AOQ Review 6-3: "Flooded"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
(or "Let the water carry us away")
Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
Director: Douglas Petrie
Sometimes - not always, but sometimes - one can tell how an
episode is going to play out based on the teaser. This week's teaser
shows Buffy back to something resembling normal, trying to fix
something. There's a good moment along the way ("so. We meet at
last, Mister Drippy") to a hopelessly telegraphed and overdone joke:
Buffy tries to fix something, and the entire house goes to hell.
That's the episode in a nutshell. "Flooded" has its snappy
moments, often in the low-key parts, but it's too willing to go for a
big joke even when the setup would be more trouble than it's worth.
I suppose some levity was needed after the last few. I'm not huge on
Buffy's issues being played for laughs, but on the whole, the show
does a reasonable job of easing back into the BTVS humor without
neglecting the serious undertone. Here Buffy not only has to keep
dealing with the usual stuff, there's also the financial side of
things to worry about. While trying to assure Dawn and the others that
she'll make things work, she seems partly exasperated about the one
more banal straw weighing down her proverbial camel, and partly out of
her league in the adult world (as usual). "It's not like it's the
end of the world. Which is too bad, you know, 'cause that, I'm really
good at."
So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
The loan-application sequence has elements of both of these things.
We know our hero can be a little pathetic with regards to stuff like
applying for a loan, but really, bringing a folder full of old report
cards? Just... ugh. It'd be more explainable if it were funny. A
main purpose of this part of the show, though, is to set up an attack
on the place, leading to the image of Buffy, foot on a dead demon's
chest, saying "now, about my loan." And then getting rejected
anyway. So that's the intended money moment. But wait, what about
the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
The interactions between the main cast are a mixed bag, with one big
shining exception of solid goodness which I'll get to later. I think
for the most part, the ideas make sense, but the dialogue is mixed as
far as whether or not it clicks. Xander and Anya are in a holding
pattern, with him giving a series of wise-sounding stalling tactics and
her demanding that he grow up (while letting _Spider-Man_ be an issue
of contention). I don't really know why he's hesitating at this
point, except to reiterate that it gives me a slightly bad feeling
about their future together. Probably the biggest bit of mixed-baggery
is the way Willow encourages displays of human emotion. Makes sense in
theory, and the idea of Willow sleeping with Riley is wackily out-there
in appropriate amounts. But her prattle sounds annoying and unnatural
in parts, especially while backing off at the end. So not a huge fan.
The scene also drops Angel's name, probably with the express purpose
of setting up the ending for the benefit of those just joining us.
There's a pretty good little exchange and some coordinated fighting
between Buffy and Spike too, which I don't have much to say about.
"Knew I could get a grin."
Back to the bank yet again. From a plot purpose, it's also there to
let the place be robbed, so Jonathan and friends can make a deal with
the devil. One thing that may not always come up is that I'm
absolutely terrible with faces, both in life and on TV. This leads to
a few moments that seem hideously embarrassing in retrospect. For
instance, during every scene with the geek supervillains, I was trying
to figure out whether they were all recurring characters or what.
Jonathan we all know, and Andrew's familial connection with a past
character is established early on the dialogue, but the whole time I
was asking "wait, who's this Warren guy? I feel like we've seen
him before..." Sad, really.
Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
there's a reason girls don't dig guys like them. As for me,
throughout most of these scenes, I couldn't help but notice that I
wasn't laughing, and I'm pretty sure I was meant to. I don't
actually have any problem with the premise of the bored/depressed geeks
tapping into the wrong powers and running with it, although I hope
they'll help usher in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
They're not without their high points: the stereo supervillain laughs
is pretty good, as is the flashback ("of course I remember. It was
last month") to how they first met (reminiscent of the mini-flashback
in "The Prom," appropriately enough). Jonathan's reluctance to
go after Buffy is also okay. So, better luck with the comedy next
time, guys; I hold out hope.
The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances. The others have covered the
research for the moment, but he's still good to have around for our
hero's sake. And for the episode's, since every scene in which
he's on screen is a keeper. The subdued paternal tone of all his
interactions with Buffy is nicely done. So is the strange aimlessness
he feels at having started to move on into the world of the mundane,
and then getting pulled back out. But as good as those moments are,
the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
she have certain blind spots. And it seems like Rupert doesn't
really have much of anything that he can do about it other than deliver
stern talkings-to.
I think the last scene sets the mood that the show was trying for
throughout. Giles and Dawn are committed to helping Buffy sort her
life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
of this.) The fact that it's her teenage Soulmate underlies the
sense of regression here, running out to save the world and slay and/or
date vampires while the adults "take care of things" for her. Not
to say that these things aren't important, or that the things she's
had to do have been pleasant, but the expectations tend to be simpler,
more clear-cut, than in the things she's running away from.
Doug is now the fifth in the cabal of Buffyverse writers who also
direct. Was Joss an inspiration to everyone or something?
This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
- Eating breakfast three times a day
- "That's not a horn" [it's all about the delivery]
- "*Willow* brought me back. I just lay there... I know what you
meant. It was just a little post-post-mortem comedy"
So...
One-sentence summary: Works in parts.
AOQ rating: Decent
[Season Six so far:
1) "Bargaining" - Decent
2) "After Life" - Good
3) "Flooded" - Decent]
Rowan Hawthorn
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
>
> the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
> seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
> Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
> doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
> a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
> or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
> she have certain blind spots. And it seems like Rupert doesn't
> really have much of anything that he can do about it other than deliver
> stern talkings-to.
Something else to notice about Willow in this episode, beyond her fairly
blatant threat to Giles - it's a fleeting shot, but when Xander and Anya
have their little Spider-Man spat, Willow shoots them a disturbingly
malicious, calculating smile. Buffy's not the only one acting a little
stranger than usual...
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"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 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
take me to the river
take me to the water
> Back to the bank yet again. From a plot purpose, it's also there to
> let the place be robbed, so Jonathan and friends can make a deal with
jonathon warren and the other guy
> Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
> geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
> giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
also consider the three nerds are at about the same place
willow and xander started before they met buffy
and began saving the world
i wonder when they will get out of their parents basements
> life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
> on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
> other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
> of this.) The fact that it's her teenage Soulmate underlies the
i found it interesting that they would meet in neither sunnydale nor la
with this season sunnydale was upn and la was wb
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
Mike Zeares
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
Ah, I can finally catch up. The first couple reviews caught me
unprepared, and I usually don't like posting in an already long thread.
To sum up:
Bargaining -- agree that it's 1 1/2 hour of storry crammed into two
hours. Had a lot of details I like, but wasn't quite the big WOW I was
looking for after weeks of "Buffy lives!" promos. The pace was too
slow. The Buffybot's quartering was a real gut-wrencher for me (I
adore her, mostly due to a really good fanfic series), but the Hellions
were mostly just dumb, and not in a TIRSBILA way.
I liked After Life a lot more. The key moment in that one for me is
Willow's apparent use of the Dark Side to expedite things. That can't
be good.
And now, on to the Komedy!
> That's the episode in a nutshell. "Flooded" has its snappy
> moments, often in the low-key parts, but it's too willing to go for a
> big joke even when the setup would be more trouble than it's worth.
>
> So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
> farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
You're not wrong. It's been a tendency of the show for some time. Too
many writers with backgrounds in sitcoms, maybe. I found the bank
scene mostly excruciating. Worst part is when Buffy tosses the gun
away and it goes off. What is this, Looney Tunes?
> Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
> geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
> giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point.
Heh. I liked them. I didn't really laugh, but I smiled a few times.
According to the writers, the nerds' "compressed geekery" was based on
themselves.
> the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
> seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
> Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
> doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
> a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
> or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
> she have certain blind spots.
No kidding. A great big one called "proper attitude towards doing
dangerous spells." The look on her face when she realized he wasn't
going to praise her was great.
> This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
> - Eating breakfast three times a day
> - "That's not a horn" [it's all about the delivery]
> - "*Willow* brought me back. I just lay there... I know what you
> meant. It was just a little post-post-mortem comedy"
"No! More! Full! Copper! Repipe!" Well, I thought it was funny.
I'm glad you're finally on S6. It's my favorite of the post-high
school seasons.
-- Mike Zeares
burt...@hotmail.com
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
Ah, Flooded. There are other episodes this season that get trashed a
lot more (and rightly so), but this is one of my personal worst
episodes of the entire series. There are just so many thing about it
that are so awful.
We have Giles glaring at Willow when she suggests doing a locator spell
to track down the demon, because apparentely using magic to battle the
forces of evil is now *bad.* Well, if Giles was really so concerned
about Willow and magic, why not have *the other witch* cast the spell?
Or why not do it himself? He's cast plenty of spells before. But no,
the writers were so intent on giving us a heavy-handed "Bad Willow! Too
much magic!" message that they had Giles ignore their only lead on the
demon, which let the Nerd Trio escape and yrq gb gur qrnguf bs Xngevan
naq Gnen.
Which brings me to the introduction of the Nerd Trio. This came off as
a blatant attack on the audience ("Look at what geeks and losers
sci-fi/fantasy fans are! Ha ha!"). Their scenes were boring, their
banter was unfunny, and Andrew was So. Damned. Annoying. The writers
looked at them as comic relief, but "humor" featuring the villians does
not make up for depressing, dreary storylines involving the characters
we actually care about - it just makes it impossible to take the
villians (and thus, the storylines involving them) seriously.
And then there's Giles telling Willow off over Buffy's resurrection.
What exactly is he angry about here? He doesn't know that Buffy was in
heaven. That Willow risked her life to save a friend? That's cause for
anger? Or that she went against the "laws" of magic because she thought
it was necessary? Giles did that himself in both "The Zeppo" and
"Primeval." Hypocrite, much?
And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
burt...@hotmail.com
> Ah, Flooded. There are other episodes this season that get trashed a
> lot more (and rightly so), but this is one of my personal worst
> episodes of the entire series. There are just so many thing about it
> that are so awful.
That "thing" there should, of course, be "things." (I blame the episode
for the missing 's'. It's that bad.)
Apteryx
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
> episode is going to play out based on the teaser. This week's teaser
> shows Buffy back to something resembling normal, trying to fix
> something. There's a good moment along the way ("so. We meet at
> last, Mister Drippy") to a hopelessly telegraphed and overdone joke:
Yeah, but there's a whole lot of people for whom surprise is not an
essential feature of humour. In fact there's a whole school of humour
(ok, mainly British) that relies on remorsely following the formula
"Tell 'em what you're gonna do, do it, and then tell 'em you've done
it").
> Buffy tries to fix something, and the entire house goes to hell.
> That's the episode in a nutshell.
Fhofgvghgr "Jvyybj" sbe "Ohssl" naq gung'f gur jubyr bs frnfbaf fvk naq
frira va n ahgfuryy
> I suppose some levity was needed after the last few. I'm not huge on
> Buffy's issues being played for laughs, but on the whole, the show
> does a reasonable job of easing back into the BTVS humor without
> neglecting the serious undertone.
I'd say so. But then I am a huge fan of Buffy's issues being played for
laughs.
> So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
> farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
> The loan-application sequence has elements of both of these things.
> We know our hero can be a little pathetic with regards to stuff like
> applying for a loan, but really, bringing a folder full of old report
> cards? Just... ugh. It'd be more explainable if it were funny.
It was funny to me. I've known people like that. And I liked the Stupid
Skirt bit.
> main purpose of this part of the show, though, is to set up an attack
> on the place, leading to the image of Buffy, foot on a dead demon's
> chest, saying "now, about my loan." And then getting rejected
> anyway. So that's the intended money moment. But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> that everyone present willfully repressed the memory?
Their whole towns just been devestated by demon bikers, not to mention
the dimensional walls opening up not so long ago. I think they know
their town's not normal. Certainly enough people have noticed that "For
some reason, Sunnydale property values have never been competitive."
They are just desperately trying to pretend everything will be alright.
> I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating?
It is odd. Maybe the the plumbers were formally on the Sunnydale High
swim team?
> The interactions between the main cast are a mixed bag, with one big
> shining exception of solid goodness which I'll get to later. I think
> for the most part, the ideas make sense, but the dialogue is mixed as
> far as whether or not it clicks. Xander and Anya are in a holding
> pattern, with him giving a series of wise-sounding stalling tactics and
> her demanding that he grow up (while letting _Spider-Man_ be an issue
> of contention).
I loved the desperate look she gives him, pleading with him to back her
up on the Spider Man issue.
> I don't really know why he's hesitating at this
> point, except to reiterate that it gives me a slightly bad feeling
> about their future together.
Clearly she is right now about Captain Fear being in charge of the
tugboat. Maybe she was right back when he proposed and she suggested it
was only because he didn't expect to survive the coming apocalypse.
> Probably the biggest bit of mixed-baggery
> is the way Willow encourages displays of human emotion. Makes sense in
> theory, and the idea of Willow sleeping with Riley is wackily out-there
> in appropriate amounts. But her prattle sounds annoying and unnatural
> in parts, especially while backing off at the end.
Except it works. She was glad to see Buffy angry, but her pointing it
our made it disapear. She tries (very badly) to get it back. In the end
as Willow awkwardly backs off, Buffy is left with her anger again.
>
> Back to the bank yet again. From a plot purpose, it's also there to
> let the place be robbed, so Jonathan and friends can make a deal with
> the devil. One thing that may not always come up is that I'm
> absolutely terrible with faces, both in life and on TV. This leads to
> a few moments that seem hideously embarrassing in retrospect. For
> instance, during every scene with the geek supervillains, I was trying
> to figure out whether they were all recurring characters or what.
> Jonathan we all know, and Andrew's familial connection with a past
> character is established early on the dialogue, but the whole time I
> was asking "wait, who's this Warren guy? I feel like we've seen
> him before..." Sad, really.
If you'd been really, really good with faces, you might have spotted
Andrew before - well, not Andrew, but the actor, Tom Lenk. He was one
of Harmony's minions in early season 5
> Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
> geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
> giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
> there's a reason girls don't dig guys like them. As for me,
> throughout most of these scenes, I couldn't help but notice that I
> wasn't laughing, and I'm pretty sure I was meant to. I don't
> actually have any problem with the premise of the bored/depressed geeks
> tapping into the wrong powers and running with it, although I hope
> they'll help usher in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
> They're not without their high points: the stereo supervillain laughs
> is pretty good, as is the flashback ("of course I remember. It was
> last month") to how they first met (reminiscent of the mini-flashback
> in "The Prom," appropriately enough). Jonathan's reluctance to
> go after Buffy is also okay. So, better luck with the comedy next
> time, guys; I hold out hope.
I liked the concept of the geek masterminds, but not a lot of what they
actually did or said was that good. Honourable mention to their To Do
list, and Warren's "The Force can sometimes have great power on the
weak-minded." and it having great power on the others.
> The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
> mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
> everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances.
Definitely a relief to see him back. He is an essential character for
the group dynamic.
>
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Works in parts.
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
I liked it better. I'd call it Good. Its my 63rd favourite BtVS
episode, 6th best in season 6
Apteryx
William George Ferguson
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>threads.
>
>
>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>(or "Let the water carry us away")
>Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>Director: Douglas Petrie
>
>Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
>geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
>giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
>there's a reason girls don't dig guys like them. As for me,
>throughout most of these scenes, I couldn't help but notice that I
>wasn't laughing, and I'm pretty sure I was meant to. I don't
>actually have any problem with the premise of the bored/depressed geeks
>tapping into the wrong powers and running with it, although I hope
>they'll help usher in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
The Geek Trio (one of several names that have been used for them, some of
which are printable), are the most divisive continuing villains in the
seven seasons of Buffy. Some people hated them, and other people Really
hated them (some of us did like, or at least tolerate, them). I'm not
sure why they drew such massive condemnation (basically, you aren't going
to top a god, so let's go the other way). As someone else has mentioned,
the writers based their dialogue on real conversations that went on in the
writers room.
>They're not without their high points: the stereo supervillain laughs
>is pretty good, as is the flashback ("of course I remember. It was
>last month") to how they first met (reminiscent of the mini-flashback
>in "The Prom," appropriately enough). Jonathan's reluctance to
>go after Buffy is also okay. So, better luck with the comedy next
>time, guys; I hold out hope.
Hope you also noted their 'to do' list on the chalkboard.
>The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
>mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
>everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances. The others have covered the
>research for the moment, but he's still good to have around for our
>hero's sake. And for the episode's, since every scene in which
>he's on screen is a keeper. The subdued paternal tone of all his
>interactions with Buffy is nicely done. So is the strange aimlessness
>he feels at having started to move on into the world of the mundane,
>and then getting pulled back out. But as good as those moments are,
>the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
>seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
> Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
>doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
>a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
>or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
>she have certain blind spots. And it seems like Rupert doesn't
>really have much of anything that he can do about it other than deliver
>stern talkings-to.
And you didn't comment on the real payoff of that scene. Willow flat out
threatens Giles (we've seen her do half-comedic threats before, "And if
you hurt her, I will beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimor
is nobody's friend."), but this was neither cute nor comic "You're right.
The magicks I used are very powerful. I'm very powerful. And maybe it's
not such a good idea for you to piss me off." Yeah, she immediately tried
to take it back and revert to cute loveable Willow, but, well, in
Vonnegut's Slapstick, there's a scene where the twins, thought to be
mentally retarded, reveal their actual intelligence. The onlookers are
horrified and the twins try to go back to be the loveable morons, but
their observers now know better and won't accept the behavior. That's
kind of how I felt about follow-up scenes of Willow being cute and
loveable, she'd let the mask slip, and you can't make it not seen.
>I think the last scene sets the mood that the show was trying for
>throughout. Giles and Dawn are committed to helping Buffy sort her
>life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
>on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
>other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
>of this.) The fact that it's her teenage Soulmate underlies the
>sense of regression here, running out to save the world and slay and/or
>date vampires while the adults "take care of things" for her. Not
>to say that these things aren't important, or that the things she's
>had to do have been pleasant, but the expectations tend to be simpler,
>more clear-cut, than in the things she's running away from.
My, how ...perceptive... of you.
Also note that Buffy is still having moments where she just phases out.
Next up, will Mikey like it, really like it?
--
Ben: I wish it didn't have to be this way.
Dawn: And I wish you'd fall on your head and drown in your own barf.
I guess we're both going to be disappointed.
George W Harris
:Yeah, but there's a whole lot of people for whom surprise is not an
:essential feature of humour. In fact there's a whole school of humour
:(ok, mainly British) that relies on remorsely following the formula
:"Tell 'em what you're gonna do, do it, and then tell 'em you've done
:it").
Is this called the "High school composition" school of
humor?
--
"If you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce, they taste more like
prunes than rhubarb does" -Groucho Marx
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:For
:instance, during every scene with the geek supervillains, I was trying
:to figure out whether they were all recurring characters or what.
:Jonathan we all know, and Andrew's familial connection with a past
:character is established early on the dialogue, but the whole time I
:was asking "wait, who's this Warren guy? I feel like we've seen
:him before..." Sad, really.
So, you did eventually figure out he's the guy
who built April and the Buffybot, right?
--
Doesn't the fact that there are *exactly* 50 states seem a little suspicious?
Don Sample
"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 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
>
> But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
> often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
Most of the people in Sunnydale aren't repressing. They know about the
weird stuff, they just don't talk about it.
> I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
The plumber had just given his estimate, he hadn't gotten around to
doing any of the work yet.
> Back to the bank yet again. From a plot purpose, it's also there to
> let the place be robbed, so Jonathan and friends can make a deal with
> the devil. One thing that may not always come up is that I'm
> absolutely terrible with faces, both in life and on TV. This leads to
> a few moments that seem hideously embarrassing in retrospect. For
> instance, during every scene with the geek supervillains, I was trying
> to figure out whether they were all recurring characters or what.
> Jonathan we all know, and Andrew's familial connection with a past
> character is established early on the dialogue, but the whole time I
> was asking "wait, who's this Warren guy? I feel like we've seen
> him before..." Sad, really.
Builder of April, and the Buffybot.
And you've seen Andrew before too, but in a different role. Tom Lenk
also played Cyrus, one of the members of the Dreaded Harmony Gang.
> I think the last scene sets the mood that the show was trying for
> throughout. Giles and Dawn are committed to helping Buffy sort her
> life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
> on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
> other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
> of this.)
If you really want to know:
Lrf vg jnf ernyyl uvz, ohg gur zrrgvat orgjrra Ohssl naq Natry gnxrf
cynpr bssfperra, sbe obgu rcvfbqrf.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Don Sample
"Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> > I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> > during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> > and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> > Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating?
>
> It is odd. Maybe the the plumbers were formally on the Sunnydale High
> swim team?
Between giving you the estimate for what the job is going to cost, and
actually getting around to *doing* the job takes at least a couple of
weeks.
William George Ferguson
wrote:
>In article <1154487559.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "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 3: "Flooded"
>> (or "Let the water carry us away")
>> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>> Director: Douglas Petrie
>> I think the last scene sets the mood that the show was trying for
>> throughout. Giles and Dawn are committed to helping Buffy sort her
>> life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
>> on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
>> other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
>> of this.)
>
>If you really want to know:
>Lrf vg jnf ernyyl uvz, ohg gur zrrgvat orgjrra Ohssl naq Natry gnxrf
>cynpr bssfperra, sbe obgu rcvfbqrf.
Ubjrire, vg jnf oevyyvnagyl er-ranpgrq sbe hf ol Pbeqryvn naq Jrfyrl.
--
HERBERT
1996 - 1997
Beloved Mascot
Delightful Meal
He fed the Pack
A little
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
> > I think the last scene sets the mood that the show was trying for
> > throughout. Giles and Dawn are committed to helping Buffy sort her
> > life out... and a phone call from Angel has her sweeping out the door,
> > on a mission. (Was it really him? Did they do any tie-ins over on the
> > other show? I'll have to watch ATS S3 someday and get to the bottom
> > of this.)
>
> If you really want to know:
> Lrf vg jnf ernyyl uvz, ohg gur zrrgvat orgjrra Ohssl naq Natry gnxrf
> cynpr bssfperra, sbe obgu rcvfbqrf.
theres a darkhorse comic that deals with somewhat
the comic is available on line
jil...@hotmail.com
commenting, because I really think you should. Trust me on this one.
JJ Karhu
And the "villians"? ;)
// JJ
John Briggs
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
There are several ways, in different numbering conventions, of referring to
this episode:
B6x04
6-4
6ABB04
Episode 104
Unlike with the series "Twin Peaks", which has two incompatible episode
numbering conventions, there was no confusion over the numbering of this
episode - until you came along.
--
John Briggs
Elisi
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> >
> > BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> > Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>
> There are several ways, in different numbering conventions, of referring to
> this episode:
>
> B6x04
> 6-4
> 6ABB04
> Episode 104
(Surely that would be 604?)
> Unlike with the series "Twin Peaks", which has two incompatible episode
> numbering conventions, there was no confusion over the numbering of this
> episode - until you came along.
> --
> John Briggs
IAWTP!!!!
Seriously, you have to stop it. It's not just confusing, it's
incorrect. I can't prove this (yet!), but it is.
Yes the opener was a two-parter. Why? Because the net work asked for it
- so they smooshed episode one and two together. They're still episode
1 & 2. Did Season 2 only have 21 episodes? 'Becoming' had a part 1 & 2
also. It's like... um... saying that pi is 3 exactly. That is
*technically* true if you do away with decimal points (and logic), but
no one will ever stop telling you that it's stupid, and no one will
ever take your math seriously.
Or... it's like the whole blood thing from The Gift. It might not make
sense logically, but still - that's how it works. Unless of course you
have a letter from Joss Whedon saying that he changed his mind when it
came to numbering the episodes this season...
(And why would the DVD box lie to you???)
Sorry. But it bugs me. _A lot_. *sigh*
Um... anyway I rather like this episode. It's not great, but it has a
lot of good moments - Spike and Buffy, Giles coming back, the big
argument, and of course the nerds!!!!! (I *love* the nerds.) Less than
the sum of it's parts though.
Mike Zeares
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
> about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
> wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
> unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
> characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
> human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
> jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
> of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
Never heard of "gallows humor?" You should hear some of the jokes EMTs
and cops tell. Not to mention soldiers. Or, for that matter, you've
never, ever heard anyone joke about killing people who are annoying
them?
I thought it was funny. I understood Buffy's frustration, and so did
Spike.
-- Mike Zeares
John Briggs
> John Briggs wrote:
>> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>>>
>>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>>> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>>
>> There are several ways, in different numbering conventions, of
>> referring to this episode:
>>
>> B6x04
>> 6-4
>> 6ABB04
>> Episode 104
>
> (Surely that would be 604?)
No, it really is the 104th episode. (There were 100 episodes in the first
five seasons - 1x12 + 4x22 - and there are 144 episodes in total.)
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
>
> Yes the opener was a two-parter. Why? Because the net work asked for
> it - so they smooshed episode one and two together. They're still
> episode 1 & 2.
And have two Production Code numbers: 6ABB01 and 6ABB02.
--
John Briggs
Elisi
Oh course! *facepalm* I was thinking 4th episode of S6... as in 6.04.
And do you think AOQ will try to argue that there are only 143 episodes?
Sam
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
> often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
>
I thought they had established pretty well by this point that everyone
in Sunnydale knows about the supernatural, and they just don't talk
about it? There have been several episodes where that's a fairly open
plot point. "Gingerbread" being the most obvious, but not the only one
-- Buffy's graduating class were obviously aware of this stuff even
before the Mayor turned into a giant demon snake and tried to eat them,
as they openly call out references to supernatural stuff while thanking
Buffy for protecting them from monsters throughout their time at
Sunnydale High.
"People in Sunnydale don't remember this stuff" stopped being the
explanation years ago. Now, they've moved on to something more akin to
something like Derry, Maine in Stephen King's "It," albeit with a more
comedic bent -- everyone knows darn well that something just isn't
right about the town, but nobody wants to be the first one in the room
to mention it.
--Sam
Arbitrar Of Quality
> In article <1154487559.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > But wait, what about
> > the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> > fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> > that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
> > often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> > setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
>
> Most of the people in Sunnydale aren't repressing. They know about the
> weird stuff, they just don't talk about it.
Don't have time to get into it now, but I got the impression that the
SHS class was a special case. Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
(from _IT_) in another post, but the difference is that the people of
Derry weren't innocents, and had an active force affecting them at all
times. I know there's a Hellmouth and that the town was built for
demons, but the idea that a "don't talk about this stuff" could be so
universally ingrained to the point that it is in the series just
doesn't hold together, and was a lot easier to take while Wilkins was
still alive.
> > I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> > during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> > and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> > Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> > gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
>
> The plumber had just given his estimate, he hadn't gotten around to
> doing any of the work yet.
I guess "no more copper re-plate!" could mean either that the demon's
ruined it, or that he's forced a cancellation of the planned work, but
she delivers it in an "and I just overhauled this thing!" manner. The
pipe gets broken, water bursts out (which hadn't previously been
actively happening), and Buffy yells that line, which suggested to me
that the work had been done.
-AOQ
Rowan Hawthorn
> "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 3: "Flooded"
>> (or "Let the water carry us away")
>> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>> Director: Douglas Petrie
>>
>
> threatens Giles (we've seen her do half-comedic threats before, "And if
> you hurt her, I will beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimor
> is nobody's friend.")
I suspect she wasn't joking there, either, but not being (at the moment)
Really Pissed Off when she said it, nobody realized she was serious...
Rowan Hawthorn
I always figured the plumber had just done a temporary patch job to stop
the flooding until he could get a crew out to do the re-plumbing. As to
why the basement is *still* flooded, what's the time frame involved? If
the plumbers just haven't had time to get back with a pump, it could
take a while for a small sump pump to clear out that much water.
Assuming the sump pump even *works*, or that the basement is even
equipped with one.
3D Master
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
>
> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
No, in fact it's a glaring continuity error. Earlier when Xander and his
plumber friend come out of the basement, they have dry feet, nothing
dragging around. So it's probably still a mess down below, but there
isn't 40 cms of water down below at that time. Suddenly at the end, the
water is back.
3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander
"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~
Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
> (or "Let the water carry us away")
> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
> Director: Douglas Petrie
> So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
> farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
> The loan-application sequence has elements of both of these things.
> We know our hero can be a little pathetic with regards to stuff like
> applying for a loan, but really, bringing a folder full of old report
> cards? Just... ugh.
The report cards made me wince too. But I liked the beginning of the
scene, with the montage of Buffy brightly chirping stuff like "I'm a
problem *solver*," followed by the reveal that she's actually just
rehearsing and the loan officer isn't there yet. That gave me a small
grin, at least. Of course she sounds much less confident when she's
actually talking to him. I was also mildly amused when the demon hit
Buffy and she spent *way* too long in the air, offscreen, before landing
on the desk.
> A main purpose of this part of the show, though, is to set up an attack
> on the place, leading to the image of Buffy, foot on a dead demon's
> chest, saying "now, about my loan." And then getting rejected
> anyway. So that's the intended money moment. But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> that everyone present willfully repressed the memory?
The bank guy might really not have realized that Buffy saved his life. A
lot of the fight consisted of Buffy getting tossed around, and after she
got thrown into the guard, we saw several other people fighting the demon.
Plus there was the gun thing (which also made me wince). If the loan
officer didn't happen to see the few good shots she got in, he might not
have realized how important she really was to his survival.
In general, I think Sunnydale's "forgettyitis" is caused by avoiding the
subject and fear of speaking out, rather than actual repression of the
memories. The witnesses will remember what they've seen, they just won't
talk about it or think too much about it.
> I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
Agreed that they shold have drained the basement, but I don't think the
full copper repipe was actually done yet. It seemed like Tito just did
some quick, temporary repairs, then warned them that the underlying
problems remain and they'll need a full replacement soon.
Not much mention of the financial talk in the living room, a scene I found
pretty amusing. I liked the way everyone stares at Buffy after she jokes
about burning down the house. They aren't used to her joking anymore, and
since she's been acting so strangely, they can't be sure she isn't
serious. (But it's the tree that's pretty, not the fire! Fire bad!)
Another good line: "Well, that's an idea ... *you* would have."
> Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
> geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
> giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
> there's a reason girls don't dig guys like them. As for me,
> throughout most of these scenes, I couldn't help but notice that I
> wasn't laughing, and I'm pretty sure I was meant to. I don't
> actually have any problem with the premise of the bored/depressed geeks
> tapping into the wrong powers and running with it, although I hope
> they'll help usher in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
They don't look like a Big Bad or even a Medium Bad, do they? Aside from
just generally being idiots, Jonathan and Andrew don't really act evil.
They don't want to be real villains, they want to be comic book
supervillains. Warren, though, seems a bit more serious and creepy,
especially when he tells the demon to go kill Buffy. Remember IWMTLY,
when at first he seemed to be just a creepy loser rather than actually
villainous? He's walked further down the villainy road since then. Are
Jonathan and Andrew still at the stage Warren was in IWMTLY?
> The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
> mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
> everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances. The others have covered the
> research for the moment, but he's still good to have around for our
> hero's sake. And for the episode's, since every scene in which
> he's on screen is a keeper. The subdued paternal tone of all his
> interactions with Buffy is nicely done.
Agreed. (Also nice is Buffy's understated but clear reluctance to open up
to him.) Giles's argument with Willow is the key scene of the whole
episode, but others have already discussed it so I'll slack off here. The
bits that really struck me were Willow's slow realization that Giles is
angry with her, and her threatening Giles. After the threat, Giles seems
simultaneously hurt, ashamed for Willow, and deeply worried if not
frightened. (At least, that's what I got out of half a second of his
facial expressions.)
> This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
"How much water can they fit in one set of pipes?" "If I understand right,
the whole city water supply."
"You're doing research now? You want a cappacino and a pack of smokes to
go with that?"
"I was all dead and frugal."
> AOQ rating: Decent
I'd give it a Decent too, a relatively high one. I thought all the parts
worked okay, but aside from the Willow-Giles argument, nothing of much
significance happened. Lightweight but enjoyable.
--Chris
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
>
> Something else to notice about Willow in this episode, beyond her fairly
> blatant threat to Giles - it's a fleeting shot, but when Xander and Anya
> have their little Spider-Man spat, Willow shoots them a disturbingly
> malicious, calculating smile. Buffy's not the only one acting a little
> stranger than usual...
I think she was enjoying a little Schadenfreude at their expense. "I had
a crush on Xander, but he didn't reciprocate. I didn't much like Anya,
but Xander fell in love with her. Now the two of them are having
problems. Heh." Xvaq bs yvxr Jvyybj'f yvar sebz Nf Lbh Jrer: "Lbh xabj,
jura V jnf yvggyr, V hfrq gb fcraq ubhef vzntvavat jung zl jrqqvat gb
Knaqre jbhyq or yvxr. Naq abj V ybbx ng gurz, V whfg guvax... 'Aln aln
alnu!'"
Elisi
> And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
> about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
> wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
> unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
> characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
> human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
> jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
> of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
Huh? _Buffy_ suggests burning down the house, and that Dawn should take
up smoking. All these things are only wrong if they're meant to be
taken seriously. Which they're not.
The thing that bothers *me* is the Scoobies dumping all the bills in
Buffy's lap. I know it's her house, but Willow and Tara have lived
there all summer, surely they could have sorted it out?
rrh...@acme.com
George W Harris wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2006 21:38:27 -0700, "Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> :Yeah, but there's a whole lot of people for whom surprise is not an
> :essential feature of humour. In fact there's a whole school of humour
> :(ok, mainly British) that relies on remorsely following the formula
> :"Tell 'em what you're gonna do, do it, and then tell 'em you've done
> :it").
>
> Is this called the "High school composition" school of
> humor?
The local arts center shows old(ish) movies. I recently attended a
showing of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I will venture to
speculate that everyone in that theater had seen the film, most of them
many times. It was a blast. You mileage may vary, but it is not
universally true that surprise is a necessary ingredient.
Richard R. Hershberger
alphakitten
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
>>about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
>>wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
>>unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
>>characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
>>human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
>>jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
>>of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
>
>
> Huh? _Buffy_ suggests burning down the house, and that Dawn should take
> up smoking. All these things are only wrong if they're meant to be
> taken seriously. Which they're not.
>
You mean Willow *didn't* sleep with Angel and Riley!? ;)
~Angel
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
mortgage payments could be a thousand or more a month
whatever income tara and willow had (parents? scholarships?)
would be for a dorm room much would be less than mortgage
and if dawns father is paying child support
its unlikely hes going to pay for the whole house and not live there
so theres probably some income
but not enough to maintain the house
Horace LaBadie
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> Don Sample wrote:
> > In article <1154487559.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > But wait, what about
> > > the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> > > fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> > > that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
> > > often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> > > setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
> >
> > Most of the people in Sunnydale aren't repressing. They know about the
> > weird stuff, they just don't talk about it.
>
> Don't have time to get into it now, but I got the impression that the
> SHS class was a special case. Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
> (from _IT_) in another post, but the difference is that the people of
> Derry weren't innocents, and had an active force affecting them at all
> times. I know there's a Hellmouth and that the town was built for
> demons, but the idea that a "don't talk about this stuff" could be so
> universally ingrained to the point that it is in the series just
> doesn't hold together, and was a lot easier to take while Wilkins was
> still alive.
Do people who live on Mt. Vesuvius waste time talking about the latest
tremor and puff of steam? Do people in California bother to talk about
the latest 4.5 quake? Everybody knows that the volcano and the faults
are active, and they simply get on with their lives. Same in Sunnydale
with the demons and the occult.
> > > I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> > > during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> > > and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> > > Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> > > gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
> >
> > The plumber had just given his estimate, he hadn't gotten around to
> > doing any of the work yet.
>
> I guess "no more copper re-plate!" could mean either that the demon's
> ruined it, or that he's forced a cancellation of the planned work, but
> she delivers it in an "and I just overhauled this thing!" manner. The
> pipe gets broken, water bursts out (which hadn't previously been
> actively happening), and Buffy yells that line, which suggested to me
> that the work had been done.
>
> -AOQ
Copper re-pipe, not replate. Tito obviously has only made temporary
repairs, but hasn't had time to pump out the cellar. It would take a
long time to pump the water, and a complete refitting of the plumbing is
a major job that could take weeks, once it was started.
HWL
Elisi
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
> > The thing that bothers *me* is the Scoobies dumping all the bills in
> > Buffy's lap. I know it's her house, but Willow and Tara have lived
> > there all summer, surely they could have sorted it out?
>
> mortgage payments could be a thousand or more a month
>
> whatever income tara and willow had (parents? scholarships?)
> would be for a dorm room much would be less than mortgage
> and if dawns father is paying child support
> its unlikely hes going to pay for the whole house and not live there
>
> so theres probably some income
> but not enough to maintain the house
Of course - but it just underlines how they never really dealt with the
situation. They just hung on 'until Buffy came back and could sort it
out'. What if the spell hadn't worked? What would they have done then?
Sam
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> Don't have time to get into it now, but I got the impression that the
> SHS class was a special case.
That wouldn't explain "Gingerbread," though, with Joyce getting up and
talking about Sunnydale weirdness at a town meeting -- and everyone
nodding and assenting and knowing exactly what she's talking about.
I don't think most people in Sunnydale know *exactly* what's going on,
but everyone knows they liveo n a town where strange things are common.
(At the risk of vague spoilers, there is a quite amusing background gag
on this during an episode later this season.)
Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
> (from _IT_) in another post, but the difference is that the people of
> Derry weren't innocents, and had an active force affecting them at all
> times. I know there's a Hellmouth and that the town was built for
> demons, but the idea that a "don't talk about this stuff" could be so
> universally ingrained to the point that it is in the series just
> doesn't hold together, and was a lot easier to take while Wilkins was
> still alive.
>
It's not *that* universally ingrained anymore. As we've come to see,
people do talk about it sometimes. Just because people on the street
don't come up and talk to our characters about it doesn't mean people
don't notice it. They probably talk about it at home and stuff, too. At
this point, the status quo is that everyone already knows, and everyone
seems to pretty much know that everyone else knows. So what are they
gonna do, run around yelling, "Oh my God, monsters exist"? It isn't
surprising to see a demon in Sunnydale. People are sort of blase about
it by now.
At this point, it really just comes down to not seeing the stuff on TV
-- and that, you can put down to the Secret Conspiracy of Shadowy
Figures who were behind the Initiative and the Invisible Assassin
Program.
--Sam
burt...@hotmail.com
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
> > about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
> > wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
> > unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
> > characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
> > human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
> > jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
> > of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
>
> Never heard of "gallows humor?" You should hear some of the jokes EMTs
> and cops tell. Not to mention soldiers. Or, for that matter, you've
> never, ever heard anyone joke about killing people who are annoying
> them?
Context is important. I might laugh if I heard one of my friends joke
about killing one of my other friends. If a known, unrepentant serial
killer made that same joke? Not funny. Even if he was in prison at the
time.
burt...@hotmail.com
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
> > about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
> > wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
> > unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
> > characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
> > human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
> > jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
> > of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
>
> Huh? _Buffy_ suggests burning down the house, and that Dawn should take
> up smoking. All these things are only wrong if they're meant to be
> taken seriously. Which they're not.
No, I'm talking about when Spike "jokes" about killing Buffy's friends
("I could probably thin the herd a little"). Buffy smiles when she
hears an unrepentant serial killer joke about killing her friends. As I
said, that's so very, very wrong.
> The thing that bothers *me* is the Scoobies dumping all the bills in
> Buffy's lap. I know it's her house, but Willow and Tara have lived
> there all summer, surely they could have sorted it out?
Yes, I agree this was a problem and should have been addressed by the
show.
Vanya6724
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
>
> [Season Six so far:
> 1) "Bargaining" - Decent
> 2) "After Life" - Good
> 3) "Flooded" - Decent]
How do we get you to go back to the correct numbering scheme? "Flooded"
should be 6-4. For what it's worth the official production number of
the episode is 6ABB04.
Elisi
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Huh? _Buffy_ suggests burning down the house, and that Dawn should take
> > up smoking. All these things are only wrong if they're meant to be
> > taken seriously. Which they're not.
>
> No, I'm talking about when Spike "jokes" about killing Buffy's friends
> ("I could probably thin the herd a little"). Buffy smiles when she
> hears an unrepentant serial killer joke about killing her friends. As I
> said, that's so very, very wrong.
I was suggesting that they were the same sorts of joke... or are you
saying that Spike was *actually* offering to kill her friends, and took
her smile as confirmation that it was OK for him to have the chip
removed so he could follow through on his promise?
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> Don Sample wrote:
> > In article <1154487559.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > But wait, what about
> > > the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> > > fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> > > that everyone present willfully repressed the memory? Again, as is too
> > > often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> > > setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
> >
> > Most of the people in Sunnydale aren't repressing. They know about the
> > weird stuff, they just don't talk about it.
>
> Don't have time to get into it now, but I got the impression that the
> SHS class was a special case. Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
> (from _IT_) in another post, but the difference is that the people of
> Derry weren't innocents, and had an active force affecting them at all
> times. I know there's a Hellmouth and that the town was built for
> demons, but the idea that a "don't talk about this stuff" could be so
> universally ingrained to the point that it is in the series just
> doesn't hold together, and was a lot easier to take while Wilkins was
> still alive.
Wilkins is gone, but many of the people he hired are still in place,
still doing their same old jobs, and that included covering up the weird
stuff. Look at how many people in Sunnydale turn to magical mayhem
where people in a more normal town would just go get a gun.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
burt...@hotmail.com
No, I know it was a "joke" (I keep putting "joke" in quotes because it
wasn't funny). What I'm saying is that Buffy smiling at Spike's offer
to kill her friends, even if it was made in jest, is completely wrong
given Spike's status as a serial killer. If she sees Spike's murders as
a basis for jokes, that says to me that she doesn't care about human
life anymore, and as I said, that kills the basis of her heroism for me.
Don Sample
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote:
It's also a pretty reasonable thing for her to do. Buffy is providing a
valuable public service. She *should* get paid for it. The city
doesn't expect its police or fire departments to work for free does it?
Maybe she should start sending the city a bill for every demon or
vampire that she kills. $1,000 for each demon, $500 for every vampire.
That would give her a reasonable income. She'd be averaging about
$40,000 a year, just from what we've seen. (And that doesn't count the
apocalypse bonuses.)
Don Sample
Who do you think have been taking care of things for the last five
months?
Something else that comes up regularly, is people saying, "Willow and
Tara are living there, shouldn't they be paying rent?" To which I
reply, "What makes you think that they aren't?"
Mark Jones
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>>threads.
>>
>>
>>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>>Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>>(or "Let the water carry us away")
>>Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>>Director: Douglas Petrie
>
>
> lot more (and rightly so), but this is one of my personal worst
> episodes of the entire series. There are just so many thing about it
> that are so awful.
>
> We have Giles glaring at Willow when she suggests doing a locator spell
> to track down the demon, because apparentely using magic to battle the
> forces of evil is now *bad.* Well, if Giles was really so concerned
> about Willow and magic, why not have *the other witch* cast the spell?
> Or why not do it himself? He's cast plenty of spells before. But no,
> the writers were so intent on giving us a heavy-handed "Bad Willow! Too
> much magic!" message that they had Giles ignore their only lead on the
> demon, which let the Nerd Trio escape and yrq gb gur qrnguf bs Xngevan
> naq Gnen.
>
> Which brings me to the introduction of the Nerd Trio. This came off as
> a blatant attack on the audience ("Look at what geeks and losers
> sci-fi/fantasy fans are! Ha ha!"). Their scenes were boring, their
> banter was unfunny, and Andrew was So. Damned. Annoying. The writers
> looked at them as comic relief, but "humor" featuring the villians does
> not make up for depressing, dreary storylines involving the characters
> we actually care about - it just makes it impossible to take the
> villians (and thus, the storylines involving them) seriously.
Amen!
> And then there's Giles telling Willow off over Buffy's resurrection.
> What exactly is he angry about here? He doesn't know that Buffy was in
> heaven. That Willow risked her life to save a friend? That's cause for
> anger? Or that she went against the "laws" of magic because she thought
> it was necessary? Giles did that himself in both "The Zeppo" and
> "Primeval." Hypocrite, much?
This, on the other hand, I have no difficulty with. Giles is horrified
and appalled that Willow took such a stupid chance, in my opinion. Yes,
yes, it seems to have gone off without a hitch (or not much of one), but
it was insanely dangerous, and could easily have killed everyone
involved (and possibly others)...or worse. The numerous and horrific
ways things "could have gone horribly wrong" when dealing with powerful
resurrection magic is WORTH a tongue-lashing.
Especially for Willow, who has _always_ thought she was more capable
than she is, and who is only going to be emboldened by her apparent success.
> And then there's the absolute worst thing in the episode. Spike "jokes"
> about killing Buffy's friends - *and Buffy smiles.* This is just so, so
> wrong. I realize that in order to justify Buffy getting closer to an
> unrepentant serial killer, the writers have to twist Buffy's
> characterization, but this kills the basis of her heroism for me. If
> human life isn't important, if Spike's murders are now a basis for
> jokes.... Well, that makes me sick. Talk about losing the moral center
> of the show. Totally unjustifiable, IMO.
Fan service, baby. It's all about the fan service now.
Elisi
> > The thing that bothers *me* is the Scoobies dumping all the bills in
> > Buffy's lap. I know it's her house, but Willow and Tara have lived
> > there all summer, surely they could have sorted it out?
>
> Who do you think have been taking care of things for the last five
> months?
BUFFY: But I haven't spent any money. I was all ... dead and frugal.
WILLOW: I-I know, this comes as a bit of a shock after ... a bit of a
shock, but ... it took us by surprise too.
They obviously didn't think to think about it, if that makes sense. For
them it's been post-Becoming all over again. They kept things going
until Buffy came back - and when she is, things are *her* problem
again. Not *theirs* - *hers*. Anyway, I'll leave it for now, I'm sure
we'll get back to it at some point! ;)
> Something else that comes up regularly, is people saying, "Willow and
> Tara are living there, shouldn't they be paying rent?" To which I
> reply, "What makes you think that they aren't?"
Oh I never had a problem with that. I can't imagine that they're not
paying rent.
Elisi
It kills the basis of her heroism for you? Wow. I just cannot see that.
Spike would never kill her friends. He knows it, so does she. Therefore
it is OK to joke about - just like the burning down of the house.
Elisi
> Fan service, baby. It's all about the fan service now.
Riiiiight... and keeping Angel around was what? Serving art?
burt...@hotmail.com
Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
with Adam at the end of season 4.
Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
multiple occasions.
Mark Jones
Keeping Angel around may or may not have been fan service _too_.
But we _know_ keeping Spike around was fan service. They've admitted it
openly. So what's your point?
Elisi
> Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
> them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
> Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
> Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
> with Adam at the end of season 4.
>
> Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> multiple occasions.
He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
wouldn't kill them *now*. Seriously - he was willing to die at Glory's
hands, because if anything happened Dawn it would cause Buffy pain.
Killing her friends would also cause her pain - and apart from that
they're probably the closest he has to actual friends. I'm not saying
he really, really likes them or anything, but he'd no more kill them
than he'd kill Dawn. Also he spent the entire summer working with them
and probably saved their lives on numerous occasions.
I'm honestly struggling to see where you're coming from.
Elisi
Mark Jones wrote:
> Elisi wrote:
> > Mark Jones wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Fan service, baby. It's all about the fan service now.
> >
> >
> > Riiiiight... and keeping Angel around was what? Serving art?
>
> Keeping Angel around may or may not have been fan service _too_.
It *totally* was. He was supposed to have been killed off in 'Angel'
(1.07), but he had chemistry with Buffy, so they kept him around. And
thank goodness they did - it led to a wonderful story.
>
> But we _know_ keeping Spike around was fan service. They've admitted it
> openly. So what's your point?
That the show was always about telling stories - if they could please
the fans as well, all the better. And if you're thinking that it was
just the fangirls who adored Spike, then my husband much prefers Spike
to Angel. The whole brooding, tortured, star-crossed lovers thing makes
him roll his eyes. *A lot*. Seriously - we actually watched 'Becoming
II' yesterday, and the second Angel got his soul back, husband dearest
switched from admiration to mocking. Different people like different
things.
lili...@gmail.com
I think that's the scene that made me lose my last bit of sympathy for
the scoobies. The fact that they throw all those bills (that they
didn't bother to pay) at her and expect her to deal with it, mere days
after they made her crawl out of her own grave.
Lore
lili...@gmail.com
Hell yes, if the mortage payments were too much, they should have at
least tried to sell the house, put it on a seperate account to pay for
the bills and Dawn's education and then have Dawn move in with Giles.
What you do not do, is just throw the bills on a stack, while waiting
for the person who's dead, to be brought back to life so she can take
care of all of it.
Lore
burt...@hotmail.com
Elisi wrote:
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
> > them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
> > Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
> > Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
> > with Adam at the end of season 4.
> >
> > Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> > multiple occasions.
>
> He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> wouldn't kill them *now*.
Only because he *can't* kill them now because of the chip. It's like
Buffy said - he's like a serial killer in prison (only, again, he isn't
*like* a serial killer, he *is* a serial killer).
> Seriously - he was willing to die at Glory's
> hands, because if anything happened Dawn it would cause Buffy pain.
> Killing her friends would also cause her pain - and apart from that
> they're probably the closest he has to actual friends. I'm not saying
> he really, really likes them or anything, but he'd no more kill them
> than he'd kill Dawn.
I already mentioned Spike's protecting Dawn as the one noble thing he
ever did. However, since after Buffy came back, he basically forgot
that Dawn existed, I have to question how much attachment there really
was.
> Also he spent the entire summer working with them
> and probably saved their lives on numerous occasions.
Again, only because of the chip. Without it, he would have been out
killing humans. Maybe even Buffy's friends.
But in any case, this is drifting from my original point. Buffy smiling
at Spike's offer (even made in jest) to kill her friends tells me that
Spike's many murders are now fodder for jokes. Ohssl'f yvar "Ur ngr n
qrpbengbe bapr" yngre vf rira jbefr va guvf ertneq. And that, quite
simply, disgusts me.
beloved
One thing that constantly amazes me is when someone (and this is not
just in the BtVS fandom) says 'NO, you're WRONG! He did this.' And
I'm like, 'well, yah, but he did that 4 years ago. What does that have
to do with now?"
It's like if a character once says something or does something or
thinks a certain way then that's what the character will (must?) say,
do or think in perpetuity. I don't get how someone can think that way.
If characters in fiction never change, never grow, then it becomes
incredibly boring after a while. The best fiction is reflective of life
in this way. And in life EVERYTHING changes, eventually. That's one
thing that makes life, life.
Mark Jones
There's "fan service" as in keeping Angel around for a while, and "fan
service" which consists of warping the minds, personalities, memories
and ability to think rationally of the other characters so as to justify
keeping You Know Who around. The latter, in case you missed my point
(though I doubt it), is that the gyrations necessary to keep Spike
around were...excessive.
But, I suppose, in the greater scheme of things hardly the worst or most
egregious bits of bad writing they produced in the latter seasons.
burt...@hotmail.com
beloved wrote:
> Elisi wrote:
> > burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
> > > them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
> > > Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
> > > Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
> > > with Adam at the end of season 4.
> > >
> > > Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> > > multiple occasions.
> >
> > He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> > wouldn't kill them *now*. Seriously - he was willing to die at Glory's
> > hands, because if anything happened Dawn it would cause Buffy pain.
> > Killing her friends would also cause her pain - and apart from that
> > they're probably the closest he has to actual friends. I'm not saying
> > he really, really likes them or anything, but he'd no more kill them
> > than he'd kill Dawn. Also he spent the entire summer working with them
> > and probably saved their lives on numerous occasions.
> >
> > I'm honestly struggling to see where you're coming from.
>
> One thing that constantly amazes me is when someone (and this is not
> just in the BtVS fandom) says 'NO, you're WRONG! He did this.' And
> I'm like, 'well, yah, but he did that 4 years ago. What does that have
> to do with now?"
By that logic, we shouldn't be afraid of Charles Manson anymore, since
the last time he killed someone was over 35 years ago.
Elisi
Mark Jones wrote:
> Elisi wrote:
> > Mark Jones wrote:
> >
> >>Elisi wrote:
> >>
> >>>Mark Jones wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Fan service, baby. It's all about the fan service now.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Riiiiight... and keeping Angel around was what? Serving art?
> >>
> >>Keeping Angel around may or may not have been fan service _too_.
> >
> >
> > It *totally* was. He was supposed to have been killed off in 'Angel'
> > (1.07), but he had chemistry with Buffy, so they kept him around. And
> > thank goodness they did - it led to a wonderful story.
> >
> >>But we _know_ keeping Spike around was fan service. They've admitted it
> >>openly. So what's your point?
> >
> >
> > That the show was always about telling stories - if they could please
> > the fans as well, all the better. And if you're thinking that it was
> > just the fangirls who adored Spike, then my husband much prefers Spike
> > to Angel. The whole brooding, tortured, star-crossed lovers thing makes
> > him roll his eyes. *A lot*. Seriously - we actually watched 'Becoming
> > II' yesterday, and the second Angel got his soul back, husband dearest
> > switched from admiration to mocking. Different people like different
> > things.
>
> There's "fan service" as in keeping Angel around for a while,
3 years is 'a while'? Own show that runs for 5 years is 'a while'?
and "fan
> service" which consists of warping the minds, personalities, memories
> and ability to think rationally of the other characters so as to justify
> keeping You Know Who around. The latter, in case you missed my point
> (though I doubt it), is that the gyrations necessary to keep Spike
> around were...excessive.
>
> But, I suppose, in the greater scheme of things hardly the worst or most
> egregious bits of bad writing they produced in the latter seasons.
Whoa! Someone's bitter! I'm very sorry that you (obviously) disliked
what they did with Spike (and the later seasons in general). It wasn't
perfect, but I found it a lot more interesting than the high shcool
years. *shrug*
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
manson gets periodic parole hearings
and convinces the parole board he remains dangerous
if he can convince them he is safe to release he is out on parole
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
Elisi
> Elisi wrote:
> > burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
> > > them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
> > > Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
> > > Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
> > > with Adam at the end of season 4.
> > >
> > > Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> > > multiple occasions.
> >
> > He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> > wouldn't kill them *now*.
>
> Only because he *can't* kill them now because of the chip. It's like
> Buffy said - he's like a serial killer in prison (only, again, he isn't
> *like* a serial killer, he *is* a serial killer).
Yes he's a vampire. The joke isn't in good taste. But sometimes black
humour is what's called for.
> > Seriously - he was willing to die at Glory's
> > hands, because if anything happened Dawn it would cause Buffy pain.
> > Killing her friends would also cause her pain - and apart from that
> > they're probably the closest he has to actual friends. I'm not saying
> > he really, really likes them or anything, but he'd no more kill them
> > than he'd kill Dawn.
>
> I already mentioned Spike's protecting Dawn as the one noble thing he
> ever did. However, since after Buffy came back, he basically forgot
> that Dawn existed, I have to question how much attachment there really
> was.
I think if Dawn was in danger he'd step right up again. But what's he
going to protect her from now the Slayer's back?
> > Also he spent the entire summer working with them
> > and probably saved their lives on numerous occasions.
>
> Again, only because of the chip. Without it, he would have been out
> killing humans. Maybe even Buffy's friends.
Why? I could see him killing random people, but Buffy's friends? No.
> But in any case, this is drifting from my original point. Buffy smiling
> at Spike's offer (even made in jest) to kill her friends tells me that
> Spike's many murders are now fodder for jokes. Ohssl'f yvar "Ur ngr n
> qrpbengbe bapr" yngre vf rira jbefr va guvf ertneq. And that, quite
> simply, disgusts me.
This would be the Buffy who was going to _kill_ Faith a few years
before? And was only saved from becoming a murderer by pure luck? And
who probably has HUGE resentment problems with her friends at the
moment, with no outlet except Spike.
And you got your quote wrong:
OHSSL: Lbh xabj, guvf cynpr vf bxnl sbe n ubyr va gur tebhaq. Lbh svkrq
vg hc.
FCVXR: Jryy, V ngr n qrpbengbe bapr. Znlor fbzrguvat fghpx.
BX fb znlor fur fubhyq unir fgnxrq uvz sbe nqzvggvat gb univat xvyyrq
va gur cnfg, ohg vg'f xvaqn yngr sbe gung.
Naq jura ur *qbrf* guerngra gb rng fbzrbar (Evpuneq, ng ure oveguqnl
cnegl) fur qbrf trg natel:
FCVXR: Orfvqrf, Evpuvr, lbh pna'g fxvc oernxsnfg. Tebjvat obl yvxr
lbh. (Ohssl tynevat ng uvz) Zr, V hfrq gb ybir oernxsnfg. Va gur byq
qnlf, V cebonoyl jbhyq unir rngra ol abj. (ybbxf zranpvatyl ng Evpuneq)
OHSSL: Bs pbhefr, jvgu gung arj qvrg bs lbhef, lbh jnaan or pnershy
jung lbh gel chggva' va lbhe zbhgu abj, Fcvxrl. (tvivat uvz n
zrnavatshy ybbx)
FCVXR: Lrnu? V qba'g xabj. Ghzzl'f znxvat nyy xvaqf bs thetyvrf. Znlor
V bhtugn whfg srrq ba jungrire'f nebhaq... (Ohssl ybbxvat ng Evpuneq.
Evpuneq ybbxvat orzhfrq) rira vs vg qbrfa'g tb qbja jryy. (gb Evpuneq)
Lbh, hu, jbex bhg?
OHSSL: Bxrl-qbxrl.
Ohssl dhvpxyl trgf hc, tenof Fcvxr ol uvf fyrrir, unhyf uvz gb uvf srrg
naq gbjneq gur qbbe.
OHSSL: (gb Evpuneq) 'Fphfr hf.
Ohssl unhyf Fcvxr vagb gur sblre.
OHSSL: Url, Zvfgre Cnffvir-Ntterffvir Thl. Frevbhfyl, lbh jnaan gnxr vg
qbja n abgpu be gjb va gurer?
FCVXR: Jung, cbbe qnvagl Evpuneq pna'g gnxr n wbxr?
OHSSL: (svezyl) Jr qb abg wbxr nobhg rngvat crbcyr va guvf ubhfr!
FCVXR: (natevyl) Jung ner lbh tbaan qb, orng zr hc ntnva?
~~~~
Gurer vf n pyrne qvssrerapr orgjrra nyy gurfr. Ng yrnfg gurer vf gb zr.
Lord Usher
@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>> Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
>> multiple occasions.
>
> He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> wouldn't kill them *now*.
So if Angel joked with Giles about killing his current girlfriend, you'd
expect Giles to smile about it because Angel wouldn't kill his girlfriend
*now*?
(For the record, though, I'm not hugely put off by the scene in "Flooded,"
since the point of the season thus far is that Buffy *is* deeply screwed up
and reacting inappropriately to things.)
--
Lord Usher
"I'm here to kill you, not to judge you."
Elisi
Lord Usher wrote:
> "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote in news:1154544784.979363.53230
> @m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> >> multiple occasions.
> >
> > He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> > wouldn't kill them *now*.
>
> So if Angel joked with Giles about killing his current girlfriend, you'd
> expect Giles to smile about it because Angel wouldn't kill his girlfriend
> *now*?
Well if Spike had actually ever killed any of Buffy's friends, the
situation would be different. The only one he killed was Ford, and
well...
> (For the record, though, I'm not hugely put off by the scene in "Flooded,"
> since the point of the season thus far is that Buffy *is* deeply screwed up
> and reacting inappropriately to things.)
Exactly.
beloved
Oh, don't say stupid things, it's not an accurate reflection of who you
are. I've read enough of your posts to know you're not stupid. One
determines/surmises another's reactions to a situation by who they are
and how they think NOW, not what they did/thought years ago. And you
know perfectly well that's what I was saying.
I get that you don't think there's been any real or significant change
in Spike. I get that you think that the only thing constraining Spike
from killing humans again is the chip and without it he'd respond, in a
hot minute, like S2 Spike would. But you must also have realized long
ago that everyone who watched BtVS has their own perspective and their
own take on what they saw. And everyone's opinion is as valid as
yours, no need to belittle others because they saw it differently than
you did. (well, except for one person, you can belittle him if you want
- no, sorry, just kidding. Really. He has all the right in the world
to save all the dumb, poor little girls with his posts if he wants to).
burt...@hotmail.com
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Elisi wrote:
> > > burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Spike would never kill her friends? Are you kidding? He tried to kill
> > > > them all in "School Hard." He kidnapped Willow and Xander in "Lovers
> > > > Walk" and threatened to kill them. He tried to kill Willow in "The
> > > > Initiative." And he tried to get them all killed by allying himself
> > > > with Adam at the end of season 4.
> > > >
> > > > Spike most definitely would kill her friends - he's attempted it on
> > > > multiple occasions.
> > >
> > > He also tried to kill _Buffy_ time and time again. The point is that he
> > > wouldn't kill them *now*.
> >
> > Only because he *can't* kill them now because of the chip. It's like
> > Buffy said - he's like a serial killer in prison (only, again, he isn't
> > *like* a serial killer, he *is* a serial killer).
>
> Yes he's a vampire. The joke isn't in good taste. But sometimes black
> humour is what's called for.
Spike making the joke isn't what I have a problem with. It's Buffy
smiling at it.
> > > Also he spent the entire summer working with them
> > > and probably saved their lives on numerous occasions.
> >
> > Again, only because of the chip. Without it, he would have been out
> > killing humans. Maybe even Buffy's friends.
>
> Why? I could see him killing random people, but Buffy's friends? No.
Why not? If nothing else, once he started killing random people again,
Buffy's friends would certainly try to stop him. And that could only
end two ways - either they kill him, or he kills them.
> > But in any case, this is drifting from my original point. Buffy smiling
> > at Spike's offer (even made in jest) to kill her friends tells me that
> > Spike's many murders are now fodder for jokes. Ohssl'f yvar "Ur ngr n
> > qrpbengbe bapr" yngre vf rira jbefr va guvf ertneq. And that, quite
> > simply, disgusts me.
>
> This would be the Buffy who was going to _kill_ Faith a few years
> before? And was only saved from becoming a murderer by pure luck? And
> who probably has HUGE resentment problems with her friends at the
> moment, with no outlet except Spike.
>
> And you got your quote wrong:
>
> OHSSL: Lbh xabj, guvf cynpr vf bxnl sbe n ubyr va gur tebhaq. Lbh svkrq
> vg hc.
> FCVXR: Jryy, V ngr n qrpbengbe bapr. Znlor fbzrguvat fghpx.
Jubbcf, lbh'er evtug. Gunax lbh sbe gur pbeerpgvba. Fb vg'f abg dhvgr
nf onq nf V gubhtug. Ohg fgvyy, vg'f rira jbefr guna jung unccraf va
"Sybbqrq" - Fcvxr ersreraprf n fcrpvsvp zheqre va uvf cnfg naq Ohssl
cnffrf vg bss nf n wbxr. Qbrf Ohssl whfg abg pner nobhg uhzna yvsr
nalzber?
Rira vs fur jnfa'g tbvat gb fgnxr Fcvxr, fur pbhyq ng yrnfg fgbc
fzvyvat jura ur gnyxf nobhg xvyyvat crbcyr.
(Naq jul jnf vg gbb yngr gb fgnxr uvz, naljnl? Gurer'f ab fgnghgr bs
yvzvgngvbaf ba zheqre.)
burt...@hotmail.com
Then shouldn't we judge Charles Manson by who he is now, rather than
who he was 35 years ago when he killed all those people? Or, pick any
murderer who's been in prison for four years (since you specifically
mentioned that time frame).
My point is that you can't say Spike has changed because he isn't
killing people anymore. That ignores the fact that he *can't* kill
people because of the chip. Just like Charles Manson *can't* kill
people because he's in prison.
Seriously, if your daughter brought home a guy who'd killed his
previous girlfriend four years ago, would you really say, "Yeah, but
that was four years ago. What does that have to do with now?"
> I get that you don't think there's been any real or significant change
> in Spike. I get that you think that the only thing constraining Spike
> from killing humans again is the chip and without it he'd respond, in a
> hot minute, like S2 Spike would. But you must also have realized long
> ago that everyone who watched BtVS has their own perspective and their
> own take on what they saw. And everyone's opinion is as valid as
> yours, no need to belittle others because they saw it differently than
> you did.
I haven't belittled anyone. I attack the argument, not the person
making it.
Elisi
> Why not? If nothing else, once he started killing random people again,
> Buffy's friends would certainly try to stop him. And that could only
> end two ways - either they kill him, or he kills them.
I'd say he'd probably leave town, to be honest. He's not Angelues - he
wouldn't kill her friends. It'd upset her.
> > > But in any case, this is drifting from my original point. Buffy smiling
> > > at Spike's offer (even made in jest) to kill her friends tells me that
> > > Spike's many murders are now fodder for jokes. Ohssl'f yvar "Ur ngr n
> > > qrpbengbe bapr" yngre vf rira jbefr va guvf ertneq. And that, quite
> > > simply, disgusts me.
> >
> > This would be the Buffy who was going to _kill_ Faith a few years
> > before? And was only saved from becoming a murderer by pure luck? And
> > who probably has HUGE resentment problems with her friends at the
> > moment, with no outlet except Spike.
> >
> > And you got your quote wrong:
> >
> > OHSSL: Lbh xabj, guvf cynpr vf bxnl sbe n ubyr va gur tebhaq. Lbh svkrq
> > vg hc.
> > FCVXR: Jryy, V ngr n qrpbengbe bapr. Znlor fbzrguvat fghpx.
> Jubbcf, lbh'er evtug. Gunax lbh sbe gur pbeerpgvba. Fb vg'f abg dhvgr
> nf onq nf V gubhtug. Ohg fgvyy, vg'f rira jbefr guna jung unccraf va
> "Sybbqrq" - Fcvxr ersreraprf n fcrpvsvp zheqre va uvf cnfg naq Ohssl
> cnffrf vg bss nf n wbxr. Qbrf Ohssl whfg abg pner nobhg uhzna yvsr
> nalzber?
Ur'f xvyyrq gubhfnaqf bs crbcyr. Fur xabjf gung, fb vg'f abg ernyyl n
fubpx. V'z abg fnlvat gung vtabevat vg vf tbbq, ohg ng gung cbvag V
qba'g guvax fur'f ernyyl guvaxvat pyrneyl...
> Rira vs fur jnfa'g tbvat gb fgnxr Fcvxr, fur pbhyq ng yrnfg fgbc
> fzvyvat jura ur gnyxf nobhg xvyyvat crbcyr.
> (Naq jul jnf vg gbb yngr gb fgnxr uvz, naljnl? Gurer'f ab fgnghgr bs
> yvzvgngvbaf ba zheqre.)
V whfg zrna gung fur'q abg fgnxrq uvz fb sne - fur'q or cresrpgyl
whfgvsvrq, ohg fhqqrayl qrpvqvat gb xvyy uvz abj, lrnef nsgre fur
qrpvqrq gb yrg uvz 'yvir'? Frrzf n yvggyr qnsg.
Maybe we should contiue this conversation in the S6 thread?
One Bit Shy
news:1154487559.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
I tend to run hot and cold on this episode. I think it essentially comes
down to whether I'm in the mood to enjoy the scenes with our new geek
villains. There's a lot I like about them. The show does an excellent job,
I believe, of quickly establishing their common ground as nerds, but still
making them very distinct characters. And lots of neat geek details - too
many to recount here, but for example... The way the periscope view of
outside settles on some gal sunbathing. (And was that Duke Nukem in the
background earlier?) I enjoyed Jonathan lighting his cigar with money -
then not knowing quite what to do with the burning bill. Their list of
goals. (How many of them do you suppose we'll see achieved?) Andrew
getting bogged down over the viability of a worm hole that small. And so
on...
But all those tidbits are kind of a problem in themselves, because I think
this introduction to the three piles on. It's like the writers were sitting
around giggling - oh, we gotta do this and we gotta do that and don't forget
that thing there - and ended up swamping the scenes. They go on kind of
long and don't seem to have much sense of pacing. Some nuances are hard to
get into initially, I think, too. Like the Jedi bit where Andrew and
Jonathan seem to really believe Warren pulled some kind of mind trick on the
demon. To me it just plays stupid here, but with a better sense of the
established characters... well, it would still play stupid, but maybe in a
way that would seem more believable.
So one day I watch it and it's tedious. And another day it's rich with
delicious content.
I'm leaning towards delicious content today, so it's going to get a Good
rating. And I think the rest of the episode is pretty solid anyway.
> Sometimes - not always, but sometimes - one can tell how an
> episode is going to play out based on the teaser. This week's teaser
> shows Buffy back to something resembling normal, trying to fix
> something. There's a good moment along the way ("so. We meet at
> last, Mister Drippy") to a hopelessly telegraphed and overdone joke:
> Buffy tries to fix something, and the entire house goes to hell.
> That's the episode in a nutshell. "Flooded" has its snappy
> moments, often in the low-key parts, but it's too willing to go for a
> big joke even when the setup would be more trouble than it's worth.
>
> I suppose some levity was needed after the last few. I'm not huge on
> Buffy's issues being played for laughs, but on the whole, the show
> does a reasonable job of easing back into the BTVS humor without
> neglecting the serious undertone.
I think the humor pairs up well with Buffy earnestly putting on the happy
face and trying to get back into the swing of things. One of the first
defense mechanisms is trying to find the humor in bad situations. I like
the pipe bursting humor myself. I think it's the kind of joke that works
better telegraphed. Classic slapstick commonly lets the audience know the
pratfall is coming so they can enjoy watching the victim walk into it as
well the pratfall itself. Besides, there is a kind of surprise in this
version. Dawn, the one telling Buffy to call a plumber, is the one who gets
hit with the water - not Buffy. (Love her squealing departure.) So you
know it's coming, but not quite where and how.
"There. All better." I like that line too, and, yes, it's establishing a
little metaphor. Each step forward - each solution - seems to end up taking
her four steps back. I also like Buffy's pantomime of the cutting scissors
for how a loan will just cut through the financial tangle. Cute and perky
in a very Buffy way we haven't seen much of in a while. (Except, curiously,
from the Buffybot.) Of course the loan fails and the financial problems
sink into further wrecking of the house and a Buffy deciding to just not
think about it, go visit Angel, and leave it all in other people's hands.
And there's the bigger message. Buffy's efforts to fight her detachment -
to get involved in life - pretty much all fail. Ending up further
solidifying that detachment.
> Here Buffy not only has to keep
> dealing with the usual stuff, there's also the financial side of
> things to worry about. While trying to assure Dawn and the others that
> she'll make things work, she seems partly exasperated about the one
> more banal straw weighing down her proverbial camel, and partly out of
> her league in the adult world (as usual). "It's not like it's the
> end of the world. Which is too bad, you know, 'cause that, I'm really
> good at."
I don't think she's all that ready to save the world either. The banal
straw probably isn't a bad way of describing her attitude. But I think that
just obscures her difficulty in being motivated about anything - even the
simpler day to day things like actually caring whether Dawn eats her
breakfast.
> So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
> farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
> The loan-application sequence has elements of both of these things.
> We know our hero can be a little pathetic with regards to stuff like
> applying for a loan, but really, bringing a folder full of old report
> cards? Just... ugh. It'd be more explainable if it were funny.
I laughed at that. As for continuity - well, she doesn't have experience
with things like loan applications and has nothing genuinely helpful in the
way of documents. So she's trying to sell herself as best as she can. The
only interview kind of situations that I can recall Buffy being in have been
with two school principals, a school psychiatrist, Maggie Walsh and the WC.
All of those were largely about her personally - as in her character. Not
something as abstract as a credit rating. I think the scene is actually
kind of true to how it feels for lots of young adults diving into the
financial world for the first time.
> A
> main purpose of this part of the show, though, is to set up an attack
> on the place, leading to the image of Buffy, foot on a dead demon's
> chest, saying "now, about my loan." And then getting rejected
> anyway. So that's the intended money moment. But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> that everyone present willfully repressed the memory?
No, you're meant not to expend any effort worrying about such things. Why
are you all of a sudden back on this kick? A real Sunnydale couldn't exist
without the entire town having fled in panic years before. It's just a
perennial pretense that the common populace only dimly gets what's going on
or pretends not to see it, that's left mostly static so that she show can
keep on telling new stories without getting bogged down in a boring side
issue. I think it's plenty for the loan officer to observe the poor
property values in Sunnydale.
> Again, as is too
> often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
I don't want to be too cranky about this - it's not that great a scene - but
it's not all setup for a one line payoff. Yes, that's a nice punchline.
But it's just the last of a series of jokes, and the whole scene is a
process in support of the episode. You know, it's about the journey, not
just the destination. I liked each stage of it.
> I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
> gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the plumbing work has been done yet. Has
there been time for that? I thought all the plumber did initially was shut
down the active leaks. I think the demon fight is just the day after the
leak.
> The interactions between the main cast are a mixed bag, with one big
> shining exception of solid goodness which I'll get to later. I think
> for the most part, the ideas make sense, but the dialogue is mixed as
> far as whether or not it clicks. Xander and Anya are in a holding
> pattern, with him giving a series of wise-sounding stalling tactics and
> her demanding that he grow up (while letting _Spider-Man_ be an issue
> of contention). I don't really know why he's hesitating at this
> point, except to reiterate that it gives me a slightly bad feeling
> about their future together.
Surely you don't expect those two to have a trouble free walk to the altar?
I mean, look at them. As sweet as their romance is, it's not like they're
the most even keeled of souls or haven't had squabbles before.
> Probably the biggest bit of mixed-baggery
> is the way Willow encourages displays of human emotion. Makes sense in
> theory, and the idea of Willow sleeping with Riley is wackily out-there
> in appropriate amounts. But her prattle sounds annoying and unnatural
> in parts, especially while backing off at the end. So not a huge fan.
It's not clear to me what you're seeing. To me, Willow is aware of Buffy's
detachment and attempts to exploit a moment of passion from her. But fails,
and in the process ends up further disconnected with Buffy resisting both
the emotion and Willow reaching out to her. Willow backs off as she does
because Buffy isn't buying into it - won't even see the humor of it - just
reacts kind of badly to it. So Willow retreats to avoid a fight.
> The scene also drops Angel's name, probably with the express purpose
> of setting up the ending for the benefit of those just joining us.
> There's a pretty good little exchange and some coordinated fighting
> between Buffy and Spike too, which I don't have much to say about.
> "Knew I could get a grin."
"So what do you know about finances?"
> Mrs. Quality really didn't like these parts; too much compressed
> geekery for her, I guess. She proclaimed the three "too pathetic,"
> giving me a chance to mock her for missing the point. I suppose
> there's a reason girls don't dig guys like them. As for me,
> throughout most of these scenes, I couldn't help but notice that I
> wasn't laughing, and I'm pretty sure I was meant to. I don't
> actually have any problem with the premise of the bored/depressed geeks
> tapping into the wrong powers and running with it, although I hope
> they'll help usher in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
> They're not without their high points: the stereo supervillain laughs
> is pretty good, as is the flashback ("of course I remember. It was
> last month") to how they first met (reminiscent of the mini-flashback
> in "The Prom," appropriately enough). Jonathan's reluctance to
> go after Buffy is also okay. So, better luck with the comedy next
> time, guys; I hold out hope.
Already commented on this. Some days that's pretty akin to my reaction.
Other days it's funnier.
> The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
> mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
> everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances. The others have covered the
> research for the moment, but he's still good to have around for our
> hero's sake. And for the episode's, since every scene in which
> he's on screen is a keeper. The subdued paternal tone of all his
> interactions with Buffy is nicely done. So is the strange aimlessness
> he feels at having started to move on into the world of the mundane,
> and then getting pulled back out.
I think the most telling moment is when Giles reaches to comfort Buffy on
the couch, but she gets up and walks away. There are other related moments
between the two. I think Buffy was hoping that Giles would pull her out of
her funk. But then didn't feel that once he was there. Instead she pushes
him away a little emotionally, while offloading onto him what she can of her
real world problems. Again further solidifying her detached feeling.
> But as good as those moments are,
> the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
> seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
> Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
> doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
> a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
> or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
> she have certain blind spots. And it seems like Rupert doesn't
> really have much of anything that he can do about it other than deliver
> stern talkings-to.
A crackling little fight. Willow's enthusiasm about the spell experience
was so delightful initially. (Loved the little physical bit of peaking
through her fingers.) Of course that's what she thought Giles would want to
know - and fully expected Giles to be excited with and for her. Getting
slapped with the truth was a harsh reversal for her - and the implied threat
she made rather disturbing. But I'm not all that impressed with Giles
either. Yes, I understand his fury. But if he really feels it's that
dangerous, then Willow's enthusiasm should have told him that she really
doesn't understand.
As interesting as all that is, I suspect the most important thing about that
fight is that Buffy (and Spike) overheard it. Great, her coming back is
driving a wedge between Willow and Giles. Giles doesn't even think Willow
should have done it. "I'm far from convinced she's come out of all this
undamaged." I don't think Buff is convinced either. All in all that had to
have been a terribly depressing thing for Buffy to overhear.
> This Is Really Stupid But I Laughed Anyway moment(s):
> - Eating breakfast three times a day
> - "That's not a horn" [it's all about the delivery]
> - "*Willow* brought me back. I just lay there... I know what you
> meant. It was just a little post-post-mortem comedy"
Buffy: I cost *you*? That's a designer lamp, ya mook!
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Works in parts.
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
Good for me. Even though the episode resolves around the oh so exciting
world of paying bills, I thought Buffy's character story was interesting and
well handled. Plus, of course, the big Willow/Giles spat. And our new
geeky criminals are refreshing to me. Plus it's just a generally funny
episode to me.
About Anya's suggestion - poor Anya. It really wasn't so crazy. Look at
Angel. And, you know, maybe that loan officer really should have looked
more kindly upon the loan after Buffy saved his sorry ass.
About Dawn's education. That book she's looking at is rather entertaining.
The "Picture Museum of Sorcery". The text on the page she's looking at
references a tale from Faust, and then a corresponding one from another
book, where a conjuror in a circle of protection brings forth the devil in
the form of a camel and then asks him to manifest in the form of a spaniel
instead.
"Scarcely had I given the order when the dreadful camel stretched out his
neck to a length of sixteen feet, lowered his head to the middle of the
room, and vomited up a white spaniel with fine shining silky hair and ears
down to the ground. The whole vision disappeared, and nothing remained
under the vault but myself and the dog. He walked around the circle,
wagging his tail and fawning, and then said to me, 'Master, I should greatly
like to lick just the tip of your toes, but the terrible circle around you
keeps me back.'"
OBS
George W Harris
wrote:
:> By that logic, we shouldn't be afraid of Charles Manson anymore, since
:> the last time he killed someone was over 35 years ago.
:
:Oh, don't say stupid things
But he said stupid things four years ago!
--
Never give a loaded gun to a woman in labor.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
George W Harris
:
:George W Harris wrote:
:> On 1 Aug 2006 21:38:27 -0700, "Apteryx" <Apte...@gmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> :Yeah, but there's a whole lot of people for whom surprise is not an
:> :essential feature of humour. In fact there's a whole school of humour
:> :(ok, mainly British) that relies on remorsely following the formula
:> :"Tell 'em what you're gonna do, do it, and then tell 'em you've done
:> :it").
:>
:> Is this called the "High school composition" school of
:> humor?
:
:The local arts center shows old(ish) movies. I recently attended a
:showing of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I will venture to
:speculate that everyone in that theater had seen the film, most of them
:many times. It was a blast. You mileage may vary, but it is not
:universally true that surprise is a necessary ingredient.
Oh, absolutely. I was more mocking highschool
compositions of the "In this paragraph I am going to tell
you blah. Blah. In this paragraph I told you blah."
variety.
Not sure what you're getting on about.
:
:Richard R. Hershberger
--
"Intelligence is too complex to capture in a single number." -Alfred Binet
Clairel
George W Harris wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2006 13:13:02 -0700, "beloved" <beloved...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> :> By that logic, we shouldn't be afraid of Charles Manson anymore, since
> :> the last time he killed someone was over 35 years ago.
> :
> :Oh, don't say stupid things
>
> But he said stupid things four years ago!
--Heh heh. Good one.
Clairel
Shuggie
>
> But wait, what about
> the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
> fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
> often a source of disconnect between this viewer and the show, the
> setup is too labored to justify the payoff.
>
I'm reminded of something I read about Jaws. Apparently the book ends
much less dramatically than the film with the shark sinking to the
bottom of the ocean and dying there. This is because the author did a
lot of research on sharks and wanted it be realistic. So they come to
work on the script and they come up with the ending as in the film and
Spielberg sends the script to the author of the book (Benchly?) who
mentions that whilst he thinks the ending is cool it's a bit
implausible. Spielberg says that since it's the end of the movie, if
he's 'got' the audience with him he can pretty much do what he likes, if
he hasn't it doesn't matter anyway.
I guess by season 6 ME figured that either the audience was ok with the
'vampires are real, lot of 'em live in Sunnydale' thing or it didn't
really matter.
> The most important ingredient of "Flooded" that I haven't
> mentioned yet is Giles, who makes one of those nice
> everyone-turns-around-to-stare entrances. The others have covered the
> research for the moment, but he's still good to have around for our
> hero's sake. And for the episode's, since every scene in which
> he's on screen is a keeper. The subdued paternal tone of all his
> interactions with Buffy is nicely done. So is the strange aimlessness
> he feels at having started to move on into the world of the mundane,
> and then getting pulled back out. But as good as those moments are,
> the one I'll remember is the shouting match he has with Willow. She
> seems as taken aback as the viewer might be by the extent of his anger.
> Per usual, there's a part of her that needs constant approval, and
> doesn't take criticism well at all. One line in particular that says
> a lot about the way Willow works is "I thought you'd be... impressed,
> or, or something." Well, imagining that would certainly require that
> she have certain blind spots. And it seems like Rupert doesn't
> really have much of anything that he can do about it other than deliver
> stern talkings-to.
>
One thing that I missed until someone pointed it out to me the first
time I saw this ep - which is how hypocritical Giles is being. So
Willow's channelling dark magics without thinking of the consequences?
Hello? Eyghon?? At least Willow got away with it, Giles' youthful
dabblings caused the deaths of 3 or 4 of his friends.
Of course one could argue it's not hypocrisy, it's learning from one's
mistakes. Maybe it's because he was burned so badly that he's so hard on
Willow.
In any case I love that scene. I particularly love Giles' expression
when Willow threatens him - not worried but intrigued as it what it
implies about her.
--
Shuggie
my blog - http://shuggie.livejournal.com/
Shuggie
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>> threads.
>>
>>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>> Director: Douglas Petrie
>>
>> I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
>> during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
>> and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
>> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
>> gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
>
> plumber friend come out of the basement, they have dry feet, nothing
> dragging around. So it's probably still a mess down below, but there
> isn't 40 cms of water down below at that time. Suddenly at the end, the
> water is back.
I just watched it and when Xander and Tito come up from the basement you
never seen them below the knee. Their feet could be sopping and you'd
never know. I suppose you'd expect them to mention it though.
Rowan Hawthorn
>
> One thing that I missed until someone pointed it out to me the first
> time I saw this ep - which is how hypocritical Giles is being. So
> Willow's channelling dark magics without thinking of the consequences?
> Hello? Eyghon?? At least Willow got away with it, Giles' youthful
> dabblings caused the deaths of 3 or 4 of his friends.
>
> Of course one could argue it's not hypocrisy, it's learning from one's
> mistakes. Maybe it's because he was burned so badly that he's so hard on
> Willow.
But, of course, that speaks even more strongly that he really *should*
have explained the dangers to her long ago - in excruciating detail, if
that was what it took to make her understand. I wonder, in a way, if
Willow even truly understands that this *is real magick* - or if, with
her science background, she's so focused on the fact that this is
something she can do - something *she* can make work - that she really
doesn't comprehend what it is she's tapping into?
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
beloved
Yes, we should judge him by who he is now. That's how some people get
out of prison early and I'm assuming that when he's up for parole they
do evaluate his current mindset(etal) and that's why he's not one of
them.
> My point is that you can't say Spike has changed because he isn't
> killing people anymore. That ignores the fact that he *can't* kill
> people because of the chip. Just like Charles Manson *can't* kill
> people because he's in prison.
And we've had this conversation before. I don't think Spike *can't*
kill people because of the chip. To me, the chip stops him from
killing people with his own hands (or teeth as the case may be), that's
all. He chooses not to kill people indirectly. And you disagree with
my opinion. I get that.
> Seriously, if your daughter brought home a guy who'd killed his
> previous girlfriend four years ago, would you really say, "Yeah, but
> that was four years ago. What does that have to do with now?"
If I felt he was the same kind of person now, no. If I felt he was
different, then yeah. I evaluate people based on the kind of person
they are now. People make mistakes, all people, me, you. Do you really
want to be judged on something you said or did years ago if you've
truly changed? (and I'm not talking about taking responsibility here,
even if you've changed you're still responsible for your previous
actions). Of course the 'bigger' the transgression, the deeper the
evaluation. Killing someone is a pretty big transgression, arguably the
biggest.
> > I get that you don't think there's been any real or significant change
> > in Spike. I get that you think that the only thing constraining Spike
> > from killing humans again is the chip and without it he'd respond, in a
> > hot minute, like S2 Spike would. But you must also have realized long
> > ago that everyone who watched BtVS has their own perspective and their
> > own take on what they saw. And everyone's opinion is as valid as
> > yours, no need to belittle others because they saw it differently than
> > you did.
>
> I haven't belittled anyone. I attack the argument, not the person
> making it.
If you say that hasn't been your intent, then I'll believe you.
Rowan Hawthorn
Actually, I'd expect Xander probably stayed on the stairs where it was
dry - I know *I* would, if I wasn't the one doing the repairs.
Wes <>
Yeah, and the confrontation scene has never felt 'natural' to me
because of that.
We get Giles' standard vague warnings about crossable lines and primal
forces, his admission of feeling "indescribably wonderful" that Buffy
is back and a lot of name calling.
If there was a chance that the spell could have brought about the end
of the world as he claims, well, I just feel the need for more than
his word for it now. After all, Giles is the one who recently said
"the only way [to close the portal] is to kill Dawn."
Wes
vague disclaimer
Rowan Hawthorn <rowan_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Shuggie wrote:
> >
> > One thing that I missed until someone pointed it out to me the first
> > time I saw this ep - which is how hypocritical Giles is being. So
> > Willow's channelling dark magics without thinking of the consequences?
> > Hello? Eyghon?? At least Willow got away with it, Giles' youthful
> > dabblings caused the deaths of 3 or 4 of his friends.
> >
> > Of course one could argue it's not hypocrisy, it's learning from one's
> > mistakes. Maybe it's because he was burned so badly that he's so hard on
> > Willow.
>
> But, of course, that speaks even more strongly that he really *should*
> have explained the dangers to her long ago - in excruciating detail, if
> that was what it took to make her understand.
Unlikely to have made a blind bit of difference. Kids have the dangers
of smoking drilled into them daily - complete with gross shots of
fucked-up lungs. Hasn't noticeably stopped kids smoking. Besides,
everyone close to her has tried.
But Willow's into it, and the disapproval of an authority figure is as
likely to a a red-rag-to-bull as an effective countermeasure.
> I wonder, in a way, if
> Willow even truly understands that this *is real magick* - or if, with
> her science background, she's so focused on the fact that this is
> something she can do - something *she* can make work - that she really
> doesn't comprehend what it is she's tapping into?
It makes the "bad" that is her self-image go away. With it, she matters.
When Spike offered the Dutch courage in The Gift, I doubt it would have
occurred to him that she had her own home-brew variety, which became the
headiest of brews when she smacked down a god.
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> time I saw this ep - which is how hypocritical Giles is being. So
> Willow's channelling dark magics without thinking of the consequences?
> Hello? Eyghon?? At least Willow got away with it, Giles' youthful
> dabblings caused the deaths of 3 or 4 of his friends.
so maybe giles should teach willow to raise eyghon
so she can do all the stupid things he did
instead of seeing an innocent miss calendar possessed
and learning the lesson that way
Mel
Rowan Hawthorn wrote:
> William George Ferguson wrote:
>
>> "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 3: "Flooded"
>>> (or "Let the water carry us away")
>>> Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>>> Director: Douglas Petrie
>>>
>>
>> And you didn't comment on the real payoff of that scene. Willow flat out
>> threatens Giles (we've seen her do half-comedic threats before, "And if
>> you hurt her, I will beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimor
>> is nobody's friend.")
>
>
> I suspect she wasn't joking there, either, but not being (at the moment)
> Really Pissed Off when she said it, nobody realized she was serious...
>
Too bad she didn't follow through.....I would have like that ending
better for Into the Woods.
Mel
Mel
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote:
> 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 3: "Flooded"
>>(or "Let the water carry us away")
>>Writers: Douglas Petrie and Jane Espenson
>>Director: Douglas Petrie
>
>
>
>
>>So, not such a bad idea. But the execution sometimes goes too far into
>>farce and sometimes shows the tendency to ignore continuity for a joke.
>> The loan-application sequence has elements of both of these things.
>>We know our hero can be a little pathetic with regards to stuff like
>>applying for a loan, but really, bringing a folder full of old report
>>cards? Just... ugh.
>
>
> The report cards made me wince too. But I liked the beginning of the
> scene, with the montage of Buffy brightly chirping stuff like "I'm a
> problem *solver*," followed by the reveal that she's actually just
> rehearsing and the loan officer isn't there yet. That gave me a small
> grin, at least. Of course she sounds much less confident when she's
> actually talking to him. I was also mildly amused when the demon hit
> Buffy and she spent *way* too long in the air, offscreen, before landing
> on the desk.
>
>
>>A main purpose of this part of the show, though, is to set up an attack
>>on the place, leading to the image of Buffy, foot on a dead demon's
>>chest, saying "now, about my loan." And then getting rejected
>>anyway. So that's the intended money moment. But wait, what about
>>the fact that the bank was attacked by inhuman creatures and Buffy
>>fought them off (in a Stupid Skirt, no less)? Are we meant to believe
>>that everyone present willfully repressed the memory?
>
>
> The bank guy might really not have realized that Buffy saved his life. A
> lot of the fight consisted of Buffy getting tossed around, and after she
> got thrown into the guard, we saw several other people fighting the demon.
> Plus there was the gun thing (which also made me wince). If the loan
> officer didn't happen to see the few good shots she got in, he might not
> have realized how important she really was to his survival.
>
> In general, I think Sunnydale's "forgettyitis" is caused by avoiding the
> subject and fear of speaking out, rather than actual repression of the
> memories. The witnesses will remember what they've seen, they just won't
> talk about it or think too much about it.
>
>
>>I'm also little confused about why the basement is still flooded
>>during the last fight, other than that someone thought it'd be cool
>>and/or funny - was everyone just going to leave it looking like that?
>> Did the plumbers just swim around while doing their re-plating? It
>>gives that sequence a dumb-cartoon feel.
>
>
> Agreed that they shold have drained the basement, but I don't think the
> full copper repipe was actually done yet. It seemed like Tito just did
> some quick, temporary repairs, then warned them that the underlying
> problems remain and they'll need a full replacement soon.
>
> Not much mention of the financial talk in the living room, a scene I found
> pretty amusing. I liked the way everyone stares at Buffy after she jokes
> about burning down the house. They aren't used to her joking anymore, and
> since she's been acting so strangely, they can't be sure she isn't
> serious. (But it's the tree that's pretty, not the fire! Fire bad!)
> Another good line: "Well, that's an idea ... *you* would have."
What's really telling about the scene is how everyone is looking to
Buffy (freshly returned from the dead) to "fix it" and yet they (Willow
and Tara) are living there as well and don't seem too inclined to _help_
fix it. They don't even come up with any suggestions.
Mel
Don Sample
shu...@gmail.com (Shuggie) wrote:
Or Xander stayed on the stairs, and Tito took off his hip waders before
coming back up into the kitchen. He left them hanging to drip-dry in
the stairway to avoid making a mess on Buffy's kitchen floor.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Rowan Hawthorn
<snicker> Me, too...
jil...@hotmail.com
> Seriously, if your daughter brought home a guy who'd killed his
> previous girlfriend four years ago, would you really say, "Yeah, but
> that was four years ago. What does that have to do with now?"
Heck, fathers particularly have enough trouble with men their daughters
bring home who seem perfectly innocent. Because all fathers know this
man wants to have sex with their little girl....
One Bit Shy
news:Htmdne9FQ--...@giganews.com...
Buffy's running water at the sink - suggesting that there's been water
pressure for a while. Tito has prepared a written estimate that he must
have worked on sometime. I think the temporary repairs were done earlier
and that this was just Tito taking Xander down the stairs a bit to point out
things as they discussed the estimate.
OBS
Arbitrar Of Quality
focuesd on he "gallows humor" element. for the record, my stance is
that it's a very believable distasteful joke of the type, and that damn
near anyone can be made to laugh about "wrong" things if they're in the
right (or wrong, rather) state of mind.
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> We have Giles glaring at Willow when she suggests doing a locator spell
> to track down the demon, because apparentely using magic to battle the
> forces of evil is now *bad.*
No, Willow using magic is now bad (to his way of thinking) because
Giles thinks that her power exceeds her responsibility, and that she's
happily playing with forces that are more or less guarenteed to blow up
in her face.
> Well, if Giles was really so concerned
> about Willow and magic, why not have *the other witch* cast the spell?
> Or why not do it himself? He's cast plenty of spells before. But no,
> the writers were so intent on giving us a heavy-handed "Bad Willow! Too
> much magic!" message that they had Giles ignore their only lead on the
> demon, which let the Nerd Trio escape
That is a reasonable objection, although he may have been worried that
the double-standard would lead to no good on the Willow front.
> Which brings me to the introduction of the Nerd Trio. This came off as
> a blatant attack on the audience ("Look at what geeks and losers
> sci-fi/fantasy fans are! Ha ha!").
Given the writers' self-depricating side, I have no problem believing
they were based on them as much as on the fans. If they hated geeks
and losers so much, Xander and Willow wouldn't be among the main
characters on the show.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> And you didn't comment on the real payoff of that scene. Willow flat out
> threatens Giles (we've seen her do half-comedic threats before, "And if
> you hurt her, I will beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimor
> is nobody's friend."), but this was neither cute nor comic "You're right.
> The magicks I used are very powerful. I'm very powerful. And maybe it's
> not such a good idea for you to piss me off." Yeah, she immediately tried
> to take it back and revert to cute loveable Willow, but, well, in
> Vonnegut's Slapstick, there's a scene where the twins, thought to be
> mentally retarded, reveal their actual intelligence. The onlookers are
> horrified and the twins try to go back to be the loveable morons, but
> their observers now know better and won't accept the behavior. That's
> kind of how I felt about follow-up scenes of Willow being cute and
> loveable, she'd let the mask slip, and you can't make it not seen.
It's certainly a noteworthy scene, but I think it resonated for you
more than for me. Part because I do think it was somewhat
heat-of-the-moment, and part because I'm already convinced that she's
more than just cute and lovable (although she is both). We've seen
before that someone hits her with the wrong words or action at exactly
the wrong time (note that her rage isn't always proportionate to the
heinousness of the percieved crime, either), she's a force of unnature.
Think of any Willow-yelling-at-people scene... actually, for a past
example of dangerousness, how about how close she came to cursing Oz in
"Wild At Heart?"
-AOQ
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> they were based on them as much as on the fans. If they hated geeks
> and losers so much, Xander and Willow wouldn't be among the main
> characters on the show.
in the commentaries they point out that much of the three nerds dialouge
is taken from conservations amongst the writers themselves
Arbitrar Of Quality
Horace LaBadie wrote:
> In article <1154523647.0...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,> > Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
> > (from _IT_)
Wait, MN is Minnesota, right? What's Maine?
> Copper re-pipe, not replate. Tito obviously has only made temporary
> repairs, but hasn't had time to pump out the cellar.
Did he swim while doing his temporary work?
Good pickup from 3DM that he doesn't seem wet after havng gone dwn and
presumably taken a close enough look at the damage to know what has to
be done.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
One Bit Shy wrote:
> > Are we meant to believe
> > that everyone present willfully repressed the memory?
>
> No, you're meant not to expend any effort worrying about such things. Why
> are you all of a sudden back on this kick? A real Sunnydale couldn't exist
> without the entire town having fled in panic years before. It's just a
> perennial pretense that the common populace only dimly gets what's going on
> or pretends not to see it, that's left mostly static so that she show can
> keep on telling new stories without getting bogged down in a boring side
> issue. I think it's plenty for the loan officer to observe the poor
> property values in Sunnydale.
[Sigh.] I hate Sunnydale Forgettyitis. Yeah, it's always been one of
the show's conceits that I've never liked, but then I got used to it,
and then S3 suggested that Sunnydale could only happen because of a
confluence of many factors, and that even then, things couldn't stay
that way forever. So this seems like backsliding. Time to get used to
the perennial device again...
> > Probably the biggest bit of mixed-baggery
> > is the way Willow encourages displays of human emotion. Makes sense in
> > theory, and the idea of Willow sleeping with Riley is wackily out-there
> > in appropriate amounts. But her prattle sounds annoying and unnatural
> > in parts, especially while backing off at the end. So not a huge fan.
>
> It's not clear to me what you're seeing. To me, Willow is aware of Buffy's
> detachment and attempts to exploit a moment of passion from her. But fails,
> and in the process ends up further disconnected with Buffy resisting both
> the emotion and Willow reaching out to her. Willow backs off as she does
> because Buffy isn't buying into it - won't even see the humor of it - just
> reacts kind of badly to it. So Willow retreats to avoid a fight.
If that wasn't cear, I'm reacting to the dialogue and delivery thereof
rather than the results.
> But I'm not all that impressed with Giles
> either. Yes, I understand his fury. But if he really feels it's that
> dangerous, then Willow's enthusiasm should have told him that she really
> doesn't understand.
Which is exactly the problem. "You are lucky to be alive, you rank,
arrogant, amateur!"
-AOQ
Terry
news:dsample-C84328...@news.giganews.com:
> It's also a pretty reasonable thing for her to do. Buffy is providing
> a valuable public service. She *should* get paid for it. The city
> doesn't expect its police or fire departments to work for free does
> it?
My town has volunteer fire and ambulance crews. They don't get paid, except
for some tax breaks. Maybe Buffy could get a tax break?
-Terry
Rowan Hawthorn
> In article <X6KdnR2GC5k...@giganews.com>,
> Rowan Hawthorn <rowan_h...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Shuggie wrote:
>>> One thing that I missed until someone pointed it out to me the first
>>> time I saw this ep - which is how hypocritical Giles is being. So
>>> Willow's channelling dark magics without thinking of the consequences?
>>> Hello? Eyghon?? At least Willow got away with it, Giles' youthful
>>> dabblings caused the deaths of 3 or 4 of his friends.
>>>
>>> Of course one could argue it's not hypocrisy, it's learning from one's
>>> mistakes. Maybe it's because he was burned so badly that he's so hard on
>>> Willow.
>> But, of course, that speaks even more strongly that he really *should*
>> have explained the dangers to her long ago - in excruciating detail, if
>> that was what it took to make her understand.
>
> Unlikely to have made a blind bit of difference. Kids have the dangers
> of smoking drilled into them daily - complete with gross shots of
> fucked-up lungs. Hasn't noticeably stopped kids smoking. Besides,
> everyone close to her has tried.
Actually, at this point, they're just *beginning* to. I don't think any
of them - with the possible exception of Tara - really realized just how
powerful Willow was becoming until she went up against Glory. And by
that time, it was too late, anyway; she'd already discovered that she
had a talent for the magicks, that she was good at tapping into the
power, even if her results didn't always come out the way she wanted.
>
> But Willow's into it, and the disapproval of an authority figure is as
> likely to a a red-rag-to-bull as an effective countermeasure.
>
>> I wonder, in a way, if
>> Willow even truly understands that this *is real magick* - or if, with
>> her science background, she's so focused on the fact that this is
>> something she can do - something *she* can make work - that she really
>> doesn't comprehend what it is she's tapping into?
>
> It makes the "bad" that is her self-image go away. With it, she matters.
> When Spike offered the Dutch courage in The Gift, I doubt it would have
> occurred to him that she had her own home-brew variety, which became the
> headiest of brews when she smacked down a god.
Oh, no question that's certainly what *attracts* her to the magicks,
along with, for the first time in her life, giving *her* control over
the world instead of the other way around; just as her hacking skills
allowed her some means of *covert* noncompliance with the rules before
she found something that allows her to take direct actions.
Rowan Hawthorn
> William George Ferguson wrote:
>
>> And you didn't comment on the real payoff of that scene. Willow flat out
>> threatens Giles (we've seen her do half-comedic threats before, "And if
>> you hurt her, I will beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimor
>> is nobody's friend."), but this was neither cute nor comic "You're right.
>> The magicks I used are very powerful. I'm very powerful. And maybe it's
>> not such a good idea for you to piss me off." Yeah, she immediately tried
>> to take it back and revert to cute loveable Willow, but, well, in
>> Vonnegut's Slapstick, there's a scene where the twins, thought to be
>> mentally retarded, reveal their actual intelligence. The onlookers are
>> horrified and the twins try to go back to be the loveable morons, but
>> their observers now know better and won't accept the behavior. That's
>> kind of how I felt about follow-up scenes of Willow being cute and
>> loveable, she'd let the mask slip, and you can't make it not seen.
>
> It's certainly a noteworthy scene, but I think it resonated for you
> more than for me. Part because I do think it was somewhat
> heat-of-the-moment, and part because I'm already convinced that she's
> more than just cute and lovable (although she is both).
Very perceptive (on both points.)
> We've seen
> before that someone hits her with the wrong words or action at exactly
> the wrong time (note that her rage isn't always proportionate to the
> heinousness of the percieved crime, either), she's a force of unnature.
> Think of any Willow-yelling-at-people scene... actually, for a past
> example of dangerousness, how about how close she came to cursing Oz in
> "Wild At Heart?"
>
> -AOQ
>
All the way back to "The Harvest," we've seen that, given the means and
opportunity, Willow's first instinct when she's hurt is to lash out.
It's just that, previously, those times when she had the means to
retaliate appear to have been infrequent (Cordelia's still alive,
right?) But now she actually *has* the means to retaliate at her
fingertips, which gives her the potential to be much more dangerous if
she doesn't learn to control her emotions.
Rowan Hawthorn
> Horace LaBadie wrote:
>> In article <1154523647.0...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>>> Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
>>> (from _IT_)
>
> Wait, MN is Minnesota, right? What's Maine?
ME (appropriate, no?)
>
>> Copper re-pipe, not replate. Tito obviously has only made temporary
>> repairs, but hasn't had time to pump out the cellar.
>
> Did he swim while doing his temporary work?
>
> Good pickup from 3DM that he doesn't seem wet after havng gone dwn and
> presumably taken a close enough look at the damage to know what has to
> be done.
Don't know about plumbers in Sunnydale, but most of the people *I* know
who are about to go sloggin' through deep water wear waders rather than
have to either change clothes in the truck or wear soggy pants back to
the shop...
Rowan Hawthorn
Yeah, but that's like... you know, *logical* and stuff...
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:It's certainly a noteworthy scene, but I think it resonated for you
:more than for me. Part because I do think it was somewhat
:heat-of-the-moment, and part because I'm already convinced that she's
:more than just cute and lovable (although she is both). We've seen
:before that someone hits her with the wrong words or action at exactly
:the wrong time (note that her rage isn't always proportionate to the
:heinousness of the percieved crime, either), she's a force of unnature.
: Think of any Willow-yelling-at-people scene... actually, for a past
:example of dangerousness, how about how close she came to cursing Oz in
:"Wild At Heart?"
And her spell-gone-wrong in "Something Blue".
Attracted D'Hoffryn's attention with *that* one.
:
:-AOQ
--
e^(i*pi)+1=0
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:
:Horace LaBadie wrote:
:> In article <1154523647.0...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
:> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:> > Sam compares Sunnydale to Derry, MN
:> > (from _IT_)
:
:Wait, MN is Minnesota, right? What's Maine?
ME. Mutant Enemy Medical Examiner Maine.
:-AOQ
--
They say there's air in your lungs that's been there for years.
BTR1701
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> I don't actually have any problem with the
> premise of the bored/depressed geeks
> tapping into the wrong powers and running
> with it, although I hope they'll help usher
> in the real Big Bad rather than being it.
Hope springs eternal...
BTR1701
"Vanya6724" <vanya...@pochta.ru> wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> >
> > AOQ rating: Decent
> >
> > [Season Six so far:
> > 1) "Bargaining" - Decent
> > 2) "After Life" - Good
> > 3) "Flooded" - Decent]
>
> How do we get you to go back to the correct numbering scheme? "Flooded"
> should be 6-4.
He's made it clear that he's doing it his way and that everyone can
either deal or bail.
BTR1701
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> >
> > BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> > Season Six, Episode 3: "Flooded"
>
> There are several ways, in different numbering conventions, of referring to
> this episode:
>
> B6x04
> 6-4
> 6ABB04
> Episode 104
I'm getting a kick out of it because it's driving all the anal-retentive
people nuts. I hope he sticks with it.