Angel seasons 3 and 4; What went wrong? (spoil away)
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 08:12
VIEWED: 14331
PAGE 2 of 6
Quote:Your opinion is perfectly valid, however, I can't personally understand this, as Bs7 is one of my favourites; I don't see how any Angel season (except possibly 5, which I'm still working on at the moment *It's GREAT*) could be better than that.
Originally posted by Groosalugg:
Basically, Angel S4 is still better than Buffy S7,
But then, I'd take Dark Angel over Angel any day of the week, so maybe Angel's just not my 'thing'. If it weren't for Buffy, I'd never have watched an episode.
Chrisisall, Spike fan extrordinaire
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:But you can't get S3 without getting S4; Angel's at the bottom of the sea at the end of the third, and you can't just leave it there in your mind. That's why I go from two right to five.
Originally posted by Whisper:
I think you will find season 3 to be on par with the other seasons- it's a personal favorite of mine. The episode "Lullaby" was outstanding. It's still all the characters we love with the addition of Fred.
Well, that AND lack of coin Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
chrisisall wrote:
Quote:
If you think the seasons went in a wrong direction- then how?
If you think they were fine- then why?
Rant or praise: your choice.
Ok there is a question!
Well Chrisisall I'll tell you now I love Season 3 above all the other seasons; however I will say that both seasons suffered heavily from too much of it's own mythology and a reluctance to resolve any of the issues brought up within.
This I think lead to numerous difficult plot lines where contrivances had to be brought in to clear muddy arcs. As example Wesley's character. I know everyone loves the unshaven 'Crocket style' Wes but really he's a different character, and he was so in order to justify certain plot lines.
Secondly. Charles Gunn... Unfinished and unrealised. They really didn't know where to go with him and it showed. His on/off relationship with Angel was just dumb and unbelievable.
Conor/Cordelia - just too contrived and as such plot lines were cut and it showed the frayed edges.
Having said all that individual episodes were very strong. And really the first four discs of Season 3 are fun, entertaining and energetic and along the mission statement of the show. Thereafter it's a little soapy. But it ends well! Extremely well and part of me wishes that Angel were still at the bottom of the sea, waiting for Joss ten years hence to bring back the show/ a show where the ANGEL character emerges again.
Angel is still a great great show but it is better appreciated on an episode by episode basis. When looked at from a seasonal point of view they become frustrating.
...don't even get me started on season 5.
The
Somnambulist
www.cirqus.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You no like the Spike?
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
...don't even get me started on season 5.
Gotta be startin' something Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:You no like the Spike?
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
...don't even get me started on season 5.
Gotta be startin' something Chrisisall
...and there's more but anyway....
www.cirqus.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Your opinion is perfectly valid, however, I can't personally understand this, as Bs7 is one of my favourites; I don't see how any Angel season (except possibly 5, which I'm still working on at the moment *It's GREAT*) could be better than that.
Part of that opinion comes from the fact that while I love Buffy, I love Angel just a little more (I prefer the actors and characters of Buffy, but like the dark atmosphere of Angel better). But Buffy7 spent way too much time on an arc that the writers never really seemed totally clear on themselves. Going back, you'll notice that in earlier seasons (2, with Angelus/Spike/Dru; 3 with the Mayor/Faith; 5 with Glory) the Big Bad's plot wasn't necessarily always real clear or consistent, either, but the difference there was, it was relegated to being a small part of the overall storyline. Most of the time was spent focused on the main characters and their personal ups and downs. In S7, it was all-First Evil-all-the-time, and if you're gonna spend that much time on it, it better be a great plot that flows well, doesn't have any major lulls, and makes sense throughout. In that respect, the Buffy writers were 0-for-3. And those characters that I said I actually preferred over the Angel cast? In S7, only Buffy and Spike got any kind of meaningful character arcs. Willow had her little "Ooh, I'm afraid to use magick" that was about the easiest and quickest cop-out they could get away with after S6; Xander was so criminally under-used that they finally just poked his eye out, if only to give poor Nick Brendon something to do; and Giles' biggest contribution to the year was the uber-lame "Is he the First" thing that they (almost painfully) dragged out for 3 or 4 episodes.
I'll say S4 of Angel is better in three respects:
1) The production quality was great. Between the big fight scenes, the rain of fire, and the Beast, it just has a bigger, more "epic" feel to it than Buffy7.
2) The storyline was better and tighter. As I was watching both seasons as they originally aired, Angel was just blowing Buffy out of the water--I mean, it wasn't even close--until ep 18 (Jasmine), when the writers pretty much give up completely on the first arc and go off in a new direction, with only the weakest of attempts ("they were birth pains," according to Wesley) to tie the two together. That took care of most of that huge lead it had gained over Buffy, but IMO, it still comes out slightly ahead.
3) The character development never suffered the way it did in Buffy's last year. Maybe they didn't get to go as in-depth as they did in other years, but none of the main characters seemed to disappear for ages on end the way they did on Buffy (Why? Easy: no annoying Potentials around to suck up screen-time).
There's a lot to knock about both those seasons, but each one has a lot to love, too. I'd say don't hate on Angel S3&4 until you've tried them. Then, at least, you'll be able to base your criticisms on first-hand experience.
And if I can, I'd just like to respond to something Embers said a few posts up, about Charisma Carpenter. I don't like the "Saint Cordelia" term, because I feel like the gradual disappearance of her bitchiness was just a normal case of growing up and maturing (and also being exposed to the kinds of horrible monsters and helpless people-in-peril that she dealt with every day). I disagree with the idea that she went outside her range trying to play anything but bitchy-Cordy, because I think she was so great, and such a huge part of the show (and warm on-screen presence) in seasons 1, 2, 3, and 5. But if you amend that slightly and say that she was beyond her range trying to play a Big Bad, then I couldn't possibly agree more. She was so arch, so over-the-top, so cheesy, that she became the sort of poorly-acted, poorly-written, laughably-bad villain that you would never expect to see in something by Joss Whedon. To me, that was the one aspect of the season that's hard to watch--not
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That did cross my perverted mind...
Originally posted by Groosalugg:
Here's an "eww" that nobody ever seems to mention: in Buffy7, Willow would 22. Kennedy's age is never given, but as a Potential, you can probably assume 15-17. Umm, girl/girl or not, last time I checked that was illegal.
But HEY! They're potentials, outside of normal societal parameters!!!
And I'm a Chinese jet pilot Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Seriously, you present a detailed and interesting take. I would probably agree with most of your arguments upon viewing.
Originally posted by Groosalugg:
Just a little perspective...
Chrisisall, doomed to sell more comics....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Groosalugg:
And as far as the yuckiness of the Cordy/Connor thing, what's the reason most people feel that way? Is it because (as Angelus--among others--points out) she used to take care of him as a baby, and is almost like his mother? I don't think so, because it's not as though she watched him grow up for 18 years. He was a baby for a few weeks, disappeared, and re-appeared as an 18-year-old. It's hard to consider them (the baby vs. the teenager) as even being the same character.
I think it's the age difference. You look at Cordy and see a woman in her early/mid-30s, and then you look at Connor and see a teenager. Except while the actress was in her 30s (and looked it, especially as her pregnancy started to show), remember that the character is only supposed to be the same age as Buffy, Willow, and Xander--in Angel S4, that would be 22. Connor's 18, so really, you're talking about two people who are (supposed to be) very close in age. But when you see them on-screen, they don't look that way, and with the way Evil Cordy bosses the poor kid around, they certainly don't act that way.
Here's an "eww" that nobody ever seems to mention: in Buffy7, Willow would 22. Kennedy's age is never given, but as a Potential, you can probably assume 15-17. Umm, girl/girl or not, last time I checked that was illegal. But since the actresses both look about the same age (mid-20s), I don't think anyone ever even gives it a second thought.
Just a little perspective...
For me, the "ewww" factor has nothing to do with age. It has to do with the fact that Cordy was supposedly in love with Angel. Angel wanted to do it with Cordy, she wanted to do it with him. They probably would've if they had been allowed. Instead, she does it with his son? Blech and double blech. The whole thing really squiggs me out. It's the stuff of Jerry Springer...not my world...and not the world of a TV show that I enjoy. Thus, I didn't like Season 4.
As for Willow and Kennedy? Didn't like that either, but not because of any age difference. They had no chemistry (didn't think Tara and Willow had much either)...and Kennedy was a pushy beyotch. Kennedy does say in one ep (can't remember which) that she's probably too old to be called anyway, so that takes her out of the 15-17 age range. Also, she could order drinks, so I have always taken her to be at least 21, as I think I was intended to.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I thought season 3 was pretty good. While I was not particularlly fond of the Holtz character, he did make for an entertaining head to head with Angel. The beginnings of the Wes transformation was good to. Justine annoyed me to no end. The Loa was absolutely fantastic, though. 
Season 4 was not so bad, in my opinion, until the last quarter or third of the season (though it is my least favorite of the 5 and the only one that I do not own). The big rock beast bad guy was pretty cool, stomping through Wolfram and Hart. I agree with many other posters here that the Cordelia-Connor "relationship", even with Cordelia not being of sound mind, was a mistake. It was too weird, even for this show. Jasmine was an interesting idea, though I think better suited to just a short story arc, 2-3 episodes and not a season ender. Especially with that kind of build up, I would have wanted to see a showdown with a senior partner or The Powers That Be. The appearance of Angelus was..... interesting, but seemed more for the shock value than anything else, having him talk all vulgar and threatening to everyone. I understand why so many people find Connor to be annoying, but he did not bother me so much. It sets him up nicely for his return in season 5.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME