1. hitnrun017: Now that we know what Twilight wanted all this time, what about everything else we've learned about him this season? Banishing magic, the symbol, outfit/mask, etc... will these still play a part in the season or were they just red herrings? Fooling the bad guys to get what he ultimately wanted?
Scott Allie: The things you specifically mention are definitely still the point of what we're doing, or at least instruments to getting there. I think you have to wait till next issue to see what Twilight was really after though, this issue didn't really spell that out. In fact, it's not till #35, I think, that we really pull it together for you.
2. Charles: In prior Q/A's, you've said that Buffy's dreams mean something still. Regarding her very first one, she had romantic feelings towards that ended with his head being knocked off. Since then she confessed, got turned down and now we've got Angel telling her that they will never be happy with anyone else followed by a kiss. So is it safe to say Angel's words at least to how it relates to her Xander-shaped friend, are accurate and that Meltzer or Whedon will not be addressing them again in the future be it S8 or beyond?
Scott Allie: I don't think Angel's words mean that necessarily. But I've found the arc of her relationship with Xander really interesting so far.
3. bamph: After reading the issue and seeing your interview with Buffyfest, I am worried about something. There have been a lot of nice statements over the years and especially recently about Buffy and Angel's feelings for the other. You made some nice comments in that new interview. But after reading #33, how should B/A shippers take this issue? Worry that this is ultimately about subverting Buffy's and Angel's romantic relationship with each other and tearing it down or is that not even close to what is going on and not the right question and concern?
Scott Allie: I don't think that's accurate. The next issue will give you more on that topic. I'm not sure how to address how B/A shippers should take this issue, because we've just opened a can of worms—stick around to find out what comes out of it. I think by #35 those shippers will have more concrete stuff to talk about.
4. Hellbound Hyperion: Uh, okay, so I've got #33 in my hands. Angel's speech is bleeding Shanshu all over his fluffy Big Bad suit, and I'm deeply concerned that a similar "prophecy" might be in play for Buffy as well. So I gotta ask: can we consider the upcoming explanations an alteration or an expansion of the Slayer mythos?
Scott Allie: It strikes me as an expansion. It doesn't contradict anything that's already out there, except in that it's been hidden—and that concealment is addressed in the next issue too. We're learning something new about the histories.
5. Emmie: Would it be right to say Buffy isn't in her right mind at the end of this issue? Perhaps because of an unnatural glow?
Scott Allie: She's definitely affected by what's happening. That girl ain't never been right, but this Twilight business is certainly complex. More next issue.
6. cheryl: My question is concerning Buffy and Angel and what appears to be a moment of throwing caution to the wind and jumping head first into a physical relationship. Are we to assume that while Angel is powered up as shown, that his soul is anchored? Should we fear a return of Angelus?
Scott Allie: As he said to Faith—paraphrasing, don't have it handy—what makes you think invulnerable doesn't mean all over?
7. smashed: Is it safe to say that Angel as Twilight is definitely Angel? By that I mean not a clone, robot, or anything else? Like, this is the Angel that we saw in both of the TV shows?
Scott Allie: It is really him.
8. willow333: I have a question regarding Angel and him being Twilight. What about the war he started with Buffy's slayer army in Tibet and him asking Giles, Faith and Andrew who should die first. Are we suppose to assume this was him trying to keep the kill count down? It just seems a bit off to me.
Scott Allie: It does seem off, I know it's a lot to swallow. I hope you feel it all makes sense as they talk through some of it in the next two issues, #35 in particular.
9. maje77: Even with knowing the identity of Twilight, Angel’s reveal still packed a punch! The line in today’s issue where Angel says “this is history” but then later Angel says it isn’t just history it’s Buffy and Angel and their future; maybe I’m missing something, but history in what sense? Buffy and Angel’s connection and their past or is it something else. Must admit, I’m slightly concerned with how Buffy and Angel’s history will be treated in this, because Joss sure likes to bring on the pain.
Scott Allie: Those lines definitely read on many levels. They have their personal history; the history of all Slayers and vamps is to some degree wrapped up in the two of them; but it's really the future we're dealing with now. And there's more to it than that, but hopefully that'll do until next issue.
10. Charles: Renee as she lay dying mentioned she never got a chance to tell Xander something. Can you go on the record and say what it is?
Scott Allie: I cannot.
11. striped_lily: Will there be a Spike/Buffy cover in the future? Any details you can share about that?
Scott Allie: We haven't decided on the last few covers, but so far we don't exactly have a Spike/Buffy cover. I swear to the Powers that Be, that is not my fault—Joss is spec'ing all the covers for his arc.
12. bamph: I don't know if you can answer this. I don't even know if there is any link. In Angel:After The Fall, Angel and us learned that Angel will achieve the shanshu but end up on evil's side in the big apocalypse. Angel saw a vision of this future in vamp face surrounded by dead bodies that he killed.
Spoiler:
This image is reduced by 16%, click it to view full size.
Is there any connection between what was revealed about the shanshu for Angel in After The Fall and what's going on in season 8?
Scott Allie: I can't say at this time. I think this will be a good topic of discussion for you guys in the months to come.
13. moscowwatcher: In Dark Horse Dispatch sent to retailers immediately post-Twilightgate you wrote that "mature content" in issue #34 doesn't mean nudidy or blood - yet the issue is so intense that Meltzer asked you to put a mature-themes notice. One of your replies in current session implies that Buffy isn't acting on her free will - you say that she is "affected". So, the question: does the "mature content" imply mind-rape or physical rape?
Scott Allie: No spoilers. C'mon, you knew I was gonna cop out on that one, right? There'll be a lot of opportunity to get into this next month.
14. collex: Next Issue is called Them F@#%ing. Do we have to take this literally? Because there this curse and all that... And if yes, what do you have to say to those who think that kissing and doing the deed with Angel after all he has done is turning Buffy into an hideous and irredeemable monster that doesn't care for all those killed?
Scott Allie: Not answering the first question, but as for the second question, Buffy's attitude toward him after he reveals himself—Joss and Brad and I have spent a lot of time talking about this, trying to get this right. We know it's gonna raise questions. I think this arc more than any other would've benefited from being scheduled weekly like a TV show. Sorry, it's a cheap answer, but you gotta wait and see a bit here.
15. lmblack21: My question is about the reveal and the B/A impact - duh.
The whole thing could be read as fairly mocking (although I also see it as kind of sad in a poignantly true kind of way), I just can't quite decide if Joss is mocking B/A (which would be strange since that is his own creation) or mocking Twilight (the OTHER vampire story with Edward/Bella). I think both readings can be seen here because of Buffy's comment about how HER Twilight vampire was "way better". So can you tell us if we should be reading this as mocking B/A, mocking the Twilight series or a bit of both?
Scott Allie: Neither. Aside from a stray line of dialogue, Joss is not at all concerned with that other Twilight. Our book bearing the same title as those novels is an unfortunate coincidence. Very unfortunate. And as for mocking the couple he created—no. He's definitely not mocking that.
16. wenxina: As I understand it, "Twilight" is the climax of Season 8, which is pretty much defined as the point of the highest narrative/emotional tension. Brad Meltzer was recently quoted as saying that he had a "plot brain", whereas Joss' has a "character brain". How involved was Joss in this arc, making sure that the characters stayed true to form? Or was this a case where Brad just "got" it, and he doesn't give himself enough credit for his "character" lobe?
Scott Allie: Oh, Brad got the characters, all right. And he got the thematic point of Season 8, did more for that than any other writer. But Joss did come in on this one, about as much as the average arc. They plotted it together—there were major beats Joss handed Brad, and others that Brad suggested, that Joss adjusted, manipulated. The plotting was probably about 50/50, ultimately, but with the character stuff, Brad did a lot of that without any help or direction. He got it, he nailed the voices in my opinion. And he structured things to really make the most of the characters—although he's kept the focus on a few characters. The boys worked very well together, but it's Brad on the page. However, Brad's Twilight is the penultimate arc. Joss still has to do the climax.
17. maje77: I’ve always considered how Buffy and Angel can feel one another as an otherworldly special connection between them. It was good to see that reiterated again in this issue. And with Angel’s comments to Buffy that there’s a reason for their connection, how they feel about one another, not being able to be happy with others and this glowing thing between them; is that just romantic sentiments or is there more of a purpose to what he’s saying?
Scott Allie: There is a lot to what he's saying, yes. Not just sentiment. This is part of what Twilight is, part of what we spend the next two issues exploring.
18. a2zmom: It seems to me that if Angel had just told Buffy and the others to begin with what was happening; ie the consequences of the path they were on, a lot of deaths could have been avoided. Will this be addressed at some point?
Scott Allie: Yeah, it will be addressed. This, along with Buffy's reaction to his unmasking, is what we've spent the most time talking through, trying to make sure it works. It's a tough reveal, and it's also what we spend the next two issues connecting for you.
19. sosa lola:
Spoiler:
Judging by Jeanty's cover for #35 and the recent developments in #33, I'm guessing Buffy would somehow join Twilight. I'm most interested in Xander's reaction if Buffy really does join Angel's side. She's turned to him the most this season and they've had a special connection, so her suddenly turning on them would be more personal for him than anyone else in the gang at this point.
Scott Allie: Agreed.
20. vampmogs: You said a while back (and in this Q/A) that things will become more clear in the next two issues. Were you anticipating a backlash from the Buffy/Angel kissage? And if so, do you think the next two issues will change people’s opinion on this? Or at least put everything into more perspective?
Scott Allie: Yeah, definitely expecting a backlash for this. But I've given up predicting what people's reactions will be. I had no idea that some readers would think Joss was mocking the Buffy/Angel relationship. And I'm afraid that when an idea like that takes root among the fans, it's impossible to reverse. But yeah, what you get in #34 & #35 will at least put it into more perspective. We put a fair amount of work into that.
21. Kratos: Given that either Buffy is in control and decides to make out with a mass-murdering psychophath possibly followed by f"#&ing (although I do believe it can be "them fighting") him. Or the other option being that Buffy is under some sort of control. Neither outcome being any good, one has her on the same level of a genocidal maniac and the other has a female icon being raped. You have in the past given small pieces of hope for Angel fans(telling them to see it through). Is there any hope for Spike,Buffy,Spuffy fans at the end of the tunnel? Or should we just brace ourselves for a twisted bangel lovefest.
Scott Allie: I can't fully answer that without spoiling, but first I'd have to know what hope means to you. If your hope is that Joss comes out and says that Buffy and Spike are the key relationship, that Spike is more important to Buffy than Angel, then probably you'll be disappointed, because I don't think Joss writes in those terms. If on the other hand all you want is that the relationship between Buffy and Spike gets treated with respect, then yes, there is hope.
23. Dorotea: So, we just saw post-Amends and post-I Will Remember You Angel come forward glowing with 'unholy power' and claiming basically 'dog ate my homework' - er I did this all (arranged 206 murders) for you baby so that we can be together happy. And while most of the fandom gives Buffy some slack, many fans are gloating and insisting that Angel finally turned to the dark side for good - was irredeemable to begin with, not worthy of Buffy love and the 'destiny's bitch'. Not sure how to formulate the question - but is/was he? Irredeemably evil and corrupted by power? Was that the message his character was supposed to deliver--that since he is weak he will always be defined by moments of weakness, not by what he does afterwards?
Scott Allie: Wait, Dog Ate My Homework?!? What made you say that? But to sort of answer your question, the message Angel's character is supposed to deliver is not signed for yet; it has not been delivered. I swear I'm not saying this just to get you to buy two more comics, but this question isn't even entirely legit until what you've heard what he has to say, and seen what they do next. He will be defined and redefined over and over again, and weakness might be part of it.
24. iloveromy: Referencing Season 7, do you think Buffy is still cookie dough?
Scott Allie: She is. She's a lot closer to edible, though.
25. bamph: Have Buffy's and Angel's feelings for each other all been manipulation going back to the start of the show?That's the impression be given to some I've talked to after reading the issue. That this issue is hinting that the Buffy/Angel romance isn't really real and never has been. That they were manipulated into falling in love all those years ago by some unknown force when Angel first saw her in the Becoming flashback and when finally meeting in season 1 and what is happening now with this secret history between slayers and vampires and the unholy power the two have gotten is the end game to all this manipulation. Is that the view we're supposed to come away with after the new issue or is that the wrong thinking about the Buffy/Angel romance?
Scott Allie: I think this sort of thing is personal for the reader. What do you believe about love, about fate, about destiny? You will never get a scene where one of the characters says to the other, I guess we never really had feelings for each other, it was all just some unholy power. In my opinion, there can be fate, and you can be chosen, and still have to earn it. But ultimately my answer to your question is no, no one is telling you that. That is not the impression you're meant to walk away with.
26. maje77: How long has Angel and Giles known that Buffy would be the slayer to gain this special power? With Giles it seems like it's been from the beginning of season 8. Which makes me wonder why he never shared any of his thoughts with Buffy, allowing her to be blind to what was going to happen and putting her at a big disadvantage. And for Angel, I would assume it's been even longer because this Twilight persona had to have taken a lot of time to setup & to come to power.
Scott Allie: Giles, you'll find out in #34, Angel in #36. Their understanding of all this is central to the plot, for sure.
27. richie: Is there a meaning for Satsu being with Xander and Willow in the last panel instead of Dawn?
Scott Allie: Joss likes to cause his kids pain. Dawn might not like hearing what Willow says there, but Satsu's probably really pissed.
28. lmblack21: So a followup. Joss is not mocking B/A - so yay for that, it did seem rather strange to me to view it that way. A lot of people who are not into B/A are invested in the idea that Joss resurrected the comics to subvert the B/A relationship. What do you make of the idea that some people have that Joss would suddenly decide the entire point of the comics is about Buffy's romantic relationship with Angel and that the most important thing for him to do is trash and/or subvert that relationship and the whole long history of Buffy/Angel?
Scott Allie: It doesn't make sense to me—I don't get it. But it seems like there are some people who are into the B/A relationship, who are just as invested in—or at least they're espousing—the idea that Joss is mocking or subverting the relationship. I think because Joss doesn't specifically write these stories for the shippers, sometimes the shippers see him as specifically writing these stories to hurt the shippers. That is not the case. Neither of those things are on his to-do list. However, the Buffy/Angel relationship is going to be a bit different after all this.
29. Maggie: Thanks for your willingness to do this. It must be tiresome to have fans try to drag you into our various squabbles. But I guess I'll offer the counter question to the one you just got. Do you think it's Joss's intent that we look at Buffy and Angel caught up in that unholy glow as an affirmation of their epic romantic soul-mates forever affair? Are we supposed to be happy that they go for epic happiness when there is, to put it mildly, a bit of a cloud hanging over them, what with all the dead bodies that Twilight has seemed to have something to do with and the unholy glow and all. It had seemed rather dark to many of us, hence the thought that maybe part of the story is moving B/A away from a Twu Wuv 4eva sort of teenage romance to something a bit more complicated.
Scott Allie: Wow, Maggie, there are a couple really good thoughts in there. First, does the glow confirm the true-love-forever thing—it affects it. For some readers, like perhaps Bamph, above, the unholy glow might refute the idea that they ever were really in love. Or maybe it makes it more of a soul-deep connection than ever. I think when Season 8 is done, there will be plenty of room, still, for arguments about that to continue. However, a lot remains to be seen about their decisions, about what they go for. But it is definitely complicated.
30. neowhobaz: Is there time left in season 8 for "The Battle of Startbucks" mentioned in Fray?
Scott Allie: There is room.
31. Remmy: Scott, in a previous question you answered that nothing of what the two characters have done is meant as mockery. My question: how can it not be a mockery? Almost everything Angel spouts is false. Buffy and Angel had been fully capable of moving on over the last years. Angel had an immense deep bond with Cordelia, Buffy even this season admitted to having feelings for Xander. As for Angel's justification for doing what he did, it's not. He says it could have been much worse but that doesn't justify all the little girls that are dead now. Killing and torturing one person to save a hunderd does not make you a hero, the real hero is the one that save all 101 or fails trying.
Scott Allie: You don't like it, I take it? There's nothing mocking in it. No one intended mockery.
32. Sue: Have you and Meltzer watched all of AtS? Watched it all the way through? Will any of the character development for both Spike and Angel that went on in there be reflected in Season 8?
Scott Allie: I'm pretty sure Brad watched all of the Angel series, but I'm not positive. I know he and Joss talked through the story quite a bit, and that the main story beats in here comes from Joss. But I'm pretty sure readers will continue to debate whether or not Joss and his writers are doing right by these characters—which is to say that yes, I think we'll deal with the characters' development, but that readers won't all agree.
33. wenxina: How concrete is Joss arc looking right now? I guess the more specific question here is whether or not all the little cryptic messages (e.g. the Prince) will finally make sense? After years of stewing, it'd be a waste for it not to pay off in one way or another.
Scott Allie: Frankly, I'm a little concerned that some of the little bits like the Prince won't be spelled out, won't pay off, the way you and I would like them to. Some of those things, we know what they mean and what they are, but things are moving fast, and it still seems like we have a long way to go in seven issues. The only way to really spell out the prince and the queen stuff is by exposition, and there's not gonna be a lot of time for that, as the climax takes over.
34. tigerfan: In the homage cover of #35 Dawn seems to be curiously missing. Is there a signficant reason for her to be missing?
Scott Allie: Nope, she just didn't get on there. I think Georges picked the characters that he felt made the best stand-ins for the X Men characters. With this, and some of the other homage covers, there was not a ton of discussion about that kind of detail. He did his thing.
35. sla: In 'The Master Plan', Amy says that she come up with a spell to hide Twilight's H.Q., but, what she meant with "3 seconds in the future,"? I didn't get it, can you explain it, please?
Scott Allie: Yeah, that was supposed to sound really smart, but missed for some readers. If I try to think it through, like ANY time travel, it breaks down. But instead of hiding something in Africa, or behind a mountain, or under a glistening mist, don't hide it in a place, hide it in a time—just a few seconds in the future. It's not a major plot point, it's just a high concept thing that either sounds cool or confusing. You and me—confused.
36. otakumike: Angel says he "didn't kill anyone". But it's a bit naive, no? After all, there is at least 1 guy who died after he issued a direct order to kill him (remember that computer guy that failed to locate the gang in the mountains?).
Does Angel really believe what he's saying? Or is he glossing over some "details" to better charm Buffy?
Scott Allie: I don't want to get into motive, because we'll hit that in upcoming issues, but you're on the right track. Angel is a bit of a moral relativist. He believes in sacrifices for the greater good. But he does believe what he's saying. And he did not kill those 206 Slayers, for example.
37. zamolxis: So, all this time Angel was pushing Buffy to become something she couldn't fight! And he's doing the final push right after he finds out from Giles that Buffy knows nothing about! My question is, according to your knowledge, would Angel still played the sentimental card if Buffy knew what's happening?
Scott Allie: Had Buffy known what was happening much earlier, it would not have worked. But if, after Giles had been running around looking for this particular thing he needed, Buffy had learned what it all was, yes, Angel would have played the sentimental card to seal the deal. The sentiment is what it's all about, in the end.
38. Prophecygirrl: It has to be a bit frustrating, or at least intimidating, as an author to navigate all the romantic ships out there whilst trying to tell a story. In fact, I'm starting think that the appearance of any of Buffy's love interests will ultimately end with the realization that they are all beside the point. That we as readers should be open to new things, like Satsu's realization that cinnamon is not the only flavor of lip gloss. Comment?
Scott Allie: It ain't easy. But it's more an issue when doing interviews and going on message boards. You don't really think about that aspect of it when you're working on the material. Doing so would kill the story.
39. Emmie: First, apologies for the essay-length of my question. In this issue, Angel excuses his actions by saying, "I didn't kill anyone. This was happening. You really don't know how much worse it could've been? Powerful people -- *governments* -- lining up to wipe out the "terrorists" you created. Demons weren't thrilled either. I put on a mask, talk about "master plans"... distract them. Keep the body count as low as I can while I push."
He says he was trying to "keep the body count low" but in Retreat V he stood idly by and watched soldiers die, stating, "I'd like to watch this." His general later counters, "But we're letting our men die!" Angel-as-Twilight answers, "They're mortal. They have to die sometime."
Angel says his goal is for Buffy to realize "the manifest truth", yet he wears a mask and manipulates everyone around him. He says he's lowering the body count, then cavalierly shrugging off his soldiers' deaths when he has the powers of Superman and could finish the battle in one fell swoop. He could stop the Goddesses just as Buffy later does. Why doesn't he? Because he's pushing Buffy into becoming what he is, right? It's all starting to read more like Angel has gone mad with god-like powers--he's become Frankenstein and his one true aim is to acquire his "unholy" bride, Buffy.
Would you comment on these glaring contradictions in what Angel is saying versus what he's actually doing? Angel has been imbued with powers akin Superman, yet we do not see him using these powers to actually save lives, nor does he lift a finger to "keep the body count low"--instead he manipulates the situation to control who dies and when. At this point, the only justification I can find for forgiving Angel for those he's hurt (and slain) is if he's gone mad with his powers. I used to think that he was doing evil for the greater good ('kill a thousand to save a million' big picture mentality), but this issue shows the priority was "pushing" Buffy all along in her transformation, a transformation that's beginning to appear frighteningly ominous.
Edmund Burke said: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." But in a world of superheroes flying the skies with immense strength and invulnerability, what does it mean when a 'good' man stands idly by and does nothing? What does it mean when that 'good' man encourages and directs evil?
Scott Allie: Oy. How the &$%# do I answer this, Em!?? I think you have to wait and ask me again after #35. I see this question echoed, rephrased, reflected in many of the following questions, certainly some of the preceding questions. "What are we supposed to conclude from this thing that you've only started to reveal to us?" Some specifics, though: He did watch soldiers die. He didn't kill them. Mortals do die. This was happening. He was trying to keep the body count low, not stop the deaths. Not by standing in the way of bullets. But by wearing a mask. And manipulating people. I accept that all this is a lot to swallow, and that it's hard to view it as heroic—I am not saying you should. But I'm saying that in my opinion, there are not glaring contradictions between what he's saying and doing. There are conflicts, there are things to disagree with. But his powers could not have prevented what's happening, that which was gonna lead to Slayer deaths. Angel did not, in the words of E. Burke, "Do nothing." For more, you gotta wait.
40. sosa lola: When Xander, Satsu, and Willow were guessing what Buffy and Angel were doing, do they know that Twilight is Angel? I mean, it's hard to see from that far. Also, would we get to see their reactions to the revelation in the next issue?
Scott Allie: They don't know that here, but you will see it next issue.
41. Vergil: Hey Scott, how are we supposed to view the Angel character? I mean it seems like whatever this guy does, he always manages to come out of it with a halo on the top of his head. Firmly believed to be a champion, hero regardless of all the suffering, death, pain he has caused other people. I used to believe that Joss structured his work in such a way that different interpretations were possible. That went out the window with Joss's After the fall were Angel is again herald as a hero even though he did willingly start an apocalypse, in the end everyone was rooting for him. Is this the same sort of story we can expect from season8, Angel walking away with no consequences or retribution?
Scott Allie: I think the current reaction proves that Joss structures his work to allow for different interpretations. To judge Angel's role here, you need to know more about it.
42. bamph: To give sort of a general sum up,what would you say to concerned Buffy/Angel shippers as we move forward into the rest of season 8 and beyond about there ship and it's future?What would you say to fandom in general going forward into the rest of the season and beyond?
Scott Allie: I don't know how to answer either part of this except to say to read the book. Maybe some of my answers to the questions below will help?
43. Nixennacht: You said, you didn't quite understand where the idea that this new magically assisted form of B/A is subversive comes from. More than one thing in that scene points at Twilight (the vampire soap), the star crossed 'destined connection' for one thing and also the dominating patronizing lover, who explains the world to his girl, admittedly manipulated her into this position and, if his previous lines and the cover of the collected vollume are anything to go by, wants to drive her into suicide. And also like in Twilight, the heroine takes this and falls into her lovers arms.
Now it's no secret that Twilight is a romance that is seen as a sad regression into long overcome genderstereotypes by many. Practically the Anti-Buffy in terms of feminsm. So it would seem weird to many that Joss would suddenly put his heroine in such a subdued position without something up his sleeve.
So my question would be, is this zombiefyed state Buffy seems to be in really to be seen as something positive, or rather as something extremely dangerous that she'll have to overcome to prevail?
Scott Allie: I totally see how this is subversive, I just disagreed with the idea of "mocking," I think. There's nothing mocking in the way Joss is portraying this. But subversive, sure. We're subverting certain accepted truths, and we're changing certain things about their relationship. And I don't think Buffy has become Bella. Again, let's see where it goes in a couple issue. Next issue is not gonna please you, though, Nixennacht.
44. wenxina: Thanks for being frank regarding my question about the Prince. As a follow-up question, because you said that it won't be spelled out explicitly, will we at least be able to draw some logical conclusions as to who was meant, from the rest of the story being told? Because I don't necessarily need/want one of the characters to be like "Hey, remember that Prince... that's him!". Or hey, there's always another MDHP short to give a condensed version of the exposition you speak off... or a one-shot...
🙂
Scott Allie: What I meant to say is that some parts of it might not be spelled out, because we might not have room. The last few scripts aren't written yet, so exact details remain to be seen, about what exactly gets onto the page. But yeah, I think by the end it will be easy enough for people to go back and interpret all that stuff, although as in everything else, there'll be room for debate.
45. Kratos: Following up on my previous question and your answer, I agree, I also don't believe that Joss writes in those terms. And I also see treating the spuffy relationship with respect as hope. I guess my question is, can we expect the opposite? That we'll have it spelled out that Bangel >>>>>>> Spuffy, Bander,etc. The end result being that Bangel is seen as the key relationship and that Angel is more important to Buffy then Spike or Xander. If that is the endgame then yeah I can live without the comics, to me the outcome is just as important as the journey.
PS:Like Maggie said, we really do appreciate you doing these Q&A's.
Thanks.
Scott Allie: Thanks for asking it like that, that hadn't occurred to me—No, I don't think you'll see either relationship spelled out as the one. To the B/S fans out there, who might be feeling invalidated by what's going on between Buffy and Angel right now, note that the B/A fans feel like they're being mocked. So while the B/S fans aren't getting to see B/S talking about destiny and all that, it ain't all roses or the B/A fans. And while I'm at it, because I think Kratos is the guy I pissed off last time—I'm sorry that I don't fully understand certain parts of fandom, and least of all the shippers and all that. Last month I think I equated shipping and fanfic. I wasn't trying to make fun—my only exposure to shippers is on message boards, I don't know that much about what this is. So when you said that you "shipped" Spike Fray, yeah, my Spray comment was flip, but I assumed that if you "ship" a relationship that doesn't actually exist in the canonical stories, then the only thing you could do was write fanfic about it. I get now that I was wrong about that—but I'm an outsider. I don't know shipping, or fanfic, or any of it, aside from what I'm exposed to on these Q&As. So I apologize.
46. henzinnit: With Angel returning in a huge and different role, any thoughts as to where Connor fits into Season 8? I don't expect an appearance, just wondering what he'd be up to now his dad is a big, war-mongering schemer.
Scott Allie: I try to steer clear of this subject, but that gets into IDW territory. Angel was created on the Buffy show; Spike was created on the Buffy show. Not to say that they're separate characters, and don't read too much into this, but we're not gonna go into areas of their story that aren't necessary to telling our story. Does that make sense? Wesley, for instance, was created on the Buffy show, but he's not necessary to telling our story. (He's alive in the IDW books, right?)
47. AndrewCrossett: Looking at current events and the possible directions things can go from here, one really sad thing seems clear: the "Scooby gang"... that wonderful friendship dynamic that's been in place since "Welcome to the Hellmouth", and which has survived all attempts to destroy it in the past... is something we're going to have to say goodbye to. There are lines being crossed now that can never be un-crossed. Is that a fair assessment?
Scott Allie: I don't think so. Things change. But the core is always the core.
48. cheryl: Will Angel be in season 9 of Buffy? Or is that too spoilery?
Scott Allie: Too spoilery.
49. angeliclestat: As an "Angel"(as in AtS) fan first and foremost, I am reading the current arc with great interest and a lot of trepidation. I have decided to go the route of not judging or flipping out (too much!) before the end of the arc and the full story has been told. However can you reveal if there will be any flashbacks between the end of 'After the Fall' to the point where Angel decided to become Twilight - which seems like a story that needs to be told. Or perhaps would Dark Horse consider joining forces with IDW and jointly tell that story? Has Joss any intention of telling that story? Thanks.
Scott Allie: We will be telling that story, yeah. There will be flashback material.
49. trunktheslayer: Was the "Hiding your base three seconds in the future" line a Sonic the Hedgehog (archie comics) reference? I mean, I know that's a long shot but after rereading it I thought..."wait, didn't that happen in there at one point?" so I figured I'd ask.
Scott Allie: Oh, I don't know, I gotta ask my kid! I don't know Sonic, and no one mentioned that.
50. Da Letter Jay: This question may seem kind of morbid. Recently, I lost someone very close to me. This made think about the people in my life and what they mean to me.
Eventually, way, WAY farther down the road, I thought about Buffy. In my eyes, the only way for this incarnation of Buffy to truly die would be if something happened to Joss (or if Joss called it quits). What I would like to know is if Joss has a plan to keep Buffy's story going if something were to happen to him. Does Joss share his ideas with certain people that would most likely take over the series in such an event? Or is it basically a “no Joss, no Buffy” kind of deal?
Scott Allie: Yeah, too morbid. I'm sorry for your loss, Jay. I do ponder this sort of thing in relation to some of my projects, but with this one I sort of think we'd close up shop without him.
51. vampmaster: Faith was meant to be "the" traditional slayer of this generation as the line passed on to her through Kendra who was activated after Buffy's death in Prophecy Girl. Am I correct in assuming Buffy was made the slayer of this generation again by the resurrection spell in "Bargaining" which specially states "Here lies the warrior of the people" implying they are rising the slayer and not just Buffy. Or is Faith still the technical slayer ignoring the chosen spell and Buffy was chosen to have all the new nifty powers for a different reason?
Basically what I am asking: Was Buffy chosen to be the one to receive the new nifty powers due to her current position in the Slayer line, or due to one of her own personal actions?
Scott Allie: Lot of stuff in there—but you know by now, I think, that Joss doesn't approach this in quite these terms, right? Who is "technically" the Slayer? Things have gone a little weird in Buffy's time, compared to all previous Slayers. The ways in which things have evolved has made Buffy unique. What she's done, what's been done to her, who she is—all of these things make her a unique Slayer, uniquely significant.
52. collex: Scott, you are a writer and an editor. Wouldn't you like to write an issue of Buffy? A DHP maybe,a one-shot or an issue of Season 9? Did you ever tak about that with Joss? You've been by Joss sides since Fray, he surely wouldn't refuse. So, do you think it's feasible?
Scott Allie: I'm a writer and an editor, but I'm an editor on this book. I wrote a couple Slayer prose pieces for Pocket, I wrote an Angel strip once upon a time, but the Buffy characters are not my sweet spot. I don't have the voice for them, though I think I have the character chops. Anyway, no, not something high on my list.
53. maje77: I just read Brad Meltzer's Commentary;
BEHIND BUFFY SEASON 8: Meltzer Talks - Comic Book Resources for issue 33 and noticed he stated that it was terrifying to him to get Angel’s opening line of the reveal right, because fans have waited a decade for Buffy and Angel to get together and that Joss has been thinking about this for years. Also in the commentary it mentions that the next cover will be an homage to the old Carmine Infantino Superman cover and that the next issue plays up romance. Obviously you can’t say what will happen between Buffy and Angel, but is the romance factor of Buffy and Angel an important aspect of their relationship that Joss wants to highlight in this arc?
Scott Allie: Yes.
54. lostsoul: Some fans around the internet are thinking that Buffy may get pregnant. Can you please put my worries to rest that she will not?
Scott Allie: What, you mean ever?
55. Charles: What happened to Twilight's mark on Riley or is that a spoiler?
Scott Allie: Well, fans wrote in to comment on a panel where it was missing, but we looked at the panel, and I think from that angle it wouldn't show up in the drawing. Tell me where you're talking about, though. If it's missing, it's an error. But if it's where I'm thinking, it wouldn't really show up.
56. King:
Quote:
"No. Don't reckon there's many you killed. No. Just put 'em in a position to die easy."
This is a quote from the "Firefly" episode "Trash", Mal says it in answer to Yo-Saf-Bridge's claim she didn't kill someone. Above, you reinforce Angel's claim that he "didn't kill" 206 Slayers. Well, he sure put them in a position to die easy. He says he "stopped the worst of it", but that also means that, by definition, he chose not to stop some things. My question is... is this explanation really Season 8's last word on Angel's moral culpability in the deaths of the those Slayers, of Ethan, of Genevieve and the Slayers she "practiced on" at Roden's (meaning Angel's) insistence? Or of people who died because Angel didn't stop what he easily could of with his powers, like Toru's gang (and therefore Renee)?
To be clear, I understand from your other answers that we're going to get some more context for his decisions, etc, but as far as his actions and his choices and how he thinks they put him in the moral clear, is the 8.33 explanation really all we're getting?
Scott Allie: We revealed Angel twelve pages ago. You haven't heard the last word on it yet.
57. Remmy: Is there a date we can look forward to when new covers will be shown or are they perhaps too spoilerish to show just yet?
Scott Allie: Our PR department is handling the release of upcoming covers. I'm not sure the exact dates. We've got the covers done through #36 right now.
58. AndrewCrossett: Angel tells Buffy that the balance of power wouldn't allow the Slayer army to exist without dire consequences "on this plane." (I guess in computer terms, you'd say Buffy was trying to run 6 gigabytes of RAM in a world with a 32-bit operating system.)
Anyway, should we keep our eye on that "not on this plane" qualifier as something possibly significant, or was it just a throwaway?
Scott Allie: There will be some shenanigans on other planes, yes.
59. deadfrog: Seems there is a lot of prophecy from a few early Issues that's coming to pass. For example, issue 2 - the dream of kissing Xander (having feelings for him), then on the next page:
Panel 1 - wishing not to fall (discovery that Buffy could fly)
Panel 2 - Buffy wanting a "New Wish" (finding out the disturbing source of the powers was the dead slayers)
Panel 3- "I know you" to the Dragon (the recognition of Angel as Twilight).
So would you say that we're about to hit Panel 4 on that page real soon (the Dragon burning Buffy)?
Also, the "Betrayal" mentioned in #10. That's still coming, right? Or has it already happened, technically?
Scott Allie: This is a really interesting and legit reading of all that. Betrayal is a theme the story will continue to explore.
60. bamph: Is there any info you can give on the next Buffy One-Shot in July?
Scott Allie: It will focus on Riley Finn. And sadly, due to scheduling, it will be in August. There'll be no Whedonverse comic in July from Dark Horse.
61. maje77: I’m a little confused with some of your answers to a few questions regarding Joss subverting Buffy and Angel’s relationship. In the beginning of the Q&A you stated it’s not the intention of the story to mock and subvert the Buffy/Angel relationship, yet in your response to Nixennacht, you state there is an intention to be subversive. So the Buffy and Angel relationship, aspects of their shared story, is intended to be undermined?
Scott Allie: The relationship is evolving, as relationships tend to. Mock is certainly not an accurate description of what's going on. Subvert isn't exactly right either, but it didn't seem as wrong as mock. But you're right, subversion is not really what I see Joss doing to the relationship. Evolve. I think I can stick by that. But we're carrying on a discussion of the comic so far beyond the book itself, analyzing words used in a message-board Q&A, that I think it stands to ruin the story. The book should tell you everything you need to know about the characters and their relationships. I've really enjoyed doing the Q&A's, but based on how many times I've been asked the same question this time, about the Buffy/Angel relationship, or what it says about the Spike/Buffy relationship—and knowing what happens in the forthcoming issues—I'd like to end the Q&A's now. I want to thank you guys for your passion for this material, your commitment to the characters, and your insight. Thanks to Emmie for running the Q&A's, and giving me the chance to address you all directly. I hope you like what happens over the next seven issues. Please keep writing in to the lettercol, and anything we can't run before #40 will hopefully find its way into Season 9. I realize we're wayyyyy behind on the letters now, and we're talking about how to accelerate it without denying people a chance to have their say. But ultimately the message boards is the place for you to have your say, and it's a kind of an invasion for someone like me to linger here. Thanks again, and enjoy the big climax.
