• Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:
    1. You really should register so you can chat with us!
    2. Twelve thousand people can't be wrong.
    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.
    4. See 1 through 3.
    Come on, register already!

Discussion of 1.01 "City Of..." - Aired 10/5/99 (WB-US)

nightshade

Your grandfather is a cat
Staff member
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
10,009
Location
England
Black Thorn
Rewatched this today, I love Doyle's bedtime story! It lets those that haven't watched Buffy know the past without making it a big deal.

Cordelia's trust in Angel beating Russell was great, even though they weren't really friends before she knew that he would help her and deal with the bad guy.

Angel remarks at the party that she's not really grown as a person, but you can see by the end of the ep even that actually she's not the same Sunnydale girl she was.

Plus Doyle's "we all got something to atone for" gives a little insight to the fact Doyle has a past, one that he's not proud of.
 

Give Us A Kiss

Fuffy Apologist
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
2,523
Sineya
Angel tells the story about how he came to LA, and he talks about how much he liked Buffy.

Angel giggly says "Girls are nice", we haven't seen his funny side on Buffy :(

Angel asks the vamps if they have seen his car, then attacks them, nice :D

Blonde girl, get away from Angel, he tries to avoid human blood when he can.

Angel gets into his place in LA, it looks like a cool place ;)

Doyle appears out of nowhere, and he turns into a demon when he sneezes :rolleyes:

I like Doyle's bedtime story, the Irish accent adds something to it :D

Angel's not liking that story about him...

Doyle's probably using his visions to tell Angel about what will happen to him next.

Angel, listen to Doyle, get involved, it will help your people skills :D

Angel sure has become a bit socially awkward since moving to LA, it's cute :oops:

Tina, put the pepper spray down...

Tina, lots of people don't make it in the entertainment industry, even if they totally deserve it :(

Angel gets a business card, and he isn't even an actor :p

Cordy :)

Good to hear that Cordy is liking it in LA :D

She also seems to have grown as a person...

Stacy sure looks like a creep.

It's not OK to go grab girls against their will :mad:

Angel sure looks threatening with a gun, and yes, that party was a bit too much for him...

Cordy's place is a dump, and no one wants to hire her :(

Tina opens up to Angel about Russell, she looks like she needs a hug.

Seems like Angel did some research about Russell, and if I were Tina, I would be freaking out too.

Russell looks like a psychopath...

Tina's gun looks like a small cap gun :p

Russell's a vamp, and he killed Tina :eek:

Angel doesn't really know how to share his feelings, that's OK.

Lindsey used to have short hair, he looks better with short hair.

Cordy's meditating, and she is about to go meet Russell :eek:

Cordy's in the limo, someone save her...

At least Angel has the "chat and punch" thing down :D

Cordy figured out that Russell's a vamp, he's denying it.

Angel attacks Russell, and saves Cordy in the process.

Doyle knows how to dress himself :p

Russell's still here, with W&H...

No, Russell can't fly, but he sure can burn to death :p

Angel calls Buffy back home, he doesn't say anything.

Cordy's right, an exterminator would do some good.

...and AI was born :D

Next time:A serial killer kills single people.
 

Antho

Scooby
Joined
Nov 30, 2016
Messages
1,934
Age
26
Location
Montauban (France)
Finally, I decided to watch Angel for the first time. Considering i like the character of Angel and i have DVDs, i don't know why i haven't done it earlier. Maybe it's because, for me, Angel without Buffy meant nothing, and Sunnydale is my home so i didn't want to go to L.A. Today, i feel ready. I like share my opinion but this is my first review in english, so please be indulgent and also i apologize for my english (sure there will be mystakes). I hope that will be understandable.


The french title of this episode is "Bienvenue à Los Angeles" (english translation : "Welcome to L.A" instead of "City of" which is the real title). The french translators didn't have imagination, they did the same thing with Buffy pilot because the french title is "Bienvenue à Sunnydale" (english translation : "Welcome to Sunnydale" instead of "Welcome to the hellmouth"). "City of" is a better title, i'm convinced Joss didn't choose it by chance. Los Angeles is often named as city of angels and there is an interesting contrast between that signification and the firsts images we see in the show. From the beginning, it's the night, it's dark (angels appear in the light, in the day), we see a girl little dressed get into a car ( we all knew what she will do ;)) and we see Angel in a bar (which is not the holiest place in the world). It seems like the town is corrupted. Plus, Angel isn't an angel, he is an creature of the night, a vampire ! He is someone who act in the shadow not in the light.. I very like the contrast !


From the firsts minutes, i found Angel different, his personnality seem not to be the same as in Buffy. I don't know, see him drunk, it seem like he is just not him, but i must say that i like him more like that, he is so funny.. "She was a really pretty girl, No i mean, she was a hottie girl, she had, i mean her hair, was.. you know, you kind of remind me of her" talking to a guy who has no hair ! Do you think he is really drunk or he plays the drunk ? Alcohol affect vampires ? However, he saves two ladies, he represents the hero in atypical form because he saves lifes but the sight of blood gives him envy to yield to his impulses. That's also why he is interesting as character.


I like Doyle, he acts like a guide for Angel, someone who put Angel in a good way. He is a half-demon him too. He has visions, a direct link with "Power that be". It's the first time we heard that ? I don't remember have heard "Power that be" in Buffy. Apparently Angel is their fighter. It can be an interesting arc. Doyle is amazing but in his place i will have seen more Whistler (flashbacks in Acathla). This guy helped Angel in the past, he gaves him advices and Angel's life change after he met Whistler, so i would have loved see him again ! But at least Doyle is funny : "I'm parched from this yakking man, Let's go treat to a Billy Dee" "It is not about finghting and gadgets and such, it is about reaching out ! Showing them that there is love and hope in this world" "Spare change ?" "Get a job, you lazy sow"


Cordélia is in L.A her too.. I'm glad to see her. She is hilarious and she brings gladness, freshness. She is exactly as in Buffy. She is honest and direct ("Are you still grrr" "I really should talk to people that are somebody"), she has her humour and her incredible sense of deduction (I finally get invited to a nice place with no mirrors and lots of curtains, hey you are a vampire ! "I'm from Sunnydale, we had a hellmouth I know a vampire when i'm alone with him in his fortress-like home, I'm just feeling a little lightheaded from hunger, i'm just wacky and kidding"), her vulnerability (I've tried really hard you know but i don't know everybody and i don't really have friends") and her "selfishness" ("He is not gonna come looking for me, right ? talking to Angel who is hurt). It have really sense that she is here. Angel saves humans but he doesn't evolve with them, he is not really connected to the humanity. He is a solitary, he rests and acts in the shadow, but this is dangerous because he cans loose the little humanity he has and also loose control. Cordélia and Doyle are like a way to connect him to reality, to humanity, help him to open his heart and his minds.


I found tina's case very interesting. She is very lovely and i felt concerned by her. It's a story of a girl who lost landmarks, she doesn't find her place in his world. She has wanted realize her dreams, so she moves on in a new city and infortunately she has faced to reality. Desesperate, she trusted bad people who lied to her by giving hope. All the chracters are/were in a similar situation because for them too, life change/changed ! They all expect/expected a sign of destiny. For Doyle it was the Power that be by giving him visions, for Angel, it's Doyle who induce this lifestyle change, for Cordélia it's Angel, and for Tina it was Russel and now Angel. Angel observed Tina and he noticed her loneliness because he is like that him too. He tried to make contact with her, and he did it in an awkward way but terribly touching at the same time. Tina seemed not be ready to trust an another person, but she trusts Angel after she realises he saw clearly in her, he has been sensitive to her loneliness. It touched her ! I really love their moments. Each understand almost perfectly the other. However, Angel mades a mystake, he didn't reveal his nature and when she discovered the truth she ran away from him and met death. I think it's a mystake understandable and maybe inevitable, if Angel has said her the truth, i don't think the things changes. But i'm sad because I really like tina.. Her death send a message which is true : evil can win ! and that proves the show will be a little dark.. Also, in Buffy, in the pilot, Jesse dies..


Russel isn't a normal vampire. He lives as a civilian, he has a house, he pays taxes, and he is protected by humans lawyers who know his nature and covers his murders. That's an interesting point of view of justice. Angel doesn't only fight the pure evil but also the people who are corrupted and that is an unfair fighting considering the fact that justice is used to do evil. But it's right that justice isn't always fair ! And it proves humans and evil are not incompatible, humans can be worse than the demon. Just like Angel, humanity is full of nuances. This lawyers really interested me. In situation like this, there is no line between evil and good, the two are confused.
The makeup of vampire is really awful, Russel looks silly. What did they want to do ? In any case, Russel takes the sun and Angel was very badass :).


Angel, Cordélia, Doyle, that's the team ? They can be interesting together. Plus there is a convivial atmosphere in this rooms. I will see in the future episodes.

Angel called Buffy but he didn't say a word.. A little crossover..

I like the openig credit, absolutely love the song. I already heard and it's one of my favorites. The acting was good, particularly David Boréanaz he makes me laugh many times (when he is not in the right car...)

I have a question : How can Angel have a car (i'm jealous i want the same :D) and an apartment ? he doesn't have money..

I really enjoy share my thoughts :)
 
Mr Trick
Mr Trick
Thanks for the insight on the French title.

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
14,401
Age
40
Location
London, UK
@Antho Its good to hear your thoughts on the opening episode. I liked the pilot, but think that the first season as a whole is hit and miss. It gets better from season.

Anyway, some shameless self-promotion, but check out my thread here:phttps://buffy-boards.com/threads/mr-trick-does-the-angel-rewatch-thingy.64131/
 
Antho
Antho
I will go see your topic with pleasure..

Priceless

Scooby
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
7,483
Location
UK
Finished S3 Buffy on rewatch so am now going to alternate Buffy with Angel till the end of both shows. Haven't watched Angel since it first aired, and didn't remember much about this episode.

First thing that I noticed was the music, which had a very superhero-y feel about it, and I guess we are meant to think of Angel as a superhero, a role he performed well to begin with, thought I thought the two stakes up the sleeves was a bit cheesy, and his need for blood was trying too hard to give him an edgy vibe he really didn't need.

Doyle was far too exposition heavy, but I understand that had to be done to introduce new viewers to Angel's backstory.

The best thing in this episode was Cordy. She was adorable, living in a hovel and eating scraps, into self-help mantras. Not much like the Sunnydale Cordy, but then neither was Angel, who seemed to suddenly have ideas, was able to develop plans and was able to put them into action, which I don't remember him ever doing before. He played a drunk character to achieve his goals, had he ever done that before, at least without instruction? I am sure on BtVS he'd never shown such imagination. Plus he uses 3 computers at once, now that was a surprise :)

Didn't think much of the damsel of the week, and the story seemed paper thin, but it is the opening episode and really only a set-up for what's to come. Not sure about the charging people for helping them, surely achieving redemption should be free of charge, but maybe it's too early to judge where that goes.

The absolute best thing about the episode was the 'Can you fly?' scene, with Angel pushing Russel out of the window. That was fun :)
 

Out for a walk

5 Words Or Less...
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
206
I am now onto my rewatch of Angel. This will be different than my rewatch of Buffy. I have only watched Angel maybe once when it first aired. I also know that I missed a lot of episodes. So, this will almost be "new" for me.

I liked the first episode, it did a great job of telling you this isn't BTVS. He doesn't save the girl was a first big flag that it is different. He also had no hesitation killing the bad guy. We didn't get the bickering back and forth for a few episodes.

I am a huge Spike and Spuffy fan, but I am also an Angel fan. So this will be fun. :)
 
Antho
Antho
Good rewatch :)

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,580
Age
30
When Cordelia asked that guy "what do you want me to do?", did anyone else think that Cordelia thought she was going to have to exchange sexual favours so that she could get the connections she needed to advance her career?

If this episode is commenting on the "casting couch" culture of Hollywood, then given what has come out about Joss and now all the Weinstein allegations in the news, do you think this episode has actually shone a light on the dark side of Hollywood?
 

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
14,401
Age
40
Location
London, UK
When Cordelia asked that guy "what do you want me to do?", did anyone else think that Cordelia thought she was going to have to exchange sexual favours so that she could get the connections she needed to advance her career?

If this episode is commenting on the "casting couch" culture of Hollywood, then given what has come out about Joss and now all the Weinstein allegations in the news, do you think this episode has actually shone a light on the dark side of Hollywood?
I do think that Cordy is suggesting that sadly:rolleyes: Still I don't think there's much more to read into it besides that. Those sorts of rumours have been out there in Hollyood for ages. It is a bit depressing that Cordy thinks that way.
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,580
Age
30
I do think that Cordy is suggesting that sadly:rolleyes: Still I don't think there's much more to read into it besides that. Those sorts of rumours have been out there in Hollyood for ages. It is a bit depressing that Cordy thinks that way.
Do you think the show should've gone there with Cordy to highlight the issue or do you think the network vetoed it so that it would remain Hollywood's grubby little secret.
 

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
14,401
Age
40
Location
London, UK
Do you think the show should've gone there with Cordy to highlight the issue or do you think the network vetoed it so that it would remain Hollywood's grubby little secret.
I'm not sure that's what they were going for anyway. Think it was just a basic comment on the idea that sometimes actresses feel like they have to sleep with powerful people to move up the ladder. Think that idea has been out there for awhile. Its also just Cordy still being the old superficial Cordy from Sunnydale.
 

thrasherpix

Scooby
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
3,207
Age
38
Do you think the show should've gone there with Cordy to highlight the issue or do you think the network vetoed it so that it would remain Hollywood's grubby little secret.
That depends how well known it is. I didn't know about Weinstein, and maybe most people didn't. In that case, they did have something to hide. I know I've heard about this and that case, and I don't keep up with the news of Hollywood. I do recall some geek friends of mine upset over Brian Singer, but I can't recall that they boycotted a single movie of his after, and I've heard of much worse (can't recall names) who also weren't boycotted, just talked about like they're a disgusting human being (that they're still going to reward them with their money, thus indirectly facilitating further abuse).

OTOH, I recently watched a Cracked vid on Weinstein and they showed footage that it was public knowledge, they even made jokes about "women not having to pretend to like Weinstein anymore" (or words to that effect--granted, it MIGHT be that they're making fun of the "excessive reputation" rather than winking at the behavior that was taken out of context to create a false narrative, but that didn't seem to be the case), and some here say this stuff is well known and normal. In this case, it's not a secret, and they don't have to protect it. Is anyone trying to catch it on tape? Are unions or even blocks doing anything to stop it or censure those who do? Did so many people know about Weinstein but refuse to boycott his works (that is, on the audience) so that it hit people in Hollywood where it counts (the wallet)? If they knew--and this includes the public, many who are bitching now, btw--and did nothing, then why hide it? Who cares if people bitch, cry, and moan if they're not going to do anything else about it?

'Course you'll find that in digital games and about everywhere else, and many don't even see a problem with it as it's just normal. It's even in too many damn romances where they might even portray it as romantic, that he can't help himself, and she really does want him even as she denies him...though it's so bad that it even gets into friggin cartoons and kids shows.

I even recall hearing that Kangaroo Jack, a movie aimed at children, including blatant boob grabbing by a guy who would later show the same woman getting all wet in a waterfall and the guy roughly takes his clothes off, and she tells him that if he comes near her she'll kill him, but he does, forcibly kissing her, and she responds with pleasure, and the really sad thing is that many parents who were upset over these scenes weren't upset by the force used here, actual rape culture promotion in a children's movie, but that it was seen as being too sexy...that's right, sexy, though there were others who condemned it for the right reason.

Hell, it's even a problem in many gay-bashing, moralizing churches (not just Catholic), and I know it's treated as a joke on how many Republican gatherings here in the USA go after prostitutes and use Craigslist, including for gay sex. Hmm, shouldn't give Democrats a break, they're not as likely to bash things like gay marriage (at least not anymore--I do recall back when they were almost as bad as the typical Republican in the 90s, including Bill Clinton who signed the Defense of Marriage Act and had high ratings as his actions with Monica Lewinsky came out even as Lewinsky was trashed over it, and of course there's worse) and talk about "family values," but they do generally promote treating women with respect and dignity, and yet that's not how many do in private, so it's just as hypocritical. Of course power gets abused at much lower levels, not just high up in church and state.

It's so ever present like air that it's even hard to IMAGINE it being different. There are people who try but it rarely becomes popular, and when it does, it remains problematic. Lots of Joss's works are like that (whether he had good intentions or was, like some others, cynically manipulating ideals like feminism isn't something I feel I can say), and it's for women, too. I personally loved when Lily Allen came out with Hard Out Here (for a bitch) as a response to the incredibly popular Hard Out Here for a Pimp, a song I despised so much, and despised that it was so touted, and yet in her response to it she relies on the same objectification that arguably doubles as slut shaming for women who DO try to be sexy (and may even use their body, perhaps even sexually) to advance their careers so that it's ironically just as problematic in a different way (just like with Joss Whedon, but at least I'm certain Lily Allen MEANT well), among other issues brought up about it.

And when the rare song or story or series (usually amateur) does break far enough away from that (btw, I'd recommend the webseries Carmilla for people who identify as feminists and/or love Buffy, though it can take patience before a real story and character depth actually make it interesting, IMO), it usually flops--though to be fair, when they don't have millions to spend on advertisement and doesn't fit the formulas executives want then it's not necessarily because people reject it, but that they just don't get the awareness they need.

When it's so damned prevalent, why SHOULD they hide it? Especially when even those who do complain aren't going to DO anything, not even boycott it? Even the rare criminal charges (when it appears to be quite common that they make jokes about it at award shows and the like) doesn't seem to pan out (Wolfram & Hart is ready to help!), at least it's much less than if one of us slobs got convicted of it. I don't see why it would bother them, it would seem normal to them, and even glamorizing it (unless they felt being shown as Russell Winters who gets kicked out a high rise window was insulting or even threatening to their them and their egos).
 
Last edited:

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
14,401
Age
40
Location
London, UK
That depends how well known it is. I didn't know about Weinstein, and maybe most people didn't. In that case, they did have something to hide. I know I've heard about this and that case, and I don't keep up with the news of Hollywood. I do recall some geek friends of mine upset over Brian Singer, but I can't recall that they boycotted a single movie of his after, and I've heard of much worse (can't recall names) who also weren't boycotted, just talked about like they're a disgusting human being (that they're still going to reward them with their money, thus indirectly facilitating further abuse).

OTOH, I recently watched a Cracked vid on Weinstein and they showed footage that it was public knowledge, they even made jokes about "women not having to pretend to like Weinstein anymore" (or words to that effect--granted, it MIGHT be that they're making fun of the "excessive reputation" rather than winking at the behavior that was taken out of context to create a false narrative, but that didn't seem to be the case), and some here say this stuff is well known and normal. In this case, it's not a secret, and they don't have to protect it. Is anyone trying to catch it on tape? Are unions or even blocks doing anything to stop it or censure those who do? Did so many people know about Weinstein but refuse to boycott his works (that is, on the audience) so that it hit people in Hollywood where it counts (the wallet)? If they knew--and this includes the public, many who are bitching now, btw--and did nothing, then why hide it? Who cares if people bitch, cry, and moan if they're not going to do anything else about it?

'Course you'll find that in digital games and about everywhere else, and many don't even see a problem with it as it's just normal. It's even in too many damn romances where they might even portray it as romantic, that he can't help himself, and she really does want him even as she denies him...though it's so bad that it even gets into friggin cartoons and kids shows.

I even recall hearing that Kangaroo Jack, a movie aimed at children, including blatant boob grabbing by a guy who would later show the same woman getting all wet in a waterfall and the guy roughly takes his clothes off, and she tells him that if he comes near her she'll kill him, but he does, forcibly kissing her, and she responds with pleasure, and the really sad thing is that many parents who were upset over these scenes weren't upset by the force used here, actual rape culture promotion in a children's movie, but that it was seen as being too sexy...that's right, sexy, though there were others who condemned it for the right reason.

Hell, it's even a problem in many gay-bashing, moralizing churches (not just Catholic), and I know it's treated as a joke on how many Republican gatherings here in the USA go after prostitutes and use Craigslist, including for gay sex. Hmm, shouldn't give Democrats a break, they're not as likely to bash things like gay marriage (at least not anymore--I do recall back when they were almost as bad as the typical Republican in the 90s, including Bill Clinton who signed the Defense of Marriage Act and had high ratings as his actions with Monica Lewinsky came out even as Lewinsky was trashed over it, and of course there's worse) and talk about "family values," but they do generally promote treating women with respect and dignity, and yet that's not how many do in private, so it's just as hypocritical. Of course power gets abused at much lower levels, not just high up in church and state.

It's so ever present like air that it's even hard to IMAGINE it being different. There are people who try but it rarely becomes popular, and when it does, it remains problematic. Lots of Joss's works are like that (whether he had good intentions or was, like some others, cynically manipulating ideals like feminism isn't something I feel I can say), and it's for women, too. I personally loved when Lily Allen came out with Hard Out Here (for a bitch) as a response to the incredibly popular Hard Out Here for a Pimp, a song I despised so much, and despised that it was so touted, and yet in her response to it she relies on the same objectification that arguably doubles as slut shaming for women who DO try to be sexy (and may even use their body, perhaps even sexually) to advance their careers so that it's ironically just as problematic in a different way (just like with Joss Whedon, but at least I'm certain Lily Allen MEANT well), among other issues brought up about it.

And when the rare song or story or series (usually amateur) does break far enough away from that (btw, I'd recommend the webseries Carmilla for people who identify as feminists and/or love Buffy, though it can take patience before a real story and character depth actually make it interesting, IMO), it usually flops--though to be fair, when they don't have millions to spend on advertisement and doesn't fit the formulas executives want then it's not necessarily because people reject it, but that they just don't get the awareness they need.

When it's so damned prevalent, why SHOULD they hide it? Especially when even those who do complain aren't going to DO anything, not even boycott it? Even the rare criminal charges (when it appears to be quite common that they make jokes about it at award shows and the like) doesn't seem to pan out (Wolfram & Hart is ready to help!), at least it's much less than if one of us slobs got convicted of it. I don't see why it would bother them, it would seem normal to them, and even glamorizing it (unless they felt being shown as Russell Winters who gets kicked out a high rise window was insulting or even threatening to their them and their egos).
The Singer case has not been proven and actually the evidence is in his favour. From what I heard he wasn't even in the state at the time of the so-called offence. Even if he did have relations with the boy, Singer was only 19 himself at the time. The boy was 15. That's very different from a 50 something going after a teen, or abusing young women etc..
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
8,580
Age
30
I don't see why it would bother them, it would seem normal to them, and even glamorizing it (unless they felt being shown as Russell Winters who gets kicked out a high rise window was insulting or even threatening to their them and their egos).
People can get funny when something involves a popular character eg people have problems with the Balcony scene in Dead Things and the Spuffy sex by the dumpsters in Doublemeat Palace because it involves Buffy and it's seen as degrading to her for her to agree to those situations.

Having Cordelia exchanging sexual favours for acting opportunities could be seen as the same kind of degradation. Therefore the situation itself (Young woman having to perform sex acts on a powerful man to advance her career) would not be viewed positively.
 

thrasherpix

Scooby
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
3,207
Age
38
The Singer case has not been proven and actually the evidence is in his favour. From what I heard he wasn't even in the state at the time of the so-called offence. Even if he did have relations with the boy, Singer was only 19 himself at the time. The boy was 15. That's very different from a 50 something going after a teen, or abusing young women etc..
You may have missed my point, which wasn't on the guilt or innocence of Signer, something I don't claim to know, nor if the specific incident was a one time thing or a long habit (though males, including full grown men, are said to be pressured into the metaphoric casting couch as well, and if anything, are probably even more likely than women to either reject it and never be known or to be frozen by the situation, unsure how to react to the point they do nothing but go on with their normal lives, saying nothing, even more likely than women to take it to the grave). The point is they BELIEVED it, wholly, and that it represented a lot of daily abuse in Hollywood, but weren't going to do a damn thing about it. And with that being the case, why should network executives and people like Weinstein care?

Put into a more personal way, do you even think about people in the third world who marvel at your first world problems? I doubt it. And the same is for powerful people like Weinstein. Who cares what you think? They've got power, people, prestige, money, and don't need you, and as long as you're not a threat to them then they don't care. It's not even contempt, it's simply disinterest. When it does get sensationalized (which can do more harm than good for the issue itself, but that's beside the point), they'll just dismiss it as "envy is a common human trait." That is, they don't see outrage on your part, they see envy. And for some people I think they're right.

And when male aggression is lauded and female power being reduced to little more than sexuality, and power is abused at every level of society (I can even describe these power dynamics and power abuses in public schools among the student body in middle school), and that abuse routinely defended save when it's time to make another rare sacrifice to appease the peasants (which is often little, and may include multimillion dollar parachutes for executives who have embezzled away retirement funds and lied to the public for years, or having to relocate to another country with little else changing so that it's just a change of scenery, like for Woody Allen), then they must feel more validated and fortunate to be on the winning side than caring that a bunch of "losers" like us without their power, wealth, and clout bitch about them in futility, soon to forget all about it as we always do and keep throwing money at them.

The point of that being they don't feel they have anything to hide, so they wouldn't care if Joss Whedon showed the casting couch situation, as I believe other shows have done. Of course they wouldn't want it shown in such a way that would actually challenge that privilege, but I don't think it would've, anymore than Beer Bad was going to be seen as a threat to the alcohol industry. Which means, no I don't think the network would veto any such scene there, at least not to "protect the secret."
 
Last edited:

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
14,401
Age
40
Location
London, UK
You may have missed my point, which wasn't on the guilt or innocence of Signer, something I don't claim to know, nor if the specific incident was a one time thing or a long habit (though males, including full grown men, are said to be pressured into the metaphoric casting couch as well, and if anything, are probably even more likely than women to either reject it and never be known or to be frozen by the situation, unsure how to react to the point they do nothing but go on with their normal lives, saying nothing, even more likely than women to take it to the grave). The point is they BELIEVED it, wholly, and that it represented a lot of daily abuse in Hollywood, but weren't going to do a damn thing about it. And with that being the case, why should network executives and people like Weinstein care?

Put into a more personal way, do you even think about people in the third world who marvel at your first world problems? I doubt it. And the same is for powerful people like Weinstein. Who cares what you think? They've got power, people, prestige, money, and don't need you, and as long as you're not a threat to them then they don't care. It's not even contempt, it's simply disinterest. When it does get sensationalized (which can do more harm than good for the issue itself, but that's beside the point), they'll just dismiss it as "envy is a common human trait." That is, they don't see outrage on your part, they see envy. And for some people I think they're right.

And when male aggression is lauded and female power being reduced to little more than sexuality, and power is abused at every level of society (I can even describe these power dynamics and power abuses in public schools among the student body in middle school), and that abuse routinely defended save when it's time to make another rare sacrifice to appease the peasants (which is often little, and may include multimillion dollar parachutes for executives who have embezzled away retirement funds and lied to the public for years, or having to relocate to another country with little else changing so that it's just a change of scenery, like for Woody Allen), then they must feel more validated and fortunate to be on the winning side than caring that a bunch of "losers" like us without their power, wealth, and clout bitch about them in futility, soon to forget all about it as we always do and keep throwing money at them.

The point of that being they don't feel they have anything to hide, so they wouldn't care if Joss Whedon showed the casting couch situation, as I believe other shows have done. Of course they wouldn't want it shown in such a way that would actually challenge that privilege, but I don't think it would've, anymore than Beer Bad was going to be seen as a threat to the alcohol industry. Which means, no I don't think the network would veto any such scene there, at least not to "protect the secret."
Well I don't think one incident amounts to a lot of daily abuse. Not to mention the Singer thing if it is true actually took place outside of Hollywood. I think the context of him being 19 and the teen being 15 does matter. Its the same as how people would view what Joss has been accused of as not being as bad as the incidents involving Woody Allen and Polanski. Then there's the age long question of if you should boycott someone's work because the person behind it. As for your question about Weinstein. I'm not sure I agree that people don't care. When you see the reaction the past week then it seems to me that his career is done. The reason he should care is because he's supposed to be a human being;)
 
thrasherpix
thrasherpix
Again, THEY believe it does, and that's what matters. And people care only for a little while, and often for ulterior reasons when they do. I do not hold to the view that humanity is innately good so his being human is irrelevant to caring.

Mylie

Scooby
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
2,098
Age
32
Just rewatched the episode and my thoughts on it :

It's a solid pilot and I love the way it was able to differentiate itself from BtVS while relying on it at the same time (Doyle's exposition + Angel calling Buffy). Wolfram and Hart being present right from the start (though only at the very end of the episode) is great. It really was such a big part of the show. Lindsey already mentioned the Senior Partners which I loved!

Russell Winters isn't a particularly interesting villain but the focus is mostly on his victims in this episode (first Tina then Cordelia) so it doesn't really matter. Though I have to say his vamp face is probably the ugliest we've seen so far (except for The Master obviously).

I love the way Angel's mission ( wanting to atone and save people who need it) is set up here and how Doyle's words about needing to feel part of the world has an impact on him. It's really sad that the first helpless and tried to connect to ended up dying. I think it made him see how important it is to connect with people and have their trust, if you want to help them.
 

Out for a walk

5 Words Or Less...
Joined
Jun 1, 2017
Messages
206
Think we should do this on the re-watch soon. Its probably one of the more solid TV pilots.
I agree it is a very solid pilot. I am currently in my annual rewatch. I am doing it different this year and watching Buffy and Angel in order. So, I watched BTVS season 4 Episode 1 first, then this one...etc. Let’s see how this goes.


I think it was a clever way for Doyle to do the introduction to Angel’s backstory to the audience. (Which I wonder how many people actually never watched BTVS before Angel...probably very few).
 
Top Bottom