Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 60 of 60

Thread: Screenrants Top 5 Angel Episode (And 5 Worst) Do you agree?

  1. #41
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vampmogs View Post
    For what it’s worth, my problem isn’t that Buffy is having a European fling or that she’s partying in clubs. In actual fact, I’m rather fond of the idea that Buffy was finally able to let loose again after jumping from one serious romantic relationship to another through her teens/early twenties. My problem is that they have her fling be some morally ambiguous, shady guy without any thought or care whatsoever as to what this means for her. Yes, they can poke fun at the idea that she’s been attracted to a “centuries old guy who may or may not be evil” before but the story earned that. Trivialising it in such a manner and having her hook up with The Immortal seems like some pretty iffy characterisation all for a cheap joke.

    I’m afraid I also have to agree that it rubs me up the wrong way that she’s seemingly in The Immortal’s shadow in Rome and is only known as his new girlfriend. The fact that a huge fight breaks out and Buffy doesn’t get involved also strikes me as terribly unlikely.

    As a huge Buffy-centric fan none of these developments exactly thrill me. I’d have preferred they just leave her alone. I guess “TGIQ” is a Buffy-centric fan’s version of “As You Were.” The plot doesn’t make a whole lot of sense and it kind of messes with the character as a result. I can only speak for myself of course but I’ve come across very few hardcore Buffy fans over the years who loves what AtS Season 5, and TGIQ in particular, did with her. It all just seems so random and nonsensical or OOC (“Damage” included). I feel similarly about a lot of the post-“Chosen” developments for The Scoobies. Buffy in Rome? Xander in Africa? Willow and Kennedy in Brazil? Andrew a Watcher? I don’t know. It all just sounds so random. I mean, I guess I don’t have any reason why Xander couldn’t or wouldn’t go to Africa or Buffy wouldn’t choose Rome to settle down in, however, it also doesn’t speak to me why they would, either. I also find it depressing that they’re all split up across the globe but that’s the Scooby fan in me.

    Tbh I thought Joss retcon in the S8 comics was even worse and made even less sense. While him pressing the reset button on Buffy and basically abandoning all those girls by the end of S8 was even worse than that imo

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to BtVS fan For This Useful Post:

    Silver1 (02-08-19)

  3. #42
    Scooby Gang SpuffyGlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    683
    Thanks
    5,518
    Thanked 2,007 Times in 771 Posts

    Default

    Wow, I didn't realise people blamed Buffy for anything in this episode. My problem with the episode is not Buffy at all. She's my favourite character in the Buffyverse and I love her having the upper hand. I've accepted "TGIQ" and even find parts of it funny in an absurdist, cringe-y way now. I don't have a strong opinion on it, either, because I haven't seen the episodes leading up to it (so I don't know the full context and am reserving judgement till I see the whole of S5.) But "TGIQ" was the first episode of AtS I accidentally watched and I really disliked it (I've seen random bits of AtS S5 after that, but not a full episode in that season.) Imagine this being your first accidental introduction to the show!

    I don't have any problem with Buffy partying or having a fling. I'd actually enjoy having Angel and Spike pine over her and realise that she's not waiting around forever for either of them. As I said, Buffy having the upper hand is always fun to watch. My problem has to do with the fact that Angel and Spike don't seem to love her at ALL in this episode. And that's the deeper subtext underlying the entire episode. On the surface, yes, they're in Rome because "It's Buffy". But Angel can't even remember her eye colour (how do you forget the eye colour of someone you love??), Spike is quick to concede that she's "their" girl (without a flicker of genuine feeling); when they run into Buffy at the dance club, within seconds they're distracted again by the theft of the "head". In the end, they both amiably commiserate with each other over the predicament of how this one woman makes them both act so "silly" and they really are above it and should get over it. Buffy's used as the Manic!Pixie Dream Girl to facilitate Angel and Spike's male bonding and mutual realisation that they're just being "a bit silly". The whole "bros before hoes" vibe that TTB describes really came through to me in every single scene, including the slow motion Spander fight at the club. It's great to have a Spander episode, but it's done at the expense of Buffy in a way that was pretty unnecessary.

    On Buffy, Angel and Spike were never trivialised in quite this way, their presence was always lent a certain gravitas and even in funny, subversive or self deprecatory episodes like "Lovers Walk" or "Something Blue" the writers took pains to keep their characterisations consistent. Any "OTT-ness" was explained by spells/ drunkenness. But Buffy still comes through as some version of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl in "TGIQ". On BtVS, you did have male versions of this trope used occasionally— the Manic Pixie Dream Boy, for instance, who is
    "everything everyone wants in their lives, and he's a fallacious notion of what we can actually have in our lives"
    You had episodes like "I Was Made to Love You", "Beer Bad", "Him" and "As You Were" where male figures like Ben, Parker, R.J. & Riley were written into those episodes purely as devices:— Ben's proposal of a coffee date in "IWMTLY" was the catalyst to make Buffy realise that it's OK to be herself and single; the figure of Parker in "BB" serves to make her realise —as Willow tells her— "you need to think about not Parker, there are other men"; "Him" uses stereotypical jock R.J. as a device to highlight that "no guy is worth your life" in a comedy-break style episode that has everyone acting OTT because of a spell; "AYW" has Riley suddenly appear to throw light on Buffy's messed up life and the things she needed to change.

    The Immortal is presented as a joke (Angel and Spike are laughably obsessed and threatened by him, and are textually made fun of for taking him so seriously). He's supposed to have this "effect" on women that even the CEO of W&H, Rome, an "ebullient Italian woman" (who is a gross caricature of Italian iconic female stars like Sophia Loren and Gina Lollobrigida) finds him "most satisfactory". The Immortal is like another mysterious "R.J.-esque" womaniser only this time, Buffy isn't under any spell. Even the stand-in for Buffy looks absolutely nothing like her, her hair is too flat and blonde and I'm pretty sure they could have found a better Buffy-esque substitute for the episode, not to mention that Angel and Spike would have both scented that this wasn't the real Buffy in seconds.

    Having said that, the Wesley/Illyria scenes are brilliant and very intriguing. I'm not trying to take away enjoyment of the episode, it is absurdly funny in parts and I think there is something fun about taking Spike and Angel down a peg or two, but I still don't think it's particularly well written or respectful to Buffy or other canon plot points from Buffy. I may change my mind when I get to it again, though
    .
    buffylover made this stunning banner

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SpuffyGlitz For This Useful Post:

    Andrew S. (03-08-19),ghoststar (03-08-19),Silver1 (02-08-19),Stoney (03-08-19),vampmogs (03-08-19)

  5. #43
    Library Researcher Lostsoul666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    449
    Thanked 241 Times in 103 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BtVS fan View Post
    Tbh I thought Joss retcon in the S8 comics was even worse and made even less sense. While him pressing the reset button on Buffy and basically abandoning all those girls by the end of S8 was even worse than that imo
    Personally I hated the Season 8 retcon cause it was just one of many cases where Joss and his team of writers ignored plot elements from Angel Season 5.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lostsoul666 For This Useful Post:

    BtVS fan (02-08-19),Silver1 (02-08-19)

  7. #44
    Slayer flow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,640
    Thanks
    3,884
    Thanked 3,883 Times in 1,618 Posts

    Default

    I rather like TGIQ although it should have aired much earlier in the season. At the time it aired the season's tone had already become too dark and bleak to allow for a funny epsiode.

    It is obvious that the girl dancing in the club is not Buffy. The haircolor is all wrong. That's how I always watched the episode and that's why it makes sense to me.

    It's not objectifying Buffy but instead it's making fun of Spike and Angel, who are chasing a red herring (and at the same time it mocks all Spuffy and Bangel shippers).

    flow
    ................................ Banner by buffylover

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to flow For This Useful Post:

    GoSpuffy (02-08-19),Silver1 (02-08-19)

  9. #45
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,481
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 1,703 Times in 823 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vampmogs View Post
    For what it’s worth, my problem isn’t that Buffy is having a European fling or that she’s partying in clubs. In actual fact, I’m rather fond of the idea that Buffy was finally able to let loose again after jumping from one serious romantic relationship to another through her teens/early twenties. My problem is that they have her fling be some morally ambiguous, shady guy without any thought or care whatsoever as to what this means for her. Yes, they can poke fun at the idea that she’s been attracted to a “centuries old guy who may or may not be evil” before but the story earned that. Trivialising it in such a manner and having her hook up with The Immortal seems like some pretty iffy characterisation all for a cheap joke.
    You mean like Spike or Angel? The only people claiming he is morally ambiguous or evil are Angel and Spike, all while contradicting it by having him saving nuns and returning the head to them. In the episode, the only evil things he does are Darla and Dru, which neither Angel or Spike (or Buffy herself) can throw any stones at.

    I’m afraid I also have to agree that it rubs me up the wrong way that she’s seemingly in The Immortal’s shadow in Rome and is only known as his new girlfriend. The fact that a huge fight breaks out and Buffy doesn’t get involved also strikes me as terribly unlikely.
    Still not seeing this at all.

    As a huge Buffy-centric fan none of these developments exactly thrill me. I’d have preferred they just leave her alone. I guess “TGIQ” is a Buffy-centric fan’s version of “As You Were.” The plot doesn’t make a whole lot of sense and it kind of messes with the character as a result. I can only speak for myself of course but I’ve come across very few hardcore Buffy fans over the years who loves what AtS Season 5, and TGIQ in particular, did with her. It all just seems so random and nonsensical or OOC (“Damage” included). I feel similarly about a lot of the post-“Chosen” developments for The Scoobies. Buffy in Rome? Xander in Africa? Willow and Kennedy in Brazil? Andrew a Watcher? I don’t know. It all just sounds so random. I mean, I guess I don’t have any reason why Xander couldn’t or wouldn’t go to Africa or Buffy wouldn’t choose Rome to settle down in, however, it also doesn’t speak to me why they would, either. I also find it depressing that they’re all split up across the globe but that’s the Scooby fan in me.
    As You Were is the Buffy-centric version of As You Were.

    Most "hardcore Buffy fans" are full of it and only even claim to like her as a juxtaposition to their ship or social blathering. They only even talk about her as an excuse to talk about Spike, Angel or Faith or bash Willow and Xander.

    Personally, I liked that they split up. I liked that it showed the possibility that all was not well after the handwaved reconciliation at the end of S7.

    It's only bros>hos if you accept that Buffy is doing something wrong. The ending says exactly the opposite. Though the ending, it's explained to both that if they keep running on their hamster wheel, they're never going to meet up again.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by BtVS fan View Post
    Tbh I thought Joss retcon in the S8 comics was even worse and made even less sense. While him pressing the reset button on Buffy and basically abandoning all those girls by the end of S8 was even worse than that imo
    The retcon did way more damage to the character than anything in S5. It's bizarre seeing people claim it saved the character. Obviously banging some dude is far worse than international grand larceny, throwing girls to the wolves while hiding out in Scotland. That goes without saying. But hey, at least the Scoobs are BFFs and no other boys are playing with Spike and/or Angel's toy.
    Last edited by HardlyThere; 02-08-19 at 10:18 PM.

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to HardlyThere For This Useful Post:

    BtVS fan (02-08-19),flow (02-08-19),Lostsoul666 (02-08-19),Silver1 (02-08-19),SpuffyGlitz (02-08-19)

  11. #46
    Bronze Party-Goer
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    738
    Thanked 518 Times in 178 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vampmogs
    As a huge Buffy-centric fan none of these developments exactly thrill me. I’d have preferred they just leave her alone. I guess “TGIQ” is a Buffy-centric fan’s version of “As You Were.” The plot doesn’t make a whole lot of sense and it kind of messes with the character as a result. I can only speak for myself of course but I’ve come across very few hardcore Buffy fans over the years who loves what AtS Season 5, and TGIQ in particular, did with her. It all just seems so random and nonsensical or OOC (“Damage” included). I feel similarly about a lot of the post-“Chosen” developments for The Scoobies. Buffy in Rome? Xander in Africa? Willow and Kennedy in Brazil? Andrew a Watcher? I don’t know. It all just sounds so random. I mean, I guess I don’t have any reason why Xander couldn’t or wouldn’t go to Africa or Buffy wouldn’t choose Rome to settle down in, however, it also doesn’t speak to me why they would, either. I also find it depressing that they’re all split up across the globe but that’s the Scooby fan in me.
    It used to feel random to me but it actually makes a lot of sense when you take in mind all of the Slayers that they activated. They needed to split up into different terms in order to recruit. It's the same way in the comics. Buffy and her squad in one area, Xander and his squad in another, same thing with Giles and Andrew. I'm sure they all kept in regular contact with one another as they were all still working together, just in different places. I'm a huge Scooby fan too, but I actually really like the idea of them all splitting up. Not only because friends moving away and having different lives is a part of growing up, but I think they all needed a huge break from one another after S6-S7. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. I've always felt that real friends can go stretches of time without seeing or speaking to one another and then when they finally each other again, they can pick up right where they left off. And even though I don't consider Season 8 (or any of the comics) canon, I really like how it explored that. Like, when Willow reunites with Buffy and Xander after being away for so long in "The Long Way Home" arc, Buffy is sooo damn happy to see her and their friendship in that season feels a hell of a lot stronger than it did in S6-S7 when they were under the same roof. I think that distance was much needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny View Post
    [B]Yes, it's almost like... Buffy is not treated as a character in AtS season 5, but as an object/idea. Weird.
    LMAO, way to totally miss the point in a lame attempt at sarcasm.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Andrew S. For This Useful Post:

    flow (03-08-19),GoSpuffy (03-08-19)

  13. #47
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpuffyGlitz View Post
    Wow, I didn't realise people blamed Buffy for anything in this episode. My problem with the episode is not Buffy at all. She's my favourite character in the Buffyverse and I love her having the upper hand. I've accepted "TGIQ" and even find parts of it funny in an absurdist, cringe-y way now. I don't have a strong opinion on it, either, because I haven't seen the episodes leading up to it (so I don't know the full context and am reserving judgement till I see the whole of S5.) But "TGIQ" was the first episode of AtS I accidentally watched and I really disliked it (I've seen random bits of AtS S5 after that, but not a full episode in that season.) Imagine this being your first accidental introduction to the show!

    I don't have any problem with Buffy partying or having a fling. I'd actually enjoy having Angel and Spike pine over her and realise that she's not waiting around forever for either of them. As I said, Buffy having the upper hand is always fun to watch. My problem has to do with the fact that Angel and Spike don't seem to love her at ALL in this episode. And that's the deeper subtext underlying the entire episode. On the surface, yes, they're in Rome because "It's Buffy". But Angel can't even remember her eye colour (how do you forget the eye colour of someone you love??), Spike is quick to concede that she's "their" girl (without a flicker of genuine feeling); when they run into Buffy at the dance club, within seconds they're distracted again by the theft of the "head". In the end, they both amiably commiserate with each other over the predicament of how this one woman makes them both act so "silly" and they really are above it and should get over it. Buffy's used as the Manic!Pixie Dream Girl to facilitate Angel and Spike's male bonding and mutual realisation that they're just being "a bit silly". The whole "bros before hoes" vibe that TTB describes really came through to me in every single scene, including the slow motion Spander fight at the club. It's great to have a Spander episode, but it's done at the expense of Buffy in a way that was pretty unnecessary.

    On Buffy, Angel and Spike were never trivialised in quite this way, their presence was always lent a certain gravitas and even in funny, subversive or self deprecatory episodes like "Lovers Walk" or "Something Blue" the writers took pains to keep their characterisations consistent. Any "OTT-ness" was explained by spells/ drunkenness. But Buffy still comes through as some version of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl in "TGIQ". On BtVS, you did have male versions of this trope used occasionally— the Manic Pixie Dream Boy, for instance, who is You had episodes like "I Was Made to Love You", "Beer Bad", "Him" and "As You Were" where male figures like Ben, Parker, R.J. & Riley were written into those episodes purely as devices:— Ben's proposal of a coffee date in "IWMTLY" was the catalyst to make Buffy realise that it's OK to be herself and single; the figure of Parker in "BB" serves to make her realise —as Willow tells her— "you need to think about not Parker, there are other men"; "Him" uses stereotypical jock R.J. as a device to highlight that "no guy is worth your life" in a comedy-break style episode that has everyone acting OTT because of a spell; "AYW" has Riley suddenly appear to throw light on Buffy's messed up life and the things she needed to change.

    The Immortal is presented as a joke (Angel and Spike are laughably obsessed and threatened by him, and are textually made fun of for taking him so seriously). He's supposed to have this "effect" on women that even the CEO of W&H, Rome, an "ebullient Italian woman" (who is a gross caricature of Italian iconic female stars like Sophia Loren and Gina Lollobrigida) finds him "most satisfactory". The Immortal is like another mysterious "R.J.-esque" womaniser only this time, Buffy isn't under any spell. Even the stand-in for Buffy looks absolutely nothing like her, her hair is too flat and blonde and I'm pretty sure they could have found a better Buffy-esque substitute for the episode, not to mention that Angel and Spike would have both scented that this wasn't the real Buffy in seconds.

    Having said that, the Wesley/Illyria scenes are brilliant and very intriguing. I'm not trying to take away enjoyment of the episode, it is absurdly funny in parts and I think there is something fun about taking Spike and Angel down a peg or two, but I still don't think it's particularly well written or respectful to Buffy or other canon plot points from Buffy. I may change my mind when I get to it again, though
    You need to see all episodes from Hole in the World onwards to get proper context for TGIQ.
    Tbh the Fred parents scenes are even worse. Not telling them that there daughter had died is a disgrace. I guess if they had the plot couldn't have happened.....

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BtVS fan For This Useful Post:

    Priceless (03-08-19),SpuffyGlitz (03-08-19)

  15. #48
    Slayer
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,746
    Thanks
    4,475
    Thanked 2,502 Times in 1,190 Posts

    Default

    As a huge Buffy-centric fan none of these developments exactly thrill me. I’d have preferred they just leave her alone.
    Thats exactly how I felt about 'season' (thats a laugh for a start) 8 and what they did to her character in that, which imo was far, far worse then anything in TGIQ which imo unlike season 8 was meant to be viewed as nothing more then harmless fun.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Silver1 For This Useful Post:

    BtVS fan (03-08-19),Lostsoul666 (03-08-19)

  17. #49
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver1 View Post
    Thats exactly how I felt about 'season' (thats a laugh for a start) 8 and what they did to her character in that, which imo was far, far worse then anything in TGIQ which imo unlike season 8 was meant to be viewed as nothing more then harmless fun.

    Preach. It was terrible and the whole sleeping with one of her students thing even worse. Plus how they were drawn ie childlike by the artist was creepy.
    Joss having Spike show up at the end to provide transportation and exposition (not including Giles exposition) for what could laughably called the plot was equally bad.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BtVS fan For This Useful Post:

    Lostsoul666 (03-08-19),Silver1 (03-08-19)

  19. #50
    Slayer TimeTravellingBunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,816
    Thanks
    5,639
    Thanked 4,796 Times in 2,264 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew S. View Post
    LMAO, way to totally miss the point in a lame attempt at sarcasm.
    Um, that was not sarcasm, that the whole point. Buffy was treated as an object/idea throughout season 5, especially in TGIQ. No, not just by the other characters, but also the narrative itself. Can you really deny that?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver1 View Post
    Thats exactly how I felt about 'season' (thats a laugh for a start) 8 and what they did to her character in that, which imo was far, far worse then anything in TGIQ which imo unlike season 8 was meant to be viewed as nothing more then harmless fun.
    "This crappy thing is worse than that crappy thing" is one of the worst possible defenses. The answer to that is, so what?

    Defending bad writing - OOC characterizations, bad dialogue, illogical plots, use of bad stereotypes in attempts to get cheap laughs - by "it's just meant to be fun" is another terrible defense tactic.I don't find it fun, anyway, so I guess it failed to satisfy everyone on that front, too.

    Look, I am aware that you have great love for TGIQ, but I can't understand why. You've never listed anything positive about it except... you find it fun? That's a personal thing,so I'm not sure why you think it's going to change my or anyone's mind and convince people that it's a good episode. I'm frankly baffled by how many fans this episode has that seem ready to fight for it tooth and nail. What is it about it that you like so much?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    The retcon did way more damage to the character than anything in S5. It's bizarre seeing people claim it saved the character. Obviously banging some dude is far worse than international grand larceny, throwing girls to the wolves while hiding out in Scotland. That goes without saying. But hey, at least the Scoobs are BFFs and no other boys are playing with Spike and/or Angel's toy.
    It's bizarre seeing people defend an episode that features Buffy. in her last mention in TV Buffyverse ever, as nothing but an absent object for boys to fight over, where she's only known as the girlfriend of some shady/possibly evil guy and the episode mocks the entire run of BtVS by implying that Buffy doesn't care if her boyfriends are evil and what they do (which is contrary to everything that we saw in BtVS, did the writers even watch that show? Oh wait, they wrote for it?! SDK wrote Dead Things and then he wrote this? I mean, if you want to argue that Buffy should be banging people without worrying if they are evil and what they do, fine, but you know that this is extremely OOC for the actual character of Buffy?), where she's not seen as doing anything else and mattering any other way but being the girlfriend of some guy, where her banging that dude is notable because it shows that the Gary Stu is superior to two other dudes she's banged, and every woman is implied to be under his spell - yay, women as objects for boys to show who's the bestest of all the dudes! Amazing narrative! We're making fun of that... except we're actually completely confirming that and playing into that which we're supposedly mocking...

    ...and then try to make it sound like defending that episode is the feminist thing. It's those who critiicize is that must be bad and sexist.

    Sure, Jan.

    Seriously.why are you so in love with TGIQ? This is the battle you think it's worth fighting, to prove the grand feminist meaning of TGIQ? I'm baffled.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by SpuffyGlitz View Post
    Wow, I didn't realise people blamed Buffy for anything in this episode. My problem with the episode is not Buffy at all. She's my favourite character in the Buffyverse and I love her having the upper hand. I've accepted "TGIQ" and even find parts of it funny in an absurdist, cringe-y way now. I don't have a strong opinion on it, either, because I haven't seen the episodes leading up to it (so I don't know the full context and am reserving judgement till I see the whole of S5.) But "TGIQ" was the first episode of AtS I accidentally watched and I really disliked it (I've seen random bits of AtS S5 after that, but not a full episode in that season.) Imagine this being your first accidental introduction to the show!

    I don't have any problem with Buffy partying or having a fling. I'd actually enjoy having Angel and Spike pine over her and realise that she's not waiting around forever for either of them. As I said, Buffy having the upper hand is always fun to watch. My problem has to do with the fact that Angel and Spike don't seem to love her at ALL in this episode. And that's the deeper subtext underlying the entire episode. On the surface, yes, they're in Rome because "It's Buffy". But Angel can't even remember her eye colour (how do you forget the eye colour of someone you love??), Spike is quick to concede that she's "their" girl (without a flicker of genuine feeling); when they run into Buffy at the dance club, within seconds they're distracted again by the theft of the "head". In the end, they both amiably commiserate with each other over the predicament of how this one woman makes them both act so "silly" and they really are above it and should get over it. Buffy's used as the Manic!Pixie Dream Girl to facilitate Angel and Spike's male bonding and mutual realisation that they're just being "a bit silly". The whole "bros before hoes" vibe that TTB describes really came through to me in every single scene, including the slow motion Spander fight at the club. It's great to have a Spander episode, but it's done at the expense of Buffy in a way that was pretty unnecessary.

    On Buffy, Angel and Spike were never trivialised in quite this way, their presence was always lent a certain gravitas and even in funny, subversive or self deprecatory episodes like "Lovers Walk" or "Something Blue" the writers took pains to keep their characterisations consistent. Any "OTT-ness" was explained by spells/ drunkenness. But Buffy still comes through as some version of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl in "TGIQ". On BtVS, you did have male versions of this trope used occasionally— the Manic Pixie Dream Boy, for instance, who is You had episodes like "I Was Made to Love You", "Beer Bad", "Him" and "As You Were" where male figures like Ben, Parker, R.J. & Riley were written into those episodes purely as devices:— Ben's proposal of a coffee date in "IWMTLY" was the catalyst to make Buffy realise that it's OK to be herself and single; the figure of Parker in "BB" serves to make her realise —as Willow tells her— "you need to think about not Parker, there are other men"; "Him" uses stereotypical jock R.J. as a device to highlight that "no guy is worth your life" in a comedy-break style episode that has everyone acting OTT because of a spell; "AYW" has Riley suddenly appear to throw light on Buffy's messed up life and the things she needed to change.
    But, see, people in this thread think that writing the main male characters as idiots unable to truly love a woman, warping their characterizations and turning them into one-dimensional jokes right out of a lame sitcom, is super duper feminist and generally a great thing. Because showing men in a bad light is a feminist thing in itself and something we should all aspire to, right? Nope.

    By that logic, I guess sitcoms like Men Behaving Badly or Two and a Half Men or (insert any sitcom where the main male character has no appealing qualities and is stereotypically sexist, lazy, horny and stupid) are the height of feminist storytelling...

    The Immortal is presented as a joke (Angel and Spike are laughably obsessed and threatened by him, and are textually made fun of for taking him so seriously). He's supposed to have this "effect" on women that even the CEO of W&H, Rome, an "ebullient Italian woman" (who is a gross caricature of Italian iconic female stars like Sophia Loren and Gina Lollobrigida) finds him "most satisfactory". The Immortal is like another mysterious "R.J.-esque" womaniser only this time, Buffy isn't under any spell. Even the stand-in for Buffy looks absolutely nothing like her, her hair is too flat and blonde and I'm pretty sure they could have found a better Buffy-esque substitute for the episode, not to mention that Angel and Spike would have both scented that this wasn't the real Buffy in seconds.
    I'm sure someone here will find a way to explain how that's a super smart and also super feminist message, too.
    Last edited by TimeTravellingBunny; 04-08-19 at 10:48 AM.
    You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to TimeTravellingBunny For This Useful Post:

    SpuffyGlitz (04-08-19)

  21. #51
    Slayer
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,746
    Thanks
    4,475
    Thanked 2,502 Times in 1,190 Posts

    Default

    Defending bad writing
    Sorry, imo I don't think It's bad writing. We had season 8 for that.

    What is it about it that you like so much?
    I found it funny, daft, charming and I adore the shot of basically two old farts haggling over who saved the world the most. Spike and Angel can be terribly entertaining when they're at their most petty imo. Also sometimes ideas/characters need taking down a peg.

    *goes off muttering that some fans need to get a sense of humour*
    Last edited by Silver1; 04-08-19 at 12:04 PM.

  22. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Silver1 For This Useful Post:

    Andrew S. (05-08-19),BtVS fan (04-08-19),GoSpuffy (04-08-19),Lostsoul666 (04-08-19),SpuffyGlitz (04-08-19)

  23. #52
    Slayer TimeTravellingBunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,816
    Thanks
    5,639
    Thanked 4,796 Times in 2,264 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver1 View Post
    Sorry, imo I don't think It's bad writing. We had season 8 for that.



    I found it funny, daft, charming and I adore the shot of basically two old farts haggling over who saved the world the most. Spike and Angel can be terribly entertaining when they're at their most petty imo. Also sometimes ideas/characters need taking down a peg.

    *goes off muttering that some fans need to get a sense of humour*
    Sorry. I don't think what TGIQ does is humour. Not good humour, anyway.
    But what people find funny or not is subjective.

    At least you're not trying to make TGIQ look like some sort of a grand statement that people don't understand, or something.
    You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

  24. #53
    Graveyard Patrol ghoststar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    244
    Thanked 668 Times in 256 Posts

    Default

    Moloch, the Corrupter, is still on the internet, and he cursed this thread.

  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ghoststar For This Useful Post:

    Andrew S. (05-08-19),Lostsoul666 (04-08-19),Priceless (04-08-19),Skippcomet (08-08-19)

  26. #54
    Bronze Party-Goer
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    738
    Thanked 518 Times in 178 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny View Post
    Um, that was not sarcasm, that the whole point. Buffy was treated as an object/idea throughout season 5, especially in TGIQ. No, not just by the other characters, but also the narrative itself. Can you really deny that?
    She was definitely treated as an object by characters – Angel and Spike – but it was in-character for them to do that (not to the extent that they did in some TGIQ scenes, but in the other S5 episodes, yes). Like I said, they used to do the same thing with Dru. And as for Buffy being treated as an object/idea by the narrative, well of course she was, she was never there! There’s only so much that you can do with a character whose actress is unavailable to make an appearance. What I’m getting from your posts is that you wanted TGIQ to show Buffy’s POV better, despite the fact that (1) her actress wasn’t available and (2) the whole point of the episode is to show her douchey ex-boyfriends’ POV through farcical, unreliable narration.

    And for the narrative itself using Buffy as an object for plot/character, yes I think it often does. But so what? Why is it such an issue? Buffy is not Angel/Cordy/Spike/Wes/Faith, etc. Her character arc does not span two shows. It's just limited to BtVS. Buffy's appearances on AtS, even in IWRY and "Sanctuary", were never about developing her own character and advancing her arc, that's what BtVS was for. Her references/appearances on AtS are about how she influences Angel as he's the main character and Buffy -- in terms of Angel the series -- is just someone who guest starred twice.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny
    It's bizarre seeing people defend an episode that features Buffy in her last mention in TV Buffyverse ever,
    It doesn't feature Buffy, that's the whole point. *bangs head on keyboard* You emphasize that it's her 'last mention in TV Buffyverse ever', but why does that mean anything? BtVS is over, therefore Buffy's character arc is. Anything afterwards is irrelevant, in the grand scheme of things.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny
    as nothing but an absent object for boys to fight over, where she's only known as the girlfriend of some shady/possibly evil guy and the episode mocks the entire run of BtVS by implying that Buffy doesn't care if her boyfriends are evil and what they do (which is contrary to everything that we saw in BtVS, did the writers even watch that show? Oh wait, they wrote for it?! SDK wrote Dead Things and then he wrote this? I mean, if you want to argue that Buffy should be banging people without worrying if they are evil and what they do, fine, but you know that this is extremely OOC for the actual character of Buffy?),
    Buffy’s fling with The Immortal is no different than her S6 fling with Spike. The only difference is that with Buffy/Spike, you actually get Buffy’s perspective and see that it is way more complex with that. Whereas with Buffy/Immortal, it’s unreliable narration. You just get the perspective of her jealous ex-boyfriends who objectify her in order to constantly one-up one another. I’m sure Buffy/Immortal’s relationship (pre-retcon) was much more complex than TGIQ made it out to be. But of course, we don’t know because – again – it’s not Buffy’s perspective being shown in the episode.

    Quote Originally Posted by TimeTravellingBunny
    where she's not seen as doing anything else and mattering any other way but being the girlfriend of some guy, where her banging that dude is notable because it shows that the Gary Stu is superior to two other dudes she's banged, and every woman is implied to be under his spell - yay, women as objects for boys to show who's the bestest of all the dudes! Amazing narrative! We're making fun of that... except we're actually completely confirming that and playing into that which we're supposedly mocking...

    ...and then try to make it sound like defending that episode is the feminist thing. It's those who critiicize is that must be bad and sexist.

    Sure, Jan.

    Seriously.why are you so in love with TGIQ? This is the battle you think it's worth fighting, to prove the grand feminist meaning of TGIQ? I'm baffled.
    The writers weren’t confirming anything. It seems like you’re just saying that because you don’t like the episode because that’s not what I got from it at all. If that’s your interpretation of the episode’s meaning, then fine, but don’t shove it down people’s throats and expect them to see it the same way. It's ironic, however, that you say the writers failed with this episode as their intentions were to make jabs at/get reactions from fans and, boy, it seems to have really gotten a reaction out of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by ghoststar
    Moloch, the Corrupter, is still on the internet, and he cursed this thread.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Andrew S. For This Useful Post:

    Silver1 (05-08-19)

  28. #55
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    SMG was never going to be in TGIQ. She was meant to be for the 100th episode and she offered to do the Finale but Joss said no as that should be about the Ats characters. I think he was right on that, look what happened on Enterprise as a comparison.
    But for TGIQ she was never going to be on there. That was meant to be part of the joke. Originally it was going to be MT as Dawn but they couldn't get her back either so they got Tom Lenk instead. Even though it completely ignores what happened in Damage to do it. Why Angel wasn't throttling him I don't know ....

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to BtVS fan For This Useful Post:

    Silver1 (05-08-19)

  30. #56
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,481
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 1,703 Times in 823 Posts

    Default

    They wanted her for 20 and 21, but SMG was still in Japan. When they couldn't get her they did the TGIQ story to show she had moved on. I'm glad because I shutter at them writing Buffy.

  31. #57
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    They wanted her for 20 and 21, but SMG was still in Japan. When they couldn't get her they did the TGIQ story to show she had moved on. I'm glad because I shutter at them writing Buffy.
    Yes for 21 but not 20
    Writing
    Edit
    It is a commonly held but mistaken belief that the producers sought Sarah Michelle Gellar for this episode. Another actress played Buffy Summers in a faraway shot of her dancing with The Immortal in a nightclub. In fact, the intention of this episode was always that neither Buffy nor the Immortal would be clearly seen. Gellar was actually sought for the penultimate episode "Power Play", but proved unavailable because she was busy finishing the filming of The Grudge. Writer David Fury explains this in an interview with Mike Jozic:

    “ JOZIC: But wasn't there talk of [Sarah Michelle Gellar] being in "The Girl in Question"?
    FURY: There was very, very little talk about that. No, she was never going to be in that. The missed opportunity to see Buffy was always going to be the joke of that. It's the tease of, they're going to see Buffy, and they can't quite get to her. It's sort of the After Hours kind of craziness where it's like, I can't get to her, I can't see her, and that was always pretty much decided.

    The person we expected to get and didn't get was Michelle Trachtenberg. We had expected to get her for that episode but she was tied up prepping a movie, I believe, and wasn't able to do it, which is why we brought Andrew back again.

    But, Sarah? No. We never expected Sarah to be in that episode. We did think she might be in the second last episode, "Power Play", just like Angel appeared in the second last episode of Buffy's finale. We thought we'd do that but wound up not.[3]

  32. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BtVS fan For This Useful Post:

    ghoststar (06-08-19),Priceless (06-08-19),Silver1 (05-08-19),SpuffyGlitz (06-08-19)

  33. #58
    Slayer
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,481
    Thanks
    68
    Thanked 1,703 Times in 823 Posts

    Default

    TGIQ wasn't TGIQ until they couldn't get Sarah. That ep wasn't even constructed until they knew they could not get her. In fact, it was all about not being able to get her for it. She was never meant to be in the ep as planned. Hence Joss's "Sarah has moved on, maybe we should too" quote.

    Put it this way: If they weren't trying to get her for the original ep 20, whatever that was, there was no need to deal with it in that ep.

  34. #59
    Scooby Gang
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    543
    Thanks
    821
    Thanked 352 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghoststar View Post
    Moloch, the Corrupter, is still on the internet, and he cursed this thread.
    If only. Seriously, though, I almost wish that were true, as then I could blame some contentious behavior on other places on the Internet (Buffy-verse isn't my only interest, y'all) on good ol' Moloch instead of people just being dick-ish. And I'm not calling anyone here dick-ish; this thread has been downright civil compared to other kerfluffles elsewhere that I've been witnessing.
    Last edited by Skippcomet; 08-08-19 at 01:16 AM.

  35. #60
    Graveyard Patrol
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    358
    Thanks
    408
    Thanked 400 Times in 210 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardlyThere View Post
    TGIQ wasn't TGIQ until they couldn't get Sarah. That ep wasn't even constructed until they knew they could not get her. In fact, it was all about not being able to get her for it. She was never meant to be in the ep as planned. Hence Joss's "Sarah has moved on, maybe we should too" quote.

    Put it this way: If they weren't trying to get her for the original ep 20, whatever that was, there was no need to deal with it in that ep.
    Lol one of the creators of the show said Sarah was never going to be on TGIQ so maybe you should give it up

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •