|
|
Post by Queen E on Oct 25, 2004 14:37:02 GMT -5
I want you to hit me as hard as you can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Oct 29, 2004 16:42:39 GMT -5
Hey, Erin! Nice analysis!
First, great title. **snerk, snicker** ;D
OK, on to slightly more thoughtful comments.
I can see why many look at this as just a stand alone/one-off episode - your list of the reasons why was very spot on. But really, it’s not so much a “part of larger arc” ep and more of a . . . "part of the larger picture" episode.
I was glad to see you compare this to the episodes dealing with the Initiative on BtVS (plus, loved the parallels you mention, cuff/chip, etc.). We always saw the Initiative from the human point of view on Buffy. Even when it turned on her and the scoobies, we still were placed outside the Initiative, looking in. The episode where Oz is captured comes closest to actually putting the viewer “inside” their white cells or on top of that lab table. Even then, we were still allowed to keep some distance. The Ring puts us right in there on the inside. We are presented with a nice view of the humans putting on the show, the humans watching the show, and the demons who are the show. The notable choice to have the series lead, the hero of the show, be one of the demons captured definitely gives us a push in empathizing with a “different” side. In addition to the themes you mentioned, I’ve also always seen The Ring as a companion-piece, and a commentary on, Buffy’s Initiative arc. From a grayer, more ambiguous angle.
I loved your paragraphs on media bias! Who’s responsible here? The folks running the demon fights or the “good citizens” who pay big money to watch and gamble? Good thing to think of, and one that Joss – working in the for-profit entertainment industry – would see as very close to the bone.
Again, very nice job!
Lola
Plus, you know, Lilah! And the snarky Cordy and Wes show! Ah, good times . . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Oct 29, 2004 22:24:31 GMT -5
Hey, Erin! Nice analysis! First, great title. **snerk, snicker** ;D OK, on to slightly more thoughtful comments. I can see why many look at this as just a stand alone/one-off episode - your list of the reasons why was very spot on. But really, it’s not so much a “part of larger arc” ep and more of a . . . "part of the larger picture" episode. I was glad to see you compare this to the episodes dealing with the Initiative on BtVS (plus, loved the parallels you mention, cuff/chip, etc.). We always saw the Initiative from the human point of view on Buffy. Even when it turned on her and the scoobies, we still were placed outside the Initiative, looking in. The episode where Oz is captured comes closest to actually putting the viewer “inside” their white cells or on top of that lab table. Even then, we were still allowed to keep some distance. The Ring puts us right in there on the inside. We are presented with a nice view of the humans putting on the show, the humans watching the show, and the demons who are the show. The notable choice to have the series lead, the hero of the show, be one of the demons captured definitely gives us a push in empathizing with a “different” side. In addition to the themes you mentioned, I’ve also always seen The Ring as a companion-piece, and a commentary on, Buffy’s Initiative arc. From a grayer, more ambiguous angle. I totally agree. BtVS was able to sidestep the question by the fact that all of the demons in the Initiative ended up being killed in the final battle (well, except for that one that was there when Buffy and Spike went back *grin). And the "bigger picture" is definitely a hallmark of Angel; given the choice between saving the world or saving Dawn, would Angel have made the choice Buffy did? Ahhhh! So many connections; I'm going crazy with arc! Well, it struck me the similarities between that and something like Jerry Springer. It always bothered me when I knew people watched just to laugh at the craziness displayed by his guests. No matter how complicit the "guests" are in the show, they are obviously at a societal, economic, and educational disadvantage. It reminds me of people who make a point to pull over and stop and look at a horrible traffic accident; the ethics of "watching" is a very murky thing. You totally rock for posting, by the way. |
|
|
|
Post by Nickim on Oct 30, 2004 10:24:28 GMT -5
<snip> Well, it struck me the similarities between that and something like Jerry Springer. It always bothered me when I knew people watched just to laugh at the craziness displayed by his guests. No matter how complicit the "guests" are in the show, they are obviously at a societal, economic, and educational disadvantage. It reminds me of people who make a point to pull over and stop and look at a horrible traffic accident; the ethics of "watching" is a very murky thing. You totally rock for posting, by the way. ITA It's a sad thing that some people seem to enjoy, or at least are fascinated by, someone else's pain. And, Lola does rock. Erin--I really enjoyed how you pointed out the moral dilema of letting the demons go. It's like letting a killer out of prison on a legal technicality. He's still dangerous, but we can't keep him locked up. Angel could have killed the demons he knew were dangerous. I think him not doing so, shows that he knew he couldn't "save the world," that he could only try to save individuals. Something he lost focus of when he was at W&H. |
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Oct 31, 2004 19:44:08 GMT -5
ITA It's a sad thing that some people seem to enjoy, or at least are fascinated by, someone else's pain. And, Lola does rock. Erin--I really enjoyed how you pointed out the moral dilema of letting the demons go. It's like letting a killer out of prison on a legal technicality. He's still dangerous, but we can't keep him locked up. Angel could have killed the demons he knew were dangerous. I think him not doing so, shows that he knew he couldn't "save the world," that he could only try to save individuals. Something he lost focus of when he was at W&H. I agree on both counts. The other part of it was, in my opinion, that each of those demons has a right to fight on their own terms. What the Initiative (and the MacNamara brothers) did, was take away the autonomy of the demons, and I think Angel would rather fight them in a fair fight; rather like Mal's words to Simon: "If I ever kill you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing me, and you'll be armed." And thank you so much for your comments! |
|
|
|
Post by Riff on Nov 8, 2004 6:19:48 GMT -5
A wonderful review, as usual. I’m sorry my feedback is so late (also as usual). You’re right that there are some central AtS themes in this episode. As always, names and words have significance and power. Eetah on your obviously seeing parallels with Fight Club. Though I’m glad it didn’t inspire you to invent any homoerotic subtext. ;D Or a collar.  Enthrallment, possession, abuse, etc. The themes of slavery/freedom are seen throughout the series, and of course link to the themes of shells and choice. Presumably a reference to Tyler Durden. As you say, there is much critique of media spectacle here, but then what does that make us as viewers of the ep? Are we somehow absolved because this is quality drama (as, indeed, is Fight Club)? The murky waters of AtS often part to reveal these. The simple idea of demons as evil and humans as essentially good (no matter how wrong their current behaviour might be) is unravelling during this first season and beyond. We can see Angel helping demons and opposing humans on several occasions. Humans become monsters; demons become the helpless. Choice is the most crucial theme of the show. Are our lives determined by fate, prophecies, the universe? Are we shells or puppets? Can we take a stand or simply lose all balance and make a futile gesture? The ultimate irony of the label Wes gives himself is that in time he does indeed take on that role. I would suggest one reason he is still so awkward in Angel’s presence at this point is that he sees the vampire as a father figure (not entirely surprising, given that Angel is more than 200 years older than him). Wesley doesn’t look at Angel in the same way he looks at his actual father, but there is one similarity – he is seeking acceptance and approval. |
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 9, 2004 7:32:28 GMT -5
A wonderful review, as usual. I’m sorry my feedback is so late (also as usual). You’re right that there are some central AtS themes in this episode. As always, names and words have significance and power. Eetah on your obviously seeing parallels with Fight Club. Though I’m glad it didn’t inspire you to invent any homoerotic subtext. ;D Or a collar. Enthrallment, possession, abuse, etc. The themes of slavery/freedom are seen throughout the series, and of course link to the themes of shells and choice. Eetah on the idea that slavery/freedom being a theme throughout AtS and how that links to shells and choice. We'll see the idea of choice really come to the fore in the Faith arc. Nice comment, Riff. I love how the Jossverse frequently does eps that make us think about our own position as viewer. From the internet demon and the Zeppo on BtVS to The Ring and Smile Time on AtS (to name just a few), we often get an opportunity to see the camera pointing both ways. **nods a lot to both of these!!** And considering the actual father relationship Wes had, it's certainly not surprising that he a) is looking for another person to fill that role and b) selects one who should hold every expectation of cruel behavior but has turned away from that. My father was a monster masquerading as one of the "good guys". I'll go work for an actual monster, who far more deserves my loyalty. Lola |
|
|
|
Post by Riff on Nov 11, 2004 13:19:49 GMT -5
Absolutely. Faith’s ultimate move to self-loathing and gradual recovery are an integral part of this season. I was always a little disappointed we didn’t see more of her after this. As I recall, other than one prison visit in the first ep of Season 2, she doesn’t appear again until Wesley breaks her out to catch Angelus. Thank you, Lola. And eetah.  My own favourite episode of this kind is the BtVS ep Normal Again. It makes me consider the “reality” of fictional characters as creatures of our imaginations. Those moral mazes and problems of choice vs. determinism can make for good drama, but sometimes it’s difficult to see the characters we admire in such situations. I need more Angelverse now! Your completely right, of course. This is quite strongly hinted at later in the Faith arc ( Sanctuary) when Wes says to Weatherby, “In point of fact I've confronted more evil - slayed more demons - in short, done more good while working with Angel than I ever did while in the Council's employ.” The Council can easily be thought of as representing his father. |
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 11, 2004 16:36:21 GMT -5
Absolutely. Faith’s ultimate move to self-loathing and gradual recovery are an integral part of this season. I was always a little disappointed we didn’t see more of her after this. As I recall, other than one prison visit in the first ep of Season 2, she doesn’t appear again until Wesley breaks her out to catch Angelus. I wish we had gotten more of Faith's story, too. I can understand, from a purely business stand point, that this may not have worked with Eliza's schedule, etc. But it would have been soooo interesting to have continued to get a series of brief scenes, throughout the next season, or even all of the seasons. Showing her life in prison and her journey toward making amends and making peace with herself would have been an amazing counterpoint and commentary on events unfolding on AtS. Ah, yes. Normal Again. Such a controversial episode! I remember the comments right after it aired - people asking if the final shot was intended to really suggest that the slayer story was just inside the head of a mentally ill girl, etc. I have always liked it for that very ambiguity, that blurring of the line between fiction and reality. From your mouth to TV executives ears! ;D Yes! I just love that line! For both the obvious and more subtexty messages. And the Council gits he's talking to don't really even understand the surface meaning! Because they are so stuck in their Council approved rut. Lola **snickers** Tag! You're it! |
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Nov 11, 2004 19:45:38 GMT -5
I love you guys! All discussion-y! Yay!
I promise to respond to each and every post after Monday. Then I can get my brain out of the GRE purgatory and focus on what really matters. Oh, and write my 5x5 review.
|
|
|
|
Post by Riff on Nov 16, 2004 7:33:21 GMT -5
That’s an excellent idea. Faith’s progression would have contrasted well with the FG becoming morally greyer. This would have been particularly interesting in Season 4. Faith is ultimately shocked at some of the lengths Wes is prepared to go to in order to achieve a necessary goal. There‘s nothing like a bit of controversy. It was a brave way to end the episode. It’s fun to be left asking if the Buffyverse is real, a delusion, or merely in an alternate universe to the one in which there is a mentally girl somehow linked to it. Then there is the other question of whether it matters, whether our thoughts are less real than the apparently objective world, and so on. I’ll ignore the subtext there and just say eetah! ;D As the Council’s muscle they seem even less open to reason than the Watchers. There’s a kind of pseudo-religious mania about Weatherby’s lines, “A Watcher working for a vampire. It's perversion,” and “Do the sacred oaths you swore as a Watcher mean nothing to you now?” He sounds more like a cult-member than anything else at this point. Yet another reason to be suspicious of the Council. *chuckles* I got you back! Riff. |
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 16, 2004 16:16:49 GMT -5
That’s an excellent idea. Faith’s progression would have contrasted well with the FG becoming morally greyer. This would have been particularly interesting in Season 4. Faith is ultimately shocked at some of the lengths Wes is prepared to go to in order to achieve a necessary goal. Yes, the scenes with Wes (all of them, but especially Wes) after she breaks out of prison are very interesting. Faith trying to act “unshock-able”, yet at the same time, trying to hold on to the changes she has made in herself while inside. And really, they’ve already introduced the idea of alternate realities when Cordy made her wish and we saw the reality where Buffy didn’t come to Sunnydale. Plus, of course, the world without shrimp, etc. So, in a sense, there is a reality where Buffy is in a mental hospital AND a reality where Buffy is really the slayer. So why couldn’t one pierce the walls between them via a demonic stinger? (Of course, there is also a reality where Buffy is just a character on a TV show – but who wants to think about that boring reality. ;D ) **snicker** I would not be surprised if the council deliberately “indoctrinates” the folks they recruit as muscle. Being such an intellectual/research based group as well as a closed/secret society, I could see them sort of looking down on the people who are more action-oriented (witness their condescension toward slayers). Perhaps believing that these more “common” or “ignorant” people need to just have the basic messages hammered home with religious fervor and that more complicated or ambiguous ideas would be “too much” for them. Plus, I tend to thing that any time a group is both powerful and hidden, it can easily veer into the realm of the cult-like religion, even without any deliberate attempts to do so. This is fun! We’ve got to encourage more folks to play. Lola |
|
|
|
Post by Riff on Nov 21, 2004 13:32:30 GMT -5
Faith is now very much aware that she’s on the side of good and this is reflected in her attention to means as well as ends. At their lowest ebbs in Season 4, most of the FG resort to any means to achieve a goal. Faith, who was probably expecting the slightly square white knights she’d known, is taken aback but some of what she actually finds. Yet another loose end. I wanted to see a shrimp dimension. Why were we never shown a shrimp dimension? ;D And then there’s that other dimension, the dimension of our imaginations, where Buffy really is the slayer. I certainly got that kind of feel from the ep. The Watchers do (seem) to undervalue less intellectual people. I wonder if they themselves are indoctrinated/educated (please use the word of your choice) to have this kind of belief. When we first saw Giles and Wes, they both had something of that in them, but went on to break their conditioning, as it were. Another aspect to this is one of class, which is shown by the accents. You’re quite right, too, about the idea of hidden groups. The Council is outside public scrutiny and is unaccountable. Never was the phrase, “Who watches the watchers?” more applicable! They have some social attitudes that pre-date the 60s; perhaps they’re so disconnected from society that changes have not impacted on them. Quite right. Come on, everyone! Riff. |
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Nov 29, 2006 9:27:32 GMT -5
This is the episode in which we see Wes put the “rogue” in rogue demon hunter. He is calm, quick on his feet, and ruthless in pursuit of his goal. All of this outside of the view of Angel. Perhaps because Angel is such a paragon of skill and agility, Wes feels all elbows in his presence. Yet he has the ability to set free these “demons” of bad self-image and get the job done when needed. At this point, it is only when the watcher isn’t being watched when the true Wes comes out, . . ..Poor Wes. So capable and smart but such a bundle of insecurities and baggage from his past. Not unlike many people. I haven't read the other comments, but this last statement really struck me. Great review, Erin! I know I'm late to these discussions (like, waaaaaaaaaaaaay late) but I've never seen every episode of Angel and am just now watching many of them in the mornings. Thought I would check the reviews out and I'm glad I am.
|
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Nov 29, 2006 9:33:17 GMT -5
<snip> Well, it struck me the similarities between that and something like Jerry Springer. It always bothered me when I knew people watched just to laugh at the craziness displayed by his guests. No matter how complicit the "guests" are in the show, they are obviously at a societal, economic, and educational disadvantage. It reminds me of people who make a point to pull over and stop and look at a horrible traffic accident; the ethics of "watching" is a very murky thing. You totally rock for posting, by the way. ITA It's a sad thing that some people seem to enjoy, or at least are fascinated by, someone else's pain. And, Lola does rock. Erin--I really enjoyed how you pointed out the moral dilema of letting the demons go. It's like letting a killer out of prison on a legal technicality. He's still dangerous, but we can't keep him locked up. Angel could have killed the demons he knew were dangerous. I think him not doing so, shows that he knew he couldn't "save the world," that he could only try to save individuals. Something he lost focus of when he was at W&H. There's the ultimate greater good of preserving the structure and integrity of the law and society's goals at stake and I think that putting a stop to slavery and abuse is in line with achieving those ends. Just as, in the case of setting the criminal free on a "technicality", the individual in question poses a threat, but there is the greater threat of not abiding by our own laws, put in place to protect the innocent as well as the guilty that is present. What is the old adage? Better to let a the guilty free in order to prevent one innocent man from being wrongly punished? Something like that. While this can be taken too far on both sides of the argument, the balance and the furtherance of the higher purpose need to be observed. |
|
