I'm not saying that Jasmine was a bad idea. It's an intriguing one. I just feel it was the wrong story for the climax of the season 4 arc.
Buffy or Angel?
- Thread starter amdmiami
- Start date
See, I prefer Season 4 of Angel to Season 5. Season 4 certainly had it's downsides, but the good of that season by far outweighs the bad.
Connor, for example. Yeah, I disliked Connor, but obviously not as much as other people. Even though his "reason for being born" was simply written in because of Charisma Carpenters' pregnancy, at least it was a reason. That's what bugged me about Season 3 of Angel. They never gave a reason for how Connor was even born. It might be a dumb reason, but it worked for me given the circumstances.
As for Cordy being the bad guy, I had read somewhere, many years ago, that Cordy was always suppose to be the big bad of Season 4. If I remember correctly, the end of the season was suppose to be Angel and Cordy in this huge fight. So, really, no matter what, Cordy wouldn't have been Cordy in Season 4. I don't have a problem with that. Now, yes. I missed the "real" Cordy in Season 4 (and 5), but this was something the Wheadonverse had tried before and failed at (having one of the main, GOOD characters go bad). They tried it with Willow, and it just didn't work. At least with Cordy, they worked an entire season of her being bad and pulling the gang's threads. It worked. And at least we got "You're Welcome" in S5 to bring the real Cordy back.
Unlike everyone else, I didn't have a problem with Jasmine. I think it was meant to be a stark juxtaposition to the rest of the season. The Fang Gang was expecting the ultimate evil, and instead, the got someone who was bring around world peace. Yeah, it was at a terrible cost, but it was still world peace.
Season 5 of Angel suffered for a couple of reasons. Number one was Spike. I was a huge fan of his until he, uh, fell in love with Buffy. After that I couldn't stand him. Plus, they destroyed the wonderful relationship Angel had built with Cordy by having Angel suddenly back in love with Buffy. It made no sense.
Then there was the whole Lindsey arc that didn't make sense. And Illyria. And the Nazi submarine episode. Plus, Lorne, my favorite character, was reduced to the background.
Connor, for example. Yeah, I disliked Connor, but obviously not as much as other people. Even though his "reason for being born" was simply written in because of Charisma Carpenters' pregnancy, at least it was a reason. That's what bugged me about Season 3 of Angel. They never gave a reason for how Connor was even born. It might be a dumb reason, but it worked for me given the circumstances.
As for Cordy being the bad guy, I had read somewhere, many years ago, that Cordy was always suppose to be the big bad of Season 4. If I remember correctly, the end of the season was suppose to be Angel and Cordy in this huge fight. So, really, no matter what, Cordy wouldn't have been Cordy in Season 4. I don't have a problem with that. Now, yes. I missed the "real" Cordy in Season 4 (and 5), but this was something the Wheadonverse had tried before and failed at (having one of the main, GOOD characters go bad). They tried it with Willow, and it just didn't work. At least with Cordy, they worked an entire season of her being bad and pulling the gang's threads. It worked. And at least we got "You're Welcome" in S5 to bring the real Cordy back.
Unlike everyone else, I didn't have a problem with Jasmine. I think it was meant to be a stark juxtaposition to the rest of the season. The Fang Gang was expecting the ultimate evil, and instead, the got someone who was bring around world peace. Yeah, it was at a terrible cost, but it was still world peace.
Season 5 of Angel suffered for a couple of reasons. Number one was Spike. I was a huge fan of his until he, uh, fell in love with Buffy. After that I couldn't stand him. Plus, they destroyed the wonderful relationship Angel had built with Cordy by having Angel suddenly back in love with Buffy. It made no sense.
Then there was the whole Lindsey arc that didn't make sense. And Illyria. And the Nazi submarine episode. Plus, Lorne, my favorite character, was reduced to the background.
This is true. It was just the pregnancy that screwed the producers over.
Exactly. While I had the same reaction as many during the actual viewing, when I consider how things built up with the growing evil, the beast, the rain of fire, etc, etc they almost lead you to believe the climax will involve this mammothly evil creature who breathes fire. Ironically, (and I think elegenatly) we get this mammothly evil creature who supposedly wants to bring world peace but at the price of your free will and her killing thousands upon thousands to kill herself in the name of peace.
It was a great commentary on the ends justify the means told in such a way as to reflect some of the worst atrocities that have been committed in real life by leaders saying the same things Jasmine said. Which, when you think about it, is a more frightenting evil then a rain of fire or beast because the "paradise" that is offered is not offered to all equally and the price is your free will so you're no longer actually in the picture to really enjoy this paradise in the first place.
Agreed. This was a big disappointment even though I enjoyed seeing him again.
I actually really liked Illyria. I think she would have made an interesting character.
Agreed.
Charisma's pregnancy could have been dealt with in a number of ways without taking it to the completely absurd.
I'd felt from the beginning, as Angel got closer to Cordy (what with his inabilty to 'love' someone) that she was going to have to 'go bad'. But, what they did was ... fuck up a perfectly good wet dream.
Everything after that just seemed like they were grasping at straws.
It could be that I was unpleasantly surprised by the 'absurdity' of it, and may enjoy it if I actually watched it again. Who knows, maybe someday I will.
And, I liked the actor that played Conner. I just didn't like the way they wrote him.
I'd felt from the beginning, as Angel got closer to Cordy (what with his inabilty to 'love' someone) that she was going to have to 'go bad'. But, what they did was ... fuck up a perfectly good wet dream.
Everything after that just seemed like they were grasping at straws.
It could be that I was unpleasantly surprised by the 'absurdity' of it, and may enjoy it if I actually watched it again. Who knows, maybe someday I will.
And, I liked the actor that played Conner. I just didn't like the way they wrote him.
I can't choose between Buffy and Angel - they are so completely different. Angel, overall, was a stronger series and more consistently well-written. Some of the events on Angel kicked me in the gut, really got to me emotionally. It was a dark, brooding show. Buffy, overall, was lighter in tone. It was definitely more fun. It's very quotable.
What's with all the Angel love? That show was fucking awful.
Consistent? Maybe consistently mediocre. For the first three seasons it never took any real chances. It was so paint by numbers, it made my head spin. The episodes of the first season were just leftovers from your run-of-the-mill crime drama with a demonic spin ... oh yeah, with some needless emo brooding thrown in. The second season was more of the same. They did experiment a little, but with little avail.
This continued into season three, but all that did was turn the show into one giant schizophrenic cluster fuck.
So towards the end they threw in this bizarre plot line that carried over into season four. But the thing ultimately just read like a really bad afternoon soap opera.
In fact, the show had become so bad, that they had to go and "reinvent" it. Now, this comes across as tentative at best. They changed everything about the show: setting, characters, story devices such that, if you changed the character's names, you might as well have been watching a different show.
The characters (save green show-tune singing demons) where so cookie-cutter and stereotyped that one might even find it offensive.
People can throw words like "dark" "adult" "mature" all they want to, but that doesn't make it good.
The "Friday the 13th" movies are "dark," "adult," and "mature," but that doesn't make them good.
I've strongly believed for a long time that the show only lasted so long because it road Buffy's (or even just Whedon's) coattails. All things being equal, had this been a completely unrelated series run by someone else, it wouldn't have lasted past a dozen episodes or so.
Though, I suppose in that case it's rabid little group of fans would just complain it was unjustifiably canceled and blame suits, bureaucracy, politics, and whatever they could point fingers at save the show's quality.
The result would be the show posthumously reaching "Greatest Sci-fi/fantasy series of all time!" to the utter nuisance of more rational people.
...Oh wait.
Consistent? Maybe consistently mediocre. For the first three seasons it never took any real chances. It was so paint by numbers, it made my head spin. The episodes of the first season were just leftovers from your run-of-the-mill crime drama with a demonic spin ... oh yeah, with some needless emo brooding thrown in. The second season was more of the same. They did experiment a little, but with little avail.
This continued into season three, but all that did was turn the show into one giant schizophrenic cluster fuck.
So towards the end they threw in this bizarre plot line that carried over into season four. But the thing ultimately just read like a really bad afternoon soap opera.
In fact, the show had become so bad, that they had to go and "reinvent" it. Now, this comes across as tentative at best. They changed everything about the show: setting, characters, story devices such that, if you changed the character's names, you might as well have been watching a different show.
The characters (save green show-tune singing demons) where so cookie-cutter and stereotyped that one might even find it offensive.
People can throw words like "dark" "adult" "mature" all they want to, but that doesn't make it good.
The "Friday the 13th" movies are "dark," "adult," and "mature," but that doesn't make them good.
I've strongly believed for a long time that the show only lasted so long because it road Buffy's (or even just Whedon's) coattails. All things being equal, had this been a completely unrelated series run by someone else, it wouldn't have lasted past a dozen episodes or so.
Though, I suppose in that case it's rabid little group of fans would just complain it was unjustifiably canceled and blame suits, bureaucracy, politics, and whatever they could point fingers at save the show's quality.
The result would be the show posthumously reaching "Greatest Sci-fi/fantasy series of all time!" to the utter nuisance of more rational people.
...Oh wait.
Not unfair. It was a detective/Batman hybrid show at that point, after all.
No, the second season was very different. They had a real direction. And I've got to disagree with most of the rest of what you said after that as well.
There's a huge difference between "mature" and "not for little kids." The Friday the 13th movies are some of the most immature movies ever made, catering to hormonal teenagers that want to see lots of sex and blood (which also counts out them being adult.) Also the only dark thing about Friday the 13th is that lots of people die. Other than that, the movies are practically comedies. They're not meant to provoke any thoughts whatsoever. In a post filled with flimsy arguments, that one was the flimsiest of them all.
The first seasons of either show really wasn't good since they were still starting out. Half of the episodes from the first season of Buffy were extremely mediocre not to mention cheesy. Like DS9 I say Angel was always better doing arc episodes and that really didn't start it until the season one finale. While the first season was still good the Vampire in crime drama thing wasn't working out so the Angel writers wisely moved away from that starting in season two.
Bad afternoon soap opera? You mean like the later seasons of Buffy?
Buffy season four didn't work out. It was a bad idea to mix sci fi with fantasy like that. The Initiative came out of nowhere. Where the hell were they in the first three seasons during the times the world was about to end? Riley was Buffy's most boring boyfriend though the guy deserved better. Adam had no personality as the main villain.
Buffy season five bounced back somewhat. I liked that it was the most arc based season of the show. It had the perfect ending but they had to fuck that up with season six and seven.
Yes they explained where Dawn came from but in the first half of season five Dawn was just there to take screen time from the main characters and pretty much just be annoying. Dawn became background in season six and seven.
Also I was really disappointed with what happened to Buffy in season six. Season three Buffy would have never would have never gone to Spike and started fucking him since she was depressed. That bizarre plot also made Spike look like a complete loser who took the abuse so he could get some sex. Took away any menace the character every had. Also the near rape scene was the worse thing ever done in the Buffyverse. I felt bad for Masters having to do that crap. The Willow and Tara relationship was done well in season four and five but they trashed it in six. Then out of nowhere the writers gave Willow another girlfriend in season 7.
Season seven was just boring. Most of the episodes took place on the crappy Buffy's house set and the potentials were even worse then Dawn since they just took up space and took screentime away from the main characters that we did care about in the final season.
Angel did reinvent itself in season 5 but I blame that on network interference. They demanded a Buffy character to go onto Angel so the writers had to make due with Spike. But the writers went a long way to redeeming the character after how much he was messed up by the final season of Buffy.
I disagree. With the exception of Clem (who was comic relief) and Spike pretty much all the Demons on Buffy were pure evil. Angel gave the demon world more personality. They weren't just completely evil or good. Also Wesley Wyndam Pryce has to be one of the best developed characters on television, it's a little hard to believe that the Wesley in his first appearances on Buffy is the same character he was in the final season of Angel.
Being dark doesn't make it good. It's just that some people prefer the dark arc storytelling that Angel had over Buffy's most comedic tone.
Spinoffs can be great or absolutely horrible. Frasier was great while Joey wasn't. If the stories and acting was really bad then fans would have stopped watching Angel rather quickly and it would have ended in it's first season. It has nothing to do with the Joss fanboys.
Unlike other fan bases Angel fans rarely whine that Angel was cancelled too early or anything. It did however go out on top which I can't say the same for Buffy.
I think the whole Buffy vs Angel argument is very much like the TOS vs DS9 thing. TOS and Buffy came first and had more classic episodes however DS9 and Angel's strengths were it's darker arc storylines and better developed characters.
I really don't think the producers/writers had much time to come up with something else. Whedon is known for planning his shows years in advance, so a lot of Season 4 was already sketched out. Then Charisma comes in and announces she's pregnant. I think they did the best they could with the little time they had.
Illyria was a good concept. However, it was kind of a no-win situation. You couldn't have this all powerful being roaming around. A demon that Angel and Co. could never defeat. So they had to take her powers away. Fine. But now what they have is Data, basically. They have to show her how to "live in this world", since she can't destroy it and hop dimensions anymore. The only thing this really accomplished was giving Spike something to do other than annoy Angel.
Now, Amy Acker did a WONDERFUL, superb job as Illyria. Fred and Illyria are such polar opposites of each other, and it takes a damn fine actress to pull something like that off. To go from giggly, annoying Fred to stone cold bitch Illyria in a matter of seconds (I'm thinking of the Wes/Fred/Illyria scene in Not Fade Away) is pure talent. I give Acker lots of props for that.
Last edited:
Buffy all the way! 
I liked Angel season 2, 3 and parts of season 4. I hated Conner, he ruined the fun for me.
I liked Angel season 2, 3 and parts of season 4. I hated Conner, he ruined the fun for me.
Yeah, and more complex character arcs where there are consequences. By and large characters on Buffy stayed the same with little variation. (and no, I don't think Willow sleeping with women instead of men a big change)
Granted, Angel himself was somewhat consistant but look at Wes's arc which I consider to be on of the finest character arcs of any story ranking right up there with G'kar and Londo. Look at Cordy's arc (don't count season 4), she grew and matured into a true hero. That's what I liked about Angel over Buffy is that the story impacted the characters and those characters were forever changed by those events.
Everyone hated Conner in Seasons 3-4. That was the point, after all.
That being said I loved what they did with his character in Season 5. I would have loved to seen him join the cast in Season 6 and fight side by side by his dad.
Why does everyone keep saying that the characters on Buffy were underdeveloped? Buffy had some of the best characters including Buffy herself. Somtimes she made the dumbest mistakes and you wanted to hate her, but thats what made her such a good character. She went from bitchy L.A. girl, to love struck girl, to confused girl, to depressed girl, to lonely girl and beyond.
Willow developed also sooo much over the series. When we met her in season 1, she was a small insecure nerdy girl who was wuite bland. By the end of season 7 she had turned into a strong young woman who had gone through a ton of shit including her addiction to magic, and the untimely death of Tara.
As for Xander, he was probablly the most underdeveloped character, however he went from being comic relief to an actually person. Anya, Tara, Spike, Giles, Andrew and even Dawn also were developed very well. For such a large cast, all the characters got plenty of screen time save for season 7 (which was understandable because the writes were trying to lean away from the character driven season 6).
Willow developed also sooo much over the series. When we met her in season 1, she was a small insecure nerdy girl who was wuite bland. By the end of season 7 she had turned into a strong young woman who had gone through a ton of shit including her addiction to magic, and the untimely death of Tara.
As for Xander, he was probablly the most underdeveloped character, however he went from being comic relief to an actually person. Anya, Tara, Spike, Giles, Andrew and even Dawn also were developed very well. For such a large cast, all the characters got plenty of screen time save for season 7 (which was understandable because the writes were trying to lean away from the character driven season 6).
Similar threads
