Missing Slayer

POSTED BY: SpikeSpiegel
UPDATED: Friday, August 27, 2004 13:34
VIEWED: 13165
PAGE 2 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

ANGELDOVE

Friday, January 30, 2004 12:47 AM

SpikeSpiegel,
Yeah I totally agree with you about the potential slayers not necessarily knowing the whole story, I definatly considered that when I read it. And even when Buffy says it I thought maybe she didn't have all the info either, so I was really hoping to locate a Giles explanation as I figure he would be the only one who would know for sure. As for the two hours, I was just avoiding work stuff, pathetic isn't it. But I actually had been wondering about this since FX just starting showing season 5 again and I was waiting for the explanation that still hasn't been offered. We have all noticed small inconsistancies throughout the series, so I guess it seems to reason this is just another one.

SPIKESPIEGEL

Friday, January 30, 2004 12:59 AM

Well, some kind posters are saying Joss has said that Buffy is out of the heritage continuity because she died once. Love to see an official citation, to make sure. But if so, the writers have allowed at least three conversations, including one from Buffy herself, that says she IS still in the chain.

Joss' comments fly in the face of what was written on his show, that's bad. If you write characters saying incorrect things, that we can't know are wrong, because the characters are misinformed or ignorant, and you never on the show set the facts straight by having the truth laid out, you've needlessly misled many a viewer. Essentially, all the viewers who didn't trawl the web hunting for Joss comments.

Man, I've been bashing the writers in terms of mythmaking/canon-keeping today. Love the shows, but wish someone on-staff had been taking better notes.

"Bang."

DRAKON

Friday, January 30, 2004 10:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SpikeSpiegel:
But still, esp. since they intro'd a new slayer in the 1/28 episode of Angel ("Damage") and could've made her that replacement, I think they just ignored/forgot their own mythology.

Anyone?

Okay, my take, for what it is worth.
When Buffy died the first time, she was no longer "The" Slayer. Since she was no longer "The Slayer, then we have to wait for Faith to die out before another could have taken the post.

But now with all potentials becoming slayers.. its a moot point. But I am curious if new potentials crop up every once in a while.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

ALFERDPACKER

Friday, January 30, 2004 11:11 AM

Canon is that the Slayer line passes on from Faith. I can't quote you an episode or a specific interview but Joss and other writers have said this.

As far as the potentials and Buffy in Season 7 go, sometimes the characters don't know everything. Despite Buffy being treated as the Slayer throughout the series, Kendra and Faith were the true Slayers.

The Watcher's Council continued to deal with Buffy because Faith went rougue. Buffy was still controllable so it wasn't an issue.

JUSTDAVID

Friday, January 30, 2004 5:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AlferdPacker:
...sometimes the characters don't know everything....

This is exactly how I see it. The entire thing about there being two slayers is completely new territory, and it makes sense to me that the folks in Sunnydale would be confused as to what the new rules would be.
This was one of several things that were never completely explained by the writers, and I'm just fine with that.

Haken needs a new development system for fireflyfans.net, please donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

SPIKESPIEGEL

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 12:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JustDavid:
This was one of several things that were never completely explained by the writers, and I'm just fine with that.

I'm okay with stuff that goes unexplained, sometimes, but this thread quotes several instances in which (possibly misinformed) characters, including Buffy herself, contradict this idea that the Kendra-Faith line is the only true lineage.

I'm willing to accept that idea, esp. if Joss/the writers have said this in interviews (no links have turned up here yet, though), but to not explain that something is A when you've repeatedly had characters say it's B, is a fuckup any way you look at it.

Well, any way I look at it ...

"Bang."

LITWOLF689

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 11:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SpikeSpiegel:

Buffy died at the end of season five, and was dead all summer. So why was no new slayer called? When all the potentials were being killed, from the start of Season 7, there was no mention of any full slayer out there. I can't believe that the Watcher's Council didn't know where this new slayer was.

"Bang."

Okay, When Kendra died, Faith was called. Faith was now the 'new' slayer. Buffy was the 'old' slayer. The new line of slayers would start from when Faith died, and she never did.

There were no new slayers being killed off, only the potentails (sp?) who had not been called yet.

The reason Dana had slayer power was because, in 7th season, Buffy needed help against the First so she had Willow give the slayer power to the other potentials.

Understand?

^-^

Litwolf689

SPIKESPIEGEL

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 9:19 PM

Sure, Litwolf, I understand. All that's already been said in this thread. It's gotten down now to saying that because this logic has only appeared, apparently, in interviews with the creators, that it's bloody bad writing to have not only never explained this on the show, but to have had, as quoted above, put more than one mislead on the topic into Season Seven scripts.

I'm all for occasionally NOT explaining everything, and I do understand things when I read them in a thread three or four times, thanks. But since my original question was answered (said answer being from unspecified interviews), I've not been arguing the story logic, but the failure of the writers to put that logic into the actual show.

"Bang."

LITWOLF689

Wednesday, February 4, 2004 10:12 PM

Sorry, sometimes I just like to repeat what has been said.

But that is true, the creators of Buffy and Angel sometimes forget to add logic into the episodes.

Here's a part I noticed that shows that the episode writers are just stupid: Did you ever see, in the 7th or 6th season, the episode where Spike's chip really hurts him. He tell Buffy that there are some medications that the Initiative gave him to stop the pain. We saw almost his whole time in the Initiative cell and they never once gave him anything to stop the pain. That is a good example of the writers being stupid.

Sorry I repeated what has already been said.

^-^

SPIKESPIEGEL

Thursday, February 5, 2004 12:01 AM

You're not teasing me, are you?

Spike was in the Initiative cell for days, wasn't he? The scenes we saw were mere minutes. The initiative could've done lots to him in that time.

But still ... I don't recall that meds comment, but it strikes me as stupid. The chip was meant to hurt, and the initiative wasn't about helping "subterrestrials" feel better. They should've just killed Spike (logically, I mean -- I loved him on the show).

Then again, the fact that Buffy or a Scooby didn't stake spike in season 4 or 5, despite repeated misbehaviors, and despite him being an unrepentent serial killer looking for a way to resume his career, is just insanely stupid. Been watching Season 5, and up until Spike withstands torture to protect Dawn, there's no reason to have mercy on him. He comes in useful as muscle, but at other times, there are SO many reasons to stake him, that it always rang false that he survived.

One of the first signs of "Buffy" declining was the way the writers struggled, struggled, struggled to keep Spike around, 'cause he was so great, despite it defying almost all story logic.

"Bang."

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE