For an AU there doesn't seem to be much that's significantly different here, other than Dawn being around from the beginning (which isn't a plus for me) and Buffy returning Xander's interest (and I agree it should have been Xander x Willow).
I did say it will have a mix of the original and alternate differences which are beyond Dawn being a part of the show from the beginning and the continuation of Xander's interest in Buffy. To mame some on the top of my head: the prophecy, the Anointed One continuing to be a pain in the team's butt beyond the first episode of Season 2, Giles becoming rebellious aganist the Council earlier than before and establishing his stand aganist them more openly, and Willow's act at the end of Season 3 which will have consequences, believe me. And believe me when I say there will be more differences coming.
I would never pair Xander with Buffy.
Xander and Willow belong together, when Willow turned lesbian it was a heavy blow to the show. Not that lesbians are a bad thing. Rather that the Xander and Willow relationship was so obvious and pitch perfect within the show.
I still think that someday Willow will wake up, decide she was just going through a phase in college, and get back together with Xander.
The first two seasons are pretty much perfect, although I would make it 100% clear that Drusilla is the gypsy that got Angel cursed with his soul. If you listen to the what that gypsy was, what abilities she had, and what Angel did to her, and listen to Drusilla's backstory, you find they're pretty much the same. I think, indeed, originally that Drusilla and the gypsy are one and the same.
S3 is where it starts to unravel, and thus this is where the biggest changes have to be. First; Xander does NOT get reduced to a donut-running boy who can't do anything. During the summer Xander was the leader of their group as the fought vampires, how the leader gets to be reduced to a donut boy is beyond me. Also, in S2 Buffy was the one doing the donut running, as she didn't have what it took to do the research, Xander and Willow on the other hand are the ones doing research and use the donuts to keep going all night.
As such, during S3, Xander should really keep performing somewhat of a leadership role; his night hawk role, although less 100% in charge.
This works perfect, as in S4 when he returns from his trip and is estranged from his college going friends, he goes about hunting vamps and demons on his own, and saves one of the Initiative teams, which gets him recruited. Riley's story in the original S4, will become Xander's story: the professor pumps him full of drugs, gets separated from his friends, and starts seeing the Initiative from both the drugs, and his sense of duty and following orders partially instilled by the solidier he dressed as his new family and friends. Riley either doesn't exist at all, or is a mere recurring character as Buffy's squeeze.
This has the advantage of keeping the cast smaller, (there's also no need for Anya), but the story itself is much more visceral; first the estranging story line, as Xander is genuinely gone, as well as Xander being part of the Initiative as opposed to Riley. Riley only just arrived in the cast, he simply wasn't around long enough to instill an emotional response into the audience. His getting out is just, meh - it doesn't help that he's boring. Thus have it happen one of the core four, Xander, would tighten the season and produce a much more interesting and emotionally charged storyline.
Oh, and Spike, the moment his information runs out and can no longer help, he gets dusted right away after that. The Scoobs keep looking like idiots not dusting the vamp.
Um Xander never married Anya remember he left her in "Hells Bells". Regarding killing Xander instead of Tara...who would reach out then to Willow to prevent her from destroying the world? Xander plays a vital role in helping to heal her somewhat. Also Tara was killed by accident remember, she was not Warren's primary target, Buffy was. Tara just happened to get caught in the cross fire. Xander was confronting Buffy regarding her relationship with Spike remember in the backyard when Warren appears and shoots...it misses Buffy goes over her shoulder and into Willow's bedroom breaks the window and pierces Tara. He could have pointed the gun at Xander and killed him but his intention was to kill Buffy and missed. Warren was a coward with a gun who didn't know how to fire it properly and his actions resulted in an accidental death that triggers Willow's down hill spiral into darkness. I disagree that Xander would have had any more poignancy and I'm a huge Xander fan.
The first two seasons are pretty much perfect, although I would make it 100% clear that Drusilla is the gypsy that got Angel cursed with his soul. If you listen to the what that gypsy was, what abilities she had, and what Angel did to her, and listen to Drusilla's backstory, you find they're pretty much the same. I think, indeed, originally that Drusilla and the gypsy are one and the same.
S3 is where it starts to unravel, and thus this is where the biggest changes have to be. First; Xander does NOT get reduced to a donut-running boy who can't do anything. During the summer Xander was the leader of their group as the fought vampires, how the leader gets to be reduced to a donut boy is beyond me. Also, in S2 Buffy was the one doing the donut running, as she didn't have what it took to do the research, Xander and Willow on the other hand are the ones doing research and use the donuts to keep going all night.
As such, during S3, Xander should really keep performing somewhat of a leadership role; his night hawk role, although less 100% in charge.
This works perfect, as in S4 when he returns from his trip and is estranged from his college going friends, he goes about hunting vamps and demons on his own, and saves one of the Initiative teams, which gets him recruited. Riley's story in the original S4, will become Xander's story: the professor pumps him full of drugs, gets separated from his friends, and starts seeing the Initiative from both the drugs, and his sense of duty and following orders partially instilled by the solidier he dressed as his new family and friends. Riley either doesn't exist at all, or is a mere recurring character as Buffy's squeeze.
This has the advantage of keeping the cast smaller, (there's also no need for Anya), but the story itself is much more visceral; first the estranging story line, as Xander is genuinely gone, as well as Xander being part of the Initiative as opposed to Riley. Riley only just arrived in the cast, he simply wasn't around long enough to instill an emotional response into the audience. His getting out is just, meh - it doesn't help that he's boring. Thus have it happen one of the core four, Xander, would tighten the season and produce a much more interesting and emotionally charged storyline.
Oh, and Spike, the moment his information runs out and can no longer help, he gets dusted right away after that. The Scoobs keep looking like idiots not dusting the vamp.
I'm sorry, but the show is called Buffy The Vampire Slayer, NOT Xander The Vampire Slayer. If Xander wanted to be what Buffy is, he should have stepped up, get buff, improve his fighting skills, and then do what you say he should-instead, all he did was be silly, get a construction job, marry Anya, and be Renfield in the Dracula episode. Not much to be proud of-that's why I wanted him killed off.
Buffy didn't bring Willow back from the Dark Side, Xander did.Also, the killing of Tara, while great from a dramatic standpoint, to me felt like the same old, same old 'LGBT person dies at end of play/novel/movie' plot that's the bane of most LGBT people and is mentioned in the documentary The Celluloid Closet. Killing Xander would have been better, and also have the same effect on Willow as Tara being killed, but with an even better story point: it's Tara who pulls Willow away from the dark side of the Force, not Buffy, and their love grows stronger as a result!
You do understand that Xander is a character that only does the way writers make him do, right? And this thing is about how writers could have improved Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and thus written things differently, and writing Xander differently - aka, allow him continuous use of his spine, instead of yanking it out - is the way to make this show better, right?
That Xander, the only male character that is Buffy's age, that's her friend, is reduced to whimpering buffoon to prop her up (because apparently Hollywood (feminist writers) think that the way to show the strength of a woman is to reduce every male around them to spineless, incompetent wimps and fail miserable) makes Buffy look pathetic and weak, and reduces the show from an ensemble cast, to a dramatically broken pile of nothing. Especially if he gets yanked from buffoon to more powerful than a god, and back down again, because he's only Xander, with every other episode, because plot, and the continuing existence of Buffy's world and thus the show depends on it.
Using Xander consistently as a strong male character wouldn't have turned BtVS in XtVS, it would have only made Buffy look stronger and more competent. Riley, after all, had the same role in the season I would give Xander, and yet the show never devolved into Riley the Vampire Slayer. In the end it did devolve into Spiky-woo and his Spikettes, but that's a whole other matter.
You do understand that Xander is a character that only does the way writers make him do, right? And this thing is about how writers could have improved Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and thus written things differently, and writing Xander differently - aka, allow him continuous use of his spine, instead of yanking it out - is the way to make this show better, right?
For you, and guys like you. This whole thing is all because you can't stand the way that men are treated on the show, so you write it to make Buffy weak, and Xander strong.Again, I repeat: This show is called Buffy The Vampire Slayer, NOT Xander The Vampire Slayer. There is no way that Xander can really be Buffy's equal unless he had or has the same powers, which he doesn't. You're dealing with a die that was cast 20 years ago by the creators, who wanted the inverse of the strong male hero that protects everybody from harm. Only now, you want to reverse it.
That only makes Joss and Marti look like two misandrists, two people that hate men, consider them wrong and evil. It doesn't make for good stories, and doesn't make Buffy look strong and competent, it makes her look pathetic and weak. That makes it not "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", it makes it... well... something, or maybe even nothing. "Willow the Witch", maybe.Compared to how most male writers make women usually look, what's the big deal? I call this tit for tat on Joss and Marti's part. Also considering how comic book creators kill off women characters and violate their bodies in a nasty manner, I'd say the same thing again.That Xander, the only male character that is Buffy's age, that's her friend, is reduced to whimpering buffoon to prop her up (because apparently Hollywood (feminist writers) think that the way to show the strength of a woman is to reduce every male around them to spineless, incompetent wimps and fail miserable) makes Buffy look pathetic and weak, and reduces the show from an ensemble cast, to a dramatically broken pile of nothing. Especially if he gets yanked from buffoon to more powerful than a god, and back down again, because he's only Xander, with every other episode, because plot, and the continuing existence of Buffy's world and thus the show depends on it.
Ah, I see. So you believe that Buffy was written as such a wining, pathetic, weak-willed, incompetent moron, that if only one man shows his mere normal human competence he'd immediately overshadow even super-powered Buffy. You see, that's not a problem with a competent Xander, that's a problem with a badly written Buffy who is supposed to look strong but is written as anything but. This problem would be solved, with writing Buffy as strong, competent, and capable, and be the one even competent, strong Xander look to as the leader of their group.The show would still have been XtVS, since Xander would have overshadowed Buffy, Willow, and Tara. This is a show about strong young heroic women & the men that support them, not about a strong women who has to have a man back her up-remember, it's the inverse of the standard damsel in distress show/movie we've all seen in our livesUsing Xander consistently as a strong male character wouldn't have turned BtVS in XtVS, it would have only made Buffy look stronger and more competent. Riley, after all, had the same role in the season I would give Xander, and yet the show never devolved into Riley the Vampire Slayer. In the end it did devolve into Spiky-woo and his Spikettes, but that's a whole other matter.
Interesting you mentioned Kim Possible. You seen its last episode? Ron goes Super Saiyan (gains control of his monkey fu powers with the help of spiritual projection of the monkey ninja clan leader) and kicks the Aliens asses, completely outshining the best Kim would be able to do by about a 1,000 times. Interesting to note, that it is said, Ron could have done this all along, he simply didn't have the proper focus, mindset, and self-confidence to do so. Indeed, an earlier episode where Ron and Kim switch bodies, shows Kim perfectly able to do all her normal things in Ron's body, showing physically Ron is able to be every bit as agile, fast, and strong as Kim is; he just always lacked the right mindset.(Kim Possible is one of these shows also.)
No, it's STILL in a few chosen few. The final episode had the power only in the potential Slayers, not all the girls. Of course, you must also remember that earlier in the season the creation of a Slayer was likened to rape, most of the 1000+ potentials were not asked to be turned into Slayers, Buffy and co. by the earlier metaphor performed an act of mass rape, especially considering the Slayers are actually demons; a nasty black inky blob with phallic tentacles. At the same time Buffy acts like an idiot, and regains her confidence from lying in the arms of her attempted rapist.It's really also all about overturning white male privilege, in a way; that's why the final episode of Buffy had the Slayer power be born into every young girl on the planet, instead of just a chosen few.
You see, I understand perfectly why they did it, which you seem to be unwilling to grasp. And I will tell you know why, and there are two possibilities:If you're feeling bad about this, I suggest you check out some feminist blogs/websites-you might begin to understand why the writers of these shows wrote the way they did, and why it pissed you off so.
I really don't think the series needs much reworking in the early seasons. I like the bit about Drusilla and the Gypsies being made clear. Spike's first appearance and meeting with Angel would probably in hindsight, be better developed and written, since later they revealed what a long-form history the 4 of them (Darla and Dru also) had.
Season 3 is perfect.
Season 4, well I would have kept Maggie Walsh around longer that episode where she bit the dust was just a fast episode, too much happened. That was 2 or 3 episodes easily. Then we'd have less "hey we're searching for Adam!" stuff.
The only time Adam seemed like a threat btw was in the Joss-penned episode where he convinces the vampires to "come out into the light" (Faith arc part 2 I believe).
In fact, THAT would have been my climax. Instead of Adam being a lurching Frankenstein plot, he would "motivate" the vampires to carry out a string of brazen daylight attacks, an actual attempted daylight vampire invasion of Sunnydale, that would actually be kind of epic. Eventually they could fight and take out Adam the same way they did in the aired S4, and Restless would air as-is.
S5 is mostly fine, except I go with the writers' original plan to turn Willow evil when Glory takes out Tara. Five great seasons.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.