February 18 2009
Joss Whedon answers your Buffyverse (and Serenity) questions.
Finally closure on some long standing fan theories and speculation.
© 2002 - 2009 - WHEDONesque.com
(e-mail)
Individual posts are copyright their respective authors
This is a non-profit, unofficial website, not affiliated with Mutant Enemy, Inc., 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers or UPN.
Individual posts are copyright their respective authors
This is a non-profit, unofficial website, not affiliated with Mutant Enemy, Inc., 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers or UPN.
crazygirlne | February 18, 10:11 CET
Mercenary | February 18, 10:14 CET
Also loved hearing him say (re "season8) "I can't really compare it to the TV show because they're such different mediums", since I'm so not into comics. Not even for Joss.
Looking forward to the next installment. (And waiting for Serenity sequel diehards to latch on to the "I'm at the ready" hope. ;)
ETA: Love the beard, he should keep it.
[ edited by Shey on 2009-02-18 10:28 ]
Shey | February 18, 10:27 CET
MobileHQ | February 18, 10:30 CET
twinkiefoo | February 18, 10:47 CET
Ildeth | February 18, 10:48 CET
twinkiefoo | February 18, 10:47 CET,
Try using a different browser, that sometimes works. I got it fine with Mozilla but for some videos, I have to switch to IE.
Shey | February 18, 10:51 CET
Numfar PTB | February 18, 11:06 CET
Racoon Boy | February 18, 11:15 CET
It's my very first comment here, and I'm complaining. *shakes head sadly*
poisonyoulove | February 18, 11:19 CET
timeerkat | February 18, 11:34 CET
gossi | February 18, 12:09 CET
ShanshuBugaboo | February 18, 12:19 CET
Come on, no one would miss a measly $100m!
zz9 | February 18, 12:51 CET
Shep | February 18, 13:01 CET
Transcript
I couldn't see the video in Internet Explorer either, but it worked fine in Firefox. Strange.
stormwreath | February 18, 13:46 CET
Always loved Anya's bunny-phobia!
Shep | February 18, 13:57 CET
thricewise | February 18, 13:57 CET
I still miss Matt!
redfern | February 18, 14:04 CET
Simon | February 18, 14:07 CET
NotaViking | February 18, 14:07 CET
Yay one of my questions got answered about wether he considered season eight a success! That gave me a happy, I was bummed when it didn't get picked in the other interview. I liked how he handled all the answers.
vampmogs | February 18, 14:09 CET
Shep | February 18, 14:12 CET
@Shep, I guess it's gone for good, a few people didn't play nice anyway.
Krusher | February 18, 14:19 CET
Okay, has Morena really given away Inara's secret at conventions? Or was that a funny? Inara's secret has been one of the things driving me insane for years. Years.
phlebotinin | February 18, 14:23 CET
Sparticus | February 18, 14:26 CET
And I love those answers - just great. I've got a suit somewhere too - I just need the money.
The Do That Girl | February 18, 14:35 CET
Ivalaine | February 18, 14:41 CET
swanjun | February 18, 14:48 CET
zeitgeist | February 18, 14:50 CET
Radaar | February 18, 14:58 CET
gossi | February 18, 15:00 CET
And I'm a bad fan, cause I didn't even knew there was an "Inara's secret".
Nice to have some clarification on the chat thing.
the Groosalugg | February 18, 15:20 CET
Enisy | February 18, 15:24 CET
sueworld2003 | February 18, 15:34 CET
Joss Whedon: They're going to have sex for three issues straight. Nothing but porn. And that's what America needs.
Question: Will Buffy ever know that Spike is alive?
Joss Whedon: Spike will appear in two of the three issues. I can't really describe how.
No, all of these things, you know, all of these characters we have licence to use in the Buffyverse but because a different company has the franchise we've been a little hands-off. But, you know, we've got so much to play with right now that we're waiting; but we won't wait forever. Got to see our boys.
[ edited by Enisy on 2009-02-18 15:36 ]
Enisy | February 18, 15:36 CET
If there was such a thing as comic book sweeps, Joss'd be on a winner with that concept!
And isn't the big secret supposed to be that Inara is Ben?
missb | February 18, 15:40 CET
Buffyfantic | February 18, 15:43 CET
Numfar PTB | February 18, 15:44 CET
sueworld2003 | February 18, 15:45 CET
Mirage | February 18, 15:47 CET
That was a joke?! Damn I was looking forward to that arc.
barboo | February 18, 15:49 CET
Actually it's that she's Glory.
barboo | February 18, 15:51 CET
Except that it hasn't done in the last four hours. :-(
Thanks for the transcript, Stormwreath.
Gill | February 18, 15:56 CET
Joseph | February 18, 16:20 CET
angry_puppy | February 18, 16:45 CET
But... but... that would mean that Ben is Glory?!??!?!!!
Class Protector | February 18, 17:08 CET
Léo | February 18, 17:20 CET
angry_puppy | February 18, 17:32 CET
Please someone in a suit approach Joss,
Please someone in a suit approach Joss,
Please someone in a suit approach Joss,
Please someone in a suit approach Joss,
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase!
Penthos | February 18, 17:49 CET
embers | February 18, 18:01 CET
Deanna_Lynne | February 18, 18:05 CET
[ edited by karosurly on 2009-02-18 19:29 ]
karosurly | February 18, 18:09 CET
Dont we have an official transcripter? It's like a matching set ala Papageno and Papagena. Only in this case its Quotergal and Transcriptboy. They kind of sound like super heroes...or dare I say, members of the ELoE?
And I have to add the obligatory, "This looks like a job for the literary duo!"
alexreager | February 18, 18:14 CET
buysteal a suit*korkster | February 18, 18:56 CET
I was kinda wondering what happened to the chat. But yeah, it wasn't perfect, looking forward to them improving it. :-)
AnotherFireflyfan | February 18, 18:58 CET
electricspacegirl | February 18, 19:07 CET
Yeah--whoever asked that question should keep an eye on the comics, I got a distinct "hey, now THAT's an idea I could work with" vibe from Joss's answer to that.
I was delighted with his frank assessment of S8 as having been a bit hit-and-miss, and with the promise that the second half would be more up to the mark.
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 19:54 CET
(Plus, being a billionaire must have other perks).
Yeah but would you be happy though ?
Some decent questions (though I did cringe a bit when the seemingly inevitable 'Serenity 2' question appeared), always making wid da funny that Joss fella. And cool that Warren basically happened because of the possibility of Britney Spears appearing - great oaks from little acorns and so on.
And wasn't Inara originally suffering from some strange malady that was gradually turning her into Morgan Freeman ?
Saje | February 18, 19:59 CET
The One True b!X | February 18, 19:59 CET
Yeah, I was wondering about that: have we seen Dru in action (not flashback) since the events of Chosen? I can't remember.
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 20:02 CET
My question on Anya was answered... although my exact wording was much more interesting and witty!!!
hbojo | February 18, 20:14 CET
But now that makes me wonder if any past Slayers had been turned into vampires? Now that would be interesting.
NYPinTA | February 18, 20:14 CET
Simon | February 18, 20:16 CET
I'm thinking that by being a vampire, she was automatically disqualified from ever being a Slayer.
Yet more evidence of the blatant species-ism woven through the very fabric of the Buffyverse.
Saje | February 18, 20:17 CET
jcs | February 18, 20:23 CET
;-)
Saje | February 18, 20:24 CET
At one point during Season 7, I believed that this is what was going to have to happen to Buffyin order to defeat the First.
The One True b!X | February 18, 20:25 CET
Saje | February 18, 20:28 CET
Yeah? I'm probably forgetting something, but I can't think of anything that was said about the Chosen Slayer-mojo that would rule out giving slayer-powers to a Vamp. I mean, unless it was made clear that the mojo worked on the soul in some way...
Even if they didn't choose to do it with Dru, it would be an interesting storyline to work (part of the whole "unintended consequences" line that they've explored with the rogue slayers). I imagine you might end up with a pretty conflicted Vamp--maybe rather like the one Angel created in "Why We Fight"?
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 20:29 CET
I don't think the "rules" of "Nightmares" were such that the way things went in the Nightmare sections had to reflect the way they would be in "reality." (Boy, I'm buried in "meta" levels here).
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 20:32 CET
pillboxed | February 18, 20:32 CET
Emmie | February 18, 20:34 CET
GVH | February 18, 20:35 CET
Edit for clarification: There is a blurb up there now listing more of the questions Joss will be answering, and that's one of them.
[ edited by Tonya J on 2009-02-18 20:39 ]
Tonya J | February 18, 20:37 CET
When you're dealing with magic (and the undead), pretty much anything goes as long as it doesn't directly contradict some previously established principle. Vampires are "dead"--but they still have all the memories, skills and abilities of the "dead" person, as well as many of the character traits, desires etc. If those things hang around, maybe "potential slayer status" hangs around too. That depends how the spell worked, and that depends entirely on what Joss chooses to write.
[ edited by snot monster from outer space on 2009-02-18 20:38 ]
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 20:38 CET
alexreager | February 18, 20:38 CET
Ah. That's what I get for not reading the comics.
I can't think of anything that was said about the Chosen Slayer-mojo that would rule out giving slayer-powers to a Vamp.
I can't either. But I would hope that the mystical men that made the first Slayer would have put in that kind of clause. I mean, they had enough trouble with regular demons... enough to warrent a Slayers creation in the fisrt place. I just hope they had enough foresight to making it impossible that the demons could turn the Slayer into one of them- and have her retain her powers. But I'm probably placing too much faith in ancient mystical men and their ability to think ahead.
NYPinTA | February 18, 20:38 CET
How'd the three Musketeers get caught up in this?
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 20:39 CET
GVH | February 18, 20:45 CET
1) Dawn is made of Buffy-stuff and she didn't become a Slayer. So it isn't just physical that makes one a potential.
2) Buffy tells her dying friend that becoming a vampire isn't really being immortal since the demon takes over the body. It just has the same memories, but you aren't the same person. So, that means that whatever it was about Dru that could have been a potential Slayer is gone now.
IMO.
NYPinTA | February 18, 20:50 CET
Rikardo | February 18, 20:52 CET
2) Buffy tells her dying friend that becoming a vampire isn't really being immortal since the demon takes over the body. It just has the same memories, but you aren't the same person. So, that means that whatever it was about Dru that could have been a potential Slayer is gone now.
Those are perfectly sound points except that they can neither of them face up to the dreaded "this isn't physics, it's metaphysics" response. That potential-ness isn't something encoded in the DNA is obviously true, so #1 is neither here nor there. The question is "does it go away when you get vamped."
#2 just tells us that some things do go away when you get vamped. It doesn't answer the question of "is potential slayerness one of those things."
The real question you have to ask is: if Joss ran this story, would fans get up in arms and say "this doesn't fit with..." If he'd said somewhere that being a potential slayer is a property of the soul, for example, then he'd have everyone up in arms. Clearly the vampire doesn't have the vampee's soul anymore. But not having said that, I can't see what you'd point to that would conflict with a single comic panel in which, say, Giles says "it would seem that a Potential remains a Potential even after becoming a vampire."
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 21:01 CET
wiesengrund | February 18, 21:03 CET
embers | February 18, 21:12 CET
So I think NYPinTA made perfectly good points about what scould arguably be considered normal (for the paranormal). I would add point 3: the Slayer's power is in part demonic. I would think being made a vampire would mean trading in one set of demon powers (potential Slayer) for another set (vampire). If that wasn't the case, I would think you would have vampire/other-demon combos, instead of vampires only turning humans. (Unless you had a Sylar-Slayer, who could keep adding powers by brain sucking.)
OneTeV | February 18, 21:17 CET
Oh, the wonders of this universe.
wiesengrund | February 18, 21:19 CET
Well, this is no doubt too much speculation about the plotline that hasn't actually happened (and probably won't), but it seems to me that A) you're dealing with two different aspects of the Slayer-mojo and B) you're still facing the "it's metaphysics, not physics" problem.
A) you're talking about the "slayer succession" rules (one dies, another is called). But it's never been clear if that applied to Potentials. In fact, it can't have, really, or otherwise The First's tactics in S7 would have been pointless (why run around killing Potentials if another Potential gets created for every one you kill? Actually, start thinking about that too much and the whole notion of "killing the slayer line" becomes meaningless. Oops. Ah well, I always thought The First sucked as a Big Bad anyway). So Potentials simply are Potentials. Into every generation some indeterminate number are born.
B) And, again, if the Scoobs go into research mode and consult the Ear of Vajayjay, a demon oracle that never lies and it says "the magic that makes someone a "Potential" remains active for as long as their bodies are still animated" then what have we got to left to say? "That's not how I'd have written it" won't cut it.
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 21:27 CET
The recent comic books hint that Joss will go into what happened in the future (the long time gap of Slayers).
OneTeV | February 18, 21:30 CET
Well, no, I don't think they can do anything they want (well, yes, of course they can, but they can't do it without risking our suspension of disbelief). With the "vampires cannot create life" thing, I'm not sure we'd had definitive word on that before Darla got pregnant, had we? I mean, I don't think that was an established 'fact' of the Buffyverse that they then needed to work around, I think it was something that they threw in to emphasize how extraordinary a being Connor was. I'm probably forgetting some episode where it was actually baldly stated that vampires can't breed, but to the best of my recollection they could have simply had the story be that "vampire births are incredibly rare" or what have you. ETA: But, in any case, in order to work around the new "rule" that they created they needed to invoke extraordinary magic. Of course they could fall back on an "extraordinary magic" angle to explain Dru getting "enslayered" as a vamp, but I don't see that there's a "rule" sitting there that they'd need the "extraordinary magic" loophole for.
And as to "doing whatever they want." Well, they can't contradict established lore without explanation--or, when they do, they seriously risk the reader's investment in the story. My point is simply that whether or not a Potential remains a Potential after being vamped is a question simply not addressed by established lore. The answer is "yes" if the Ear of Vajayjay says it's yes and "no" if it says no.
[ edited by snot monster from outer space on 2009-02-18 21:40 ]
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 21:38 CET
I think it came up between Buffy and Angel during season 3, in that they couldn't get children together.
[ edited by the Groosalugg on 2009-02-18 21:56 ]
the Groosalugg | February 18, 21:56 CET
Yes, that certainly ruled out vampire/human kids. Did it rule out vamp/vamp kids too? It probably did, and if so then Connor's a good example of using the "extraordinary magic" loophole to get around an established "rule" of your fictional world. What we still don't have is any "rule" that rules out a Vamp-Potential.
snot monster from outer space | February 18, 22:28 CET
I must say, I never thought about Drusilla being a Potential. Her visions weren't of the Slayer variety...but then she did seem to share some odd connection with Buffy (dream-wise) in S2. Hmmm. *ponders that*
But in the fanfiction I'm writing (the one that looks like it's never getting finished), I do have Drusilla set up to be Angel's next Seer, which is what really she was in life...and continued to be in death.
menomegirl | February 18, 23:07 CET
Beyond that, Tempted Champions reads like a logical treatment of it.
DaddyCatALSO | February 18, 23:08 CET
Good interview. Pithy and fun.
redeem147 | February 19, 00:29 CET
silent knight | February 19, 01:31 CET
Emmie | February 19, 01:40 CET
and spike in TWO of the THREE ISSUES.
Chris the Bloody | February 19, 01:44 CET
and spike in TWO of the THREE ISSUES.
Not sure that either of those comments was serious.
snot monster from outer space | February 19, 01:48 CET
Saje | February 19, 01:52 CET
snot monster from outer space | February 19, 02:07 CET
As mentioned before, this was explained in Buffy Season 3. Not only did Angel say that he & Buffy can't have kids, but he then dived into detail about how his body is dead and cannot support human life. There is no nutrients in that walking corpse.
Darla confirms this allusion with the scene on the balcony (before she dies). Angel talks about how she's caring for it, nurturing it... and Darla exclaims "I haven't given this kid a thing! It's been nurturing me!" She was merely the dead vessel to carry the mystical birth.
And think about it... why would vampires be equipped to have children? They have the power to make their own "children" every time they open a vein. Which is why Darla, Angel, Drusilla, & Spike are considered a family; they all "gave birth" to one another.
korkster | February 19, 02:42 CET
Well, as I made clear, it's neither here nor there for my argument. It was just a side-thought. But do you have an episode reference for this detailed discussion about "nutrients" and so forth? All I can find is "Bad Eggs" where Angel says that he can't have kids with Buffy. He doesn't even generalize to "vampires in general can't have kids with humans" (let alone with other vampires)--although Buffy takes it that way.
Darla confirms this allusion with the scene on the balcony (before she dies). Angel talks about how she's caring for it, nurturing it... and Darla exclaims "I haven't given this kid a thing! It's been nurturing me!" She was merely the dead vessel to carry the mystical birth.
Yeah, but that wouldn't help settle the question of whether it had been ruled out as a possibility before the Darla pregnancy, would it?
And think about it... why would vampires be equipped to have children? They have the power to make their own "children" every time they open a vein. Which is why Darla, Angel, Drusilla, & Spike are considered a family; they all "gave birth" to one another.
You're confusing "would this be a good story that I'd like to tell" with "has this been directly contradicted by some previous claim."
snot monster from outer space | February 19, 02:55 CET
Bottom line, I'm excited to hear that the second half of Season 8 will apparently be more focused and Joss' enthusiasm for it is infectious as well.
Now someone ask him what he thinks of the Angel comics. I've bought and read the first two hardcover collections so far (which only gets me up to issue #8, so I'm less than halfway to the folks who're current...less if you consider some of Brian Lynch's other Angel/Spike comics canon or canon-worthy, dunno if Joss does). I have no clue what the majority of the fandom thinks about it, though I remember seeing a fair bit of dissent early on for the first arc or two when I was still skimming the issue discussion threads (back when I wasn't sure if I wanted to get into it). A whole lotta praise too, to be fair.
Joss mentioning the Illyria-as-Fred thing (good, she wasn't going to be outright resurrected, just a learning/coping tool for the new character) brings up the old feelings of hating the non-existence of Season 6 for depriving us of more Amy Acker and more of that new intriguing character.
Kris | February 19, 12:22 CET
I think it's pretty clear that vampires can't have children. Connor's birth was prophesised, meaning it was going to happen one way or another, the whole point of a prophecy is that it is certain. And Connor was brought into the world as part of some bigger plan, for which loads of stuff had to be put in motion as Skip said, although I was never sure if he was lying or not.
I did find this on Wikipedia though, but I think it's just the writer's theory:
Shep | February 19, 13:20 CET
Another prophecy thing I like about the series and surrounding Connor is that the Season 3 line, "The Father Will Kill the Son" eventually did come true in Season 4's finale "Home". Angel did kill Connor (although to save him, which was the nice twist on that fulfilment).
Kris | February 19, 20:00 CET
I'd imagine, given that they often hung around Watchers, that any number of Potentials have been sired over the millenia, and some are probably still walking around. ("I can't even bury my dead little girl because she's walking and talking! Willow, is there a support group for parents whose children have become vampires?") So if Joss had the idea that these would have turned into megavamps after Willow 's spell, I'm sure we'll see it soon. And I don't expect to.
Related to Angel 's not being able to do CPR. When you die in the Buffyverse, you lose some things.
Heck, as I gather, the Fangsters were worried that maybe a male vampire with a soul and a female vampire without (as far as they knew) one would be fertile in general and so when they found that Spike and Harmony had slipped away from the office party for some horizontal dancing there was moment of general unease.
And there's no way to answer (yet!!!!) how much of Connor's abilities derive form his aprentage and how much from his infancy, childhood, and adolescence being spent in a dimension filled with strange energies which he had to have absorbed.
Of course siring an activated Slayer would probably be different. Buffy died twice and reatined her powers, so it seems logical a turned SLayer would be exactly the megavamp I mentioned. Which is probably why it has been done very rarely and only by foolish vampires.
And let's face it, we're only able to have this much fun with these ideas because Joss hasn't written them.
[ edited by DaddyCatALSO on 2009-02-21 17:53 ]
DaddyCatALSO | February 21, 17:52 CET
Riker | February 23, 04:14 CET
Riker | February 23, 04:18 CET
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.