- This topic has 26 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
well, we reach the end of the end of this season of Buffy on SkyOne here on thursday. (lost track of the season number, but it’s the one where something nasty happens to Willow..). anyway, they’ve been advertising it as the ‘finale’, which to me sounded ominous. does this mean that there will be no more, or not? i admit, i’ve only been an occasional watcher, but i’d be sad to see it go! i’ve got some pet theories as to what will happen to Spike, if anyone’s up for a debate!!
quote:
Originally posted by snooklepie:
well, we reach the end of the end of this season of Buffy on SkyOne here on thursday. (lost track of the season number, but it’s the one where something nasty happens to Willow..). anyway, they’ve been advertising it as the ‘finale’, which to me sounded ominous. does this mean that there will be no more, or not? i admit, i’ve only been an occasional watcher, but i’d be sad to see it go! i’ve got some pet theories as to what will happen to Spike, if anyone’s up for a debate!!
It’s the season finale, not the series finale. The show is guaranteed at least one more season, possibly more if the demand is high (I haven’t heard anyone saying “we’re running out of ideas and pulling the plug” in interviews or the like), according to the contracts signed, so don’t fret — it ain’t over yet.
Best not to start guessing about what’s gonna happen with Spike until you see the upcoming episode. Rest assured, things *do* change for him, and not in a way that he either wants or expects. Let’s just say that it’s most likely going to be a case of deja vu all over again for Buffy next season…
–Aleck
Snooklepie, you are about to watch the season final of season 6. According to Xander in a recent interview, Buffy will be winding up at the end of season 7 (when buffy’s contract expires, and now that wheedon has moved on to firefly, amongst others. Season 6 already saw Wheedon’s creative involvement ‘reduced’, and the show’s reputation has apparently suffered as a result. This season has been generally alledged to be very ‘uneven’ and highly ‘melodramatic’. I disagree – i think its been particularly interesting). Anyway
http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,4237561,00.htmlI also heard that only one more season was in the offing, but as the show (as far as I’m concerned) is still pretty sharp, I think we may see a movie.
As for Spike, looks like at the moment he’s going the way of Angel, but knowing the little twists they like to employ, it’ll probably be the opposite.
I was surprised to read that Xander is now 31, he still pulls of the early twenties guy really well, although he does seem to be getting a little chubbier in the face.
BTW, I heard a rumour that Dark Angel had been canned, does anyone know if there is any truth in this?, again it would be a shame.
Squishy 
Welp!
Me and NewKate were so enthralled with the last two episodes of season 6 that we couldn’t wait another week and downloaded the episode off the internet!
Let me tell you Squishy, we weren’t dissapointed, especially with the last Spike scene – you’ll love it!
quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
Welp!Me and NewKate were so enthralled with the last two episodes of season 6 that we couldn’t wait another week and downloaded the episode off the internet!
Let me tell you Squishy, we weren’t dissapointed, especially with the last Spike scene – you’ll love it!
Call me soppy, but I’m really hoping Spike does get his soul and doesn’t turn back into Mr Nasty vamp again, but then I guess Spike isn’t half as good unless he can be the big bad.
I remember when it was mentioned why Spike had become a vamp, he invited death as he lost the one he loved to another and then still couldn’t get it on as a vamp, and then Buffy gives him a bad deal…so I think ol’ Spikey deserves a break, especially as he’s English and the coolest dude in Buffy.
C’mon give us a clue Saddy, it’s an eternity until next thursday!!!
Squishy quote:
BTW, I heard a rumour that Dark Angel had been canned, does anyone know if there is any truth in this?, again it would be a shame.
Dark Angel has indeed been canned – to make way for Wheedon’s Firefly!! Apprently Firefly has been brought forward in Fox’s schedule accordingly.
http://adinfinit.net/danation/sitenews.htmBy the way, if you want an excellent source of television news/articles, visit
http://www.tvtattle.comquote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
Dark Angel has indeed been canned – to make way for Wheedon’s Firefly!! Apprently Firefly has been brought forward in Fox’s schedule accordingly.
http://adinfinit.net/danation/sitenews.htmBy the way, if you want an excellent source of television news/articles, visit
http://www.tvtattle.com
Thanx for the links Bonnee.
I can’t believe it’s been canned, it’s so frustrating that a T.V series can be got rid of because of American audiences dislike for it, for chrissake don’t they ever take into account what the rest of the world think.
Too many times this has happened, American audiences and the studios are so fickle, don’t get me wrong I love the U.S and it’s people, but it’s times like this that I curse it.
Dark Angel was still in it’s infancy and had not been given a fair crack of the whip, but such is the state of U.S T.V, that even pilots are thrown out before anyone really get’s a chance to see it.
For instance, I would have liked to have seen the X-Files spin-off about the lone gunman, but that was canned almost straight away, so i’ll never see it.
I understand that America is bursting at the seams with wannabe sci-fi hits like Dark Angel, but us poor Brits and other worldwide citizens don’t have that luxury, we live on a very meagre diet of Buffy, Angel, Enterprise, Dark Angel, Mutant X and Andromeda, and they are all on in one week, but take those away and we have nothing.
I don’t think Dark Angel deserved this, it still had plenty to live for, a beautiful star in Jessica Alba, well written scripts and pretty good acting, and when you weigh it up against a simliar natured programme like Mutant X, it’s even more puzzling, as Mutant X is so bad it’s funny.
So again the rest of T.V world falls prey to what America likes and doesn’t like, in some ways I wish we didn’t get any American programmes, as then we wouldn’t feel so frustrated and heartbroken when the one’s we like are axed.
Truth be told, even our beloved Lexx might have gone on or even the much anticipated spin-off might have succeeded, but again no one cares about what the rest of the globe thinks, it’s failed in America, so the rest of us suffer.
Ok, you can’t tell people what to watch in America, and I guess that there is so much on offer that you can’t always succeed, but
the studios get an awful lot of money from other countries for these programmes, but that doesn’t mean jack, it’s the American audience they are out to please…so I guess it means sod the rest of us.
Squishy
quote:
Originally posted by Squishy:
it’s so frustrating that a T.V series can be got rid of because of American audiences dislike for it, for chrissake don’t they ever take into account what the rest of the world think.
Too many times this has happened, American audiences and the studios are so fickle, don’t get me wrong I love the U.S and it’s people, but it’s times like this that I curse it.
Truth be told, even our beloved Lexx might have gone on or even the much anticipated spin-off might have succeeded, but again no one cares about what the rest of the globe thinks, it’s failed in America, so the rest of us suffer.
Ok, you can’t tell people what to watch in America, and I guess that there is so much on offer that you can’t always succeed, but
the studios get an awful lot of money from other countries for these programmes, but that doesn’t mean jack, it’s the American audience they are out to please…so I guess it means sod the rest of us.
No offemse, but its a simple game of numbers. Studio’s produce shows to sell them to the market(networks). Networks buy the show so that they can sell advertising to assorted bussinesses. Bussineses want their ads to go out to as many people as possible.
The US has ~265 million poeple, the UK, 60 million, Australia 20 million, Canada 29 million. If you want to sell a show to certain market, which one would you choose. Canada, UK, Australia together would only make up roughly a third of the US audiance.Many of these shows are made with America money for American audiances. When these programs are sold to different markets, they typically don’t make nearly as much money because of the countries’ cultural differences. Al beit not much differnces, but there are differences. For instance if you come to America and ask where the lift is, peopel will look at you funny. Like wise if I go over there and ask for the elevator, I’ll get the same dumb look.
The smaller markets in England are also the reason why many shows only get to run a half dozen episodes, before thjay are offically purchased for a full season. Lets just say it costa million to produce and hour of a show. Over here we can afford to but 12 eps becasue if it only gets 1.0 thats still roughly 1 million viewers. That’s a million potential customers for the advertisers.
For you guys a 1.0 may only be 2-300,000. So the show reaches less poeple and therefore advertisers pay less for the show. The network may only net 10% off the show over there, where as here it may net 30%.quote:
Originally posted by Squishy:
[QB]I can’t believe it’s been canned, it’s so frustrating that a T.V series can be got rid of because of American audiences dislike for it, for chrissake don’t they ever take into account what the rest of the world think.[QB]
It’s an American program, created for an American network. If it doesn’t gain an American audience, it’s going to be canceled. There are a lot of British programs that nobody in America will ever see, and the same goes for programs created all over the world. It’s not that nobody cares about any other country besides America, it’s that if a show is made for US networks, and the networks are the ones putting up the money for the show, they’re not going to say, “hey, well, let’s try and pawn this turkey off on the Brits,” if it fails to gain an audience. They certainly aren’t going to continue to produce the show on the hopes that a British audience might catch on to it, and it would be a difficulty to try and find British investors willing to finance a show produced stateside (given that it’d be nearly impossible to suddenly set the show in Manchester and import all of the actors).
–Aleck
….although interestingly (and this is the market exception rather than the market rule) Neighbour’s keeps getting made because the Brits seem to like it so much. This former no 1 show in Australia barely rates locally anymore – although it keeps getting made for a ‘foreign’ market, not to mention helps to keep Britian’s pantomine and pop industries afloat
[ 27-05-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
…and ‘Neighbours’ has got to be one sorry excuse for a tv program!!! why can’t they carry on making the decent ones instead?? there almost seems to be fashion for binning programs that don’t immediately take off, and instead we get the tv producers’ version of Soylent Green- dodgy stuff to feed the masses. i do apologise if people are into soaps, but it happens to drive me nuts that this kind of stuff even goes as far as sparking national debates, even parliamentary questions (remember the ‘free George Jackson’ campaign in Brookside? ‘Free Dierdre Rashcid’from Corrie ?) and we’re ridiculed for our fandom. at least i know where a story ends, and real life begins…
It almost seems like sometimes the powers that be have no respect for us, and have forgotten the example set by ‘Trek’.whats that saying about acorns and mighty oak trees? ok, so this may be all about money, but how much has the ‘Trek’ franchise generated over the last 30+ years? probably a damn sight more than some worn out Aussie soap. (sorry, i had too many years of being force-fed them by my mother. soaps have the same affect on me know as the thought of taking a spoonful of cod liver oil!)[ 27-05-2002: Message edited by: snooklepie ]
I feel the same way Snooklepie, I hate the over the top publicity soaps in this country get, people in the UK have been brainwashed by this cheap form of television.
What’s even more amazing is that the actors (if you can call them that) feel that they are top dogs in the acting industry, they are pathetic, rubbish actors who can’t act they way out of a paper bag!
They even have an awards ceremony for these idiots!!!
And this is supposed to be the best the UK has to offer, personally why anyone would want to sit in front of a T.V and be depressed by watching this trash is beyond me.
Squishy quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
It’s an American program, created for an American network. If it doesn’t gain an American audience, it’s going to be canceled. There are a lot of British programs that nobody in America will ever see, and the same goes for programs created all over the world. It’s not that nobody cares about any other country besides America, it’s that if a show is made for US networks, and the networks are the ones putting up the money for the show, they’re not going to say, “hey, well, let’s try and pawn this turkey off on the Brits,” if it fails to gain an audience. They certainly aren’t going to continue to produce the show on the hopes that a British audience might catch on to it, and it would be a difficulty to try and find British investors willing to finance a show produced stateside (given that it’d be nearly impossible to suddenly set the show in Manchester and import all of the actors).
–Aleck
Thanx Aleck and Headgy for pointing that out, I guess I’m getting a little frustrated as Dark Angel is being cancelled.
But like Star Wars, you can’t expect everyone to enjoy it, to me it seems like a real waste, Dark Angel seemed to be riding high and then all of a sudden it’s dropped in it’s ratings.
I can’t understand why that’s happened, from what I can see it has gotten any worse, so I find it odd to see it crash like this.
The funny thing is that you mention that nobody in the UK has the clout or finances to support these shows, one does though…Sky, being part of News Corporation it has some muscle, but like you say it probably would be a bad investment for such a small market like the UK.
But then Lexx survived a long time without US money, and was partly funded by the smallest T.V company in the UK (Channel 5) to begin with.
It’s particularly annoying because the only class television comes from the US, so you kinda depend on programmes like Buffy and it’s ilk, without them we are left with some pretty dire stuff.
Anyway I didn’t mean to annoy anyone with that statement, it was really borne out of frustration, so I’m sorry if I was implying the wrong thing.
Squishy quote:
Originally posted by Squishy:
The funny thing is that you mention that nobody in the UK has the clout or finances to support these shows, one does though…Sky, being part of News Corporation it has some muscle, but like you say it probably would be a bad investment for such a small market like the UK.
Which is why Sky, having some financial muscle, would be more tempted probably to develop a program on its own than to buy the property and the rights to the characters and storylines and fund the filming of the program from a continent away (or transport everyone to the UK). It’d be much more cost-effective to create a new show from scratch since they don’t have the huge financial support that advertisers provide the US networks (larger commercial base = larger advertising fees levied = more income for the network).
quote
But then Lexx survived a long time without US money, and was partly funded by the smallest T.V company in the UK (Channel 5) to begin with.
Well, since LEXX has always operated as kind of a “free agent,” with Salter Street able to retain ownership of the property as a whole and negotiating only for broadcast rights in return for investment money, they’ve been able to exist on a multi-national broadcast basis and avoided having to completely acquiesce to the demands of one network. For the record, though, US money was invested in the first and fourth seasons, possibly the third (at the least, Sci-Fi put up money for broadcast rights to the third season, which should probably be factored in to the ability to have the program produced).
quote
Anyway I didn’t mean to annoy anyone with that statement, it was really borne out of frustration, so I’m sorry if I was implying the wrong thing.
No problem. Sorry if I came across as too harsh above there. I was just being kinda blunt, but there was no antagonism behind it. You just have to keep in mind that the foreign markets for TV shows made for US networks are looked at as essentially just part of the syndicated market, a market that will remain open and lucrative no matter whether the show being syndicated is canceled or not. For example, Seinfeld will continue to make money for the people who own the rights to it from here to infinity, so cancelling the show was of no great importance in the long run, financially speaking.
–Aleck
Which is why Sky, having some financial muscle, would be more tempted probably to develop a program on its own than to buy the property and the rights to the characters and storylines and fund the filming of the program from a continent away (or transport everyone to the UK). It’d be much more cost-effective to create a new show from scratch since they don’t have the huge financial support that advertisers provide the US networks (larger commercial base = larger advertising fees levied = more income for the network).
I think Sky is now broadcast to many countries, not just the UK, and being part of a larget corporation which includes Fox, should give them quite a bit of muscle.
That said, I think your right, Sky aren’t in a position to handle US programmes.
But it wouldn’t need to bring across actors or sets to the UK, as Fox and Sky share the same umbrella so to speak, they could very well continue in the states, I know that as far as Fox programmes go, Sky doesn’t have to worry about bidding against the BBC or other UK channels.
In a way I’m thankful for just having Sky because of the fact they bring these programmes to us, if it were anyone else in the UK we would never see the volume of US programmes we now see.
But I guess that whether Dark Angel was in the UK or the US it would equate to the same thing, it’s lost it’s appeal among fans, so either way there’s no point in me moaning about it.
Squishy I hope no one likes sarah michelle geller on the board, because this is my opinion
and i sticking to it……….. is a f@##ing
dirt bag and she does not deserve spikeerrmmm…back to my original point (sort of!)…my other half will confirm this, but last weekend, whilst trying to make an intelligent conversation whilst p****d, i came to the conclusion that Spike would be made human again, because despite the fact that he’s been outwardly been angry about what’s happened between him and Buffy, deep inside he really wants her to love him- which she won’t because she sees him still as a monster. so, what he actually wants is to be human so she will love him.
i don’t think i was far off…quote:
Originally posted by snooklepie:
errmmm…back to my original point (sort of!)…my other half will confirm this, but last weekend, whilst trying to make an intelligent conversation whilst p****d, i came to the conclusion that Spike would be made human again, because despite the fact that he’s been outwardly been angry about what’s happened between him and Buffy, deep inside he really wants her to love him- which she won’t because she sees him still as a monster. so, what he actually wants is to be human so she will love him.
i don’t think i was far off…
I don’t think it’s what he actually wants, I think it’s an ironic twist. He told whoever that thing was that he “wanted to be like he was before,” meaning of course that he wanted to be rid of the chip so he could inflict harm on those that are important to Buffy and make her life as painful as she’s made his. Of course, as Spike oughta know, when you’re making a deal with a supernatural entity, you gotta be pretty freakin’ specific about what you want, or you’re gonna get screwed. And, of course, he was. He was made like he was before…just before he had his soul taken away.
Of course, we know what this means for next season: reams and reams of really awful poetry.
–Aleck
I’m more of an Angel fan myself….
you may well be right Aleck, but the way i saw it that demon that was setting all those tests for Spike must have seen beyond the front that he was showing, in order to know to give him back his soul. after all, when Spike first meets this creature, its first response is to berate him for not being evil anymore- for being weak. outwardly Spike is not happy about this and seems to want to go back to being the bad guy he was when we first met him. on the surface then you would assume that the ultimate result of Spike’s testing would be at least the cancelling out of the affects of the chip, so he could return to how he was in that sense. but then we remember Spike, the lovesick puppy- and then you have someone that has been spurned by his beloved. love is something that takes something quite spectacular to be destroyed and although in the last episodes buffy has basically treated him like crap for which he would obviously be angry, inside he would be hurting and wondering why…and would want her back. and thats why i thought that he would want to become human again, and that demon realised this.
[ 31-05-2002: Message edited by: snooklepie ]
…after all, how human again had that chip made him anyway? the problem there though in Buffy’s eyes was that was an artificial control put on Spike’s personality, so she couldn’t love him back because he was still a monster. Maybe if there was more of an emotional response from her to his advances, then i think we would end up untimately with more of a Buffy/Angel scenario. and maybe Spike would become less sex-obsessed!!!
..and maybe i’ve just overdosed on chocolate….
please be nice if you think i’m full of it- be diplomatic!!! See, though, I don’t think that the Demon was trying to do him any favors. As you said, the first thing he does is berate Spike for not being evil anymore. For letting the chip in his head make him go soft. Spike is trying to put up a front of bad-assitude, but it’s obvious to the demon that he’s let himself go.
See, Spike doesn’t (or didn’t) have a soul, and is incapable of really being in love with Buffy. He’s able to fool himself into thinking that a relationship of mutual exploitation *is* love, but the fact is that he’s been impotent as a vamp for so long that he’s lost the taste for the hunt, and has channeled his unspent energies into an obsession. So when Buffy comes back subtly altered, and Spike finds that he *can* physically approach her, this obsession is coupled with compensating for his impotence as a vampire with sex. While he may have been *acting* more human, he’s been forced into it and has been conditioned to act in a way that’s acceptable. It’s obvious, though, that his feelings for Buffy aren’t love — if they were, he never would have attempted to rape her. It’s at that point that it becomes clear that this isn’t love, it’s not caring, this is merely obsession and desire masquerading as love. We can’t fool ourselves into thinking that Spike’s just a heartbroken guy anymore, he’s a soulless monster that attempted to hurt the person he professed to love.
Now, the demon he’s made a bargain with has seen this. It knows that Spike has let himself go ga-ga over Buffy. It also knows that if he passes the tests, that his request must be fulfilled. Because the demon isn’t really impressed with Spike and his attitude or the way he’s let himself go soft, it does fulfill his request. But it does it in a way that isn’t going to help Spike at all. He follows Spike’s wish to the letter, and makes him as he was before. Spike will realize what a completely horrible b@stard he’s been. He’s going to actually be able to be in love with Buffy, and know that because of what he’s done, he can’t have her. This isn’t going to be a good deal for Spike. This isn’t what he wants at all.
And this could, after all, make him even more dangerous. As Warren and Willow have shown, you can have a soul — be entirely human, in fact — and still be as evil as they come.
–Aleck
Snooklepie, Spike has never needed to have a soul to be capable of real or true love (whatever that might mean) – witness his relationship with Druisilla. The episode Lovers Walk is particularly indicative of the depths of his feelings – whilst their entire relationship was an indication of the depths he would sink to to have/keep/please her. He has always had the soul of a poet even when his soul was taking away from him. As for the suggestion that his ‘love’ for Buffy is an instance of displacement, i’m convinced that their relationship goes much further and deeper than that. It is intimately connected to each and every Slayer’s invariable death wish, something that was obviously displaced by her ‘resurrection’ and something that Spike can (and might) still bring about. I think what we’ve encountered is an ironic twist of fate that will bring these fated lovers back together again in one way or another. As for heartless, soulless behaviour – Buffy step right up. She chose to devalue and disrespect Spike’s obvious feelings for her by turning it into a purely carnal relationship. In order to allow herself to feel anything again, she used Spike’s feelings to her own dis/advantage, and tried to keep it on the one level indefintely. Her behaviour was not only potentially self destructive, it threatened to destroy the person who professed to love her. What a typical bloke (heartless, soulless) thing to do.
As a side note – I don’t think we should buy into the show’s serviceable distinction between good and evil, however they try to problematise and interrogate it. You need a soul to know the difference between good and evil – those without a soul can have no such knowledge. Further, such knowledge is supposed to prefigure in the choices taken and the decisions made. Vampires, demons et al are simply who and what they are, and have no choice but to act in accordance with their own (limited knowledge) and complete ‘natures’. The way the show tries to get around the apparently universal or absolute distinction between good and evil is via relativism – by the way in which humans relate to something they can’t understand by virtue of their own self knowledge and natures. Now, that’s just plain ‘evil’.
[ 01-06-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
Interesting that you should mention Drusilla, Bonnee, as it was her that told Buffy that Vampire’s were able to love (remember when Spike had them both tied up).
I don’t think Spike’s attempt to rape Buffy was from the fact his has no soul, moreover he was displaying a trait of a human.
He only thinks he knows one way of being with Buffy, through sex, and he can’t communicate with her on any other level, so he kinda hopes that the one thing that he can do well will be enough to win her back, but unfortunately Buffy has long realised that she needs more than just using Spike for sex, and she knows this will never happen.
Spike is consumed by Buffy, he still wants her so he can feel something, but the only way he can do that is through sex, plus he is like a schoolkid with a huge crush on the girl he can’t have, he’s still obsessed.
He’s the one who likes to think he has the power, after all he’s the Big Bad, and who is she to treat him this way, he needed to show her that she couldn’t treat him this way.
So Spike just got it wrong again, and now he has a soul, he may be able to call upon other emotions such as guilt and remorse.
I think there is a part of him that truly loves Buffy, but it was a battle between that small part and his darker side, he had base emotions as a vampire, but having a soul we just be like switching all those lost emotions on all at the same time, might be something he just can’t handle, and he will probably still want Buffy to pay and turn out to be a bad guy yet again.
It certainly won’t be like Angel, who managed over years to find out what it’s like to have a soul, Spike doesn’t have that luxury, even having the chip might have been preferable to what is too come.
Squishyquote:
and i sticking to it……….. is a f@##ing
dirt bag and she does not deserve spike
This coming from the person who doesn’t think ANYONE, including herself, is worthy of Spike… how typical.
BTW, haven’t you noticed your new name I gave you???? I told you about it today!this one’s going to be a difficult one. for now Spike has a full range of feelings and emotions back, how would he handle it? he may realise that trying to force himself on Buffy is the reason she doesn’t love him (its probably a bit of that old chestnut, confusing sex with love). how could he make it up to her? i don’t think he could, and knowing that alone may be more destructive than anything Buffy has already said or done. that will probably more likely make him self-destructive and reckless. A male slayer, perhaps? make up for not having Buffy by imitating her? just guessing obviously, but in one way, it could be his way of trying making it up to her, by doing good deeds instead of bad.
[ 01-06-2002: Message edited by: snooklepie ]
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.