But in other situations - unless it's apparent the danger is minimal - the Scoobies typically rush to her aid. In 'Triangle', as soon as Willow finds an opportunity to cast the spell without being beaten to a bloody pulp by Olaf, she does so. Nothing would've prevented the Ubervamp from simply snapping Buffy's neck in 'Showtime', for example.
They typically rush to her aid. True. But they don't always have to. And you're right, the Ubervamp could have snapped her neck. The fact that he doesn't is dramatic license in a sense; it's a way for the writers to hit the audience over the head with the fact that Buffy is in the fight of her life but that she can still pull through--ultimately the point of her staging the fight in the first place in front of the potentials. This happens a lot on Buffy. The writers stretch what we know to be possible based on the parameters they've established. You can dismiss it, but it's makes for good entertainment; it's not a documentary.
And you're missing my 'bottom line' point, which I've mentioned before as well. Inspiring.the Potentials and getting them to accept Buffy's leadership would've been better accomplished by good-decision making rather than a display of brute strength and pure luck.
What else can I say? I don't see it as pure luck, and I clearly can't be convinced that it is. I thought their decisions were good enough based on the information they had. I didn't see much brute strength at all (for a slayer who is already quite "brute" and I assume you are referring to a level of strength outside of her natural abilities). If Buffy was going simply "brute strength," she'd have been able to simply stake him in spite of his impenetrable chest.
And out of curiosity, what would you consider a "good decision" in Showtime, given the Scoobies' information and resources, or lack thereof?
Really? Because from what I saw, Buffy didn't use the location to her advantage until she was literally knocked against whatever object was there. For example, only when she was punched face first into some cement blocks, did she use them. And the tide of the battle was turned around by...a crossbow arrow, something that wasn't part of the location to begin with. I would've been more impressed if Buffy had just carried some barb wire with her to begin with.
I thought this particular example was in reference to the argument that she was not prepared when she went into battle. I think that by choosing a location which she
could have used to her advantage, she was. Again, I agree that it's slightly ridiculous that she waited to use the equipment until later in the fight. And I maintain that it was the writers' attempt to illustrate a point, if poorly executed.
Even if the person is powerful, it sure doesn't hurt to have weapons, so why not just bring them along? Why take risks when it's not necessary
Again, the attempted analogy here, (brought to us by the Scoobies) is "Potential slayers with weapons can be as effective as Buffy without weapons." Or something along those lines. It isn't airtight and it doesn't add up perfectly, (obviously), but the inspirational message is there.
Well, in that sense, the demonstration in 'Showtime' doesn't work at all, since there are plenty of advantages, but she uses them poorly, and she literally needs an external source (the arrow) to turn things around.
I wouldn't go as far as to say that she uses them poorly, but she certainly waits to do so. See above re: (sometimes overabundant) use of dramatic license.
The arrow further confirms the point of the scene, at least for me: that Buffy's demonstration in 'Showtime' wasn't a sensible course of action at all.
You know how I see the arrow now, honestly? As silly as it is, I think it's their way of saying, "See? Buffy wasn't reckless--she intentionally brought the others along with weapons so that if need be, they could help." And it totally undermines everything else they tried to set up in the scene. No argument there. But that's the frustrating thing about delving too deep into these types of scenes; the writers often contradict themselves and one can find herself with a less than airtight argument on their behalf.
Impossible? No. Improbable? Yes, incredibly so. Buffy's patrols at least are based on empirical experience, like how many of them she tends to encounter, the strength of newly risen vampires and the (relative) ease at which she can kill them. Contrast that with the Ubervamp, and the fact that her only two encounters with the creature had ended with her being beaten to a bloody pulp.
I'd say it's slightly more than improbable. The fact that it hasn't happened before tells us that the odds are low, but the fact that it's quite easy for a whole bunch of people to be vamped on a given night and rise at the same time at a later point would be enough to make me wonder if tonight was the night there might just be too many vamps to handle alone. Hey, it took only one vampire to stab her with her own stake when when she was in excellent physical shape.
As for the Turok Han: she sets up the fight, herself. The fact that he's beaten her down twice before is chalked up to her own reasoning that in the past, she hadn't been ready, both physically and emotionally. That she had forgotten she's the thing monsters have nightmares about and having just remembered why, wants to show the potentials. Should that translate to a victory, in the show? I guess we'll never agree on that.
As I said way back in an earlier post, the outcome that follows this realization is obviously unrealistic in our world. We can either choose to accept it as a metaphor for what does go on in our lives and regard Buffy as an inspirational figure for fearlessly meeting the challenges in hers, or we can over analyze it until the entire show is really quite meaningless.
