Buffy vs Other Genre Shows

[mstaken]

This is the place to compare BtVS to Whedon's other work and other genre shows in general. What do you like more or less about Buffy than, say, Angel, Vampire Diaries, True Blood, etc.? What other shows, current or former, remind you most of Buffy in tone and scope? 

[Kalliste]

Are we only talking vampires, I remember back in the day Buffy was compared to Dark Angel a bit too.

[mstaken]

I was thinking of any genre shows at all! 

[Kalliste]

ok :) well I never watched much of Dark Angel because I thought Jessica Alba was terrible :P So obviously Buffy was my go to kick ass female lead :)

 

I also find lots of similarities between Buffy and Smallville. Main character who is stronger than everyone else learning to live with their new identities which are mostly secret. I also didn't like the main characters in either, I find Buffy and Clarke to be mega pains in the arse. Plus they had a similar format, episode villain plus season big bad.

[Bitterswete]

I also find lots of similarities between Buffy and Smallville. Main character who is stronger than everyone else learning to live with their new identities which are mostly secret.

 

Smallville also had it's own Hellmouth, in a way. The meteor rocks that covered the town mutated people/animals into the show's version of "demons." 

 

Given some things the producers and writers have said, SV was pretty heavily influenced by BtVS from the start. While the show was certainly going to show Clark Kent fighting evil, it was going to focus more on the characters and relationships, and Clark dealing with having special powers and a destiny, but just wanting to lead a normal, teen-aged life. The problem was they didn't do this stuff as well as BtVS. Not because the writers couldn't but because, half the time, it seemed like they didn't want to put more effort into things than absolutely necessary. 

 

I think part of the problem was that, unlike BtVS, Smallville had decades of Superman lore to fall back on, and they seemed to rely on that to do a lot of the work for them. For example, they rarely tried to show that Clark had these awesome qualities that would make him the greatest hero ever. After all, everyone knew he was going to be Superman one day, so we should just assume Clark had those qualities. Only what actually happened was a lot of viewers stopped believing SV's Clark had what it took to ever become Superman.

 

However I do think that, in later seasons, BtVS started doing something SV did for most of it's run. On SV, it felt like Clark was always right (even when my own common sense said he wasn't) because he was going to be Superman. Anything he did was okay because he was going to be Superman. (But someone else doing the same thing was bad.) People were supposed to blindly trust him because he was going to be Superman. (And anyone who didn't blindly trust him was obviously in the wrong.)

 

I sometimes got the same vibe late in BtVS's run, only replace "because he's going to be Superman" with "because she's the Slayer" or "because she's Buffy."

 

[KatWay]

I gotta say that back when I watched the show I sometimes had my problems with Buffy or felt she was annoying, but having watched other genre shows, she comes off sooo much better just by comparison.

I mean, as far as other vampire shows are concerned, Sookie Stackhouse is AWFUL and Elena Gilbert is THE WORST. Both of them are primarily defined by their relationships with men and their magical vaginas. Makes me really appreciate Buffy, a kickass heroine who did stuff on her own, not just to be with whichever guy she swooned over at the moment, who genuinely deeply cared about her platonic friends, her family, and innocent people. 

 

I think part of why Buffy is so much more awesome than those two is that BtVS never had a full blown triangle which are so en vogue right now, where the heroine goes back and forth between guys for the entire run of the show, and waxes poetically a lot about she just really loves them both, but in different ways, and through her relationships with them she explores different aspects of herself and blahblahblah. See, Buffy did that too, but not simultaneously and not while the second guy pines after the heroine forever to finally make up her mind. 

 

Angel getting his spin-off was really the saving grace there because it allowed them to have Buffy move on to another guy, without Angel being kept around for sometime sexual tension, heated looks and pining. When Spike was into Buffy while she was with Riley, she still wasn't even considering him. With Angel she set boundaries after getting together with Riley. None of this "dating one guy, but making googly eyes at guy number two behind his back (or even right in front of him, ahem, Elena)" crap, aside from one or two eps maybe. 

[Jack Shaftoe]

I find Warehouse 13 to be sort of a spiritual successor of BtVS. Sure, it was never as good as the best of BtVS but it was also never also as consistently awful as the last few seasons of BtVS. Personally, I loved that the W13 crew had the "team spirit", so to speak, of the early Scoobies and the show always had light-hearted moments - even in the midst of important dramatic developments. And there were some characters who were really, really similar to their Buffy counterparts - Claudia even looks like Willow in addition to being a hacker and Artie is basically a grumpier Giles. But early Buffy's finales were much better than W13's finales that were usually disappointing as most of them had annoying resets (resurrected characters and so on) and one was even similar to the silly Dark Willow storyline.

 

Warehouse 13 also had a fan favorite character with a not-so-stellar past, namely H.G. Wells. And instead of pandering to the fanbase and making her (confusingly, H.G. Wells is a woman in that show) one of the main characters, they used her in only a handful of episodes in the last two seasons. The one time I like a character that seems poised to hijack a show the way Spike did, and the showrunners refuse to be tempted. Bastards. :)

 

After season 1 of Grimm I started thinking that David Greenwalt was more responsible for BtVS's success than I previously thought but by season 3 Grimm became unwatchable, so I guess he is not that consistent of a writer, either. 

Edited July 23, 2014 by Jack Shaftoe

[ae2]

I find Warehouse 13 to be sort of a spiritual successor of BtVS. 

 

Currently on my first ever watch of W13. (At the start of season 4.) I never considered this, but I can see why you might draw the comparison between them.

 

I never felt like there was a single central character in W13, like Buffy was. Artie plays as big a role as Myka and Pete. The dialogue isn't as snappy and smart as Buffy was at its best. (But Pete is hilarious, and I think I like him more than any Buffy character.) And I don't think any character is as kick-ass as Buffy. But the stories have some similar ideas, and the basic principle of a ragtag team working behind the scenes to stop weird and bad stuff from happening is similar.

 

My favorite thing about BtVS was that it never took itself too seriously. The writers always seemed to be aware when the acting, or the writing, or the special effects, or the monster makeup, or the story was particularly cheesy. And they poked fun at it. E.g., "This is a school library, Xander." "Since when?" To me, that made it a lot easier to forgive all its flaws.

 

They also poked fun at the fans from time to time.

 

It also (from what I can recall on my last watch) was the master of continuity and character development. It drives me nuts when a show glosses over big events that recently happened. 

[KatWay]

 

It also (from what I can recall on my last watch) was the master of continuity and character development. It drives me nuts when a show glosses over big events that recently happened.

Very true. Honestly, I can't think of any genre show right now which comes even close to the level of continuity Buffy achieved. Most shows I watch introduce and drop random storylines all the time never to mention them again, characters suddenly pop up only to disappear forever without anybody even bothering to explain their absence, huge life-changing events happen only to be completely ignored the very next episode or at the very least never to be brought up again after the end of that storyline. Not that Buffy was perfect, but they really were great about foreshadowing and referencing stuff and trying to keep a sense of continuity.

[ae2]

Most shows I watch introduce and drop random storylines all the time never to mention them again, characters suddenly pop up only to disappear forever without anybody even bothering to explain their absence, huge life-changing events happen only to be completely ignored the very next episode or at the very least never to be brought up again after the end of that storyline. 

 

You must be watching Under the Dome right now... :-)

[CletusMusashi]

One thing I appreciate is that Buffy's vamps did not have The Ancient Secret Council.

True Blood, Forever Knight, Being Human, Lost Girl, the other version of Being Human, Twilight, The Laurel Hamilton books... it's not a bad idea in and of itself, but it's been done into the ground. Enough already. And, yes, they could have gotten away with it in the early seasons, because it hadn't been quite that over-done yet, but they didn't even try.

If anything, Buffy flat-out subverted the trope, almost from the very start. Yes, the Aurelius cult was a big deal, but we saw that many if not most vampires were not affiliated with them and really just wanted to party and suck blood. And when the Maestro finally got taken down, they did not do the now-traditional "His uber-powerful boss comes to see what happened," schtick. Instead, they showed a fascinating story of completely different vampire personalities, from all over the place, moving into the power vacuum and clashing with each other.

Edited July 29, 2014 by CletusMusashi

[romantic idiot]

I think in terms of quality, if I were to compare Buffy, it would be with Farscape, Red Dwarf, Babylon 5 and the like. Not too many urban fantasy shows really come to mind. 

[Dobian]

Smallville season one was very much like Buffy's first season.  The main character was a secret superhero and fought a freak of the week at the high school in each episode.  I don't think it's a stretch to say that the makers of Smallville had watched a lot of Buffy.  I liked Smallville a lot, until it just started getting very dark and over-the-top.  The tone of the show changed a lot with the departure of Clark's parents, and also when Lex Luthor left.  I always liked Buffy better, because even in the show's darker moments, it had a sense of humor about it, or at least a feeling of a light at the end of the tunnel.  The story always had a glass is half full feel to it, while Smallville too often felt like the glass was half empty.  SMG was also better in her lead role than Tom Welling.  She always conveyed a heart and soul, and a worldly wisdom as the seasons progressed, while Clark so often came off as a douchebag.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Dobian

[Kalliste]

Smallville season one was very much like Buffy's first season.  The main character was a secret superhero and fought a freak of the week at the high school in each episode.  I don't think it's a stretch to say that the makers of Smallville had watched a lot of Buffy.  I liked Smallville a lot, until it just started getting very dark and over-the-top.  The tone of the show changed a lot with the departure of Clark's parents, and also when Lex Luthor left.  I always liked Buffy better, because even in the show's darker moments, it had a sense of humor about it, or at least a feeling of a light at the end of the tunnel.  The story always had a glass is half full feel to it, while Smallville too often felt like the glass was half empty.  SMG was also better in her lead role than Tom Welling.  She always conveyed a heart and soul, and a worldly wisdom as the seasons progressed, while Clark so often came off as a douchebag.

 

I was so sad when Lex left. He was the best, in his overly paranoid but usually right way.

 

And you're so right about Clark coming off as a douchebag but then inevitably he was right and everyone apologised.. ugh,.

[Bitterswete]

Smallville season one was very much like Buffy's first season. 

 

Not just season one, either. They often did things in later seasons that seemed to be inspired by BtVS. The example that instantly springs to mind is Clark running away from home at the end of the season 2 finale, after suffering various emotional traumas. And the season 3 premiere showed him living in a big city (Metropolis) under an assumed name. The storyline was totally different in other ways, so it wasn't like SV did an exact copy of the BtVS storyline. But there was no way the SV writers weren't inspired by BtVS with that one. 

 

I always liked Buffy better, because even in the show's darker moments, it had a sense of humor about it,

 

The Smallville PTB always seemed to think that, because the show was based on a comic book super hero, and a lot of people think comic books are "kid stuff," the show wouldn't be taken seriously if they did too much humor. Which is a shame because, when they did do humor, they often did it pretty well.

 

That being said, I did like a lot of the dark stuff they did. Like "Memoria," which is one of my favorite episodes.

 

And you're so right about Clark coming off as a douchebag but then inevitably he was right and everyone apologised.. ugh,.

 

I actually liked Clark a lot in the early seasons. But, as the show went on, he became less and less likeable.

[romantic idiot]

In terms of quality though, I don't think they compare. I hide the fact that I watched Smallville - or at least, my only real justification is the pretty Tom Welling. Especially since they ruined the good things they had - Lex and Chloe - in the service of Lana and Lois. 

 

Buffy - I dare my friends to badmouth, and tell them it's their loss if they haven't seen it. Including the last 2 seasons, which, IMO, were still worth watching and better than almost all of Smallville, barring a few good episodes. 

 

And AlMiles then had to go ruin Spiderman too, but that's a rant for a different day. 

[Dobian]

You must be watching Under the Dome right now... :-)

Ugh, don't get me started on that one.  I already ranted about it on the other thread.

[Bitterswete]

In terms of quality though, I don't think they compare.

 

I definitely think BtVS is the better show, but that doesn't mean there weren't things about Smallville that I could enjoy. There were also things I think they did pretty well.

 

For example, Lex. There was a time when I could enjoy a good, mustache-twirling Lex Luthor, and just have fun watching him do bad things just because (sort of like I did with Angelus). But now, thanks to SV's Lex, I can't completely enjoy other versions of the character unless they have layers and dimensions and actual, understandable reasons (beyond wanting power, or money, or whatever) for the things they do.

 

So while SV wasn't as good as BtVS, it did have some good stuff going on.

 

Including the last 2 seasons, which, IMO, were still worth watching and better than almost all of Smallville, barring a few good episodes.

 

I wouldn't say that. Mostly because I really, really don't care for BtVS season 7, and have a hard time thinking it's better than anything. In fact, there's plenty of stuff on SV that I'll take over most of BtVS 7. And a lot of season 6.

 

Still, while I didn't care for the last two seasons, I think anyone who hasn't given Buffy a chance is depriving themselves, and should start watching immediately.

Edited August 2, 2014 by Bitterswete

[Bitterswete]

To be honest, Smallville was in my opinion, at least at the beginning, only a bad copy of Roswell mixed with the MOTW-concept of Buffy with a little Superman thrown in so it wouldn't tank out of the gate. I don't know what it became later in its run, because I only watched the first season, but I have no interest in ever finding out.

 

First, I've never watched much Roswell but, from what I saw of it, I don't think SV was much like it beyond a few details here and there.

 

As for what SV was like later in its run, it had some great elements I think people might enjoy. Lex and his relationship with his abusive, sociopathic father was fascinating. And, from season three on, Chloe became an awesome character, and a hero in her own right. Then there was stuff like getting to see the very beginnings of the Justice League.

 

The problem is that, to see the good, you have to wade through quite a bit of crap. Which is what I tell people when they ask if they should watch it. If you accept that a lot of the show isn't so great, and try to focus on the good stuff, you can enjoy the show somewhat.

 

As for Buffy vs other genre shows, while I generally feel like Buffy holds up well and that it is still one of the greatest shows of all time, I can see how current genre shows will probably have an edge over Buffy, at least in getting new younger viewers to sample the show,

 

I actually see a lot of younger viewers mentioning they've just started watching BtVS, and how much they love it over any of the current shows. And while other shows might have fans hooked, I don't think the fans are nearly as engaged, largely because there isn't as much to most of those shows.

[Joe Hellandback]

9 hours ago, Fool to cry said:

  Me too. I just listened to the Nash Bridges writers reunion(some went on to co-create Lost and The Shield) and it was very entertaining and informative. A lot of shows today like the CW superhero  emulate Buffy but some can't seem to be able to get doing entertaining filler episodes along with ones that move the season long story arc right.

Personally I think Buffy will simply never be equalled, it was simply the perfect conjunction of writing, acting talent, premise and internet explosion, it was the Elvis/Beatles of fantasy TV.   

[Joe Hellandback]

7 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

It was also a different time. There were not a lot of shows like it and it was still in the old age of television where ratings were the most important thing and where people didn't exactly consume their television by binging it. Nowadays, it is almost frowned upon if a series does have stand alone episodes that do not contribute to an arc. That's kind of why I liked "iZombie", it's not close to Buffy and not even among my favorite TV shows, but I really liked that they have a case-of-the-week structure and even at the beginning when I didn't like that show at all, I thought they had a great stand-alone episode gimmick and I thought it was usually better than their on-going storylines

 

Btw. growing up I had friends who thought Charmed was better than Buffy and to this day it makes me really furious that some people were not able to see past the silly title and the monster-make-up to see the depths and brilliance of Buffy. 

Charmed is to Buffy as the Monkees are to The Beatles (Xena is The Rolling Stones). Now I like The Monkees but there's no comparison (especially after they killed off Shannen, after that I only watched eps where CC guest starred).

 Frankly the only shows these days I watch more than once are Gotham, The Americans and Dr Who.  

[Halting Hex]

8 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

Charmed is to Buffy as the Monkees are to The Beatles (Xena is The Rolling Stones). Now I like The Monkees but there's no comparison (especially after they killed off Shannen, after that I only watched eps where CC guest starred).

Not a bad analogy (and remember that The Monkees were severely underrated), but you quit Charmed a little too early.  Charmed's Season 4 blows BtVS Season 6 (which it ran against) out of the water; "Long Live the Queen" was one of that series' best episodes.  S5 was just as mediocre as Buffy's S7, though, and later years were more often muddled than not, but there were worthwhile episodes sprinkled in now and then, as you know from seeing CC's guest-spots in the Avatar arc in S7.  (The climax of that, "Extreme Makeover:  World Edition" and "Charmageddon' guest-starred Max Perlich, whom you like.  I can't imagine why, but you do.)

I do wonder why Charmed was always the bigger hit, though.  Was it simply that the WB was more skilled at promotion by 1998 than they had been in '97?  I mean, witches are no more "realistic" than vampires, after all, and BtVS always did have Charmed beat in the "hot boys" category, which allegedly goes down well with the demographic.  Strange.

[Joe Hellandback]

6 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

Not a bad analogy (and remember that The Monkees were severely underrated), but you quit Charmed a little too early.  Charmed's Season 4 blows BtVS Season 6 (which it ran against) out of the water; "Long Live the Queen" was one of that series' best episodes.  S5 was just as mediocre as Buffy's S7, though, and later years were more often muddled than not, but there were worthwhile episodes sprinkled in now and then, as you know from seeing CC's guest-spots in the Avatar arc in S7.  (The climax of that, "Extreme Makeover:  World Edition" and "Charmageddon' guest-starred Max Perlich, whom you like.  I can't imagine why, but you do.)

I do wonder why Charmed was always the bigger hit, though.  Was it simply that the WB was more skilled at promotion by 1998 than they had been in '97?  I mean, witches are no more "realistic" than vampires, after all, and BtVS always did have Charmed beat in the "hot boys" category, which allegedly goes down well with the demographic.  Strange.

1. I have an extreme hatred for Rose McGowan even before she started all the hysteria over the casting coach;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/2798941/Rose-McGowan-I-would-have-signed-up-for-the-IRA.html

2. Charmed was the bigger hit because it was Buffy-lite, you could watch it and it was utterly undemanding. It didn't have the legacy, no one ever wrote a book called the 'The Quotable Charmed'. Rambo ; First Blood pt 2 was bigger at the box office than First Blood yet the latter is an infinitely better film (as is the final film in the series). 

3. Plus Buffy had a successful spinoff whilst Charmed didn't, despite so obviously, desperately aiming for one, even Kelly Cuoco dressed as a schoolgirl couldn't pull that off.   

[Halting Hex]

45 minutes ago, nosleepforme said:

For a short amount of time, "Charmed" was a fun show to watch too, but there was never really anything to it. it was very shallow.

I'd say that Constance Burge's original conception had depth, with the emphasis on Phoebe needing to reconnect to her family and the analogy of the sisters to the three parts of the psyche.  (Pru is Ego, Phoebe is Id, Piper is Superego.)  Certainly episodes like "Is There a Woogy in the House?" and "Fear, Itself" had gravitas, as well as tragic episodes like "Time and Time Again" and "Astral Monkey" and, of course, "Morality Bites".  But Brad Kern saw more potential in the show as being primarily lighter in tone (and given the ratings, one can't really argue with that).  So that led to the series getting notably fluffier beginning with S3, ironically right when they started to attempt a serious arc, with all the Cole stuff.  

(Which, don't get me wrong, got draggy for a large part of those seasons, too.  Still better than Spuffy, though…if only because Phoebe had nowhere near as far to fall.  And because her sisters called her on her self-destructive shit in ways the Scoobs were never allowed to do wrt Buffy.)

Still, one's champagne and the other is diet soda, so yeah, the way the ratings worked out is baffling to me, too.  Could it really be nothing more than the title?  Personally I don't see an issue with Buffy the Vampire Slayer…it tells you who the lead character is and what she does.  And if "Buffy" is a quirky name, what of it?  What makes that any different from Xena, Warrior Princess or Doctor Quinn, Medicine Woman or Magnum, P.I. or Quincy, M.E., or House, M.D.? 

Meanwhile, I always thought that Charmed was a little overly-cutesy as a series title.  But I guess that's just me.  (And it's not as if the streets are full of women named "Pru" or "Piper", either.  [Apologies to Ms. Perabo and Ms. Laurie on the last])

[Joe Hellandback]

1 hour ago, nosleepforme said:

I think "Charmed" had the advantage of not having a silly title. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" has a stigma to it from the get-go. When I was telling people that I was watching "Buffy", even the friends that watched "Charmed" would look at me with an expression of ridicule in their face.  But generally I don't understand it either, as Buffy was superior in pretty much every possible aspect: Storylines, characters, acting, cinematography, special effects, depth. For a short amount of time, "Charmed" was a fun show to watch too, but there was never really anything to it. it was very shallow.

 

Though I do think "Buffy" was initially considered the more successful show, at least in the US. I remember the "Charmed" actresses complaining about being treated like the stepchild of the WB and not being promoted properly. Critics were all over "Buffy" and pretty much ignoring "Charmed". Though I do think that "Charmed" had more consistent ratings throughout its run. Here in Germany, Charmed was more successful though, at one time Buffy repeats got canned and replaced with Charmed repeats, Angel was cancelled altogether in the middle of the third season and only resurfaced again years later, airing after midnight. 

Television executives logic is not like our earth logic, I mean look at them cancelling Angel?

33 minutes ago, Halting Hex said:

I'd say that Constance Burge's original conception had depth, with the emphasis on Phoebe needing to reconnect to her family and the analogy of the sisters to the three parts of the psyche.  (Pru is Ego, Phoebe is Id, Piper is Superego.)  Certainly episodes like "Is There a Woogy in the House?" and "Fear, Itself" had gravitas, as well as tragic episodes like "Time and Time Again" and "Astral Monkey" and, of course, "Morality Bites".  But Brad Kern saw more potential in the show as being primarily lighter in tone (and given the ratings, one can't really argue with that).  So that led to the series getting notably fluffier beginning with S3, ironically right when they started to attempt a serious arc, with all the Cole stuff.  

(Which, don't get me wrong, got draggy for a large part of those seasons, too.  Still better than Spuffy, though…if only because Phoebe had nowhere near as far to fall.  And because her sisters called her on her self-destructive shit in ways the Scoobs were never allowed to do wrt Buffy.)

Still, one's champagne and the other is diet soda, so yeah, the way the ratings worked out is baffling to me, too.  Could it really be nothing more than the title?  Personally I don't see an issue with Buffy the Vampire Slayer…it tells you who the lead character is and what she does.  And if "Buffy" is a quirky name, what of it?  What makes that any different from Xena, Warrior Princess or Doctor Quinn, Medicine Woman or Magnum, P.I. or Quincy, M.E., or House, M.D.? 

Meanwhile, I always thought that Charmed was a little overly-cutesy as a series title.  But I guess that's just me.  (And it's not as if the streets are full of women named "Pru" or "Piper", either.  [Apologies to Ms. Perabo and Ms. Laurie on the last])

You always wonder did Charmed copy Buffy deliberately? Certainly there are some Xena eps which have very similar themes to Buffy eps. 

[Halting Hex]

Add Kolchak, the Night Stalker to the list of "this is my name, this is my job" series titles.  And not a lot of people named "Kolchak" out there, either.  At this point, I'm starting to feel that a (putative?) negative reaction to the title "Buffy" might be nothing more than sexism.

[Jack Shaftoe]

Quote

Charmed's Season 4 blows BtVS Season 6 (which it ran against) out of the water;

Yes, but so does watching paint dry.

But yeah, I might have watched Charmed to the bitter end but it never came close to the heights of BtVS and at its worst was almost as bad as BtVS's worst. I honestly had no idea until now that it was more successful.

[Halting Hex]

26 minutes ago, Jack Shaftoe said:

its worst was almost as bad as BtVS's worst

Oh, probably even worse.  BtVS never had a bunch of stupid faeries and the like running around, there was at least an attempt at plot consistency, and Buffy was never so seduced to evil that she sat by and watched human sacrifices, ffs.  (That part of Cole's coronation is only retconned in offscreen in "Womb Raider", but even so.)  It just hurts more here, because I have much higher expectations of this show.

So Phoebe becoming Queen of All Evil? Not a good look, but it's Phoebe…we're not that appalled, I'd say.  OTOH, Willow skinning people alive?  Buffy telling Robin she'd let Spike kill him? Go fuck yourself, Joss.  But JMO.

[secnarf]

6 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

I think "Charmed" had the advantage of not having a silly title. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" has a stigma to it from the get-go. When I was telling people that I was watching "Buffy", even the friends that watched "Charmed" would look at me with an expression of ridicule in their face.  But generally I don't understand it either, as Buffy was superior in pretty much every possible aspect: Storylines, characters, acting, cinematography, special effects, depth. For a short amount of time, "Charmed" was a fun show to watch too, but there was never really anything to it. it was very shallow.

 

5 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

Still, one's champagne and the other is diet soda, so yeah, the way the ratings worked out is baffling to me, too.  Could it really be nothing more than the title?  Personally I don't see an issue with Buffy the Vampire Slayer…it tells you who the lead character is and what she does.  And if "Buffy" is a quirky name, what of it?  What makes that any different from Xena, Warrior Princess or Doctor Quinn, Medicine Woman or Magnum, P.I. or Quincy, M.E., or House, M.D.?

For the longest time, I wouldn't watch Buffy largely because the name sounded dumb. Of course, I was also 6 years old when it first started airing ;) But I really had no idea what it was about, just heard the name, which I thought was dumb. I eventually stumbled onto the show while channel surfing - the day before the series finale was a holiday here, and one of the TV stations was airing a 10-hr viewers choice marathon. I happened to flip the channel to the season 2 finale and was instantly captivated (by this point I was 12 years old), though surprised when I eventually learned what the show was! Got my little sister into it that day as well - we spent a good chunk of the day watching that marathon, and then the finale the next day.

[Joe Hellandback]

22 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

Add Kolchak, the Night Stalker to the list of "this is my name, this is my job" series titles.  And not a lot of people named "Kolchak" out there, either.  At this point, I'm starting to feel that a (putative?) negative reaction to the title "Buffy" might be nothing more than sexism.

I like Kolchak, bought the series on DVD, the monsters get a little pathetic after a while but it's interesting to see old fashioned gutter journalism and 70s Chicago.  

[Joe Hellandback]

21 hours ago, Jack Shaftoe said:

Yes, but so does watching paint dry.

But yeah, I might have watched Charmed to the bitter end but it never came close to the heights of BtVS and at its worst was almost as bad as BtVS's worst. I honestly had no idea until now that it was more successful.

We'll discuss s6 when we get there, sometimes the weaker show does better, think of all the L&O, CSI, NCIS franchises going on forever whilst Tru Calling, Firefly, Dollhouse, Space AAB get cancelled? I guess because they're sometimes just undemanding, 

21 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

Oh, probably even worse.  BtVS never had a bunch of stupid faeries and the like running around, there was at least an attempt at plot consistency, and Buffy was never so seduced to evil that she sat by and watched human sacrifices, ffs.  (That part of Cole's coronation is only retconned in offscreen in "Womb Raider", but even so.)  It just hurts more here, because I have much higher expectations of this show.

So Phoebe becoming Queen of All Evil? Not a good look, but it's Phoebe…we're not that appalled, I'd say.  OTOH, Willow skinning people alive?  Buffy telling Robin she'd let Spike kill him? Go fuck yourself, Joss.  But JMO.

In other words, no Leprechauns in the Buffyverse, thank god! As for season 6&7 talk about that then. 

Edited July 8, 2018 by Joe Hellandback

[Joe Hellandback]

18 hours ago, secnarf said:

 

For the longest time, I wouldn't watch Buffy largely because the name sounded dumb. Of course, I was also 6 years old when it first started airing ;) But I really had no idea what it was about, just heard the name, which I thought was dumb. I eventually stumbled onto the show while channel surfing - the day before the series finale was a holiday here, and one of the TV stations was airing a 10-hr viewers choice marathon. I happened to flip the channel to the season 2 finale and was instantly captivated (by this point I was 12 years old), though surprised when I eventually learned what the show was! Got my little sister into it that day as well - we spent a good chunk of the day watching that marathon, and then the finale the next day.

Always fun when you discover a series you like that's been on for a while and can go back and watch it in its' entirety. Of course the whole point of Buffy is that it sounds a light and ridiculous show but is actually incredibly serious, inverting the cliché.  

[Halting Hex]

On July 7, 2018 at 3:43 AM, Halting Hex said:

Add Kolchak, the Night Stalker to the list of "this is my name, this is my job" series titles.

Also, Sabrina the Teenaged Witch, now that I think of it.

[Joe Hellandback]

1 hour ago, Halting Hex said:

Also, Sabrina the Teenaged Witch, now that I think of it.

Just re-watching that at the moment, UK tv having a 90s nostalgia kick. It's an interesting comparison, a blonde heroine inheriting her powers at 16, having an attractive yet nerdish best friend (regularly changing but practically indistinguishable) and a rivalry with bitchy dark haired cheerleader captain? Plus Clare Kramer guest stars and they do a Buffy spoof in the later seasons. And Aunt Zelda is hot.  

[Halting Hex]

2 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

They kept the "sisterhood" concept, except the tall black girl is the long lost sister that they only introduced in season four in the original Charmed. Basically, they turn the four Charmed sisters from the initial series into three sisters again.

So they keep the unnecessary revision ("long-lost 'fourth' sister") in the name of "diversity" and sacrifice the basic concept of the three who grew up together having a special bond?  Wonderful.  And that still doesn't explain the complete sampler platter with the one Latina actress (Sarah Jeffery, playing the "Phoebe" analogue) and the one less-Latina actress (although, going by Melonie Diaz's name, she probably has some heritage there, but she looks rather straight-up white) to go along with the black (Madeleine Mantock).  Perhaps they're not going to claim three baby-daddies after all, but it still looks like that.  And we're throwing out all of the "Phoebe rebonds with her sisters" theme of S1 if "Maggie" (Phoebe) has been living with "Mel" (Piper) the whole time, just waiting for "Macey" (Paige, but with Pru's powers…and boy, I bet some people are gonna be pissed about that) to have her suddenly-British butt pop up on the doorstep.  Blech. 

And I don't even care about that show, to any relevant extent.  I'm just anticipating what a similar project might do to this show, which I would crawl across broken glass for (okay, maybe…not the Dawnverse, but S1-2 anyhow) and, well, I'm getting twitchy.  Apologies, I suppose.

(But none for Ms. Mantock, who evades questions about comparing the two versions by going "I was 8 when the original series came on."  Hey, it's not as though it takes magic to look at the DVDs, you know…)

[ursula]

44 minutes ago, Halting Hex said:

And that still doesn't explain the complete sampler platter with the one Latina actress (Sarah Jeffery, playing the "Phoebe" analogue) and the one less-Latina actress (although, going by Melonie Diaz's name, she probably has some heritage there, but she looks rather straight-up white) to go along with the black (Madeleine Mantock).

??‍♀️ I'm not Latina but... I think saying someone is less-Latina because she's White is kind of not-right. Latina is not a race. 

[Halting Hex]

I'm sorry if I expressed that poorly.  I meant that Melonie Diaz does not appear to be Latina where Sarah Jeffrey does, even though the "Diaz" surname indicates she may likely have Latina ethnicity. 

(And on the larger point, they appear different enough to make me question their casting as full-sisters, whereas Madeleine Mantock's being black can be excused as her character being only a half-sister.  And I suppose the mother could have raised two of the half-sisters together while having a third left overseas, but it still makes her seem…complicated?  It just seems unnecessary; I would have taken three full sisters of any race or ethnicity.  But JMO.)

Some pushback on the Buffy (and Charmed) reboots:

Talent of Color do not need White hand-me-downs

No, I don't want a Black Buffy, and here's why

From the latter article, by Princess Weekes:

Quote

Any African-American actress who enters this role is forever going to be known as “Black Buffy,” and that’s something I find frustrating.

................

From the very beginning, [the reboot] will be held to an unreasonably high standard and will be compared in terms of writing, acting, etc. to the original, and if this show doesn’t go on to last seven seasons, it’ll just be looked at as a failed attempted to update a popular series. All the flaws will be its own and anything good will be attributed to Whedon’s influence.

................

Unless original work from creators of color gets made, it’ll never belong to that community. We will never get to say “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and not have it belong to Joss Whedon and Sarah Michelle Gellar first and foremost, and considering Joss Whedon and the way he wrote WOC and POC in the past, it’s not the best place to start.

And in that regard, I can’t be excited. I can’t be excited because I can already imagine all the shit the actress who plays Buffy will get, because that’s what happens when black actresses are given roles that used to “belong” to white characters.

Well…I hope not, but I understand Ms. Weekes's cynicism on this front. (The other article also praises original African-American hero shows, such as Black Lightning and Luke Cage, as opposed to the "reboot" concept.)  Worth a thought, IMO.

Edited July 24, 2018 by Halting Hex

[Dee]

Melonie Diaz is Puerto Rican.

[Joe Hellandback]

12 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

So they keep the unnecessary revision ("long-lost 'fourth' sister") in the name of "diversity" and sacrifice the basic concept of the three who grew up together having a special bond?  Wonderful.  And that still doesn't explain the complete sampler platter with the one Latina actress (Sarah Jeffery, playing the "Phoebe" analogue) and the one less-Latina actress (although, going by Melonie Diaz's name, she probably has some heritage there, but she looks rather straight-up white) to go along with the black (Madeleine Mantock).  Perhaps they're not going to claim three baby-daddies after all, but it still looks like that.  And we're throwing out all of the "Phoebe rebonds with her sisters" theme of S1 if "Maggie" (Phoebe) has been living with "Mel" (Piper) the whole time, just waiting for "Macey" (Paige, but with Pru's powers…and boy, I bet some people are gonna be pissed about that) to have her suddenly-British butt pop up on the doorstep.  Blech. 

And I don't even care about that show, to any relevant extent.  I'm just anticipating what a similar project might do to this show, which I would crawl across broken glass for (okay, maybe…not the Dawnverse, but S1-2 anyhow) and, well, I'm getting twitchy.  Apologies, I suppose.

(But none for Ms. Mantock, who evades questions about comparing the two versions by going "I was 8 when the original series came on."  Hey, it's not as though it takes magic to look at the DVDs, you know…)

Does seem to be a case of having their cake and eating it, a multiracial cast but all light-skinned in the true Hollywood 'colourism' cliché ( or 'prejuduce', you think of Jesse Jackson's spat with Playboy). But they could still be sisters, just with different dads or mums. 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Joe Hellandback

[Halting Hex]

14 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

I'm not a big fan of Charmed, as opposed to Buffy, but that was drew me in for the first season, because Prue and Phoebe had a great dynamique with each other.

Exactly.  Aside from the three sisters representing the three parts of the psyche, as I wrote about elsewhere (Pru is Ego, Phoebe is Id, and poor Piper is Superego, stuck in the middle…no wonder she wants to stop time!), the basic subtext of the Constance Buerge era (S1, some of S2) is that Phoebe wants Pru to love her and is scared that Pru…doesn't.  (I haven't looked, but I'm assuming there's a good bit of incest fic…well, with all pairings, given what fic is like, but that one especially.*)  Obviously, it's leftover damage from Penny having died when the girls were so young, which gave Phoebe the worst abandonment issues, as she was the youngest.  (And Patty ["Grams"] may have been beloved during her ghostly guest spots, but honestly she seems to have been a shitty surrogate parent, too.)

*-The show even gave this a shoutout in S8, when the sisters have faked their deaths and are now magically disguised:

Quote

PHOEBE (checking her and Piper's new reflections in a store window):  Damn, you look hot!

PIPER (somewhat appalled, but it's not as if she doesn't know Phoebe, after all):  Phoebe!  I'm your sister!

PHOEBE (devilish):  "Cousin", now

PIPER (firm):  Still wrong.

 

9 hours ago, ursula said:

Not to get too meta but arguably, there is always an inherent degree of selfishness/egomania in the decision to procreate.

I don't even see it as much of "decision" for Robin and Faith; there's no reason the contraception couldn't have failed in the midst of passion.  And Faith eventually goes back to prison because she can't run forever (if she got on that bus to Cleveland with the rest of the Scoobs after Chosen, she'd face Federal time for interstate flight), and Robin ends up raising young Nikki, just as Bernard Crowley raised him.

(I'm ignoring anything that the comics might be saying, as that can all be handwaved away.  And some of it 

Spoiler

Angel kills Giles, but gosh he's really sorry!  He's going to brood for a good 45 minutes, at least!

obviously should be, IMO.)

Edited July 25, 2018 by Halting Hex

[Joe Hellandback]

11 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

Exactly.  Aside from the three sisters representing the three parts of the psyche, as I wrote about elsewhere (Pru is Ego, Phoebe is Id, and poor Piper is Superego, stuck in the middle…no wonder she wants to stop time!), the basic subtext of the Constance Buerge era (S1, some of S2) is that Phoebe wants Pru to love her and is scared that Pru…doesn't.  (I haven't looked, but I'm assuming there's a good bit of incest fic…well, with all pairings, given what fic is like, but that one especially.*)  Obviously, it's leftover damage from Penny having died when the girls were so young, which gave Phoebe the worst abandonment issues, as she was the youngest.  (And Patty ["Grams"] may have been beloved during her ghostly guest spots, but honestly she seems to have been a shitty surrogate parent, too.)

*-The show even gave this a shoutout in S8, when the sisters have faked their deaths and are now magically disguised:

 

I don't even see it as much of "decision" for Robin and Faith; there's no reason the contraception couldn't have failed in the midst of passion.  And Faith eventually goes back to prison because she can't run forever (if she got on that bus to Cleveland with the rest of the Scoobs after Chosen, she'd face Federal time for interstate flight), and Robin ends up raising young Nikki, just as Bernard Crowley raised him.

(I'm ignoring anything that the comics might be saying, as that can all be handwaved away.  And some of it 

  Reveal hidden contents

Angel kills Giles, but gosh he's really sorry!  He's going to brood for a good 45 minutes, at least!

obviously should be, IMO.)

 

Now I always thought it was actually Piper who was the needy one, you think of her railing at Pru's grave asking 'How could you leave me?', on Pru's death it's actually Phoebe who takes on the leadership role even though she's the youngest, probably because Alyssa was the most popular on the show and got top billing.

 And I don't think there was ever a Charmed fanfic where a spell doesn't go wrong and the sisters jump on one another, that was the whole appeal of the show, Buffy/Dawn/Joyce aside they seem to be the most popular pairing ever. I kind of get it, the intimacy, the taboo, SMG, KS and MT all extremely beautiful and almost the 3 stages of womanhood, the beautiful mother, the young girl in her sexual prime and the innocent virgin blossoming into adolescence. Probably not as shocking as it was in this era of Game of Thrones. Relations between cousins doesn't actually count despite all the hillbilly jokes at least not legally, everything else isn't even charged these days as long as everybody is a consenting adult, largely due to GSA (isn't it amazing what you learn watching SVU?).   

 And of course we mustn't forget Supernatural and 'Wincest';

Dean: There's Sam Girls and Dean Girls and...what's a slash fan?
Sam: As in Sam slash Dean, together.
Dean: Like together, together? They do know we are brothers, right?
Sam: Doesn't seem to matter.
Dean: Well, that's just sick!

Edited July 26, 2018 by Joe Hellandback

[satrunrose]

I don't know if this contributes to why Charmed was more popular or just shows that it was, but I only had rabbit ears during the Buffy era and never got Buffy during it's original run.  Charmed, on the other hand was available on non-cable (in Canada) from the beginning to Phoebe becoming the queen of evil and irregularly from that point until I think the second to last season after which it disappeared completely. 

[Joe Hellandback]

18 hours ago, satrunrose said:

I don't know if this contributes to why Charmed was more popular or just shows that it was, but I only had rabbit ears during the Buffy era and never got Buffy during it's original run.  Charmed, on the other hand was available on non-cable (in Canada) from the beginning to Phoebe becoming the queen of evil and irregularly from that point until I think the second to last season after which it disappeared completely. 

Hard to believe now, you have to remember this was a show that was still premiered on conventional TV, no satellite or cable or downloads back then and we owed it on VHS originally.

 Diet Coke is more popular than regular Coke these days but I don't think anyone would say it is better, really you have to judge the series by its' legacy, no one ever wrote a book called The Quotable Charmed.   

17 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

Honestly, I just think it's a simpler show to follow, the name is not quite as silly and where I live it got repeated constantly as well. 

Still repeated in the UK at the moment but then so is Buffy, Xena, Sabrina, we seem to really be on a 90s nostalgia kick at the moment. At a baser level it wasn't afraid to exploit its' actresses sex appeal more than Buffy was (despite all those Maxim covers), Phoebe and Piper dancing around naked with their Wicca group (Willow and Tara just got a bake sale) and Prue being kidnapped and tied up by some gangster/male model and the first thing she does when released is jump on him. 

[Joe Hellandback]

Not normally a Supernatural fan but just watched the Scooby Do ep where one of the brothers proclaims "We've saved the world....a lot!". What a shame they couldn't have had SMG/Freddie as Daffers and Fred.