(no subject)
Aug. 1st, 2003 11:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxThere once was a time when I trusted Joss Whedon's story telling instincts. There once was a time when I thought I could predict where the story would go based on what would be a decent story to tell.
Ha!
And again... ha!
So here I am a bitter and distrusting soul who has spent far too much time obsessing over these shows.
Anyway piecing together bits of info:
From one list serve:
"The second episode deals with what the hell he's doing there,"
Whedon said. "In the old version of the show, we might have stretched
that out for a lot of episodes. In the new version of the show, by
the end of that [episode] you'll know why he's there and, more
importantly, what part he plays in the ensemble."
So Spike is a ghost
Ha!
And again... ha!
So here I am a bitter and distrusting soul who has spent far too much time obsessing over these shows.
Anyway piecing together bits of info:
From one list serve:
"The second episode deals with what the hell he's doing there,"
Whedon said. "In the old version of the show, we might have stretched
that out for a lot of episodes. In the new version of the show, by
the end of that [episode] you'll know why he's there and, more
importantly, what part he plays in the ensemble."
So Spike is a ghost
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<insert [...] yesterday's>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]
There once was a time when I trusted Joss Whedon's story telling instincts. There once was a time when I thought I could predict where the story would go based on what would be a decent story to tell.
Ha!
And again... ha!
So here I am a bitter and distrusting soul who has spent far too much time obsessing over these shows.
Anyway piecing together bits of info:
From one list serve:
<i>"The second episode deals with what the hell he's doing there,"
Whedon said. "In the old version of the show, we might have stretched
that out for a lot of episodes. In the new version of the show, by
the end of that [episode] you'll know why he's there and, more
importantly, what part he plays in the ensemble." </i>
So Spike is a ghost <insert expletive laden rant... or just look at yesterday's rant>. Given that I'm pretty damn sure that Spike will end Ep 2 as a ghost, there is reason to believe he will stay that way. After all this is Joss of the glacial character development and "people never change" we're talking about.
On the other hand, a birdie told me that Bell has claimed that <i>"what Spike comes back as may not be what it seems"</i> ... whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
On the <i>other</i> other hand [it would be helpful if I was an octopus or something], I don't interpret another of Bell's statements nearly as positively as some do. [From a transcript of the Comic Con Q&A]
<i>Bell: "We'll have James. James Marsters is coming. <whoop from
audience> And people are asking... um, *ONE OR TWO* of you have
written us a letter saying, 'That's good.'" <audience chuckles>
DeKnight: "I think so, yeah."
Bell: "Yeah, so. And I know people have a lot of... uh, *concern* about how we're bringing him back. And *that's* good. You know, I had lunch with James yesterday... <bragging voice> [...] he never felt mistreated. He loved
what the character went through. And.. I know [fans?] think he went
through a lot of... 'Spank the Spike'? What was he?"
DeKnight(?): "Kick."
Bell: "'Kick the Spike.' And, uh, but he never felt that way. He felt
like his character's always had... uh, very interesting things to do,
and... plan to continue that. And we also feel... one thing I will say
is... he died a noble, heroic death on 'Buffy,' and to buy it back
with just having him... as if nothing happened would not be fair to
him or the character. And so we feel whatever he comes back as is
something that we... we have to earn. So I ask you to bear with us as
we figure out exactly what that looks like." </i>
Okay, first off, exactly why does the audience need to "bear with" them? We're an audience. It's perfectly within our rights to be "Little Shop of Horrors" plant-like plaintively pleading (heh! at the alliteration) "entertain me, ME!" They're the writers and it's a tv show. Entertaining is sort of their raison d'etre. If not they get cancelled, so it would behoove them to get with the entertaining.
Alright, so I've become demanding. I admit it.
The thing is, this statement of Bell's doesn't appear to me to be a promise that Spike's condition is temporary. To me, this statement implies they don't know what in the hell they are going to <i>do</i> with Spike.
Still there are those urging caution. And I know that if I just looked at story, I would say it's the beginning of an arc and not just lameass idea of Joss' (although I do tend to think it's a lameass idea of Joss'). It's back to the fact that I stopped trusting the story and the storyteller somewhere in Season 6, and I've never seen a reason to trust Joss or ME again. If I trusted the story or the storyteller, my feelings would be quite different, but ME squandered whatever trust they had a long time ago. I have too many incidents where I believe ME did the wrong thing for me to look to the future with <i>trust</i>. Wary seems to be a far more sane outlook.
At any rate there are hints that this may not be the black hole of character development that it appears. Taradi posted on BAPS that she had talked to the writers at Comic Con and for the Spike fans not to panic. Since she works for Dreamwatch, it's possible that she has spoilage that makes her say that. And there is the report on BAPS:
<i>Well the first words I said to James were "Please, Please, tell me you will not be a ghost!!!!!!" Poor thing got this stricken look on his face, like he didn't want to break my heart. Than he says quietly all serious like "but it won't be for long." </i>
Of course JM also has a long history of crusty minionism.
The poster did show up on BAPS and confirmed that he had said this to her. . . but she's a bit of an unknown quantity. I didn't recognize the screen name.
In all of this, the one thing that did amuse me was the Comic Con report:
<i>One of the questions to Joss was some guy saying what a
horrible, awful, stupid idea it would be to have Spike come back as a
ghost. Joss's face fell noticeably at that, and it seemed to put him
on the defensive.</i>
Heh! Now <b>that</b> report gave me a happy. :)
Ha!
And again... ha!
So here I am a bitter and distrusting soul who has spent far too much time obsessing over these shows.
Anyway piecing together bits of info:
From one list serve:
<i>"The second episode deals with what the hell he's doing there,"
Whedon said. "In the old version of the show, we might have stretched
that out for a lot of episodes. In the new version of the show, by
the end of that [episode] you'll know why he's there and, more
importantly, what part he plays in the ensemble." </i>
So Spike is a ghost <insert expletive laden rant... or just look at yesterday's rant>. Given that I'm pretty damn sure that Spike will end Ep 2 as a ghost, there is reason to believe he will stay that way. After all this is Joss of the glacial character development and "people never change" we're talking about.
On the other hand, a birdie told me that Bell has claimed that <i>"what Spike comes back as may not be what it seems"</i> ... whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
On the <i>other</i> other hand [it would be helpful if I was an octopus or something], I don't interpret another of Bell's statements nearly as positively as some do. [From a transcript of the Comic Con Q&A]
<i>Bell: "We'll have James. James Marsters is coming. <whoop from
audience> And people are asking... um, *ONE OR TWO* of you have
written us a letter saying, 'That's good.'" <audience chuckles>
DeKnight: "I think so, yeah."
Bell: "Yeah, so. And I know people have a lot of... uh, *concern* about how we're bringing him back. And *that's* good. You know, I had lunch with James yesterday... <bragging voice> [...] he never felt mistreated. He loved
what the character went through. And.. I know [fans?] think he went
through a lot of... 'Spank the Spike'? What was he?"
DeKnight(?): "Kick."
Bell: "'Kick the Spike.' And, uh, but he never felt that way. He felt
like his character's always had... uh, very interesting things to do,
and... plan to continue that. And we also feel... one thing I will say
is... he died a noble, heroic death on 'Buffy,' and to buy it back
with just having him... as if nothing happened would not be fair to
him or the character. And so we feel whatever he comes back as is
something that we... we have to earn. So I ask you to bear with us as
we figure out exactly what that looks like." </i>
Okay, first off, exactly why does the audience need to "bear with" them? We're an audience. It's perfectly within our rights to be "Little Shop of Horrors" plant-like plaintively pleading (heh! at the alliteration) "entertain me, ME!" They're the writers and it's a tv show. Entertaining is sort of their raison d'etre. If not they get cancelled, so it would behoove them to get with the entertaining.
Alright, so I've become demanding. I admit it.
The thing is, this statement of Bell's doesn't appear to me to be a promise that Spike's condition is temporary. To me, this statement implies they don't know what in the hell they are going to <i>do</i> with Spike.
Still there are those urging caution. And I know that if I just looked at story, I would say it's the beginning of an arc and not just lameass idea of Joss' (although I do tend to think it's a lameass idea of Joss'). It's back to the fact that I stopped trusting the story and the storyteller somewhere in Season 6, and I've never seen a reason to trust Joss or ME again. If I trusted the story or the storyteller, my feelings would be quite different, but ME squandered whatever trust they had a long time ago. I have too many incidents where I believe ME did the wrong thing for me to look to the future with <i>trust</i>. Wary seems to be a far more sane outlook.
At any rate there are hints that this may not be the black hole of character development that it appears. Taradi posted on BAPS that she had talked to the writers at Comic Con and for the Spike fans not to panic. Since she works for Dreamwatch, it's possible that she has spoilage that makes her say that. And there is the report on BAPS:
<i>Well the first words I said to James were "Please, Please, tell me you will not be a ghost!!!!!!" Poor thing got this stricken look on his face, like he didn't want to break my heart. Than he says quietly all serious like "but it won't be for long." </i>
Of course JM also has a long history of crusty minionism.
The poster did show up on BAPS and confirmed that he had said this to her. . . but she's a bit of an unknown quantity. I didn't recognize the screen name.
In all of this, the one thing that did amuse me was the Comic Con report:
<i>One of the questions to Joss was some guy saying what a
horrible, awful, stupid idea it would be to have Spike come back as a
ghost. Joss's face fell noticeably at that, and it seemed to put him
on the defensive.</i>
Heh! Now <b>that</b> report gave me a happy. :)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-08-01 10:01 pm (UTC)JM is ME's bitch. Never forget that. The fact that he was "okay" with all the shit they put his character through in the last two years is proof positive of this.
One of the questions to Joss was some guy saying what a
horrible, awful, stupid idea it would be to have Spike come back as a ghost. Joss's face fell noticeably at that, and it seemed to put him on the defensive.
He is truly clueless, isn't he? I mean, on one hand, he was probably congratulating himself on his "daring" idea to make Spike palatable to all fan factions, but on the other hand he still has no inkling that most of the audience would rather see his most popular character as a living, breathing being with a usable penis who is capable of interacting with others, especially women, and I don't mean That Bitch Buffy.
He'll get his rude awakening next year, when his audience changes the channel, the ratings plummet, and the WB cans his ass. But hey -- he always has his "Firefly" movie project. Snort.
no subject
Date: 2003-08-02 07:50 am (UTC)How utterly depressing for anyone who wants a *real* Spike. After all, how *real* can a ghost be? It's all soul, all spirit. And at least as far as we know in 5.2, he's not a manifest spirit, because he cannot affect things physically. Unless he 'learns' to become more solid...but that doesn't seem like something he could learn. I bet he'll learn to control when and how he appears and possible learn how to appear somewhere slightly further from Angel (because being Angel all the time is going to get old) but I still think he'll be incorporeal.
What a cheat. I notice that Angel's time in a hell dimension didn't have to be 'respected' by changing him in some fundamental way. My feeling is that they burned his body up, so they are forcing him to stick with no body. Obviously, making him human is just something they did not want to do. It's more Kick the Spike, just of a new variety.
no subject
Date: 2003-08-02 08:24 am (UTC)