To clear up a few rumors
1. For the most part, it's not a funny show
2. I didn't say "everything has to be pinned down into rigid boxes," nor does it. But again, I take film and TV quality very seriously. As I'm sure you do the shows you like. But you've reached out your observations to explain why you think the show is a quality program. Therefore, I'm doing the same to explain why it isn't
3. I never said it always matters whether or not a show changes the world or not. So therefore, that's not exclusively how I judge quality. This charge has simply turned up on Buffy's bill because of the way people treat this show like it was that progressive. We've seen girls kicking butt before, only they just weren't as annoying before. The way this show was marketed was annoying, the way that people only watched it because of the attractive case was annoying, the dialogue for this show was annoying, the whole show was annoying. It was aimed at teenagers, was partially responsible for a decline in intelligence (regardless of the creators' high ambitions) because all they took from the show was a preference for the attractive cast and all they watched for was the elements I've mentioned several times already.
4. E.R. bores me. This is a show I choose not to comment on because, I don't know it, it bores me - which is a matter of taste, and since it's a matter of taste with me, I don't comment on it
5. I agree 24 is cheesier, right now, than Buffy was in 1997. But now, Buffy is much cheesier. And 24 sucks. It stereotypes and strips characters of realistic personality traits for the sake of high intensity and simplistic plots. It's depiction of black women, women in power, and Arab-American / Muslim American families is incredibly offensive. But to be fair, this isn't the first show of it's type to do this, it simply should know better considering how many viewers it gets
6. A Show That Uses It's Attractive Cast As the
Main Selling Point Has Little Else to Fall Back On. I
never said an attractive cast was a problem
7. This show
was compromised to attract young mainstream audiences. I never said every show in the mainstream is compromised. That would take a lot of energy from Studios, Executives, and TV Stations. None of these sources all have the power to corrupt everything. You seem to be responding to what is being written and said. Well, I'm kind of into actors who actually feel right in their roles. So remember that a big fault of this show is that the actors don't do a very convincing job of playing real people really fighting. No, instead, they are being paid to look good, deliver their lines in a clear, intelligible voice, and attract people who want to see good-looking actors
8. Television networks aren't entirely responsible for advertising. They show, and often approve ads. But the people who owned the rights to this show who were in league with the creators were the ones that ultimately turned this show into a laughing stock. Literally anyone anywhere with money could turn Buffy into anything they wanted. And they sure did! And without this "interference," the show would never have gotten any attention. I think the hard thing for you to accept is that the original creators of this series never actually had ambitious as high as you think they did. That doesn't mean I'm saying their hearts weren't in the right place. But money is the ruling force and ultimately, the show shot much more out of their attractive cast just being attractive while trading their insanely dumb dialogue (much dumber than all those sitcoms you mentioned, with the exception of Friends)
9. You assumed that I assumed you are saying Buffy is a perfect show. You also assumed I'm saying Buffy is the worst. Why else do you try to single out TV shows and movies you think are cheesier?
10. Those ratings figures you had don't reflect how many viewers would watch 1 TV-set simultaneously. This just happened to be a show that a huge number of viewers watched together - I know, I've met so many Buffy fans (one of the reasons for my "vomit" comment) - I've even passed through spaces where conventions for Buffy fans were being held. I have asked around. I know that a bunch of groups of girls would watch the show together, and thanks to the Internet, they know other groups of people who'd watch the show together. Also, take into account
who would watch this show. Your figures only prove how dorky the show was and how much of a Guilty Pleasure it was for certain viewers to continue watching it. But would you argue that the Power Rangers wasn't a phenomenon? No, of course you wouldn't. Because you know it was. And it was even dorkier than Buffy. Now, I've already explained how they sold the show. And the teenage audience is smaller than those for Children's Television programs. So your dismissal of this as a phenomenon is beside the point. Any show as much referenced, discussed, imitated, and popular as this show was, makes it a phenomenon. Also - do your figures show how popular the show
continues to be in syndication??
11. Again, the "Buffy is hot" argument slides this discussion in my Camp's favor. You are in England, are you not? I was in school when Buffy first came out, I was in High School when it reached the peak of it's popularity.
I know how many American viewers tuned in just for the attractive cast. Believe me. Specifically, nearly hundreds of websites devoted to Sarah Michelle Gellar (probably hundreds more advertising Nude Photos of celebrities where members of this cast appeared, definitely several dozens have existed - again, I know, I've seen it all / not all of them, but all types). And that's just her. There were (still are) dozens of sites just devoted to the actor playing Spike
12. As far as academics are concerned, I'd bet most of your examples come from students. Well, "academics" have been to known to write a lot of classic In-Depth Articles. Your average academic thinks a paper on The Importance of Bongs to the Future of Western Civilization is a typical article. And I have met so many of these types, that I think it's safe to say they're pretty much discredited as a whole
2099net wrote:It's freaking called "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" what does that suggest to you?
If you had accepted that this is the case, you wouldn't argue that it had any deeper meaning whatsoever. But, here you are
2099net wrote:But perhaps it did change the world, to some extent. Before Buffy, how many female action television stars can you name? Charlies Angels perhaps.
Well, by name? I'd start with Diana Rigg, one of, I believe, your homeland natives. Then, I'd follow it up with mentions of Julie Newmar and Eartha Kitt as Catwoman. And then, I'm spent.
2099net wrote:Since Buffy, how many can you name? Dark Angel, Alias, Veronica Mars, Medium (...well, perhaps not Action). Just as I Love Lucy, Mary Taylor Moore, and Roseanne changed perceptions of women on TV, so has Buffy to an extent
These shows are only acting as a diversion, pure entertainment. I haven't seen anyone who really thinks women are more respected because of these shows. Which proves 2 things I've been saying for longer than we've been discussing Buffy - 1) modern TV sucks - though not as much as modern film, 2) we're in such braindead times that TV programs can be as cutting edge as they want to, but only the critics and a few intelligent viewers will ever appreciate what they're trying to do. Though I know I can't fault Buffy for this, so you get 1 point here
2099net wrote:I don't understand your obsession with the mainstream.
It's a mainstream show we're discussing. It was shown by a mainstream Channel of high mainstream exposure, it's syndication is owned by a mainstream television production studio as is it's home video distributed by the same studio, films such as Cruel Intentions and Simply Irresistable were advertised as "starring Sarah Michelle Gellar from TV's hit series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer," the cast were comprised of Highly Visible Mainstream Actors such as Seth Green of the Austin Powers films, Alison Hannigan of the American Pie films, and Gellar of I Know What You Did Last Summer. The show was forced on us by mainstream sources and remained entirely in the mainstream universe until certain cult sources claimed the series was theirs. At which point, nothing really changed
Now you understand my assistance to judge it as such.
The show sucked. It was probably meant to be better. But it still sucked.
).
(iow: stop referencing horror films on a TV show discussion, you Ninny)
