HIGHLA-L Digest - 6 Jun 2006 to 7 Jun 2006 (#2006-97)
HIGHLA-L automatic digest system (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:00:05 -0400
There are 5 messages totalling 270 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts) (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:42:07 -0400
From: Wendy <Immortals_Incorporated@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts)
John says:
> I think the problem with getting Amber back initially
> was that she was offered scenes relating
> to The First <snip> the scenes would have had Amber as
> Tara/The First in her form bemoaning her fate to Willow,
> but Amber apparently felt that if this
> was to be the last appearance in the show that it would
> under-sell the character to her fans and the exit she's
> already made.
I wonder, if that is true, why Joss didn't explain that Tara would be
returning to life in a later episode and be there for the big finale. Or
did Amber think that Tara's death was a more dramatic ending for the
character than standing by Willow's side as the happy girlfriend?
> To my knowledge there's no bad feeling because of Amber's
> decision and the version of the shoes/Tara reveal story I heard was
that it
> might well have yet appeared if Buffy had continued into another
season.
But...by the time they were writing the seventh season, they all knew it
was the *last* season - didn't they? I don't remember any suggestion at
the time that SMG would have stuck around for an eighth year. So just
when would this shoes/Tara story have been done if *not* in Season 7?
I mean, sure, I've heard lots of TV writers say "If we'd had two more
seasons, we were going to do X" but that's just smoke. Realistically,
Season 7 was the end of BtVS and everyone knew it going into the season.
Saying that the shoes/Tara episode might have made an appearance later
is like saying that Duncan would have ended up on the starship
Enterprise later. (Note the OBLHLR!)
Wendy ( Just re-watched the last "Angel")(Now *there* was a
finale.)(Dragons!)
Immortals Inc.
immortals_incorporated@cox.net
"Weasels for Eternity"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 17:59:06 +0200
From: TMar <tmar@polka.co.za>
Subject: Re: Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts)
>Or did Amber think that Tara's death was a more dramatic ending for the
>character than standing by Willow's side as the happy girlfriend?
It's funny how actors always want *dramatic* endings. Why can't they be
content with their characters living happily ever after or whatever is
consistent with their show's universe? Not every character has to die
(no, I'm not talking about Richie, geez) or have some tragedy or go off
somewhere. That drives me nuts, it really does.
What I did like in Buffy, though, was that if Oz hadn't left, I have no
doubt that Joss would have killed him if it would have served the same
purpose in the story as Tara being killed. Joss rules. I was kind of
glad that Oz left, though, because it meant he got to live. Not that I
didn't like Tara, but I liked Oz more. And not because he was a guy -
he was just cool. (And Seth Green apparently watched all the same
movies and stuff that I did as a kid - I get every freaking joke in
Robot Chicken!!)
>( Just re-watched the last "Angel")(Now *there* was a finale.)(Dragons!)
But you always protested you *weren't* Dragon Wendy, Wendy!! ;)
I *love* the Angel finale. It's one case where any other ending would
not have worked. Angel was all about fighting the good fight no matter
what:
"...fighting for what you believe in is important and that,
sometimes, the only thing that matters is that you *did*
fight." - Keith Topping (from his Angel trivia book).
It didn't bother me in the least that he never became human and lived
happily ever after with Buffy. Blah. I like to think that Angel *did*
slay the dragon and that he and Spike and their pals lived to fight
another day. But if they all died, then it doesn't matter, they went
out fighting the good fight, which is what they wanted.
- Marina.
"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: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:53:06 -0400
From: Wendy <Immortals_Incorporated@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts)
Me:
> >Or did Amber think that Tara's death was a more dramatic
>> ending for the character than standing by Willow's side as
>>the happy girlfriend?
Marina:
> It's funny how actors always want *dramatic* endings.
It's because they're ACH-TOOOORS, darlin' <eg>
>Why can't they be content with their characters living
>happily ever after or whatever is consistent with their
>show's universe? Not every character has to die
>(no, I'm not talking about Richie, geez) or have
>some tragedy or go off somewhere. That
> drives me nuts, it really does.
I think it has to do with the fact that TV actors forget that they exist
to satisfy viewers. They want their *character* to have a great exit,
something memorable - as if that mattered to anyone except the actor and
maybe the writer. The viewers want the happy/satisfying ending - they
don't give a rat's ass about the Drama. And why should they? People get
invested in their TV shows (witness our presence here 10 years after HL
went off the air), they get invested in the lives of the characters.
They *want* them survive and be happy. That way, the fans can always
think of their favorite characters as being "out there" somewhere ...
and not think of them as being *dead*.
Of course, there are occasions where death is the natural end of a
character and I think fans can generally accept that. Especially on a
series where death is a common occurrence, one comes to expect that some
characters will die. But no fan looks forward to ending a series with
all the heroes on the ground.
> I was kind of
> glad that Oz left, though, because it meant he got to live. Not that I
> didn't like Tara, but I liked Oz more. And not because he was a guy -
> he was just cool.
I agree. Oz's number was up if he didn't get out of Sunnydale. It would
have been irresistible for Joss *not* to have killed him. And, while I
liked Tara well enough, I wasn't nearly as emotionally attached to her
as I was to Oz.
> >( Just re-watched the last "Angel")(Now *there* was a
> finale.)(Dragons!)
> But you always protested you *weren't* Dragon Wendy, Wendy!! ;)
Ha ha.
> I *love* the Angel finale. It's one case where any other ending would
> not have worked. Angel was all about fighting the good fight no matter
> what: ".
Truly. Angel never expected to "win" - not to end up with Buffy, not to
become mortal again, not to live happily ever after. He knew he just had
to keep fighting and the end would be what it would be - Shanshu or
Hell.
>I like to think that Angel *did*
> slay the dragon and that he and Spike and their pals lived to fight
> another day. But if they all died, then it doesn't matter, they went
> out fighting the good fight, which is what they wanted.
I like to think that too- although I bet Spike is the one who really
killed the dragon - since Spike is the real hero <g>. In this case the
ambiguous ending works just fine. The heroes were all together, they
were enjoying themselves, and they had a chance of survival. If it
couldn't all be flowers and kittens, then it was a good ending.
Wendy(And why to TV writers think that *their* boredom is a good enough
reason to alter TV shows every few years?)
Immortals Inc.
immortals_incorporated@cox.net
"Weasels for Eternity"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 20:12:34 +0200
From: TMar <tmar@polka.co.za>
Subject: Re: Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts)
>I like to think that too- although I bet Spike is the one who really
>killed the dragon - since Spike is the real hero <g>. In this case the
>ambiguous ending works just fine. The heroes were all together, they
>were enjoying themselves, and they had a chance of survival. If it
>couldn't all be flowers and kittens, then it was a good ending.
Yup, yes, exactly. You do know that it's your fault I got hooked
on Buffy and Angel in the first place, right? I demand you take
responsibility!! And don't you dare protest that it was "only one
episode" - it was enough, damn you!! So, like, do you want
flowers as a thank you? ;)
>(And why to TV writers think that *their* boredom is a good enough
>reason to alter TV shows every few years?)
I don't think some writers listen to the audience. Now, granted,
many audience members will want "more naked chicks!!!!!" or
whatever, and the writers quite rightly shouldn't listen to them.
But they should gauge how the audience feels about certain
directions and decide whether they really want to alienate the
audience by doing something radical or not. Go the wrong way
and you get death threats (which is why Brad Wright stopped
doing conventions for a long time). Go the right way and be
a *hero* in the eyes of the audience (Go, Joss!!). But I think
many writers think the audience are too stupid to know what
they want and try to shove crap down our throats. Then they're
surprised when the show gets cancelled (do Rick Berman and
Brannon Braga ring a bell?).
Remember that verse someone posted ages back (a la Oscar Wilde):
For each man kills the show he loves
To bend or spite his plans
One moves it to the graveyard shift
Among the also-rans
Another does it by mistake
And blames it on the fans!
- Marina.
\\ "And we are scatterlings of Africa on a ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// journey to the stars. Far below we leave || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ forever dreams of what we were." - Juluka ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//===============tmar@polka.co.za=============||````````````````\\
\\============Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie===========//
"You know, Kent, it's always been my policy to back my reporters one
thousand percent. I mean, if you went up there and opened those
windows and told me that you could fly, I'd back you up. I'd miss
you, but I'd back you up." - Perry White; Lois & Clark.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 21:06:50 +0100
From: John Mosby - Laptop <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Buffy season 7 (refers to previous posts)
> It's funny how actors always want *dramatic* endings. Why can't they be
> content with their characters living happily ever after or whatever is
> consistent with their show's universe?
Maybe I mis-spoke. It wasn't that Amber apparently wanted the dramatic
ending, but she felt that if she made her last appearance - after an
emotive farewell/death ep - with a reappearance where all she was seen to do
was taunt Willow, then she felt that might be a dis-service to fans and
their over-all memory of the character.
Again, I got this scond-hand and I haven't interviewed her since she left
(though I did (almost literally) bump into her at a small Common Rotation
gig last year!)
John
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 6 Jun 2006 to 7 Jun 2006 (#2006-97)
************************************************************