|
Post by wenxina on Aug 18, 2010 20:22:53 GMT -5
He asked his team because he needed them. He asked them to vote, because it wasn't a decision he could make for them. Which is actually a sign that he learned something, from the whole Connor memory debacle. The team voted, they agreed to execute the plan. No one's arm was twisted there.
As for leader vs. champion, again, that's a definition thing. Nothing wrong with your definition, but we can't argue about who's a greater champion if we don't agree on definitions. Speaking rhetorically, of course. Therefore, trying to merge a definition debate with one about who's a better champion doesn't work. And that's what I observed happening here.
But carry on. As long as there's no namecalling or personal attacks, I'm cool. Just wanted to point out the futility.
|
|
BlueJay
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
Resident Charmed Fan[Mo0:12]
Posts: 631
|
Post by BlueJay on Aug 18, 2010 21:07:39 GMT -5
This whole issue was very "meh". Based on Riley's appearances in "Retreat", there was really nothing new learned about Riley, other than the first few pages of this issue. We still don't know what happened to Sam. But I'm assuming she's tending the farm by herself or whatever.
Whistler's appearance was very much a w-t-h moment because he popped out of nowhere. Whistler being in this issue raised more questions than it answered.
And other than Sam's and Riley's amusing bickering, their scenes together were rather boring.
I...don't really have much excitement for Season Eight anymore. IDW's Angel on the other hand...
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Aug 18, 2010 21:20:58 GMT -5
Uh oh, someone brought up the difference in meaning between words which is one of my favorite subjects to debate!
All heroes are champions, but not all champions are heroes.
A champion is a warrior who fights for the cause of others, be the cause good or ill. A hero is a warrior for good.
The terminology is a deliberate choice. As Giles puts it "Buffy is a hero, you see?" while Angel is a champion. Angel is the vampire with a soul who could go either way in the apocalypse. No one knows what side he'll land on, they only know he's pivotal. That's why he's not labeled simply a hero. No one's actually sure he'll always be good.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Aug 18, 2010 21:32:00 GMT -5
Whistler's appearance was very much a w-t-h moment because he popped out of nowhere. Whistler being in this issue raised more questions than it answered. Whistler's previous appearance was rather out of the blue too. He's less of a character than he is a plot device. He's the guy who pops in to deliver much needed/wanted exposition. And given the context, he makes the most sense. He's the one who set Angel on his path at the very beginning. He appeared to Buffy, when Angel was going to bring about the end of the world. S8 seems to be a reversal of that, where it's Buffy who may bring about the apocalypse. And Whistler appears to Angel. I haven't read the issue yet (won't be able to for a while, given that I'm on the other side of the world right now), but I'm led to believe that the choice to be made is between Buffy and the world, which pretty much mirrors the choice Buffy had at the end of "Becoming, Pt. 2": Angel or the world? Even without actually reading the piece, I see poetry in the execution of the narrative.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Aug 18, 2010 21:40:57 GMT -5
I never said he "revelled" in the Slayers' deaths. If anything, his attitude was one of detached unconcern. He pretty much pinned the fault on Buffy, while generously conceding that she "meant well."
In ToYL, he made a wisecrack to Riley about "young love" right after Warren's missile killed at least 7 Slayers. In Tibet, he kept his own troops in the field to be slaughtered in an unwinnable battle because "I want to see what happens." His speech to Buffy in "A Beautiful Sunset," and to Faith/Andrew/Giles in "Twilight" were pure megalomaniac villain stuff. In Mongolia he had one of his own scientists dragged off and executed for supposedly making a mistake. He sent Vampy Cats to invade Slayers' bodies, rape their minds, and then leave them dried-out walking corpses.
He may well have caused more innocent suffering in a year as Twilight than he did in 150 years as Angelus. All because of Whistler's say-so. All because of another damned "prophecy." All because of the "Powers That Be." Again.
Buffy has learned to no longer be a meek slave of prophecy, but to create her own future instead. The fact that Angel still hasn't is tragic.
My thinking is that Angel started out reluctantly as Twilight, but then something took hold of him... "the glow" perhaps... and clouded his thinking. I hope so.
It's interesting that Angel was offered the choice between "being loyal to the girl or to the world"... and chose the world, yet after that choice bore fruit, he had his girl and the world was being destroyed. So why did that happen? He did everything he was told to do to save the world, and instead it was being destroyed. Only through abandoning that path did they make it possible to save the world.
I'm betting Angel will want to know why. Hopefully, he will go find out during this final arc.
Anybody else envision a full-page panel of Angel punching Whistler's lights out?
Other questions this issue brings up:
1. Who is this "war" being fought against that Whistler mentioned? If Buffy and Twilight were fighting separately on the same side, who is the enemy? Not "the Universe." I mean, the Powers That Be vs. The Universe? That would just be stupid. I mean, are Jesus and Moses and Muhammad and Buddha in on it too? What about Santa Claus? Can he be trusted?
2. If Angel consciously made the choice to become Twilight, what caused him to become so deeply embedded in his role? A conversation with a demon in a hat? I don't think so.
3. Why are the "Powers That Be" so lame that they can't do anything without getting mortals to act out these ridiculously convoluted marionette shows? When are the mortals going to realize that the Powers are no greater than the First Evil was... impotent ghosts, able to talk and threaten and manipulate and nothing else. Without mortals to carry out their will, they're nothing. It's the mortals who have the real power.
4. How did Angel get the money and influence to do all that he did?
The last panel of the comic is not something Bangels are going to want to see. In the choice between Buffy and the world, Angel chose the world and Riley chose Buffy.
I'm not an Angel hater. I've got five season DVD sets (which I'm re-watching now... just finished season 2) and a bunch of comics to prove it. But let's face it... season 8 has not been his finest hour so far.
|
|
leyki
Common Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 90
|
Post by leyki on Aug 18, 2010 21:42:00 GMT -5
Uh oh, someone brought up the difference in meaning between words which is one of my favorite subjects to debate! All heroes are champions, but not all champions are heroes. A champion is a warrior who fights for the cause of others, be the cause good or ill. A hero is a warrior for good. The terminology is a deliberate choice. As Giles puts it "Buffy is a hero, you see?" while Angel is a champion. Angel is the vampire with a soul who could go either way in the apocalypse. No one knows what side he'll land on, they only know he's pivotal. That's why he's not labeled simply a hero. No one's actually sure he'll always be good. So, what i think is a leader, you say that this is a champion, and the difference is in the heroes.... Ok, that works for me, i get your point, and i agree with that. So, Angel is a champion, and his difference with Buffy is that Buffy is a hero-champion, right?
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Aug 18, 2010 22:05:57 GMT -5
I never said he "revelled" in the Slayers' deaths. If anything, his attitude was one of detached unconcern. He pretty much pinned the fault on Buffy, while generously conceding that she "meant well." In ToYL, he made a wisecrack to Riley about "young love" right after Warren's missile killed at least 7 Slayers. In Tibet, he kept his own troops in the field to be slaughtered in an unwinnable battle because "I want to see what happens." His speech to Buffy in "A Beautiful Sunset," and to Faith/Andrew/Giles in "Twilight" were pure megalomaniac villain stuff. In Mongolia he had one of his own scientists dragged off and executed for supposedly making a mistake. He sent Vampy Cats to invade Slayers' bodies, rape their minds, and then leave them dried-out walking corpses. He may well have caused more innocent suffering in a year as Twilight than he did in 150 years as Angelus. All because of Whistler's say-so. All because of another damned "prophecy." All because of the "Powers That Be." Again. He was damn good at playing the part of evil megalomaniac? The whole Twilight deal was kinda camp from the start, no? With the mask, the naff tripple belts, the billow-y cloak, the grand speeches? And hey, the Vampy Cats were a monster of the week. As demons go, they're pretty easy to dispatch. Twilight could very well have tipped the Slayers off, by sending one to infiltrate them. Once the Slayers knew what was up, they took them all out with military efficiency. The Swell was already a demon entity that had an agenda. All demons did. It can easily be argued that Twilight maneuvered them into a position to be taken out. Look, at this point, I don't think anyone's really saying that Angel was right. Just that he thought he was doing the best he could. Not the same thing, by a long shot. 1. Who is this "war" being fought against that Whistler mentioned? If Buffy and Twilight were fighting separately on the same side, who is the enemy? Not "the Universe." I mean, the Powers That Be vs. The Universe? That would just be stupid. I mean, are Jesus and Moses and Muhammad and Buddha in on it too? What about Santa Claus? Can he be trusted? Why do the PtB and the Universe have to be on opposing sides? Is it clearly stated that they aren't one and the same? Again, no book in front of me. Won't have one for a while. Buffy was fighting Twilight (the figure). Angel was told that bringing about Twilight (the event) would be the way to save the world. The entity/force that's been playing them remains kinda hazy, but it's possible that Twilight (the event) was always going to happen because Buffy changed the rules. We don't know all the details because that's where Spike comes in. With more explanations. At least that's what the solicitations make it sound like. 2. If Angel consciously made the choice to become Twilight, what caused him to become so deeply embedded in his role? A conversation with a demon in a hat? I don't think so. Wanting to save the girl? If doing what he did would save the world, and the girl, all records indicate that Angel would do it. 3. Why are the "Powers That Be" so lame that they can't do anything without getting mortals to act out these ridiculously convoluted marionette shows? When are the mortals going to realize that the Powers are no greater than the First Evil was... impotent ghosts, able to talk and threaten and manipulate and nothing else. Without mortals to carry out their will, they're nothing. It's the mortals who have the real power. But mortals do not have the foresight that the PtB have. Power without knowledge is equally as useless. And hello, commentary on the world much? A large number of people in the world follow one religion or another, many with their own sets of prophecies and eschatology. And people believe them. Written word meant to be the explanation of life and death and the afterlife. Why don't we all fight against these things? Because we don't know? 4. How did Angel get the money and influence to do all that he did? Simple enough. Convince people with the power and money of your cause. There were already people aware of the presence of Slayers. People who were frightened and angry about the presence of the ubermensch. All Angel had to do was step in, convince them that he would be the answer to their prayers. Wouldn't be hard to do with superpowers. From that preview page of #36, and from what we know so far, all Angel did was rally all the factions against Buffy under his banner. To give her one foe to fight, to concentrate her anger on him.
|
|
47kwest
Potential Slayer
"This is where the fun begins!"[Mo0:37]
Posts: 120
|
Post by 47kwest on Aug 18, 2010 22:31:49 GMT -5
I think Riley's intentions are still up for grabs. Yeah he worked for Buffy, he worked for twilight, but what no one seems to grasp is that there still has not been the final choice. Buffy thinks if she goes back she saves her friends, even though she's already been told she can't. The other plane is here, everything she does is futile. It's going to happen no matter the choices she makes. All she's doing is giving herself comfort that she tried. We've been told things will be different we have got to accept that and move on.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Aug 18, 2010 22:48:07 GMT -5
Why do the PtB and the Universe have to be on opposing sides? Is it clearly stated that they aren't one and the same? Again, no book in front of me. Won't have one for a while. Buffy was fighting Twilight (the figure). Angel was told that bringing about Twilight (the event) would be the way to save the world. The entity/force that's been playing them remains kinda hazy, but it's possible that Twilight (the event) was always going to happen because Buffy changed the rules. We don't know all the details because that's where Spike comes in. With more explanations. At least that's what the solicitations make it sound like. But Whistler is pretty clear that by becoming Twilight, and fighting parallel to Buffy, the world was supposed to be saved. Instead they fought nobody but each other, and the Apocalypse started anyway. What Buffy and Giles called "The Universe" and Whistler calls "the Powers" may be one and the same... the force that gave Angel and Buffy their current powers. But if so, it's clear that the UniPowers are not the ones causing the current Apocalypse. Something else is. I guess that's what Spike will explicate for us. But mortals do not have the foresight that the PtB have. Power without knowledge is equally as useless. And hello, commentary on the world much? A large number of people in the world follow one religion or another, many with their own sets of prophecies and eschatology. And people believe them. Written word meant to be the explanation of life and death and the afterlife. Why don't we all fight against these things? Because we don't know? It just seems odd to me that a humanist like Joss would construct a world in which humanity is so rigidly constrained by powers and circumstances greater than us. "Screwed by prophecy" only makes a good story if the protagonists turn it into "screw prophecy." That's the difference between Buffy and Angel... he will always choose to be controlled by greater powers and forces, and Buffy won't. Simple enough. Convince people with the power and money of your cause. There were already people aware of the presence of Slayers. People who were frightened and angry about the presence of the ubermensch. All Angel had to do was step in, convince them that he would be the answer to their prayers. Wouldn't be hard to do with superpowers. From that preview page of #36, and from what we know so far, all Angel did was rally all the factions against Buffy under his banner. To give her one foe to fight, to concentrate her anger on him. One has to wonder why Angel, with his superpowers far beyond those of any Slayer, wasn't just as frightening to those in power as the Slayers were.
|
|
47kwest
Potential Slayer
"This is where the fun begins!"[Mo0:37]
Posts: 120
|
Post by 47kwest on Aug 18, 2010 23:41:30 GMT -5
You cannot use use Joss' humanists beliefs in any argument. The artist is separate from the art. If that were the case why have Christian iconology present at all. Example; crosses, holy water, resurrection, don't go down that slippery slope of thinking his personal beliefs factor in to the buffyverse. Influenced yes not coinciding.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Aug 19, 2010 5:21:54 GMT -5
But Whistler is pretty clear that by becoming Twilight, and fighting parallel to Buffy, the world was supposed to be saved. Instead they fought nobody but each other, and the Apocalypse started anyway. What Buffy and Giles called "The Universe" and Whistler calls "the Powers" may be one and the same... the force that gave Angel and Buffy their current powers. But if so, it's clear that the UniPowers are not the ones causing the current Apocalypse. Something else is. I guess that's what Spike will explicate for us. Kinda already said that. They've all been played so far. Twilight was a Daffy Duck cartoon. Whatever is behind all this, Spike's supposed to have the answers. Or at least more answers than anyone else at the moment. It just seems odd to me that a humanist like Joss would construct a world in which humanity is so rigidly constrained by powers and circumstances greater than us. "Screwed by prophecy" only makes a good story if the protagonists turn it into "screw prophecy." That's the difference between Buffy and Angel... he will always choose to be controlled by greater powers and forces, and Buffy won't. At the moment, Angel has chosen to screw prophecy alongside Buffy. One has to wonder why Angel, with his superpowers far beyond those of any Slayer, wasn't just as frightening to those in power as the Slayers were. Angel is one man. A Slayer army is another matter entirely. And hey, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Buffy was apparently a common enemy.
|
|
Beaumonde
Ensouled Vampire
Stop pulling my face towards your face.[Mo0:37]
Posts: 1,810
|
Post by Beaumonde on Aug 19, 2010 5:58:44 GMT -5
Ugh this is annoying me. I'm trying so hard not to open the spoiler buttons about who makes an appearance. There should be an iComics so I could just get this right now.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Aug 19, 2010 6:04:13 GMT -5
I think we've kinda dropped the spoiler tags now, so there are a few posts in which the guest character's name is unconcealed. If you're really trying to remain unspoiled (if you still are), I would advise staying from the thread for now.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Aug 19, 2010 7:50:22 GMT -5
You cannot use use Joss' humanists beliefs in any argument. The artist is separate from the art. If that were the case why have Christian iconology present at all. Example; crosses, holy water, resurrection, don't go down that slippery slope of thinking his personal beliefs factor in to the buffyverse. Influenced yes not coinciding. I'll go right ahead and use whatever points I choose in my arguments, thank you. And if you think any artist doesn't project his personal beliefs into his art, you're mistaken. I hardly think his ultimate message is gonna be "We're all just puppets of things beyond our control, so let's try to be the best danged puppets we can be!" At the moment, Angel has chosen to screw prophecy alongside Buffy. At the moment. And very reluctantly. Angel is always fate's bitch, then learns his lesson, then forgets it in time for the next season. Buffy, on the other hand, writes her own story. That's why I consider Buffy a hero and Angel an interesting protagonist. The last two issues have both made me feel ever-so-slightly better about the direction of the story, and hopefully that will continue. The glacial pacing of season 8 has not helped things one bit. Part of me really envies those future readers who will be able to read the whole thing for the first time in trade paperback form. That's the ideal format for this season.
|
|
Neil
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 187
|
Post by Neil on Aug 19, 2010 9:15:34 GMT -5
Haven´t read the issue, but for the first time, Angel´s actions seem to make sense from what I read of the other comments.
He becomes tTwilight, because he has to. Otherwise, millions of people would die and Angel wouldn´t let that happen.
He does it with great pain, from what I read of the comments concerning the Angel-Whistler conversation. So being the villain and all the comments he gave were part of the path. He could only save everyone, if he´s not Buffy´s ally. So he has to be a villain, at least, making Buffy believe he is the villain, through word and, I guess for him, heartbreaking deeds. He did that in the end of season five of AtS and made everyone believe, he got corrupted. He made everyone hate the slayers, unites the demons, etc. because it´s the opposite of what he wants to do. He wants to join Buffy, but if he does, the outcome is what he doesn´t want. So he does the complete opposite.
He is not Jack Bauer, doing these things without turnig a hair. I guess he is in conflict. It wasn´t just shown. And even if it´s not shown, we know Angel for so long and we know how he feels. It just seems that a lot of people take the word of Twilight for granted, as the words of Angel and those as an expression of his feelings ( but he was just playing it all along)
Even if we consider Joss humanist´s point of view: Humanism means that humans are the most important thing and Angel is a humanist. He wants to save all the people. TPtB aren´t the puppetmaster and the people aren´t the puppets. TPtB showed paths and Angel made a choice. He always did. He was never a puppet. Did he make wrong decisions (not helping the lawyers in season2 when Darla and Drusilla kill them, etc.)? Yes. But he usually had to pay for it. Just think of the whole Connor storyline.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Aug 19, 2010 9:37:28 GMT -5
For me, I guess the big disconnect is between pre-Twilight Angel (I hate this, I hate what I'm going to have to do, can't there be another way?) and post-Twilight Angel, who shows not the slightest regret or remorse for the things he had to do, which were probably even worse than he might have expected.
At what point along the line did he lose all of his concern for human suffering?
You might say his only concern was for Buffy's suffering, not anyone else's... but if so, why did he choose the world instead of the girl?
It doesn't make sense yet. I hope it will.
|
|
zamolxis
Novice Witch
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 210
|
Post by zamolxis on Aug 19, 2010 9:41:08 GMT -5
I may have skipped some posts, but for those who already have the issue: did Whistler interacted with anybody else besides Angel? Is it for sure Whistler or an elaborated bird talking to Angel ? (Angel's imagination)
|
|
jellymoff
Ensouled Vampire
Claimer of Funn[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,174
|
Post by jellymoff on Aug 19, 2010 9:47:16 GMT -5
I may have skipped some posts, but for those who already have the issue: did Whistler interacted with anybody else besides Angel? Is it for sure Whistler or an elaborated bird talking to Angel ? (Angel's imagination) Whislter only spoke with Angel. There's nothing to indicate that Whistler wasn't "real", but then again, there's nothing to indicate that he is "real". My gut tells me that it was really Whistler, because I think Angel would imagine someone else (like Buffy) if it were his imagination. Perhaps Whistler is the first? (Probably not, but hey...)
|
|
Neil
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 187
|
Post by Neil on Aug 19, 2010 10:37:15 GMT -5
For me, I guess the big disconnect is between pre-Twilight Angel (I hate this, I hate what I'm going to have to do, can't there be another way?) and post-Twilight Angel, who shows not the slightest regret or remorse for the things he had to do, which were probably even worse than he might have expected. At what point along the line did he lose all of his concern for human suffering? You might say his only concern was for Buffy's suffering, not anyone else's... but if so, why did he choose the world instead of the girl? It doesn't make sense yet. I hope it will. The disconnect is part of the story. We were supposed to feel this way, but that´s because of the narrative. If we would have seen the scene chronologically where his undercover-story started, we would have a different perception on him. there is no pre- or post-Twilight-Angel. We just think that way, because that´s the way we were introduced into the story. But he stayed the same. It was: Twilight appears and is negative (the first way we see him)- Angel revealed (Big shock) => Feeling out-of-character But: If: Angel undercover - angel turning/making up as Twilightl - Twilight appears and is negative (the first step in the plan)- Angel revealed (Moment of relief).=> Different Perception He doesn´t show remorse because that was part of his cover. If we would have knon his mission from the beginning we would have said "he´s a good actor". But because we didn´t know that, we just perceived him as a cruel character. He didn´t lose his concern for human suffering, otherwise he wouldn´t have opened up himself to Buffy. He does all of that, even the bad (and in comparison to the whole outcome) consequences, to save as many as he can. He wants the good not only (but espceially) for Buffy. Angel didn´t lose his integrity. He is the same as before. We just didn´t know that.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Aug 19, 2010 11:25:55 GMT -5
The disconnect is part of the story. We were supposed to feel this way, but that´s because of the narrative. If we would have seen the scene chronologically where his undercover-story started, we would have a different perception on him. I certainly hope so. And I certainly hope they consider this important enough to work into the story. He doesn´t show remorse because that was part of his cover. If we would have knon his mission from the beginning we would have said "he´s a good actor". But because we didn´t know that, we just perceived him as a cruel character. But that attitude continued up to and even after his "ascension" with Buffy, when play-acting was no longer necessary. He would have let the entire world die if Buffy hadn't convinced him otherwise. The Angel we see in "Twilight" casually hand-waving his murder of hundreds of Slayers, and trying to hold Buffy back from going to save the world, is diametrically different from the character agonizing with Whistler over the pain he might cause. Something happened, and I hope we find out what.
|
|