From: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org (stillpt-digest) To: stillpt-digest@smoe.org Subject: stillpt-digest V2 #146 Reply-To: stillpt@smoe.org Sender: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk stillpt-digest Monday, July 10 2000 Volume 02 : Number 146 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: b/Becoming [allenw ] Re: b/Becoming ["Susan Kroupa" ] b/a bit of history today (suday) [meredith ] Re: b/Becoming [GHighPine@aol.com] Re: b/ Re: Jeff Pruitt ["Berni Phillips" ] Re: b/a bit of history today (suday) ["David S. Bratman" ] Re: b/Becoming ["David S. Bratman" ] Re: b/Becoming [Micole Sudberg ] Re: b/Becoming [meredith ] Re: b/a bit of history today (suday) ["Marta Grabien" ] b/top 10 [meredith ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 10:19:20 -0500 (CDT) From: allenw Subject: Re: b/Becoming On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, David S. Bratman wrote: > I've just seen "Becoming" (the 2nd season finale). A much talked about > pair of episodes, but my first viewing. Thoughts: > > 4. The impression I'd had from descriptions of this episode was that > Buffy sends Angel to hell before she realizes that his soul has been > restored. (And of course she did not know the spell was being cast.) > But I do not read the scene that way. If Buffy thought Angel was faking > it, she wouldn't have let him get so close: they even kissed! I think > she felt he deserved to be punished even if he's reformed. > That's a... unique interpretation. I've never before seen the claim that Buffy "sends Angel to hell before she realizes that his soul has been restored." Rather, by the time Angel's soul is restored, events have progressed to the point where she believes she *has* to send Angel to hell to save the world, even though she notices almost instantly when his soul comes back. It's an ultimate-tragedy thing. But your reading, that "she felt he deserved to be punished"; that's pretty much at right-angles to any analysis I've ever heard of. Can you elaborate? allen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 11:09:41 -0700 From: "Susan Kroupa" Subject: Re: b/Becoming Allen, your take on it is the same as mine. The tragedy of the situation was that Buffy _knew_ Angel's soul was restored but had to kill him anyway--that's what made it such a powerful episode, especially since Joss had set up a situation where we (at least I, anyway) thought it could go one of two ways--either Angel would get his soul back and Buffy wouldn't kill him or he wouldn't get it back and she would. Joss's third way was so much more poignant and powerful. Which is why I love the show, I guess! :) Sue - ----- Original Message ----- From: allenw To: Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 8:19 AM Subject: Re: b/Becoming > On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, David S. Bratman wrote: > > I've just seen "Becoming" (the 2nd season finale). A much talked about > > pair of episodes, but my first viewing. Thoughts: > > > > 4. The impression I'd had from descriptions of this episode was that > > Buffy sends Angel to hell before she realizes that his soul has been > > restored. (And of course she did not know the spell was being cast.) > > But I do not read the scene that way. If Buffy thought Angel was faking > > it, she wouldn't have let him get so close: they even kissed! I think > > she felt he deserved to be punished even if he's reformed. > > > That's a... unique interpretation. > I've never before seen the claim that Buffy "sends Angel to hell before > she realizes that his soul has been restored." Rather, by the time > Angel's soul is restored, events have progressed to the point where she > believes she *has* to send Angel to hell to save the world, even though > she notices almost instantly when his soul comes back. It's an > ultimate-tragedy thing. > But your reading, that "she felt he deserved to be punished"; that's > pretty much at right-angles to any analysis I've ever heard of. Can you > elaborate? > > allen > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 13:30:25 -0400 From: meredith Subject: b/a bit of history today (suday) Hi! In case anyone is interested: _My Stepmother Is An Alien_, featuring younger versions of Alyson Hannigan and Seth Green will be shown on the Sci-Fi Channel this afternoon (7/9) at 5 pm EST. Also, as I was checking the IMDB to verify that I wasn't misremembering the movie, I noticed that Hannigan has a role in _Boys And Girls_, which is in theaters now. (Guess she's got an agent who's into getting her in those stupid summer teen movies...) +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:51:20 EDT From: GHighPine@aol.com Subject: Re: b/Becoming I feel your points 1, 2, 3 were right on target. As to point 4, you probably misunderstood what you had read before. I don't think anyone thought that Buffy didn't realize that Angel's soul had been restored. That is what makes that moment so wrenchingly powerful. Oh, I bet you read TV Guide's little misrendered spoiler, didn't you? Well, if they =have= to put spoilers, glad they write them wrong! Probably the writer looked up the ep in the files of press releases. The press releases that shows send out to TV magazines, on which the little episode synopses are based, contain enough detail that the magazines can write synopses differently, but naturally leave out key spoilers. So the writer of the article, or that part of it, probably put the info from that press release and later ones that made reference to Buffy's killing Angel,. and surmised what happened. I can't imagine anyone who actually =saw= that moment ever forgetting it. It was one of the most powerful moments I have ever seen on screen in my life. (All the more powerful when we had no idea what was coming, and when, at first, we all thought he was really dead for good.) But I certainly don't think she felt he deserved to be punished! That wasn't the point at all. She had to sacrifice him to save the world. (And an early interpretation I heard, which unfortunately turned out to be wrong but which I feel was very poignant, was that it was a "mercy killing," to =save= him the suffering of knowing what he did on top of what he had already been suffering before with a soul.) And Whistler was the character originally intended for the Angel series. Original info that was circulated was that Angel would feature Whistler. In fact, I saw a copy of the script for the Angel premiere, and it was written with Whistler instead of Doyle, which means that the change was made very late. Some problem about actor availability. Gayle ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 17:39:07 -0700 From: "Berni Phillips" Subject: Re: b/ Re: Jeff Pruitt >From: GHighPine@aol.com > As a matter of fact, what I heard was that at a certain point Joss said >that they didn't have to bother hiding the stunt double's face, because >apparently it was someone's opinion (Jeff Pruitt's, I would guess) that they >could do better action sequences without that restriction. AFAIK, SMG's >double has always been Sophie Crawford and still is. I don't know why she >would seem larger or seem to have a different body language now, though. > Gayle Gack! That is totally the wrong decision, to show us that Buffy is played by two different people. If it's the same stunt double, then the camera work must have changed or something on the film end. But it's not the face that jars me (although I can recall a few times when I've seen the stunt double's face), it's definitely a different body. IMHO, they could do with less action if that means that the double is less obvious. I don't watch the show for the action scenes, I watch it for the writing and acting. Buffy-the-girl-who- talks-things-out would be just fine with me! Berni ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 21:46:59 -0400 (EDT) From: "David S. Bratman" Subject: Re: b/a bit of history today (suday) On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, meredith wrote: > _My Stepmother Is An Alien_, featuring younger versions of Alyson Hannigan > and Seth Green will be shown on the Sci-Fi Channel this afternoon (7/9) at > 5 pm EST. If you haven't seen it, do: lousy movie, but it's a real hoot for the Buffyfan when Baby Seth (that's pretty much what he looks like) comes over to take Baby Alyson out on a date. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 21:54:01 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: b/a bit of history today (suday) Hi! David urged: >If you haven't seen it, do: lousy movie, but it's a real hoot for the >Buffyfan when Baby Seth (that's pretty much what he looks like) comes >over to take Baby Alyson out on a date. Of course, after seeing this in the TV Guide and dutifully posting about it, I got involved in housecleaning and completely forgot to watch it until just this moment. Argh. Oh well, it's not like it's never going to be on again. :) +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 22:00:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "David S. Bratman" Subject: Re: b/Becoming On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, allenw wrote: > I've never before seen the claim that Buffy "sends Angel to hell before > she realizes that his soul has been restored." Rather, by the time > Angel's soul is restored, events have progressed to the point where she > believes she *has* to send Angel to hell to save the world, even though > she notices almost instantly when his soul comes back. It's an > ultimate-tragedy thing. This is only my dim recollection based on four years' worth of listening to people talking about the show. It could be erroneous. > But your reading, that "she felt he deserved to be punished"; that's > pretty much at right-angles to any analysis I've ever heard of. Can you > elaborate? I figured she had pretty much come to agree with Xander, who definitely felt Angel deserved to be punished, at least insofar as even if his soul was restored, he might lose it again (a fear which has proven justified by events, even if Xander no longer quite feels that way). I couldn't think of any other reason for Buffy to do this. Though by the time I read Gayle's last post, it was slowly dawning on me that sending Angel to hell was the only way to keep the demon from waking up. Is this correct? But if this is so, at what point did this necessity become clear to Buffy, and is it before any of the scenes where she seems still genuinely hopeful that his soul could be restored? If she was absolutely certain of what she _had_ to do (not just that she could do it _if necessary_, which is what she keeps swearing to), then the last thing she'd want is for Angel's soul to be restored: that would only make the necessary job harder. There's a key point, or what seems like a key point at the time, in a slightly earlier scene when Buffy meets Xander along the road to the mansion. Xander is about to tell Buffy that Willow is planning to cast the spell again, but then he stops himself. But if the theory you're outlining is correct, it would have made no difference to the outcome if Xander had gone ahead and said it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:16:57 -0400 From: Micole Sudberg Subject: Re: b/Becoming At 10:00 PM 7/9/00 -0400, David S. Bratman wrote: >I couldn't think of any other reason for Buffy to do this. Though by the >time I read Gayle's last post, it was slowly dawning on me that sending >Angel to hell was the only way to keep the demon from waking up. Is this >correct? > >But if this is so, at what point did this necessity become clear to >Buffy, and is it before any of the scenes where she seems still genuinely >hopeful that his soul could be restored? If she was absolutely certain >of what she _had_ to do (not just that she could do it _if necessary_, >which is what she keeps swearing to), then the last thing she'd want is >for Angel's soul to be restored: that would only make the necessary job >harder. If Willow had been able to restore Angel's soul before he began the ceremony to wake Acathla, then it wouldn't have been necessary for Buffy to kill the restored Angel. Buffy knows that she has to kill Angel because she can see the cheesy swirly special effects vortex in the Acathla statue's chest, indicating that the demon is waking and about to endanger the world. >There's a key point, or what seems like a key point at the time, in a >slightly earlier scene when Buffy meets Xander along the road to the >mansion. Xander is about to tell Buffy that Willow is planning to cast >the spell again, but then he stops himself. But if the theory you're >outlining is correct, it would have made no difference to the outcome if >Xander had gone ahead and said it. You could, I suppose, believe that if Buffy had known this, she would have tried harder to delay Angel, rather than kill him; it adds to the tragic sense of missed opportunities for me. But in retrospect I think it's most important for what it says about Xander. I've always taken it to be a selfish move on his part, a refusal of him to allow Buffy any hope of Angel; though you could read it as selfless, withholding information that could only cause her pain or lessen her determination and get her killed. - --m. - -- "There's trees in the desert since you moved out. And I don't sleep on a bed of bones."--Joss Whedon, BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 22:22:15 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: b/Becoming Hi! David fonted: >I couldn't think of any other reason for Buffy to do this. Though by the >time I read Gayle's last post, it was slowly dawning on me that sending >Angel to hell was the only way to keep the demon from waking up. Is this >correct? Yes. >But if this is so, at what point did this necessity become clear to >Buffy, and is it before any of the scenes where she seems still genuinely >hopeful that his soul could be restored? If she was absolutely certain >of what she _had_ to do (not just that she could do it _if necessary_, >which is what she keeps swearing to), then the last thing she'd want is >for Angel's soul to be restored: that would only make the necessary job >harder. Don would probably be much more qualified than I to answer this, since he's definitely seen it a lot more recently than I have, but my recollection is that Buffy knew the only way to save the world would be to sacrifice Angel. When the spell failed the first time, Buffy knew she wasn't going to be turning back, and there wasn't really any other choice. She didn't know the others were going to try the spell again -- had she known, I'm sure things would have been very different. But at that very last moment, when she realized that Angel had his soul back and was faced with the decision - -- save Angel, or save the world -- that was the ultimate tragic moment. >There's a key point, or what seems like a key point at the time, in a >slightly earlier scene when Buffy meets Xander along the road to the >mansion. Xander is about to tell Buffy that Willow is planning to cast >the spell again, but then he stops himself. But if the theory you're >outlining is correct, it would have made no difference to the outcome if >Xander had gone ahead and said it. On the contrary, I think it would have made a big difference if Buffy had known they were going to try the spell again. She would have tried to find some way to get the job done that wouldn't have involved sacrificing Angel, in that case. That other way might have meant sacrificing herself instead. (Please keep in mind that it's been a *long* time since I've seen this, so I may be completely misremembering the ep...) +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 19:37:21 -0700 From: "Marta Grabien" Subject: Re: b/a bit of history today (suday) I saw some of it. Pretty bad. I fell asleep and work up about 5 minutes to the end. I -think- that kid was Seth, but wow, did he have a lower lip. He managed to look faintly retarded. Of course it might not have been him, but who else could it have been? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 23:13:48 -0400 From: meredith Subject: b/top 10 Hi! Well, since it's summer and I'm bored... A Xenite posting board I'm on has a Buffy topic as well, and someone started the "what are your favorite episodes" discussion. I figured I'd post this here as well, for what it's worth: 1.) Hush 2.) Restless 3.) New Moon Rising 4.) Doppelgangland 5.) Becoming (part 2) 6.) Passion 7.) Innocence 8.) Graduation Day (part 1) 9.) The Wish 10.) Who Are You (#'s 3-10 subject to change at any moment...) +==========================================================================+ | Meredith Tarr meth@smoe.org | | New Haven, CT USA http://www.smoe.org/~meth | +==========================================================================+ | "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille | | *** TRAJECTORY, the Veda Hille mailing list: *** | | *** http://www.smoe.org/meth/trajectory.html *** | +==========================================================================+ ------------------------------ End of stillpt-digest V2 #146 *****************************