Writer's Block and Brad Meltzer...the upcoming BTVS S8 writer..

[shadowkat]

What (if any) books would you ban from a high school library? Are there certain subjects that you feel are inappropriate for teenagers regardless of literary merit?



I wouldn't ban any books from a high school library. At the age of 16 - I read Rosemary Rodgers and Harold Robbins, I also thumbed through Erica Jong's Fear of Flying (the most boring thing I'd attempted). I read anything and everything I could - as did my parents when they were young, which may be why they didn't constrict my reading. My father used to read Ian Fleming novels. Reading shows you different worlds and different perspectives. When you read, you think. You choose how to respond to the text. It is an interactive enterprise. To ban a book, any book, is sending the wrong message. Also, the most violent, and graphic novel of all time is probably the Bible. Ages ago - only monks were permitted to read it, because it was considered too difficult for the common folk.



After reading this interview with Brad Meltzer, who I have read previously - his writing not the interview, I realized why I am struggling with the Buffy comics. I am not a Brad Meltzer fan. I have read him before, more than once.

I read his breakout novel - the best-selling Dead Even - one of the millions of legal thrillers that now feel rather interchangable. To put it mildly, Meltzer makes John Grisham feel like Cormac McCarthy or Shakespeare in comparison. Grisham has more depth, not to mention more believablity and better characterization. Meltzer's characters are somewhat one-dimensional pretty people, with a cliche flaw, while Grisham's I can actually visualize. I compare the two, because they write the same genre, as does David Baldacci - who is also much much better. There's a reason Baldacci has done better. And I'm not necessarily a Baldacci fan. The best of the bunch is Scott Turow, who wrote the famous Paper Chase. Turow's sentences stick with you longer. The only thing I remember about Dead Even, besides the fact that I found it disappointing and a waste of money, much the same way I felt when I read a Danielle Steele novel - is the hero escapes a kiler by hiding under a subway platform. I remember it, because I've stood on many a platform contemplating how that is possible. At the time I was reading it - I was taking the subway and thinking, no this is not possible, you can't do it. Now that I work for a commuter rail service, I know it is impossible. The book is rather beyond belief, particularly if you know anything about law. But hey, it was a first effort. So I thought, after reading all the hype on Identity Crisis - the comic that changed the DC Universe and rocketed into a new era - or so they said, comic book publishers tend towards the hyperbole, to check it out. Read the entire thing in the space of a half hour maybe less in the comic book store, along with Whedon's endorsement - it too was forgettable - the only thing I remember is the built up about Batman and why he decided to collect dossiers on all the Justice Leaguers because he realized through the events in Identity Crisis that they could be dangerous to humanity, since they were all powerful. Batman's the duped detective in the story who manages to unravel the thing. That was interesting. The mystery? It was basically a domestic dispute..or something. I didn't find it interesting and didn't care, so don't remember what it was or what it entailed. All I remember is the split between Batman, Superman and Wonderwoman or the tension, there wasn't really a split as a result of it. Outside of that? It drug. I scanned. But unlike Buffy, they had less characters, and developed the minor ones a bit more.

The same thing is happening in the Buffy comic - I am finding that the story is dragging.
The suspense lacking and my suspension of disbelief...cracking. But hey what can we expect from someone who thinks Georges Jeanty can deliver emotional moments? I guess he does, I guess this is subjective. But I'm not seeing it. Where? I admit I may be too busy trying to figure out who is who to notice. Also the My Little Pony (TM BFG) artwork sort of lacks emotional weight in my opinion. It's too magna lite.

At any rate if Meltzer is behind the big Twilight reveal...this probably means we'll get it late in his run - ie, around March, and that it will probably be someone I really don't think is believable but all the clues lead to. I'm admittedly worried it will be Spike - even if it makes no logical sense, but I've read Metzler - he's plots don't make logical sense to me - they tend to hackneyed. Eh. I hope I'm wrong. Maybe it will be better than I think. Maybe Twilight will be Hank Summers - that's who I really want it to be - I can fanwank that one. The others, I really can't. And everyone else is sort of yawnworthy. But with Metzler? Can't say I have a lot of faith in the outcome. But I could be wrong. At any rate, going into this with extreemly low expectations. I may even thumb through it or read others reviews before buying this round, we shall see. I have not bought any Metzler novels since Dead Even - which I handed off to my Granny at the time, who also thought it was one of the crappier mysteries she'd read. We ripped it apart on the phone one night. Had quite a blast doing it. So if I buy the comics - that will be the first thing I've purchased by Metzler since Dead Even.

Beginning to think Fury, Bell, Greenwalt and Noxon were necessary components to the Whedon mix. That and the actors themselves.

Comments

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I"ve long thought that Greenwalt was a far greater component that he was ever credited for being. I think a lot of that is simply being someone with enough power to challenge Whedon to actually work to defend his story. I mean that in a positive way. Sometimes we all need to stop and think about what we're doing to present it the best way, and I think that not only did Greenwalt bring his own ideas to the table, but that his position meant that Whedon respected him enough to actually flesh out his own ideas. Spare us all too many "yes" men. It does few people good.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Sometimes we all need to stop and think about what we're doing to present it the best way, and I think that not only did Greenwalt bring his own ideas to the table, but that his position meant that Whedon respected him enough to actually flesh out his own ideas. Spare us all too many "yes" men. It does few people good.

I think that may be part of the problem - too many acolytes in the mix, and not enough challengers. When he started the whole enterprise in 1996/1997 - he was wet behind the ears by Hollywood standards (ie never had directed or run a tv show before) - so they put Greenwalt into the mix. And also Gail Berman, the network overseerer of shows like Buffy - had a decisive role. If you look at School Hard - Greenwalt is credited for teleplay and concept along with Whedon. They played off of each well - in part because they did not necessarily agree. The actors also had a role in this - it was James Marsters who gave Whedon the idea that Spike was in love with Buffy and the idea to do a musical.

The problem with this - is it is too much like a lot of fanfic - in that it is done by email and there's way too much self-congratulatory patting on the back and not enough hard editing.

Also, while Greenwalt was just a consultant in the later seasons, you can see a difference in the plotting between S5 and S6 and 7. It gets less clear and drags more. Greenwalt was better at inserting the arc throughout the season and building it to high points. But I think part of it is just the makeup of the writing and producing team - plus the network's input.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Beginning to think Fury, Bell, Greenwalt and Noxon were necessary components to the Whedon mix. That and the actors themselves.

I've been starting to think the same thing. And I wonder if it's not just that he needs people to push back against him, but also to create a huge mix of intersting stuff so he has material to work with. Dollhouse feels like it's only partially brilliant, and I've been wondering if that's because he's got a less capable writing staff on the project. As for the comics -- there's not even a writing room -- and I'm willing to bet that the good stuff happens in conversation and not with one person at the typewriter. Even though Joss has brought in other writers, they aren't meeting once a week to hash things out, and I think it shows.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Regarding Dollhouse? I have to agree. I think part of it is the makeup of the collaborative effort. Also Gail Bermane - who was an executive at WB and went after Buffy, fought for Buffy, worked closely with Buffy, and nutured Buffy, not to mention convinced the Kuzuie's to get Whedon do it and got Greenwalt involved - may be part of it. She was the big picture gal.
While I love the two seasons on UPN, there is something slightly off about them...plot wise and they do go overboard in places (ie. the AR scene, Willow's addiction to magic, too many potentials) - which I think Bermane may have yanked or pulled him back a bit on. But I don't know. But I'm sensing a similar problem with Dollhouse -the writer is being let loose to play, and that doesn't always work well in a tv medium (as Rod Sterling, Aaron Sorkin and David E. Kelly have learned the hard way.)

As for the comics -- there's not even a writing room -- and I'm willing to bet that the good stuff happens in conversation and not with one person at the typewriter. Even though Joss has brought in other writers, they aren't meeting once a week to hash things out, and I think it shows.

Agreed. Most of this, according to interviews with the respective parties - has been done entirely by email. And I'm not sure email is the best way of brainstorming. I remember trying to write a collaborative story by email once - and our plot went every which way. It was a mess. I think Whedon has a better handle on it than we did, but I see problems..and I think those problems occur less when you are meeting in person and discussing it face to face with a big white board in front of you - and everything mapped out.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Late to the discussion but I think you're onto something here. Not sure how you felt about the first half of the series, but in those instances when they were first breaking Season 8, Joss did in fact have long in-person talks with Goddard. There's an interview in Wizard where they discuss getting together for dinner and that's how Joss convinced Goddard to do it. That's where Goddard expressed what story he wanted to tell (Dracula love triangle with Xander) and so on. And much of Vaughan's story had already been worked out for the Faith movie, then later tailored for Season 8.

I think P&P and Retreat are suffering most from this lack of a writer's room. Some of the goofs in Espenson's work was inexplicable.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

For myself...it was Predators and Prey that things began to fall off a bit, although I apparently like Harmonic Divergence more than most people seemed to, and Predators and Prey (Buffy/Andrew tale)more than everyone else. The weak ones in that arc were Satsu/Kennedy, Giles/Faith, and Jeff Loeb's cartoon dream.

I was okay with Retreat until they went into the battle...and it fell apart.

I think Goddard and Whedon are also working on Cabin in the Woods together, so they probably spent more time together hatching out the plot. Vaughn, I know worked closely with Whedon on his. The others? I'm not sure about. And that may well be part of the problem.

From the poll - most of the readers who gave up on the comics - did so, either because of "Long Way Home" - which they really didn't like, or "Retreat". So the group that read, then gave up completely, can be sort of split into two groups - the group that didn't like the comics from the get-go, and the group that liked them up to Retreat...and got fed up in that arc.
But it's hard to know for certain - people insist on being unique about this, and refuse to be pigeon-holed (which I can well appreciate) so as far as I can tell - no real consensus.

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

Ah, so he's that sort of bestselling author. That epithet really doesn't say much, does it? Thanks for the quick review.

At any rate if Meltzer is behind the big Twilight reveal...this probably means we'll get it late in his run - ie, around March

Since his first issue won't be out until February, late in his run would be around May. And even then, I wouldn't be surprised if they take the classic "Twilight takes his mask off facing away from the camera, cut to Buffy saying 'Oh my God, it's YOU?!?' - end of issue" approach. It's a superhero comic, right? Assuming, that is, that Twilight is ever revealed at all.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yep, he's a moderately successful hack. ;-) Or a B list thriller writer. Publishers love guys like Meltzer - he always sells, they always make a profit.

Since his first issue won't be out until February, late in his run would be around May. And even then, I wouldn't be surprised if they take the classic "Twilight takes his mask off facing away from the camera, cut to Buffy saying 'Oh my God, it's YOU?!?' - end of issue" approach. It's a superhero comic, right? Assuming, that is, that Twilight is ever revealed at all

Oh he'll be revealed. I'm just wondering if we'll be able to recognize who it is without a name shout-out or something. Too many of these people look alike. The only one that would not require a name shout out is Willow and Xander - because she has red hair and he has an eye-patch. Or Giles - as long as he is wearing glasses.

And the "Oh GOD, it's you?" - that's pretty much how they did the big reveal in "Identity Crisis" - if memory serves. Then they did a quick unravel to show us all the little clues we were missing - by Batman, the Great Detective explaining it or something like that. I remember shrugging at the time and thinking, yeah, makes sense, but why don't I care? The murderer was a superhero in Identity Crisis - that was the big reveal. Not one we knew or cared that much about. A sort of subsidiary character that I hadn't seen or heard of prior to that comic and cared little for.

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

And the "Oh GOD, it's you?" - that's pretty much how they did the big reveal in "Identity Crisis" - if memory serves. Then they did a quick unravel to show us all the little clues we were missing - by Batman, the Great Detective explaining it or something like that. I remember shrugging at the time and thinking, yeah, makes sense, but why don't I care? The murderer was a superhero in Identity Crisis - that was the big reveal. Not one we knew or cared that much about. A sort of subsidiary character that I hadn't seen or heard of prior to that comic and cared little for.

Well, THAT certainly inspires confidence. ;-) Maybe Adam or Hank Summers aren'tt as inconceivable as I assumed they were.

[shapinglight]

I'd never even heard of Brad Meltzer before this, not being much of a DC reader. Since my expectations of this comic are now so low, hearing he's not very good doesn't so much make my heart plummet and make me think, "So what else is new?"

With you on the art, as you know. I really, really dislike it. I think I disliked it more with every issue of Jane's arc. Big, dramatic scenes are just not Jeanty's forte. The big battle and supposed deaths of lots of mini-Slayers had no emotional impact at all (that and the fact that the OCs were all faceless ciphers).

I don't think Twilight will be Spike, or Angel. Joss isn't going to give either of them an important role like that in this story. I don't for one minute think he'll be Hank Summers either. Hank was just a bit player in the show and after the high school years, seems to have no real relevance in Buffy's life. Plus, this being Jeanty, if Twilight took off the mask and it was Hank Summers, no one would recognise him. Bit of a damp squib if your villain takes off his mask and everyones says, "Who's that?"

But I agree with BGF. They're bound to leave it as a cliffhanger at the end of an issue.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Plus, this being Jeanty, if Twilight took off the mask and it was Hank Summers, no one would recognise him. Bit of a damp squib if your villain takes off his mask and everyones says, "Who's that?"

That actually could be the case regardless of who they pick.
I can't tell Andrew and Giles apart half the time. Heck in the last issue Andrew/OZ/and Riley all looked alike - I was going by dialogue and blood dripping from the forehead.

But I do agree - that's the big problem in my Hank theory - no one would recognize him without a name tag.

And yep, BGF is right - the reveal is going to be sometime in May or June, May if we are lucky and will probably be the last page and we'll have to wait until August or September to see who it is, because they've decided to give George Jeanty another break and do a series of one-shots or nothing at all.

Sigh. Note to Allie, Whedon and Meltzer - if you went to keep the suspense building don't keep your audience on the cliff for three months, insert a bunch of irrelevant teasing one-shots, then reward them with an issue that doesn't answer any of the questions you left hanging in that last issue..angry readers do not come back for more.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

And I have no idea why I wrote went instead of want.

[shapinglight]

angry readers do not come back for more.

I rather wish this was the case, must admit, but since sales are holding up, have to suppose that the majority of readers are happy with what they're getting.

Or possibly, like me, continue buying because they keep hoping it'll get better.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I rather wish this was the case, must admit, but since sales are holding up, have to suppose that the majority of readers are happy with what they're getting.

From what I've seen online, my guess is the vast majority are happy. It's not a big group. Comics don't tend to appeal to a broad audience to begin with - about 65% of the Buffy fandom, I'm guessing, probably either hasn't ever bought them or did briefly out of curiousity, got bored and went elsewhere.

Saleswise - they are doing quite well in comparison to other Dark Horse titles - but you have to keep in mind, Dark Horse isn't normally a big seller, and comics are a nitch market, with a very narrow sales margin. From their perspective - they are kicking ass.
From our perspective - they aren't, but then we are using different yardsticks of measurment.

Same deal with IDW - from their perspective Spike and Angel are selling rather well, but from ours they aren't.

I have no idea what numbers comics have to bring in to stay viable or to make up for production costs and provide a profit. My guess is at least a million. But it may be alot less than that. Depends on the production cost - but based on sale price alone? I'm
guessing they are pretty cheap to put together, nothing like a novel or gasp, a tv show (which can cost over 4 million an episode).

[shapinglight]

I have no idea what numbers comics have to bring in to stay viable or to make up for production costs and provide a profit. My guess is at least a million. But it may be alot less than that. Depends on the production cost - but based on sale price alone?

I don't know either, though I think it may be less than that. In any case, I know DH are very pleased with the Buffy comic and it's unlikely Allie and co see any reason to change what they're doing.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

In any case, I know DH are very pleased with the Buffy comic and it's unlikely Allie and co see any reason to change what they're doing

Agreed.

If you compare the current Buffy comics with the ones they were doing during the show (which were abysmal and sold reasonably well but never showed up on any bestseller lists at least not like this one has) - I'd say they are jumping with glee over how well the Buffy comics are doing. The majority of the letters to the editor are positive and the majority of the posts to SlayAlive are postive. Those of us who are dissatisfied appear to be in the minority of the people still buying the comics.

If I were Allie and DH? I wouldn't change a thing. Don't fix what isn't broken. And ignore the naysayers unless of course sales drop off dramatically. Which I don't see happening. Even if they make Xander or Spike Twilight. Actually they'd probably go up due to curiousity factor.

[shapinglight]

If I were Allie and DH? I wouldn't change a thing. Don't fix what isn't broken. And ignore the naysayers unless of course sales drop off dramatically. Which I don't see happening. Even if they make Xander or Spike Twilight. Actually they'd probably go up due to curiousity factor.

Yes, probably, though given how some of the diehard Buffy comics fans around also seem to be diehard Spike haters, I do wonder if Spike's appearance in the comic would affect sales negatively. That is, if he stuck around.

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

since sales are holding up, have to suppose that the majority of readers are happy with what they're getting.

The sales aren't holding up, though; they've lost more than one third of their readers (http://forum.slayalive.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=buffyseason8&thread=3176&page=1) since it started, and more keep dropping off with every arc. But I have no idea if those numbers are anything out of the ordinary or if it's just to be expected.

[shapinglight]

Ah. Since there's zero chance of it being cancelled, or even of the small decrease in sales making a 'season 9' comic unlikely, and therefore those who like it won't be deprived of their poison of choice, I feel safe is saying: Good. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has disliked what we got enough to stop buying (though ironically, I'm still buying it for other people).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Good. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has disliked what we got enough to stop buying (though ironically, I'm still buying it for other people).

Oh I could have told you that. ;-)

85% of my flist has either never tried it or gave up.
I know of several people who stopped sometime after Wolves at the Gate, or during that arc.

Mostly out of boredom. Several because they felt the characters did not make sense. Others because it felt very fanboy - or that the comics were being directed towards a Warrenesque faction of the fandom (and they may not be wrong about that...)

Tempted to do another poll just to see where everyone falls on the question.

[shapinglight]

Others because it felt very fanboy - or that the comics were being directed towards a Warrenesque faction of the fandom (and they may not be wrong about that...)

Um, do you mean Whedonesque faction? If so, I would agree, though I have seen people on Whedonesque saying they don't like it/have gone off it.

I know of several people who stopped sometime after Wolves at the Gate, or during that arc.

Heh! That was the arc that made me decide to persist for a little longer, because I liked it. Xacula made me laugh. I so wish Dracula had stuck around. This comic desperately needs a character like that.

Mind you, that arc also contained MechaDawn, which I thought was silly fanboy pandering (more so than usual) and the torture!Yay! scene, both of which were rather offputting.

Do another poll.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

But I have no idea if those numbers are anything out of the ordinary or if it's just to be expected.

I'm guessing to be expected. Buffy unlike X-men, had a tv following, the fanbase would try the adaptation, but odds are about a 1/3rd of the base that tried would be disappointed and wander off. So they are probably happy that it was only a 1/3rd. Comics are not money makers. Whedon wasn't kidding when he said he couldn't make a living off of them.

Even with the loss, I'm guessing that Buffy is still DH's best selling comic ever. (Actually Allie has stated that a few times.) Same is true about the Angel and Spike comics on IDW (they have also sold the best for that organization.)

Keep in mind they aren't measuring success the same way we are. Very nitch cult audience - with a young and predominantly male demographic. Buffy is picking up the young female demo - which they rarely get, apparently. So I think from their perspective they are still doing rather well - heck, they've even won awards and been nominated for awards. They won the Eisner. Jeanty has won the Eisner. And they have gotten rave reviews in comics journals and online professional comic review blogs, plus Entertainment Weekly and mainstream mags have noticed them. That's major for a publisher like Dark Horse. The only negative reviews I've seen have been on my own flist.
;-)

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

The enthusiastic introduction to Identity Crisis was the first crack in my one-time Whedon worship.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Really? Interesting. Nice to know I'm not the only one who was underwhelmed by Identity Crisis (which was the reason Whedon asked Meltzer to help him co-plot the Buffy comics.)

I think my cracks started earlier...although I'm not sure I ever worshipped Whedon per se. I loved the show. The writers, I saw, as an aspect of it, but not the whole thing.
I guess that's why I don't look at the comics as canon, and don't expect to like everything Whedon does...I like more of it than I expect, actually.

The only thing he's done that I love? Is probably the Buffy tv series.

[rahirah]

I think that Twilight being Hank Summers makes no sense at all, but at least if it was him, it would explain where the character's been all these years - he's been busy building up his secret base and infiltrating the government!

They really haven't dropped any clues, except that Twilight claims to know Buffy well, and is presumed to be male. I don't think you could say Hank knows Buffy well at this point. He hasn't seen her for years. I don't think it will be Spike or Angel just because I don't think Joss sees them as having any more importance or relevance to Buffy's story. I don't think it will be Andrew because Joss likes him. I don't think a resurrected Ethan would want to eliminate magic.

The only characters who would really make an emotional impact if revealed as Twilight would be Xander or Giles. And honestly, I think Giles would make the most sense. But I think they both have alibis.

So it will probably be some minor character out of left field, and no matter who it is, it won't make a lot of sense.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

From a purely metaphorical stand-point, Hank Summers makes sense and like I said, I can fanwank him. It also explains his absence.

They really haven't dropped any clues, except that Twilight claims to know Buffy well, and is presumed to be male.

But how well? That's never been clarified. And Hank knows his daughter fairly well - he did raise her for 16 years, and was in and out of her life up until Season 5. We really don't know how well - they haven't told us. Which is why I think it could be him - because we have no information and thus, nothing contradictory.

no matter who it is, it won't make a lot of sense.

Agreed.

I've tried to come up with someone logical and all I can come up with is someone we've forgotten about or not seen, such as Hank Summers or someone out of left field such as drawing a blank...a subsidiary character that we don't remember and has fallen off the radar - but none of them know Buffy well either.
Actually Hank knows her better than any of the subsidiaries.

Giles and Xander don't make a lot of logical sense, but that does not mean they aren't Twilight. Meltzer isn't exactly logical in his plotting. But there has been nothing supporting either...except maybe Giles? Giles fits the same metaphor Hank Summers does brilliantly. And he does know her well. But they are going to have to work overtime to explain how he was two places at the same time.

I'm not sure what Whedon thinks about Spike or Angel, but you are most likely right. He hasn't exactly said one way or another. I'd rather they didn't appear - then appear as Twilight, because that also doesn't work logically.

Note to Meltzer - If you are plotting a big reveal - it helps if you let your audience in on the clues and not keep everything a mystery, because instead of the big "gotcha" moment or "oh I did not see that coming that is sooo brilliant", you get the WTF? or Huh? or What? If the audience doesn't care or has gotten fed up before the reveal, they aren't going to be there for the reveal.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Giles is a mage and could have been bilocating when necessary. He does look remarkably haggard in Retreat, which would fit if he's burning a lot of magical energy. And he's been offstage most of the rest of the time. Logistically, I think he's possible.

But I really think what we are going to get is some sort of time travel story paralleled with the on-going story which turns out the be the evolution of Twilight. It'd require that we're in a timeloop and that future Twilight want to keep things the way they were so that he could be created in the first place. We already have text about time loops and the hint that Buffy will be the one to break out of it (ABH).

We've just been shown how some character can get puffed up to Twilight-like powers. Indeed, the last image I think is drawn to make us connect Buffy's new powers to Twilight's powers. We have at least two major untapped power sources in play -- one is the key energy bound up in Dawn. In Living Doll we got allusions to how explosive it would be if her human shell got cracked open. The other is the ripples from the Buffy killing Willow event, which probably are stronger when we get closer to their source (we've only seen the outermost ripple). I say this to say there's a lot of toys lying around that could go into the making of Twilight story that I expect is coming.

Thematically: Xander is the last human connection. Him as Twilight works. Especially if the Twilight-creation event is connected to Dawn somehow. He's been given a profile out of proportion to his actual arc to date. So though I'm going south on the theory, I still think it's most likely him. There are also three belts on Twilight -- which opens up room for him being the frontman for a triumvirate which would be some combination of Xander, Willow, Giles and Dawn. (One omitted).

Time travel hurts my head and I'm not sure it ever makes sense. But ToYL set it up -- and there's not much bang to that arc UNLESS time travel ends up cashing out in the final quarter of the season.

Angel and Spike have both received enough set up that it could work for the reveal to be either of them -- again arguably with time travel built in. Twilight fits Angel's character most closely (master mind, big picture guy capable of going way off in the name of the "right").

So I'm really not very worried it'll be some obscure secondary character. If it is, they've miscalcuated (!!!!!!) by giving the guy a mask and setting up the reveal as a big deal. For 30 issues of mask to cash out, the identity has to matter in a big way to Buffy. There just aren't many characters who fit that bill. I think Twilight is one of the four main boys. With an option for Dawn and/or Willow or even future Buffy to be involved behind the scenes.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I don't know, all of that sounds a bit too complicated for Meltzer. I can't see him coming up with that, nor Whedon for that matter.

But I admittedly prefer the idea of Twilight being Giles to well, some left of field secondary character.
It would have some level of impact.

I can see it being Xander - there are hints of it being Xander, littered throughout. But they will have to do a heavy duty time travel retcon...which I don't think really works. Time travel seldom works well.
I've seen comics do it before...Marvel's X-Men more or less did similar stories. I've seen them do at least four different versions of what you basically discuss above, making me wonder if you've read them? So it can be done. And I'm pretty sure Whedon has read them - since he's a X-men nerd.

Whedon clearly likes time-travel stuff - since he spent his formative college years watching Terminator.

So, you may well be right. And I have to say it would be more interesting than a lesser known character being Twilight - I'm admittedly still curious, but with extreemly low expectations. ;-)

Where do you get the whole Giles as a bifocal mage thing? Is it from Two to Go? He was only able to do it once with the help of the coven - as he explained. It didn't look like a lasting thing, or he'd have done things differently in Safe or so one would think. Granted if it's time travel it does not matter -since we got a parallel universe set up which convienently explains away all the plot holes and logistical problems - which is why I'm not overly fond of time-travel or parrelle universe tales. It feels like cheating. The writer is basically saying, that everything we know doesn't really matter, because we are in a different time stream now! And if the writer gets bored of the new time stream, he can always do a reset button and go back to the old one. Star Trek did this so many times, it gave me a headache.