Do I wish I was somebody else right now. Somebody not... married, not madly in love with a beautiful woman who can kill me with her pinkie!

Wash ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'


Buffy and Angel 1: BUFFYNANGLE4EVA!!!!!1!

Is it better the second time around? Or the third? Or tenth? This is the place to come when you have a burning desire to talk about an old episode that was just re-run.


Atropa - Aug 22, 2007 9:24:59 am PDT #5170 of 10469
The artist formerly associated with cupcakes.

I think Spike's overall arc would have worked better if after he had gotten the soul, he made a choice to go back to being evil.


Ailleann - Aug 22, 2007 9:25:52 am PDT #5171 of 10469
vanguard of the socialist Hollywood liberal homosexualist agenda

what would have kept Buffy in Sunnydale?

Crushing grief? A Hellmouth to keep an eye on? High real-estate prices?


P.M. Marc - Aug 22, 2007 9:27:20 am PDT #5172 of 10469
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

I agree with the die before rape bit, but since he didn't I'm actually glad he was on Angel because I love Season 5 and it's my understanding there would not have been S5 without Spike. You can't take the wee little puppet man or Illyria away from me!

I have to look at S5 as a separate entity from the rest of the series. I like to love a lot of individual episodes and the Connor B Arc, but the A Arc made no sense, it pings even harder than AtS usual did on race and gender issues, and a lot of the character development seemed utterly inorganic to me for anyone not named Angel or Spike.


DavidS - Aug 22, 2007 9:28:28 am PDT #5173 of 10469
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

Which just isn't an excuse or a good reason for doing things.

I think it's a great reason, maybe the best. Great character, great actor, enhances the show. Let's bend the show that way.

However, you are very right that Spike should've died.

So, I think they flinched on Giles and Spike. I think the Oz death was too early for a dark Willow arc. Riley would've been a perfect sacrificial lamb but they already killed off Joyce, so that was a no go.

I do concur with the Overall Pattern standard, though. I mean, that's even what the courts use to determine discrimination.

"You say that you don't discriminate against women, but you've had women in management positions for 20 years but not once has a woman been the right choice for a top executive position?"


P.M. Marc - Aug 22, 2007 9:31:38 am PDT #5174 of 10469
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

I think it's a great reason, maybe the best. Great character, great actor, enhances the show. Let's bend the show that way.

I think it's a great reason to EXPAND a character from one or two off to recurring or regular while that character still enhances, but that you can have to know when it's detracting from, rather than enhancing, the story or show. Which I don't think they did.


Sue - Aug 22, 2007 9:33:04 am PDT #5175 of 10469
hip deep in pie

but that you can have to know when it's detracting from, rather than enhancing, the story or show. Which I don't think they did.

I've been in this corner since Season 4.


JZ - Aug 22, 2007 9:33:28 am PDT #5176 of 10469
See? I gave everybody here an opportunity to tell me what a bad person I am and nobody did, because I fuckin' rule.

Would we rather have (and I am really curious) more dead good males, or more alive good females?

Both? Or more death all around? I do think that Spike and Giles were characters whose deaths would have made narrative sense and who weren't used consistently well when creator sentiment decided to spare them.

I think I'm going to have to go with more death for everyone, and Joss being more willing to strangle his darlings.

Also, I'm so glad Plei showed up. I've been feeling like a total poser in this conversation.


Polter-Cow - Aug 22, 2007 9:33:47 am PDT #5177 of 10469
What else besides ramen can you scoop? YOU CAN SCOOP THIS WORLD FROM DARKNESS!

Which just isn't an excuse or a good reason for doing things.

I think it's a great reason, maybe the best. Great character, great actor, enhances the show. Let's bend the show that way.

Yeah, I have to agree with Hec here. Hell, Spike was supposed to die in Season Two, right? And Mr. Trick was supposed to be the Big Bad for Season Three, but instead they shifted to the Mayor, who was the better character.

I think it's a great reason to EXPAND a character from one or two off to recurring or regular while that character still enhances, but that you can have to know when it's detracting from, rather than enhancing, the story or show. Which I don't think they did.

Ah, okay. That's a good distinction.


Vortex - Aug 22, 2007 9:36:12 am PDT #5178 of 10469
"Cry havoc and let slip the boobs of war!" -- Miracleman

And Mr. Trick was supposed to be the Big Bad for Season Three, but instead they shifted to the Mayor, who was the better character.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- Mr. Trick was wasted. He was a great character, had a fresh outlook on evil, and they wasted him when they switched to the mayor. I loved the mayor, don't get me wrong. They should have had Trick leave town instead of getting killed. He seems like the kind of villain that would say "this isn't working, I'm out"


Dana - Aug 22, 2007 9:36:32 am PDT #5179 of 10469
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.

I think it's a great reason, maybe the best. Great character, great actor, enhances the show. Let's bend the show that way.

Yabbut.

Your whole list up there (which was mostly information I didn't know) was all about guys, pretty much. Here's a list of reasons not to kill Xander, Giles, Spike, Oz, and Riley. And then you compare that to Jenny Calendar, Tara, Joyce, Anya.

I just agree that it's a trend worth looking at, whatever the ultimate conclusion.