While I know that there's some overlap between the two terms, a lot of what gets discussed as misogyny strikes me as more correctly described as chauvinism.
I think that's true. Damsel storylines can be chauvinistic. I think when a series does girl-in-peril stuff too often (particularly when the girl is in peril largely because she's a girl) and sadistic, it has potential to move into the territory of misogyny.
Despite "Billy," I don't think there was much misogyny on Angel, but the show and character were often guilty of chauvinism.
Yeah. I agree. Billy, the character, was a misogynist, but I don't think
Angel
(the series) was. I really liked the Billy episode though, so what do I know.
You know a good episode when you see one, that's what.
Just watched the GF pilot. Boy, that had potential. Talk about "fighting the good fight." Can't remember many pilots that have made me sniff.
I got sniffly too, though it wasn't even for the idealism inherent in the project, which normally would hit my buttons. It was the fact that
Sean, who just stumbled into this mess by accident, had to pull the trigger to shoot a man who just created this mess by accident to save himself and the entire damn city. And the guy even helps him aim. It's so damn tragic.
Both the idealism and the finale got me.
Also? I can imagine some buffy/angelverse characters being in on the frequency.
From TV Guide:
Hits and Misses:
The second episode of this new series is less gruesome than the premiere, but it's no day in the park. It's more a night in the dark, as our crack FBI team, led by the preternaturally intelligent Peter Coyote as Virgil Webster, investigates the world of S&M. There's an encounter between a suspect and Agent Rebecca Locke involving handcuffs that are not FBI issue, and there's an explicit rape scene. Inside is essentially a TV take on The Silence of the Lambs, but thanks to Coyote's malevolent monotone, it has a sleazy charm all its own.
My score: 7
Also? I can imagine some buffy/angelverse characters being in on the frequency.
You know Giles would be on it. And Fred.
My score: 7
So it's a Hit? Cool.
From the New Yorker review:
"In the first episode, when Locke is, at last, face to face with the killer, and he threatens her while explaining the deranged thinking behind his modus operandi—he’s intent on exposing the falseness of the dreams that bring young women to Los Angeles—she says, “The joke’s on you. I was made a nobody a long time ago, and by something a hell of a lot scarier than you.” Here Locke is out of control, abasing herself before a psychopath who preys on vulnerable women, and then getting all up in his face, in the space of one sentence. Her gift fails her when she needs it most. She’s just been fired from this new job (or so she thinks), and her dejection has erased her professionalism. This hardly ever happens to men on TV shows who have dangerous jobs to do; they may screw up, but not because they’re bummed out."
I didn't get that at all. Simon's motives are to strip away the lies these women have about their identities. He take their false identities leaving them with the truth that they are nobody. She's playing mental chess by trying to get him to believe that she doesn't have a false identify, what he looks to take was already taken. Her gift doesn't fail her as she knows it's the only tact she can take. It may have been desperate, which is understandable, but not unprofessional.
they may screw up, but not because they’re bummed out."
I don't think carrying around the trauma of being kidnapped for eighteen months counts as "bummed out."
Yeah, I thought that was a well written review, in terms of her prose, but whatever weird agenda she superimposed over the show made me go "heh?" My favorite rorschach review, though -- and they all are to some degree, actually -- was the guy who gave us a really, really positive review, but talked about how Rebecca was "kidnapped by a serial killer called 'The Apostle.'" Um, she was? I finally realized that in the scene where Paul confronts Web with "I know who she is..." Web mentions "your namesake, The Apostle..." meaning, of course, the Apostle Paul... somehow this guy was hearing all kinds of exposition that wasn't there. I think that may also have been the review that said Pony Man (the guy in the mirror) was the killer from the ep and that he was licking a severed hand like an ice cream cone. Well, no. I guess maybe these critics are doing their laundry while watching or something.
