In alt.tv.buffy-v-slayer Arbitrar Of Quality <tsmtsm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> It's always a bit weird seeing him as one of the principals in S7 for
> that reason. The weird thing is how well it mostly works, but how I
> think of him as a source of humor who's tied very specifically to that
> time and place. When the character appears in another setting (i.e.
> ATS, the comic), he's not nearly as enjoyable.
Yeah. I would have been just as happy if he had quietly faded away after
Chosen. Nothing he's done since then (really, since Storyteller) has
really added much to the Buffyverse. He still earns an occasional laugh
from me, no denying it, but is it really enough to merit the screen
time/page space he's gotten? I'm not so sure.
Admittedly Andrew did guest star in one of my favorite AtS S5 episodes,
The Gir-- Just kidding! I mean Damage, of course. But while he worked
well enough, he certainly wasn't what made the episode.
> The temple (and to a lesser degree, the coven)... where'd all these
> plot points come from? I guess they figured the explanation would be
> boring, but if you don't establish things before throwing them in,
> people get the impression that the "plot" only exists to serve the
> character moments or something. That's a feeling I've of course never
> once gotten from anything else in the ME canon.
Of course.... It's just a little frustrating because establi****ng these
things a few episodes ago would have been *easy*, if only they had thought
to do it.
>> IIRC the commentary track reveals that DF meant for us to understand
that
>> the temple was buried by the same earthquake that buried the Master,
and
>> apparently didn't realize that the phrase "70 years ago" would mean a
>> different year in 2002 than in 1997.
>
> I guess when you're used to your evil coming from longer farther in
> the past, when a few years don't make a difference in how you refer to
> it...
Of course I goofed there myself, in my eagerness to act all sarcastic.
In S1 Giles definitely refers to the earthquake as being 60 years before,
not 70. So I'll just go back inside my glass house and stop throwing
stones at poor David Fury.
>> > Additional comments on S6D6: I managed to make it through the thread
>> > without mentioning (except elliptically here) a certain character who
>> > dominates all the discussions despite appearing for a grand total of
>> > maybe four minutes on this disc (a few seconds of which are really
>> > really im****tant, but still)...
>>
>> An interesting choice, unusual, perhaps controversial; but I liked it.
>> Since you mention that character, this time around I proved to myself
that
>> I could FF or track-skip over every Spike scene on this disc without
>> detracting one bit from the climactic story. All of them, even the
>> legitimately im****tant part, are really setup for S7. They could also
be
>> called a resolution to Spike's S6 story, I guess, but they still aren't
>> part of disc six's story at all.
>
> I'm not sure how much I like it, but the double ending comes because
> Spike's story is the only one that can't be called a resolution.
> Every BTVS season has a bona fide *ending*, but then S6 also has an
> extra little tag that's itself simultaneously cliffhanger and Big
> Reveal.
If I'm readin you right, there may be some confusion here. The
"interesting choice" that I liked so much wasn't the Spike part of this
disc, it was your decision not to mention him at all. So there -- praise!
But I do think that, given the combined goals of springing the Spike
changeup on us and not having him entirely disappear for three episodes,
their approach was pretty reasonable. I might have appreciated more
variety and less ****rtless fighting in those Spike scenes, but that's just
me.
--Chris
______________________________________________________________________
chrisg [at] gwu.edu On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog.
|
