From: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org (stillpt-digest) To: stillpt-digest@smoe.org Subject: stillpt-digest V3 #72 Reply-To: stillpt@smoe.org Sender: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-stillpt-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk stillpt-digest Wednesday, April 25 2001 Volume 03 : Number 072 Today's Subjects: ----------------- b/intervention [meredith ] o/Dark Angel (was Re: true lies) [meredith ] intervention ["Donald G. Keller" ] "We will bring you the limp and beaten body of Bob Barker!" [Todd Huff ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:03:03 -0400 From: meredith Subject: b/intervention Hi! What a fun episode! After the past couple episodes of gloom and doom, it was good to get back to some laughs again. The episode never lost balance, though -- we never forget just what the situation is, or what has come before. The Buffybot had me HOWLING. And Buffy's reaction to it, not to mention her reaction upon finding out that her friends had mistaken the Buffybot for her ... priceless. "I mean, look at her!" "Uh, yeah." And what a final scene. I knew it was Buffy instantly -- when she kissed Spike it was so *sweet*. No, she won't forget what he did. He just bought himself a permanent get-out-of-staking-free card, methinks (not that I think he ever needed one, since I'm in the camp that drives Don to distraction on that whole issue). But lest we forget the extremely important other stuff: the trip to the desert, and the reappearance of the First Slayer. I haven't the faintest idea what all that was about, but I'm sure we're going to find out in the next 4 weeks. "And that's what it's all about." ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:55:35 -0400 From: meredith Subject: o/Dark Angel (was Re: true lies) Hi, I just watched _Dark Angel_ and had to dig this one out: > Doris Egan's response: >As long as I'm here, my next (and last) episode this season is set to run >April 24. People from story editors right up to Jim Cameron have been >saying it's the best thing we've done. I'd have to agree. Excellent episode. >Still, >everyone's excited about it, and we got a guest actor so good that when the >dailies reached Fox they immediately gave him a pilot of his own. So >hopefully the audience will like it. This audience loved it ... and I agree, the kid they got to play Ben was really good. I'm interested to see what pilot he's got. So if anyone out there could pass along to Doris the fangirl applause from this corner, I'd appreciate it. :) P.S. I watched last week's _Dark Angel_ earlier this evening, so it wouldn't get taped over by tonight's _Buffy_ and had to laugh at the final scene, wherein Max reads some of Logan's poetry. He describes her as being a "dark angel". So there you go. Take that, Joss Whedon! ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:57:50 -0400 (EDT) From: "Donald G. Keller" Subject: intervention I forgot to leave spoiler space last week, do we really need it? "Anya! How is your money?" "Fine! Thank you for asking!" We were talking (or at least I was talking) about tone. This episode lurches (maybe "sashays" is the verb I'm looking for) between two of the major tones of the series (and between two of the major poles of SMG's acting chops, Very Serious and Very Vapid), constantly and with malice aforethought. An episode I really enjoyed, but the minor problem I had with it was there were three main threads (Spike and his robot, Buffy and her vision quest, Glory and her =idee fixe=), and the first two didn't get enough time to really sink in. The whole Spike subplot, with his willing Buffy robot, was absolutely hilarious, as expected (I was especially struck by how SMG wields that smile of hers like a weapon--notice how it was the wordless punchline to several scenes?), but as with Faith-as-Buffy, I could have stood for a bit more of it. And the vision quest got a little scamped, too. The message--"death is your gift"--seems a lot less, well, numinous than the stuff in "Restless" (and they were most definitely trying for a "Restless" vibe, of course). I'm still wondering what "I'm going to be a fireman when the floods roll back" means, and what it is that Buffy "hasn't even begun." Are we going to find out this season? (Maybe not.) Odd motif with Dawn pocketing the earrings. Not followed up this episode. Terrific use of Spike, and my total approval of the scene at the end where Buffy makes it clear (it =was= clear, yes?) that her feelings toward him personally haven't changed, but also making it clear that he'd earned her respect, big time. Well done. I forgot to mention this before (and there's more about the previous episode I haven't said): I had a sudden insight about Glory last week (when she said "I want to hear it all again, without all that annoying moaning"). =She's five years old=. Think about it: the short attention span, the self-centeredness, the demand for instant gratification...We assumed from the beginning that she was, mentally and emotionally, the kind of teenaged heather that Cordelia and Harmony (and Buffy, for that matter) were when the show started. But I think her character makes a lot more sense if you think of her as much younger than that. (And I still think it's possible Clare Kramer's acting is OK, and that it's the character who is over the top and annoying. On purpose.) More to say, but later. P.S. "Intervention" isn't the right title for the episode; that was only a very small motif. I might have gone with "The Gift," but that's not very interesting. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:30:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Todd Huff Subject: "We will bring you the limp and beaten body of Bob Barker!" - --- "Donald G. Keller" wrote: > I forgot > > to > > leave > > spoiler > > space > > last > > week, > > do we really need it? > > "Anya! How is your money?" > > "Fine! Thank you for asking!" I wish I'd seen more of the data Buffybot was looking at. I caught the Anya loves money thing and Willow: Gay (1999-present) but suspect I missed something else. > > We were talking (or at least I was talking) about > tone. This episode > lurches (maybe "sashays" is the verb I'm looking > for) between two of the > major tones of the series (and between two of the > major poles of SMG's > acting chops, Very Serious and Very Vapid), > constantly and with malice > aforethought. > Even with the Scoobies thinking that Buffy might be out of it from the vision quest, it was a bit much for them to not realize she was a robot. > > And the vision quest got a little scamped, too. The > message--"death is > your gift"--seems a lot less, well, numinous than > the stuff in "Restless" > (and they were most definitely trying for a > "Restless" vibe, of course). > I'm still wondering what "I'm going to be a fireman > when the floods roll > back" means, and what it is that Buffy "hasn't even > begun." Are we going > to find out this season? (Maybe not.) Still wondering if Death is the gift she'll recieve or the one she'll give. > Odd motif with Dawn pocketing the earrings. Not > followed up this episode. Personal item. Gonna try another spell? > Terrific use of Spike, and my total approval of the > scene at the end where > Buffy makes it clear (it =was= clear, yes?) that her > feelings toward him > personally haven't changed, but also making it clear > that he'd earned her > respect, big time. Well done. Noble Spike. This works so well with how the character has developed. I only wish Xander had been there to see it. > I forgot to mention this before (and there's more > about the previous > episode I haven't said): I had a sudden insight > about Glory last week > (when she said "I want to hear it all again, without > all that annoying > moaning"). =She's five years old=. Think about it: > the short attention span, > the self-centeredness, the demand for instant > gratification...We assumed from > the beginning that she was, mentally and > emotionally, the kind of teenaged > heather that Cordelia and Harmony (and Buffy, for > that matter) were when > the show started. But I think her character makes a > lot more sense if you > think of her as much younger than that. (And I still > think it's possible > Clare Kramer's acting is OK, and that it's the > character who is over the > top and annoying. On purpose.) I haven't rewatched yet, but didn't she refer to Ben as her "old enemy"? I'm not knocking the youth idea (it fits) but it seems to me now that there was no physical connection before she came to this world. Ben will certainly turn out to be the key to defeating her. And where's the Legion of Byzantium been? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:23:33 -0700 From: "David S. Bratman" Subject: Re: intervention Donald wrote: >We were talking (or at least I was talking) about tone. This episode >lurches (maybe "sashays" is the verb I'm looking for) between two of the >major tones of the series (and between two of the major poles of SMG's >acting chops, Very Serious and Very Vapid), constantly and with malice >aforethought. I thought it was quite remarkable. Despite the stand-alone nature of the thread that the previews emphasized (Buffy-bot), this was not a stand-alone episode at all. Perhaps because we're turning toward the general buildup to the climax, the other threads were not put on hold, and they interconnected interestingly, particularly the search for the Key. The connecting cross-thread was the concept of love. Interesting how often, and under how many circumstances, that subject came up in its widely varying forms. More kudos to SMG for a remarkable performance. Here she played three characters (I'm counting the final scene as a third character, because this time Buffy is acting) that were just distinct enough and not too much so. Perfectly modulated. >An episode I really enjoyed, but the minor problem I had with it was there >were three main threads (Spike and his robot, Buffy and her vision quest, >Glory and her =idee fixe=), and the first two didn't get enough time to >really sink in. The whole Spike subplot, with his willing Buffy robot, was >absolutely hilarious, as expected (I was especially struck by how SMG >wields that smile of hers like a weapon--notice how it was the wordless >punchline to several scenes?), but as with Faith-as-Buffy, I could have >stood for a bit more of it. As we already had a good dose of Faithful Robot a couple episodes ago, I felt there was enough of it this time. I didn't feel there was need for much more. >And the vision quest got a little scamped, too. The message--"death is >your gift"--seems a lot less, well, numinous than the stuff in "Restless" I'm afraid so. Except I liked the way the landscape, previously merely similar, suddenly became the spot we recognized from "Restless". I noticed it just before Buffy did. >Odd motif with Dawn pocketing the earrings. Not followed up this episode. Whose earrings were they? Anya's? A rewatching would probably make this clear. >Terrific use of Spike, and my total approval of the scene at the end where >Buffy makes it clear (it =was= clear, yes?) that her feelings toward him >personally haven't changed, but also making it clear that he'd earned her >respect, big time. Well done. Once again, _either_ interpretation of Buffy's real feelings towards Spike is supported by this superb scene. Joss is still playing with us. >I forgot to mention this before (and there's more about the previous >episode I haven't said): I had a sudden insight about Glory last week >(when she said "I want to hear it all again, without all that annoying >moaning"). =She's five years old=. Yes. I think you've nailed her. The colloquies with chained-up Spike reinforce this. >(And I still think it's possible >Clare Kramer's acting is OK, and that it's the character who is over the >top and annoying. On purpose.) Has anybody been complaining about Clare Kramer's acting? Not me. I think she's been fine since the start. Not as good a villain as Harry Groener was, of course, but who could be? ------------------------------ End of stillpt-digest V3 #72 ****************************