Have you ever listened to the DVD commentaries on the final episodes? I don't know whether they would make you feel better or worse (I know that Joss saying that Buffy loved Spike didn't make me feel better... just vindictive toward Ducks.)
But in the commentaries they mention that they don't want to cast Petrovsky as just the bad guy. For every thing they have Petrovsky do to make the audience question him as Carrie's guy, they said they also wanted a good thing to show he wasn't a bad guy. They wanted to be sure that all his reasons to leave Carrie alone in Paris were legitimate reasons. They weren't just excuses. They were real and understandable reasons.
That was also why they had Carrie go back and kiss Petrovsky at the end telling him it's not his fault but hers.
And (rightly or wrongly) they considered her as having saved herself as she realized she needed to return back to "her" life before Big ever showed up. It was also why she tripped Big before he could reach Petrovsky-- because Big wasn't there to "save" her.
Now this may well be a case of (like Joss and Marti) what they say they wanted to show and what everyone sees aren't in sync. So I don't know whether the commentary would ease pain or make it worse (because I know how that goes).
I did have problems with the ep "Splat!" though and the "after a certain age there's nowhere to go but down."
As for leaving the computer they admit that was a conceit along with the fact that the voiceovers stop once she reaches Paris because she had "lost her voice."
They also said that they introduced the couple in the bookstore to try to say that she COULD have a life in Paris with friends that were like her. Paris wasn't the problem.
But... I think the success of this probably varies with the viewer. And I don't know whether the commentaries would be balm to old wounds or salt in them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-05-19 08:45 pm (UTC)But in the commentaries they mention that they don't want to cast Petrovsky as just the bad guy. For every thing they have Petrovsky do to make the audience question him as Carrie's guy, they said they also wanted a good thing to show he wasn't a bad guy. They wanted to be sure that all his reasons to leave Carrie alone in Paris were legitimate reasons. They weren't just excuses. They were real and understandable reasons.
That was also why they had Carrie go back and kiss Petrovsky at the end telling him it's not his fault but hers.
And (rightly or wrongly) they considered her as having saved herself as she realized she needed to return back to "her" life before Big ever showed up. It was also why she tripped Big before he could reach Petrovsky-- because Big wasn't there to "save" her.
Now this may well be a case of (like Joss and Marti) what they say they wanted to show and what everyone sees aren't in sync. So I don't know whether the commentary would ease pain or make it worse (because I know how that goes).
I did have problems with the ep "Splat!" though and the "after a certain age there's nowhere to go but down."
As for leaving the computer they admit that was a conceit along with the fact that the voiceovers stop once she reaches Paris because she had "lost her voice."
They also said that they introduced the couple in the bookstore to try to say that she COULD have a life in Paris with friends that were like her. Paris wasn't the problem.
But... I think the success of this probably varies with the viewer. And I don't know whether the commentaries would be balm to old wounds or salt in them.