From: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org (stillpt-digest) To: stillpt-digest@smoe.org Subject: stillpt-digest V2 #98 Reply-To: stillpt@smoe.org Sender: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk stillpt-digest Thursday, May 4 2000 Volume 02 : Number 098 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [Todd Huff ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary ["Berni Phillips" ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary ["Berni Phillips" ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [Todd Huff ] b/comments5/2 ["Donald G. Keller" ] b/torturestats ["Donald G. Keller" ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [allenw ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [allenw ] Re: b/comments5/2 [allenw ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [allenw ] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [GHighPine@aol.com] Re: b/comments5/2 [GHighPine@aol.com] Re: b/torturestats [GHighPine@aol.com] Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary [Dori ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 07:42:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Todd Huff Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary > I thought that was the right way to handle the whole > Willow & Tara & > Oz situation; inevitable angst, but everyone behaved > like an adult > and they sorted it out. > I was more than a bit surprised that Buffy hadn't twigged to the fact that Willow and Tara were more than just friends, especially since Faith had figured it out immediately. I had also thought that W&T had already been intimate, but the final scene makes it clear that they hadn't been. I can't wait for Xander's reaction. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 18:41:07 -0700 From: "Berni Phillips" Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary >From: "Donald G. Keller" >Are we looking at Faith having a future on =Angel=? She's going to >be in jail for a long time, I suspect. I agree with all you've said (which I've snipped for brevity's sake). Re Faith and jail, I would love it if they continued to use her, have occasional jail scenes, and have Faith find Jesus and maybe even contemplate becoming a religious. As I've said before, I've always found the lack of religion on the show to be a big hole, considering how they use Christian iconography. And, since it pertains to Buffy-the-show, I just read that it was St. Athanasius (born c. 296) who declared the effectiveness of the cross against evil. According to Scott Hahn in THE LAMB'S SUPPER (p. 42), St. Athanasius said that "'by the Sign of the Cross all magic is stopped, and all witchcraft brought to nothing.'" And, coincidentally, yesterday was St. Athanasius' feast day. Berni ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 18:45:28 -0700 From: "Berni Phillips" Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary >From: Todd Huff > >I was more than a bit surprised that Buffy hadn't >twigged to the fact that Willow and Tara were more >than just friends, especially since Faith had figured >it out immediately. I had also thought that W&T had >already been intimate, but the final scene makes it >clear that they hadn't been. I agree. I'm guessing that it was just such a great parallel, Riley's reaction to Willow being "that kind of girl," dating "dangerous" guys and Buffy's unspoken reaction to Willow being another kind of girl. As for Faith, for someone with no friends who can be really insensitive, she's also pretty perceptive about people and their relationships. She's pretty savvy and frequently seemed to clued in to emotional things before Buffy admitted them to herself. > >I can't wait for Xander's reaction. Do you think he doesn't know? I thought that his response to Oz (off camera) that Willow "didn't have a new guy" was a painful avoidance of telling Oz the truth. Berni ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 19:15:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Todd Huff Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary > >I can't wait for Xander's reaction. > > Do you think he doesn't know? I thought that his > response to > Oz (off camera) that Willow "didn't have a new guy" > was a painful avoidance of telling Oz the truth. > > Berni > Hmm, that's an interesting point. Without hearing Xander himself we can't really say whether he was being cute or not. A true but not very helpful answer from him certainly isn't out of the question. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:28:14 -0400 (EDT) From: "Donald G. Keller" Subject: b/comments5/2 Dori: A bit belatedly, thumbs up on your mini-essay on Wesley, with which I agree. I didn't find Wesley a very likable character last season (pitiable, but not likable), but he's grown as a person and become more sympathetic on =Angel=. To give Wesley more credit than I did at the time, despite the clear early impression that he Just Didn't Get It as to how to handle Buffy (much less Faith), the fact that he allowed Giles to stay around and participate means that he actually rather quickly figured out that maybe the Council didn't have the whole story. =Very= good point about Wesley falling into old roles around Cordelia and Angel. (As Buffy does with her mother, say.) Jennifer: Right, the "equivalent to" character (equal with a "tilde" on top) would be more useful. But I'll just have to ask my readers to assume the tilde since I'm using such a minuscule character set. Hilary: Thought of another parallel structure that runs across all four seasons. I shouldn't have to say any more than just this: Owen = Tom = Scott = Parker Different characters, different situations, different fates...but each shows up early in the season and is wrapped up before the first third is through. I =do= have all the episodes, pretty much in order; I've been as careful as I can. Little glitches like the 1st season is out of order, one 3rd season episode is at the wrong speed, etc. but they're all there and I can find the episode I want with minimal effort (as I'll prove in a little bit). Right! somebody has to go over to the Dark Side before the season's over! I'm guessing Riley (= Angel = Faith), especially after Buffy told Angel she can trust Riley. But maybe Tara, since we don't know what's up with her. (But maybe they'll abstain this year.) The skateboarding character who first sees Buffy at school in "Welcome to the Hellmouth" is Xander, not Jessie. The latter two have a brief scene right after that, but I =believe= Buffy doesn't meet Jessie until the scene where she looks up Willow, after which Xander and Jessie (and Cordelia) show up. (Refraining from explaining in detail the clever patterning of that premiere episode...) It's true that it's =plausible= Buffy could end up in the military; but she =does= ask an awful lot of questions (learned it from Giles); and I'm guessing she does something to scotch a military career sometime before the season ends (if she hasn't already). Not being an experienced habitue of comic book stores, could you be a little more exact (title and publisher) re the Patsy Walker comic that is out? I might want to go take a look at it. Really interesting about the parallel patterns/motifs in those other genres. Jung's collective unconscious makes more and more sense the more I think about it... I saw that book about the religious girl who died at Columbine; I'm afraid that it gave me the willies. Which leads me to David: Yes, you're right, the Christian woman was a stereotype. The show sometimes has a problem with this: not very many black characters, most of whom die (Mr. Trick, Mr. Platt the guidance counselor), for example. I just wanted to emphasize that, stereotype or not, she wasn't insane or dismissible, but based on reality. I =have= gone to see movies that SMG has been in (and mostly found them unsatisfying), and I did watch an episode of =Providence= that Eliza Dushku was in (playing the Good Girl!). (I learned recently that she was in =True Lies= when she was about 12.) So while I will brave questionable-quality art for a strong performer, I feel like I can tell the difference. I think in this case that the =character= (Faith) is so strong, so fascinating (only part of which is Dushku's performance), that even if the actual episode's line-by-line writing is below par I'll find enough happening with the character to make it worthwhile. Re =Earthsea= and =LOTR=, oh, absolutely; your question is well-posed. (Le Guin is one of the most =consciously= Jungian fiction writers around.) With those models in mind, how do you feel =now= about Faith always running away (until just this last episode)? Phaedre: That's another odd thing. To me a genre is a genre, and the medium (text, screen, stage, etc.) doesn't much matter; there's not a great difference between the book and the movie of =Silence of the Lambs= (or =Psycho=). Allen: What did I think of "The Zeppo"? I went into this at the time (when this list was my GEnie topic), but briefly: that episode was my strangest first-time viewing experience in the history of the show. Remember, it immediately follows "Helpless," where things start to come apart (with Giles' firing). I kept waiting for the serious stuff to start, and couldn't figure out why what there was seemed so =generic= (relative to the show, as in "we've =seen= this before!" or as Willow and Xander said, "=Again?="). Enjoyed the Xander scenes, but... Took me several viewings to realize what was going on (the serious scenes are =parody=, dummy!), and now I =appreciate= it for the very clever stunt it is. But interrupting as it does the sequence "Helpless"/"Bad Girls"/"Consequences" (one of my favorite stretches in =any= season), I don't rate it all that highly. Had a thought today, which I'm not going to go into at length now: Buffy and Faith in "Sanctuary" act more like they do in Faith's dreams in "This Year's Girl" than the way they usually act. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:29:30 -0400 (EDT) From: "Donald G. Keller" Subject: b/torturestats If Torture Were a Sporting Event: [All times approximate] "Becoming" (2nd season; Angelus-->Giles) Four segments: 1:00, 1:00, 1:30, 3:00, total 6:30 "Enemies" (3rd season; Faith-->Buffy) Single scene: total 4:00 "Into Dark" (4th season; guest torturer-->Angel) Three segments: 4:20, 1:00, 1:40, total 7:00 "Five by Five" (4th season; Faith-->Wesley) Two segments: 2:20, 2:20, total 4:40 I don't know quite what conclusions to draw from this, but if we're going to have the discussion we may as well have the facts. The scene in "Becoming" is not gratuitous at all: Angel needed information from Giles. Nothing much besides talk happens onscreen, but Giles shows some damage. In "Enemies" it could be termed gratuitous: it's only to satisfy Faith's grudge against Buffy. Rather long scene, basically all talk. "Into Dark" again has a good reason: Spike needed to find out where the ring was. But the torturer himself was in it for the aesthetics. Very long scene, torture explicit and onstage. "Five by Five" in my opinion was not gratuitous. The torture itself is suggested or happens offstage (pretty gruesome, though), and as with Giles, Wesley shows some damage. As for motivation, Faith needed to get Angel's attention: clobbering Cordelia was hardly enough. And she had a grudge against Wesley, too. From an extrinsic point of view, I'm more of the opinion that we needed to see Wesley prove himself =in extremis= (i.e. not just brave in theory, willing to jump into battle). And we also needed to see Faith really going overboard. =Maybe= it wasn't that well written a scene, which would have made it seem slower/longer; but basically I had no major trouble with the scene from a dramatic point of view. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:10:01 -0500 (CDT) From: allenw Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary On Wed, 3 May 2000, Berni Phillips wrote: > >From: "Donald G. Keller" > >Are we looking at Faith having a future on =Angel=? She's going to > >be in jail for a long time, I suspect. > > I agree with all you've said (which I've snipped for brevity's > sake). Re Faith and jail, I would love it if they continued to > use her, have occasional jail scenes, and have Faith find Jesus > and maybe even contemplate becoming a religious. As I've said > before, I've always found the lack of religion on the show to > be a big hole, considering how they use Christian iconography. > Seems pretty unlikely, considering both the show, and the character. Though being from Boston does make it not unlikely Faith was raised Catholic. The lack of religion is pretty noticible, although we have had one religious loon this season (the orphanage lady), a nice Church-going protestant type (Riley), and a vampire going to church on Buffy, and a pretty cool elderly nun on Angel. Not counting the vampire, Christian religion is at least not being dismissed this season, and is only *sometimes* presented negatively. As far as Faith's jail-time goes: I don't believe we've established her age. Yes, she's at least 17, and with a murder charge one would expect her to be charged as an adult anyway, but in TV-California, she still might get out soon if she's underaged. Not that the writers couldn't spring her by any of a dozen means anytime the whim struck them (and Eliza was available). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:13:17 -0500 (CDT) From: allenw Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary On Wed, 3 May 2000, Berni Phillips wrote: > >From: Todd Huff > >I can't wait for Xander's reaction. > Do you think he doesn't know? I thought that his response to > Oz (off camera) that Willow "didn't have a new guy" > was a painful avoidance of telling Oz the truth. Not unless Xander has a grudge against Oz for some reason. Which he doesn't seem to, considering he was the only one to step up and welcome Oz back at Giles'. If Xander knew, he would have warned Oz. On the other hand, I'm hoping that Anya not only knew, but assumed everyone else knew also and never bothered to mention it. -Allen W. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:18:45 -0500 (CDT) From: allenw Subject: Re: b/comments5/2 Donald, But Riley already *did* go over to the dark side; he just "got better" the same episode. And hasn't Buffy already kinda blown any military career, considering this week? Of course, that'll probably get resolved somehow, or else *none* of the Scooby Gang should have much future. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:31:41 -0500 (CDT) From: allenw Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary On Wed, 3 May 2000, Donald G. Keller wrote: > Nice thickening of plot with Spike and Adam joining forces; I'm > interested in what's going to happen next, now. NEW MOON RISING SPOILER SPECULATION v v v v v v v v v v v v v v It's apparent that Adam wants a big demons-vs.-Initiative fight, on his terms, and has been setting it up by filling the Initiative holding cells with demons. I'm not sure if he was planning on triggering the fight this week, and was foiled by Giles and Anya cutting the power, or if this was just a dry run, and it was Adam who really cut the power (which considering this was *Giles giving Anya computer directions*, seems more likely). But why? I see two likely scenarios: 1: The Two-Edge option. Named after a half-elf, half-troll character from the comic book ElfQuest, who set up a big racial fight to resolve his own issues of personal identity. Possible, but doesn't "sing" to me. 2: The Adam and Eve option. Adam wants to reproduce, so he wants lots of demon and human parts, from battle-proven donors. Heck, maybe he wants to take the winners and use their parts to rebuild Mommy. What I'm not sure of is how loyal a lackey Spike is going to be. Granted, there's no down-side for Spike in this Master Plan (that we know of yet), unlike Angelus' destroy-the-world scheme, but I think he's starting to grow fond of the Scoobs. Plus, Adam doesn't seem like Spike's type; too Annointed-Oney. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:21:59 EDT From: GHighPine@aol.com Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary In a message dated 5/3/00 8:15:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time, allenw@io.com writes: << Oz (off camera) that Willow "didn't have a new guy" > was a painful avoidance of telling Oz the truth. Not unless Xander has a grudge against Oz for some reason. >> I really think that Xander would have told Oz if he knew. To know and not to tell him, just get his hopes up instead, would be setting him up for shock and hurt. Xander would certainly know that. And Xander has never hesitated to say hard truths, or what he perceives as truths, simply to avoid dealing with people's reactions. Gayle ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:22:02 EDT From: GHighPine@aol.com Subject: Re: b/comments5/2 In a message dated 5/3/00 8:21:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time, allenw@io.com writes: << But Riley already *did* go over to the dark side; he just "got better" the same episode. And hasn't Buffy already kinda blown any military career, considering this week? >> As far as the military thing, I can't believe that someone as high as a colonel would be such a freaking coward, or someone so cowardly could rise so high in the military. Isn't the presumption that one is supposed to be ready to give one's life for the cause, not let the enemy win in order to save one's personal hide? (Which is the essence of desertion.) And is it really standard military protocol to let an enemy force escape simply because they are holding an officer hostage? I'd really like to see some military person's take on that whole sequence. Gayle ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:21:39 EDT From: GHighPine@aol.com Subject: Re: b/torturestats In a message dated 5/3/00 7:32:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dgk@panix.com writes: << "Five by Five" in my opinion was not gratuitous. The torture itself is suggested or happens offstage (pretty gruesome, though), and as with Giles, Wesley shows some damage. As for motivation, Faith needed to get Angel's attention: clobbering Cordelia was hardly enough. And she had a grudge against Wesley, too. From an extrinsic point of view, I'm more of the opinion that we needed to see Wesley prove himself =in extremis= (i.e. not just brave in theory, willing to jump into battle). And we also needed to see Faith really going overboard. =Maybe= it wasn't that well written a scene, which would have made it seem slower/longer; but basically I had no major trouble with the scene from a dramatic point of view. >> It seemed much less gratuitous to me after seeing Part 2. It set up Faith's breakdown ./ breakthrough as Faith was trying to prove to herself that she was so truly evil that she should die, and it made Wesley's course of action in Part 2 much more powerful -- his ability to see what was right under the circumstances MUCH MORE CLEARLY THAN BUFFY DID, IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT (arguably, after the prolonged torture) HE HAD GREATER REASON FOR HATRED OF FAITH THAN BUFFY DID. My respect for Wesley was increased much more by Part 2 than by Part 1. He didn't have much choice in Part 1, but he did have a choice and exercised it courageously in Part 2. The torture scenes in Part 1 seemed essential to set that up. In retrospect, it does not seem gratuitous to me at all. Gayle ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:59:12 -0400 From: Dori Subject: Re: b/newmoon/sanctuary Berni said: >> Do you think he doesn't know? I thought that his >> response to >> Oz (off camera) that Willow "didn't have a new guy" >> was a painful avoidance of telling Oz the truth. I think Xander's clueless because he hasn't had -time- to notice anything going on with Willow. Anya's pretty high maintenance, and I have to wonder exactly how often she drags him off for sex. Bet he never thought there could be such a thing as -too much- sex. (And maybe he's not to that point yet. But I can see it getting there, if Anya has her way.) - -- Dori cleindor@cfw.com - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Torture first. It's better that way. Troll maxim - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ------------------------------ End of stillpt-digest V2 #98 ****************************