5/21/03

Why is Buffy liked by so many fans and critics alike, and not me?

My gosh... this may be blasphemy or something, but I'm glad "Buffy" is over. I could never get into the show, (though I thought the Movie was a hoot) for reasons that escape me. I should love it.... Vampires are (for the most part) inherently evil creatures to be destroyed? Check. Cute, shy redhead? Check. Tried and true "excuse for local weirdness, a la 1000 other sci-fi shows?" Check.

So what made it suck in my opinion?

Really, only two things.

One: First and foremost, the writing sucked so bad in my opinion that I couldn't bear to watch more than five episodes before seeking solace in *anything* else. From what I hear, this season was especially poor, so much so that the fans were annoyed more at the writing than the show being put to rest. I think that's a good sign that the show's time had come. Personally, I like to see stuff go out on a high note, like Calvin and Hobbes or The Far Side stopping before they lost what made them entertaining.

Two, Sarah Michelle Gellar cannot act, nor is she attractive in my eyes. (And please, don't tell me that an anorexic dolt of a bottle-blonde with tight clothes, fake boobs and a penchant for picking abusive boyfriends is a good, solid, feminist role model.)

I've had people say I don't like Buffy (or Voyager, for that matter) is because I don't like strong female leads. Not true, at lease not entirely. I have no problem with Sarah Conner, Ripley, Dax, Jaime Sommers, Dana Scully, Xena, or Oracle... and all the shows / movies that featured those characters had a stinkeroo or three, too. The difference? The writers and actor involved managed to find something that made me sympathize, respect or admire them in some way. Sure, eye candy is nice, but you can't do an entire episode of Voyager featuring 7 of 9 skipping rope. (Well, Danny'd watch it.... probably.)

I'm not choosy. I liked the first 3 seasons of Xena... not exactly a literary masterwork, but good enough to keep me close to the fold. (Note that the writing on Xena went way downhill after around season 3ish. I don't need pointless subtext or bonus super joke episodes.. or "alternate mythos". Xena had a foxy brunette amazon, suitable for using as wonder woman. The sidekick, Gabrielle, was sage who was just the perfect "calmer" cohort to keep the show's namesake in line. It was a fine pattern. (They later broke it, and killed the show dynamic, I feel) It was a spin-off of the Hercules show, which was at its best when he had a goofy mortal sidekick, Iolus. I think the writing on the later episodes of Hercules is what got Xena's writing to roll so well at first.

I was fooled by the x-files before it went off the air. I gave it a 3-show try out, and I got the three worst episodes ever. "Invisible Circus animals" stick out in my mind. I went back and started watching it here and there when folks told me there was a good episode being rerun, so I'd watch the inevitable replay on FX the following Saturday, and was won over. I loved the lone gunmen spin-off, but *hated* the addition of the two new players... the "dumb jock-guy" and "chick with her own agenda". it reminded me of what I hated so much about gaming with lone-wolfers. I like teams to be a team, not these guys, and some one else. I msay be wrong about buffy.. maybe all I saw were the crappiest of crap episodes. Maybe it's golden, otherwise.

Reflecting on it now, I like shows with teams that perform teamwork, or play well off of one another well for the most part.

I don't think science fiction fans want to see a woman be a part of a cohesive unit. More than three main characters, and it gets tough to allow everyone fair air time, and contracts make it so that every character has a line every episode. I don't know if you can have it both ways, and still make it fit in under an hour.