• 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. Fourteen thousand people can't be wrong.

    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.

    4. See 1 through 3.

    Come on, register already!

How did Warren become a murderer with zero remorse and if Willow had not caught him. What type of killer he would have become?

sweetiepie

Potential
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
132
1. In the first place he has never intented to murder Katrina. He has intented to make her his sex slave. He killed her by accident and unlike Andrew and Jonathan, he didn't panicked or he was panicking inside. On the other hand he kept his cool and was thinking of a plan. How could he do that when he has just murderered someone without intented to? He showed zero remorse when his victim was his ex girlfriend. The girl he had loved. He had never killed in the past and he could not care less about Katrina.



2. Why wasn't he remorseful for murdering Tara who was not his target. If he had murdererd Buffy and showed zero regret, it would have made a bit sense. Tara has never been his target but when he learnt he had shot to death an innocent person. He didn't express any remorse. How so?



3. What type of killer would he have become if Willow had not caught him?
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
790
Age
36
Location
England
1. In the first place he has never intented to murder Katrina. He has intented to make her his sex slave.
I think you are perhaps misunderstanding the nature of "evil", or indeed just bog standard rampant misogyny, if you draw distinction between either intention - and believe that, due to his intentions, he would be OK with one but the other would cross a line for him. In order to intend to make someone your sex slave you have to have already crossed a moral event horizon. This is no small thing. This is not even 'I didn't mean to hit her' or 'she was drunk so I had sex with her' this is making the cold and calculated decision to kidnap another human being, override their will and then violate their body for his own pleasure. You don't just do that. You have to really hate someone to do that. You have to have convinced yourself that this person is not human, that they are beneath you and you are entitled and every violation is as much about your anger and hatred as it is about your pleasure. The intention to 'make someone a sex slave' is a huge act, displaying massive hatred.

But once you have already dehumanised someone to the point that you can make them your sex slave - then killing them means almost nothing at all. They're subhuman; they don't matter; you already hate them, what they are and what they represent. Of course someone in this position would feel little to no guilt or remorse for killing one of their victims.

Real life examples of what Warren was doing (if you strip away the use of magic) are Ariel Castro and Josef Fritzl - do you really think either of these men would have felt remorse if their victims had attempted to escape and they had killed them in the ensuing struggle?

On the other hand he kept his cool and was thinking of a plan. How could he do that when he has just murderered someone without intented to?
Because he did not see her as equally human. I'm sure he would claim that if she hadn't tried to escape then she wouldn't be dead. It's her fault, and now she is a problem for him to get rid of. He probably hates her even more for causing him the inconvenience. He is afraid of getting caught and going to jail, but he isn't bothered about her.

He showed zero remorse when his victim was his ex girlfriend. The girl he had loved. He had never killed in the past and he could not care less about Katrina.
These two statements appear to be contradictory as you say both that he loved her and couldn't care about her. I think he did love her in his own, twisted way - but his love wasn't stronger than his hate, his anger, his sense of entitlement and his sense of superiority and he felt that about all women - not just Katrina. Katrina, if anything was the worst because she was the one he wanted and she left him, so she would be the one he hated the most, who he was most angry at.
He didn't respect any woman's right to safety, life and bodily autonomy - and that included Katrina. If he was OK to treat her as a sex slave then he was OK to kill her and not care about it because her type of human doesn't matter to him.

2. Why wasn't he remorseful for murdering Tara who was not his target. If he had murdererd Buffy and showed zero regret, it would have made a bit sense. Tara has never been his target but when he learnt he had shot to death an innocent person. He didn't express any remorse. How so?
Because he sees all women as subhuman and inferior. Their lives do not matter. Katrina shouldn't have tried to escape, Tara shouldn't have been standing there. These silly, stupid women bring it on themselves and make him do it just because they don't do as they're told or they get in the way. If they would just shut up and submit to him he wouldn't have to kill hem. Look at Buffy - if she hadn't kept trying to stop him he would never have had to turn up at her garden and shoot her, so Tara wouldn't have died either. It's all their fault. If they would just recognise their place beneath him and their function to help and support him then he'd treat them well*. But they don't - and he is not responsible for the consequences.

That is his mindset. It's not his fault and these women do not matter. Besides - once you've successfully killed the one girl you did love (in your own twisted way) and not felt any remorse about it, you're not going to suddenly develop remorse about killing other women are you? If Katrina ultimately didn't matter, how much less do the rest of them matter?

*Of course this isn't true either. He built his dream woman who shut up and submitted - April - and in the end he learned to despise her as much as he despised real women and treated her appallingly too. But just because he has a bad track record with both women who know their own mind and doormats who do exactly what he wants, doesn't mean he would recognise that the fundamental flaw lies with him - not them. He's a nice guy. It's the women that are bitches.

3. What type of killer would he have become if Willow had not caught him?
I certainly don't think he would go on to be a serial killer in the silence of the lambs sense of the word. And I don't think he go in for mass shootings because he has too great a sense of self preservation. I don't think he'd set out to continue killing anyone. But he is careless and does not value female life and I suppose there would be more accidents like Katrina along the way. But the victims would never link to each other, the deaths would not follow a pattern - he'd always use whatever was handy as a weapon, and he would probably skip town every time he killed a girl and go somewhere new where nobody knew him and possibly across state lines so there would be even less chance of connections ever being made. The deaths would be sporadic and it is unlikely he would ever be caught.
 

sweetiepie

Potential
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
132
I think you are perhaps misunderstanding the nature of "evil", or indeed just bog standard rampant misogyny, if you draw distinction between either intention - and believe that, due to his intentions, he would be OK with one but the other would cross a line for him. In order to intend to make someone your sex slave you have to have already crossed a moral event horizon. This is no small thing. This is not even 'I didn't mean to hit her' or 'she was drunk so I had sex with her' this is making the cold and calculated decision to kidnap another human being, override their will and then violate their body for his own pleasure. You don't just do that. You have to really hate someone to do that. You have to have convinced yourself that this person is not human, that they are beneath you and you are entitled and every violation is as much about your anger and hatred as it is about your pleasure. The intention to 'make someone a sex slave' is a huge act, displaying massive hatred.

But once you have already dehumanised someone to the point that you can make them your sex slave - then killing them means almost nothing at all. They're subhuman; they don't matter; you already hate them, what they are and what they represent. Of course someone in this position would feel little to no guilt or remorse for killing one of their victims.

Real life examples of what Warren was doing (if you strip away the use of magic) are Ariel Castro and Josef Fritzl - do you really think either of these men would have felt remorse if their victims had attempted to escape and they had killed them in the ensuing struggle?



Because he did not see her as equally human. I'm sure he would claim that if she hadn't tried to escape then she wouldn't be dead. It's her fault, and now she is a problem for him to get rid of. He probably hates her even more for causing him the inconvenience. He is afraid of getting caught and going to jail, but he isn't bothered about her.



These two statements appear to be contradictory as you say both that he loved her and couldn't care about her. I think he did love her in his own, twisted way - but his love wasn't stronger than his hate, his anger, his sense of entitlement and his sense of superiority and he felt that about all women - not just Katrina. Katrina, if anything was the worst because she was the one he wanted and she left him, so she would be the one he hated the most, who he was most angry at.
He didn't respect any woman's right to safety, life and bodily autonomy - and that included Katrina. If he was OK to treat her as a sex slave then he was OK to kill her and not care about it because her type of human doesn't matter to him.



Because he sees all women as subhuman and inferior. Their lives do not matter. Katrina shouldn't have tried to escape, Tara shouldn't have been standing there. These silly, stupid women bring it on themselves and make him do it just because they don't do as they're told or they get in the way. If they would just shut up and submit to him he wouldn't have to kill hem. Look at Buffy - if she hadn't kept trying to stop him he would never have had to turn up at her garden and shoot her, so Tara wouldn't have died either. It's all their fault. If they would just recognise their place beneath him and their function to help and support him then he'd treat them well*. But they don't - and he is not responsible for the consequences.

That is his mindset. It's not his fault and these women do not matter. Besides - once you've successfully killed the one girl you did love (in your own twisted way) and not felt any remorse about it, you're not going to suddenly develop remorse about killing other women are you? If Katrina ultimately didn't matter, how much less do the rest of them matter?

*Of course this isn't true either. He built his dream woman who shut up and submitted - April - and in the end he learned to despise her as much as he despised real women and treated her appallingly too. But just because he has a bad track record with both women who know their own mind and doormats who do exactly what he wants, doesn't mean he would recognise that the fundamental flaw lies with him - not them. He's a nice guy. It's the women that are bitches.



I certainly don't think he would go on to be a serial killer in the silence of the lambs sense of the word. And I don't think he go in for mass shootings because he has too great a sense of self preservation. I don't think he'd set out to continue killing anyone. But he is careless and does not value female life and I suppose there would be more accidents like Katrina along the way. But the victims would never link to each other, the deaths would not follow a pattern - he'd always use whatever was handy as a weapon, and he would probably skip town every time he killed a girl and go somewhere new where nobody knew him and possibly across state lines so there would be even less chance of connections ever being made. The deaths would be sporadic and it is unlikely he would ever be caught.
This is perfection. I have not noticed that he hated Katrina and that he had dehumanized her. I did not know that he was blaming women for all his crimes. I have belived he would become a serial killer wanting to become popular.
 

AlphaFoxtrot

Scooby
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
1,976
Age
39
Dark magic corrupts your soul, and the Black Loa eventually demand human blood as the price for their secrets. So, he would no doubt kill again, that's the price of power. I remember this one book, "Monster Hunter Memoirs; Saints," where a fairly significant subplot is about a group of humans that basically kidnaps teenage girls, murders their families with knockout drugs and arson, and then sells the girls as virgin sacrifices. I can see a market for that in the Buffyverse.

But, his two kills were Katrina and Buffy. Katrina seemed to get dark really quick, like the original plan was to make her get drinks for a few hours, and then release her, the rape idea came afterwards. And Buffy is a soldier in a war. She was interfering in his business. He would have done the same to Angel, Faith or Nighthawk. (Boom! Comics Presents; "Nighthawk and the White Hats" Issues 1-6, with 60 alternate covers for #1. Coming to an Ollie's near you.) Frankly, it could work either way, as late season 6 Warren was more of a foil for Willow, not a Character in his own right.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
790
Age
36
Location
England
Katrina seemed to get dark really quick, like the original plan was to make her get drinks for a few hours, and then release her, the rape idea came afterwards
As early as Flooded their plans on the board included 'chicks chicks chicks' ... I really don't think any of them ever believed for a moment they were inventing a neural dampener to use on a girl so she'd get them drinks.
Andrew and Jonathan just didn't realise that having sex with a girl whose consent they had overriden was rape. If Warren realised - he didn't care. I'm sure Jonathan and Andrew believed they would definitely release whatever girl they took home once they were done with her, maybe wipe her memory if they could ... I'm not sure Warren didn't always know what they were going to have to do with the witness to their crimes.
Hence why Andrew and Jonathan freak out when Katrina calls it 'rape' and Warren doesn't, and hence why Andrew and Jonathan freak out once she's dead - and Warren doesn't.
 

Faded90

Scooby
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
697
Age
63
As early as Flooded their plans on the board included 'chicks chicks chicks' ... I really don't think any of them ever believed for a moment they were inventing a neural dampener to use on a girl so she'd get them drinks.
Andrew and Jonathan just didn't realise that having sex with a girl whose consent they had overriden was rape. If Warren realised - he didn't care. I'm sure Jonathan and Andrew believed they would definitely release whatever girl they took home once they were done with her, maybe wipe her memory if they could ... I'm not sure Warren didn't always know what they were going to have to do with the witness to their crimes.
Hence why Andrew and Jonathan freak out when Katrina calls it 'rape' and Warren doesn't, and hence why Andrew and Jonathan freak out once she's dead - and Warren doesn't.
They also say sometime about wanting to make Buffy their sex slave (or along them lines) when they make that list. Also in this episode we have Jonathan and Andrew saying they don’t want Buffy killed - Warren pretends he doesn’t but then gives the demon Buffy’s address to go and kill her
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
790
Age
36
Location
England
Warren pretends he doesn’t but then gives the demon Buffy’s address to go and kill her
Yes, a lot of people think his turn to the dark side happens in 'Dead Things' - but it was always there, it just wasn't as explicit and was played more low key so seemed less harmful. But the first time we meet him he has built a girlfriend that can't cry, not because having an electronic person capable of spouting water from their electronic eyeballs is clearly a disaster waiting to happen, but because 'tears are emotional blackmail' - and he specifically programs that belief into her. There was no need to teach April that good girlfriends don't cry - there were perfectly good, scientific reasons for him to leave her unable to cry - but that is already what he thought about women, girlfriends and their tears and it was important enough to him that he took the time to make sure April knew it and could repeat it by rote.

Like with him handing Buffy's address to the M'Fashnik, it's not particularly flagged up as being especially dark in the episode itself - but it is planted there in his very first appearance so that when he eventually becomes what he does we can all look back and see no it didn't come from no where, there were plenty of early warning signs.

I obviously don't like Warren but I do think what the show does with him, and the way they gently seed his villainy is masterful. He's a joke until suddenly he isn't - but then after Dead Things you can look back and see he was never a joke at all. Considering this was all well before the online phenomenon of incels and Elliot Rodger, Warren was remarkably prescient.
 

sweetiepie

Potential
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
132
Yes, a lot of people think his turn to the dark side happens in 'Dead Things' - but it was always there, it just wasn't as explicit and was played more low key so seemed less harmful. But the first time we meet him he has built a girlfriend that can't cry, not because having an electronic person capable of spouting water from their electronic eyeballs is clearly a disaster waiting to happen, but because 'tears are emotional blackmail' - and he specifically programs that belief into her. There was no need to teach April that good girlfriends don't cry - there were perfectly good, scientific reasons for him to leave her unable to cry - but that is already what he thought about women, girlfriends and their tears and it was important enough to him that he took the time to make sure April knew it and could repeat it by rote.

Like with him handing Buffy's address to the M'Fashnik, it's not particularly flagged up as being especially dark in the episode itself - but it is planted there in his very first appearance so that when he eventually becomes what he does we can all look back and see no it didn't come from no where, there were plenty of early warning signs.

I obviously don't like Warren but I do think what the show does with him, and the way they gently seed his villainy is masterful. He's a joke until suddenly he isn't - but then after Dead Things you can look back and see he was never a joke at all. Considering this was all well before the online phenomenon of incels and Elliot Rodger, Warren was remarkably prescient.
Dark magic corrupts your soul, and the Black Loa eventually demand human blood as the price for their secrets. So, he would no doubt kill again, that's the price of power. I remember this one book, "Monster Hunter Memoirs; Saints," where a fairly significant subplot is about a group of humans that basically kidnaps teenage girls, murders their families with knockout drugs and arson, and then sells the girls as virgin sacrifices. I can see a market for that in the Buffyverse.

But, his two kills were Katrina and Buffy. Katrina seemed to get dark really quick, like the original plan was to make her get drinks for a few hours, and then release her, the rape idea came afterwards. And Buffy is a soldier in a war. She was interfering in his business. He would have done the same to Angel, Faith or Nighthawk. (Boom! Comics Presents; "Nighthawk and the White Hats" Issues 1-6, with 60 alternate covers for #1. Coming to an Ollie's near you.) Frankly, it could work either way, as late season 6 Warren was more of a foil for Willow, not a Character in his own right.
I don't understand Katrina seemed to get dark really quick.
 
Myheadsgonenumb
Myheadsgonenumb
sorry - we're you saying you didn't understand Alpha's post? if so ignore my reply.
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
790
Age
36
Location
England
I don't understand Katrina seemed to get dark really quick.
Well that's because the twist in the episode is what makes it so masterful and hard hitting.

The decision to override a woman's will (any woman - and I know there are people who vehemently believe Katrina was not the intended target) kidnap her and force her to act out anything without her will (even if they were just planning on using her to get drinks ... which they weren't, the plan was always sex) is dark. Capital D Dark. It's really bad. There is no way this is excusable or understandable or anything than exactly what it is - a plan to, at the very least, kidnap a woman and hold her prisoner. No one planning that takes a dark turn later - the dark turn has already been taken.

But the show doesn't present in that way - on purpose, to make it all the more hard hitting. The show presents it as a joke, a bit of harmless fun. These boys are a joke, their plans are a joke, hahaha these nerds creating willing sex slaves because they can't get a girl for themselves - aren't they a joke? And definitely that is how Andrew and Jonathan think of it - harmless fun, no one gets hurt, they get a willing, hot girl and the hot girl will be none the wiser. Fun old times.

It's presented as a joke all the way through from the first suggestion in 'Flooded', to the pick up, to having her in her maid's outfit telling Andrew he's hot ... and then BAM Katrina calls it what it is: 'rape' - and Jonathan and Andrew just wilt. And the audience realise that this isn't funny. It was never funny. It was never OK. They were always doing something terrible. These men are pathetic but they are not a joke - they are dangerous.

Katrina sends Warren flying, she fights tooth and nail to get out of there - it is not an accident how powerful and strong she looks as she tells them exactly what they are and makes a damn good escape attempt. Despite what they have tried to do to her, she is the one who looks like the adult, the fully realised human, in this scene. They look like tiny, pathetic men in the face of her rage.

And her rage is warranted - what has been done to her is disgusting, it was always disgusting, it was always dark. It hasn't turned dark because she has woken up, it was dark before it started. It's just only now Andrew, Jonathan and the audience understand that.

But for all that she looks powerful and strong, and for all she is worth 10 000 of Warren, ultimately, he is faster and stronger than she is because of his male body and so is able to kill her without even meaning to. One blow to the head - and that's it.
It is an accident, I fully agree he didn't mean to kill her - but he did mean to kidnap and rape her, so it isn't her death that is a dark turn. That is not the point that the line is crossed.

It is absolutely purposeful on the part of the show that it is presented as funny, that we see it as funny until suddenly it isn't. But we're not meant to take from that that it was OK up until she died - we're supposed to understand we were in the wrong to not take it seriously. We're supposed to feel ashamed that we ever laughed along with the nerds.
Because up until Katrina wakes up, we see it all through the nerds POV. That this is harmless fun to get them what they want. Once she wakes up - we see it through her's, that she has been kidnapped, that Warren has tried to rape her - that these men are monsters without their even realising it,

It is an amazing depiction of male entitlement and female objectification - something that sadly we see more and more nowadays, thanks to the internet, rather than less and less.
And the twist is meant to be a gut punch. It is meant to open your eyes and turn everything on it's head. it's absolutely beautifully and masterfully done. But what it isn't is a scene that gets dark fast. It is a scene that shines a light on how dark all the other scenes preceding it really were.
 

sweetiepie

Potential
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
132
Well that's because the twist in the episode is what makes it so masterful and hard hitting.

The decision to override a woman's will (any woman - and I know there are people who vehemently believe Katrina was not the intended target) kidnap her and force her to act out anything without her will (even if they were just planning on using her to get drinks ... which they weren't, the plan was always sex) is dark. Capital D Dark. It's really bad. There is no way this is excusable or understandable or anything than exactly what it is - a plan to, at the very least, kidnap a woman and hold her prisoner. No one planning that takes a dark turn later - the dark turn has already been taken.

But the show doesn't present in that way - on purpose, to make it all the more hard hitting. The show presents it as a joke, a bit of harmless fun. These boys are a joke, their plans are a joke, hahaha these nerds creating willing sex slaves because they can't get a girl for themselves - aren't they a joke? And definitely that is how Andrew and Jonathan think of it - harmless fun, no one gets hurt, they get a willing, hot girl and the hot girl will be none the wiser. Fun old times.

It's presented as a joke all the way through from the first suggestion in 'Flooded', to the pick up, to having her in her maid's outfit telling Andrew he's hot ... and then BAM Katrina calls it what it is: 'rape' - and Jonathan and Andrew just wilt. And the audience realise that this isn't funny. It was never funny. It was never OK. They were always doing something terrible. These men are pathetic but they are not a joke - they are dangerous.

Katrina sends Warren flying, she fights tooth and nail to get out of there - it is not an accident how powerful and strong she looks as she tells them exactly what they are and makes a damn good escape attempt. Despite what they have tried to do to her, she is the one who looks like the adult, the fully realised human, in this scene. They look like tiny, pathetic men in the face of her rage.

And her rage is warranted - what has been done to her is disgusting, it was always disgusting, it was always dark. It hasn't turned dark because she has woken up, it was dark before it started. It's just only now Andrew, Jonathan and the audience understand that.

But for all that she looks powerful and strong, and for all she is worth 10 000 of Warren, ultimately, he is faster and stronger than she is because of his male body and so is able to kill her without even meaning to. One blow to the head - and that's it.
It is an accident, I fully agree he didn't mean to kill her - but he did mean to kidnap and rape her, so it isn't her death that is a dark turn. That is not the point that the line is crossed.

It is absolutely purposeful on the part of the show that it is presented as funny, that we see it as funny until suddenly it isn't. But we're not meant to take from that that it was OK up until she died - we're supposed to understand we were in the wrong to not take it seriously. We're supposed to feel ashamed that we ever laughed along with the nerds.
Because up until Katrina wakes up, we see it all through the nerds POV. That this is harmless fun to get them what they want. Once she wakes up - we see it through her's, that she has been kidnapped, that Warren has tried to rape her - that these men are monsters without their even realising it,

It is an amazing depiction of male entitlement and female objectification - something that sadly we see more and more nowadays, thanks to the internet, rather than less and less.
And the twist is meant to be a gut punch. It is meant to open your eyes and turn everything on it's head. it's absolutely beautifully and masterfully done. But what it isn't is a scene that gets dark fast. It is a scene that shines a light on how dark all the other scenes preceding it really were.
I understand better now. The Trio was more dangerous than it looks.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
790
Age
36
Location
England
The Trio was more dangerous than it looks.
Yep - but what is perhaps most dangerous about them is that they don't think they are dangerous. Vampires know they are doing bad things - Jonathan and Andrew, at least, don't. They don't want to hurt people, they're not setting out to hurt people - but they are careless, thoughtless and entitled and display no empathy for the people whose lives they are messing with. They are caught up in their little comic book world of playing at being supervillains and they don't stop to realise that this isn't a comic and the people they hurt don't just come back in the next issue. They don't understand real life consequences for other people - and care even less - because they are maladaptive fantasists playing at being Lex Luthor.

And we as the audience are absolutely led in the direction of seeing them as a joke at the beginning. We are supposed to not take them seriously. The aim of Dead Things is to turn that joke on its head completely and make us look back at it all in a whole new light.

It also wakes Jonathan and Andrew up to what they are doing. The difference between Jonathan and Warren is that, once Jonathan fully understands what they have been doing and where it has led them, he wants to back out - whereas Warren likes it and keeps going deeper. And Andrew follows Warren. But from the moment Jonathan can see them for what they really are - we can too.

The question is was Warren ever as clueless as the other two? He was certainly darker earlier (giving the M'Fashnik Buffy's address even though they had voted not to kill her) but there is nothing really definitive on whether he knew his plans with the neural dampener were plans to commit rape and just didn't care or if it just never crossed his mind. I certainly credit him with more intelligence about these things than the other two - I'm not sure he ever took the time to label the crimes he was thinking of committing but I do think that, whereas the other two never even stopped to consider that what they were planning would hurt someone else- they were lost in their own entitlement, he knew it would be harmful to their victims and enjoyed the thought of harming them. Or at least thought that if he had the power to harm them than he had the right to do so, and his victims would be victims because of their own weakness - if they were powerful like him, they wouldn't be victims.

The belief that because he can do something therefore he has a right to, and the lack of care for the people he does it to, then parallels him to Willow and her addiction to and abuse of magic and the way she treats people during that arc. And then of course both their arcs (and entitlement over power) collide when he accidentally shoots Tara.

It's clever stuff this Buffy show.
 

sweetiepie

Potential
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
132
Yep - but what is perhaps most dangerous about them is that they don't think they are dangerous. Vampires know they are doing bad things - Jonathan and Andrew, at least, don't. They don't want to hurt people, they're not setting out to hurt people - but they are careless, thoughtless and entitled and display no empathy for the people whose lives they are messing with. They are caught up in their little comic book world of playing at being supervillains and they don't stop to realise that this isn't a comic and the people they hurt don't just come back in the next issue. They don't understand real life consequences for other people - and care even less - because they are maladaptive fantasists playing at being Lex Luthor.

And we as the audience are absolutely led in the direction of seeing them as a joke at the beginning. We are supposed to not take them seriously. The aim of Dead Things is to turn that joke on its head completely and make us look back at it all in a whole new light.

It also wakes Jonathan and Andrew up to what they are doing. The difference between Jonathan and Warren is that, once Jonathan fully understands what they have been doing and where it has led them, he wants to back out - whereas Warren likes it and keeps going deeper. And Andrew follows Warren. But from the moment Jonathan can see them for what they really are - we can too.

The question is was Warren ever as clueless as the other two? He was certainly darker earlier (giving the M'Fashnik Buffy's address even though they had voted not to kill her) but there is nothing really definitive on whether he knew his plans with the neural dampener were plans to commit rape and just didn't care or if it just never crossed his mind. I certainly credit him with more intelligence about these things than the other two - I'm not sure he ever took the time to label the crimes he was thinking of committing but I do think that, whereas the other two never even stopped to consider that what they were planning would hurt someone else- they were lost in their own entitlement, he knew it would be harmful to their victims and enjoyed the thought of harming them. Or at least thought that if he had the power to harm them than he had the right to do so, and his victims would be victims because of their own weakness - if they were powerful like him, they wouldn't be victims.

The belief that because he can do something therefore he has a right to, and the lack of care for the people he does it to, then parallels him to Willow and her addiction to and abuse of magic and the way she treats people during that arc. And then of course both their arcs (and entitlement over power) collide when he accidentally shoots Tara.

It's clever stuff this Buffy show.
You have explained it very perfectly. It does not excuse Andrew and Jonathan but they were more followers. They thought it was all a game unlike Warren.
 
Top Bottom