|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 22, 2003 10:15:28 GMT -5
OK..I'm almost a week late, but thanks to a friend, I finally saw it. Interesting review - but I think I'm going to take issue with it. (which is usual for me as I love to play Devil's Advocate (although in this case, it's actually ANGEL's Advocate :^). In a nutshell: While things DO fall apart, I'm not quite sure the centre isn't holding. Let me start from the beginning: Joss doesn't do the obvious. Watching 11+ years of Buffy/Angelverse shows - he has a penchant for upsetting expectations. When I heard that Angel & Co. were taking over W&H, the obvious thought that came to mind was: siigh...let's see how this will go: "They accept, even though it's a clear trap, thinking that they won't be tempted into evil, they ARE tempted into evil - which grows out of escalating grey to black areas - they realize they've become evil - ultimately their innate goodness triumphs and they reject evil. By the end of the year, they turn the tables on Evil, score a major victory, and quit (or destroy) W&H (which, of course, can never REALLY be destroyed b/c without evil, we'd all be Angels :^)" Nan's review fits right in with this prediction. So is that going to happen? Am I soo smart I can predict the whole season ahead of time? I think not. And I think an alternative reading of "Unleashed" is possible- one which takes us away from the expected storyline . Rather than it being a harbinger of the destruction of the Fang Gang, I think it can be seen as an affirmation of their core values. As Nan points out, the episode starts with the strained dinner between the Gang - complete with anti-listening devices and accusations against Gunn. Then we get the central story - Nina - a woman who is becoming a monster - a werewolf. Is her life over? Is she doomed to destruction and the loss of a "normal life"? She thinks so. Angel thinks not. Angel compares his life to hers - shows her how he's made a life for himself - how he's gathered friends together in a common goal - how they've become his family. And in doing so, he states the renewed center of this show: Angel IS about family - about the helpless, the beaten, the downtrodden gathering together as a family - relying upon each other in a harsh world. Each of the Fang Gang has its scars and burdens - but despite it all, they are hanging in there - together. Nina gets the point - and by the end of the episode she's ready to return to HER family. Back to the Fang Gang. Nan IS correct that Spike's dilemma has meaning - and she hits on a valid point - to abandon Spike would be evidence that the Fang Gang is losing their mission. But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! Fred, who initially won't take him seriously and brushes him off, promises Spike that she WILL save him (not that she'd try - but that she'd succeed). Fred's reversal is symbolic of the return back to core values for the Fang Gang. And to bring the point home, the episode ends the way it began - with the Gang ordering food again. This time it's done with gusto - the Gang is lighthearted and joking - they order "the usual" - a sign that they are back to doing things the way they used to be done - together - as a family. I think this holds together with Joss' comments that the season will hearken back to the first season - be more episodic - and avoid the darkness that characterized last season. Of course I could be totally wrong (but that's the whole fun of watching the durn thing! :^) Len First: Welcome to the board, Len. I hope you post more often, that's an interesting take you provide on the upcoming Season of Angel. I think it is possible that the Season will be about both things: Falling Apart, and Coming Together. Kind of like Season 4 Buffy - but darker and more EEEEVUL! Please feel free to join us in our main discussion thread of all things AtS/BtVS (the first thread, currently "Part 56 1/2"): scubiefan.proboards18.com/index.cgi?board=generalOr to check out our homepage, and the other reviews and essays and analysis (and more) available there: www.soulfulspike.com
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Oct 22, 2003 10:18:04 GMT -5
Newbie to Scubies here. I was a long time lurker of the Scoopme board. I am delurking because I have so enjoyed the reviews from Nan Dibble. I was excited to hear Nan was doing the review. I read Nan's Enemy of My Enemy and Old Blood and loved them. It was a story that has stuck with me ever since reading it. I found it to be extremely moving and one of the best reads I have had the priviledge of perusing. On to Angel, I can't believe noone has mentioned the "Frankenstein" remark made to Angel when he is telling the werewolf girl that he is a monster. I loved how he rubbed his forehead. I think Spike and his Captain Forehead remarks are getting to our beloved leader. I must say, I am getting a happy so far this season. I hope they keep up the good work, judging by the previews for tonights episode, it appears that ME will be. Nan, your reviews are by far the best. I look forward to your thoughts every week. Nan does do one of the best reviews available, and she has it out there when people want to read it - right away, not weeks later! Hope to see you posting again here and anywhere else that strikes your fancy on this board. (see my note to Len above for some suggestions). WELCOME!!!
|
|
|
Post by batmankm on Oct 22, 2003 12:07:21 GMT -5
Lenny, loved your post and as always enjoyed your acting as "ANGEL's Advocate" However.....Im going to challenge:-)
Most of what Im going to argue Ms Dibble so much more eloquently described in her review, so I will start by tipping my hat of props to her. It was a brilliant review and one that shed a whole new light on the episode for me. Lenny didn't It reminded you of the great Dusk-Fire comments at the Watchers Diary board? great stuff and certainly to get such a response from you is testimony to its insightfulness. However, I couldn't disagree more with your interpretation. In my opinion your analysis would in fact be the more "obvious" surface interpretation. I think it ignores the subtext completely.
To exemplify the groups coming together and "connecting" (my word:-) you state " But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! " It seems to me that only Fred reaches out to Spike, at the very end none of the others have seemingly re established thier moral center with regards to his plight. When ordering food at the conclusion I don't read Wesley's being "too tired to handle the chore of ordering Chinese take-out." as a sign of growing strength in the team but rather the exact opposite. Not to mention the clear metaphor inherent in viewing the far off buildings from their white (or perhaps black in in this case) tower. All of this says to me that they are drifting further apart and down, not coming together.
As for Angels reassurance to Nina about staying connected to your "family" as a means to moral stability, well based on his actions in the episode towards his own "family" members I think that it's advice that he is NOT following himself. As the episode showed and Ms Dibble pointed out, the way Angel treats both Gun and Loren in Gun's office, and then Loren's direct confrontation to Angel that his " punches are getting sloppy and we've got the bruises to prove it." clearly seek to demonstrate that Angel might be talking the talk but his walking the walk is drifting a little, maybe allot. There was another great metaphor for the cost of loosing this internal struggle with the brief description of the first werwolf's case history. The scientist points out that he had run from his "family" to protect them but Angel points out that in so doing he assured the beasts total dominance over the man in side.
Lenny, you also don't comment on our hero Angels obvious neglect of Spike, a true hero, a souled individual, a fellow champion. As Ms Dibble pointed out Nina is already a beast, and I would add so is Spike. There really is no difference between them. They were both decent people that where made into monsters not by there choice and now want to do the right thing. Further more Spike has sacrificed everything to save the world, Yet Angel can not see the hypocrisy in his stance towards Spike.
You argued vehemently a couple of weeks ago that Angels lack of concern about killing the SWAT leader , a souled human that was convicted to evil, was out of character, that it reflected a turn to the dark side so to speak. Well leaving the scientist to be next months meal ticket at the werwolf Buffet, I believe reflects the same growing disregard for A life that Angel has decided is unworthy. A rather pretentious, egotistical, selfish and dare i say evil point of view.
I would summarize by saying, you can listen to Angels words if you want, and you can believe, perhaps hope , that it is the truth, the way the story will unfold, or you can watch the actions of our ensemble and see a whole other reality unfolding. It is in my opinion this surface vs subtext, words vs actions that is so much a part of the style of Joss Whedon. My guess is that slowly each member of the Fang Gang will start to realize their slip down the slippery slop and begin to rally against the manipulation and control of W&H but not before allot of pain, suffering and Im guessing a few losses. I also bet that Angel will be the last to resolve this conflict internally perhaps not before we see a little Angelus dropping by, ...he said with hope in his voice:-)
Great post dude i look forward to a renewed discourse on everything Angel now that Buffy is no more. Great board to and i cant wait for the next Nan Dibble review!!!
KM
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Oct 22, 2003 12:15:12 GMT -5
Lenny, loved your post and as always enjoyed your acting as "ANGEL's Advocate" However.....Im going to challenge:-) Most of what Im going to argue Ms Dibble so much more eloquently described in her review, so I will start by tipping my hat of props to her. It was a brilliant review and one that shed a whole new light on the episode for me. Lenny didn't It reminded you of the great Dusk-Fire comments at the Watchers Diary board? great stuff and certainly to get such a response from you is testimony to its insightfulness. However, I couldn't disagree more with your interpretation. In my opinion your analysis would in fact be the more "obvious" surface interpretation. I think it ignores the subtext completely. To exemplify the groups coming together and "connecting" (my word:-) you state " But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! " It seems to me that only Fred reaches out to Spike, at the very end none of the others have seemingly re established thier moral center with regards to his plight. When ordering food at the conclusion I don't read Wesley's being "too tired to handle the chore of ordering Chinese take-out." as a sign of growing strength in the team but rather the exact opposite. Not to mention the clear metaphor inherent in viewing the far off buildings from their white (or perhaps black in in this case) tower. All of this says to me that they are drifting further apart and down, not coming together. As for Angels reassurance to Nina about staying connected to your "family" as a means to moral stability, well based on his actions in the episode towards his own "family" members I think that it's advice that he is NOT following himself. As the episode showed and Ms Dibble pointed out, the way Angel treats both Gun and Loren in Gun's office, and then Loren's direct confrontation to Angel that his " punches are getting sloppy and we've got the bruises to prove it." clearly seek to demonstrate that Angel might be talking the talk but his walking the walk is drifting a little, maybe allot. There was another great metaphor for the cost of loosing this internal struggle with the brief description of the first werwolf's case history. The scientist points out that he had run from his "family" to protect them but Angel points out that in so doing he assured the beasts total dominance over the man in side. Lenny, you also don't comment on our hero Angels obvious neglect of Spike, a true hero, a souled individual, a fellow champion. As Ms Dibble pointed out Nina is already a beast, and I would add so is Spike. There really is no difference between them. They were both decent people that where made into monsters not by there choice and now want to do the right thing. Further more Spike has sacrificed everything to save the world, Yet Angel can not see the hypocrisy in his stance towards Spike. You argued vehemently a couple of weeks ago that Angels lack of concern about killing the SWAT leader , a souled human that was convicted to evil, was out of character, that it reflected a turn to the dark side so to speak. Well leaving the scientist to be next months meal ticket at the werwolf Buffet, I believe reflects the same growing disregard for A life that Angel has decided is unworthy. A rather pretentious, egotistical, selfish and dare i say evil point of view. I would summarize by saying, you can listen to Angels words if you want, and you can believe, perhaps hope , that it is the truth, the way the story will unfold, or you can watch the actions of our ensemble and see a whole other reality unfolding. It is in my opinion this surface vs subtext, words vs actions that is so much a part of the style of Joss Whedon. My guess is that slowly each member of the Fang Gang will start to realize their slip down the slippery slop and begin to rally against the manipulation and control of W&H but not before allot of pain, suffering and Im guessing a few losses. I also bet that Angel will be the last to resolve this conflict internally perhaps not before we see a little Angelus dropping by, ...he said with hope in his voice:-) Great post dude i look forward to a renewed discourse on everything Angel now that Buffy is no more. Great board to and i cant wait for the next Nan Dibble review!!! KM Just wanted to welcome you to the board. Excellent comments on the episode--hope you stick around; we're all about the thoughtful discourse around here, except when we're not.
|
|
|
Post by Nan-S'cubie Mascot on Oct 22, 2003 12:25:58 GMT -5
OK..I'm almost a week late, but thanks to a friend, I finally saw it. Interesting review - but I think I'm going to take issue with it. (which is usual for me as I love to play Devil's Advocate (although in this case, it's actually ANGEL's Advocate :^). In a nutshell: While things DO fall apart, I'm not quite sure the centre isn't holding. Let me start from the beginning: Joss doesn't do the obvious. Watching 11+ years of Buffy/Angelverse shows - he has a penchant for upsetting expectations. When I heard that Angel & Co. were taking over W&H, the obvious thought that came to mind was: siigh...let's see how this will go: "They accept, even though it's a clear trap, thinking that they won't be tempted into evil, they ARE tempted into evil - which grows out of escalating grey to black areas - they realize they've become evil - ultimately their innate goodness triumphs and they reject evil. By the end of the year, they turn the tables on Evil, score a major victory, and quit (or destroy) W&H (which, of course, can never REALLY be destroyed b/c without evil, we'd all be Angels :^)" Nan's review fits right in with this prediction. So is that going to happen? Am I soo smart I can predict the whole season ahead of time? I think not. And I think an alternative reading of "Unleashed" is possible- one which takes us away from the expected storyline . Rather than it being a harbinger of the destruction of the Fang Gang, I think it can be seen as an affirmation of their core values. As Nan points out, the episode starts with the strained dinner between the Gang - complete with anti-listening devices and accusations against Gunn. Then we get the central story - Nina - a woman who is becoming a monster - a werewolf. Is her life over? Is she doomed to destruction and the loss of a "normal life"? She thinks so. Angel thinks not. Angel compares his life to hers - shows her how he's made a life for himself - how he's gathered friends together in a common goal - how they've become his family. And in doing so, he states the renewed center of this show: Angel IS about family - about the helpless, the beaten, the downtrodden gathering together as a family - relying upon each other in a harsh world. Each of the Fang Gang has its scars and burdens - but despite it all, they are hanging in there - together. Nina gets the point - and by the end of the episode she's ready to return to HER family. Back to the Fang Gang. Nan IS correct that Spike's dilemma has meaning - and she hits on a valid point - to abandon Spike would be evidence that the Fang Gang is losing their mission. But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! Fred, who initially won't take him seriously and brushes him off, promises Spike that she WILL save him (not that she'd try - but that she'd succeed). Fred's reversal is symbolic of the return back to core values for the Fang Gang. And to bring the point home, the episode ends the way it began - with the Gang ordering food again. This time it's done with gusto - the Gang is lighthearted and joking - they order "the usual" - a sign that they are back to doing things the way they used to be done - together - as a family. I think this holds together with Joss' comments that the season will hearken back to the first season - be more episodic - and avoid the darkness that characterized last season. Of course I could be totally wrong (but that's the whole fun of watching the durn thing! :^) Len Hi, Len. Good you came to visit, and I'm even more glad you're presenting an independent viewpoint, even if only (perhaps) for the sake of argument.
In reply, I'll just ask: was the impression you got from 5.3, overall, a positive one? (As you'll gather, mine wasn't.) Your reading would suggest that yours was. And your hypothetical scenario for this season is...that the FG aren't really tempted at all and maintain (more or less) their familial ties through all? Where would be the drama in that, pray? And how does that fit in with Gunn's brain boost and Lorne's caution to Angel that his own side is taking the brunt of his frustration and anger?
Certainly you COULD be right--like you, I have only the aired episodes to go by. But, you know, somehow I don't think that you are. Further episodes, as they air, will give more weight to your interpretation, mine, or another neither of us has come up with yet. I look forward to seeing the epsodes, and your further commentary on them.
Again, welcome! [/color]
|
|
|
Post by Nan-S'cubie Mascot on Oct 22, 2003 12:34:32 GMT -5
Lenny, loved your post and as always enjoyed your acting as "ANGEL's Advocate" However.....Im going to challenge:-) Most of what Im going to argue Ms Dibble so much more eloquently described in her review, so I will start by tipping my hat of props to her. It was a brilliant review and one that shed a whole new light on the episode for me. Lenny didn't It reminded you of the great Dusk-Fire comments at the Watchers Diary board? great stuff and certainly to get such a response from you is testimony to its insightfulness. However, I couldn't disagree more with your interpretation. In my opinion your analysis would in fact be the more "obvious" surface interpretation. I think it ignores the subtext completely. To exemplify the groups coming together and "connecting" (my word:-) you state " But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! " It seems to me that only Fred reaches out to Spike, at the very end none of the others have seemingly re established thier moral center with regards to his plight. When ordering food at the conclusion I don't read Wesley's being "too tired to handle the chore of ordering Chinese take-out." as a sign of growing strength in the team but rather the exact opposite. Not to mention the clear metaphor inherent in viewing the far off buildings from their white (or perhaps black in in this case) tower. All of this says to me that they are drifting further apart and down, not coming together. As for Angels reassurance to Nina about staying connected to your "family" as a means to moral stability, well based on his actions in the episode towards his own "family" members I think that it's advice that he is NOT following himself. As the episode showed and Ms Dibble pointed out, the way Angel treats both Gun and Loren in Gun's office, and then Loren's direct confrontation to Angel that his " punches are getting sloppy and we've got the bruises to prove it." clearly seek to demonstrate that Angel might be talking the talk but his walking the walk is drifting a little, maybe allot. There was another great metaphor for the cost of loosing this internal struggle with the brief description of the first werwolf's case history. The scientist points out that he had run from his "family" to protect them but Angel points out that in so doing he assured the beasts total dominance over the man in side. Lenny, you also don't comment on our hero Angels obvious neglect of Spike, a true hero, a souled individual, a fellow champion. As Ms Dibble pointed out Nina is already a beast, and I would add so is Spike. There really is no difference between them. They were both decent people that where made into monsters not by there choice and now want to do the right thing. Further more Spike has sacrificed everything to save the world, Yet Angel can not see the hypocrisy in his stance towards Spike. You argued vehemently a couple of weeks ago that Angels lack of concern about killing the SWAT leader , a souled human that was convicted to evil, was out of character, that it reflected a turn to the dark side so to speak. Well leaving the scientist to be next months meal ticket at the werwolf Buffet, I believe reflects the same growing disregard for A life that Angel has decided is unworthy. A rather pretentious, egotistical, selfish and dare i say evil point of view. I would summarize by saying, you can listen to Angels words if you want, and you can believe, perhaps hope , that it is the truth, the way the story will unfold, or you can watch the actions of our ensemble and see a whole other reality unfolding. It is in my opinion this surface vs subtext, words vs actions that is so much a part of the style of Joss Whedon. My guess is that slowly each member of the Fang Gang will start to realize their slip down the slippery slop and begin to rally against the manipulation and control of W&H but not before allot of pain, suffering and Im guessing a few losses. I also bet that Angel will be the last to resolve this conflict internally perhaps not before we see a little Angelus dropping by, ...he said with hope in his voice:-) Great post dude i look forward to a renewed discourse on everything Angel now that Buffy is no more. Great board to and i cant wait for the next Nan Dibble review!!! KM Hi, KM. Glad you liked my review. Even more glad you brought up your own points independently in argument. The fact that I say a thing doesn't mean it's so...it only means I've thought about it and can specify the reasons for my coming to the conclusions I have. Others may interpret that same evidence differently. Only the development of the episodes, and the series, will tell if I've read the evidence more or less correctly.
Thinking for yourself, having your own take on the evidence (whether we end up agreeing or not), will further everyone's enjoyment of this fine series. Hope to see you posting again, whether in support of my conclusions or challenging them. Both make interesting conversation. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by Len on Oct 22, 2003 12:55:57 GMT -5
KM- Addressing your points in semi-order, with respect to the "embracing" of Spike, I took Fred's promise to Spike to be symbolic of the whole Gang's movement. Angel's past disdain of Spike appears to be more of an outgrowth of his rivalry with Spike over Buffy and Spike's past role as a buffoon in the earlier years of Buffy (particularly Buffy s4), rather than true lack of caring and/or hatred. I predict that once he is made aware of the apparent enormity of the danger to Spike, he'll join Fred in his commitment to helping Spike. However, maybe he won't. You point to comments I made about the first episode, "Conviction" [yes, KM and I go back aways], in which I thought Angel's murder (and what else do you call the killing of an incapcitated enemy?) of the SWAT team leader was out of character and too quick and sudden a movement in the "Angel & Co. are corrupted by W&H" arc, as comparable to the abandonment of the scientist. That's actually a good point - and it DID irk me a bit when I saw it. Perhaps those 2 scenes can be synthesized with Nan's analysis and my own to reach the following theory: Angel IS reconnecting with his family and his mission, but the his new view of that mission is that it is totally acceptable to allow the "bad guys" to be sacrificed. Nan suggested that Angel was being human-centric in his defense of the downtrodden - hence his dismissal of Spike's plight. But I'd suggest that rather, he's being good-centric. He'll help only those beings that he deems to be worthy of help, while abandoning those who are unworthy. Which actually leads to an interesting and dangerous slippery slope - of Angel setting himself up as judge over others. Under this view of Angel's evolution, his murder of the SWAT team leader is understandible, as is his abandonment of the scientist, and perhaps even his view of Spike - who he might not yet be convinced is a force for good. Interesting stuff. (oh, and thanks for the warm welcome to the board! ) Len
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Oct 22, 2003 13:06:18 GMT -5
But I'd suggest that rather, he's being good-centric. He'll help only those beings that he deems to be worthy of help, while abandining those who are unworthy. Which actually leads to an interesting and dangerous slippery slope - of Angel setting himself up as judge over others. Under this view of Angel's evolution, his murder of the SWAT team leader is understandible, as is his abandonment of the scientist, and perhaps even his view of Spike - who he might not yet be convinced is a force for good. Interesting stuff. (oh, and thanks for the warm welcome to the board! ) Len Oh, I like this thought. And, indeed, it is a very slippery slope. Yesterday's TNT episode from season 1 was the one where Angel is "enslaved" to fight gladiator style with other demons. In the end they (deliberately) kill the "bad-guy", who is human and release all of the demons--who are clearly not all "good-guys", but they were the victims at the moment. Angel wasn't choosing, at the point, to leave them to their fates just because they weren't "good." (P.S. to the N'ubies--many of us are currently using special Halloween-themed avatars--just didn't want you to think that I always look like one of the Three Amigoes!) Sue
|
|
|
Post by raenstorm on Oct 22, 2003 13:07:09 GMT -5
OK..I'm almost a week late, but thanks to a friend, I finally saw it. Interesting review - but I think I'm going to take issue with it. (which is usual for me as I love to play Devil's Advocate (although in this case, it's actually ANGEL's Advocate :^). In a nutshell: While things DO fall apart, I'm not quite sure the centre isn't holding. Let me start from the beginning: Joss doesn't do the obvious. Watching 11+ years of Buffy/Angelverse shows - he has a penchant for upsetting expectations. When I heard that Angel & Co. were taking over W&H, the obvious thought that came to mind was: siigh...let's see how this will go: "They accept, even though it's a clear trap, thinking that they won't be tempted into evil, they ARE tempted into evil - which grows out of escalating grey to black areas - they realize they've become evil - ultimately their innate goodness triumphs and they reject evil. By the end of the year, they turn the tables on Evil, score a major victory, and quit (or destroy) W&H (which, of course, can never REALLY be destroyed b/c without evil, we'd all be Angels :^)" Nan's review fits right in with this prediction. So is that going to happen? Am I soo smart I can predict the whole season ahead of time? I think not. And I think an alternative reading of "Unleashed" is possible- one which takes us away from the expected storyline . Rather than it being a harbinger of the destruction of the Fang Gang, I think it can be seen as an affirmation of their core values. As Nan points out, the episode starts with the strained dinner between the Gang - complete with anti-listening devices and accusations against Gunn. Then we get the central story - Nina - a woman who is becoming a monster - a werewolf. Is her life over? Is she doomed to destruction and the loss of a "normal life"? She thinks so. Angel thinks not. Angel compares his life to hers - shows her how he's made a life for himself - how he's gathered friends together in a common goal - how they've become his family. And in doing so, he states the renewed center of this show: Angel IS about family - about the helpless, the beaten, the downtrodden gathering together as a family - relying upon each other in a harsh world. Each of the Fang Gang has its scars and burdens - but despite it all, they are hanging in there - together. Nina gets the point - and by the end of the episode she's ready to return to HER family. Back to the Fang Gang. Nan IS correct that Spike's dilemma has meaning - and she hits on a valid point - to abandon Spike would be evidence that the Fang Gang is losing their mission. But by the end of the episode, they've EMBRACED Spike! Fred, who initially won't take him seriously and brushes him off, promises Spike that she WILL save him (not that she'd try - but that she'd succeed). Fred's reversal is symbolic of the return back to core values for the Fang Gang. And to bring the point home, the episode ends the way it began - with the Gang ordering food again. This time it's done with gusto - the Gang is lighthearted and joking - they order "the usual" - a sign that they are back to doing things the way they used to be done - together - as a family. I think this holds together with Joss' comments that the season will hearken back to the first season - be more episodic - and avoid the darkness that characterized last season. Of course I could be totally wrong (but that's the whole fun of watching the durn thing! :^) Len Although I am going to agree with KM in that I didn't see an EMBRACING of Spike in this episode, I absolutely agree with Len on the rest of his post. I also saw this episode as a reinforcement or a return to the values that the FG hold dear. That last scene did seem a bit forced to me but almost in the way you'd have difficulty walking again after laying in bed for months. It's been a while since they've been close enough to just hang out and order Chinese. It wasn't going to be a perfect transition. If anything, that last scene would have felt MORE ackward if they had all been sprawled out comfy on Angel's couch munching on snacks. It was ackward and it was meant to be that way. That doesn't mean it wasn't geniune. They're all making an effort to come together as a family. To remain close despite how running their separate areas of W&H splits them apart. They actually use the word family throughout the episode. We are given an image of a tight-knit family in Nina and her sister and niece that remains close despite the differences they are experiencing. Lorne warns Angel that he's hurting those who are close to him and he better start paying attention to that. And it goes on... The only person who isn't really a part of this family yet is Spike. That is true from the story standpoint and the viewers standpoint. There are probably a lot of Buffy fans who are now watching and are invested in Spike but, the long-time Angel fans who may or may not have been Buffy fans don't have the same investment. Spike IS new. Spike IS an outsider to the FG. It'd be a bit much to expect the viewers to suddenly embrace him regardless of what he did in Sunnydale. However, the way I see it, the FG has come together again. They've reaffirmed their closeness to each other. Now they are ready to accept a new family member. So... I'm anxious to see tonight's show and if I'm even getting close with these arrows I'm throwing. My luck... let's just say I probably need to 'invest' in target lessons
|
|
|
Post by Len on Oct 22, 2003 13:08:09 GMT -5
by the way..sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question, but is there a way to partially quote someone's post? i.e. I often like to quote a small part, reply to that, and then quote another small part, and reply to that - all in the same reply posting. Does this site allow that? How do I do it? (I couldn't find an instructions part of the site).
Len
|
|
|
Post by raenstorm on Oct 22, 2003 13:12:17 GMT -5
by the way..sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question, but is there a way to partially quote someone's post? i.e. I often like to quote a small part, reply to that, and then quote another small part, and reply to that - all in the same reply posting. Does this site allow that? How do I do it? (I couldn't find an instructions part of the site). Len Len, The only way to really do it is to use the "quote" button to quote the whole thing and then just remove the parts you don't want. If you want to split the quote stuff up... you can put "quote" "/quote" (with the square brackets) around each of the separate parts and that will pull those out. If you want to quote more than one person... you'd have to do it the same way. Copy and paste the parts you want to quote and then put the (quote) (/quote) around it. Clear as mud?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Oct 22, 2003 13:24:19 GMT -5
Like this? um..it's only sorta working! My "quote" with square brackets is appearing in the text, while my "/quote" with square brakets is disappearing! The 2nd quoted text IS appearing, but it's not boxed, and my first comment appears trapped within the 1st quote! (so is that a yes or a no??) That's because you added a {quote} of your own in addition to the one already there at the very top {quote=authorctowner1link=board=blahblahblah}. It was already ready to quote, when you typed in {quote} again, which confused it. Try again, as I said we can go back and delete after the lesson is over. And there really isn't enough irony out there for me to be giving posting advice.
|
|
|
Post by DaveCrenshaw on Oct 22, 2003 13:31:09 GMT -5
Hello, Tessa. Glad you could visit us. Yes, the guy with the mail cart has been in every episode thus far, and the mask is a part of his get-up. I trust that his significance will be revealed with time. Good watching! [/color] [/quote]He could be significant, or he could be The Cheeseman version 2.0, that is, completely not significant and just another example of how underneath all his genius, Joss Whedon is really insane.
|
|
|
Post by raenstorm on Oct 22, 2003 13:33:37 GMT -5
Dave said,
That is what I was thinking too Dave... that he's just AtS's version of the Cheeseman.
|
|
|
Post by batmankm on Oct 22, 2003 13:34:02 GMT -5
Hey before i forget I echo what my friend Len said, thanks for the welcome to the board. looking forward to lots of discussion.
KM
|
|