HIGHLA-L Digest - 29 May 2005 to 30 May 2005 (#2005-54)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Mon, 30 May 2005 22:00:09 -0400
There are 4 messages totalling 379 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. the stuff we were talking about...yeah, kinda OT (4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 20:49:50 -0700
From: FKMel <sgt_buck_frobisher@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: the stuff we were talking about...yeah, kinda OT
Sorry, forgot the title lol. You probably have some
good points. I've heard others say those things as
well.
Of course some of the character killing stuff went
right out the window in Buffy. They were always coming
up with ways to bring back dead people. Even the star
character could die there.
Angel got rushed unfortunately I think. (btw if it had
gone on, Gunn would have died instead of Wes. Whedon
wanted Wes to die in the end since forever so it got
changed.)
And some shows did a lot of character deaths to go out
with a bang I guess....I'm mostly talking FK there
although with it and Angel, I refuse to believe anyone
died as long as their isn't canon stating otherwise.
And if HL can have Clan Denial, other shows can have
denial too.
I know, I'm an optimist lol.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 17:31:42 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: the stuff we were talking about...yeah, kinda OT
>Of course some of the character killing stuff went
>right out the window in Buffy. They were always coming
>up with ways to bring back dead people. Even the star
>character could die there.
I'm usually of the opinion that if you're going to get rid of a
character for whatever reason (dramatic, the actor is bored,
whatever), then just *kill off* that character and be done with
it. Let the audience mourn and *move on*. They string us along
for a season (or 2, if you're in the U.S.) of Due South, and
then brought the character back in such a wishy-washy way that
I wanted to strangle the writers (especially PG)!
Yeah, I was upset that Richie died, but at least I could mourn
and move on, and still enjoy the show (what was left of it). I
hate when a character leaves and *might* come back, because then
the audience is left hanging.
The only time I've been wrong about this (and glad to be wrong)
was in Stargate with Daniel. Up until - was it "Abyss" or
"The Changeling"? - I was still saying, "They should have just
killed him off." Boy was I thrilled to be wrong then. But that
happens in like 10% of stuff. Usually it IS better to just kill
the character and be done with it.
>Angel got rushed unfortunately I think. (btw if it had
>gone on, Gunn would have died instead of Wes. Whedon
>wanted Wes to die in the end since forever so it got
>changed.)
I so loved Wesley. But somehow it didn't feel wrong for him to
die in the end - I mean, without Fred what was left for him to
live for? As long as Spike and Angel didn't die. :) (And hey,
we got our slashy confirmation about those two. Joss Whedon rules.)
>And some shows did a lot of character deaths to go out
>with a bang I guess....
Someone a while back was talking about this and said, WHY
exactly do TPTB seem to feel they need to end in an unhappy
way? Why not have the characters "live happily ever after"?
Let's face it - by the time most shows are cancelled, most
of the audience isn't watching anyway. The ones still watching
are the die-hards - and do TPTB really want to upset the die
hards - the ones who stuck with a show to the bitter end? It
seems weird to me.
>... Angel, I refuse to believe anyone
>died as long as their isn't canon stating otherwise.
Me too. At least if they ever want to make a movie or follow-up
mini-series, they can. But if they don't, that's fine too.
Because, really, Joss said that the point of Angel was that it's
never over. The fight will always go on. Which is inspiring if
you think about it.
It's like HL - why have a "prize"? You don't need one - the Game is
enough on its own. Why not just follow one character around like we
did in HL:TS without needing BREWs or other nonsense? Then, when it
ends (in NTB, for example), the audience is free to imagine that
Duncan is still out there fighting the good fight. I still think they
could have done The Methos Chronicles - because does the main
character *have* to be a hero? Why can't we follow Methos around
and learn about the ancient world through his eyes? I mean, think
of the possibilities for flashbacks alone! Sure, he can get into
fights and win by nefarious means - so what? It doesn't mean he's
a bad person. He's a survivor - and in this world, what is wrong
with that?
So I choose to think Duncan is still out there living his life by his
rules. And Angel and his team are out there making the Senior Partners'
life hell. Heh.
- Marina.
\\ "Good girls go to heaven. ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Bad girls go to Smallville." || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ - 'Sorority Boys' wallpaper ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//=======tmar@sifl.iid.co.za========|| \\
\\=======Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie=======//
"Nothing in the world is the way it ought to be. It's harsh and
it's cruel, but that's why there's us ... We live as though the
world were how it should be, to show it what it can be." - Angel
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 13:23:16 -0700
From: Jen <data@cyberg8t.com>
Subject: Re: the stuff we were talking about...yeah, kinda OT
Haven't been in the conversation, but just couldn't help myself right now.
:) Here are a couple of my cents.
Marina said some of the following:
--snip snip--
>
> The only time I've been wrong about this (and glad to be wrong)
> was in Stargate with Daniel. Up until - was it "Abyss" or
> "The Changeling"? - I was still saying, "They should have just
> killed him off." Boy was I thrilled to be wrong then. But that
> happens in like 10% of stuff. Usually it IS better to just kill
> the character and be done with it.
It was all planned that Daniel was going to -stay- gone even. Michael
Shanks really didn't see the need for the char being around any longer
because the char had been reduced, in his opinion, to wallpaper, more or
less. There wasn't anything interesting going on. Ascension seemed to
change all that, though. *laughs* Oooh, probably "Abyss." That, to me, is
the best episode of the whole show, and one of the best examples of the
Jack/Daniel friendship/relationship thing (even if you don't want to go as
far as slash). Awesome writing makes me go "squee."
> >Angel got rushed unfortunately I think. (btw if it had
> >gone on, Gunn would have died instead of Wes. Whedon
> >wanted Wes to die in the end since forever so it got
> >changed.)
>
> I so loved Wesley. But somehow it didn't feel wrong for him to
> die in the end - I mean, without Fred what was left for him to
> live for? As long as Spike and Angel didn't die. :) (And hey,
> we got our slashy confirmation about those two. Joss Whedon rules.)
That's so sad, though, that Wes got directly connected to Fred like that. I
think he could have survived by himself. He would have made a deliciously
angsty Immortal, wouldn't he? *laughs* As for Spike and Angel, Nancy
Holder told me this weekend, at Enigma Con, that she believes that Spike and
Angel survived that alley confrontation. And why wouldn't they? Her
reasoning: they both are tied to a prophecy that talks of a greater battle.
Whedon definitely knows how to do it and is the epitome of the type of
writer I hope to be someday, being able to seamlessly blend realistic
elements, humorous dialogue/elements, and mythology. Props to him always.
Plus, he approves of slash. :)
> Someone a while back was talking about this and said, WHY
> exactly do TPTB seem to feel they need to end in an unhappy
> way? Why not have the characters "live happily ever after"?
> Let's face it - by the time most shows are cancelled, most
> of the audience isn't watching anyway. The ones still watching
> are the die-hards - and do TPTB really want to upset the die
> hards - the ones who stuck with a show to the bitter end? It
> seems weird to me.
Ending "happily ever after" is also contrived and mundane. It's sort of the
fan's fantasy, but not the logical ending for a character (or characters)
who never acted in a contrived way since the beginning. That's why we have
endings like in Highlander, or Hercules, even Xena: the camera is panning
back, no longer following the character's life, but their journey continues.
As for the Stargate: SG-1 season 9 ending (and let's face it, it was very
much a series ending for as the show initially existed) was the "live
happily ever after" method. Overall, I think the ending was done well...and
better than some ways it could have been done.
>
> Me too. At least if they ever want to make a movie or follow-up
> mini-series, they can. But if they don't, that's fine too.
> Because, really, Joss said that the point of Angel was that it's
> never over. The fight will always go on. Which is inspiring if
> you think about it.
I recently heard a rumor that Spike was possibly going to get his own
series, but then it was axed after Noxon's "Point Pleasant" tanked. I
haven't gotten this validated, though. I also heard that Whedon was pretty
much done with doing TV himself. I hope things change. :) Hehe. Maybe
there could be another Firefly TV show after Serenity kicks ass in the box
office. But that's not really conntected, so moving on. :)
> It's like HL - why have a "prize"? You don't need one - the Game is
> enough on its own. Why not just follow one character around like we
> did in HL:TS without needing BREWs or other nonsense? Then, when it
> ends (in NTB, for example), the audience is free to imagine that
> Duncan is still out there fighting the good fight. I still think they
> could have done The Methos Chronicles - because does the main
> character *have* to be a hero? Why can't we follow Methos around
> and learn about the ancient world through his eyes? I mean, think
> of the possibilities for flashbacks alone! Sure, he can get into
> fights and win by nefarious means - so what? It doesn't mean he's
> a bad person. He's a survivor - and in this world, what is wrong
> with that?
The "prize" provided a gimmick to the Game, but who said that the "prize"
had to be won at all? And my thoughts: what if there really isn't a "prize"
but it's a story that was told by some Immortal and it just got wide-spread.
*laughs* That would be terribly ironic. The Methos Chronicles could have
easily been done, but from what I understand, TPTB didn't see that a gray
character such as Methos could be the lead of his own show. It might have
been a good thing that a Methos show was never made if they would have ended
up buthering up his character as badly as they did Amanda's. *sighs* "Good"
does not necessarily mean "interesting."
> So I choose to think Duncan is still out there living his life by his
> rules. And Angel and his team are out there making the Senior Partners'
> life hell. Heh.
>
Good things to believe. :) As long as Duncan isn't with Faith, it's all
cool beans. *laughs*
Jen the Fangirl
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 23:06:41 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: the stuff we were talking about...yeah, kinda OT
>It was all planned that Daniel was going to -stay- gone even. Michael
>Shanks really didn't see the need for the char being around any longer
>because the char had been reduced, in his opinion, to wallpaper, more or
>less.
Yes, I know. I was glad that he came back, though. And I wasn't even
one of the Jonas-haters. :) Do you think the show got renewed because
he agreed to come back? I mean, season 6 was originally supposed to
be the last season.
>Oooh, probably "Abyss." That, to me, is
>the best episode of the whole show, and one of the best examples of the
>Jack/Daniel friendship/relationship thing (even if you don't want to go as
>far as slash). Awesome writing makes me go "squee."
Totally am Emmy performance from RDA. It's a great episode. Also doesn't
hurt that Baal has a South African accent. :)
>That's so sad, though, that Wes got directly connected to Fred like that. I
>think he could have survived by himself.
I don't think it was out of character, though. He seemed to fixate on
her from the beginning and never really even tried to stop. He was a
really good character - someone who sort of became a hero by default.
Those are always the most interesting characters.
>He would have made a deliciously
>angsty Immortal, wouldn't he? *laughs*
YEAH!!
>As for Spike and Angel, Nancy
>Holder told me this weekend, at Enigma Con, that she believes that Spike and
>Angel survived that alley confrontation. And why wouldn't they? Her
>reasoning: they both are tied to a prophecy that talks of a greater battle.
I remember getting quite excited after Spike got his soul - "The Shanshu
Prophecy doesn't say it's ANGEL! It could be Spike! Whoo-hoo!" And not
because I like Spike better - the idea of there being TWO vamps with
souls, ONE prophecy and the two of them with their very different ways
of doing things. Come on, the story possibilities! They only just
scratched the surface in season 5.
>Whedon definitely knows how to do it and is the epitome of the type of
>writer I hope to be someday, being able to seamlessly blend realistic
>elements, humorous dialogue/elements, and mythology. Props to him always.
>Plus, he approves of slash. :)
Like I said - he rules. :) I just dislike the fact that he always had to,
in the words of someone on the commentary, "Stomp on everybody's heart"
all the time. Let people be happy once in a while, Joss - it won't kill
you!
>Ending "happily ever after" is also contrived and mundane. It's sort of the
>fan's fantasy, but not the logical ending for a character (or characters)
>who never acted in a contrived way since the beginning. That's why we have
>endings like in Highlander, or Hercules, even Xena: the camera is panning
>back, no longer following the character's life, but their journey continues.
Yes - that's fine. It's what I'm saying. There's no reason to have a "big
finish" if it means killing off characters. Why do that? Give me the
Highlander or Angel way of ending any day.
>As for the Stargate: SG-1 season 9 ending (and let's face it, it was very
>much a series ending for as the show initially existed) was the "live
>happily ever after" method. Overall, I think the ending was done well...and
>better than some ways it could have been done.
Okay, how do you know how it ends when they haven't even started showing
season 9 yet?
>I recently heard a rumor that Spike was possibly going to get his own
>series, but then it was axed after Noxon's "Point Pleasant" tanked. I
>haven't gotten this validated, though.
Well, I'm not too much of a fan of hers. That whole Willow-going-evil
because of magic plot of hers was contrived and silly. Now if Jane
Espenson had worked on it...
>The "prize" provided a gimmick to the Game, but who said that the "prize"
>had to be won at all? And my thoughts: what if there really isn't a "prize"
>but it's a story that was told by some Immortal and it just got wide-spread.
Yes! I don't think the Prize ever *could* be won - not if new Immortals
kept being activated.
>The Methos Chronicles could have
>easily been done, but from what I understand, TPTB didn't see that a gray
>character such as Methos could be the lead of his own show.
You know, sometimes TPTB could do with a bang on two on the head! Grey
characters have been used in other shows and been fine. Oh well.
>It might have
>been a good thing that a Methos show was never made if they would have ended
>up buthering up his character as badly as they did Amanda's.
So true!
>Good things to believe. :) As long as Duncan isn't with Faith, it's all
>cool beans. *laughs*
Faith would totally kick Duncan's ass (in a good way). Oh, wait, you mean
the chick from HL 4. :) Can you just see Eliza Dushku taking no nonsense
from Duncan? Heh. Now, SHE would have made a great Immortal lead for a
show. And she could have had non-repetitive flashbacks. ;)
- Marina.
\\ "You've heard it said that living well is ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// the best revenge? Au contraire - living || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ forever is the best revenge." - Lacroix ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//===============tmar@sifl.iid.co.za===========|| \\
\\=============Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie============//
"What about the fact they thought we were gay?"
"Adds mystery." - Wesley and Angel; 'Expecting' (Angel)
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 29 May 2005 to 30 May 2005 (#2005-54)
**************************************************************