Buffy was and hugged her. As others have said, it makes perfect
sense for Dawn to think about how this will affect *her*, since Buffy is
her only legal guardian. Plus, teenager.

> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> "Wrecked."

True. It's just a shame the writers didn't get the actual script of
Wrecked more in line with its message.... But seriously, it's nice to see
Tara back, both for her own sake and as reassurance that magic will not
always be portrayed Wrecked-style from now on.

About the great, heart-wrenching final scene, I'll just point out that if
a relationship doesn't make you feel good about yourself, it's probably
not a healthy relationship.

One of the most striking things about Dead Things is the lack of
resolution to the Katrina plotline. On first viewing I felt like there
was an act missing at the end, one where Buffy figures things out and
captures Warren. Either that, or it was all setup for a later episode.
AOQ, you'll have to wait and see to what extent it might be the latter.

> This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):

"We hardly ever see you, what with slinging the doublemeat and pounding
the big evil."

Buffy's fear when she sees dancing in the living room.

Warren dropping his earpiece into a drink.

> AOQ rating: Good

This one has grown on me over repeating viewings. I'd give it a low Good.

--Chris

______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.

[BTR1701]

In article <l64o-1rj5-AB92E...@europe.isp.giganews.com>,
vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:

> In article <btr1702-C3DAD0...@news.giganews.com>,
> BTR1701 <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
> > combining two characters names into one.
>
> You watch Veronica Mars don't you? Surely after that there is nowhere
> for this habit to go - if LoVe isn't the ultimate shippers wet dream I
> don't know what is.

Oh, god... I hadn't heard of that one yet.

[peachy ashie passion]

Ian Galbraith wrote:

I think that's a very valid point.
We may feel that Giles, as the adult, should overrule Dawn's wishes.
But Giles was trained to be a watcher. To put life and death
decisions, even the fate of the entire world decisions, in the hands of
a girl Dawn's age. He sent Buffy out against vampires and demons
nightly when she was Dawns age.

Why would he possibly think Dawn wasn't capable of deciding she'd
rather be with Tara and Willow, rather than have to live with strangers
and pretend not to know anything about the real world.

[burt...@hotmail.com]

lili...@gmail.com wrote:
> This particular pairing just seems to have
> > this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> > fangirls, while leaving others untouched.
>
> It's kinda like Faith, her 'tough girl' act turns some people into
> squealing fanboys, while leaving the rest of us cold. (sorrry, but you
> really asked for that one by putting it like that)

True, I'm sure it does. But the Faith fanboys weren't nearly as
numerous nor as loud as the Spike fangirls were, and more importantly,
the show's writers and producers didn't decide to pander to the Faith
fanboys by making the show focus on her all the time (to the detriment
of the other characters) and including long, lingering shots of her
nearly naked in every other episode.

[burt...@hotmail.com]

My favorite answer to this (I guess you'd use it if you were a
Veronica/Duncan shipper): LoVe fades, but VD lasts forever.

[burt...@hotmail.com]

Ian Galbraith wrote:
> On 16 Aug 2006 11:48:13 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > MBangel10 (Melissa) wrote:
> [snip]
>
> >> There is a big difference between mirroring a scene in an earlier
> >> episode and copying verbatim. They did not copy the scene. How is it
> >> exact, do tell.
>
> > I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
> > almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
> > innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
> > that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
> > doesn't buy it....
>
> FFS there was so much more going on in this episode beyond this that to
> call it a copy is ridiculous. DT has many more resonances than
> Consequences and far more depth as a result.

Not really. A great deal of "Dead Things" is just a rehash of what's
been done before. There are differences, yes, but the main plot is
exactly the same as the plot in "Consequences." In fact, "Consequences"
is actually deeper, because in that episode, Buffy did accidentally
cause the death of an innocent human being and has to carry the guilt
from that, while in "Dead Things," she's given an easy out when she
finds out that it was Warren who killed Katrina, not her.

[ruken]

Ian Galbraith wrote:
> On 16 Aug 2006 00:53:08 -0700, ruken wrote:
>
> > Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> > But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> >> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> >> "Wrecked."
>
> > For the longest time I thought it was power. But then, I think the
> > writers changed their mind...I never did figure out what the issue was.
>
> Fgvyy cbjre gurl trg onpx gb vg ng gur raq bs F6 naq vgf rira zber
> rkcyvpvg va Jvyybj'f nep va F7

Did they? The season was such a mess I honestly can't remember. I
remember thinking Willow's power issues were going to give her trouble
one day and the next thing I know she's going cold turkey and having
withdrawl symptoms.

[George W Harris]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 03:00:17 -0000, chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
wrote:

:> Warren's always been the meanest of the three, but his

:> interactions with Katrina bring out the worst in him. Not everything
:> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
:> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
:> wasn't?
:
:It still fits. He initially fell for her because of her non-robotic
:qualities, but after a.) she dumped him and b.) he moved a few blocks
:farther down villain street, he's determined to get her back in any way he
:can. Cerebrally dampened Katrina might not be the girl he first fell for,
:but the important thing to him is that she's technically still Katrina and
:he now possesses her. It's part compensation for what he wanted and
:couldn't have before, and part revenge.

It's not about love or attraction, it's about power.
Warren wanted Katrina (*had* Katrina), and she rejected
him. To win, to feel good about himself, he doesn't need
to (or want to) return things the way they are, he needs to
dominate and destroy the aspect of her which caused her
to humiliate him. It's not getting her back, it's getting back
at her. It's not part revenge, it's *all* revenge.

That's part of the reason he's not bothered by
killing her. It gets him the same thing that raping her would.
--
/bud...@nirvana.net/h:k

[ruken]

peachy ashie passion wrote:

> >
>
> I think that's a very valid point.
> We may feel that Giles, as the adult, should overrule Dawn's wishes.
> But Giles was trained to be a watcher. To put life and death
> decisions, even the fate of the entire world decisions, in the hands of
> a girl Dawn's age. He sent Buffy out against vampires and demons
> nightly when she was Dawns age.
>
> Why would he possibly think Dawn wasn't capable of deciding she'd
> rather be with Tara and Willow, rather than have to live with strangers
> and pretend not to know anything about the real world.

It always seemed to me that Buffy was extraordinarily mature for her
age and Dawn was extraordinarily immature for hers. In years past Giles
would have been smart enough to notice the difference. However, this
being season 6 I could see how he wouldn't. At one point in the season
he was somewhat astute enough to realize that Dawn may be in danger
under Buffy's care though. In any case, I wasn't even refering to his
second escape. I was refering to the first one before he knew Dawn
would be under the questionable care of Buffy. He left Dawn forever to
be under the care of Willow and Tara, two college students with no
readily apparent income sources. Who was paying for Dawn's food,
clothes, school supplies? was there a college fund for Dawn? How were
Tara and Willow going to come up with the money to raise Dawn? And how
did Willow go so quickly from being such an unselfish and caring friend
as to take over the upbringing of Buffy's teenage sister to well, to
season 6 Willow?

[ruken]

Elisi wrote:
I
> know a lot of people (around here esp) disliked what they did with
> Buffy this season. I love it - she breaks so utterly beautifully.

LOL, actually it's been my experience that most fans (at least most of
the fans still around) loved what happened to Buffy after season 5.
Some don't think the writers went far enough actually.

[ruken]

vague disclaimer wrote:

>
> Someone on the DP thread described the dumpster fuck as hot. Someone who
> has never been in an alley behind a fast food joint (mind you, in
> Sunnydale at least the vamps might keep the rats down).
>

LOL, and yuck. I've been so hung up on how miserable Buffy looked that
I hadn't thought about how smelly the place must have been. And now I'm
thinking how unsanitary. Good thing she has super-healing.

[peachy ashie passion]

ruken wrote:

> peachy ashie passion wrote:
>
>
>> I think that's a very valid point.
>> We may feel that Giles, as the adult, should overrule Dawn's wishes.
>> But Giles was trained to be a watcher. To put life and death
>>decisions, even the fate of the entire world decisions, in the hands of
>>a girl Dawn's age. He sent Buffy out against vampires and demons
>>nightly when she was Dawns age.
>>
>> Why would he possibly think Dawn wasn't capable of deciding she'd
>>rather be with Tara and Willow, rather than have to live with strangers
>>and pretend not to know anything about the real world.
>
>
> It always seemed to me that Buffy was extraordinarily mature for her
> age and Dawn was extraordinarily immature for hers. In years past Giles
> would have been smart enough to notice the difference. However, this
> being season 6 I could see how he wouldn't. At one point in the season
> he was somewhat astute enough to realize that Dawn may be in danger
> under Buffy's care though. In any case, I wasn't even refering to his
> second escape. I was refering to the first one before he knew Dawn
> would be under the questionable care of Buffy. He left Dawn forever to
> be under the care of Willow and Tara, two college students with no
> readily apparent income sources. Who was paying for Dawn's food,
> clothes, school supplies? was there a college fund for Dawn? How were
> Tara and Willow going to come up with the money to raise Dawn?

Yes, that's why I referenced Tara and Willow.

And they said clearly, Joyce's life insurance.

> And how
> did Willow go so quickly from being such an unselfish and caring friend
> as to take over the upbringing of Buffy's teenage sister to well, to
> season 6 Willow?

As unsatisfactory as it may be in a work of fiction, it's very
realistic for an addiction.

[ruken]

peachy ashie passion wrote:

> ruken wrote:
>
>
> And they said clearly, Joyce's life insurance.

It is my understanding that Joyce's life insurance is gone??

> > And how
> > did Willow go so quickly from being such an unselfish and caring friend
> > as to take over the upbringing of Buffy's teenage sister to well, to
> > season 6 Willow?
>
> As unsatisfactory as it may be in a work of fiction, it's very
> realistic for an addiction.

Agreed about Willows addiction problem. While I can see Willow honestly
believing that she was the right choice to raise Dawn I have a harder
problem with Giles's agreement that Willow was really prepared to
become Dawn's guardian, or even that it would be fair to either Willow
or Dawn to place such a burden on her. LOL, this is mean but I wonder
if it was having to take care of Dawn over the summer what really
pushed Willow into bringing Buffy back (just kidding)
Given Buffy's maturity and Willow's addiction problems......perhaps
Dawn should not be living with them? Especially since on top of
everything else money is also tight. It's weird to me that Joss (or
Marti) decided that they would tackle real-life issues this season but
then chose to ignore something very real-life like such as Giles (as an
adult) ignoring Dawn's well being.

PS
Sometimes I suspect the season wasn't really about real-life "grown up"
problems as much as how many different ways can we suck the life out of
Buffy and make her wish she were still dead. JMO. Certainly being 22
and having a 14 year old daughter that often behaves as if she is 10,
losing your parents one to death and the other to hmm whatever that
was, losing your best friend to drug addiction, finding out all the
money your dead parent left has been taken by the hospital while
enganging on self-abusive relationship with someone you used to
consider a monster sounds all at the same time sounds a tad outside the
bounds of realism....JMO.

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

Apteryx wrote:

> Hey! It's only been a day! Ordinarily I could cope with reviews as fast
> as you can write them, but I'd got used to there being at least two
> days between reviews. After watching DP, I popped Das Rheingold into
> the player, intending to alternate BtVS episodes with Ring Cycle
> operas. Now Rheingold's barely more than 2 hours, a piece of cake,
> hardly even counts as Wagnerian. But once I get into the proper RC
> operas, its going to be hard to manage one of them plus an episode of
> BtVS every evening :)

You have to decide what's important in life.

Actually, the posting rate has been something like two episodes per
three days. Sometimes a little slower depending on what's going on in
my life... for instance, right now I doubt I'll even have time to
answer the posts here until tomorrow night, let alone write another
review. Also, with the episodes that generate meatier discussion (get
it, because the previous epsiode was DmP...?) like DTs (get it?), I try
to allow time for them to play out.

> Doesn't work for me. Partly because it makes it difficult for me to
> fast forward to the end of the action sequence. But mainly because it
> doesn't seem to make sense. How could the trio control the ending with
> all that confusion. And with all that confusion, why was Buffy so sure
> that her single backhander of "Katrina" had killed her. It doesn't come
> close to killing Jonathon, disguised as Katrina. I'm thinking that by
> now Buffy should know what is and isn't a killing blow. It must be
> particularly annoying for those who believe in Slayer Instincts
> (although those instincts make a triumphant return when Buffy "knows"
> Warren must have done it when she learns the dead girls identity).

I can't really argue with any of that, just say that it doesn't seem
important.

-AOQ

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

One Bit Shy wrote:
> "Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155725771....@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...

>
> > And with all that confusion, why was Buffy so sure
> > that her single backhander of "Katrina" had killed her. It doesn't come
> > close to killing Jonathon, disguised as Katrina. I'm thinking that by
> > now Buffy should know what is and isn't a killing blow.
>

> She didn't think she killed her with that blow. She only knew she hit her,
> sending her rolling down a hill. So she went to help and found her dead -
> presumably from the fall, not from her blow. The coroner's report said
> injury consistent with a fall.

>
> > It must be
> > particularly annoying for those who believe in Slayer Instincts
> > (although those instincts make a triumphant return when Buffy "knows"
> > Warren must have done it when she learns the dead girls identity).
>

> She doesn't just "know". She remembers Katrina's face from having met her
> with Warren. And she already knows that Warren uses strange magics,
> considers her his arch nemesis, and has tried to kill her. That's not all
> that much of a deductive leap.

Okay, I guess I can argue with the objections, then. So, what OBS
said.

-AOQ

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

lili...@gmail.com wrote:
> This particular pairing just seems to have
> > this uncanny effect on certain people to turn them into squealing
> > fangirls, while leaving others untouched.
>
> It's kinda like Faith, her 'tough girl' act turns some people into
> squealing fanboys, while leaving the rest of us cold. (sorrry, but you
> really asked for that one by putting it like that)

Mmmm, Faith...

... what were we talking about?

> > But from
> > there, the fact that she'd show no reaction to the whole dead-woman
> > thing other than how it affects her does not speak volumes about what a
> > pleasant person she is to be around. Believe it or not, this has
> > nothing to do with you.
>

> Doesn't it? Buffy is willing to give up her life, which means that if
> Buffy is arrested, Dawn will mostly likely have to go into a
> fosterhome.

The end result has to do with her, but not the situation. I can see
"you can't do this to me" at a time like this, but "you're just trying
to get rid of me" is a good way to render her entriely unsympathetic.

> And Dawn is just a kid, she's so mature a lot of the time
> that I'm willing to forgive her about thinking about herself here

But she's also a TV character, and her job is not to make the audience
want to jam toothpicks into our ears.

> > But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's
> > almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
> > "Wrecked."
>

> Actually it's not the magic that's bad. It never was. It's Willow's
> lack of respect for magic and it's consequences. Tara in Tabula Rasa
> didn't say Willow had to stop using magic, she just wanted Willow to
> understand that magic isn't a tool. And that's something that Willow at
> this point, still hasn't grasped.

You're preaching to the choir on this one. Some people somehow don't
see that.

-AOQ

[Arbitrar Of Quality]

One Bit Shy wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...

> It starts out with them seeming almost content. It's like Spike almost has
> his dream... and then he kind of blows it by wanting to talk about their
> relationship and steadily making Buffy a little more uncomfortable with each
> step until asking her if she trusts him leaves the mood wrecked. Still, the
> scene almost makes them look like they really do belong together. Buffy
> seems to be entertaining the notion - which comes a little clearer later
> when we realize that she had started buying into Spike's claim that she had
> come back wrong.

And that she belongs in the shadows with him. There's still more
confusion in the fact that no one can seem to agree on who's using
whom, who's preying on whom, and the characetrs don't seem too clear on
it either.

> > [Aside: I don't know what significance, if any, it has
> > that their reaction somewhat resembles Willow's in "Tabula
> > Rasa."]
>
> It probably hasn't been quite so obvious until now, but all along they've
> served as parallels to Willow and Buffy - especially Willow. They too have
> been dangerously indulging their desires and getting trapped by them.
> Willow ended up at Racks. Buffy ended up in Spike's crypt. But the Trio's
> childish plans have somehow led them to barely avoid rape by replacing it
> with murder. They seem so dopey, but the things they play with can only
> destroy.

A few people have made that argument; a way that our geeky heroes
could've turned out if they hadn't had enough sense of self to be the
good guys. I can see it here, but I don't think it's been too strong a
parallel before now. (And even now, the reflection on Buffy is
incomplete, as are pretty much any attempts to equate her convoluted
thing with Spike to any of the more straightforward plotlines.)

-AOQ

[One Bit Shy]

"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message

news:1155792364.4...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...

> One Bit Shy wrote:
>> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> It starts out with them seeming almost content. It's like Spike almost
>> has
>> his dream... and then he kind of blows it by wanting to talk about their
>> relationship and steadily making Buffy a little more uncomfortable with
>> each
>> step until asking her if she trusts him leaves the mood wrecked. Still,
>> the
>> scene almost makes them look like they really do belong together. Buffy
>> seems to be entertaining the notion - which comes a little clearer later
>> when we realize that she had started buying into Spike's claim that she
>> had
>> come back wrong.
>
> And that she belongs in the shadows with him. There's still more
> confusion in the fact that no one can seem to agree on who's using
> whom, who's preying on whom, and the characetrs don't seem too clear on
> it either.

Oh, I agree with that absolutely. You're quite right I believe in singling
out confusion as a big element of the episode. I had actually been laughing
to myself when you earlier described their relationship as a mobius strip,
though I think you had something else in mind then.

OBS

[lili...@gmail.com]

burt...@hotmail.com schreef:

They never pandered to Spike fans either. In fact, if you looked at the
scenes and dialogue actually given to Spike, you'd quickly come to
realize that he really doesn't have that much screentime. It's just
that more of his scenes were memorable than those with Willow and
Xander.
Now B/A fans were pandered to, Faith fans were pandered to, Wesley fans
were definitely pandered too, even though AD tends to bore me to sleep.
But Spike fans rarely if ever were pandered to, we weren't loud enough
for that.

Lore

[Ian Galbraith]

On 16 Aug 2006 20:16:12 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:

> Ian Galbraith wrote:
>> On 16 Aug 2006 11:48:13 -0700, burt...@hotmail.com wrote:

[snip]

>>> I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
>>> almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
>>> innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
>>> that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
>>> doesn't buy it....

>> FFS there was so much more going on in this episode beyond this that to
>> call it a copy is ridiculous. DT has many more resonances than
>> Consequences and far more depth as a result.

> Not really. A great deal of "Dead Things" is just a rehash of what's
> been done before. There are differences, yes, but the main plot is
> exactly the same as the plot in "Consequences." In fact, "Consequences"
> is actually deeper, because in that episode, Buffy did accidentally
> cause the death of an innocent human being and has to carry the guilt
> from that, while in "Dead Things," she's given an easy out when she
> finds out that it was Warren who killed Katrina, not her.

That would be the case if thats all DT was about, its not, in fact
because they clearly have different themes the events of DT are not a cop
out.

DT is about abusive relationships about the uses abuses of power in such
relationships. Consequences is about..... consequences and owning up to
them. They are both trying to achieve something different. To a certain
extent DT mirrors Consequences and contrasts it by showing how Buffy
reacts differently but thats only part of the episode unlike
Consequences. Consequences parallels Buffy and Faith, DT parallels the
different couples comparing and contrasting them.

[Apteryx]

One Bit Shy wrote:
> "Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155725771....@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>

> > Doesn't work for me. Partly because it makes it difficult for me to
> > fast forward to the end of the action sequence. But mainly because it
> > doesn't seem to make sense. How could the trio control the ending with
> > all that confusion.
>

> Jonathan has just one job, get hit by Buffy and roll down the hill. The
> confusion, in whatever form, runs its course and a body at the bottom of the
> hill is left.

Sounds easy. All he has to do is be in the right place at the right
time. But how does he know where and when that will be, when
everythings going David Lynchy. Not saying it impossible - maybe he's
just a more talented guy than anyone (especially Warren) supposes.

>
> > It must be
> > particularly annoying for those who believe in Slayer Instincts
> > (although those instincts make a triumphant return when Buffy "knows"
> > Warren must have done it when she learns the dead girls identity).
>
> She doesn't just "know". She remembers Katrina's face from having met her
> with Warren. And she already knows that Warren uses strange magics,
> considers her his arch nemesis, and has tried to kill her. That's not all
> that much of a deductive leap.

It's excellent grounds for suspicion. Certainly reason enough to
realise it didn't have to be her that killed Katrina. She knows Warren
has motive, and that its within the bounds of possibility that he has
means. But so did the demons. And the evidence against Buffy herself is
no weaker than it ever was - she's just aware now that there other
possibilies she wasn't aware of before. Willow certainly isn't sure,
and the clincher for Buffy is that "You always hurt the one you love."
But song titles won't hold up in court.

Apteryx

[Elisi]

They did them of Angel, and they did them of Riley. My husband's only
issue is that they didn't do enough of Buffy. Anyway, it's all about
the character - half naked Angel just doesn't do it for me, except in a
detached, objective way. Find me an excuse for the Tai Chi, and I'll
apologise for Spike - your argument is old and wearisome.

[Elisi]

burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Elisi wrote:

> > burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I said they lifted the *plot* from "Consequences." And they did. It's
> > > almost exactly the same - Buffy accidentally causes the death of an
> > > innocent human being, she's guilt-ridden over it, someone tells her
> > > that it doesn't matter because of all the lives she's saved, she
> > > doesn't buy it....
> > >

> > > Sound familiar? The big difference is that in "Consequences," Buffy
> > > (and Faith) did accidentally kill a human being, and Buffy had to live
> > > with that, while in "Dead Things," she got an easy out when she
> > > discovered that she hadn't actually killed Katrina after all.
> >

> > Of course it's familiar - that's why it's so terrifying for Buffy. It's
> > 'Ted' all over again, but this time she's afraid she's turning into
> > Faith.
>
> I understand that Buffy is in a different emotional place in this
> episode than she was in "Consequences." But did we really need yet
> another episode telling us how bad Buffy feels and how much she hates
> herself? Hasn't that been beaten into our heads over and over again
> for, oh, about half a season now?
>
> And if it was so all-fired important for the writers to tell us this
> again, don't you think they could have found a way to do it without
> rehashing "Consequences," an episode which, in my opinion, did a better
> job of telling the same basic story?

But 'the story' isn't the point - the _characters_ stories are.
Katrina's death isn't even really part of Buffy's story, except in the
emotional response it brings forth. Katrina's death is part of The
Trio's story, and marks their turn to true darkness (Warren's at
least). It's very different from Faith's and a lot more disturbing -
Warren's fate was pretty much sealed the moment he brought out those
globe things.

The parallels back to S3 are only important as concerns Buffy - but OBS
has said this better than I, so I'll just quote:

---------------------------------
Whether Buffy really should turn herself in is a complex logical issue,
but
this isn't being worked out on an intellectual plane. It doesn't
matter if
the comparison to S3 is precise. Because of Buffy's experience with
Faith,
any accidental killing is going to raise screaming red flags for her,
and
anything even hinting at expediency in response will look like the path
to
total corruption to her. She was already in that mode before Spike
uttered
a word - it's why she's going to the police. Spike's words, aside from

possibly reminding the audience of the parallel, serve mainly to get
Buffy
to focus on the moral bankruptcy of Spike himself and what she's doing
with
him.

Also, changing Spike's words as you suggest wouldn't make a difference.

It's still the same argument, and the point to Buffy isn't totting up
numbers to see what comes out ahead, but rather the corruption of her
own
soul to take the expedient route with innocent life.

This moment is, among other things, part of Buffy's recovery - though I

wouldn't count on it being terribly visible for a while. She
re-affirms a
core principal she has stood for repeatedly across the years - that she

won't give into expediency when it comes to people's lives. She's
fought
Giles on this. She's fought Wesley on this. She's fought Faith on
this.
You can argue forever about whether she's right, but it is who she is.
And
here she reclaimed that part of her. Bit by bit she's finding again
what
she cares about.

OBS
---------------------------------

[Rincewind]

"ruken" <ru1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1155783275.4...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> Rincewind wrote:
>> <lili...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1155739389....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> >
>> >> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the
>> >> police.
>> >> But the writer chose to hide this aspect of the problem by putting
>> >> exactly
>> >> the wrong words in Spike's mouth:
>> >>
>> >> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
>> >> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
>> >>
>> >> misleading the viewer into a wrong parallel with S3 Faith, when really
>> >> what
>> >> Spike should have said is:
>> >>
>> >> And how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save
>> >> them?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Rincewind.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > But see, no matter how much those words might have fit the situation
>> > better, the problem is that Spike couldn't be the one to say those
>> > words.
>> >
>> > Spike, much as I love him, has this huge lack of concern over innocent
>> > people. And his first thought wouldn't be about the innocent people
>> > that'd die while Buffy is gone. He cares about Buffy, and through her,
>> > about her friends. So at most he might mention something about Dawn or
>> > Buffy's friends getting hurt while she's in jail. But it wouldn't enter
>> > his mind that other people would be in danger as well.
>>
>> But wasn't one of the points of your post that Spike is learning morality
>> from Buffy, in a childish this-is-wrong-because-she-says-so way? By now
>> he
>> has certainly learned how important saving innocent people is FOR HER.
>> Since
>> his goal is to convince Buffy it doesn't matter if he really believes it
>> or
>> not: he is not stupid, he must know that this is an argument that can
>> penetrate Buffy's stubbornness.
>> And of course he could also have played the Dawn card, like you
>> suggested.
>>
>> For me the "One dead girl doesn't tip the scale." approach is not more
>> characteristic of Spike than a subtler attempt to manipulate her by
>> appealing to HER sense of duty (like he did, for instance, in Becoming:
>> "He's
>> got your Watcher. Right now he's probably torturing him.").
>>
>>
>> Rincewind.
>>
>> --
>> Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:
>> WILLOW: Faith's like this cleavage-y slut-bomb walking around "Ooh, check
>> me
>> out, I'm wicked-cool, I'm five-by-five."
>> TARA: Damn! Why can't I ever meet any girls like that?
>
> This is very interesting and something I hadn't thought about. Spike
> has never been stupid, impulsive and not a very good planner? yes but
> not stupid. If anything he has demonstrated an uncanny skill to be able
> to find out the best way in which to manipulate others into his way of
> thinking. My guess is that Spike didn't use that reasoning because that
> would have actually been somewhat helpful to Buffy, and I don't think
> that's what they were going for in this season.
>

My point exactly.

Rincewind.
--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:
CLEM: "Cats? Eww! I am totally a 'dog person.'"

[Rincewind]

"BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> "Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If she had called the Council of Watchers and asked to be judged by them
>> I
>> would have approved, but a normal court cannot judge a slayer, they lack
>> the
>> requisite knowledge of of the existence of demons and vapires and
>> supernatural threats, they cannot properly evaluate the mitigating
>> circumstances. So she would not be subjected to a fair trial.
>
> Slayers are not above the law. Having a special ability doesn't give you
> carte blanche to do what you please-- professional athletes
> notwithstanding.

Which is not what I said.
I said that she should be judged by a competent court. A court which doesn't
know anything about the slayers job is not competent to judge her. That's
why we learned in S3 that these situations are dealt with by the CoW.

>
>> But the most important thing is: she has responsibilities. She has to
>> save
>> the world. Who will protect innocent people from vapires and demons while
>> she is in jail? The Council of Watchers would take this into
>> consideration,
>> a normal court wouldn't.
>
> The Council would probably just kill her and be done with it, knowing
> they'd get a fresh new Slayer without any of that bothersome baggage.

Did the show ever give us any reason to think that the Watchers are cold
blooded murderers?
If they are then why are they fighting against evil?

>> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.
>

> She not only has the right, she has a duty to do so. Not only could
> Faith turn herself in, she could just quit slaying any time she wanted
> to. So could Buffy. So could any of them. None of these girls lose their
> inherent rights to personal autonomy, self-determination and freedom
> just because some supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on them
> without their consent.

You're right: these girls don't loose their inherent rights just because
some supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on them without their
consent. I totally agree that a slayer has the right to refuse her calling.
But AFTER she has decided to accept her calling she must accept the
limitations to her rights that come as part of the job.
It's just like being a soldier (in one of those countries in which the
military service is not compulsory but is just a job that you freely choose
to do): if you have chosen to be a soldier you must accept that some of the
rights that you had as a civilian don't apply to you any more.

Rincewind.
--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:

RILEY: I swear I have something interesting to say.

[Rincewind]

"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> "Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> <lili...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I mostly think of this scene as Buffy who's clearly the stronger and
>>> more powerful of the two, beating Spike up when he's trying to save her
>>> from herself. That and that moment where she basically asks him why he
>>> can't understand why something like this is killing her and he tells
>>> her: "Then explain it to me."
>>>
>>> Because 'he' doesn't understand. He's a vampire, he has no moral compas
>>> other than her. And that's the main problem, he's been hanging on her
>>> for a moral compas and unlike last year, she's no longer providing it.
>>> And that shows the problem between them at this point. Buffy can't be
>>> his moral compas, that's unfair on her. But that doesn't keep him from
>>> needing it.
>>>
>>> He's doing everything he can to help her, but because of his lack of
>>> moral compas, of a soul, he can't grasp issues that seem self evident
>>> to the rest of us.
>>
>> I mostly agree with you except for that last sentence.
>> At this point this particular issue is NOT self evident to me and the
>> parallel that the writers are trying to make with S3 Faith is just wrong
>> for lots of reasons.
>> Maybe my moral compass is as defective as Spike's, but I firmly believe
>> that turning herself in would have been very wrong.

>> If she had called the Council of Watchers and asked to be judged by them
>> I would have approved, but a normal court cannot judge a slayer, they
>> lack the requisite knowledge of of the existence of demons and vapires
>> and supernatural threats, they cannot properly evaluate the mitigating
>> circumstances. So she would not be subjected to a fair trial.
>>

>> But the most important thing is: she has responsibilities. She has to
>> save the world. Who will protect innocent people from vapires and demons
>> while she is in jail? The Council of Watchers would take this into
>> consideration, a normal court wouldn't.
>>

>> So I don't think that she has the right to turn herself in to the police.

>> But the writer chose to hide this aspect of the problem by putting
>> exactly the wrong words in Spike's mouth:
>>
>> SPIKE: And how many people are alive because of you? How many have you
>> saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale.
>>
>> misleading the viewer into a wrong parallel with S3 Faith, when really
>> what Spike should have said is:
>>
>> And how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them?
>

> Whether Buffy really should turn herself in is a complex logical issue,
> but this isn't being worked out on an intellectual plane. It doesn't
> matter if the comparison to S3 is precise. Because of Buffy's experience
> with Faith, any accidental killing is going to raise screaming red flags
> for her, and anything even hinting at expediency in response will look
> like the path to total corruption to her. She was already in that mode
> before Spike uttered a word - it's why she's going to the police. Spike's
> words, aside from possibly reminding the audience of the parallel, serve
> mainly to get Buffy to focus on the moral bankruptcy of Spike himself and
> what she's doing with him.

See, this is my main problem with S6.
Many have said that it's darker and thought provoking: it's certainly darker
(and I like that) but I can't see how it can be called thought provoking if,
when a complex logical issue is raised, it is immediately sidestepped.
Yes, Buffy is feeling corrupted.
Yes, Spike is an immoral soulless monster.
Yes, we get it!
They have been repeating it ad nauseam for 12 (13?) episodes!
What's so thought provoking about repeating the same concept again instead
of exploring some deeper moral issues when the plot offered a chance to so?

I honestly think that Consequences was more thought provoking than DT.

> Also, changing Spike's words as you suggest wouldn't make a difference.
> It's still the same argument, and the point to Buffy isn't totting up
> numbers to see what comes out ahead, but rather the corruption of her own
> soul to take the expedient route with innocent life.

Ok, on this I have to strongly disagree.
It is NOT the same argument.

The "How many have you saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale." argument
is all about the past, it's about looking at what you have done and feeling
that you have nothing to feel guilty about.

The "how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them" is
about redemption. You still know that you are guilty, but instead of
choosing the easy way out of lazing in a prison cell (the childish moral
choice: I accept punishment and everything's allright again) you can choose
to DO something good and keep fighting the good fight.
Juvpu vf gur cbvag bs gung vagrerfgvat fprar va Becurhf (NgF F4) jura Snvgu
vf ybfg va Natry'f qernzf:
NATRY: Snvgu, trg hc! Ner lbh yvfgravat?
SNVGU (jrnxyl): Natry, V'z qlvat.
NATRY: Lrnu. Vg'f n ybg rnfvre guna erqrzcgvba, uhu? (xvpxf Natryhf)
...
NATRY: Snvgu, jnxr hc!
SNVGU (jnxrf): V'ir ebyyrq gur obarf. Lbh sbe zr.
NATRY: V hfrq gb guvax gung. Gung gurer'q or n cbvag jura V'q cnvq zl qhrf.
...
NATRY: Snvgu, yvfgra gb zr. Lbh fnj zr qevax. Vg qbrfa'g trg zhpu ybjre guna
gung. Naq V gubhtug V pbhyq znxr hc sbe vg ol qvfnccrnevat.
SNVGU: V qvq zl gvzr.
NATRY: Bhe gvzr vf arire hc, Snvgu. Jr cnl sbe rirelguvat.

> This moment is, among other things, part of Buffy's recovery - though I
> wouldn't count on it being terribly visible for a while. She re-affirms a
> core principal she has stood for repeatedly across the years - that she
> won't give into expediency when it comes to people's lives. She's fought
> Giles on this. She's fought Wesley on this. She's fought Faith on this.
> You can argue forever about whether she's right, but it is who she is.
> And here she reclaimed that part of her. Bit by bit she's finding again
> what she cares about.

And again, this is why I find S6 so disappointing: "it is who she is".
No evolution, no growing up.
They gave us the dark stuff, they promised that this season would be more
adult than the highschool years.
But it really isn't.

Rincewind.
--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:

FAITH: Leather? Screw that, I need a fabric that breathes. Maybe something
in a nice pastel.

[Elisi]

Well... it's _Buffy_! Many girls sleep with their boyfriend and then he
turns into a creep. Buffy's boyfriend lost his soul, tried to kill her
friends and attempted to end the world. _Everything_ in BtVS is
magnified in this way, so even when it's ordinary problems they become
extraordinary, or larger than usual:

- The losers from High School don't just dream of being 'super
villians', they are actually able to attain this dream in some
measure... except it's turning into a nightmare.

- The Best Friend isn't just abusing drugs or drink - she was meddling
with extremely powerful and dangerous magic.

- And Buffy isn't just depressed, she's been torn out of heaven by her
friends. For once the show did what so many keep asking for: Let there
be serious, long term consequences from a choice. So why are they
complaining?

[BTR1701]

In article <5tVEg.22251$ZJ6....@tornado.fastwebnet.it>,
"Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > "Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> If she had called the Council of Watchers
> >> and asked to be judged by them I would have
> >> approved, but a normal court cannot judge a
> >> slayer, they lack the requisite knowledge of

> >> the existence of demons and vapires and
> >> supernatural threats, they cannot properly
> >> evaluate the mitigating circumstances. So she
> >> would not be subjected to a fair trial.
> >
> > Slayers are not above the law. Having a special
> > ability doesn't give you carte blanche to do what
> > you please-- professional athletes notwithstanding.
>
> Which is not what I said.
> I said that she should be judged by a competent court.
> A court which doesn't know anything about the slayers
> job is not competent to judge her. That's why we
> learned in S3 that these situations are dealt with
> by the CoW.

So send her to a military tribunal. We know that the military has full
knowledge of Slayers, demons and the whole mess.

> >> But the most important thing is: she has
> >> responsibilities. She has to save the world.

> >> Who will protect innocent people from vampires

> >> and demons while she is in jail? The Council of
> >> Watchers would take this into consideration,
> >> a normal court wouldn't.
> >
> > The Council would probably just kill her and
> > be done with it, knowing they'd get a fresh new
> > Slayer without any of that bothersome baggage.
>
> Did the show ever give us any reason to think that
> the Watchers are cold blooded murderers?

Yes. Have you forgotten the Council's assassin squad? Or the
Cruciamentum?

> If they are then why are they fighting against evil?

They obviously believe in the "you have to break a few eggs to make an
omelette" theory of evil fighting.

> >> So I don't think that she has the right to
> >> turn herself in to the police.
> >
> > She not only has the right, she has a duty to
> > do so. Not only could Faith turn herself in, she
> > could just quit slaying any time she wanted to. So
> > could Buffy. So could any of them. None of these
> > girls lose their inherent rights to personal autonomy,
> > self-determination and freedom just because some
> > supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on
> > them without their consent.
>
> You're right: these girls don't loose their inherent rights just because
> some supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on them without their
> consent. I totally agree that a slayer has the right to refuse her calling.
> But AFTER she has decided to accept her calling she must accept the
> limitations to her rights that come as part of the job.

There's no decision involved. When a Slayer dies, the new girl just
wakes up with all the powers and abilities. She's now a Slayer. She
doesn't decide to accept or reject them. It's not like she can give them
back and pass them on to someone else. They are hers until she dies and
no one else can have them until she dies.

[Stephen Tempest]

"ruken" <ru1...@yahoo.com> writes:

>Did they? The season was such a mess I honestly can't remember. I
>remember thinking Willow's power issues were going to give her trouble
>one day and the next thing I know she's going cold turkey and having
>withdrawl symptoms.

Naq nf fbba nf fur fgnegf hfvat zntvp ntnva, fur dhvpxyl fyvqrf sebz
jnagvat gb niratr Gnen'f qrngu, gb jnagvat gb hfr ure cbjref gb frg
evtug rirelguvat fur erfragrq be qvfyvxrq va ure sbezre yvsr, gb
jnagvat gb "svk" gur ragver jbeyq'f ceboyrzf ol xvyyvat rirelbar. Vg
frrzf gung ol oynzvat ure ceboyrzf ba "zntvp nqqvpgvba" vafgrnq bs gur
erny vffhrf, fur'f whfg fgberq hc nyy ure natre naq erfragzrag naq
arrq gb pbageby, haqre fhpu cerffher gung vg riraghnyyl rkcybqrf.

Va frnfba 7, fur'f orra sbeprq gb snpr gur gehgu bs jung fur vf, naq
fur ernyyl qbrfa'g yvxr vg. Zbfg bs gur frnfba vf ure fgehttyr gb
npprcg gung, naq svaq n arj jnl sbe urefrys. Va n jnl, vg'f fvzvyne
gb Ohssl'f cngu va frnfba 6, vs yrff rkgerzr...

Stephen

[Mike Zeares]

Stephen Tempest wrote:

> lili...@gmail.com writes:
>
> >It's kinda like Faith, her 'tough girl' act turns some people into
> >squealing fanboys, while leaving the rest of us cold. (sorrry, but you
> >really asked for that one by putting it like that)
>

> Faith fanboys don't squeal. We drool instead.
>
> Stephen

I kind of moan incoherently.

-- Mike Zeares

[Rincewind]

"BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> "Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > "Rincewind" <rincewi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> If she had called the Council of Watchers
>> >> and asked to be judged by them I would have
>> >> approved, but a normal court cannot judge a
>> >> slayer, they lack the requisite knowledge of
>> >> the existence of demons and vapires and
>> >> supernatural threats, they cannot properly
>> >> evaluate the mitigating circumstances. So she
>> >> would not be subjected to a fair trial.
>> >
>> > Slayers are not above the law. Having a special
>> > ability doesn't give you carte blanche to do what
>> > you please-- professional athletes notwithstanding.
>>
>> Which is not what I said.
>> I said that she should be judged by a competent court.
>> A court which doesn't know anything about the slayers
>> job is not competent to judge her. That's why we
>> learned in S3 that these situations are dealt with
>> by the CoW.
>
> So send her to a military tribunal. We know that the military has full
> knowledge of Slayers, demons and the whole mess.

But who is supposed to send her there?
The Initiative was a SECRET military operation.

>
>> >> But the most important thing is: she has
>> >> responsibilities. She has to save the world.
>> >> Who will protect innocent people from vampires
>> >> and demons while she is in jail? The Council of
>> >> Watchers would take this into consideration,
>> >> a normal court wouldn't.
>> >
>> > The Council would probably just kill her and
>> > be done with it, knowing they'd get a fresh new
>> > Slayer without any of that bothersome baggage.
>>
>> Did the show ever give us any reason to think that
>> the Watchers are cold blooded murderers?
>
> Yes. Have you forgotten the Council's assassin squad? Or the
> Cruciamentum?

The Cruciamentum was not cold blooded murder: it was an ancient admittedly
barbaric ritual in which the death of the slayer was NOT the desired
outcome.
And the assassin squad was not sent to kill just because it was the easiest
solution: the decision to kill was made because Faith had proved to be too
dangerous to risk transporting her to England. And by the way, Faith was a
cold blooded murderer, not just a slayer waiting to be judged for an
accidental death.

>> If they are then why are they fighting against evil?
>
> They obviously believe in the "you have to break a few eggs to make an
> omelette" theory of evil fighting.

Which is not nice but is still quite different from cold blooded murderers.

>> You're right: these girls don't loose their inherent rights just because
>> some supernatural force decided to dump superpowers on them without their
>> consent. I totally agree that a slayer has the right to refuse her
>> calling.
>> But AFTER she has decided to accept her calling she must accept the
>> limitations to her rights that come as part of the job.
>
> There's no decision involved. When a Slayer dies, the new girl just
> wakes up with all the powers and abilities. She's now a Slayer. She
> doesn't decide to accept or reject them. It's not like she can give them
> back and pass them on to someone else. They are hers until she dies and
> no one else can have them until she dies.

Of course there is a decision involved: if Buffy had decided to not slay
vampires and just use her superpowers to become an athlete and win the
Olympic Games who could have forced her to slay vampires?
From WttH:
GILES: I really don’t understand this attitude. You’ve accepted your duty,
you’ve slain vampires before.
BUFFY: Yeah, and I’ve both been there and done that, and I’m moving on.

Rincewind.
--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:

TARA: You know Will, you could have at least asked if I wanted to go with
you to bleed the little fawn. I miss all the fun!

[mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges]

In article <1155791082....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,

she already knew warren was one of them
and she had met katrina briefly
its when she hears katrinas name in the police station
that she remembers her and her relation to warren
and thats when buffy realizes this could be warrens work

she goes back to research
and the katrina image and demons are something the trio couldve called up

arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him

[mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges]

> Agreed about Willows addiction problem. While I can see Willow honestly
> believing that she was the right choice to raise Dawn I have a harder
> problem with Giles's agreement that Willow was really prepared to

wasnt really giles decision
he could call child welfare and point out dawns legal guardian was dead
and what looked like her guardian was a robot
but he himself had no legal concern for dawn

also when he left it was willow and tara and xander taking care of dawn
with tara in the same house

when he left the second time buffy was alive again as legal guardian

> Given Buffy's maturity and Willow's addiction problems......perhaps
> Dawn should not be living with them? Especially since on top of
> everything else money is also tight. It's weird to me that Joss (or

unless their father took custody
dawn is old enough it would be hard to get her adopted
life has to get dangerous at home
before child welfare can present a better option

but its unlikely dawn or giles or anyone else
would talk about demons and vampires and nerds oh my to cw

[Ken from Chicago]

<burt...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155784298.0...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <l64o-1rj5-AB92E...@europe.isp.giganews.com>,
>> vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <btr1702-C3DAD0...@news.giganews.com>,
>> > BTR1701 <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > the spectacularly irritating phenomena of
>> > > combining two characters names into one.
>> >
>> > You watch Veronica Mars don't you? Surely after that there is nowhere
>> > for this habit to go - if LoVe isn't the ultimate shippers wet dream I
>> > don't know what is.
>>
>> Oh, god... I hadn't heard of that one yet.
>
> My favorite answer to this (I guess you'd use it if you were a
> Veronica/Duncan shipper): LoVe fades, but VD lasts forever.

The one that's been assaulting Chicagoans this past year has been Vinnifer
and / or Vaughnnistan.

Of course, Steven Colbert has the ultimate one, BEHOLD the glory:

FILLIAM H. MUFFMAN

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q22SS11ZtYY

-- Ken from Chicago

[Ken from Chicago]

"vague disclaimer" <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:l64o-1rj5-69E4B...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,

> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>

>> Not everything
>> matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
>> first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
>> wasn't?
>
> And then she dumped him.
>
>> squealing
>> fangirls
>
> That's "tidal wave of squeeing drivel".

>
> Someone on the DP thread described the dumpster fuck as hot. Someone who
> has never been in an alley behind a fast food joint (mind you, in
> Sunnydale at least the vamps might keep the rats down).
>

>> sex scene at the Bronze
>
> And here he again does all he can to keep her away from her friends.
> Nope. Nothing predatory there. He's just a horny little devil.
> --
> Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls

She ALREADY separated from her friends. Spike was just keeping her company,
so she wouldn't feel so all alone--which she does when he wasn't around and
even when her other friends were.

It's not his fault she didn't want to tell her other friends the truth. If
anything Spike hates lies and deception--even when he could benefit from it.
For the most part he'd rather lay the cards on the table, spill the beans
and let the cat out of the bag (aside from kitty poker), and deal with the
consequences.

In large part because he simply lacks the patience to maintain a deception
for a long time, tho unlike Buffy, if he focuses, he can be quite good at
it.

-- Ken from Chicago

P.S. "You know, I just ... I woke up, and I looked in the mirror, and I
thought, 'Hey, what's with all the sin? I need to change. I'm ... I'm dirty.
I'm-I'm bad with the ... sex and envy and that, that um loud music us kids
listen to these days. Why-' .. Oh, I just stink at undercover."<KICK>--Sarah
Michelle Gellar, 'Buffy Anne Summers', BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER, "Anne".

[Ken from Chicago]

"vague disclaimer" <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote in message

news:l64o-1rj5-F6888...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <1155751538.1...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> vague disclaimer wrote:
>> > In article <1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>> > "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Not everything
>> > > matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in
>> > > the
>> > > first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
>> > > wasn't?
>> >
>> > And then she dumped him.
>> >
>> > > squealing
>> > > fangirls
>> >
>> > That's "tidal wave of squeeing drivel".
>> >
>> > Someone on the DP thread described the dumpster fuck as hot. Someone
>> > who
>> > has never been in an alley behind a fast food joint (mind you, in
>> > Sunnydale at least the vamps might keep the rats down).
>> >
>> > > sex scene at the Bronze
>> >
>> > And here he again does all he can to keep her away from her friends.
>> > Nope. Nothing predatory there. He's just a horny little devil.
>>

>> I agree that Spike was being a bit predatorial, but how exactly did he
>> keep her from her friends? She did a pretty good job of making herself
>> distant on her own, he just had a habit of showing up when she was
>> already away from them.

>> > --
>> > Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
>

> I believe the modern term is 'grooming'. Usually applied to kiddy
> fiddlers, but really applicable to any who play the faux friend to the
> vulnerable for their own ends. And given that Buffy is showing all the
> (undiagnosed, untreated) signs of clinical depression, I'd say she
> counts as vulnerable.

Except Spike's friendship wasn't fake. He was still helping Dawn and her
friends for months after Buffy's death. Even after she dumped him, he tried
to get her to really turn to her friends because she was still shutting them
out.

> She'll end up in a funny farm at this rate.

> --
> Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls

It would take more than a funny farm to make Buffy normal again.

-- Ken from Chicago

[MBangel10 (Melissa)]

One Bit Shy wrote:
> "MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155751538.1...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

> >
> > vague disclaimer wrote:
> >> In article <1155703621....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> >> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Not everything
> >> > matches up here; anyone else remember that this guy fell for her in the
> >> > first place because she was exciting in a way that his slave robot
> >> > wasn't?
> >>
> >> And then she dumped him.
> >>
> >> > squealing
> >> > fangirls
> >>
> >> That's "tidal wave of squeeing drivel".
> >>
> >> Someone on the DP thread described the dumpster fuck as hot. Someone who
> >> has never been in an alley behind a fast food joint (mind you, in
> >> Sunnydale at least the vamps might keep the rats down).
> >>
> >> > sex scene at the Bronze
> >>
> >> And here he again does all he can to keep her away from her friends.
> >> Nope. Nothing predatory there. He's just a horny little devil.
> >
> > I agree that Spike was being a bit predatorial, but how exactly did he
> > keep her from her friends? She did a pretty good job of making herself
> > distant on her own, he just had a habit of showing up when she was
> > already away from them.
>

> Buffy's doing her part, yes, but look at Spike's words. They're totally
> about pulling Buffy away from them. He's doing his best to convince her
> that she belongs with him - not them. This is probably the starkest example
> of it, but it's not new. He's been playing that card ever since he found
> that she "came back wrong". Buffy didn't believe that initially, but at
> this point pretty much does. That's feeding Buffy's separation from her
> friends and Spike's feeding that notion with everything he's got.
>
> OBS

Oh I agree. I was just pointing out that Spike didn't initiate her
separation from her friends, he just added fuel to the fire. That' s
why I agreed that he was being predatorial, once he had her with him
his main objective was keeping her there. However, it was Buffy who was
already feeling the disassociation that he fed off of.

[Rowan Hawthorn]

Rincewind wrote:
>
> The "How many have you saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale." argument
> is all about the past, it's about looking at what you have done and feeling
> that you have nothing to feel guilty about.
>
> The "how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them" is
> about redemption. You still know that you are guilty, but instead of
> choosing the easy way out of lazing in a prison cell (the childish moral
> choice: I accept punishment and everything's allright again) you can choose
> to DO something good and keep fighting the good fight.

I'm gonna try and remember that for when Season Seven rolls around...

--
Rowan Hawthorn

"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"

[peachy ashie passion]

Rincewind wrote:

>
> See, this is my main problem with S6.
> Many have said that it's darker and thought provoking: it's certainly darker
> (and I like that) but I can't see how it can be called thought provoking if,
> when a complex logical issue is raised, it is immediately sidestepped.
> Yes, Buffy is feeling corrupted.
> Yes, Spike is an immoral soulless monster.
> Yes, we get it!
> They have been repeating it ad nauseam for 12 (13?) episodes!
> What's so thought provoking about repeating the same concept again instead
> of exploring some deeper moral issues when the plot offered a chance to so?
>
> I honestly think that Consequences was more thought provoking than DT.
>

That would be a remarkably on point argument - if you know, it were true.

But Buffy and Spike have only been repeating this bit for 3 episodes
now, 4 at the most. Not 13.

Which makes your statement more than a bit overdramatic.

[Rowan Hawthorn]

lili...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Finally, the reintegration of Tara into the show comes via a mechanism
>> that isn't about Willow, a little unexpectedly. (But when's Giles
>> coming back?!) She's always been in this strange position as
>> Buffy's "outside" confidante during certain situations where the
>> very distance between them makes things easier. Also, note that
>> neither Buffy nor the writers seem to have a problem with Tara tapping
>> into the mystic arts. But I thought magic was bad, mmkay? Gee, it's

>> almost as if I was right that that wasn't the message of
>> "Wrecked."
>
> Actually it's not the magic that's bad. It never was. It's Willow's
> lack of respect for magic and it's consequences. Tara in Tabula Rasa
> didn't say Willow had to stop using magic, she just wanted Willow to
> understand that magic isn't a tool.

I'd rephrase that line a bit: magick *is* a tool, but, like *any other*
tool, needs to be respected. If you need to drive a tiny finishing nail
into your plaster wall to hang a picture, you don't use a nine-pound
sledge hammer to drive it. Or use an industrial table saw to trim your
nails...

> And that's something that Willow at
> this point, still hasn't grasped.

--

[Stephen Tempest]

"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> writes:

>It would take more than a funny farm to make Buffy normal again.

Yes - with all the entropy in her life, half-hearted measures might
get her totally seeing red and starting to believe that _all_ of her
friends are villains, not just one or two. To go on a rampage might
be her next move: it would be a very grave situation!

Stephen

[Rincewind]

"peachy ashie passion" <exquisi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mu_Eg.62850$hH1.24940@trnddc08...

Yes, it is a bit overdramatic... mostly because I really didn't want to go
and rewatch and count the episodes so I thought: "they have been doing this
for a lot, this is episode 12 (in AOQ's world) (or 13 for everybody else),
let's keep this simple".
But the point remains: What's so thought provoking about repeating the same
concept for 3 episodes, 4 at the most, instead of exploring some deeper

moral issues when the plot offered a chance to so?

Rincewind.
--
What I have learned from Buffy:
A "one Starbucks town" may be larger than you think: it can have manors,
castles, 12 cemeteries, harbours, airports, army bases, a university, an
infinite number of abandoned warehouses, and at least one dry cleaner
capable of getting mustard out.

[Rincewind]

"Rowan Hawthorn" <rowan_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kZ6dnaXMVPpg7nnZ...@giganews.com...

> Rincewind wrote:
>>
>> The "How many have you saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale."
>> argument is all about the past, it's about looking at what you have done
>> and feeling that you have nothing to feel guilty about.
>>
>> The "how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them"
>> is about redemption. You still know that you are guilty, but instead of
>> choosing the easy way out of lazing in a prison cell (the childish moral
>> choice: I accept punishment and everything's allright again) you can
>> choose to DO something good and keep fighting the good fight.
>
> I'm gonna try and remember that for when Season Seven rolls around...

What do you mean? (feel free to rot13 if the only way to explain is
spoilery).

Rincewind.
--
What I have learned from Buffy:

I do a better Irish accent than David Boreanaz.
In fact, my cat probably does a better Irish accent than David Boreanaz.

[Rowan Hawthorn]

Rincewind wrote:
> "Rowan Hawthorn" <rowan_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:kZ6dnaXMVPpg7nnZ...@giganews.com...
>> Rincewind wrote:
>>> The "How many have you saved? One dead girl doesn't tip the scale."
>>> argument is all about the past, it's about looking at what you have done
>>> and feeling that you have nothing to feel guilty about.
>>>
>>> The "how many people WILL DIE while you are in jail and cannot save them"
>>> is about redemption. You still know that you are guilty, but instead of
>>> choosing the easy way out of lazing in a prison cell (the childish moral
>>> choice: I accept punishment and everything's allright again) you can
>>> choose to DO something good and keep fighting the good fight.
>> I'm gonna try and remember that for when Season Seven rolls around...
>
> What do you mean? (feel free to rot13 if the only way to explain is
> spoilery).

Bar bs gur pbafgnag xirgpurf nobhg Frnfba Frira vf gung "Jvyybj qvqa'g
tb gb wnvy sbe xvyyvat Jneera, fb vg ehvaf ure fgbel naq ure punenpgre."

[vague disclaimer]

In article <2bt8e298itlpuis1d...@4ax.com>,
Stephen Tempest <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote:

I'm staying well out of this. There must be some lessons in there
somewhere.

[vague disclaimer]

In article <1155819975.2...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"MBangel10 (Melissa)" <MBan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Oh I agree. I was just pointing out that Spike didn't initiate her
> separation from her friends, he just added fuel to the fire. That' s
> why I agreed that he was being predatorial, once he had her with him
> his main objective was keeping her there. However, it was Buffy who was
> already feeling the disassociation that he fed off of.

Some predators storm through the jungle. Others wait in the long grass
for the stray to wander into range.

The net effect is the same.

[Rincewind]

"Rowan Hawthorn" <rowan_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:lICdnTutw-lW43nZ...@giganews.com...

Ah, that's why I didn't get it: I wasn't watching the show when it aired so
I missed all these interesting discussions. (I watched it on DVD only a few
months ago).
Anyway that's one of the few things of S7 that really didn't bother me.
But we will talk more about it in a few weeks when AOQ gets there.

Rincewind.
--
What I have learned from Buffy:

Raise a demon that burns several people to a crisp and no one will ever
mention it again.

[vague disclaimer]

In article <GsudnWp0zMTR-nnZ...@comcast.com>,

"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > I believe the modern term is 'grooming'. Usually applied to kiddy
> > fiddlers, but really applicable to any who play the faux friend to the
> > vulnerable for their own ends. And given that Buffy is showing all the
> > (undiagnosed, untreated) signs of clinical depression, I'd say she
> > counts as vulnerable.
>
> Except Spike's friendship wasn't fake. He was still helping Dawn and her
> friends for months after Buffy's death. Even after she dumped him, he tried
> to get her to really turn to her friends because she was still shutting them
> out.

Well I guess it will all end well then, and the Slayer and the Chipped
Vampire will live happily ever after.

Or alternatively:

SPIKE: You see ... you try to be with them... ...but you always end up
in the dark ...with me. What would they think of you ... if they found
out ... all the things you've done? If they knew ... who you really were?

BUFFY: (whispers) Don't.

SPIKE: Stop me. No ... don't close your eyes. Look at them. That's not
your world. You belong in the shadows... with me. Look at your friends
... and tell me ... you don't love getting away with this... ...right
under their noses.

I wonder which part of 'don't' he had trouble understanding.

[Stephen Tempest]

vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> writes:

Oh? You think it's beneath you, do you?

Stephen