Unpopular Opinions

[Jazzy24]

^ How was Xander right about Angel?

And I don't know how Buffy came out of her relationship with Angel thinking something was wrong with her or that it was her fault.

Angel being a vampire and that soul thing were the main reasons her relationship couldn't work with Angel, other than that Angel loved Buffy and she knew that so I never understood her blaming herself for that relationship.

Edited August 19, 2014 by Jazzy24

[stagmania]

Here's my unpopular opinion: I was totally on board with the idea of Spike/Buffy in Season 5 and early Season 6, until they ruined it by turning it into the super dark self-loathing abusive relationship parade. A passage from an essay by Jennifer Crusie that illustrates my take on where I thought their relationship was going in the first part of Season 6:

 

"In what was evidently one of the great botched metaphors in the history of storytelling, Buffy and Spike consummate their relationship and demolish a derelict mansion in their throes. Houses are a common symbol for people in stories (think of Roderick Usher’s mansion in “The Fall of the House of Usher” or Emily’s decaying home in Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily”) and this one seems to clearly represent Buffy’s once rich but now derelict past life. She has died in one life and been resurrected into a new one, but she’s clinging to the past, living in the decaying shell of her former existence, an old life must be rejected before she can live fully in the new world. When she embraces Spike, she embraces the dark side of her destiny, an adult rejection of the simplistic good/evil universe of her childhood, freeing herself to move into the future and defeat the worst enemy of all, the First Evil. Their consummation takes them to their deepest levels, both symbolically and literally as they fall into the basement, and leaves Buffy standing in a shaft of light in the morning, reborn. As metaphoric scenes go, it’s one of the most powerful in the history of the series.

 

Except that’s evidently not what the writers had in mind."

 

I'm not saying they were destined to be or that their relationship would ever have been totally healthy, but I saw potential there for both of them to grow as characters. That potential was wasted when the writers decided to suddenly turn it into a mutually abusive situation (remember that they had a friendly relationship in Season 6 prior to bringing the house down) culminating in Spike's attempt to rape Buffy, a decision I will never understand.

[Jack Shaftoe]

No offence to the author of this essay that but I want to tear my hair out whenever I see the notion that dating a serial killer is an "adult rejection of the simplistic good/evil universe of her childhood". Call me crazy, but to me the simplistic notion is believing said serial killer can so easily change via the power of chemistry, I mean love. 

 

And, of course, once you reject the "simplistic" notion that soulless vampire = pure evil, then you turn Buffy into a specieist serial killer herself...

Edited August 20, 2014 by Jack Shaftoe

[stagmania]

And, of course, once you reject the "simplistic" notion that soulless vampire = pure evil, then you turn Buffy into a specieist serial killer herself...

 

True, and pretty much everything around the souled vs. unsouled vampire debate was handled terribly by the show. You can't present clear exceptions/complexities to the rule (Spike choosing to do good and seek out his own soul versus Angel having to be cursed with his, Angel and Angelus being viewed as separate entities while Spike is always just Spike, etc) and then never have the characters acknowledge or explore the implications.

 

Also, I reject the notion that Spike's transformation was "easy", as it played out over years and plenty of struggle. I also don't believe that had he and Buffy had a nicer relationship, that would suddenly absolve him of all his past sins, just like I didn't believe that of Angel. Buffy dated Angel previously, who was also a serial killer. She justified that by telling herself that Angel and Angelus weren't the same (a notion that was later challenged on Angel's own show). I view her getting involved with a Spike who is actively trying to be good as a rejection of that simplistic souled/unsouled dichotomy, not as an indication that serial killers are great.

[Jack Shaftoe]

 

Also, I reject the notion that Spike's transformation was "easy", as it played out over years and plenty of struggle.

 

Easy is a bit of exaggeration in Spike's case, I admit, but it fits perfectly in Anya's case. I was trying to make a more general point about Joss's brand of "redemption through love". Still, the very fact that Spike survived to reach the moment of having wet dreams about Buffy, or kidnapped her and was forgiven for no apparent reason, tells me he was protected by a very obvious "plot armor". So even if we accept Spike's development as natural (which I personally don't), the reactions the other characters had to him were contrived in the extreme, in order to get the plot to the point where Spuffy would be more of a crack ship. 

 

And simplistic or not, once you remove the soul/no soul dichotomy you end up with "good guys" who are not only speciesist serial killers but also awful hypocrites - they talk all the time how awful it would be to kill Warren or Faith but crack jokes when they kill vampires. If Joss and co were really striving for "mature storytelling" they would have explored that problem once they decided unsouled Spike would stick around and not be evil. They did nothing of the sort. Which to me tells me that their priority was simply to pander to shippers without giving a damn about the wider repercussions.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Jack Shaftoe

[stagmania]

Easy is a bit of exaggeration in Spike's case, I admit, but it fits perfectly in Anya's case.

 

The Anya point is interesting, as I never got the impression that she cared about redemption, or felt she was in need of it. She never expressed any regret for her actions as a vengeance demon until after getting her powers back in Season 7, and in fact often made fond recollections of her misdeeds, which Xander and the others would just brush off. Another thing the show failed to fully explore, choosing instead to play it for comedy.

 

As to the Scooby gang being made to look like awful hypocrites-they are. There are so many canonical examples of this, from judging each others' love lives,  to who they think should be killed versus who can be redeemed, who deserves to be treated with dignity versus who they can kick around and use when necessary, etc. It's part of their dynamic, and doesn't make them bad people, but realistic characters.

[Jack Shaftoe]

My complaint isn't so much that they are hypocrites as it is about that this is never addressed in show, hence, it seems more like unintended effect of getting fond of the likes of Spike, Anya and Clem and keeping them around than any intentional desire to add depth to the characters. Spike himself has no problem whatsoever killing vampires once he regains his soul. And I don't see anything realistic in that particular aspect of the show. Giving Willow more chances to reform than say Warren - sure, that's completely realistic. Not once wondering how the hell Spike managed to "reform" and if other vampires are capable of it - that is just stupid and out of character. Buffy and Willow being more worried about Xander dating Cordelia than him dating a serial killer man-hater makes even less sense.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I'm not saying they were destined to be or that their relationship would ever have been totally healthy, but I saw potential there for both of them to grow as characters. That potential was wasted when the writers decided to suddenly turn it into a mutually abusive situation (remember that they had a friendly relationship in Season 6 prior to bringing the house down) culminating in Spike's attempt to rape Buffy, a decision I will never understand.

Except it wasn't so much 'friendly' as it was Buffy wallowing in the fact that she hated her friends, herself, and her life once she was pulled out of Heeeeeeeaven. I've said this before,, but it always bears repeating - a Buffy who liked herself would never have had sex with Spike in a million-billion years. Tell me she would all you want, and I'll show you any number of reasons why she wouldn't. Buffy is not Drusilla, who enjoys being tied up and tortured until she likes someone. Its very much worth noting that during the Dumpster Sex, we see Buffy looking over Spike's shoulder, but we don't see his face at all, and her expression says, "Oh, my God, somebody kill me before he can finish." That's not even remotely close to 'friendly'.

 

Also, I'm always surprised that others are surprised by the attempted rape, given that Spike was A) evil, B) obsessive, and C) evil and obsessive. Somehow I doubt that was the first time he tried to force himself on someone who was begging him to stop. Joss' crap about how Spike was capable off change despite not having a soul is IMO exactly that, crap to pander to the Spuffy shippers and make them happy.

[stagmania]

Joss' crap about how Spike was capable off change despite not having a soul is IMO exactly that, crap to pander to the Spuffy shippers and make them happy.

 

Multiple seasons of slow character growth was an awful lot of work to put in if the writers were simply pandering to shippers. Spike was capable of change, we saw him change over the years of the show as he reacted and adapted to each new set of circumstances. 

 

As for Buffy and Spike's brief period of friendship, I agree that the only reason she allowed it was because she didn't feel like herself and wasn't comfortable with her other friends. That doesn't mean it wasn't real, and I'll always be disappointed at the direction the writers decided to take that relationship.

[Bitterswete]

And, of course, once you reject the "simplistic" notion that soulless vampire = pure evil, then you turn Buffy into a specieist serial killer herself...

 

I don't reject the notion that soulless vampire = pure evil. Or I should say that being soulless made them incapable of really getting that killing innocent people is bad. And since their biggest urge was to kill innocent people, there was nothing stopping the average vamp from doing just that.

 

I don't consider Spike (an exception, but not really much of one) any kind of proof that Buffy should stop killing vampires on the off chance that, after killing however many innocent people, some of them might reform someday. Because we never actually saw that happen. Not even with Spike.

 

As for other demons, it wasn't like Buffy went out every night to hunt down and kill any demon she found, not caring whether or not they were actually harming anyone. In fact, unless a demon was actively harming people, Buffy never knew they existed.

 

Spike choosing to do good and seek out his own soul versus Angel having to be cursed with his

 

Spike didn't go and get a soul because he thought it was the right thing to do, or he suddenly decided he wanted to be a better person. He did it because, after what he did in "Seeing Red," he saw it has his absolute last chance to get something he wanted (Buffy). Doing something good for a selfish reason is not redemption.

 

Not once wondering how the hell Spike managed to "reform" and if other vampires are capable of it

 

I don't think Spike really did "reform" before getting a soul. (Which is why I don't think he's any kind of proof that vampires are capable of becoming good people, so Buffy is somehow wrong to slay them.) Spike showed that vamps are capable of  controlling themselves if it suits their purposes. But that's not the same thing. 

 

Spike put a leash on himself (with the help of the chip), but it wasn't because he suddenly felt bad for all the pain and suffering he'd caused in the past, or he actually thought killing random people was bad, or he actually cared about helping anyone outside of the tiny group of people he'd decided to care about. And I think all of those are requirements when it comes to truly reforming.  

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Multiple seasons of slow character growth was an awful lot of work to put in if the writers were simply pandering to shippers. Spike was capable of change, we saw him change over the years of the show as he reacted and adapted to each new set of circumstances. 

 

As for Buffy and Spike's brief period of friendship, I agree that the only reason she allowed it was because she didn't feel like herself and wasn't comfortable with her other friends. That doesn't mean it wasn't real, and I'll always be disappointed at the direction the writers decided to take that relationship.

Not to be That Guy  or anything, but the stuff about Spike having a 'partial soul' or whatever happy horseshit Joss and Co pulled out of their butts didn't really start until after Spuffy was a thing. It wasn't enough that the writers took a dump on Spike and Dru by having him 'fall in love' with Buffy because of a damned wet dream. No, they had to make him 'worthy' of Buffy by claiming that he was different from pretty much every vampire who had ever been on the show. And all that stuff about him betraying the gang to Adam, about him saying he was going to find a then-murderous Faith and lead her to them so she could kill them while he pointed and laughed, the inconvenient timing of him scooping up Drusilla and running while Buffy was fighting Angelus? Never mind any of that, because he's really just a big, fluffy puppy with bad teeth, and isn't Buffy just so mean because she won't love him back. Barf.

 

Was their 'friendship' real? Hell, I don't know, maybe. But as @Bitterswete notes, doing the right thing because it gets you something you want isn't the same thing as doing the right thing because it's, y'know, right. Not to be crude, but Spike wanting to get laid did not in the slightest way put him on the path to redemption, and if anything he actually regressed out of whatever microscopic progress he might have made. While he was Buffy's 'friend', he helped her isolate herself from people who might have actually been able to do something for her, convinced her that she came back wrong so she'd stay with him, and in general did absolutely everything he could to keep her miserable so he could get his knob polished. That's not friendship, IMO, that's obsession. It might have been real, but the AR was the only 'real' logical conclusion to the progression of it.

[stagmania]

As for other demons, it wasn't like Buffy went out every night to hunt down and kill any demon she found, not caring whether or not they were actually harming anyone. In fact, unless a demon was actively harming people, Buffy never knew they existed.

 

Buffy did, in fact, go out seeking demons to kill-that's what patrolling was, and she was shown doing it in nearly every episode. She often would camp out at the graves of the recently deceased and stake them as soon as they rose, before they ever had a chance to harm anyone. 

 

 

Spike didn't go and get a soul because he thought it was the right thing to do, or he suddenly decided he wanted to be a better person. He did it because, after what he did in "Seeing Red," he saw it has his absolute last chance to get something he wanted (Buffy). Doing something good for a selfish reason is not redemption.

 

Or he did it because he was so appalled by his actions that he wanted to change. That whole story is completely open to interpretation, as we didn't really get to see Spike's perspective so that they could preserve the surprise. Spike did not try to get back together with Buffy after returning with his soul; the idea that he did it solely to "get" her never made much sense to me.

[stagmania]

No, they had to make him 'worthy' of Buffy by claiming that he was different from pretty much every vampire who had ever been on the show.

 

The writers made a distinction between Spike and other vampires from his very first episode-namely, that the way he and Drusilla loved each other was unusual for vampires. They had The Judge tell him that he reeked of humanity. They had him strike up a deal with a slayer to save the world, even if for selfish reasons. All of this in Season 2, when Bangel was still reigning supreme, and there were no plans to make him a love interest for Buffy. His uniqueness was baked in to his original characterization. Spuffy fan or not, it's a bit disingenuous to claim they only set him apart later for the sake of propping up that relationship.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Buffy did, in fact, go out seeking demons to kill-that's what patrolling was, and she was shown doing it in nearly every episode. She often would camp out at the graves of the recently deceased and stake them as soon as they rose, before they ever had a chance to harm anyone. 

Then why didn't she drive a stake into Spike's chest after he sided with Adam? Why didn't she cut his head off when she found out he was trying to get the chip removed? Hell, why didn't she set him on fire when he tried to rape her? Doesn't that count as trying to hurt people? Or are we just supposed to pretend that none of those things happened?

 

The writers made a distinction between Spike and other vampires from his very first episode-namely, that the way he and Drusilla loved each other was unusual for vampires. They had The Judge tell him that he reeked of humanity. They had him strike up a deal with a slayer to save the world, even if for selfish reasons. All of this in Season 2, when Bangel was still reigning supreme, and there were no plans to make him a love interest for Buffy. His uniqueness was baked in to his original characterization. Spuffy fan or not, it's a bit disingenuous to claim they only set him apart later for the sake of propping up that relationship.

Except, once again, Buffy is not Drusilla. The way Spike loved Dru (torture, betrayal, her 'Daddy' issues) would hardly work with Buffy, at least not a Buffy who had her mind right. Also, Spike didn't really help Buffy save the world, since the second he had what he wanted, he rabbited and left her to possibly die. Although really, that kind of fits, since he was too much of a chickenshit to stop playing crippled and take on Angelus himself. That's not disingenuous, that's what happened. It also happened that they spent the entire final season playing "Will they or won't they?" because Joss thought that would be such riveting frigging television. How is it not propping up Spuffy that she considered him different enough to snuggle up to him after he tried to violate her in her own home, not to mention that five minutes after that happened she wanted him to 'protect' her sister from Warren?

[Bitterswete]

Buffy did, in fact, go out seeking demons to kill-that's what patrolling was, and she was shown doing it in nearly every episode. She often would camp out at the graves of the recently deceased and stake them as soon as they rose, before they ever had a chance to harm anyone. 

 

In my mind, I tend to separate demons from vamps. And I had no problem with her killing newly risen vamps because newly risen vamps kill people. Never did they show a vamp rise from the grave and decide that, despite their raging bloodlust, they just didn't have the heart to hurt anybody. And should Buffy wait until a vamp has killed a few innocent people before stopping them? I don't think so.

 

Spike did not try to get back together with Buffy after returning with his soul;

 

Because he had a soul. I think having a soul made him feel unworthy of Buffy in a way he really couldn't while soulless and incapable of really getting why his past actions might make him a less than ideal catch.

 

The writers made a distinction between Spike and other vampires from his very first episode-namely, that the way he and Drusilla loved each other was unusual for vampires.

 

Only they later showed other vampires who were just as capable of love. So it turned out Spike and Dru really weren't all that unique, they were just the first time we saw vampy love in action.

 

They had The Judge tell him that he reeked of humanity.

 

The Judge said Spike and Dru reeked of humanity while Angelus didn't, which I thought showed that Angelus was the exception, and was therefore scarier than the average vamp.

 

They had him strike up a deal with a slayer to save the world, even if for selfish reasons.

 

Exactly. It was for selfish reasons. And, since then, both BtVS and Angel showed other vamps who would have been just as against what Angelus was doing for the same reasons.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Bitterswete

[Jack Shaftoe]

 

 

 

As for other demons, it wasn't like Buffy went out every night to hunt down and kill any demon she found, not caring whether or not they were actually harming anyone. In fact, unless a demon was actively harming people, Buffy never knew they existed.

 

Be that as it may, the double standard was still very much in place. Demons were treated on "a one strike and you lose your head" basis, while humans were treated on the principle of "even a mass murderer's life is sacred". Which I am completely fine with - but only as long as the demons were, well demonic, and not wacky aliens as they basically were on Angel and quite a few Buffy episodes (Hell's Bells being a particularly egregious example).

 

 

I don't think Spike really did "reform" before getting a soul.

 

Well, Buffy and Dawn certainly thought he had reformed to an extent for a while yet nether bothered to ponder the possible repercussions of that. And of course, all the Scoobies seemed to buy the idea that he willingly went to get his soul back which really shouldn't be something any sane vampire should be trying. Not that Spike was ever particularly sane, to be fair.

 

 

The Judge said Spike and Dru reeked of humanity while Angelus didn't, which I thought showed that Angelus was the exception, and was therefore scarier than the average vamp.

 

The Judge also thought Dalton was too human because he enjoyed reading. Me thinks the Judge's detector was broken because Angel enjoys art too and in any case one can be a ruthless monster and a book lover, no problem whatsoever. 

 

 

They had him strike up a deal with a slayer to save the world, even if for selfish reasons.

 

They also showed him literally shrugging nonchalantly and leaving when it seemed Buffy was losing the sword fight against Angel. Which made his loud claims that he wanted to save the world a big fat lie.

[Dobian]

I always thought that the writers willfully disregarded Spike not having a soul as they showed his transformation.  Not having a soul means not being able to express empathy or to understand feelings.  With Angelus/Angel they were very clear on the distinction between not having a soul and having one.  But Spike was able to at least partly cross that divide without one.  There were suggestions that the chip in his head had something to do with it, but that was never made clear.  Buffy's behavior toward him after he attempted to violate her I thought was off the mark.  Leaving Dawn in his care and continuing to interact with him I just didn't buy.

 

As for the nightly cemetary patrols, I thought that was okay the first couple of seasons, it was campy and fun, but when she was still doing them in season 7 I thought it was silly.  Why would all these vampires and demons be hanging around a cemetary?  You would think  they would move out of there right away and into better digs, blend in with the locals.  And even when they're just out and about....a cemetary?  They would be hanging around night spots where people go.  That's where Buffy should be patrolling.

[stagmania]

I always thought that the writers willfully disregarded Spike not having a soul as they showed his transformation.  Not having a soul means not being able to express empathy or to understand feelings.  With Angelus/Angel they were very clear on the distinction between not having a soul and having one.  But Spike was able to at least partly cross that divide without one. 

 

With Spike, I think it was at least partially a case of the writers wanting to keep around a character they loved, and not fully thinking through the implications of the plot twists they came up with to make that happen. I'm not sure they ever considered why exactly he was capable of emotions like love when Angelus wasn't, or why that would inspire him to try to change when he could have easily gone on being completely evil. I do think he was intended to be different from other vampires (which is not to say "good"), and was always written as such. 

 

 

They also showed him literally shrugging nonchalantly and leaving when it seemed Buffy was losing the sword fight against Angel. Which made his loud claims that he wanted to save the world a big fat lie.

 

Yes, he didn't really care about Buffy at that time, which is not surprising. My point in mentioning it was not to make it out as some altruistic act, but to point out that it was highly unusual for a vampire to think of making a deal/working with the Slayer at all-just another way that the writers made him a bit different from the rest.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

With Spike, I think it was at least partially a case of the writers wanting to keep around a character they loved, and not fully thinking through the implications of the plot twists they came up with to make that happen. I'm not sure they ever considered why exactly he was capable of emotions like love when Angelus wasn't, or why that would inspire him to try to change when he could have easily gone on being completely evil. I do think he was intended to be different from other vampires (which is not to say "good"), and was always written as such. 

But this is the problem,that they didn't think about the implications. They, and whether 'they' is Whedon or Noxon or some combination of the two, decided that they wanted to keep Spike around because he was popular, and to hell with what it did to Buffy, the other characters, or the entire premise of the show. If Spike was capable of reforming (which, please) then some other vampire with an IQ above that of an inanimate object should also have been capable of reforming. Full stop. If they had ever explained why he was so diffferent that he could choose to seek out his soul, I wouldn't still be harping on it after all this time, but they didn't. And its not good enough to say "a wizard did it" in this case, IMO. Not when it destroys the entire concept of Buffy-as-hero.

[CletusMusashi]

I think his willingness to work with a Slayer was also largely ego-based. 

"Well, I've bloody killed two of them already, haven't I? She ought to be thrilled to have a Big Bad like me on her side! Plus, I can still eat her afterwards..." Other vamps, even when their goals do happen to line up with a Slayer's, are a bit more unlikely to hang around talking to one.

Well, I suppose I should chime in with an unpopular opinion of my own while I'm here.

I loved the Initiative arc. There were things about the ending that made no sense to me. The bullets to doves crap? Stupid, but really just a special effect that they could have ditched and still run the story the same exact way. And that pretentious "Restless" episode as the finale? Not a good pacing choice, but again, not really a part of the arc. More of a prequel to the next big thing, which the writers very quickly forgot about. But Riley, his relationships with his friends, Maggie, Adam, the chip, Spike's playing both sides, even the general idea of Buffy combining her strengths with those of her friends, no matter how confusingly it was actually depicted in the fight scene... I thought it was a great story.

Edited August 22, 2014 by CletusMusashi

[Bitterswete]

Not having a soul means not being able to express empathy or to understand feelings. 

 

I never thought that having no soul meant having no emotion. Especially since we saw vampires other than Spike show very human emotions, including love.

 

Instead, having no soul seemed to mean having no conscience (which isn't the same). The conscience is what keeps us from acting on every desire, impulse, and instinct we have. It also tries to keep us from doing things that we know are bad, and makes us feel guilty if we do something we know is wrong. That's what vampires lack.

 

I'm not sure they ever considered why exactly he was capable of emotions like love when Angelus wasn't,

 

Again, Spike wasn't special when it came to being able to experience love.

 

And I don't hold Angelus up as an example of what most other vampires were like (so Spike not being like him meant Spike was special somehow). If anything, Angelus seemed to be an exception in his own right, even more heartless and cruel than most vampires. I remember Darla looking kind of freaked over something Angelus did, like they were trying to show that, even for a vampire, Angelus was out there evil-wise.

 

If Spike was capable of reforming (which, please) then some other vampire with an IQ above that of an inanimate object should also have been capable of reforming. Full stop. If they had ever explained why he was so diffferent that he could choose to seek out his soul, I wouldn't still be harping on it after all this time, but they didn't. And its not good enough to say "a wizard did it" in this case, IMO. Not when it destroys the entire concept of Buffy-as-hero.

 

Again, I don't think Spike going to get a soul showed he was reformed. He did it for selfish reasons, and as a result of some very special and unique circumstances.

 

But let's say Spike did go to get a soul for the right reasons, which meant vampires were capable of reforming. When would this reforming takes place? After they'd killed a few dozen innocent people? And how many vamps would end up reforming? Probably not a lot (if any) since we saw plenty of vamps who'd been killing for decades or centuries and, since they were still killing, obviously hadn't reformed yet.

 

Basically, I don't think Buffy dusting vamps is wrong because the alternative is leaving all vampires free to kill people on the off chance that a small handful of them might, after years/decades/centuries of slaughtering innocents, undergo a change of heart.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Bitterswete

[Dobian]

No, I didn't say that it meant you have no emotions, I said it meant you don't feel empathy.  You are more or less a sociopath.  A sociopath can have emotions, selfish ones.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Again, I don't think Spike going to get a soul showed he was reformed. He did it for selfish reasons, and as a result of some very special and unique circumstances.

 

But let's say Spike did go to get a soul for the right reasons, which meant vampires were capable of reforming. When would this reforming takes place? After they'd killed a few dozen innocent people? And how many vamps would end up reforming? Probably not a lot (if any) since we saw plenty of vamps who'd been killing for decades or centuries and, since they were still killing, obviously hadn't reformed yet.

 

Basically, I don't think Buffy dusting vamps is wrong because the alternative is leaving all vampires free to kill people on the off chance that a small handful of them might, after years/decades/centuries of slaughtering innocents, undergo a change of heart.

I agree that Spike's reasons were selfish, @Bitterswete, but unfortunately the show didn't really present it that way. And perhaps more importantly , some viewers didn't interpret it that way. The Spuffy shippers, in particular, couldn't wait to crow over how superior to Angel Spike was and how he obviously loved Buffy more because he 'chose' to get a soul. While its true that a real shipper sees what they want to see, I think if they took their Spuffy-prone goggles off, they'd have a different perspective.

 

And as a related issue, I'm always torn between anger and perverse amusement that of all the things Buffy did wrong over the course of the series,all the situations she should have (IMO) taken steps to correct and didn't, the one thing she actively tries to fix is that she was 'mean' to Spike in season sux. I mean, okay, you could say that she should treat everyone decently regardless of whether or not they have a pulse, but OTOH couldn't she have for God's sake chosen to prioritize what she felt bad about? Refusing to walk on eggshells around the unrepentant serial killer who's hitting you because he can is not worth getting upset over, Buffster. If that's unpopular, I'll find a corner and go sit in it.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Dobian]

Buffy was right to kill first and ask questions later with vampires.  Vampires are undead abominations.  It doesn't matter how witty and fun they are - and there were numerous scenes over the years where Buffy had exchanges with them in the middle of a fight that sounded like two friends out having lunch - in the end she had to kill them becuase if she didn't they would kill a human later that night to feed.

[SparedTurkey]

A slightly different topic - I liked Dawn. I didn't like that the writers didn't always change her lines from the 8 year old they initially imagined her to be, but that isn't MT's fault. I get that it messed with canon to a degree, but ultimately, it didn't change the previous 4 seasons for me. I preferred Dawn in season 6-7 (because by that point they were writing for a teenager, not a child) because she was whiny and needy and sometimes nice and on point. I also loved her relationship with Tara.

[pootlus]

I didn't like that the writers didn't always change her lines from the 8 year old they initially imagined her to be.

 

That...explains so much of the dumb Dawn stuff in S5 it's not even funny.

[amensisterfriend]

In many ways I think Season 4 is the very best season, or at least the one with the greatest number of my favorite episodes. I think it's held up better over time than the earlier seasons for me. (And I never really liked Seasons 5-7 in the first place.) Even Riley has grown on me. 

[joelene]

In many ways I think Season 4 is the very best season, or at least the one with the greatest number of my favorite episodes. I think it's held up better over time than the earlier seasons for me. (And I never really liked Seasons 5-7 in the first place.) Even Riley has grown on me.

This is my favourite season. I love 1 through 5, like season 6 for a lot of reasons and dislike season 7 for a lot of reason, but season 4 is the one I go back to the most. I like season 4 Riley and I have nothing against the universally disliked Beer Bad (even if it ranks low in season 4 episodes for me as well). Where The Wild Things Are is a hoot.

[Dobian]

I just finished season 7, been running through the series since April.  I liked the later seasons, including 6.  There really is no season I disliked.  I thought the biggest mistake of season 4 was to dust Dr. Walsh and make Adam the main villain.  Adam was clearly henchman material (like Caleb in season 7), while Walsh made for a very intriguing opponent.  Beyond that, I liked season 4.  The problem with season 7 was that they rushed to a conclusion, and had to contrive a lot of things and make up convenient plot devices to make it work.  Dawn was totally underused that season, and really all of the main gang got pushed to the background while Spike and Wood took more of center stage along with all the slayer girls, not to mention Andrew (who I could do without).  Then of course they brought Faith back, so there was just too big a cast of characters with too few episodes.  But I did enjoy seeing Faith back in season 7 and on Angel, I thought she was great on both shows.  And I can forgive a lot of season 7s flaws with that kickass grand finale.

[saki]

A few of mine:

 

I love season 1.  I genuinely think it's really good - Prophecy Girl is, of course, brilliant but I think episodes like The Witch and The Puppet Show are very underrated too.

 

I really like Buffy - she's not perfect but I don't really agree that she is especially self-absorbed/whiny.  Given the endless patrolling, etc, I think she's actually surprisingly perky.

 

I hate Tara.  When rewatching, I actually fast forward her scenes.  The actress is just awful, I don't understand why they cast someone so dull and unable to emote.  And why is she permanently slack jawed?

 

I think Faith is fun to have on screen but I'm really surprised at how many people find her a 'complex' character - to me she is fairly stereotypical 'bad girl' and that's fine, particularly because Eliza Dushku had such great chemistry with other members of the cast, but it isn't especially 'complex'.

 

I loved Kendra's episodes and am sorry that there aren't more of them.   The dynamic with Buffy was excellent.  "Kendra killed the bad lamp."  

 

I don't have very strong views on any of the romances in Buffy - there are some I enjoyed more than others, but they were never a big part of my enjoyment of the show.

[ladyrott]

saki, I totally agree with you about Kendra.  As much as I liked Faith, Kendra truly was my favorite "second slayer".  I was sad that they didn't do more with the character when they had the chance.  She could have visited Sunnydale a little more often.  I liked how she and Buffy related and how they learned to like/respect each other (Kendra killed the bad lamp IS always funny and is When this is over, we are getting you a stuffed animal). 

 

And I too love season 1.  The Witch is one of my favorite Buffy episodes.  The show started off strong, IMO, and maintained a great pace through the first season.  It doesn't hurt that I always liked the Master as a Big Bad either.

[Bitterswete]

I think Faith is fun to have on screen but I'm really surprised at how many people find her a 'complex' character - to me she is fairly stereotypical 'bad girl' and that's fine, particularly because Eliza Dushku had such great chemistry with other members of the cast, but it isn't especially 'complex'.

 

I also think Faith is a bad girl cliche in seasons 3 or 4 of Buffy. But, to me, she didn't even stand out as being particularly fun to have around. She was there. I didn't hate her, and some interesting things happened because of her character. But she wasn't a favorite.

 

But once she went over to Angel, Faith really blossomed for me as a character. After that, I became a fan.

Edited September 13, 2014 by Bitterswete

[romantic idiot]

I like Chosen. There. I said it. I know it's got major plot issues and everything (how did they miss a few potentials, why did the Ubervamps become so wimpy), but I've never understood the argument that Buffy sharing the slayer power with all the potentials was like her spreading the taint of a rape around, since the original power was gotten from a demon raping a woman. That's too hating children born of rape to me. So, with that gone, I can fanwank the rest of it is way, and I liked that the Slayer wasn't alone anymore. Not just with her friends, but because she got to share her burdens, they all got to share their burdens. I liked that. (And i never really liked Anya so Anya's death didn't piss me off that much. I was more pissed off at the cookie dough speech)

[stagmania]

I like Chosen. There. I said it. I know it's got major plot issues and everything (how did they miss a few potentials, why did the Ubervamps become so wimpy), but I've never understood the argument that Buffy sharing the slayer power with all the potentials was like her spreading the taint of a rape around, since the original power was gotten from a demon raping a woman. That's too hating children born of rape to me. So, with that gone, I can fanwank the rest of it is way, and I liked that the Slayer wasn't alone anymore. Not just with her friends, but because she got to share her burdens, they all got to share their burdens. I liked that. (And i never really liked Anya so Anya's death didn't piss me off that much. I was more pissed off at the cookie dough speech)

 

Agreed, I really like the ending, while also recognizing it has its problems. And good lord, I hated that cookie dough speech. It came across to me as blatant attempt to pander to both Bangel and Spuffy shippers, and I thought it was wholly unnecessary. Angel had been on his own show for 4 years at that point; I really had no desire to have that doomed romance dredged up one more time for the road.

[Bitterswete]

I've never understood the argument that Buffy sharing the slayer power with all the potentials was like her spreading the taint of a rape around

 

That's not how I saw it. My problem with it was much more down-to-earth.

 

Buffy treated being a Slayer like it was a burden pretty much always. There were times when she was more gung-ho about being the Slayer but, even then, it was more, "Well, since I'm the Slayer, I might as well try to be a good one," than, "Wow, being a Slayer is great and I wouldn't change it for the world!" And the sense that being a Slayer was a burden was at its worst in season 7.

 

The fact that Buffy was now free to do more "normal" stuff because their were other Slayers was great for her and all. But it's hard not to see that a lot of her new-found freedom came from giving something to other girls that she herself saw as a burden that, on many occasions, she desperately wanted to escape. And I have no doubt that (just like Buffy) their were Potentials who wanted nothing more than to live normal lives. But the spell pretty much took that away from them.

[Fat Elvis 007]

But the new slayers are just as free to give up their callings as Buffy now is. That's the point; with 2000 slayers out there, the burden is now a shared one, and the Slayers might even be able to act as more of a volunteer army. There's less of a chance that girls will be forced into the fight like Buffy was now that there is a wider selection of recruits.

The alternative is continuing the system as it was before, with one girl forced to bear the burden alone, as Buffy was. I don't see how that's preferable. Who's to say Dana or a girl like her wouldn't be the next Slayer called if and when Faith and Buffy die? Then who would stop her? The spell might have created a few rogue Slayers, but it also created plenty of good ones capable of stopping and helping them.

I don't like the way the Slayer spell was handled, and I wish the characters had at least acknowledged the downsides once in the episode. But the basic concept behind it works; in fact, in my opinion it's one of the few things in the episode that does.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Fat Elvis 007

[Bitterswete]

I don't like the way the Slayer spell was handled, and I wish the characters had at least acknowledged the downsides once in the episode. But the basic concept behind it works; in fact, in my opinion it's one of the few things in the episode that does.

 

Oh, I can make a list of all the ways having lots of Slayers is a good thing. What didn't sit right with me was the message that Buffy was so much freer, and could start to live a more normal life...now that she had spread her burden (which is how she always saw it) to lots of other unsuspecting girls who had no choice in the matter. And even if there being lots of Slayers meant they all had it easier, I'm sure that a lot of those girls, who would never have been Chosen without the spell, would not have wanted to be activated if they'd had any say in the matter, which they didn't.

 

Thinking of stuff like that just makes it hard to buy the whole "Buffy gets to ride happily into the sunset" vibe the finale was trying to sell. And it kind of went against the message that I hoped the show was ultimately going for. That being the Slayer was hard, but Buffy would find a way to be the Slayer and live a happy life. But no. The only way for Buffy to have a shot at happiness was to pass a big chunk of her Slayer burden on to others.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Bitterswete

[Carrie Ann]

I kind of agree with all points of view regarding the finale and the Grand EnSlayering spell. It's bad in about a dozen ways--forcing power onto girls who didn't ask for it, just like the original dudes did to the original slayer. Also, you're going to be giving superpowers to all manner of people. Some will be like Buffy, some will be like Faith, some will be worse. And yeah, these 2,000 girls have no clue what's happening to them, so you better find them all and help them with that (I think the comics deal with this, right?). 

 

On the other hand, it means that every Slayer's story doesn't end in her death, and that is a good thing--good enough for Buffy to smile about. I think in an ideal world, you would find all these superpowered ladies, see which of them want to fight the fight, and wish the rest a happy life. The ones who want to become Slayers fight and train and help each other and no one has to die in order for the next to be called; they can have kids if they want, they can retire and have other careers. In general, more than one Slayer is a good thing. The problem is with the depiction of it as a 100% positive, empowering thing for not just Buffy but every potential-now-actual Slayer out there. I wish they'd shown it as a complicated and tough, but correct and necessary decision, which is how I view it.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

 And yeah, these 2,000 girls have no clue what's happening to them, so you better find them all and help them with that (I think the comics deal with this, right?). 

I haven't been following the comics because friends whose opinions I trust say they're crap, but from what I understand they're focused on stuff like destroying magic, Angel murdering Giles, and various and sundry other crap. So no, not really. The closest the shows get to acknowledging that the Slayer spell wasn't a hundred percent wonderful was Damaged, when, by the way, Buffy didn't even show up to help clean up the mess she helped to make.

[Writing Wrongs]

I don't know if it's unpopular or not, but I hate that Faith isn't considered the "true" Slayer. If you go by the show mythology, after Buffy died and then Kendra, shouldn't the Slayer line go through Faith? I know Faith went all crazy for a bit, but still. I hate that she gets treated as second best.

[Fat Elvis 007]

I kind of agree with all points of view regarding the finale and the Grand EnSlayering spell. It's bad in about a dozen ways--forcing power onto girls who didn't ask for it, just like the original dudes did to the original slayer. Also, you're going to be giving superpowers to all manner of people. Some will be like Buffy, some will be like Faith, some will be worse. And yeah, these 2,000 girls have no clue what's happening to them, so you better find them all and help them with that (I think the comics deal with this, right?). 

 

On the other hand, it means that every Slayer's story doesn't end in her death, and that is a good thing--good enough for Buffy to smile about. I think in an ideal world, you would find all these superpowered ladies, see which of them want to fight the fight, and wish the rest a happy life. The ones who want to become Slayers fight and train and help each other and no one has to die in order for the next to be called; they can have kids if they want, they can retire and have other careers. In general, more than one Slayer is a good thing. The problem is with the depiction of it as a 100% positive, empowering thing for not just Buffy but every potential-now-actual Slayer out there. I wish they'd shown it as a complicated and tough, but correct and necessary decision, which is how I view it.

Exactly. In previous season finales, Buffy's crazy plans were acknowledged as crazy (see "Graduation Day Part 2" as a comparison). Here, Giles calls her plan "brilliant"--despite the fact that their dozen or so Slayers can't possibly stand up to thousands of Ubervamps. And even after depowering the Ubervamps with no real explanation, the plan still doesn't work; Spike has to save their asses via an amulet given to Buffy via Angel via an evil law firm that had never even been mentioned on this show before. 

 

Guh. 

 

Another problem: the spell just happens, with no research, no preparation, and no explanation of how Willow is suddenly able to do it. Remember when the gang actually had to solve problems with their brains? Remember when Willow was Little Miss Likes to Study? Now all problems are solved whenever the characters (and writers) declare that it can be. So Willow and Buffy know they can use the scythe to empower the Slayers because...they say they can, that's why. The same reason Dawn speaks Sumerian now, the Ubervamps aren't as strong, and the amulet destroys the Hellmouth. The same reason the finale ends with Willow telling us "The First is scrunched" as if that means anything, instead of, you know, actually showing the audience that the Big Bad of the season--the source of all evil in the universe, allegedly--has been defeated, the writers have Willow tell us. 

 

Again, I like the concept of the Slayer spell, but the execution of it--along with everything else in this finale--was horrendous.

[stagmania]

I don't know if it's unpopular or not, but I hate that Faith isn't considered the "true" Slayer. If you go by the show mythology, after Buffy died and then Kendra, shouldn't the Slayer line go through Faith? I know Faith went all crazy for a bit, but still. I hate that she gets treated as second best.

 

It is kind of weird. Buffy was basically the "extra" after her first death, but she was definitely treated by everyone we saw as The Chosen One. I guess because Faith was so unreliable? But actually, thinking about this more, I always interpreted the Cruciamentum as a way of getting rid of "troublesome" slayers; if you had a difficult personality to deal with and wanted someone more malleable, just give her a particularly tough test that she'll probably fail. But when Buffy went through hers, the slayer line had already passed on from her; only Faith's death would get them a new slayer. So what was the point?

[ladyrott]

I always wondered about the mythology of the whole second slayer thing.  Everyone acted like Buffy was the "real Slayer" (I vividly remember the scene where Buffy shows Faith the scythe and Faith says "It feels like it's mine. So it must belong to you"), but it was Kendra's death that called Faith, as far as I can recall.  If that is the case, then Faith WAS the true slayer.  Joyce wanted Buffy to retire and honestly, she could have.  Faith was the Chosen One at that point.  Buffy lived on the Hellmouth and I guess she couldn't just walk away from the responsibility of fighting evil (at least, not if she stayed in Sunnydale or Cleveland since the vamps and assorted other bad things gravitated there) but I will join WritingWrongs in the UO that Faith got the shitty end of that particular stick.  And who knows, if she HAD been treated like the chosen one, perhaps she never would have "gone bad" and would have ended up being a great Slayer.

[Loandbehold]

For whatever reason, when Buffy was brought back to life by Xander, she retained her slayer abilities. So, she was still a slayer, even if she was no longer THE slayer. If the spell worked differently, then Buffy would have come back a normal girl with no supernatural powers, because her powers transferred to Kendra leaving her as the only slayer. Would Buffy and the Scooby Gang continued fighting evil if she didn't have her powers? Hell, could they have stopped the Master? Since Buffy did come back to life with her slayer powers intact, neither Kendra nor Faith could be the only chosen one. Buffy was still treated that way, but mostly by her friends and Giles, as well as the Sunnydale demons who knew about her. Kendra was only in town briefly and Faith, possibly because Buffy was around, would occasionally go on walkabout and also felt excluded from the rest of the gang. Really, what's surprising to me is that, after Kendra was killed, nobody asked who the next slayer would be and if it might be a good idea to bring them to Sunnydale, especially after Buffy left town without a forwarding address.

[romantic idiot]

I figure Buffy got the gig as the incumbent. Possesion's nine tenths of the law and all that. 

[Bitterswete]

I don't know if it's unpopular or not, but I hate that Faith isn't considered the "true" Slayer. If you go by the show mythology, after Buffy died and then Kendra, shouldn't the Slayer line go through Faith?

 

Yes, and I remember one of the PTB's actually saying this. That the Slayer line no longer ran through Buffy, which was exactly why no new Slayer was called when Buffy died in "The Gift." A new Slayer would only be called if Faith died.

 

That being said, I don't think Buffy, Kendra or Faith was more the "true Slayer" than the others. They were all Slayers with the powers that went with the title. The only difference was which one had to die in order for a new Slayer to be called.

 

But I do think Buffy's friends thought of her as the Slayer because she was their friend, who they looked up to and had seen do all of these heroic things. Technicalities like who the Slayer line now ran through weren't going to change that. And the writers kept treating her like the Chosen One because she was their lead and main hero, and I think they were just used to writing with that mindset.

[saki]

I think, also, Buffy was the 'senior' slayer - i.e. she'd been a slayer for longer than Faith, had more experience and was (in my opinion) more naturally gifted - so it made sense to think of her as the main slayer.

[CinnamonCat]

I thought some of SMG's weakest moments happened during season five. There were far too many scenes where it was obvious she was only reciting her lines.

 

I loved Buffy and Spike's arc in season six -- not because I'm a shipper, but because I felt it made perfect sense that these two characters specifically were one another's rock bottom. I also don't think Spike sought out his soul for purely selfish reasons; his story was that of someone who was both a man and a monster, and at the same time, neither. So he made his choice. 

 

I hated Early Willow. "Ugh, I'm such a doormat! I wish everyone would stop treating me like a doormat!" Ugh.

 

Also, I thought everything about Riley made perfect sense. I understood why Buffy liked him, and also why, ultimately, she couldn't trust him. I wouldn't necessarily agree with Spike that she "needed a little monster in her man," but there was a potential for darkness in her that Riley, even with all his crackvamp hijinks, could never hope to understand. That's not to say I blame Buffy for their break up, of course -- he was the asshat in that scenario. But I felt the whole Briley thing was a pretty good showcasing of the way some relationships -- especially college relationships -- just aren't meant to last, how their only purpose is for the participants to learn about themselves.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I loved Buffy and Spike's arc in season six -- not because I'm a shipper, but because I felt it made perfect sense that these two characters specifically were one another's rock bottom. I also don't think Spike sought out his soul for purely selfish reasons; his story was that of someone who was both a man and a monster, and at the same time, neither. So he made his choice. 

 

So I can ask you this question, since as a non-shipper you'll probably give me an answer that has some logic to it. :-)

 

What exactly made sense to you about it on Buffy's part? The part where she was banging a serial killer who tried to kill her and her friends because she needed a way to cope with her depression? And yes, that is a real question. Was I supposed to see Buffy as one of those women who have so few friends and so little self-esteem that they start writing to Death Row inmates? Because that's a real thing too, and given the choice between the two scenarios I'd rather have seen her doing that. If she had this "darkness" in her before the thing with Spike, why wasn't she having sex with Angelus? Who represents the "demon within the man" more than the monster who wore her first love's face? Beyond that, I've been depressed off and on for the past fifteen years, crushingly depressed. I can assure you, my first thought was not to hunt up a serial murderer and make the beast with two backs. So I''m seriously asking, what about Spuffy made sense to you?

Edited September 26, 2014 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Wilowy]

I loved Buffy and Spike's arc in season six -- not because I'm a shipper, but because I felt it made perfect sense that these two characters specifically were one another's rock bottom. I also don't think Spike sought out his soul for purely selfish reasons; his story was that of someone who was both a man and a monster, and at the same time, neither. So he made his choice.

 

I liked their stuff, too. Not because I think they were predestined or anything, but it was just... hot. I loved their hate!sex, and how mean she was to him, I loved their occasional jokes to one another after the fact, and I do think that Spike was crazy about her, no matter what. You don't have to be *perfectly healthy* to have serial sex with somebody, most people aren't - so why would Buffy have to be?

 

She lived, ran, worked, and socialized in the darkest of worlds, why wouldn't she have a few unconventional sexual relationships? Maybe even simultaneously? I don't see how holding a superhero who works with and kills the undead every day, to our standards of normal, healthy relationships works at all, CoStar.

 

I say let the gal have her masochistic fun! :D