I sure am starting to like Angel by Succatash

ANGELUS ARCANUM

I sure am starting to like Angel

POSTED BY: SUCCATASH
UPDATED: Sunday, February 15, 2004 06:30
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4680
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, January 28, 2004 9:28 PM

I'm not a big Buffy or Angel fan but I managed to catch most of both show's last season and I started getting into it.

I wasn't so sure about this season's Angel with the lawyer story, but I must say the recent episode ("Damage", Episode #511) with the escaped psycho girl (who seemed an awful lot like River) was a great episode.

Select to view spoiler:

Can't believe Spike got his hands cut off.

I really like the tension between Angel and Spike and

Select to view spoiler:

seeing Andrew again and all the Slayers.

Great episode, what did you think?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:18 PM

11THHOUR

Quote:
Originally posted by Succatash:
I wasn't so sure about this season's Angel with the lawyer story, but I must say the recent episode ("Damage", Episode #511) with the escaped psycho girl (who seemed an awful lot like River) was a great episode.

Great episode, what did you think?

I also noticed the resemblance between the girl and River. Although the girl was more like River cubed, and not nearly as cuddly...

As far as the first spoiler you mentioned... I actually kinda saw that coming. It was hard core creepy and for most folks, you don't come back from that too well. But I figured that they'd come up with a way to remedy the situation. Still, hell yeah, gasp-a-rama...

Angel seems to tread into the shadows much more than Buffy did. Tonight's ep was an exploration into the cycle of evil. A jaunty romp all about the giving and receiving thereof...

Select to view spoiler:

I always wondered what would happen if "The Chosen One" powers got bestowed upon a very unbalanced girl. Faith the Vampire Slayer was an expample that there doesn't seem to be a very good screening process on who gets the super powers and psychic dreams.

My Angel viewing had become somewhat sporadic for a while. The stories were becoming a little too much like soap opera. (All the romantic entanglements and partner switching was dreary for me.) However, I've been watching Angel steadily all this season and really getting back into it. The show has a new vitality, and has found both the fun... and the dark. I have a theory that with the ending of Buffy, and the cruel, untimely yanking of Firefly, that a great deal of righteous energy is being concentrated into Angel. The show has been reinvigorated and it shows.

I'm lovin' it.

11thHour

__________________________________________________________

"Doing the impossible makes us mighty." - Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 2:18 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by Succatash:
Select to view spoiler:
seeing Andrew again and all the Slayers.

Great episode, what did you think?

I wanted to kill their "guest star". Sorry, but ain't forgiven him for what he did last year. To his best friend none the less. I kept hoping an anvil would drop out of the sky on top of him.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 4:37 AM

STILLSHINY

I am all there with you. I never watched wither Buffy or Angel. OK I really tried to get into both. But now with this season, I'm freaking hooked. I'm trying to read all the epp summary's for Buffy & the transcripts for Angel just cuz I gotta have all the backstory. I love the whole Angel and Spike element. Which one was truly the monster, and which was the victim? My wife thought the LOTR references we're funny too. and she pointed out the riverisms as well.
On the "I thought of Firefly today" post I mentioned the River Slayer idea.

“Firefly is the source of probably more joy & pain than anything I’ve done.” - Joss

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 6:19 AM

KASUO

The psycho girl kinda reminded me of a Reaver with that little bit of blood on her face and wild behavior.

________
"Let's moon 'em!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 7:12 AM

STILLSHINY

Kind of a River-Reaver-Slayer!

Oh please stop me.

“Firefly is the source of probably more joy & pain than anything I’ve done.” - Joss

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 8:40 AM

HJERMSTED

Fantastic episode!

Anytime a new character is introduced AND the Buffyverse mythology is advanced/expanded interesting possibilities are inherent.

And Team Whedon nailed this one.

Select to view spoiler:

The build up in the institution was brutal and engaging. The big reveal as to Dana's nature would have come as a pleasant surprise if I hadn't already read about her online. It'd be fun to see this character again. She definitely made bad Faith seem well-adjusted.

Hearing about what was happening with the Buffy characters was a hoot especially coming from Andrew's interesting perspective.

I find it difficult to accept that Rupert Giles would tolerate a ninny like Andrew enough to make him a Watcher-in-training... but times are tough for the Council, I s'pose. Xander perhaps would have been the better choice for such a position, but the comic/strangeness possibilities are greater when Andrew is in the story.

The Spike/Angel definitions of good/evil contrasts are becoming more interesting. I do believe these two should have bonded by now already, tho. The hissy fits are becoming less interesting than the possibilities of these two becoming genuine brothers-in-arms/drinking buddies. Let's see where Team Whedon takes these two but maybe it's time to send up a warning flare signifying concern over how much longer this squabbling will go on?

The battle lines between the Council and the Angel run W&H have been drawn! Exciting! Wouldn't it be strange if the new Council were the Big 'Bad' this season? (or the Big Good in this case)

Great episode! The third one to REALLY impress me this season (the halloween ep, and 'Harm's Way' are the others if you care to know)

mattro

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 9:21 AM

KURUKAMI

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
I wanted to kill their "guest star". Sorry, but ain't forgiven him for what he did last year. To his best friend none the less. I kept hoping an anvil would drop out of the sky on top of him.

Ah, but you forget... "the Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded." And, well, Andrew's probably about as weak-minded as they come. The First just kind of pushed him towards the murder through trickery and psychological pressure.

Additionally, if you were Giles and you didn't entirely trust Wolfram & Hart, who would you send as an emissary? Someone important, or someone less capable but arguably expendable?

History doesn't always repeat itself. Sometimes it merely shouts "Weren't you listening the first time?!?" and lets fly with a club.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:33 PM

STEVE580

These newer episodes of Angel are arguably some of my favorites. I loved how in this one, there were three differant sides of 'good'. The elevator scene was hilarious! I thought it was cool they sent Andrew; when Angel said Giles sent someone, I was affraid it'd be Buffy, Willow, or Xander, who I hope never to see on Angel again, unless it's something super important, like a series finalle. I was a bit upset to hear that the original buffy gang was all scattered about the world; I kinda figured they were all together, gathering the slayers. It is cool that they're the most powerful force in the world, though - all those slayers, surely, no one can challenge them.

Since seeing the Buffy series finalle, I was waiting for Angel to run into a Slayer, and thought it rather odd that he hadn't. This episode was awesome.
-Steve

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 12:36 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by Kurukami:
Ah, but you forget... "the Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded." And, well, Andrew's probably about as weak-minded as they come. The First just kind of pushed him towards the murder through trickery and psychological pressure.

He may have been pushed, but it was still his choice to do it. And I don't care how weak minded he may be, it don't excuse it or redeem him in my eyes. I want to see that sniviling little crapweasle suffer terribly.

Quote:
Additionally, if you were Giles and you didn't entirely trust Wolfram & Hart, who would you send as an emissary? Someone important, or someone less capable but arguably expendable?

Now there is a good point. If W&H are bad guys, well the potential is lost anyway to them, and they lose Andrew as well. If not, and he can complete the mission, all the well and better. Either way, its a win win for the Buffsters.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 1:33 AM

KALATHENA

I find it damn creepifying that people can't forgive Andrew, but can forgive Angel and Spike, both of whom slaughtered their parents. Very strange dichotomy among viewers. It reminds me of the horrorified screms by fans when Willow sacrificed a deer just one episode after they were saying that Ben "deserved it".

Select to view spoiler:

I didn't read anything online, but I could see it coming that it was a Slayer when the door started pounding.

I was just glad when they got out of the hospital because the security was so incredibly unrealistic. Where was security to escort the out the nurse who would be immediately terminated for mixing up controlled substances? Sheesh. Anyone who made a mistake that big where I worked sure woulda been.

But once the opener was done, I loved the rest. I can't wait until Spike and Lindsey make a special connection now that they have something intimately in common. Heh.

Select to view spoiler:

At least Spike got his own hands back.

I think the structure of this season is far stronger than others. It's more compact and continuous. The only drawback to the over-arch is that we *really* need to get that plot device out of Charles "Mary Sue" Gunns head. It's just too easy. Not very well thought out.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 4:45 AM

IDEFIX

Quote:
Originally posted by kalathena:
I find it damn creepifying that people can't forgive Andrew, but can forgive Angel and Spike, both of whom slaughtered their parents. Very strange dichotomy among viewers. It reminds me of the horrorified screms by fans when Willow sacrificed a deer just one episode after they were saying that Ben "deserved it".

--Kala

about Andrew <-> Angel/Spike:
I think most people see Andrew as ONE being who was talked into murdering his best friend. whereas Angel and Spike are seen as being TWO different beings inhabiting one body. one man one demon. it's best seen in Angel. he has about nothing in common with his bad alter ego. I haven't seen much of Angel the series yet but I've just recently seen all of Buffy in one go. and there it's so clearly stated that Angel is not one but two very different men. they are both able to 'play' the other but they can't understand or sympatise with each other in any way. they seem to truely hate each other and so it's very easy to separate them as two very different beings and love one of them and hate the other and you aren't even tempted to blame the good Angel for anything the bad Angel has done.

it's less pronunced in Spike because you never saw him change much when he got his soul. but I think he wasn't 'that bad' as a vampire. selfish but capable of love and not really cruel. he always walked the grey paths shouting at the top of his lungs that he was BAD but never really living up to it. or at least he seemed to equal it out with good deeds. there was never anything good about the bad Angel, he never did anything good and it was very clear to everyone.

and there's something else. the demon Spike would have been bad if he was human but he wasn't and so some of us seem to apply different rules to judge him. for a vampire with no soul he was a pretty nice fellow. he killed people to eat them and he liked it but he wasn't cruel. he didn't torture people for fun, he didn't drive them mad before turning them... at least we never saw him acting like that. he was a funny bad not a creepy bad. he earned his name by torturing people or so we are told but it doesn't seem to fit his profile so it's easily dismissed. it's not justice but we tend to forgive people we like more easily than people we hate. but there's something Giles said: "You don't forgive because someone deserves it, you forgive them because they need it." so maybe forgiveness is not about justice and someone can 'earn' it by being a nice fellow half the time, when he's murdering people to feed off them the other half. it's weird logic but what else is there to explain why Spike was never staked?

about Ben deserving it:
there's only one thing I would like to smack him up about: going to help Giles when Buffy called him. he knew about Dawn and Glory and he could have easily asked Buffy if Dawn was with her and he should never have gone out there then. he could have helped in sending someone else or something.
but even better maybe after he found out about Dawn he should have told them to stay away from him or tried to do it on his own. he probably was scared that they'd kill him. but I think they wouldn't have if he came to them early on and 'confessed' being the host of a hellgod. they would have found a way to keep Glory from using the key there was just this one time to do it. and maybe afterwards there would have been a way to get rid of her or keep her from taking over or whatever. if not they might have killed him anyways. Buffy sent Angel to hell, so who knows???

but he sure as hell didn't deserve to die. about as much as Jenny did. but I wouldn't want to charge Giles with murder either because in that situation Ben simply had to die to save others. Glory would not have taken kindly to having missed her one opportunity and there was nothing anyone could have done to stop her. maybe they could have locked Ben/Glory up someplace safe. but what's safe for a hellgod? and what's being locked up forever good for an innocent man?

the deer sacrifice is something else entirely. some people (like me for instance) have some crazy feeling that we humans should not kill/harm/endanger animals unnecessarily. I'm not even a vegetarian but I think it's natural for me to eat meat and kill animals to eat them. but it would be a crime if I killed or hurt an animal for no good reason at all. I always try to safe animals that are in danger and I go out of my way to avoid hurting them myself. there are limits but I feel animals are the true innocents of this world. and I will never feel the amount of compassion for a human being that I feel for an animal treated unfairly. maybe because I don't think too highly of the human race as a whole. myself and all the people I love included. we all do wrong just because we can and we are easily tempted. animals don't have that problem they akt on instinct, they are truely innocent whatever they do. and that doesn't keep me from yelling at my dog when he - on purpose - tries to aggravate me. there are always exceptions to the rule *grin*.
it's just a feeling, just an idea. maybe it's stupid but it exists.

Idefix

and if my english sucks I do appologise. I've learned it in school and on the internet. I'm german and have never been to the US or the UK myself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 6:12 AM

KALATHENA

Quote:
I'm not even a vegetarian but I think it's natural for me to eat meat and kill animals to eat them. but it would be a crime if I killed or hurt an animal for no good reason at all.

So knowing that you're the only one with the power enough to bring back the Slayer and are killing the deer in order to complete that task so you can save your city from rampaging demons is "no good reason at all"? Is that what you're saying?

Just curious.

Glad to know you felt Ben didn't deserve it. I've talked to many who felt he did and it was very disturbing.

I have a "pay it forward" kind of mentality myself. If someone has made a horrible mistake in their past, yes, it's a bad thing. But if they have changed their lives and we know that such a horrible thing will never happen again, I have much less anxiety about it.

What's past is past. Let's look to the future. Even Angel himself said something very like this to Darla before Connor was born. Is Andrew likely to murder again? Is Spike? Is Angel? Is Angel a risk because he could yet again have a moment of true happiness? Yep. He most certainly is. Can Andrew now do more good than harm if he is allowed to take a part in the upcoming epic battle? Jury is still out, but I think it's possible. I also think it's possible for Angel and Spike to do the same, which is why I think they are allowed to exist, too.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 6:40 AM

IDEFIX

Quote:
Originally posted by kalathena:

So knowing that you're the only one with the power enough to bring back the Slayer and are killing the deer in order to complete that task so you can save your city from rampaging demons is "no good reason at all"? Is that what you're saying?

--Kala

no, not really. I think it was a bad idea of Willow to do it but that has nothing to do with the deer. I never thought too much about it myself. she felt she had to get Buffy back and so she killed that animal to do it. seemed to make sense in itself. I thought more along the lines of resurrecting dead people and the general wrongness of that. Dawn wasn't allowed to get her mother back so why should Willow be allowed to get Buffy back? she was just as dead and just as loved. maybe she was needed but maybe Willow was just selfish and presumptious. but it was the only way to get to were the series needed to go. for both Buffy and Willow.

on second thought some people just seem to not want to see cute animals getting killed, maybe that's the case here. isn't much of an argument not even a silly one like mine was. maybe it should have been an 'ugly' animal. I don't seem to make that kind of difference. I carry the spiders out same as everything else that's alive but that's just me.

and I never wanted to kill Andrew. just played devil's advocate here. he annoyed me to no end but that's just me not liking him not me wanting to kill him for killing Jonathan, who annoyed me even more if that's possible.

I'd much rather have 100 murderers run free than one innocent killed by something that calls itself 'the law'. we don't have death penalty here but I even think one innocent man sentenced to lifetime imprisonment is worse than letting the murderers go. it's just the opposit of justice to have someone pay for something he didn't do. and as a principle of mine no one deserves death. some should mearly be kept away from others because they pose a threat to them. and people can change and everyone makes mistakes some of us simply do it 'better' than others. killing is a pretty extreme mistake but it's television. everything is much more extreme there. would be boring to watch otherwise.

I seem to have no problem with Giles killing Ben to get rid of Glory (it's like Mal killing that cop in Serenity) but I really have a problem with Willow going after Warren to avenge Tara. he didn't even shoot her on purpose. and revenge is simply nothing I could accept as a good excuse for murder. she was out of her mind and addicted to the magic or whatever but I think the idea of taking a life in vengeance is pretty low and degrading. I loved Willow up to that point afterwards she had lost my respect in a way. I was never sure it was in-character either. but it was a pretty good plotline.

and we seem to drift widely off topic here. hope that no one minds...

Idefix

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 7:54 AM

KALATHENA

Quote:
I thought more along the lines of resurrecting dead people and the general wrongness of that. Dawn wasn't allowed to get her mother back so why should Willow be allowed to get Buffy back? she was just as dead and just as loved. maybe she was needed but maybe Willow was just selfish and presumptious.

Oh yeah, that's another entire issue. I have my own personal feelings about Willow's motives, but they are heavily biased by my faith. I was deeply touched by Willow's plea to Osiris to let Buffy come back, but then my favorite myth is the Sumerian version of Inanna going to the underworld. Willow begging for Buffy to return reminded me of Geshtinana, Inanna's handmaid, seeking help from all the other gods to allow Inanna to return.

Quote:
on second thought some people just seem to not want to see cute animals getting killed, maybe that's the case here.

And that is what it seemed like from most folks I talked to about it when S6 began. They were just upset about seeing the cute baby deer get killed. None of them seemed to even have a system of personal ethics like yours.

Quote:
and I never wanted to kill Andrew. just played devil's advocate here. he annoyed me to no end but that's just me not liking him not me wanting to kill him for killing Jonathan, who annoyed me even more if that's possible.

Point taken. I know he annoys a lot of people. I just get annoyed with those who say they don't like him because he killed Jonathan when its really that they're made at the writer's for keeping Andrew and killing Jonathan.

Quote:
I'd much rather have 100 murderers run free than one innocent killed by something that calls itself 'the law'.

Not something I want to argue here. Too much personal bias. I worked in corrections for several years.

Quote:
but I really have a problem with Willow going after Warren to avenge Tara. he didn't even shoot her on purpose.

Now see, I don't have any issue with what Willow did to Warren. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. Warren was a misogynistic prick who had committed murder more than once and had no intention of stopping.

Just my opinion, though.

Quote:
and we seem to drift widely off topic here. hope that no one minds...

Heh heh. Yeah, sorry about that, folks.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 7:59 AM

IDEFIX

@Kala
don't know you much but I already like you.
and not because of the opinions you state but because of the way you state them. to most people debating equals fighting. and I hate that with a passion. debating should equal learning or maybe even bonding.

and I'm female and not really gay and lots of miles away and not interested in more than conversation. just thought I'd say that.

Idefix

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 9:05 AM

KASUO

Well, we are kind of off-topic but not quite.. yes, I'm confusing my own self.

Instead, let us all hug and rejoice as we eagerly await Firefly's feature presentation to the big screen.

________
"Let's moon 'em!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 30, 2004 2:14 PM

KALATHENA

Quote:
Kala
don't know you much but I already like you.
and not because of the opinions you state but because of the way you state them. to most people debating equals fighting. and I hate that with a passion. debating should equal learning or maybe even bonding

I know what you mean. Too many people take things too personally. In general, I've found that people who can respect diversity argue very well. I don't have to agree with your opinions to know that there is some validity to them. I also don't feel that my own beliefs are threatened when someone disagrees.

Heh heh, not to worry about attraction. Been married for 14 years myself. Take care.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 15, 2004 6:30 AM

SUCCATASH

Well, two weeks ago I decided I was becoming a BIG Angel fan. Now I feel kicked in the gut.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE