Is there anyone out there who *does* watch B7 or another show at least partly (and large-part, please) for one of the minor characters, with little interest in the majors?
Buffy. The lead is self-centered and often obnoxious and/or whiney. But Giles is so marvellous. I like Xander. Anya says the most unbelievable things. In fact, I think the entire ensemble is terrific. I'd be happy if the pulled a 'Blake' with her and let the show go on without Buffy >if SMG deecided to leave.
How true! Only you forgot someone.. Buffy is only worth watching for Spike. My dream would be that they end that show by letting him finally kill her... she grows more awful by the season.
Isobel (been here ages, still a newbie, doesn't post often at all!) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Buffy. The lead is self-centered and often obnoxious and/or whiney. But Giles is so marvellous. I like Xander. Anya says the most unbelievable things. In fact, I think the entire ensemble is terrific. I'd be happy if the pulled a 'Blake' with her and let the show go on without Buffy >if SMG deecided to leave.
How true! Only you forgot someone.. Buffy is only worth watching for Spike. My dream would be that they end that show by letting him finally kill her... she grows more awful by the season.
Isobel
Sorry, here totally disagree. Buffy (the character) is flawed, definitely, but that's what makes her interesting. (As opposed to Willow, whom I found too sugary sweet and too good to be true for nearly three seasons, until they allowed her display some more unpleasant characteristics as well on occasion.) She's also funny, passionate, loyal, and SMG has consistently pulled off a great lead performance for five years now.
As for Spike, he's a great character, but he never was the reason why I watched the show. If he got dusted in the next episode (which btw is logically long overdue) I'd still continue to watch. But the show wouldn't work without Buffy at all, and not just because of the title.
Tanja
----- Original Message ----- From: angria Angria@t-online.de
Sorry, here totally disagree. Buffy (the character) is flawed, definitely,
but
that's what makes her interesting. (As opposed to Willow, whom I found too sugary sweet and too good to be true for nearly three seasons, until they allowed her display some more unpleasant characteristics as well on
occasion.)
I agree with you on the first point, but I have to say I don't find Willow too sugary-sweet. A bit of a nerd sometimes, but I do like that. Initially I liked her better than Buffy, but Buffy's grown on me since.
As for Spike, he's a great character, but he never was the reason why I
watched
the show.
Well, I like Spike, but he wasn't why I started watching. He's just an added bonus. I can't say I care much for Angel to be honest (too brooding) but I know I'm in the minority :). Cordelia I used to despise, but I've been watching a bit of S2 Angel and I like her a lot better in that.
overdue) I'd still continue to watch. But the show wouldn't work without
Buffy
at all, and not just because of the title.
Agreed. Buffy is the element that pulls it all together. Getting rid of the lead worked on B7 IMO because Avon was not only a strong and interesting character but a leader-figure in his own right, if a different one to Blake. But I can't see Willow, Giles, Xander or Spike at the head of the Scooby-Gang somehow... and Angel, of course, is in San Francisco.
*Buffy*, IMHO, never ceases to amaze with the way it takes simple, even cliched premises and characters, and turns them into something that's really quite clever without being too clever for its own good.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Fiona Moore wrote:
I agree with you on the first point, but I have to say I don't find Willow too sugary-sweet. A bit of a nerd sometimes, but I do like that. Initially I liked her better than Buffy, but Buffy's grown on me since.
As did Willow on me. As I said, my "too sugary sweet" objection is only to the first two seasons, and a bit of the third. Then she stops being Saint Willow and makes mistakes, like cheating on Oz with Xander. And I certainly felt for her in season 4, both when Oz left and when she had to chose between him and Tara.
Well, I like Spike, but he wasn't why I started watching. He's just an added bonus.
Same here.
I can't say I care much for Angel to be honest (too brooding) but I
know I'm in the minority :). Cordelia I used to despise, but I've been watching a bit of S2 Angel and I like her a lot better in that.
Now I on the other hand had liked Cordelia ever since "Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered" in the second season (though she had good moments before this, notably her "spank your inner moppet" talk with Buffy in "When she was bad"), but I agree her best developement occured during the 1 and 1/2 seasons of Angel.
overdue) I'd still continue to watch. But the show wouldn't work without
Buffy
at all, and not just because of the title.
Agreed. Buffy is the element that pulls it all together. Getting rid of the lead worked on B7 IMO because Avon was not only a strong and interesting character but a leader-figure in his own right, if a different one to Blake. But I can't see Willow, Giles, Xander or Spike at the head of the Scooby-Gang somehow... and Angel, of course, is in San Francisco.
Los Angeles, and taking a serious trip to the dark side now. But yes, great as the other characters are, they wouldn't work as leader-figures. We saw the Scooby Gang sans Buffy once, in "Anne", and it worked as comic relief, but honestly, the scenes with Buffy in Los Angeles taking a trip to hell, first figuratively, then literally, were much more compelling.
*Buffy*, IMHO, never ceases to amaze with the way it takes simple, even cliched premises and characters, and turns them into something that's really quite clever without being too clever for its own good.
You've captured the essence of the show beautifully. BTW, I could count both Willow and Cordelia as examples for this. Both, as introduced, are well-known clichés from every high school movie - the shy nerd who is a Cinderella destined to blossom, the cheerleader bitch - but quickly moved beyond that stage.
Tanja
Tanja,
Los Angeles, and taking a serious trip to the dark side now. But yes,
great as
the other characters are, they wouldn't work as leader-figures. We saw the Scooby Gang sans Buffy once, in "Anne", and it worked as comic relief, but honestly, the scenes with Buffy in Los Angeles taking a trip to hell, first figuratively, then literally, were much more compelling.
The obvious reason why the other characters in 'Buffy' and 'Angel' can't take over as leader-figures is because, first, they don't have the physical powers that Buffy and Angel have. Buffy is the Slayer, the Chosen One, the recipient of great powers to enable her to fight the forces of evil; Angel is a good vampire, with all the powers such a creature has. Blake, of course, has no such physical powers.
Second, Buffy and Angel are important prophetic figures in that they are referred to in prophecies, particularly Buffy. There are no such things in B7 as prophecies referring to Blake, because the universe does not admit the existence of divine beings like The Powers that Be in the Buffyverse. If such beings exist, they are explained away (like the Thaarn) as the impact of sophisticated aliens on primitive societies. This does not exclude, as we saw in 'Deliverance', a B7 character being taken for the saviour that carries out a prophecy; but this is not an admission that real prophecies actually exist, in that they tell what will happen and cannot be got around.
You've captured the essence of the show beautifully. BTW, I could count both Willow and Cordelia as examples for this. Both, as introduced, are
well-known
clichés from every high school movie - the shy nerd who is a Cinderella
destined
to blossom, the cheerleader bitch - but quickly moved beyond that stage.
Of course, Buffy was herself the cheerleader bitch before she became the Slayer, as we saw at the end of season 2. Indeed, she admitted to Angel that she was _worse_ than Cordelia at the time. I was amused by this, as it meant that becoming the Slayer made her a better person (leaving aside all the violence and heartbreak), forcing her to use her brain.
Murray
"Murray" == Murray mjsmith@tcd.ie writes:
The obvious reason why the other characters in 'Buffy' and 'Angel' can't take over as leader
It's about time to take the Buffy discussion over to the spin list, I think. Or drag it kicking and screaming back on topic by mixing it with B7 stuff, or something.
-
Angria＠t-online.de -
Calle Dybedahl -
Fiona Moore -
Isobel Hamilton -
Murray