Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

The Eternal Angelriffic Thread (Merged)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3775 replies to this topic

#3761 of 3776 OFFLINE   KevinGress

KevinGress

    Supporting Actor



  • 655 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2005

Posted August 29 2007 - 04:52 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Weak?

Hell it would have been flat-out stupid.

Having those Buffy characters show up to help or heaven forbid, save the day, would have completely undermined not only the message of 'never give up the good fight', but also the integrity of the entire series. It would have sent the message that ANGEL, as both a character and a series, could never stand on its own from the originating show.

That is why I find that idea flat-out stupid. If that actually happened, I'd never watch the show again. I'd chuck my ANGEL DVDs in the trash if I knew the series existed just to build up to that kind of cop-out resolution. Would have been a complete disgrace to me.

Wow! Such a visceral reaction! Sounds like Whedon struck a brilliant stroke by ending the show where he did. I don't have a problem with others not liking my view of how things work out, but I am curious to hear how those that don't like my view see how the battle works out. From their statements we know that Angel 'n crew won't run, so what is it then? We're talking Whedon's version of 300 here. So, unless there's intervention from someone/something, we're left with utter defeat (which we wouldn't want) or victory, which I would find flat-out stupid.

And going back to Jason's post- I don't see it as missing the point. As mentioned before, Angel and crew were all set to fight to the death. Therefore the statue "fight the good fight even against all odds" is satisfied. I figure that Buffy would have found out through other means - so that would cancel out Angel relying on/depending on Buffy. And although there are some out there that want it to be so, the characters and shows of Buffy and Angel are connected - to completely disconnect the two would be disingenuous to both series and characters.

Don't forget - Angel was notified about the coming Hellmouth battle and went to help her - why not the reverse? I'm more than certain that Angel would have reiteriated to Buffy, "The dragon's MINE!". Posted Image

#3762 of 3776 OFFLINE   Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor



  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted August 29 2007 - 05:29 AM

Actually, I think Angel and Buffy would both have benefited from being a little more disconnected - I wonder if Riley would have grown on the Buffy audience more, for example, if they hadn't done that crossover during the shows' respective first and fourth seasons and reinforced the pair as soulmates in the audience's mind. Also, not being so tied to continuity would have meant not having to believe Cordelia was younger than Fred. Posted Image

And while it would have fit with the whole shared continuity thing, it would be deflating to think about - Angel's the show's hero, and it's better to let the hero die than castrate him by having him saved by people who show up out of nowhere.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#3763 of 3776 OFFLINE   KevinGress

KevinGress

    Supporting Actor



  • 655 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2005

Posted August 29 2007 - 07:37 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Seaver
Actually, I think Angel and Buffy would both have benefited from being a little more disconnected - I wonder if Riley would have grown on the Buffy audience more, for example, if they hadn't done that crossover during the shows' respective first and fourth seasons and reinforced the pair as soulmates in the audience's mind. Also, not being so tied to continuity would have meant not having to believe Cordelia was younger than Fred. Posted Image

I guess I'm a fan of continuity- I can overlook an oversight here or there if it can be reasonably explained, but not when ignored. One of my pet peeves is when an important character leaves a show or is spun off and then that character essentially becomes 'nonexistent'. A recent example would be the finale for Stargate SG-1. The writers should have given some explanation why Jack O'Neil, former leader of SG-1 and personal envoy to the Asgards, was not present when the Asgards decided to end their race. He simply was not mentioned. So, while I understand the showrunners' and some fans' need for separation between the shows, they need to take care not to go to the opposite extreme and simply ignore. In most cases, I think Whedon and crew did a good job of striking a balance between the two.

Quote:
And while it would have fit with the whole shared continuity thing, it would be deflating to think about - Angel's the show's hero, and it's better to let the hero die than castrate him by having him saved by people who show up out of nowhere.

I see it as a difference of perception. I wouldn't view it necessarily as Buffy coming to save Angel, rather coming to assist - Angel's still the main target here. While bagging the top slayer (remember, she's not 'special' anymore) would be a nice fringe benefit to the Wolf, Ram, and Hart, their focus would be spilling the insolent vampire's blood that sought to upsurp their power on Earth. And it wouldn't simply end with the big battle. He'd be a marked man for a very long time, long after Buffy and slayers went on to the next Hellmouth or whatnot.

I sat thinking about this at lunchtime and while "fight the good fight" is a major theme of the series, and certainly the focus of that episode, so is redemption. Angel is out helping people because, in the end, he's searching for redemption. Now, one could argue that he'd already achieved redemption through various forms, the last being his signing away the Shanshu prophecy and performing a pure, selfless act, but unless he experiences this redemption (having it explained to him somehow) or through his actual conversion back to being human, for him to simply die after the final scene would, as Nicholas posted, simply undermine perhaps the main theme of the series as well as its integrity.

Plus, the fact that Whedon's writing season 6 in comic form, completely destroys the notion that Angel simply dies. Posted Image

#3764 of 3776 OFFLINE   Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor



  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted August 29 2007 - 08:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinGress
but unless he experiences this redemption (having it explained to him somehow) or through his actual conversion back to being human, for him to simply die after the final scene would, as Nicholas posted, simply undermine perhaps the main theme of the series as well as its integrity.
If you like things tied up with a little bow. I prefer to think that the knowledge Angel will never receive that redemption which has been dangled before him since the first episode is a sign of a greater truth - that no true hero striving for redemption and absolution will ever think he actually deserves it.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#3765 of 3776 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted August 29 2007 - 02:21 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinGress
And although there are some out there that want it to be so, the characters and shows of Buffy and Angel are connected - to completely disconnect the two would be disingenuous to both series and characters.

Don't forget - Angel was notified about the coming Hellmouth battle and went to help her - why not the reverse? I'm more than certain that Angel would have reiteriated to Buffy, "The dragon's MINE!". Posted Image

Just because one show grew out of the other, doesn't mean it has to end by going back to its roots. ANGEL as a series will forever live under the shadow of Buffy the series, and that's part of why I loved how it ended, and also loved that Buffy herself wasn't a part of it - Whedon wised up and realized it would have been a mistake to include her in the finale. ANGEL was certainly strong enough...it didn't need Buffy to survive, Angel himself didn't either, but having characters from it show up would have solidified its standing as nothing more than a Buffy "spinoff", completely dependent on the parent series even though it was so much more and deserves to be regarded as more than that.

#3766 of 3776 OFFLINE   Mikel_Cooperman

Mikel_Cooperman

    Producer



  • 4,184 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2001

Posted August 29 2007 - 04:04 PM

I would have liked Buffy to come back to "Assist" the gang not save them.

#3767 of 3776 OFFLINE   Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor



  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted August 29 2007 - 04:34 PM

Quote:

I sat thinking about this at lunchtime and while "fight the good fight" is a major theme of the series, and certainly the focus of that episode, so is redemption. Angel is out helping people because, in the end, he's searching for redemption. Now, one could argue that he'd already achieved redemption through various forms, the last being his signing away the Shanshu prophecy and performing a pure, selfless act, but unless he experiences this redemption (having it explained to him somehow) or through his actual conversion back to being human, for him to simply die after the final scene would, as Nicholas posted, simply undermine perhaps the main theme of the series as well as its integrity.

See, I would see Buffy or others showing up as something else all together. Earlier in Season 5, when a stray slayer was found, it was made clear to Angel that he was not viewed as a "friend of good" anymore, as long as he was part of Wolfram Hart. Obviously, I didn't expect Buffy to show up (although I do think the episode with the Immortal, a funny poke at "Highlander" was probably written with the hopes of getting at least a guest shot), a sign of any slayer willing to fight by his side would have been a major act of redemption and acceptance. Slayers played a part in Angel, as well.. showing that a slayer was willing to accept that he was back fighting for the side of good would have been fitting, I think. The last few episodes of Angel were in large part about him rejecting the power they had built in Wolfram & Hart and trying to rejoin the sign of good.

It might have been nice to have some sign of someone there on the other side willing to realize that he had not turned his back on them, and when he rejoined the forces of good, they were waiting for him.
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#3768 of 3776 OFFLINE   Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor



  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted August 30 2007 - 03:04 AM

One other thing: David (Angel) as an actor was -really- slugging it out in Angel Season 5. He looks -terrible- through most of it; when you see him in "Bones" now, he's easily lost 20+ lbs from his look in this season of Angel. He just got very "puffy" by the end of Angel Posted Image All that pigs blood must be too fattening Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#3769 of 3776 OFFLINE   KevinGress

KevinGress

    Supporting Actor



  • 655 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2005

Posted August 30 2007 - 06:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Just because one show grew out of the other, doesn't mean it has to end by going back to its roots.


But it shouldn't ignore its roots, either. We're not talking about Angel the Series now, we're talking about the moment AFTER the series. I like how the series ended, but as a fan, it left me wondering what happened next. I like to think I've constructed a scenario that's both believeable and faithful to the Angel/Buffy universe. And as I've said, I fully expect that when Whedon's vision comes out in comic form it'll totally differ from mine, and that's fine - it's his universe to construct. But now I'm left wondering what your reaction would be if Whedon followed that template, and if you'd totally reject it out of hand.

Quote:
ANGEL as a series will forever live under the shadow of Buffy the series, and that's part of why I loved how it ended, and also loved that Buffy herself wasn't a part of it - Whedon wised up and realized it would have been a mistake to include her in the finale. ANGEL was certainly strong enough...it didn't need Buffy to survive, Angel himself didn't either, but having characters from it show up would have solidified its standing as nothing more than a Buffy "spinoff", completely dependent on the parent series even though it was so much more and deserves to be regarded as more than that.

I guess I don't see the need for competition between the two series - they are companion series in my mind. BtVS will always be thought of before ANGEL, and it's because it was unique for its time. It took the stereotypical damsel in horror movie distress and turned it on its head. But I don't take that to mean that ANGEL is in anyway inferior - it, in fact, enriches and expands the mythos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Seaver
If you like things tied up with a little bow. I prefer to think that the knowledge Angel will never receive that redemption which has been dangled before him since the first episode is a sign of a greater truth - that no true hero striving for redemption and absolution will ever think he actually deserves it.

And I agree with that. Whedon's never put a tidy little bow on anything. And if ANGEL was on several more seasons, he'd never achieve it, but the hope would always be there. I do think, however, that if Whedon were ever to write the "final chapter" on Angel that he would give him some sort of absolution - not make him human, of course, but some acknowledgement that he was one of "the good guys".

#3770 of 3776 OFFLINE   Cameron Yee

Cameron Yee

    Executive Producer



  • 10,643 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2002
  • Real Name:Cameron Yee
  • LocationSince 2006

Posted August 30 2007 - 11:13 AM

Quote:
One other thing: David (Angel) as an actor was -really- slugging it out in Angel Season 5. He looks -terrible- through most of it; when you see him in "Bones" now, he's easily lost 20+ lbs from his look in this season of Angel. He just got very "puffy" by the end of Angel All that pigs blood must be too fattening
I believe that was due to some pain meds he was taking for an injury.
One thing leads to another at cameronyee.com

#3771 of 3776 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted August 30 2007 - 01:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cameron Yee
I believe that was due to some pain meds he was taking for an injury.

He's had several knee surgeries over the years.

#3772 of 3776 OFFLINE   Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor



  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted September 03 2007 - 05:28 PM

One nitpick.. but one that stuck with me through the whole series. In S4 of Buffy, S1 of Angel, they had a crossover in which Buffy delivers the "Jewel of Amare" or something to Angel. The whole thing about the jewel is that it renders him virtually invincible and able to walk in open daylight.

He hides the jewel underneath the hotel, and it NEVER reappears in any episode ever again.
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#3773 of 3776 OFFLINE   Duane R

Duane R

    Second Unit



  • 297 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 30 2002

Posted September 03 2007 - 07:49 PM

At the end of the ep, he smashes the ring to pulp with a brick on the rooftop.
Six worlds prayed to her, they built her temples, conquered planets, and yet one day she still rode off and destroyed all six worlds. And when the last warrior was dying he said "We gave you everything, why did you destroy us?" and she looked down upon him and she whispered, "Because I can".

#3774 of 3776 OFFLINE   Scott-S

Scott-S

    Screenwriter



  • 2,042 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2001
  • Real Name:Scott Sturdevant
  • LocationThe Land of Zion

Posted September 04 2007 - 01:01 AM

Yes, one of the stupidest things Angel ever did.

That ring would have been helpful during the many apocoli. I guess the writers didn't want to have that "cheat" available.
-----
Scott

View My DVD Collection
Stop the on-screen Bugs!!!!!!

#3775 of 3776 OFFLINE   Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor



  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted September 04 2007 - 02:11 AM

Ok, I missed that part. Yep, you're right, pretty stupid, IMHO...
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#3776 of 3776 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted September 04 2007 - 10:31 AM

Well if you actually thought about WHY he did it, it's not stupid at all. He made his reasons crystal clear, and they make sense considering his situation and everything.


Back to TV Programming



Forum Nav Content I Follow