That said, I've gotten to the point with both Angel and Buffy where I just look over at Patty sometimes and say "rapetastic plotline #873."
That said, I've gotten to the point with both Angel and Buffy where I just look over at Patty sometimes and say "rapetastic plotline #873."
no subject
Date: 2010-03-10 09:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-10 10:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-10 11:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-11 01:00 am (UTC)I admit I'm a bit bemused you think Angel never really tackled serious issues; I think it did plenty of that, and very successfully, though I grant it didn't do Very Special Episodes on Issues of the Week in quite the way Buffy did. It was more content to be a fantasy show and explore its own internal complexities rather than finding allegories with real life, but I don't think it was any less serious for that in its themes. I do agree it could be very funny, but I don't think being funny negates it being serious; things can be both.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-12 01:47 am (UTC)As for Angel, I think post-heroism is a good way to put it. It more explored what heroism is.
I think one of the strengths of both shows is that they were able to balance seriousness with humor, not just in terms of the occasional light-hearted episode but in terms of banter between characters and whatnot.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-12 01:34 pm (UTC)As for Angel, I think post-heroism is a good way to put it. It more explored what heroism is.
Nodnod. I think the nature of heroism is sort of taken as a given in Buffy whereas Angel addresses what that means more head on. One of the things I love about Angel's team (why don't they have a cool name like the Scoobies?) is that they're all people who've failed at heroism before, and they're working under the knowledge that they could fail - and not just because of external factors, but because of themselves.