July 2002 Archives

July 2002 posts

Previous July 2002
More July 2002

Soulmate vs. Lover- B/A Theory -- Wizardman, 15:55:35 07/22/02 Mon

One B/A concept that I've come across on the 'Net- and one that even the ME officals seem to hint at- is that while Buffy and Angel are no lnger lovers, and are probably no longer in romantic love with each other, they are still in fact soulmates. I've wondered about what that might mean. This is what I've come up with.

To be someone's soulmate is different than being their lover. Two people can love each other with everything that they have, but a soulmate is different. Soulmates are beyond love. Your soulmate is someone whose spirit matches yours in some profound and intangible way. This person doesn't necessarily complete you- although they can- but this person IS you. You posess an empathy for and understanding with your soulmate that is on a different level than what you would feel for a lover. Having a soulmate in no way invalidates or lessens what you feel for a lover, but it means that your soulmate owns a part of you that no one else can. Even if you love another with everything else that you have, that special part of you cannot be given. That is what a soulmate is to me.

Buffy and Angel hold a deep connection to each other. They may not be in romantic love with each other anymore, and their soulmatedness doesn't lessen what they feel (or felt) for Cordelia, Riley, and Spike, but that connection exists and will probably always exist. While I would argue with anyone that says a romantic B/A relationship is impossible, I will say that it is unlikely. What I do hope to see- and hopefully soon- is a strong B/A friendship. It doesn't have to be major- for example, if we should see Faith in the upcoming season (and with ED's schedule and Faith's position on both shows, it will almost certainly be on both shows if it happens), even a "Tell the Scoobies/L.A. Gang that I said hi" would make me happy. And a crossover that doesn't end with either of the two hurt or furious would make me jump for joy. That's just me though...

[> Man, I'm with you -- AngelVSAngelus, 22:56:59 07/22/02 Mon

Possibly because I'm, as Cordelia said of Buffy in relation to ghost James in IOHEFY, "identifying much". My ex girlfriend and I have a profound connection beyond words, we just virtually ARE each other, not in the sense of their being no differences between our personalities or identities, but in the sense that we seem to share the same consciousness. We don't have to speak, we KNOW with a simple glance what the other is thinking, at all times. Its crazy. Its for that reason we're best friends, post her not wanting to be involved in a relationship right now.
I guess I sort of look at B/A that way. Their connection is one that seems to me to transcend even romantic interaction. I'd love, as you suggested, to see this kind of connection realized in a long distance friendship between the two, though I suppose with separate networks and the writer's "they're in different worlds now" position, that's kind of unlikely.
I just think of them as the type that, despite many trials and completely differing situations, never really grow apart. If they were brought together into the same room again, I'd imagine they could sit down and converse like they'd just seen each other last yesterday.

I need evil Spanish help! -- d'Herblay, 03:49:41 07/23/02 Tue

It's way too early for Julia to be up. I don't know whether anom even has regular hours these days. Malandanza seems like he'd be the perfect person to help out with Evil Spanish, but then, how much French do I know? Anyway, for various reasons, I need to get reasonably idiomatic translations of the following:

Do you want to eat my big buritto?

and

You'll do what you're told if you want to live.

Currently, I have ¿Usted quiere de comer mi burrito grande? and Usted hará lo que le dicen si usted desea vivir. The first sounds ok, but I think the second is gibberish (I've been over at babelfish again -- when will I ever learn? a foreign language? never!).

Any help would be appreciated. Also, if anyone knows what word I'm thinking of when I type deweomers, please tell me, because I'm sure there's a word that looks something like that which means "enchantments," but I can't find it in either dictionary.

[> Ok, Google thinks it's "dweomers," but . . . -- d'Herblay, 03:56:05 07/23/02 Tue

. . . hits seem to be limited to D&D and Katherine Kurtz related sites. The history of this word would seem to be up some of your alleys; can anyone tell me if the word was used legitimately before the post-Tolkein era?

Oh, by the way, this thread is OT. Or it's on-topic, but has minor spoilers for the Fanged Fic. Now I tell you.

[> [> lol, I only know it from Katherine Kurtz -- Rahael, 04:46:10 07/23/02 Tue

But she dabbles a lot in Welsh mythology - perhaps it has a Celtic origin? I could be talking rubbish, but perhaps Marie might know?

[> [> Re: Ok, Google thinks it's "dweomers," but . . . -- aliera, 05:07:24 07/23/02 Tue

Do you mean Kerr, d'H, and the Deverry books?

Started in 1982, based in Celtic; but, she says that the magic system owes more to Jewish. Suspect it's the spelling that's causing you problems. Sidenote: there's a Perl connection.

[> [> [> Re: the roots of "dweomer" -- aliera, 05:27:52 07/23/02 Tue

this the result of search for (roots dweomer) which brought up 'take our words magazine', issue 102:

Question From Pjotr:

Do you know the exact meaning and etymological roots of the word dweomer? It is often used in fantasy literature as a synonym for "magic spell", but I was unable to find the word in any dictionary. can you help?

Of course we can help but, boy, those fantasy novels certainly go out of their way to use obscure words! What's wrong with straightforward words like cantrap? We are not surprised that you couldn't find this word in a dictionary. As far as we can tell, it occurs only once in medieval
literature - in a work from around 1205. Even then it does not occur alone but in the compound term dweomer-craeften meaning "magic art". It is thought to be related to the Old English gedwimer (or gedwomer)
"sorcery".

Then again, there is the song by Supertramp: "Dweomer... can you put your hands in your head? Oh no!"

Hope this helps.

[> [> [> [> Re: the roots of "dweomer" -- auroramama, 21:47:17 07/23/02 Tue

I assumed it was either Old English or Tolkien's reconstruction thereof, because it's part of his 'translation' of the language of the Rohirrim, who are wary of the magics of the Golden Wood:
"...in Dwimmordene, in Lorien..."
Or am I remembering wrong?

[> [> [> [> [> Re: the roots of "dwimerdene" -- aliera, 08:22:10 07/24/02 Wed

No, you're right.

Dwimerdene: (Roh. translation haunted valley) name given to Lorien by the Rohirrim. (bk III)

also used...

Dwimerberg: (tr haunted mtn) for the mountain in Ered Nimrais behind Dunharrow, in which was the Dark Door. (bkII)

Dwimmerlaik: (tr work of necromancy, spectre) name given to the Lord of the Nazgul by Eowyn at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. (Bk III)

I'll see what I can find.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: the roots "dwimer/dwimmer" vs "dweomer" -- aliera, 09:01:18 07/24/02 Wed

Sorry, I'm not going to be able to get the answer. Rohirrim was apparently based on Mercian Old English and I just don't find much in the way of on-line resources. Maybe someone else with a linguistics background or who knows more about how Tolkien used the vowels in this language?

Funny, mostly Perl sites again.

DWIM = do what I mean

(if only!) :-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: the roots "dwimer/dwimmer" vs "dweomer" -- auroramama, 19:31:10 07/24/02 Wed

From Ruth S. Noel's =The Languages of Tolkien's Middle- earth= (1980 edition), p. 24-25. Definitions for words of the Rohirrim:
dwimmerlaik: ME dweomerlaik 'legerdemain' from OE dwimor 'illusion'. [So Eowyn was saying, "Begone, foul magic trick"? Okay...]
The connotations are similar but not identical in:
dwimorberg: OE 'haunted mountain'
dwimordene: OE 'valley of illusion'

Does anyone have a different reference?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks auroramama -- aliera, 06:49:15 07/25/02 Thu

[> Re: I need evil Spanish help! -- Cactus Watcher, 05:55:13 07/23/02 Tue

One person close to you: Quieres comer mi burrito grande?
One person, not close: Quiere Usted comer mi burrito grande?
More than one person: Quieren Ustedes comer mi...?

The second looks like it would have a subjunctive in it which I would surely foul up, but it looks close to right. 'Dicen' as written would mean someone else besides you was giving the orders. Excuse the lack of preceding upside down question marks. A computer whiz I'm not.

[> Re: I need evil Spanish help! -- Rattletrap, 06:41:33 07/23/02 Tue

*'trap dusts off the long unused Spanish-speaking part of his brain*

CW's translations of the first one are exactly what I'd come up with. The second one is technically fine as it is, but this might be a bit closer:

Harás lo que le dicen si quieres vivir

or

. . . si no quieres morir would say "if you don't want to die," another possibility to consider.

Added sidenote: ¿Quieres comer mi burrito grande? would be the most common translation of the first in Mexico and most of Latin America. The (formal) Usted form is used only very rarely in conversation there. I can't speak for Spain.

[> Re: I need evil Spanish help! -- Purple Tulip, 07:00:23 07/23/02 Tue

Well, I've taken six years of Spanish and I've been to Spain, so my Spanish is pretty decent---what you've got sounds correct. Spanish sometimes does sound like giberish because they say a lot of words backwards, or in a different order than we do. That's why translations are sometimes not exact. If you're still not sure, then go to www.sparknotes.com and go under translator---you can translate any quote into many different languages, and I know that Spanish is there because I've used it myself!

[> Re: I need evil Spanish help! -- Malandanza, 07:17:56 07/23/02 Tue

"You'll do what you're told if you want to live."

CW translation for the first is good -- I'd use the second (familiar) unless you have a good reason for burrito eating to be formal.

As for "you'll do what you're told..." -- definitely familiar (tu form). Command would probably be appropriate here as well. Maybe "do what I tell you", or "do what we tell you" would be better (as CW mentions):

Haz lo que te digo si quieres vivir.

or

Haz lo que te decimos si quieres vivir.

As for the subjunctive after the if clause -- I don't know that it's required as the subjunctive is typically used to show doubt or uncertainty -- the subject probably doesn't have any doubts that they want to live. Still, the subjuntive is probably better grammatically, since the speaker might be expressing doubt that the subject want to live based on his current (undoubtedly foolish) actions:

Haz lo que te digo si quieras vivir.

(Do that which I tell you if you wish to live -- is how I would translate this literally)

Encantamientos for enchantments -- we had to read Cuentas de Hadas (Fairy Tales) in my Spanish classes, so I have a speacialized and almost completely useless vocabulary -- Bruja, for example, is witch, while Principe Azul is Prince Charming, enano is dwarf, etc.

[> Ok, now you're making me crazy -- Vickie, 07:24:34 07/23/02 Tue

I see you got the Spanish help you needed. So when do we see the fic for this?????????

[> [> Well, if you've been following along... -- Deeva, 09:03:11 07/23/02 Tue

Thank so very much for doing so! Currently we're released up to chapter 3. What d'H is writing would maybe chapter 13. Hang in there! It'll be out before you know it.

[> Re: I need evil Spanish help! -- Ixchel, 07:45:43 07/23/02 Tue

My Spanish is serviceable, but not great. So I checked with a Colombian friend and she translated your second phrase as follows:

Mejor que hagas lo que te han dicho o te mueres. (Best that you do as you are told or you die.)

It makes sense that if you're threatening someone you would use "tu" rather than "Usted".

Hope this helps.

Ixchel
Missing the board lately because of RL demands. :(

[> not exactly regular hours... -- anom, 11:06:24 07/23/02 Tue

...& then I couldn't get to the board for about an hour (same as last night--loaadddiiiinnnnnggggggg...). Between %^*&* Voy & my !@$%@#$ browser, I haven't been able to get my reply through till now (I hope). As for the evil Spanish, I agree w/the other posters who prefer tú to usted--the latter makes it sound like the speaker is calling the other person "Ma'am" (I'm assuming the burrito is, ahem, metaphorical, although maybe that doesn't imply anything about sexual orientation) & addressing her by her last name.

"Do you want to eat my big buritto?"

First off: burrito, double r, one t. I'd use ¿Quieres comer mi gran burrito? Usually gran means "great" rather than "big," but if my assumption is correct, that may be entirely appropriate. ...mi burrito grande just doesn't sound right to me, although it might work better if I'm wrong & you're being literal.

One question on this one: Does the scene take place in the present day, or close to it? I'm not sure burrito would be used in earlier times.

"You'll do what you're told if you want to live."

Harás lo que se te dice si quieres vivir. I'd definitely use the reflexive here, rather than lo que te dicen, which means "what they tell you." Cactus Watcher & Malandanza mentioned the subjunctive, & you could say lo que se te diga, which is more like "whatever you're told," but the indicative sounds better to me in this case. Actually, se te manda (or subjunctive mande) might be better; it has more of a sense of giving orders.

Ixchel's Colombian friend's version could also work: "Mejor que hagas lo que te han dicho o te mueres. (Best that you do as you are told or you die.)," although te han dicho actually means "they have told you," & I'd still go w/the reflexive se te dice (or se te manda), "you are told." Malandanza's "Haz lo que..." ("Do what...") is also a possibility.

BTW, if you want a laugh, try Google's translation feature. Search on a word in Spanish (or French, Italian, German, or Portuguese), & when the results come up, click on "Translate this page" for any of them. I especially recommend recipes in Spanish (enter "receta" [recipe] or any food word in Spanish)--hilarious!

Oh, & Cactus Watcher? For ¿ try Alt+0191, & for ¡ it's Alt+0161. It doesn't work on every computer, but it's worth a try.

[> [> Thanks -- CW, 13:15:46 07/23/02 Tue

Now it'll probably be another 30 years before I'd need it again. LOL.

We have complicated the issue, haven't we? And people wonder why computer translation never really works.

[> Thanks everyone! You guys are the greatest! -- d'Herblay, 13:16:14 07/23/02 Tue

For the moment, I am going with ¿Quieres comer mi burrito grande? (CW's suggestion) for the first and Mejor que hagas lo que se te manda o te mueres (Ixchel's, with a tweak by anom which I may have interpolated incorrectly) for the second, because I like the punning possibilities. Of course, now I'm doubting that there were even burritos in 1896. Urggh.

I'm disappointed that dweamors is out the window too. Using "enchantments" instead.

By the way, for those who want to produce upside-down questionmarks and all sorts of other weird characters, bookmark this. This involves simple HTML coding (you have to type &# before the number and ; after), and should work cross- platform. There's Cyrillic! (Though typing out even a word in unicode is so timeconsuming that I'd rely on a universal find/replace in a word processor to do it.)

[> [> Burritos -- Masq, 15:05:15 07/23/02 Tue

"doubting that there were even burritos in 1896"

If they did, I am almost absolutely sure they were a Mexican (i.e., Indian) food rather than a Spanish food. Don't know what you have in mind with that burrito sentence....

[> [> [> Yes, I know that. Just be patient. -- d'Herblay, 15:50:31 07/23/02 Tue

In time, all will be revealed!

[> [> [> [> Get the visual: "Naked Burritos, 1896 -- Coming Soon to a Fanged Fic Universe near You!" -- redcat (still ! cleaning her glasses & muttering 'oh, dear'), 20:23:13 07/23/02 Tue

[> [> [> [> [> Would a naked burrito be a burrito at all? -- d'Herblay, 03:52:40 07/24/02 Wed

Or just a mess?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Sure-it just wouldn't be a saucy naked burrito. -- Arethusa, 05:16:47 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> i think the idea is... -- anom, 21:22:32 07/24/02 Wed

...naked meaning w/no taco clothing it (therefore a mess), not w/no sauce (that'd be more like an undressed salad). Actually, maybe a taco-less burrito would most resemble a salad.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Right, no tortilla, no burrito, I always say . . . -- d'Herblay, 01:55:13 07/25/02 Thu

Well, I don't always say that. I do occasionally use words like "hello" and "exegesis."

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Only occasionally? -- LittleBit, 06:56:47 07/25/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> [> [> It'd be a really big taco. -- Deeva, 08:56:18 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> [> But, alas, it would be a *soft* taco -- Arethusa, 09:13:00 07/24/02 Wed

'Cause a soft taco is made with a flour tortilla, and so is a burrito.

I know, I know. Bad joke. Hey, at least I didn't say it would be a flaccid taco!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Soft is good cause hard shell tacos are... -- Deeva, 09:37:58 07/24/02 Wed

hard. And they tend to shred up the inside of your mouth. What? Was it something I said? *g*

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> They do fall apart under pressure, don't they? -- Arethusa, 11:41:35 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> Anything like "Extreme Fajitas"? (from the movie Office Space) -- mundusmundi, 06:10:06 07/24/02 Wed

Ok, now I can safely say this is the weirdest thread I've ever posted to.

Angel article on Zap2it... about Writing Helm and Spoilers S3 & 4 -- neaux, 04:55:36 07/23/02 Tue

I'm putting this up as much as I hate to put up posts with spoilers..

it wasnt until after I read half the article that I realized the bottom half contained general spoilers for Season 4. =\

here is the
Link

or cut and paste this:
http://tv.zap2it.com/sciencefiction/feature.html?27099

[> Re: Angel article on Zap2it... about Writing Helm and Spoilers S3 & 4 -- LadyStarlight, 05:56:04 07/23/02 Tue

Thanks for the link, neaux. One thing tho, there's a really annoying ad for something that blocks out a good portion of the text while everything's loading. But then it goes away.

[> [> Yes, the dreaded Pop-up ads.......hate em... -- Rufus, 06:35:16 07/23/02 Tue

[> [> Sorry LadyST!! ^_^ -- neaux, 07:43:29 07/23/02 Tue

I didnt want to copy and paste the article.. because I dont want to get the board in possible trouble with copyright issues.

I didnt know what the board had decided about reprinting articles.. so I wanted to play it safe. =D

[> [> [> Don't be sorry... -- LadyStarlight, 09:41:56 07/23/02 Tue

...it was a good article, just that the ad kinda threw me for a second. And I'm easily throwable these days. ;)

The replacement: Two Spikes? -- luvthistle1, 07:14:49 07/23/02 Tue

It occured to me that Spike has been helping the scoobies since season 5. We also haven't season much of his demon face in season 5 nor 6. Then it also, occured to me what "doc"said( S5 (forever) .Doc had said that he recognize Spike from somewhere. that he look like the guy who hang out at the corner mart: Is this foreshadowing of Spike getting a soul, or is there someone else who looks like him? Spike was also hit by that shot by that same demon that zapped Xander in "the replacement" (although it supposedly hit his lamp,would Spike had notice? Xander didn't. It would explain for his un-demon like ways after "the replacement"
suddenly he know longer wants to hurt the scoobies or ask for money for his services. That could be why he was surprise by his own actions in "Seeing Red" nor did he have any desire to bite Buffy in "Tabula Rasa". So if Toth did split Spike into two I would imagine that one of them would have all the humanity of William and the other all the evilness. Perhaps one is human but evil and the other is the Spike we know and love and who is trying to do good & is in love with the Slayer. Their seems to be Spike lookalike in Bargaining where the SG is seeing off Giles at the airport. I think It would be interesting if they are both shown next season but we don't know that there are two of them. We would see soul Spike being all good and then evil Spike and think they are the same.Therefore , he would not be like Angel nor William.
What do you think?

[> Re: The replacement: Two Spikes? -- Purple Tulip, 07:42:40 07/23/02 Tue

Soooo....are you saying that the Spike we saw last season was not the real Spike, but simply the "William" part of him? Like when Xander was split, neither half was "the real Xander"? That's a really interesting theory. I've always kinda wondered what Doc meant by what he said---if he was just babbling or if he really was foreshadowing something. I don't remember that part in "Bargaining" though- the one in the airport. Of course, if Spike really was hit, would it have had the same effect on him that it had on Xander? Xander is human and Spike is a demon---would one demon's toy work on another demon? That certainly would make for an interesting plot twist next season. If your theory is true, then all of Spike's actions this past season wouldn't be because of his love for Buffy, it would be his "William" side trying to be good. And what's interesting: We first saw Spike's love for Buffy visualized in "Out of My Mind", which followed "The Replacement". So, if Spike really was split into two, and we just haven't found out yet, then it would make sense that the very next episode is the one where we see his love begin to play out, as it's that personality that we seem to have followed throughout season six. This could also be why Buffy was able to fall for him in the way that she did, because she would never fall for evil Spike, but she possibly could for sweeter, kinder William. Hmmm...you've got me thinking now....

[> [> Well I Doubt They'll Go There, But I'd Enjoy It -- AngelVSAngelus, 08:03:00 07/23/02 Tue

For one thing, it'd be something that could be viably pulled and fit with the cannon, something late-Season 5/Season 6 Spike with a conscience can't and didn't do,IMHO. It would be an exploration of the different sides and dimensions of Spike's character without contradicting any rules.
But what would Spike split into? Xander split into two humans each with characteristics that are collectively his. Would Spike turn into two vampires, one with the romantic inclinations of William, and one with the impulsively rash, violent tendancies of Spike?
And what about the chip? Would that too replicate itself? Or am I thinking too much?

[> [> [> Re: Well I Doubt They'll Go There, But I'd Enjoy It -- Cheryl, 15:02:14 07/23/02 Tue

Very interesting theory. I'll have to rewatch those two episodes. But if that's true, where has evil Spike been all this time?

Cheryl

[> [> [> [> They're cousins, identical cousins.... -- leslie, 16:06:10 07/23/02 Tue

Obviously NiceSpike is the one who has sex with Buffy under the carpet in the crypt and wants to chat afterward, while EvilSpike is the one who accosts her on the balcony of the Bronze, etc.

[> [> [> [> The evil Spike is human -- luvthistle1, 22:45:14 07/23/02 Tue

The human part of Spike (the one that walks in daylight) has all of the evilness. If you want "Bargining" When Giles was at the airport, you will notice a Spike look alike on the plane. and in scene son the airport. Plus, Riley stated that the doctor is world (internationally) known. Where has he been? out of town. Also, it's the first time Spike didn't say"It's because I'm evil.

Next season the scoobies would have to face there worst nightmare.I think spike 's will have to face his Human half or convince the scoobies he has a soul.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: The evil Spike is human -- Jacques Regnier, 01:01:18 07/24/02 Wed

On that thought Xander had to be put back together to be whole. What do you get when you combine a human without a soul who is pure evil with a vampire who has a soul and is good. Seems to me you get Blade. A human/vampire crossbreed with all theie strength and none of there weaknesses.

Okay one question in the episode where Riley is looking for the eggs spike never denies being the Doctor but looks shocked that they're in his crypt any ideas how they got there if it was the evil human Spike's doing?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The evil Spike is human -- luvthistle1, 05:10:11 07/24/02 Wed

" I love the Blade" comparison. I never thought of that. That would be great if they do a season 8. I was just thinking, suppose Xander kills the "Human" Spike? they both would die right? or is it different with demons?

when Buffy ask him about the eggs he told her he would tell her later, after they sleep together. He Might had holding them for a friend. he was probably doing a favor for the Shark guy that he owes the kittens to , or Clem, who state to Buffy that he stays at Spike's place from time to time. He did denie about the eggs, he said he wasn't the doctor. Did you notice that he didn't say " I'm evil, remember" but Spike tried to explain himself- something that he never did before. So far we know Spike have Two friends, which is a far cry from season 4 when he didn't have any.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The eggs -- Purple Tulip, 07:32:04 07/24/02 Wed

I really thought that Spike was trying to harvest the eggs to get some money for Buffy so that she could quit working at the Double Meat Palace. In that episode (DMP), Spike did tell Buffy that she didn't have to work there, that he could "get money"---so what if this was just an attempt by to help her out, even if the methods were villianous and against the law. Spike didn't come out and say "I'm evil, rememeber?" but he did say "you know what I am, and you came to me all the same", alluding to the fact that he is still a soul-less vampire, capable of doing evil. But the fact that he would go through all of this for the his love for a woman who doesn't love him back, really says something about who he is now and who he will become next season. And if there really is an evil Spike, do you think that the good Spike knows about him? That's such an intriguing theory---and I really hope that they address the whole demon eggs thing sometime, they just kind of left it hanging there.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The eggs -- LadyStarlight, 07:40:14 07/24/02 Wed

I read something about the whole 'international arms dealer' thingie (I think it was on the BA_Gutter list, but I forget now) that basically said "How can Spike be this big international crime lord when he doesn't even have a telephone?"

Which I thought was an interesting point.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I think your right -- luvthistle1, 15:11:48 07/24/02 Wed

The human part of Spike is a big international crime lord , he's the one who left town (watch the episode when giles leave town, the airport scene) The demon spike has humanity and is in love with buffy, that stayed in sunnydale. Spike was probably holding them for a friend like he said. because after that , we see he has friends Like Clem or Shark guy. It would have made sense for Clem to stated to Buffy that he stay at Spike's place from time to time or to show he has friends. Plus, Joss said in a interview, that Spike went to Africa to get a "Soul". I can send a link if you e-mail.

Buffy's New Gig (spoilers for season 7) -- Purple Tulip, 07:20:14 07/23/02 Tue

I was thinking last night about what Buffy's going to do with herself next season. If the rumors are true, then Buffy is going to join Dawn at the newly rebuilt Sunnydale High---but what can she do there without a college degree? Well, one idea that I came up with, is that the new principal, like Snyder, is aware that the high school is on top of the Hellmouth. He/She is also aware of all of the terrible things that had happened there in the past and how the school was destroyed. So, the principal doesn't want those kind of things to happen while he/she is around, sort of a "not on my watch", kind of thing. And unlike Snyder, the new principal has been made aware of who and what Buffy is (possibly by the Council, or some other method - not really sure on that one yet), and so he offers her a position at the new high school to keep things in check and to keep the students safe. He might have to invent a position for her, one that she would not need a degree to have. ---OR--- Giles could be re-hired as the Librarian because he was so good at it before, and she could masquerade as his assistent or something while really playing superhero protector or the world. Maybe the Principal would also be made aware of what exactly Giles' role was in the whole thing and he wants him around because of his knowledge on all things demon. This would deffinately apply to the "Back to the Beginning" theme that seems to be in place for next season.

So that's what my poor tired mind came up with this morning. What ya'll think?

[> Re: Buffy's New Gig (spoilers for season 7) -- Calluna, 07:42:47 07/23/02 Tue

Ever since I heard about the whole "Sunnydale High rebuilt" spoiler, I've had this image in my mind of Willow as the computer teacher, Buffy doing security (that would nicely fit with your idea of the principal knowing who B is) and Xander as the shop teacher. It would explain why everyone is back a SHS.

[> [> Re: Buffy's New Gig (spoilers for season 7) -- _, 13:27:40 07/23/02 Tue

Yes and then Screech can be Mr. Beldings personal assistant...oh wait wrong show...:-/

[> [> Buffy's New Gig (spoilers for season 7 & previous) -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 10:22:56 07/24/02 Wed

Given Buffy's lack of credentials, & checkered record (wanted for murder, fleeing a warrant, evading justice, etc.) I think that even security guard might not be realistic.

Who was it who suggested that with the Doublemeat Palace experience she could get a job in the cafeteria . . . ?

"Buffy the Luncheon-Meat Slayer."

[> [> [> Re: Buffy, the Salami Server - ( Wrong, just really wrong) -- Brian, 19:11:04 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> Re: Buffy's New Gig (spoilers for season 7 & previous) -- skeeve, 08:10:04 07/25/02 Thu

Actually it's not clear that Buffy did anything illegal. She isn't wanted for anything and no warrant was ever served on her.
Even if she had a long and checkered official history, a potential employer who knew what was going on and wanted Slayer abilities might be willing to overlook said history.

I still think that Buffy has better money-making possibilities.
With the right marketing, people would be coming from all over to watch Buffy beat the latest and supposedly greatest challenger.
They would, of course, pay for the privelege.
Is Xander's company the only construction company in town? If not, it probably pays better than DMP.

Nimrod -- MaryAnn, 11:56:44 07/23/02 Tue

Apologies if someone has already answered this question, or if the answer is obvious and I'm just being thick, but can anyone explain to me why Spike calls Warren "Nimrod" in "Smashed"? I know all about the Biblical Nimrod - mighty hunter, builder of the Tower of Babel, overweening pride, etc., etc. And I know what Campbell says in HERO about the Nimrod/Abraham, Herod/Jesus, Massacre of the Innocents parallels. But none of this seems to relate to Warren. Well, the "overweening pride" maybe, but in "Smashed" Spike knew nothing about the world domination plans of the troika. I'm also aware of possible connections between Nimrod and Osiris, and therefore a hypothetical link not only with Willow's spells but with the demon in Spike's cave, who may be Set according to one theory. This argument posits that the pictures on the cave wall, which look rather like the fate of Warren, actually portray the death of Osiris (who was torn apart by Set). The Set theory all seems more than a bit farfetched to me (doesn't mean it's not true, of course), and while it's a nice thought that Spike's use of the name may be a foreshadowing of Warren's death, I'm sure there must be a much simpler explanation.

[> Nimrod, a little insult from grade school (IMHO) -- Earl Allison, 12:07:35 07/23/02 Tue

Could be a deep reference, but I don't think so.

More likely just an insult -- used to call people I didn't like "nimrod" in grade school and junior high :)

Take it and run.

[> [> Re: Nimrod, a little insult from grade school (IMHO) -- Robert, 13:54:28 07/23/02 Tue

>> "More likely just an insult -- used to call people I didn't like "nimrod" in grade school and junior high :)"

Ahhh yes! You must be one of the people who made my public school experience a living hell.

[> [> [> Not what I meant ... apologies -- Earl Allison, 15:07:58 07/23/02 Tue

[> Re: Nimrod -- Purple Tulip, 12:40:37 07/23/02 Tue

I really think you're reading too much into this---though I admire your Biblical and philosophical knowledge---honestly, I feel I am severly inadequate and unmatching when it comes to the insight of the posters here. But I really think that the use of "Nimrod" was just an off-hand insult, like "Dweeb", "Nerd", or "Dork", (all of which I have proudly used at one time or another in my youth, though usually in a joking reference). Hope that helped:)

[> another famous source -- anom, 20:49:21 07/23/02 Tue

I thought I remembered that someone once suggested the insulting use of "Nimrod" came from a Looney Tunes cartoon in which Bugs Bunny says it to Elmer Fudd after eluding him yet again--like a sarcastic "O mighty hunter." However, I searched on it, & found this on the alt.usage.english site (newsgroups have websites?):

"In contemporary U.S. slang, 'nimrod' means 'fool, numbskull.' Rex Knepp ingeniously suggested that the origin of this was Bugs Bunny's taunt of Elmer Fudd: 'So long, Nimrod.' Unfortunately for this theory, Jesse Sheidlower says that Random House has two citations of 'nimrod' = 'numbskull' from the 1930s, before the Bugs Bunny episode containing the taunt."

How much of this Spike was aware of is something we'll probably never know. But we can speculate forever....

[> [> Re: another famous source -- MaryAnn, 12:20:10 07/24/02 Wed

Thanks, folks. My puzzlement was due to the fact that I'm English and we just don't use "Nimrod" as an insult here(so I suppose Spike shouldn't have used it either, but he could have picked it up in the US from all his TV watching). I did a little Google hunt after posting and discovered the US slang usage though I too found that no one could trace its origin. The Bugs Bunny appearance may have popularised it, but it predates that. Given that we don't use it in England, I'm wondering if it could have had its origin in some character in a very old US movie or radio show the actual memory of which has become lost in the mists of time. I can see this is just another etymological mystery I shall have to add to my little list, along with why the mackerel is holy and what the 'H' stands for in Jesus H. Christ. But I'm getting OT here. Oh, I don't know though - mackerel... soul... hmm!

[> [> [> I think I can solve one of your mysteries... -- Belladonna, 09:05:33 07/25/02 Thu

I'm not sure how accurate this is, but from my many years at Catholic school (ugh), I alway understood the "H" in Jesus H. Christ to mean holy. Jesus Holy Christ!

Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Darby, 08:53:19 07/24/02 Wed

I'm kind of teasing together a post about Angels' cowardly tendencies when it occured to me how often responses include comments to the effect of, "But I can't talk about AtS, I don't watch it."

How many of we Buffy fanatics really don't watch Angel? And if you don't, why not? If you do, can you suggest why others should?

I'm probably not a typical respondent in this case - once I get pulled into a particular milieau, in this case the Buffyverse, I tend to follow everything that seems legitimately connected. So I watch Angel, and buy the comics written by the ME creative staff, assuming that no writer can take the time to separate out their "comics canon" from the "show canon." Otherwise I ignore the books and comics, etc. However, I also enjoy all of this stuff. I thin if you like any of the pieces, you'd like the others.

That having been said, I'm going out on a limb here and saying that this past season's Angel was a more enjoyable ride than Buffy, for a slew of reasons: Less angsty darkness, which shifted the comparison the previous year clearly to Buffy. This past year, way better secondary players / guest actors. A better plotted season arc, with almost every episode contributing in a way that usually made sense, and the payoff held together better, although one could make a case for both Saint Cordy and Dark Willow being more plot-driven and less character-driven. A better ensemble feel. More "Aha!" moments as I watch the reruns, details that zipped by originally but which are rife with portent (a phrase which I ordinarily only make ironic use of) for things down the road.

To be fair, Buffy has some advantages: This board, to squeeze whatever meaning (and beyond) there is out of every microsecond. Greater tendency to bury literary allusions and metaphors (or we're all sorely misguided). Clearer, generally more sympathetic characters, which I at least fondly remember while they act like idiots. Better quips, and just an overall better blend of humor with the drama. The great episodes are truly great. What seems like a less murky mythology. Other stuff I can't think of right now.

But hey, I like the theme songs pretty much equally...

Did I just manage to hijack my own thread in a single post?

[> In my case it's... -- Masq, 09:08:43 07/24/02 Wed

"This Angel fanatic still puts up with watching BtVS..."

[> [> I watched.. didnt and do again -- neaux, 09:14:37 07/24/02 Wed

I watched the first season.. and after the season finale.. thought to myself.. what a waste of time.. so I took season 2 off.. boy was I stupid.. and Watched all of season 3 and loved it.. and now I'm back tracking season 2.

... ... now I have my cootie shot. ?_?

[> [> But everyone knows that... -- Masq, 09:20:48 07/24/02 Wed

I identify with Angel and always have. Intellectual, broody, sensitive, awkward, that's me. And with a dark side that probably has a bit of cruelty in it, although I keep that in check better (I hope!)

Of course, I'm not identifying with the super-heroey, blood- drinking parts of Angel.

I'm not finding much to identify with in BtVS these days. Wasn't much like my early 20's.

And I'd venture to say that if one of our literary metaphor- diggers put their mind to AtS, they'd find just as much subtextual literary allusions and metaphors there. It's just no one has the balls to try.

I'm not good at the metaphory stuff myself.

[> [> Re: In my case it's... -- yabyumpan, 09:33:03 07/24/02 Wed

Quote from Masq "This Angel fanatic still puts up with watching BtVS..." I second that.

I think that AtS is still seen as BtVS poor relation. Not wanting to be the 'thrower of flames' but I do think there is a snobery thing that happens. BtVS was first and is therefore the best. I also think think that that extends to DB. He is rarely given any kudos for his work, people seem stuck in the Angel/DB of BtVS S1, even though for many people, Angelus was the best 'big bad', which was pretty much down to DB's acting skills as well as the writing.

I do try to start threads and join in any Angel threads that are going, but a lot of the time the threads catch the 'spike syndrome': all threads lead back to spike. ARRRGGG! Yes, he's an interesting character but not everything in whendonverse can be related to him.

I do hesitate a lot of the time in starting AtS related threads because I've got the feeling over time that people on this board just aren't that interested. It's quite sad how I almost leap for joy when ever there is an actual discussion about AtS. The best show, ever, IMHO

[> [> *high fives Masq* -- AngelVSAngelus, 09:53:45 07/24/02 Wed

Yeah! You read my mind and spoke my words exactly!
The ONLY disappointing element of Angel this season for me was Cordelia, the ascending-part-demon. Everything else, the tightly woven story arc, the performances on everyone's part (man, in Forgiving, David B goes from vengefully obsessed to on-the-verge-of-tears-father that's lost his son and BACK in 0.2 seconds), the twists and turns in character development (Wesley), was MUCH more satisfactory for me than anything in this season of Buffy, save most of OMWF.
Add to the usual activities of the series the wonderful ep written and directed by Joss, Waiting In The Wings, and you've got a stellar season.

[> [> [> "Lullaby" was my favorite episode of this season -- Rufus, 17:19:12 07/24/02 Wed

I still prefer "Buffy" cause I identify with her more than the tall broody guy (love Wesley, like Angel at times)...my temptation is to tell the guy to take a Prozac, but then he might get all happy....and massacre.. massacre...so that's out. But seriously...it's just personal preference, I feel both shows are very strong and I watch both of them and can't wait for ATS to come out in DVD. You mentioned WITW where the henchmen are Comedy/Tragedy...I loved that it speaks to both shows so well...life is both Comedy and Tragedy and if we were all "perfectly happy" then much of the fun in life would be gone as there would be no challange to living. And who could forget the LOA, the talking hamburger...it seems ME has something out for the Fast Food people...;) ATS can have comedy and effortlessly slide into tragedy all in a breath. In Lullaby we had moments such as Darla's water breaking all over the back seat of the car and no one wanting to sit back there with her....right to the moment she stakes herself because in the first time in ANY life she loved someone...her darling boy, the one she would never meet. After reading the info at this site there is another one that goes into the allusions and the Angelspeak The Sanctuary. There should be no complaints about Angel not having deeper meaning because besides Masq there are a few other places that have taken notice of just how worthwhile ATS (Wesley the Series) is.

My only wish is that they would de-saint or whatever, Cordy who has been the only character that got less interesting as she got more power.

[> I love Angel -- Rahael, 09:11:37 07/24/02 Wed

The only reason *I* am not analysing it to its barest bones is:

This last season is the only one I've spent on the board. I have only been getting vcd's of Buffy, not Angel. Therefore, I cannot comment adequately on it.

There are no Angel Annotations being requested by Rob. They referenced Dante this year, I'm pretty sure the literary allusions are there too in Angel - just see what a small detail in IRYJ was an allusion to Fritz Lang (Kudos to Ponygirl!) - shows you the wittyness of ME.

And finally, there is no Spike in AtS. So, we don't have hoardes of posters wanting constantly to discuss one of the main themes of AtS. We don't have enough threads!! If I were a threadstarter, I would, but I'm not and I don't.

[> [> There will be "Angel" annotations... -- Rob, 09:53:53 07/24/02 Wed

...but I want to do all the episodes of both shows in order, so when I get to the end of the fourth season of "Buffy," I'll start on the first season of "Angel," and alternate eps. That will make the crossovers much easier to deal with, for the purpose of my notes.

And as far as "Angel," I started watching at the beginning, but grew bored with all the sub-par standalone eps that populated the first portion of the season, and so I stopped watching, except for the crossover eps. I tried non- crossover eps, but still wasn't enjoying that much. Then, I began getting into the show again when "Darla" aired. And I watched for a few weeks, but then, for whatever reason, stopped. I've tried to pick it up again, but keep getting confused with what's going on, etc, because I've missed too much. I wish they'd get put out on DVD, so I could start from the beginning again, and see all the eps in order.

I will say, though, that out of the 10 I've seen from the third season of "Angel," I still love "Buffy" more. This obviously could be because I'm not as aware of everything on "Angel" as "Buffy," but just from a tried-it-a-bunch-of- times standpoint, I don't care for the characters nearly as much. And that's a big problem for me. I really hope no "Angel" fans take this as a dis. This is just my own personal feelings. I adore every one of the Scoobies. I relate to every one of them in major ways, perhaps because it is the first show I've ever seen where the characters are all my age. I started in a new high school the same year as Buffy, graduated the same year as Buffy, started college the same year as Buffy, and even took a year off the same year as Buffy! And my birthday is only 2 months after Buffy's...And I've indentified in some way with almost every experience on that show, particularly in the fourth through sixth seasons, everything from having a roommate from hell to dealing with the loss of someone I love. Angel I just can't identify with on the same level, and, when he was on "Buffy," he was never one of my favorite characters.

With that said, though, I did enjoy a great deal of the recent "Angel" episodes I've seen, and I would love to get more into it, especially since I've heard so many great things about it. And I definitely need to do so in order to do the annotations...that would be kind of hard w/o it!

Rob

[> [> [> But they are out on DVD! I have S1 and S2 Angel DVDs. -- Marie, 02:29:17 07/25/02 Thu

[> [> No Spike but there's Lindsey ! I can do Lindsey anytime ! -- Etrangere, 15:37:33 07/25/02 Thu

I think I made a lapsus :)

[> Nonono, Buffy has a much better theme song! -- Vickie, 09:14:47 07/24/02 Wed

But I do love AtS. I agree it's been "more fun" to watch this season. And I do think the allusions and complexities are there.

We've just been so busy with BtVS that we haven't turned the laser beams of our gaze to AtS yet. When we do, look out!

[> [> Personally, I side with Angel -- JCC, 11:06:51 07/24/02 Wed

I just find it a little more intresting than Buffy. That darker aspect to it is very appealing.

[> [> [> Doesn't it make you want to play the air-cello? -- Masq, 11:37:31 07/24/02 Wed

Or is that just me?

[> [> [> [> Re: I think Angels theme song is the best. -- Miss Edith, 11:49:39 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> For me it's the drum lines - on both! -- Darby, 12:15:56 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> Re: Doesn't it make you want to play the air-cello? -- Buffyboy, 14:19:49 07/24/02 Wed

As a long time Classical Music fan, I absolutely love the Angel theme. The air-cello sounds wonderful, is quite well played and its hauntingly plaintive melody is just great. The Buffy theme just isn't my kind of music; I can take it or leave it.

[> [> [> [> [> Hey BB! How's it going in your neck of the Bay Area? -- Masq, 14:44:40 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> Re: Personally, I side with Angel -- Rob, 13:25:22 07/24/02 Wed

I'm not really into that Celtic-sound of the "Angel" theme. I like the more rockin' "Buffy" one.

Rob

[> [> my band is learning the buffy theme for one of our intros... -- heather galaxy, 13:39:49 07/25/02 Thu

we're gothy, experimental (2 synths and a violin (me!)), so it won't sound like rock at all... but perhaps we should learn the angel theme as well....

hmmm...

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Sofdog, 09:24:19 07/24/02 Wed

I'm a devoted Angel viewer. The past two seasons were outstanding. Season 2 gets less credit because it ended with that annoying Pylea story, but the rest of the year had been *excellent*.

Compared to BtVS, Angel just doesn't have the same constraints. It's not a show about growing up, but simply about the struggle to do and be good. They seem to have forgotten Cordelia's supposed to be 21. Angel's past has proved some mighty rich fodder for the writers. Everything to do with Darla, Drusilla and the other vamps from his past, has been excellent. The way rituals, icons and demons are presented is on a grander scale than BtVS somehow.

I might need some time to truly articulate it. It's just a fantastic show. And the shades of gray abound. The bad guy isn't really bad. He's a crusader who hasn't had time to come to terms with the changes in the circumstances. Or he's been lied to and misdirected by other people, but he's doing what he believes is a good thing.

The layers in Angel never cease to amaze, and even gratify.

[> I do. -- Deeva, 09:25:11 07/24/02 Wed

I'm kind of in the same boat as you. If enjoy one show and they spin off another one, I'll most likely watch that one, too, thinking that I'll get a little something out of that also. But, up until recently, I didn't own a stitch of merchandising. Books, comics, action figures, t-shirts, none of it. Up until last Christmas that all changed. My friends and family having finally noticed that I love BtVS, got me what amounts to a some what scary collection of merchandising. But hey, they were gifts. But I digress.

If I really think about it, I've always enjoyed BtVS over AtS consistently. I like the blending of small comic moments that quickly get glossed over by the dramatic/scary/angsty moments. The quipping is evenly spread out through all the characters. On AtS it seems that the quippage comes mostly out of Cordy's mouth, sometimes Angel.

I agree that in this past season of AtS, they've had an awesome set of guest and secondary characters. But I won't go so far as to say that I think that it out shone BtVS.

This is hard. It's kind like trying to say which pet is your favorite. There's the one you adopted first from the pound (that's the way it should be done, people. Don't go to a pet store!) and it's great! You have fun, hang out, find out some of the cute and silly things that it does. Someone close to you sees that you love this one so much that hey!, what about another one! So they give you another pet as a gift, of which you can quite turn down, cause you know you just can't. This one takes a little getting used to and you like it and all but it's not the first pet that you chose. OK well that was certainly an interesting rambling parallel. I think I need to eat some breakfast now.

[> Angel is wonderful -- Arethusa, 09:32:36 07/24/02 Wed

and fits in better with my pessamistic world view than BtVS. I watch BtVS because I love the characters, but I watch Angel because the twists and turns never fail to amaze and delight me.

Must. Return. To Work.

[> Digging my own grave - with my handy shovel! -- ponygirl, 09:41:45 07/24/02 Wed

This of course is all my own very humble opinion but I've always had a tough time with Angel. I was an eager viewer at the start of the series, gave it the benefit of the doubt for much of the first season and spotty viewing since. I will state without hesitation that there was a 3-4 episode run around Waiting In The Wings that was utterly fabulous, but overall I have never been able to shake my initial feeling that the scripts are a rewrite or 2 away from Buffy quality. I will be watching the new season mainly for the amazing arc with Wesley. But I'll be cringing while I endure the further destruction of Cordelia's character, the continuing under-development of Gunn. And the over-reliance on divine interventions, reversals, and conventiently changing prophecies that always strike me as lazy writing.

I would definitely enjoy reading analyses of references and symbols in AtS. I love that stuff! But I've never felt that Angel could withstand the same critical regard that we turn on Buffy.

I do like the Angel theme song better though...

[> Nope -- dream of the consortium, 09:45:49 07/24/02 Wed

I never liked Angel - found the broody, mysterious thing very dull. Cordelia was occasionally entertaining, but generally not as interesting to me as my favorite BtVS characters. Buffy-period Wesley was an embarrassing cartoon who makes it difficult for me to show non-Buffy watching friends otherwise excellent season three episodes. I have to start with the apologies: "There's some cheesy monster costumes, and a wimpy British guy who's really just awful, but just ignore those parts." So when they left, I felt like someone had cleaned up my favorite show. I watched a pieces of a few episodes of Angel (my roommate watches), but unfortunately hit on the Pylea arc - can't stand swords and scorcery-type fantasy, and seeing Cordelia in that awful costume did not help my impression of the show. Because there is clearly crossover, I have gone back and read a few of the scripts, and it sounds like there's some interesting stuff going on, particularly with Wesley, but I'm not interested enough to hunt down the tapes. Life is short. I'm obsessive enough about Buffy as it is.

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Dead Soul, 09:51:49 07/24/02 Wed

I'm one of the FX parvenues (sp?) and never even saw an episode of BtVS until last fall - although to be fair to myself, my cable company didn't get the WB until January and still doesn't carry UPN. Buffy is shown on the Fox station at 11:30 Tuesday nights (and the Wed. reruns aren't being shown at all - pout).

(Sorry, this is going to be a long post, very expositiony and full of probably irrelevant personal detail. Possibly way more set-up than is justified by the payoff - I'm just saying.)

Watching the beginning of Season 6 once a week and watching the previous five seasons throughout the week was an interesting process - like reading one chapter from the back of a book then going back and reading ten chapters from the front of the book and so on (It would be a really big book). By the time the season six shows were beginning to be rerun it was like watching them again for the first time because my interest was so much greater and my understanding so much deeper.

I started watching Angel as soon as the WB was available and was promptly and completely lost. I only watched sporadically throughout the spring, in part because DB has never wound my clock, but mostly because I had no way to get the backstory besides transcripts which aren't quite the same thing. Then I discovered ATPoBtVS.

I spent hours and hours reading the archives and became more and more curious about Angel as I read the discussions. But short of begging total strangers for tapes, I didn't know what else to do. Then I ran across the magic thread. Nothing deep or philosphical, nothing funny or insightful. Just an electronics recommendation from one board poster to another. I wish I could remember who had written it - I owe them a hug!

Multi-region DVD players. I knew you could get Angel seasons one & two from overseas, but didn't know that you could get the players to play them outside of the area where they're sold. Got the player, got the DVDs, watched 'em all in one weekend - yup, all 44 eps. An experience I can either not recommend or recommend highly depending on your fondness for mind-altering substances. I had the same adrenalin, pseudo-speed rush that I had after watching the movie "Sid & Nancy" at mind-numbing volume packed cheek by jowl with 200 other punkers in a theatre in NYC. And I was an Angel convert.

So I guess my answer to the question posed by Darby is: I do. I still prefer BtVS and have serious issues with St. Cordy and over all prefer season two of Angel to season three.

An interesting theory was put forward on the board, last week I think it was. IIRC, it was that people (not everyone, obviously, but a majority) who have watched BtVS from the beginning "get" B/A and people who have only begun watching recently don't. While I think I "get" B/A - again the lack of clock winding is an issue, I also think that there is a difference between long and short timers. Long timers lived with the B/A relationship for three years. Short timers, for three months (approximately, I haven't actually sat down and figured out how long it takes FX to run through three seasons.) I think that makes a difference to the amount emotional investment people have felt in the B/A relationship.

If you've hung in this long you're probably waiting for me to get to the point. I know that when I started writing this I actually had one, if you find it wherever I've mislaid it, please let me know and thanks for reading

Dead Soul

[> [> Tried to stay on-topic but it ended up being a hijack. -- Caroline, 13:13:16 07/24/02 Wed

I'm what you call a 'long-timer' - watched from Welcome to the Hellmouth - and I adapted quite easily to Angel being gone. I enjoyed the themes and metaphors the relationship allowed ME to explore but then after 3 seasons it was enough. Angel was not only brooding (it got really boring) but selfish in his treatment of Buffy. Their relationship may have played out as a soapy, grand obsession but it was basically Angel literally and figuratively leeching Buffy dry. I agree with the people who say it's all about Buffy. And I think the reason so many people prefer Buffy and Spike together is that, for Spike, it's also all about Buffy. Angel, Parker, Riley were all about themselves. That's why there are so many women out there who swoon about Spike - he really does have a grand, magnificent obsession about Buffy and so many fans, particularly women, thrill to that in their romantic heart of hearts. I'm not a redemptionista or whatever you call the people for whom it's all about Spike, I'm just giving my humble opinion.

[> [> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Cheryl, 16:01:39 07/24/02 Wed

"I'm one of the FX parvenues (sp?) and never even saw an episode of BtVS until last fall"

My story exactly - somehow caught Buffy on FX at the beginning of this past season and was hooked so started watching Season 6 after it started and have since seen every episode since Season 1. I didn't start watching AtS until probably mid-season and it hasn't grabbed me like BtVS. It's a little too dark for me (kinda like DS9 vs the other Treks) and most of the characters don't interest me, although I am caught up in the story arc now and will watch next season.

I was never that taken with DB in BtVS, except for when he was Angelus - and then I thought he was excellent. I don't like what they're doing with Cordy's character and could care less about Gunn and Fred. I do like what they've done with Wesley, though, and I like Lorne. There's enough substance there for me to continue watching, but I don't think it will ever replace BtVS in my heart. :-)

Cheryl

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Cactus Watcher, 09:58:11 07/24/02 Wed

I run hot and cold on Angel. I thought the first season was great. I disliked the second season mostly because I don't like Julie Benz's acting and Darla was central to the story. I liked most of last season, but thought teenage Connor was too much to take. The way he acted made sense. I just wasn't in the market for that kind of story. For me, Angel had enough guilt problems without all this.

I'm not sure I'll be watching Angel in the fall. Sunday turns out to be a night I'm not interested in TV. Haven't seen one Angel rerun this summer. Maybe I'll tape it and watch it on Monday.

[> [> Further problems with me watching "Angel"... -- Rob, 10:02:35 07/24/02 Wed

If it's on Sunday nights, I already have two simultaneous shows on Sunday nights...Alias on ABC, and Sopranos/Sex and the City/Six Feet Under/Oz (whichever's airing at the time) on HBO. Can't tape three things at once! Grr aargh!

Rob

[> [> [> Re: Further problems with me watching "Angel"... -- MaeveRigan, 10:46:46 07/24/02 Wed

Rob, you can easily solve that nagging little Sunday night "Angel" problem by just saying no to HBO ;-)

"Alias" is trickier, but since it never really wound my clock (to borrow a phrase from Dead Soul), not a problem for me.

But by the time you get to annotating "Angel," DVDs! Love the annotations!

[> [> [> Re: Further problems with me watching "Angel"... -- Deeva, 10:56:22 07/24/02 Wed

I've got the EXACT same problem!! Between HBO (did you know that the upcoming season of OZ will be the last?) Alias and Angel, I'm scrathing my head. My sister watches these shows too but she's too unreliable. Love her to death but has like no memory! *sigh* At least I have a couple of months to figure it out.

[> [> [> [> Tape two, watch the third one live? -- Vickie, 11:03:19 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Tape two, watch the third one live-- absolutely, VCR's are super cheap these days. -- OnM, 19:36:17 07/24/02 Wed

And besides, if one breaks just before a critical episode taping-- you're covered!

;-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> Well, not really an option as I can't hog the two t.v.'s -- Deeva, 21:28:13 07/24/02 Wed

I've got two tv's and two vcr's but one of the tv's is on digital cable. What you record is what you're watching. You can't program it to record another show while you're watching one. Basic cable, because you don't have to deal with a cable box does not have this problem. So I can record one show while I'm watching another on the same tv. But I can't hog all these tv's cause then my boyfriend would most assuredly not be a happy camper about that and would probably think that I'm even crazier than he even knew me to be.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Well, 'not really an option' -- actually, it is. -- OnM, 07:29:04 07/26/02 Fri

*** What you record is what you're watching ***

This depends entirely on how the VCR is hooked up-- it isn't a 'given', as you may have been told.

I can provide several ways to let you watch one show and tape another, on both TV's. First, I have to know whether you receive any of the shows you want to tape on your basic cable, or only on the digital cable box as a digital channel. This latter point is important, because if your digital cable box is like the ones in my locale, only certain channels-- typically pay-per-view and premium channels like HBO-- are digital. The remainder of the channels are plain ol' standard cable TV analog ones, even though the box will tune them. (What, they didn't tell you that?)

So, give me a little feedback, and I can make it work for you with your existing rig. Expenses would be trivial, maybe a few bucks for a splitter or A/B switch or some cables.

You could also just buy a 3rd VCR, as I suggested originally. You do not need a third TV, the TV set has NOTHING to do with the VCR being able to tape anything.

[> [> [> [> You can also catch "Alias"... -- Herne, 11:13:32 07/24/02 Wed

... the following Friday at 10:00 pm EST on the ABC Family Channel. These are not old reruns, they are repeats of the new episodes. Hope this helps some of you :-)

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Sophist, 10:24:32 07/24/02 Wed

Before I say anything about AtS, I should say that I don't watch TV shows. I do watch sporting events and some news broadcasts and movies. I gave up on TV in about 1979; the last show I watched regularly was M*A*S*H. For me to watch Buffy is, therefore, a significant departure from my usual habits.

The first 2 seasons, I only watched AtS for the crossovers. I didn't watch the beginning of S3, but I started to watch it after seeing many glowing reviews on this Board. I watched about 2/3 of the episodes (maybe more). Frankly, I was disappointed. JMHO, but the acting on AtS is far inferior to that on BtVS. I was not impressed by the season story arc, though there were some good moments (Wes and Lilah were great). Although I've made very clear my disappointment with the ending of Buffy S6, I liked the rest of the season; at least 5 BtVS eps this season were far better than any AtS episode I've ever seen.

I don't plan to watch S4.

[> Yes,I watch both *and * watching "Angel" was less painful than Season 6 Buffy. -- AurraSing, 10:33:03 07/24/02 Wed

I've watched Angel since day one and while it's had it's ups and downs, I am fascinated by watching Cordy change towards maturity and Angel swing between the pull of good and evil.

Plus I really,really like Lorne.

[> [> me like Lorne, too - lots! -- Dead Soul, 10:48:56 07/24/02 Wed

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- JBone, 10:38:26 07/24/02 Wed

When AtS started, I wondered how in the world are they going to build an hour, week after week, around a guy who hardly talks? After the troublesome growing pains it displayed early on, I thought the show really started coming around during the Faith crossover. I think that Wesley just became much more grounded after that. And they seemed to settle on Lindsey and Lilah to represent W&H to Angel.

I still believe that BtVS is a superior show, although the gap has narrowed considerably. The new AtS show has been better than the new BtVS show more than a couple times this last year. Little things about AtS still get stuck in my craw, but I don't want to get into all that, I'm trying to let go of them.

I will say I believe AtS to be a technically better show than BtVS. I love the letterbox, and their special effects/stunts seem more seamless. That whole slow-motion sequence when Connor returned from whatever dimension was spectacular.

[> Re: Not really but... -- Purple Tulip, 10:42:36 07/24/02 Wed

I have watched it before. I have seen exactly two episodes of Angel, one of which I bought off of Ebay (I Will Remember You), and one random episode this past season that my roommate and I watched because we were curious about the show. But I don't watch it regularly, no, and here's my reasons: 1) It's on during Ally McBeal (though now that the show is cancelled, that frees up my Monday 9:00 p.m. time slot, so...) 2) I just became a Buffy fan last October, so I haven't exactly been watching either show very long 3) I find myself more connected to and invested in Sunnydale, the characters there, and the lore that surrounds the place, than I am in Los Angeles, Angel and Cordelia 4) I just can't stomach Angel and Cordelia together, (but I love Buffy and Spike, so go figure) 5) I was very dissapointed to find out, after seeing IWRY, that Doyle had been killed off in the first season of AtS 6) I love Spike and need to see him more than Angel 7) Buffy just makes more sense to me than AtS, though I'm not trying to take anything away from AtS, as I'm sure that it is a good show and very worth watching---who knows, maybe next season I'll watch, and if some channel like FX would do the re-run thing, then that would help me out a lot! ;)

Though I do like the Angel theme song better ;)

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Miss Edith, 11:31:55 07/24/02 Wed

The first season of Angel was okay. It had some exceptional episodes and a lot of dull filler. But Buffy wasn't on top form in the first season so I was prepered to wait (Cordy became my favourite charatcer on Angel and I never liked her much on Buffy).
Season 2 was my favourite season. I loved the Darla plot with all the cliffhangers. I can still remember gasping when Angel leaves W&H lawyers at the mercy of Dru and Darla. Dru is one of my favourite characters anyway and I loved watching her and Darla and season 2 is when W&H got really interesting. I loved Holland, Lilah and Lindsay and the way evil had a significant part to play and wasn't just a baddy to be killed off each season. All the flashbacks were amazing and I loved the growth of Cordy. The second half of the season wasn't quite as good. Once Angel became dark too little was made of it and there was too much filler (Blood Money etc). I loved the zombie episode though when Wesley and Gunn bonded. And the two episodes where Angel faced up to the truth about evil and tried to win back is friends were of a terrific standard. I also enjoyed Disharmany as a lighter comedy episode. And I loved Lorne. I didn't care for the pyrea arc but it was only 4 episodes and easy enough to skip when you rewatch the season.
I haven't enjoyed season 3 much. Gunn and Fred are underdeveloped and dull. Can't stand their sickly sweet romance. And I cannot stand the angelic/perfect Cordy anymore who we are constantly being to told is perfect for Angel because she is a champion. The C/A romance came out of the blue and seemed forced. Someone tells Angel he would make a good itme with Cordy and suddenly he can't stop thinking about her. It felt driven by story purposes rather than character driven. I also didn't care for Conner and the baby plot much.
What has kept me watching is Wesley and Lilah's little fling and the suggesstion Wesley is headed for the dark side. I love how the complexities of his character are being explored (ALexis is amazing) and personally I would prefer if the show was just the Wesley and Lilah show at the moment. But that's just me. I loved Wesely's inner struggle with doing the right thing and how it ended up with Conner in another dimension and Angel going crazy with rage. But then the story slows down and there are several filler installments. Just does't work for me. A story needs to build up momentum and suddenly having an episode in which Gunn is about to lose his soul for a truck doesn't work for me. I think the show does have potential and the spoilers for next season do sound promising. But at the moment I am not too impressed with the shameful lack of Wesley in the last few episodes. Sometimes he barely got a scene. And seeing Cordy float to heaven and having Conner become a regular just make me very afraid.
Basically I love the darkness but aside from Wesley and Lilah just don't feel like I'm getting it. And I miss Lindsay.

[> [> Re: Buffy without Angel is like: -- Brian, 11:54:52 07/24/02 Wed

Ham w/o eggs
beer w/o pretzels
steak w/o potatoes
apple pie w/o icecream
Martinis w/o gin
horses w/o carriages
day w/o night
x w/o y

They belong together. Each is the shadow reflection of the other. Each show is needed to appreciate the other.
For example: Angel and Buffy are single parents: Now what?

Buffy and Angel are two threads that weave a wonderful tapestry.

[> I'm gonna have to go down on the side of watching both. -- VR, 15:26:55 07/24/02 Wed

[> Sadly not -- Caesar Augustus, 16:31:32 07/24/02 Wed

Simply missed a whole bunch of episodes at the beginning (mainly due to network problems) and, having missed the continuity, didn't ever bother watching regularly. I've seen some very entertaining episodes here and there, but don't feel like catching up on 60 odd episodes!!

[> Watch both, love both, but love Angel's theme more -- LadyStarlight, 18:21:35 07/24/02 Wed

[> [> LS, did you get the tapes yet? -- Masq, 18:25:06 07/24/02 Wed

Haven't got the m.o. yet

[> [> [> Not yet, but I'm not expecting them for another week or so. -- LadyStarlight, 19:25:06 07/24/02 Wed

If you haven't gotten the M.O. within another week, lemme know & I'll get a new one & resend.

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- celticross, 20:18:01 07/24/02 Wed

I do...very much. I've watched AtS from day one and there are very few episodes I wouldn't watch again. I love BtVS (though Season 6 laid on the hurt a bit too thick for my taste), but I don't see any reason why any BtVS fan can't love both. Personally, I love the mythic feel of AtS, the prophecies and portents. The quippage may be less, but that makes the ones there are even funnier. (Fred on supermodels: "I lived in a cave for 5 years. What's their excuse?" :)

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- OnM, 20:36:36 07/24/02 Wed

I enjoy watching both shows, I just put myself into a somewhat different head space depending on which one I'm viewing.

That being said, there is little question that I prefer Buffy overall. I think it's just as Rufus and others have conjectured, namely a matter of which character (or characters) you tend to identify with the most.

For me, in that regard, Buffy's inherent 'grace', and her efforts to always make the best of a bad situation, and keep forging ahead despite setback after setback exemplifies what kind of a person I would like to be. At the same time, Buffy's flaws-- and she has a number of them-- humanize her, and make her accessible.

Or maybe it's the theme song after all. They're both beautifully composed, and sum up the nature of each show in a mere minute's time. I suppose I'd just rather spend more time rockin' than brooding!

BTW, quickie breakdown as to MHO re: Angel's 3 seasons:

S1 - Good start for a spinoff. Got better as the season progressed.

S2 - Best season overall. Loved the Pylea arc, Lorne, Cordy's character development.

S3 - Wildly erratic, up/down season for me. Some eps brilliant, fully the equal of anything done on BtVS.* Other eps outrightly dull and unintersting, never even rewound the tape to rewatch. Holtz arc falls on the brilliant side, one of the best Buffyverse villians ever. Great to see Dru and Darla again. Wesley-- ah, Wesley. For me, now the 2nd most interesting BV character after Buffy herself.

Bad side? Lorne was largely wasted, the writers didn't seem to have a clear handle on Cordy anymore (and Cordy was always a main reason for me to tune in), and Fred's character's potential has been largely underutilized.

But, as always, I'll hold off any final opinions until I see what happens next year-- S4 may justify many of these unresolved S3 events.

* OK, rereading this before clicking 'send', and I'm sorry, but I have to back down on this statement. Yes, there have been many superb Angel eps, but none of them, IMO, can equal Prophecy Girl, Surprise/Innocence, Becoming Pt II, Anne, This Year's Girl, Who Are You, Restless, Fool For Love, The Body/Forever, The Gift, Bargaining Pts. I & II, OMWF, Tabula Rasa, Dead Things, or Normal Again.

Sorry. Thinking too much again.

(Well, you did ask.)

~sigh~

[> [> Glad to see you included "Anne"... -- Rob, 22:03:17 07/24/02 Wed

...in your list of superior eps, OnM, since I adore that episode, even though I've heard complaints about it from some people. I personally thought it was just brilliant--the Buffy stuff and the SG-trying-to-cope-without-her stuff. And like "When She Was Bad," we saw Buffy in an unhappy mood for the start of the season, but in the former ep, I thought Buffy's return to being her "normal" self was too rushed, while in the same amount of time, I thought Buff's evolution from depressed/trying to put Slayer life behind her to her final resolve to return to Sunnydale was much more convincing. Perhaps the slower, more methodical pacing of "Anne" is what made it the superior episode. But I digress...

Also glad to see, btw, your inclusion of two other eps that caused some divisiveness among the fans--"Dead Things" and "Normal Again." I would personally add "Seeing Red," "Hush" and "The Zeppo" to this list as well, but that's just me. ;o)

Rob

[> [> [> Re: Sidenote: Season 6 (slight spoilers) -- Brian, 04:07:46 07/25/02 Thu

Reading these messages in this thread reminded me of a message I did some time ago about how each first episode of each season of Buffy demonstrated how Buffy needed to reaffirm who and what she was. In Annie, her reply to the demon , "I'm Buffy, the Vampire Slayer", and that kick ass image of her holding the axe, turning to waste more demons, will always be with me as a defining moment.

I now realize that all of Season 6 was a quest for Buffy to rediscover who and what she was, and her final realiation that she is Buffy the Vampire Slayer and so much more.

[> [> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Cactus Watcher, 06:49:58 07/25/02 Thu

Angel always suffers in comparison with BtVS in terms of production budget. Buffy always has that advantage. But, I think there have been Angel episodes whose stories and execution has been every bit as good as those OnM mentioned, particularly in the first season: I Will Remember You, (the rest of the Faith 'saga') 5X5/Sanctuary, and Eternity. In fact, after Restless, I personally like 5x5 the best of all the episodes of the Buffy/Angel cycle that year.

[> [> Agree..except isn't this comparing grapefruits to oranges -- shadowkat, 12:11:37 07/25/02 Thu

I actually agree with most of what OM said. I watch both
off and on. I tend to be more of a BTVS fan due to characters than story arcs, I just prefer Willow to Cordy and Spike to Angel and Xander to Gunn...but hey that's me.
I used to prefer grapefruite juice to orange juice. (Reminds me of Buffy's favorite drink being part grapefruit and part orange - great idea, must try it sometime - this is in Killed By Death.) Now I like oj and grapefruit juice equally, though orange juice is easier to digest because it's not as sour. Sort of the same for me with Btvs and Ats, Btvs I identify with more, it seems funnier, Ats just seems more broody and often scared me more at least it did in the beginning, not so really any more, (I still have problems with I Fall To Pieces). I also find more to analyze in Btvs - which is partly due to the fact that I have watched all the Btvs episodes ten times and Ats episodes once...well getting closer to twice now.

That said, my appreciation for Ats is growing now that i've gotten a chance to start re-watching those episodes. Thanks Doc! Beginning to remember why I liked Cordy. And Wesely truly is the most developed character...the changes in his character from Season 1 - Season 3 are astonishing. Beginning to get engrossed in Wesley's character arc.

What is interesting is how different Joss has tried to make the two series. One is shot in letterbox and tends to have darker colors, less light, and darker themes - while the other tends to be square shot, very bright in costumes and colors and much lighter themes. Joss in an interview sometime after OMWF explained why Angel is letterbox and Buffy isn't. Angel, he said was supposed to be more of an "epic" - the great journey. While Btvs is supposed to be smaller, squarer, with soap operic elements as well as mythic ones. I remember the interview b/c it irked me at the time.

Now I begin to see what he was trying to say. They are two completely different shows, with characters that echo each other but are also very different. Watching both actually
enriches each one.

I watched "Under Your Skin" through Eternity yesterday - and in all these episodes the true evil was human not demon.
The demons were actually being used by the humans. Very different than Btvs where the demons are metaphors for what the humans are afraid of. In Ats they are metaphors for what the humans reject or discriminate against. And since we tend to discriminate against that which we fear...well
it's just taking the metaphor to another different level.
Perhaps making the metaphor more real or literal?

I must admit I've stopped watching Angel at different points, some episodes just plainly bore me. I wasn't that interested in the Pylea storyline last year...maybe I will change my mind when I see it again? (It could be a mood thing.) And I found She, Eternity, The Ring, and several episodes in Seasons 2 and in Season 3 (Birthday, Waiting in the Wings, Provider) to be rather uninvolving. OTOH - Room with A View, Lullaby, Sleep Tight, Forgiving, Loyalty, Benediction, Darla, Dear Boy, The Prodigal, Five BY Five and Sancturary blew me away. I also love the Sonmabulist (where Penn is introduced).

I also realized in Season 6/Season 3 Ats that the two shows were echoing each other's themes. Showing two different ways of looking at things. Seeing the father/son dynamic
on Angel echo the big sister/little sister dynamic on Buffy became actually fascinating. Just as it did seeing the vengeance arcs on both shows. Also the two vampires Angel and Spike are very interesting in how they compare and contrast (if you have the ability to do it objectively and few of us do).

The other thing that fascinates me is where the posters fall on the two shows. People who tend to like Spike and
Willow tend to dislike Angel and Cordy and vice versa.
Not everyone of course...but the most vocal seem to show this tendency. I've seen countless posts where one character is used to destroy another. (This usually causes me to stop taking the poster seriously...and is something I try really hard not to do myself.)This tendency almost makes me want to ask personal questions about some of the posters. Because I honestly think that some of these characters have taken root in our hearts and imaginations in ways Joss Whedon never intended.

Unlike most shows on television - I've noticed that Ats and Btvs elicit emotional and at times gut responses from their viewers. Ask yourself - how many times have you wanted to scream at the computer when you see a post that either bashes or discusses you favorite character and/or episode in a derogatory manner? I know I have felt this way quite a bit this year. When did this happen? I used to watch Btvs like every other tv show, dispassionately, now... I find myself struggling to maintain calm when I see a post that is derogatory about Spike or Buffy or Willow or Btvs? LOL! For me Btvs elicits this response. Ats - I'm still safe on, no guttural emotional knee-jerk reactions, so far. Although this may change once I finish watching all those Ats episodes. ;-)

So is it possible to explain why we love one show more than another or love both...when the reasons are so tied up with our personal makeup that to do so would reveal far more about ourselves than may be suitable for a public board such as this one? Or is discussing the issue a bit like explaining why you think a grapefruit is better than an orange?

Gee hope this ramble made sense. Been giving the board a break from my rambling nonsense for past two days, for just this reason. ;-)

[> [> [> but I like your rambles! -- ponygirl, 13:29:15 07/25/02 Thu

[> [> [> Re: Agree..except isn't this comparing grapefruits to oranges -- aliera, 13:47:52 07/25/02 Thu

Missed you and your interesting rambles. Regarding the revealing of self, you know that I think people are revealed through their posts...will ye nil ye. Although we all have different risk levels, styles and reasons we frequent the board and so you see in the posting.

I wasn't as enthralled with Angel's character as many others were; but I did watch most of season one and two. This year I'm not sure why I was more infrequent; life interfering, perhaps. And you know that I watched Bargaining through Normal again in a solid block in the spring after a break from the show. This, and other factors colored my perception of the season.

I've come to believe that it's better to be watching both in terms of fully appreciating what they're doing with the arcs and I plan to do that again next season. For me although I enjoy Angel it doesn't resonate in the way Buffy does. I don't know why and that's not about not revealing, but simply about not knowing.

I think I feel most connected to Buffy although my personality is probably closer to Willow (not dark Willow I hasten to add) and that's most likely why it's Buffy for me then Angel. And that's in spite of some of my struggles with season 6. Like Masq it didn't recapture my twenties and like some others, it dealt with issues that were difficult for me.

For Buffy, I also saw quite a difference in the way that they shot season six but since I don't know much about production I couldn't tell you why. I noticed in particular a change in the way the shots were framed, a difference in the style and size of the sets (for example the socioeconomics of her house were much different, the use of light and dark. All in keeping with the other changes they were making in the show. The entire atmosphere shifted.

Glad you're back!

[> [> [> One possible difference-- Angel is the fulcrum, not the lever? -- OnM, 07:35:46 07/26/02 Fri

In reading several responses so far, it suddenly occurs to me one difference between the two shows that
may also play a part in how we perceive and analyze them.

In BtVS, there is no question that Buffy is the driving force behind all that happens. I even posted a short
bit earlier this week about how Buffy tends to start other people (or even demons) on a path towards
greater involvement in making the world a better place. Buffy, I think without question, is a 'leader' or
'spirit guide' or otherwise an 'alpha female'.

Angel, OTOH, seems to be not so much a leader, as a player in a cosmic drama around which events
unfurl. Think about who is 'in charge' during the three seasons. Is it Angel, as we might initially assume?
Hey, he is the title character, but does that mean he's the 'alpha male' in the Buffy mode? I don't think so.

As to who is in charge at any given time, that can change. One time it may be Angel, but most times it's
Cordy, or Wesley, or Lorne, or Gunn, or even some of the villains, such as Lindsey or Holling, or even
indeterminates like Skip.

Thematically, this might make sense to have Angel serve as a 'fulcrum' rather than a lever (Buffy). Angel's
path to redemption may entail having to surrender the position of leadership and instead act to provide a
means for others around him to assume that position.

This makes for a very different, and very unconventional way to tell what on the surface appears to be a
standard 'hero's journey'.

BTW, furthering this idea will now be the fact that there are two vampires with a soul. Just who are the
'prophesies' speaking about, Angel or Spike?

And does anyone else happen to think that Wesley may be on to something that justified his attempts to get
Conner out of Dodge, that may have to do with prophesy and now-souled-Spike? I recall seeming to be in
the distinct minority in my support of Wesley's decision back then, and so I'm wondering if anyone else has since
put together a possible connection between Spike and Wesley and the events of late S3 Angel?

Off to work... bye for now!

[> [> [> [> Great point! -- matching mole, 09:26:33 07/26/02 Fri

I tried to express something like this but not nearly so eloquently a few months ago. I called Angel the uncharacter which unfortunately I think came across as more uncomplimentary than is justified. For me AtS isn't really about Angel's destiny as a champion - if that was the case I wouldn't really be all that interested in the show. Instead, and what seems far more interesting to me, it seems to be about how this 'destiny' is like the eye of a hurricane, stirring up everything around it. In fact the show seems to constantly subvert the ideas of destiny and prophecy. The terms are used all the time but nothing ever goes the way anyone plans it and nothing ever really gets resolved.

OnM's post higher up also makes an interesting point. I agree that the best BtVS episodes, as individual episodes, are better than any individual episodes on AtS (and let my echo Rob's appreciation of your appreciation of 'Anne' which I think is the best season-opening episode). For me I think this relates to the different strengths of the two shows (since the start of AtS). In my humble opinion the twists and turns on AtS are what make the show so great. The cumulative effect of the episodes rather than individual ones are what draw me in and on.

In contrast BtVS is a much more obviously structured show with clear seasonal stories. BtVS excelled at stand alone episodes (up through the end of S4 IMHO) and at seasonal stories. While the results of a seasonal story obviously carry on for years to come there are clear starting and stopping points. This leads to memorable individual episodes in a way that AtS doesn't lend itself.

I would have to agree that BtVS is better at characterization in that all the regulars and semi-regulars seem to get attention from the writers to make them quite interesting. The main disappointment of S3 AtS (for me) was the neglect of Lorne, Gunn, and Fred - all of whom seemed potentially really interesting when introduced but have been allowed to languish. As discussed a while back what it means to 'like' a character can mean a lot of different things. Different characters appeal to me in so many different ways that I can't really compare them.

Finally I think that Joss' comment about the two shows that Shadowkat mentioned is interesting. I assume it irritated her because he referred to BtVS as being like a soap opera. Although it is clearly not a soap opera I can see the increase in soap operatic trappings on the show with time. Similarly I find the idea of AtS as an epic kind of irritating because it is the subversion of the epic in it that I find so appealing. Perhaps the way to think of BtVS and AtS is as a soap opera and an epic that subvert their genres to make points that are completely antithetical to the standard ones. It seems obvious that finding happiness through romance is definitely not the message of BtVS. Perhaps achieving your destined role as a 'champion' is definitely not the message of Angel as well?

[> [> [> [> [> Ooh good points on both! -- shadowkat, 09:35:07 07/26/02 Fri

"Finally I think that Joss' comment about the two shows that Shadowkat mentioned is interesting. I assume it irritated her because he referred to BtVS as being like a soap opera. Although it is clearly not a soap opera I can see the increase in soap operatic trappings on the show with time. Similarly I find the idea of AtS as an epic kind of irritating because it is the subversion of the epic in it that I find so appealing. Perhaps the way to think of BtVS and AtS is as a soap opera and an epic that subvert their genres to make points that are completely antithetical to the standard ones. It seems obvious that finding happiness through romance is definitely not the message of BtVS. Perhaps achieving your destined role as a 'champion' is definitely not the message of Angel as well?"

Yes that's what irked me, the soap opera comparison, mostly because it's considered so derogatory. And the epic one.
I think you're right, they are subverting them, flipping both on their head. That's exactly why I've become so obsessed. Showing that the way to happiness or to redemption isn't necessarily what we think.

Good points. Hadn't thought of that and do agree.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: good points on both on all! -- aliera, 11:07:56 07/26/02 Fri

And by redefining 'champion' and 'lovers' we are more likely to redefine other stereotypes both within and after the show. Joss also said early on that he hoped that Buffy would become mythic. I don't belive he meant that in the sense that we typically define myths; but in the sense that his heroine and heros would redefine those and other concepts and affect people beyond the show.

In a certain sense we take the shows with us when the set is off. We do this with books and other things; but TV is a different experience and now, as home TV viewing becomes more like theatre experience has even greater potential influence.

Heinz Insu Fenkl wrote an interesting article that likened the TV viewing experience to aboriginal 'dreamtime' and made a case thereby for the deeper and long term effects of the what we absorb from this media.

It's on my mind again because of the Tara quotes. There's always a number of posts when people become disheartened over the course a show takes, the actions of a favorite character or in this case the death of one. And they run along the lines of if it's disturbing turn it of and watch something else.

Which I don't entirely disagree with. However, people do see pieces of themselves in the characters and do become affected by the show. These shows with the use and oversetting of not just stereotypes but perhaps archetypes seem to affect us on a deeper level.

OnM I liked your point about Buffy as a catalyst; it reminded me of wondering again if the vampires are drawn to the slayers in some way. And MM the point about character development was well taken. BTVS has suffered somewhat from that also (in spite of it being a strength). Very difficult to strongly emphasize certain characters without it being at the expense of others.

SK another essay? I wondered if your absence might not be due to writing. :-)

[> [> [> [> You aren't alone here OM...been wondering the same -- shadowkat, 09:29:46 07/26/02 Fri

Taking break from work and my latest essay... to respond.

After rewatching City of up to Five by Five - I tend to agree with you. Angel does not strike me as either in control, leading the troops, or an alpha male. This show is very differently structured. Unlike Buffy, Angel is not certain of himself or his journey at all. (Well unlike Buffy prior to Season 6. Now Buffy's less certain - except for one thing - Buffy knows she's good, she knows that her job is vampire slayer, raise Dawn and keep moral path, and she really isn't worrying so much about redemption. Her path is far clearer as are ours.) Angel is cursed. He did NOT choose a soul. Angelus never chose redemption. Angel with a soul is trying for it. Will he get it? From the past six episodes of Season 1, and all of Season 3 - not sure it matters. I think the story is more about how all the others deal with their world and the murkiness of our moral choices. Very ambitious story to try and pull off.

"BTW, furthering this idea will now be the fact that there are two vampires with a soul. Just who are the
'prophesies' speaking about, Angel or Spike?

And does anyone else happen to think that Wesley may be on to something that justified his attempts to get
Conner out of Dodge, that may have to do with prophesy and now-souled-Spike? I recall seeming to be in
the distinct minority in my support of Wesley's decision back then, and so I'm wondering if anyone else has since
put together a possible connection between Spike and Wesley and the events of late S3 Angel?"

Been wondering much the same thing in the back of my brain, the reason I started taping Angel and wanted to see those old episodes again. The mirror effect of the last episode of Angel and the last episode of Buffy hit me as interesting.

Spike gets a soul in a cave. Angel is sent to the watery Grave. Lilah tell Wesely - "interesting Angel has gained a soul and you're in danger of losing yours". Buffy worries about Willow - "we don't want to lose you" - or "Willow's in danger of losing her soul" - while ironically enough,
Spike is gaining his. Nice touch having Willow and Wesley echo each other, considering two actors are dating.

Also Buffy crawls from the Grave and Xander saves the Day.
Cordelia is sent to heaven? Or so we presume. Makes me think of Buffy getting out of Grave. Or Cordy becomes half demon and Anya goes back to being demon?

Anyway back to your point. Unlike everyone else on the boards, I really didn't blame Wes for taking Connor. I also have always wondered but the truth of those prophecies.
Wouldn't it be interesting if Angel really wasn't the object of the prophecy after all? What if there was a sentence that had been altered or left out - like in Connor's prophecy or that whole prophecy about Angel killing Connor?? What if what was left out is that "the vampire in question has to choose the soul to begin with, it can't be a curse?" And what if the prophecy about Connor is Angel's true prophecy - and Angel is still a threat to Connor and may kill him before Connor saves the world? Maybe sending Angel to that watery grave is what frees Angelus and puts Connor in danger? Maybe what saves
Connor will be the other vampire with the soul?

Or whoa, this just occurred to me after reading your post again: "I'm wondering if anyone else has since
put together a possible connection between Spike and Wesley and the events of late S3 Angel?" What if - the Lurker demon took Angel's soul and gave it to Spike?? Being sent to the watery grave and Spike getting a soul happened at the same time? No, then we'd end up with another Angel. Dismiss that.

Oh the possibilities are endless. But I do know one thing, which is what I love about these shows, they love to mislead us with their prophecies and canons. They love to tell us that it's cream when it's really skim milk masquerading as cream.

Can't wait to see what they do next. And like you Om - I am remaining unspoiled for both Ats and Btvs this year.

So hopefully they don't disappoint.

Okay end of ramble number two and back to work and essay...and possibly lunch...bye.

[> Watch both. Love both. About AtS.... -- cjl, 07:41:53 07/25/02 Thu

Even though I thought Angel didn't quite measure up to the mother series in season 1, I kept watching because I trusted Joss and remembered that Buffy S1 had some rough spots, as well. I was totally spoiled regarding Doyle's demise, and that episode ("Hero") remains a great disappointment to me (with the exception of Cordy and the videotape).

I agree with some posters on another board who said that either Wes should have come in earlier, or Doyle should have died later, so we could have a transition period. Regardless, Wes was solid comic relief for a few eps--and then things got very interesting in "I've Got You Under My Skin." At that point we realized that Wes had a ton a potential under that buffoonish exterior, and the series really took off.

With the Darla plotline in Season 2, the series gathered steam, and when it hit the apex with "Reprise," I felt (for the first time) that it was the equal of BtVS.

Agree with OnM that Season 3 was wildly inconsistent. Gunn/Fred romance is a snooze, and the love thang has neutralized both characters. I have no clue what the hell they're doing with Cordy. What's bad is, Charisma Carpenter doesn't seem to have a clue either. Alexis Denisof officially took over the show with "Loyalty," and he's mesmerizing every time he comes on screen. The Holtz plotline ended anticlimactically, but I still can't wait for Season 4. Dark Wes? Angelus? The fall of St. Cordy? Lorne in Vegas? Bring it on!

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Lyonors, 08:18:13 07/25/02 Thu

Okay, I will be honest with y'all. I started with Buffy first...who hasnt?! anywhoo...as a late-comer to the whole Whedonverse, its kinda hard to catch up on Angel--lack of syndication and all...but thanks to our friendly neighborhood philosopher Masq, I have been able to start with the catch up. I am now midway through season 2, and the rabbid(sp?) fan in me is starting to develop. I would say that I love them both, because for me, they can't be separated.

Ly.

[> Re: Angel the series - Do you or don't you? -- Etrangere, 15:29:23 07/25/02 Thu

Finally caugh back this thread...

well Angel. It's an okay show, yes I like. Can't say i love it as much as Buffy. I don't think it's only characters, there's characters I love in Angel too (and anyway i didn't use to like much the main character in BtVS too either before S6)

It's not either a question of darkness or maturity IMO. I love when it's dark themed :) (ok, maybe it IS a question of maturity, i wouldn't know :)

There's also very good episodes in Angel. I absolutly love 5x5 and Sanctuary, Are you now or have you ever been, guise will be guise and the shroud of ..., yup. (Haven't watched yet much of S3. Not my fault, it's French distribution.)

But there's only that. There's good episodes, but it's a once in a while thing. I don't find myself interrested in the seasonnal arc like with Buffy. Is there even seasonnal arc ? The rythm is different, and for me, it doesn't work as good. It's not a much well structures, well warped.

It's still a good show, one i watch with pleasure, but yeah, I prefer Buffy.

[> [> Angel/Buffy Seasonal Arcs -- cjl, 08:47:07 07/26/02 Fri

Gotta admit, AtS seasonal arcs have been a bit different for the last two seasons. In AtS Season 1, "To Shanshu in L.A." was the big, dramatic cliffhanger setting up the events of Season 2. But in the last two seasons, the climactic episode of the season seems to have come about long before the finale, and the remaining eps start building up to the next season, so the creative team can hit the ground running.

The Dark Angel arc in Season 2 pretty much peaked with "Reprise," and the season as we knew it pretty much ended when Lindsay bolted Wolfram and Hart. The Pylea four-parter set up some of the themes for Seaason 3. Similarly, the climactic episode of S3 was "Sleep Tight" (concluding Darla's pregnancy/birth of Connor), and the rest of the season was a grand set-up for Season 4 (which is why some viewers felt slightly let down by "Benediction").

Not any better or worse than Buffy's all-in-one-bite seasonal arcs, just different.

Road Trip! **Spoilers for Angel Season 4** -- Arethusa, 09:06:02 07/24/02 Wed

When Lorne moved to Vegas I made a post saying I hoped the gang would make a road trip to see him there. It looks like my fantasy is coming true, according to this site, which I got from slayage.com: http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art- main.html?2002-07/23/13.00.tv

So what would you guys like to see happen to the gang in Vegas? (Assuming, of course, that most or all of the gang actually gets back together. A road trip with just Fred and Gunn would be a little dull.)

[> Re: Road Trip! **Spoilers for Angel Season 4** - - Q, 19:06:45 07/24/02 Wed

Any idea when they will be shooting? I would love to go down and catch an eyefull of the Angel cast on the Vegas strip!

Buffy vs Angel. Decide! -- JCC, 11:29:00 07/24/02 Wed

Based on the thread below started by Darby
(There ya go D, some recognition.) Here's
a poll to decide which show the board honestly
prefers:

The Poll

[> Re: Buffy vs Angel. Decide! -- Brian, 11:35:15 07/24/02 Wed

I landed on the Buffy side, but a life without Angel in it would be sadder.

[> Re: Buffy vs Angel. Decide! -- Darby, 12:26:50 07/24/02 Wed

I appreciate it, but I really was just comparing the last season. I have trouble comparing them overall.

No, that's a lie. Overall, I'd have to go with the Dutchess of Buffonia.

[> [> If You'd Have Asked Me A Season Ago... -- AngelVSAngelus, 12:57:43 07/24/02 Wed

Buffy would have won, despite my adoration of the Brood King and his Fang Gang. Six versus Three is a vastly different story for me.

[> [> [> Re: If You'd Have Asked Me A Season Ago... -- Q, 19:05:00 07/24/02 Wed

I'm the opposite! During Angel season one I thought Angel was FAR superior. I still believe Angel season one is FAR superior to Buffy season four. But the last two seasons of Angel have dissapointed me immensely. The overall arc's for both seasons were good ideas, but they dealt with the arc to scarcely, and put tons of stupid "filler" eps in between. I couldn't believe season 2 when they ended the Darsilla arc with a third of the season left and then went to the lamest nightmare in the world, Pylea, for 5 EPISODES! That was insanity. The last two seasons of Angel haven't even COMPARED with the last two of Buffy, IMO!!!

[> [> [> [> Agreeing with Q -- Malandanza, 07:18:38 07/25/02 Thu

I expected AtS to be bad, but started watching it anyway since it was on right after Buffy and Season Four Buffy left me dissatisfied most of the time (I hated The Intiitaive/Adam arc). Season One Angel was better than Season Four Buffy, especially once they killed off Doyle and dropped the Angel-thinks-he's-Batman nonsense. For Season Two Angel, I thought the first part of the season was great (my second favorite scene from Buffy/Angel was when Angel shut the door on the lawyers -- first, of course, was B2 when Buffy ran the sword through Angel after was looked like a last minute save). However, I agree with Q that Pylea was awful. There were some clever moments (like Lorne shaking his head as Angel is carried off to swing the Crebit at the Bach-nal), but overall, there was only about an episode's worth of good material.

I didn't watch Season Three when it was on, but kept up via the shooting scripts and have watched several episodes since summer reruns began. I dislike the baby arc too much to see anything redeeming in this season, and, in spite of some less than subtle moments on BtVS, I did enjoy Season Six. The difference between Season Four and Season Six is extreme -- in Season Four there are a handful of good stand-alone episodes in a mediocre season while in Season Six there are a handful of mediocre stand-alone episodes in a good season. Angel's only saving grace this season was the finale, with Angel sinking into the depths as Cordelia ascended into the heavens, but as far as symbolism goes, I'd say Buffy crawling out of the grave at the end of Season Six is certainly its equal.

[> [> [> [> [> Wow. We Are Inverted -- AngelVSAngelus, 11:02:46 07/25/02 Thu

I liked the image in the finale, but found it otherwise my single disappointment in the entirety of Angel's third season.
Someone want to tell me how I-Was-Raised-In-Another- Dimension Connor skips right to knowing how to use a taser and its affect on dear old dad? Or how he formulated that entire plan of getting Angel to the ocean to be attacked, THEN knew exactly how to use all those power tools, not to mention how he acquired them in the first place... *sigh*
I loved the rest of the season. I love the image of Angel sinking to the depths of the ocean. But I think I've pin pointed all of my problems beginning with the Angel/Cordy relationship arc. I think that was their motivation in making her Ascendant Cordy in the first place...
Despite all of this, I didn't feel violated by the end of Angel's season. I can't say the same about Buffy. It seems like I was watching my beloved characters, and beloved story for that matter, through the warped glass of an amusement park mirror. They wanted to show me the self-absorption and grave mistakes of the gang, and what they did instead was make it damn near impossible for them to be redeemed to this viewer. My opinion of the faults with this season of the Buffster and others' have been discussed ad nauseum, so I'll stop there.

[> Disenfranchised -- Rahael, 15:55:35 07/24/02 Wed

There's no option for the vote I want to make. I'm not undecided. I like both shows. Both are intelligent, gripping, insightful shows that mean a whole lot to me. I love Cordy, my favourite character. I love Wes and Angel. I like Gunn and Fred. I adore Buffy, love Giles and Anya, interested in Willow and Xander. I think there are loads of great writers on both shows, whom I appreciate. Joss, of course, and Tim Minnear, Stephen de Knight, Rebecca Kirchner, and many many more.

What exactly are we deciding on here? what show we prefer? Some of us may strongly prefer one show, but for those who are completely doolally about both of them? I'm sorry but 'undecided' doesn't cut it for me!

Also, will this poll result matter? If Buffy wins, will it get trotted out? "75% of this board don't want to discuss Angel!" or something? Is the result binding in any way?

And by good 18th Century principles, the best voters are informed voters - is there anyway to restrict voting to people who actually *watch* both shows?

I guess I'll have to take the apathetic voter line - no candidate to vote for, so not going to vote.

Yours,

pedantically,

Rahael

[> [> You go, Rah! Great points all -- Masq, 15:59:43 07/24/02 Wed

Especially that one about people who don't watch both shows shouldn't vote.

Reminds of those posts that start with "I don't actually watch 'Angel', but I'll tell you why I don't like it anyway".

[> [> [> Re: You go, Rah! Great points all -- aliera, 17:49:55 07/24/02 Wed

Pedantic - Now there's a great word for which the connotative meaning is also adrift from the dictionary definition! And oddly, a word that I've been thinking about today, although (hastening to add) not in reference to anyone's posts except in the definative way.

And Masq, I especially liked your post challenging us to watch for the metaphor in Angel. I'll be honest and say I was an infrequent viewer this year, but had already intended to be more faithful next season because of the connections between the two shows. Seems important to at least be aware of both storylines.

[> [> [> [> perfect pedantic button -- anom, 20:06:18 07/24/02 Wed

Aliera wrote: "Pedantic - Now there's a great word for which the connotative meaning is also adrift from the dictionary definition!"

The button says: "I'm not pompous, I'm pedantic. There's a difference." A difference perfectly illustrated by that statement. Love them self-referential buttons!

[> [> Re: Disenfranchised -- Wizardman, 00:48:58 07/25/02 Thu

Amen, Rahael! Both shows are intelligently written- most of the time-, both are beautifully acted- most of the time-, both feature very sexy people- very, very sexy people... Okay, I'm back now. My point is that we shouldn't compare the two. Each has its respective srengths and weaknesses- even I can see that. They complement each other very well! Now if we could just get a crossover...

[> Re: Rah's response -- JCC, 07:21:47 07/25/02 Thu

This poll isn't designed to change what we discuss on the board. It dosen't have some great plan. It's just a little bit fun to find out what people prefer.

Right now, its gotten 62 votes and it's preety close.
Buffy 48%
Angel 42%
Undecided 10%

Great Article with an anti-Emmy rant due to OMWF snub...No spoilers -- Rob, 12:55:25 07/24/02 Wed

http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/entertainment/television/3714 159.htm

Tue, Jul. 23, 2002

Something's fangtastically wrong in Emmyland
BY CONNIE OGLE
cogle@herald.com

Say it loud, once more, with feeling: Buffy was robbed.

Oh, I know. Who cares, really, about the Emmy Awards? The same shows always seem to be nominated; seems like the same ones win. And Russell Crowe is never going to attend the ceremonies and glower threateningly, so why even watch?

Still, when people in the industry choose the best of TV, you'd think they'd at least spare a couple of real nominations for the single best show of the year. Especially this time, when voters boldly stopped going through the motions and favored innovative newcomers such as Six Feet Under, 24 and The Shield instead of merely dredging up ER and Dennis Franz (no disrespect to Dennis. Loved him in the Goodbye Earl video).

HEARTBREAKER

And yet the most astonishing, entertaining hour (hour plus, actually) of TV in the past year slips by virtually unnoticed. Nothing here is real; nothing here is right. Buffy the Vampire Slayer's musical episode, Once More, With Feeling, registers a paltry outstanding music direction nomination. Nice for the musical directors. A stake through the aspirations of writer/director Joss Whedon, the beating creative heart of Buffy, the only TV writer brave and clever enough to use horror as one great big wonderful metaphor for growing up.

Whedon, who learned to read music and play the piano just so he could write a musical episode, has been snubbed before. This year UPN tried to help. The network sent out DVDs of Once More, With Feeling to Variety subscribers (you can now find 'em on eBay for upward of $100). Didn't help. In a weird twist Whedon was left off the ballot; he was supposed to be a selection in the dramatic writing category. The Academy of Television Arts and Sciences assured everyone they sent out supplemental ballots immediately. Sorry, we forgot. And the check's in the mail, too.

TALENT APLENTY

Buffy could have been nominated in other categories. Jennifer Garner from new series Alias instead of Sarah Michelle Gellar as best actress? After six years of being Buffy, Gellar keeps getting better. And the supporting actor category surely could have spared one of The West Wing's four spots to Buffy's sparring partner James Marsters, who as the vampire Spike has become the glue that holds the show together.

But Once More, With Feeling is something special. It's not just an episode with cool tunes. The plot sandwiches nicely in the middle of Buffy's sixth season. Everything that happened in the season led up to it; everything that happened afterward stemmed from it. Buffy slays vamps while she sings (speaking of brave, Gellar deserves a nomination just for having the guts to sing her own part). Spike rocks out on top of a coffin. The songs are better and far more clever than most of the ones you'll hear on Broadway these days.

And yet these Emmy boneheads don't even bother to nominate this genre-rattling episode in the music and lyrics category, although Family Guy, The Simpsons and Judging Amy somehow made the cut. Something is terribly wrong here.

I've got a theory: that title is what's standing in the way of Buffy Emmys. Emmy voters think "teen show" and pencil in the more grown-up The West Wing. There's also the whole problem of whether Buffy is a comedy or a drama. It's both; it defies easy classification and rewards longtime, passionate viewing in a way no other series does and thus earns rabid devotion in return (if you think I'm mad, you oughta see the outrage on the Buffy bulletin boards).

SOMETHING SPECIAL

Look, Sex and the City is hilarious, and Michael Chiklis kicks serious butt on The Shield. But Once More, With Feeling is TV of a different sort, something that comes along once in a lifetime and should not be buried but celebrated and rewarded.

Whedon and Co. are taking the high road, probably parroting Buffy's lines: "It's all right if some things come out wrong/we'll sing a happy song, and you can sing along." But Buffy fans don't have to be so well mannered. We can take out our metaphorical crossbows and fire at will on minds too narrow to see beyond a playful title. Until Whedon gets recognition for his genius, we will not rest in peace.

[> Gimme an AMEN!!! -- Wizardman, 00:34:16 07/25/02 Thu

[> AMEN! -- Dichotomy, 05:29:48 07/25/02 Thu

[> Now I'm really P' O'd... -- Darby, 08:11:44 07/25/02 Thu

My wife loves The West Wing, and I like it too, although it was spotty this year. Anyway, we watch it and tape it to rewatch later. We just got back around to the season finale, which was pretty much the worst episode of the season, with a nonsensical subplot involving Lily Tomlin and an incredibly cliched plot (as cliched as the Dead & Evil Lesbians, but that's another issue) involving Mark Harmon as the good guy with the Little Brother who got tragically and stupidly killed just when everything seemed okay (good thing the ep was set in New York, 'cause you could see the pay-off comin' up Broadway!), and this episode (I don't know the ep names like I do B & A, so I didn't realize this until the title came up on tape) is up for a writing Emmy, while OMWF was skunked! Insert various expletives here!

And don't get me going about how Judging Amy got a song (not a theme, not a score, but a song) nominated, as did King of the Hill, but Buffy didn't! And the "musical episode" of That 70's Show got a nomination!!??!!

I apologize that I didn't post a link to the full nominations list on Emmy morning, but it was just too depressing to consider.

[> That's it. I'm writing them an angry letter. -- Caesar Augustus, 19:48:57 07/25/02 Thu

The Scoobies' Fault -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:37:01 07/24/02 Wed

Man, the forces of darkness must be loving it. This season, not only has the Scooby Gang done very little monster slaying, but the monsters they have fought have usually been their fault in the first place.

Afterlife - That demon wouldn't have existed if Buffy hadn't been brought back from the dead.

Life Serial - The Trio was focused solely on Buffy. Without her around, they wouldn't have bothered with all that stuff.

Once More With Feeling - Xander is responsible for summoning Sweet, and he didn't actually die, so there's nothing to stop him from being summoned again.

Tabula Rasa - Loan Shark and his vampires were focused on Spike, they wouldn't have been a problem if not for Spike's debt of 40 kittens.

Smashed & Wrecked - The only monster was one briefly created by Willow while on a magic high.

Dead Things - Fuzzy Time demons were only there to confuse Buffy. Again, without her, the Trio wouldn't have bothered.

Older and Far Away - Halfrek wouldn't be there if not for the A/X wedding, and wouldn't have trapped them in the house if not for Dawn.

As You Were - Spike was the one who go the demon eggs sent through whatever connections he has.

Hell's Bells - No Anya, no Stewert Burns monster.

Normal Again - Same as Life Serial and Dead Things, no Buffy, no reason for the Trio to be summoning monsters.

Entropy - Anya becomes vengeance demon

Seeing Red - If Buffy hadn't killed those two vampires in Entropy, they wouldn't have dropped the disc Warren needed to get superstrength.

Villains, Two to Go, and Grave - Willow was the Big Bad of these episodes.

Anyone else see something very wrong with this? The only monsters the Scooby Gang has fought that weren't their fault to begin with have been a few, standard vampires, the Hellions from Bargaining, the Trio of Nerds (who weren't really much of a threat to public safety), the vampire "rebels" from All the Way, the Doublemeat Palace Lady, and the sword demon from Older an