Log in

No account? Create an account
26 February 2002 @ 03:24 am
bloody babies  

There were some charms to this episode; Tough!Wesley is always good to see, and Gunn and Fred continue to be charming. But the story arc continues to be an idiot-plot; that is, Wesley fails to do the obvious sensible thing: tell Angel. And/or Gunn. And Cordelia when she come back, and frankly it's worth hauling her back from vacation for.

Yes, it'll be an unpleasant conversation. Yes, Angel will be sad. However, it's a necessary one. And considering his other options are killing Angel or stealing the baby, don't you think a little conversation is the obvious answer? And it's simply not fair to Angel to not give him the information.

Apart from that... the Look How Happy Angel Is With The Baby anvils were as subtle as the drug metaphor anvils over on Buffy. Yawn. Holtz's fine actor continues to anchor the goofiness they are turning his arc into, with his little mission impossible team. And the Holtz-Justine stuff they seem to be implying... whatever.
Monicarani23 on February 26th, 2002 06:20 am (UTC)
Oh, I have to seriously disagree with you there. Fred and Gunn are driving me up a wall. I can't stand them together. They annoy me. Plus, I can predict everything they are going to say to each other.

On TV: "I've got your back." Says Fred
Monica at home: "Actually, you got his."
On TV: "Actually, I got his back." Says Fred

Bah! Annoying! Plus I hate them together. Hate hate hate.

The loa-burger was tres cool tho. And as unsubtle as it may be, I like Angel being Happy with the Baby. Like Holtz. Like Justine. Like Holt'z crew.

Lauratavella on March 1st, 2002 10:27 am (UTC)
I like Gunn and Fred, as opposed to Wesley and Fred, because I don't think that W & F would be very good for each other, I think they'll hurt each other; they already have. Their damage is too similar. Gunn's got problems too, but I think their strengths will compliment and help heal their weaknesses.

Angel being Happy With the Baby would be fine and cute if it all wasn't just a setup for him losing the baby. It just feels very artificially heightened so we'll be extra sad when it happens.
Angelachotii on February 26th, 2002 02:57 pm (UTC)
Bloody babies, Gunn et al

I don't think Fred and Gunn are suited to each other. But how could Fred *ever* seriously consider Wesley after what he did to her that time when he had that bloodborne disease that made him aggressive and dominant? How do they know he'll never relapse? Shudder.

I keep wondering how Angel can be so happy, and not lose his soul again. I keep wondering how Wesley knows beyond question that the prophecy ("the father will kill the son") applies to Angel and Connor?

The loa was very cool. I got to explaine to Ryan that a Loa is a voodoo god, which I think helped a little with visual comprehension (thank you, Emma Bull).

I like Holz, except that he's perfectly willing to kill as many people as necessary to get to Angel. And he's supposed to be better than a vampire?

silkiemom on February 27th, 2002 03:18 pm (UTC)
Re: Bloody babies, Gunn et al
I *so* agree with you about the soul bit. The first time the little rugrat looks up at Daddy with a big smile and goes, "Goo!", and I'm sorry, that soul is outta there. If that's not a moment of perfect happiness, I don't know what is. (Maybe *only* for a moment, but still.)
Lauratavella on February 27th, 2002 07:47 pm (UTC)
Re: Bloody babies, Gunn et al
What annoys me about Holtz is not that he wants to kill Angel, it's that the plot demands that the can't kill Angel. So instead of putting a crossbow bolt in his chest in the rain, he's going to execute some huge stupid plan about making Angel suffer before he dies (not.)

If he had just nailed him when he had the chance, I'd be all 'you go, guy!'
Alix (Tersa)tersa on February 27th, 2002 02:35 pm (UTC)
Personally, I think Wesley has a definite dilemma, but I'm not sure talking about it will help. Angel is going to absolutely flip if/when Wes tells him the prophecy said that. He'll take some kind of drastic action to prevent it, and, like Oedipus's father, will inadvertantly set up the prophecy to succeed. That's the funny thing about prophecies.

And killing Angel or taking Conor is just no in Wes's nature. Hence, dilemma. However, I think betraying them is kind of d-u-m.

Gunn and Fred are reaching the annoying phase, but I've never been a raving Fred fangirl. Cordy, as far as I know, is out of contact, which is why no one's called her back from vacation.

The jury is still out on where the Holtz commandos factor in to all this.
Lauratavella on March 1st, 2002 11:23 am (UTC)
Yes, but it doesn't look like Wesley is going to shrug his shoulders and just say 'too bad' -- he's going to try to derail the prophecy. Which means he doesn't accept that it's inevitable. And if he's going to try to do that, he should let *Angel* have the knowledge and the choices.

Myself, I'm guessing that Angel kill Dru (his 'child') may be the writers' out plan, since I suspect they won't actually kill the kid. Could be wrong.