|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:48:25 GMT -5
For the first time ever, I watched Angel last night, reason being, in case the two shows will be converging at some point I want to get the full benefit. Impressions:
-'Didn't even recognize Cordy at first without the hair.
- Faith was great
- I am SO NOT an Angel fan, although from everything I've heard about the quality of the show this season I understand that it is far, far better than my single, isolated viewing can appreciate.
- Angel's phone call to the Summers's (Grammar check please. Did I do that right?) home was the definite high point of the hour.
deborah
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:49:04 GMT -5
I absolutely loved every moment of it (except for the Evil Cordy moments). From the episode title, "Salvage" to the significance of the "Sanctuary Spell" -- the last ep in which Faith appeared was titled "Sanctuary"...fantastic.
I really appreciated Eliza's performance. She's still Faith, but with a dose or two of temperance. More willing to work with a team, not afraid to jettison weak or unreliable members of said team (Connor!).
There were so many significant moments between Faith and Wesley. In a Watcher/Slayer kind of way, you could see that Wes was really proud of her.
Imagine, though, back in Sunnydale, Dawn saying to Buffy "Angel called but he hung up on me when I told him you were here". Dont'cha think our Buff would make a call to L.A. to find out what was up?
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:50:18 GMT -5
I agree, Diane. AtS has not been suffering from the langours we've been complaining and speculating about in some BtVS episodes lately, and this episode was certainly worth the wait. Faith's battle with the Beast had Buffy's outing(s) against the uber-vamp beaten in drama and pacing. And I didn't find the bone knife a problem--the Beast made and delivered it to its master/mistress because it was ordered to. Why seeming-Cordelia WANTED such a weapon constructed, one capable of killing the Beast, is still in doubt, though. But I think it's clear the weapon was used for the purpose for which it was intended.
It also seemed clear to me, by seeming-Cordelia's expression, that the addition of Faith to the mix was not at all to her liking, nor had it figured in her planning. She doesn't want an LA Slayer complicating the equation; I wonder what (other than trying to have Faith killed in prison with a Bringer knife) she'll try to do about it?
The fact that Cordelia is NOT a manifestation of the First (she's HIGHLY touchable, per the eeewww with Connor) makes me wonder if anyone who has a touch of demon in them can be influenced (to the degree of their demonosity?) by the First. Vamps, obviously. Spike, also obviously, despite the soul (but still, now that he's conscious of the influence and prepared to resist?). Therefore Angel, possibly, and Angelus; also Buffy and Faith, possibly, inasmuch as the source of the Slayer powers, we now know, is demonic. Evidently Willow--apparently because of her innate capacity for magic. Also, somewhat less possibly, Anya (now human, but does some taint of demon remain?).
A while back, we were speculating about the outcome of the present challenge to the forces of Good being determined by the non-superpowered among the Scoobies. If this formulation of mine proves to be true, that subtracts Willow and possibly Anya, maybe Dawn (her continuing "keyness" might be a factor) and leaves...
just Xander.
Are you paying attention, Robert?
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:51:27 GMT -5
Briefly (hah!), names that end in *s* traditionally get a *'s* added as a possessive. Plurals ending with *s* (e.g., the Robinsons'; the mountains' grandeur) make their possessives with a final apostrophe, whether plurals of common nouns or of proper names, per the examples.
However, there is acceptable variation. Currently, either *James'* or *James's* is an acceptable form (proper names only).
Your friendly resident Grammar Nazi.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:52:32 GMT -5
I have read through much of two linked sites that have excellently executed Spike fiction, some of it historical and existing within the same milieu/universe. The first of the sites belongs to "coquette"; the second, strictly historical site, which one can reach via a link to coquette's site, belongs to "peasant." Peasant's stories, in particular, are brutal, well researched and soundly hypothecized, excellently paced--well executed in all respects. However, she posits that (since reproduction is impossible--my interpretation) vampires will screw practically anything that has a suitably sized orifice and that, within vampire "families" like the one comprised of Angelus, Darla, Drusilla, and William/Spike, forced sex is among the ways a Sire typically enforces his will and domination over his "childe"/fledgling vampires. They also do it as recreation, pretty indiscriminately. I find this entirely credible, and it's certainly not the sole focus of the stories--far from it!--but it's completely graphic and rather off-putting if you can't tolerate reading fiction that contains such scenes. Not all of Peasant's do--only when it happens to come up, or William/Spike has been particularly obstreporous or disobediant to Angelus' very strict ideas of household order and appropriate submission to the Sire. There's also a fair amount of graphic torture (which, as we know, Angelus has a great fondness for and considers to be both an art form and a type of recreation). Coquette, in turn, has set several of her stories in this milieu originally formulated by Peasant. It's really fine reading for the strong-stomached. The URLs: Peasant's fiction is at www.ficbitch.com/peasants_plot/Coquette's is at lavraiecoquette.tripod.com/contents.htmlNan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:54:50 GMT -5
Good analysis of Spike's "relationship" with the Buffy bot. What a deal. He could have a smoke and sex at the same time and she'd still swoon over his washboard abs. I think Warren made a mistake going evil. He could have made a fortune selling sex bots.
Rusty Goode
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:55:25 GMT -5
Remember, there's also our Scubie email.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:56:02 GMT -5
Your point being?
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:56:45 GMT -5
It just occurred to me that historical Angelus, in the flashbacks, is a solemn, manipulative killjoy, whereas present Angelus is nastily quippy, laughs quite a lot, and plays brutal practical jokes. He's seldom solemn or dour--instead, Angel is.
Historically, Angelus is mostly seen interacting with his family: Darla, Dru, and Spike; whereas in the present, he's interacting mostly with humans, although there are quite a few exchanges with Spike and Drusilla over the course of the Judge plot. Is that the difference--how he relates to vampires of his own lineage and to humans? Or is it something else?
Anybody have any idea what might be the significance of this really conspicuous change in demeanor?
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:57:26 GMT -5
Well . . . we don't get to see much of the historical Angelus. When we see him trying to strangle William/Spike in the mine shaft, he's furious with Spike, so that accounts for his mood. When we see him in China, he's already got his soul back and is trying to be a vampire anyhow - but he's really Angel, not Angelus here.
The only other flashbacks I can remember were in "Amends"? And - I can't remember details - but I think he was doing some nasty grinning and "joking" at his victims expense. Not to the extent he did in Season 2, or current Angel, but I think there was a touch of it.
Also - I guess we can just assume that 100 years or more can change a guy. And I read Angelus' sort of . . . wild joy . . as resulting from "being freed" after a long dark tea time with that unwanted soul. He didn't experience that element until he was first freed by sex with Buffy in Season 2 of BtVS. He's . . . exultant, thrilled to be let loose.
Spring Summers
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:58:35 GMT -5
You know, I realize that there's no possibility to build a show around Xander, but are the folks at scifi.com trying to tell me that putting a stake in the show is a better option? Gotta say I'm a little annoyed by that.
Yes....(sighs heavily)...I know that Xander isn't a central character, but jeez, he's a better alternative than throwing out the Jossverse completely. Isn't he? C'mon, isn't he (insert photo of a grown man pouting like a child here)?
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 13:59:18 GMT -5
Angelus talking to Dawn was great. I also think Eliza looks better every time I see her. She brings an energy to every scene. She even made Connor interesting (I don't blame the actor for that, by the way. They've made Connor into too much of a Johnny One Note these days. I hate my evil dad...blah blah blah). Charisma Carpenter said it best. Eliza's gonna be a big ole star one of these days.
I'm getting goosebumps just thinking about the interaction between Faith and the Scoobies. Everyone has changed so much, and sparks will be flying everywhere. Show of hands from anyone who thinks we've waited long enough to see Eliza and James on screen together. There's a biker she wouldn't mind riding. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 14:00:15 GMT -5
Spring, have you followed Angel the Series? Between the two series, there are a whole lot more Angelus flashbacks than that, though of course those on BtVS pretty much (some exceptions, like the Cornish mine shaft in Fool for Love)ended with Angel's departure to LA.
Alternatively, does anyone with more familiarity with AtS than I (I've seen only occasional episodes up to last season, although I've read ALL the scripts) care to comment on the perceived difference in personal style between archival Angelus and present Angelus? Is it observer error--just an artifact of my selective viewing--or is it real? And, if it's real, WHY?
Nan Dibble
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 14:01:03 GMT -5
From the couple of comments I've seen from pro TV reviewers, the premise of ED's new series is stale and awful--going back in time to avert assorted disasters: done to death several times over in recent years.
What if ME just held off until ED's new series had time to tank and THEN approached her again about playing Faith?
It still might work, even though we'd then have to wait until next January, at the earliest, for the spin-off series to begin. Oh, what would we do with ourselves over all that time!
Woe, woe!
Nan Dibble
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 9, 2003 14:02:01 GMT -5
Thanks Vlad.
I apologize for not reading the note at the top of the board carefully enough. I would say I was just so thrilled I didn't remember, but actually I just didn't pay enough attention to the posting rules ahead of time. Dumb of me, I know one should do that. Anyway, I'm fine, and will definitely remember that rule! (Nan) ..whimper...snicker.
Patti T.
|
|