slayerette
Innocent Bystander
There aren't a lot of people that I love[Mo0:1]
Posts: 32
|
Post by slayerette on Aug 24, 2009 21:39:26 GMT -5
I'm honestly not sure about anyone truly "being safe" but if you look at Buffy's story as a heroic journey...(and since people keep saying we really get to see what a hero she is this season) then Giles is the one Scoobie I'm worried about. The mentor/wise man usually bites it, usually at the worst possible time, and usually sacrificing himself. The fact that Giles is the ONE person Buffy has confided in about Willow, and she definitely still seems to need his guidance...made him pretty high on my list.
I hope I'm totally off base, but I've had a bad feeling about his status since NFFY.
|
|
richie
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:1]
Posts: 170
|
Post by richie on Aug 27, 2009 0:29:20 GMT -5
i'm sure oz will die... im watching A HOLE IN THE WORLD with commentaries, and joss said "Ow happy peoplo in my show??? lets spit some blood" (when fred sing and fell from the stairs) so... Oz happy... he'll die (ok maybe i'm a bit bitter... but they killed fred/wes, i can be can i???)
|
|
|
Post by Jsebold87 on Aug 27, 2009 2:16:24 GMT -5
Maybe not Oz, but maybe the woman he's happy with? I would be pissed if Oz died.
I have a feeling Riley will probably end up dieing.
|
|
|
Post by faithlehane on Aug 31, 2009 2:12:29 GMT -5
My guesses lead to either Giles, Xander, or Riley.
|
|
bishopcruz
Common Vampire
There might be hope for them yet.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 50
|
Post by bishopcruz on Sept 2, 2009 17:35:39 GMT -5
Really hope I'm wrong but Xander has had a target on his back since Season 4.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 19, 2009 22:48:34 GMT -5
Joss said the following in a post at Whedonesque about the GLEE episode he's directing:
I know he wasn't being entirely serious here, but it hints to me that he's aware the "Joss always kills characters" thing is getting a bit stale and predictable. If so, we might make it through season 8 without any major fatalities.
Naaaah.
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Oct 19, 2009 23:06:45 GMT -5
Joss said the following in a post at Whedonesque about the GLEE episode he's directing: I know he wasn't being entirely serious here, but it hints to me that he's aware the "Joss always kills characters" thing is getting a bit stale and predictable. If so, we might make it through season 8 without any major fatalities. Naaaah. I still maintain that killing characters isn't stale at all provided it's done well. I like my stories to have a nice high body count. So far the only major death in the Buffyverse that's felt pointless and indulgent was Renee's, but then I don't really see the point of her character in general. Since they're rotting in limbo anyway, I think Vi and Rona should've been killed at the start of "Retreat". Having Twilight bomb various Slayer bases around the world, including Manhattan and Chicago, would have been a exciting start to the arc and would've actually justified the titular retreat. I'd throw Wood in there as well had Brian Lynch not recently expressed an interest in using the character.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 7:36:16 GMT -5
I still maintain that killing characters isn't stale at all provided it's done well. Well done or not, it's still always going to seem stale to some degree because Joss does it so much. He's famous for it, and it's become predictable to the point of being a punchline. Joss has always been about defying expectations and doing the unexpected. This quote... joking tone notwithstanding... shows that Joss is aware that his character-killing is being seen as a cliche. I'm not saying he won't kill anybody in season 8... I think we've already been told there will be fatalities among characters we know by name. But I hope it won't seem like Joss checking a name off his "to do" list... because that's what it's seemed like at times. I like my stories to have a nice high body count. I like my stories to have dramatic tension and payoff... but there are plenty of more original and challenging ways to accomplish that than just snuffing people. Joss is too good a writer to fall into such a predictable copy-and-paste routine.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Oct 20, 2009 8:19:19 GMT -5
Well done or not, it's still always going to seem stale to some degree because Joss does it so much. He's famous for it, and it's become predictable to the point of being a punchline. Hey God! You hear that? Your whole death thing is getting a wee bit stale.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 9:25:05 GMT -5
Hey God! You hear that? Your whole death thing is getting a wee bit stale. God doesn't need to worry about ratings or selling comics.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Oct 20, 2009 11:04:41 GMT -5
Hey God! You hear that? Your whole death thing is getting a wee bit stale. God doesn't need to worry about ratings or selling comics. What are you talking about? Until Vatican II, Catholics were dropping like flies. That's like losing your subscription right there. I jest, of course. But what you're essentially arguing is that because character deaths make people walk away, Joss should stop. He makes a good point. Everyone dies. Just because his characters have names, a face, and a connection to an audience doesn't mean that they should be exempt from the general rules of the universe. Well, except perhaps Satsu... she should totally live through this... only coz the Scoobies are seriously lacking in the personal style dept. as of late. Even Buffy. But I digress. In fact, I find it odd that none of the better known Slayers, or even the core Scoobies have either been shown to be injured, or just flatout dead. It's war. Werewolves and one-time superpowered girls vs tanks doesn't remotely make any sense at all.
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Oct 20, 2009 11:22:11 GMT -5
I still maintain that killing characters isn't stale at all provided it's done well. Well done or not, it's still always going to seem stale to some degree because Joss does it so much. He's famous for it, and it's become predictable to the point of being a punchline. Joss has always been about defying expectations and doing the unexpected. This quote... joking tone notwithstanding... shows that Joss is aware that his character-killing is being seen as a cliche. I'm not saying he won't kill anybody in season 8... I think we've already been told there will be fatalities among characters we know by name. But I hope it won't seem like Joss checking a name off his "to do" list... because that's what it's seemed like at times. I like my stories to have a nice high body count. I like my stories to have dramatic tension and payoff... but there are plenty of more original and challenging ways to accomplish that than just snuffing people. Joss is too good a writer to fall into such a predictable copy-and-paste routine. Joss doesn't actually kill many more characters than any other series, it's just he knows how to do it right. He knows how to make it hurt. He'll take the sweetest, most innocent character in the show and make her die of a long, agonising, soul-destroying disease. He'll take the funniest, most likable fan-favourite and brutally slice her in half just for the hell of it. His character deaths are powerful and memorable, which is why he's known for them. There usually is dramatic tension and pay-off to Joss' deaths... he's not writing a slasher movie. Fans just complain that they want "more original and challenging ways..." because they'd rather have a happy ending than see their favourite characters die. Look at Dr. Horrible... Penny's death was hugely important to that story and Billy's arc. But a lot of fans just ignore that and go, "Waaahh. I wanted them to end up together!!! Joss will never let us be happy!!!"
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 11:25:32 GMT -5
But what you're essentially arguing is that because character deaths make people walk away, Joss should stop. That's not my argument. My argument is that predictable storytelling is bad storytelling... and having a character death quota is bad storytelling. Sometimes, everyone survives. Sometimes, the tragedy and drama come from things other than death. Anybody can kill a character for a quick fix of tragedy porn. I prefer the psychological drama to the slasher flick. He makes a good point. Everyone dies. Just because his characters have names, a face, and a connection to an audience doesn't mean that they should be exempt from the general rules of the universe. Most people live through wars... especially superpowered people. If you want realistic storytelling, then by rights ALL of the Scoobies should be dead by the end of #30. Well, except perhaps Satsu... she should totally live through this... only coz the Scoobies are seriously lacking in the personal style dept. as of late. Even Buffy. But I digress. Well, I agree with your digression. In fact, I find it odd that none of the better known Slayers, or even the core Scoobies have either been shown to be injured, or just flatout dead. It's war. Werewolves and one-time superpowered girls vs tanks doesn't remotely make any sense at all. Well, there is the matter of those three angry giant goddesses... And the Scoobies had the advantage of higher ground, terrain familiarity, entrenchment and preparation... those can enable a much smaller, worse-equipped force to hold off a much stronger force... especially a force that's idiotic enough to take a tank battalion into the frickin' Himalayas.This is why the greatest fighting force in the history of the world has been unable to win a decisive victory against gangs of peasants with Kalashnikovs in Afghanistan. There usually is dramatic tension and pay-off to Joss' deaths... he's not writing a slasher movie. Fans just complain that they want "more original and challenging ways..." because they'd rather have a happy ending than see their favourite characters die. Look at Dr. Horrible... Penny's death was hugely important to that story and Billy's arc. But a lot of fans just ignore that and go, "Waaahh. I wanted them to end up together!!! Joss will never let us be happy!!!" I've said it before and I'll say it again... NEVER having a happy ending rings just as false as ALWAYS having a happy ending. But we'll never agree on this point.
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Oct 20, 2009 11:47:10 GMT -5
There usually is dramatic tension and pay-off to Joss' deaths... he's not writing a slasher movie. Fans just complain that they want "more original and challenging ways..." because they'd rather have a happy ending than see their favourite characters die. Look at Dr. Horrible... Penny's death was hugely important to that story and Billy's arc. But a lot of fans just ignore that and go, "Waaahh. I wanted them to end up together!!! Joss will never let us be happy!!!" I've said it before and I'll say it again... NEVER having a happy ending rings just as false as ALWAYS having a happy ending. But we'll never agree on this point. Joss' endings tend to be bittersweet rather than outright happy or sad: "Graduation Day, Part Two" - The Scoobies all survive high school. But Buffy has to say goodbye to Angel. "The Gift" - Buffy dies a glorious death, saving the world and finally finds the peace she always wanted. But her friends are left in mourning. "Chosen" - The Scoobies overcome impossible odds, and look forward to a hopeful future. However, Spike, Anya, and many others pay the price for that victory. "Unstoppable" - Kitty dies saving the world, but the X-Men find a new member in Armor. Cyclops and Emma's relationship is strengthened by their experiences. Even Dr. Horrible's ending is kind of bittersweet... Billy achieves exactly what he set out to do, just not in the way he wanted. Buffy is, ultimately, an opitmistic show. I have no doubts it will end on an uplifting, empowering note. But I don't expect that to happen without a price. But again, this isn't good enough for many fans, who want everthing tied up with a bow and fat grandchildren, Charmed-style.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Oct 20, 2009 12:00:54 GMT -5
But what you're essentially arguing is that because character deaths make people walk away, Joss should stop. That's not my argument. My argument is that predictable storytelling is bad storytelling... and having a character death quota is bad storytelling. Sometimes, everyone survives. Sometimes, the tragedy and drama come from things other than death. Anybody can kill a character for a quick fix of tragedy porn. I prefer the psychological drama to the slasher flick. But what you and many have argued is that watching your favorite characters die is psychological trauma. So hello... apparently damned if you do, damned if you don't. I don't get this whole thing about a "death quota". Never seen it in either TV shows. Every death served some purpose, even if it was just to show the brutality of battle (Anya's comes to mind). Most people live through wars... especially superpowered people. If you want realistic storytelling, then by rights ALL of the Scoobies should be dead by the end of #30. [...] Well, there is the matter of those three angry giant goddesses... Already argued that realism dictates more significant deaths. As for the goddesses, I was arguing for before the fact, when they were being pulverized. A tank can fire a shell from pretty far away. A wooden hut/temple is a pretty easy target, even for the short-sighted. I fail to see how that wasn't leveled from afar. And as I said, "one-time superpowered" girls. Right now, powerless. Not weak, but definitely not Slayer-esque by any stretch of the imagination. And the Scoobies had the advantage of higher ground, terrain familiarity, entrenchment and preparation... those can enable a much smaller, worse-equipped force to hold off a much stronger force... especially a force that's idiotic enough to take a tank battalion into the frickin' Himalayas.Beats Hannibal, or whichever idiot it was who thought that bringing an army of elephants through the French Alps was a great idea? At least with tanks, you don't have to deal with mass mortality of your "vehicles of war". And from what I could see of the landscape, it wasn't set up with too much advantage for the white hats. Again, tank trumps cover.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 12:49:36 GMT -5
But what you and many have argued is that watching your favorite characters die is psychological trauma. So hello... apparently damned if you do, damned if you don't. There are other ways to achieve dramatic tension than through death. There are other bad things in the world. Death is the easy and cheap way to get a reaction... one step up from slicing an onion under the audience's noses. When you become famous for killing characters, I submit that as evidence that you're relying on that device too much. Ditto with the "no happy relationships" thing. These are genuine flaws in Joss's writing, IMO. Sometimes, everybody lives. Already argued that realism dictates more significant deaths. Realism dictates that they all die. All of them, right now, and the series is over. Buffy lost, the bad guys won. The end. But luckily this is fiction, so realism is negotiable. As for the goddesses, I was arguing for before the fact, when they were being pulverized. A tank can fire a shell from pretty far away. A wooden hut/temple is a pretty easy target, even for the short-sighted. I fail to see how that wasn't leveled from afar. And as I said, "one-time superpowered" girls. Right now, powerless. Not weak, but definitely not Slayer-esque by any stretch of the imagination. Since we know Twilight's army has air support... presumably more than that one plane they shot down... the temple should be in flames right now, along with everyone inside it. Starting with the non-combatants trapped in the "safe" room in the center of the building, where if they aren't burned alive or overcome with smoke, they'll be crushed when the roof collapses. There's no reason for the tanks to be there at all. Air cover, infantry, and a few urban assault vehicles are what this situation would call for.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Oct 20, 2009 13:03:35 GMT -5
Re: Dramatic tension. Yes, there are other ways to create that, and I'd make the argument that Joss has utilized quite a spectrum. However, it seems that most people don't fully recognize that, and instead harp on and on about deaths and no happy ending. Examples: the whole Buffy/Angel thing. Sexual tension. Didn't end happy, granted. Buffy/Faith animosity. Ended better than the B/A thing. Testosterone poisoning between Angel and Riley, or Angel and Spike. Personal vendettas... Angel/Xander, Spike/Wood, etc. Cheating partners. Sexual conflict. Oz still loves Willow, but Willow now loves Tara. Only a few would argue that was a bad way to go. Power struggles... Buffy against the Watchers' Council. Teen/parent angst... I fail to see how this one ended badly. Joyce's death is an entirely separate entity. Point being, given the number of different ways Joss has created dramatic tension, I think it's a tad unfair to just say that all he does is killhis characters. Maybe the fact that he's infamous for killing characters is because he's one of the only creators with the balls to actually do so, and not because he overdoes it indiscriminately. Perspective. Realism dictates that they all die. All of them, right now, and the series is over. Buffy lost, the bad guys won. The end. But luckily this is fiction, so realism is negotiable. Not disputing that realism is negotiable. All I'm saying is that more significant deaths should've occurred by the time the stomping goddesses appeared. All things considered, these odds don't look as bad as the battle in "Chosen". And people survived that. But with significant casualties. Since we know Twilight's army has air support... presumably more than that one plane they shot down... the temple should be in flames right now, along with everyone inside it. Starting with the non-combatants trapped in the "safe" room in the center of the building, where if they aren't burned alive or overcome with smoke, they'll be crushed when the roof collapses. There's no reason for the tanks to be there at all. Air cover, infantry, and a few urban assault vehicles are what this situation would call for. Never argued that there was a reason for there to be tanks. I did mention tanks being better than elephants, in jest. However, there's no evidence of more than 1 plane at the moment. We saw one, it was shot down. HOWEVER, more planes or not, the tanks are there, and even a lumbering tank can take out a hut without much effort. But if you're trying to make a point about military accuracy, I'd say that this is the wrong show for that. Joss is no expert in that area, and hey, neither am I. I do however realize that each time the military, or some sort of military organization has been depicted, it's always been a mere plot device, or at best, a foil for the Scoobies (S4 comes to mind, and I guess we may eventually be able to say the same for S8's Slayer army vs. real world army). I mean, Xander escaped with a rocket launcher! The Slayers made out with a submarine. Buffy and Xander successfully infiltrated the Initiative to free Oz. The details don't really matter here, the tropes do. It's how it's always been handled in the Buffyverse.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 13:45:29 GMT -5
Basically I'm just frustrated at the fact that we have come to anticipate the "Joss character death" as an inevitability, just because that's what's supposed to happen to make it more "real."
I watch/read stories in order to enjoy myself, and I don't like it when characters I love get killed because that's what fits the formula. I just wish Joss would mix things up sometimes with the occasional undiluted happy ending.
Happy endings make me happy, and I like being happy. Maybe that makes me an immature, uncultured idiot, but there we are.
I'm hoping that the quote I mentioned indicates that Joss knows it's time to do something different and surprise us... if he even takes it seriously at all.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Oct 20, 2009 16:03:14 GMT -5
I just wish Joss would mix things up sometimes with the occasional undiluted happy ending. But where would you place a happy ending? If a conflict arises say in S9, after a ridiculously joyful end to S8, one would argue that "happily ever after" is misleading here, because the "ever after" seems to be a false sell. And if you're not arguing for "ever after", then what about the "happy" part? After huge losses on their side, I doubt anything could make Team Buffy very happy. Relief, sure, but I don't know about happy. The closest we ever got to a happy ending in BtVS was S3. Possibly S1, but then again, Buffy died the first time, and that's gotta come with baggage. And I guess S7. But none of those are pure joy. If they were, they would probably be considered inappropriate. As it is, Team Anya haven't dropped the bone about Xander not mourning her right that instant yet. Perhaps you'll get a happy ending in S9, since there are no plans for a S10 as yet, according to Allie. But here's the thing, if the Fray future comes into play, is whatever ending that comes in S9 truly happy? Dystopian futures tend to be more bleak than bales of laughter.
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Oct 20, 2009 16:18:56 GMT -5
I wanted a happy ending, not a "ridiculously joyful" one. Ridiculousness is not something I'm looking for in a story. Letting all the major characters make it through alive would satisfy me, and not having one or two token deaths because that somehow makes the story "ring true."
I don't understand the desire to slaughter characters we claim to love. I guess because I enjoy the characters more than the stories.
But it doesn't matter. Joss will do what Joss will do. I'm not getting into a big fight over little colored squiggles on a piece of paper.
I suppose I'm fated to lose interest in Joss's storytelling style sooner or later. But for the moment, I'm enjoying it.
|
|