Sunday, February 20, 2005

TV Report: The Cowing of Buffy

The e-mails regarding the review of Patricia Arquette's NBC show Medium keep coming in. One point that gets raised is that Moonlighting wasn't the last show to cow a female. Of the various shows offered, we've decided to focus on Buffy the Vampire Slayer which began life on the WB.
But after we note the destruction of the TV character by the writers, we'll also turn a critical eye to two actresses who are doing more damage to "strong women" than some man behind a TV show.

For those unfamiliar with the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer, we'll sketch out the basic details. Buffy lives in Sunnydale where's she's a high school student . . . and a vampire slayer. Giles is her watcher (which is sort of like one of those women offering make up consultations at the make up counter). Xander's her class mate who has the hots for her and is kind of nerdy. Willow is her bookish best friend. Angel's the big nosed, brooding guy trying to look slim in black leather.

Slowly, we learn that Angel is a vampire -- a good vampire. He becomes one of the 'Scooby gang' or 'the Slayerettes' (we preferred the latter term then and continue to do so now that Sarah Michelle Geller has gone on to disgrace herself post-Buffy as Daphene in the Scooby Doo movies). They battle all sorts of people and school bitch Cordelia begins tagging along.

The show was one of the Xena-waves, a powerful action figure who's a woman. Early on it mixed laughs and observations with action and commentary. It was a good blend.

As the story rolled along (with a variety of villans), Angel and Buffy moved from glances and the occassional smooch to doing the deed. Then all hell broke loose because Angel isn't just a vampire, he's a cursed vampire and part of the curse means if he ever experiences passion, he reverts to evil vampire. Passion was doing the deed with Buff (apparently he's never sampled Ben & Jerry's Cherry Garcia).

In what would remain a high point for the show, the two hour "Becoming" attempted to wrap up a variety of storylines and did so amazing well. We won't focus on the subplots.

Buffy has to confrot Angel and kill him both to save the world and because there's no hope for him now that he's crossed over to the dark side. Xander's supposed to tell her that Willow (who begins dabbling in white magic) is working on a spell to return Angel to his frigid state. But Xander (remember, has the hots for Buffy) doesn't. So Buffy's left without the knowledge that Angel's soul might possibly be restored. Buffy and Angel have a sword fight and throw around a lot of snappy dialogue. In the end, as she's about to kill the evil vampire, Willow's spell works.

Faced with the real, loving, caring Angel (who won't stop weeping), Buff does the only thing a gal can -- kill him apparently.

Seriously though, if she doesn't kill him, the world's over (trust us, we're doing a favor by sparing you the details). So she kills him after repeated kisses (and while he has his eyes closed).

That was a knock out episode. And there wasn't anyone in school the next day talking about it (including people pretending to have seen the episode). It was the show at it's finest.

Sadly, the next year Angel returns. (TV buff Jim points out that it's the same reason Lindsey Wagner's Jamie returned from "death" on The Six Million Dollar Man: spin-off monies, baby!)
There was no point to it in terms of adding to the story.

Let's note that David Boreanaz played Angel and you'd do well to not remember that name because his limited range is such that we're amazed he got cast as Angel and aren't expecting any major developments in his career. (A good drama coach might allow him to make liars out of us.) With no passion and nothing to do, Angel mopes along, marking time for his spin-off.

Angel finally gets his spin-off and Joss Whedon gets to guy it up and act macho. (Angel slaps Buffy on one episode of Angel.) Characters come and go on Angel as the show attempts to find it's voice (but never does). Women never fair well in the cast. Which is a reason to fear future projects by Whedon.

But it's not enough that he has to render women obsolete on Angel (Susan St. James on McMillian & Wife was more integral to the action than any of the women on Angel), he also seems to really lose interest in Buffy and then lack of interest turns to outright hate.

Before we get to that point, Buffy is off to college. After a bumpy start (a sign of things to come), the show hits its stride with Lindsey Crouse as a questionable teacher who's actually running a monster-spy program underground. Riley is an agent and Crouse's T.A. Fortunately, he's good looking because he's either not much of an actor or he wasn't given much to do. But he did play sincerity well. And after a bumpy start, the season built to a huge season ender that rivaled the X-Files for it's complexity, multi-threaded storyline. And like the X-Files, it found new life in the "evil government programs you aren't supposed to know about" stories. The show held promise.

And then? Season five (which starts off with one of the worst "stunt casting" episodes: Buffy meets Dracula) begins. Suddenly Buffy's got a younger sister, teenaged, curvy, ditsy Dawn. (Rumors were Joss would be creating a Saturday animated show with Dawn in the lead.) Now there were all sorts of reasons for this (including that Dawn wasn't her sister) but the point was, Joss didn't seem interested in the show. He was more focused on his macho bullshit Angel. And the whole Buffy takes on the government storyline was out the window.

Critics like Ken Tucker (who slobbers over at Entertainment Weekly) would praise individual episodes like "Hush" but the show was faltering badly. (We agree "Hush" was excellent. It was largely a silent episode. And anytime we didn't have to hear chattering in season five was a high point.)

A huge mistake according to Edna, K240 and Shannen was in breaking up Buffy and Riley.
We agree. The show wasn't Riley the Vampire Slayer. It was Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And, with Buffy as the lead character, Riley was a nice romantic sidekick. But apparently Buffy (powerful women?) can't find happiness with average Joes. So Riley's gone (episode ten, we think). And the show muddles along by bringing back vampire Spike who's been off and on for years and is to masculine sexuality what Donald Duck is to . . . masculine sexuality. Did we mention the Buffy-bot? No? Then let's just avoid that embarrassment.

And then? Buffy dies (again) to save the world (again). And that's the last episode the WB airs.

The show should have ended then and there. (And the WB was smart to dump it.) But UPN picked it up. And by now Joss was really into his destroy Buffy mode. (He's referred to season five as being "dark" -- like a depressive off the meds.) Buffy's brought back to life. Why? To flip burgers apparently. And to face how miserable her life will apparently be. (It's the Batman Forever season -- reference to Val Kilmer's infamous "I can Batman no more!" turn in that weak sequel.)

Along the way, Willow's been demonized for using her witchcraft apparently excessively. (Does Buffy use her powers excessively?) Willow's also become a lesbian. Xander's got a girlfriend (Anya) after Cordelia moves on to the Angel spin-off (where she exists largely as the wacky receptionist who often becomes the damsel in distress -- apparently she's forgotten everything about fighting she learned on Buffy -- before it turns out she's really an evil bitch -- surprise ending only to those who hadn't noticed how much joy Joss seemed to take in degrading Buffy).

The show's a huge downer. We've had to suffer through Buffy being with Spike (something that pleased the masochists in the Buffy viewing audience). We've had to suffer through Buffy being Queen of the Mopers. We've had to suffer through ditzy Dawn who added nothing at a time that audiences wanted to focus on Xander and Willow. How bad is season six? The opening episode is considered by many to be the best of the season.

We also get the episode "Once More With Feeling" where Joss tries to do for the musical what he did for the silent movies (with "Hush") but a song and dance Buffy plays like Cop Rock and no matter who tells you "they really can all sing!" they really can't.

The show has no focus (it should have ended on the WB with season five when Buffy died). Willow's become the "evil lesbian" stereotype. Funny how that happened, isn't it? And funny how Buffy's avenged each and every loss she could but let Willow try to avenge her lover's death and suddenly she's got to be evil. Even funnier, we're about to get the rapist who really isn't so bad storyline that we would have thought, or at least hoped, was a storyline long ago banished.

What can you say about season seven? Where were the regulars? Why did Buffy turn into Dr. Phil barking out motivational speeches to potential slayer-ettes (who ate up way too much time, were too numerous in number and had no individual appeal)? It ends thankfully. (But not before Spike's assured that even a rapist can be loveable).

When the show ended, the New York Times ran an editorial, AN EDITORIAL, noting the feminism in Buffy.

Uh, what were they watching!

Let's recap. Riley leaves because he's suddenly threatened by Buffy's strength. Spike tries to rape but that's a-okay. Shit happens, apparently. Willow turns into evil lez stereotype. (And Tara, Willow's former partner, ends the noble way: the only good lesbian, according to the stereotype, is a dead one.) And via the creation of new slayers (don't ask), Buffy is now normal.
We don't remember Lois & Clark ending with Superman losing his special knack. This is empowering? Rapist as good guy, lesbian stereotypes, Buffy reduced to "normal."

As usual the Times got it wrong.

There's another thread running through the show that led many to grow disenchanted. It largely didn't take place within the episodes of Buffy but it bears remarking on because the Medium review prompted a number of e-mailers to make comparisons between Buffy and Alias and feel both shows had turned to shit.

Jennifer Garner tried to add bangs last year. Big mistake unless she was attempting to emphasize her horsey face. After season four, Sarah Michelle Geller's hair alternated between oily and overlong or both. Neither woman's a great beauty. (Garner does qualify for pretty.) And there's something really off-putting about bad makeovers that attempt to make them look "girly."

But were that hair was the most of the problems.

Apparently tired of being known as a "tough chick" both SMG and JG hit the talk show circuits to prove that we were nothing like the characters they play. They largely succeeded because some fans had identified them with their strong characters. After watching a chat session with Jay Leno, for instance, viewers were appalled to discover them both attempting to pass themselves off as brainless bimbos (and succeeding!).

Theresa e-mailed that both women hit a level of success and then "attempted to sport their breasts on talk shows and, let's be harsh but honest, Sarah doesn't have much to sport."

So while we criticize Joss Whedon (and stand by the criticism), SMG's own efforts to expand the way Hollywood saw her resulted in weaking Buffy (on the show and off) as well. Sarah Michelle Geller has had one strong movie role in the dog of a movie Cruel Intentions. Otherwise, she's played the victim. And to quote Wednesday Adams, she will, "all her life." It's a real shame to watch her and Jennifer Garner both attempt to make themselves over into cartoon versions of Jennifer Love Hewitt (who can actually act).

Garner would be well advised to cool the jets in her personal life. A divorce, a supposed affair with co-star Michael Vartan and now a supposed pairing with Ben Affleck (what, one version of Bennifer wasn't enough for America to suffer through) have left Garner looking not like a sexual being but instead like a woman who loves too much. (Further stripping away the strong image Alias originally provided her with.)

Geller would be well advised to return to a more flattering hair style and to stop appearing onscreen with her husband (Freddie Prinze -- who's yet to meet a role that he couldn't perform the same way he did every role prior). Someone could also advise her that when she's distant and strong, she draws you in with a sense of mystery. When she's playing bubbly bimbo, you just can't help but notice how unattrative her face is. Shot from above, she can almost pass for pretty. This is a woman who needs careful lighting and planned camera shots. She needs to stop kidding herself that she can be mistaken for beautiful. (Well groomed may be the highest she can reasonably aspire to.)

Joss Whedon appears to have fallen into the "I'll prove to them I can write exciting male characters!" syndrome so many TV creators fall into (which usually includes the cowing of the female character that brought them fame). But blame goes to SMG for the fate of Buffy as well. And Garner's proving in real time that you don't need anyone else to destroy the "magic" -- you can easily do yourself in with no assistance at all. The show Alias remains her show. She remains the focal point and the writers have not tried to cow her character. But her bimbo eruptions on talk shows are destroying how she's seen.

It's apparently not just some men who fear strong women, it's also some women. And while the two women may or may not be responsible for their movie roles -- they may be picking from the best they are offered (we'd argue there's still no excuse for the Scooby Doo movies) -- they are responsible for how they promote themselves. They both benefitted from a rare interest on the part of TV in strong women. And they both appear to shrink from being seen that way. Maybe they believe this is the way to build an acting career ("See, I don't have anything together! Not even my bra straps!") but they'd do well to remember that Henry Winkler once went to great lengths to prove in TV interviews that he was nothing like Fonzie and his post-Happy Days acting career didn't set the world on fire.