![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatSleepy. I didn't sleep well last night. Woke up in the middle of the night, and my body would not let me get back to sleep. Finally did, and had an odd dream about being unable to give new people I met my contact information. As if something was preventing me from putting it down accurately. I kept putting down the wrong thing. Also, I couldn't seem to get to my flight on time. Very odd dream. As a result of the sleep deprivation - I decided to only take a short walk today at lunchtime, well that and the fact that the pants I was wearing kept sliding down my hips as I walked, because I'd put a wallet and a phone in the front pockets. So I had to keep pulling them up. (Highly annoying.)
And spent most of the morning, taking a cybersecurity course that made me paranoid about everything I've ever posted on DW and social media in my lifetime. (We're required to take web based training modules for work every year, they are the same ones. Actually this one may have been updated. But the others are the same. )
***
Anyhow, here's a bit more of the August Question a Day Memage.
4. The artist Laura Knight was born on this day in 1877. She was an artist who worked in oils, watercolours, etching, engraving, and drypoint. Can you draw? Do you doodle?
Yes. I've been able to draw and paint since I was a small child. And took watercolor as a teenager. And have had art classes intermittently from the age of 5 until roughly my mid-thirties. I have worked in watercolors, etchings, engraving, and acrylic, not so much oil. And I don't think I've done drypoint.
I've posted some of them here from time to time. I can draw from memory, from life, and from photos.
Some people can sing, some can play instruments, I can draw and paint. - that came naturally to me. So does taking pictures. I'm visual. I can usually reproduce what I've seen, or a representation of it, through my own lens. My difficulty is knowing when to stop adding stuff to it. My mother used to yank my drawings and paintings away from me as a child before I ruined them.
5. How often do you check what paid subscriptions you’ve signed up for (e.g. an App on your phone, a TV channel, a subscription to a magazine, a membership to an organisation).
Not as often as I should? But I do keep track. If I'm not using, then I cancel. Just cancelled Paramount Plus and New York Magazine, next up may be three others.
6. Would you rather go on a city break, a seaside holiday or have a staycation?
I live and work in the city, and can go to the seaside if I want to. So probably a staycation and just do both?
7. This week in Bristol in the UK is the National Balloon Fiesta, a time to celebrate hot air balloons which draws thousands of visitors each year. Have you ever been in a hot air balloon (or would you like to?).
No. And...ambivalent? I'm not really a fan of heights? I could probably handle it, but I wouldn't go out of my way or anything.
***
So, I've been slowly rewatching the Buffy series, I forgot more about it than I realized. I honestly thought it was memorized, but apparently I managed to delete some of that over the years. Go figure.
I had forgotten why I didn't like Season 3 of Buffy as much as most fans of the series seem to? People rank that season high, and seem to love it.
But I never quite did and I forgot why, well until now.
It's the Faith Arc. It doesn't work for me. I was watching Dopplegangland last night, which much like Amends, is a stand out episode. The dialogue snaps, crackles and pops. It feels a bit like watching a movie. The color palette is precise, the costumes perfect for the characters, and every lead character is utilized in some way. Also the characters emotional arcs are all furthered.
But, it is also an episode in which the writer, in this case Whedon, is working over time to fill in some serious plot holes. Honestly the first two seasons plots worked better, and I was pondering why. I think it's David Greenwalt - I know he took off in Season 3 to develop Angel and sell it to the network. So wasn't as involved in the plotting in S3. Greenwalt was a better plotter than Whedon in some respects. Whedon plots like a daytime soap opera writer or comic book writer. Apologies to kazzy_cee who stated a while back that Buffy's plots were problematic. You were right, I was wrong. I had clearly forgotten how problematic the plotting is after Season 2, not that S2 was necessarily perfect? But it was better than S3, I think it's the simplicity - also Angel and Jenny Calendar were built better than the Mayor, who we get very little of, and just a touch of a mention in S2. They should have been alluding to him all along, and having him lurk in the shadows. It's ironic in a way? The writing gets better in other ways - the characters are more interesting, the emotional arcs are more interesting, and it's less campy, plus better stand-alone episodes, but the plotting has gotten somewhat convoluted and suffered as a result.
Of the first three seasons? Ironically, Season 3 has the most plot holes.
Also the least developed villains. Mr. Trick is barely developed - I think they were afraid of making the character too likable, and not being able to kill him off. But that's problematic for another reason, Mr. Trick is also the only POC in the story. You can kind of tell from that alone that this was produced in the 1990s over 20 years ago. In the 90s, American Broadcast Television Series didn't have many POC characters or if they did, they were all POC casts, not a lot of intermingling, or the POC character was a token, like Kendra or Mr. Trick. And of course they are killed off. And of course they are written as a bit of a cliche. Trick had the potential of rising above cliche - but alas, much like Kendra, they never bothered to develop him past that point. And yes, it is glaring - and no, it does not date well. Alan - the Mayor's Assistant is better developed, but even he doesn't get enough development - for the audience to care that Faith accidentally kills him. I didn't realize how accidental it truly was. Damn.
Buffy threw the guy at Faith, and Faith stabbed him without looking, right before Buffy could stop her. They were busy killing vampires, and the idiotic assistant got in the way. I felt for Faith. What doesn't work - is how Buffy and everyone else handles it.
They act like she did it in cold blood. It reminds me a little of Dead Things, and the argument that Spike and Buffy have over Katrina, who Buffy is convinced she killed. If she had it would have been an accident. But Buffy acts like she did it on purpose and in cold blood. No, hon, this is involuntary manslaughter. It's not the same thing.
I found both annoying for the same reason. Giles is right - these things happen. It's kind of like a cop accidentally shooting someone in the line of fire - they thought they had a gun, or solider accidentally shooting someone in friendly fire. It's a dicey situation - and I don't think the writers understand it well enough to handle it well.
At any rate, the entire plot of S3 kind of spins off of this event. Just as Dopplegangland spins off of Cordelia's wish to Anya. Now the second bit, actually does work for the most part. It sets up the premise of alternative worlds, which is revisited in S5, and in Angel. The only issue I have with that - is how many alternative worlds are there? And why does Anyanka's necklace not exist in the world, if it was destroyed in that one? Did Anyanka travel between them? And wouldn't that world cease to exist, along with Vamp Willow, if Anyanka's necklace was destroyed? It's a comic book concept - and yeah, I can kind of handwave it?
Whedon does a lot of things in Dopplegangland. First he tries to plug plot holes. At the beginning of the episode he spends about ten minutes explaining why Faith hooked up with the Mayor (basically what she's gaining from it and it doesn't really work for me, but okay - it's pure old guy fantasy, unfortunately very cliche, and among the many reasons Whedon isn't producing content any longer or Neil Gaiman for that matter (I think I saw something similar in his comics)), and why the Watcher Council hasn't put the kibbutz on the entire deal, and yanked Faith back to merry old Britain for review. Faith actually calls the Mayor, Sugar Daddy, and comes on to him, until he pushes her off him, saying none of that. (This scene is all the more nauseating when you consider what Whedon was up to behind the scenes on that series and his working relationship with various folks.) The actor playing Wilkins does save a lot of it, by playing it light, with a sardonic sense of humor. But it is an echo of Angelus and Dru, and in an unsettling way, also Angel and Buffy, which makes me wonder about Whedon and the WB.
The Faith/Mayor relationship does not hold up well. I was annoyed. I liked the Buffy/Faith dynamic. And even the Faith/Scooby Gange dynamic. I honestly think they went the wrong direction with this. Or, it would have worked better with a female figure. And a far less, ahem sexual dynamic better Faith and the Mayor, and yes that's unfortunately implied.
The Watcher Council bit makes no sense. Why the Council would go along with Giles after Faith broke free, or allow Wes, who failed miserably, to stay behind as Faith's watcher, is beyond me. It doesn't jive with Helpless, where they fired Giles. Why would they listen to him? Where's Travers?
I mean they only have two slayers. Why not yank the other one back to ensure she's with the program? Seems to be a big risk? Whedon seems to realize this - because he quickly tries to plug the hole and then say, hey look at the pretties, and hope the audience goes along. For the most part it did. Also campy teen horror show on the WB, people hand-waved it.
He jumps very quickly from the main plot to the story he really wants to tell - which is the main plot line of the episode. And the main plot line is quite good, although...I'm not sure how well it holds up now?
Anyhow, it's late and bed calls.
So I may or may not continue rambling about this at a later point.
And spent most of the morning, taking a cybersecurity course that made me paranoid about everything I've ever posted on DW and social media in my lifetime. (We're required to take web based training modules for work every year, they are the same ones. Actually this one may have been updated. But the others are the same. )
***
Anyhow, here's a bit more of the August Question a Day Memage.
4. The artist Laura Knight was born on this day in 1877. She was an artist who worked in oils, watercolours, etching, engraving, and drypoint. Can you draw? Do you doodle?
Yes. I've been able to draw and paint since I was a small child. And took watercolor as a teenager. And have had art classes intermittently from the age of 5 until roughly my mid-thirties. I have worked in watercolors, etchings, engraving, and acrylic, not so much oil. And I don't think I've done drypoint.
I've posted some of them here from time to time. I can draw from memory, from life, and from photos.
Some people can sing, some can play instruments, I can draw and paint. - that came naturally to me. So does taking pictures. I'm visual. I can usually reproduce what I've seen, or a representation of it, through my own lens. My difficulty is knowing when to stop adding stuff to it. My mother used to yank my drawings and paintings away from me as a child before I ruined them.
5. How often do you check what paid subscriptions you’ve signed up for (e.g. an App on your phone, a TV channel, a subscription to a magazine, a membership to an organisation).
Not as often as I should? But I do keep track. If I'm not using, then I cancel. Just cancelled Paramount Plus and New York Magazine, next up may be three others.
6. Would you rather go on a city break, a seaside holiday or have a staycation?
I live and work in the city, and can go to the seaside if I want to. So probably a staycation and just do both?
7. This week in Bristol in the UK is the National Balloon Fiesta, a time to celebrate hot air balloons which draws thousands of visitors each year. Have you ever been in a hot air balloon (or would you like to?).
No. And...ambivalent? I'm not really a fan of heights? I could probably handle it, but I wouldn't go out of my way or anything.
***
So, I've been slowly rewatching the Buffy series, I forgot more about it than I realized. I honestly thought it was memorized, but apparently I managed to delete some of that over the years. Go figure.
I had forgotten why I didn't like Season 3 of Buffy as much as most fans of the series seem to? People rank that season high, and seem to love it.
But I never quite did and I forgot why, well until now.
It's the Faith Arc. It doesn't work for me. I was watching Dopplegangland last night, which much like Amends, is a stand out episode. The dialogue snaps, crackles and pops. It feels a bit like watching a movie. The color palette is precise, the costumes perfect for the characters, and every lead character is utilized in some way. Also the characters emotional arcs are all furthered.
But, it is also an episode in which the writer, in this case Whedon, is working over time to fill in some serious plot holes. Honestly the first two seasons plots worked better, and I was pondering why. I think it's David Greenwalt - I know he took off in Season 3 to develop Angel and sell it to the network. So wasn't as involved in the plotting in S3. Greenwalt was a better plotter than Whedon in some respects. Whedon plots like a daytime soap opera writer or comic book writer. Apologies to kazzy_cee who stated a while back that Buffy's plots were problematic. You were right, I was wrong. I had clearly forgotten how problematic the plotting is after Season 2, not that S2 was necessarily perfect? But it was better than S3, I think it's the simplicity - also Angel and Jenny Calendar were built better than the Mayor, who we get very little of, and just a touch of a mention in S2. They should have been alluding to him all along, and having him lurk in the shadows. It's ironic in a way? The writing gets better in other ways - the characters are more interesting, the emotional arcs are more interesting, and it's less campy, plus better stand-alone episodes, but the plotting has gotten somewhat convoluted and suffered as a result.
Of the first three seasons? Ironically, Season 3 has the most plot holes.
Also the least developed villains. Mr. Trick is barely developed - I think they were afraid of making the character too likable, and not being able to kill him off. But that's problematic for another reason, Mr. Trick is also the only POC in the story. You can kind of tell from that alone that this was produced in the 1990s over 20 years ago. In the 90s, American Broadcast Television Series didn't have many POC characters or if they did, they were all POC casts, not a lot of intermingling, or the POC character was a token, like Kendra or Mr. Trick. And of course they are killed off. And of course they are written as a bit of a cliche. Trick had the potential of rising above cliche - but alas, much like Kendra, they never bothered to develop him past that point. And yes, it is glaring - and no, it does not date well. Alan - the Mayor's Assistant is better developed, but even he doesn't get enough development - for the audience to care that Faith accidentally kills him. I didn't realize how accidental it truly was. Damn.
Buffy threw the guy at Faith, and Faith stabbed him without looking, right before Buffy could stop her. They were busy killing vampires, and the idiotic assistant got in the way. I felt for Faith. What doesn't work - is how Buffy and everyone else handles it.
They act like she did it in cold blood. It reminds me a little of Dead Things, and the argument that Spike and Buffy have over Katrina, who Buffy is convinced she killed. If she had it would have been an accident. But Buffy acts like she did it on purpose and in cold blood. No, hon, this is involuntary manslaughter. It's not the same thing.
I found both annoying for the same reason. Giles is right - these things happen. It's kind of like a cop accidentally shooting someone in the line of fire - they thought they had a gun, or solider accidentally shooting someone in friendly fire. It's a dicey situation - and I don't think the writers understand it well enough to handle it well.
At any rate, the entire plot of S3 kind of spins off of this event. Just as Dopplegangland spins off of Cordelia's wish to Anya. Now the second bit, actually does work for the most part. It sets up the premise of alternative worlds, which is revisited in S5, and in Angel. The only issue I have with that - is how many alternative worlds are there? And why does Anyanka's necklace not exist in the world, if it was destroyed in that one? Did Anyanka travel between them? And wouldn't that world cease to exist, along with Vamp Willow, if Anyanka's necklace was destroyed? It's a comic book concept - and yeah, I can kind of handwave it?
Whedon does a lot of things in Dopplegangland. First he tries to plug plot holes. At the beginning of the episode he spends about ten minutes explaining why Faith hooked up with the Mayor (basically what she's gaining from it and it doesn't really work for me, but okay - it's pure old guy fantasy, unfortunately very cliche, and among the many reasons Whedon isn't producing content any longer or Neil Gaiman for that matter (I think I saw something similar in his comics)), and why the Watcher Council hasn't put the kibbutz on the entire deal, and yanked Faith back to merry old Britain for review. Faith actually calls the Mayor, Sugar Daddy, and comes on to him, until he pushes her off him, saying none of that. (This scene is all the more nauseating when you consider what Whedon was up to behind the scenes on that series and his working relationship with various folks.) The actor playing Wilkins does save a lot of it, by playing it light, with a sardonic sense of humor. But it is an echo of Angelus and Dru, and in an unsettling way, also Angel and Buffy, which makes me wonder about Whedon and the WB.
The Faith/Mayor relationship does not hold up well. I was annoyed. I liked the Buffy/Faith dynamic. And even the Faith/Scooby Gange dynamic. I honestly think they went the wrong direction with this. Or, it would have worked better with a female figure. And a far less, ahem sexual dynamic better Faith and the Mayor, and yes that's unfortunately implied.
The Watcher Council bit makes no sense. Why the Council would go along with Giles after Faith broke free, or allow Wes, who failed miserably, to stay behind as Faith's watcher, is beyond me. It doesn't jive with Helpless, where they fired Giles. Why would they listen to him? Where's Travers?
I mean they only have two slayers. Why not yank the other one back to ensure she's with the program? Seems to be a big risk? Whedon seems to realize this - because he quickly tries to plug the hole and then say, hey look at the pretties, and hope the audience goes along. For the most part it did. Also campy teen horror show on the WB, people hand-waved it.
He jumps very quickly from the main plot to the story he really wants to tell - which is the main plot line of the episode. And the main plot line is quite good, although...I'm not sure how well it holds up now?
Anyhow, it's late and bed calls.
So I may or may not continue rambling about this at a later point.
no subject
Date: 2025-08-09 07:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-08-09 02:13 pm (UTC)Also, I walked through their television set for years on my way to work. They filmed it in Fort Green, behind BAM and the street leading to the train terminal. I never saw any of the stars, just their trailers, and the crew.
I do think that sometimes the seasons are so long in US shows that there are always a few dud episodes to 'fill' time. In the UK, we rarely go beyond 10 episodes a season, and it's usually only 6 or 8. It keeps the writing tighter.
I agree for the most part? The one advantage of the longer season - is it gives the writers more time to develop and play with their characters and their world - which a shorter series doesn't provide. On the other hand - it does lead to a lot of duds, and crappy plotting. Mainly because they have a short period of time - to write and film 22 episodes, and due to the pace, they often do filler episodes. The longer series also tend to have more writers - you might have upwards of 10 writers possibly more on a 22 episode series, although there are exceptions. Rare though. A shorter and limited series, like say Andor, with 12 episodes, you may have four writers or one. I think Gilroy wrote and directed most if not all of the episodes. Same with Fargo and True Detective - the same writer did most of the episodes. You can't really do that with 22 episodes - although Rod Sterling famously tried, and burnt himself out very quickly. He even produced bad episodes.
When it comes to plot? Less is more. Less characters, shorter series, and smaller number of writers, say no more than two if that.