|
Post by WinterDreamer on Feb 1, 2004 0:26:14 GMT -5
IMO Spike is truly terrified that Buffy will reject him, souled hero or no. That B/A kiss he witnessed did it for him. He died, IMO, (1) because he did want to do what ever he could NOT to end the world. (Go back to Becoming II - He likes the world!) (2) The act of existing had become too much for him. (Can we rest now, Buffy?) He was mentally and emotionally ready to die. (3) By his death, Buffy could go on a live a normal life, and, by extension, so could Dawn. If Buffy were to learn that he was alive, she might (1) feel obligated to see him. Spike is proud. He doesn't want/won't accept charity - not even from Buffy. And, it still wouldn't return his love - as he loved her. (2)not want to see him. This would also hurt him deeply. Very painful. Therefore, why should he seek her out? why let her know? He'd just open himself to more pain. He'd rather be in the pain of wondering than the pain of knowing. Spike knew by LMPTM, IMO, that Buffy would never love him as he loved her. By their meeting the day after Touched, talking in the kitchen, from the expression on his face, he knew she'd never return his love. He would be content just to be there with her, "being heroes". I predict that by the end of the season, Spike will find himself and, if the series is renewed, (please PTB) next season he will find a new love. And the new love? will love him back....(I'm taking odds on this...since I am banking that SMG won't be back, that B/A is locked up in the thoughts of JW, DB, and SMG, JM, and the many fans of JM/Spike want Spike to have some happiness and lurve.) Thanks for your kind words, makd--I always enjoy my time here, whether posting or just browsing! I agree with all of the above, EXCEPT I'm not sure about Spike finding a new love quite so quickly. For one thing, love never lasts in the Jossverse, and I just am not ready to see Spike have to deal with the loss of a great love, again. When the show comes to an end, perhaps we could get to see the beginnings of something that we don't have to watch the end of, but I'm hoping that's some time away.
|
|
|
Post by WinterDreamer on Feb 1, 2004 0:31:45 GMT -5
Okay, LadyDi: we've got a horse race agoing! I'm betting that JW will not go with the B/S ship, based on what he's already said in interviews about B/A, including the latest in TVGuide. (HE thought B/A was over, but the Bangels keep hanging on....) On the other hand--I really don't want to see B/A. I'd much rather see Joss put an end to both 'ships. I wonder if he's got the guts to go against nearly all the fans--the majority must be either B/A's or B/S's.
|
|
|
Post by WinterDreamer on Feb 1, 2004 0:37:15 GMT -5
WD-- This seems like a reasonable scenario. And I like it for this reason: I'd like to see ASH do a guest spot where he comes to LA to check out Andrew's report, what's up with Spike and what's up with AI and W & H AND gets to meet the "new Wes." (Except for the flame of my B/S shippiness there are plenty of Buffy alum I'd rather see do guest spots than SMG.) I'd love to see ASH on AtS (I almost wrote "ASH on Angel", but that sounded way too slashy). It is hard to imagine that a visit by Giles to W&H would go well, though.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Feb 1, 2004 10:07:04 GMT -5
I'd love to see ASH on AtS (I almost wrote "ASH on Angel", but that sounded way too slashy). It is hard to imagine that a visit by Giles to W&H would go well, though. Not in the least, which is one reason it would be really entertaining.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Feb 1, 2004 11:29:35 GMT -5
Not in the least, which is one reason it would be really entertaining. My mind just flashed to a scene where Angel finds out that Giles tried to have Spike killed, with Giles, Spike, Wes, and Angel all having lines ;D Julia, dressed, almost out the door, but stopping to give a lecture about the mess in the Teenager's hallway oozing into the living room
|
|
|
Post by aria on Feb 1, 2004 20:34:55 GMT -5
Another wonderful review, Nan -- you've cleared up so much without diminishing the complexities presented in this especially rich episode -- my favorite ep this season!
I'm especially struck by your observation that, while Spike is innocent when it comes to Dana, his encounter with her is the first time that he sincerely (and visibly) makes the connection between his own guilt and suffering and the pain of his past victims. Except that this isn't really the first time -- In "Never Leave Me" from Buffy season 7, Spike breaks down when he tells Buffy "do you know how much blood you can drink from a girl before she'll die? I do. You see, the trick is to drink just enough to know how to damage them just enough so that they'll still cry when you--(chokes up) 'cause it's not worth it if they don't cry." The word "damage" stands out here, of course. What kind of damage is Spike talking about? This is the only suggestion that I can recall that Spike hasn't always gone for the clean fight and kill. I don't in any way believe that he's one to "play with his food" - I don't think he's capable -- or even interested -- in the sadistic torture that Angelus is known for and which Drusilla serves as unliving testimony to. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. In the context of the last few episodes of Angel, though, I was extremely moved by Spike's sad response to Dana's "You killed them." When he acknowledges this "and worse" -- he seems to be coming to terms not only with the pain he has caused but with the problematic status of the "hero" on Angel. To do heroic acts after you've been a monster. For Spike to have this revelation on Angel is different than what it would be on Buffy -- on Buffy, the acts of heroism were, in general, more impersonal -- there were more apocalypses -- more saving of the world en-mass and less of the day to day saving of individuals that you see on Angel.
|
|
|
Post by Nan-S'cubie Mascot on Feb 1, 2004 21:48:47 GMT -5
Another wonderful review, Nan -- you've cleared up so much without diminishing the complexities presented in this especially rich episode -- my favorite ep this season! I'm especially struck by your observation that, while Spike is innocent when it comes to Dana, his encounter with her is the first time that he sincerely (and visibly) makes the connection between his own guilt and suffering and the pain of his past victims. Except that this isn't really the first time -- In "Never Leave Me" from Buffy season 7, Spike breaks down when he tells Buffy "do you know how much blood you can drink from a girl before she'll die? I do. You see, the trick is to drink just enough to know how to damage them just enough so that they'll still cry when you--(chokes up) 'cause it's not worth it if they don't cry." The word "damage" stands out here, of course. What kind of damage is Spike talking about? This is the only suggestion that I can recall that Spike hasn't always gone for the clean fight and kill. I don't in any way believe that he's one to "play with his food" - I don't think he's capable -- or even interested -- in the sadistic torture that Angelus is known for and which Drusilla serves as unliving testimony to. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. In the context of the last few episodes of Angel, though, I was extremely moved by Spike's sad response to Dana's "You killed them." When he acknowledges this "and worse" -- he seems to be coming to terms not only with the pain he has caused but with the problematic status of the "hero" on Angel. To do heroic acts after you've been a monster. For Spike to have this revelation on Angel is different than what it would be on Buffy -- on Buffy, the acts of heroism were, in general, more impersonal -- there were more apocalypses -- more saving of the world en-mass and less of the day to day saving of individuals that you see on Angel. Hello, Aria. Glad you could drop in. As to your second point, I think you're right: up until now, Angel the Series has dealt with person saveage rather than wide-scale heroism. However, since the move to Wolfram & Hart, that's changed, and is what Gunn is so pleased about: sweeping changes that affect large numbers of people who otherwise would have been victimized by W & H and its clients. That seems ominous.... I'm dubious about your first point, though. In "Never Leave Me," Spike is saying just about anything to get Buffy to stake him. I don't argue it's not true...just that he's not simply reflecting on past evil done but desperately afraid of future evil he might be triggered by the First to do. So he's choosing and slanting what he says with the intent of pushing Buffy's "hot buttons" to the point that she'll stake him. I'm don't think that he's made any personal connection with his past victims at that point. He's not looking to the past here--just to the frightening future and the problematic present. But that's a judgment call, and someone else could well see it differently. It is, however, how I see it, and Spike's making an imaginative connection with a victim seems unarguably clear in "Damage."
|
|
|
Post by aria on Feb 2, 2004 2:14:29 GMT -5
Good point, Nan -- I should consider the context of that line from NLM -- Spike is trying to push Buffy's buttons, that's why he brings up Dawn, knowing full well that that is the button to push (Buffy, thankfully, sees through it in any case).
B-t-w -- sorry about the inopportune smiley faces -- I didn't plan for those to pop in whenever I typed a capital D!
|
|
|
Post by Nan-S'cubie Mascot on Feb 2, 2004 2:31:18 GMT -5
Good point, Nan -- I should consider the context of that line from NLM -- Spike is trying to push Buffy's buttons, that's why he brings up Dawn, knowing full well that that is the button to push (Buffy, thankfully, sees through it in any case). B-t-w -- sorry about the inopportune smiley faces -- I didn't plan for those to pop in whenever I typed a capital D! It's not you, it's our board (re the smileys). I explain about how to nuke them (if you want to) on the "If you're new to this board" thread of AI. You might want to take a look at it. We love our board, but it has its quirks....
|
|
|
Post by Angels Champion on Feb 2, 2004 16:55:47 GMT -5
I'd love to see ASH on AtS (I almost wrote "ASH on Angel", but that sounded way too slashy). It is hard to imagine that a visit by Giles to W&H would go well, though. I'd be just as happy if not another Buffy character showed up on Angel or if another reference to Buffy was never made. I'm getting quite tired of it. Buffy has never been much seen or heard in Angel and that's the way I like it. I think the show has gone way beyond needing Buffy references and I just want the references to end. The show is fine on it's own and doesn't need all the reference or characters showing up on it. I think the addition of Spike was great. But I'd prefer Buffy never show up. She finds out off screen about Spike, but then that's it.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Feb 2, 2004 17:25:00 GMT -5
I'd be just as happy if not another Buffy character showed up on Angel or if another reference to Buffy was never made. I'm getting quite tired of it. Buffy has never been much seen or heard in Angel and that's the way I like it. I think the show has gone way beyond needing Buffy references and I just want the references to end. The show is fine on it's own and doesn't need all the reference or characters showing up on it. I think the addition of Spike was great. But I'd prefer Buffy never show up. She finds out off screen about Spike, but then that's it. I'm with you here. I know lots and lots of folks disagree, but I would be insanely happy not to hear bugger all about sodding Buffy. Not that I don't love her. I do. But her story is over, for now at least, and her constant haunting of Angel stands in danger of damaging the show's independence. I did, however, appreciate the "Scoobie update", and wouldn't mind if there was an occasional (like, say, once a season) cameo by a Scoobie. . .but honestly, I don't want any season to revolve around it. But in the writers' defense, I'm pretty sure they're of the same mind, but they need to give the fans what they want (need?) on some level, and lots of the fans need some closure on the Buffy story. More closure, that is. We got a lot of that last week, and what's left (that's likely to be addressed) is the big ole' Buffy and Spike bugaboo. Which will need to be dealt with on some level. Phone call? I mean, really - pick up the phone, have a Lineage-like one-way phone call, and then we're out.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Feb 2, 2004 17:33:25 GMT -5
I'd be just as happy if not another Buffy character showed up on Angel or if another reference to Buffy was never made. I'm getting quite tired of it. Buffy has never been much seen or heard in Angel and that's the way I like it. I think the show has gone way beyond needing Buffy references and I just want the references to end. The show is fine on it's own and doesn't need all the reference or characters showing up on it. I think the addition of Spike was great. But I'd prefer Buffy never show up. She finds out off screen about Spike, but then that's it. Well, different strokes as they say. Actually, Buffy is the character I least want to see show up because I can't think of a creative way for her to leave both vamps on a positive, but final note. The other characters though... I don't think "Angel" (the show) in any way needs visits from BtVS alum, I just like seeing the other characters, on the condition that it makes logical plot sense and is well written. (Both conditions were filled splendidly by Andrew's visit I thought.) Of course, I always loved have original Star Trek characters show up on ST:Generations episodes or movies, too. It's just fun. Like meeting old friends that you've lost touch with. And, I would have been just as happy for it to go the other way if WB/UPN would have allowed it. Would have loved Wes to show up during season 7, after years of working with Angel and Lorne and intervene with Giles (and possibly Wood) re the issue on ensouled, "good" Spike. Or for Cordy to drag Groo back to Sunnydale for a visit. And who wouldn't want Oz on either show under any conditions? Nope, I like drop-ins, it seems to expand the Joss-verse somewhat. (Now, I agree not too many or too often, because it takes screen time away from the regulars, but sheesh, I'd have rather had pregnant evil Cordy and Connor do a guest shot during season 7 than more time on the potentials!)
|
|
|
Post by Angels Champion on Feb 2, 2004 17:43:06 GMT -5
Well, different strokes as they say. Actually, Buffy is the character I least want to see show up because I can't think of a creative way for her to leave both vamps on a positive, but final note. The other characters though... Maybe it's because I watched Angel for a while without seeing an episode of Buffy that I feel this way, who knows. But I do know one thing, I don't want either vamp ending up with Buffy. While I liked the show, was never fond of her character.
|
|
|
Post by Dev(Rob) on Feb 2, 2004 21:55:31 GMT -5
Technically Angels Champion she was the show but I see what you're saying. I'd love to see Oz come back for an episode sometime but there is no logical way to write him into Season 5 I don't think. If there is a season 6 a sort of 2 - 5 episode run with Buffy guest staring to bring an end to the whole B/S & B/A thing would be good.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Feb 2, 2004 22:51:39 GMT -5
Technically Angels Champion she was the show but I see what you're saying. I'd love to see Oz come back for an episode sometime but there is no logical way to write him into Season 5 I don't think. If there is a season 6 a sort of 2 - 5 episode run with Buffy guest staring to bring an end to the whole B/S & B/A thing would be good. Logic? Oz? Oz has his own logic, and maybe he could rescue Angel from something. Julia, who just wants to be told an involving story, and hopes the writers can get every character they need to tell it.
|
|