Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

True or False?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • False

    Cordelia would never have fallen for Doyle, and their relationship worked well just as Cordy/Wesley did. The only man for Cordy was Angel

    Statement - Andrew Wells should never have become a Scoobie and should be in Mexico/prison/dead

    Comment


    • True, I don't really care what should happen to him. But the idea that they gave this irresponsible figure so much power is absurd and simply wrong. But the Scoobies already kind of sold out by ignoring Anya's crimes and lack of guilt for years. Meanwhile Team Angel had Harmony on board (Thanks Wesley!), in the name of humor everything is apparently acceptable for the writers.


      Groo might have only appeared in a few episodes, but the guy seriously overstayed his welcome.

      Comment


      • Very true. One of the worst characters ever to appear on AtS. It always felt like he belonged on some cheap 1980s B-rate fantasy show/movie, instead. His look always makes me think of those infamous Manowar album covers.

        Statement: The writing in Buffyverse got terrible every time the writers tried to tackle history or other (non-Anglo) cultures/countries.
        You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

        Comment


        • Yup true. It's not only terrible because of all the stupid steretypes and the bad research. But they missed so many chances. By example Angel, a main character... They created a character who grew up in horrible situation (repression by the English state, radicalised religious people everywhere, a famine, a proud family losing their status and money because of the repression) plus the Irish were mistreated for centuries after his birth and they don't do anything with it. If they created another background for him (let's say a protestant guy from Oxford), Angel would probably be exact the same person in the show. So why introduce his Irishness if you don't do anything with it? Just because of the Claddagh ring?



          The character Cordelia Chase was more damaged by Ats season 3 than by Ats season 4.

          Comment


          • False - I really enjoy Cordy in S3 and I find most of the cast unbearable in Season 4

            Statement - The writers shouldn't have killed off Lilah in S4 AtS

            Comment


            • Hmm, I don't know whether to pick true or false. On the one hand, we got one of my favorite scenes of the entire Buffyverse (Wesley about to chop off her head), on the other hand, her death seemed to be solely to give us the Cordy-is-evil-twist and she deserved better.

              Statement: After S4's college-heavy focus, we got way too little college scenes in the following seasons.
              "Gay, straight, retarded, why do we have to put a label on everything?"

              Comment


              • I would have loved more Lilah in season 5, with the added bonus of getting rid of Eve. I would happily take dead!Lilah over all other W&H employees. Also, there was just enough college in the series

                STATEMENT: Anya caused more death and destruction than the Fanged Four combined. Xander should have had a moment of realization, at least.
                Can we agree that the writers made everyone do and say everything with a thought to getting good ratings and being renewed. This includes everything we love as well as everything we hate.

                Comment


                • True. Anya's past and particularly with her fond recall of it, is too ignored.

                  Statement: Whilst I do understand why it would have been totally boring boring writing if they'd done it constantly, Lorne's ability to give insight into the character's futures was unrealistically underused by them deliberately once he loses Caritas.

                  Comment


                  • Agreed, although it's typical for a popular side-character who becomes a main character. Suddenly they need a new role and their old role is forgotten. At least his character didn't change all that much.


                    And because I've the feeling that Puppet was talking about BtVS and not Ats:
                    I agree that that season 5 should've done more with Buffy, Willow and Tara at university. It might have made the blow that Buffy had to drop out bigger as well.




                    Faith's fall of grace in BtVS season 3 was rushed.

                    Comment


                    • False. I thought Faith's fall from grace worked really well. She was perhaps underused in the season, but her actual fall made sense in what we saw and learnt about the character. I wouldn't have wanted the season to lean too heavily on Faith and her arc.

                      Statement - Season 4 BtVS gets better with every re-watch, while Season 4 AtS gets worse

                      Comment


                      • False. Season 4 Buffy has Adam. Season 4 Angel has Orpheus.

                        Statement: The Initiative was an evil place where demons were tortured and killed regardless of the harm they could cause. Riley was a good soldier who just followed orders, which makes him a well meaning nazi.
                        Can we agree that the writers made everyone do and say everything with a thought to getting good ratings and being renewed. This includes everything we love as well as everything we hate.

                        Comment


                        • False to the Nazi part, because I'm cringing at that comparison. Vampires and most demons in BtVS are treated as beings evil by nature and not worthy of the human status. It's OK to kill them on sight, and if they are vampires and some other demon species, it's desirable. So, vanpires and demons on one side....Jews, Roma, disabled people (to be all killed) and Slavs and most non-white people (not deserving of the full human status) in the other...Same thing? Nope. There's no need to show why that comparison doesn't make sense, does it?

                          Statement: The distinction between "Angel" and "Angelus" and the habit of using them to refer to souled and soulless version of the vampire (as of late season 3 of BtVD) is one of the most absurd things Buffyverse has done, since "Angelus" is just the Latin version of the same name.
                          You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

                          Comment


                          • False. I think it makes sense. Most people who care about Angel are pretty eager to make the distinction because it justifies their positive feelings for a vampire with a very bloody past. It just simplifies things. And it's easy to make a distinction because the soulless version is so different from the soulled one (most likely because of Angel's depression that doesn't seem to effect him when he has no soul). And Angel just rolls with it to make it all a bit less ackward I guess. At the same time we see Spike call Angel 'Liam' in season 5, Angel calls himself 'Angelus' in War Zone and Darla uses 'Angel' when she speaks about the soulless vampire sometimes. So the vampires continue to make it all a bit more fluid, which again makes sense. After all, they understand better the nuances between soulled & soulless and human & demon.

                            The stuff in Orpheus on the other hand... that really didn't make sense.





                            Statement: The concept of what a soul is in the Buffyverse, should've been worked out better.

                            Comment


                            • Tough one, but I'm going to go for False . . . I think part of the reason these shows are still so popular and so open for discussion is precisely because questions like 'what is a soul' are left open for the audience to make their own minds up, and as a viewer I like that. I understand lots of fans want there to be a Buffy Bible and nothing ever deviates from the prescribed path, but that's not what I enjoy in storytelling. The soul can mean anything you want it to mean.

                              Statement - Willow was not addicted to magic as such, but to power and magic was only the conduit for that addiction.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Nina View Post
                                False. I think it makes sense. Most people who care about Angel are pretty eager to make the distinction because it justifies their positive feelings for a vampire with a very bloody past. It just simplifies things. And it's easy to make a distinction because the soulless version is so different from the soulled one (most likely because of Angel's depression that doesn't seem to effect him when he has no soul). And Angel just rolls with it to make it all a bit less ackward I guess. At the same time we see Spike call Angel 'Liam' in season 5, Angel calls himself 'Angelus' in War Zone and Darla uses 'Angel' when she speaks about the soulless vampire sometimes. So the vampires continue to make it all a bit more fluid, which again makes sense. After all, they understand better the nuances between soulled & soulless and human & demon.

                                The stuff in Orpheus on the other hand... that really didn't make sense.





                                Statement: The concept of what a soul is in the Buffyverse, should've been worked out better.
                                I think you missed my point. How does it make sense to use those two "names" to make such a supposedly big distinction, when it's basically the same name? That's like using Drusilla and Dru, or John and Johnny.

                                Re: Willow - true. Is there any other way to understand it whete it makes sense? Willow's whole characterization supports it.

                                Statement: Tara's death fits the Women in Refrigerators tripe (except for being used to motivate a female character), but doesn't really fit the Bury Your Gays trope that much (at least not in its original meaning).
                                You keep waiting for the dust to settle and then you realize it; the dust is your life going on. If happy comes along - that weird unbearable delight that's actual happy - I think you have to grab it while you can. You take what you can get, 'cause it's here, and then...gone.

                                Comment


                                • False. Every single event in Buffy can fit in a trope of some sort. It's all tropes,which makes tropes a form of background noise. Tara's death was a tragedy - not a trope.

                                  Statement: Joyce was a damn good mother with a daughter who refused to explain why she got in trouble for fighting in school, running off in the middle of the night, and burning down school buildings.
                                  Can we agree that the writers made everyone do and say everything with a thought to getting good ratings and being renewed. This includes everything we love as well as everything we hate.

                                  Comment


                                  • True. Sure she made mistakes, but everybody does. And she did very well considering the lack of help from Hank and Buffy's issues.



                                    Statement: Wesley didn't deserve to be fired by the CoW.



                                    Originally posted by TimeTravellingBunny View Post
                                    I think you missed my point. How does it make sense to use those two "names" to make such a supposedly big distinction, when it's basically the same name? That's like using Drusilla and Dru, or John and Johnny.
                                    Ah, gotcha.

                                    Still don't think it's really true though. The name has a different ring to it. But it might have ben nice if they used 'Liam' from time to time, or at least showed that other characters besides Angel, Darla and Spike knew about that name.

                                    Comment


                                    • False. Wesley utterly failed to offer a directionless Slayer the minimum emotional and logistical support. We saw that Giles frequently went patrolling with Buffy during her first couple of years in Sunnydale, helped coordinate her friends' backup efforts, helped her with her workouts, and kept an eye on her physical condition (like when he recognizes her illness as the result of a spell in "The Witch"). Compare that to... everything Wes did in season 3 of BtVS. Wes was worse than useless to both Buffy and Faith. Now, you could make a reasonable argument that the people who fired Wes should themselves resign for training him so badly, but that wouldn't change the fact that he was a miserable failure.

                                      Statement: The Watchers' Council is to the Knights Templar as the Initiative is to U.S. Special Ops.

                                      Comment


                                      • I love Wesley. He is one of my favorite characters in the B-verse. And he so deserved to be fired. But it was the fault of the CoW because he should never have been given that job. The only reason I can see for him getting it was sheer nepotism. Daddy dearest pulled strings to get him there expecting another failure and disappointment.

                                        Statement: Willow should never have been used by Giles to resoul Angel. She was not his slayer and he had no right to give a 16 year old a dangerous skill and not train her in ethics. Angel's soul shouldn't have been restored, and he shouldn't have returned from Acathla's hell dimension.
                                        Can we agree that the writers made everyone do and say everything with a thought to getting good ratings and being renewed. This includes everything we love as well as everything we hate.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by ghoststar View Post
                                          Statement: The Watchers' Council is to the Knights Templar as the Initiative is to U.S. Special Ops.
                                          False ( I think, not American and don't know really all that much about the Special Ops), I don't think the CoW is anything like the Knight Templar. The CoW is to it's core an organisation that protects the world from evil forces. Either by training slayers, training new watchers, research or by going themselves into battle.

                                          Originally posted by bespangled View Post

                                          Statement: Willow should never have been used by Giles to resoul Angel. She was not his slayer and he had no right to give a 16 year old a dangerous skill and not train her in ethics. Angel's soul shouldn't have been restored, and he shouldn't have returned from Acathla's hell dimension.

                                          I believe that the whole 'ensouling' of Angel (espcially in BtVS season 2) is wrong. There is a reason that the Roma picked this as their ultimate revenge. Death would've been much more merciful for Angel himself. I never understood why there was never a debate about if it is right to do it in the first place. Letting Willow do it, makes it all even more problematic.

                                          That said, Angel is my favourite Buffyverse character. I wouldn't have wanted to miss his journey and I think the Buffyverse would've been less rich without one of the best characters and arcs they ever wrote. So false about the part where he shouldn't have returned.




                                          Statement: It was a mistake to cast actors who were nearly 10 years older than their (teenage) characters.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X