dane5by5
Wise-cracking Techno Genius
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 734
|
Post by dane5by5 on Sept 7, 2008 0:41:26 GMT -5
Okay, I've had this issue for a couple of days now. Read it more times than most issues. I needed to really think about it before forming my final opinion. I think the problem I've had with this arc is that we've been waiting for answers since January about Willow and Saga Vasuki and they still have not been answered, and now we have even MORE questions. Does Kennedy know what Willow is doing? Is this how Kennedy died? If not, why and how did she die? This question is more than a year old! Then we have the same questions about Dawn, who was it that worked the mojo to make her a giant and now centaur? We need the questions answered soon, we're coming up to the half way point in the series, taking almost two years to get there and so far there's been only set up, no questions answered at all. Maybe I'm just impatient or it's because I was expecting this to be paced more like a television series and having never read a comic series before they were collected it's just frustrating.
That said, I'm really excited about were this issue left us for issue 19. The last page with Fray was perfect, and for the people that said Fray hasn't shown any difference or made a strong impression of her character, I think that scene by itself shows what kind of character she is, world weary, cynical and distrusful. Which you can't hold against her, since everything she's been through.
The art, well I'm still not loving it, but in some pages it was amazing, and others just took away from the story, like when Fray and Buffy are in the car and you seen their stupid expressions through the windshield. And Dawns little curl in the middle of her forehead. That looked rediculous. And also Buffy's hair, she always has the tendrils falling out from her ponytail. That just annoys me. But otherwise I really appreciate Karl Moline's work. He has his unique style and it seems to fit in well with the overall story.
There are so many things that need to be tied up next issue, it really seems like it's going to be rushed, Buffy Vs. Fray, FDW & Harth Vs. Fray & Buffy, Xander & Dawn Vs. Monster Snake Things, Willow & Kennedy opening the portal to bring Buffy back, Buffy finding out why there's no mention of the Slayer army (although this one could take place in a future issue), Gunther Vs. Vampires. And the list goes on... So many plot points that need to be tied up.
And the main question I still have after all this is what exactly is going on with Saga Vasuki and Willow. Kumiko made it sound like she was Willow's tutor, in this issue Willow made it sound like they were lovers and she owes her some great debt possibly for bringing Kennedy back from her mystical death or teaching Willow.
Oh, and the Fray-Speak, it's still grating and seems forced. I don't know why there's been such a noticable change in language since the miniseries and 'Time of Your Life'.
I hope issue 19 is not delayed too much. Hopefully it still comes out in October. If it comes out late October, then it's still a full month between it and issue 20.
|
|
|
Post by SlayerLV on Sept 7, 2008 2:32:02 GMT -5
I thought the issue was great. Xander and Dawn's interaction wants me to see a relationship between them. I thought the tree men were pretty corny. Willow and the snake lady (I can't remember her name) was very revealing and graphic but not in a bad way, I wonder when Kennedy will catch on to the things that are happening? I love how Willow has obviously manipulated Meleka in the future and would really like to know what she showed her.
|
|
|
Post by vampiresaiyan on Sept 7, 2008 8:26:19 GMT -5
We already found out who did the mojo on Dawn It was her boyfriends roommate wasnt it? We found out she slept with him and cheated on her bf.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Sept 7, 2008 9:08:55 GMT -5
We already found out who did the mojo on Dawn It was her boyfriends roommate wasnt it? We found out she slept with him and cheated on her bf. Actually, while Dawn did cheat on Kenny with Nick, it's never been established with 100% certainty which of the two worked the mojo on her. It could be Nick, since Dawn did do the horizontal polka with him, but it could be Kenny (since everyone suspected that he was a Thricewise) working some kind of vengeance mojo.
|
|
|
Post by vampiresaiyan on Sept 7, 2008 17:42:10 GMT -5
ahhh thanks wenxina shows how much I pay attention
|
|
|
Post by Skytteflickan88 on Sept 8, 2008 6:57:46 GMT -5
I can't believe how many of you who said ”Come one, talking tees? Joss is losing it.” before evn reading the issue. This is so Buffy. The demons are all; ”We're going to kill you, we're scary” and the scoobies inflate their bubble. So damn funny. And the scene when Gunther sees the taptaptap-vamp? Now that was scary. Expected, but scary. I felt fear for our dear fish. I'm not sure about the "Summers, you drive like a spaz!"-line. I still hear Snyder's voice, and it's not always fun and cute to re'use old lines. But Buffy's response; "And that phrase stod the test of time?" was a good one. But the re-use of this line makes me wonder if the Saga-vasuki line from issue 14, "Did you think I could not find you? Did you think you could hide from what you are? Or what's to come?" is meaningless to the plot. That was also said by dream-Tara in Restless and Dracula in season 5. I thought it had a deeper meaning, but maybe it was just a cute thing to do. When Buffy doesn't stop to save those people, I'm first horrified, then proud, but still scared. I no longer believe that she looks to the little person, but to the big picture. She knows how many that can suffer when you focus on the single lives. It's sad really. Makes me wonder if she would have saved Willow in Choices with that kind of attitude, when Faith and the Mayor had Willow traped. I think Buffy would save Willow in a similar situation today, even if it meant risking to die and let a greater threat live. Maybe she would let Willow die. Today I wouldn't expect the cavalry for the less fortunate people... First we see future Willow talking about killing Buffy, then we switch to porn. I'm disturbed. I wonder who helped Willow make contact with Saga before. She had better been taking care of the job herself! ”I'm sorry. You know how grateful I am for what we... what you taught me.” ”I'll see you soon.” PROSTITUTE!!! And Kennedy looks so happy. I can't dislike that girl anymore. How can Willow do this? Has she learned nothing about what lies and addiction to dangerous things can do to the people you love? I can't believe I actually feel sorry for Willow too. But I understand, she is now deep in this mess with Saga, but that doesn't make it right to let Kennedy be blind for what Willow has done. That she-dog needs to tell the truth, pronto, before Kennedy can never forgive her. God knows, maybe Kennedy will try to kick Saga's arse for this and and in the process? Kennedy does not deserve this. And about killing Buffy? I'm afraid thet Melaka is going to learn that trusting strange mad-woman is baaaad. Even if it's fortold that Buffy will do something bad, it's not like Buffy's hasn't beaten propechys and the likes before. I just wonder if the vison Willow showed was from the past for the future, and if it was real or not. It must have been something horrible, if Mel is ready to trust the mad-women who's been working for her murderous brother. I hope Mel's just in Willow's thrall or something, not knowing what she's doing. I have a hard time beliveing that Buffy made one misstake and Willow turned evil. It must be something HUGE. Through season 6 Buffy stod by Willow's side, even tough Dawn almost died, and when Wilow turned into a homicidal maniac, she was still there, and in season 7 she accepted Willow back. What the hell did Buffy do to piss of/hurt future Willow? I really hope that future Willow turns out to be soulsucked or possessed or something, explaining her actions. Maybe Willow will disobey Saga's order, looks into the future, pull Buffy out and kills herself afterwards so she won't become evil. That's the only easy way out I can see. The one thing I have to complain about this issue is this; two pages were stuck together which some kind of paint. That sucked.
|
|
Patches
Innocent Bystander
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 19
|
Post by Patches on Sept 8, 2008 7:54:25 GMT -5
And I laughed my ass off when I read your comment about Buffy crashing the car, because that's exactly what she did. Although she did accomplish her mission before crashing it though. Well, with her driving it could have ended either way. And, btw, this site needs "Buffy driving the car" smiley/icon. Yet they went after JVamps only after they became threat to the slayers. In fact, if Joss wanted to show slayers doing the family business, you know, saving people, hunting things... it would not take more than one panel, heck, even one frame. For example one frame in Beautiful Sunset, right after Buffy&Slayers doing the "Rot Front" stance, could show slayers protecting some innocents. media.comics.ign.com/media/856/856079/img_5191518.htmlYet there isn't one. Maybe there isn't one on purpose? An army, any army, does not exists in vacuum. It performs a social function: protecting the citizens of the nation from external threat. If Buffy's army protects only slayers, than that means that Buffy considers only slayers her nation. As the leader of the military, who answers to no one this makes her a leader of military junta, a dictator. Not to mention the whole "personality cult" which she has going on. And this is not exactly a heroic quality isn't it? And it goes way back. In fact it starts with season 2, when Buffy was letting Angel kill non-important people for half a year, before pulling herself together. Or season 3, when she was willing to let Faith's killing spree slide, until her own boyfriend was threatened. Well. Moral stance of a central character does not directly indicate a moral stance of the writers. If it would be so, writers, of, for example, "Battlestar Galactica", would be a very very messed up people. And Joss & K had their fill of hate-mail during the "Buffy" runs. (Heck half of fandom have been in "Joss Whedon sucks" camp for years) Writers are used to it by now. Maybe it wasn't. Maybe it was like Xander's summoning of Sweet in S6 - just something done as a joke. But from the other hand... you see, writers are doing interesting stuff with Buffy's character in S8. They show this more cheerful, more cute, more together exterior which is improvement of S7 Buffy. And then show some glimpses of something darker in between. Ruthless, steel glove without any velvet, Buffy.
|
|
|
Post by Skytteflickan88 on Sept 8, 2008 8:24:29 GMT -5
You think that Xander was going to wait to kill the vamps until Buffy's birthday???
No way that Xander would do that, that's evil. He was joking, that was a typical Xander-joke.
Sorry if I sound upset and unreasonable, but I didn't think that people took Xander's jokes seriously.
And my two cents of how I think that the slayer army works:
They locate a vamp-nest or demon or whatever, they recon and take it out. Not to protect themselves, but to kill the bad guy, who is bad because he/she/they kill innocent people. true, we haven't seen Buffy or the others find an innocent in immediate danger and deal with it, but I figure that's what's going on between the issues. after all, there aren't that many frames in one issue.
I can't really see the army as a gang fighting for power because of the power itself. They kill their enemies to save lives, they fight for the average Joe who can't defend himself against the forcess of darkness.
It's not about power, it's about what's right. The slayers fight for their families & friends, and for the people they will never meet but still defend.
Sure, some slayers must have joined up just to fight, like Simone, but not Buffy and the scoobies. They will not turn into power-hungry warriors, just out for blood.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Sept 8, 2008 8:24:30 GMT -5
Well, with her driving it could have ended either way. And, btw, this site needs "Buffy driving the car" smiley/icon. Hey Phil! We need a Buffy driving the car smiley! Think you can wrangle that? There was a Tokyo squad, you know. Buffy and central command didn't even know about the Jap Vamps till they stole the Scythe. I'm reading that as indication that while central command has veto power, each Slayer headquarters the world over has command over their own jurisdiction, unless central command decides to take over. The same thing was shown in #16, where Kennedy headed an away team, at Willow's behest. NYC is Vi's jurisdiction, but still had to work with Kennedy's team. Maybe the scene you wanted wasn't there on purpose. Or maybe it's just not important enough to dedicate panel room to it. You're working under the assumption that Buffy's Slayer army only saves Slayers, but the whole point of raising an army was to beat back the forces of evil. It's implied. See above. I responded before realizing that the point I was addressing was below that quote. You try killing your ex, even when he turns out to be a monster. The point is that Buffy is very much a girl living in a world much like ours. She has emotions, and sometimes they get the better of her. Fact remains, she was out fighting evil, protecting the innocent even when she was crushed. And hello, Angel switched addresses on her after he went all fang-boy again. He went from his little apartment to some serious digs, i.e. the mansion. Faith did the same thing. She switched apartments, possibly even zipcodes, going from the motel to the "lush" apartment. Buffy was always a step behind Faith anyway, since the Mayor's agenda was pretty much hidden until the Scoobies finally figured it out. That wasn't my point at all. My point was had the writers written Buffy any other way than they did back then (i.e. caring about the people she loved), they would have received an enormous amount of backlash. They're receiving it now, for writing Buffy that way. And that's why she's interesting to read, still. I've no complaints.
|
|
Patches
Innocent Bystander
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 19
|
Post by Patches on Sept 8, 2008 9:29:33 GMT -5
You think that Xander was going to wait to kill the vamps until Buffy's birthday??? No way that Xander would do that, that's evil. He was joking, that was a typical Xander-joke. Sorry if I sound upset and unreasonable, but I didn't think that people took Xander's jokes seriously. "Does that mean that I would have to be... your queen?". For years there was a big section of fandom who consider Xander responsible for death of people in "Once more with feeling". The reason for that is exactly one joke. And, yes, "I was saving it for your birthday" could be just Xander's style of talking. Or it could be something else. The problem is most likely in my head anyway. After Buffy's "I am the law" declaration in S7 I tend to view her actions as a bit more dark then they probably are. You see, they could be saving people between issues. Or they could be worshiping Ctulhu for all we know. If it is not shown, we can safely assume pretty much anything. What we were shown however, is slayers robbing banks, having castles and riding in limos and personal planes. Besides in WATG Buffy clearly knew where Drac live. She worked with him and then let him go back to his Albanian cuisine. Because, hey, maybe he would be useful again. Loosing the mission is not about being hungry for blood. It is about loosing the distinction between right and wrong. Loosing the sight of the border which you cannot cross. Btw, I am interested what you would be considering the line which Buffy cannot cross?
|
|
Slayer489
Wise-cracking Techno Genius
"Why do I feel like this? Why do I let Spike do those things to me?" - Buffy 'Dead Things'[Mo0:0]
Posts: 784
|
Post by Slayer489 on Sept 8, 2008 11:11:29 GMT -5
Got my issue today. The Xander and Dawn bit was short but sweet. Fray and Buffy's differing personalities were shown when Fray jumped in to slay the lurks and Buffy looked at the bigger picture. Then Gunther's capture/death? Who knows yet. And when Erin and Fray set Buffy up at the end. I can see Fray dying in the next issue. And more Willow and Saga which was great to see. All in all, fantastic issue and I can't wait until the conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Sept 8, 2008 12:42:39 GMT -5
Besides in WATG Buffy clearly knew where Drac live. She worked with him and then let him go back to his Albanian cuisine. Because, hey, maybe he would be useful again. Could I point out a more practical explanation? Buffy can't kill Dracula. He's impervious to stakes and the like because he can transmogrify. So it wasn't like she was just leaving him to kill people. She couldn't kill him. Add to that, the fact the she pretty much left him a crippled old man at the end of "Antique" was probably the most she could hope to achieve at that point. Dracula has never been useful to her, at all, except for showing her the darkness within her (prior to WatG). And less I remember incorrectly, Dracula wasn't exactly hankering for much more than booze when we see the "15 minutes before" bit in #13. Broken spirit and all. And who's to say that Dracula was returning to his castle after the events of WatG? We saw the man on a boat... he could have been moving on. You could argue that she could kill Dracula after the events of #15, where he's just a regular old vampire. But she didn't kill Spike in S2, and she didn't kill Ben in S5. Because, as Giles pointed out, she's a hero, and she has honor. Maybe it was wrong in the big picture of things, but personal integrity comes to play here. So maybe Buffy isn't as "big picture"-oriented as some would like to make her out to be.
|
|
witcher
Wise-cracking Techno Genius
Homicidal Bunny
Willow fan forever[Mo0:30]
Posts: 711
|
Post by witcher on Sept 8, 2008 14:33:45 GMT -5
Besides in WATG Buffy clearly knew where Drac live. She worked with him and then let him go back to his Albanian cuisine. Because, hey, maybe he would be useful again. Could I point out a more practical explanation? Buffy can't kill Dracula. He's impervious to stakes and the like because he can transmogrify. So it wasn't like she was just leaving him to kill people. She couldn't kill him. Add to that, the fact the she pretty much left him a crippled old man at the end of "Antique" was probably the most she could hope to achieve at that point. Dracula has never been useful to her, at all, except for showing her the darkness within her (prior to WatG). And less I remember incorrectly, Dracula wasn't exactly hankering for much more than booze when we see the "15 minutes before" bit in #13. Broken spirit and all. And who's to say that Dracula was returning to his castle after the events of WatG? We saw the man on a boat... he could have been moving on. You could argue that she could kill Dracula after the events of #15, where he's just a regular old vampire. But she didn't kill Spike in S2, and she didn't kill Ben in S5. Because, as Giles pointed out, she's a hero, and she has honor. Maybe it was wrong in the big picture of things, but personal integrity comes to play here. So maybe Buffy isn't as "big picture"-oriented as some would like to make her out to be. I agree with the part that she could not kill Dracula when he was able to go all misty, but when he became a regular vampire there was nothing stopping her. I mean The Master was an old vampire and she had no problem killing him lol
|
|
underbuffysspell
Potential Slayer
Seize the day, 'Cause tomorrow, you might be dead. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wizw5VqvXI8[Mo0:0
Posts: 187
|
Post by underbuffysspell on Sept 8, 2008 14:49:40 GMT -5
Could I point out a more practical explanation? Buffy can't kill Dracula. He's impervious to stakes and the like because he can transmogrify. So it wasn't like she was just leaving him to kill people. She couldn't kill him. Add to that, the fact the she pretty much left him a crippled old man at the end of "Antique" was probably the most she could hope to achieve at that point. Dracula has never been useful to her, at all, except for showing her the darkness within her (prior to WatG). And less I remember incorrectly, Dracula wasn't exactly hankering for much more than booze when we see the "15 minutes before" bit in #13. Broken spirit and all. And who's to say that Dracula was returning to his castle after the events of WatG? We saw the man on a boat... he could have been moving on. You could argue that she could kill Dracula after the events of #15, where he's just a regular old vampire. But she didn't kill Spike in S2, and she didn't kill Ben in S5. Because, as Giles pointed out, she's a hero, and she has honor. Maybe it was wrong in the big picture of things, but personal integrity comes to play here. So maybe Buffy isn't as "big picture"-oriented as some would like to make her out to be. I agree with the part that she could not kill Dracula when he was able to go all misty, but when he became a regular vampire there was nothing stopping her. I mean The Master was an old vampire and she had no problem killing him lol But Dracula isn't doing anything to her. Once he does something to hurt her or someone she loves, then she'll most likely finish what she started in Season 5. However, at the moment he isn't a threat.
|
|
|
Post by Skytteflickan88 on Sept 8, 2008 14:53:11 GMT -5
Wenxina, you make a lot of sense, but Buffy should definitely have killed Dracula. And in season 2, Buffy didn't let Spike live because she had honor. If she could have, she would have killed him. Not sure were you get that from. However, he should have staked him in Lover's walk, risky since Angel was weak and she had to protect him and because Spike could have gotten to the fabric and killed Willow & Xander in case Buffy failed killing him. I guess she shouldn't have staked him then. But you're right about Ben. She couldn't kill him because she's hero. And in season 4, she didn't kill Spike, although he could have lost his chip any minute. So she's not as much a big picture gal, she more stupid way too sensitive-gal. But Dracula isn't doing anything to her. Once he does something to hurt her or someone she loves, then she'll most likely finish what she started in Season 5. However, at the moment he isn't a threat. He eats people. Ergo, Buffy should kill him. I don't get why she didn't try, that's a weird decision by the writers.
|
|
janiejones
Innocent Bystander
In nonsense is strength.[Mo0:21]
Posts: 34
|
Post by janiejones on Sept 8, 2008 16:32:14 GMT -5
He eats people. Ergo, Buffy should kill him. I don't get why she didn't try, that's a weird decision by the writers. I think maybe she was unsure how to kill him. She did spike him through the heart twice, we saw his skeleton, dust, etc., but it didn't kill him. He also left town after that episode, so it's not like they had time to research him and find his "kryptonite". I also think that in "Antiques" and "Wolves..." perhaps she knew that if she really got into a death match with him, he very well come out on top, and there are more deadly things out there that she may need to contend with first. Or I could be completely off my rocker. Happens. ;D
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Sept 8, 2008 17:00:19 GMT -5
Wenxina, you make a lot of sense, but Buffy should definitely have killed Dracula. And in season 2, Buffy didn't let Spike live because she had honor. If she could have, she would have killed him. Not sure were you get that from. I got that from the series actually. The deal she made with Spike was he gets to leave Sunnydale with Drusilla, and she would stake him the next time she saw him again. She honored that deal. EDIT: Here's a summary I clipped from Wikipedia: As for the Dracula bit, I'm answering both you and witcher here. Dracula helped her retrieve her Scythe, and to a certain degree, protected Xander. And so, out of honor, Buffy doesn't stake him, even though she has the chance to. I agree, she can be somewhat stupid when it comes to these things, but she's Buffy. Like you mentioned in a separate thread, she should have killed Ben. One nice big blow from the hammer would have done his skull in. But she didn't. The only explanation I have for all these instances of "mercy" showed to vampires is because she is honoring either a deal, or because of a favor done for her. There's nothing saying that she won't stake Dracula the next time she sees him trying to eat people, but for services rendered, he gets a one time get out of jail free card. And witcher, she had no problem doing the Master in because she owed him no favors, and come on, the dude just killed her. Seriously... my point wasn't about the age of the vampires (i.e. the older you are, the more likely she's not gonna stake you). And the fact remains that the Master didn't have Dracula's powers.
|
|
stakey
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
2nd in command to Mr pointy
"Don't be a hero Scherbatsky." [Mo0:31]
Posts: 676
|
Post by stakey on Sept 8, 2008 17:00:28 GMT -5
I got the issue today and thought it was the worst yet.
The art is definately not improving like joss said and if anything gettng worse...wtf ios wrong with buffys face??!! I didnt mind the art all that much but now its bugging me.
I could only find about 2 panels I thought yes that looks like smg or at least a normal pretty human face.
the plot is seriously dragging and Im finding the arc in general completely uninteresting.
Really annoyed cos Iv been waiting years for more Fray action and if this is the next installment of fray ill be seeing for another few years im far from happy.
Only bit I really liked and made me laugh out loud was buffy having crashed the spaceship thing into the wall and says something along the lines of 'wel thats went as planned' or something...and the nod to 'Band Candy' ' summer you drive like a spazz!' lol.
And the xander/dawn stuff...meh...I have no problem with tree ents...we saw similar stuff in Angel if not even more ridiculous with a internet laptop using tree.lol...so its not the idea of the Tree Ents its just the timing of it...centuar dawn/green mist monsters/evil willow...theres just too much comicy annoying stuff for me to fully take in one after the other and none of it is really working at all for me personally.
all in all definately worst issue so far.
|
|
ded1
Rogue Demon Hunter
The Zombie Lord
BRAINS!!![Mo0:8]
Posts: 468
|
Post by ded1 on Sept 8, 2008 18:09:13 GMT -5
I'll wait til the next issue to determine how much I like this arc,but this issue felt flat to me.It does a decent job of continuing the story of the arc,but not much more than that.
Xander and Dawn:if you blink,you will miss them Buffy:While her story is continuing nicely,I seem to be getting less intrested in it Willow:This arc,so far,is my least favorite for her character.
I realize that we are taking a darker turn toward the second half of the series,but my caution is on high alert
|
|
|
Post by Skytteflickan88 on Sept 9, 2008 7:48:36 GMT -5
He eats people. Ergo, Buffy should kill him. I don't get why she didn't try, that's a weird decision by the writers. I think maybe she was unsure how to kill him. She did spike him through the heart twice, we saw his skeleton, dust, etc., but it didn't kill him. He also left town after that episode, so it's not like they had time to research him and find his "kryptonite". I also think that in "Antiques" and "Wolves..." perhaps she knew that if she really got into a death match with him, he very well come out on top, and there are more deadly things out there that she may need to contend with first. Or I could be completely off my rocker. Happens. ;D I meant that in issue 15, she should have tried. She has staked him before after all, and she is BUFFY. But maybe you're right, she could be afraid. *whispers in frustration* But she's Buffy.You think that Xander was going to wait to kill the vamps until Buffy's birthday??? No way that Xander would do that, that's evil. He was joking, that was a typical Xander-joke. Sorry if I sound upset and unreasonable, but I didn't think that people took Xander's jokes seriously. "Does that mean that I would have to be... your queen?". For years there was a big section of fandom who consider Xander responsible for death of people in "Once more with feeling". The reason for that is exactly one joke. Yeah, they might have killed of a lot of people for one joke. no one ever mentioned Xander's dirty dead afterwards. He should have been smaked on the head with a crowbar. The line that cannot be crossed would be if Xander actually was planning on keeping that nest until Buffy birthday. And in case Buffy ordered witches to whipe out the memories of those guards at the banks or after Simone's raid, that would be too far. And in case Buffy says "Nah, let's not send a squad out to save that family, we have to check that our computers work" that would cross the line. That Buffy stands by, not killing the bad guy because he's human or letting enemies go because's she's a sooftie or whatever, that I'm barely okay with, but it's acceprtable. So far. So many times have i seen buffy not doing what she has to do(killing Spike in season 4, killing Ben in season 5, not turning Andrew over to the police for katrina's murder, not killing dracual in isue 15), so it would actually not be that far until I was just as suspiscious as you. But I firmly believe that Xander was joking.
|
|