FLM films - My Webpage

2003-01-08 07:32:29-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Carmikl <Carmikl@rcn.com>)


DarkMagic wrote: > > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > At least you knew Ubie wasn't going to make any silly speeches.

2003-01-08 07:32:29-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Carmikl <Carmikl@rcn.com>)


DarkMagic wrote: > > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > At least you knew Ubie wasn't going to make any silly speeches.

2003-01-08 09:54:35-05:00 - There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


Like no business I know Even with a Turkey that you know will fold You may be stranded out in the cold Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold Let's go on with the show Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out to be someone we already know. I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" Understated and, yet, still eloquent. Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly a Slayer by any other name...... The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation of one that I've ever imagined. Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. And, Anya tells the eyeball that they all have memories, what she and Giles are looking for is something new. Well, time to remember Giles and Anya. Buffy has been dead and brought back before. There's nothing new about that. What Anya and Giles don't know about, however, is Connor. All in all, I'd say Buffy put on a good show. The telepathy thing could really come in handy in the future. How many times will we be forced to ooh and ahh over the miracle of Spike recognizing the real Buffy when he sees her? I hope that was the last. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 09:54:35-05:00 - There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


Like no business I know Even with a Turkey that you know will fold You may be stranded out in the cold Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold Let's go on with the show Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out to be someone we already know. I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" Understated and, yet, still eloquent. Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly a Slayer by any other name...... The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation of one that I've ever imagined. Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. And, Anya tells the eyeball that they all have memories, what she and Giles are looking for is something new. Well, time to remember Giles and Anya. Buffy has been dead and brought back before. There's nothing new about that. What Anya and Giles don't know about, however, is Connor. All in all, I'd say Buffy put on a good show. The telepathy thing could really come in handy in the future. How many times will we be forced to ooh and ahh over the miracle of Spike recognizing the real Buffy when he sees her? I hope that was the last. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 10:35:24-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:pifo1vclk2pb55ocftbqa3gosf0spsnjqs@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > Just when I think I'm going to agree with you, you go all 'off an a > tangenty'. Two different networks. Yes, two different networks. But, "Angel" is still very much a part of the Buffyverse. The shows mirror one another to an extent that I occasionally find creepy, but most often am fascinated by. No crossovers. Separate stories. Now, this just isn't true. The only seasons that didn't have an actual physical character crossover and intertwined storylines were last seasons. And, even then, Whedon made sure that Buffy and Angel had their off screen rendevouz. This year Faith is crossing over and ME has already stated that the two storylines *are* related. > You seem to have a gift for connecting the things that aren't... but > don't stop... its very refreshing. Everything is connected. Willow said it, not me. > > Connor is the progeny of vampires, he has absolutely no relation to > the 'slayer'. Mixing up the two storylines would be a huge mistake, We don't know that. We don't know how The Slayer originated. Time and again, though, references have been made on BtVS that the Slayer origin is demonic in nature. Who is to say that the original Slayer wasn't the result of two vamps who couldn't keep it in their pants? The two storylines *are* mixed up. "Angel" started out as an extension of the Buffyverse and has never pretended to be anything else. A simple way for ME to separate the two universes would have been to have the Buffyverse change to the Dawnverse, sans Angel/Cordelia/Wesley. Or, have Angel and the gang come back from Pylea to a universe where Buffy hadn't died. But, ME didn't do that and the reason is that the stories are still connected. Trust me, Connor is a Slayer. > not only from a writing perspective but based on the fact that not > everyone who watches BtVS also watches Angel. It is what it is. Whedon is the creator and he says that Buffy and Angel are inseparable. If they can't be together literally, they will be together metaphorically. And they have been. Take a good look at the two show's storylines and the parallels between them will start popping out in astonishing numbers. Their hero's journeys mirror one another. They are the yin/yang of the Buffyverse. > > Crossover eps are one thing, because they are selfcontained, crossover > story arcs are a whole different beasty and a smelly one at that. "Angel" is nothing more than an extension of the BtVS story arc. One that is too large to be contained in one hour long show. You should have started smelling it long before now. > > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 10:35:24-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:pifo1vclk2pb55ocftbqa3gosf0spsnjqs@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > Just when I think I'm going to agree with you, you go all 'off an a > tangenty'. Two different networks. Yes, two different networks. But, "Angel" is still very much a part of the Buffyverse. The shows mirror one another to an extent that I occasionally find creepy, but most often am fascinated by. No crossovers. Separate stories. Now, this just isn't true. The only seasons that didn't have an actual physical character crossover and intertwined storylines were last seasons. And, even then, Whedon made sure that Buffy and Angel had their off screen rendevouz. This year Faith is crossing over and ME has already stated that the two storylines *are* related. > You seem to have a gift for connecting the things that aren't... but > don't stop... its very refreshing. Everything is connected. Willow said it, not me. > > Connor is the progeny of vampires, he has absolutely no relation to > the 'slayer'. Mixing up the two storylines would be a huge mistake, We don't know that. We don't know how The Slayer originated. Time and again, though, references have been made on BtVS that the Slayer origin is demonic in nature. Who is to say that the original Slayer wasn't the result of two vamps who couldn't keep it in their pants? The two storylines *are* mixed up. "Angel" started out as an extension of the Buffyverse and has never pretended to be anything else. A simple way for ME to separate the two universes would have been to have the Buffyverse change to the Dawnverse, sans Angel/Cordelia/Wesley. Or, have Angel and the gang come back from Pylea to a universe where Buffy hadn't died. But, ME didn't do that and the reason is that the stories are still connected. Trust me, Connor is a Slayer. > not only from a writing perspective but based on the fact that not > everyone who watches BtVS also watches Angel. It is what it is. Whedon is the creator and he says that Buffy and Angel are inseparable. If they can't be together literally, they will be together metaphorically. And they have been. Take a good look at the two show's storylines and the parallels between them will start popping out in astonishing numbers. Their hero's journeys mirror one another. They are the yin/yang of the Buffyverse. > > Crossover eps are one thing, because they are selfcontained, crossover > story arcs are a whole different beasty and a smelly one at that. "Angel" is nothing more than an extension of the BtVS story arc. One that is too large to be contained in one hour long show. You should have started smelling it long before now. > > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 10:55:58-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: >For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the >eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to >The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been >an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two >Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective >refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where >the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly >a Slayer by any other name...... > >The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last >one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy >himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation >of one that I've ever imagined. I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. I'm not subscribing to this theory but it sure would be an opportunity for them to give us a little more information about The Key that you and I and a few others have been talking about since season 5. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-08 10:55:58-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: >For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the >eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to >The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been >an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two >Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective >refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where >the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly >a Slayer by any other name...... > >The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last >one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy >himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation >of one that I've ever imagined. I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. I'm not subscribing to this theory but it sure would be an opportunity for them to give us a little more information about The Key that you and I and a few others have been talking about since season 5. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-08 11:28:21-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"EGK" <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:t8io1v0uavumct3vu12g0t32cm2e3fdi05@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> > wrote: > > > >For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > >eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > >The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > >an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > >Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > >refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > >the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > > >The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > >one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > >himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > >of one that I've ever imagined. > > I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > I would like nothing better than a rational explanation for Dawn. I'm really starting to worry that it's not going to happen. However, I'm less inclined than ever to believe that Dawn is a Slayer. FE hasn't targeted her. I suppose it's possible that her encounter with Joyce was really FE, but I don't think so. I haven't seen CWDP so I'm just going by the Wildfeed, but Dawn's encounter with Joyce was very dramatic. The radio, the whirling wind that messed up the house, the vision of Joyce on the sofa, etc...that isn't FE's style. FE is subtle. Eve-ol, if you will. It sneaks up on people, it's tricky, it's not obvious. Connor, on the other hand, is a Slayer. He may not be a natural Slayer, as in he received his powers when a Slayer died, but he unquestionably has Slayer powers and he unquestionably is a mystical entity. Is it really a coincidence that the demons in Quor-toth call him "The Destroyer"? Demon destroyer, demon slayer, what's the difference? None that I can tell. At any rate, I believe it's his existence in the Buffyverse that has created this "disturbance in the Force". Connor returned at the end of Angel's last season and it makes sense that FE started acting up in full force a couple of months later, rather than the full year that has passed since Buffy's resurrection, the two years that have passed since Dawn's creation, or the six years that have passed since Buffy's first resurrection and the two Slayer anomaly. > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 11:28:21-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"EGK" <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:t8io1v0uavumct3vu12g0t32cm2e3fdi05@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> > wrote: > > > >For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > >eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > >The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > >an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > >Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > >refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > >the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > > >The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > >one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > >himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > >of one that I've ever imagined. > > I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > I would like nothing better than a rational explanation for Dawn. I'm really starting to worry that it's not going to happen. However, I'm less inclined than ever to believe that Dawn is a Slayer. FE hasn't targeted her. I suppose it's possible that her encounter with Joyce was really FE, but I don't think so. I haven't seen CWDP so I'm just going by the Wildfeed, but Dawn's encounter with Joyce was very dramatic. The radio, the whirling wind that messed up the house, the vision of Joyce on the sofa, etc...that isn't FE's style. FE is subtle. Eve-ol, if you will. It sneaks up on people, it's tricky, it's not obvious. Connor, on the other hand, is a Slayer. He may not be a natural Slayer, as in he received his powers when a Slayer died, but he unquestionably has Slayer powers and he unquestionably is a mystical entity. Is it really a coincidence that the demons in Quor-toth call him "The Destroyer"? Demon destroyer, demon slayer, what's the difference? None that I can tell. At any rate, I believe it's his existence in the Buffyverse that has created this "disturbance in the Force". Connor returned at the end of Angel's last season and it makes sense that FE started acting up in full force a couple of months later, rather than the full year that has passed since Buffy's resurrection, the two years that have passed since Dawn's creation, or the six years that have passed since Buffy's first resurrection and the two Slayer anomaly. > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 12:05:22-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > of one that I've ever imagined. Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll start feeling sick. In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. It's like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is too much in my opinion. In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case.

2003-01-08 12:05:22-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > of one that I've ever imagined. Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll start feeling sick. In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. It's like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is too much in my opinion. In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case.

2003-01-08 12:23:54-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (izedragon@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. > > Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, > she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and > Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain > Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. > > We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out > to be someone we already know. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > > Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." > > Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" > > Understated and, yet, still eloquent. > > Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn > would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would > be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. Not nessesarily.. Raising Buffy magicked Willow out, but if she hadn't been doing that the bickers would have run into Willow, Tara and gang at full strength. At that point odds are fairly good that they would have gotten run out of town with a lightning bolt. Or seven. Alternately the gang gets blown away when the millitary shows up.

2003-01-08 12:23:54-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (izedragon@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > Like no business I know > Even with a Turkey > that you know will fold > You may be stranded > out in the cold > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > Let's go on with the show > > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. > > Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, > she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and > Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain > Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. > > We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out > to be someone we already know. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > > Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." > > Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" > > Understated and, yet, still eloquent. > > Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn > would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would > be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. Not nessesarily.. Raising Buffy magicked Willow out, but if she hadn't been doing that the bickers would have run into Willow, Tara and gang at full strength. At that point odds are fairly good that they would have gotten run out of town with a lightning bolt. Or seven. Alternately the gang gets blown away when the millitary shows up.

2003-01-08 13:09:06-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > of one that I've ever imagined. > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy that theory.

2003-01-08 13:09:06-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > of one that I've ever imagined. > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy that theory.

2003-01-08 15:24:26-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > Like no business I know > > Even with a Turkey > > that you know will fold > > You may be stranded > > out in the cold > > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > > > Let's go on with the show > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > start feeling sick. > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? How else to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast internet. It's > like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > too much in my opinion. > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they don't show a little closure to some of these things. > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 15:24:26-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > Like no business I know > > Even with a Turkey > > that you know will fold > > You may be stranded > > out in the cold > > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > > > Let's go on with the show > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > start feeling sick. > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? How else to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast internet. It's > like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > too much in my opinion. > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they don't show a little closure to some of these things. > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 15:41:22-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any writers or producers off camera. -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Satan: Beyond these doors is an agony worse than all others. You will remain in here for eternity listening to... whiny protest songs from the Sixties.

2003-01-08 15:41:22-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any writers or producers off camera. -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Satan: Beyond these doors is an agony worse than all others. You will remain in here for eternity listening to... whiny protest songs from the Sixties.

2003-01-08 16:01:11-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? Countless? Name two? As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at the time. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 16:01:11-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? Countless? Name two? As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at the time. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 16:02:15-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <tk6p1vkkbrenhnggr8fvvk68tf708ruiak@4ax.com>, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > > >I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > >deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > >disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > >Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > > > > You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" > schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not > anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any > writers or producers off camera. And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to back it up. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 16:02:15-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <tk6p1vkkbrenhnggr8fvvk68tf708ruiak@4ax.com>, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > > >I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > >deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > >disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > >Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > > > > You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" > schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not > anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any > writers or producers off camera. And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to back it up. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 16:53:28-07:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (William George Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu>)


On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > >Countless? Name two? > >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at >the time. Adam in Buffy's Restless dream Do I get a cookie? -- "Oh Buffy, you really do need to have every square inch of your ass kicked." - Willow Rosenberg

2003-01-08 16:53:28-07:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (William George Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu>)


On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > >Countless? Name two? > >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at >the time. Adam in Buffy's Restless dream Do I get a cookie? -- "Oh Buffy, you really do need to have every square inch of your ass kicked." - Willow Rosenberg

2003-01-08 18:03:38-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:h50p1v840p3nqmka5r44kq2m3g5bcn87l7@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:35:24 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Yes, two different networks. But, "Angel" is still very much a part of the > >Buffyverse. The shows mirror one another to an extent that I occasionally > >find creepy, but most often am fascinated by. > > > >No crossovers. Separate stories. > > > >Now, this just isn't true. The only seasons that didn't have an actual > >physical character crossover and intertwined storylines were last seasons. > >And, even then, Whedon made sure that Buffy and Angel had their off screen > >rendevouz. This year Faith is crossing over and ME has already stated that > >the two storylines *are* related. > > > > Faith has been a character on both shows. The story lines would have > to be related if they involve her. That doesn't mean that Connor is > going to pop up on buffy as the first male slayer. I never said that he would. I just said that I think he's a natural born Slayer. Natural born, of demonic origin, powers rooted in darkness, just like the first Slayer. Since one has been created naturally the mystical forces that have always controlled Slayer succession are out of whack. ED is not a regular > on either show. She is not bound by contract to either. It only makes > sense that both shows have to 'deal' with her return. I bet you $20 > that Faith is the source of that 'relatedness'. Undoubtedly Faith is the primary source for this seasons related storyline. But, Faith returning on either show doesn't explain how a transformation has occurred in the forces surrounding Slayer selection. Faith has been around for a long time now. There is nothing recent about her Slayerness, or even her potential for altering the balance between good and evil. Maybe Dru as > well....again, not a 'regular' character. Dru doesn't have anything at all to do with Slayer succession or Slayer origin. Making Connor some kind of > rogue mutant slayer would be silly in the extreme and would do nothing > but take away from BtVS itself. Okay. Buffy has been told time and again that the Slayer origin is demonic in nature and that her power is rooted in darkness. Now we have a super human with Slayer powers and yen for demon slaughter whose origin is demonic and whose power is rooted in darkness. But, he's not a Slayer. Fine. > >> You seem to have a gift for connecting the things that aren't... but > >> don't stop... its very refreshing. > > > >Everything is connected. Willow said it, not me. > > > >> > >> Connor is the progeny of vampires, he has absolutely no relation to > >> the 'slayer'. Mixing up the two storylines would be a huge mistake, > > > >We don't know that. We don't know how The Slayer originated. Time and > >again, though, references have been made on BtVS that the Slayer origin is > >demonic in nature. Who is to say that the original Slayer wasn't the result > >of two vamps who couldn't keep it in their pants? The two storylines *are* > >mixed up. "Angel" started out as an extension of the Buffyverse and has > >never pretended to be anything else. > > Simple, Connor didn't get 'called', there has been no indication on > Angel that Connor 'came into his abilities', he just had them from > birth. Right. That's why it's screwed up the mystical powers that control the line of succession. Connor wasn't called, he was created. > > >A simple way for ME to separate the two universes would have been to have > >the Buffyverse change to the Dawnverse, sans Angel/Cordelia/Wesley. Or, > >have Angel and the gang come back from Pylea to a universe where Buffy > >hadn't died. But, ME didn't do that and the reason is that the stories are > >still connected. Trust me, Connor is a Slayer. > > That sounds simple to you? Ever hear of Occam's razor? Just because > they are in the same universe doesnt mean every event is directly > related to every other. Willow said "Everything is connected." Whedon said "We're going back to the beginning." Angel is a huge part of that beginning, a major character, a major influence on Buffy's life and the storyline. Whedon can't end BtVS without some closure from the characters that populate Angel. We know from past experience there are a whole > host of Big Bads in the world. There is no reason to assume there is > any link between the current angel story arc and the current buffy > one. Yes, they have common metaphors etc.... but it doesnt mean the > actual stories are the 'same'. > Are you serious? Take a good look at Cordelia. Short, blonde hair, a mysterious connection to the PtB, super-powers that are demonic in origin, a fixation with Angel, a psudeo death, heavenly experience, resurrection, memory loss gig, sleeping with Angel's son. Now, take a look at Buffy. Shorter (than it was, anyway) blonde hair, a mysterious connection to the PtB, super powers that are demonic in origin, a fixation with Angel (and souled vampires in general), death, heavenly experience, resurrection, memory loss, sleeping with Angel's son (vampirically speaking). I could go on. And on, and on. The connections are endless and they go way beyond similar metaphors. > There may be a link, but it would have to be minor, just based on the > network thing. > The WB's anal retentive attitude has inhibited some seriously good storyline potential. As has Whedon's focus on Firefly. The link between the two shows was never minor to begin with, though, and there is no way to change that fact now. Angel is firmly rooted in the Buffyverse. > >> not only from a writing perspective but based on the fact that not > >> everyone who watches BtVS also watches Angel. > > > >It is what it is. Whedon is the creator and he says that Buffy and Angel > >are inseparable. If they can't be together literally, they will be together > >metaphorically. And they have been. Take a good look at the two show's > >storylines and the parallels between them will start popping out in > >astonishing numbers. Their hero's journeys mirror one another. They are > >the yin/yang of the Buffyverse. > > Of course they are going to have common metaphors and similar story > lines, but thats a far cry from claiming connor is an actual slayer. Why? What else is he supposed to be then? A super-powered being with demonic origins that just happens to fight and think exactly like a Slayer but really isn't? > You wouldnt even have an Angel show if it wasnt for BtVS, but that > doesnt demand that every story arc be linked. In fact the only > linkages have been with secondary characters: Dru, Darla, Spike, > Harmony. > You're referring to actual character crossovers. I would hardly call Spike a secondary character (anymore, at least), but even then Angel, Buffy, Willow, Faith and Oz have all been part of a storyline crossover. > They have never done a story arc crossover, even when they were on the > same network. If it didn't happen then, it wont happen now. They haven't? They didn't show Angel reacting to Buffy's death? They didn't show how the relationship between Angel and Spike in the past has affected the choices they make now? They didn't show how Wesley's poor Watchering skills eventually caught up to him? The didn't show how Cordelia's Slayer envy has changed her life? > > > > >"Angel" is nothing more than an extension of the BtVS story arc. One that > >is too large to be contained in one hour long show. You should have started > >smelling it long before now. > > No, you're wrong about that. One could watch Angel from the beginning > and never watch buffy at all. Sure you would miss some things, but > nothing in the 'story arcs' on Angel demand that you watch BtVS as > well. Having knowledge of BtVS is certainly helpful, but hardly > required. Now, some episodes rely heavily on BtVS to work, but we're > talking story arcs not isolated episodes. > Yes, one could watch Angel from the beginning without ever having watched Buffy. In fact, having watched Buffy first sometimes actually hinders getting into the Angel storyline. For example, it's impossible for me to accept that Cordelia ever seriously considered getting involved with Angel, or vice-versa, based on what I know about the past. But, you can't deny that the shows started out with deeply intertwined storylines. I know Whedon actually prefers it that way. He has said so many times. It's the WB that inhibits the stories from connecting as often as Whedon wants. > > ---- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:03:38-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:h50p1v840p3nqmka5r44kq2m3g5bcn87l7@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:35:24 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Yes, two different networks. But, "Angel" is still very much a part of the > >Buffyverse. The shows mirror one another to an extent that I occasionally > >find creepy, but most often am fascinated by. > > > >No crossovers. Separate stories. > > > >Now, this just isn't true. The only seasons that didn't have an actual > >physical character crossover and intertwined storylines were last seasons. > >And, even then, Whedon made sure that Buffy and Angel had their off screen > >rendevouz. This year Faith is crossing over and ME has already stated that > >the two storylines *are* related. > > > > Faith has been a character on both shows. The story lines would have > to be related if they involve her. That doesn't mean that Connor is > going to pop up on buffy as the first male slayer. I never said that he would. I just said that I think he's a natural born Slayer. Natural born, of demonic origin, powers rooted in darkness, just like the first Slayer. Since one has been created naturally the mystical forces that have always controlled Slayer succession are out of whack. ED is not a regular > on either show. She is not bound by contract to either. It only makes > sense that both shows have to 'deal' with her return. I bet you $20 > that Faith is the source of that 'relatedness'. Undoubtedly Faith is the primary source for this seasons related storyline. But, Faith returning on either show doesn't explain how a transformation has occurred in the forces surrounding Slayer selection. Faith has been around for a long time now. There is nothing recent about her Slayerness, or even her potential for altering the balance between good and evil. Maybe Dru as > well....again, not a 'regular' character. Dru doesn't have anything at all to do with Slayer succession or Slayer origin. Making Connor some kind of > rogue mutant slayer would be silly in the extreme and would do nothing > but take away from BtVS itself. Okay. Buffy has been told time and again that the Slayer origin is demonic in nature and that her power is rooted in darkness. Now we have a super human with Slayer powers and yen for demon slaughter whose origin is demonic and whose power is rooted in darkness. But, he's not a Slayer. Fine. > >> You seem to have a gift for connecting the things that aren't... but > >> don't stop... its very refreshing. > > > >Everything is connected. Willow said it, not me. > > > >> > >> Connor is the progeny of vampires, he has absolutely no relation to > >> the 'slayer'. Mixing up the two storylines would be a huge mistake, > > > >We don't know that. We don't know how The Slayer originated. Time and > >again, though, references have been made on BtVS that the Slayer origin is > >demonic in nature. Who is to say that the original Slayer wasn't the result > >of two vamps who couldn't keep it in their pants? The two storylines *are* > >mixed up. "Angel" started out as an extension of the Buffyverse and has > >never pretended to be anything else. > > Simple, Connor didn't get 'called', there has been no indication on > Angel that Connor 'came into his abilities', he just had them from > birth. Right. That's why it's screwed up the mystical powers that control the line of succession. Connor wasn't called, he was created. > > >A simple way for ME to separate the two universes would have been to have > >the Buffyverse change to the Dawnverse, sans Angel/Cordelia/Wesley. Or, > >have Angel and the gang come back from Pylea to a universe where Buffy > >hadn't died. But, ME didn't do that and the reason is that the stories are > >still connected. Trust me, Connor is a Slayer. > > That sounds simple to you? Ever hear of Occam's razor? Just because > they are in the same universe doesnt mean every event is directly > related to every other. Willow said "Everything is connected." Whedon said "We're going back to the beginning." Angel is a huge part of that beginning, a major character, a major influence on Buffy's life and the storyline. Whedon can't end BtVS without some closure from the characters that populate Angel. We know from past experience there are a whole > host of Big Bads in the world. There is no reason to assume there is > any link between the current angel story arc and the current buffy > one. Yes, they have common metaphors etc.... but it doesnt mean the > actual stories are the 'same'. > Are you serious? Take a good look at Cordelia. Short, blonde hair, a mysterious connection to the PtB, super-powers that are demonic in origin, a fixation with Angel, a psudeo death, heavenly experience, resurrection, memory loss gig, sleeping with Angel's son. Now, take a look at Buffy. Shorter (than it was, anyway) blonde hair, a mysterious connection to the PtB, super powers that are demonic in origin, a fixation with Angel (and souled vampires in general), death, heavenly experience, resurrection, memory loss, sleeping with Angel's son (vampirically speaking). I could go on. And on, and on. The connections are endless and they go way beyond similar metaphors. > There may be a link, but it would have to be minor, just based on the > network thing. > The WB's anal retentive attitude has inhibited some seriously good storyline potential. As has Whedon's focus on Firefly. The link between the two shows was never minor to begin with, though, and there is no way to change that fact now. Angel is firmly rooted in the Buffyverse. > >> not only from a writing perspective but based on the fact that not > >> everyone who watches BtVS also watches Angel. > > > >It is what it is. Whedon is the creator and he says that Buffy and Angel > >are inseparable. If they can't be together literally, they will be together > >metaphorically. And they have been. Take a good look at the two show's > >storylines and the parallels between them will start popping out in > >astonishing numbers. Their hero's journeys mirror one another. They are > >the yin/yang of the Buffyverse. > > Of course they are going to have common metaphors and similar story > lines, but thats a far cry from claiming connor is an actual slayer. Why? What else is he supposed to be then? A super-powered being with demonic origins that just happens to fight and think exactly like a Slayer but really isn't? > You wouldnt even have an Angel show if it wasnt for BtVS, but that > doesnt demand that every story arc be linked. In fact the only > linkages have been with secondary characters: Dru, Darla, Spike, > Harmony. > You're referring to actual character crossovers. I would hardly call Spike a secondary character (anymore, at least), but even then Angel, Buffy, Willow, Faith and Oz have all been part of a storyline crossover. > They have never done a story arc crossover, even when they were on the > same network. If it didn't happen then, it wont happen now. They haven't? They didn't show Angel reacting to Buffy's death? They didn't show how the relationship between Angel and Spike in the past has affected the choices they make now? They didn't show how Wesley's poor Watchering skills eventually caught up to him? The didn't show how Cordelia's Slayer envy has changed her life? > > > > >"Angel" is nothing more than an extension of the BtVS story arc. One that > >is too large to be contained in one hour long show. You should have started > >smelling it long before now. > > No, you're wrong about that. One could watch Angel from the beginning > and never watch buffy at all. Sure you would miss some things, but > nothing in the 'story arcs' on Angel demand that you watch BtVS as > well. Having knowledge of BtVS is certainly helpful, but hardly > required. Now, some episodes rely heavily on BtVS to work, but we're > talking story arcs not isolated episodes. > Yes, one could watch Angel from the beginning without ever having watched Buffy. In fact, having watched Buffy first sometimes actually hinders getting into the Angel storyline. For example, it's impossible for me to accept that Cordelia ever seriously considered getting involved with Angel, or vice-versa, based on what I know about the past. But, you can't deny that the shows started out with deeply intertwined storylines. I know Whedon actually prefers it that way. He has said so many times. It's the WB that inhibits the stories from connecting as often as Whedon wants. > > ---- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:10:19-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Wally Rosenberg" <wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a6dd0bff.0301081309.390e4ed4@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's > > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. > > Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks > that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy > that theory. Recollecting the appearance of the Primal Slayer I'm going to say she predates the written word. A dusty, old, cave drawing, maybe. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:10:19-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Wally Rosenberg" <wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a6dd0bff.0301081309.390e4ed4@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the last > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder boy > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn impersonation > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, that's > > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. > > Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks > that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy > that theory. Recollecting the appearance of the Primal Slayer I'm going to say she predates the written word. A dusty, old, cave drawing, maybe. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:31:32-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > Countless? Name two? > > As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > the time. > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" and Adam insinuates she's a demon. Buffy say's "We're not demons." Also, in "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's to come. You've only just begun." In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is demonic. In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." There are other references, too, that I can't think of off the top of my head. But, I think the ones I've given are sufficient to make the point. ME has clearly implied on several occasions that Slayers are some demony by-product of times gone by. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:31:32-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > Countless? Name two? > > As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > the time. > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" and Adam insinuates she's a demon. Buffy say's "We're not demons." Also, in "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's to come. You've only just begun." In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is demonic. In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." There are other references, too, that I can't think of off the top of my head. But, I think the ones I've given are sufficient to make the point. ME has clearly implied on several occasions that Slayers are some demony by-product of times gone by. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-08 18:47:04-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com>)


Don Sample wrote: > And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking > metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to > back it up. At the time. But then her death closed the portal. Of course, if you want to overlook that, I'm willing to let you. That whole business was seriously messed up on multiple levels.

2003-01-08 18:47:04-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com>)


Don Sample wrote: > And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking > metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to > back it up. At the time. But then her death closed the portal. Of course, if you want to overlook that, I'm willing to let you. That whole business was seriously messed up on multiple levels.

2003-01-08 19:04:45-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > > > Countless? Name two? > > > > As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > > from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > > the time. > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she is afraid of becoming. �The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.� > and Adam > insinuates she's a demon. �Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it another way.� Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same way. > Buffy say's "We're not demons." A direct denial of the demonic origin theory. > Also, in > "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's > to come. You've only just begun." A statement that only says Buffy doesn't know what she is. Nothing about what it is she doesn't know. > In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her > powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is > demonic. > In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." Joyce teasing Buffy after Buffy has been teasing Joyce about her brief fling with Giles. Absolutely no reason to think it means anything. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 19:04:45-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > > > Countless? Name two? > > > > As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > > from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > > the time. > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she is afraid of becoming. �The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.� > and Adam > insinuates she's a demon. �Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it another way.� Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same way. > Buffy say's "We're not demons." A direct denial of the demonic origin theory. > Also, in > "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's > to come. You've only just begun." A statement that only says Buffy doesn't know what she is. Nothing about what it is she doesn't know. > In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her > powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is > demonic. > In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." Joyce teasing Buffy after Buffy has been teasing Joyce about her brief fling with Giles. Absolutely no reason to think it means anything. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 19:48:48-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <7eep1vo7ov9qg6opkocl7op77j0o3gqcus@4ax.com>, William George Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu> wrote: > On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: > > >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > > >Countless? Name two? > > > >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > >the time. > > Adam in Buffy's Restless dream > > Do I get a cookie? Nope. Adam says their aggression isn't human in origin. Doesn't say what it is, and Buffy directly denies that it's demonic. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 19:48:48-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <7eep1vo7ov9qg6opkocl7op77j0o3gqcus@4ax.com>, William George Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu> wrote: > On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: > > >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > > >Countless? Name two? > > > >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is > >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at > >the time. > > Adam in Buffy's Restless dream > > Do I get a cookie? Nope. Adam says their aggression isn't human in origin. Doesn't say what it is, and Buffy directly denies that it's demonic. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-08 20:23:17-07:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (William George Ferguson <wmgfrgsn@newsguy.com>)


On 8 Jan 2003 19:48:48 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <7eep1vo7ov9qg6opkocl7op77j0o3gqcus@4ax.com>, William George >Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu> wrote: > >> On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >> >> >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic >> ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: >> > >> >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin >> >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? >> > >> >Countless? Name two? >> > >> >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is >> >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at >> >the time. >> >> Adam in Buffy's Restless dream >> >> Do I get a cookie? > >Nope. Adam says their aggression isn't human in origin. Doesn't say >what it is, and Buffy directly denies that it's demonic. And Adam pooh-poohs her denial. You didn't ask for proof, just a reference. -- I think it's entirely possible that we might try to fool people hell bent on spoiling our season. We're deceptive people. We promote sex and violence and the occult. Frankly, we're just not good seeds. -- Drew Goddard (Bronze Beta 8/28/2002)

2003-01-08 20:23:17-07:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (William George Ferguson <wmgfrgsn@newsguy.com>)


On 8 Jan 2003 19:48:48 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <7eep1vo7ov9qg6opkocl7op77j0o3gqcus@4ax.com>, William George >Ferguson <william.george.ferguson@domail.maricopa.edu> wrote: > >> On 8 Jan 2003 16:01:11 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >> >> >In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic >> ><slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: >> > >> >> How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin >> >> references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? >> > >> >Countless? Name two? >> > >> >As far as I can remember the only actual reference we have for this is >> >from Dracula, and hey, he was evil and trying to manipulate Buffy at >> >the time. >> >> Adam in Buffy's Restless dream >> >> Do I get a cookie? > >Nope. Adam says their aggression isn't human in origin. Doesn't say >what it is, and Buffy directly denies that it's demonic. And Adam pooh-poohs her denial. You didn't ask for proof, just a reference. -- I think it's entirely possible that we might try to fool people hell bent on spoiling our season. We're deceptive people. We promote sex and violence and the occult. Frankly, we're just not good seeds. -- Drew Goddard (Bronze Beta 8/28/2002)

2003-01-08 21:18:39-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Zombie Elvis <DELETE-ME-2-REPLY-castillo@enteract.com>)


It was a time of great turmoil. The strong preyed on the weak, dogs and cats lived together. One voice cried out in the wilderness: "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in <65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>: > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. I posted earlier that I thought that this would be the perfect role for Britney Spears to play. Of course that would have made the fact that she's evol even more obvious. > > Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, > she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and > Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain > Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. What about Vi? The one with the hat. She's cuter than a generically engineered puppy/kitten hybrid. > > We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out > to be someone we already know. It better not be who I'm thinking you're thinking. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > > Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." > > Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" > > Understated and, yet, still eloquent. Well, I don't think there's a reason why Firstie couldn't have made more Turok-hans. We might see Ubie replaced by a whole gang of uber-vamps. > > Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn > would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would > be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. Yep. > > For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > a Slayer by any other name...... I'd prefer to minimize Connor/Steven's involvement at this point. -- "Welcome to the Hellmouth, where even outerwear isn't safe. -- Xander Harris Roberto Castillo castillo@enteract.com http://www.enteract.com/~castillo

2003-01-08 21:18:39-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Zombie Elvis <DELETE-ME-2-REPLY-castillo@enteract.com>)


It was a time of great turmoil. The strong preyed on the weak, dogs and cats lived together. One voice cried out in the wilderness: "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in <65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>: > Hello? (knocking on collective Scoobie and S.I.T. heads) Yoo! Hoo! Anybody > home? Buffy? Did you forget to put on your super Slayer senses this > morning? She's Eve-ol! Didn't need to be spoiled to see that one coming. I posted earlier that I thought that this would be the perfect role for Britney Spears to play. Of course that would have made the fact that she's evol even more obvious. > > Again, the only clear candidate for Slayerdom is Kennedy. (obviously, then, > she won't be picked) Molly is a runner up. She's brave, compassionate, and > Watcher trained. Rona has the attitude down pat and she has a certain > Slayer like presence about her. Time will tell. What about Vi? The one with the hat. She's cuter than a generically engineered puppy/kitten hybrid. > > We learn that Kennedy has a half-sister and I wonder if that will turn out > to be someone we already know. It better not be who I'm thinking you're thinking. > > I'm going to miss Ubie. He had style. I really loved the patched leather > look. It worked well for him. His primitive language skills were a > refreshing change from the usual snarky vampire/Slayer banter. > > Buffy: "I'm the thing that monsters dream about." > > Ubie: "Growl! Urg! Snarl, snarl!" > > Understated and, yet, still eloquent. Well, I don't think there's a reason why Firstie couldn't have made more Turok-hans. We might see Ubie replaced by a whole gang of uber-vamps. > > Anya is wrong. If Buffy had stayed dead Anya, Tara, Willow, Xander and Dawn > would all be Demon Biker sex slaves (if they survived) and Sunnydale would > be Biker bar heaven. How quickly they forget. Yep. > > For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > a Slayer by any other name...... I'd prefer to minimize Connor/Steven's involvement at this point. -- "Welcome to the Hellmouth, where even outerwear isn't safe. -- Xander Harris Roberto Castillo castillo@enteract.com http://www.enteract.com/~castillo

2003-01-08 23:59:10-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > >>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >> > >You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >writers or producers off camera. LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to make sense. Neither did but there you have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-08 23:59:10-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > >>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >> > >You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >writers or producers off camera. LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to make sense. Neither did but there you have it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 02:03:47-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<DimdnUrVy4OFLYGjXTWcqQ@comcast.com>... > "Wally Rosenberg" <wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:a6dd0bff.0301081309.390e4ed4@posting.google.com... > > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the > last > > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder > boy > > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn > impersonation > > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, > that's > > > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. > > > > Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks > > that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy > > that theory. > > Recollecting the appearance of the Primal Slayer I'm going to say she > predates the written word. A dusty, old, cave drawing, maybe. That's going to be a very naughty cave drawing.

2003-01-09 02:03:47-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<DimdnUrVy4OFLYGjXTWcqQ@comcast.com>... > "Wally Rosenberg" <wallyrosenberg@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:a6dd0bff.0301081309.390e4ed4@posting.google.com... > > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the > last > > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder > boy > > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn > impersonation > > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > > > Andrew asks Dawn about the potential for a male Slayer, which, IIRC, > that's > > > the first time it's ever been brought up on the show. > > > > Suppose Giles reveals from his reading of the Watcher's old dusty boks > > that the first slayer was the offspring of two vamps... then I'll buy > > that theory. > > Recollecting the appearance of the Primal Slayer I'm going to say she > predates the written word. A dusty, old, cave drawing, maybe. That's going to be a very naughty cave drawing.

2003-01-09 03:49:14-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Sine <jaemd@sympatico.ca>)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in > Connor, on the other hand, is a Slayer. He may not be a natural Slayer, as > in he received his powers when a Slayer died, but he unquestionably has > Slayer powers and he unquestionably is a mystical entity. Is it really a > coincidence that the demons in Quor-toth call him "The Destroyer"? Demon > destroyer, demon slayer, what's the difference? None that I can tell. > > At any rate, I believe it's his existence in the Buffyverse that has created > this "disturbance in the Force". Connor returned at the end of Angel's last > season and it makes sense that FE started acting up in full force a couple > of months later, rather than the full year that has passed since Buffy's > resurrection, the two years that have passed since Dawn's creation, or the > six years that have passed since Buffy's first resurrection and the two > Slayer anomaly. > > > -- > Shannon > If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. > > Your argument seems to be based on a lot of assumptions about Connor. We know he has the kind of speed and strength that slayers have, but he's the spawn of two vampires and they have those abilities as well. We've seen nothing to indicate he has rapid healing (though he could come by that too from his vamp heritage) or prophetic dreams. The fact that he's referred to as "The Destroyer" could mean just about anything at this point. He could be the prophesied destroyer of earth, for all we know. If this is the last season of BtVS, then I wouldn't be surprised to see crossovers, in addition to Faith, near the end of this season. If Angel is going to be renewed, the WB would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by allowing it. We'll see.

2003-01-09 03:49:14-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Sine <jaemd@sympatico.ca>)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in > Connor, on the other hand, is a Slayer. He may not be a natural Slayer, as > in he received his powers when a Slayer died, but he unquestionably has > Slayer powers and he unquestionably is a mystical entity. Is it really a > coincidence that the demons in Quor-toth call him "The Destroyer"? Demon > destroyer, demon slayer, what's the difference? None that I can tell. > > At any rate, I believe it's his existence in the Buffyverse that has created > this "disturbance in the Force". Connor returned at the end of Angel's last > season and it makes sense that FE started acting up in full force a couple > of months later, rather than the full year that has passed since Buffy's > resurrection, the two years that have passed since Dawn's creation, or the > six years that have passed since Buffy's first resurrection and the two > Slayer anomaly. > > > -- > Shannon > If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. > > Your argument seems to be based on a lot of assumptions about Connor. We know he has the kind of speed and strength that slayers have, but he's the spawn of two vampires and they have those abilities as well. We've seen nothing to indicate he has rapid healing (though he could come by that too from his vamp heritage) or prophetic dreams. The fact that he's referred to as "The Destroyer" could mean just about anything at this point. He could be the prophesied destroyer of earth, for all we know. If this is the last season of BtVS, then I wouldn't be surprised to see crossovers, in addition to Faith, near the end of this season. If Angel is going to be renewed, the WB would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by allowing it. We'll see.

2003-01-09 03:51:48-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Sine <jaemd@sympatico.ca>)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com... > > > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > Like no business I know > > > Even with a Turkey > > > that you know will fold > > > You may be stranded > > > out in the cold > > > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > > > > > Let's go on with the show > > > > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the > last > > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder > boy > > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn > impersonation > > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > start feeling sick. > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? How else > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > > > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > internet. > > It's > > like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > > too much in my opinion. > > > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each > show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched > Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links > what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, > Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor > through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's > reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or > not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up > engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he > ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, > drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I > think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they > don't show a little closure to some of these things. > > > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. > > Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't > going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive > version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some > solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. > > -- > Shannon > If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. > I don't know about articles, but Jane Espenson implied as much in her May 2002 interview on the Succubus Club. It can be found quite easily with Google.

2003-01-09 03:51:48-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Sine <jaemd@sympatico.ca>)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com... > > > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:<65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>... > > > Like no business I know > > > Even with a Turkey > > > that you know will fold > > > You may be stranded > > > out in the cold > > > Still, you wouldn't trade it for a sack of gold > > > > > > Let's go on with the show > > > > > > > > The mystical forces surrounding the Slayer are wacked out because the > last > > > one called was a boy. Why do I believe that? Well, there's the wonder > boy > > > himself. If Connor isn't a Slayer he's doing the best damn > impersonation > > > of one that I've ever imagined. > > > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > start feeling sick. > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? How else > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > > > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > internet. > > It's > > like we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > > too much in my opinion. > > > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each > show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched > Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links > what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, > Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor > through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's > reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or > not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up > engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he > ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, > drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I > think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they > don't show a little closure to some of these things. > > > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. > > Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't > going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive > version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some > solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. > > -- > Shannon > If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. > I don't know about articles, but Jane Espenson implied as much in her May 2002 interview on the Succubus Club. It can be found quite easily with Google.

2003-01-09 07:31:36-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>... > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > start feeling sick. > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so she could fight the demons themselves. > How else > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the entire mythos of the Slayer Line. > > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > internet. An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a cheat. Like if the whole "You don't know what you are, what's to come. You only just begun" thing would apply to Faith after all. In any way, if the Spike Shanshu would ever happen, I just hope that it happens within AtS, where the storyline started 3 years ago, and not out of the blue at the end of BtVS. > It's > > like if we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > > too much in my opinion. > > > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each > show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched > Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links > what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, > Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor > through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's > reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or > not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up > engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he > ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, > drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I > think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they > don't show a little closure to some of these things. I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it unless you read another book that she wrote. > > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. > > Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't > going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive > version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some > solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring appearances.

2003-01-09 07:31:36-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>... > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > start feeling sick. > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so she could fight the demons themselves. > How else > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the entire mythos of the Slayer Line. > > In anyway, I don't believe this for the same reason that I don't > > believe that Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. Although the > > two shows are related, they each deal with their own storyline. > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > internet. An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a cheat. Like if the whole "You don't know what you are, what's to come. You only just begun" thing would apply to Faith after all. In any way, if the Spike Shanshu would ever happen, I just hope that it happens within AtS, where the storyline started 3 years ago, and not out of the blue at the end of BtVS. > It's > > like if we found out that Gunn was the Key 2 years ago. It's nice to > > have episode-long crossovers (that don't penalize viewers who only > > watch one show), but to have the storyline completely depend on the > > fact that you would watch the previous 3 seasons of the other show is > > too much in my opinion. > > > I don't think that would be necessary. We have two Slayers one on each > show. If you've watched Buffy, you know about Faith. If you've watched > Angel, you know about Faith. Faith will be the common thread that links > what's up with the First and the Slayer line and what's up with Angel, > Connor, and the First. Buffy and the gang will find out about Connor > through Faith. Can ME really end BtVS without ever showing us Buffy's > reaction to the fact that Angel scored with Darla and got her pregnant? Or > not have Cordelia find out that the demon she summoned to Sunnydale ended up > engaged to Xander? Or not have Xander find out that the only normal girl he > ever dated has now become part demon? It doesn't need to be long, > drawn-out, or complicated. A couple of one-liners would work out fine. I > think ME is doing a disservice to the characters and to the fans if they > don't show a little closure to some of these things. I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it unless you read another book that she wrote. > > In anyway, I just strongly hope it's not the case. > > Just the opposite here. I know my dream of "Big Honking Crossover" isn't > going to happen. I'm going to have to settle for the WB's anal retentive > version. I won't be satisfied with the ending of BtVS unless we get some > solid answers to plot threads that have been dangling for years now. I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring appearances.

2003-01-09 12:14:05+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Kamil <kamil@cox.netted>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:pifo1vclk2pb55ocftbqa3gosf0spsnjqs@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > Just when I think I'm going to agree with you, you go all 'off an a > tangenty'. Two different networks. No crossovers. Separate stories. True, but if ME pulls Connor away from Angel (and bear in mind it's the WB not UPN saying that characters from Angel can't do crossover guest shots on Buffy) and send him to Sunnydale -- then WB is screwed. Especially if he's the one they're planning a spin-off around. Which wouldn't surprise me at all. He's young and cute enough to get the fangirls to squee and since it would be an action show with a young male lead it might pick up a bit more of that 18-34 male demographic that all the networks covet so deeply. Because somehow I don't see your average young American male sitting down to watch a new show with NB, JM, or ASH as its male lead -- but I think they just might watch something with him. And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head with it before they're through -- but still. <g> He's a Slayer. Yep. -- K- Kamil Why did Gandalf wait until dawn to arrive? Suspect is so he would be most attractively backlit while riding down hill. Drama Queen. Have gotten revenge on him by telling all my men Gandalf is wearing fishnets under white robe. First one who snaps his garter gets to snog Legolas. Who wields the flame of Arnor now, you poncy tosser? "The V.Secret Diary of Theoden"

2003-01-09 12:14:05+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Kamil <kamil@cox.netted>)


"st" <striketoo@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:pifo1vclk2pb55ocftbqa3gosf0spsnjqs@4ax.com... > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:54:35 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > >a Slayer by any other name...... > > Just when I think I'm going to agree with you, you go all 'off an a > tangenty'. Two different networks. No crossovers. Separate stories. True, but if ME pulls Connor away from Angel (and bear in mind it's the WB not UPN saying that characters from Angel can't do crossover guest shots on Buffy) and send him to Sunnydale -- then WB is screwed. Especially if he's the one they're planning a spin-off around. Which wouldn't surprise me at all. He's young and cute enough to get the fangirls to squee and since it would be an action show with a young male lead it might pick up a bit more of that 18-34 male demographic that all the networks covet so deeply. Because somehow I don't see your average young American male sitting down to watch a new show with NB, JM, or ASH as its male lead -- but I think they just might watch something with him. And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head with it before they're through -- but still. <g> He's a Slayer. Yep. -- K- Kamil Why did Gandalf wait until dawn to arrive? Suspect is so he would be most attractively backlit while riding down hill. Drama Queen. Have gotten revenge on him by telling all my men Gandalf is wearing fishnets under white robe. First one who snaps his garter gets to snog Legolas. Who wields the flame of Arnor now, you poncy tosser? "The V.Secret Diary of Theoden"

2003-01-09 13:01:06-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com> wrote in message news:<3E1CB877.914AAADF@oracle.com>... > Don Sample wrote: > > > And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking > > metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to > > back it up. > > At the time. But then her death closed the portal. That doesn't support Dawn being made from her, though. It just means death really was Buffy's gift or it was the PTB that intervened or some other mystical whysit explanation. According to the books that Glory's minions and Giles consulted, only when the flowing of the blood stopped would the portal be closed(They assumed it was when Dawn died, but they never stopped to think a few band-aids might have solved the problem). Where in the name of all that is holy and shit did Buffy get the idea that jumping into the portal was going to stop the flow of Dawn's blood? Even if she and Dawn had the same blood what would jumping into the portal do? there was nothing in any of the books that said anything about jumping into the portal to close it. That's why the end of The Gift was stupid and why the end of the Glory arc was ruined. > Of course, if you want to > overlook that, I'm willing to let you. There's nothing to overlook. Having the same blood doesn't mean jumping into the portal will save the world. > That whole business was seriously messed up > on multiple levels. You got that right. Smaug69

2003-01-09 13:01:06-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com> wrote in message news:<3E1CB877.914AAADF@oracle.com>... > Don Sample wrote: > > > And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking > > metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to > > back it up. > > At the time. But then her death closed the portal. That doesn't support Dawn being made from her, though. It just means death really was Buffy's gift or it was the PTB that intervened or some other mystical whysit explanation. According to the books that Glory's minions and Giles consulted, only when the flowing of the blood stopped would the portal be closed(They assumed it was when Dawn died, but they never stopped to think a few band-aids might have solved the problem). Where in the name of all that is holy and shit did Buffy get the idea that jumping into the portal was going to stop the flow of Dawn's blood? Even if she and Dawn had the same blood what would jumping into the portal do? there was nothing in any of the books that said anything about jumping into the portal to close it. That's why the end of The Gift was stupid and why the end of the Glory arc was ruined. > Of course, if you want to > overlook that, I'm willing to let you. There's nothing to overlook. Having the same blood doesn't mean jumping into the portal will save the world. > That whole business was seriously messed up > on multiple levels. You got that right. Smaug69

2003-01-09 13:01:12-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com> rose up and issued forth: >Don Sample wrote: > >> And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking >> metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to >> back it up. > >At the time. But then her death closed the portal. Of course, if you want to >overlook that, I'm willing to let you. That whole business was seriously messed up >on multiple levels. I have stated my theory/wank on Buffy's dive coinciding with the clotting of Dawns cuts coincidentally, thus the blood has "stopped flowing" out of Dawn just as Buffy hits the portal, killing her just as the portal closes because the blood no longer flows, thus the whole reason to need to keep cutting Dawn with tiny cuts till she has completely bled out to keep the portal open many times. If they just needed her to spill some blood and the portal would have remained open until she died or was out of blood, then they would logically have cut her just enough to open the portal, and then stop, keeping her alive until the portal could then be used, and then killing her afterwards if Glory didn't want to just keep the portal open after that. The need to keep on cutting her with tiny cuts to keep the portal open indicated that Giles misinterpreted the text of "The blood flows, the gates will open. The gates will close when it flows no more." as meaning when Dawn is dead as opposed to when she stops bleeding out. -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org "The truth is out there, but so are lies." - Scully

2003-01-09 13:01:12-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson@oracle.com> rose up and issued forth: >Don Sample wrote: > >> And I have always maintained that Buffy was just speaking >> metaphorically about how she felt. She had absolutely no evidence to >> back it up. > >At the time. But then her death closed the portal. Of course, if you want to >overlook that, I'm willing to let you. That whole business was seriously messed up >on multiple levels. I have stated my theory/wank on Buffy's dive coinciding with the clotting of Dawns cuts coincidentally, thus the blood has "stopped flowing" out of Dawn just as Buffy hits the portal, killing her just as the portal closes because the blood no longer flows, thus the whole reason to need to keep cutting Dawn with tiny cuts till she has completely bled out to keep the portal open many times. If they just needed her to spill some blood and the portal would have remained open until she died or was out of blood, then they would logically have cut her just enough to open the portal, and then stop, keeping her alive until the portal could then be used, and then killing her afterwards if Glory didn't want to just keep the portal open after that. The need to keep on cutting her with tiny cuts to keep the portal open indicated that Giles misinterpreted the text of "The blood flows, the gates will open. The gates will close when it flows no more." as meaning when Dawn is dead as opposed to when she stops bleeding out. -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org "The truth is out there, but so are lies." - Scully

2003-01-09 13:03:12-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse ><cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > >>Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >> >>>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >>> >> >>You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >>schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >>anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >>writers or producers off camera. > >LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all >over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy >never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to >make sense. Neither did but there you have it. > Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message in this thread), so... :) -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Brain: Pinky, Are you pondering what I'm pondering? Pinky: I think so, Brain, but if they called them sad meals, kids wouldn't buy them.

2003-01-09 13:03:12-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse ><cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > >>Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >> >>>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >>> >> >>You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >>schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >>anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >>writers or producers off camera. > >LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all >over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy >never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to >make sense. Neither did but there you have it. > Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message in this thread), so... :) -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Brain: Pinky, Are you pondering what I'm pondering? Pinky: I think so, Brain, but if they called them sad meals, kids wouldn't buy them.

2003-01-09 13:07:05-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2b0q1vcqr618eipeacos9hpavr434ufv0t@4ax.com>... > On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse > <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > > >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > > > >>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > >>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > >>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > >>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > >> > > > >You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" > >schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not > >anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any > >writers or producers off camera. > > LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all > over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy > never made a lick of sense. It never has. > They needed that to make sense for The Gift to > make sense. Neither did but there you have it. Yep. Even if the monk came right out and said that Dawn was made from Buffy's DNA it still doesn't explain why jumping into the portal would stop the flow of Dawn's blood(Which is what the consulted books said had to happen for the portal to close). Buffy jumped because she has always been about action- about doing physical things. ME did it because it was a much more dramatic moment than Buffy slapping several band-aids on Dawn. Smaug69(Who still thinks that the PTB intervened on Buffy's behalf at the end of both The Gift and Bargaining I)

2003-01-09 13:07:05-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2b0q1vcqr618eipeacos9hpavr434ufv0t@4ax.com>... > On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse > <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: > > >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > > > >>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's > >>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical > >>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. > >>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. > >> > > > >You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" > >schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not > >anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any > >writers or producers off camera. > > LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all > over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy > never made a lick of sense. It never has. > They needed that to make sense for The Gift to > make sense. Neither did but there you have it. Yep. Even if the monk came right out and said that Dawn was made from Buffy's DNA it still doesn't explain why jumping into the portal would stop the flow of Dawn's blood(Which is what the consulted books said had to happen for the portal to close). Buffy jumped because she has always been about action- about doing physical things. ME did it because it was a much more dramatic moment than Buffy slapping several band-aids on Dawn. Smaug69(Who still thinks that the PTB intervened on Buffy's behalf at the end of both The Gift and Bargaining I)

2003-01-09 14:28:58-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:03:12 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > >>On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse >><cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >> >>>Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >>> >>>>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>>>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>>>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>>>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >>>> >>> >>>You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >>>schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >>>anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >>>writers or producers off camera. >> >>LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all >>over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy >>never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to >>make sense. Neither did but there you have it. >> > >Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my >theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it >was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message >in this thread), so... :) Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 14:28:58-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:03:12 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse <cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: > >>On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:41:22 -0600, Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse >><cyohtee@barbarian.org> wrote: >> >>>Out of the ether EGK <egk@hotmail.com> rose up and issued forth: >>> >>>>I haven't seen anyone else mention this but when you think about it, Buffy's >>>>deaths have technically followed the rules. She did die. The only mystical >>>>disturbance in the slayer line that didn't involve a death was Dawn. >>>>Remember, she's supposedly made from Buffy. >>>> >>> >>>You know, people keep saying this whole "Dawn was made from Buffy" >>>schtick, but the only onscreen mention of it was Buffy saying so, not >>>anyone actually involved in the creation of Dawn (the Monks) or any >>>writers or producers off camera. >> >>LOL hey, I was getting with the program there. I've been jumped on all >>over this newsgroup for bringing up the fact that Dawn being made from Buffy >>never made a lick of sense. They needed that to make sense for The Gift to >>make sense. Neither did but there you have it. >> > >Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my >theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it >was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message >in this thread), so... :) Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 16:11:26-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:080120031944216828%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" > > She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she > is afraid of becoming. ���The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. > Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.��� > > > and Adam > > insinuates she's a demon. > > ���Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it > another way.��� > > Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same > way. > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other options would be.....? > > Buffy say's "We're not demons." > > A direct denial of the demonic origin theory. > Denial ain't just a river. Adam was part demon. > > Also, in > > "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's > > to come. You've only just begun." > > A statement that only says Buffy doesn't know what she is. Nothing > about what it is she doesn't know. > Buffy thinks she knows that she's human. That she's not a demon. That demons and humans are different and that's why it's okay for her to kill them.> > > In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her > > powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is > > demonic. > > > In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." > > Joyce teasing Buffy after Buffy has been teasing Joyce about her brief > fling with Giles. Absolutely no reason to think it means anything. > Right, except for all of those other references. The bottom line is, we don't know where a Slayer gets her power, why a girl qualifies as a potential Slayer, who/what decides which one gets picked or how. What we do know is that ME has inferred on a few occasions that the Slayer's origin is demonic in nature. BtVS is a show about a demon fighter who is irresistably drawn to vampires, after all, it's not like it would come as any huge shocking revelation to any of us that the first Slayer was created when two vamped humans did the nasty. Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. -

2003-01-09 16:11:26-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:080120031944216828%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" > > She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she > is afraid of becoming. ���The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. > Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.��� > > > and Adam > > insinuates she's a demon. > > ���Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it > another way.��� > > Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same > way. > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other options would be.....? > > Buffy say's "We're not demons." > > A direct denial of the demonic origin theory. > Denial ain't just a river. Adam was part demon. > > Also, in > > "Restless" Tara/primal Slayer says "You think you know what you are. What's > > to come. You've only just begun." > > A statement that only says Buffy doesn't know what she is. Nothing > about what it is she doesn't know. > Buffy thinks she knows that she's human. That she's not a demon. That demons and humans are different and that's why it's okay for her to kill them.> > > In Dracula, Drac tells Buffy that her > > powers are rooted in darkness, calls her a "killer", and implies she is > > demonic. > > > In "The Body" Joyce calls Buffy her "demon child." > > Joyce teasing Buffy after Buffy has been teasing Joyce about her brief > fling with Giles. Absolutely no reason to think it means anything. > Right, except for all of those other references. The bottom line is, we don't know where a Slayer gets her power, why a girl qualifies as a potential Slayer, who/what decides which one gets picked or how. What we do know is that ME has inferred on a few occasions that the Slayer's origin is demonic in nature. BtVS is a show about a demon fighter who is irresistably drawn to vampires, after all, it's not like it would come as any huge shocking revelation to any of us that the first Slayer was created when two vamped humans did the nasty. Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right. -

2003-01-09 16:29:44-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message news:24ab6293.0301090731.7a0f4707@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>... > > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > > start feeling sick. > > > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but > found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of > shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so > she could fight the demons themselves. > That's fine, but where did the demon power come from? How did the Shaman's possess it? Who has it now? > > How else > > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > > That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for > Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we > haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I > find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the > entire mythos of the Slayer Line. An explanation for Connor is long overdue. But, an explanation for Dawn is long overdue too, and we're still waiting. It's not Connor's powers that interest me, although, they are undeniably Slayer like. It's the way he thinks, his urge to hunt, the way he behaves in a fight. And, if Connor is a natural Slayer, just like the first Slayer, then it doesn't really have anything to do with the Slayer mythology. > > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > > internet. > > An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she > only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some > prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to > Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a > cheat. > Yeah, it is a cheat. But, at least its a cheat that makes sense. Whereas some many of ME's (cough *Summer's blood* cough) cheats don't. snip > I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't > appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on > Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what > Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha > Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it > unless you read another book that she wrote. > Actually, I don't think the glitch in the Slayer line is the main storyline on either show. If it's happened, it's happened. No one is going to murder Buffy and Faith to fix it now. And, if it were the main storyline it wouldn't make sense for FE to be targeting Angel in L.A. We should see FE going after Faith. So, I think the real issue, on Buffy anyway, is going to be how to pick the next Slayer and who is going to be responsible for training them now the Watcher's are all gone. Not really sure where the FE story on Angel will take us. > > I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect > them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring > appearances. Cordy/Xander are way past due. Buffy/Angel/Darla/Spike/Connor are way past due. I am the Key and the Key is in me is way past due. There are some things that should have been dealt with a year or more ago and are still hanging. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 16:29:44-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message news:24ab6293.0301090731.7a0f4707@posting.google.com... > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>... > > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > > news:24ab6293.0301081205.230ae213@posting.google.com... > > > > Ugh, if the writers can't keep that Connor nonsense in AtS, then I'll > > > start feeling sick. > > > > > How else will ME explain the countless Slayer roots in demonic origin > > references they've been throwing our way for the last three years? > > I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but > found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of > shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so > she could fight the demons themselves. > That's fine, but where did the demon power come from? How did the Shaman's possess it? Who has it now? > > How else > > to explain that a human child with two demon parents has Slayer powers and a > > bottle full o' Slayer attitude to go with it? > > That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for > Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we > haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I > find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the > entire mythos of the Slayer Line. An explanation for Connor is long overdue. But, an explanation for Dawn is long overdue too, and we're still waiting. It's not Connor's powers that interest me, although, they are undeniably Slayer like. It's the way he thinks, his urge to hunt, the way he behaves in a fight. And, if Connor is a natural Slayer, just like the first Slayer, then it doesn't really have anything to do with the Slayer mythology. > > > I don't know if Spike is related to the Shanshu prophecies. If I had to bet > > my last Reeces Peanut Butter cup on it, I'd bet that Spike is related to the > > "son of the vampire with a soul" portion of the prophecies. Still, one of > > the ME writers has confirmed that some prophecies are about Spike. CC Zona > > has already asked me for the link and I don't have it, or any idea about > > where to find the article. Still, unless I'm dreaming articles about Spike > > in my sleep, it's a legimate remark to be found somewhere on the vast > > internet. > > An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she > only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some > prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to > Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a > cheat. > Yeah, it is a cheat. But, at least its a cheat that makes sense. Whereas some many of ME's (cough *Summer's blood* cough) cheats don't. snip > I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't > appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on > Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what > Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha > Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it > unless you read another book that she wrote. > Actually, I don't think the glitch in the Slayer line is the main storyline on either show. If it's happened, it's happened. No one is going to murder Buffy and Faith to fix it now. And, if it were the main storyline it wouldn't make sense for FE to be targeting Angel in L.A. We should see FE going after Faith. So, I think the real issue, on Buffy anyway, is going to be how to pick the next Slayer and who is going to be responsible for training them now the Watcher's are all gone. Not really sure where the FE story on Angel will take us. > > I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect > them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring > appearances. Cordy/Xander are way past due. Buffy/Angel/Darla/Spike/Connor are way past due. I am the Key and the Key is in me is way past due. There are some things that should have been dealt with a year or more ago and are still hanging. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 16:39:11-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Zombie Elvis" <DELETE-ME-2-REPLY-castillo@enteract.com> wrote in message news:75qp1vkbq9vgaqi8c0o0bivairj74mc1kh@4ax.com... > It was a time of great turmoil. The strong preyed on the weak, dogs > and cats lived together. One voice cried out in the wilderness: > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in > <65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > > eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > > The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > > an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > > Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > > refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > > the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > > Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > > a Slayer by any other name...... > > I'd prefer to minimize Connor/Steven's involvement at this point. > Hey, I'm no Connor fan, believe me. The best thing I can say about him is that he doesn't whine. Much. But, I don't think he needs to be involved in the BtVS storyline at all for his existence to still be the reason that the Slayer line is screwed up. We find out how Slayer's originally came into being. Two vamped humans mated and a bizzarre human/demon hybrid sprung up. The chances of such a creation occuring again are one in a gazillion. So, some intrepid Shaman decides to harness this beings power and transfer to it to a human female who can defend the tribe against demon attacks. Now, the once in a gazillion has occurred again. (maybe Angel should play the lottery?) The power that controls the Slayer becomes unstable. The big story here shouldn't be how the power became unstable, anyway. The big story should be what happens now. How do Slayers get choosen? Who will control the power? Who will train them now the Watcher's are gone? > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 16:39:11-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Zombie Elvis" <DELETE-ME-2-REPLY-castillo@enteract.com> wrote in message news:75qp1vkbq9vgaqi8c0o0bivairj74mc1kh@4ax.com... > It was a time of great turmoil. The strong preyed on the weak, dogs > and cats lived together. One voice cried out in the wilderness: > "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in > <65OdnY5t1JZ5poGjXTWc3g@comcast.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > For the record, Giles is wrong, too. I don't believe for a minute that the > > eye ball collective was speaking about Buffy, or Faith, when it referred to > > The Slayer. Buffy was resurrected at the end of Season 1. There has been > > an imbalance, instability, in the line of Slayer succession ever since. Two > > Slayers is hardly anything new to FE. No, I think the eyeball collective > > refers to something quite different altogether. See, here's the part where > > the occasional post card or phone call to L.A. might come in handy. > > Because, he might be known as The Destroyer in Quor-toth, but quite frankly > > a Slayer by any other name...... > > I'd prefer to minimize Connor/Steven's involvement at this point. > Hey, I'm no Connor fan, believe me. The best thing I can say about him is that he doesn't whine. Much. But, I don't think he needs to be involved in the BtVS storyline at all for his existence to still be the reason that the Slayer line is screwed up. We find out how Slayer's originally came into being. Two vamped humans mated and a bizzarre human/demon hybrid sprung up. The chances of such a creation occuring again are one in a gazillion. So, some intrepid Shaman decides to harness this beings power and transfer to it to a human female who can defend the tribe against demon attacks. Now, the once in a gazillion has occurred again. (maybe Angel should play the lottery?) The power that controls the Slayer becomes unstable. The big story here shouldn't be how the power became unstable, anyway. The big story should be what happens now. How do Slayers get choosen? Who will control the power? Who will train them now the Watcher's are gone? > -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 20:10:11-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <6o-cnRYRx-fgtIOjXTWcog@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > news:090120031628430520%dsample@synapse.net... > > In article <tdGcncnIg6tceICjXTWc3g@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human > > > tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other > > > options would be.....? > > > > An angel? Over on Angel they've added the whole "higher being" thing > > to the mix. > > > Phhht! Higher being, indeed. That was Skip's speil for convincing Cordy > to get the hell out of the way last Summer. We've never seen one before or > since. > -- > Shannon Of course we don't see them. If you were a higher being would you hang out on this rock? -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-09 20:10:11-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <6o-cnRYRx-fgtIOjXTWcog@comcast.com>, DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > news:090120031628430520%dsample@synapse.net... > > In article <tdGcncnIg6tceICjXTWc3g@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human > > > tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other > > > options would be.....? > > > > An angel? Over on Angel they've added the whole "higher being" thing > > to the mix. > > > Phhht! Higher being, indeed. That was Skip's speil for convincing Cordy > to get the hell out of the way last Summer. We've never seen one before or > since. > -- > Shannon Of course we don't see them. If you were a higher being would you hang out on this rock? -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-09 21:00:24-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:090120031628430520%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <tdGcncnIg6tceICjXTWc3g@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > news:080120031944216828%dsample@synapse.net... > > > In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > > > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > > > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > > > > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > > > > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" > > > > > > She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she > > > is afraid of becoming. ���The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. > > > Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.��� > > > > > > > and Adam > > > > insinuates she's a demon. > > > > > > ���Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it > > > another way.��� > > > > > > Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same > > > way. > > > > > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human > > tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other options > > would be.....? > > An angel? Over on Angel they've added the whole "higher being" thing > to the mix. > Phhht! Higher being, indeed. That was Skip's speil for convincing Cordy to get the hell out of the way last Summer. We've never seen one before or since. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 21:00:24-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:090120031628430520%dsample@synapse.net... > In article <tdGcncnIg6tceICjXTWc3g@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > news:080120031944216828%dsample@synapse.net... > > > In article <WkCdnXk1CJKMKIGjXTWcoA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > "Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message > > > > news:080120031658450671%dsample@synapse.net... > > > > > In article <h7OdnZBOz5irFIGjXTWcpA@comcast.com>, DarkMagic > > > > > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alright, countless is an exaggeration. But, it's been mentioned often > > > > enough that it's been bugging me for a long time. In "Restless" Buffy > > > > dreams of Riley and human Adam. Riley calls her "killer" > > > > > > She's the Slayer. Killing is what she does. It's very much what she > > > is afraid of becoming. ���The spirit guide told me that death is my gift. > > > Guess that means a Slayer really is just a killer, after all.��� > > > > > > > and Adam > > > > insinuates she's a demon. > > > > > > ���Aggression is a natural human tendency, though you and me come by it > > > another way.��� > > > > > > Nothing about what that way is, or even that they both got it the same > > > way. > > > > > Adam's aggression, and Buffy's, are not the result of natural human > > tendencies. This is a show about humans and demons, so the other options > > would be.....? > > An angel? Over on Angel they've added the whole "higher being" thing > to the mix. > Phhht! Higher being, indeed. That was Skip's speil for convincing Cordy to get the hell out of the way last Summer. We've never seen one before or since. -- Shannon If loving Buffy is wrong, I don't want to be right.

2003-01-09 21:20:40-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Ian Galbraith" <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote in message news:4h4s1v0m7pkmcd817kuprda8bqbp9kbs40@4ax.com... > On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:36:34 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > [snip] > > >He doesn't have that sort of connection with the PtB, or whoever it is that > >has been pulling Slayer strings all of these years. He isn't a Slayer in > >the sense of being The Choosen One. He's a natural Slayer. > > So your argument seems to be that he's got powers and he kills > vampires therefore we should call him a slayer, well yeah maybe, but > so what. If he hasn't got any connection with TPTB there's no > significance to it. > 1. He is of demonic origin 2. He doesn't have super powers, he has Slayer powers 3. He thinks like a Slayer 4. He acts like a Slayer 5. He is referred to as The Destroyer by demons from Quor-toth 6. He has a fascination for vampires 7. Some recent event has caused an imbalance in the mystical forces surrounding Slayer selection. Connor has recently returned from Quor-toth. Connor's return is far more recent than anything to do with Buffy's death and ressurrection. 8. For the first time ever on BtVS someone asked about the potential for a male Slayer. If you have other thoughts about what Connor might be that is more likely than A Slayer please feel free to share your idea. Shannon

2003-01-09 21:20:40-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (DarkMagic <slnospambilan@comcast.net>)


"Ian Galbraith" <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote in message news:4h4s1v0m7pkmcd817kuprda8bqbp9kbs40@4ax.com... > On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:36:34 -0500, "DarkMagic" > <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: > > [snip] > > >He doesn't have that sort of connection with the PtB, or whoever it is that > >has been pulling Slayer strings all of these years. He isn't a Slayer in > >the sense of being The Choosen One. He's a natural Slayer. > > So your argument seems to be that he's got powers and he kills > vampires therefore we should call him a slayer, well yeah maybe, but > so what. If he hasn't got any connection with TPTB there's no > significance to it. > 1. He is of demonic origin 2. He doesn't have super powers, he has Slayer powers 3. He thinks like a Slayer 4. He acts like a Slayer 5. He is referred to as The Destroyer by demons from Quor-toth 6. He has a fascination for vampires 7. Some recent event has caused an imbalance in the mystical forces surrounding Slayer selection. Connor has recently returned from Quor-toth. Connor's return is far more recent than anything to do with Buffy's death and ressurrection. 8. For the first time ever on BtVS someone asked about the potential for a male Slayer. If you have other thoughts about what Connor might be that is more likely than A Slayer please feel free to share your idea. Shannon

2003-01-09 22:07:20-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: > > Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have > affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in > that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off > the hook. Which is pretty sad. Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and she made a literal leap of faith. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-09 22:07:20-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net>)


In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: > > Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have > affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in > that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off > the hook. Which is pretty sad. Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and she made a literal leap of faith. -- Don Sample, dsample@synapse.net Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/ Quando omni flunkus moritati

2003-01-09 22:17:09-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:09:26 +1100, Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote: >On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: > >[snip] > >>And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to >>call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one >>in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they >>bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then >>they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head >>with it before they're through -- but still. <g> > >>He's a Slayer. Yep. > >Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. >I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. Aww. c'mon. Just think of the hijinks that can occur if Xander sticks around and Conner can regale him with information about putting it to Cordy. That would be as much fun as Spike and Buffy screwing in the alley. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 22:17:09-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:09:26 +1100, Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote: >On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: > >[snip] > >>And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to >>call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one >>in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they >>bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then >>they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head >>with it before they're through -- but still. <g> > >>He's a Slayer. Yep. > >Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. >I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. Aww. c'mon. Just think of the hijinks that can occur if Xander sticks around and Conner can regale him with information about putting it to Cordy. That would be as much fun as Spike and Buffy screwing in the alley. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 22:53:43-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:18:55 GMT, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >From somewhere over there EGK <egk@hotmail.com> mumbled incoherently: > ><snip> > >>>Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my >>>theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it >>>was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message >>>in this thread), so... :) >> >>Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift >>is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for >>substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved >>the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell >>Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. > >That still does not affect the crappy ending of the Gift. Buffy jumped >for no reason. Preaching to the choir, man. At least it would have solved the "Dawn was made from me" plot hole. Then it would be easier to buy in to the theory that it wasn't really the blood stopping but a death that the portal needed to close. After all, if the key had been made in to anything else, there would never have been blood in the first place. Stopping the bleeding really meant destruction or dying. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-09 22:53:43-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:18:55 GMT, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >From somewhere over there EGK <egk@hotmail.com> mumbled incoherently: > ><snip> > >>>Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my >>>theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it >>>was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message >>>in this thread), so... :) >> >>Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift >>is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for >>substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved >>the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell >>Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. > >That still does not affect the crappy ending of the Gift. Buffy jumped >for no reason. Preaching to the choir, man. At least it would have solved the "Dawn was made from me" plot hole. Then it would be easier to buy in to the theory that it wasn't really the blood stopping but a death that the portal needed to close. After all, if the key had been made in to anything else, there would never have been blood in the first place. Stopping the bleeding really meant destruction or dying. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-10 01:14:51-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On 9 Jan 2003 22:07:20 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 ><smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >> >> Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have >> affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in >> that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off >> the hook. Which is pretty sad. > >Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and >she made a literal leap of faith. As you've poitned out many times (especially on Angel) those assorted spirit guides and others giving prophecies should never be trusted. Way too often on both shows they come back to bite them on the ass when they think they know what they mean. The Gift was all style and no substance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-10 01:14:51-05:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (EGK <egk@hotmail.com>)


On 9 Jan 2003 22:07:20 -0600, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote: >In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 ><smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >> >> Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have >> affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in >> that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off >> the hook. Which is pretty sad. > >Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and >she made a literal leap of faith. As you've poitned out many times (especially on Angel) those assorted spirit guides and others giving prophecies should never be trusted. Way too often on both shows they come back to bite them on the ass when they think they know what they mean. The Gift was all style and no substance. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "There would be a lot more civility in this world if people didn't take that as an invitation to walk all over you" - (Calvin and Hobbes)

2003-01-10 03:17:37+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com>)




2003-01-10 03:17:37+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com>)




2003-01-10 03:18:55+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com>)




2003-01-10 03:18:55+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com>)




2003-01-10 03:25:11+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (CC Zona <cczona@nospam.invalid>)


In article <8nes1v0ediva6svn5mdvo1huf051s61455@4ax.com>, EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:09:26 +1100, Ian Galbraith > <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote: > > >On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: > > > >[snip] > > > >>And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to > >>call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one > >>in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they > >>bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then > >>they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head > >>with it before they're through -- but still. <g> > > > >>He's a Slayer. Yep. > > > >Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. > >I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. > > Aww. c'mon. Just think of the hijinks that can occur if Xander sticks > around and Conner can regale him with information about putting it to Cordy. > That would be as much fun as Spike and Buffy screwing in the alley. Judging by the ads for the next episode of Angel, there may be regaling (sp?) aplenty coming up. Somehow Connor doesn't seem like the type to keep mum about screwing (ewwwww) pseudo-mum. Not when he can drive a metaphorical stake through good ol' dad's heart by bragging. And, yes, I agree that either prospect sounds as enjoyable as root canal or S/B having another quickie out by the garbage dumpster. -- CC "All I'm saying is soulles Spike would have had me upside down and halfway to happyland by now..." - Anya Dawn: "I feel safe with you..." Spike: "TAKE THAT BACK!"

2003-01-10 03:25:11+00:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (CC Zona <cczona@nospam.invalid>)


In article <8nes1v0ediva6svn5mdvo1huf051s61455@4ax.com>, EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:09:26 +1100, Ian Galbraith > <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au> wrote: > > >On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: > > > >[snip] > > > >>And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to > >>call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one > >>in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they > >>bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then > >>they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head > >>with it before they're through -- but still. <g> > > > >>He's a Slayer. Yep. > > > >Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. > >I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. > > Aww. c'mon. Just think of the hijinks that can occur if Xander sticks > around and Conner can regale him with information about putting it to Cordy. > That would be as much fun as Spike and Buffy screwing in the alley. Judging by the ads for the next episode of Angel, there may be regaling (sp?) aplenty coming up. Somehow Connor doesn't seem like the type to keep mum about screwing (ewwwww) pseudo-mum. Not when he can drive a metaphorical stake through good ol' dad's heart by bragging. And, yes, I agree that either prospect sounds as enjoyable as root canal or S/B having another quickie out by the garbage dumpster. -- CC "All I'm saying is soulles Spike would have had me upside down and halfway to happyland by now..." - Anya Dawn: "I feel safe with you..." Spike: "TAKE THAT BACK!"

2003-01-10 06:48:07-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:<090120032304457851%dsample@synapse.net>... > In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 > <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: > > > > Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have > > affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in > > that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off > > the hook. Which is pretty sad. > > Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and > she made a literal leap of faith. How she got from "Death is your gift" to "Hey, if I jump into the portal it will stop the flow of Dawn's blood because I'm pretty sure Dawn is made from me" is more like a leap of insanity, not faith. There is no earth logic there. Smaug69

2003-01-10 06:48:07-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:<090120032304457851%dsample@synapse.net>... > In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 > <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: > > > > Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have > > affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in > > that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off > > the hook. Which is pretty sad. > > Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and > she made a literal leap of faith. How she got from "Death is your gift" to "Hey, if I jump into the portal it will stop the flow of Dawn's blood because I'm pretty sure Dawn is made from me" is more like a leap of insanity, not faith. There is no earth logic there. Smaug69

2003-01-10 06:50:57-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<fkgs1vgut0ku2jjcivcfls8g93aea48fua@4ax.com>... > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:18:55 GMT, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> > wrote: > > >From somewhere over there EGK <egk@hotmail.com> mumbled incoherently: > > > ><snip> > > > >>>Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my > >>>theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it > >>>was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message > >>>in this thread), so... :) > >> > >>Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift > >>is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for > >>substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved > >>the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell > >>Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. > > > >That still does not affect the crappy ending of the Gift. Buffy jumped > >for no reason. > > Preaching to the choir, man. At least it would have solved the "Dawn was > made from me" plot hole. That may be, but the jump at the end would still undermined it anyway. > Then it would be easier to buy in to the theory > that it wasn't really the blood stopping but a death that the portal needed > to close. After all, if the key had been made in to anything else, there > would never have been blood in the first place. Yet another giant plot hole regarding the Glory/Key arc. I don't have to tell you, though. > Stopping the bleeding > really meant destruction or dying. Or band-aids. :-) Smaug69

2003-01-10 06:50:57-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (smaug86@yahoo.com)


EGK <egk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<fkgs1vgut0ku2jjcivcfls8g93aea48fua@4ax.com>... > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:18:55 GMT, Smaug69 <smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> > wrote: > > >From somewhere over there EGK <egk@hotmail.com> mumbled incoherently: > > > ><snip> > > > >>>Well, you and I have been around here long enough for you to know my > >>>theory on The Gift and how Buffy didn't really close the portal, it > >>>was just a coincidence (restated just a moment ago in another message > >>>in this thread), so... :) > >> > >>Yup, I saw that. I just hate to have to fanwank huge plot points. The Gift > >>is one of those episodes that's high on points for style but very low for > >>substance. You've probably seen my wish for how they could have solved > >>the whole thing with a single line of dialog. Just had the dying monk tell > >>Buffy they stole a lock of her hair and made Dawn from her. > > > >That still does not affect the crappy ending of the Gift. Buffy jumped > >for no reason. > > Preaching to the choir, man. At least it would have solved the "Dawn was > made from me" plot hole. That may be, but the jump at the end would still undermined it anyway. > Then it would be easier to buy in to the theory > that it wasn't really the blood stopping but a death that the portal needed > to close. After all, if the key had been made in to anything else, there > would never have been blood in the first place. Yet another giant plot hole regarding the Glory/Key arc. I don't have to tell you, though. > Stopping the bleeding > really meant destruction or dying. Or band-aids. :-) Smaug69

2003-01-10 07:49:52-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<ccacnTso9MyWd4CjXTWcqg@comcast.com>... > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301090731.7a0f4707@posting.google.com... > > I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but > > found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of > > shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so > > she could fight the demons themselves. > > > That's fine, but where did the demon power come from? How did the Shaman's > possess it? <fanwank> Maybe they sacrificed a demon, robbing it of its powers and passed them on to the First Slayer </fanwank> > Who has it now? Faith. > > That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for > > Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we > > haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I > > find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the > > entire mythos of the Slayer Line. > > An explanation for Connor is long overdue. But, an explanation for Dawn is > long overdue too, and we're still waiting. There was an explanation for Dawn that started in 'No Place Like Home' and concluded in 'Spiral'. What do we still need to know ? > It's not Connor's powers that > interest me, although, they are undeniably Slayer like. It's the way he > thinks, his urge to hunt, the way he behaves in a fight. And, if Connor is > a natural Slayer, just like the first Slayer, then it doesn't really have > anything to do with the Slayer mythology. If he's something new, then yes. It's just the way you were explaining it, you made it sound as if he had been the next one called. What I REALLY NEED to know is who sent him to Darla and for what purpose. At least, with Dawn, they played on the mystery of who she was for a couple of episodes, then gave us the explanation. With Connor, they played on the mystery for a couple of episodes, then ignored it, and now just accepts him as a character. I can't accept him as a character without the explanation of his miraculous birth. > > An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she > > only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some > > prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to > > Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a > > cheat. > > > Yeah, it is a cheat. But, at least its a cheat that makes sense. Whereas > some many of ME's (cough *Summer's blood* cough) cheats don't. At least, there were in-show clues for that... development, however much it made sense. > > I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't > > appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on > > Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what > > Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha > > Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it > > unless you read another book that she wrote. > > > Actually, I don't think the glitch in the Slayer line is the main storyline > on either show. If it's happened, it's happened. No one is going to murder > Buffy and Faith to fix it now. And, if it were the main storyline it > wouldn't make sense for FE to be targeting Angel in L.A. We should see FE > going after Faith. So, I think the real issue, on Buffy anyway, is going to > be how to pick the next Slayer and who is going to be responsible for > training them now the Watcher's are all gone. Not really sure where the FE > story on Angel will take us. As long as the two issues are dealt with the baggage of their own shows, I'll be happy. > > I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect > > them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring > > appearances. > Cordy/Xander are way past due. Buffy/Angel/Darla/Spike/Connor are way past > due. I am the Key and the Key is in me is way past due. There are some > things that should have been dealt with a year or more ago and are still > hanging. But that's the way of life. I mean, I recently heard that a girl who used to be my best friend when I was young is married with kid, and as close ase we used to be, we just don't talk anymore. Yes, some people sometimes part with unresolved issues, and as much fun as it would be for us to see them resolve them between themselves, it's believable that they might never be. While jamming down Connor down our throat without any explanation other than 'his birth was miraculous, now let's move on' just doesn't cut it.

2003-01-10 07:49:52-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (bergeg@parl.gc.ca)


"DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<ccacnTso9MyWd4CjXTWcqg@comcast.com>... > "NightBaron" <bergeg@parl.gc.ca> wrote in message > news:24ab6293.0301090731.7a0f4707@posting.google.com... > > I like the Fray explanation (I haven't read the comic itself, but > > found the explanation here in the group), something about a group of > > shamans doing a spell imbuing the First Slayer with demon powers, so > > she could fight the demons themselves. > > > That's fine, but where did the demon power come from? How did the Shaman's > possess it? <fanwank> Maybe they sacrificed a demon, robbing it of its powers and passed them on to the First Slayer </fanwank> > Who has it now? Faith. > > That's where "that connor nonsense" comes in. An explanation for > > Connor is long due. But although he does exhibit some powers, we > > haven't seen him have prophetic dreams, for example. In anyway, I > > find that having Connor a male slayer would kind of throw away the > > entire mythos of the Slayer Line. > > An explanation for Connor is long overdue. But, an explanation for Dawn is > long overdue too, and we're still waiting. There was an explanation for Dawn that started in 'No Place Like Home' and concluded in 'Spiral'. What do we still need to know ? > It's not Connor's powers that > interest me, although, they are undeniably Slayer like. It's the way he > thinks, his urge to hunt, the way he behaves in a fight. And, if Connor is > a natural Slayer, just like the first Slayer, then it doesn't really have > anything to do with the Slayer mythology. If he's something new, then yes. It's just the way you were explaining it, you made it sound as if he had been the next one called. What I REALLY NEED to know is who sent him to Darla and for what purpose. At least, with Dawn, they played on the mystery of who she was for a couple of episodes, then gave us the explanation. With Connor, they played on the mystery for a couple of episodes, then ignored it, and now just accepts him as a character. I can't accept him as a character without the explanation of his miraculous birth. > > An interview with Jane Espenson, which I've read. Paraphrasing, she > > only said "With Spike getting a soul, you might find that some > > prophecies that seemed to apply to Angel might end up applying to > > Spike". I mean, it could stil happen, but I would find it such a > > cheat. > > > Yeah, it is a cheat. But, at least its a cheat that makes sense. Whereas > some many of ME's (cough *Summer's blood* cough) cheats don't. At least, there were in-show clues for that... development, however much it made sense. > > I agree that the crossovers are good and wanted, but I wouldn't > > appreciate such a cheat, where Angel's main story is resolved on > > Buffy. And the resolution of Buffy's seventh season depended on what > > Angel's sex life 2 years ago. It's like you were reading an Agatha > > Christie book, presented a mystery, but had no way of solving it > > unless you read another book that she wrote. > > > Actually, I don't think the glitch in the Slayer line is the main storyline > on either show. If it's happened, it's happened. No one is going to murder > Buffy and Faith to fix it now. And, if it were the main storyline it > wouldn't make sense for FE to be targeting Angel in L.A. We should see FE > going after Faith. So, I think the real issue, on Buffy anyway, is going to > be how to pick the next Slayer and who is going to be responsible for > training them now the Watcher's are all gone. Not really sure where the FE > story on Angel will take us. As long as the two issues are dealt with the baggage of their own shows, I'll be happy. > > I don't expect all those plot threads to be resolved. I would expect > > them to be resolved in AtS, over time, with some random guest starring > > appearances. > Cordy/Xander are way past due. Buffy/Angel/Darla/Spike/Connor are way past > due. I am the Key and the Key is in me is way past due. There are some > things that should have been dealt with a year or more ago and are still > hanging. But that's the way of life. I mean, I recently heard that a girl who used to be my best friend when I was young is married with kid, and as close ase we used to be, we just don't talk anymore. Yes, some people sometimes part with unresolved issues, and as much fun as it would be for us to see them resolve them between themselves, it's believable that they might never be. While jamming down Connor down our throat without any explanation other than 'his birth was miraculous, now let's move on' just doesn't cut it.

2003-01-10 12:14:48-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> rose up and issued forth: >In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 ><smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >> >> Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have >> affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in >> that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off >> the hook. Which is pretty sad. > >Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and >she made a literal leap of faith. I still think that "Death is your gift" means "You kill things that would cause death and pain to the world, so killing those things is your gift to humanity". :) -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Ferengi Rules Of Acquisition 104 - Faith moves mountains ... of inventory.

2003-01-10 12:14:48-06:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - ("Rev. Cyohtee - O'k�home Ehohatse" <cyohtee@barbarian.org>)


Out of the ether Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> rose up and issued forth: >In article <3les1vospjm5c4ah188h7okqbis00p11kp@4ax.com>, Smaug69 ><smaug69xx@carolinaxx.rrxx.com> wrote: >> >> Either way, Buffy's jumping into the portal would in no way have >> affected the flow of Dawn's blood. Buffy basically lost her mind in >> that moment. It's the only fanwank I can come up with to get ME off >> the hook. Which is pretty sad. > >Buffy understood what her spirit guide told her in _Intervention_ and >she made a literal leap of faith. I still think that "Death is your gift" means "You kill things that would cause death and pain to the world, so killing those things is your gift to humanity". :) -- Cyo cyohtee@ucan.foad.org http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org Ferengi Rules Of Acquisition 104 - Faith moves mountains ... of inventory.

2003-01-10 13:04:34+11:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au>)


On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:36:34 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: [snip] >He doesn't have that sort of connection with the PtB, or whoever it is that >has been pulling Slayer strings all of these years. He isn't a Slayer in >the sense of being The Choosen One. He's a natural Slayer. So your argument seems to be that he's got powers and he kills vampires therefore we should call him a slayer, well yeah maybe, but so what. If he hasn't got any connection with TPTB there's no significance to it. [snip] -- Ian Galbraith Email: igalbraith@removeozonline.com.au 'I'm not an adult!'' he says, shaking his head. ''I don't want to create responsible shows with lawyers in them. I want to invade people's dreams.'' -Joss Whedon

2003-01-10 13:04:34+11:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au>)


On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:36:34 -0500, "DarkMagic" <slnospambilan@comcast.net> wrote: [snip] >He doesn't have that sort of connection with the PtB, or whoever it is that >has been pulling Slayer strings all of these years. He isn't a Slayer in >the sense of being The Choosen One. He's a natural Slayer. So your argument seems to be that he's got powers and he kills vampires therefore we should call him a slayer, well yeah maybe, but so what. If he hasn't got any connection with TPTB there's no significance to it. [snip] -- Ian Galbraith Email: igalbraith@removeozonline.com.au 'I'm not an adult!'' he says, shaking his head. ''I don't want to create responsible shows with lawyers in them. I want to invade people's dreams.'' -Joss Whedon

2003-01-10 14:09:26+11:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au>)


On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: [snip] >And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to >call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one >in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they >bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then >they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head >with it before they're through -- but still. <g> >He's a Slayer. Yep. Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. -- Ian Galbraith Email: igalbraith@removeozonline.com.au 'I'm not an adult!'' he says, shaking his head. ''I don't want to create responsible shows with lawyers in them. I want to invade people's dreams.'' -Joss Whedon

2003-01-10 14:09:26+11:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (Ian Galbraith <igalbraith@ozonline.com.au>)


On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:14:05 GMT, "Kamil" <kamil@cox.netted> wrote: [snip] >And Shannon's right: he's *so* a Slayer; it just hasn't dawned on anyone to >call him that yet. Andrew and Dawn talking about a male slayer cast that one >in stone since that's exactly what passes as foreshadowing for ME. If they >bother to drop something out there like that (Summers blood, anyone?) then >they plan on picking it up again. And usually bashing you about the head >with it before they're through -- but still. <g> >He's a Slayer. Yep. Connor the Vampire Slayer is even worse than Dawn The Vampire Slayer. I would give Dawn a chance, Connor I wouldn't bother. -- Ian Galbraith Email: igalbraith@removeozonline.com.au 'I'm not an adult!'' he says, shaking his head. ''I don't want to create responsible shows with lawyers in them. I want to invade people's dreams.'' -Joss Whedon

2003-01-10 14:49:01-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (jillun@hotmail.com)


Don't be silly. She wasn't "dead" really, since her brain wasn't dead and she was brought back by mere mouth-to-mouth. But since in the old days most Slayers didn't have anyone around to save them, it passed.

2003-01-10 14:49:01-08:00 - Re: There's no business like show business (Showtime spoilers) - (jillun@hotmail.com)


Don't be silly. She wasn't "dead" really, since her brain wasn't dead and she was brought back by mere mouth-to-mouth. But since in the old days most Slayers didn't have anyone around to save them, it passed.