No, that's right and it's in the middle. Just about the half past the hour mark.

oh, I see what you mean. I don't know why I think of it as the beginning of the episode. probably because that's when the wheels are set in motion for the denouement.

which led to b) the audience getting a little attached. And then we were catered to.

This is the besetting problem with ME: pandering to the fans came close to ruining both Buffy (with the Fonzification of Spike) and Angel (with the bloody flashbacks)

I think they were less pandering to the fans than writing to those actors who remained enthusisastic and prepared. Some actors burn out after playing the same character for a long time or personal reasons interfere and you have to write around them. There is very little time in TV to pull a good performance out of an actor on set or to edit around a spotty one, and writers and producers are leery of writing for actors who may not be able to play a big arc or a big scene.

If you're not going to pander to your fans, ie, the folks who love and watch the show, who are you going to pander to? The hyper-sophisticate theatre school types?

I think they were less pandering to the fans than writing to those actors who remained enthusisastic and prepared. Some actors burn out after playing the same character for a long time or personal reasons interfere and you have to write around them. There is very little time in TV to pull a good performance out of an actor on set or to edit around a spotty one, and writers and producers are leery of writing for actors who may not be able to play a big arc or a big scene.

Scrappy, as usual, is wise. But we knew that.

I am also very hard pressed to think of a series that lasted for more than a 3-4 years, and that had any reliance on a presumed continuity, that didn't eventually succomb to a round of "wouldn't it be cool if", or "this would be neat", or "we need to shake things up" that in turn sacrafices some of the continuity/integrity somehow. Can anybody think of one? And does that paragraph actually make any sense?

If you're not going to pander to your fans, ie, the folks who love and watch the show, who are you going to pander to? The hyper-sophisticate theatre school types?

I guess you could 1, not distinguish between sophisticated viewers and fans or 2, avoid pandering. Or both.

I don't even know who you mean by "hyper-sophisticate theatre school types". I'm saying that the weakest parts of late Buffy and Angel were the parts which mimicked fanfic tropes, which buried themselves in injokes and shoutouts, which turned somersaults to keep Spike in the show after Seeing Red rather than breaking new ground. The trend that culminated in the only unwatchable, actively painful episode they ever did, The Girl In Question, which wasn't just fanfic but bad fanfic, not just injokes but bad injokes. An episode which I still suspect existed purely to have that slash-pandering little exchange about 'that one time'.

If you're not going to pander to your fans, ie, the folks who love and watch the show, who are you going to pander to? The hyper-sophisticate theatre school types?

Maybe a touch less with the pandering, and c'mon, with Spike it was anvil!pandering every week.

with the Fonzification of Spike

Oh baby, mine is a bitter laugh.

The trend that culminated in the only unwatchable, actively painful episode they ever did, The Girl In Question, which wasn't just fanfic but bad fanfic, not just injokes but bad injokes.

Except there were people who liked that episode.

buried themselves in injokes and shoutouts

Which injokes?

I totally agree that Spike lasted too long. Or, well, he didn't. *My* Spike was replaced by a pod-vampire, and with no real explanation or benefit to the show.

An episode which I still suspect existed purely to have that slash-pandering little exchange about 'that one time'.

Because it was such a hard line to slip into an episode?