Well, boy howdy, I was two for two. Spoilers abound…including the revelation of the single most horrifying moment of the evening…
Yup, two for two on being wrong in predictions for the season enders of SMALLVILLE and ANGEL. In both cases I wish I hadn’t been because, in one instance, it was dámņëd depressing, and in the other, it more or less made one element of the show predictable for me.
SMALLVILLE: As Lionel awaits his fate and Lana heads off to Paris, a blonde superchick shows up, claiming to be Kara from Krypton, to try and convince Clark that he should walk through a cave wall with her which will take him to see mommy and daddy dearest.
Last week I opined that the blonde girl in the teasers would be named anything but Kara. This week I wish to God she had been, because as soon as she said her name was Kara, I knew it was a red herring for the fanboys. That she would turn out not to be his cousin from Krypton or anything from Krypton, and certainly not a future Supergirl.
Why? Because, believe me, I know first hand exactly how determined DC is to keep Kara Zor-El squeaky clean, both in terms of the “S” label and in terms of the film currently in development. So when this chick says, “My name is Kara from Krypton,” the first thing that went through my mind was, “She blew up a car thirty seconds in the episode, like hëll she’s Kara from Krypton.” Granted, the driver–whoever he was–deserved what he got, because he should have known better than to drive in Smallville, the town where no one ever saves money by switching to Geico. So I knew something was fishy (and it was reinforced with the FBI agent’s fate).
But that awareness of the fakery pretty much didn’t matter with the jaw dropping fourth act. Talk about making up for the occasional pokey pacing of the latter half of the season. Considering the track record of the supporting cast, I’m surprised Lana’s plane wasn’t hijacked. I’ve run my video of the episode back and forth about six times and I still can’t tell for sure if Chloe actually went into the house (I sure know my spider-sense was tingling during that sequence, so maybe hers was as well). The only moment that nearly kicked me out of the episode was when Jor-El was saying, “Come to me, Kal-El,” I kept waiting for him to add, “Kneel before Zod!”
The downside of every season of “Smallville” so far has been an almost slavish determination to restore the status quo. Well, with this season ender, it sure seems like they’ve crossed the Kryptonian Rubicon this time around.
ANGEL: The Fang Gang spends one final night of “normalcy” and then goes toe to toe with the Black Thorns and the Senior Partners.
Okay, so…no pretty way to put it. Blew the call on that one. I figured Lorne would be “out” since they’d done nothing interesting with him all season, and therefore thought he was toast. Well, I got the “out” part right, since he said he was giving up the fight-for-right life, but I sure never saw the death of Wes coming. I’m absolutely positive that, were the series continuing, Wes wouldn’t have died. As it was, the farewell scene between Wes and Illyeria was not only heart-wrenching, but I think Wes is now firmly entrenched as being the single most tragic character in the entirety of the Whedonverse. That Andrew winds up with gorgeous blondes on either arm while Wes’ only solace is that he gets to wind up with Fred in death…jeez.
But hey, kids…let’s talk ending. The Butch and Sundance ending. An ending that I think is likely to polarize “Angel” fans. This will simply not be something that people go “eh” over. They’ll either love it or hate it.
Personally, I loved it.
Why? Because it wasn’t an ending. Why is that good? Because it was a true ending. It was true because the fight against evil has no ending. “Angel,” particularly in its last season, has been a series about ambiguities, about gray areas. The fact that there was no clear cut conclusion means that the series ended in a way that was thematically consistent. And that was a nervy, incredibly gutsy way to go. Gutsy because it was 100% guaranteed to pìšš øff a lot of fans who wanted to see if Shonshu was fulfilled, who wanted to see how (not if) Angel triumphed over the Senior Partners. The final episode of BtVS bent over backwards to have a tidy ending, and the incredible plot contrivances in order to accomplish that were painfully obvious. “Angel” made no such compromises. Whether Angel and the gang win or lose is almost less important than that they fought knowing that the fight itself is what mattered.
And what was the single most horrifying moment of the evening?
The closing adios from “your friends at the WB.” The WB which, in the words of Warners staple Elmer Fudd, would have to stand for “Wat Bastawds.” If they’re gonna be áššhølëš and cancel the series, then be áššhølëš and cancel the series, but don’t dump a sad, Gee, sorry to see you go tag at the end when they’re the miserable wat bastawds who handed Angel and Company their walking papers in the first place.
Jerks.
PAD
• 
Can someone explain to me exactly HOW Angel could just sign away the Shonshu prophecy? Since when are prophecies something you can cross off with a stroke of the pen?
I don’t think it was specifically the prophecy he signed away, but his destiny. We’ve already seen that the prophecy could refer to him or Spike, so it’s not set in stone to begin with. In the Vegas episode we saw that it’s possible for destinies to be transferred to other people, so I assume the contract did something similar.
Or, since evil folks are usually liars of the Grandmaster-Level, signing the prophecy may have had no effect what-so-ever and was purely a symbolic act with no real effect.
Or worse, imagin he actually agreed to it be signing, and just as they’re about to defeat the horde of bad guys attacking them, Angel becomes human and loses all his vampire abilities and strengths….
A good conclusion, but there were several dangling plot developments that make me wonder.
1.) The Senator’s opposition. Clearly the spell was cast that caused him to confess to being a pedophile. I’m going to assume that most of what we saw about him in the commercial was true and that he was a decent man. Angel sacrficed him.
2.) The baby was given back to the woman that signed him over. Angel’s decision.
3.) The Truthsayer was set up by Angel to convince the Black Thorns that Angel wanted in. Then Angel murdered him as the final initiation.
Is there that much diference between Angel and Angelus in the end?
By the way, in regards to the title, “Not Fade Away,” I now find that to be appropriate. The LA gang will never do that. They went down fighting. And all allusions aside, until and unless Whedon specifically states otherwise and explains how they could possibly have survived, they’re dead.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing because the Scoobies have ‘faded away’. I believe that at the beginning of the season Whedon definitely intended to bring more of the cast of Buffy over, keep them in the spotlight. But the realities of entertainment careers, juggling schedules and prior commitments (and please, let us not engage in character assassination as to why someone might not have wanted to commit in the first place) made that extremely difficult.
They did fade away, as Mr. David has commented upon in the past, they acted in ways that they probably wouldn’t have done had they appeared on the show instead of always being refered to or talked to over the phone. A betrayal here and a refusal to help there.
The cast of Angel did not fade away.
Hamiliton stated “We are legion.” Angel’s response could be “We are legend.”
Just in closing. A friend who liked “The Girl In Question” suggested that I watch it again after the final episode and see if the conclusion altered my opinion of it.
Yes, I dislike it even more. The humor of “Not Fade Away” was far more apropriate to the series than the slapstick of the earlier effort and seemed to fit Angel and Spike far better.
Second, do you think the ‘moving on’ speech might have contributed to the decision to engage in a unwinable battle. Men fight to survive who have something to live for, to aspire to. Men without that simply fight.
“…(and please, let us not engage in character assassination as to why someone might not have wanted to commit in the first place)…”
Gee, and I just finished cleaning and polishing my Character Sniper Rifle, too! 🙁
pgavigan stated:
“And all allusions aside, until and unless Whedon specifically states otherwise and explains how they could possibly have survived, they’re dead.”
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
I said the EXACT OPPOSITE above you in the same thread.
I don’t believe FICTIONAL heroes have to die to resonate. We get enough of death in REAL life. (See the death of fictional character James T. Kirk as a prime example.)
Most fans don’t want their heroes to permanently die– if for the simple reason they don’t like the idea of investing untold hours, days or years into their heroes just to see them die. That’s why the Whedon Universe was always so comforting– because death often served as a second chance for redemption.
If Angel and his friends did die in that battle (and I see no evidence that they did) I, for one, am glad it was OFF CAMERA.
Given the fact that Joss Whedon has already made it clear (in an interview on zap2it.com) that he can’t imagine the Buffy Universe not continuing in some form (he even hinted about taking his talents to HBO ’cause he likes the cussin’)– I can’t imagine Angel is dead.
Hopefully, one day, we’ll both get to see who was right.
The cynical side of me thinks that the “Butch and Sundance” ending was Whedon’s way of drumming up fan support for an Angel made for TV movie.
After all, such cliffhander endings worked for Alien Nation and Farscape.
I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t see Kara being a fake. It crossed my mind, but Smallville has turned the mainstream Superman history just enough that it throws me. Her lack of concern for human life meshed with what we’ve seen/heard from Jor-El, so it appeared entirely plausible that, someone raised by Jor-El would share his lack of concern. Still, glad to see in the end that she was a dupe, and not the real deal.
Angel, hard to add to what’s already been written. Direct to DVD movies sounds like an interesting idea. I’d buy. With Angel gone, there’s precious little left of “network” shows for me to watch.
I’ve seen some Blake’s 7 references regarding Angel’s ending, so I’ll throw this obscure reference into the mix: “Angel ducked….”
Can’t believe there’s actually something everyone hasn’t already mentioned. But here it is.
I grant that Spike’s poetry reading at the bar was a neat bit of reversal (Mr. Whedon does enjoy that whiplash, doesn’t he?). But, friends and neighbors, it was much, much more than that. Through BUFFY and ANGEL, Spike has shown insight into individual personalities that no other character in either show could match (indeed, it was this insight that made his Iago moves in BUFFY work), not to mention a taste for the nitty-gritty of everyday life that Angel never really had time for (except for coffee with Connor; and didn’t he tell Joyce Summers that caffeine gave him the jitters?). In other words, William/Spike has, and has never lost, the mind of a poet. He may or may not have had the skills for florid diction that in breathing-life he might have wished for, but that was just as likely an indication of his aristocratic companions’ taste as of his talent. (Personally, I didn’t find one bloody thing wrong with “effulgent.” And that his parlor critics were being their usual cruel selves is undisputed.) What shone through continually was his involvement with life, his desire to experience it from the inside, and his ability to observe people. His triumph in the bar vindicated who he is, and his “That was for Cecily” brought to a satisfying close the arc that started in the parlor so long ago.
Plus, it also illustrated Count Vorkosigan’s advice: Preserve your honor. Let your reputation take care of itself. And outlive the bášŧárdš.
Oh, yeah: And massive kudos to Whedon and most definitely Marsters for making this character work.
Word.
I don’t have much else to add… although Wes’ death was sort of anticlimactic. He and Fred JUST get together… and Whedon yanks Fred away. Then Wes gets gutted. It didn’t quite have the impact that, say, Cordy’s death did… possibly because it came when the rest of the cast was also known to be gone (most likely).
On the plus side, Illyria was more interesting than Fred, and it does show Amy’s acting ability.
Michael Spence – bonus points for the Vorkosigan reference! We had someone read a quote from “Cordelias Honor” at our wedding… so you could say we rather like the books…
Dunno, Spike’s poetry seem more Vogon than anything else 🙂
“I’ve seen some Blake’s 7 references regarding Angel’s ending, so I’ll throw this obscure reference into the mix: “Angel ducked….” “
Vila clearly did not duck. He tripped!
Gonna have to do my own lj post on the Angel conclusions. But, basically:
1. I liked it.
2. It was better than the Buffy Finale.
3. I hate the re-write on Lindsay’s character for the entire season 5.
4. There are lots of plot holes I’m starting to spot.
5. The Jasmine arc is still my favorite.
6. Spike reading poetry rocks. Anne rocks.
7. And I really liked the ending.
Don’t know if I’ve much to say here that hasn’t already been said, but here goes anyway:
— Connor. It’s becoming more clear to me that the problem with Connor in season 4 was the character, not the actor. I’ve liked Connor a lot both times he appeared this season; the “what, you come by for a cup of coffee and the world’s NOT ending?” line was beautifully done.
— Lorne/Lindsey. Ðámņ, but I should’ve called this sometime in the episode before it happened. Lisa did at the start of the scene — something like “Lorne just looks entirely too uncomfortable … he’s got something left to do he doesn’t want to … oh, HÊLL.” Lindsey’s reaction was absolutely spot-on (and probably similar to what Cartagia’s would’ve been in B5 had he gotten any real dialogue after the fact).
— Wesley. Someone had spoiled this for me in advance (and a hearty “grrrrrr” to them, sans “argh”), but it still hit hard. Definitely agreed with Peter here; he’s got one of the most tragic arcs of anyone in the Whedonverse. What a journey from the idiot Watcher of 1999. (I wasn’t totally enchanted with the Illyria/evil-wizard bit afterwards, though; I see the point, but at least on first viewing I feel like it intruded on the emotion a little.)
— A lot of really great moments (seeing Anne again, letting Gunn cut loose, Spike’s poetry reading, much of the Angel/Hamilton dialogue (especially the “which one word” question), etc.
— The ending. I figure Joss guaranteed that everyone would have the same response on the end credits: “Son of a BÍTÇH.” The only question was whether we’d be smiling or snarling as we said it. I was smiling: I want more, of course, but what a neat way to end.
All in all, a very solid way to end a usually-solid series.
TWL
On a slight digression…
Yay! A DS9 fan! Yeah, there was actually intelligent writing, intricate plots, big moments you could only get in sci-fi, and characters you were REALLY invested in.
And for the reasons stated above, that is why I am going to miss “Angel” terribly. The premature cancellation really stinks. Can you imagine if they had to wrap up the Dominion War and all subplots in the FIFTH season?
Given how much I felt the overemphasis on the war detracted from DS9’s last two seasons, I’m not sure that’s the best analogy. DS9 nearly always got beautifully high marks for ambition, but I always had difficulty with the fact that they’d so frequently settle for less than they could have.
(And the way Dukat’s character was mangled in the last season and a half REALLY bugs me, even now.)
And as an aside to the aside, since there are undoubtedly lots of people here who read PAD’s Trek work — let me also recommend all of the “season 8” DS9 novels that have come out over the past 3 years or so. Absolutely kick-ášš stuff.
TWL
Lisa: Agreed–Anne rocks. And to Raymond’s post on the 20th, yes, it was the same actress. When her name flashed on the screen at the beginning, I thought, “Hot dog! She gets a curtain call too!” Although her story had already been finished, it was good to see this character who had come so far since her “airhead Lily” turn on BUFFY. “Can I be Anne?” she had asked–and she did, with energy to spare.
James B: Wow. That must’ve been something to hear. Sorry to have missed it.
Bladestar: Right. 🙂 back at you.
One other thing on Spike: Ever notice who was consistently best at seeing past appearances and getting to the heart of the matter? E.g., on Oz’s departure, when everyone was saying how bravely Willow was getting on with her life, it was evil Spike who scolded them with, “Can’t you _see?_ She’s hanging by a thread!” This time, he was the one who could tell Illyria that her ability to pass as Fred was, as far as this crew was concerned, her most “devastating” power. On FIREFLY, Whedon said his people-perceptive character was Kaylee. In the Buffy universe, it appears to be Spike.
Angel: I use to mock a few friends that watched Buffy, then during the last Season of Buffy they started to replay the old episodes two or three times a week, and I started to watch it and discovered that I enjoyed it, a first just for its humor, but then I got into the characters and, well, I began to watch Angel as well. I wish now that I had actually taken the time to watch Buffy and Angel from the beginning… But at least I’ve got to see them, and now how good they truly are.
The series finale of Angel was just awesome, I loved every minute of it, and wished that it would have been two hours just so I could see Angel slay that Dragon… Because while I know that, yeah, they are all probably dead… I still hold out some hope. I mean just because Angel signed over his destiny doesn’t mean the Shinshu (sp?) is void altogether… There is still Spike, so at least he has to live… Right?
Wes and Illyria’s final scene together was just about perfect… Could have been better, I mean he could have lived, but I still liked it, hëll I loved it.
The ending in the alley, just everything about the episode I enjoyed. My favorite line belongs to Angel though “Me, I’d like to slay the Dragon.” (or something like that.)
“(And the way Dukat’s character was mangled in the last season and a half REALLY bugs me, even now.)”
Let’s see now – he signs a deal with the Devil, reachign accomodation with the Founders in order to satisfy his obsession with regaining Terak Nor (don’t tell me I misspelled it – the words aren’t even in any Terran language!); his paranoia was further fed by Sisko’s baseball on the desk; his most trusted lieutenant plots to betray him, and shoots his daughter – the only living being he truly cares about (other than his consuming hatred of Sisko); and he loses the station AGAIN, to Sisko AGAIN…
…and you don’t think that’s enough to drive Gul Dukat thoroughly batshit crazy?
Given how much I felt the overemphasis on the war detracted from DS9’s last two seasons, I’m not sure that’s the best analogy. DS9 nearly always got beautifully high marks for ambition,
Which is MUCH more than I can say about Trek post DS9…..
Jonathan,
“Batshit crazy” isn’t the problem. One-note bad guy is the problem. Give me the Dukat of seasons 2-5, who could protest that he was the victimized party at the exact moment he was sticking a dagger in your back — the one who could engage Sisko in a true debate of ideas rather than an on-your-knees-you-worm bit.
An insane Dukat could have been phenomenally interesting — and was, at the end of “Sacrifice of Angels” and most of “Waltz.” A Dukat who was made “pure evil” by writer fiat was not. (Towards the end, when Dukat was masquerading as Anjohl (sp?) … that part was usually very good.) Proper antagonists are manipulators, not rantors. Your mileage, of course, may vary.
Roger — no argument there. I always poked and prodded DS9 for not going as far as it could, but it usually always TRIED. I think it easily reached the furthest of all the Trek series; the fact that it often fell short of the mark doesn’t mean I don’t give it a lot of credit for trying.
Hëll, it’s the only Trek series I’m potentially willing to pay Paramount’s exorbitant DVD prices for.
TWL
Tim,
I guess we’ll agree to disagree on the Dominion War. Different ‘strokes for different folks. I just felt it made for some real hard choices – and manipulations – that wouldn’t have been there otherwise (“In The Pale Moonlight”).
I do agree that Dukat becoming truuuuuly eeevil was disappointing, as I felt he was possibly the most interesting “villain” in the history of television, and he’s definitely in the conversation. The episode where “duty” (“Defiant”) caused him to miss his son’s birthday was one case in point.
And as another poster stated, have any of the subsequent Trek shows been one-hundredth as interesting, or have characters as juicy as Weyoun, Garak and so many others?
One point I agree with whole-heartedly is the quality of the “Season 8 and Beyond Books”. I have all of them, and they are the only Trek books – besides PAD’s and Friedman’s – that I MAKE SURE I pick up. Nana Visitor commented recently that she reads them, and she’s really happy with the way they’ve portrayed and progressed her character.
One more thing does stand out in comparing
DS9 to the Trek shows that appeared afterwards. DS9 had great semi-regulars, actors who were not part of the regular cast, but would show up a couple of times each year or perhaps, once a year: from Andrew Robinson to Wallace Shawn to Louise Fletcher.
“In the Pale Moonlight” is certainly an exceptional piece of work — I’d never argue otherwise. I just think it was something of an exception.
I thought the Federation/Bajor relationship (as mirrored by Sisko/Kira) was the heart and soul of that show, and by the last season it was usually treated as an afterthought. By the end of the series, it felt like Bajor had about six people on it.
I completely agree that the war opened up some intriguing plotlines — it’s just that in many cases, it also closed some and it most certainly tended to make the characters more shallowly drawn.
(The last two seasons also brought Vic Fontaine, who I never liked even a twentieth as much as Ira Behr clearly did, and Ezri Dax, who would’ve been a lot more interesting had the focus not been on finding her a date for the prom.)
I hate to think I’m coming off as the anti-DS9 zealot here, because I did quite like the show. Among other things, I think it had the best pilot of any modern Trek, by a country mile, and as others have noted a spectacular ensemble cast.
TWL
DS9 was fantastic, but it’s kinda unfair to hold its superb recuurent characters (Garak, Weyoun, Dukat, Zek, Ishka and a ton more) over the ship-based ones like Voyager because the premise of the show meant they could have them. Poor Voyager was restricted from the start, only a hundred odd distressingly standard starfleet/noble maquis-ex-starfleet souls on the ship (despite one being a cardassian spy, and another the horrendously underused homicidal maniac Lon Suder) and always passing through areas and populations. No wonder they never had the scope for the support cast, but of course the very premise of DS9 was what gave it the strength and potential to be so great.
Skii,
I’d partly disagree — I don’t think Voyager’s premise was all that restrictive. What turned me off the show was the fact that the writers ran **away** from that premise so quickly as to leave skid marks on the TV screen.
The ideas of (a) two crews with very disparate philosophies having to coexist, and (b) a ship having to keep itself running without the ability to limp back to a starbase every time it gets banged up both struck me as parts of the Trek universe we’d never really explored, and things we could stand to see.
Alas, instead we got a great deal of Generic Trek.
DS9’s premise, of course, was suited for some terrific storytelling, despite the initial skepticism that “they won’t be going anywhere!” Sheesh.
TWL
DS9 was fantastic, but it’s kinda unfair to hold its superb recuurent characters (Garak, Weyoun, Dukat, Zek, Ishka and a ton more) over the ship-based ones like Voyager because the premise of the show meant they could have them. Poor Voyager was restricted from the start, only a hundred odd distressingly standard starfleet/noble maquis-ex-starfleet souls on the ship (despite one being a cardassian spy, and another the horrendously underused homicidal maniac Lon Suder) and always passing through areas and populations.
Oh, no, no, no. You’ve got it exactly wrong. (And Tim knows what I’m going to say next, because he’s heard it so often)
VOYAGER had a SUPERB set up with potentially great characters. Think about it: how do you maintain the Federation’s ideals when you’re shorn of all the technological support…and you’re marooned with folks who stand against you. It was a superb set up for a great supporting cast.
It was totally botched by pedestrian writing that threw away that premise after a handful of episodes and by an esemble of actors (with perhaps one or two exceptions) that were totally not up to the demands of even those lackluster scripts.
I think DS9 was by far the best series. The best acting and plotlines. I personally love religious and political intrigue, and the show weaved both into excellent storytelling. I also loved TNG for the variety of it all. The reason I loved VOYAGER was because it was pure fun. They didn’t overplay it and didn’t try to become a moral compass for society as much as the other shows did–IMO. For me, it was a great reimaging of LOST IN SPACE, trek style. True, they started pandering to the “I need big breasts to be happy” set. But at least, they made me really care about 7of9’s rebirth as a human and becoming a complete individual.
I also am a huge fans of the post-TV DS9 books. Its some of the best writing I’ve ever had the true pleasure to read in the trek novels. I was pleasantly surporsed to find that the 2 post-TV VOYAGER novels were also well done. They worked in lots of character development, so we continue to see how the crew managed to move forward apart from each other. After all, for 7 years they literally had no normal contact with the worlds of the federation and their loved ones back home–not including the letters they were able to exchange in the latter part of the series.
Daniel
Yeah I can totally see your guys’s point. I liked Voyager but it did tend to toe a generic line rather than the wild amorality vs morality etc etc it could quite amazingly settled into. (Course, we are talking about TREK here… 🙂 )
My problem was that some of the characters that could have really shaken things up – like Suder who was, no question, a homicidal maniac – were killed off ASAP because the happy-travelling-starship premise meant they had to be gotten rid of before they made the crew, or audience, think too hard about what it meant to have someone like that as part of their society. Sure, Suder died saving the crew and the ship from the Kazon, but if he’d survived (and he should have! he easily killed all those Kazon dead as doornails, how come one ‘corpse’ pops up and superflously shoots him in the back?! I demand a recount! Or something) then what would they have done with him? Aside from the distincly unique and not contemporarily relevant Borg-remdemption thing going on there wasn’t anything extreme in that department going on. Like there was in DS9. Things like that, and other ambigiuities were shunted aside for more happy, time-travelling, shoot-the-borg plots. Which were cool, but lacking the twist of the better stuff in DS9.
But there was always the Doctor – now he was a great example of Voyager being ingenious. Sad he wasn’t one of many possible.
Hey, I may be a bit late, but I still want to make a comment on Angel…
I loved the episode, but one thing irked me when I thought about it…
As far as we know, Buffy still doesn’t know that Spike is alive. Earlier in the season, Andrew offered to tell Buffy, but Spike declined. When Angel and Spike went to Rome, Buffy had no idea that they were even there!
As far as Buffy knows, Spike stayed dead after he died closing the hellmouth….I kinda wish Buffy knew what happened //after//…
Vocalyz,
Yes, I decided to pick up the Voyager “Homecoming” novels by Christie Golden. The characters were fleshed out and the story was interesting.
Which shows it was never the premise, it was berman and the hack writers, especially Braga, that were the real problems with the show, and why it was the first “Trek” show i stopped watching (and was painful when i did.
There’s only one thing about the Angel finale that I was thinking at the time that no one has mentioned. How much fun do you think Joss Whedon had writing and then seeing the W&H set trashed?
Other than that, I will miss this show quite a bit.
Continuing the Trek digresson:
I vote with those who rank DS9 as the best or at least best-executed of the series.
As for Voyager, I’d argue that its two serious flaws were in world-building and character development.
World-building: nobody seems to have seriously considered the logistics of interstellar economies, trade, and politics in a region of space where warp-drive and transporter/replicator technology is (apparently) a lot scarcer than it is in Federation space. This wasn’t handled anywhere close to consistently over the life of the series.
Character development: If you go by Janeway’s actions and decisions in the first couple of seasons, you have to wonder how in Hades she got through command track at Starfleet Academy — she’s inconsistent in her handling of Prime Directive issues and has real trouble trusting her command crew and delegating authority. (Only after Jeri Taylor stepped back to “consulting” status did this improve much.)
See, whereas I would argue that Janeway got progressively worse.
Ok, here’s a thought as a way to connect Enterprise and Angel:
During a battle within a sphere in the Expanse, Archer and several crew members (as well as MACOs) are somehow briefly transported to modern Los Angeles. Thinking the Fang Gang to be getting attacked from possible time-traveling Xindi, Archer helps them out, curving at least what will be the first major wave of baddies heading the heroes’ way.
As the Enterprise crew are being sent back to their timeline, Angel takes a minute to look really at Archer, his face shocked at who he sees.
“Sam? Sam Beckett?”
Another thought: If you can have Seson 8 and beyond DS9 novels, why not the same for Buffy/Angel?
Oh and an interesting (I think) fanfic theory on the Immortal:
http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1872721
Since the conversation has turned to “DS9” and “Voyager”, let me just add my two cents worth. Of the two, DS9 was by far the better show. Was it perfect? No. It had its flaws, and by the last season, I was only watching it sporadically.
On the other hand, I stopped watching “Voyager” (with the exception of occasional late-night reruns, and the Sulu episode) by the 10th episode (if not earlier).
One of the frustrating things about “Voyager” is that I could see the potential in a particular character– how he or she could be someone you’d actually want to know if he or she was a real person– but the writers and producers would never get that; and so the characters never realized that potential. The characters never really became “real”, as did those on “Babylon 5”, “Buffy”, “Angel” and other QUALITY shows, so why bother watching?
I also always thought that “Voyager’s” premise was flawed from the start, and in talking with people at the time of the show’s debut, would use the following analogy: Imagine that during the battle between the U.S.S. Monitor and the C.S.S. Virginia (nee the Merrimac) in the American Civil War, both vessels are somehow transported to the waters off of Fiji. One ship is damaged beyond repair, the other still seaworthy, but will have to limp home at less than full speed.
Until or unless they get back home, which I imagine would take at least a year, assuming they knew where they were, the war is essentially over for these people. Who in Fiji in 1862 knew or cared about the American Civil War? Probably no one, just as no one in the Delta Quadrant would likely care about the political disagreements between the Federation and the Maquis.
Also, if the surviving crew of the destroyed ship tried to take over the surviving ship, what then? There are still only two real choices: Make a new home where you are, or make the long, slow journey home.
Those two points– the fact that few, if anyone, in the new territory would care about fighting taking place so far away, and the fact that no matter which crew was in charge, it’d still be a long journey home– undercut a great deal of the dramatic tension in having these different crews interacting. That’s probably one reason stories centering around that conflict were soon dropped, and to all appearances the crew of Voyager was one crew, not an amalgam of two.
Though, if Janeway REALLY wanted them to be one crew, why did the Maquis wear different style pips than Federation officers on their uniforms?
Now, if “Voyager” had been a mini-series rather than an ongoing series, the Federation/Maquis conflict in the Delta Quadrant might have worked, since you couldn’t assume that, for example, Janeway would survive just because she’s the star. In fact, I recall there was one episode where someone tried to convince the Doctor that he was not a hologram, and was in fact running a holographic simulation program about what would happen if Federation and Marquis personnel had to work in close quarters in stressful situations. THAT could have been an interesting idea for a Trek-related mini-series, a variation of sorts on the Kobayashi Maru tests.
To my way of thinking the “conflict between two disparate groups” type of story only really works if A) they’re in a location where people are aware of and have opinions about which side is right in said conflict, and thus get involved in it; B) you’re dealing with a short story or a TV mini-series, with no guarantee as to how things will work out; or C) you have a very small group of people, so that the conflict is on a much more personal level. Davidge and the Drac in “Enemy Mine” are stranded on a planet away from the fighting between their species. Their conflict is one-on-one. Janeway’s crew Vs. Chakotay’s crew? Too many characters to get invested in, especially when there’s really nothing for them to fight about out there, and no one out there cares about their fight.
Rick
I think that they still could have milked some tension out of it – if the writers had occasionally remembered that the Maquis *weren’t* Starfleet, that they might not be totally reliable in a crisis. Remember, a significant number of them had *dropped out* of Starfleet Academy, or been cashiered from the Fleet itself. What if Janeway and Chakotay had been on some dangerous mission off the ship, a Kazon cruiser had shown up, and the Maquis at the ship’s helm had taken it upon himself to flee at warp 9? Then we have the dramatic tension of the captain and her potentially treacherous first officer facing hostile beings, and whoever’s in titular command of the Voyager having to overcome the helmsman, and possibly a few of his friends, in order to return and save Our Heroes…
…nah, let’s just have ’em endangered by the Holodeck again! (My wife and I could never figure out why they kept running Holodeck programs, when the only two that never went lethally wrong were the Beach and the Pool Hall. Anything else they ran, they were taking their lives, and the ship’s safety, into their hands!)
You could not be more right about the bloody holograms!
DS9 hands down was the better of the recent Startrek spinoffs.I tried to watch Voyager but just was never knocked out by anything on the show.Ok i liked the Doctor but everyone else was just so blah.
Sisko,Kira ,and Odo were great as well as the Cardassian Tailor whose name escapes me.It just seems more effort was put into stories as opposed to relying on the Star trek brand to sell the name.
This was the same thing that happened with Angel.Once the ties between shows were broken by the change to UPN i found myself more into the characters on Angel than Buffy,simply cause the storylines were better.Using Angelus to defeat the Beast and Faith to fight Angelus awesome.
The Dominion and the Jemhadar(spelling?),Dr Bashir being genetically enhanced,Odos past,name one thing on Voyager even close to that as far as interesting plot development.
For my money good writing and character development win out everytime.Of course a lot stuff i like gets cancelled so maybe im doing something wrong:)
Well, to bring these two threads together, I can’t believe they renewed Enterprise and not angel. Sure wish there were a station out there that would give quality programs a chance. Then we could watch all the shows Sci-Fi canx as well. Not to mention Firefly. There’s so little SF or Fantasy on the new schedules for next year. And I’m still mourning Wesley…….. (:(
Deano:
1) Garak, former (?) member of the Cardassian secret service, the Obsidian Order.
2) Jem’Hadar, with a subtle glottal stop at the ‘.
Just to keep things cleared up… 🙂
I was much angrier at the WB after seeing the Angel finale than I was before it and not because of the title card in the closing credits (they didn’t air that here in Canada).
I thought this was not just a great finale to the series, but one of it’s best episodes ever. It’s filled with great lines and it feels a little rushed (would a two-hour finale have killed anyone?) ever character gets their moment to shine.
(My wife and I could never figure out why they kept running Holodeck programs, when the only two that never went lethally wrong were the Beach and the Pool Hall. Anything else they ran, they were taking their lives, and the ship’s safety, into their hands!)
Voyager had such a collection of blah characters and mediocre storylines that were often rehashes of Next Generation plots that I gave up on it pretty early. I kept laughing at how Berman would announce the show’s “bold new direction” at the beginning of each season and then I’d tune in to see the same crap they pulled off the year before.
The “trapped on the holodeck” gimmick was tired and overused before the Next Gen ended, so by the time Voyager rolled around, there was nothing new they could’ve added to it.
When I first saw, “The Big Goodbye,” TNG’s much lauded first use of the “Trapped on the Holodeck” gimmick, I wondered even then why something like that didn’t come with a kill switch as standard equipment. You know, one button you can hit that cuts all power to it, shutting down the program and popping the manual locks on the door.
Seemed like Safety Engineering 101 to me.
Hmm…of course, Angel is immortal…what’s to say the Wolf, the Ram, and the Hart don’t have offices in the future? And that Angel isn’t a crewmember (or even officer!) on board a starship? I mean, if you can have Klingon security officers, why not a vampire with a soul in engineering? 😉 Hey, the X_MEN had a very eXcellent (pun intended) crossover with BOTH Picard and Kirks’ crew…
Cross-gen speculation aside, anyone that has read either the fine TALES OF THE SLAYER omnibus or the excellent FRAY series , rejoice! Whedon drops hints that “a vampire with a soul” leads the penultimate fight against , well, everything, along with the Slayer of that time, in the end banishing magic from “our” universe…
Just a few random thoughts.
Kudos to Bill Mulligan for agreeing with me on the GODFATHER references.
In case anyone else hasn’t seen the Coppola classics in a while (and yeah, I include part 3!), the films always end with Michael Corleone settling loose ends. Lorne was simply “taking care of business”. Ruthlessly, I might add.
Must be the Pylean in him…
Poor Eve.
Andrew asked:
would a two-hour finale have killed anyone?
Joss is on record as not being too fond of overlength episodes. I believe he was offered the chance for a two hour finale for BUFFY and passed.
To the best of my memory, the only over-length episodes Joss has done are the two-hour FIREFLY pilot and the extended version of “Once More with Feeling” on BUFFY (which was around 70 minutes with commercials).
On Smallville:
Also, the whole Native American angle is a bit odd. Not that I have a problem with the general concept, just that it seems to be shoehorned in most of the time. I mean, ancient artifacts, prophecies, all added together with everything else…its just “too many notes.”
Does anyone have a clear understanding of how all of these elements are supposed to mesh together? I would really appreciate a little clarification.–William
This was a problem for me too; and it was irking me to the point were I wasn’t enjoying the series any longer. So, in order to get past it, I had to come up with a working unifying theory that’ll either 1-prove to be the only explanation I get on the subject, or 2-be discarded by the shows own explanation (which may, or may not, be equally good).
My theory: Jor-EL is really Gen.Zod, who is stuck in the Phantom Zone and may have been there since the begining of modern civilization. The caves could be a nexus or a gate way between the Phantom Zone and our worlds, or if you follow the Superman Movies, it could be the crash site of the Space Prism that stored their bodies. How does this fit the Native American Angle? Well, as ghosts the Phantom Zone Villains used to be able to move things and influence others. Also, they could have been trapped there way back when the Natives roamed the States, and thus “influenced” their culture “as spirits”.
Jor-El’s “Come to me Kal-El… [kneel before Zod!]”, and Clark’s naked body twirling in an S-Shield Phantom Zone prism kind of clinched it for me.
I went like, “yup, Phantom Zone… outside of time, space and reality.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if next season’s opener is about Zod-El inhabiting Clark’s body. You know, another variant on the Red Kriptonite formula.
As far as the rest of the episode goes, I enjoyed it, I loved it, and I had a great time!!!
3 hours later I realized it was all an illusion, smoke and mirrors… a tease! And this beautiful lady will never be mine or at the very least, will never be more than what she is.
Case in point, next season I wouldn’t be surprised if:
1-Chloe was safely thrown clear by the explosion.
2-Martha never mentions that her lawn spontaneously combusted.
3-Jonathan wakes up and dusts himself off.
4-Lex and Clark become friends again.
5-Lionel beats the rap (or the evidence disappears, or Chloe recants).
6-Clark shows up, only he’s possessed by Zod-El, but not to worry as he’ll fix it by the end of the episode.
The only “new” development I see is Lex’s relationship with Lana; but seeing as how Clark and Lana haven’t been together and will never be together, I hardly call that change.
On Angel:
I liked the series (to an extent), and I liked the ending. It’s safe to say that Angel slayed the Dragon…
…and the Giant
…and the hordes of Monsters.
And even if there had been a season Six, all that fighting would’ve still happened OFF CAMERA. Why?
Well, don’t ask me why; that’s just how it is! Countless series have had Season Finales were the crew is about to face Armageddon, only to have the season premiere pick up after the all the fighting was done! If memory serves me right, the X-Files and DS9 were repeat offenders in this category. I bet if I put my mind to it, I can remember a couple more.
So, if there is another Buffy-verse project, you can bet that both Angel and Spike will be there. Illyria and Gunn are question marks, but they are question marks based on actor’s availability and the possibility that their characters may get lost in the shuffle.
One more thing,
What I got out of this series and the series finale was completely different from anyone else.
And that is…
There is no redemption for Angel, and I don’t think that any is deserved. The signing away of the Shanzu prophecy was just a formality (to get the point across).
The fact is, Angel doesn’t want to be human; he wouldn’t know what to do with his life if he were human; and the battle between good and evil will never end, so there’s no point in being human.
Plus…
Lorne has blood on his hands because of Angel. And Angel has both Lindsey’s blood and Lorne’s innocense on his consience as well.
In my mind, Angel did not redeem himself, nor does he deserve it.
I honestly don’t care how bankrupt the conscience and moral fiber of america is; a line was crossed.
Angel ordered the cold blooded execution of a human being, and Lorne carried it out. He’s no Hero, hëll, he didn’t even have the guts to do it himself.
And for those readers out there waiting to make the Lindsey/Glory comparison, don’t even bother. Lindsey was a human being, Glory was not. Lindsey was redeeming himself by working with Angel, Glory was not. Lindsey had his future read by Lorne, Glory had not.
And even if the argument can be made that Lindsey deserved Capital Punishment, it shoudn’t have been at the expense of Lorne’s innocence.
And let’s not forget that, as Angel, he killed the Truthsayer! (Poor Mo’Dib!)
And all for what? One shining moment were they get to “stick it to the man”? Yeesh! …and what was the price? Your colleagues’ lives?
And the next day, the powers of evil are status quo while you are 2, maybe 3 men down!!!
Meanwhile, nobody thought about opening a portal to another dimension and killing the Wolf, the Ram and the Hart on their turf?
How would you get there, you ask? Well, you have the old Oracle site, and Illyria, and the Graveyard… those would be nice places to start.
Anyways,
I liked this episode. It was a worthy finale for the series. But, it also showed me that Angel was no hero; just a vampire thug with a gimmick. He may live tormented by what he did, but he has never assumed responsibility for it. And I think that being responsible means putting your friends and family before yourself. Sending your friends to certain doom for one “kewl” moment was certainly anything but responsible.
It took me 5 seasons, but after all is said and done, I believe the gypsies (in their infinite wisdom) were right. Just like there is plenty of William the Bloody in Spike, there is also plenty of Angelous in Angel. Let the punishment fit the crime.
I think there’s a little bit more to the reason Angel was cancelled – the WB doesn’t look at it as having any real potential to grow. And they’re probably right. After 5 seasons, the show would have a lot of trouble attracting new viewers.
The WB looks at new shows like baseball teams look at prospects with potential. They see the possibility that their prospeects could get higher ratings than Angel could. And they prefer to try out the prospects instead of giving the more expensive veteran they know the performance level of another chance.
The ratings and demographics of Angel were fine; the WB just didn’t believe the show had any growth potential left. And the fact that Fox owned the show and not the WB certainly didn’t help. UPN would not have renewed Enterprise if it didn’t own the show and didn’t need a fourth season for syndication purposes.
redRicky,
Nice observations. Very thought provoking stuff on Angel.
As for “Enterprise”, anyone still watching this lame excuse for a “Trek” series – and especially anyone buying merchandise and willing to buy the inevitable DVD – and thereby continuing to supprt the mess Berman and Braga have made of the Trek universe…Well, how can you?
If you really enjoy Trek, everyone needs to quit supporting crap. Then maybe Berman will finally be told to find another purpose in life, the franchise can get a well-deserved and needed break, and when/if Trek does come back it will do so in a fresh and exciting way, and with people who care and are excited by it.
Angel finale repeat tomorrow.
Jerome, a brief glimpse at the history of the Trek franchise tells me that UPN is looking for a valid excuse to cancel the show. The only reason they can’t now is that for all its abysmal ratings, it’s still one of the highest-rated shows they’ve got.
However, when NBC was forced against their corporate will to renew “Star Trek” for its third season, they moved the show to Friday nights, figuring its audience would stop watching so they could go out. (Only somewhat true, but between that move and the terrible, terrible stories produced that year, the ratings did drop to the point that NBC could cancel it.) I felt a strong sense of deja-vu when UPN announced that “Enterprise” would be moved to Friday nights at 9pm…
If we stop watching “Enterprise” just because it’s not up to the standards of “DS9”, or even “TNG”, we give the programmers at UPN a chance to throw up their hands and say, “Look, nobody’s watching – no one wants to see Trek shows any more!” Think that can’t happen? Hop into the Way-Back machine, and listen to some of the movie studio heads back in the ’70s, when “Silent Running” silently ran out of the theaters. “Nobody wants to see those silly sci-fi movies any more – they all want buddy movies about rogue detectives!”
Of course, then we finally got “Star Wars”, and the studios began falling all over themselves pumping out bad sci-fi flicks…
It is so nice to see that others have the same idea I did when it comes to Smallville. Even though I’m leaning away from the General Zod theory (since Smallville is not allowed to use any other Kryptonians), I was thinking either the Eradicator (because of his strong Krypton as ruler ideas in the comics), or as in the Superman cartoon Brainiac. The other thought I had was possibly Darkseid in an effort to gain control of the most powerful being in the universe. He works even better because he is not Kryptonian related in any way and would thus abide by the producers contract.
The other reason I have problems believing it is Jor-el is because the one torturing Clark doesn’t fit the one we have seen in Relic. Yes, he could change and become corrupted because of his experience on Earth, but that drastic a change?