Francine - harvest
I Blame the Dutch mpoetess
Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Heh -
Says Peaches, over at the Cross & Stake:

I am nodding my head in complete agreement over the daily mantra of "It's all about Buffy - the show's called *Buffy* the Vampire Slayer - blah, blah, blah...." Using the words of The Rock, there are some days I want to take that mantra, tie it into a great big knot, shine it up real nice and pretty and then stick it sideways up a few people's candy a**es!


Yeah. I have those moments.

elfgirl

2002-10-28 12:38 pm (UTC) (Link)

Heh is right. I guess my Sunday morning rant was just one of many that are going around. Sigh. I'm so, so tired of all the whining. . .

mpoetess

2002-10-28 12:45 pm (UTC) (Link)

*g*

I just really don't believe it's all about Buffy. I cut my teeth on shows like Blake's 7, where it wasn't All About Blake after the first season was over, despite the title. And Doctor Who, where it's almost never actually about the Doctor, even though he's the link that one follows through the series. It's always more about the people he interacts with.

My issues with it being her story are basically, I give a good goddamn about her story. I might have cared, if Buffy had managed to stay a person I'd like to know (though she's coming back around to that, this season) or if she'd ever been a person I could understand being... But for me, the show is usually about how to live in a world that includes Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I would always be one of the sidekicks if I lived in that world, and I tend to find them more compelling than I find her.

karra

2002-10-28 02:06 pm (UTC) (Link)

Hell, Blake was barely in all the episodes...

And hell, for a good while "Red Dwarf" didn't even take place on Red Dwarf!

mpoetess

2002-10-28 02:10 pm (UTC) (Link)

I'm gonna go back further into my wasted youth.

Remington Steele wasn't about Remington Steele. It wasn't even about the guy pretending to be Remington Steele. It was about Laura Holt, and it was about their almost-romance, but it wasn't about him. And it was told, for the most part, from her POV.

karra

2002-10-28 02:24 pm (UTC) (Link)

*starts the Way Back Brain Machine, and tries to remember her misspent childhood* I seem to recall that Mr. Belvedere was not really about Mr. Belvedere, but the family he was for some ungodly reason enslaved to.

I was going to say something about Magnum PI, but it occurs to me I've never actually seen that, so I'd mostly be bullshitting.

mpoetess

2002-10-28 02:43 pm (UTC) (Link)

Heh! No, Magnum was pretty much about Magnum. With minor sidekicks and majorly slashable (if you like older men) foil.

karra

2002-10-28 02:57 pm (UTC) (Link)

It occurs to me I /did/ see one episode, but I don't think it was standard. Something about him having a 1940s style case, and something about the girl who played the blonde galpal on Charles in Charge. It didn't make much sense.

the british butler was indeed slashable. Though, I think I might be imaginging the british part.

mpoetess

2002-10-28 03:01 pm (UTC) (Link)

No, he was British. The character, that is - Higgins. The actor was actually a Texan.

Which may be the beginning of a long and distinguished tradition of me falling for American actors who can pull off a good English accent. *g*

karra

2002-10-28 03:04 pm (UTC) (Link)

I loves me the americans who can pull of the british accent. And the british that can pull off an american.


djinanna

2002-10-28 05:34 pm (UTC) (Link)

And was at it's *best* when focused on Laura Holt's POV.

When Pierce Brosnan became *so* popular, though, and the show began to shift focus towards his character at the expense (and I mean *major* expense) of Laura, that's when they took the ramp on the ol' shark jump. The bastards.

Not that I didn't love PB's character, too -- but it was supposed to be Laura's story... /rant

nakedwesley

2002-10-29 10:03 am (UTC) (Link)

And here I thought it was all about Murphy... or should have been. *g* Mmmmm, James Reed = nummy

mpoetess

2002-10-29 10:05 am (UTC) (Link)

Well, okay, parts of it were about Murphy.

And his denial about the hot English guy that got so strong he eventually had to move to Denver and start his own agency just so he wouldn't have to face his feelings...

elfgirl

2002-10-28 02:56 pm (UTC) (Link)

But for me, the show is usually about how to live in a world that includes Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I would always be one of the sidekicks if I lived in that world, and I tend to find them more compelling than I find her.

I have to agree with finding the 'secondary' characters more compelling. Hell, I said as much.

I guess my point was that you can't expect the show to focus on any of the characters more than they do to Buffy, and that's what I think many of the Spike fans (toward whom my rant was directed) want, even if they may not admit it. They're so anxious to see how the whole soul thing plays out that they're tending to ignore the fact that it, and Buffy and Spike's relationship, is not the main plot of the series. That's not to say that the other characters don't or shouldn't have their own plotlines that may or may not have anything directly to do with Buffy. They do, and should. Even when the plot isn't All.About.Buffy, though, they still tend to bring it back to her somehow (like the last scene on the couch in "Hell's Bells" with Buffy talking about how Xander and Anya were the light at the end of her tunnel).

I guess the best way to put it is, every character has their storyline and their path of character development that the writers want to take them on. When it's a decision between advancing Buffy's plot or one of the other characters' plots, though, Buffy's always going to win. If they can do both at the same time, fine, but if they have to choose, they're going to choose Buffy (because it is Buffy the Vampire Slayer).

mpoetess

2002-10-28 03:04 pm (UTC) (Link)

I guess the best way to put it is, every character has their storyline and their path of character development that the writers want to take them on. When it's a decision between advancing Buffy's plot or one of the other characters' plots, though, Buffy's always going to win. If they can do both at the same time, fine, but if they have to choose, they're going to choose Buffy (because it is Buffy the Vampire Slayer).


I'm with you there! Buffy will occasinally take a backseat in a specific episode, but indeed it's always going to touch upon her somehow, and the overriding narrative is always going to be about how her life progresses. But I can definitely sympathize with those who aren't supremely interested in that narrative, and are along for other parts of the ride.

wesleysgirl

2002-10-28 12:58 pm (UTC) (Link)

Glad I'm not the only one.

As someone who felt very little sympathy/empathy for Buffy last season but who is liking her more again now, I still have a hard time understanding the "It's all about Buffy" mantra. I'm not denying that she gets top billing, that most of the shows must revolve around her character, or that SMG is the Big Name Star. But I do deny that the show is all about her, because I believe that lots of people wouldn't be watching it if that were true. Every show has one or two (or sometimes three) main characters, and then others that revolve around those main characters. The minor characters are just as important as the main character, to the whole that is the show.

And again, I like Buffy. (Last year after OMWF I couldn't have said that, but there are personal issues I bring to the dynamic - a tendency to behave, in slightly similar circumstances, in the same ways that she was is the biggest one - and I'm past that now, just about the same way she is. That says something not only for the writing but also for SMG's acting, which I was badmouthing fiercely last season and over the summer, much to my current embarassment.) I like her. Doesn't mean she's the shiniest star in the night sky for me, though. I'd never be her. For me, it's more about the fellow-feeling that comes along with being the sidekick. Just the way I'm built, I guess.

mpoetess

2002-10-28 03:09 pm (UTC) (Link)

Yeah -- one thing I'm not going to fault is SMG's acting -- I've never doubted that any time I've disliked Buffy, it's been 90% because of something scripted, that SMG was portraying perfectly. The other 10% is my unpleasant but honest reaction that damn, she seems colder and less friendly than when she wasn't all collar-and-hip-bones -- SMG's weight or lack thereof does make me feel less friendly towards Buffy.

wesleysgirl

2002-10-28 07:29 pm (UTC) (Link)

SMG's weight or lack thereof does make me feel less friendly towards Buffy.

I'm with you there, too. I have such mixed feelings about it - concern that she's too thin and has to be/feels like she has to be for the industry, disgust that someone who's a role model for young girls looks like that, anger that it's been going on for a while now and it doesn't seem like anything it being said or done about it. She's not healthy at that weight. She doesn't look healthy, she looks like a famine victim.

tamarabass

2002-10-29 02:39 am (UTC) (Link)

I've got to admit I'm somewhat glad to hear (er... read) you guys discussing this. It's not something I harp on too much when discussing BtVS, but SMG and all the other women on the show (except AB, who is now unfortunately not around -rumors not withstanding) are all insanely thin. When I contemplate this fact it makes me utterly crazy. They are presenting such a profoundly unhealthy image to young women everywhere, not to mention doing potential damage to their own bodies! Still, I lay the primary blame on the Hollywood industry and (IMO) it all tends to come back to fashion designers.

...and now I'm entering rant-land, on someone else's LJ no less, so I'd better shut up before I get worse. ;)

Summing up: ITA.

karra

2002-10-28 02:07 pm (UTC) (Link)

And if Joss has his way about next year (ie: if Sarah leaves like she threatens, and they have to reeval.), the show's not even going to be /called/ Buffy: The Vampire Slayer.

mpoetess

2002-10-28 02:15 pm (UTC) (Link)

I think, (much as I'd like to believe that the story will continue in some form) that it's so much Big Talk from Joss/Marti/et al. I suspect that if SMG leaves, that'll be it. There might be a minor exodus to Angel for some of the characters, but...

Hey, if I'm wrong, I'll be happy.

Actually, if it continues being Buffy, with Buffy there, I'll be happy. I've never wanted Buffy gone. At times I've wanted to *like* Buffy more or at all, and at times I've been only mildly interested in what's going on in her life, but I think she's needed.

karra

2002-10-28 02:26 pm (UTC) (Link)

Personally, Buffy annoys the living crap (yes. indeed. living. sentient. crap.) out of me. But that might just be me.


I know that their making big motions about having a Faith spinoff with a couple of the Buffy regulars, if Sarah should decline a new season. I don't know if it'll actually happen, but that's what I said about Angel

About the recent Anya origins episode...didn't Anya have red hair in OMWF?

mpoetess

2002-10-28 02:50 pm (UTC) (Link)

Eh. Here's Anya in the scene from "Selfless" which was set the day *before* OMWF started. Or at least the day before they realized what was going on.



and here's Anya in OMWF



I think it's either a) a quiet sight gag about how often Anya's hair changed color last season or b) an implication that the Song-and-dance magic changed people's appearances to go with their musical numbers too.

karra

2002-10-28 03:18 pm (UTC) (Link)

Just last season? that girl's hair changes color more than my sisters! Though, at least Anya's aren't based on anime styles.

Thanks for the pics!