|
|
Post by wenxina on Apr 9, 2009 15:17:46 GMT -5
Let me put it this way. As a friend on this forum pointed out... when the longest debate about an issue is about the "G" issue, it really speaks of how little meat there was in the first place.
Valid points are being made about people's interpretation of how Faith uses nicknames. That's worthy of being posted because it's a legitimate exchange of opinions and interpretations.
|
|
Nicholas
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
One Good Scare
Tonight I'm Dancing.[Mo0:16]
Posts: 656
|
Post by Nicholas on Apr 10, 2009 12:55:41 GMT -5
But seriously, a nickname? Do people think this is going to completely change her character or something?
"Oh my god! Faith called Giles "G" so therefore she is eveil again!!!!!!11111oneoneone!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Apr 10, 2009 14:06:52 GMT -5
Not to be rude but why the hell are people actually sitting on here getting angry and having in depth discussions on why Faith called Giles "G"? Sorry but you sound way more angry about this than I do in my discussion posts. I've already said it's a relatively small moment in itself, but whatever anger you may be reading is more the controversial spirit of debate and not the subject under discussion. There's a difference between the disappointment and disinterest I actually feel for this issue and then the sparring that goes on here in discussion threads. As for Faith, how she uses nicknames is a part of her characterization. I think I've written enough on that subject though. She called Buffy "B" and has had an assorted amount of nicknames for characters throughout the series. Even when we do the Q&A's after each ish, he tells us that sometimes we are reading WAY to deep into it, like seeing things where their is nothing to see. A lot of fans were "reading WAY too deep into" the subtext of Buffy/Faith in Season 3 to the point that Joss basically called them out on a fanboard for actively looking for slash when nothing was there. The fans responded by directing Joss to their meta written on the subject. He read it and apologized, saying he'd never realized that the subtext was there. He and his writers had written it and not even realized it til it was pointed out to them by fans. So does Allie telling me we read too much into this mean much? No, not when subjective analysis of art means that meaning can exist in works without the creators being initially aware of it. Whether the meaning exists because the creator did it unconsciously, subconsciously or by accident - it still exists. Can't stop the signal even if the creator didn't realize they were sending it out. But seriously, a nickname? Do people think this is going to completely change her character or something? "Oh my god! Faith called Giles "G" so therefore she is eveil again!!!!!!11111oneoneone!" Um, sorry. But where did anyone say that? My point was that the writer doesn't get how to write Faith. I've pushed this issue into the 'Bad Characterization' box I have reserved for such episodes like Empty Places when the Scoobies kick Buffy out of her house in the middle of an apocalypse. It's bad writing. Nowhere has anyone said they're worried about what this does to her character in a characterization sense - it's more that the writer failed to embody the character at all. |
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Apr 10, 2009 15:13:39 GMT -5
I've pushed this issue into the 'Bad Characterization' box I have reserved for such episodes like Empty Places when the Scoobies kick Buffy out of her house in the middle of an apocalypse. It's bad writing. This is off-topic but I'm interested... why do you think "Empty Places" was bad writing? I think the characters' actions were pretty understandable... Buffy can be self-righteous and her leadership resulted in several deaths and Xander losing an eye. I'm not putting her at fault, but I can see how the characters would be angry at her. Also, it leads to Spike's speech in "Touched" which is the best Spuffy moment in the series. I'm not disagreeing with you so much as curious...  |
|
|
|
Post by henzINNIT on Apr 10, 2009 16:32:51 GMT -5
^ It could be the way the conversation goes from "We're not going back to the vineyard" to "GTFO" in a matter of minutes. That scene is horribly contrived.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Apr 10, 2009 16:35:43 GMT -5
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Apr 10, 2009 17:21:32 GMT -5
Cool, thanks. Sorry for the off-topicness. |
|
Mathieu
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Mathieu on Apr 10, 2009 18:48:12 GMT -5
Ahaha, interesting to check back on this thread and realize everybody is still complaining about the G thing. I'm sorry but I'm still on the "I'm ok with it" team. When I first read it I found it totally in character. Like somebody put it, just Faith being Faith. It shows that now Giles has become her new buddy since they've teamed up. Maybe she should pay him more respect but hey she's not perfect.
|
|
Mathieu
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Mathieu on Apr 10, 2009 19:35:35 GMT -5
This is absolutely random and doesn't belong to any thread but I was just randomly watching old previews of BTVS episodes from all the seasons and it makes me feel weird. It was already such a long time ago? I just saw the Gift promo. I love it when Buffy says "Tell me to kill my sister" and Giles goes "She is not your sister". Season 5 was so twisted. I loved it. How could Giles say that though? Even if he knew for a fact she was the key and had just been created, his heart should think she has always been around.
Sorry, so off-topic!!!
|
|
rogue11
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 197
|
Post by rogue11 on Apr 10, 2009 19:37:18 GMT -5
lol "G" is a good name for him, has Faith written all over it. Since when has a slayer shown Giles much respect (with the exception of Kendra). He doesn't treat them like he's their superior, he behaves more like he's on the same level with them.
Okay i haven't commented on this issue yet.
I like the Faith and Giles team up, definetly working. I mean you could give them their own miniseries and it would rock ma socks.
I would have liked to see a little more growth in Faith's character. Emphasis was put on her past, but i think they should have just briefly mentioned it then focus more on the woman she is now. She said she was going to be a social worker for slayers but she didn't seem like she really wanted to in this issue. It felt like it was just another mission for her instead of helping that girl.
The art was nice, the dialogue worked well. Overall I'd say this was a pretty nifty issue.
|
|
dane5by5
Wise-cracking Techno Genius
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 734
|
Post by dane5by5 on Apr 10, 2009 22:38:20 GMT -5
Let me put it this way. As a friend on this forum pointed out... when the longest debate about an issue is about the "G" issue, it really speaks of how little meat there was in the first place. Valid points are being made about people's interpretation of how Faith uses nicknames. That's worthy of being posted because it's a legitimate exchange of opinions and interpretations. That's not true. The past two issues have created discussions involving inane and inconsequential parts of the story. In issue #23 it was the little Italian girl speaking English and in issue #22 it was Satsu and her submarine. That's not indicative of the quality or "meat" of the story, it's a telling sign of BtVS fans being obsessive and overanalysing, which I confess to as well. If you're drawing parallels between "Empty Places" and "Safe", saying both were OOC. I have to say, just because a characters actions don't have precedent, does not mean they are OOC. Sometimes there is precedent and you're just not looking hard enough, just like the Buffy/Satsu tryst. There was plenty of precedent for that. And just a final note, I think so many people were expecting this issue to be a great exploration of Faith and Giles relationship and undertakings since NFFY, that when it was more concerned with the theme of P&P and the story came first, like Scott Allie said, and left little time for nostalgia and character moments, that some people were disgruntled by this, hence the controversy. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Apr 10, 2009 22:52:49 GMT -5
That's not true. The past two issues have created discussions involving inane and inconsequential parts of the story. In issue #23 it was the little Italian girl speaking English and in issue #22 it was Satsu and her submarine. That's not indicative of the quality or "meat" of the story, it's a telling sign of BtVS fans being obsessive and overanalysing, which I confess to as well. I'm guessing the other part of your post was not directed at me, since I didn't make those statements. I will however say that I stand by my assessment that there wasn't really much to sink my teeth into in this issue. #22 on the other hand, I felt had plenty of meat, and the discussion here really wasn't focused on the submarine. Yes, some people got obsessive over it, but if one can buy that Buffy operated a rocket launcher in the middle of a crowded mall without much consequence (what, no surveillance cameras?) for acting like a "terrorist", one can buy that Slayers can operate a sub. #23 while kinda meh provided some food for thought. Andrew's inclusion into the family, Simone's comments about Buffy being obsolete, etc. The writing was passable... but not bad. #24 on the other hand failed on all levels. I understand the plot, I understand the intent of the external and internal action. What I don't understand is why such a poorly executed attempt was allowed to pass. Claiming that plot progression overrides character development is a cop-out. Character development should occur as a result of the plot; i.e. the external action should complement, and in many cases, reflect the internal action. It's called layers. But when the ho-hum writing fails to connect the two, that's a problem. If Gossip Girl can pull it off, I find it alarming when BtVS can't. Yes, the quality of the writing is of course subjective. Some found Krueger's script to be very fitting. I found it debasing. |
|
Mathieu
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Mathieu on Apr 10, 2009 23:03:50 GMT -5
Let me put it this way. As a friend on this forum pointed out... when the longest debate about an issue is about the "G" issue, it really speaks of how little meat there was in the first place. Valid points are being made about people's interpretation of how Faith uses nicknames. That's worthy of being posted because it's a legitimate exchange of opinions and interpretations. That's not true. The past two issues have created discussions involving inane and inconsequential parts of the story. In issue #23 it was the little Italian girl speaking English and in issue #22 it was Satsu and her submarine. That's not indicative of the quality or "meat" of the story, it's a telling sign of BtVS fans being obsessive and overanalysing, which I confess to as well. If you're drawing parallels between "Empty Places" and "Safe", saying both were OOC. I have to say, just because a characters actions don't have precedent, does not mean they are OOC. Sometimes there is precedent and you're just not looking hard enough, just like the Buffy/Satsu tryst. There was plenty of precedent for that. And just a final note, I think so many people were expecting this issue to be a great exploration of Faith and Giles relationship and undertakings since NFFY, that when it was more concerned with the theme of P&P and the story came first, like Scott Allie said, and left little time for nostalgia and character moments, that some people were disgruntled by this, hence the controversy. Well the little Italian girl speaking English in issue 23 was by far the lamest thing I had seen in a long time. Worth mentioning in my opinion. But apparently I was the only one that thought it was worth noting, for some odd reason. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Apr 10, 2009 23:15:55 GMT -5
mathieu: Someone else pointed out the same discontent you had about the English speaking girl. So you weren't alone.
|
|
Mathieu
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Mathieu on Apr 10, 2009 23:20:16 GMT -5
mathieu: Someone else pointed out the same discontent you had about the English speaking girl. So you weren't alone. Oh really? I forgot already! I need to go back to the thread and check. Be right back. PS: I do remember debating the whole thing with you though ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Apr 10, 2009 23:24:18 GMT -5
Let me put it this way. As a friend on this forum pointed out... when the longest debate about an issue is about the "G" issue, it really speaks of how little meat there was in the first place. Valid points are being made about people's interpretation of how Faith uses nicknames. That's worthy of being posted because it's a legitimate exchange of opinions and interpretations. That's not true. The past two issues have created discussions involving inane and inconsequential parts of the story. In issue #23 it was the little Italian girl speaking English and in issue #22 it was Satsu and her submarine. That's not indicative of the quality or "meat" of the story, it's a telling sign of BtVS fans being obsessive and overanalysing, which I confess to as well. I'm very guilty of overanalyzing the 'verse also. Except my overanalyzation manifests in writing meta exploring the complexities of Time of Your Life or The Long Way Home or the Chain. As to the two examples you pointed above, I didn't have issue with #23 and the Italian girl - she was a oneoff character who didn't matter all that much. It wasn't important how she spoke, but more important in what she said. As for the submarine, I can easily see that being explained by the wiccas that each squad has. *shrugs* That stuff has never bothered me. It's easy enough to fanwank. This is just flat characterization of both Giles and Faith. Giles first dozen lines of dialogue are laughingly bad. That's why they were so easy to mock earlier. But if anyone's looking for more concrit of this issue I have two questions for you: 1) Why does the entire town just stay and let all their children be die instead of getting on that train and leaving town? 2) Why do the vampires just hang outside the town limits, looming more like zombies, instead of just moving on to another town where the eating is good and they'd probably be treated like the cool new thing due to their recent popularity? I compared it on another forum to a guy standing outside a girl's house while the girl refuses to answer his calls or even acknowledge him loitering outside, while this really hot girl across the street is jumping up and down on a trampoline entreating him to come and play with her. Yet he still stays outside the house that will never let him in. Vampires go where the eating is good. This town is not good. Hence vampires wouldn't hang out. *laughs* Even the vampires are OOC. Bad writing. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Apr 10, 2009 23:29:13 GMT -5
I compared it on another forum to a guy standing outside a girl's house while the girl refuses to answer his calls or even acknowledge him loitering outside, while this really hot girl across the street is jumping up and down on a trampoline entreating him to come and play with her. Yet he still stays outside the house that will never let him in. Vampires go where the eating is good. This town is not good. Hence vampires wouldn't hang out. *laughs* Even the vampires are OOC. Bad writing. Whoa... did you just describe the Ballard/Caroline/"Mellie" triangle? |
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Apr 10, 2009 23:30:57 GMT -5
...sure. Lol! I am that good.
The difference being that Ballard actually has the necessary motivation to keep trying to get inside the locked house he's barred from. With vampires, no such motivation exists in this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Apr 10, 2009 23:34:08 GMT -5
With their newfound popularity, vampires have become maladapted. lol...
But I agree about the OOC-ness of the vampires camping outside a town for an indefinite period of time.
|
|
Mathieu
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,069
|
Post by Mathieu on Apr 10, 2009 23:36:29 GMT -5
EMMIE : I have to agree with you on this. The story did not make a whole lot of sense when it comes to the vampires staying around town. It feels like this town for some reason was the center of the universe. People would have sacrificed everything to just stay, even innocent kids and innocent girls! And besides that, vampires don't think, vampires just find a way to feed themselves (well this is not entirely true, vampires can be pretty manipulative and smart but whatever), they should have been moving to the next town and settled there.
|
|
