AOQ Review 7-7: "Conversations With Dead People"
Arbitrar Of Quality
threads.
BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
(or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
Director: Nick Marck
You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
it. Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
everyone involved is trying, of course.
Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
alone, hearing voices and such. And let me also mention that I would
like to see some indication that the characters on the show ever eat
anything other than pizza and dessert; kinda kills the special-treat
status there. A few entertaining moments early on, especially the
anchovies song and the attack on the innocent wall. Apparently Dawn
and Kit are still hanging out together. Once the house starts acting
up, the images of a loud cacophony of insanity work well. Thiss feels
like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style. Dawn
wishes she could be a star, but without her sister, she's still
usually the kid who screams a lot and gets killed before the opening
credits. And the actor really does have a great scream, as best heard
early in this episode, although the show maybe runs it into the ground.
Much of this story is in stasis throughout CWDP - Dawn is yelling
for her mom, getting thrown around, screaming, and showing a little
backbone, cut to another scene, come back and do this again. After the
above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
And after all that, the reward she was fighting for is disappointing
(appropriate for the episode, just disappointing to Dawn): Mom gives a
quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
plays out.
Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
Wars_ jokes. Not speaking Mexican, Jonathan and The Other One return
to Sunnydale seeking something undefined. The former ends up in no
condition to tell Buffy about it, and the latter, as the lone surviving
member of the group, may soon earn the right to be referred to by his
real name again. He's taking advice from Warren or something that
looks like him, and seems happier and more comfortable than ever. Is
he insane like Spike, or is he getting messages from the same From
Beneath You as Willow? Or is Spike insane because of FBY too? "Last
time we were here, 33.3bar percent of us were flayed alive." The
communications check is hilarious. And of course there's the "no.
There is another" gag ("no, I was just going with it"). I
smiled. There's not so much to this story compared to the others,
but again I'm sure we'll learn more as the season progresses. And
the final visual of Andrew stabbing one of our longest recurring guest
characters, just after he's kinda starting to maybe absorb what Buffy
was telling him in "Earshot," does its job.
What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
Anyway, Cassie initially claims that she's coming by just to say
hello to Willow on behalf of someone else, with no special deeper
purpose. This scene seems to test how long the creators can have two
characters sitting around and talking, not even moving around in an
animated manner. It still draws the viewer in, fixing itself as the
one that stands out. I was hurting some for Willow, hearing that
Tara's crying and unable to quite reach her, and then properly
indignant on her behalf as it became clear that she was being played.
I don't know what the red-alert moment was for everyone else, but for
me, it was the caution against using any magic. That's obviously
enough contradictory with the rest of what we've been told... and
appropriately enough, our girl recognizes this, because she's good
that way. The suicide thing is indeed too far, especially given that
she's starting to get suspicious as it is. Looks like they're not
kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
trying to eliminate her early.
If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show, Buffy's is set up
as the character/emotional center. Overall it's good, but not
perfect. The very concept of reuniting with an old barely-acquaintance
in this manner is pretty goofy, and takes a little while to get past,
but it's basically an extension of a joke the show's used in the
past, so not too jarring. And once one gets used to the unusual tone
of these sequences, well, it helps them stand out. Something a little
different. Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil. Seems like he
should've known more about Buffy, even if not the Slayer thing, if he
was there for Graduation Day. The chance to get caught up on
classmates is oddly fun, and things like the mention of Scott work as
both amusing continuity porn and a natural transition into Buffy
angsting a little. There's a lot of angsting here, and the show does
its best to keep things entertaining. The Buffy/Holden scenes seem
like among the longest uninterrupted two-characters-talking exchanges
of the series. The flippancy about the psychoanalysis is welcome, as
is the way they begin a dual to the death, and then can't resist
stopping and chatting a little longer. But do we really need yet
another episode of Buffy rambling about her bad luck with guys and/or
how bad being with Spike made her feel (the former seems more redundant
than the latter, which at least has some catharsis involved)? As
pleasant as it all is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of new
ground covered anywhere in the discussion, until the end. This part
thinks it has something important to say, but it's not all getting
through, at least not to this viewer on first viewing. The mixed
superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
someone with a vested interest. Plus, hey, it's another sig-quote
("I'm here to kill you, not to judge you").
Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
field at all. Some of Buffy's worst enemies have had souls, after
all. Questions about how long Spike's been up to this, how often
(and why) he's siring, and how long he's been able to ignore the
chip (was he faking the pain in "Help" for Buffy's benefit or
something?) can be left to entice viewers to tune in next week.
So those are our conversations. The stories don't seem to be linked
by some special thematic device beyond the obvious - Warren and
Cassie may be manifestations of the same FBY, but Holden and possibly
Joyce aren't. Some of the advice the alleged dead give is terrible,
but that's not universal. I'm fine to let this be a set of
semi-isolated discussions if everyone else is.
Neither Xander nor Anya is in this episode, and the only thing odder
than that is the fact that I didn't miss them at all while the show
was playing. This is the first Xander-free episode of the whole
series, whereas Caulfield could probably be knocked back down to
"Guest Star" at this point if anyone was so inclined. Spike does
appear, of course, but I don't think he has any lines.
Lots of people on that commentary track. Looking forward to that one
during my post-series runthrough of Special Features.
So...
One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
AOQ rating: Good
[Season Seven so far:
1) "Lessons" - Good
2) "Beneath You" - Decent
3) "Same Time, Same Place" - Excellent
4) "Help" - Good
5) "Selfless" - SUPERLATIVE
6) "Him" - Bad
7) "Conversations With Dead People" - Good]
Arbitrar Of Quality
preemptively issue a periodic reminder that if I rank an episode
"Good," it means that I liked it and thought it was good. Just thought
that'd be worth mentioning again. Have a pleasant night.
-AOQ
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
:mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
And, of course, you recognize him as Tracy
from the "Firefly" episode "The Message", naq ur'f
bar bs Wbff'f 3-sref, univat n erpheevat ebyr va "Natry"
F5 nf Xabk.
--
/bud...@nirvana.net/h:k
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:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
and marti noxon and joss whedon
this is partly a look to the past
a chance to sit down and chat with some of the main characters
where theyve been and where they are
and this is partly set up for future episodes
like all your questions about spike
some of it makes more sense further on
it took me a while to understand why spike talking to a woman
would be included in conversations with dead people
until i remember that spike was the dead people
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes. Not speaking Mexican, Jonathan and The Other One return
the three nerds are a favorite of the writers
meow arf meow - they are performing horrible experiments in space
major grubert is watching you - beware the bakalite
there can only be one or two - the airtight garage has you neo
Apteryx
news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> alone, hearing voices and such. And let me also mention that I would
> like to see some indication that the characters on the show ever eat
> anything other than pizza and dessert; kinda kills the special-treat
> status there. A few entertaining moments early on, especially the
> anchovies song and the attack on the innocent wall. Apparently Dawn
> and Kit are still hanging out together. Once the house starts acting
> up, the images of a loud cacophony of insanity work well. Thiss feels
> like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style. Dawn
> wishes she could be a star, but without her sister, she's still
> usually the kid who screams a lot and gets killed before the opening
> credits. And the actor really does have a great scream, as best heard
> early in this episode, although the show maybe runs it into the ground.
> Much of this story is in stasis throughout CWDP - Dawn is yelling
> for her mom, getting thrown around, screaming, and showing a little
> backbone, cut to another scene, come back and do this again.
Isolated out, this probably is the weakest of the 4 main stories, but the
way in which it is done (cutting from one story to another) it is essential
for it all to be what in isolation seems like OTT action because without it
the talkiness of the other stories would drag. Even the Nerd and Buffy
segments are pretty talky
> After the
> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
it.
> And after all that, the reward she was fighting for is disappointing
> (appropriate for the episode, just disappointing to Dawn): Mom gives a
> quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
> overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
> message is real.
Just if its real? Real or not, doesn't the content of the message (that
"When it's bad, Buffy won't choose you. She'll be against you") make you go
"Ooo"? Because its certainly a prophecy, and even real prophecies in the
Buffyverse are likely to be misleading, and even fake ones may have an
element of truth.
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes. Not speaking Mexican, Jonathan and The Other One return
> to Sunnydale seeking something undefined. The former ends up in no
> condition to tell Buffy about it, and the latter, as the lone surviving
> member of the group, may soon earn the right to be referred to by his
> real name again.
I think "The Other One" has just become a bit redundant. I think we can call
him Andrew now (or maybe the Nerd Uno).
> He's taking advice from Warren or something that
> looks like him,
But only looks like Warren to Andrew. When we see the same basement from
Jonathon's POV, we don't see him at all.
> and seems happier and more comfortable than ever. Is
> he insane like Spike, or is he getting messages from the same From
> Beneath You as Willow? Or is Spike insane because of FBY too? "Last
> time we were here, 33.3bar percent of us were flayed alive." The
> communications check is hilarious. And of course there's the "no.
> There is another" gag ("no, I was just going with it").
Good questions. And good gags.
>
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead.
But acceopting the premise that Tara can't appear to Willow, what recently
dead person that Willow knows would be an appropriate choice to speak for
her? Warren?
> Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
The simple explanation is the with the cost and quality current state of the
art for virtual actors, Tara can only appear in episodes that Amber Benson
is available for.
> Anyway, Cassie initially claims that she's coming by just to say
> hello to Willow on behalf of someone else, with no special deeper
> purpose. This scene seems to test how long the creators can have two
> characters sitting around and talking, not even moving around in an
> animated manner. It still draws the viewer in, fixing itself as the
> one that stands out. I was hurting some for Willow, hearing that
> Tara's crying and unable to quite reach her, and then properly
> indignant on her behalf as it became clear that she was being played.
> I don't know what the red-alert moment was for everyone else, but for
> me, it was the caution against using any magic.
Well possibly. But of course I'm entirely on the side of the evil
manifestation on that issue. Shame it didn't work.
> That's obviously
> enough contradictory with the rest of what we've been told... and
> appropriately enough, our girl recognizes this, because she's good
> that way. The suicide thing is indeed too far, especially given that
> she's starting to get suspicious as it is.
Kind of obviously too far too. It would seem that the evil manifestation
suffers the usual villains' shortage of intellence.
> If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show, Buffy's is set up
> as the character/emotional center.
Whether Willow/Cassie is the most important for plot depends of course on
where the plot goes, but clearly Buffy's undead psychoanalys is about
character.
> different. Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil. Seems like he
> should've known more about Buffy, even if not the Slayer thing, if he
> was there for Graduation Day.
Peculiar. I guess Sunnydale forgetyitis strikes again.
> its best to keep things entertaining. The Buffy/Holden scenes seem
> like among the longest uninterrupted two-characters-talking exchanges
> of the series. The flippancy about the psychoanalysis is welcome, as
> is the way they begin a dual to the death, and then can't resist
> stopping and chatting a little longer. But do we really need yet
> another episode of Buffy rambling about her bad luck with guys and/or
> how bad being with Spike made her feel (the former seems more redundant
> than the latter, which at least has some catharsis involved)? As
> pleasant as it all is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of new
> ground covered anywhere in the discussion, until the end. This part
> thinks it has something important to say, but it's not all getting
> through, at least not to this viewer on first viewing. The mixed
> superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
> and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
> someone with a vested interest. Plus, hey, it's another sig-quote
> ("I'm here to kill you, not to judge you").
You wouldn't have got to the good stuff at the end (superiority/inferiority
complex pluse Spike as Holden's sire) without the recap of the other stuff.
Plus its fun. There's more great lines here than you can shake a stick at).
> Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
> we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
> twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
> field at all. Some of Buffy's worst enemies have had souls, after
> all. Questions about how long Spike's been up to this, how often
> (and why) he's siring, and how long he's been able to ignore the
> chip (was he faking the pain in "Help" for Buffy's benefit or
> something?) can be left to entice viewers to tune in next week.
Certainly questions needing answers, and a good hook to keep the faithful
faithful.
>
> Neither Xander nor Anya is in this episode, and the only thing odder
> than that is the fact that I didn't miss them at all while the show
> was playing.
That's a shame, but those are the characters that keep things grounded.
Maybe the writers wanted to lift off this week.
>
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
Now you'll be in trouble. I see what you say that Good means you like it,
but there is such a thing as not liking something enough. Of course, I give
it the same rating, but I have the usual excuse (I fixed my numerical
ratings to your grades at a certain level long ago and can't change them
now, 17 Excellents in all the world etc etc). Along with Selfless, this is
what makes the season 7 DVDs not a waste of space on my shelves. Though as
they are both on the same DVD, I suppose some space savings could be made...
It's my 20th favourite BtVS episode, 2nd best in season 7.
--
Apteryx
Rowan Hawthorn
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
That was actually intended, and it was the way the script was originally
written, but they were unable to get Amber (she really didn't like the
idea of "Evil Tara,") so they altered it. Personally, though I agree
that Tara was the logical choice, I think it works even better this way
within the context of the story, by allowing the evil apparition to play
on Willow's guilt and insecurity (never far from the surface in the best
of times.) Willow's already grieving because Tara's gone, and one thing
that has to be weighing on her is her inability to bring Tara back after
successfully resurrecting Buffy; how much *worse* is she gonna feel if
she thinks that her own actions are keeping them from communicating now?
>
> Anyway, Cassie initially claims that she's coming by just to say
> hello to Willow on behalf of someone else, with no special deeper
> purpose. This scene seems to test how long the creators can have two
> characters sitting around and talking, not even moving around in an
> animated manner. It still draws the viewer in, fixing itself as the
> one that stands out. I was hurting some for Willow, hearing that
> Tara's crying and unable to quite reach her, and then properly
> indignant on her behalf as it became clear that she was being played.
> I don't know what the red-alert moment was for everyone else, but for
> me, it was the caution against using any magic. That's obviously
> enough contradictory with the rest of what we've been told... and
> appropriately enough, our girl recognizes this, because she's good
> that way. The suicide thing is indeed too far, especially given that
> she's starting to get suspicious as it is. Looks like they're not
> kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> trying to eliminate her early.
>
Willow is still Buffy's Big Gun, even if she is currently wearing a
self-imposed trigger lock...
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
> it. Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
> it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
> of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
> perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
> ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
> it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
> does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
> everyone involved is trying, of course.
The opening song was another Joss Whedon composition. Angie Hart, who
sings it, may be the performer to make the most appearances at The
Bronze other than Four Star Mary (AKA Dingos Ate My Baby.) She was also
the girl who sang "Amazing Grace" in the Firefly episode "Heart of Gold."
>
> Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
> alone, hearing voices and such. And let me also mention that I would
> like to see some indication that the characters on the show ever eat
> anything other than pizza and dessert; kinda kills the special-treat
> status there. A few entertaining moments early on, especially the
> anchovies song and the attack on the innocent wall. Apparently Dawn
> and Kit are still hanging out together. Once the house starts acting
> up, the images of a loud cacophony of insanity work well. Thiss feels
> like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style. Dawn
> wishes she could be a star, but without her sister, she's still
> usually the kid who screams a lot and gets killed before the opening
> credits. And the actor really does have a great scream, as best heard
> early in this episode, although the show maybe runs it into the ground.
> Much of this story is in stasis throughout CWDP - Dawn is yelling
> for her mom, getting thrown around, screaming, and showing a little
> backbone, cut to another scene, come back and do this again. After the
> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
> And after all that, the reward she was fighting for is disappointing
> (appropriate for the episode, just disappointing to Dawn): Mom gives a
> quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
> overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
> message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
> plays out.
I am of the opinion that "Joyce" was another manifestation of the From
Beneath You guy as well. Her "message" to Dawn seemed to be designed to
achieve the same goal as its message to Willow, sowing dissent among the
ranks of Buffy's friends. She said nothing that was in any way useful.
(DOMFDD were made happy again, though.)
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
The script was written for it to be Tara, but Amber Benson was
"unavailable" at the time they were filming this. Many people suspected
that she didn't want to do it, because there was a lunatic fringe of
Willow/Tara fans who went a little nuts after Tara was killed, some
going so far as to make death threats, and she was afraid of how they
might react if "Tara became evil."
>
> So those are our conversations. The stories don't seem to be linked
> by some special thematic device beyond the obvious - Warren and
> Cassie may be manifestations of the same FBY, but Holden and possibly
> Joyce aren't. Some of the advice the alleged dead give is terrible,
> but that's not universal. I'm fine to let this be a set of
> semi-isolated discussions if everyone else is.
While Webs wasn't a manifestation of FBY, it's possible that he was an
agent working for it.
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
This is a lot of people's #1 episode of the season, and it one the Hugo
for Dramatic Presentation (short form) in 2003.
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
George W Harris
wrote:
:> After the
:> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
:> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
:
:Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
:it.
:
He did set that book on fire (in "Superstar"?)
--
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar." -Wash, 'Serenity'
George W Harris
<tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
:Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
:alone, hearing voices and such.
One thing to consider is that this episode of
"Buffy" is unusual in that it is actually *horror*. The
Dawn story is excellent horror; the shot when the
camera pans down so the empty couch is out-of-frame,
and then pans up to show Joyce's dead body is chilling.
--
Firefly Fan Since September 20th, 2002 - Browncoat Since Birth
One Bit Shy
news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
Jane wrote the Dawn scenes.
Drew wrote the Nerd scenes.
Marti wrote the Willow scenes.
Joss wrote the Buffy scenes.
Don't have time for more right now, but thought that might be important to
you.
OBS
Don Sample
wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> > threads.
> >
> > After the
> > above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> > some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
>
> Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
> it.
He can light fires when he speaks Latin in front of the books.
>
> > He's taking advice from Warren or something that
> > looks like him,
>
> But only looks like Warren to Andrew. When we see the same basement from
> Jonathon's POV, we don't see him at all.
And where have we seen something like that before?
Rincewind
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
Just a few quick notes.
Goddard and Espenson are the only writers appearing in the credits, but the
entire Buffy/Holden conversation was written by Joss.
> Dawn is yelling
> for her mom, getting thrown around, screaming, and showing a little
> backbone, cut to another scene, come back and do this again. After the
> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
She can scream but she can kick ass too.
> "Last
> time we were here, 33.3bar percent of us were flayed alive." The
> communications check is hilarious. And of course there's the "no.
> There is another" gag ("no, I was just going with it").
The geeks are so much funnier in this episode than they were in season 6.
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
The original plan was to have Tara.
Joss says that Benson wanted too much money.
Benson, more diplomatically, hints that after Seeing Red she didn't trust
Joss to treat her character in a way that would not be offensive to gay
fans.
Pick the version you like better...
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
For me this is one of the three Excellents of the season (and one of the top
5 episodes in all the series).
Rincewind.
--
Lines you'll never hear on Buffy:
TARA (after being shot by Warren): Is it because I'm a lesbian?
Segment of outraged fans: Is this because she's a lesbian?
JOSS WHEDON: Of course not. Don't you people have anything better to be
outraged about?
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes. Not speaking Mexican, Jonathan and The Other One return
> to Sunnydale seeking something undefined.
Note the "Welcome to Sunnydale" sign. The population is given as
32,900, down from the 38,500 that the sign Spike ran over in seasons 2
and 3 declared.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Don Sample <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote:
> In article <eelb9r$jfc$1...@emma.aioe.org>, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> > "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> > > threads.
> > >
>
> > > After the
> > > above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> > > some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
> >
> > Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
> > it.
>
> He can light fires when he speaks Latin in front of the books.
>
> >
> > > He's taking advice from Warren or something that
> > > looks like him,
> >
> > But only looks like Warren to Andrew. When we see the same basement from
> > Jonathon's POV, we don't see him at all.
>
> And where have we seen something like that before?
lessons
when spike is speaking to people that arent there
Apteryx
news:tpcsg25ha01ekk2u7...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:36:57 +1200, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> :> After the
> :> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> :> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
> :
> :Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot
> at
> :it.
> :
> He did set that book on fire (in "Superstar"?)
Of course! And without even trying. Clearly a natural :)
--
Apteryx
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
> There's not so much to this story compared to the others,
> but again I'm sure we'll learn more as the season progresses. And
> the final visual of Andrew stabbing one of our longest recurring guest
> characters, just after he's kinda starting to maybe absorb what Buffy
> was telling him in "Earshot," does its job.
If you count the unaired pilot, he *is* the longest running recurring
character at this point.
Jonathan's fate was sealed back in "Flooded" when he smoked that cigar.
Scythe Matters
> Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
> alone, hearing voices and such.
This is the only flaw in what I consider an otherwise perfect episode,
and the flaw is minor: the carnage goes on too long. It's well done, but
we've seen it a dozen times before in horror films.
> After the
> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
> And after all that, the reward she was fighting for is disappointing
> (appropriate for the episode, just disappointing to Dawn): Mom gives a
> quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
> overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
> message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
> plays out.
It's definitely supposed to seem ambiguous. But, see below.
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes.
It's like they've perfected the tone they were going for in the
pre-murder days of season six. Though I wonder if the issue isn't better
writing, but the fact that here they interact in pairs rather than as a
trio. Maybe there's something to the tone that works better with two
than with three.
But I agree: the geek jokes here are thoroughly of the good. "33.3bar." Heh.
> And
> the final visual of Andrew stabbing one of our longest recurring guest
> characters, just after he's kinda starting to maybe absorb what Buffy
> was telling him in "Earshot," does its job.
Plus, you know, there's that whole funky Satan thing in the floor.
There's something here that bears on the strange disagreement people are
having about rape, hyenas, etc. in the other thread:
---
JONATHAN
Time goes by, and everything drops away. (Andrew stops digging, looks at
Jonathan) All the cruelty, all the pain, all that humiliation. It all
washes away.
---
This seems to be a reasonably strong indication of the show's stance on
these issues.
And then, on a different subject:
---
ANDREW
You know what? They don't wanna talk to you. All those people you just
mentioned. Not one of them is sitting around going, "I wonder what
Jonathan's up to right now." Not one of them cares about you.
JONATHAN
Well, I still care about them. That's why I'm here.
---
Not only has Jonathan _become_ (high school-era) Buffy here, but in fact
he's made the journey all the way back to the "right" version of himself
vs. "Superstar." Helping because it's important to help. Doing right
because it's important to do right.
And yet...
I made a point, back in the third season or whenever I was still
responding on a regular basis, that this show always finds a way to
punish people who've done wrong. There was some disagreement, and a
little of it from you. In retrospect, you might understand my point a
little bit better, and this season isn't done demonstrating my point.
Jonathan didn't actively participate in the same evil that Warren did,
nor did he cheerlead it like Andrew, but he helped create its
circumstances. Plus, "Superstar" had some less than good consequences.
It's great that Jonathan was on the road to redemption here, and of
course the show killed him for it because it's an evil show run by evil
people, but in the end Jonathan does have to pay for what he's done.
Disproportionately, sure, but then that's where the shock value comes in.
> No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role
There weren't.
> The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
They wanted to.
To tell you the full tale and its consequences here would, I think,
necessitate spoilers -- and also, others certainly know it better than
me -- but here, Cassie is a more effective Pylea. A quick substitute off
the bench, as it were.
One thing worth wondering about: there have been a number of apparitions
thus far this season, starting with "Lessons" (and most notably in that
episode's final scene). Non-dream apparitions aren't a typical thing on
this show. So why now? But since there's no way for us to know that
given what we've seen, maybe it might help to start with this question:
what do they all have in common? And has the show ever used non-dream
apparitions before?
> I don't know what the red-alert moment was for everyone else
Well, the appearance itself. But then, this:
---
CASSIE
She's sorry she couldn't come herself.
WILLOW
Why didn't she? I don't understand... I mean, if you can manifest yourself
CASSIE
She just can't.
WILLOW
Why not? I don't understand.
CASSIE
Because of what you did.
WILLOW
What?
CASSIE
You killed people. You can't see her. That's just how it is. I'm sorry.
---
Way too convenient. Borderline nonsensical.
Note, too, the tie-in with a seasonal theme:
---
CASSIE
It was the power.
WILLOW
I am the power. It's in me. Did I mention the random destruction of
property? The Magic Box is not so much a box now?
CASSIE
The power is bigger than you are.
---
Think about this for a minute. Buffy said "it's about power," and meant
it. So did something that was not Buffy, at the end of "Lessons," but I
think it's safe to assume that a different meaning might have been
intended there. Or not. But back to this in a moment.
Xander also constructed an analogy about power:
---
XANDER
Yeah, I get that. Figuring out how to control your magic seems a lot
like hammering a nail. (Willow looks confused) Well, uh, hear me out. So
you're hammering, right? OK, well at the end of the hammer, you have the
power, but no control. It takes, like, two strokes to hit the nail in,
or you could hit your thumb.
WILLOW
Ouch.
XANDER
So you choke up. Control, but no power. It could take like ten strokes
to knock the nail in. Power, control. It's a tradeoff.
---
It seems offhand and directed at another subject, but maybe it ties into
something broader.
Buffy also has a comment about power in this episode:
---
BUFFY
I have all this power. I didn't ask for it. I don't deserve it.
---
It's almost as if she's denying what she so firmly told Dawn in
"Lessons." Or maybe her thinking on this point has progressed, and she's
tying it into (here's my personal hobby horse) her consideration of
fate, destiny and the issue brought up at the end of "Help." I don't
think it's clear yet, but it's something to consider.
But back to Cassie...if a big seasonal theme is power (which, obviously,
it is), and Cassie is specifically warning against power, then it stands
to reason that power -- Willow's, certainly, but maybe also power as
conceived by our gang in general -- is somehow dangerous to whatever
Cassie's representing. That's a useful datum. For me, this was the first
time that I saw any attempt to link "it's about power" with the
heretofore offscreen Big Bad. I had no idea what the connection was,
outside of this little tidbit, but it did start the wheels turning.
> Looks like they're not
> kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> trying to eliminate her early.
And yet, see OBS's (correct) assessment of the big conversation in
"Selfless." Willow's afraid to use the power she has, and with seemingly
good reason after the events of that episode. Maybe the bottom-eating
Big Bad is simply working a contingency plan here, and she's already out
of the game.
> Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
But he's pretty insightful. And you know about this show and evil
truth-speakers. For example:
---
HOLDEN
No, no. Feels great. Strong. Like I'm connected to a powerful
all-consuming evil that's gonna suck the world into a firey oblivion.
---
That's an interesting restatement of the threat we've been hearing over
and over this season, isn't it?
> The chance to get caught up on
> classmates is oddly fun, and things like the mention of Scott work as
> both amusing continuity porn
Lots of continuity porn here. Crazy Jay. Nemeses. Insane troll logic. It
goes on and on.
> So those are our conversations. The stories don't seem to be linked
> by some special thematic device beyond the obvious - Warren and
> Cassie may be manifestations of the same FBY, but Holden and possibly
> Joyce aren't. Some of the advice the alleged dead give is terrible,
> but that's not universal. I'm fine to let this be a set of
> semi-isolated discussions if everyone else is.
The thing is, you have to look at the outcome. "Cassie" tried to get
Willow to kill herself, but even if that failed she's still shown her
that the Big Bad is here...and Willow's still afraid to use her power.
Buffy is clearly not happy with Willow's reticence. No one is completely
sure about Willow. Dawn has been told, by the one and only person she'd
believe on this subject, that she cannot rely on Buffy. No one except
Buffy had any trust in Spike, and now she believes he's killing
again...despite his chip, and despite his soul...and apparently while
doing one of the great acting jobs of all time in hiding it from her.
Spike is killing again, plus he's apparently insane even aside from
that, and no one knows what his having a soul really means. Buffy is
questioning her very purpose. Anya is a marked woman, and once more
powerless. Dead people are appearing to the living. Andrew just murdered
someone in cold blood, and he's back in Sunnydale. Girls are being
hunted down and killed, for reasons that are not clear but that are
obviously important. The principal may or may not be evil. There's some
big Mercyful Fate medallion over the Hellmouth, and it's all glowy.
Everything and everyone is destabilized right now, and that's the
thematic tie.
Viewed in that context, by the way, it's reasonably obvious what Joyce
is. Though you will unquestionably get to experience a big debate on
this very subject. ;-)
> AOQ rating: Good
By your scale, excellent for me. By your scale thus far in season seven,
this also rates a superlative, as I think it's better than "Selfless."
William George Ferguson
>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>threads.
>BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
>(or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
>Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
>Director: Nick Marck
A note upfront (if didn't bring this up at least a half dozen other people
would, and probably still will), although Espenson and Goddard are the
credited writers, each of the foou main threads was actually scripted by a
different writer, two uncredited. Espenson scripted the Dawn Home Alone
thread, Goddard scripted the Jonathan/Andrew thread, Marti Noxon scripted
the Willow/"Cassie" thread, and Whedon scripted the Buffy/Holden thread.
I've seen a specific comment on who wrote the Spike scenes.
And Espenson is on record as being disappointed that she didn't get to
write the Jonathan/Andrew scenes. Jonathan was her pet character, she had
the opportunity to write his best scenes in the past, including all of
Superstar. She really wanted to write this one, for obvious reasons.
>You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
>it. Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
>it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
>of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
>perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
>ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
>it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
>does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
>everyone involved is trying, of course.
Also, this is virtually the only episode of Buffy that has a specific date
stamp. The opening tells exactly when it is occuring. It is also
supposed to be occuring just about in real time.
>Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
>alone, hearing voices and such.
[snip]
> since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
>message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
>plays out.
The salsa dance and the Anchovy Song, following the Dawn Dance in Him,
really nailed down the existence of the DOMFDD (Dirty Old Men for Dawn
Dancing).
Also, Dawn bandaging up her shredded feet (from the microwave explosion)
and soldiering on shows a nice level of toughness and determination. She
doesn't just scream and run, she fights back.
[snip Jonathan/Andrew paragraph]
"It eats you up, starting with your bottom" didn't make my sig file, but
maybe it should have.
>What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
>starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
>Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
>Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
>two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
>make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
>an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
>matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
>part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
>have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
It wasn't so much being really impressed with Azura Skye (although they
were) as it was the unavailability of who they really wanted, Amber
Benson. The two sides tell slightly differing stories, but the bottom
line, reading both sides, is that Amber just didn't want to play an evil
Tara (this echoes a previous situation, but we'll discuss it later).
>Anyway, Cassie initially claims that she's coming by just to say
>hello to Willow on behalf of someone else, with no special deeper
>purpose. This scene seems to test how long the creators can have two
>characters sitting around and talking, not even moving around in an
>animated manner. It still draws the viewer in, fixing itself as the
>one that stands out. I was hurting some for Willow, hearing that
>Tara's crying and unable to quite reach her, and then properly
>indignant on her behalf as it became clear that she was being played.
>I don't know what the red-alert moment was for everyone else, but for
>me, it was the caution against using any magic. That's obviously
>enough contradictory with the rest of what we've been told... and
>appropriately enough, our girl recognizes this, because she's good
>that way. The suicide thing is indeed too far, especially given that
>she's starting to get suspicious as it is. Looks like they're not
>kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
>trying to eliminate her early.
Nothing much to say that isn't spoilery, so guvf vf gur rknpg zbzrag gung
V xarj sbe pregnva jub gur ovt onq jnf.
>If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show, Buffy's is set up
>as the character/emotional center.
[snip]
>Plus, hey, it's another sig-quote
>("I'm here to kill you, not to judge you").
Don't know if you noticed, but the actor playing Holden is one of the
Whedon trifecta actors (well, you wouldn't notice the Angel part since you
haven't seen it yet). On Firefly, he played Tracy (the civil war buddy
cum organ smuggler) in The Message.
>Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
>we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
>twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
>field at all. Some of Buffy's worst enemies have had souls, after
>all. Questions about how long Spike's been up to this, how often
>(and why) he's siring, and how long he's been able to ignore the
>chip (was he faking the pain in "Help" for Buffy's benefit or
>something?) can be left to entice viewers to tune in next week.
>
>So those are our conversations. The stories don't seem to be linked
>by some special thematic device beyond the obvious - Warren and
>Cassie may be manifestations of the same FBY, but Holden and possibly
>Joyce aren't. Some of the advice the alleged dead give is terrible,
>but that's not universal. I'm fine to let this be a set of
>semi-isolated discussions if everyone else is.
To try and prevent spoileryness sneaking in, since, obviously, I now know
what's coming up, having watched it in the day, I'm going to resurrect my
immediate response back on November 12, 2002, posted within 20 minutes of
the episode's ending. I'm going to snip some of it, because I reached a
conclusion that I can't even hint at without doing what could be
considered massive spoilers. I'll just say that after this episode, most
of the folks posting on atbvs reached and/or agreed with the same
conclusion. So:
"Things are seldom as they seem
Skim milk masquerades as cream
First thing, I'm taking nothing in this episode at face value."
[snip speculation that is too spoilery']
"Was Cassie Cassie? No. Definitely not. Was Joyce Joyce? Probably
not, in fact, almost certainly not. Was Holden Holden? Maybe yes,
maybe no, but it doesn't really matter. He was clearly a mouthpiece,
another manipulation. Was Spike Spike? Well, lets consider the trend
so far. Is Jonathan really dead? I'm not sure even of that."
"It's a good thing for Dawn's feet that the Casa Summers likely has
enough general medical supplies to stock a triage center."
"On Willow not mourning Tara
"It hurts so much. Every day, it's like this giant hole, and it's not
getting any better."
[Certain people, still outraged about Tara's death, accused the writers of
having Willow get over it too easily at this point]
"The Big Bad's [snip] range is clearly
not restricted to Sunnydale, since it was manipulating TOG all the way
down in Mexico."
"In my in-my-own-head speculations, once the most minimal of info had
come out about this season (mostly that they were trying to get AB
back, but she wouldn't be playing Tara), I assumed that the BB would
try to manipulate Willow, and, in my mind, I always assumed the
failure would occur because it would try to push a button that Willow
would realize Tara never would. I'm happy to see that's exactly what
occurred."
"Now we get to see if characters will actually talk to each other about
important things. Even if Buffy doesn't open up, Willow should get a
real big red flag on whatever Dawn tells about what happened at the
house, given the psych attack on her the same night."
"More Morphy thoughts. He doesn't just tap into people's memories and
echo them. We've seen him mimic people fairly well that the person
he's manipulating wouldn't know (Spike and the Mayor)."
"Also, Morphy still hasn't done anybody who hasn't died yet."
"For those trying to place the singer, she's Angie Hart, the lead
singer of Frente."
End quoted stuff from the past.
>Neither Xander nor Anya is in this episode, and the only thing odder
>than that is the fact that I didn't miss them at all while the show
>was playing.
It's like Spike not being in The Body. Shoehorning them in wouldn't serve
the story being told in the episode.
And, as you note, this is the first episode Nick Brendon has not been in.
Up to this point, the three main Scoobies had been in every single
episode, now it's just Gellar and Hannigan.
--
... and my sister is a vampire slayer, her best friend is a witch who
went bonkers and tried to destroy the world, um, I actually used to be
a little ball of energy until about two years ago when some monks
changed the past and made me Buffy's sister and for some reason, a big
klepto. My best friends are Leticia Jones, who moved to San Diego
because this town is evil, and a floppy eared demon named Clem.
(Dawn's fantasy of her intro speech in "Lessons", from the shooting script)
Scythe Matters
of the opening/closing song here.
Paul Hyett
>On 17 Sep 2006 20:55:03 -0700, "Arbitrar Of Quality"
><tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>
>:Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
>:mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
>
> And, of course, you recognize him as Tracy
>from the "Firefly" episode "The Message", naq ur'f
>bar bs Wbff'f 3-sref, univat n erpheevat ebyr va "Natry"
>F5 nf Xabk.
I can't believe I never realised that before!
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
Ian Galbraith
[snip]
> So...
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
> AOQ rating: Good
Don't have time for a more detailed response but this rates an excellent
for me.
--
You can't stop the signal
George W Harris
wrote:
:Lots of continuity porn here. Crazy Jay. Nemeses. Insane troll logic. It
:goes on and on.
Wait- was Crazy Jay the guy that beat Xander
out for Class Clown?
Don Sample
George W Harris <gha...@mundsprung.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:49:01 -0400, Scythe Matters <sp...@spam.spam>
> wrote:
>
> :Lots of continuity porn here. Crazy Jay. Nemeses. Insane troll logic. It
> :goes on and on.
>
> Wait- was Crazy Jay the guy that beat Xander
> out for Class Clown?
Nope. That was Jack Mayhew.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Scythe Matters <sp...@spam.spam> wrote:
> Bar guvat jbegu jbaqrevat nobhg: gurer unir orra n ahzore bs nccnevgvbaf
> guhf sne guvf frnfba, fgnegvat jvgu "Yrffbaf" (naq zbfg abgnoyl va gung
> rcvfbqr'f svany fprar). Aba-qernz nccnevgvbaf nera'g n glcvpny guvat ba
> guvf fubj. Fb jul abj? Ohg fvapr gurer'f ab jnl sbe hf gb xabj gung
> tvira jung jr'ir frra, znlor vg zvtug uryc gb fgneg jvgu guvf dhrfgvba:
> jung qb gurl nyy unir va pbzzba? Naq unf gur fubj rire hfrq aba-qernz
> nccnevgvbaf orsber?
lbh xabj ur bayl unf gjb zber rcvfbqrf hagvy svefgrivy vf anzrq
vs ur unfag svtherq bhg ba uvf bja
jul abg whfg jnvg n pbhcyr bs qnlf
vafgrnq bs qlvat arrq gb oyheg bhg vgf gur svefg vgf gur svefg
lili...@gmail.com
Arbitrar Of Quality schreef:
This is not exactly one of my favorite eps, but it does have one
immensely memorable moment. Buffy admitting, only to Holden, but still,
that she was a monster to Spike. It's the first (and so far only)
admission that Buffy has ever given of her own bad behavior in that
relationship. In fact, it's probably the thing that made me like her
again in s7, after being pissed off with her for a while after s6.
Lore
lili...@gmail.com
>
> But acceopting the premise that Tara can't appear to Willow, what recently
> dead person that Willow knows would be an appropriate choice to speak for
> her? Warren?
>
Actually that wouldn't have been all that bad an idea. Maybe showing
some actual guilt from Willow about Warren's death and what else came
out of that.
They could have done the pain over the lost one with Xander and
actually dealing for once, just once, with his feelings over the death
of his friend Jesse. (who's a lot more mentioned in fanfic, than he
ever was on the show*g*)
Hell I would have loved to see some Xander scenes if they meant cutting
into bits of the Willow scene.*eg*
Lore
Ben Morrow
Quoth "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com>:
>
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
The original intention was for it to be Tara, but AB refused to do it,
mostly on the grounds of further upsetting Tara-lovers by having her
return as something evil. The Cassie character was pretty much entirely
invented as a substitute, and I think it's pretty amazing how much they
made me care about her in one episode, to the point where I found it
entirely fitting it should be her speaking to Willow.
Not much to say about the rest of your review: I thought the whole
episode was just beautiful; it's one of my favourite eps in the whole
series. Beyond that I'd pretty much agree with you.
Ben
--
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe: attack ships on fire off
the shoulder of Orion; I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the
Tannhauser Gate. All these moments will be lost, in time, like tears in rain.
Time to die. benm...@tiscali.co.uk
John Briggs
>
> While Webs wasn't a manifestation of FBY, it's possible that he was an
> agent working for it.
Have you considered the possibility that he might be a vampire?
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
>
> Marti wrote the Willow scenes.
Wrote, or re-wrote? Or both?
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone.
The clue is in the original script - September 29, 2002 (WHITE)
--
John Briggs
Elisi
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
>
> You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
> it.
I believe it is the only episode ever to have its name shown at the
beginning.
Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
> it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
> of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
> perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
> ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
> it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
> does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
> everyone involved is trying, of course.
Hmmm... the thing is, the execution/concept is part of the premise. It
all ties in with the season, the themes etc. But it's not easy seeing
it at this stage. Which is why 'Selfless' stood out so much more for
you I think - it built (exceptionally well) on everything that came
before. This episode is all about what's to come. And it really does a
fantastic job.
> This feels
> like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style.
It's been forever since I saw this, and re-watching the other day I was
very impressed with the creepiness factor. The furniture moving around
is classic poltergeist, but works *very* well. Although the most
unsettling moment was definitely Joyce appearing on the sofa behind
Dawn. *shivers*
> After the
> above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
> some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
She freaks, but when she realises that no one is going to come to her
rescue, she really does cope rather well. She's a fighter, even if her
powers aren't great.
> And after all that, the reward she was fighting for is disappointing
> (appropriate for the episode, just disappointing to Dawn): Mom gives a
> quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
> overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
> message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
> plays out.
Tralalalala... ;)
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes. Not speaking Mexican, Jonathan and The Other One return
> to Sunnydale seeking something undefined. The former ends up in no
> condition to tell Buffy about it, and the latter, as the lone surviving
> member of the group, may soon earn the right to be referred to by his
> real name again. He's taking advice from Warren or something that
> looks like him, and seems happier and more comfortable than ever.
I wouldn't say 'happy' exactly... but he appears to have retreated into
his fantasy world completely, and gets very uncomfortable whenever
Jonathan mentions 'real' things.
> And
> the final visual of Andrew stabbing one of our longest recurring guest
> characters, just after he's kinda starting to maybe absorb what Buffy
> was telling him in "Earshot," does its job.
Poor Jonathan... knowing how he'll end up makes watching realier
episodes very bitter sweet. Anyway, here we see the mirroring of the
Scoobies again. We have Willow/Warren (former nerds, seduced by power,
but vastly different in how they deal), Jonathan/Buffy (victim/hero, he
tries to _be_ her in 'Superstar', and has a good heart underneath
everything) and Andrew/Xander (geek roots, follow a leader that they
are attracted to, but Andrew uses magic and lives in a fantasy world,
whereas Xander is often too judgmental and is the only one without
powers). This is obviously far too brief, but I just felt like pointing
it out now. Might elaborate in future.
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
As everyone has said, they intended to use Tara (and the script has
her), but I'm actually very happy with the way things were done.
Firstly because using Tara would probably have been just that bit too
heart breaking, and secondly because Cassie is an inspired choice.
Having never met Willow, the fact that she knows so many intimate
details about her is incredibly unsettling. And Cassie could foretell
the future, which makes her warnings carry more weight...
> Looks like they're not
> kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> trying to eliminate her early.
"Not it. Me."
Excellent moment!
> And once one gets used to the unusual tone
> of these sequences, well, it helps them stand out. Something a little
> different. Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
He's very good, switching between caring and supportive, and friendly,
unapologetic evil:
"Aw, come one. I mean, we had a moment. You opened up. It was really
sweet. It make me want to bite you."
> There's a lot of angsting here, and the show does
> its best to keep things entertaining.
I just wanted to mention that I love the start of this scene, with
Buffy walking alone through the very large cemetary. This is what she
does, this is her life... is it any wonder that she feels disconnected
(despite her protestations, and the fact that she's apparently getting
along with all her friends again).
> But do we really need yet
> another episode of Buffy rambling about her bad luck with guys and/or
> how bad being with Spike made her feel (the former seems more redundant
> than the latter, which at least has some catharsis involved)? As
> pleasant as it all is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of new
> ground covered anywhere in the discussion, until the end. This part
> thinks it has something important to say, but it's not all getting
> through, at least not to this viewer on first viewing. The mixed
> superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
> and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
> someone with a vested interest. Plus, hey, it's another sig-quote
> ("I'm here to kill you, not to judge you").
This is an important scene, not so much for what's happened in the past
(although Buffy actually talking about it freely must have done her a
lot of good), but (again) for what's to come. It's a snap shot of where
Buffy's at just now. How she sees herself, her life, her calling. And
she talks about this for longer and in more depth than ever, which is
incredibly unusal for our clam-like Slayer. She doesn't confide in
people much, not even her friends because (as she says) they can't
understand:
"It is always different! It's always complicated. And at some point,
someone has to draw the line, and that is always going to be me. You
get down on me for cutting myself off, but in the end the slayer is
always cut off. There's no mystical guidebook. No all-knowing council.
Human rules don't apply. There's only me. I am the law."
> Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
> we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
> twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
> field at all. Some of Buffy's worst enemies have had souls, after
> all. Questions about how long Spike's been up to this, how often
> (and why) he's siring, and how long he's been able to ignore the
> chip (was he faking the pain in "Help" for Buffy's benefit or
> something?) can be left to entice viewers to tune in next week.
Brilliant ending. Can I say again how much I love this season? ;)
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
Definitely an excellent for me. Won't say anything about how the
conversations might be connected or not, but when you re-watch this I
think you'll enjoy it more. :)
vague disclaimer
>
> Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
> it.
Um, OMWF...
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
Elisi
Elisi wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
> > BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> > Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> > (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> > Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> > Director: Nick Marck
> >
> > You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
> > it.
Oh I forgot! The song at the start ('Blue') is by Joss Whedon and
written specifically for this episode. It's described in the script
thus:
~~~~~~~~~
Now we see the source of the sounds from the previous scene. On stage,
a BAND starts to play a mournful tune. It's full of loneliness. Pain.
You know, season six stuff.
Ken from Chicago
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158551929.8...@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Given that this one seems to a favorite of many, I'm going to
> preemptively issue a periodic reminder that if I rank an episode
> "Good," it means that I liked it and thought it was good. Just thought
> that'd be worth mentioning again. Have a pleasant night.
>
> -AOQ
It was great, but it was a shot to the gut that left me literally speechless
with the finale for an hour after the show ended. I couldn't even post
anything that night back in 2002.
After shock was fear:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer/msg/6bd0e6e1d096a73e?hl=en&
And denial:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer/msg/0e3821d50782ad15?hl=en&
And fury:
Tho it was admittedly transferred from the writers to Andrew, who caught
both barrels of. I had thrown down the gauntlet before to TPTB that if they
wanted Spike to be evil, to make him clearly unambiguously evil:
Little did I know they would picked up that gauntlet and knock me senseless
with it.
-- Ken from Chicago
rrh...@acme.com
Rowan Hawthorn wrote:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> > threads.
> >
> >
> > Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> > (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
> > Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> > Director: Nick Marck
> >
> > What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> > starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> > Willow studying. Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
> > Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
> > two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
> > make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
> > an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
> > matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
> > part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
> > have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
>
> written, but they were unable to get Amber (she really didn't like the
> idea of "Evil Tara,") so they altered it. Personally, though I agree
> that Tara was the logical choice, I think it works even better this way
> within the context of the story, by allowing the evil apparition to play
> on Willow's guilt and insecurity (never far from the surface in the best
> of times.) Willow's already grieving because Tara's gone, and one thing
> that has to be weighing on her is her inability to bring Tara back after
> successfully resurrecting Buffy; how much *worse* is she gonna feel if
> she thinks that her own actions are keeping them from communicating now?
It also helps that Azura Skye is absolutely terrific. She is so good
that I am willing to overlook her stupid name. (It does raise the
question, though, of which would be worse: that is her real name, or
she herself chose it as a stage name...)
Richard R. Hershberger
Malsperanza
Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
Another perceptive review. Because this episode is a pivot point,
balanced between summarizing the past and setting up the rest of the
season, you may wish to revisit it later. There are many pleasures
embedded in it that become visible on re-watching, and for once I think
it was written specifically to be that way.
I think it's interesting, and not happenstance or mere convenience,
that the format follows that of "Restless," the other episode with 4
unrelated stories.
Snipping to get to this:
> If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show, Buffy's is set up
> as the character/emotional center. Overall it's good, but not
> perfect. The very concept of reuniting with an old barely-acquaintance
> in this manner is pretty goofy, and takes a little while to get past,
> but it's basically an extension of a joke the show's used in the
> past, so not too jarring. And once one gets used to the unusual tone
> of these sequences, well, it helps them stand out. Something a little
> different. Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil. Seems like he
> should've known more about Buffy, even if not the Slayer thing, if he
> was there for Graduation Day. The chance to get caught up on
> classmates is oddly fun, and things like the mention of Scott work as
> both amusing continuity porn and a natural transition into Buffy
> angsting a little. There's a lot of angsting here, and the show does
> its best to keep things entertaining. The Buffy/Holden scenes seem
> like among the longest uninterrupted two-characters-talking exchanges
> of the series. The flippancy about the psychoanalysis is welcome, as
> is the way they begin a dual to the death, and then can't resist
> stopping and chatting a little longer. But do we really need yet
> another episode of Buffy rambling about her bad luck with guys and/or
> how bad being with Spike made her feel (the former seems more redundant
> than the latter, which at least has some catharsis involved)? As
> pleasant as it all is, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of new
> ground covered anywhere in the discussion, until the end. This part
> thinks it has something important to say, but it's not all getting
> through, at least not to this viewer on first viewing. The mixed
> superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
> and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
> someone with a vested interest. Plus, hey, it's another sig-quote
> ("I'm here to kill you, not to judge you").
Lots to discuss in Buffy's conversation with Holden. (And why, we may
ask, did Whedon name him for the Catcher in the Rye?) Holden is not
only genuinely likable and even decent, but he actually helps Buffy--a
lot. He's a pretty good shrink, for a grad student (and a dead one at
that) (and an evil dead one at that). So while Buffy is fretting over
her tendency to make bad romance choices and her habit of isolating
herself from her friends, she is also, in this one scene, bringing
forward one of the key problems of Buffyverse: Why is it OK to kill
Holden? Why is it OK kill vampires? This conversation does not permit
us to reply with a simple, flippant "Because they're evil." Holden's
too real, too much a person for that to suffice.
Watching the Holden/Buffy conversation, how can we not think: Gee, if
only he weren't an Evil!Dead, he'd be such a great addition to the
Scoobies. Friendly, thoughtful, full of human insight, not vicious ...
nothing he says to Buffy is obviously malicious the way False!Cassie
and (probably) False!Joyce are. In fact, some of Holden's advice may
really help Buffy overcome the isolation that has infected her and all
her team. I think it's quite possible that Holden takes the time to
talk to her because he is genuinely interested and wants to
help--coupled, perhaps, with the fact that if he is working for FBY
he's getting some good info out of her. But that's not altogether
proven; if Holden is milking Buffy for info, he's doing a much more
subtle and skilled job of it than False!Cassie and False!Joyce, isn't
he?
So, why does Buffy find it so easy to speak about these problems to
him, when she can't talk to anyone else about them? Not only because
Xander, Willow, and Giles have all become inappropriate confidantes
(and Spike is a wingnut), but because she has *always* found it easier
to confide in the Undead--starting with Angel, to whom she turned
rather than to her mom, back when she was 16. But there's something
particularly adult and thoughtful about this conversation--Buffy's
really thinking through her problems, rather than suppressing them with
an "I'll deal with it" Slayer dismissiveness. Why? Why now, and why
with Holden?
A lot of key conversations in BtVS have taken place in that cemetary,
especially those between Buffy and Giles and Buffy and Spike (OMWF,
etc.).
~Mal
George W Harris
:It also helps that Azura Skye is absolutely terrific. She is so good
:that I am willing to overlook her stupid name. (It does raise the
:question, though, of which would be worse: that is her real name, or
:she herself chose it as a stage name...)
'Azura' is her given name. Her family name is
'Storozynski', so the change is understandable.
:
:Richard R. Hershberger
--
Real men don't need macho posturing to bolster their egos.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Malsperanza
This was a great pleasure to read--thanks!
snipping to get to this:
Scythe Matters wrote:
> Buffy also has a comment about power in this episode:
>
> ---
>
> BUFFY
> I have all this power. I didn't ask for it. I don't deserve it.
And when has Buffy ever talked about whether she deserves to be the
Slayer or not? At least, not since s1, and not even then, really. And
does she mean that she "doesn't deserve it" in a good way, or a bad
way? Both, I expect. But I think the concept of deserving, which
suddenly appears here, adds a further level to Buffy's emotional
stock-taking, her inventory of issues. So it's really not a
conversation about bad boyfriend choices, is it?
> It's almost as if she's denying what she so firmly told Dawn in
> "Lessons." Or maybe her thinking on this point has progressed, and she's
> tying it into (here's my personal hobby horse) her consideration of
> fate, destiny and the issue brought up at the end of "Help."
For one thing, the reverberant prophecy "From beneath you, it devours,"
has all the mystickal magickal hallmarks of a fate-and-destiny thang.
Especially now that we have had a full range of explorations of
"beneathness," from Basement Goblins to Satanic seals over the
Hellmouth to problems of social class in dating to sexual positions:
the Buffyverse triad of themes, Under ground, Underworld, and, um,
Underwear, all make an appearance in the Buffy/Holden dialogue. Can
fate and destiny be far behind?
~Mal
John Briggs
>
> It also helps that Azura Skye is absolutely terrific. She is so good
> that I am willing to overlook her stupid name. (It does raise the
> question, though, of which would be worse: that is her real name, or
> she herself chose it as a stage name...)
I believe neither alternative to be true :-)
--
John Briggs
vague disclaimer
"Elisi" <eli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
> > it.
>
> I believe it is the only episode ever to have its name shown at the
> beginning.
Nah, it was a reprise. You know what they say: once more, with feeling.
Scythe Matters
> Another perceptive review. Because this episode is a pivot point,
> balanced between summarizing the past and setting up the rest of the
> season, you may wish to revisit it later. There are many pleasures
> embedded in it that become visible on re-watching, and for once I think
> it was written specifically to be that way.
Agreed (and also agreed on the parallel to "Restless.") I think, though
I might be forgetting something, that this is the first time the series
has so blatantly pointed to its big seasonal arc and announced, "Hey!
Look! It's starting Right Now!" It's delightfully jarring.
> she has *always* found it easier
> to confide in the Undead
Absolutely. And it also shows that not everything from last season has
been resolved:
SPIKE: I hope you don't think this antidote's gonna rid you of that
nasty martyrdom. See, I figured it out, luv. You can't help yourself.
You're not drawn to the dark like I thought. You're addicted to the
misery. It's why you won't tell your pals about us. Might actually have
to be happy if you did. They'd either understand and help you, god
forbid ... or drive you out ... where you can finally be at peace, in
the dark. With me. Either way, you'd be better off for it, but you're
too twisted for that. Let yourself live, already. And stop with the
bloody hero trip for a sec. We'd all be the better for it.
It's almost prophetic.
Scythe Matters
> And when has Buffy ever talked about whether she deserves to be the
> Slayer or not? At least, not since s1, and not even then, really.
She's taken partial ownership of it in "WttH/The Harvest," "Prophecy
Girl," "Anne," "What's My Line" and "Buffy vs. Dracula," but yeah...this
is a new, more fundamental level of self-examination. What does it
really mean, to be chosen? To be the one girl in all the world?
> So it's really not a
> conversation about bad boyfriend choices, is it?
It's sort of a "state of the Buffy Union" address more than a
conversation about boyfriends, yes.
William George Ferguson
wrote:
>One Bit Shy wrote:
>>
>> Marti wrote the Willow scenes.
>
>Wrote, or re-wrote? Or both?
From the get-go. Goddard and Espenson were the assigned writers, but they
broke up the writing of the vignettes right from the start when they
started the scripting after breaking the story (with, the breakdown as
indicated by OBS).
rrh...@acme.com
George W Harris wrote:
> On 18 Sep 2006 09:17:01 -0700, rrh...@acme.com wrote:
>
> :It also helps that Azura Skye is absolutely terrific. She is so good
> :that I am willing to overlook her stupid name. (It does raise the
> :question, though, of which would be worse: that is her real name, or
> :she herself chose it as a stage name...)
>
> 'Azura' is her given name. Her family name is
> 'Storozynski', so the change is understandable.
Hmm... I suppose 'Storozynski' is a no-go for Hollywood purposes, but
whoever chose 'Skye' didn't have to get quite so close to "azure sky".
lili...@gmail.com
> So, why does Buffy find it so easy to speak about these problems to
> him, when she can't talk to anyone else about them? Not only because
> Xander, Willow, and Giles have all become inappropriate confidantes
> (and Spike is a wingnut), but because she has *always* found it easier
> to confide in the Undead--starting with Angel, to whom she turned
> rather than to her mom, back when she was 16. But there's something
> particularly adult and thoughtful about this conversation--Buffy's
> really thinking through her problems, rather than suppressing them with
> an "I'll deal with it" Slayer dismissiveness. Why? Why now, and why
> with Holden?
>>
I don't know, I think that part of it is that she knows she's going to
stake him at the end of the conversation. It's something Spike remarks
on in his song in OMWF:
And why you come to be with me
I think I finally know
You're scared.
Ashamed of what you feel
And you can't tell the ones you love
You know they couldn't deal
Whisper in a dead man's ear,
It doesn't make it real.
Holden isn't a person, he's not someone she'll have to deal with after
the conversation, since she's going to stake him when they're done.
Now I don't mean it as something evil or pragmatic, but it's like how
it's easier to tell the deep truth to someone you see on a bus and will
never see again. She's basically talking with herself and Holden's just
there's as a soundboard for her to thave someone to talk to.
Of course he's more than that as well, but basically she wouldn't find
it half as easy to talk to someone that can later talk to her friends
and tell them what she told him.
Lore
One Bit Shy
news:1158572722.2...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> This is not exactly one of my favorite eps, but it does have one
> immensely memorable moment. Buffy admitting, only to Holden, but still,
> that she was a monster to Spike. It's the first (and so far only)
> admission that Buffy has ever given of her own bad behavior in that
> relationship. In fact, it's probably the thing that made me like her
> again in s7, after being pissed off with her for a while after s6.
Buffy to Spike when she broke up with him in As You Were. "I'm using you."
Tara and Buffy talking about Buffy's relationship with Spike in Dead Things:
Tara: I-It's okay if you do. He's done a lot of good, and, and he does love
you. A-and Buffy, it's okay if you don't. You're going through a really hard
time, and you're...
Buffy: What? Using him? What's okay about that?
Tara: It's not that simple.
Buffy: It is! It's wrong. I'm wrong. Tell me that I'm wrong, please...
OBS
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu
> A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
> threads.
>
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
> Director: Nick Marck
.
Great episode. It looks like most of what I'd like to say has already
been said. But it's either this or get back to the huge mound of work on
my desk, so I'll probably think of *something* to write.
> Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
> alone, hearing voices and such. And let me also mention that I would
> like to see some indication that the characters on the show ever eat
> anything other than pizza and dessert; kinda kills the special-treat
> status there.
Oh, we've seen them chowing down on healthy fare like breakfast cereals,
peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, and Doublepseudomeat Palace products.
Perhaps Buffy told Dawn not to buy pizza because it's too healthy? ...
Anyway, while the Dawn sequences are the least thematically significant
part of CWDP, they're also the best filmed. Buffy never did sheer horror
this well before. Interesting that Joyce appeared on the couch in the
same position that Buffy found her in in The Body, even though Dawn never
saw her that way. As with Spike's vision of the Mayor in Lessons and
Willow's vision of Cassie in this episode, we see that the FBY is not
limited to working with its victims' memories.
CWDP also has another great horror-movie bit with Andrew's visions of
Warren, especially when he's just standing there staring in front of the
door. Creepy as hell. It's a good thing for Andrew that the high school
was built with a dirt-floor basement, without any concrete to dig through.
The bit where Andrew dangles the hope of joining Buffy's team in front of
Jonathan was especially sad. I think Goddard said that Andrew's
translation "It eats you starting with your bottom" was his joke after he
(Goddard) got tired of the repetitions of "From beneath you it devours."
I love the scene between Willow and pseudo-Cassie, but I can't think of
anything to add. Has anyone drawn attention to the startling final
special effect yet? I love Amber Benson, but it's hard to imagine that
this scene would have been any better if Willow was talking directly to
"Tara." Among other things, this creates a parallel between Willow, Buffy
and Dawn, all cut off from their loved ones in one way or another.
That reminds me -- The commentary track reveals that a lot of CWDP was
hastily improvised at the last minute. If they hadn't said that, I would
*never* have guessed. To me it felt as carefully constructed as those two
episodes it's often compared to, Restless and OMWF.
> different. Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
I like his line "I just think you're in some pain here -- which I do kind
of enjoy 'cause I'm evil now -- but you should just ease up on yourself."
This is another example of vampires enjoying human suffering for its own
sake, and it also gives Holden more motive for the conversation beyond
simple intellectual interest in human psychology. He goes on, "It's not
exactly like you have the patent on bad relationships," to which Buffy
replies "Wouldn't it be cool if I did?" She would never have had to worry
about money in that case!
Another nice bit was Buffy insisting that she is connected to people, as
her phone rings unheard. Buffy keeps working on her disconnection with
family and friends; can she ever actually solve it?
> Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
> we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
> twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
> field at all.
A Joss Whedon specialty. BTW, this development could only come in
season 7; it wouldn't have seemed a quarter as interesting if it had
happened pre-soul.
> Neither Xander nor Anya is in this episode, and the only thing odder
> than that is the fact that I didn't miss them at all while the show
> was playing. This is the first Xander-free episode of the whole
> series,
Leaving Willow and Buffy herself as the only characters that have appeared
in every episode. So far. With all the spoilers flying around, I'm sure
AOQ has already heard about the string of deaths leading up to the series
finale, which consists of a 42-minute monologue by a shirtless Spike.
> AOQ rating: Good
I'd give it an Excellent. It's not one of my absolute uppermost favorites
(though it is the first season 7 episode that has a chance of making my
top 10 list, if I ever made one). But it is one of those episodes where I
keep seeing new details that I love every time I watch it.
--Chris
(candidate member, DOMFDD)
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
One Bit Shy
news:1158596938....@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> For one thing, the reverberant prophecy "From beneath you, it devours,"
> has all the mystickal magickal hallmarks of a fate-and-destiny thang.
> Especially now that we have had a full range of explorations of
> "beneathness," from Basement Goblins to Satanic seals over the
> Hellmouth to problems of social class in dating to sexual positions:
> the Buffyverse triad of themes, Under ground, Underworld, and, um,
> Underwear, all make an appearance in the Buffy/Holden dialogue. Can
> fate and destiny be far behind?
Under ground, underworld and underwear are the Buffyverse triad of themes...
Oh, my.
OBS
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
chr...@removethistoreply.gwu.edu wrote:
> Leaving Willow and Buffy herself as the only characters that have appeared
> in every episode. So far. With all the spoilers flying around, I'm sure
> AOQ has already heard about the string of deaths leading up to the series
> finale, which consists of a 42-minute monologue by a shirtless Spike.
there can only be one
One Bit Shy
news:qzvPg.22658$Mh2....@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> One Bit Shy wrote:
>>
>> Marti wrote the Willow scenes.
>
> Wrote, or re-wrote? Or both?
As I understood the commentary, the 4 parts were assigned to the different
writers from the get-go. Though everything was rushed - probably *because*
everything was rushed. So she wrote it. After they all came back to put it
together, it says that parts of the script were passed around to everybody
for re-work. Goddard, for example, spent time on the Dawn scene with the
knocking. I don't know how much of the Willow scenes were re-written, or
who did it. But I know they had to change the character from Tara to Cassie
at the last minute.
The commentary really makes the episode out to be a minor miracle. Four
writers independently writing their parts - praying that they'll come
together OK. The script delivered to the director just 3 days before
shooting - still with a bunch of vague parts in it. A last minute casting
change to bring Cassie in. Barely able to get the Nerds there - flying them
in from Europe and back just in time for an appearance of some sort. The
first cut was 9 minutes over, requiring heavy handed cutting. (Evidently
Jonathan and Andrew did a Raiders of the Lost Ark riff on digging in the
wrong place.) Production short cuts. (The monster we glimpse on top of
Joyce was the Gnarl costume painted black.) And so on. Not exactly the
carefully constructed concept piece that the opening suggests.
OBS
Stephen Tempest
>You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
>it. Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way.
One of just two in the series to get that, the other being OMWF. But
in the commentary, the writers are actually more excited about the
date and time on display - which, as you can probably guess, were
exactly correct for people watching this episode during its first
broadcast.
Also, all the events of this episode take place simultaneously over
the course of a single hour.
>For what
>it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
>of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
>perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
>ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
>it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
>does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
>everyone involved is trying, of course.
What really sticks in my memory about this episode is not any one
story, but the overall mood. It has to be one of the most atmospheric
teasers the show's ever done... the band setting up, the brief flashes
of all the characters - each of them, you'll notice, alone - the
singer starts into her song, which is also all about being alone: and
then the camera cranes up to reveal Buffy standing in this vast
graveyard stretching out in all directions; and then the vampire's
hand bursts out of the grave, and she says quietly in a voice that
isn't *quite* resigned, "Here we go...", and the title sequence
begins. Classic.
Incidentally, they went to a real graveyard to film that scene,
instead of using the Mutant Enemy parking lot as they usually did...
>Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
>alone, hearing voices and such. And let me also mention that I would
>like to see some indication that the characters on the show ever eat
>anything other than pizza and dessert; kinda kills the special-treat
>status there.
I thought the point was that Buffy was *trying* to get Dawn to eat
something other than pizza... and failing miserably?
>Thiss feels
>like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style.
Particularly liked the wall-writing: "Mother's milk is red today".
Random scariness, or hinting something to us about the apparition of
Joyce?
>Cool. No clue if there were always plans to use
>Cassie in this role or if Azura Skye impressed someone. Since these
>two characters have never met before, there's no particular reason to
>make her the messenger from the dead. Except for the fact that Skye is
>an inspired choice for the role, especially combined with the
>matter-of-fact demeanor when talking about heavy things established as
>part of the character. The more obvious apparition would of course
>have been Tara, so it's curious that they didn't go that route.
Well, in case you're curious:
INT. U.C. SUNNYDALE - LIBRARY
Back to Willow's stunned face. Tara still sits across from her, still
looking at Willow lovingly.
TARA
Hey.
Willow blinks.
WILLOW
Hey?
TARA
I'm sorry to wake you.
Willow smiles a little regretfully.
WILLOW
Ha...
TARA
Ha - what?
WILLOW
Is that like a dream joke thing? You're sorry to wake me, but I'm
clearly not awake and if I was awake and you really were here, would
you be sorry to wake me up? I mean, after all this time and - Oh God,
I'm babbling. I'm dream babbling and it's the best dream of my life
and I'm wasting it and-
TARA
(gently)
I just meant, I liked watching you sleep.
WILLOW
Oh.
Now the emotion of it all really penetrates. Dream or not - Tara is
near her. Talking to her. Loving her. Willow fights tears.
WILLOW (cont'd)
Oh... Oh God, Tara...
Tara gets emotional as well.
TARA
Shhhh, baby-
Willow reaches out to take Tara's outstretched hand, but Tara gently
moves it away. Willow looks stricken.
WILLOW
Sorry. Sorry. I didn't mean to-
TARA
(regretful)
It's okay. I want you to. But I don't think I can. Touch.
(A word of warning: in case you try to track it down, the shooting
script contains spoilers for later episodes
Specifically, it includes this line:
Abj jvyybj naq gnen (jub vf ernyyl gur svefg, angpu') snpr bss.)
> Looks like they're not
>kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
>trying to eliminate her early.
It's an interesting thought. Previous Big Bads have set out with their
evil master plan, and then tried to deal with Buffy if and when she
got in their way. This one seems to be taking the proactive
approach... it clearly knows who she is and what she (and her friends,
especially Willow - and Spike too, if we assume his earlier visions of
Buffy are coming from the same source) are capable of.
>If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show, Buffy's is set up
>as the character/emotional center. Overall it's good, but not
>perfect.
I see this scene as the _definitive_ look at Buffy's personality and
motivations. Yes, it's tied to a particular point in time and her
development, but it also covers more ground and looks in more detail
at her character than any other moment. It's one that gets referred
back to a _lot_ when discussing her personality, among people who
don't care about spoilers any more. :)
It's also noteworthy for its revelation about Buffy's personal
religious beliefs - and by extension, the metaphysics of the show:
"Well, not MY god, 'cause I defy him and all his works -- does he
exist, by the way? Is there word on that?"
"Nothing solid."
As I said in a ROT-13'd comment during the season 6 discussions: Buffy
has personally been to Heaven and returned. And yet she's still an
agnostic, and believes there's no solid evidence for the existence of
God (with a capital 'G', as opposed to the various gods and spirits
and Powers). If any mortal is in a position to know that, it's post-S6
Buffy...
Stephen
George W Harris
:
Hey, if Rip Torn can be a movie star...
--
"Intelligence is too complex to capture in a single number." -Alfred Binet
George W Harris
wrote:
:Malsperanza wrote:
:
:> And when has Buffy ever talked about whether she deserves to be the
:> Slayer or not? At least, not since s1, and not even then, really.
:
:She's taken partial ownership of it in "WttH/The Harvest," "Prophecy
:Girl," "Anne," "What's My Line" and "Buffy vs. Dracula," but yeah...this
:is a new, more fundamental level of self-examination. What does it
:really mean, to be chosen? To be the one girl in all the world?
It's like winning the lottery. Powerball or Shirley
Jackson, one.
--
"It is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a
democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every
country."
-Hermann Goering
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Malsperanza
Although to be fair, I don't think Spike's assessment is wholly
accurate--he gets some of it right, but he's also speaking from his own
bitterness and resentment and lonelyhearts frustration. He's trying to
hurt her there, because he thinks that will get through to her.
Similarly in OMWF, when he says, "Whisper in a dead man's ear/doesn't
make it real" that's only partly accurate.
In fact, I think Holden's assessment is more correct. He doesn't accuse
Buffy of wallowing in misery and martyrdom; he shows her how she's
fallen into a pattern of mistrust and self-isolating behavior, because
of her weird mixture of Slayer superiority and college-dropout/orphan
insecurity. This conversation was definitely written by someone who has
been to a shrink. They're all about Teh Patterns.
~Mal
Don Sample
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> The commentary really makes the episode out to be a minor miracle. Four
> writers independently writing their parts - praying that they'll come
> together OK. The script delivered to the director just 3 days before
> shooting - still with a bunch of vague parts in it. A last minute casting
> change to bring Cassie in. Barely able to get the Nerds there - flying them
> in from Europe and back just in time for an appearance of some sort.
Apparently Danny and Tom did their first read-through of scripts that
had been faxed to them on the plane coming back from England. Danny
just sort of skimmed through his the first time only reading his
dialogue, and none of the description parts of it, and the end told Tom
something like "Wow! This was great! I wonder what they're going to do
with Jonathan next!"
And Tom goes "Dude! Did you read it? I kill you!"
--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
Daniel Damouth
news:12gto7t...@corp.supernews.com:
> I love the scene between Willow and pseudo-Cassie, but I can't
> think of anything to add. Has anyone drawn attention to the
> startling final special effect yet? I love Amber Benson, but it's
> hard to imagine that this scene would have been any better if
> Willow was talking directly to "Tara."
It would have been about three times more horrifying and
heartwrenching, driving the episode up a notch or two. Amber's non-
appearance is one of the biggest lost opportunities of the series, in
my opinion, and I still feel a residual anger towards her about it.
-Dan Damouth
Elisi
> Lots to discuss in Buffy's conversation with Holden. (And why, we may
> ask, did Whedon name him for the Catcher in the Rye?) Holden is not
> only genuinely likable and even decent, but he actually helps Buffy--a
> lot. He's a pretty good shrink, for a grad student (and a dead one at
> that) (and an evil dead one at that). So while Buffy is fretting over
> her tendency to make bad romance choices and her habit of isolating
> herself from her friends, she is also, in this one scene, bringing
> forward one of the key problems of Buffyverse: Why is it OK to kill
> Holden? Why is it OK kill vampires? This conversation does not permit
> us to reply with a simple, flippant "Because they're evil." Holden's
> too real, too much a person for that to suffice.
See I came to the opposite conclusion. I'd forgotten a lot of the
details of the talk, and watching it again I found it very interesting.
As you say:
> Watching the Holden/Buffy conversation, how can we not think: Gee, if
> only he weren't an Evil!Dead, he'd be such a great addition to the
> Scoobies. Friendly, thoughtful, full of human insight, not vicious ...
> nothing he says to Buffy is obviously malicious the way False!Cassie
> and (probably) False!Joyce are. In fact, some of Holden's advice may
> really help Buffy overcome the isolation that has infected her and all
> her team. I think it's quite possible that Holden takes the time to
> talk to her because he is genuinely interested and wants to
> help--coupled, perhaps, with the fact that if he is working for FBY
> he's getting some good info out of her. But that's not altogether
> proven; if Holden is milking Buffy for info, he's doing a much more
> subtle and skilled job of it than False!Cassie and False!Joyce, isn't
> he?
He's as close as you'll ever get to a really nice vampire. Except:
HOLDEN
Oh, so I'm a vampire. (laughs) How weird is that?
BUFFY
Sorry.
HOLDEN
No, no. Feels great. Strong. Like I'm connected to a powerful
all-consuming evil that's gonna suck the world into a firey oblivion.
He's happy being evil. He never once argues with Buffy's 'we're mortal
enemies and have to fight to the death' - and considering how he
questions everything else she says, that's important. And there's
hitting her over the head of course:
HOLDEN
Aw, come one. I mean, we had a moment. You opened up. It was really
sweet. It make me want to bite you.
Not to mention the fact that he wants to get out and kill a bunch of
people:
HOLDEN
And fun catching up. I haven't really kept in contact with many of my
friends from high school. Guess I'll be looking them up pretty soon.
(laughs)
<snip>
BUFFY
You're not leaving this graveyard. (shrugs) Can't let ya.
HOLDEN
Do the words "superiority complex" mean anything to you?
BUFFY
You think I'm gonna let you go kill a bunch of people? You know I'm
sworn to -
HOLDEN
No, no. I get the battle against evil. That's not the issue -
A charming villain is still a villian. Holden is a wonderfully vivid
character who's obviously a lot more than your average 'Grrr Argh'
monster - which also makes him a lot more dangerous. Remember Spike
chatting up Sheila in 'School Hard'? Holden would never have gone
hungry for long...
hayes62
> A charming villain is still a villian. Holden is a wonderfully vivid
> character who's obviously a lot more than your average 'Grrr Argh'
> monster - which also makes him a lot more dangerous. Remember Spike
> chatting up Sheila in 'School Hard'? Holden would never have gone
> hungry for long...
Holden reminds me of the Mayor. A younger version but the same apparent
bonhomie and the same ability to go straight for the hurt at the end:
HOLDEN
Oh, it makes every kind of sense. And it all adds up to you feeling
alone. But, Buffy, everybody feels alone. Everybody is, until you die.
In an episode structured around our heroes' isolation from one another,
in a series in which our herione's ties to the world are the one thing
keeping her alive that's about as grim as it gets. And he makes it so
plausible.
Michael Ikeda
news:1158581705.6...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
>
>> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
>> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
>> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
>> Writers: Jane Espenson and Drew Goddard
>> Director: Nick Marck
>>
>> You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in
>> front of it.
>
> I believe it is the only episode ever to have its name shown at
> the beginning.
>
> Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
>> it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
>> of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead -
>> is perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the
>> series has ever produced. It's of course possible that the
>> execution could keep it from reaching the level of a "Restless"
>> or a OMWF, as it indeed does, but it's hard to go too wrong
>> with that premise. Assuming everyone involved is trying, of
>> course.
>
> Hmmm... the thing is, the execution/concept is part of the
> premise. It all ties in with the season, the themes etc. But
> it's not easy seeing it at this stage. Which is why 'Selfless'
> stood out so much more for you I think - it built (exceptionally
> well) on everything that came before. This episode is all about
> what's to come. And it really does a fantastic job.
Also note that this episode takes place at the same point in the
season as OMWF. Both of them are Episode 7.
--
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
news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Jonathan: Desde abajo te debora.
Andrew: "It eats you starting with your bottom."
Jonathan: Gonna make it right.
Andrew: We're outlaws with hearts of gold.
> BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER
> Season Seven, Episode 7: "Conversations With Dead People"
> (or "_Crossing Over_, with special guests The BTVS Cast...")
Would that were true.
> You know an episode's special if it gets a title placard in front of
> it. Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
> it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
> of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
> perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
> ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
> it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
> does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
> everyone involved is trying, of course.
The teaser is one of my favorites in BtVS. I like the simple elegance of
the titling - which is a great title. The connection of the band setting up
to play with setting the stage for each of the featured characters, with
eerie music of loneliness and death in the background, leading to Buffy's,
"Here we go." The only spoken words. And what a delivery. A mix of
resignation and dread. But most of all, portent. The whole segment has
that mixed mood to it. Really nicely done.
As for extolling the concept of the concept-piece - I don't know. It's a
perfectly good concept, well placed and mostly well executed, but it doesn't
strike me as all that remarkable an idea. YMMV
> Going in order of ascending interest, let's start with Dawn at home
> alone, hearing voices and such.
...
>A few entertaining moments early on, especially the
> anchovies song and the attack on the innocent wall.
Oh, yes. The anchovies song. Very good. I very much liked the whole bit
of Dawn making fun for herself at home by pretending to be slayer Buffy.
I'm not sure what all they were getting at with it - and don't want to make
too big a deal of it - but the feeling I got was a sense of warmth and
safety - like Dawn was putting her protecting sister next to her in her
mind. Whatever it is, something about that part of Dawn's story just feels
good. Which makes for a nice lead in to contact with Joyce - Dawn's ideal
of warmth and safety.
It's perhaps worth noting that the Willow and Buffy stories also start off
with the characters being put at ease.
> Once the house starts acting
> up, the images of a loud cacophony of insanity work well. Thiss feels
> like a vintage ghost story. Not much new, but done with style.
Mostly I like the horror house a lot - more than most it would seem. Yes it
draws form other sources, but that's hardly out of character with the
series. It's still exciting when much of the rest of the episode is static
and reminds us that something bad is going down.
And the creep factor really goes up a few notches when it's Joyce's voice on
the radio and Joyce's body appearing on the couch. The best action doesn't
rely on the action alone. It's the emotional connection that makes it soar.
> Dawn is yelling
> for her mom, getting thrown around, screaming, and showing a little
> backbone,
The only part of the action that fell a little flat for me was when she went
to the door and decided to stay for Mom. I understand the idea - which is
quite valid - it's just that the action didn't convey well the desire to
leave contrasted with the courage and determination to stay. The moment
seemed too easy.
That, however, is made up for with the spell. Boy does Dawn get beat up for
that.
> Mom gives a
> quick prophecy and disappears into the night. Here there's some
> overlap, since the end of Willow's story makes one wonder if the
> message is real. Either way, nothing to add - let's see how it
> plays out.
Well, the prophecy does play to Dawn's fears about Buffy, which though I
hate to mention it, were most recently shown in Him, when Buffy betrayed
Dawn for her own desires. On the other hand, Him also had Buffy there for
Dawn when it counted at the railroad tracks in spite of Buffy's other
desires. That recent memory serves to play into the ambiguity over whether
the Joyce ghost is there to help Dawn or to deceive her.
That's an interesting question. We know that Cassie was playing Willow.
It's easy to assume Joyce is doing the same to Dawn - what with the doubt
instilling message and all. But if so, then this is one clever message
delivering bad guy, because Joyce didn't just come to Dawn, she had to fight
her way through demonic obstacles with a ton of help from Dawn. Maybe the
bad guy really is clever enough to use that to convince Dawn that Joyce is
real, but this bad guy - for all his bwa-ha-ha to Willow - doesn't act like
he already holds all the cards if he/it believes he needs to take Willow out
to succeed. So I'd take seriously the idea that Joyce is the real deal.
> Well, maybe that should have ranked higher in the ascending-interest
> scheme than the returning Geek Trio, but I have a soft spot for _Star
> Wars_ jokes.
God was that funny. I'm not a huge Adam Busch fan, but many kudos to him
for playing that so perfectly. Tom Lenk is good this episode too. "We're
outlaws with hearts of gold." Man, how totally is he into his fantasy
world? The thing abut that Star Wars riff is that what led into it for
Andrew is real. "If you strike me down I shall become more powerful than
you could possibly imagine." He believes that. Even the joke itself comes
out of Andrew being so into the fantasy that he actually wonders who the
other last hope is.
But he's not Spike insane. The fantasy can't quite cover what he's about to
do to Jonathan. The telling moment for Andrew is spitefully telling
Jonathan that nobody cares about him. Andrew can't stand to hear Jonathan's
ode to loving others. This is not exactly the kind of character depth I
would have expected from the Andrew role.
> as the lone surviving
> member of the group, may soon earn the right to be referred to by his
> real name again.
I'd go with annoying virgin. Though I don't know how many opportunities
there will be to use it. Besides, since when does death remove somebody
from the show? Warren's still here after all.
> And
> the final visual of Andrew stabbing one of our longest recurring guest
> characters, just after he's kinda starting to maybe absorb what Buffy
> was telling him in "Earshot," does its job.
Jonathan got an arc out of this. I think it's kind of nice that they went
through the effort of bringing some closure to his character journey rather
than just off him.
And then for his blood to pool across that evil design - well, that can't be
good. I mean, I assume he must have been sacrificed for a reason.
I love the whole Nerd part. Perhaps not as provoking as Buffy's
conversation, but not as belabored either.
> What may end up being the most important conversation of the episode
> starts off very innocuously, with a ghost just wandering in to find
> Willow studying. Cool.
...
> Looks like they're not
> kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> trying to eliminate her early.
Personally, I find the Willow conversation to be the least interesting of
the episode. Yes, the Cassie performance is wonderful - an inspired choice
since they couldn't get Amber Benson to do Tara. But I'm sorry, I don't buy
into the notion that Cassie worked out better than Tara would have. I think
these scenes are seriously wounded by not having Tara there. Especially the
later parts.
Think of Tara telling Willow that she'll kill everyone. Tara telling Willow
to suicide. Willow having to challenge Tara who she really is. Tara
describing how the suicide would work - complete with Indigo Girls. Tara
doing the bwa-ha-ha and saying, "Not it. Me." Me - Tara.
It's just so much more harrowing for that to come from Tara's mouth with
Tara's voice. What we actually get is way subdued through its indirectness.
The ending not on par with Joyce's appearance, Spike's vampire attack and
Jonathan's blood draining - but it would have been with Tara saying, "Me."
But that was not to be, and there still are some notions of note in the
conversation. You pointed out that Willow must matter to whoever this evil
thing is. Perhaps more importantly (though I suppose obvious) is that it's
her magic that matters. The thing that Willow is scared to touch. Giles
told her that she was needed, but I don't get the impression that Willow
much wants to be needed that way.
> If Willow's chat is the plot center of the show,
Do you really think so?
> Buffy's is set up
> as the character/emotional center. Overall it's good, but not
> perfect.
I don't have a lot to say about your comments. I think the dialog and
alternating fight/talk/fight & talk is extremely clever and sharp. But
there sure is a lot of it. I don't object to you finding it rambling at
times with a fair amount of rehashing. It's certainly not bad, but I know
that in rewatching it my pleasure in it rises and falls some. Still, you'll
never find so much introspection from Buffy. Not expressed anyway. Worth
remembering and referencing for that alone.
Two things I want to point to. With various arguments about who hurt each
other more that never seem to quite end, Buffy seems to pretty point blank
say that there was a duality of that in her affair with Spike.
Secondly, Malsperanza brings up how this conversation broaches the subject
of when it's OK to kill vampires. I don't think it actually goes that far
with that question per se. (Nor do I think that Buffy is really all that
conflicted about it.) But it does offer this - one of my favorite lines of
the episode:
Holden: Are you killing me 'cause I'm evil or because you opened up?
Forget about Holden and vampires. They're not the point. It's about who
Buffy is. It goes to the superiority complex, and I am the law, and whether
it's even possible for her to decide these things for other than selfish
reasons. The influence of selfish desires was a big part of her argument
with Xander. Yeah, she won that by invoking Angel. But she still side
stepped the Spike issue. (How interesting that the Holden conversation ends
with learning that Spike had sired him. Can Buffy run from that issue any
more?)
Who the hell is Buffy to be making these decisions anyway? Buffy herself
says here that she didn't ask for the job and doesn't deserve it.
Having said that, I think I'll leave it to prompt its own thoughts.
> The mixed
> superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
> and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
> someone with a vested interest.
I'm not terribly fond of that expression - it's so psycho-babble. And
college freshman clever. But the sentiment of the conflict within her is
still worthy. I'd point to the season opener statement that it's about the
power. Buffy's calling - this power placed on her alone puts her in this
"superior" position. But it's still just Buffy inside. Is she the power?
Or does the power own her? Do these questions remind you of anybody else?
> Twice, Spike and some woman are shown, briefly, just long enough that
> we'll remember their existence. That paves way for quite a good plot
> twist, one of those that's unexpected but doesn't seem out of left
> field at all. Some of Buffy's worst enemies have had souls, after
> all. Questions about how long Spike's been up to this, how often
> (and why) he's siring, and how long he's been able to ignore the
> chip (was he faking the pain in "Help" for Buffy's benefit or
> something?) can be left to entice viewers to tune in next week.
All I can say is whoa! That can't be good.
Pretty shocking. That along with Jonathan's end are what made me quake this
episode.
> So...
>
> One-sentence summary: Unique and interesting.
>
> AOQ rating: Good
The neat thing about reviewing this season is that finally, it's a season
that I watched as it aired, and I can recall first impressions.
My initial impression of this episode was that there was an awful lot to
take in. More than I was ready to comprehend. Upon a little reflection,
two things stood out. First that it was a kind of dividing line. A whole
bunch of things in the episode that looked back - which, frankly, most of
the season has so far. But everybody's eyes turn towards whats coming by
the end.
Second was that the proverbial guantlet had been thrown down. This was a
hell of an announcement that the Big Bad is here. And this time he's coming
after the Scoobies. That's rather unusual. Normally the Big Bad has
his/her agenda and then runs into Buffy.
And obviously there's something immediate going on with Spike and Jonathan's
sacrafice.
But for all that there was something incredibly vague about the episode too.
And for all that I know of what's to come now, it still feels vague to me
today. BtVS has always enjoyed being oblique about things. But boy, does
this feel like it's its own art form.
I like this episode, but clearly not as much as others. I'd rate it Good.
There are cool things in it. Lots to think about. And a very dramatic
closing. Other things I'm not so fond of. Especially the Willow section,
which seems to tell me the least and isn't as scary in the end. (Though
that is one cool special effect the way Cassie disappears.) And for all the
suggestive things to think about, at this point they don't take me that far.
It's not a great episode for me.
OBS
Malsperanza
All true, to be sure. But there's a curious disconnect between what
Holden says and how he is presented to us. What he says is in line with
what other plausible villains have said. What he *does* is help Buffy.
What we *see* is a nice guy with a good sense of irony and humor. So I
ask: Why would the show present this key conversation in that way?
Frex, I don't connect Holden with the Mayor, though I know others have
made that comparison. The Mayor was a bag of slime, a phony, smarmy
parody of a glad-handing politician. He was oily and smirky and wholly
unlikable, *except* in his genuine fondness for Faith. Holden isn't
slimy or phony; he speaks with honesty and insight. And oh yeah, BTW,
he's evil. People who have been to a shrink may find the humor in this
particularly incisive. A shrink is someone who looks and sounds a lot
like a friend, but isn't a friend and is paid to tell you unpalatable
and sometimes harsh truths.
Is it evil of Holden to remind Buffy that "We are all alone until we
die"? That's not exactly news to her, and she's smart enough to know
how much to believe it, considering the source. If anything, this
conversation helps to ground her--it clears away some longstanding
confusions she's been struggling with. But it brings sharply into the
foreground that old problem, which she voiced back in early s2, in
"Reptile Boy":
Giles: Buffy, you think I don't know what it's like to be sixteen?
Buffy: No. I think you *don't* know what it's like to be sixteen. And
a girl. And the Slayer.
Giles: Fair enough, no, no, I-I don't.
Buffy: Or what it's like to have to stake vampires while you're having
fuzzy feelings towards one?
>From the time Buffy meets Angel, this is an issue for her, though she
never stops doing the Slayer's job, and rarely acknowledges the dilemma
after this.One of the many problems Angel creates for her is that he
makes the job of Slayer much more difficult, and more morally
complicated.
~Mal
Ari
>Why is it OK to kill Holden? Why is it OK kill vampires? This conversation
> does not permit us to reply with a simple, flippant "Because they're evil." Holden's
> too real, too much a person for that to suffice.
Uh oh, sounds like Spike might have some stiff competition there for
bestest most humanest vampire ever!!! *g*
Malsperanza
Could be. But he's Still The Prettiest. (with apologies to Legolas)
~Mal
Apteryx
news:l64o-1rj5-8F178...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> In article <eelb9r$jfc$1...@emma.aioe.org>, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot
>> at
>> it.
>
> Um, OMWF...
Technically I think summoning demons is a different skill in the Buffyverse
than casting spells - in the Nerd Trio, summoning demons is Andrew's
specialty, spellcasting Jonathon's. And traditionally anyone can summon a
demon, even inadvertently - "Say the devil's name and he'll appear", whereas
spellcasting supposedly required special skill or knowledge. The skill in
demon summoning is in controlling the demon once summoned, something Xander
didn't attempt in OMWF.
But as others have said, he has cast at least one spell before accidentally,
speaking Latin in front of the books.
--
Apteryx
vague disclaimer
wrote:
> "vague disclaimer" <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote in message
> news:l64o-1rj5-8F178...@europe.isp.giganews.com...
> > In article <eelb9r$jfc$1...@emma.aioe.org>, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot
> >> at
> >> it.
> >
> > Um, OMWF...
>
> Technically I think summoning demons is a different skill in the Buffyverse
> than casting spells -
Mebbe - but in Him Willow was invoking Hecate to girlify RJ.
Mel
Don Sample wrote:
> In article <eelb9r$jfc$1...@emma.aioe.org>, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1158551703.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>A reminder: Please avoid spoilers for later episodes in these review
>>>threads.
>>>
>
>
>>>After the
>>>above comment, it's nice to see her comes through at the end with
>>>some spellcasting despite the monster's best effort to interrupt.
>>
>>Anybody in the show can't cast magic spells? When will Xander get a shot at
>>it.
>
>
> He can light fires when he speaks Latin in front of the books.
>
>
>>>He's taking advice from Warren or something that
>>>looks like him,
>>
>>But only looks like Warren to Andrew. When we see the same basement from
>>Jonathon's POV, we don't see him at all.
>
>
> And where have we seen something like that before?
>
It looked like Jonathon did see Warren, though, just as Andrew stabbed him.
Mel
Don Sample
Mel <melb...@uci.net> wrote:
That just means that FBYG can choose who does, or doesn't see him. It
chose to give Jonathan a glimpse before Andrew killed him.
Mel
vague disclaimer wrote:
Hecate is the goddess of witches. Not a demon. So I guess she was sort
of praying while doing the spell??
Mel
Mel
Don Sample wrote:
> In article <KtCdneAFk-zqypLY...@uci.net>,
> Mel <melb...@uci.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Don Sample wrote:
>>
>>>In article <eelb9r$jfc$1...@emma.aioe.org>, "Apteryx" <apt...@xtra.co.nz>
>>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>But only looks like Warren to Andrew. When we see the same basement from
>>>>Jonathon's POV, we don't see him at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>And where have we seen something like that before?
>>>
>>
>>It looked like Jonathon did see Warren, though, just as Andrew stabbed him.
>
>
> That just means that FBYG can choose who does, or doesn't see him. It
> chose to give Jonathan a glimpse before Andrew killed him.
Yes, I agree. Jonathan didn't see him until then, and it was deliberate,
showing him his own death in that moment.
Mel
Scythe Matters
> Although to be fair, I don't think Spike's assessment is wholly
> accurate--he gets some of it right, but he's also speaking from his own
> bitterness and resentment and lonelyhearts frustration. He's trying to
> hurt her there
Oh, agreed. But it's the development of an idea, introduced at least as
early as "Buffy vs. Dracula," that's finally getting around to full
realism here.
One Bit Shy
news:dsample-88FB23...@news.giganews.com...
LOL! That's a great story.
OBS
Ari
Personally, I think Orli looks better as himself. Legolas isn't even in
the same league as Spike. Besides isn't he an elf? LOL.
Now I know both Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise's lust worthiness have gone
way down, but in Interview with the Vampire they still rate high up on
the hotness scale.
As far as performance goes playing a vampire, although Gary Oldman
isn't remotely as pretty as any of the above mentioned guys were in
these particular roles, IMO he's the only actor I've seen that gives JM
a real run for his money. Might even be better. Oh well, he was
probably a source of inspiration for him anyway, as both Dracula and
Sid Vicious.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> "Don Sample" <dsa...@synapse.net> wrote in message
> news:dsample-88FB23...@news.giganews.com...
> > In article <12gtpqn...@news.supernews.com>,
> > "One Bit Shy" <O...@nomail.sorry> wrote:
> >
> >> The commentary really makes the episode out to be a minor miracle. Four
> >> writers independently writing their parts - praying that they'll come
> >> together OK. The script delivered to the director just 3 days before
> >> shooting - still with a bunch of vague parts in it. A last minute
> >> casting
> >> change to bring Cassie in. Barely able to get the Nerds there - flying
> >> them
> >> in from Europe and back just in time for an appearance of some sort.
> >
> > Apparently Danny and Tom did their first read-through of scripts that
> > had been faxed to them on the plane coming back from England. Danny
> > just sort of skimmed through his the first time only reading his
> > dialogue, and none of the description parts of it, and the end told Tom
> > something like "Wow! This was great! I wonder what they're going to do
> > with Jonathan next!"
> >
> > And Tom goes "Dude! Did you read it? I kill you!"
>
> LOL! That's a great story.
on the other hand since some characters get more air time after they die
perhaps we can get more jonath-n
Arbitrar Of Quality
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges wrote:
> it took me a while to understand why spike talking to a woman
> would be included in conversations with dead people
> until i remember that spike was the dead people
Well, now they both are.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
Wow. Just reading that is making me tremble a little bit, so I can
only imagine a filmed version. Seriously, wow. To all who say that
the Tara-less version is better, well, everyone's entitled to an
opinion and yours is wrong.
-AOQ
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
at that point it is more a soliquy than a conversation
Arbitrar Of Quality
That take works for me too.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
One Bit Shy wrote:
> "John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:qzvPg.22658$Mh2....@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> > One Bit Shy wrote:
> >>
> >> Marti wrote the Willow scenes.
> >
> > Wrote, or re-wrote? Or both?
>
> As I understood the commentary, the 4 parts were assigned to the different
> writers from the get-go. Though everything was rushed - probably *because*
> everything was rushed. So she wrote it. After they all came back to put it
> together, it says that parts of the script were passed around to everybody
> for re-work. Goddard, for example, spent time on the Dawn scene with the
> knocking. I don't know how much of the Willow scenes were re-written, or
> who did it. But I know they had to change the character from Tara to Cassie
> at the last minute.
>
> The commentary really makes the episode out to be a minor miracle. Four
> writers independently writing their parts - praying that they'll come
> together OK. The script delivered to the director just 3 days before
> shooting - still with a bunch of vague parts in it. A last minute casting
> change to bring Cassie in. Barely able to get the Nerds there - flying them
> first cut was 9 minutes over, requiring heavy handed cutting. (Evidently
> Jonathan and Andrew did a Raiders of the Lost Ark riff on digging in the
> wrong place.) Production short cuts. (The monster we glimpse on top of
> Joyce was the Gnarl costume painted black.) And so on. Not exactly the
> carefully constructed concept piece that the opening suggests.
And for anyone who's not a true fan and doesn't have the Chosen
Collection, Joss lists it in his top ten BTVS shows (the list actually
contains twleve episodes) that he didn't direct. (There're also none
that he has a teleplay credit for on this list, although one or two are
"story by"s.)
"And from scheduling conflicts, an idea is born... what if they NEVER
see each other? What if four people spend a night alone in four very
different stories, and we start it all with a song?"
-AOQ
~if anyone doesn't know, the others he gives props to are "The Pack,"
"Ted," "Passion," "I Only Have Eyes For You," "The Wish," "The Zeppo,"
"Earshot," "Pangs," "Fool For Love," "Tabula Rasa," and "Selfless"~
Arbitrar Of Quality
> I made a point, back in the third season or whenever I was still
> responding on a regular basis, that this show always finds a way to
> punish people who've done wrong. There was some disagreement, and a
> little of it from you. In retrospect, you might understand my point a
> little bit better, and this season isn't done demonstrating my point.
> Jonathan didn't actively participate in the same evil that Warren did,
> nor did he cheerlead it like Andrew, but he helped create its
> circumstances. Plus, "Superstar" had some less than good consequences.
> It's great that Jonathan was on the road to redemption here, and of
> course the show killed him for it because it's an evil show run by evil
> people, but in the end Jonathan does have to pay for what he's done.
> Disproportionately, sure, but then that's where the shock value comes in.
I'm just not entirely sure that the show doesn't punish characters just
because nobody gets off easy in the Buffyverse. Yes, there's a sense
of karma. But killing someone as he's on the road to redemption could
as easily be about maximizing pathos as about punishment. In some
cases the argument makes more sense than others (for Jonathan, it does
to a degree), but I doubt you'll ever convince me that Joyce getting
abducted in "Helpless" is any kind of payoff to "Gingerbread."
I forget, do you see the various deaths and punishments that the heroes
endure to all be karmic in some way, or are there some that're just
because life sucks? If it's the latter, how would one tell which is
which? Where does Joyce's death fit in? Tara's?
> To tell you the full tale and its consequences here would, I think,
> necessitate spoilers -- and also, others certainly know it better than
> me -- but here, Cassie is a more effective Pylea. A quick substitute off
> the bench, as it were.
Despite her scenes in "Help" dragging some, I know I'd take four
Cassie-focused episodes over four Pylea episodes. And to appease
certain members of the group, Dawn could do the Dance Of Joy.
> BUFFY
> I have all this power. I didn't ask for it. I don't deserve it.
>
> It's almost as if she's denying what she so firmly told Dawn in
> "Lessons." Or maybe her thinking on this point has progressed, and she's
> tying it into (here's my personal hobby horse) her consideration of
> fate, destiny and the issue brought up at the end of "Help." I don't
> think it's clear yet, but it's something to consider.
One thing I'm not sure of is how seriously to take that particular
line. She could just be being pouty, or it could be some kind of clue
into her headspace about either herself or the whole Slayer
institution. It doesn't seem clear.
> > Holden works as a one-show character, combining nice-guy
> > mannerisms with reveling in his new and exciting evil.
>
> There's some
> big Mercyful Fate medallion over the Hellmouth, and it's all glowy.
Heh.
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
Ben Morrow wrote:
> The original intention was for it to be Tara, but AB refused to do it,
> mostly on the grounds of further upsetting Tara-lovers by having her
> return as something evil. The Cassie character was pretty much entirely
> invented as a substitute
Okay, so was she invented in "Help" because they knew they needed a
substitute Dead Person for this one, or did they grab an already
established character at the last minute?
-AOQ
Arbitrar Of Quality
> Arbitrar Of Quality wrote:
> Well, that and if it's unconventional in some way. For what
> > it's worth, CWDP's premise - a story consisting almost entirely
> > of four non-overlapping chats between the living and the dead - is
> > perhaps the best pure concept for a concept-episode that the series has
> > ever produced. It's of course possible that the execution could keep
> > it from reaching the level of a "Restless" or a OMWF, as it indeed
> > does, but it's hard to go too wrong with that premise. Assuming
> > everyone involved is trying, of course.
>
> Hmmm... the thing is, the execution/concept is part of the premise. It
> all ties in with the season, the themes etc. But it's not easy seeing
> it at this stage. Which is why 'Selfless' stood out so much more for
> you I think - it built (exceptionally well) on everything that came
> before. This episode is all about what's to come. And it really does a
> fantastic job.
Maybe. Two things I love watching (in general, not just in this
series) are plots being set up and themes coming together. Themes
being set up tend to be a little too vague, and plots being resolved
are too often disappointments.
-AOQ
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
latter
Don Sample
"Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
The "Help" script, with Cassie in it, is dated Sept 3. The
"Conversations With Dead People" script with Tara still in it is dated
Sept 29. So 26 days after the script for "Help" was done, they were
still hoping to have Amber Benson available to do "Conversations With
Dead People."
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> > course the show killed him for it because it's an evil show run by evil
> > people, but in the end Jonathan does have to pay for what he's done.
> > Disproportionately, sure, but then that's where the shock value comes in.
>
> I'm just not entirely sure that the show doesn't punish characters just
> because nobody gets off easy in the Buffyverse. Yes, there's a sense
jonath-n was killed because ultimately he is an expendable recurring character
and btvs is willing to kill off recurring characters
to prove the situation is really that dangerous
jenny wasnt killed because gypsies cursed angel
she was killed to prove angelus was dangerous
larry wasnt killed because he was gay
he was killed because big snakes are dangerous
it was impossible to avoid all casualties
harmony on the other hand
if youve seen serenity
then you realize even buffy willow xander and giles may be killed
before the series ends
its a tragedy of life that good people dont always have a long and happy lives
people have poured useless buckets of salt over this
trying to find karma or justice or something
instead of just accepting the random cussedness of nature
or in this series just to demonstrate the seriousness of the matter
> Despite her scenes in "Help" dragging some, I know I'd take four
> Cassie-focused episodes over four Pylea episodes. And to appease
> certain members of the group, Dawn could do the Dance Of Joy.
theres always xanders snoopy dance
George W Harris
wrote:
:> Apparently Danny and Tom did their first read-through of scripts that
:> had been faxed to them on the plane coming back from England. Danny
:> just sort of skimmed through his the first time only reading his
:> dialogue, and none of the description parts of it, and the end told Tom
:> something like "Wow! This was great! I wonder what they're going to do
:> with Jonathan next!"
:>
:> And Tom goes "Dude! Did you read it? I kill you!"
:
:LOL! That's a great story.
But does it illustrate that Danny Strong only
skimmed the script, or that Tom Lenk doesn't
understand how meaningless it is to be dead in this
series?
:
:OBS
--
"The truths of mathematics describe a bright and clear universe,
exquisite and beautiful in its structure, in comparison with
which the physical world is turbid and confused."
-Eulogy for G.H.Hardy
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'
Rowan Hawthorn
>
> Despite her scenes in "Help" dragging some, I know I'd take four
> Cassie-focused episodes over four Pylea episodes. And to appease
> certain members of the group, Dawn could do the Dance Of Joy.
>
That would have lots of *other* people doing the Dance of Joy, too...
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"Occasionally, I'm callous and strange." - Willow Rosenberg, "Buffy the
Vampire Slayer"
Arbitrar Of Quality
> That's an interesting question. We know that Cassie was playing Willow.
> It's easy to assume Joyce is doing the same to Dawn - what with the doubt
> instilling message and all. But if so, then this is one clever message
> delivering bad guy, because Joyce didn't just come to Dawn, she had to fight
> her way through demonic obstacles with a ton of help from Dawn. Maybe the
> bad guy really is clever enough to use that to convince Dawn that Joyce is
> real, but this bad guy - for all his bwa-ha-ha to Willow - doesn't act like
> he already holds all the cards if he/it believes he needs to take Willow out
> to succeed. So I'd take seriously the idea that Joyce is the real deal.
So, in conclusion, ambiguous. And Joyce could be neither real nor a
manifestation of FBYG.
>. "We're
> outlaws with hearts of gold." Man, how totally is he into his fantasy
> world? The thing abut that Star Wars riff is that what led into it for
> Andrew is real. "If you strike me down I shall become more powerful than
> you could possibly imagine." He believes that. Even the joke itself comes
> out of Andrew being so into the fantasy that he actually wonders who the
> other last hope is.
> But he's not Spike insane. The fantasy can't quite cover what he's about to
> do to Jonathan. The telling moment for Andrew is spitefully telling
> Jonathan that nobody cares about him. Andrew can't stand to hear Jonathan's
> ode to loving others. This is not exactly the kind of character depth I
> would have expected from the Andrew role.
Well said on both counts there.
> > Looks like they're not
> > kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> > trying to eliminate her early.
>
> Personally, I find the Willow conversation to be the least interesting of
> the episode. Yes, the Cassie performance is wonderful - an inspired choice
> since they couldn't get Amber Benson to do Tara. But I'm sorry, I don't buy
> into the notion that Cassie worked out better than Tara would have. I think
> these scenes are seriously wounded by not having Tara there. Especially the
> later parts.
[snip]
> It's just so much more harrowing for that to come from Tara's mouth with
> Tara's voice. What we actually get is way subdued through its indirectness.
> The ending not on par with Joyce's appearance, Spike's vampire attack and
> Jonathan's blood draining - but it would have been with Tara saying, "Me."
I don't mind subdued, given that it's a subdued episode. The indirect
approach, though it wouldn't be my first choice here, takes advantage
of what the show has to work with (i.e. since Tara can't be there, it
plays up Willow's pain at her actions denying her the chance to see
Tara. And hearing that she's crying but not able to reach her). Like
you say, it's an inspired choice, and i think they do good things with
it.
> > The mixed
> > superiority/inferiority complex assessment is at least worth a look,
> > and it can be taken more seriously coming form an outsider than from
> > someone with a vested interest.
>
> I'm not terribly fond of that expression - it's so psycho-babble. And
> college freshman clever. But the sentiment of the conflict within her is
> still worthy. I'd point to the season opener statement that it's about the
> power. Buffy's calling - this power placed on her alone puts her in this
> "superior" position. But it's still just Buffy inside. Is she the power?
> Or does the power own her? Do these questions remind you of anybody else?
Oooh, nice pickup.
> But for all that there was something incredibly vague about the episode too.
> And for all that I know of what's to come now, it still feels vague to me
> today. BtVS has always enjoyed being oblique about things. But boy, does
> this feel like it's its own art form.
Yep. The simple act of foreshadowing doesn't make something a
masterpiece or anything.
-AOQ
hayes62
> All true, to be sure. But there's a curious disconnect between what
> Holden says and how he is presented to us. What he says is in line with
> what other plausible villains have said. What he *does* is help Buffy.
> What we *see* is a nice guy with a good sense of irony and humor. So I
> ask: Why would the show present this key conversation in that way?
In terms of his physical actions what Holden *does* is try to kill
Buffy. What he seems to be doing in their conversations is to treat
Buffy and her problems from the point of view of a scientist
(pyschology is a science or so I've heard) with a fascinating new
specimen to investigate. And then terminate.
> Frex, I don't connect Holden with the Mayor, though I know others have
> made that comparison. The Mayor was a bag of slime, a phony, smarmy
> parody of a glad-handing politician. He was oily and smirky and wholly
> unlikable, *except* in his genuine fondness for Faith. Holden isn't
> slimy or phony; he speaks with honesty and insight. And oh yeah, BTW,
> he's evil. People who have been to a shrink may find the humor in this
> particularly incisive. A shrink is someone who looks and sounds a lot
> like a friend, but isn't a friend and is paid to tell you unpalatable
> and sometimes harsh truths.
Aww, I liked the mayor even before Faith. Nice guy, check, good sense
of irony, check and humour, check. And so clean-living.
Holden by contrast shows no sign of being genuinely fond of anyone - he
doesn't even care enough about his girlfriend to go vampify her. He's
the kind of of shrink who takes your payment in order to tell you
things that sound just plausible enough for you think you need to come
back and pay him some more.
> In fact, I think Holden's assessment is more correct. He doesn't
accuse
> Buffy of wallowing in misery and martyrdom; he shows her how she's
> fallen into a pattern of mistrust and self-isolating behavior,
because
> of her weird mixture of Slayer superiority and
college-dropout/orphan
> insecurity. This conversation was definitely written by someone who
has been to a shrink. They're all about Teh Patterns.
> Is it evil of Holden to remind Buffy that "We are all alone until we
> die"? That's not exactly news to her, and she's smart enough to know
> how much to believe it, considering the source.
I think it serves an ultimately evil purpose. Buffy's "I am the law"
speech in Selfless is a pretty fair indication that this season she's
struggling with the problem that having fully accepted her Slayer
duties the logical conclusion of her being "the one girl in all the
world" is that she *alone* has ultimate responsibilty. The supernatural
buck stops with her. It's not simply that she's self-isolating,
although she is that too. Isolation is hardwired into the Slayer
mythology. I think to say much more would be spoilery but nothing so
far has dissuaded her of that belief and Holden's words appear to
reenforce it rather than to help her work through it. Indeed in their
final scene those very words are shown to come true. She slays him and
is left literally alone.
> Buffy: Or what it's like to have to stake vampires while you're having
> fuzzy feelings towards one?
>
> >From the time Buffy meets Angel, this is an issue for her, though she
> never stops doing the Slayer's job, and rarely acknowledges the dilemma
> after this.One of the many problems Angel creates for her is that he
> makes the job of Slayer much more difficult, and more morally
> complicated.
>
OK, I see more what you're getting at now but I think this is
different. By S5 already Buffy seemed to have adopted a simple solution
to the problem of which demons it's OK for her to slay - she lets them
go if they run away or otherwise aren't in attack mode. Its both moral
and practical - demons understand she's just doing her job (if they
don't want her to do it they can back down) and the ones who run away
are ideal candidates for spreading her fearsome reputation and
persuading others to back down pre-emptively.
Rowan Hawthorn
Just for the record, I didn't say it was a *better scene*, 'cause it's
certainly not; the scene as shot makes me hurt for Willow, but *nothing*
like the original would have (and, boy, would I have liked to see A&A
work that.) Just that it works better from the standpoint of Something
From Beneath trying to work on Willow's weaknesses to take her out of
the game early - not only does she have to live without Tara, now she
has to live with "knowing" that she's responsible for Tara's inability
to contact her and Tara's unhappiness on the Other Side. Even knowing
that her visitor *didn't* come from Tara, you know her own issues would
keep that in her mind now.
John Briggs
> In article <1158649997....@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ben Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> The original intention was for it to be Tara, but AB refused to do
>>> it, mostly on the grounds of further upsetting Tara-lovers by
>>> having her return as something evil. The Cassie character was
>>> pretty much entirely invented as a substitute
>>
>> Okay, so was she invented in "Help" because they knew they needed a
>> substitute Dead Person for this one, or did they grab an already
>> established character at the last minute?
>>
>> -AOQ
>
> The "Help" script, with Cassie in it, is dated Sept 3. The
> "Conversations With Dead People" script with Tara still in it is dated
> Sept 29. So 26 days after the script for "Help" was done, they were
> still hoping to have Amber Benson available to do "Conversations With
> Dead People."
Which shows up something that I hadn't noticed before - it rather looks as
if they shot "Selfless" *before* "Help".
--
John Briggs
vague disclaimer
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
I vaguely recall this being discussed back in the UK group - which is
where my thought about them having to wait for Benrubi to be available
comes from (I think). Seem to recall he was tied up elsewhere (ER?).
--
Wikipedia: like Usenet, moderated by trolls
rrh...@acme.com
Stephen Tempest wrote:
> "Arbitrar Of Quality" <tsm...@wildmail.com> writes:
> > Looks like they're not
> >kidding about Willow having a big part to play if From Beneath You is
> >trying to eliminate her early.
>
> It's an interesting thought. Previous Big Bads have set out with their
> evil master plan, and then tried to deal with Buffy if and when she
> got in their way. This one seems to be taking the proactive
> approach... it clearly knows who she is and what she (and her friends,
> especially Willow - and Spike too, if we assume his earlier visions of
> Buffy are coming from the same source) are capable of.
That is a good point. But it also seems to me that this Big Bad is
kind of a crappy tactician. What is it trying to accomplish with
Willow? To get her to kill herself? If so, it pushed too hard. It
should have run a longer campaign with multiple visits building up to
the idea. Or was it just messing with Willow, trying to convince her
not to use magic, and the suicide idea was just an opportunistic
attempt? Again, it pushed too hard. By bringing up the suicide, it
revealed itself to Willow. The proactive approach involves some good
(er... Bad) ideas, but the execution needs work.
Richard R. Hershberger
One Bit Shy
news:1158649863.1...@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Scythe Matters wrote:
>
>> I made a point, back in the third season or whenever I was still
>> responding on a regular basis, that this show always finds a way to
>> punish people who've done wrong. There was some disagreement, and a
>> little of it from you. In retrospect, you might understand my point a
>> little bit better, and this season isn't done demonstrating my point.
>> Jonathan didn't actively participate in the same evil that Warren did,
>> nor did he cheerlead it like Andrew, but he helped create its
>> circumstances. Plus, "Superstar" had some less than good consequences.
>> It's great that Jonathan was on the road to redemption here, and of
>> course the show killed him for it because it's an evil show run by evil
>> people, but in the end Jonathan does have to pay for what he's done.
>> Disproportionately, sure, but then that's where the shock value comes in.
>
> I'm just not entirely sure that the show doesn't punish characters just
> because nobody gets off easy in the Buffyverse. Yes, there's a sense
> of karma. But killing someone as he's on the road to redemption could
> as easily be about maximizing pathos as about punishment.
I'm of a mixed mind on this topic. A lot of times there seems to be a
special fate at work. Looking at Jonathan's story from a distance one might
see a kind of God's mercy and justice at work. The mercy to allow for his
redemption, but then the implacable justice that payment must be made.
Larry's story might be a mini-template of that. Or, I suppose, Jenny would
be the original. Other times just the payment.
But I'm not convinced that there's a careful accounting going on to keep the
scales balanced. I think the show just likes to foster that kind of feeling
frequently with its pain and death. Perhaps for the drama of it. Perhaps
for a broader theme that everything has a price - not just the bad. (The
show does, after all, like to play on the emotions of the innocent being
hurt too.) One thing I note is that almost everybody in the show has
something to pay for, so it's not like it's hard to come up with the
connection any time they suffer pain.
> Despite her scenes in "Help" dragging some, I know I'd take four
> Cassie-focused episodes over four Pylea episodes. And to appease
> certain members of the group, Dawn could do the Dance Of Joy.
Now that's humor.
OBS
Stephen Tempest
>
>That is a good point. But it also seems to me that this Big Bad is
>kind of a crappy tactician. What is it trying to accomplish with
>Willow? To get her to kill herself? If so, it pushed too hard. It
>should have run a longer campaign with multiple visits building up to
>the idea. Or was it just messing with Willow, trying to convince her
>not to use magic, and the suicide idea was just an opportunistic
>attempt? Again, it pushed too hard. By bringing up the suicide, it
>revealed itself to Willow. The proactive approach involves some good
>(er... Bad) ideas, but the execution needs work.
Possibly. But it's not the first time we've seen a bad guy attempt a
cunning manipulation of a character, then opportunistically settle for
just convincing them to commit suicide instead. From 'Amends':
JENNY
You haven't the strength to kill yourself.
ANGEL
I don't need strength. I just need the sun to rise.
He turns and walks out into the garden. Starts heading up the stairs.
JENNY
You're not supposed to die! This isn't the plan!
Jenny watches him go. After a moment, she smiles.
JENNY
But it'll do.
Since the bad guy in that episode was "Absolute evil, older than man,
than demons - very few have heard of it, fewer believe in it. But it
is a force that transcends all realities, all dimensions" it made
sense that individual mortals hardly registered in its planning. If it
could get one to do what it wanted, great... but otherwise it could
just generally torment him and make his life hell. After all, there'd
surely be another mortal along in a century or three who could serve
the same purpose - and in the meantime, Transcendant Evil just wants
to have fun.
While we don't know (yet) if the mysterious bottom-eating monster in
season 7 has a similar outlook on things as The First did back in
season 3, we can at least see it as a model for how something that
even True Demons fear might think...
Stephen
One Bit Shy
news:1158692971....@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Probably true in retrospect. But give Willow some credit. She may just be
a tougher nut to crack than appearances suggest. The Big Bad did go right
for her weaknesses. Somebody genuinely closer to giving up to start with,
or less perceptive, might have succumbed. This reminds me a lot of IRYJ
from S1 when Willow broke the spell the Internet stalker demon had over her
when it too went a step too far.
OBS
John Briggs
You're quite right - we did, and you did! I'd quite forgotten that. No,
there was actually a bigger availability problem: SMG getting married! That
meant that she was only available for four days of the fourteen day period
allowed for "Selfless". But as they say on the commentary, you can fit an
awful lot into four days. I don't think Benrubi's availability was a
problem - they shot that scene with the second unit, anyway. But SMG is
kinda important for "Help", and would need to be available for the whole
shooting period. That alone would explain why they switched round the
shooting of the episodes. (But it is interesting that they should do this
before writing - or at least before delivering - the initial scripts.) I
originally thought it was Emma's availability that was the problem, but the
script for "Help" includes a scene for her which was either dropped before
shooting or cut from the final episode.
--
John Briggs
Malsperanza
> Malsperanza wrote:
>
> > All true, to be sure. But there's a curious disconnect between what
> > Holden says and how he is presented to us. What he says is in line with
> > what other plausible villains have said. What he *does* is help Buffy.
> > What we *see* is a nice guy with a good sense of irony and humor. So I
> > ask: Why would the show present this key conversation in that way?
>
> In terms of his physical actions what Holden *does* is try to kill
> Buffy. What he seems to be doing in their conversations is to treat
> Buffy and her problems from the point of view of a scientist
> (pyschology is a science or so I've heard) with a fascinating new
> specimen to investigate. And then terminate.
The claim that psychology is a hard science, in which the patient is a
mere specimen, is dubious. It's usally called a social science or a
branch of medicine. Holden isn't investigating a specimen that
interests him intellectually; he's communicating as one old friend to
another. Even if you think he's only faking his bonhommie and warmth,
there's no indication that he's *studying* Buffy as a scientist.
Holden tries to kill Buffy at the beginning, before he recognizes her.
Once he sees who it is, he stops immediately. Both of them take time
out from their jobs to catch up, and the chat quickly turns into a
patient-doctor session. The only way to see his behavior as evil in the
rest of their dialogue is if you assume that Holden is in touch with
the FBY and is working for it--which is very possible, but there's no
evidence for or against it either way.
> > Frex, I don't connect Holden with the Mayor, though I know others have
> > made that comparison. The Mayor was a bag of slime, a phony, smarmy
> > parody of a glad-handing politician. He was oily and smirky and wholly
> > unlikable, *except* in his genuine fondness for Faith. Holden isn't
> > slimy or phony; he speaks with honesty and insight. And oh yeah, BTW,
> > he's evil. People who have been to a shrink may find the humor in this
> > particularly incisive. A shrink is someone who looks and sounds a lot
> > like a friend, but isn't a friend and is paid to tell you unpalatable
> > and sometimes harsh truths.
>
> Aww, I liked the mayor even before Faith. Nice guy, check, good sense
> of irony, check and humour, check. And so clean-living.
> Holden by contrast shows no sign of being genuinely fond of anyone - he
> doesn't even care enough about his girlfriend to go vampify her.
One could argue that vampifying one's girlfriend was not a mark of
affection but of hostility, no?
Holden strikes me as genuinely fond of Buffy, but I think that is very
much a YMMV question for each viewer. It depends on whether you think
Buffyverse vampires are or are not capable of sincere feeling. There
are a lot of general statements in BtVS to the effect that vampires are
incapable of such emotions or motives--from Giles, from various other
authorities. But then we have Spike, who even before the chip showed
real attachment to Dru. And demons... the show gets into hot water with
demons, because it both draws a distinction between demons with real
emotions, real kindness (Clem, Anya, to some extent Hallie and
D'Hoffryn, etc.) and vampires, who supposedly do not--although vampires
*are* demons. I think the show does not resolve this discrepancy.
In any case, Holden is written carefully, so that he can be swung
either way, depending on viewer preferences on this topic.
> He's
> the kind of of shrink who takes your payment in order to tell you
> things that sound just plausible enough for you think you need to come
> back and pay him some more.
I think he's written and performed in a much more sincere, er, vein.
BtVS almost always signals to us when it wants us to identify someone
as a phoney, a shyster, a pious fake. The Mayor, Principals Snyder and
Flutie, the manager of the Doublemeat Palace... the list of charming
phoneys is very long, but they all have distinct "badguy" markers on
them. Holden doesn't seem to have those markers.
> > In fact, I think Holden's assessment is more correct. He doesn't accuse
> > Buffy of wallowing in misery and martyrdom; he shows her how she's
> > fallen into a pattern of mistrust and self-isolating behavior, because
> > of her weird mixture of Slayer superiority and college-dropout/orphan
> > insecurity. This conversation was definitely written by someone who
> has been to a shrink. They're all about Teh Patterns.
> > Is it evil of Holden to remind Buffy that "We are all alone until we
> > die"? That's not exactly news to her, and she's smart enough to know
> > how much to believe it, considering the source.
>
> I think it serves an ultimately evil purpose. Buffy's "I am the law"
> speech in Selfless is a pretty fair indication that this season she's
> struggling with the problem that having fully accepted her Slayer
> duties the logical conclusion of her being "the one girl in all the
> world" is that she *alone* has ultimate responsibilty. The supernatural
> buck stops with her. It's not simply that she's self-isolating,
> although she is that too. Isolation is hardwired into the Slayer
> mythology. I think to say much more would be spoilery but nothing so
> far has dissuaded her of that belief and Holden's words appear to
> reenforce it rather than to help her work through it. Indeed in their
> final scene those very words are shown to come true. She slays him and
> is left literally alone.
That's the big question of the scene, isn't it? And really of the
whole episode: Is Buffy right in her claim that "I am the law" or is
that a huge leap into megalomania? And is Holden trying to help her
sort out the problem or is he encouraging her to take a sharp left turn
into monstrous amorality? (Presumably in a kind of Angelus-like desire
to cause misery, and/or on behalf of the FBY.)
I don't see Holden doing that. If he is motivated by Evolness, what he
may be doing is causing Buffy to doubt herself--undermining her
confidence in "I-am-the-law" to make her less effective. But the net
result of her conversation with Holden is that she seems to be somewhat
*more* confident, more focused. In other words, he seems to have really
helped her. So either the FBY wasn't involved, or the scheme backfired.
Or, of course, there may be another motive that we haven't seen yet.
I was trying to think of who Holden reminded me of, and I finally got
it: Whistler, in "Becoming Pt. 2." I wasn't here for the discussion of
"Becoming": what was the NG's consensus (hahahaha) on whether Whistler
was a good demon or a bad demon?
In any case, Buffy doesn't slay him, and he has a line that's nearly
identical to Holden's:
Whistler: In the end, you're always by yourself. You're all you've
got. That's the point.
Compare that with this:
BUFFY
I have all this power. I didn't ask for it. I don't deserve it. [...] I
feel like I'm worse than anyone. [...] Sometimes I feel-(sighs) this
is awful-I feel like I'm better than them. [...]
HOLDEN
Until you can't win. And I thought I was diabolical-or, at least I
plan to be. You do have a superiority complex. And you've got an
inferiority complex about it. (laughs) Kudos.
BUFFY
It doesn't make any sense.
HOLDEN
Oh, it makes every kind of sense. And it all adds up to you feeling
alone. But, Buffy, everybody feels alone. Everybody is, until you die.
> > Buffy: Or what it's like to have to stake vampires while you're having
> > fuzzy feelings towards one?
> >
> > >From the time Buffy meets Angel, this is an issue for her, though she
> > never stops doing the Slayer's job, and rarely acknowledges the dilemma
> > after this.One of the many problems Angel creates for her is that he
> > makes the job of Slayer much more difficult, and more morally
> > complicated.
> >
> OK, I see more what you're getting at now but I think this is
> different. By S5 already Buffy seemed to have adopted a simple solution
> to the problem of which demons it's OK for her to slay - she lets them
> go if they run away or otherwise aren't in attack mode. Its both moral
> and practical - demons understand she's just doing her job (if they
> don't want her to do it they can back down) and the ones who run away
> are ideal candidates for spreading her fearsome reputation and
> persuading others to back down pre-emptively.
It's interesting that some viewers see Holden as clearly evil and
others (well, me) don't. Maybe I'm just a sucker for anyone who likes
Vaclav Havel... that's quite a big moral authority to be citing here,
no?
~Mal
rrh...@acme.com
You do give a valid third possibility: the Big Bad is just
entertaining itself by messing with people. I just think that is the
least interesting theory. The idea of the Big Bad being a proactive
strategist is more interesting to me.
Richard R. Hershberger
vague disclaimer
rrh...@acme.com wrote:
Another possibility is that the big bad is just a tad on the arrogant
side, perhaps as a consequence of seeing how is it was to mess with
Spike's head (taking it as read that BottomEater!Cassie is the same
thing as MultiMorph!WarrenGloryAdamMayorDruMasterBuffy and Fake!Buffy in
Selfless). And Andrew's for that matter.
BottomEater would not be the first to underestimate Willow (even
vamp!Willow underestimated Willow).
vague disclaimer
vague disclaimer <l64o...@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:
> > You do give a valid third possibility: the Big Bad is just
> > entertaining itself by messing with people. I just think that is the
> > least interesting theory. The idea of the Big Bad being a proactive
> > strategist is more interesting to me.
>
> Another possibility is that the big bad is just a tad on the arrogant
> side, perhaps as a consequence of seeing how is it was to mess with
> Spike's head (taking it as read that BottomEater!Cassie is the same
> thing as MultiMorph!WarrenGloryAdamMayorDruMasterBuffy and Fake!Buffy in
> Selfless). And Andrew's for that matter.
>
> BottomEater would not be the first to underestimate Willow (even
> vamp!Willow underestimated Willow).
> --
Actually, further on this: What Spike and Andrew share is a sort of
twisted romanticism (Spike's focussed on Buffy, Andrew's on Warren).
Willow may be a romantic, but it is hardly twisted (tinged with quite
appalling pain now, for sure, but not twisted). She never idolised (or
idealised) Tara.