Updating classics and AtS issues

[selenak]

A great analysis of the films "Dangerous Liasons" and "Cruel Intentions" via the character of Merteuil (the Marquise and Kathryn respectively), which puts its finger on why the later, despite some clever concepts and a great performance by SMG, ultimately dissappointed me. It also reminds me of how tricky updating classic plays/novels can be, but how admirable if people actually manage to pull it off, a la Romeo and Juliet and West Side Story. Another thing that Les Liasons Dangereuses evokes is that the picture of the French aristocracy painted here, by Chloderos de Laclos, who worked for the Duc de Orleans and wrote his one and only bestseller before the French Revolution (barely), couldn't be more different from the sentimental idealizations later crowding the works of Baroness Orczy and yes, even Dickens.

(Insert "They had it coming" as sung in Chicago here.)

cadesama makes a case for Gunn as the most mishandled character on AtS. You know, the only reason why I still think that dubious honour belongs to Cordy is that it took me several seasons to have any interest in Gunn at all. Warzone is the only season 1 episode I only watched once. Same with That Old Gang of Mine and season 3. It's not that I ever actively disliked Gunn - I just never connected to him emotionally, nor was interested in him intellectually. In fact, I kept voting for him to be the next cast member to die an heroic death. This didn't change until season 4 and Supersymmetry, and now, in season 5, for the first time Gunn's storyline is something which genuinenly fascinates me.

Otoh, Fred I had disliked in the Pylea episodes, which in retrospect probably hailed from the great Pylea dislike in general; I warmed up to her when everyone else started to dislike her, in season 3, and could never understand why she was blamed for her reactions in regards to Wesley when she had been the one to try and prove his innocence and the one who kept bringing up his name to the others. (Me, I was furious with Cordelia and Gunn. Angel I could understand.) In seasons 4 and 5, she became a favourite. Thinking back to my fondness for Wesley back in the BTVS days when most other people hated him, I wonder whether there is a system here, and why it failed in the case of Gunn.

Comments

sounds very logical

[illmantrim.livejournal.com]

I personally favor Spike and Cordelia for the worst handled characters who should have their own show and rule---

Re: sounds very logical

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Cordelia: yes. Spike: no. Mind you, I'm more or less a neutral party in the Spike Wars - I neither believe he became too dominant and ruined the show, nor do I believe he was mishandled/didn't get enough attention/etc. He's a great character, but he's also, like, say, Methos in HL or Max Eilerson in Crusade, not really suited to be the central character. It's much better to have Spike as a counterpoint, someone who bounces of the central character, no matter whether it's Buffy or Angel. In any event, he has been really well explored by the writers, and after all this seasons, I don't think there is much more to add.

Now if you gave me the spin-off of my choice, it would be The Darla Chronicles, but hey...

[kathyh]

in season 5, for the first time Gunn's storyline is something which genuinenly fascinates me.

Yes, me too. Watching "You're Welcome" last night it was obvious that if Angel had left W&H Gunn would not have gone with him. He's the character who has really got something out of the deal. I'd actually like to see more of him dealing with all these morally ambiguous clients and find out about the compromises he's obviously making. He's a lot more interesting now, but we're still seeing him from the outside rather than being in his point of view at any time.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

I'd actually like to see more of him dealing with all these morally ambiguous clients and find out about the compromises he's obviously making.

Your wish is about to get fulfilled, you know.*g*

[cadesama.livejournal.com]

Weeeeell, it's true that I believe he was the most mishandled, but most mistreated still goes to Cordy. The difference is in the fact that with Gunn it was a very passive process of simply not writing character moments for him, while with Cordy it was a slow process of incrementally changing her reactions to things in character moments so that she was a completely different character by the end of S3. Cordy is more horrifying only that it was deliberate.

Still, love him though I do, I would take Gunn's heroic death over Fred's maudlin OTT death -- although that would deny me Illyria and Wes's very clear dissociation.

[zeelee-penguin.livejournal.com]

Hiya! illmantrim pimped you here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zeelee_penguin/138089.html?view=174441#t174441), so I friended you. *waves hello*

[selenak.livejournal.com]

*waves back at you*

Gunn

[bimo.livejournal.com]

In my opion, one of the biggest problem with early Gunn was that his presence did not add very much to the dynamic between the already established characters and also had little to no influence on the grand scheme of things. Up to seaon 4 and 5, he was essentially a character without function.

Wesley, on the other hand, even during his cardboard character/comic relief times on BtVS, never lacked dynamic or influece. He was antagonistic towards Giles and Buffy, played a crucial part in the downfall of Faith, and also served the purpose of adding new, darker shades to the formerly unquestioned Watchers' Council. Regardless whether one sympathized with Wesley or hated him, as a character, he just could not be ignored.

And this is really, where the difference lies, I think.