BUFFY: "Primeval" (Hines's SPOILER review)

30 views
Skip to first unread message

David Hines

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to

BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
"Primeval," by David Fury

review by David Hines
rating: **


Well, thank Ghod *that's* over with.

The Initiative is dead. Its men are either dead or being debriefed and
sworn to secrecy; its underground headquarters will be filled with
concrete. "Burn it down, gentlemen," says the Man In Charge. "Burn it
down and salt the earth." That sounds about right to me, even if I wonder
how they're going to handle the order on that. Do they burn it down
first, then fill it with concrete and salt the earth; or burn it down,
salt the earth, and fill it with concrete; or fill it with concrete, salt
the earth, and then burn it; or fill it with concrete, burn it, and then
salt the earth; or...

Of course, it doesn't matter; he's speaking metaphorically. Though I have
to admit the sentiment isn't a bad idea, and would go so far as to suggest
they salt the earth twice, for good measure. If you're guessing I've
hated the whole Initiative storyline -- you're right! And you obviously
haven't been reading my reviews for the season up to this point, or you
wouldn't have to guess. The Initiative has been an incredibly lame
plotline, with a lame introduction and lame development. All it has been
missing is a lame capper -- but no more. "Primeval" fills the void.

It's not that David Fury doesn't try; he does, and makes a fairly valiant
attempt for a man who's been tossed a big ball of suck. But he has two
things going against him. First off, he's been tossed a big ball of suck.
Fury's got to wrap up a storyline that's ill-conceived and dull, dispatch
a major villain who (despite being well-acted) never made much of an
impression, and resolve character conflicts that were never really
explored much, or at all well, in the first place. There really isn't a
way for him to win here. Even if he busts his tuchis, reaches deep, and
rises to the occasion with a spectacular diving catch and throw to the
plate, there's no escaping the fact that what lands in his mitt is still
going to be a big ball of suck. Even if Fury does a bang-up job, the
result is not going to thrill.

The second problem... is that Fury *doesn't* do a bang-up job.

Oh, he does okay for a man who's got a big ball of suck to work with. He
gets off some good lines and some very cute bits; he writes the characters
as fairly smart; he lets Xander show some life. Unfortunately, except for
the last, all of that is confined to the first half of the show, after
which the episode is as lame as the season arcs it wraps up. Some of this
is only partly Fury's fault; the "Slayerettes being driven apart" angle
has been done so ineffectively over the season that the writers have had
to hammer it on in the past couple of episodes to let us know that yes,
they were *trying* to do something, and they hadn't just forgotten quality
screen time for the supporting characters *really.* Accordingly, Fury
doesn't have much choice but to make his resolution of the mess clumsy,
hammering the plotline home even as he resolves it. The characters saying
there have been problems substitutes for the problems' adequate
development onscreen; this is essentially the writers saying to the
audience, "Look, guys, we were *trying* to do something here, dammit."
Yes, I think they were; but they failed rather impressively, and rubbing
our noses in it now doesn't help.

Some of the problems with the episode, however, *are* Fury's fault (or
Joss Whedon's). For instance, that far-too-on-the-nose conversation takes
place... where? If you've seen it, you know, but if you haven't, you
won't believe it: halfway down an elevator shaft! And not just any
elevator shaft, either. No, this particular heart-to-heart takes place in
the elevator shaft that leads to the headquarters of the Initiative, and
our heroes have this touching chat *while they are rappelling down the
wall.*

You think that breaking into a top-secret military facility is something
best done with some degree of speed and stealth, and that it's probably
not a good idea to take time out for a Heartfelt Conversation while you're
doing it, especially if you're breaking in through an entrance that you
know is heavily monitored and is in fact THE FRONT DOOR? Not our heroes!
They're actually *surprised* to find several soldiers waiting for them
with zap guns just inside the Initiative. (They are, however, still
smarter than the Initiative, especially MacNamara, who is written in full
"military moron" cliche mode.)

There's a lot of that kind of thing in the episode: bits here and there
that get a couple of points for cuteness, which are then outright
obliterated by large penalties for utter stupidity. A particular favorite
of mine is the latest bit of chips-all-around. Yes, you knew I'd get to
him sooner or later: everybody's favorite commando, Rank Sweatsock! It's
a kick watching his implanted chip force him to obey as Adam tells him to
sit, stay, speak, shut up, in part because I've wished I could make Stiff
Crotchpole shut up on pretty much a regular basis since his inception.
(Hey, can we get one of those chips for Buffy, too?) But then, of course,
as we've seen a billion mind-controlled heroes do in a billion movies and
TV shows and comic books before, Bland Coldcuts overcomes his programming
enough to struggle against it. Although ordered to remain still, he
torturously reaches for a nearby shard of glass, cuts a hole in his chest,
reaches in *with his fingers,* and yanks the chip out. There's a MAN for
you, folks!

How much of a man is he? We're told that the chip in Lance Guardrail's
chest is "on the thoracic nerve." I'm guessing they mean the long
thoracic nerve. The good news is that it doesn't ennervate anything
absolutely critical -- it goes to serratus anterior, which originates on
the ribs and serves to stabilize and pronate the scapula -- so that even
if he rips the nerve right out, the worst Trip Faceplant is going to wind
up with is a winged shoulderblade. The bad news is that the long thoracic
nerve runs deep to pectoralis major and minor. To get to it, Chip
Rockpile (if his anatomy matched normal human, which, based on where he
cut and probed on the show, it doesn't) would have to cut *through* both
muscles, stick a couple fingers in the hole, widen it, feel around, find
the blood-slicked chip, get a grip on it -- and if there's anyone who's
not feeling faint at the mere prospect, savvy this: not only does he rip
the sucker out, he does NOT keel over in shock from the trauma and
attendant blood loss. No, *he stands up and fights.* (Anybody feeling
nostalgic for the days when we only had to extend our suspicion of
disbelief to the honest-to-goodness supernatural?)

Anyway, the fights are good; there's certainly a hell of a lot of action
and stunts, and most of it is pretty impressive, especially considering
TV's limited time and budget. There are some directing flubs; several
times, especially when the action is in a wide shot, director James
Contner's framing cramps the style and makes it look as if less is going
on than it actually is. He does include some decent long and medium shots
of one-on-one fights, though, especially in the final battle between Buffy
and Adam, which at its best lets us see Sophia Crawford getting off some
of the tastiest moves she's had all season. At its worst... well...

Conceptually, it bites. To give Buffy the wherewithal she needs to defeat
Adam, the Slayerettes perform a ritual that gives her their combined
powers (Giles's knowledge, Willow's magick, Xander's spirit) and throws in
all the mojo that ever juiced all the Slayers just for good measure. The
ritual boosts Buffy's strength and speed tremendously, and also gives her
the useful power to evaporate bullets with very pretty MATRIX-style
effects, and the useful ability to transmute larger missiles into doves,
as well as some other nifty things. Plus, when she rips out Adam's
uranium core, she's able to fold space-time to make it wink out of
existence. (Obviously, Xander has been holding back on us.) Just in case
anyone was doubting it, you see, *Buffy does need her friends, because she
is stronger and more firm of purpose when the Slayerettes are united.* The
theme isn't just hammered mercilessly, as in the elevator shaft; it's
beaten to death.

Still, the ham-handedness has a certain twisted symmetry to it. After
all, Joss Whedon has remarked a number of times that the WB's CHARMED
survives by doing riffs on BUFFY; in a warped way, it's sort of amusing to
see this limping season of BUFFY returning the favor.

(At least until Spike returns a few seconds later, and the Slayerettes,
who *know* full well what he's been up to, and that the *only* reason
he's doing anything to help them is so he can live to kill again someday,
decide that because he saved their lives solely to avoid being staked,
they can't rightly stake him -- oh, *ghod.*)

The good news: it's over. And in a sad, fitting way, this season's story
arc has been given the send-off it deserves. A few sparkles. Some good
performances. A good chunk of sheer stupidity. But mostly, ultimately,
*cripplingly*... "Primeval" is simply *lame.*

Joss Whedon doesn't need the remaining episode this season for a coda. He
needs it to apologize.

The ground. Salt.

*Twice.*

--
David Hines

C. Barrans

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
David Hines wrote:
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> "Primeval," by David Fury
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
<snip most 'cos I'm sleepy and sick>

> (At least until Spike returns a few seconds later, and the Slayerettes,
> who *know* full well what he's been up to, and that the *only* reason
> he's doing anything to help them is so he can live to kill again someday,
> decide that because he saved their lives solely to avoid being staked,
> they can't rightly stake him -- oh, *ghod.*)

My impression of that scene was that they didn't stake him because at
that point, after the oh-so-dangerous-but-cool spell they had just done,
they were too exhausted to care. Then again, they immediately went out
and saved the lives of a bunch of soldiers by killing a bunch of demons,
so that doesn't work. Okay, I know there must have been some kind of
logic here... They didn't stake him because, after taking over
Jonathan's role in _The Matrix_ in their fight with Adam, putting a
pointy piece of wood in the heart of an undead shell-of-a-loser would
just be too anticlimactic. Yeah, that works.

> The good news: it's over. And in a sad, fitting way, this season's story
> arc has been given the send-off it deserves. A few sparkles. Some good
> performances. A good chunk of sheer stupidity. But mostly, ultimately,
> *cripplingly*... "Primeval" is simply *lame.*

While I've enjoyed this season's episodes much more than you have, I'm
forced to agree with you about the treatment of the arc. I've loved, or
at least really liked, every episode that hasn't been "Where the Wild
Things Are" or "A New Man," but I can't say I've looked forward to where
the plot was going. I haven't *cared*. Haven't had the least little
bit of suspense, just a little twinge of curiosity about whether or not
they'd give an adequate explanation of the Initiative's motives in
creating a monster to destroy the human race in order to save it or
whatever all that was about, and of course they didn't. (Why did the
Man In Charge say they'd had 40% casualties as if they'd wanted their
guys to live? Wasn't the whole POINT that Maggie'd wanted Adam to kill
a bunch of beings for their parts?)

I have to say that Adam as a villain impressed me as much as The Master
in first season. Didn't like that guy either.

> Joss Whedon doesn't need the remaining episode this season for a coda. He
> needs it to apologize.

Or at least give us something to talk about over the summer. (Xander
lied. Full of Grace. The WB folks are morons for postponing G2. What
oh what can top those classics?)

-- CB

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Science is not the way to find answers to all our questions.
Science is a way to find better questions.

Ian J. Ball

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <NFKU4.15805$Y4.6...@typhoon2.san.rr.com>, hra...@mib.org
(David Hines) wrote:

> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> "Primeval," by David Fury
>
> review by David Hines
> rating: **
>
>
> Well, thank Ghod *that's* over with.

Yep. Couldn't agree more...

> ...Yes, you knew I'd get to


> him sooner or later: everybody's favorite commando, Rank Sweatsock! It's
> a kick watching his implanted chip force him to obey as Adam tells him to
> sit, stay, speak, shut up, in part because I've wished I could make Stiff
> Crotchpole shut up on pretty much a regular basis since his inception.
> (Hey, can we get one of those chips for Buffy, too?)

Don't forget Willow! (Or Spike, for that matter...)

> Just in case
> anyone was doubting it, you see, *Buffy does need her friends, because she
> is stronger and more firm of purpose when the Slayerettes are united.* The
> theme isn't just hammered mercilessly, as in the elevator shaft; it's
> beaten to death.

I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
*appalled* by this turn of events?!

I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!

Yeah, that's right Folks! You don't need any real "Slayer powers" to do
your Slayer duty! That's right! All you need is a couple of friends who
are going to help you *cheat* to defeat your Mortal Enemy! Ain't that
grand, Kids?!

Maybe it's just me, but this "final cheating" finished deflating what was
already a lackluster finale for me.

(And don't get me started on the "battle" shots which looked cheap - like
they were filmed on a Universal Studios backlot! And to think people
complained about GD2. At least those battle sequences *worked*!)

> Still, the ham-handedness has a certain twisted symmetry to it. After
> all, Joss Whedon has remarked a number of times that the WB's CHARMED
> survives by doing riffs on BUFFY; in a warped way, it's sort of amusing to
> see this limping season of BUFFY returning the favor.

Except that "Charmed" does it better. Actually, "Charmed" does *both*
things better...

> The good news: it's over.

The bad news? I think this is just the begining! (But I hope to Ghu I am
wrong...)

--
Ian J. Ball | "I'm not going to have somebody probing my mind,
Ph.D. Chemist, | looking for things that aren't there!"
& TV lover | - Tricia Dennison McNeil, CBS's Y&R
ib...@socal.rr.com | http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/TV.html

Ian J. Ball

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <39237DE9...@erols.com>, "C. Barrans"
<cbar...@erols.com> wrote:

> Or at least give us something to talk about over the summer. (Xander
> lied. Full of Grace. The WB folks are morons for postponing G2. What
> oh what can top those classics?)

Oh, I think we know what this summer's classics will be: "Did Season #4
Suck as Badly as I Think It Did?!" and "Is 'Buffy" Finished (as a Good
Show)?"

Ladies and Gentlemen, Start Your Engines! <vroom> <vroom>

David Goldfarb

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,

Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
>*appalled* by this turn of events?!
>
>I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!

While a lot of the time I don't agree with David Hines, his comments
are always intelligible and articulate.

This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
set up rules and is keeping score?

>Yeah, that's right Folks! You don't need any real "Slayer powers" to do
>your Slayer duty! That's right! All you need is a couple of friends who
>are going to help you *cheat* to defeat your Mortal Enemy! Ain't that
>grand, Kids?!

They thought of a way to beat Adam, and they used it. It seems little
different to me from using a rocket launcher to blow up the Judge -- did
you object to that too?

You can call it a deus ex machina. You can say it was a heavy-handed
use of theme. You can note that it weakens future storylines by creating
something that can handle problems too easily. People have raised all
these objections, and with some truth.

But saying they were *cheating*...??

--
David Goldfarb <*>|"Understanding is a three-edged sword."
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |
aste...@slip.net | -- Babylon 5, "Deathwalker"
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |

Ian J. Ball

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
(David Goldfarb) wrote:

> In article
<iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,
> Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> >I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
> >*appalled* by this turn of events?!
> >
> >I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!
>

> This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
> the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
> set up rules and is keeping score?

Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...

Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

Mike Zeares

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
"Ian J. Ball" wrote:
>
> In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
> (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>>
> Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...
>
>
> Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
> a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
> was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

So was it honorable for her to trick Luke in "The Harvest?" How about
the vamps she back-stabbed or beheaded when they weren't aware of her
presence? Using a rocket launcher on The Judge? Working with Spike?
Fooling Faith? The times Willow has cast a spell to assist the fight?

Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.

-- Mike Zeares
"From day one, Buffy only resorts to thought after she has established
that violence won't work." -- William George Ferguson

Jim Roberts-Miller

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote in <iball***death-to-
SPAM***-18050008...@pool0617.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net>:

>In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
>(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>

>> In article
><iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,
>> Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>> >I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
>> >*appalled* by this turn of events?!
>> >
>> >I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!
>>
>> This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
>> the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
>> set up rules and is keeping score?
>

>Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...
>
>Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
>a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
>was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

And here I thought you were referring to the *writer's* cheating.

Are you serious about this? Because I, a relative Buffy neophyte, have never
gotten the impression, from either the episode synopses or the episodes I have
seen, that there was any such idea of "honorable warrior".

Jammer Jim Roberts-Miller
--
Texas A&M '89, '91 "Is there in Truth no Beauty?"
"Of course, you do not have to go to the moon to find cold, dark, and
inhospitable...conditions. Much of Canada will do." -- the Economist
http://www.mindspring.com/~jammerjim/jimpg01.html

vicpusateri

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
Ian wrote:

[...]


>
>Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who
beats Evil in a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and
magic to win this fight >was not honorable. By doing this, she
devalued The Slayer in my book.

No offense, Ian, but that's bullshit.

Buffy has always used trickery and magic against her opponents
[the ruse in Enemies to smoke out Faith; tricking Luke in the
Harvest; the clouding spell in Zeppo; even the little
run-and-stumble technique she uses against average, everyday
vamps, pretending she's an ordinary girl so they'll chase her]
and I've never seen that as being dishonorable. She's doing what
it takes to win.

She has never been overly concerned with "honor" and I, for one,
am damn glad of it. It's a stupid concept that says you can't
fight your dirtiest when someone's trying to kill you/become a
snakedemon/suck the world into hell, etc.

victoria p.
the dishonorable Miss July

--


"Cunnilingus and psychiatry brought us to this!" Tony Soprano,
_The Sopranos_

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


Peter Meilinger

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
: In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
: (David Goldfarb) wrote:

:> In article
: <iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,
:> Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
:> >I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
:> >*appalled* by this turn of events?!
:> >
:> >I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!
:>
:> This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
:> the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
:> set up rules and is keeping score?

: Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...

: Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in


: a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
: was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

I could not disagree more, I'm afraid. I've never seen Buffy as
worrying about honor or anything but winning. And I think that's
a good thing, personally. She often gets into fights where the
fate of the world literally hangs in the balance, and even her
less important struggles are to save any number of innocent
lives. In that kind of situation, I want someone who's out
to win the damned fight no matter what, not make sure they
fight with honor.

Pete

Mike Zeares

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
vicpusateri wrote:
>
> Ian wrote:
>
> [...]

> >
> >Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who
> beats Evil in a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and
> magic to win this fight >was not honorable. By doing this, she
> devalued The Slayer in my book.
>
> No offense, Ian, but that's bullshit.

Dang it, I was going to say that, but I didn't want to start trouble.

Guess I'm going soft.

-- Mike Zeares the Soft

Scott C. Swalwell

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to

"Mike Zeares" <mze...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:3924181E...@texas.net...

<Snip Cheating Debate>

> Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
> Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.

^^^^^^

It seems to me she prefers beer.

--
Scott C. Swalwell, Esq.

"The world's address, a place that's worn.
A sad pun that reflects a sadder mess,
I'll repeat it for those who may not have already guessed:
The world's address."

- They Might Be Giants

vicpusateri

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <3924422F...@texas.net>, Mike Zeares

<mze...@texas.net> wrote:
>vicpusateri wrote:
>>
>> Ian wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> >
>> >Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who
>> beats Evil in a clean fight. What she did by using trickery
and magic to win this fight >was not honorable. By doing this,
she devalued The Slayer in my book.
>>
>> No offense, Ian, but that's bullshit.
>
>Dang it, I was going to say that, but I didn't want to start
trouble.

Oh, hell, I'm just feeling unwell and ornery. And tact-free.

>Guess I'm going soft.

Say it ain't so, Mike. YOur legion of female fans will be quite
disappointed.

>-- Mike Zeares the Soft

I'm sure we could find a remedy for that. ;)

victoria p.
Miss July
Occasional Mike Zeares groupie
"Cordelia"

Mike Zeares

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
"Scott C. Swalwell" wrote:
>
> "Mike Zeares" <mze...@texas.net> wrote in message
> news:3924181E...@texas.net...
>
> <Snip Cheating Debate>
>
> > Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
> > Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
> ^^^^^^
>
> It seems to me she prefers beer.

Beer foamy! Mike's spelling bad!

-- Mike Zeares

Christopher Rickey

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article
<iball***death-to-SPAM***-18050008...@pool0617.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net>,

iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:

> In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
> (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>
> > In article
> <iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,
> > Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> > >I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
> > >*appalled* by this turn of events?!
> > >
> > >I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!
> >
> > This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
> > the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
> > set up rules and is keeping score?
>
> Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...
>

> Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
> a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
> was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

"Honorable warrior?" "Clean fight?" I never knew style points were the
essence of what she was. I thought she was there to save our asses.

--
Blow up the outside
Blow up the outside
Blow up the outside world

Terry McNeal

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
On Thu, 18 May 2000 15:38:00 GMT,
iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:

>Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
>a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
>was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

"This isn't a spelling bee. Nobody expects you to fight fair."
-- Angel, "Bachelor Party"

Terry

Peter Meilinger

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
Terry McNeal <tymc...@remove.this.zdnetonebox.com> wrote:
: On Thu, 18 May 2000 15:38:00 GMT,

Waitaminnit. You're supposed to fight fair in a spelling bee?

So I guess I shouldn't have kneecapped Tara McMartin back in
5th grade then? Why doesn't anyone *tell* me these things?!

Pete

Shawn Hill

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:

: While a lot of the time I don't agree with David Hines, his comments


: are always intelligible and articulate.

: This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving


: the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
: set up rules and is keeping score?


Yep. David did. He's had the rules all figured out all season, which is
why he gets annoyed when the show(apparently in ignorance) doesn't follow
them.

:>Yeah, that's right Folks! You don't need any real "Slayer powers" to do

:>your Slayer duty! That's right! All you need is a couple of friends who
:>are going to help you *cheat* to defeat your Mortal Enemy! Ain't that
:>grand, Kids?!

: They thought of a way to beat Adam, and they used it. It seems little
: different to me from using a rocket launcher to blow up the Judge -- did
: you object to that too?

: You can call it a deus ex machina. You can say it was a heavy-handed
: use of theme. You can note that it weakens future storylines by creating
: something that can handle problems too easily. People have raised all
: these objections, and with some truth.

: But saying they were *cheating*...??

It's not a deus ex machina, either. That would be something like the
Powers that Be from Angel showing up and saying "Adam. Bad boy. Go boom
now!"

Instead we got the slayerettes, reunited cause it feels so good,
extrapolating from their own abilities and histories to cast a spell that
takes down the bad guy by kicking it up a notch past his
understanding. IE, what they did to save Angel's soul. And not what they
did to fight the mayor, where they used deception and lots of bombs.

It was cool. It was Buffy temporarily to the nth degree. Loved it.

Shawn


Shawn Hill

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:

: Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...

: Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in


: a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
: was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

The Slayer IS magic. How could using it be dishonorable for her? Such an
assertion really does not compute.

Shawn


Shawn Hill

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
David Hines <hra...@mib.org> wrote:

: BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
: "Primeval," by David Fury

: review by David Hines
: rating: **


: Some of the problems with the episode, however, *are* Fury's fault (or


: Joss Whedon's). For instance, that far-too-on-the-nose conversation takes
: place... where? If you've seen it, you know, but if you haven't, you
: won't believe it: halfway down an elevator shaft! And not just any
: elevator shaft, either. No, this particular heart-to-heart takes place in
: the elevator shaft that leads to the headquarters of the Initiative, and
: our heroes have this touching chat *while they are rappelling down the
: wall.*

don't you have the slightest inkling here that this scene is supposed to
be unlikely and a bit ridiculous? Of course it's not a wise tactic, but
this isn't Mission:Impossible, and the show isn't about the effectiveness
of the evil and the efficiency of Buffy's response. It's also a comedy
(something I know you've missed before, or not cared about, or found just
unfunny I guess) about Buffy's life and her ups and downs. It's hilarious
to pick such a moment to reconcile. Buffy wasn't worried about fooling
General Moron, anyway, , she was worried about getting to Adam.

: a kick watching his implanted chip force him to obey as Adam tells him to


: sit, stay, speak, shut up, in part because I've wished I could make Stiff
: Crotchpole shut up on pretty much a regular basis since his inception.
: (Hey, can we get one of those chips for Buffy, too?) But then, of course,

NO, we can't, because a powerless Buffy is beside the point. She always
wins because she's the Slayer. It may be a silly tautology, but it's her
special magic. She has to fight evil. She wants to have a life. She has
no problem mixing the two.

: as we've seen a billion mind-controlled heroes do in a billion movies and


: TV shows and comic books before, Bland Coldcuts overcomes his programming
: enough to struggle against it. Although ordered to remain still, he
: torturously reaches for a nearby shard of glass, cuts a hole in his chest,
: reaches in *with his fingers,* and yanks the chip out. There's a MAN for
: you, folks!

It was pretty cool.

: muscles, stick a couple fingers in the hole, widen it, feel around, find


: the blood-slicked chip, get a grip on it -- and if there's anyone who's
: not feeling faint at the mere prospect, savvy this: not only does he rip
: the sucker out, he does NOT keel over in shock from the trauma and
: attendant blood loss. No, *he stands up and fights.* (Anybody feeling

he's already been shown to have extranormal strength and healing ability.

: nostalgic for the days when we only had to extend our suspicion of


: disbelief to the honest-to-goodness supernatural?)

I actually don't have a problem extending my disbelief in a variety of
ways. I take that as part and parcel of fiction and especially fantasy.

: is stronger and more firm of purpose when the Slayerettes are united.* The


: theme isn't just hammered mercilessly, as in the elevator shaft; it's
: beaten to death.

We already know that Buffy's advanatge is her allies. That was covered in
Season 3, when she was so punished for deserting everyone. This was just
a different version of using that advantage, one that I found exciting
and profound, not caring that it could also be seen as simplistic and
"ham-handed." Buffy often makes metaphors into concrete, punchable
things.

: Still, the ham-handedness has a certain twisted symmetry to it. After


: all, Joss Whedon has remarked a number of times that the WB's CHARMED
: survives by doing riffs on BUFFY; in a warped way, it's sort of amusing to
: see this limping season of BUFFY returning the favor.

Buffy has always had magic, before charmed. Remember Willow being
possessed in a group magic scenario in order to restore Angel's soul?

: (At least until Spike returns a few seconds later, and the Slayerettes,


: who *know* full well what he's been up to, and that the *only* reason
: he's doing anything to help them is so he can live to kill again someday,
: decide that because he saved their lives solely to avoid being staked,
: they can't rightly stake him -- oh, *ghod.*)

he's cute and funny. I'm sure they don't want to waste him. Logic isn't
what this show has eVER been about.

: Joss Whedon doesn't need the remaining episode this season for a coda. He
: needs it to apologize.

For what? Providing another season of one of the best shows on TV? I'm
hoping for some Emmy noms this year, for writing and acting.

Buffy is supposed to entertain. It's not a strategic diagram for how to
fight evil correctly.

Shawn


Christopher Rickey

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <8g1fai$fqu$4...@news.fas.harvard.edu>, Shawn Hill
<sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:

> David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
> : While a lot of the time I don't agree with David Hines, his comments
> : are always intelligible and articulate.
>
> : This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
> : the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
> : set up rules and is keeping score?
>
>
> Yep. David did. He's had the rules all figured out all season, which is
> why he gets annoyed when the show(apparently in ignorance) doesn't follow
> them.

"'Cheated'?" was a reply to Ian.

Christopher Rickey

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <8g1rmm$icl$1...@news3.bu.edu>, Peter Meilinger <mell...@bu.edu> wrote:

> Terry McNeal <tymc...@remove.this.zdnetonebox.com> wrote:
> : On Thu, 18 May 2000 15:38:00 GMT,
> : iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:
>

> :>Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in


> :>a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
> :>was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.
>

> : "This isn't a spelling bee. Nobody expects you to fight fair."
> : -- Angel, "Bachelor Party"
>
> Waitaminnit. You're supposed to fight fair in a spelling bee?
>
> So I guess I shouldn't have kneecapped Tara McMartin back in
> 5th grade then? Why doesn't anyone *tell* me these things?!

They probably figured you had a thing for her and were just getting her
back for kicking you in the shins at recess.

Don Sample

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
In article <8g1tq0$k5h$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>, Shawn Hill
<sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:

> David Hines <hra...@mib.org> wrote:
>
> : BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER


> : "Primeval," by David Fury
>
> : review by David Hines
> : rating: **
>
>
>

> : (At least until Spike returns a few seconds later, and the Slayerettes,


> : who *know* full well what he's been up to, and that the *only* reason
> : he's doing anything to help them is so he can live to kill again someday,
> : decide that because he saved their lives solely to avoid being staked,
> : they can't rightly stake him -- oh, *ghod.*)
>

> he's cute and funny. I'm sure they don't want to waste him. Logic isn't
> what this show has eVER been about.

Also at this point they are deep in a hole surrounded by demons that
want to kill them. Spike may be an untrustworthy bastard who will no
doubt sell them out the next opportunity he gets, but at the moment
their interests and his are alined: Getting out of there alive.

Spike is a very effective fighter, who at the moment is on their side.
Staking him now might very well cost them one of their lives in the
next few minutes, and would likely cost the lives of several of the
Initiative people that he could help them save.

Leave him alone for now, and stake him later.

--
Don Sample, dsa...@synapse.net
Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://www.synapse.net/~dsample/BBC
Quando omni flunkus moritati

All the Tea in China Blue

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
/ Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
/ Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.

Wining, Winning, or Whining?

--
CACS: Collective Against Consensual Sanity v0.123
Now a text site map! http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/cacs/

While PacBell is broken, contact will be intermittent.

Mike Zeares

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
All the Tea in China Blue wrote:
>
> / Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
> / Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
>
> Wining, Winning, or Whining?

Oh, kiss my white saggy ass. You know what the fuck I meant.

-- Mike Zeares

Loots

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
I'm not a Riley fan nor do I belong to the "KILL RILEY NOW" camp. But the
nicknames you had for him in this review were the best yet.

-Loots

Eric F.

unread,
May 18, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/18/00
to
Mike Zeares wrote:

> Oh, kiss my white saggy ass. You know what the fuck I meant.

Tsk, tsk. Why the flames?

One would think YOU just got fired...

Later,

Eric F., Buffy Fan
----

Willow: Nervous?
Xander: No way. I'm full of that good old kamikazee spirit.
Giles: Xander, just because this is never going to work, there's no need
to be negative. ("Primeval")

Tom Breton

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Spoilers for _Primeval_:


"Ian J. Ball" <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> writes:

> In article <NFKU4.15805$Y4.6...@typhoon2.san.rr.com>, hra...@mib.org

> (David Hines) wrote:
>
> > BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> > "Primeval," by David Fury
> >
> > review by David Hines
> > rating: **
> >
> >
>

> > Just in case
> > anyone was doubting it, you see, *Buffy does need her friends, because she

> > is stronger and more firm of purpose when the Slayerettes are united.* The
> > theme isn't just hammered mercilessly, as in the elevator shaft; it's
> > beaten to death.
>

> I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
> *appalled* by this turn of events?!
>
> I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!

I guess you mean a deus ex machina. That sounds about rite. But not
quite as bad as having magic snow save the day. }:)

--
Tom Breton, http://world.std.com/~tob
Not using "gh" since 1997. http://world.std.com/~tob/ugh-free.html
BTVS geek code, http://world.std.com/~tob/btvs-geek-code.html
1+ 2+++ 3- 4- W--- R@ F+ A- Dar++ J+ A&B--- W&Moloch+++ T&O++ X&C+
X&Ay--- XL+++ Cru--- Gav--- JW- SMG+++ ED+ MN- DF- DP- JE+

Tom Breton

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Spoilers for _Primeval_:


iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) writes:

> In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
> (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>
> > In article
> <iball***death-to-SPAM***-697312.224...@news-server.socal.rr.com>,

> > Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:

> > >I'll probably cover this more in my Year-End Review, but wasn't anyone
> > >*appalled* by this turn of events?!
> > >
> > >I mean, for all intents and purposes, Buffy *cheated* to beat Adam!
> >

> > This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
> > the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
> > set up rules and is keeping score?
>

> Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...
>

> Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
> a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
> was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

Sorry, I can't agree. I don't see anything wrong with Buffy saving
the day by whatever reasonable means will work, eg Xander's missile
launcher. IMO, Buffy's dumbest moments have come from the "clean
fite" ethic. Eg, her fite with Faith in GD1.

Tom Breton

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
"Ian J. Ball" <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> writes:

> In article <39237DE9...@erols.com>, "C. Barrans"
> <cbar...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> > Or at least give us something to talk about over the summer. (Xander
> > lied. Full of Grace. The WB folks are morons for postponing G2. What
> > oh what can top those classics?)
>
> Oh, I think we know what this summer's classics will be: "Did Season #4
> Suck as Badly as I Think It Did?!" and "Is 'Buffy" Finished (as a Good
> Show)?"

I rather suspect the Pruitt saga will rate heavily this summer.

Hines

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <8g1fai$fqu$4...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,

Shawn Hill <sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
>: While a lot of the time I don't agree with David Hines, his comments
>: are always intelligible and articulate.
>
>: This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving

>: the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
>: set up rules and is keeping score?
>
>Yep. David did. He's had the rules all figured out all season, which is
>why he gets annoyed when the show(apparently in ignorance) doesn't follow
>them.

Before you try to take me to task for an opinion, you might want to be
sure that I actually hold it.

Just a suggestion, mind.

--
David Hines
threaded newsreaders are your *friend*

Dedalus

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
You go tell 'em Mr. Zeares.

Fight fair? Against a kimetically redundant, biomechanical demonoid?
Don't think ettiquette counts much in these situations. Not exactly the
Code Duello, is it? With a world in peril ... throw dirt in their eyes,
kick 'em in the groin, whatever, just save the world, already.
Priorities folks. For what it's worth, I think you people ran out of
legitimate criticism around Doomed and now you're just making stuff up.

And Mr. Hines, Joss doesn't need to apologze to anyone.

Dedalus


Ian J. Ball

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <2002-392...@storefull-228.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
Paul-...@webtv.net (Dedalus) wrote:

> You go tell 'em Mr. Zeares.
>
> Fight fair? Against a kimetically redundant, biomechanical demonoid?
> Don't think ettiquette counts much in these situations. Not exactly the
> Code Duello, is it? With a world in peril ... throw dirt in their eyes,
> kick 'em in the groin, whatever, just save the world, already.
> Priorities folks.

Hmmmm.... How can I put this: "Buffy is a whiny and self-absorbed suck!
And she's a *cheater*!"

> For what it's worth, I think you people ran out of
> legitimate criticism around Doomed and now you're just making stuff up.

Yeah, whatever, Pal...

> And Mr. Hines, Joss doesn't need to apologze to anyone.

Think again. I may not necessarily agree with the fundamental basis of
Hines' criticisms (I care more about dialogue and entertainment value than
plot structure), but I can't deny that he's been on the money more often
than not this season.

--
Ian J. Ball | "I'm not going to have somebody probing my mind,
Ph.D. Chemist, | looking for things that aren't there!"
& TV lover | - Tricia Dennison McNeil, CBS's Y&R
ib...@socal.rr.com | http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/TV.html

Hines

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <8g1tq0$k5h$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
Shawn Hill <sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
[re: the heart to heart]

>don't you have the slightest inkling here that this scene is supposed to
>be unlikely and a bit ridiculous? Of course it's not a wise tactic, but
>this isn't Mission:Impossible, and the show isn't about the effectiveness
>of the evil and the efficiency of Buffy's response. It's also a comedy
>(something I know you've missed before, or not cared about, or found just
>unfunny I guess) about Buffy's life and her ups and downs.

Precisely. BUFFY is (sometimes) a comedy; it's not a farce. The elevator
shaft scene is a farce, and it might play great on, say, THE TICK, as a
parody of reunion scenes. The time is abysmal. The place is worse.
Only incredibly *stupid* people would have a reunion in an elevator shaft
that's almost certainly lined with cameras: it's completely ludicrous.
Which is why it would work on THE TICK, and why it doesn't work on BUFFY.

BUFFY isn't doing a farcical riff on stories about friends who've lost
touch and reunite; it actually is trying to *do* a story about friends
who've lost touch and reunite. Buffy's humor, and its horror, is grounded
in truth and emotional believability: that's what makes the reactions of
these imaginary people in this fantasy world, so affecting -- because the
situation may be fantastic or ludicrous, but the *people* are real and
react as real people probably would react if they dealt with weirdness
regularly. Which, in this scene, they don't. It's as inappropriate as
Xander's joking about Angel(us)'s breaking into Buffy's house in
"Passion."

>Buffy wasn't worried about fooling
>General Moron, anyway, , she was worried about getting to Adam.

Which, I should point out, does necessitate getting past the two hundred
or so armed military personnel between Buffy and him!

>: a kick watching his implanted chip force him to obey as Adam tells him to
>: sit, stay, speak, shut up, in part because I've wished I could make Stiff
>: Crotchpole shut up on pretty much a regular basis since his inception.
>: (Hey, can we get one of those chips for Buffy, too?) But then, of course,
>
>NO, we can't, because a powerless Buffy is beside the point. She always
>wins because she's the Slayer. It may be a silly tautology, but it's her
>special magic. She has to fight evil. She wants to have a life. She has
>no problem mixing the two.

Swing and a miss!

(You just completely whiffed on my sarcasm, dude.)

[the Dip rips his chip]


>he's already been shown to have extranormal strength and healing ability.

When he was on Maggie Walsh's drugs, which he's been off for some time
now. (And it's noteworthy that even when he was fresh off them, he was
much easier to incapacitate.)

>I actually don't have a problem extending my disbelief in a variety of
>ways. I take that as part and parcel of fiction and especially fantasy.

I hope you realize that, by these standards, it's impossible for anyone
to write a bad fantasy story. If suspension of disbelief carries you, not
only over the basic premise, but over implausibilities of character
interaction and inconsistencies in the fantasy world itself, then action,
characterization, and setting don't have to make the slightest bit of
sense, even relative to each other. I suppose that makes things easier
from a production standpoint; it certainly allows for a considerable
savings in lighting and editing...

("The screen's too dark, and the camera's upside down!"
"Shhh, honey. Suspend disbelief.")

>Buffy often makes metaphors into concrete, punchable things.

And when it tries to convey the episode's theme through them, as opposed
to using them to ground the story, we get stuff like "Beauty and the
Beasts." Or "Primeval," though it wasn't nearly as bad as BatB.

>: Still, the ham-handedness has a certain twisted symmetry to it. After
>: all, Joss Whedon has remarked a number of times that the WB's CHARMED
>: survives by doing riffs on BUFFY; in a warped way, it's sort of amusing to
>: see this limping season of BUFFY returning the favor.
>
>Buffy has always had magic, before charmed. Remember Willow being
>possessed in a group magic scenario in order to restore Angel's soul?

Magick has been a part of BUFFY since "The Witch," but uniting the powers
of separate people through magick is new ground for the show. I just find
it funny that Whedon complains about CHARMED doing stuff similar to stuff
on BUFFY, then wraps up the season using a variation on the other show's
premise.

>Logic isn't what this show has eVER been about.

You're confusing being *about* logic with *subscribing* to it. The show
has never been about the logistics of vampire hunting (that might be an
interesting show, but it's not this one), but it has for damn sure paid
considerable attention to common sense and internal consistency. If it
hadn't, I wouldn't have stuck around for season two, much less through
season four. (Will I stick around through season five? Beats hell out of
me.)

--
David Hines

David Goldfarb

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <iball***death-to-SPAM***-18050008...@pool0617.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net>,

Ian J. Ball <iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>In article <8g0823$ng5$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>, gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
>(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>> This, on the other hand, is just from outer space. "Cheated"? Saving
>> the world from techno-Frankenstein's-monsters is a game? Someone has
>> set up rules and is keeping score?
>
>Wow, you don't get it so it's from "outer space"? Nice...

It's so far removed from anything I'd have thought of myself that it
might as well be the product of another planet, yeah.

>Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in
>a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
>was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

She uses magic every day -- her Slayer-strength is magical. And she's
done lots of stuff before that was't exactly "honorable single combat";
ranging from stealing a rocket launcher to use on the Judge, to playing
on the Mayor's grief to lure him into a room booby-trapped with explosives.
How is this any different? (I asked before and you didn't answer.)

--
David Goldfarb <*>|"In the fifties, people responded well to
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | authoritative disembodied voices."
aste...@slip.net |
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- MST3K

Peter Meilinger

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Tom Breton <t...@world.std.com> wrote:
: Spoilers for _Primeval_:
:

:
: iball***death-to-SPAM***@socal.rr.com (Ian J. Ball) writes:

:> Look, The Slayer is supposed to be an honorable warrior who beats Evil in


:> a clean fight. What she did by using trickery and magic to win this fight
:> was not honorable. By doing this, she devalued The Slayer in my book.

: Sorry, I can't agree. I don't see anything wrong with Buffy saving


: the day by whatever reasonable means will work, eg Xander's missile
: launcher. IMO, Buffy's dumbest moments have come from the "clean
: fite" ethic. Eg, her fite with Faith in GD1.

I think her fight with Faith was much more about her wanting to
beat Faith bloody with her bare hands than about honor. Still
not the brightest thing in the world, but more understandable
to me at least.

Pete

vicpusateri

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
On Thu, 18 May 2000 23:13:53 -0500 Mike Zeares <mze...@texas.net>
wrote:

> All the Tea in China Blue wrote:
> >
> > / Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
> > / Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
> >
> > Wining, Winning, or Whining?
>
> Oh, kiss my white saggy ass. You know what the fuck I meant.

I guess you haven't gone soft after all.

victoria p.
Miss July

--

"Well, you know what they say: if you don't have anything nice to say
about anybody, come sit by me!" Clairee Belcher, _Steel Magnolias_
--
Free audio & video emails, greeting cards and forums
Talkway - http://www.talkway.com - Talk more ways (sm)


Daryl McCullough

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Tom says...

>I guess you mean a deus ex machina. That sounds about rite. But not
>quite as bad as having magic snow save the day. }:)

Are you talking about a _Buffy_ episode, or _The Wizard of Oz_?

Daryl McCullough
CoGenTex, Inc.
Ithaca, NY

Unusual weather we're having, ain't it?


Todd Yarbrough

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Heheheh- the best thing about your reviews is the nicknames you come up with
for Riley... love 'em.

Mike Zeares

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
"Ian J. Ball" wrote:
>
> In article <2002-392...@storefull-228.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> Paul-...@webtv.net (Dedalus) wrote:
>
> > You go tell 'em Mr. Zeares.
> >
> > Fight fair? Against a kimetically redundant, biomechanical demonoid?
> > Don't think ettiquette counts much in these situations. Not exactly the
> > Code Duello, is it? With a world in peril ... throw dirt in their eyes,
> > kick 'em in the groin, whatever, just save the world, already.
> > Priorities folks.
>
> Hmmmm.... How can I put this: "Buffy is a whiny and self-absorbed suck!
> And she's a *cheater*!"
>
> > For what it's worth, I think you people ran out of
> > legitimate criticism around Doomed and now you're just making stuff up.
>
> Yeah, whatever, Pal...

That's it? That's your response to me and the others who have responded
to your "honorable warrior" post? You have NOTHING to back up your
statement?

Actually, I'm not surprised. It was an unsupportable position, IMHO.
But you could have at least *tried*.

-- Mike Zeares
"From day one, Buffy only resorts to thought after she has established
that violence won't work." -- William George Ferguson

Daryl McCullough

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Don Sample says...

>> he's cute and funny. I'm sure they don't want to waste him. Logic isn't


>> what this show has eVER been about.
>

>Also at this point they are deep in a hole surrounded by demons that
>want to kill them. Spike may be an untrustworthy bastard who will no
>doubt sell them out the next opportunity he gets, but at the moment
>their interests and his are alined: Getting out of there alive.

Also, the Scooby gang are a bunch of *good guys*. Good guys on TV
won't kill someone, no matter how evil, if they are being nice at
that moment. They have to catch the bad guys in the act of being evil.

SWeick

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
Mike Zeares mze...@texas.net wrote:

>"Ian J. Ball" wrote:
>>
>> In article <2002-392...@storefull-228.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
>> Paul-...@webtv.net (Dedalus) wrote:
>>
>> > You go tell 'em Mr. Zeares.
>> >
>> > Fight fair? Against a kimetically redundant, biomechanical demonoid?
>> > Don't think ettiquette counts much in these situations. Not exactly the
>> > Code Duello, is it? With a world in peril ... throw dirt in their eyes,
>> > kick 'em in the groin, whatever, just save the world, already.
>> > Priorities folks.
>>
>> Hmmmm.... How can I put this: "Buffy is a whiny and self-absorbed suck!


Reasonably close encaspulation of the character.


>> And she's a *cheater*!"


Ah, we now get the reason behind the high SAT Scores.


>>
>> > For what it's worth, I think you people ran out of
>> > legitimate criticism around Doomed and now you're just making stuff up.
>>
>> Yeah, whatever, Pal...
>
>That's it? That's your response to me and the others who have responded
>to your "honorable warrior" post? You have NOTHING to back up your
>statement?


Hey, it's not like he's been the only one.


>Actually, I'm not surprised. It was an unsupportable position, IMHO.
>But you could have at least *tried*.


Hmm. Let me think...

It is honorable to battle with equivalent weapons. So when Buffy
goes out to fight vampires with stakes or that inaccurate crossbow,
it is a fair fight with a vampire. It is an honorable fight.

Now when she used the deception of sunrise against bright boy
Luc, it was fair because he was acting as a vessel and thus was
a trick for the Master to feed on souls. It was not fair to fight the Judge
hand to hand when he could only burn by the touch. It would have
been unfair to use the rocket launcher then. But after the Judge
started flaming everyone without touching them then the launcher was
an honorable weapon.

But Adam wasn't using magic against the Slayer. Hell, he wasn't
even using demons. He was a scientific creation. The use of
magic was thus inappropriate and without honor.

Damn, my fanwanking muscles haven't totally gone.


Stephen Weick | Want to become a Wesley/Kate 'shipper? Ask me how!
swe...@aol.com | Philosophy : Any systematic scheme of thought which
swe...@mcs.kent.edu| allows you to be unhappy intelligently
Kate & Wesley in 00! Like their chances.

Don Sample

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <3925...@news.prismnet.com>, Todd Yarbrough
<tod...@SPAMyarbrough.org> wrote:

> Heheheh- the best thing about your reviews is the nicknames you come up with
> for Riley... love 'em.

I've pretty much quit reading his reviews because of the nicknames he
comes up for Riley. They have stopped being reviews, and have become
outlets for his dislike of the character.

Timothy A. McDaniel

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <190520001233047485%dsa...@synapse.net>,

Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
>I've pretty much quit reading his reviews because of the
>nicknames he comes up for Riley. They have stopped being
>reviews, and have become outlets for his dislike of the
>character.

<AOL />

While I share some of his dislike of Riley, I find the various
nicknames to be peculiarly grating, so I avoid his reviews.

--
Tim McDaniel is tm...@jump.net; if that fail,
tm...@us.ibm.com is my work account.
"To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting everything
up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka....@hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)

pjmc...@gate.net

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to

Daryl McCullough <da...@cogentex.com> wrote in message
news:8g3m6j$1v...@edrn.newsguy.com...

Except on on Xena, where Xena murdered Callisto like the fifth time (don't
really know).

Anyway, Callisto wasn't being evil, she was just chuckling about something-
the first joy in her existance since Xena
murdered her parents and her family and her friends and thier parents etc.


Lisa nor Jeff

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

1) The bonding scene in the elevator shaft was lame.

2) I don't care for Hines' nicknames for Riley, although I'm not fond of
Riley. But in reality, isn't Riley better for Buffy than Angel--if you
require her boyfriend to be a member of the "community" (which does seem
to be a prerequisite for all of Team Scooby).

3) I disagree with Ian about the "cheating". Buffy uses whatever weapon
she can come up with at the moment that will do the job. Willow has
used magic numerous times to assist in their fight. Willow has broken
into restricted computers to get information. Buffy has used deception
numerous times to get her enemies. Was it honorable to threaten
Drucillia to free Max? (Ok, knowing how Max turned out changes things,
but at the time we didn't know what was coming.)

David Homerick

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to

Hines wrote:
>
> In article <8g1tq0$k5h$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
> Shawn Hill <sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:


> >I actually don't have a problem extending my disbelief in a variety of
> >ways. I take that as part and parcel of fiction and especially fantasy.
>
> I hope you realize that, by these standards, it's impossible for anyone
> to write a bad fantasy story. If suspension of disbelief carries you, not
> only over the basic premise, but over implausibilities of character
> interaction and inconsistencies in the fantasy world itself, then action,
> characterization, and setting don't have to make the slightest bit of
> sense, even relative to each other.

BZZT! Fallacy of the excluded middle. Implausibilities come in
various degrees, and being willing to ignore minor implausibilities
does not obligate one to accept more serious ones.

-- David

Ian J. Ball

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <392566BC...@texas.net>, Mike Zeares <mze...@texas.net> wrote:

> "Ian J. Ball" wrote:
> >
> > In article <2002-392...@storefull-228.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> > Paul-...@webtv.net (Dedalus) wrote:
> >
> > > For what it's worth, I think you people ran out of
> > > legitimate criticism around Doomed and now you're just making stuff up.
> >
> > Yeah, whatever, Pal...
>
> That's it? That's your response to me and the others who have responded
> to your "honorable warrior" post? You have NOTHING to back up your
> statement?
>

> Actually, I'm not surprised. It was an unsupportable position, IMHO.
> But you could have at least *tried*.

No, Mike, I'm not responding to that in Daedulus' post. I'm responding to
the "fankwankish" idea that there has been no legitimate criticism of
"Buffy" since "Doomed". *That* is an unsupportable claim!

As to my "Honorable Warrior" thing, no one agrees with me, and frankly I
don't care, because it's still what I think. I honestly believe that Buffy
didn't play fair in her final battle with Adam, that she should have tried
to beat him fair-and-square *herself*, and that I lost respect for her as
a result (not that I haven't already throughout most of the season).

But I don't care if nobody agrees with me on that because it's *my* opinion...

Shawn Hill

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
David Homerick <dhom...@jps.net> wrote:

:> interaction and inconsistencies in the fantasy world itself, then action,


:> characterization, and setting don't have to make the slightest bit of
:> sense, even relative to each other.

: BZZT! Fallacy of the excluded middle. Implausibilities come in


: various degrees, and being willing to ignore minor implausibilities
: does not obligate one to accept more serious ones.

thank you. That's what I meant. I'm sure I have my threshold, too. I know
there are things buffy could do that would just be Not-Buffy to me. but,
my threshold is set way higher than David's, I think, when it comes to
what is too much regarding Buffy and co's employment of magic spells.

Shawn

Hines

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
In article <190520001233047485%dsa...@synapse.net>,
Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
>
>I've pretty much quit reading his reviews because of the nicknames he
>comes up for Riley. They have stopped being reviews, and have become
>outlets for his dislike of the character.

Calm down, Don! New Shimmer is a floor wax *and* a dessert topping!

(Though Mr. Garibaldi claims some success in using it as an aphrodisiac.)

--
David Hines

Shawn Hill

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
David Homerick <dhom...@jps.net> wrote:


: Hines wrote:
:>
:> In article <8g1tq0$k5h$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
:> Shawn Hill <sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:


:> >I actually don't have a problem extending my disbelief in a variety of


:> >ways. I take that as part and parcel of fiction and especially fantasy.
:>
:> I hope you realize that, by these standards, it's impossible for anyone
:> to write a bad fantasy story. If suspension of disbelief carries you, not
:> only over the basic premise, but over implausibilities of character
:> interaction and inconsistencies in the fantasy world itself, then action,
:> characterization, and setting don't have to make the slightest bit of
:> sense, even relative to each other.

: BZZT! Fallacy of the excluded middle. Implausibilities come in


: various degrees, and being willing to ignore minor implausibilities
: does not obligate one to accept more serious ones.

BTW, how come I never saw the quote by DH that responded to my suggestion,
the one you refute here? Where did he post it? It hasn't shown up on my
server.

Shawn


Chine Bleu

unread,
May 19, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/19/00
to
>> / Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow
the code of
>> / Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
>>
>> Wining, Winning, or Whining?
>
>Oh, kiss my white saggy ass. You know what the fuck I meant.

Oh. Whining.

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


tommyk

unread,
May 20, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/20/00
to
In article <qq4V4.26676$0o4.2...@iad-read.news.verio.net>, Hines wrote:
>In article <8g1tq0$k5h$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu>,
>Shawn Hill <sh...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>[re: the heart to heart]
>
>Precisely. BUFFY is (sometimes) a comedy; it's not a farce. The elevator
>shaft scene is a farce, and it might play great on, say, THE TICK, as a
>parody of reunion scenes. The time is abysmal. The place is worse.
>Only incredibly *stupid* people would have a reunion in an elevator shaft
>that's almost certainly lined with cameras: it's completely ludicrous.
>Which is why it would work on THE TICK, and why it doesn't work on BUFFY.

Wooo-hooo! Thank you for saying this.

Now, is there a dark alley somewhere in which we can take it up with
the writers?


--
"Actually, in my killfile, you tend to
know a lot of the people."

To...@fred.net

unread,
May 20, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/20/00
to
<snip>

For the summer:

1) List *all* your Riley euphamisms.

2) Devise a "create your own Riley name" (similar to the stinkypants list
that was circulating, dependent on your first name initial, last name
initial, and last letter of last name).

I shall do homage to your work.

--
To...@Fred.Net http://www.fred.net/tomr

* Faith Manages...... But Willow is in Tech Support
* "Hello, girls.... I'm the Easter Bunny!" - Janet Reno, "South Park"

"I'm not wealthy enough to be innocent." - Marc Bowden

Mary Kay Bergman 1961-1999 - http://www.wackyvoices.com

To...@fred.net

unread,
May 20, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/20/00
to
This post on Thu, 18 May 2000 14:53:18 -0500 would probably sound more commanding if Mike Zeares wasn't wearing the Yummy Sushi Pajamas:
: "Scott C. Swalwell" wrote:
:>
:> "Mike Zeares" <mze...@texas.net> wrote in message
:> news:3924181E...@texas.net...
:>
:> <Snip Cheating Debate>
:>
:> > Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
:> > Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
:> ^^^^^^
:>
:> It seems to me she prefers beer.

: Beer foamy! Mike's spelling bad!

Parker bad! *bonk*

To...@fred.net

unread,
May 20, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/20/00
to
This post on Thu, 18 May 2000 23:13:53 -0500 would probably sound more commanding if Mike Zeares wasn't wearing the Yummy Sushi Pajamas:
: All the Tea in China Blue wrote:
:>
:> / Look, she's the Slayer, not a Samurai. She doesn't follow the code of
:> / Bushido, she follows the code of Wining Any Way I Can.
:>
:> Wining, Winning, or Whining?

: Oh, kiss my white saggy ass. You know what the fuck I meant.

- Spike to Adam, "Primeval"

Eric F.

unread,
May 20, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/20/00
to
Lisa nor Jeff wrote:

> 1) The bonding scene in the elevator shaft was lame.

I thought it was one of the best, important & most effective scenes in
the entire ep.

Later,

Eric F., Buffy Fan
----

Giles: Perhaps a paralyzing spell. Only I can't perform the incantation
for this.
Willow: Right. Don't you have to speak it in Sumerian or something?
Giles: I do speak Sumerian. ("Primeval")

Ian Galbraith

unread,
May 22, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/22/00
to
On Fri, 19 May 2000 20:15:07 GMT, Ian J. Ball wrote:

[snip]

:As to my "Honorable Warrior" thing, no one agrees with me, and frankly I


:don't care, because it's still what I think. I honestly believe that Buffy
:didn't play fair in her final battle with Adam, that she should have tried
:to beat him fair-and-square *herself*, and that I lost respect for her as
:a result (not that I haven't already throughout most of the season).

So did this loss of respect start in The Harvest when she tricked Luke?
What about the Mayor, she sucked him in as well?

So basically you're saying that Buffy should fight Adam fair, she should
have fought the Mayor fair, and Luke, and The Judge, and damn the world.
She may have died and unleashed terrible forces upon the world, but she
died in a fair fight, so its OK.

:But I don't care if nobody agrees with me on that because it's *my* opinion...

But you should be able to support it.

Be Seeing You
--
Ian Galbraith
Email: igalb...@ozonline.com.au ICQ#: 7849631

"Mm, I wouldn't dream of interfering." Mark made for
the door. "Though I'm not at all sure I'd choose to
structure my most intimate relationship as a war.
Is she the enemy, then?"
- A Civil Campaign - Lois McMaster Bujold

sbe...@dowco.com

unread,
May 22, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/22/00
to
Timothy A. McDaniel wrote:
>
> While I share some of his dislike of Riley, I find the various
> nicknames to be peculiarly grating, so I avoid his reviews.

Gee, I like Riley (and I think Marc Blucas has come a long way this
year), but I don't particularly mind the silly names that David uses in
his reviews. Riley is a pretty earnest character, and I think it holds
up to a little good-natured ribbing. He's been quick to praise the actor
when he's thought it was deserving (David's "Goodbye Iowa" review comes
to mind) so as long as he's even-handed, I don't mind.

But I know how you feel. If someone was to call this year's Slayer
"Whiny the Snivel Slayer" or "Bratty Buffycakes" or "Buffy the Parker
Doormat", I could certainly get annoyed at the reviews. :-)

Scott Bennie

"And the Beaver is a truly proud and noble animal." - some Canadian
beer-selling schill

Shawn Hill

unread,
May 22, 2000, 3:00:00 AM5/22/00
to
Hines <hra...@clark.net> wrote:

:>only their conversation, but also their THEME MUSIC? What was that if not a
:>moment of meta-narrative whimsy and irony?

: I really don't see the relevance of that scene to the point under
: discussion. The interruption of the B/A theme was *damn* funny, but it
: was also entirely outside the bounds of human interaction: after all, the
: characters don't hear or react to the musical cues being given (except in
: a couple of episodes of ANGEL, most notably "City Of").

Okay, I'll try to follow this, category man. The Zeppo theme music scene
affeced U