Gorram'd bloodsuckers... by XeroGravity

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Gorram'd bloodsuckers...

POSTED BY: XEROGRAVITY
UPDATED: Friday, October 21, 2005 09:05
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3836
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, October 15, 2005 10:42 AM

Ok I'm obviously having Whedon-withdrawl to be doin this but here goes...

I've stated here in these forums Buffy the Vampire Slayer ain't my cup of tea. And it ain't. I've done had my fill of bad undead slaying from the entertainment industry. Saw it (and read it) all... the old black and white films (even Nosferatu and Abbott and Costello flicks), the very 3rd rate remake of Stoker's book back in the late 90's (I think it was) with Depp and whats-her-name, etc.

I loved the genre but hollywood whored it out till they killed it. Anne Rice's novels were the last interesting dip into vampires for me. They even made a film out of the first installment of Vampire Chronicles. Was a fairly good movie, involving big name stars (Pitt and whats-his-name). Unfortunately, they skipped the very best book in the series which should have been the sequel (Lestat), prolly cuz "whats-his-name" was at some scientology commune (or whatever).

Instead, Rice sold out (victim of her own success), wrote the most trashy book of the series, and hollywood leapt on it as the sequel (queen of the damned) ~ still trying to forget how hideous it was.

I'm burnt out on vampire stories. I just saw Whedon's film on TV, the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It sucked as bad as I remembered it did. I'm assuming he was just learning the ropes and I will now watch the entire TV series. He has definately proven he has a talent for TV series. Plus, wanna see what all you Buffy-freaks are goin on about.

End of the day... even if I think that series sucks, I'll still love Firefly.

XG

"No such thing as gravity. The "Earth-that-was" just sucks.

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 11:20 AM

SAMWIBATT

Quote:
Originally posted by XeroGravity:
I just saw Whedon's film on TV, the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It sucked as bad as I remembered it did. I'm assuming he was just learning the ropes and I will now watch the entire TV series.

The series is a whooooole different beast. The movie wasn't so much Joss learning the ropes as having no control over the film whatsoever, IIRC. I'm guessing it would have been a lot better if it hadn't been yoinked from his grasp.

Even so, it's watchable (if only just).

I think you'll like the series a lot more. You can slap me if I'm wrong.

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 11:26 AM

CYBERSNARK

The movie had two insurmountable flaws.

(1) No Willow.
(2) No Xander.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 11:38 AM

EMBERS

Quote:
Originally posted by Cybersnark:
The movie had two insurmountable flaws.

(1) No Willow.
(2) No Xander.

No, the movie had ONE insurmountable flaw:
No Joss Whedon

they threw out his script
the woman who was the director wanted to make a different movie (different from what Joss wrote),
so she went for slap stick, goof-ball, comedy

the Star, Donald Sutherland, didn't even attempt to learn lines from the script, he ad libbed his way through it...

to blame this mess on Joss Whedon, who had no control and no power,
is just wrong.

No...you have to watch the original two part premier of the TV show if you want to see what Joss wanted to do, because that was his work...

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 12:00 PM

SEP7IMUS

Vampires are both tired and tiresome. They had their day and were pretty well played out.

Buffy, on the other hand, is neither tired nor tiresome. It's about the characters (in a way that we can only wish Firefly had a chance to be).

It's safe to say that Buffy is about vampires in the same way that Firfly is about spaceships. They play an integral part, but there's a WHOLE lot more going on.

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 12:08 PM

EMBERS

Quote:
Originally posted by Sep7imus:
It's safe to say that Buffy is about vampires in the same way that Firfly is about spaceships. They play an integral part, but there's a WHOLE lot more going on.

actually, I have to argue that point...
maybe you could say that (vampires = spaceships)
if you make sure to leave Serenity herself out of that lump...

I would be more likely to say that Buffy was about Vampires in the same way that Firefly is about the Alliance,
it (the Alliance, and/or the Vampires) represent the threat which is the basis for the metaphor

the metaphore in Buffy being learning to over-come your fears and inner demons

the metaphore in Firefly being learning to be independent and free of all attempts to make you conform or abandon your dreams.

But Serenity, that particular spaceship, is actually (IMO) a central character...or the glue that holds together all the other characters/the crew. Serenity is more important than any of the actors....
I'm not sure it is analogus to anything we see on Buffy or Angel....

not meaning to be argumentative sep7imus...but I just needed to say that.
thanks

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 1:47 PM

STAKETHELURK

Quote:
Originally posted by XeroGravity:
I will now watch the entire TV series.

I urge you to stick to this. The first season of "Buffy," while good on its own and necessary for the complete experience, is a definite step down from the rest of the series (this is actually something of a Whedon trademark, the first season of any of his series is always weak in retrospect; he was still figuring out the dynamics--which makes Firefly's cancellation all the more tragic; the 14 brilliant episodes we have right now would probably have paled in comparison to those yet to come and we be telling prospective browncoats that you need to "work your way thru season one before you get to the good stuff.").

Others have already talked about how "Buffy" isn't tired, but it bears repeating. One of the reason's "Buffy" was so highly regarded was because it did so many new things. They might not seem quite as new today, because everybody's been copying them, but they were very new back then. So, it is so not your same old same old. This show was so fresh and original that none of the major networks wanted to touch it--it wasn't formulaic and it didn't follow conventions, which is usually the only way suits know how to judge things. So, XG (and all the others who've shied away from "Buffy"), give it a chance and it should impress you with its originality and sheer quality.

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

Saturday, October 15, 2005 4:29 PM

BATMARLOWE

As others have already said don't judge the T.V. show by the movie--Joss had little to do with it.
Screenwriters are well-paid but they have no power when it comes to feature films.

Even though I'm a big BUFFY fan I would have to say the half-season of FIREFLY is better than the first season of BUFFY (which is also half-a-season).

But Joss cut his eye-teeth on the BUFFY series. I urge you to witness the sharpening of Joss' eye-teeth and watch at least one season of BUFFY if not two.

Not because of Buffy or Vampires or Slaying. But because of the talents of Joss Whedon (and everybody else at Mutant Enemy).

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

Sunday, October 16, 2005 12:09 AM

XEROGRAVITY

Update: 4 eps into season 1 as of this sitting. If I hadn't watched a replay of the original BtVS movie on TV, I doubt I would have retrieved the DVDs of the show. Assuming Whedon was responsible for that atrocity, I could'nt make the mental leap from that movie to the subsequent Firefly eps and Serenity. How could someone produce a masterpiece of such calibre (pure genius) when they started out with that movie (mindless fodder)? Kind of like going from fingerpainting stick people to bronze sculpting of Greek gods.

4 episodes into season 1 (plus the insights from this post)...

So far it feels like Hardy Boys solving the crisis of the week (the Boys being replaced by hip hawt fashionistas). Kinda campy. Has a very Scooby-Doo-esque quality about it, unveiling the villian at the end of each show. However, it's a huge step up from the movie on every level. The villian is the monster pretending to be human, versus the human playing monster per Scooby Doo.

By episode 3, Buffy has distanced herself from the social-climbing shallowness of being a cheerleader. Not to mention a quantum leap forward in intellectual capacity from the movie to the show. Kristy Swanson doomed herself to "B" movies with this performance.

But... "The Chosen One" thing with Buffy is unfolding, they added a brainy Brit (ex-curator of a museum with a wealth of ancient books destined to help the "chosen slayer"), and a mostly-nonbelievable entourage of cohorts.

Sorry.. I'm just having a hard time seeing anyone as insanely beautiful as Allison Hannigan (sp?) as being a socially challenged nerd wearing clothes selected by her mother. Too beautiful to be believable. Too smart to be that inept. But she's a hacker, and we all know hackers are doomed to that stereotype.

Plus we're no longer limited to just vampires. We have shapeshifting insects (kinda corny but will give it time), a hint of all manner of undead entering the picture, etcetera.

I take season 1 to be 2 things... (1) Whedon gets to redeem his name by repairing his storyline (figured his storyline got hijacked), and (2) he has to lay foundations for the characters in the story (while muddling through all the necessary repairwork).

XG

No such thing as gravity. The "Earth-that-was" just sucks.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 2:09 AM

XEROGRAVITY

moving into 2nd season. withholding all opinions till I get to season 3.

XG

No such thing as gravity. The "Earth-that-was" just sucks.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 2:50 AM

JASONZZZ

Quote:
Originally posted by XeroGravity:
...
...
...
Kinda campy.
...
...

Yeah, think that's about summarizes it...

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs new equipment to keep the site shiny. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13317#185514

Given the freedom to do so, anarchy will result in an organic organization unto itself.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 3:03 AM

SPINLAND

I think my primary problem with the whole Buffy thing is two-fold:

1. Characters awash in teen angst: who cares? I want stories about grown-ups.

2. Grown-ups trying to play the aforementioned teens: Ridgemont High, anyone? Just don't buy it, even if I wanted to see realistic teens (which obviously I don't).

I grant that the series is/was about the characters, but when the characters are of the sort I'd rather gnaw off an arm to avoid, the kiss of death has been planted.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 4:11 AM

JASONZZZ

maybe not gnaw off my own arm, but definitely planting a freaking stake in all of their hearts to make them quit it... At least.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs new equipment to keep the site shiny. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13317#185514

Given the freedom to do so, anarchy will result in an organic organization unto itself.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 5:34 AM

SEP7IMUS

You know, it's funny that you should object to the whole "teenage-angst" side of Buffy.

First of all, though this is more true in later seasons, it's not ALL about teenage angst, and there are some pretty adult issues going on.

Secondly, I think the teenage angst stuff that DOES appear on Buffy is head-and-shoulders above typical teen-fare. Unlike a multitude of teenage shows, the relationships (romantic and otherwise) seem realistic and take place over realistic time periods (not a whole lot of bed-hopping going on). Plus, whenever it does deal with a "typical teen" kind of issue (fitting in, steroids, being unpopular, whatever...) it's always through the supernatural filter, which makes it a bit more fun, and occasionally more insightful. Finally, even when it DOES deal with these teenage angst issues, it rarely oversimplifies them or comes down on the tiresomely moralistic side that most shows for teens end up supporting.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 5:45 AM

SPINLAND

With me it's not an issue of whether the "teen angst" is handled poorly or well; I personally don't find any flavor of it to be entertaining in the least. Everyone's mileage is bound to vary, but for my part the entire context of Buffy is simply a show-stopper. As I said, I want stories about grown-ups. The popularity of the series indicates my requirement is in the minority, and that's fine, but there's nothing odd or even difficult to understand about my personal distaste for it.

If the series were ever picked up again, when Buffy were (at least) somewhere in her early thirties and reconciling her special talents with the requirements of that stage in her life--and Joss were doing the creative work behind the scenes--perhaps I'd consider giving it a try.

Those are my views, and I like them.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 5:56 AM

SEP7IMUS

Quote:
Originally posted by Spinland:
With me it's not an issue of whether the "teen angst" is handled poorly or well; I personally don't find any flavor of it to be entertaining in the least. Everyone's mileage is bound to vary, but for my part the entire context of Buffy is simply a show-stopper. As I said, I want stories about grown-ups. The popularity of the series indicates my requirement is in the minority, and that's fine, but there's nothing odd or even difficult to understand about my personal distaste for it.

If the series were ever picked up again, when Buffy were (at least) somewhere in her early thirties and reconciling her special talents with the requirements of that stage in her life--and Joss were doing the creative work behind the scenes--perhaps I'd consider giving it a try.

Those are my views, and I like them.

You're welcome to 'em. I'll just say two things.

1) I think that, when handled well, teen-angst issues ARE adult issues. Adults might have ADDITIONAL problems, but at the bottom, we still worry about all the things we worried about in high school (though, I hope, we're better at dealing with them). So, for me, teen stories are interesting because they're like adult stories without the filter of maturity.

2) Have you watched the later seasons of Buffy (or any of Angel)? They get a lot more adult-oriented. Buffy worries about having a job (as does Xander). Real responsibilities show up in a number of forms. (My personal favorite season is Season 6 of Buffy, partly because I think it IS the most realistic/adult season, though many fans hate it the most for probably the same reasons.)

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 6:07 AM

SPINLAND

I have to be fair and pass along that my three "kids" are in the age groupings represented by the series' main characters, up to and including early college. The last thing I'm looking for in entertainment is linkage to the very real sturm and drang of raising my own brood. I want to be entertained by characters who've been through the same wringers I have, not by avatars of some of the very things I'm seeking escapist entertainment to get away from. I also have nothing but sympathy for that period in their (and my own) life, not nostalgia, and that is also an obstacle to finding that context at all entertaining.

Malcolm Reynolds ... now there's a character I can find cause to identify with.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 6:16 AM

EMBERS

Quote:
Originally posted by XeroGravity:
moving into 2nd season. withholding all opinions till I get to season 3.

XG

which season was Dopplegangland? Was it 3?
If you are an Alyson Hannigan fan then you will LOVE Willow & Vampire Willow together (they are so cute!)

And who can resist the beautiful and damaged Faith?
Her story drifts throughout until Buffy's final season AND into Angel...

**********************************************
watch the R. Tam Session vids: http://www.hittarivertam.nu/
and buy the 'Serenity' comics published by Dark Horse!

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 8:06 AM

JASONZZZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Sep7imus:

1) I think that, when handled well, teen-angst issues ARE adult issues. Adults might have ADDITIONAL problems, but at the bottom, we still worry about all the things we worried about in high school (though, I hope, we're better at dealing with them). So, for me, teen stories are interesting because they're like adult stories without the filter of maturity.

Just have to chime in and say that YMMV definitely. Some of us either have the luck, the fortune, the capacity/will, find that everything about teenage angst so angstful/hateful, or found lives so happy/bountiful/fulfilling that simply there just isn't room in their lives for angst. Some of us just don't have angst in our lives, different phase of life now, doing other things than be angst ridden. Even teenagers don't have to deal with angst or have a very very short phase... For me, this angst thing is mostly a rich nation problem - people who don't eat "Big Macs's" all day don't have the same kind of time for angst. True, they prolly have more pressing problems such as survival to deal with - but there isn't angst at least. Personally, people really should get a good perspective:

Got clothes on (don't have to be designer clothes or clothese that matches your friends - yes, even Goths try to fit in) check.

Got food - 3 squares a day - check.

Got roof over head - leaky ok - check.

Friends - who needs them - check.

Parents - well, everyone has them, yeah sure, good parents are hard to find, check.

No vampires chasing me down to kill me every single moment of my life - check.

Cool... everything is set, moving on and now I need to get a plan together and make my life better. Plenty of schedule and no room for angst - neither in my own life nor in a show.

Quote:
Originally posted by Sep7imus:

2) Have you watched the later seasons of Buffy (or any of Angel)? They get a lot more adult-oriented. Buffy worries about having a job (as does Xander). Real responsibilities show up in a number of forms. (My personal favorite season is Season 6 of Buffy, partly because I think it IS the most realistic/adult season, though many fans hate it the most for probably the same reasons.)

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs new equipment to keep the site shiny. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13317#185514

Given the freedom to do so, anarchy will result in an organic organization unto itself.

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 8:17 AM

EMBERS

Jasonzzz I think you have a different definition of the word 'angst'
it isn't some suburban made problems about boys and clothes...
to most of us 'angst' refers to real pain or problems with the dead Mom, and the abusive boyfriend, or friends messed up on drugs...

Buffy is metaphor about Real Life, but since the problems are wrapped up in the vampiric metaphor goodness she can over-come them.

It is supposed to be something that helps people who are dealing with serious problems both gain some fun distraction while getting inspired to find the strength to face what must be faced.

I know a lot of people like to just dismiss Buffy as The OC with Vampires, but it has a lot more depth than that...if you are willing to be open enough to pay attention.

If not then screw it,
stick to Firefly & Serenity, which are obviously the culmination of Joss' creative success....

**********************************************
watch the R. Tam Session vids: http://www.hittarivertam.nu/
and buy the 'Serenity' comics published by Dark Horse!

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

Friday, October 21, 2005 9:05 AM

MALSWAY

I've had a lot of friends who didn't watch Buffy when it was on, and showed no interest in it despite my raving about it.

After much begging and cajoling, I've gotten them to watch the first season of Buffy on DVD (I loaned them my copy) and warned them that the first season was nothing compared to the rest of the series.

They've all muddled through the first season, watched the second, and then begged me for the rest...and for my Angel DVDs. Don't give up on Buffy because of the first season.

As for the Buffy movie...well, I don't even consider that to be anywhere near a part of the Joss 'verse.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE