Angel news on Sci Fi Wire

[WisdomLikeSilence]

Really though, the whole 'intentionally ambiguous' excuse only works when it is done well, which is not the case here. The end of 6 is not an example of ambiguity or simple misdirection, it flat out contradicts everything said in season 7. They were going to take the story in one direction; they changed their minds and took it in a different one. The end.

Sorry buddy, but there is no contradiction. There is, however, great and deliberate misdirection. I figured Spike was going to get his soul back from the beginning, (something about his expression and self-loathing after the attempted rape) and was amused at how very carefully the writers wrote the entire thing. Every single thing that is said about Spike's quest could be applied to either the chip or his soul. I know, I was watching like a hawk for them to tip their hand one way or the other.


-WLS

 

[Wayside]

Sorry buddy, but there is no contradiction. There is, however, great and deliberate misdirection. I figured Spike was going to get his soul back from the beginning, (something about his expression and self-loathing after the attempted rape) and was amused at how very carefully the writers wrote the entire thing. Every single thing that is said about Spike's quest could be applied to either the chip or his soul. I know, I was watching like a hawk for them to tip their hand one way or the other.

You crack me up. The 'misdirection' (like I already said, it isn't misdirection, but if that's the word you want for it have at it) isn't great, therefore I choose to believe it isn't deliberate. Whether it's bad writing accidentally or purposefully, well, I prefer accidentally. The emotion being shown after the attempted rape looked much more like anger at feeling self-loathing than simple self loathing, which is just obvious (examples to follow, since peoples’ memories here are so flawed).

(Just so you know though, 'misdirection' and your belief that 'every single thing that is said about Spike's quest could be applied to either the chip or his soul' are incompatible. Ambiguity is not misdirection. However, as I will show, it’s not as ambiguous as you’d like it to be.)

You know, when I saw The 6th Sense the plot twist was apparent 25 minutes in, and when it became wicked obvious 10 minutes later I got up and walked out. It was crap writing. The writers of a TV series leaving themselves room is cool, but they screwed this one up. Just because you expected them to go there doesn't make it good.

They can write good TV. They can make screw ups (like intending one thing, writing for it, and then changing to something contradictory). But it is impossible for them to use a ploy in a way that you feel is mediocre? I don't buy that. It's entirely possible for the writing team to pull the ambiguous ploy in a way that doesn't quite work for you.

Good TV is nice, but that's not why I watched Buffy. It was actually good writing at times, not just good TV. And for Christ's sake, either you also think there is a contradiction, or there is no ploy. You people are mixing things up. If it's just ambiguous, there is no ploy. There's indecision. "We'll decide how to proceed in the off-season. This is good enough for now." Now, for the lines in question: I am fully aware of the only quote anyone’s been willing to mention (the ‘give Buffy what she deserves’ line), the accurate text of which is:

SPIKE (cont'd)
Got any more ruddy tests, ya ponce?
I'll take anything you throw at me.
If it'll get me what I need to take
care of the Slayer, give her what's
coming to her, you just bring it on.
Bring on the whole--

(Is that ambiguous? Hell yes. The problem is, that is from the finale, Grave, and all the important lines are from three epsidodes earlier, Seeing Red (these are excerpts, not one flowing conversation. It is significant, however, that he doesn’t call her Buffy.):

SPIKE
What have I done?
(then)
Why didn't I do it? What has she
done to me?

(Why didn’t he do it? Why didn’t he rape her?)

SPIKE
Why do I feel this way?

CLEM
(shrugs)
Love's a funny thing.

SPIKE
Is that what this is?

CLEM
Well, I don't know. Drinking,
breaking stuff -- how's your appetite?
You been eating?

SPIKE
I can feel it. Squirming inside my
head.

CLEM
Love?

SPIKE
The chip. Little Jiminy Cricket,
gnawing bits and chunks.
Spike puts his fingers to his heads probing harshly as if he's going to gouge the chip out with his bare hands. Clem eyes him with concern.

(Ambiguous? I think not)

CLEM
(re: Spike's head)
Maybe a wet cloth...?

SPIKE
Everything used to be so clear.
Slayer. Vampire. Vampire kills
Slayer, sucks her dry, picks his
teeth with her bones.

SPIKE
That's how it's always been. I've
tasted the life of two Slayers. But
with Buffy...
(hating himself)
This isn't the way it's supposed to
be. It's the chip. Steel and wires
and silicon. It won't let me be a
monster. And I can't be a man. I'm
nothing.

(This at least could go either way, taken out of context. In context, I’m afraid not).

SPIKE
She thinks she knows me. She thinks
she knows who I am. What I'm capable
of. She has no idea. I wasn't always
this way. It won't be easy, but I
can be like I was. Before they
castrated me. Before...
(a beat)
Then she'll see who I really am.

(If they had just left out the castration remark, this could be ambiguous, but it isn’t. It’s referring to the chip. There’s no room for interpretation).

SPIKE
Get nice and comfy Slayer. I'll be
back. And when I do... it's all
gonna change.

(Doesn’t help that he’s calling her Slayer again.)

So, why do I call this a mistake? Because if the writers wrote the end of 6 this way, knowing they are going to switch gears and ignore ALL of it in 7, they are morons. However, I am quite confident they are not morons, so it is obviously just a case of changed directions. Buddy.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

And how do you read the episode where Spike was going to kill Buffy until he saw how broken up she was at her mother's illness? Was that a mistake, and they changed their minds when they got to the last scene? Not likely.

This is that, just on a longer term scale. Spike is incredibly conflicted. At times he wants to kill her, at times he is in love, and he himself probably doesn't know which is which when it boils down to it.

I have no problems whatsoever with him getting the soul.

Your position implies that you know what the writers were thinking at each individual point in the season. You may not buy it, but I think its clearly intended to be ambiguous, and the writers did not "make a mistake." To imply that "a mistake" was made is to imply that there is a truth to be known here, and this is a work of fiction we're discussing!

 

[Chimera]

I.e., she didn't come back 'wrong.' The molecular sunburn was one guess, but, like I said, we never hear for sure.

What happened to Buffy should be obvious to any D&D player worth his salt. (Although I didn't think of it until just now )

She made 20th level Monk and gained Perfect Body.

So now she's a (Human) Vampire Slayer Outsider. Probably a bit outside the line for the Chip to protect.

 

[zyzzyr]

I dunno, I thought the whole Spike soul thing is fairly clear cut.

Spike was definitely, without a doubt, wanted to get the chip removed. However, he worded his request to the demon as "put me back the way I was," or similar.

Remember the warning in the PHB about carefully wording your wishes? Well, he chose poorly.

The demon then either deliberately or accidentally misinterpreted Spike's true wish, and instead of putting him back the way he was before the chip, he put him back the way he was before the vampage.

Fairly cut-and-dried to me.

It *is* confusing to have him allude that he did this deliberately to gain Buffy, in 7th season. However, it's unfair to interpret sixth season as indicating this.

And, btw, Sixth Sense was not crap writing. Are you kidding when you say this? Just because you "got it" 25 minutes in doesn't mean that it was overly obvious. It fooled millions of people worldwide. And not just dummies.

Granted, when you watch it when you already know the ending, it is very obvious. But to imply it was crap writing implies that it was obvious to anyone with a brain, which it most definitely was not.

 

[John Crichton]

I dunno, I thought the whole Spike soul thing is fairly clear cut.

Spike was definitely, without a doubt, wanted to get the chip removed. However, he worded his request to the demon as "put me back the way I was," or similar.

Remember the warning in the PHB about carefully wording your wishes? Well, he chose poorly.

The demon then either deliberately or accidentally misinterpreted Spike's true wish, and instead of putting him back the way he was before the chip, he put him back the way he was before the vampage.

Fairly cut-and-dried to me.

It *is* confusing to have him allude that he did this deliberately to gain Buffy, in 7th season. However, it's unfair to interpret sixth season as indicating this.

I think this is close to what I was thinking at the time. He definitely said something to the effect of putting him back the way he was. I took it as him wanted to go back to bad-ass, pre-lovin'-Buffy Spike. I could be wrong but that seemed like the big twist to me: That he got the soul by accident, not by plan.

No big either way.

And, btw, Sixth Sense was not crap writing. Are you kidding when you say this? Just because you "got it" 25 minutes in doesn't mean that it was overly obvious. It fooled millions of people worldwide. And not just dummies.

Granted, when you watch it when you already know the ending, it is very obvious. But to imply it was crap writing implies that it was obvious to anyone with a brain, which it most definitely was not.

Just for the record, Sixth Sense was a well done flick and worth watching even if you know the 'twist.' Someone actually told it to me before I saw the movie (bastard!) and I still found it to be an entertaining film. But enough of that...

 

[Wayside]

And, btw, Sixth Sense was not crap writing. Are you kidding when you say this? Just because you "got it" 25 minutes in doesn't mean that it was overly obvious. It fooled millions of people worldwide. And not just dummies.

By crap I mean fine for a movie, but hardly Joyce. Certainly it was enjoyable (I've watched it all the way through since, on DVD--I think Unbreakable was better, though similarly predictable; better because less predicated on a gimmick, if nothing else). I make distinctions between what I like and what is good though. 75% of the music I listen to, for example, is crap. Which doesn't stop me from liking it .

Granted, when you watch it when you already know the ending, it is very obvious. But to imply it was crap writing implies that it was obvious to anyone with a brain, which it most definitely was not.

I definitely don't mean that it was crap in the sense that anybody with a brain could see the ending 1/4 way in (they didn't do a bad job concealing the gimmick, and the continuity is great; the use of color symbolism is trite but we can only ask so much of Hollywood). I mean that it relies for its force on a gimmick, in a way that, for example, Fight Club, which has a similar gimmick, does not rely on it. I don't want to sound like a pedantic whore, and I'm not saying Fight Club is some extrordinarily well written movie. I'm saying The Sixth Sense can be watched twice: once for the bang, and once for all the silly clues you missed the first time. It can be fun and entertaining, but that only makes it that: fun and entertaining. There were many fun and entertaining satyr plays in Athens; how many survived? Meanwhile there's plenty of Aristophanes to go around.

 

[Wayside]

And how do you read the episode where Spike was going to kill Buffy until he saw how broken up she was at her mother's illness? Was that a mistake, and they changed their minds when they got to the last scene? Not likely.

Come now, that analogy doesn't follow. I read it as one unified episode, not a plot arc spanning multiple seasons (the end goals of which aren't all on table at the same time; i.e. at the end of 6 the Buffy writers are certainly still working out Spike's role in 7. Is it so insane to posit that they altered that role? That's like saying Spike's move to Angel was part of the story in 7, when 7 was done before that move was even definite). Think of it this way: there were a good number of open ended elements to 7 that numerous people have mentioned here, all left hanging: Joyce's prophecy to Dawn, the weakness of the Slayer line, etc. The Spike thing is more or less among these. It just gets stated and accepted in 7, and the outcome there contradicts the intent in 6 (I think the quotes I posted are pretty clear on this).

This is that, just on a longer term scale. Spike is incredibly conflicted. At times he wants to kill her, at times he is in love, and he himself probably doesn't know which is which when it boils down to it.

I have no problems whatsoever with him getting the soul.

I totally agree with that possibility, but it gets glossed over in an 'oops' way in 7, don't you think? If he was meant to be conflicted in a similar way, then they failed to pull it off in the writing. If it was meant to be a case of poor wish phrasing, they didn't pull that off either. Why? Because none of those things are in the scripts, in this case.

Your position implies that you know what the writers were thinking at each individual point in the season. You may not buy it, but I think its clearly intended to be ambiguous, and the writers did not "make a mistake." To imply that "a mistake" was made is to imply that there is a truth to be known here, and this is a work of fiction we're discussing!

So, looking at the lines I posted from the two pertinent episodes, you think that it's ambiguous as to why he goes off on the quest? If that is the case then we just have to agree to disagree. It is incredibly clear to me from the text that his intent is to get rid of the chip. Could he have changed his mind? Sure, but it never happens on the show. Hard to argue against what we do see with what we don't.

 

[WisdomLikeSilence]

Ok, Wayside, obviously we have very different interpretations of what the writers intended. We’re simply not going to settle this in the absence of definitive testimony from them on what they were trying to do. Since we’ve both obviously spent a lot of time on Buffy, quoting episodes back and forth at each other clearly isn’t going to change either of our minds. So I don’t want to escalate this argument, but I do want to clarify my reasoning.

The emotion being shown after the attempted rape looked much more like anger at feeling self-loathing than simple self loathing,

Oh, I agree that it’s complicated, but it seems to me that Spike is very upset with himself for even attempting such a thing. Either way, there is a lot of self-loathing. He also has flashbacks to the attack in this episode, and is haunted by what he did. And remember, Buffy looks right at him after the attack and says, “Ask me again why I could never love you.” These are real incentives for him to change completely, and for the better.

Just so you know though, 'misdirection' and your belief that 'every single thing that is said about Spike's quest could be applied to either the chip or his soul' are incompatible. Ambiguity is not misdirection.

It seems clear to me from Spike’s character and responses that he wanted his soul back from the beginning. In that case, for the writers to leave it ambiguous and suggest that he might want the chip removed is, in fact, misdirection. I can see that since you don’t think that was original plan you won’t consider it the same way.

I agree that the lines you quote strongly suggest that Spike wants the chip out, and clearly that is what the writers want us to think. In fact, my main disagreement with the way this was handled was that I thought the writers used the chip too much as misdirection, and that this was torturous and not completely in character. But I also need to note that the scene plays out mostly as Spike trying to figure out what’s wrong with him, and that he never actually says he wants the chip removed. The crux of the problem is that he’s neither a good monster nor a good man, and he needs to resolve one way or the other.

So, why am I convinced that the writers always intended for him to get his soul back?
1) It’s the satisfying arc for the character. The season becomes about him proving that he will change for Buffy.
2) It gives the best chance of having Spike around as a regular character in season 7. Soulless Spike without the chip is just another villain for Buffy to stake, and it’s hard to justify her not killing him. Spike with soul is much more interesting to play with.
3) The way they deliberately never have Spike say what he is looking for. If they intended for him to have the chip removed, there is no reason not to just say so. To dance around the issue as much as they did, and to keep it so it could be read both ways, required considerably more effort on their parts.
4) It feels right. It’s in keeping with the way that the character and the relationship were written all season, and it’s very much in keeping with Mr. Marsters' portrayal.

Ok, now that’s off my chest. But I don’t think it’ll change anyone’s mind.

So, agree to disagree on this one?

-WLS

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Ok, Wayside, obviously we have very different interpretations of what the writers intended. We’re simply not going to settle this in the absence of definitive testimony from them on what they were trying to do.

Yeah.

What he said.