JM Interview Angel Mag 01/04 Pt I

[deborah]

I love the guy but some of his pronouncements about Spike can just drive me to despair if I let them. The following interview is a case in point. So far I've only read the first page (will probably save the rest till I get home) but he's already said that his sacrifice was just for Buffy and nothing to do with selflessness, but that he should really move on because Buffy loves Angel.

A fanfic writer that I like very much has said that she never takes what JM says about Spike seriously or lets it upset her because he's been wrong so often. (He was certainly wrong about Spike never being able to win a fight against Angel.) So I've been trying to adopt her attitude and not let his incomprehensible statements get to me. Here's the interview:

deborah


www.buffy.nu/article.php3?id_article=2450

From Angel Magazine January 2004

James Marsters - Angel Magazine Interview

By Jeremy A. Lawson
2003 - 12 - 31st

« Previous Article - Next Article »

When we last saw Spike on Buffy he was, well... well done. He has just sacrificed everything for the love of his death, Buffy Summers,
and managed to save all of human-and-demon-kind in the process. So just where does that leave everyone’s favorite bleach-blond
vampire with a soul?

Angel Magazine caught up with James Marsters during a break from filming an early season five episode, to get the low-down on his
transition to the new series, Spike’s new ghostly (un-life) and lots more...

Interview by Jeremy A. Lawson

ANGEL MAGAZINE: It’s all new for you at the moment - new cast, new crew, new show. How’s the adjustment going?

JAMES MARSTERS: Everyone has welcomed me with open arms here and made me feel really comfortable. A lot of the writers, producers
and directors are the same [as on Buffy], so it hasn’t been as much of an adjustment as I thought it would be. I feel very much at
home, I’m in the same damn coat, you know?

And how’s Spike adjusting?

He’s hating life. He doesn’t think his reward for saving the world should have to be hanging around Angel, not being able to touch
anything or smell anything or get any tail or anything

Does Spike feel under-appreciated by the Angel gang?

I don’t think that Spike really considers himself a champion. I don’t really think he thinks what he did was that amazing, but he’ll use it
to try to get them to save him. He’ll put that out and guilt-trip them like crazy, but if you were to ask him, I think he’d probably have to
admit that he was just wearing the amulet. He was almost more of a guinea pig than he was a hero.

Did Spike sacrifice himself out of selflessness or did he do it for Buffy?

Oh, for Buffy. Definitely for Buffy. They thought the amulet was going to help but they had no idea what it was going to do. He went in
there willing to die to back Buffy up, I don’t know if he cares about saving the world. You know, Buffy? Yeah, save her. She’s cute. But
Spike really should move on. She loves Angel.

Does Spike still have hope for his future?

He is very afraid that he’s going to slip away from the world completely. He assumes, and I think correctly, that he will be going to Hell.
I don’t think he believes that getting fried by an amulet makes up for all the evil that he ever did. So he’s scared. And desperately
trying to get help to stay. But he’s a fighter, man. He’s not going to give up. So he has hope that he’s going to save his ass.

Aside from their shared past as William the Bloody and Angelus and their shared love for Buffy what do Spike and Angel have in
common?

You really can’t underestimate that crazy vampire stuff that happened between them. I hear tales of guys who come back from war who
really can’t talk about it to anyone except someone else who has been through it - there’s no context and too much to explain. I think
that’s really true with Angel and Spike. They’ve both done things that we can’t even imagine and then they’ve had to come to terms with
it because they both got souls. I think they both know what it is to be alone. When you’re a vampire in the company of humans, you
really are alone because they don’t understand you at all.

Does Spike’s presence alone bring little hints of Angelus out in Angel?

That’s what Spike is trying to do. He’s trying to get Angel to cut the bullshit and admit who he really is. Spike doesn’t really understand
the journey that Angel has been through, that he’s not just playing champion for the fun of it, so he thinks Angel is being kind of
mendacious. I think at some point Spike is going to have to come to a better understanding about what Angel is really trying to do with
his life.

In a way, it seems as though Spike is being repaid for his past transgressions against humanity despite what he did to save the world.
Would Spike prefer to be dead?

Yep. Go out clean. Go out in a beautiful blaze of glory. Or if you’re going to come back, come back and be able to enjoy life. But to be
brought back as a ghost? I don’t think anybody fantasizes about ending up as a ghost. He can’t even go check out the world. If I was a
ghost, I’d be hanging out in the locker rooms with the girls, but he can’t even do that. Spike’s gotta hang around Wolfram & Hart.

Who do you prefer playing as an actor, the evil, dark Spike or the kinder, gentler Spike we got to see on Buffy?

I think playing the bad-ass evil guy is always fun, but if I’d only been playing that for the last six years, I’d be bored with the role. I like
to play variety. One of my favourite things about the role is that it hasn’t stayed in one place. It’s gone all over the map. I like to say
that I started out as a super-villain and went to wacky neighbour for a season and then the wrong boyfriend for a couple of seasons and
then the redeemed man. That’s kind of like four roles in one.

It’s a testament to the writers that they can take Spike over such a broad arc successfully... It’s an amazing thing because in the
beginning he seemed to be a direct threat to the theme, which was that vampires are not meant to have human aspects. They’re really
just meant to be metaphors for the pain of growing up. And that’s why the vampires in this universe are not beautiful when they kill. In
other vampire lore, they have pointy teeth and a human face and that’s a very sexy look. That’s something that [series creator] Joss
[Whedon] denied the vampires for a specific reason. We’re hideously ugly when we kill. To have a vampire without a soul who the
audience responded to and had compassion for was a very weird fit in that universe. It was really amazing when they decided to include
Spike in the show as a permanent fixture.

Do you think that Spike’s appeal to the fans was so broad and so vast that Mutant Enemy had to keep him around?

I don’t think Joss lives to please the fans. The fact that the fans reacted well, it does my heart good, but I think ultimately it was the
episode where Spike came looking for Drusilla in the third season of Buffy when he was pathetic and drunk and weak, Joss looked at
the character and for the first time told me that he thought there was enough mileage to explore the character more. Because evil is not
cool to Joss. He doesn’t spend any energy trying to make it look cool. And so it was when Spike got pathetic, Joss thought "that’s
interesting".

********************************************

Article is too long to copy on one post. See next post for remainder of article - we'll call it Part II.

[deborah]

Continued from previous post, copied from: www.buffy.nu/article.php3?id_article=2450

deborah

How tough is it to tap into a situation where you’re really at the base depths of your character’s life?

Horrible. Absolutely horrible. I dabbled with the Method when I started doing television because it’s so intimate that the camera will
catch you lying. The quick way of explaining the Method is the actor develops a fantasy life, a fantasy world that is so detailed that he
can release into that fantasy and improvise and therefore have real experiences in front of the camera as opposed to deciding
intellectually what you’re going to do and mapping it out. But I discovered that the Method will eat you alive in television. If you do the
Method for a stage play, first of all it doesn’t work, but it’s only three months long. If you do it for a movie, it’s two or three or maybe
four months. But if you do the Method for six years, it can really bite you in the butt. The camera wants to document something actually
happening, so if you’re playing a guy who is breaking up, you have to go there.

I went home shivering in tears a lot. I really did put myself through all that crap. And I can’t watch it now because I don’t want to go
back there. It’s real. And I know what I was thinking. I can’t watch James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause anymore because all my life I
wondered how he came up with that incredible performance and I’m starting to realize that he was simply in that much pain. I don’t
know what he was going through, but it was very painful. Yeah. I can’t watch that anymore. Wow.

Your background is in stage work. How does acting for the camera differ from theater where you have the instant gratification of the
audience?

It’s a whole different job. On stage you’re like a Benihana (hibachi) chef. A lot of people give you the ingredients you need, but when
the product is made and sold to the customer, it’s all done by the actor. The actor has to cook it up every night, and that’s a big
responsibility. In television or film, you’re just one of the condiments and the chef is the editor later. So your job shrinks down to
minutia but within that it’s as challenging as stage because the camera needs you to be much more honest, so much more immediate.

In stage work, you spend a lot of time creating the illusion that `this is happening for the first time’ but the camera will catch that
illusion. The camera wants it to really happen for the first time so it’s really about trusting yourself. The audience is paying for the right
to stare at you. They’re not expecting anything more interesting than what they live, they just want to stare because you can’t do that in
real life. If you were able to stare at any human being this close for an hour you’d learn a lot about them. It takes a lot of courage to
stand there and not try to hide.

Is it possible to deliver that same type of performance when acting for the camera?

The greatest example is Sir Lawrence Olivier, who was a great stage actor, one of the best obviously. But on film? Not so great. You can
see the man acting. You can see the strings being pulled on the puppet. There’s a great story about Dustin Hoffman staying up all
night when he was preparing to do the teeth drilling scene in Marathon Man. Lawrence Olivier looks at him and Hoffman’s eyes are all
bloodshot and baggy and Olivier says, "My dear boy, why don’t you try acting?" My response to that is, ’Larry look at the dailies `cause
Dustin is kicking your ass!’

On stage, you have to translate the inner workings of a mind and put it into your body. When a character changes his mind or notices
something, you have to really physicalize it, push it out and that’s what performance is. You cannot perform for the camera. The camera
hates performance. The camera knows what you’re thinking, all you have to do is think it. And you have to be very careful to make that
transition or else you’re going to be false.

Have you given any thought to directing film or television? I could fake my way through it, and I might end up with a really good
episode, but I don’t think I’d really earn the money. And until that’s true, it’s kind of a waste of time. I’ve given more thought to
producing, actually. I would very much like to produce. I’ve produced a lot of theater, and I’m good at it. I’m good at convincing people,
getting people excited to do things they normally wouldn’t do. I would really love to do a film version of Macbeth. It’s never been done
well. I would love to act in it, but I’d never direct myself in a film. I give it up to guys like Mel Gibson. Braveheart was phenomenal.

You did a European tour this past summer with your band, Ghost of the Robot, and now you’re playing dates here in the US. How is that
going?

We’ve been having really good rehearsals and we’re working on some new material. About half of our set isn’t even on this album it’s
gonna be on the new album.

How does acting compare to musicianship? Are they two totally different worlds?

Music is a real taskmaster. Technically, to create something that seems effortless in an emotional expression actually takes slavish
devotion to beat and note and one little tiny mistake disrupts the whole thing. In singing, you can’t release to the emotion of the song
because it will clam up your voice. You get so into the song and you start to get sloppy, which is a weird thing because music is such a
personal expression, such an intangible expression between lyric and melody and chords, but it is a very technical thing to create. I find
live music very refreshing because frankly in television, if you mess up you get another take. Psychologically, that’s a big difference
from being out in front of an audience. If you hit one string wrong in an hour and a half, that’s what everyone is going to remember.
You didn’t carry the audience to that other place, the charm didn’t come. And more importantly, your brothers, your mates are gonna be
pissed at you - you didn’t hold up your end of the bargain. You can soundcheck for six hours if you want, but when you hit the stage
and you can’t see anybody anymore it’s all different. But through all that crap, you still reach out and find them and come together and
that feeling is exhilarating.

Is that a feeling that Spike will ever come to know?

There are very, very few people Spike connects with actually. His connection with Buffy is one of the reasons he was so attracted to her.
He doesn’t really include very many people in his life. He’s a total absolute loner. Well, not total absolute…

[Laura]

deborah said:

I love the guy but some of his pronouncements about Spike can just drive me to dispair if I let them. The following interview is a case in point. So far I've only read the first page (will probably save the rest till I get home) but he's already said that his sacrifice was just for Buffy and nothing to do with selflessness, but that he should really move on because Buffy loves Angel.

A fanfic writer that I like very much has said that she never takes what JM says about Spike seriously or lets it upset her because he's been wrong so often. (He was certainly wrong about Spike never being able to win a fight against Angel.) So I've been trying to adopt her attitude and not let his incomprehensible statements get to me. Here's the interview:

deborah

For what it's worth Deborah, and for all that this interview is appearing in a January issue -- it very much sounds to me like this interview was conducted pre-Destiny. I think that we've already seen everything that JM is talking about here, and we already know how things are starting to turn out. So I wouldn't get too worked up about it.

[SpringSummers]

deborah said:

I love the guy but some of his pronouncements about Spike can just drive me to dispair if I let them. The following interview is a case in point. So far I've only read the first page (will probably save the rest till I get home) but he's already said that his sacrifice was just for Buffy and nothing to do with selflessness, but that he should really move on because Buffy loves Angel.

A fanfic writer that I like very much has said that she never takes what JM says about Spike seriously or lets it upset her because he's been wrong so often. (He was certainly wrong about Spike never being able to win a fight against Angel.) So I've been trying to adopt her attitude and not let his incomprehensible statements get to me. Here's the interview:

deborah

Let me second Laura's thoughts.

deb - From what I've seen and read, I like James and think he is a very bright, nice, talented guy. But I don't have any reason to put his (or any of the actors) thoughts about BtVS and AtS and Spike above my own.

Most of us S'cubies pay a lot more attention to the characters and overall arc than I think the actors do (or have time to do, or need to do). I think a lot harder about an opinion you or Dave or Laura or Nan or Karen (etc) express than I do an opinion James or SMG (e.g.) express about the Jossverse.

I've gotten some great insights from the S'cubie essays and posts (and other fan site essays and analysis) - but very few from listening to actor interviews. If it's not Joss, well - it's not Joss.

James' does a fantastic job portraying Spike, and he's good to his fans. That's all I need or want from him - well, I can think of other things I might want from him, but that is a whole 'nother story.

ALSO: Thanks for posting this!

[deborah]

SpringSummers said:

Let me second Laura's thoughts.

deb - From what I've seen and read, I like James and think he is a very bright, nice, talented guy. But I don't have any reason to put his (or any of the actors) thoughts about BtVS and AtS and Spike above my own.

Most of us S'cubies pay a lot more attention to the characters and overall arc than I think the actors do (or have time to do, or need to do). I think a lot harder about an opinion you or Dave or Laura or Nan or Karen (etc) express than I do an opinion James or SMG (e.g.) express about the Jossverse.

I've gotten some great insights from the S'cubie essays and posts (and other fan site essays and analysis) - but very few from listening to actor interviews. If it's not Joss, well - it's not Joss.

James' does a fantastic job portraying Spike, and he's good to his fans. That's all I need or want from him - well, I can think of other things I might want from him, but that is a whole 'nother story.

ALSO: Thanks for posting this!

I don't know what point AtS was in filming at the time the interview took place - James may have been mindful of spoilage in that the Angel & Buffy magazines are UK publications. But regardless, all the way back in "Just Rewards" Spike tells Angel that he sacrified himself for "....love, honor and all the right reasons..." so I just can't understand how JM can say that it was just for Buffy! As I said, some many of JM's pronouncements about Spike are fairly incomprehensible to me and this interview definitely falls into that category.

Thanks to you and Laura for your comments.

deborah

[SpringSummers]

deborah said:

I don't know what point AtS was in filming at the time the interview took place - James may have been mindful of spoilage in that the Angel & Buffy magazines are UK publications. But regardless, all the way back in "Just Rewards" Spike tells Angel that he sacrified himself for "....love, honor and all the right reasons..." so I just can't understand how JM can say that it was just for Buffy! As I said, some many of JM's pronouncements about Spike are fairly incomprehensible to me and this interview definitely falls into that category.

Thanks to you and Laura for your comments.

deborah

Well - I'll take a stab at comprehending the (I agree) seemingly incomprehensible . . .

When I read James' comments, it seems to me there are several things going on:

1) He's just not paying close attention and is literally forgetting things.

2) He likes to talk and to talk off the top of his head . . . doesn't mind being inconsistent and taking a chance on being totally wrong and saying things he hasn't completely thought out.

2) He's projecting his own thoughts and feelings about himself on to the character of Spike. He's made many comments that suggest to me that he believes he's been on the short end of the stick with some of his major relationships, and that he's something of a "love's bitch" himself. Maybe he can't let himself believe anything better for Spike than he can let himself believe (for whatever reason) about himself.

[Julia, wrought iron-y]

SpringSummers said:

Well - I'll take a stab at comprehending the (I agree) seemingly incomprehensible . . .

When I read James' comments, it seems to me there are several things going on:

1) He's just not paying close attention and is literally forgetting things.

2) He likes to talk and to talk off the top of his head . . . doesn't mind being inconsistent and taking a chance on being totally wrong and saying things he hasn't completely thought out.

2) He's projecting his own thoughts and feelings about himself on to the character of Spike. He's made many comments that suggest to me that he believes he's been on the short end of the stick with some of his major relationships, and that he's something of a "love's bitch" himself. Maybe he can't let himself believe anything better for Spike than he can let himself believe (for whatever reason) about himself.

I think, from reading this, that all you say is true, but I'd add one more thing: although he denies doing "the method" anymore, I think there's one big insecurity of Spike's that James is holding on to. No matter what Buffy really feels, if, indeed, she herself knows what that is, Spike fears that she still loves Angel the most.

Julia, actually there wass a whole lot more to that thought. I wonder where it fled to

[SpringSummers]

Julia said:

I think, from reading this, that all you say is true, but I'd add one more thing: although he denies doing "the method" anymore, I think there's one big insecurity of Spike's that James is holding on to. No matter what Buffy really feels, if, indeed, she herself knows what that is, Spike fears that she still loves Angel the most.

Julia, actually there wass a whole lot more to that thought. I wonder where it fled to

Good point. I agree with all you say, and that's a good one to add to the list of trying to understand where James is coming from.

I mean - I agree that Spike hangs on to this insecurity, this suspicion - regardless of what Buffy may or may not feel. And if his actor feels the same way - well, I don't think you're gonna see Joss disabusing him of the notion. It serves.

[Julia, wrought iron-y]

SpringSummers said:

Good point. I agree with all you say, and that's a good one to add to the list of trying to understand where James is coming from.

I mean - I agree that Spike hangs on to this insecurity, this suspicion - regardless of what Buffy may or may not feel. And if his actor feels the same way - well, I don't think you're gonna see Joss disabusing him of the notion. It serves.

It definately serves: the actor sees the character in the same place that the character's deepest insecurity lies.

Julia, wishing the feast fairy would drop by my house with sumptuous nonfsattening treats, because as things sit we're having Cheerios, no milk, for New Years Eve

[makd]

Deb

Not to fret. James Marsters is a fine actor who is as adept at giving an audience what it wants as he is at giving a reporter a story worth it's ink.

He's also a solid company man. He usually spouts the Jossline at cons and interviews, often seeming to be ME's liaison with the outside world. He says everything he thinks his boss wants him to say.

Occasionally he hits a speedbump in his verbal ramblings. And they are big speedbumps.

Several years ago, he stated that Spike "would never" have a soul. "It would destroy the character", or some such rot. Bingo: Spike gets a soul.

Would Spike and Buffy ever get it on? "No way", he once said (or words to that effect). Bingo: Spike and Buffy get it on. and on. and on.

On another occasion, he told an audience that Spike didn't go to Africa to get a soul, but to get the chip out. Joss Whedon was present, and he said, "Wrong; it was to get ensouled." (Again, or words to that effect.)

Now, he's saying in some interviews I've seen floating around (but can't recall where; I should check with buffy.nu), that NoWay Would Spike Ever Become Human.
Ever. Right, James; if you think you are.....

Hell, he can't even cite his favorite Spike quotes to fans at cons! ("Don't remember any of the dialogue", he says.) I don't think he (or anyone else from ME) even watches the show! If they had been, there wouldn't have been the seasons 6 and 7 we saw, as we saw them!

So, my dear Chicago friend, don't lose heart with him and don't despair.

Strangely, he reminds me, personality-wise a lot of one of my nephews, and quite a few of my daughter's friends, my former college cohorts, and the students and jr. faculty I've mentored.

He's basically, from what I've seen in the con tapes, transcripts, and interviews, a nice guy with a glamorous job. He's trying to make a nice comfortable living after years of remembered near-starvation and humble living conditions. He doesn't want to bollix it up; he wants to be comfortable in his seniority. He's also, I think, making up for lost time, but that's clearly OT.

He's our guy, after all: actor, imperfect, actor, imperfect, actor, imperfect. He bears some insecurities (Hello, aren't we all insecure?), needs some therapy (Hello again, 'cause, online addiction?), he speaks without thinking (Could he possibly be on the same DNA line as I?), and thinks he's sexier and cooler than he is. (okay; forgot: He is sexy and cool. Sorry about that. Not the sexy and cool, just the forgetfullness of it.)

In that, he's closer to our REAL GUY (Spike, who's not real at all. Strange, no?), whom we love because of his faults, not just in spite of them.

So, again, don't feel bad; don't lose hope. Spikey is okay. Spikey is corporeal. Spikey is sexy and funny and smartass and obnoxious and graceful. JM just plays him on TV. What does he know?

[makd]

Julia said:

It definately serves: the actor sees the character in the same place that the character's deepest insecurity lies.

Which further attests to the actor's skill.

[Julia, wrought iron-y]

makd said:

Which further attests to the actor's skill.

Oh, yeah.

As I mentioned before, I first remember JM from theater reviews in the Seattle paper- even in small parts, in houses where the actors and the front row are uncomfortably aware of each other's physical presence, he was mentioned.

Julia, who had another sentence there but has teenagers and has lost it.

[deborah]

makd said:

Deb

Not to fret. James Marsters is a fine actor who is as adept at giving an audience what it wants as he is at giving a reporter a story worth it's ink.

He's also a solid company man. He usually spouts the Jossline at cons and interviews, often seeming to be ME's liaison with the outside world. He says everything he thinks his boss wants him to say.

Occasionally he hits a speedbump in his verbal ramblings. And they are big speedbumps.

Several years ago, he stated that Spike "would never" have a soul. "It would destroy the character", or some such rot. Bingo: Spike gets a soul.

Would Spike and Buffy ever get it on? "No way", he once said (or words to that effect). Bingo: Spike and Buffy get it on. and on. and on.

On another occasion, he told an audience that Spike didn't go to Africa to get a soul, but to get the chip out. Joss Whedon was present, and he said, "Wrong; it was to get ensouled." (Again, or words to that effect.)

Now, he's saying in some interviews I've seen floating around (but can't recall where; I should check with buffy.nu), that NoWay Would Spike Ever Become Human.
Ever. Right, James; if you think you are.....

Hell, he can't even cite his favorite Spike quotes to fans at cons! ("Don't remember any of the dialogue", he says.) I don't think he (or anyone else from ME) even watches the show! If they had been, there wouldn't have been the seasons 6 and 7 we saw, as we saw them!

<snip>

Thanks, Makd. I would have posted sooner but forgot to check this thread all afternoon.

Besides all the examples of JM being wrong about Spike that you mentioned in your post is my recent favorite. Back in October when Kristen did that EOnline! TV interview from the set of AtS he said that he hoped Spike would never get into a fist fight with Angel because Angel would kick his ass - he was certain he'd lose. Then we have "Destiny." I had wondered if JM had just been deliberately dealing out misinformation or if he was truly taken by surprise. Well, I read an interview from the AtS 100th show party thing they had and he mentioned being taken by surprise - that he'd never thought Spike could best Angel in a fight.

Oh, and there was that statement about Spike not having the intelligence to be a jester. Spike not intelligent??? He said he had the emotional maturity of a twelve year old which is generally true, or at least was for quite a while, but he has always been among the sharpest and most insightful of the Jossverse characters so for him to refer to him as less than intelligent is preposterous.

Although I knew that JM doesn't remember his lines from previous shows (although he can recite Shakespear plays he hasn't performed in years) I was disappointed to hear read that he said Spike's sacrifice was all about Buffy and nought to do with wanting to save the world, given the JW statement about "....love, honor and all the right reasons..." Not only that but Spike has strongly suggested many times this season that he is a white hat, that he doesn't fight on the side of evil anymore, as well as making a number of self sacrifices for people he dislikes or at least professes to dislike (Angel) and people he barely knows.

It's amazing to me that he can nail Spike so perfectly and be so clueless about him.

I read or listen to him and just shake my head in utter bewilderment. But I admire him no less for all his bizarre opinions.


deborah

[LadyDi]

deborah said:

<snip>

Thanks, Makd. I would have posted sooner but forgot to check this thread all afternoon.

Besides all the examples of JM being wrong about Spike that you mentioned in your post is my recent favorite. Back in October when Kristen did that EOnline! TV interview from the set of AtS he said that he hoped Spike would never get into a fist fight with Angel because Angel would kick his ass - he was certain he'd lose. Then we have "Destiny." I had wondered if JM had just been deliberately dealing out misinformation or if he was truly taken by surprise. Well, I read an interview from the AtS 100th show party thing they had and he mentioned being taken by surprise - that he'd never thought Spike could best Angel in a fight.

Oh, and there was that statement about Spike not having the intelligence to be a jester. Spike not intelligent??? He said he had the emotional maturity of a twelve year old which is generally true, or at least was for quite a while, but he has always been among the sharpest and most insightful of the Jossverse characters so for him to refer to him as less than intelligent is preposterous.

Although I knew that JM doesn't remember his lines from previous shows (although he can recite Shakespear plays he hasn't performed in years) I was disappointed to hear read that he said Spike's sacrifice was all about Buffy and nought to do with wanting to save the world, given the JW statement about "....love, honor and all the right reasons..." Not only that but Spike has strongly suggested many times this season that he is a white hat, that he doesn't fight on the side of evil anymore, as well as making a number of self sacrifices for people he dislikes or at least professes to dislike (Angel) and people he barely knows.

It's amazing to me that he can nail Spike so perfectly and be so clueless about him.


I read or listen to him and just shake my head in utter bewilderment. But I admire him no less for all his bizarre opinions.


deborah

ITA! (emphasis mine)

I've always wondered where he comes up with all this crazy talk when he's been on set and performing this character for so long. Sometimes I think James isn't really all there - Spike just takes over.
I think it's easier for him to remember Shakespeare, as opposed to lines of dialog from BtVS or AtS 'cuz he spent more time rehearsing for the Shakespeare. For the show, he has to learn his lines and say them, only to forget them so he can move on to the next ep.

[makd]

LadyDi said:

ITA! (emphasis mine)

I've always wondered where he comes up with all this crazy talk when he's been on set and performing this character for so long. Sometimes I think James isn't really all there - Spike just takes over.
I think it's easier for him to remember Shakespeare, as opposed to lines of dialog from BtVS or AtS 'cuz he spent more time rehearsing for the Shakespeare. For the show, he has to learn his lines and say them, only to forget them so he can move on to the next ep.

Right there with you, Scooter. The Shakespeare - and anything else he's rehearsed and memorized for weeks on end is "up there" - filed away to be recalled at a moment's notice. However, the TV scripts aren't recallable because they are rarely/minimally/not rehearsed, so, no recall. I'd be willing to bet coffee at Starbucks, though, that fight scenes and fight dialogue can be recalled, since THEY require precision and beaucoup rehearsal time.

As to where some of his more doosy comments about Spike, S/B, A/B, etc? Well, he works to help put the shows together, doesn't mean he SEES the finished product.

Course, he does seem to have access to Spike's mindset - that is, like Spike, he thinks Buffy is in love with Angel, and loves him (Spike) as a friend. He follows canon; problem with canon is, IMHO, none of the writers (including the great JW) actors, etc. ever freakin' watch it!

Once, just once, I'd love to hear the god Joss discuss 'ships (both generally and specifically) after having marathoned all 144 episodes of BtVS, 2 a day, (a la FX) but without commercial interruption. He'd surely have a better appreciation of where the fanbase is and why, for example, some fans don't give a hoot if Buffy Anne Summers EVER appears on Angel.