VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:29:07 03/04/04 Thu
Author: Kuzibah
Author Host/IP: 12.175.117.195
Subject: Angel 5:16- "Shells" (SPOILERS)

First, let me say that I look at last night's episode as a necessary evil, in that a lot of things had to happen to move the story along, and not a lot of time was left for character development. I understand that. It makes for some clunky writing, some out of character moments, but I'm willing to go with that. For one episode. But let's get to the critique.

The Fred love-fest continued. In a way, Fred reminds me of Riley, in that I think the writers miscalculated the character, and are trying to bulk up support 1)by making her too good to be true, and 2)having all the characters around her say how great she is. Wesley, unfortunately, is having to shoulder the bulk of the Fred-adoration, and I'm finding it *really* out of character. I mean, Wesley can be stone-cold when he needs to be. I don't buy him getting as weepy as he was. It was so off I was wondering if he was under some sort of spell.

And while we're on the subject, someone needs to tip off the writers that Wesley-the-Gun-Fetishist is not the same as Dark-and-Scruffy-Wesley from the past two seasons. The gun thing is shorthand, but it's being overused and used in a lazy way. He's grieving, he's not a psychopath. I did like him trying to convince Illyria to retreat, though. That was smart writing.

Illyria... so far, not a character. More like a Seven of Nine impression without the gravity-defying rack. I know they're trying to create three dimensions with the turnaround at the end, but she went from one cliche (I am evil, crawl before me, maggots) to another (I am an alien, teach me the ways of your people). We didn't see a glimpse of the "alien" in the evil persona, we didn't see a transition. We have absolutely no reason to believe she's changed, and I don't care what she looks like, Wesley doesn't either.

Around all this, there's a lot of very interesting things going on. Gunn's betrayal, and now he needs to redeem himself. This all played out against a group that wonders if they didn't make the same deal by joining W&H. This, I'm interested in seeing.

The Angel and Spike stuff continues to be gold. I don't know if James is doing a little mentoring, but I think David's doing some of his best work in their scenes together. I like the relationship they've established, too. It's like a family. You and your brother may bicker non-stop, but when the chips are down, you pull together because of the relationship and the history. It's fun to watch, and I hope they continue to feature it.

A few quick things:

Did Andy Hallett piss somebody off? It was like one line and outta there.

I love Wesley, you all know it, but could he look any gayer in that turtleneck sweater (and not in a good way?)

Harmony. How I love Harmony. Mercedes is so funny and gorgeous. Even prying open a safe with a crowbar, she's a vision of womanly beauty. Somebody needs to grab this girl for a sitcom, playing the lead's ditsy best friend.

Now, was Illyria opening the portal to her temple at the hotel? Or did they just re-use the flats? If it was the first, why wasn't it mentioned? And if it was the second... really dumb idea. The architectural details are way too distinctive to pass for anyplace else.

And speaking of sets, did they borrow that matte painting from "Lord of the Rings"?

Did Spike kill the doctor, or just torture him? And why does that idea really bother me?

And speaking of Spike, he shouldn't sit down in Angel's enormous couch. You look really small when the armrest hits at your shoulder.

Where is Spike living now? I only wonder because during the musical montage he's on the steps, while everyone else is at home or in an office.

And speaking of the musical montage... it really made me miss Buffy. On Buffy it always seemed very natural; here it seemed forced. I didn't care for the song, either.

And finally, a note to the location scouts: If you must use a farm somewhere within two hours of LA to double as a farm in Texas, don't get a mountain in the background of the shot. Thank you.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Texas has mountains. -- Mo, 10:48:23 03/04/04 Thu (169.152.251.99)


[ Edit | View ]
[> Hills. Texas has hills. -- wwolfe, 11:20:48 03/04/04 Thu (161.149.63.106)

It, doesn't as far as I know, have mountains like the Sierra Madres, which I'd bet a dollar those mountains were.

I found Wes's behavior closer to Dark Wesley than you did, I think. On the other hand, I agree completely on the Riley/Fred comparison, and the overweepiness of Wes. Thanks to Mike, I've now see all of last week's episode and the Mary Sue-ing of Fred in that ep's first half was pretty nauseating.

One minor detail that bugged me: couldn't they cast an actor and an actress who looked at least a little like Amy Acker? One of my pet peeves in movies and TV shows is when immediate family members bear no resemblance to one another (a.k.a., "The Bonanza Syndrome").

My one real complaint about last night's episode was Wesley's decision to help Dead Fred. Although Alexis sold me on the moment itself, isolated from the history of the character and the show, I didn't buy it at all when considered in that larger context.

They're going to have serious problems if this plot line depends on Amy Acker's acting ability to sell it, because in that regard she does not rise to the heights of even a lowly Texas foothill as compared to the lofty Sierra Mountain range that will, I suspect, be needed.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Which explains Fred. -- Grim ,_,_), 11:58:37 03/04/04 Thu (66.95.229.84)

She doesn't have mountains either. Just hills.

Good casting!


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Agree about the Hills. -- Kuzibah, 12:25:15 03/04/04 Thu (12.175.117.195)

And totally agree on the one big complaint. I didn't see how they got to point b from point a.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> I know a few Texans who'd be a bit ornery about you calling them "hills." -- Mo, 16:15:40 03/04/04 Thu (24.128.159.238)


[ Edit | View ]

[> Gunn's "Betrayal" -- GGsBrother, 18:39:55 03/05/04 Fri (208.185.179.196)

Lots made about Gunn's betrayal in the ep, but I don't get it. He got tricked, he didn't betray anyone. I mean, it's not like the custom form he signed said "Item 1: Fred killing demon" did it? So how is that a betrayal?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Gunn's "Betrayal" -- Kuzibah, 00:44:45 03/06/04 Sat (68.80.18.137)

It's a betrayal because he thinks it is. He says he didn't think signing that paper would hurt anyone he knew, which implies he knew someone would be hurt or die. As long as it wasn't anyone he cared about, it didn't matter.

But seeing Fred die, and knowing he had a part in it, he realizes the price he paid to upgrade his brain was too high. Yes, in pure terms, he was less responsible than Knox or the doctor, who knew exactly what they were doing, but to himself, he shouldn't have taken an action he knew would hurt another, even a stranger. Up until now, he's been better than W&H, uncorruptable. But now he realizes he's as base as any of them; he's aware of his own fall. That's why he never argued or defended himself, and why he offered his own life for Fred's safe return.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Gunn's "Betrayal" -- Mcookies, 19:15:41 03/07/04 Sun (205.188.209.73)

Thanks, GGsBrother for saying the same thing I was thinking. I was quite befuddled. And thanks Kuzibah for explaining it. I had forgotten about the "hurt someone he knew" comment.


[ Edit | View ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.