Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion Thread for #10 FULL SPOILERS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No she just stole from large banks, so obviously thats alright then. Took whatever money she needed to fund her organization.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shipperx View Post
      Nazis??
      Google Swiss Banks + Nazi Gold (or Jewish Gold). This was hinted at when Buffy said she found a painting the Nazi's had hid.

      BUFFY: And we totally found a Watteau the Nazis hid and sent it to the Tate!
      - Anywhere But Here
      I'm not saying Buffy was so discerning in her theft, but I think the situation is more complex than her simply robbing the ~innocent~ and her actions being coded as black.

      Anyways yeah, I agree that it's in-character and that it was morally wrong. The idea I object to, even in arguing that it's in-character, is that we're all saying that if Buffy's never done something before that she'll never do something in the future. That's not how character growth works. Buffy could fall so far down that she'd do things she'd never done before. The point is: did the motivation make sense? Would it push her this far?

      And yes, considering how Season 7 emphasized how TORTURED Buffy felt over all the girls under her roof dying (she worked herself to the edge, barely sleeping because she was so terrified of not being enough to protect them), and now to be sending all these Slayers out into the world to fight, Slayers who are spread so far out that she can't even keep an eye on them. She does what any 'parent' would do who can't be physically present and look after the young'uns -- she provided for them materially.

      Buffy's always had the weight of the world, the Apocalypse, weighing on her shoulders, but when people need her, that's when she falters under the pressure. The more people who directly depend on her, the further she'll go for them, the further she'll compromise herself for them.
      Last edited by Emmie; 26-06-12, 02:32 PM.
      sigpic

      Banner Set by thedothatgirl

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Emmie View Post
        Google Swiss Banks + Nazi Gold (or Jewish Gold). This was hinted at when Buffy said she found a painting the Nazi's had hid.
        They also have a lot of Mitt Romney's money. You can't be postulating that a 'so underfunded that she must rob banks for cash' Buffy had means exceeding that of the Israeli and the U.S governments to break the Swiss banking codes to know in which lock boxes to look for what or that she had the means to convert gold to currency without using BANKS. (Nor would she be a shining beacon of restitution to sell such a painting on the black market for cash rather than turn it over to an art museum.) Or if she didn't have those means, using the Haulocaust to silence her conscience when what it would amount to is using blood money for a wide array of needs.

        The more it's spoken of, the more ridiculous it sounds that Dark Horse thought this a minor 'victimless' crime with which to saddle Buffy.

        Sorry, I still think Buffy is better than blindly stealing a truly massive sum of money, especially if it --as people are now supposing-- it was dug out of Haulocaust victim's teeth and melted wedding rings -- and ever renting impractical castles, limo rides, the occasional outfit, and I think at one point there was also a sub(?) (was there a chance of deep sea demons?)

        The Buffy I remember from the show would be more conflicted and resistant to that than the comics showed its Buffy to be. I just believe Buffy to be a better person than that. There are compromises that I can see Buffy making. Stealing millions of dollars in a bank hiest still seems several bridges too darn far. Sorry, but I still find it OOC for her. Just do.
        Last edited by shipperx; 26-06-12, 03:11 PM.
        Learning Experience: "...one of those things that says, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.?
        ~Douglas Adams

        Comment


        • Originally posted by shipperx View Post
          You can't be postulating that a 'so underfunded that she must rob banks for cash' Buffy had means exceeding that of the Israeli and the U.S governments to break the Swiss banking codes to know in which lock boxes to look for what or that she had the means to convert gold to currency without using BANKS. (Nor would she be a shining beacon of restitution to sell such a painting on the black market for cash rather than turn it over to an art museum.) Or if she didn't have those means, using the Haulocaust to silence her conscience when what it would amount to is using blood money for a wide array of needs.
          She doesn't need to postulate it, she can declare it outright -- Buffy had means exceeding that of the Israeli and the US government to break the Swiss banking codes to know which lock boxes to look for. Even before Willow returned, Buffy had witches on staff. A wizard, literally, did it. Plot hole closed.

          As for converting gold to cash without banks... funny thing about nazi gold is that nobody is going to exactly trip over themselves trying to go through legal channels to reclaim it. So she could sell it to a private buyer, she could pawn it for that matter, or she could just borrow against its value, or probably various illicit options.

          The more it's spoken of, the more ridiculous it sounds that Dark Horse thought this a minor 'victimless' crime with which to saddle Buffy.
          Well, the idea of victimless crime is mostly an abstraction, it's rarely actually true. Buffy's previous criminal activity hasn't always been genuinely victimless, either.
          sigpic
          Banner by LRae12

          Comment


          • I think that is a really good post Emmie, particularly about character growth. Perhaps I wouldn't have this gut feeling of it being off still if they had omitted the 'shiny' remark. It didn't feel that Buffy was facing what she was doing with a sense of gravity or an air of reluctant necessity or even a moment of reckless abandonment it felt rather like the opportunity to get a cool car out of it and splash out. I think this is it for me, the reasons people are giving, the contextual points of why Buffy could have put herself into that position, how her character took that path, do make it seem more in character and make sense to me. I know it seems nitpicking but, *sigh*, if only she had seemed less carefree at the time?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by shipperx View Post
              ...and others seem to take the view that if Buffy did it that automatically makes it better.
              Not a single person in this thread has said that the bank robbery was ok. Not one. We all have stated, repeatedly now, that we consider the bank robbery morally wrong. All we are saying is that we don't consider it to be poor writing or "OOC" and have tried to explain why her motivations make sense.

              My opinion was and remains that the Buffy from the show would have resistance to or --heck-- vocally conflicted issues with staging a massive bank robbery.
              Buffy was conflicted. If she didn't think there was anything wrong with the bank robbery there would have been no reason to keep it from Willow. Then in A Beautiful Sunset she's shown stewing over what she had done and wondering if it makes her enemies justified to attack her.

              Originally posted by shipperx View Post
              The more it's spoken of, the more ridiculous it sounds that Dark Horse thought this a minor 'victimless' crime with which to saddle Buffy.
              Um, who says they do? Buffy calls it a "victimless crime" but in the very same scene the demon calls her out on her "lies, delusions, gross simplifications." She tried to rationalise it to feel less guilty. It doesn't mean "Darkhorse" (aka Joss Whedon as he wrote #10) agrees with her or expects us to.

              ...and I think at one point there was also a sub(?) (was there a chance of deep sea demons?
              It has been pointed out several times now that Buffy never purchased the submarine. It's clearly stated in Swell that Satsu and her Tokyo squad stole the submarine off a bunch of vampires who had killed it's Korean crew.

              ~ Banner by Nina ~

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shipperx View Post
                They also have a lot of Mitt Romney's money. You can't be postulating that a 'so underfunded that she must rob banks for cash' Buffy had means exceeding that of the Israeli and the U.S governments to break the Swiss banking codes to know in which lock boxes to look for what or that she had the means to convert gold to currency without using BANKS. (Nor would she be a shining beacon of restitution to sell such a painting on the black market for cash rather than turn it over to an art museum.) Or if she didn't have those means, using the Haulocaust to silence her conscience when what it would amount to is using blood money for a wide array of needs.

                The more it's spoken of, the more ridiculous it sounds that Dark Horse thought this a minor 'victimless' crime with which to saddle Buffy.

                Sorry, I still think Buffy is better than blindly stealing a truly massive sum of money, especially if it --as people are now supposing-- it was dug out of Haulocaust victim's teeth and melted wedding rings -- and ever renting impractical castles, limo rides, the occasional outfit, and I think at one point there was also a sub(?) (was there a chance of deep sea demons?)

                The Buffy I remember from the show would be more conflicted and resistant to that than the comics showed its Buffy to be. I just believe Buffy to be a better person than that. There are compromises that I can see Buffy making. Stealing millions of dollars in a bank hiest still seems several bridges too darn far. Sorry, but I still find it OOC for her. Just do.

                You're right, I can't be. Because I wasn't. See my post above and the specific statement about Buffy not being so discerning.

                You're responding to an extreme position that no one is taking.
                sigpic

                Banner Set by thedothatgirl

                Comment


                • This is bizarre. I don't know why I didn't post my bullet points and analysis in this thread. I did it for SA, so, I don't know what happened here. So, by some bizarre happenstance or whatever, this is posted over 5 months after I wrote it.


                  BtVS 9.10 bullet points and analysis


                  * Artwork is terrible.

                  * I really need to know what is canon from IDW. Whether the
                  Spoiler:
                  Spider, Illyria, Beck, Drusilla things happened. Whether Spike will be alive in the time of flying cars.
                  It might actually make sense why Spike is leaving Buffy. Buffy's side I'll discuss below.

                  * I want to know how involved Joss was in this Issue. Scott in the Slayalive Q&A says that, "Andrew wrote a loose outline, I wrote a script, and Sierra and Andrew gave me notes." and "Spike's series builds directly out of that conversation that he had with Buffy at the end of #10. That was my favorite part of the arc to write."

                  This ?breakup scene' seems extremely important to the future of Buffy/Spike and for all I know, Joss had little or no involvement in it. I don't even know if Joss agreed to having a Spike miniseries happen.



                  * A San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) taskforce is created to fight the vampires. I wonder if there are other police or military forces across the world being created to fight the vampires. Spike's friend Dowling will head the force.

                  * Spike's still called "Your Majesty" by the bugs.

                  * Spike to bugs: "Maybe we'll catch the sound of a young lady arguing with herself about the best way to break a bloke's?"

                  What makes Spike think that Buffy doesn't want to be with him? Spike's the one who's been away from Buffy for years. Spike hasn't even told Buffy what he'd want out of a relationship between them. Spike actually told Buffy in 9.07 that as soon as he knows she's okay, he's going to leave her.

                  * We don't know whether Simone kicked Spike hard enough to make his mouth bleed or if that was blood from the previous gunfire.

                  * The bugs instinctually protect Spike from the gunfire.

                  Do they know that gunfire won't kill Spike?

                  * Spike easily knocks the machine gun from Simone's hand. It seems he did this with the bug (using the bug as a weapon). The bug says, "All hail King Spike."

                  * I wonder who in the Buffyverse knows his name is William Pratt.

                  Spike is reacting badly to every ?wrong thing' Buffy says. But has he even told her his full name? Does she even know his mother's name?

                  * Andrew was going to hit Buffy's body in the head with a baseball bat with nail spikes.

                  * Buffy tells Andrew, "If I thought for a second you could've connected with that ?warriors' bat I would have yanked your arm off."

                  Andrew is just beyond awful.

                  * Simone killed at least 4 of Spike's bugs.

                  * Simone tried to stake Spike, but she got his shoulder instead. It's not clear whether he moved at the last instant or if she didn't mean to actually dust him.

                  * FakeBuffy saved Andrew from being shot.

                  Buffy still needs Andrew to put her back into her real body. But FakeBuffy knows, or should know, that by helping Buffybot Buffy that FakeBuffy will no longer exist.

                  * Simone got away and she is still a danger.

                  Obviously, Spike should stay to help Buffy. Instead, he unilaterally decides to leave.

                  I transcribed the entire ?breakup scene'. I put it in spoilers.

                  Spoiler:
                  * After Spike tells Buffy he's going to leave her or whatever he says, Buffy responds: "I'm going to be here fighting alone."

                  Spike retorts that Andrew will put her back in her real body and "[t]hen you can take some time to figure out what you need, Buffy. Me being here doesn't help."

                  Buffy responds, "Don't tell me what I need."

                  Spike says, "Withdrawn."

                  Spike says, "But you tell me. How do you imagine I felt when you said you were thinking of us two running off together? Come with me now. You're right. There's no one here for you. What does this town have to offer? Going back to serving coffee, an awkward conversation explaining to the little bit and her boyfriend about this whole [b] thing [/i]."

                  Buffy: "Oh no. I keep forgetting about Dawn?"

                  Spike: "I don't want to go back. To lurking around the edge of your life. Watching from this far above it all till you're desperate for someone you can count on."

                  Buffy: "Simone's still out there. You could use that as an excuse to stay."

                  Spike: "That is what I'd usually do."

                  Buffy after this, touches her stomach.

                  Spike: "You know what. Forget it Slayer. And I don't mean to be snappish. I love you. You know this. But I can't be jerked around no more. I'm not even saying I blame you. I can never tell for sure where your heart's at, so I'm not gonna stand here under a romantic, albeit deadly sunset lecturing you. I believe in you, Buffy. And I know you'll do right. [b] That's [/i] how I have your back."

                  And then Spike leaves.



                  First off, apparently Scott Allie wrote the break up scene. I would have certainly preferred Joss Whedon write this.

                  Secondly, if the IDW stuff is canon, why didn't Buffy mention
                  Spoiler:
                  Twinkle ? Does Buffy not know about Spider?


                  Buffy doesn't mention that Spike was away from her for years, that she obviously wanted to be with him this whole time, and that it was HE who was away from her, that it was SHE who didn't know whether he still loved her given that he decided to be away from her for years and has never since "Chosen" (7.22) made any effort to be with her.

                  Spike tells Buffy to immediately leave San Francisco with him. He tells her this knowing that Simone's still a problem. Does Spike not actually want to be with Buffy?

                  Spike says, "I don't want to go back. To lurking around the edge of your life. Watching from this far above it all till you're desperate for someone you can count on."

                  This only applied during BtVS S5 when Spike was in his Courtly Lover phase. This doesn't even apply to BtVS S6 because Spike was the main part of her life in that Season. It doesn't apply to BtVS S7. And it's Spike who's been away from her. It's Spike who has been distant. Buffy obviously wanted to be with him and Spike decided not to be with her.


                  Essentially, the new problem Spike sees is that Buffy may want children and may want to ?settle down' in the suburbs or whatever. And those are two things that he can't exactly give her. Spike can't give her a child and Spike's not getting ?any older' and doesn't need to ?settle down'. He's used to being able to travel the world and whatnot. So, would he really want to spend 70-80 years in the suburbs?

                  Spike still seems to want Buffy to have no romantic feelings for anyone but him. He still seems to consider she has feelings for Angel.

                  Buffy during this ?breakup scene', doesn't really try to get him to stay. She doesn't tell him she loves him. She doesn't tell him she wants to be with him. She's clearly sad that he wants to leave her, but she pretty much only uses the excuse of Simone and her needing help with the slaying as reasons why he should stay.

                  Spike seems to want "All or nothing" from Buffy. From the IDW stuff
                  Spoiler:
                  he has Drusilla, Spider, Beck, Illyria and those first three are 100% in love with him and devoted to him.
                  Spike is used to having Drusilla, Harmony,
                  Spoiler:
                  Spider, and Beck
                  . Spike's not sure how much Buffy loves him and he doesn't seem sure what kind of relationship she'd want with him. He now doesn't seem sure whether she actually wants to live her life with him or whether she'd actually or eventually prefer to have a human guy and have kids and such and ?settle down'.

                  Buffy has never even asked Spike whether he's been with others since "Chosen" (7.22). Buffy may be questioning Spike's love and devotion to her given that he's been away from her for years and even when he's around he doesn't seem to want to be with her. Spike didn't ask her to stay with him on the ship and he didn't ask for them to find some place to move in together.


                  * Spike's ?ultimatum' is worse than the one Riley gave her. Riley wanted Buffy to give him a reason to stay, whatever that meant. He at least wanted to know whether Buffy loved him.

                  Spike knows Buffy loves him. But Spike tells Buffy to leave Dawn, Xander, and Willow and go away with him and live her life with him. He's all bent out of shape over whatever remaining feelings she may have for Angel, but if the IDW stuff is canon
                  Spoiler:
                  he's had a lot of sex since "Chosen" (7.22), loved Fred, had some kind of relationship with Illyria, had a girlfriend in Spider, had something going on with Beck, and still loves Dru and made out with Dru, and tried to help Dru get psychologically better.




                  * Buffy suggests that Andrew keep her in the Buffybot and let FakeBuffy live a ?normal life'.

                  The only way this makes any sense is if Buffy is super depressed at this moment.

                  * Buffy already had the
                  Spoiler:
                  job offer
                  from Kennedy before she quit her job at the coffee shop.


                  Slay the Critics section:

                  * I had forgotten that in 9.07, Spike told Buffy that he was going to leave her once he knew she was okay. Allie says, "It won't be the last you see of them together this season, but you will have to wait a while."

                  Comment


                  • What possible reason do you spend time wondering whether or not Simone didn't mean to kill Spike? He's nothing to her, why would she have spared him?
                    sigpic
                    Banner by LRae12

                    Comment


                    • MikeB Joss is named as the Executive Producer of the Spike mini, his name is not on the Spike AtF stuff at all and he only was involved in the outline of 12 issues of AtF with Lynch who wrote 17 plus the extras. Joss did not approve all that Lynch wrote you are not likely to get any more confirmation than that which has already been given. As I've said to you before, I take the basic outline of Angel AtF as canon and the Spike AtF even less so, just the rough outline/concept. The Twinkle thing is one of the cr*pest things ever conceived/written so I hope for Joss' own self respect he had nothing to do with that and if he did he has the sense to never say so, equally for the details of Spider. But we have discussed this all before, you need to just decide for yourself how much to take as canon. I don't know anyone else who wants to accept as much of it as you seem to, or who focusses on it as much, most other people I have seen talk about it think the Spike characterisation was bad but it is your choice.
                      Last edited by Stoney; 19-11-12, 10:59 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                        What possible reason do you spend time wondering whether or not Simone didn't mean to kill Spike? He's nothing to her, why would she have spared him?
                        It regards my wondering what Simone knows about Spike. There's a decent chance that she'd know he's capable of killing a Slayer and there's a decent chance she knows that Buffy loves the guy.

                        Originally posted by Stoney View Post
                        you need to just decide for yourself how much to take as canon.
                        Joss Whedon is the arbiter of canon. I take the Brian Lynch stuff as possible canon and Illyria: Haunted as possible canon because those are the only things that are possibly canon. And certain stuff in the BtVS S9: Spike miniseries and BtVS 9.16 makes this stuff more possibly canon than I previously thought.

                        Anyway, I want Joss to tell us what is and isn't canon and it's beyond frustrating that I'm dealing with the Spike and Illyria stuff.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by MikeB View Post
                          It regards my wondering what Simone knows about Spike. There's a decent chance that she'd know he's capable of killing a Slayer and there's a decent chance she knows that Buffy loves the guy.
                          There's no rational reason to think that, had Simone had a clear opportunity to kill Spike (which you seem to tacitly consider), that she would have made an intentional, extra effort not to (i.e. redirecting her stake at the last minute). If she considered him especially threatening, that's all the more reason to make sure her strike is true. If she knew that Buffy had any sort of feelings for him, again, all the more reason to kill him, not to spare him. And the most likely thing would be that she doesn't know him from a hole in the floor, so, again, you've stated no plausible reason why Simone would have acted overtly to avoid staking him. She missed.
                          sigpic
                          Banner by LRae12

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by KingofCretins View Post
                            There's no rational reason to think that, had Simone had a clear opportunity to kill Spike (which you seem to tacitly consider), that she would have made an intentional, extra effort not to (i.e. redirecting her stake at the last minute). If she considered him especially threatening, that's all the more reason to make sure her strike is true. If she knew that Buffy had any sort of feelings for him, again, all the more reason to kill him, not to spare him. And the most likely thing would be that she doesn't know him from a hole in the floor, so, again, you've stated no plausible reason why Simone would have acted overtly to avoid staking him. She missed.
                            It's unlikely that Simone out-of-nowhere became that crappy a Slayer. She stakes his right shoulder. My whole point was coming up with possible reasons for why she would miss on purpose. If she didn't miss on purpose, the likeliest explanation is Spike moved at the last instant.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by MikeB View Post
                              It's unlikely that Simone out-of-nowhere became that crappy a Slayer. She stakes his right shoulder. My whole point was coming up with possible reasons for why she would miss on purpose. If she didn't miss on purpose, the likeliest explanation is Spike moved at the last instant.
                              Not that I'm surprised that you defer to an assumption of Spike being the most special, magical, awesome snowflake in all of supernatural fiction, but the fact remains -- "likely" is not a word that applies to "nontextual superpower" more than it applies to "human error".
                              sigpic
                              Banner by LRae12

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X