They kinda already did their "homage" to Superman II back in the first season of Angel with IWRY.
And that folks is what they call a deal breaker. I'm not well versed enough in my Angel history to recall that. Ok so I'll revise. After watching Not Fade Away it ocurred to me it might be fun to see two moments 1) to play against expectation and to see a more William than Spike guy wearing a blazer and reciting poetry present day and 2) that guy turning in the blazer to don the leather duster and become Spike again. It's more symbolic than anything else and reunites the audience with the character. To have a scene centered around Spike putting his coat on means not only is he back within the story but back for us as an audience as well. The whole poetry reading blazer thing is just something I cooked up to make the moment more dramatic and I think it would be fun to see him that way first. Maybe I took the long road but all I really wanted to emphasize was that symbolic moment and I probably took away from my point by trying to set up how it might happen.
that guy turning in the blazer to don the leather duster
My mind just went to a very twisted Mr. Rogers place.
Kristen wrote this while ago:
The book is called Scene of the Crime. It's a collection of crime scene photos found in the LAPD archives. It's a really cool book.
Damn cool book. Got my copy today and I just want to squeeze it, and hug it, and pet it and damnit, if it hadn't said it's name was Frank, I even would have called it George.
I'm watching the S3 Angel DVDs for the first time. I'm quite amused by the Billy commentary.
Ooo, I told Allyson she should listen to that one. It made me appreciate the episode technically, even if I couldn't get past the, y'know, with the whatzis. And yeah, they were very funny, too.
With the exception of the title, the episode didn't bug me much. It didn't have me diving for the remote to rewatch, either. But, you know, didn't hate it.
The commentary cracked me up. "Everybody's wrong...We're so boring...Ooooh, that's cool."
I'm a big fan of that commentary as well. And the episode.
With the exception of the title, the episode didn't bug me much.
What's wrong with the title? What do you think it should have been titled? (Note: inquisitive tone, not bitchy.)
The Line What Joss Wrote bugged me a lot, and try as I might, I cannot separate it from the story. Plus at the time I had a crazy-making argument on TWoP about some aspect, so I sorta associate the episode with feeling frustrated and terribly incoherent.
Which line? Is it the primordial misogyny thing? Or a different thing?
ETA: I don't really remember the post-episode conversation. I think that maybe I walked away.
The primoridial misogyny, yes. The "Blame Joss!" chorus made me laugh and laugh.
I remember reading the conversation here, and being amused by it because it wasn't my problem. Heh. I think my issue at TWoP was some kind of weird thing that only bothers me, but since I was explaining it badly I got frustrated, and that did nothing to improve my temper. I may still have the thread, actually; I saved it for a while to remind myself to calm the hell down.
I feel like somewhere Tim is moaning, "First they bring up Spike again, and now they're talking about 'Billy.' Sigh. Let's talk about 'That Old Gang of Mine,' and then you can make me drink tabasco sauce!"
