AOQ Review 6-10: "Gone"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Six, Episode 10: "Gone"
(or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
our accomp...uh")
Writer: David Fury
Director: David Fury
I had a bad feeling about this one based on the opening scene. So
Willow's trying to keep from using magic, and our hero has some
issues of her own in that direction. Got it. So does the show have to
give us dialogue like "any reminder of, of what it is that she's
trying to stay away from, you know, could cause her to ... give in to
temptation." and Buffy seeing visions of Spike? Seriously, show, we
do get it. That's like one step from having the characters explain
their powers to each other for the benefit of the viewer. Maybe
they're trying to baby-talk someone happening to channel-surf across
the show for the first time?
We shake that, but stay one-note. If there's one part to single out
in particular, it's the visit from the social worker, one of my least
favorite scenes in recent memory. It soon becomes clear that
everything Buffy says is going to "comically" come off sounding
bad, the social worker won't be a character so much as a token evil
authority figure who's out to get her, and this will drag on and on
and on. Check, check, and check. And just to make me really happy,
they bring back the Stupid Sage. Overall, I would say other than
Jonathan sitting on the invisible chair and Dawn's "I appreciate
your concern," I can't recall anything that I liked about the first
act, all in all ten or so of the most unpleasant minutes of S6.
To say that things pick up once Buffy comes down with a case of
invisibility would be an understatement. She's having so much fun
with it at first, uninhibited and genuinely happy, and the enthusiasm
is infectious. I'd consider the first conversation with Xander and
Anya to be an extremely strong character-driven comedy scene, and wish
that the light moments were always this good. The accidental groping,
and the eyeballs, and "um, about up to here ... well, if you could
see my hand, it's kind of above my shoulders," and the Señor Wenchez
bit... s'aright, all of it. Although less clever, driving Doris
mildly crazy is also good for a burst of dumb pleasure; presumably they
made her a worthless character specifically so she could be a target
here. I have to nitpick everything, of course, so I'll mention that
the blatant pop-culture reference ("all work and no play...") works
better for a TV audience than it does for the characters; don't give
the co-workers anything derivative to latch onto. Overall, quite
enjoyable. The fun also spills over into scenes Buffy's not in, like
all the stumbling over the invisible fire hydrant. And "for all we
know, she could be one of us!"
The Möbius Twins actually go somewhere slightly different this week,
or at least it makes a difference to me. I'm actually going to make
the case that this is a bigger deal than the end of "Smashed."
Obviously Buffy and Spike have been very physically friendly, but this
is the first time that they've gotten together in a way that can't
be explained as a sudden fit of passion, heat of the moment stuff.
Here Buffy's deliberately and unambiguously choosing to go to Spike,
and hopefully she'll appreciate the significance of that next time
she considers doing a "you're not part of my life" speech.
Meanwhile Spike, although still something of a slave to male desire and
blowjobs and stuff, finds a second to get all perceptive and be the one
to back away from the halfassedry - a worthwhile reversal of the
"this isn't real" dynamic. Although there are hosts of
differences, Spike is developing that same fun thing that Xander had
going in the early seasons, where he'll have the knack for saying or
doing the right things which are motivated by a heavy dose of
selfishness.
Primarily, this review has focused on the comedic side of "Gone,"
but stories are still moving. There're a few prominently featured
bits here and there dealing with Wil's attempts to stay off the
magic. Very fittingly, it's the little things, the habitual stuff,
that proves the most irritating. After plunking down in a chair, who
wants to suddenly have to get up to grab books that're out of reach
books? And waiting for that computer to load would be like suddenly
being back on a 14.4 kbs connection after years of Ethernet. There are
some solid touches, going from Xander's understandable but wrong
suspicion, to her resentment (and at-least-half-serious attempt to use
it as an excuse to hop off the wagon), and their surprisingly touching
sincere apology afterward. It's not a shock that "Gone" ends
with its two leads not exactly bubbling with joy. The fact that
Buffy's slightly happier alive than dead is a cause for celebration,
but more of the type that involves quietly brooding, and it seems like
that's a more important struggle to "win" than her issues with
Spike, honestly.
So, that's the good. Then things start to fall apart again, and
things start to feel a little hollow. I can trace my issues with the
later parts of "Gone" to three scenes. First is Xander walking in
on the exercising vampire. It's an obvious gag that requires us to
ignore a lot of things to make it work. Normally, of course, Xander
wouldn't have any reason to think of Buffy visiting here. But he's
got Buffy and invisibility on his mind, so it stretches credulity a
little more that he wouldn't notice how obviously an invisible person
could be underneath the sheets, or making noises, or playing with
Spike's ears. Then he has to, even though Buffy's life is in
danger, not warn one of the people who'd be most motivated to help,
or even give any indication that his need to find her is as urgent as
it is. And then he has to decide to give his "you know, kidding
aside, Spike... you really should get a girlfriend," at just that
moment, because ha ha, he's wrong. None of these flaws would matter
much in isolation, but together, they're a bit much. Talk about the
setup not holding together.
Second is the confrontation with Dawn, which is a more isolated
complaint. Long story short, despite the setup earlier, I feel like
she goes into tearful/yelling mode way too quickly and that
Trachtenberg's performance sounds hopelessly forced. Third is the
invisible fight at the arcade, which after starting nice (the boys
getting distracted by the fighting game is really stupid, but I
chuckled), goes on too long for its own good. There's also the whole
thing of the Geek Trio arguing over the attempt to kill Buffy, which
Jonathan is not at all pleased with... which is ignored thereafter, and
they're on the same page again from there. That seems lamer every
time it happens, since it would seem to be a major difference of
opinion and bit of betrayal on Warren's part. But why let consistent
storytelling get in the way of the jokes you're obsessed with
telling? That rubbed me the wrong way, and gave me the impression of,
once again, a show willing to ignore making sense. And why did Buffy
not disintegrate at all, other than that it was just a way to
artificially add some drama?
Upshot is, I was entertained by "Gone," and had a good time with
the middle portions. And it broadly makes sense in the overall story
of the season. But the bad taste in my mouth is annoyingly persistent.
Call it a high Decent. It can start a little commune with other
comedy episodes of which I've been "unfairly" critical, like
"Döppelgangland" and "Superstar," and live just south of the
Good border.
Since I have a moment to spare, a few Idle Thoughts:
Idle Thought 1: We're now halfway through the year and we still
don't have an arch-nemesis who can be taken seriously. It's
unusual for this show. I could see this continuing, or... well, I have
a few ideas on what might happen, but they're based on half-spoilers
and such, so forget about it for now.
Idle Thought 2: I know that being interested in anything involving
Riley Finn seems like a contradiction in terms, but I do admit to some
slight curiosity over how he'd react to where Buffy is in her love
life, just given the events that led up to his separation with her...
So...
One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
AOQ rating: Decent
[Season Six so far:
1) "Bargaining" - Decent
2) "After Life" - Good
3) "Flooded" - Decent
4) "Life Serial" - Good
5) "All The Way" - Good
6) "Once More, With Feeling" - Excellent
7) "Tabula Rasa" - Good
8) "Smashed" - Decent
9) "Wrecked" - Good
10) "Gone" - Decent]
Arbitrar Of Quality
the second half of S6 Mon. or Tues.
-AOQ
Apteryx
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> Willow's trying to keep from using magic, and our hero has some
> issues of her own in that direction. Got it. So does the show have to
> give us dialogue like "any reminder of, of what it is that she's
> trying to stay away from, you know, could cause her to ... give in to
> temptation." and Buffy seeing visions of Spike? Seriously, show, we
> do get it.
Yeah, it does seem unnecessary at this point as a way of letting us
know that Buffy fancies Spike. Maybe its not for that. Maybe its one of
them new things ... whaddya call them ... oh yeah - jokes.
And amongst pre-invisible Buffy I also liked Buffy's reaction when
Xander is busy telling Spike how Spuffy is never going to happen, and
the fact that Buffy decides to cut her hair immediately after Spike has
said he likes it. And the explanation that its magic weed. And Buffy
lying about the lighter, but being tumbled... so to speak.
> The Möbius Twins actually go somewhere slightly different this week,
> or at least it makes a difference to me. I'm actually going to make
> the case that this is a bigger deal than the end of "Smashed."
> Obviously Buffy and Spike have been very physically friendly, but this
> is the first time that they've gotten together in a way that can't
> be explained as a sudden fit of passion, heat of the moment stuff.
> Here Buffy's deliberately and unambiguously choosing to go to Spike,
> and hopefully she'll appreciate the significance of that next time
> she considers doing a "you're not part of my life" speech.
She'll have to settle for not wanting to be seen dead with him. But
clearly being invisible allows her to shed something that normally
stops her choosing to be with Spike. Just like the Nerd Trio wouldn't
just walk into the Women Only Spa without first using the invisibility
ray on themselves, Buffy wants to be with Spike, she just doesn't want
to be seen with him.
> So, that's the good. Then things start to fall apart again, and
> things start to feel a little hollow. I can trace my issues with the
> later parts of "Gone" to three scenes. First is Xander walking in
> on the exercising vampire. It's an obvious gag that requires us to
> ignore a lot of things to make it work. Normally, of course, Xander
> wouldn't have any reason to think of Buffy visiting here. But he's
> got Buffy and invisibility on his mind, so it stretches credulity a
> little more that he wouldn't notice how obviously an invisible person
> could be underneath the sheets, or making noises, or playing with
> Spike's ears.
I think he'd have trouble believing it even if he saw it.
>
> Upshot is, I was entertained by "Gone," and had a good time with
> the middle portions. And it broadly makes sense in the overall story
> of the season. But the bad taste in my mouth is annoyingly persistent.
> Call it a high Decent. It can start a little commune with other
> comedy episodes of which I've been "unfairly" critical, like
> "Döppelgangland" and "Superstar," and live just south of the
> Good border.
It's not nearly as "seriously funny" as those two. I'd put it more in
the company of Inca Mummy Girl and Beer Bad (as many people do - only I
like IMG and BB and this a lot better than many people).
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
This is a frequent selection for many peoples Bottom 10 list, but I'd
put it just the other side of the Good/Decent boundary, as a low Good.
I agree that the middle section is the strongest, but I like the early
part as well. It does flag at the end. It's mostly fun (and I really
needed that to get the taste of Wrecked out of my mouth) but it does
have some important moments. Especially the fact that when faced with
death, Buffy decides she's rather live - but I love the fact that when
she hears the news, we can't see her, so have to imagine how she takes
it. And the Nerd Trio are still struggling to fill the role of her
missing arch-nemesiss...es. It's my 76th favourite BtVS episode, 10th
best in season 6.
Apteryx
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:There's also the whole
:thing of the Geek Trio arguing over the attempt to kill Buffy, which
:Jonathan is not at all pleased with... which is ignored thereafter, and
:they're on the same page again from there. That seems lamer every
:time it happens, since it would seem to be a major difference of
:opinion and bit of betrayal on Warren's part.
Well, a couple of things. First, we don't actually
see the Trio after they flee the arcade, so we don't know
that they're all on the same page. Second, I think this
not only establishes that Warren is more actually evil than
Jonathon and the other one, Tucker's brother, but that
he's also the alpha of the group. They might disagree
with or resent what he does, but they aren't going to
openly rebel.
--
Firefly Fan Since September 20th, 2002 - Browncoat Since Birth
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> Idle Thought 1: We're now halfway through the year and we still
> don't have an arch-nemesis who can be taken seriously. It's
> unusual for this show. I could see this continuing, or... well, I have
> a few ideas on what might happen, but they're based on half-spoilers
> and such, so forget about it for now.
you dont think its signficant that the jennings-harris wedding
keeps bubbling in the background?
that anya has warned us about the dangers of june brides
and the season originally ended in june?
they arent dropping hints
they are dropping anvils
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
vague disclaimer
"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 10: "Gone"
> (or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
> our accomp...uh")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: David Fury
I have an odd feeling about this ep: I always feel that somewhere in
here is a really good episode trying to get out, but that everybody's
minds were elsewhere. Like they had built something then forgotten to go
round and tighten all the nuts and blots.
> Meanwhile Spike, although still something of a slave to male desire and
> blowjobs and stuff, finds a second to get all perceptive and be the one
> to back away from the halfassedry - a worthwhile reversal of the
> "this isn't real" dynamic.
Or perceptive that he's not the one pulling the strings this time, and
not liking it.
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
Stephen Tempest
>One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
>
>AOQ rating: Decent
Pretty much concur. There are some wonderful bits in this episode,
and it could have made an Excellent 21-minute show; but at 42 minutes
it's only Decent.
>To say that things pick up once Buffy comes down with a case of
>invisibility would be an understatement. She's having so much fun
>with it at first, uninhibited and genuinely happy, and the enthusiasm
>is infectious.
They seem to be doing this quite a bit: first 'Tabula Rasa' and now
'Gone' both find legitimate excuses to have Buffy acting
"out-of-character" - in other words, happy and carefree. It's almost
as if they realised that too much uninterrupted doom and gloom would
be too wearing on the viewer. <g>
(Although there is a reasonable argument to say that they didn't get
the balance quite right even so...)
>Here Buffy's deliberately and unambiguously choosing to go to Spike,
>and hopefully she'll appreciate the significance of that next time
>she considers doing a "you're not part of my life" speech.
What are the odds? <g>
>And why did Buffy
>not disintegrate at all, other than that it was just a way to
>artificially add some drama?
Presumably living creatures had a greater resistance to the effect
than inanimate traffic cones? Also, if Buffy *had* disintegrated it
would have made future episodes of the show problematic.
>Idle Thought 1: We're now halfway through the year and we still
>don't have an arch-nemesis who can be taken seriously. It's
>unusual for this show. I could see this continuing, or... well, I have
>a few ideas on what might happen, but they're based on half-spoilers
>and such, so forget about it for now.
>
>Idle Thought 2: I know that being interested in anything involving
>Riley Finn seems like a contradiction in terms, but I do admit to some
>slight curiosity over how he'd react to where Buffy is in her love
>life, just given the events that led up to his separation with her...
Hmm. Interesting thoughts. I'm not going to speculate at this stage,
though.
On a general note, one thing I thought was funny and well done in this
episode was the camera work - all the reaction shots to Buffy's face
just as if the actress was actually on-screen...
Stephen
jil...@hotmail.com
the social worker. Not because they thought she was a stupid
character, but because she was right. Dawn is being neglected and
ignored, incidently being thrown into dangerous situations, and living
with her very young older sister who is jobless and out of school.
>From the outside, it all looks very bad.
I wasn't one of those who fussed so much. I felt for the woman, she
really didn't deserve what Buffy put her through. However, since she
doesn't know all of what's really going on, her judgement was too
severe. And how could she possibly ever understand?
To tell Spike about the danger Buffy is in would be to treat Spike as
if he matters. Xander does not want Spike to matter. And Buffy being
there to Xander would be a billion miles past left-field, so his
refusal to "not" see what's in front of him is perfectly normal.
EGK
wrote:
>I remember that one thing that MANY people really made a fuss about was
>the social worker. Not because they thought she was a stupid
>character, but because she was right. Dawn is being neglected and
>ignored, incidently being thrown into dangerous situations, and living
>with her very young older sister who is jobless and out of school.
>>From the outside, it all looks very bad.
>
>I wasn't one of those who fussed so much. I felt for the woman, she
>really didn't deserve what Buffy put her through. However, since she
>doesn't know all of what's really going on, her judgement was too
>severe. And how could she possibly ever understand?
Another reason this was a big issue is the show is supposedly being more
"mature" and dealing with more realistic problems this year. Then they
would turn around and try to play those same things for cheap laughs. That
didn't work for me at all. QbhoyrZrng Cnynpr vf gur nofbyhgr jbefg sbe
guvf.
I've said it once and I'll say it forever. Buffy and the gang were way more
mature in HS than they were in season 6. Buffy had to grow up fast and
deal with loss and responsibility at a very early age. You'd have thought
she learned absolutely nothing to this point. Same for the rest of them.
They all regressed as characters, in my opinion.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
(Calvin and Hobbes)
peachy ashie passion
> In article <1155450237.3...@m79g2000cwm.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 10: "Gone"
>>(or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
>>our accomp...uh")
>>Writer: David Fury
>>Director: David Fury
>
>
> I have an odd feeling about this ep: I always feel that somewhere in
> here is a really good episode trying to get out, but that everybody's
> minds were elsewhere.
I think that's a great descriptor of my opinion of this one.
It's just... too dorky.
peachy ashie passion
> On 13 Aug 2006 06:07:01 -0700, "jil...@hotmail.com" <jil...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I remember that one thing that MANY people really made a fuss about was
>>the social worker. Not because they thought she was a stupid
>>character, but because she was right. Dawn is being neglected and
>>ignored, incidently being thrown into dangerous situations, and living
>>with her very young older sister who is jobless and out of school.
>>>From the outside, it all looks very bad.
>>
>>I wasn't one of those who fussed so much. I felt for the woman, she
>>really didn't deserve what Buffy put her through. However, since she
>>doesn't know all of what's really going on, her judgement was too
>>severe. And how could she possibly ever understand?
>
>
> Another reason this was a big issue is the show is supposedly being more
> "mature" and dealing with more realistic problems this year. Then they
> would turn around and try to play those same things for cheap laughs. That
> didn't work for me at all. QbhoyrZrng Cnynpr vf gur nofbyhgr jbefg sbe
> guvf.
>
> I've said it once and I'll say it forever. Buffy and the gang were way more
> mature in HS than they were in season 6. Buffy had to grow up fast and
> deal with loss and responsibility at a very early age. You'd have thought
> she learned absolutely nothing to this point. Same for the rest of them.
> They all regressed as characters, in my opinion.
>
Maybe because they were so mature in HS?
I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
peachy ashie passion
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>>threads.
>>
>>
>>I had a bad feeling about this one based on the opening scene. So
>>Willow's trying to keep from using magic, and our hero has some
>>issues of her own in that direction. Got it. So does the show have to
>>give us dialogue like "any reminder of, of what it is that she's
>>trying to stay away from, you know, could cause her to ... give in to
>>temptation." and Buffy seeing visions of Spike? Seriously, show, we
>>do get it.
>
>
> Yeah, it does seem unnecessary at this point as a way of letting us
> know that Buffy fancies Spike. Maybe its not for that. Maybe its one of
> them new things ... whaddya call them ... oh yeah - jokes.
>
Can't be that.
Jokes are, you know, funny.
Elisi
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 11: "Gone"
> One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
>
> AOQ rating: Decent
Nothing much to add... I hate 'cringe' comedy, so the early Doris
scenes make me want to throw stuff at the tv. Ditto the scene with
Xander in Spike's crypt. Grrr. Even Spike's near nakedness doesn't make
up for the stupidity of that scene. Although it does provide the only
fanwakable explanation for Xander's behavior: He's sub-consciously
attracted to Spike and therefore is not concentrating. ;)
What else... I liked Buffy cutting off her hair and going to the
hairdresser. "Make me... different." It's a lovely touch.
I didn't think Dawn was all that over-the-top. Buffy has been very
'absent' since she came back, and it's freaking Dawn out.
Oh and yet again we see how juvenile The Trio is - Buffy and her
friends are doing their best at being grown-ups. Willow was on the same
sort of self indulgent path as the geeks, but had an abrupt awakening.
Seriously, they can turn themselves invisible, and all they can think
about is girls? Heh. I also like the invisible fight. And the
arch-nemesis...is...
And finally a thought about the whole addiction thing. Apart from Giles
getting addicted to 'the high' of Eyghon, we've had Riley getting
addicted to being bitten by vampires, and Spike told Buffy that she
would 'crave him, like he craves blood'. So in the Buffy verse, pure
self indulgent pleasure is obviously addictive, and part of that is a
physical sensation and dependance.
EGK
I think learning to deal with responsiblity and loss are probably two of the
most important things people learn in their path to adulthood. Buffy and
the gang learned those things in spades but by the time of season 6 it
seemed to me like they were experiencing all those same issues for the very
first time.
Much of this was reported at the time as being Marti Noxon wanting to inject
her own personal experiences on BTVS. Frankly, I couldn't care less about
Marti Noxon's experiences with bad boyfriends, drugs or shitty jobs.
When she was Bad and Anne covered much of the same ground as far as Buffy's
depression and growth as a character. Both were better episodes for me than
season 6. What I'm saying is you'd think those episodes never even
existed or Buffy learned absolutely nothing from them.
Elisi
> > Maybe because they were so mature in HS?
> >
> > I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
> >with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
> >it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
>
> I think learning to deal with responsiblity and loss are probably two of the
> most important things people learn in their path to adulthood. Buffy and
> the gang learned those things in spades but by the time of season 6 it
> seemed to me like they were experiencing all those same issues for the very
> first time.
>
> Much of this was reported at the time as being Marti Noxon wanting to inject
> her own personal experiences on BTVS. Frankly, I couldn't care less about
> Marti Noxon's experiences with bad boyfriends, drugs or shitty jobs.
>
> When she was Bad and Anne covered much of the same ground as far as Buffy's
> depression and growth as a character. Both were better episodes for me than
> season 6. What I'm saying is you'd think those episodes never even
> existed or Buffy learned absolutely nothing from them.
There is a vast, vast difference between being a responsible teen and
being a grown-up. Back then they all had parents and teachers (Giles)
to keep them in line. If they messed up there would be consequences -
they could be grounded etc. They had to follow rules set for them by
others.
Now they're on their own. No one is grounding Willow for being so
utterly irresponsible - she has to keep herself in check, not rely on
anyone else. Buffy can't run away anymore, even if she wanted to. Dawn
is *her* responsibility, as is the slaying. She slips up, there's no
one to pick up the slack - like f.ex. the furniture getting broken in
'Flooded'. And Xander isn't just dating anymore - if he happened to say
kiss someone else, it would be a far greater deal than back in S3.
They're not children anymore. Becoming an adult and being responsible
is an ongoing process that isn't just learned the once and then
everything's fine.
That said, 'Gone' is not a very good episode. But overall I like S6 -
partly just because I can much better identify with with them now.
EGK
Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn a
lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever do.
By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode happened
in a vacuum.
Don Sample
Stephen Tempest <ste...@stempest.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
> >And why did Buffy
> >not disintegrate at all, other than that it was just a way to
> >artificially add some drama?
>
> Presumably living creatures had a greater resistance to the effect
> than inanimate traffic cones? Also, if Buffy *had* disintegrated it
> would have made future episodes of the show problematic.
Or maybe it was because the traffic cone was a lot lighter, so it broke
down a lot faster. Warren was planning to give Buffy another blast, to
hasten her demise at the end.
Assume that the traffic cone weighed 2 pounds, and Buffy 100 pounds.
The same blast from the invisibility ray would pump 50 times as much
energy per pound into the traffic cone than it did into Buffy, so the
traffic cone would break down 50 times faster.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Clairel
--I agree. "Gone" isn't as good an episode as either "Doppelgangland"
or "Superstar" (both of which I absolutely love), but I enjoy almost
everything in "Gone."
I agree with AOQ that the part with the social worker at Buffy's house
is annoying. But that isn't all there is to Act One of the episode.
AOQ completely skipped over Buffy's two encounters with Spike in the
house -- the flirtation with the pancake flipper, etc., etc. Those
were some very powerful scenes. I do always fast-forward through the
Doris bit from the point where Spike leaves the living room to the
point where Doris departs, but everything else in the episode is
entertaining.
And as long as I'm replying to AOQ's objections, here's this one: "And
why did Buffy
not disintegrate at all, other than that it was just a way to
artificially add some drama?" Well, I know she got zapped blinvisible
at the same moment as the traffic cone got zapped, but perhaps living
organic matter doesn't disintegrate as easily as inorganic matter. Or,
really, any other rationalization you choose. It's all imaginary
fiction anyway, so why sweat it?
"Gone" is mostly just for fun, and ought to be taken in that spirit.
Clairel
Clairel
--"This time"? When did he ever pull the strings?
Clairel
Clairel
--There is such a thing as relapse, and regression. People's wills
don't always remain strong. People do things they know better than to
do, just because they weaken.
I can think of mistakes that I've made, and suffered the consequences
of, and repented bitterly of -- yet repeated again, six or seven years
later. Why? Because even though I knew better, I weakened.
Most of season 6 is very true to human nature.
Clairel
EGK
>
>EGK wrote:
>> Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
>> should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn a
>> lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever do.
>> By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode happened
>> in a vacuum.
>
>--There is such a thing as relapse, and regression. People's wills
>don't always remain strong. People do things they know better than to
>do, just because they weaken.
>
>I can think of mistakes that I've made, and suffered the consequences
>of, and repented bitterly of -- yet repeated again, six or seven years
>later. Why? Because even though I knew better, I weakened.
>
>Most of season 6 is very true to human nature.
But not very entertaining for many of us who weren't so enamored with James
Marsters. Daytime soap operas are full of those same character relapses
and is why season 6 was so often compared unfavorably with them. I know
you like the final seasons best because of one thing. Spike. That's fine
too but write Spike out in Season 5 and replace him with Riley. Would you
have really been that interested in bits of Marti Noxon's life story as
played out on BTVS? I found it to be tedious and uninteresting for the
most part and while others say they can relate better to it, I found it
totally unoriginal too.
When she was Bad and Anne (with a carryover to Dead Man's Party) were single
episodes that covered much of the same ground in Buffy's development. A
whole season of it was excrutiating.
One Bit Shy
news:1155450237.3...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 10: "Gone"
> I had a bad feeling about this one based on the opening scene. So
> Willow's trying to keep from using magic, and our hero has some
> issues of her own in that direction. Got it. So does the show have to
> give us dialogue like "any reminder of, of what it is that she's
> trying to stay away from, you know, could cause her to ... give in to
> temptation." and Buffy seeing visions of Spike? Seriously, show, we
> do get it. That's like one step from having the characters explain
> their powers to each other for the benefit of the viewer. Maybe
> they're trying to baby-talk someone happening to channel-surf across
> the show for the first time?
> We shake that, but stay one-note. If there's one part to single out
> in particular, it's the visit from the social worker, one of my least
> favorite scenes in recent memory. It soon becomes clear that
> everything Buffy says is going to "comically" come off sounding
> bad, the social worker won't be a character so much as a token evil
> authority figure who's out to get her, and this will drag on and on
> and on. Check, check, and check. And just to make me really happy,
> they bring back the Stupid Sage. Overall, I would say other than
> Jonathan sitting on the invisible chair and Dawn's "I appreciate
> your concern," I can't recall anything that I liked about the first
> act, all in all ten or so of the most unpleasant minutes of S6.
I don't much care for the play of the opening act either. There are a few
things though. You noted Dawn's bad attitude, which allowed for this nice
exchange.
Willow: Okay, I deserve the wrath of Dawn, but ... why is she taking it out
on you?
Buffy: Because I let it happen.
Willow: Buffy, I was the one who-
Buffy: Who was drowning. My best friend. And I was too wrapped up in my own
dumb life to even notice.
Aside from what that says about Buffy's relationship with Dawn, it's also
showing, I think, some desire by Buffy to reconnect with life and friends.
(Perhaps something behind her later expressed desire to live?) Buffy's
sympathy for Willow is partly driven by her own guilt over Spike, but the
parallel she sees in that probably lets her connect with Willow more too.
One of the weird ways that the affair with Spike may actually be helping
her. Anyway, one thing I appreciate about the way the show handles Willow's
story is that friends aren't just turning on Willow. Their bonds really are
stronger than that.
I don't much like Jonathan and the invisible chair because turning it
visible again is done so clunkily with an obvious change in size and
position between visible and invisible. I do, however, like Andrew's line,
"I pictured something cooler. More ILM, less Ed Wood."
There's one other thing I like in the first act, which is the lighter
turning up in Buffy's pocket. It's a nice device to alter perceptions of
the previous scene. It show's Buffy falling off the wagon before Spike even
shows up - she just had to carry with her that reminder of Spike. It alters
the meaning of her lying to Spike about the lighter being there. Initially
it's just giving him a hard time, but now it's really concealing that she
has it. Does she want to keep it that bad? Or is she afraid what Spike
would think knowing she was carrying it around in her pocket? Now Spike
surely believes - correctly - that Buffy can't stop thinking of him.
Spike's reaching for the lighter initially looks like an aggressive sexual
advance - until the lighter is revealed. But then you realize that he knew
it was there from his rubbing Buffy's thigh earlier in the scene - oddly
emphasizing the intimacy of that moment and further setting up how fast and
hard she's fallen off her wagon.
Pretty good device, but unfortunately the rest of the scene is really too
pedestrian for it.
> To say that things pick up once Buffy comes down with a case of
> invisibility would be an understatement.
The spirit of the humor is very good, but I was continually taken out of it
myself by what seems to me to be some of the clumsiest production in years.
The whole invisible angle seemed to defeat M.E. Buffy's voice was so
obviously recorded separately that I couldn't stop thinking of that fact.
The timing of dialog was frequently off - rarely, if ever, coming across as
actual conversation. Some of the mechanical elements - like the chair
turning visible and Buffy under the sheets seemed overtly faked. The camera
action of focusing on the empty space seemed awkward and inconsistently
done - even dizzying. (Though I did chuckle at the meta-humor of the camera
not knowing where to focus during one spot in the fight at the end.)
That's not to say there aren't fun things included. I laughed at the
nibbling on Spike's ears. And though the play on the social worker was a
little mean, it also got the job done and was probably the best staged piece
of the invisible period. (I'm not sure I understand your criticism of the
reference to The Shining. Buffy would be familiar with the movie and it
seems a natural enough model to use as a basis for making it look like Doris
is losing it, hence undermining her work on Dawn's case.)
> The Möbius Twins actually go somewhere slightly different this week,
> or at least it makes a difference to me. I'm actually going to make
> the case that this is a bigger deal than the end of "Smashed."
I see them as connected. The Willow/Buffy parallel is extended one more
episode - this time to show Willow staying on the wagon (even as she talks
of falling off), while Buffy falls off the wagon - positively wallowing in
it. When Buffy asked Spike earlier, "Why won't you go?", the lighter
answered that question too - and extended upon in the later invisible scene.
She doesn't want him to go.
> Meanwhile Spike, although still something of a slave to male desire and
> blowjobs and stuff, finds a second to get all perceptive and be the one
> to back away from the halfassedry - a worthwhile reversal of the
> "this isn't real" dynamic. Although there are hosts of
> differences, Spike is developing that same fun thing that Xander had
> going in the early seasons, where he'll have the knack for saying or
> doing the right things which are motivated by a heavy dose of
> selfishness.
At this point in their game Spike hasn't acted all that badly. Yes, he
exulted over the chip thing, but it's hard to blame him too much at feeling
freed by its constrictions and being excited at the thought that Buffy is
more like him than either had realized before. Mostly he's been pretty
honest and straight forward about what he thinks, naturally bewildered and
put off by Buffy's hot and cold act, and periodically trying to be helpful
when appropriate - like offering sympathy for the bad interview with Doris.
Yet you're right that there's a heavy dose of selfishness running throughout
it. The interesting part to me is Buffy saying, "I thought this is what you
wanted." It's a good thought. Spike *is* getting what he wanted - has
wanted for a very long time - yet it's not satisfying. Curious
relationship. There is a connection - a chemistry. But they can't seem
able to even just indulge it without getting all dysfunctional. Buffy's
probably understood this all along - even while unable to stay away from it.
If not, this aborted attempt at living free ought to make it clear. But can
Spike ever understand that? How far must his own psychology force him to
push it? To have all of her?
> Second is the confrontation with Dawn, which is a more isolated
> complaint. Long story short, despite the setup earlier, I feel like
> she goes into tearful/yelling mode way too quickly and that
> Trachtenberg's performance sounds hopelessly forced.
I don't think it's the most artful scene, but it wasn't only setup by Act I.
Did you notice that Dawn was sneaking into the house? She wasn't supposed
to be out. Buffy caught her, but being caught up in the invisible thing,
she didn't notice. That's really the trigger. From Dawn's point of view,
Buffy doesn't notice. Buffy doesn't care. Really puts the lie to the token
expressions of concern like telling Dawn to eat her breakfast.
> Third is the
> invisible fight at the arcade, which after starting nice (the boys
> getting distracted by the fighting game is really stupid, but I
> chuckled), goes on too long for its own good. There's also the whole
> thing of the Geek Trio arguing over the attempt to kill Buffy, which
> Jonathan is not at all pleased with... which is ignored thereafter, and
> they're on the same page again from there. That seems lamer every
> time it happens, since it would seem to be a major difference of
> opinion and bit of betrayal on Warren's part. But why let consistent
> storytelling get in the way of the jokes you're obsessed with
> telling? That rubbed me the wrong way, and gave me the impression of,
> once again, a show willing to ignore making sense.
I think you're mistaken. Jonathan and Andrew gang up against Warren,
eventually leading to the meet in the video arcade, which really was for the
purpose of making Buffy visible again. But Warren betrayed them, and
Jonathan and Andrew objected.
Invisible Warren: You'll have to find me first! There's three of us, against
just one of you.
Invisible Jonathan: Hey, you lied to us!
Invisible Andrew: Fight her yourself!
So they're not on the same page at all. There's a growing divide with
Warren quite willing to kill while Jonathan and Andrew are not. But having
committed so much crime already, they're kind of stuck with each other.
It's a classic thieves dilemma.
> And why did Buffy
> not disintegrate at all, other than that it was just a way to
> artificially add some drama?
Presumably because living flesh takes longer. Maybe it's the regernerative
aspects.
> Idle Thought 1: We're now halfway through the year and we still
> don't have an arch-nemesis who can be taken seriously. It's
> unusual for this show. I could see this continuing, or... well, I have
> a few ideas on what might happen, but they're based on half-spoilers
> and such, so forget about it for now.
Freeze ray. Invisible ray. Able to call forth demons. Magic bone. (OK.
Maybe not that. <g>) I think the only reason not to take them seriously is
that they're still using their powers to sneak in and watch a bikini wax.
(Wednesday is bikini wax day. I'm not sure why I find that so amusing.)
But their collective powers seem rather potent to me.
> Idle Thought 2: I know that being interested in anything involving
> Riley Finn seems like a contradiction in terms, but I do admit to some
> slight curiosity over how he'd react to where Buffy is in her love
> life, just given the events that led up to his separation with her...
I'd like to imagine him going all juvenile and throwing it in her face and
staking Spike for the hell of it, but he's so damned even keeled that he'd
probably restrain himself to saying he likes what she's done with her hair.
> So...
> One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
> AOQ rating: Decent
I give the show credit for good spirit and some story advancement, but I
don't really enjoy watching it much. For me it's the weakest episode so far
this season - ending a very strong run. A not very high Decent.
OBS
Clairel
--You make it sound as if Spike just wanted sex. But he didn't. He
wanted love.
Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
Spike ever wanted.
At the beginning of "Wrecked," when Spike was shocked and hurt at
Buffy's cold, contemptuous treatment of him, she sneered "What did you
think? That we'd read the newspaper together and play footsie under
the rubble?" Well, something like that (though not exactly that, of
course) is what Spike thought would happen: some kind of
acknowledgement that physical intimacy ought to have meaning and ought
to go together with affection and friendliness.
So no wonder he's dissatisfied in "Gone."
Clairel
burt...@hotmail.com
> One Bit Shy wrote:
> > At this point in their game Spike hasn't acted all that badly. Yes, he
> > exulted over the chip thing, but it's hard to blame him too much at feeling
> > freed by its constrictions and being excited at the thought that Buffy is
> > more like him than either had realized before. Mostly he's been pretty
> > honest and straight forward about what he thinks, naturally bewildered and
> > put off by Buffy's hot and cold act, and periodically trying to be helpful
> > when appropriate - like offering sympathy for the bad interview with Doris.
> > Yet you're right that there's a heavy dose of selfishness running throughout
> > it. The interesting part to me is Buffy saying, "I thought this is what you
> > wanted." It's a good thought. Spike *is* getting what he wanted - has
> > wanted for a very long time - yet it's not satisfying.
>
> --You make it sound as if Spike just wanted sex. But he didn't. He
> wanted love.
>
> Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
> sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
> Spike ever wanted.
Are you forgetting his relationship with Harmony? Spike never had and
never wanted a real relationship with Harmony; he just used her for sex
and as a stand-in for Buffy when Buffy wouldn't have anything do to
with him. And there were plenty of put-downs and humiliations there,
too - although it was pretty much always Spike putting down and
humiliating Harmony....
Clairel
--Yes, I know. And it's a pity that Spike ever behaved that way to
anybody. But, hey, soulless vampire. . .
If one is going to start bringing up the bad behavior that Spike
displayed in the episode where he first showed up in town with Harmony
(HLOD), one should probably include the biting and killing of human
victims, which is surely ranks as the worst thing of all.
You seem to think I'm moaning about the terrible wrongs that poor
Spikey suffered in season 6 -- I'm not. I'm simply pointing out that
he wanted something different from Buffy than what he had wanted from
Harmony in the past. Spike never mentioned the word "love" to Harmony.
But he fell in love with Buffy, and Buffy knew it.
The post to which I was replying seemed to have been written on the
assumption that all Spke ever wanted from Buffy was sex. I posted to
refute that assumption.
But as for your own post: To point out that a soulless vampire, who
has become the usee of the series' heroine, had formerly behaved as the
usER of a different female character (a female character who, like him,
but unlike the series' heroine, was a soulless vampire), doesn't really
mitigate the badness of the heroine's behavior. Buffy should be above
that kind of conduct. And if a soulless vampire can't be expected to
be above it (because he hasn't any concept of morality), well, then
what is a heroine doing rolling in the dirt with him?
Clairel
MBangel10 (Melissa)
wants because what he wants IS a relationship. Yes, he used Harmony as a
Buffy substitute but that doesn't change the fact that what he wants
with Buffy is something more than what he is getting. So, what is your
point?
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> > Riley Finn seems like a contradiction in terms, but I do admit to some
> > slight curiosity over how he'd react to where Buffy is in her love
> > life, just given the events that led up to his separation with her...
>
> I'd like to imagine him going all juvenile and throwing it in her face and
> staking Spike for the hell of it, but he's so damned even keeled that he'd
> probably restrain himself to saying he likes what she's done with her hair.
hes been so long in central america
i thought riley was supposed to be dead by now
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> wanted love.
>
> Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
> sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
> Spike ever wanted.
is a soulless demon capable of a real relationship without sex?
Michael Ikeda
news:12dv4oc...@news.supernews.com:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1155450237.3...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Six, Episode 10: "Gone"
>
>
>
>> Second is the confrontation with Dawn, which is a more isolated
>> complaint. Long story short, despite the setup earlier, I feel
>> like she goes into tearful/yelling mode way too quickly and
>> that Trachtenberg's performance sounds hopelessly forced.
>
> I don't think it's the most artful scene, but it wasn't only
> setup by Act I. Did you notice that Dawn was sneaking into the
> house? She wasn't supposed to be out. Buffy caught her, but
> being caught up in the invisible thing, she didn't notice.
> That's really the trigger. From Dawn's point of view, Buffy
> doesn't notice. Buffy doesn't care. Really puts the lie to the
> token expressions of concern like telling Dawn to eat her
> breakfast.
Good catch.
Somewhat irritated that I didn't catch the "sneaking in" bit...
--
Michael Ikeda mmi...@erols.com
"Telling a statistician not to use sampling is like telling an
astronomer they can't say there is a moon and stars"
Lynne Billard, past president American Statistical Association
peachy ashie passion
> --There is such a thing as relapse, and regression. People's wills
> don't always remain strong. People do things they know better than to
> do, just because they weaken.
>
> I can think of mistakes that I've made, and suffered the consequences
> of, and repented bitterly of -- yet repeated again, six or seven years
> later. Why? Because even though I knew better, I weakened.
>
> Most of season 6 is very true to human nature.
>
> Clairel
>
This was exactly and precisely what I needed to hear today.
Thank you.
One Bit Shy
news:1155503525....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> One Bit Shy wrote:
>> At this point in their game Spike hasn't acted all that badly. Yes, he
>> exulted over the chip thing, but it's hard to blame him too much at
>> feeling
>> freed by its constrictions and being excited at the thought that Buffy is
>> more like him than either had realized before. Mostly he's been pretty
> honest and straight forward about what he thinks, naturally bewildered and
>> put off by Buffy's hot and cold act, and periodically trying to be
>> helpful
>> when appropriate - like offering sympathy for the bad interview with
>> Doris.
>> Yet you're right that there's a heavy dose of selfishness running
>> throughout
>> it. The interesting part to me is Buffy saying, "I thought this is what
>> you
>> wanted." It's a good thought. Spike *is* getting what he wanted - has
>> wanted for a very long time - yet it's not satisfying.
> --You make it sound as if Spike just wanted sex. But he didn't. He
> wanted love.
I thought I was saying he really wanted something more.
> Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
> sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
> Spike ever wanted.
> At the beginning of "Wrecked," when Spike was shocked and hurt at
> Buffy's cold, contemptuous treatment of him, she sneered "What did you
> think? That we'd read the newspaper together and play footsie under
> the rubble?" Well, something like that (though not exactly that, of
> course) is what Spike thought would happen: some kind of
> acknowledgement that physical intimacy ought to have meaning and ought
> to go together with affection and friendliness.
> So no wonder he's dissatisfied in "Gone."
Ah, but Gone isn't Wrecked. After pushing Buffy hard and saying stuff about
how she's tasted him now and will see that he's the only one for her, here
Buffy comes to him on her own - even eagerly. It is in an important sense a
great victory for Spike - a breakthrough - but it ends up disappointing,
even repelling.
My point is that Spike is largely getting his way. Breaking down Buffy's
resistance. Getting under her skin. But it's not working like he imagined.
Neither for Buffy nor for himself.
As for the sex part, yes, he wanted more than that, but sex was always a big
part of the desire. More importantly, I think to him sex is completely
integrated into the whole and the means of achieving it. He is in this
sense a traditional romantic where sex really means something, and you can't
have it without feeling something for the partner. When he has sex with
Buffy, he feels something special and stubbornly projects that upon Buffy
when he insists that he knows she felt something too. But it's not the same
for her. He senses that, but can't believe it. I mean literally can't.
That's a problem. You and I can sit here and analyze why this must be
unsatisfying for Spike, but Spike is blocked from the same understanding.
Spike thinks Buffy *has* to feel for him like he does for her just to be
with him. He thinks Buffy just has to let go of her illusions to understand
that. But his premise is wrong. So I speak of Spike getting what he wants,
but not being satisfied. How will Spike come to terms with that? Will he?
OBS
vague disclaimer
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> There's one other thing I like in the first act, which is the lighter
> turning up in Buffy's pocket. It's a nice device to alter perceptions of
> the previous scene. It show's Buffy falling off the wagon before Spike even
> shows up
Or alternatively Spike had found the lighter in the box and then palmed
it as an excuse to cop a feel.
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
Clairel
--Hang in there, amigo! The thing to remember is that you can always
climb back up again.
Er, well, unless the mistake you made was lethal . . . which, to be
realistic, does sometimes happen.
Clairel
Clairel
--Wow, I guess you haven't been reading the stuff about Harmony on this
thread, have you?
I do agree that Spike is ordinarily a traditional romantic. His thing
with Harmony is the one exception to that. Way back when HLOD first
aired in 1999, some people thought it was uncharacteristic of Spike to
treat a woman that way. If he thought Harmony was such an airhead
(which she was), why did he choose her in the first place?
Well, I'm not sure ME really thought it out all that carefully, but the
theory has been developed that Spike was really bitter after his second
failure to win Drusilla back. I mean his attempt to win her back after
"Loves Walk" in season 3. In "Lovers Walk" he was still devoted to
Drusilla's memory, pining for Drusilla, and unabashedly proclaiming
himself love's bitch. But when he left Sunnydale with newfound zest
and spirit to win Dru back again, and again she wouldn't stick with
him, he must have descended deep into bitterness and disillusionment.
Hence his shacking up with a brainless bimbo whom he could never love,
and using her heartlessly.
I'm not altogether happy with the theory, but we have to make sense
somehow of the things ME does.
By the way, I'm not complaining at all about Harmony from the
standpoint of entertainment value; over the years I have found her
endlessly amusing. It's just that how she fits in to the bigger
picture is sometimes a problem.
Clairel
peachy ashie passion
It doesn't appear to be lethal to anything but my heart - which has
been stomped on before, and since I never EVER learn this lesson, will
be again.
One Bit Shy
Well, I did, but I wasn't that interested and didn't relate it to this
subject as you describe. Perhaps I should have. I try to ammend for that
below.
> I do agree that Spike is ordinarily a traditional romantic. His thing
> with Harmony is the one exception to that. Way back when HLOD first
> aired in 1999, some people thought it was uncharacteristic of Spike to
> treat a woman that way. If he thought Harmony was such an airhead
> (which she was), why did he choose her in the first place?
>
> Well, I'm not sure ME really thought it out all that carefully, but the
> theory has been developed that Spike was really bitter after his second
> failure to win Drusilla back. I mean his attempt to win her back after
> "Loves Walk" in season 3. In "Lovers Walk" he was still devoted to
> Drusilla's memory, pining for Drusilla, and unabashedly proclaiming
> himself love's bitch. But when he left Sunnydale with newfound zest
> and spirit to win Dru back again, and again she wouldn't stick with
> him, he must have descended deep into bitterness and disillusionment.
> Hence his shacking up with a brainless bimbo whom he could never love,
> and using her heartlessly.
>
> I'm not altogether happy with the theory, but we have to make sense
> somehow of the things ME does.
>
> By the way, I'm not complaining at all about Harmony from the
> standpoint of entertainment value; over the years I have found her
> endlessly amusing. It's just that how she fits in to the bigger
> picture is sometimes a problem.
I guess I'm overselling the point of view. Lets see if I can get the
balance better. Spike is projecting his feelings upon Buffy. If he feels
this, then Buffy must. Or so he thinks. And there's a lot of twisted
romanticism in his construction. But it's all laden with the blindness of
love (even vampire love can be blind). He's determined to see what he wants
to see. He didn't have the same feelings for Harmony, so that was mainly
just a physical thing. Logically inconsistent? Of course it is. But it's
not an exercise in logic. (Hypocritical might describe it too.) Spike is
driven by feelings. So even if the way he treated Harmony should tell him
that someone else - as in Buffy - could use him in a similar fashion, he
won't believe it, because his emotions demand a different "truth".
Mind you, I'm aware that he does think Buffy is taking advantage of him in a
fashion. It's just that he's convinced that it's only the misguided residue
of Buffy's past life holding her back and that deep down Buffy loves him
too - or will when he breaks through her shell.
OBS
Mel
peachy ashie passion wrote:
> EGK wrote:
>
> Maybe because they were so mature in HS?
>
> I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
> with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
> it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
Plus, it's easy to be mature when you don't actually have real world
adult responsibilities (kids, mortgages, marriage, etc.) to deal with.
Mel
One Bit Shy
news:l64o-1rj5-2BE46...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <12dv4oc...@news.supernews.com>,
> "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
>
>> There's one other thing I like in the first act, which is the lighter
>> turning up in Buffy's pocket. It's a nice device to alter perceptions of
>> the previous scene. It show's Buffy falling off the wagon before Spike
>> even
>> shows up
>
> Or alternatively Spike had found the lighter in the box and then palmed
> it as an excuse to cop a feel.
Why would that work as an excuse?
OBS
(Harmony) Watcher
part of it. Bimbo she is not, :p
A simpler theory is that perhaps most men are dorks, Spike being no
exception; so they tend to chase after women that they can't get to rather
than love the ones that are already devoted to them.
--
==Harmony Watcher==
EGK
>> I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
>> with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
>> it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
>
>Plus, it's easy to be mature when you don't actually have real world
>adult responsibilities (kids, mortgages, marriage, etc.) to deal with.
If it had started out as a real show about things like kids, mortgages,
marriage, etc, I'd have never watched it in the first place. There are
already a myriad of daytime soaps that cater to that.
If I had wanted that in the earlier seasons I would have been watching
Dawson's Creek or something and you couldn't have paid me to watch that kind
of crap.
Mel
EGK wrote:
>> I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
>>with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
>>it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
>
>
> I think learning to deal with responsiblity and loss are probably two of the
> most important things people learn in their path to adulthood. Buffy and
> the gang learned those things in spades but by the time of season 6 it
> seemed to me like they were experiencing all those same issues for the very
> first time.
There are different kinds of responsibility. From an early age, Buffy
dealt with the responsibility of saving the world from evil things, but
she never quite got the relationship thing down. And, she never had to
deal with real world stuff because her mom took care of it all.
>
> Much of this was reported at the time as being Marti Noxon wanting to inject
> her own personal experiences on BTVS. Frankly, I couldn't care less about
> Marti Noxon's experiences with bad boyfriends, drugs or shitty jobs.
>
> When she was Bad and Anne covered much of the same ground as far as Buffy's
> depression and growth as a character. Both were better episodes for me than
> season 6. What I'm saying is you'd think those episodes never even
> existed or Buffy learned absolutely nothing from them.
When She Was Bad dealt with Buffy being afraid, afraid of what the
Master did to her and that he might come back and do it again. When she
crushed his bones to talcum powder, she knew she no longer had to be
afraid of that; she "got over it" and moved on.
Anne dealt with Buffy losing everything that meant something to her
(Angel, her mom, her friends, school), and still recognizing that she
was "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer." I don't see this as depression so much
as....loneliness. But I'm not even sure that's right.
This is something totally new, and much worse. Her job as Slayer was
finished, and she was content with that decision, welcomed it even. Now
she's thrust back into a life she didn't ask for, had in fact given up,
and she doesn't know what to do or how to come to grips with that. To
make matters even worse, she believes she was in heaven, and to compare
mortal life with that is even more of a contrast than black and white.
No one can imagine what that must feel like, to have to readjust just to
living day to day and have it not be a burden and feel literally like
hell. There's no way she could just "snap out of it" in 1 or 2 episodes.
It's taken several episodes, imo, to just move her _up_ to a state of
depression.
Mel
Ken from Chicago
"peachy ashie passion" <exquisi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:x1IDg.670$Ji1.199@trnddc05...
> Apteryx wrote:
>
>> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>>
>>>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>>>threads.
>>>
>>>
>>>Willow's trying to keep from using magic, and our hero has some
>>>issues of her own in that direction. Got it. So does the show have to
>>>give us dialogue like "any reminder of, of what it is that she's
>>>trying to stay away from, you know, could cause her to ... give in to
>>>temptation." and Buffy seeing visions of Spike? Seriously, show, we
>>>do get it.
>>
>>
>> know that Buffy fancies Spike. Maybe its not for that. Maybe its one of
>> them new things ... whaddya call them ... oh yeah - jokes.
>>
>
>
> Jokes are, you know, funny.
No, GOOD jokes are funny. BAD jokes, not so much.
-- Ken from Chicago
Ken from Chicago
S2.
Spike was evil, evil, evil.
-- Ken from Chicago
Ari
Spike doesn't need an excuse to cop a feel. But who needs logic when
you could just jump to a conclusion that neither the text or the
subtext implied, right?
Rowan Hawthorn
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 10: "Gone"
> (or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
> our accomp...uh")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: David Fury
>
>
> comedy episodes of which I've been "unfairly" critical, like
> "Döppelgangland" and "Superstar," and live just south of the
> Good border.
>
Putting "Gone" in the same class with "Döppelgängland"? Where did I put
my effin' baseball bat...
> Idle Thought 2: I know that being interested in anything involving
> Riley Finn seems like a contradiction in terms, but I do admit to some
> slight curiosity over how he'd react to where Buffy is in her love
> life, just given the events that led up to his separation with her...
Good gods, make me yack, why don't'cha?
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
Patrick MM
>
> I've said it once and I'll say it forever. Buffy and the gang were way
> more
> mature in HS than they were in season 6. Buffy had to grow up fast and
> deal with loss and responsibility at a very early age. You'd have thought
> she learned absolutely nothing to this point. Same for the rest of them.
> They all regressed as characters, in my opinion.
>
The whole point of season six is to show how the characters function when
they're no longer faced with a major, world threatening enemy. The issues in
season six have always been there, but they end up getting sublimated so
that everyone can come together and fight the big bad at the end of the
season.
However, beneath the surface all the characters are developing major
problems, look at Restless which sums up the characters' merits and faults.
Willow is afraid that she's still that geeky girl from the first episode,
that's always festered beneath the surface and now that she's in an
emotional crisis with Tara, she winds up acting out against that. Similarly,
Xander's deep fear of becoming his parents, shown in his constant journeys
back to the basement in Restless, manifests itself in nervousness about his
relationship with Anya.
Giles was scared that his role as Buffy's watcher was denying him the chance
to live his own life, he leaves her because of this fear. It's his personal
weakness, and it fits in perfectly with the theme of the season, the idea
that these characters can no longer count on any authority figures, they're
left on their own. Buffy's depression is dealt with in When She Was Bad and
Anne, but in both cases a foe attacks her and re-energizes her into her role
as slayer.
All the characters were able to sublimate their flaws to battle major evil,
but without any major evil around, the troubles come to the surface and all
the problems that built up over the previous five years come to the surface.
That's why I love season six, because it sees the climax of everyones'
character arc. After fighting a God, there wasn't anything bigger to fight
so they went in the total opposite direction and gave Buffy such pathetic
foes that she can't get distracted from her problems.
patrick
Patrick MM
> James
> Marsters. Daytime soap operas are full of those same character relapses
> and is why season 6 was so often compared unfavorably with them. I know
> you like the final seasons best because of one thing. Spike. That's
> fine
> too but write Spike out in Season 5 and replace him with Riley. Would you
> have really been that interested in bits of Marti Noxon's life story as
> played out on BTVS? I found it to be tedious and uninteresting for the
> most part and while others say they can relate better to it, I found it
> totally unoriginal too.
>
That analogy makes no sense. For one, Marsters is such a good performer that
it's entertaining to watch him do pretty much anything. Secondly, the whole
appeal of the Spike/Buffy relationship is in the fact that they're both
attracted to each other even though they seem to be totally wrong for each
other. The relationship forces them both into new emotional territory and
watching that kind of character journey is a lot more entertaining than
seeing two people who are essentially right together (i.e. Riley and Buffy)
get together.
patrick
Mark Jones
> "EGK" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
> >
> > But not very entertaining for many of us who weren't so enamored with
> > James Marsters. Daytime soap operas are full of those same character
> > relapses and is why season 6 was so often compared unfavorably with
> > them. I know you like the final seasons best because of one thing.
> > Spike. That's fine too but write Spike out in Season 5 and replace him
> > with Riley. Would you have really been that interested in bits of Marti
> > Noxon's life story as played out on BTVS? I found it to be tedious and
> > uninteresting for the most part and while others say they can relate
> > better to it, I found it totally unoriginal too.
> >
>
> That analogy makes no sense. For one, Marsters is such a good performer
> that it's entertaining to watch him do pretty much anything.
Uhh...no. "I'd watch him read from the phonebook" may apply to Clairel and
other Spike/Marsters fans, but hardly to everyone, even those who think
Marsters is a great actor. A great actor in a lousy story doesn't redeem
the story.
> Secondly, the
> whole appeal of the Spike/Buffy relationship is in the fact that they're
> both attracted to each other even though they seem to be totally wrong for
> each other. The relationship forces them both into new emotional territory
> and watching that kind of character journey is a lot more entertaining
> than seeing two people who are essentially right together (i.e. Riley and
> Buffy) get together.
...assuming you can buy into the attraction storyline in the first place.
Or into the various contrivances required to keep Spike around and undusted
so there could _be_ an attraction storyline.
Elisi
EGK wrote:
> Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
> should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn a
> lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever do.
> By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode happened
> in a vacuum.
I don't think it's the same thing. The lessons they learned in the
early lessons were always very specific to their particular problems.
In say, IOHEFY, Buffy felt guilty over what she'd done to Angel (and
herself and everyone else...). She was possessed by the ghost of James
and learned that she shouldn't beat herself up.
This has nothing to do with what she's doing with Spike. The situations
are different. Yes they learned a lot of stuff in HS. But learning a
lot of math doesn't necessarily prepare you for balancing a budget...
especially if you keep buying stuff you can't afford.
Anyway, I'm on holiday and this is getting tedious... have fun! :)
Elisi
> On 13 Aug 2006 09:51:18 -0700, "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >EGK wrote:
> >
> >> > Maybe because they were so mature in HS?
> >> >
> >> > I think you could make a good argument that because they were dealing
> >> >with the monster stuff in high school, they didn't mature properly, so
> >> >it's no wonder they didn't mature RIGHT.
> >>
> >> I think learning to deal with responsiblity and loss are probably two of the
> >> most important things people learn in their path to adulthood. Buffy and
> >> the gang learned those things in spades but by the time of season 6 it
> >> seemed to me like they were experiencing all those same issues for the very
> >> first time.
> >>
> >> her own personal experiences on BTVS. Frankly, I couldn't care less about
> >> Marti Noxon's experiences with bad boyfriends, drugs or shitty jobs.
> >>
> >> When she was Bad and Anne covered much of the same ground as far as Buffy's
> >> depression and growth as a character. Both were better episodes for me than
> >> season 6. What I'm saying is you'd think those episodes never even
> >> existed or Buffy learned absolutely nothing from them.
> >
> >being a grown-up. Back then they all had parents and teachers (Giles)
> >to keep them in line. If they messed up there would be consequences -
> >they could be grounded etc. They had to follow rules set for them by
> >others.
>
> >Now they're on their own. No one is grounding Willow for being so
> >utterly irresponsible - she has to keep herself in check, not rely on
> >anyone else. Buffy can't run away anymore, even if she wanted to. Dawn
> >is *her* responsibility, as is the slaying. She slips up, there's no
> >one to pick up the slack - like f.ex. the furniture getting broken in
> >'Flooded'. And Xander isn't just dating anymore - if he happened to say
> >kiss someone else, it would be a far greater deal than back in S3.
> >
> >They're not children anymore. Becoming an adult and being responsible
> >is an ongoing process that isn't just learned the once and then
> >everything's fine.
> >
> >That said, 'Gone' is not a very good episode. But overall I like S6 -
> >partly just because I can much better identify with with them now.
>
> Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
> should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn a
> lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever do.
> By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode happened
> in a vacuum.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
> didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
> (Calvin and Hobbes)
Oh - another point! I think what we're seeing now - in S6 - is
characterflaws.
Willow has been misusing magic for *years*, and when things ended badly
she was always terribly sorry and then carried right on, never actually
learning anything. It seems as though now (finally) she's understood
(in part) what she failed to grasp for years and years.
Buffy has always had a thing for keeping secrets and indulging in what
she shouldn't (*cough*Angel*cough*). Angel became Angelus, and yet when
he came back from Hell they kept doing their back-and-forth thing.
(Which I found very tedious btw. Angel is a handsome man, but there is
*no* exchuse for the half naked Tai Chi. None!) She is to some extent
doing the same thing now with Spike... except she knows that Spike
won't/can't go around killing all her friends...
That's all - see ya all tomorrow!
vague disclaimer
"Ari" <girlwhoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
it in?
Alcoholics don't need an excuse to drink. Doesn't stop them taking one
when presented.
jil...@hotmail.com
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Clairel wrote:
> > Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
> > sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
> > Spike ever wanted.
>
> never wanted a real relationship with Harmony; he just used her for sex
> and as a stand-in for Buffy when Buffy wouldn't have anything do to
> with him. And there were plenty of put-downs and humiliations there,
> too - although it was pretty much always Spike putting down and
> humiliating Harmony....
We don't know at all, actually, how Spike's relationship with Harmony
began. Poor Harmony has suffered the consequences of being a ditz
several times. Even the lead singer of The Dingoes couldn't take much
of her which, as Oz said, is a shock in itself considering what that
boy was like. If she had a different personality, it's quite possible
they might have become quite a pair. But she's Harmony, vampire or
not.
Of course, what comes around goes around, as Burt just pointed out.
Ken from Chicago
<jil...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1155474421.5...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I remember that one thing that MANY people really made a fuss about was
> the social worker. Not because they thought she was a stupid
> character, but because she was right. Dawn is being neglected and
> ignored, incidently being thrown into dangerous situations, and living
> with her very young older sister who is jobless and out of school.
>>From the outside, it all looks very bad.
>
> I wasn't one of those who fussed so much. I felt for the woman, she
> really didn't deserve what Buffy put her through. However, since she
> doesn't know all of what's really going on, her judgement was too
> severe. And how could she possibly ever understand?
If anything the social worker's judgement was far too lenient--since she did
not the REAL danger Dawn was exposed to routinely.
> To tell Spike about the danger Buffy is in would be to treat Spike as
> if he matters. Xander does not want Spike to matter. And Buffy being
> there to Xander would be a billion miles past left-field, so his
> refusal to "not" see what's in front of him is perfectly normal.
Agreed.
-- Ken from Chicago
Ari
Did you miss Spike's bemused expression when he was feeling her up in
the upper thighs and hips region in the kitchen? He knew his lighter
was in there because he felt its small and rectangular shape through
her jeans pocket or maybe he managed to slip a finger in there without
Buffy realizing she'd been caught. I'm not sure because some of his
hand movements were shot out of frame, but the end result is still the
same.
Dude, of all things, I really can't believe the lighter scene would be
cause for any kind of debate. LOL> WTF?
Don Sample
vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:
> In article <1155522332....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ari" <girlwhoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > vague disclaimer wrote:
> > > In article <12dv4oc...@news.supernews.com>,
> > > "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There's one other thing I like in the first act, which is the lighter
> > > > turning up in Buffy's pocket. It's a nice device to alter perceptions
> > > > of
> > > > the previous scene. It show's Buffy falling off the wagon before Spike
> > > > even
> > > > shows up
> > >
> > > Or alternatively Spike had found the lighter in the box and then palmed
> > > it as an excuse to cop a feel.
> > > --
> > > Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
> >
> > Spike doesn't need an excuse to cop a feel. But who needs logic when
> > you could just jump to a conclusion that neither the text or the
> > subtext implied, right?
>
> So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
> finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
> it in?
The pants were tight enough that he could see the outline, and he could
probably smell the butane on her. If he hadn't been there Buffy's
reaction to his finding it would have been completely different.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Ari
Heh. It cracks me up that I was supposed to find those lameass Tai Chi
scenes sexy. I don't think I could have kept on crushing on Spike if
they ever had him get up to that kind of mamby pamby romantic hero
nonsense -- nekkidness be damned. I could be barely stand Spike's
characterization from late S5 to early S6 because he was becoming too
Angel-lite schmoopy for my tastes.
shuggie
> In article <1155450237.3...@m79g2000cwm.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 10: "Gone"
> > (or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
> > our accomp...uh")
> > Writer: David Fury
> > Director: David Fury
>
> I have an odd feeling about this ep: I always feel that somewhere in
> here is a really good episode trying to get out, but that everybody's
> minds were elsewhere. Like they had built something then forgotten to go
> round and tighten all the nuts and blots.
>From my original review of Gone, 2002:
"I thought I hated Wrecked until I saw Gone. Then I realised that
Wrecked is a bad idea executed well. This is a thin idea done badly.
...
So when I'd calmed down and watched it a second time ... I realised
that they'd filmed a draft version of the script - some good ideas and
the basis for an interesting ep but it needed work. Later still, I
realise that Joss is no longer doing a final script review/polish and
that's the missing magic. I don't think this would ever be a top 10
episode but Joss could have made it fly a little better. "
Elisi
Clairel wrote:
Now about Harmony and Spike... there is the most hilarious of fics
called 'How Harmony Met Spiky' if anyone is curious and it can be found
here:
http://www.herringjousting.com/blackberrypatch/fics/FicWhenHarmonyMetSpiky.html
No spoilers beyond HLOD.
It also describes their initial meeting and what first attracted Spike
to her, and it rings very true:
-----------------
Spike looked her up and down. Then he looked her up and down again as
he rather enjoyed the view. He'd spent another evening trying to find
a cure for heartache in the bottom of a glass, desperately wanting to
get Drusilla off his mind. What was standing in front of him seemed to
be the anti-Dru: blonde instead of brunette, curvy instead of slim,
Californian instead of Cockney, and, perhaps most appealing of all, not
only could he understand everything she said but he got the distinct
impression that the only subject on which she had a wealth of hidden,
arcane knowledge involved a complete list of everyone Brad Pitt had
ever dated.
----------------------
As for Buffy... he and Buffy have this exchange in 'Wrecked':
Spike: "You felt something last night."
Buffy: "Not love."
Spike: "Not yet."
Spike seems to think the way to her heart is through sex...
ravimotha
Stephen Tempest wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
>
> >One-sentence summary: Reasonably fun.
> >
> >AOQ rating: Decent
>
> Pretty much concur. There are some wonderful bits in this episode,
> and it could have made an Excellent 21-minute show; but at 42 minutes
> it's only Decent.
>
>
> >To say that things pick up once Buffy comes down with a case of
> >invisibility would be an understatement. She's having so much fun
> >with it at first, uninhibited and genuinely happy, and the enthusiasm
> >is infectious.
>
> They seem to be doing this quite a bit: first 'Tabula Rasa' and now
> 'Gone' both find legitimate excuses to have Buffy acting
> "out-of-character" - in other words, happy and carefree. It's almost
> as if they realised that too much uninterrupted doom and gloom would
> be too wearing on the viewer. <g>
I completely agree , you need the light to both balance the darkness,
in fact if you get the balance right you can actually do much darker
stuff...
<spoiler alert>
In context, this little stretch of episodes is all about lighteneing up
before the plunge to the finish line, and pushing the envelope and the
charaters , we have started to up the ante very quietly regarding the
trio and also with Willow, and spike.
</spoiler alert>
>
> (Although there is a reasonable argument to say that they didn't get
> the balance quite right even so...)
>
> >Here Buffy's deliberately and unambiguously choosing to go to Spike,
> >and hopefully she'll appreciate the significance of that next time
> >she considers doing a "you're not part of my life" speech.
>
> What are the odds? <g>
> >
> Stephen
regards
Ravi
ravimotha
Mel wrote:
> EGK wrote:
> >
> This is something totally new, and much worse. Her job as Slayer was
> finished, and she was content with that decision, welcomed it even. Now
> she's thrust back into a life she didn't ask for, had in fact given up,
> and she doesn't know what to do or how to come to grips with that. To
> make matters even worse, she believes she was in heaven, and to compare
> mortal life with that is even more of a contrast than black and white.
> No one can imagine what that must feel like, to have to readjust just to
> living day to day and have it not be a burden and feel literally like
> hell. There's no way she could just "snap out of it" in 1 or 2 episodes.
> It's taken several episodes, imo, to just move her _up_ to a state of
> depression.
>
>
> Mel
These are my opinions and subjects to my whims and occassional
pithiness, feel free to correct me if you think I have been barking up
the wrong tree, it's also subject to my spelling() and the fat finger
syndrome
<spoilers ahead>
s1 is the character introduction and rule setter. it defines Buffy as
not wanting to be the slayer and her "perpetual" fight against her
responsibility, whilst dealing with the normal high school issues
love,loss and of course vampires
s2 is initally about falling in love and rejection, oh yes and
vampires and how the boy never calls after he has slept with you and
the ensuing trauma., and centrally about her personal vampire issues.
s3 is the one where she learns the responsiility of the slayer and what
that means from the slayer who is the opposite. It also happens to be
about an ancient mayor who is actually a big Honking snake. and
vampires, her bad self (Faith) and vampires.
s4 is the transition for her, moving past her first love, on to more
mature relationships (with the slightly dull boyfriend after the
kickass biker boyf, and how it's cosier but not as much fun).
It's also less about the vampires, boo!!! and more about the other
monsters, and the fact that this time her enemies are much more
confusing, representing the various journeys each of the characters
have and is choosing and has chosen. in many ways it's about the search
to find themselves.
s5 is somewhat a challengeto describe , so I will term it the challenge
it's starts with dracula, and moves to a god, there is less character
confusion, and it is much more rewarding for the characters.
This time it's about family,and unusually natural death, the aftermath
again less with the vampires (but they duck this with a neutered spike,
and bringing him into the fold) rather than the rather bonkers "god"
and her minions
oh there's a sister.
I won't do a version for s6 and 7 because AOQ (the arbiter hasn't got
htrough s6 and s7 yet)
regards
Ravi
One Bit Shy
> In article <1155522332....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ari" <girlwhoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> vague disclaimer wrote:
>> > In article <12dv4oc...@news.supernews.com>,
>> > "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
>> >
>> > > There's one other thing I like in the first act, which is the lighter
>> > > turning up in Buffy's pocket. It's a nice device to alter
>> > > perceptions of
>> > > the previous scene. It show's Buffy falling off the wagon before
>> > > Spike
>> > > even
>> > > shows up
>> >
>> > Or alternatively Spike had found the lighter in the box and then palmed
>> > it as an excuse to cop a feel.
>> > --
>> > Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
>>
>> Spike doesn't need an excuse to cop a feel. But who needs logic when
>> you could just jump to a conclusion that neither the text or the
>> subtext implied, right?
>
> So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
> finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
> it in?
Only through the touch of his magic fingers. From my original post:
"Spike's reaching for the lighter initially looks like an aggressive sexual
advance - until the lighter is revealed. But then you realize that he knew
it was there from his rubbing Buffy's thigh earlier in the scene - oddly
emphasizing the intimacy of that moment and further setting up how fast and
hard she's fallen off her wagon."
By "earlier in the scene" I meant back in the kitchen just before Xander
interrupted them.
It really is a set piece to support the idea that Buffy is hopelessly drawn
to Spike in spite of her protests and attempts to resist. It's specifically
tied to the parallel effort by Willow and Buffy to go cold turkey that was
established at the end of Wrecked. Temptations are removed for Willow and
she hangs in there, but Buffy fails.
OBS
One Bit Shy
news:1155544651....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> EGK wrote:
>> Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
>> should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn
>> a
>> lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever
>> do.
>> By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode
>> happened
>> in a vacuum.
> Oh - another point! I think what we're seeing now - in S6 - is
> characterflaws.
Specifically it's undealt with character flaws. That's one of the core
problems with the claim that they've regressed from the maturity acquired in
earlier years. These are old problems finally catching up with them.
Not that I think they ever were all that mature anyway. They've developed
many positive traits over the years, but I don't think wisdom has ever been
very high on that list. They've had moments, but always fleeting. Their
core being is and always has been very neurotic. I think Xander is the only
one to have made significant progress on that front, but hardly to the point
of extinguishing it. Stress still brings it out.
OBS
EGK
>Not that I think they ever were all that mature anyway. They've developed
>many positive traits over the years, but I don't think wisdom has ever been
>very high on that list. They've had moments, but always fleeting. Their
>core being is and always has been very neurotic. I think Xander is the only
>one to have made significant progress on that front, but hardly to the point
>of extinguishing it. Stress still brings it out.
Xander? You've got to be putting me on. This is the same Xander who would
have laid down his life for his friends in earlier seasons and actively
stood up to people for them. Abj ur'f tbvat gb or yrnivat uvf svnapr ng gur
nygne gb snpr rirelbar ol urefrys? BU, lrnu, ur'f znqr terng cebterff.
ABG!
One Bit Shy
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:04:31 -0400, "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Not that I think they ever were all that mature anyway. They've developed
>>many positive traits over the years, but I don't think wisdom has ever
>>been
>>very high on that list. They've had moments, but always fleeting. Their
>>core being is and always has been very neurotic. I think Xander is the
>>only
>>one to have made significant progress on that front, but hardly to the
>>point
>>of extinguishing it. Stress still brings it out.
>
> Xander? You've got to be putting me on. This is the same Xander who would
> have laid down his life for his friends in earlier seasons and actively
> stood up to people for them. Abj ur'f tbvat gb or yrnivat uvf svnapr ng
> gur
> nygne gb snpr rirelbar ol urefrys? BU, lrnu, ur'f znqr terng cebterff.
> ABG!
Since I wasn't speaking of courage and you're not talking about being
neurotic, I can only take that response as a non sequitur.
OBS
EGK
You said Xander was the only one to have made significant progress on that
front. The part I added with ROT13 belies that.
Michael Ikeda
news:tq2dnZaCaIlKU0LZ...@uci.net:
> Anne dealt with Buffy losing everything that meant something to
> her (Angel, her mom, her friends, school), and still recognizing
> that she was "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer." I don't see this as
> depression so much as....loneliness. But I'm not even sure
> that's right.
I do count "Anne" as depression, although reasonably near the end
of the process of recovery.
>
> This is something totally new, and much worse. Her job as Slayer
> was finished, and she was content with that decision, welcomed
> it even. Now she's thrust back into a life she didn't ask for,
> had in fact given up, and she doesn't know what to do or how to
> come to grips with that. To make matters even worse, she
> believes she was in heaven, and to compare mortal life with that
> is even more of a contrast than black and white. No one can
> imagine what that must feel like, to have to readjust just to
> living day to day and have it not be a burden and feel literally
> like hell. There's no way she could just "snap out of it" in 1
> or 2 episodes. It's taken several episodes, imo, to just move
> her _up_ to a state of depression.
>
Another thing to remember is that the time span in the Buffyverse
between "Becoming 2" and "Anne" is LONGER than the timespan between
"Bargaining II" and "Gone". It's just that the gap between
"Becoming 2" and "Anne" took place over the summer, so we didn't
see the ups and downs of the recovery process. And between the
shorter timespan and the problems that keep hitting her, it's
almost remarkable that she isn't doing even worse than she is.
--
Michael Ikeda mmi...@erols.com
"Telling a statistician not to use sampling is like telling an
astronomer they can't say there is a moon and stars"
Lynne Billard, past president American Statistical Association
One Bit Shy
On the neurotic front. And it still comes out under stress. I'm not
following you.
OBS
EGK
Maybe I'm not following you. What was possibly more neurotic than that?
What I fail to see is any progress. Saying it only comes out under stress
is pretty redundant if you ask me and isn't saying much since they've been
under great stress since the series began.
One Bit Shy
BX. Lbh fcbxr bs byq Knaqre jvyyvat gb evfx uvf yvsr naq fgnaq hc sbe uvf
sevraqf - guvatf V nffbvpngr jvgu pbhentr, abg arhebfvf. Naq gura
cebterffrq gb uvz yrnivat Naln ng gur nygne, juvpu vf serdhragyl pevgvpvmrq
nf Knaqre ynpxvat pbhentr. Fb gung'f ubj V gbbx gur pbzzrag.
Vs lbh jnag gb ybbx ng gung nf arhebgvp, BX, gubhtu V qba'g xabj jung vg unf
gb qb jvgu gur erznexf nobhg byq Knaqre va gung pnfr.
Nf n arhebgvp npg vg jbhyq or gvrq gb uvf srnef bs orvat yvxr uvf cneragf, n
unathc bs uvf gung'f arire orra qrnyg jvgu orlbaq zbivat bhg bs uvf
onfrzrag - hayvxr bgure unathcf gung jrer abgnoyl qrnyg jvgu va F3 naq rneyl
F5. Naq gur fgerff yriry bs uvf jrqqvat vf nf uvtu nf vg rire trgf sbe uvz.
Zber ba uvf punatrf bire gvzr orybj jvgubhg gur EBG13
V unir n ybg zber gubhtugf nobhg jung unccraf ng gur jrqqvat, ohg V'q engure
fnir gung sbe jura vg pbzrf. Sbe gur checbfrf bs guvf aneebj vffhr V guvax
guvf vf fhssvpvrag - haqrnyg jvgu unathc naq rkgerzr fgerff.
Xander has notably dealt with his neurotic tendencies several times. In
Revelations and Amends he came to terms with his issues trusting Buffy and
his tendency to explode. In The Zeppo he came to terms with his
insecurities about being the sideman without special talents. In The
Replacement he moved past his self image of the inept guy who can't keep a
job and still lives at home.
The net effect has been a substantial change in personality. He's a lot
calmer, even able to calm others sometimes, helpfully capable at practical
things like carpentry, and can be positively sage-like at times. That's not
to say that all of his issues have been dealt with - they haven't. He still
has a juvenile streak and a hang-up about his family. And when the stress
goes up he's still prone to getting twitchy - not as often, as extremely, or
as destructively - but enough for it stand out as a potential vulnerability.
So on a day to day basis I'd say that Xander is substantially less neurotic
than he used to be. I wouldn't say that about Willow or Buffy. They've
grown in different ways, but not that.
I hope that clarifies.
OBS
ruken
EGK wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 15:57:58 GMT, peachy ashie passion
> <exquisi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >EGK wrote:
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
>
> When she was Bad and Anne covered much of the same ground as far as Buffy's
> depression and growth as a character. Both were better episodes for me than
> season 6. What I'm saying is you'd think those episodes never even
> existed or Buffy learned absolutely nothing from them.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people
> didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you"
> (Calvin and Hobbes)
Your arguments may be valid to you, but you're forgetting a couple of
things:
snark/We would have missed out on the wonder that is Spike. The 'verse
was created just to showcase his redemption -which truth be told wasn't
even needed 'cause he wan't that evil to begin with. The High School
years were immature and boring. The real show started during seasons 6
and 7 when the scoobies stoped acting like children and started acting
the way mature grown ups act. The High School years were not realistic,
none of the situations depicted are likely to happen.Oh the other hand,
everyone knows than when you grow up your parents abandon you, you
become single parents of teenagers and your friends become drug
addicts. Spuffy was the hottest thing evah. James Marsters is the best
actor that ever acted. Everyone watched seasons 6 and 7 to find out
more about Spike. He saved the show!! The scoobies are way more eviler
than Spike could ever hope to be. Buffy should be so lucky to have a
great guy like Spike love her. Not just love her but have her be "the
love of his life" She abused him! /snark
ruken
Clairel wrote:
> burt1...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Clairel wrote:
> > > One Bit Shy wrote:
> > > > At this point in their game Spike hasn't acted all that badly. Yes, he
> > > > exulted over the chip thing, but it's hard to blame him too much at feeling
> > > > freed by its constrictions and being excited at the thought that Buffy is
> > > > more like him than either had realized before. Mostly he's been pretty
> > > > honest and straight forward about what he thinks, naturally bewildered and
> > > > put off by Buffy's hot and cold act, and periodically trying to be helpful
> > > > when appropriate - like offering sympathy for the bad interview with Doris.
> > > > Yet you're right that there's a heavy dose of selfishness running throughout
> > > > it. The interesting part to me is Buffy saying, "I thought this is what you
> > > > wanted." It's a good thought. Spike *is* getting what he wanted - has
> > > > wanted for a very long time - yet it's not satisfying.
> > >
> > > --You make it sound as if Spike just wanted sex. But he didn't. He
> > > wanted love.
> > >
> > > Sex without affection, sex without a real relationship accompaying it,
> > > sex that comes with countless put-downs and humiliations, is not what
> > > Spike ever wanted.
> >
> > Are you forgetting his relationship with Harmony? Spike never had and
> > never wanted a real relationship with Harmony; he just used her for sex
> > and as a stand-in for Buffy when Buffy wouldn't have anything do to
> > with him. And there were plenty of put-downs and humiliations there,
> > too - although it was pretty much always Spike putting down and
> > humiliating Harmony....
>
> anybody. But, hey, soulless vampire. . .
>
> If one is going to start bringing up the bad behavior that Spike
> displayed in the episode where he first showed up in town with Harmony
> (HLOD), one should probably include the biting and killing of human
> victims, which is surely ranks as the worst thing of all.
>
> You seem to think I'm moaning about the terrible wrongs that poor
> Spikey suffered in season 6 -- I'm not. I'm simply pointing out that
> he wanted something different from Buffy than what he had wanted from
> Harmony in the past. Spike never mentioned the word "love" to Harmony.
> But he fell in love with Buffy, and Buffy knew it.
>
> The post to which I was replying seemed to have been written on the
> assumption that all Spke ever wanted from Buffy was sex. I posted to
> refute that assumption.
>
> But as for your own post: To point out that a soulless vampire, who
> has become the usee of the series' heroine, had formerly behaved as the
> usER of a different female character (a female character who, like him,
> but unlike the series' heroine, was a soulless vampire), doesn't really
> mitigate the badness of the heroine's behavior. Buffy should be above
> that kind of conduct. And if a soulless vampire can't be expected to
> be above it (because he hasn't any concept of morality), well, then
> what is a heroine doing rolling in the dirt with him?
>
> Clairel
This is the beauty of being Spike. All his bad actions could, and in
all fairness must be excused, because he *is* a souless vampire. It is
in his nature to do evil. At the same time all his acts of heroism
automatcally put him a step above the souled characters because he is
unsouled and evil. He has the best of both worlds: not fair to accuse
him of acting as an evil, unsouled vampire because that is what he is
and any good thing he does counts twice as much as anything good any of
the scoobies do. Quite simply, we should, and do, expect Buffy and the
scoobies to be "better" than Spike. The writers set it up so that there
is no way the humans in this show can ever be favorably compared to
him.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"ruken" <ru1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is the beauty of being Spike. All his bad actions could, and in
> all fairness must be excused, because he *is* a souless vampire. It is
a dog is a soulless creature
a bad dog is put down
a good dog is rewarded and continues to serve
some jurisdictions are outlawing pitbulls
while many individual pitbulls are not shown to be threats
the breed as a whole is considered dangerous enough
to put down each one as soon as it is born
meanwhile many blind people have richer lives
because they have an obedient guide dog to serve their master
arf meow arf - nsa fodder
ny dnrqn greebevfz ahpyrne obzo vena gnyvona ovt oebgure
if you meet buddha on the usenet killfile him
burt...@hotmail.com
> Clairel wrote:
> > But as for your own post: To point out that a soulless vampire, who
> > has become the usee of the series' heroine, had formerly behaved as the
> > usER of a different female character (a female character who, like him,
> > but unlike the series' heroine, was a soulless vampire), doesn't really
> > mitigate the badness of the heroine's behavior. Buffy should be above
> > that kind of conduct. And if a soulless vampire can't be expected to
> > be above it (because he hasn't any concept of morality), well, then
> > what is a heroine doing rolling in the dirt with him?
> >
> > Clairel
>
> This is the beauty of being Spike. All his bad actions could, and in
> all fairness must be excused, because he *is* a souless vampire.
I wouldn't say they must be excused. No other soulless vampire on the
show had his evil acts excused the way Spike did. They usually ended up
dusty in a big hurry.
> It is
> in his nature to do evil. At the same time all his acts of heroism
> automatcally put him a step above the souled characters because he is
> unsouled and evil. He has the best of both worlds: not fair to accuse
> him of acting as an evil, unsouled vampire because that is what he is
> and any good thing he does counts twice as much as anything good any of
> the scoobies do.
I never bought into this premise, but I have heard it peddled by some
Spike fans before. They want him to get full credit for any good things
he does while unsouled (and I agree there were a few - well, one or
two), but at the same time, they want to excuse away any bad thing he
does with the excuse that he has no soul and thus has no moral compass.
What this means is that, in their eyes, Spike doesn't bear any
responsibility for any evil thing he does - it's just the demon's
influence, it's not his fault.
BS, I say. If Spike is to be judged positively for the good things he
did while unsouled, then he also deserves to be judged negatively for
the bad things he did while unsouled (which there were a LOT more of).
He's got the same "moral compass" in both cases.
ruken
> In article <1155607184.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "ruken" <ru1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> some jurisdictions are outlawing pitbulls
> while many individual pitbulls are not shown to be threats
> the breed as a whole is considered dangerous enough
> to put down each one as soon as it is born
>
Hey I know! re-name the breed "Spike" they'll automatically become the
bestest breed that ever bred. All other breeds will pale in comparison
heh
ruken
burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I wouldn't say they must be excused. No other soulless vampire on the
> show had his evil acts excused the way Spike did. They usually ended up
> dusty in a big hurry.
Yup. But in all fairness to the show, those other vamps weren't as hot
and sexy as Spike was.
> I never bought into this premise, but I have heard it peddled by some
> Spike fans before. They want him to get full credit for any good things
> he does while unsouled (and I agree there were a few - well, one or
> two), but at the same time, they want to excuse away any bad thing he
> does with the excuse that he has no soul and thus has no moral compass.
> What this means is that, in their eyes, Spike doesn't bear any
> responsibility for any evil thing he does - it's just the demon's
> influence, it's not his fault.
>
> BS, I say. If Spike is to be judged positively for the good things he
> did while unsouled, then he also deserves to be judged negatively for
> the bad things he did while unsouled (which there were a LOT more of).
> He's got the same "moral compass" in both cases.
Zru, V erfvfgrq hagvy gur jevgref cebirq gur phyg bs Fcvxr jnf evtug
naq Fcvxr gehyl jnf gur terngrfg ureb rinu!!1!!
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"ruken" <ru1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
why are you named juliett?
would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?
Ari
ruken wrote:
> burt...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't say they must be excused. No other soulless vampire on the
> > show had his evil acts excused the way Spike did. They usually ended up
> > dusty in a big hurry.
>
> Yup. But in all fairness to the show, those other vamps weren't as hot
> and sexy as Spike was.
Hey, you're the one that said it ... ugh, whatever. Yeah, people are
shallow. And what? Since when did that become a crime?
Eric Hunter
> "Patrick MM" <patrick...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> That analogy makes no sense. For one, Marsters is such a good performer
>> that it's entertaining to watch him do pretty much anything.
>
> ...assuming you can buy into the attraction storyline in the first place.
> Or into the various contrivances required to keep Spike around and undusted
> so there could _be_ an attraction storyline.
So, what you're saying is that BtVS has sucked
since "School Hard".
Eric.
--
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Six, Episode 10: "Gone"
> (or "That's right. We ain't really geeks." "All except for
> our accomp...uh")
> Writer: David Fury
> Director: David Fury
.
> Call it a high Decent. It can start a little commune with other
> comedy episodes of which I've been "unfairly" critical, like
> "D?ppelgangland" and "Superstar," and live just south of the
> Good border.
That almost sounds like you were expecting a chorus of outrage from angry
Gone fans. Did someone hint to you that it was as beloved as
Doppelgangland? If so, I wonder if they were deliberately messin' with
ya.
I've been too busy to write much, which is okay because I don't have much
to say about Gone. I enjoyed some of the invisible Buffy scenes, but the
opener with the magic housecleaning and the scene where Buffy tormented
the social services worker did not appeal to me at all. The morose happy
ending was kind of touching. On the whole I'd give it a Decent, though
not a top-of-the-range Decent.
Gone marked a small personal turning point for me. When Wrecked first
aired, on 27 Nov. 2001, I was a newborn Buffy fan who had only seen twenty
episodes at most and was desperate for *anything* Buffy. By the time Gone
aired, on 8 Jan. 2002, I had managed to see more than half the previous
episodes and had a much better idea of what constituted great, good, and
mediocre Buffy. Gone was thus the first new episode that I was able to
watch with some perspective beyond simple wide-eyed wonder. It's a shame
I couldn't have reached this point four years earlier -- I saw Prophecy
Girl when it first aired, but failed to check out season 2 when it started
-- but better late than never.
--Chris
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
Wes <>
<patrick...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>The whole point of season six is to show how the characters function when
>they're no longer faced with a major, world threatening enemy. The issues in
>season six have always been there, but they end up getting sublimated so
>that everyone can come together and fight the big bad at the end of the
>season.
>
>However, beneath the surface all the characters are developing major
>problems, look at Restless which sums up the characters' merits and faults.
>Willow is afraid that she's still that geeky girl from the first episode,
>that's always festered beneath the surface and now that she's in an
>emotional crisis with Tara, she winds up acting out against that. Similarly,
>Xander's deep fear of becoming his parents, shown in his constant journeys
>back to the basement in Restless, manifests itself in nervousness about his
>relationship with Anya.
>
>Giles was scared that his role as Buffy's watcher was denying him the chance
>to live his own life, he leaves her because of this fear. It's his personal
>weakness, and it fits in perfectly with the theme of the season, the idea
>that these characters can no longer count on any authority figures, they're
>left on their own. Buffy's depression is dealt with in When She Was Bad and
>Anne, but in both cases a foe attacks her and re-energizes her into her role
>as slayer.
>
>All the characters were able to sublimate their flaws to battle major evil,
>but without any major evil around, the troubles come to the surface and all
>the problems that built up over the previous five years come to the surface.
>That's why I love season six, because it sees the climax of everyones'
>character arc. After fighting a God, there wasn't anything bigger to fight
>so they went in the total opposite direction and gave Buffy such pathetic
>foes that she can't get distracted from her problems.
>
>patrick
>
Thanks for this,
Wes
Lydia Nickerson
>Of course there is a difference but the lessons you learn in your youth
>should prepare you for being a grown up. Buffy and the gang had to learn a
>lot more of life's lessons at a very early age than most teenagers ever do.
>By the time of season 6 you'd have thought every preceding episode happened
>in a vacuum.
What are life's lessons? Other than keep on keeping on, keeping the
faith, and keeping your friends? They learned courage, loyalty, and
love, but they didn't learn money management, clear communication (gods,
not even close), job skills, parenting skills, or patience. Most
especially not patience, which is the skill they need most.
--
----
Lydia Nickerson ly...@demesne.com ly...@dd-b.net
EGK
Responsibility covers much of that but actually Buffy did learn individual
items from your list. Things like money management. Did you forget she
held a job and lived by herself in Anne? Certainly she was much more mature
than her age group who were busy being preyed on by "Ken" in the same
episode. As others have mentioned, she should have been able to find a
better job than fast food and honestly, given what they showed in season 6,
Dawn SHOULD have been taken away from Buffy.
Xander was probably the most normal as far as having to do for himself. He
was working steady from season 4 onward yet he may have been the worst of
all as far as learning any responsibility.
V ernyyl ungrq Uryy'f Oryyf sbe jung gurl qvq gb Knaqre. Gurer vf whfg ab
jnl gur fnzr Knaqre jub obhtug Pbeql n cebz qerff naq xrcg vg frperg jbhyq
unir yrsg Naln ng gur nygre ol urefrys.
Lydia Nickerson
>On 13 Aug 2006 13:33:19 -0700, "Clairel" <reld...@usa.net> wrote:
>But not very entertaining for many of us who weren't so enamored with James
>Marsters. Daytime soap operas are full of those same character relapses
>and is why season 6 was so often compared unfavorably with them. I know
>you like the final seasons best because of one thing. Spike. That's fine
>too but write Spike out in Season 5 and replace him with Riley. Would you
>have really been that interested in bits of Marti Noxon's life story as
>played out on BTVS? I found it to be tedious and uninteresting for the
>most part and while others say they can relate better to it, I found it
>totally unoriginal too.
Is Spike really all you see in Season 6? I like Season 6 for the reason
many people do not. I like (?) tragedy. It's one of my preferred art
forms. Season 1 and Season 4 are primarily not tragedies, but Season 2
is pure, beautiful, and tearingly painful tragedy, and Season 3 takes
that story and makes it even more painful. I like "Hamlet", too.
Season 6 is largely classic tragedy, and that's why replacing Spike with
Riley wouldn't work. Riley is not a tragic character. He doesn't have
the right internal conflicts, and his relationship with Buffy doesn't
have the necessary fault-lines. I've been enamoured of Spike's tragic
love affair ever since the first -- not because it was Marsters, but
because the thing itself is so beautiful. Not merely star-crossed
lovers but, if you will forgive me, stake-crossed lovers. Giving Spike
his heart's desire, and having it be less than what he wants is a lovely
grace note. Buffy's tragedy, being alive, and her attempt to resolve it
by loving death, I mean, if you like tragedy and symbolism and all that,
how could you _not_ love their relationship?
Lots of people don't like tragedy. Lots of people don't like the dark
side of the human soul. I like both. While it's true that I like
Marsters, I would still have liked Season 6 if it had been a different
character and actor in Spike's place, if it had retained some of that
same emotional weight and symbolism.
Lydia Nickerson
>peachy ashie passion wrote:
>> Clairel wrote:
>>
>> > --There is such a thing as relapse, and regression. People's wills
>> > don't always remain strong. People do things they know better than to
>> > do, just because they weaken.
>> >
>> > I can think of mistakes that I've made, and suffered the consequences
>> > of, and repented bitterly of -- yet repeated again, six or seven years
>> > later. Why? Because even though I knew better, I weakened.
>> >
>> > Most of season 6 is very true to human nature.
>> >
>> > Clairel
>> >
>>
>> This was exactly and precisely what I needed to hear today.
>--Hang in there, amigo! The thing to remember is that you can always
>climb back up again.
>Er, well, unless the mistake you made was lethal . . . which, to be
>realistic, does sometimes happen.
It's really difficult to make the same lethal mistake twice.
Don Sample
Lydia Nickerson <lydy@AUTO> wrote:
That depends on to whom the mistake was lethal.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Lydia Nickerson
>One Bit Shy wrote:
>> "Clairel" <reld...@usa.net> wrote in message
>> news:1155503525....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > One Bit Shy wrote:
>I do agree that Spike is ordinarily a traditional romantic. His thing
>with Harmony is the one exception to that. Way back when HLOD first
>aired in 1999, some people thought it was uncharacteristic of Spike to
>treat a woman that way. If he thought Harmony was such an airhead
>(which she was), why did he choose her in the first place?
>Well, I'm not sure ME really thought it out all that carefully, but the
>theory has been developed that Spike was really bitter after his second
>failure to win Drusilla back. I mean his attempt to win her back after
>"Loves Walk" in season 3. In "Lovers Walk" he was still devoted to
>Drusilla's memory, pining for Drusilla, and unabashedly proclaiming
>himself love's bitch. But when he left Sunnydale with newfound zest
>and spirit to win Dru back again, and again she wouldn't stick with
>him, he must have descended deep into bitterness and disillusionment.
>Hence his shacking up with a brainless bimbo whom he could never love,
>and using her heartlessly.
>I'm not altogether happy with the theory, but we have to make sense
>somehow of the things ME does.
>By the way, I'm not complaining at all about Harmony from the
>standpoint of entertainment value; over the years I have found her
>endlessly amusing. It's just that how she fits in to the bigger
>picture is sometimes a problem.
Jr xabj sebz Frnfba 7 gung Fcvxr vf, hafhecevfvatyl, n encvfg. (V pna'g
svaq gur fcrpvsvp dhbgr, evtug abj, ohg ur nfxf Ohssl vs fur xabjf jung
ur hfrq gb qb jvgu tveyf Qnja'f ntr. Qbrf fur xabj gur rknpg nzbhag bs
oybbq lbh pna qevax naq fgvyy yrnir gurz pbafpvbhf, orpnhfr vg'f ab sha
vs gurl qba'g pel jura lbh...) Tvira gung cneg bs uvf punenpgre, ur
zhfg abg unir bayl bar ivrj bs frk. Uvf eryngvbafuvc jvgu Unezbal vf n
ybg yvxr frevny encr. Unezbal vf gur bar gung xrrcf ba gelvat gb gerng
vg nf vs vg jrer n eryngvbafuvc. Ur yrgf ure qb fb orpnhfr vg yrgf uvz
trg ynvq.
Lydia Nickerson
>S2.
>Spike was evil, evil, evil.
The Judge didn't think so.
Lydia Nickerson
>That analogy makes no sense. For one, Marsters is such a good performer that
>it's entertaining to watch him do pretty much anything. Secondly, the whole
>appeal of the Spike/Buffy relationship is in the fact that they're both
>attracted to each other even though they seem to be totally wrong for each
>other. The relationship forces them both into new emotional territory and
>watching that kind of character journey is a lot more entertaining than
>seeing two people who are essentially right together (i.e. Riley and Buffy)
>get together.
I'll admit to being eccentric on this one, but I think that Spike and
Buffy are actually fairly well matched for each other, and that Riley
and Buffy are nothing but a disaster on wheels. I would argue that
Buffy and Spike's relationship is not nearly as dysfunctional as most
people (including the writers) think, and that given time, it could have
become an extremely positive and supportive relationship. There seems to
be an assumption that any relationship that includes sadomasochism is
automatically unhealthy. I don't agree. I suspect that Buffy's been
looking for a partner that does feed that particular set of yearnings
without knowing it. She's obviously ashamed of that aspect of their
relationship, but that's pretty typical of most people. She never got a
chance to get seriously into it with Angel, and Riley she had to be
gentle with. Spike is the first lover who she can take on without
holding back. It's the first opportunity she's ever had to experiment
with this part of her sexuality. And I believe that Spike is the first
lover who's respected her without his ego getting in the way. Spike
doesn't need Buffy to be weak or docile or submissive in order to love
her. He rather prefers it the other way. There's an episode in Angel
that I think proves that he feels otherwise, and Riley is forever
miserable because Buffy isn't dependent enough. Buffy is just never
going to be dependent, it's not in her nature.
Lydia Nickerson
>So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
>finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
>it in?
Buffy's jeans are quite tight enough that you could see a Zippo in the
back pocket really easily.
Lydia Nickerson
>Elisi wrote:
>> EGK wrote:
>> > On 13 Aug 2006 09:51:18 -0700, "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> (Which I found very tedious btw. Angel is a handsome man, but there is
>> *no* exchuse for the half naked Tai Chi. None!)
>Heh. It cracks me up that I was supposed to find those lameass Tai Chi
>scenes sexy.
Oh, I don't think it would have been so bad if he hadn't so bad at it.
He's got no form at all. You can tell that he doesn't have the balance,
the flow, not any of the most basic feel for Tai Chi. Gellar does have
martial arts training, and she doesn't look completely awful, although I
believe at that time she was practicing kick-boxing. Still, she had
stance and flow. Boreanaz had a naked chest, and I don't really find
him all that attractive. I watched Buffy, in those scenes.
Lydia Nickerson
>It really is a set piece to support the idea that Buffy is hopelessly drawn
>to Spike in spite of her protests and attempts to resist. It's specifically
>tied to the parallel effort by Willow and Buffy to go cold turkey that was
>established at the end of Wrecked. Temptations are removed for Willow and
>she hangs in there, but Buffy fails.
One of the things I found hot continually throughout Season 6 was the
way Spike would move in close, over Buffy's objections, and how she
would freeze, her eyes would glaze slightly, and she'd yield. It's that
transport of remembered ecstacy.
I think that people make too much of an issue of Spike being a
temptation, and not enough of Buffy's cruel use of him. Her problem
with him is similar to what I think would have been a better choice for
Willow. Buffy weilds too much power over Spike, and uses it too cruelly
and selfishly. I don't think that Buffy's temptation is Spike, per se.
I think it's power and self-destruction. What she is getting from Spike
isn't what he's offering. He just doesn't understand that.
Rowan Hawthorn
> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> writes:
>
>
>> S2.
>
>> Spike was evil, evil, evil.
>
> The Judge didn't think so.
>
The Judge was looking for vestiges of *humanity*, not lack of *evil*.
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
vague disclaimer
Lydia Nickerson <lydy@AUTO> wrote:
> vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> writes:
>
> >So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
> >finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
> >it in?
>
> Buffy's jeans are quite tight enough that you could see a Zippo in the
> back pocket really easily.
That isn't the issue. The issue is when and how the lighter got from the
box that Buffy chucked it in into Spike's hand.
Textually speaking, Spike was the only left alone with the box, while
everyone else was at the door with the social worker.
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
Elisi
vague disclaimer wrote:
> In article <44e91a86$0$10303$815e...@news.qwest.net>,
> Lydia Nickerson <lydy@AUTO> wrote:
>
> > vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> writes:
> >
> > >So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather than
> > >finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy chucked
> > >it in?
> >
> > Buffy's jeans are quite tight enough that you could see a Zippo in the
> > back pocket really easily.
>
> That isn't the issue. The issue is when and how the lighter got from the
> box that Buffy chucked it in into Spike's hand.
Via Buffy's hand to her pocket.
vague disclaimer
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
When? During the opening credits?
The only person shown to be alone with the box was Spike, who went in
there specifically to look for his lighter.
One Bit Shy
news:l64o-1rj5-0ED53...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <1156184562....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> vague disclaimer wrote:
>> > In article <44e91a86$0$10303$815e...@news.qwest.net>,
>> > Lydia Nickerson <lydy@AUTO> wrote:
>> >
>> > > vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> writes:
>> > >
>> > > >So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather
>> > > >than
>> > > >finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy
>> > > >chucked
>> > > >it in?
>> > >
>> > > Buffy's jeans are quite tight enough that you could see a Zippo in
>> > > the
>> > > back pocket really easily.
>> >
>> > That isn't the issue. The issue is when and how the lighter got from
>> > the
>> > box that Buffy chucked it in into Spike's hand.
>>
>> Via Buffy's hand to her pocket.
>
> When? During the opening credits?
In a sense, yes. There's plenty of time. The next scene is a different
day! (Presumably the next morning)
> The only person shown to be alone with the box was Spike, who went in
> there specifically to look for his lighter.
No. He's there waiting to talk it out with Buffy. He already knows where
the lighter is - Buffy's pocket. (There's even a momentary look of
puzzlement on Spike's face in the kitchen when he's feeling her up - just as
Xander interrupted. That's presumably when he felt the lighter.)
The clue that matters - that explains the whole damned scene - is that the
lighter shows up in Buffy's pocket - fished out by Spike.
I don't understand what's so hard about this scene. It's just representing
Buffy falling off the wagon concerning Spike while Willow stays on her wagon
concerning magic. Buffy can't resist hanging onto that reminder of Spike.
OBS
vague disclaimer
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >So Spike just magically intuited that it was in her pocket, rather
> >> > > >than
> >> > > >finding it when he was alone in the room with the box that Buffy
> >> > > >chucked
> >> > > >it in?
> >> > >
> >> > > Buffy's jeans are quite tight enough that you could see a Zippo in
> >> > > the
> >> > > back pocket really easily.
> >> >
> >> > That isn't the issue. The issue is when and how the lighter got from
> >> > the
> >> > box that Buffy chucked it in into Spike's hand.
> >>
> >> Via Buffy's hand to her pocket.
> >
> > When? During the opening credits?
>
> In a sense, yes. There's plenty of time. The next scene is a different
> day! (Presumably the next morning)
>
Okaaaay...
>
> > The only person shown to be alone with the box was Spike, who went in
> > there specifically to look for his lighter.
>
> No. He's there waiting to talk it out with Buffy. He already knows where
> the lighter is - Buffy's pocket. (There's even a momentary look of
> puzzlement on Spike's face in the kitchen when he's feeling her up - just as
> Xander interrupted. That's presumably when he felt the lighter.)
Whereas we we actually saw Spike alone, with the box in front of him,
where we last saw the lighter being chucked.
> The clue that matters - that explains the whole damned scene - is that the
> lighter shows up in Buffy's pocket - fished out by Spike.
>
> I don't understand what's so hard about this scene. It's just representing
> Buffy falling off the wagon concerning Spike while Willow stays on her wagon
> concerning magic. Buffy can't resist hanging onto that reminder of Spike.
Reminder?
The scene as *also* about how he won't leave her alone and won't miss a
moment to pile the pressure on. He got what he came for, and it wasn't
the lighter.
One Bit Shy
I'm sorry, I didn't mean everything in the scene. Just the lighter. I know
that's not why he's there.
But that still doesn't get the lighter into Buffy's pocket, offer any
rational reason for him to pretend he got it from there, or any rational
reason for Buffy to go along with the pretense.
And it's totally unnecessary to go down that path when the visible
explanation - that it's really in her pocket - fits perfectly with an
already clearly established parallel with Willow's addiction.
Surely you're not suggesting that Buffy isn't an active participant in this
affair. I think you recall what happens the very next time they see each
other.
OBS
George W Harris
If at first you don't succeed...well, so much
for basejumping.
--
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV!
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'