buffy Bloopers

Oh, there's definitely a lot more. It's so great when you actually go back and watch the certain spots where the bloopers and continuality errors are. Very funny actually.

I noticed one that wasn't on the first list.. you know how in "Innocence" when Xander tells Cordy to meet him and Willow (and Oz!) at his house in a half an hour (to go to the artillery warehouse)? Well, a few scenes later, they have Buffy falling asleep, crying, on her bed and having a dream about Angel and seeing Jenny. Buffy wakes up and "attacks" Jenny at school. Like, a scene after that, they finally show the scene were Xander, Cordy, Willow and Oz are at the artillery warehouse. Sssuuurrreee, *THAT* was a half hour! I think there was a note in The Watcher's Guide saying that Joss noticed that at the last moment.
 
i was watching "The Wish" earlier, and i don't know if you'd call this a "blooper", just something stupid. but...
if the White Hats are so smart, why the hell did they have their base of operations at the library, where anyone can walk in as they wish, rather than have it at someone's house, where the vamps need to be invited??
just sounded like stupidity to me, seeing as they were vampire hunters, they should know this stuff.
 
The Scoobies are vampire hunters as well, and they too used the library as their base of operations up till the end of season three when Buffy blew up Sunnydale High. I certainly wouldn't call them stupid. The library pretty much revolved around the Scoobs considering all of them (except Giles, the librarian) were high school students and spent half their day there. It was the only logical place to meet. Not much of a blooper but just a small sacrifice.
 
true, but the demons were a lot more dangerous in the alternate reality. and they didn't have Buffy to protect them.
i guess the library was just easier to store all the weapons. i don't think they ever gave an explanation for why Giles was there anyway...since he didn't have a slayer to watch...
 
i guess he just knew that sunnydale was hell of an evil place and was trying to do good on his own-then he found out that buffy was coming so they gave the job to him-my theory anyway!
 
I have just gone through and read those, I didn't notice quite a few of those at the time especially the CPR one I thought that was really dumb.
 
There are continuity errors in nearly every episode of both Buffy and Angel (the unofficial episode guides give them in detail), but with a show with such tight deadlines it is only to be expected that some fall through the editing process (a lot of them are because of the editing process!)

They never spoil my enjoyment of the show, and hey, if it means we get the next season quicker, then I'm all for them!😉
 
I've got a Buffy Blooper. In "School Hard," Spike was complaining to Angel, yelling "You are my sire, mate, I can't believe this you Uncle Tom!!!." Then, we learn in "Fool for Love" that Drusilla was the one who made Spike, not Angel. Hello!!
 
Wow...that is a lot of bloopers. I can't believe they don't catch themselves making these mistakes. There are so many....oh well, I never noticed them...shows how observant I am!🙄
 
i noticed some of those, i didn't know there was that many either, i'm going to be on the look out now for any other mistakes.

~* Jamie *~
 
i have also found another blooper, i think it was either in season 3 or season 4, but Buffy i walking down the middle of the street, ( i think it was season 3, i think she walked out of the cinema ) anyway she walking down the middle of the street with someone ( Angel or Riley ) and you see this couple walk behind her one way then you see the same couple walking out of the cinema that walked out of it before, and then you see the exact same couple walking across the road toward the cinema, in other words you see the excact same couple three times and there wearing the same clothes.

i also noticed that one in season 2 ( when she was bad ) where she's wearing one outfit a pink top in the car, then you see her again in the corridoor at her locker talking to willow and xander about Angel coming to visit her and she's wearing a white t-shirt and green pants,
then you see her agian wearing the pink top again,
whoa she must change alot lol.

~* Jamie *~
 
In School Hard Giles states that Spike is barely 200. In the season 4 ep The Initiative Spike states he is 126. However in Season 5 Fool for Love the Flashback shows he was sired in 1880. Vampires tend to tell there ages as years since they were sired (so not including the 20 odd years of human life) which would make Spike 120 in 2000 (season 4). Giles quote might be taken as a mistake in the Watcher diaries but Spikes quote is just wrong. He should be either younger than the stated age (120) or older by about 20 years (if he included his human years)

In season 2 Halloween when Buffy and Willow are looking at the Watcher diaries Buffy says the entry is dated 1775 and Willow says Angel was 18 and still human. But in Becoming Pt 1 we see that Angel was sired by Darla in 1753. Now this can be taken as Willow knowing little accurate info about Angel or the date is wrong and should be 1745 (when Angel would be 18 and still human).

In Season 1 Angel Darla says remember Budapest turn of the century. However Angel was resouled in 1898 so in 1900 he couldn't of caused much damage . She could be refering to the year 1800 but the way she says it makes it sound like the most recent turn of the century.

Its almost as if writers of one ep don't even watch any previous eps
 
There are a bunch of tiny little bloopers that I've caught only because I'm so obsessed. LOL There are many times where Buffy's hair will differ a little within the same scene. LIke in What's my Line Part I, her part is on one side of her head, and then it suddenly changes sides... Interesting...
 
Also, and this is just some thinking, it is possible that the Watcher Diaries may just be a bit inaccurate in that they tend to be based on hearsay than actual fact. I mean, think about it, how in the world is a Watcher/Slayer going to know the exact date (I mean by year) that Angel becomes a Vampire. I mean was there someone who actually witnessed Darla bite Liam?...I mean they don't even know what his real name is. So, we can imagine that the Diaries, while on the whole, can tend to be a bit inaccurate with the dates. Most of the stuff, from my perspective, this is where my historical thinking comes into play, in the Diaries tend to be a bit second-hand. ie..someone heard a story-a rumor-that a man named Liam was turned into a vampire, and that was passed from village to village until it reached the ears of the Council. Well, okay, Liam who? What village? Where? and especially when? Who turned him? They didn't have The Drudge Report back then. Or CNN. Or the internet. Or Satelitte communications. Or cell-phones. Secondly, do you think that villagers even believed in vampires? They would probably just settle it down to a rumor. Liam rose from the dead. Okay. Did anyone see him? Was CNN there to witness it. I just saying that when you are dealing with diaries and accounts from different people and different places, times are going to be confused...unless of course it comes from the horse's mouth...like Spike in "Fool for Love"... I mean when Giles tells the Scoobies that The Master was the oldest known Vampire on record(that the Council knows of) it doesn't mean that there wasn't GrandFather Master laying low somewhere. I mean who turned the Master in the first place? Some vampire, I reckon that we never even heard of yet...
 
Agree with what you said. Some of the dates written in the diaries must have just been rough guesses. Inaccurate information was probably recorded a great deal of times.
 
Originally posted by gman992
Also, and this is just some thinking, it is possible that the Watcher Diaries may just be a bit inaccurate in that they tend to be based on hearsay than actual fact. I mean, think about it, how in the world is a Watcher/Slayer going to know the exact date (I mean by year) that Angel becomes a Vampire. I mean was there someone who actually witnessed Darla bite Liam?...I mean they don't even know what his real name is. So, we can imagine that the Diaries, while on the whole, can tend to be a bit inaccurate with the dates. Most of the stuff, from my perspective, this is where my historical thinking comes into play, in the Diaries tend to be a bit second-hand. ie..someone heard a story-a rumor-that a man named Liam was turned into a vampire, and that was passed from village to village until it reached the ears of the Council. Well, okay, Liam who? What village? Where? and especially when? Who turned him? They didn't have The Drudge Report back then. Or CNN. Or the internet. Or Satelitte communications. Or cell-phones. Secondly, do you think that villagers even believed in vampires? They would probably just settle it down to a rumor. Liam rose from the dead. Okay. Did anyone see him? Was CNN there to witness it. I just saying that when you are dealing with diaries and accounts from different people and different places, times are going to be confused...unless of course it comes from the horse's mouth...like Spike in "Fool for Love"... I mean when Giles tells the Scoobies that The Master was the oldest known Vampire on record(that the Council knows of) it doesn't mean that there wasn't GrandFather Master laying low somewhere. I mean who turned the Master in the first place? Some vampire, I reckon that we never even heard of yet...
Click to expand...

Well your example of Liam siring into Angelus is a little flawed as majority of the information we have on that time comes from primary sources (Angel and Darla) the only info we got from the watcher diaries (the Willow quote in Season 2 Halloween) was wrong but that could have been a script error (someone can't do math).

However I agree that the Watcher diaries are by no means a complete or accurate view of history. We must take flashbacks to be reliable though (because if we didn't we would have no source for accurate info) and that is where the Spike blooper comes in- him saying he was 126 in S4 The Initiative when Fool for Love shows him to be only 120 at that time
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom