is she serious?
POSTED BY: STEVEthePIRATE
UPDATED: Saturday, January 8, 2005 00:11
VIEWED: 14813
PAGE 3 of 5
Yeah, she's entitled to an opinion and yeah, I kinda agree with her that Buffy was going downhill towards the end (though it was still great telly, it just wasn't as great as it had been). But there's a line between saying 'I had some problems with what we did' and 'it went to shit and I wash my hands of it'.
At the end of the day, Buffy is the only reason she has a career, and she's spitting on it in every interview I see. That's just not cool.
But, despite that, she is a good actress. Very good. Her work on Buffy was superb. Part of the reason I think her character went through very little change was the weekly-syndrome. Something in the show needs to be constant in order to give it a core and something that the fans will come back to no matter what else happens. And since day one it's been Buffy who's been the core. That doesn't make Gellar a bad actress. Look at Angel, how much change has he been through? Not a lot. He's basically the same guy he was in Season Two Buffy.
Anyway, the point was that Gellar is being incredibly ungrateful considering what Buffy did for her. If Joss isn't very hurt by what she's saying, I'd be very surprised.
JK
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OK, I have to take issue with the "...she wouldn't have had a career without Buffy..." thought. BEFORE Buffy, she had already won an Emmy for her work on All My Children. Note that she was 15 at the time and was portraying a 23 year old woman on the show. I think she would have had a great career without Buffy - it just would have been different. In fact, it might have been better for her in the long run. She now seems to be stuck in horror (The Grudge) or horror-comedy (Sccoby-Doo) type films. That probably wouldn't have happened if she had gone on to something other than Buffy after All My Children. I can definitely understand why, career wise, she wants to distance herself from the show.
Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@Chronicthehedgehog:
If she didn't like where the show was going after the 5th season then she should've left. IMO, if someone doesn't like something, but still stays on, they have no right to bitch about what a horrible time it was. They had the choice to leave and didn't exercise that right. There problem not anyone elses. Perhaps she should take some responsibility for her actions.
And yes, after they defeated Glory they should've ended the series. It was the perfect ending. The slayer died saving the world in a grand last battle. But, then they had to ruin it with the pathetic ending of every potential slayer becoming one etc. Damn disappointment if you ask me.
@Rabit:
SMG cannot act anything beyond decent. During the episode that you cite as an example of her grand acting, she dropped out of character at a number of points along the way. Since a great actor is someone who doesn't do this, I'd say that she isn't one.
@Bikisdad:
I believe that it shows that she started in soaps. And not in a good way. That is that great acting and soaps don't exactly go hand in hand.
So what, she was one of the better actors among the soap opera actors. Woopie. Isn't exactly saying much.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by CapnRahn:
Mz. Gellar is just a character actor - lacking that true spark of a complete actress.
Please don't call her a character actor. A good character actor is so much a part of the character that you never see who they are. Ben Kingsley and Anthony Hopkins are great character actors. When you see them act you forget who they are - you never quite get this with Sarah.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ElliQuinn: Matter of definition - I don't consider Kingsley or Hopkins as character actors - as they have enacted different characters -- not just variants of a single character they have become known for.
Royal Dano {numerous westerns, "Spaced Invaders" and so forth} is a prime example of an excellent Character Actor.
"Remember, there is only ONE absolute - There ARE NO absolutes!!!"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
And yes, after they defeated Glory they should've ended the series. It was the perfect ending. The slayer died saving the world in a grand last battle. But, then they had to ruin it with the pathetic ending of every potential slayer becoming one etc. Damn disappointment if you ask me.
But then we'd never have had the musical episode!
I didn't love the last episode as much as I could have but I loved the way they ended it.
Select to view spoiler:
What better way for Buffy to go out than the way it started with girlpower? Also the whole cookie dough -potentially being with Angel - that was an issue that needed to be resolved. Plus the hell mouth collapsing in.
Twas shiny.
...................
Well, my sister's a ship... we had a
complicated childhood
.................
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@Heb:
One of the many problems with the ending that I have, is the
Select to view spoiler:
turning all the potential slayers into slayers. Not to mention that Willow although as powerful as she is, IMO, could never have been as powerful as those ancients (note the plural form here) that actually understood that power. Those that created the slayer.
I mean if bringing Buffy back created the reprocussions we saw, what would do that do?
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Select to view spoiler:
They were just men, is what Buffy said in the finale. They didn't create the Slayer, they harnessed power already there, from Yahweh, Vishnu, Abe Begota, doesn't matter, into the Slayer.
Willow tapped into the same power the did and there's not reason to believe she's less powerful than all three of them
I wouldn't have wanted it to end without season 6, the ending, with the villain revealed, was the best end game since Season 2, because of the possible tragedy inherent. That and the musical was brilliant.
Dan
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by witlesschum:Select to view spoiler:
They were just men, is what Buffy said in the finale. They didn't create the Slayer, they harnessed power already there, from Yahweh, Vishnu, Abe Begota, doesn't matter, into the Slayer.
Yes, and Buffy was the great and wise one among them. All I remember her basically saying is, "How do I kill it?" So, what makes me thing that she could possibly know anything of this sort? Nothing.
Select to view spoiler:
Quite frankly, if we remember back when she did that little quest to get the true essence of the slayer and the old ones wanted to basically put a demon in her.
That is where the power of the slayer comes from, darkness. It uses the power of dark to fight the dark because the slayer must walk in the world of what it fights.
This is something that Joss may have brought up to make Buffy sound more than what she is. But in the end, this last statment contradicts already established cannon, clearly.
Quote:
Originally posted by witlesschum:Select to view spoiler:
Willow tapped into the same power the did and there's not reason to believe she's less powerful than all three of them
Indeed there is. Willow was only one person who, IMO, couldn't have had a real understanding of what magic is, if only because she lived in todays day and age.
All the things that are lost today, these people knew. These people had knowledge of forces that Willow, nor anyone else in this time period could possibly know. She may know some stuff, but not nearly as much as they could have.
You still haven't touched on my reprocussions comment either. Wouldn't Willow have thought about this, being as you think she is? Or don't you think there would be any?
Quote:
Originally posted by witlesschum:
I wouldn't have wanted it to end without season 6, the ending, with the villain revealed, was the best end game since Season 2, because of the possible tragedy inherent. That and the musical was brilliant.
What villain revealed?
Select to view spoiler:
Willow tried to end the world. Xander stopped it with the power of love. <- That isn't anything resembling cool.
There are a couple episodes that are in season 6 that I wouldn't be happy about loosing. But that fact remains that the ending of season 5 was the perfect place to end (I've stated my reasons above).
Select to view spoiler:
For instance, Willow getting addicted to magic was an entirely pathetic endevour. Not to mention that most of the story lines could have gotten along without it.
Spike getting his soul back at the end? Come on.
There were many good things about season 6, but also many bad ones as well.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by straybat:
Quite frankly, well said Sarah.
Sums up pretty well how I felt about the series - I was a rabid fan until season 4, a serious fan until the second half of season 6, and I still haven't bothered watching the final few episodes.
And probably never will.
It wasn't Buffy anymore. Who can blame her for quitting?
Stray
But my friends, it's all in there... Both Buffy - and SMG - just came back "wrong" ;)
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME