This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"You people are so petty... and tiny."
11945 members | you are not logged in | 25 October 2014




Tweet







November 22 2005

Whatever happened to Ripper? TV Squad asks the question and as if by pure magic, here's the latest news from Tony Head. In the latest issue of the Buffy magazine, Tony says "It hasn't been mentioned [recently by Joss].... but it's gone from, being a series to a two-hour movie that might be part of a series of DVDs".

The Dancing Watchers show as mentioned by Alexis in that interview sounds highly entertaining.

I would have preferred it as a series, but hey, I'll take the movie
Hmm, that's the second mention from the BtVS collective (stolen from star trek, couldn't find the word I wanted in the dictionary) about our show going straight to DVD. As many may recall, Marti made a similiar statement a month or two ago. I'm still not buying it. Please don't get me wrong, I would be thrilled with any of our characters popping up in a DVD movie. But, again, I think this is more of the press reading into statements.
I'm just going to wait until Joss makes his announcement, which he keeps saying he'll be making "soon", to see exactly what he is planning, Buffyverse-wise.

The Ripper series with the BBC, as originally mooted, would have been great, and it's a shame nothing came of it.
Two hours of Giles is better than nothing and would be the push I'd need to make me fork out for the DVD series.
Well, when there was the empireonline webchat with Joss I asked him about Ripper, and this was but a few months ago and he said it was something he really wanted to get off the ground, but that the ground was sticky.
I'm just wondering how well the series would need to perform in order to be considered a success, at least so we're guarenteed more of it. At least with the BBC they won't drop it after a handful of episodes like some of the American networks.

But I do think it's a great idea, and I'd love to see any Buffyverse related projects. I think Joss is quite busy at the moment and I can understand why he isn't making Buffyverse projects his prioity, but they will come in time.

I'm just trying to work out whether it would work on the BBC or something. Of course there will be a lot of Buffy fans watching it, but I don't see Doctor Who sized ratings. But could Ripper carve out a nice niché for itself?
I want. So much.

But without any season seven of Buffy awfulness, please. Rona, Andrew, Kennedy...no, no, no.
he said it was something he really wanted to get off the ground, but that the ground was sticky.

Effortless wit. No wonder there is a website or two devoted to him. Thanks for the laugh, gilesno1fan.
Good point, Razor. I just want to see something happening at this stage....and it's not. I'm referring to the Spike TV movies of course. They're aren't happening. Why should we expect more?
I think they are happening. Joss said movies were happening! I don't need them to be on TV, as long as I get them.
Sky One had enjoyed good success with Angel, and were saddened by it's ending. Considering some of the shows they've had on, they could do Ripper, BBC isn't the only choice.

[ edited by SeanValen on 2005-11-23 00:46 ]
The Spike thing is happening. Slowly.

While at the Serenity London premiere aftershow, both Joss and ASH were there. I'm not sure if they saw each other. (I actually screamed "Giles!" at ASH mockingly, but it wasn't as funny as in my head and lead to sadness, puppies and a Halmark movie).

I'd like to see a Ripper thing. Mostly because ASH can act, and has a fair amount of potential in terms of story. Are the Scoobies adult enough to survive in Europe? More importantly, is Giles?
wat was so awful about Andrew??? He was so funny and he provided alot of comic relief that Xander used to take care of.
I miss Andrew. I always thought he should've gotten a sitcom about learning to be a Watcher. It would've been campy, but damnit, it would've been good.
Come with me now as I tell you the story of... the Watcher and the Vam-PYRE! On the topic at hand, BSkyB also chipped in for Battlestar Galactica, so it wouldn't be unprecedented were they to decide to go co-pro on something 'verse related.
Hate Andrew.

Stole time from Xander, was only moderately funny, incredibly overrated. That stupid, cringeworthy "we are gods" bit...eeyuuccch! Didn't find that funny at all, and really never understood the adulation it garnered. It just looked fey to me. How is that comical? Just didn't get it.

Ilana, I agree with your post.
Hate Andrew too. Hated the whole nerd trio, but Andrew was the worst. He was a liar and a pompous fool, and I didn't find anything at all funny about him.

Yes, Wesley was a pompous fool at first, too, but he was funny. I don't know if the difference was in the character or in the actor, but whatever it was made all the difference.
The Ripper TV series has always been the Buffyverse continuation I've wanted to see the most. Spike is fine, I guess, but there's so much untapped potential just sitting there with Giles. Joss totally needs to do a six or seven part mini-series or something, with the BBC in partnership with, say, HBO. Or just with the BBC.

Six or seven episodes is small enough that Mr Whedon could either write it all himself, or he could draft in other previous 'verse writers to help out. One for Fury, one for Espenson, one for Minear, one for Goddard, and so on. And toss one to his friend Warren Ellis, because I'd love to see his take on some 'verse material, and because Ripper is ripe for some non-fictional historical context. Moors, dales, mist, fog, cobbled London streets, henges, and thousands of years of history mired in crusades, biblical wars and druids. Giles as a modern day Crowley only less of an arse, pontificating with glasses of brandy and occasional moody entrances.

It writes itself, I'm telling you.
Actually, I'd pitch it as a modern day Sherlock Holmes. Dealing with crimes of the occult in a mature and thoughtful way, with occasional spells of dramatic - but not flashy - violence. Andrew as a possible Watson and a group of Slayer potentials as unlikely Baker Street Boys. Set it all across Britain with one base in London and another at Giles' country house somewhere in the, er, country. Giles is obviously a different type of character to Sherlock, but it's the most immediately accessible point of referece for describing the type of storylines that would be involved.
Good point, Razor. I just want to see something happening at this stage....and it's not. I'm referring to the Spike TV movies of course. They're aren't happening. Why should we expect more?

Well, from Joss' last post on Whedonesque.com it looks like he's close to getting some sort of deal to approach James Masters with. Also Joss has hinted that the Spike movie would just be the beginning. Which is why people are expecting more besides just the Spike movie. Although I imagine that 20th Century Fox or whoever is producing it would wait to see what the sales of the DVD are or the ratings of the tv show if it airs on tv, before making multiple movies. However, with Buffy and Angel still selling quite well on DVD after all this time, I can't imagine it not being successful.
Great thoughts, Gonnas. A Ripper project is the clear favorite in my post-BtVS poll too. One reservation Joss might have is that, although he could write the show anywhere, he'd have to come to Britain to oversee the shoot, and he might not want to do that right now, what with the being away for Wonder Woman, and having the two small kids at hand. He might be looking for a projects a little closer to home. 'Course, he could always hand it off to a trusted deputy.

As for Andrew, Storyteller has always been a highlight of S7 for me, and yet . . . he never quite endeared himself to me. Now, Jonathan I could have stood a lot more of. But I'm not gasping to know what happens next in Andrew's life.
My view is this, Giles can age - so Rippers a little more relaxed in that sense. If Joss and fans want a spike movie, should be done as soon as possible because as well as James Marsters is aging, he is no doubt aging. For that reason, let Joss and fans get the vampire story's out of there systems (and if DB ever came back, he's actually looking younger to me on bones then he did in the 5th season of angel, but may be just my pair of copper licoln portraits there). So who knows, although if we do assume Angel received his mortality after NFA, then I guess its fine for him to age all he wants. Spike (and most other vamps from the series) though probably are still assumed as immortal and unaged so the sooner there stories the better as far as actors go, comics and written word though they can live on the same age forever! So personally I'm rooting for more vampire stories (aka spike) since there is somewhat a time limit reality wise for that. Although if spike's goes well then I wouldn't be half suprised to see a ripper, faith, etc. follow ups along with a probable spike sequel. First things first though, Spike, Ripper, whatever it is - I'll take it, just please let something be made of it. And I don't know if its relevant or not but whatever happend to Buffy the Animated Series? Last I heard is the video game voice talent did buffy, many of the originals used there own voices, and it was co-produced or something by Jeph Loeb of Smallville... Last I heard is they made a pilot that was received fairly well and then... nothing. Oh well, I'd prefer live-action DVD's first, Animated Series second, and written mediums such as comics and books thirdly. Seeing or hearing them again would be quite satisfying. Keep in mind though, I am one of those people who owned every season of BtVS on DVD then got the Chosen Collection solely for the bonus disc and found it well worth the 100+ dollars invested... so I am pretty hungry/thirsty/starving for more.
It seems,whatever else we'd like to see (Spike, Willow etc) we all want Ripper. My own personal favorite would be Ripper with Willow as a guest (those two have great chemistry). Sadly, Joss seems less keen than the rest of us. Perhaps we should send Joss a message: Give us what *we* need, not what *you* want!
I think this interview with Tony and Alexis was done back in June of this year at the London Film and Comic Con. Those two did a Watchers' Talk there.
whirligig, I think it's more down to time and money.
As others have already said, the series would have been fantastic but given the choice between a Giles movie or nothing at all then obviously i'd go with the movie possibility every time.

I had already assumed that a Giles/Ripper movie would be one of the series that has been speculated on recently. Spike has always been the one that is mentioned but it seemed reasonable to me that Joss would want to do something with his Ripper series idea at some point and a straight to DVD movie gives him that option. Personally i'd love to see one each for Spike, Willow, Illyria and Giles but i'll take whatver comes along.
I didn't think Andrew was funny. It was obvious that he was *supposed* to be funny...a bit too obvious in my opinion.
I thought Andrew was funny. Because, you know, 'Storyteller'.
I would be very glad for Giles's fans (i'm not one of them) to have his story continue. As far Andrew, he's one of my most hated characters, IMO he got off pretty easy.

[ edited by sethsky on 2005-11-23 15:49 ]

[ edited by sethsky on 2005-11-23 15:49 ]
More Giles would always be great. As for Andrew, a little goes a long way for me. I wasn't crazy about the slapstick Wesley either. I like my comedy a little subtler.

I thought Andrew was funny. Because, you know, 'Storyteller'.


Exactly...

And besides: Andrew may be "funny", but he is not (as always with Joss) only a comic relief... he also has his share of pain, drama and glory (moment of glory: the gooduse of his permanent willigness to lie, when he tells Xander that Anya had a brilliant death).
If Andrew had been killed instead of/together with Anya I would have been very happy, he if anyone deserved a gruesome end.

One part of the Buffy in Rome comic book I am not looking forward to is any explanation of how he came to be answering the door when Angel and Spike came calling in TGIQ, I am guessing 'he was the only actor available' isn't going to work.

One part of the Buffy in Rome comic book I am not looking forward to is any explanation of how he came to be answering the door when Angel and Spike came calling in TGIQ, I am guessing 'he was the only actor available' isn't going to work.


Considering his behavior in S7, it completely makes sense that, even after the closing of the Hellmouth, he is still among the scoobies. After all, Giles trained him as a watcher, and (yes, probably in good part because there was a lack of watchers) he took care of some newly recruited (or not) slayers.

So, his presence at Rome in Buffy's house is not far fetched (what IS far fetched, however, is the entire episode... gosh I wish they never had made this, especially at this moment of the season! ;) ).
Buffy in Rome comic? Pah. It'll be set in the Immortal's house on the shores of Lake Como.
You know, i'm surprised how often i read how somebody disliked The Girl in Question. Personally i found it to be a very entertaining episode that managed to answer a long discussed fanbase question whilst leaving it up in the air at the same time. Basically the episode did exactly what the fans wanted it to do but in such a subtle way that it went over most of their heads. Such a shame people missed the point.

One thing i do have to agree on is the placement of the episode so close to the end of the season, well, series. I do agree that that was a mistake. If you removed the Illyria subplot then the whole Buffy chase story could have taken place anywhere within the second half of the fifth season, preferably before A Hole in the World. Ah well, too late to worry about that now, i guess.
The Watcher, I didn't like this episode much. It was in the wrong place and the contrast between what was happening back in LA and what was happening in Rome was far too jarring. It nothing to do with it "going over my head" as you so sneeringly put it.
I did find the episode funny but i disliked the Buffy/Spike/Angel traingle. And couldn't care less about the immortal.
I too disagree, The Watcher. I've only just finished season five for the first time, so perhaps my opinion will change, but I didn't like TGIQ much either.

Of course there is the obviously odd tone of the episode, completely out of place with the pace of the season. Really, the third last episode of the series, not just the season, should have been much more focused on the main characters and not some whimsical pursuit of Buffy.

Don't get me wrong, I love Buffy the show, and the character, but I remember reading that one of the writers said something like "This episode shows that Angel and Spike are different people and that Angel isn't defined by Buffy," but to me, that's exactly what the episode said. I would have welcomed an appearance by Willow or Giles or any of the gang earlier in the season, where it was appropriate, or Buffy showing up to help in the final battle, but to me the whole episode seemed to say, "Actually, Angel the show hasn't actually developed enough interesting characters and plots on its own, so we're going to go back to the past and have an episode entirely focused on Buffy."

I'll admit that parts of it were funny, but I didn't think it was as good as "Smile Time" or any of the funnier episodes, and it was almost like it was trying too hard to be funny. Then there were the stupid touches like Angel and Spike surviving the bomb and looking like cartoon characters afterwards. I'm fairly certain a bomb would blast a vampire into pieces or set them on fire and they would then dust. There was also possibly the stupidest car chase in history, and the sets were even below par because it certainly didn't look like Italy to me.

There was also the obvious absence of Sarah Michelle Gellar not actually being there. Although I would have preferred any mention or appearance of Buffy to be kept to a minimum, I would have at least liked SMG to appear, and if she couldn't, I frankly think the whole episode should have been scrapped.

Andrew was only in the episode because they couldn't get anyone else to do it, and that seemed quite obvious to me. Despite Andrew's growth as a character (which is limited compared to many others), I doubt Buffy and Dawn would want to share an appartment with him. And then they decide to tell us that one of the most blatantly in-the-closet characters is actually straight, which sends out the message that it can be "cured".

Perhaps Angel hasn't really touched the subject, but Willow and Tara on Buffy were certainly a positive reflection of lesbianism, whereas this doesn't come across as at all open-minded or realistic.

It's very rare for me to strongly dislike an episode of Buffy, Angel or Firefly, and I am the one usually defending them, but I just didn't like this episode. It was watchable, but certainly didn't contribute much to the main arcs and it made me feel quite disappointed. Of course the Wes and Illyria scenes were an exception, but I was personally looking for something that didn't feel like filler coming so close to the series' end.

And no offense The Watcher, but I do understand the episode and I didn't feel that it was particularly subtle, or that it was a story that needed to be told.
Lioness, i wasn't particularly refering to comments made in this thread when i stated that the more subtle messages of TGiQ were missed by many people who didn't like the episode. I tend to have a lot more respect for people who post here as they are usually able to give a good solid arguement as to why they have a given opinion.

However, the same cannot be said at other boards and forums around the internet where i have seen many less articulate opinions where the poster has clearly not given any thought to what the episode was trying to say.

Razor, from what i've read the episode was designed less as a way of showing the differences between Angel and Spike or that they weren't defined by their relationships with Buffy and more to answer the ongoing fan debate of who Buffy would end up with.

The constant Bangel and Spuffy wars had prompted the writers to make the point that the shows were not about who Buffy would eventually end up with and that there need not ever be an answer to the question, because in the grand scheme of their lives their romances were relatively unimportant.

Again, i would agree that it's position in the run of the season was very unfortunate however, given the fact that the series was coming to an end, not to mention that there was no guarantee that any future stories would be told, i do think that bringing a fullstop to the subject of which vampire would get the slayer was important, especially as they managed to do so without actually giving the answer people wanted. That was the subtle point of the episode that many fans cannot see.
With regards to The Episode in Question (get it? get it?), I believe it was written thinking SMG wouldn't be available to film it. I seem to remember either Joss or Stephen saying that.

Also, Andrew's part was written for Michelle, but she wasn't available in the end, so it got swapped to Andrew's character. I half agree on the gay aspect (I'd of loved for a few hunky men to appear to escort him), but in all honesty I think it was all campy fun anyway - people shouldn't take away the message the character was 'fixed' - the people working on the show so obviously aren't anti-gay in the slightest.

I do agree it was badly placed. It was trying to tie together a few loose ends before the more serious final arc, but (in my opinon) the final arc needed more time to develop.

And whilst we're talking about Angel, I'd just like to say the opening message of 'big bad city, on your own' - I totally relate to. The 'I'm loosing myself in this city' arc, I totally relate to (Minear, you own my ass). The 'these relationships are getting twisted' arc, I totally relate to. The 'working for The Man' arc, I totally relate to. The 'carry on fighting regardless' arc, I totally relate to.

'Angel The Series' speaks to me like nothing else before and since - it is my life in my 20s, with vampires. Which is So. Very. Cool.
Andrew cracks me up.

Some people juggle geese. (And a tip of the hat goes to Allyson and her Serenity review. ;)
The whole Bangel/Spuffy thing had already been settled. Maybe not to everyone's liking, but Angel had clearly moved on, and so had Buffy. Spike was just about over it, as well. We didn't need TGIQ for that.

If it was just a question of "who's available," I'm really sorry that it had to be Andrew. The only long-term character who would have been more jarring would have been Riley. (And I like Riley better than Andrew, just not there, not in that time and place.)

Now, Faith in Rome would have been cool. Would have been fun to see her busting chops on Angel and Spike.
I still don't understand how all the scoobies could afford all this world travel when they weren't rich before.

I'm sure there are lots of "no-prize" explanations (i.e. their houses were insured and their parents...suddenly didn't exist!) but it seems silly to me nonetheless.
Well Ilana my main thought on that was that the Watcher's Council were very wealthy and since Giles is/was probably the only remaining Watcher, that he had access to all their funds. As you say it's a "no-prize" but I think it's a plausable one.
I adore Andrew. Love him.

I really really really hope several characters' stories are developed in the 2-hour DVD movie format. I'ts a short (and probably cheaper than a series) way to expand on all the undeveloped stories we are still waiting to experience. Ripper has always been one of my top choices.
I wondered about that too, Ilana. I mean I don't think the Watcher's Council would have trusted Giles with their funds, considering they didn't know they were about to be blown up, and they were only changing their attitudes towards helping Buffy properly right before the destruction of their headquarters.

Although I suppose it is conceivable that perhaps they were government funded, after all the Sunnydale authorities were aware of the supernatural stuff, so perhaps because Giles wants to reform the council they were willing to provide the money for him to do so. It was also odd how Buffy could still afford so many glamorous, expensive clothes, and never wore the same outfit twice, whenever she was working at Doublemeat Palace.

But as regards TGIQ, I agree with MissKittysMom, in my opinion the issue of Buffy had already been settled back in "Chosen". She gave Angel her cookie dough speech, and basically said that maybe in the future they could be together, but that she was still finding out who she is, and that they both need to move on.

I personally felt it was clear with Spike how their relationship ended. When he was soulless, their relationship was fuelled by sex and passion, by Spike's vampiric side, but whenever he regained his soul it burnt itself out and he was basically the decent man he has always been, and someone that Buffy loves as a friend and has trust and respect for him, but doesn't love him romantically.

She tells him she loves him because she knows he is going to die, but even Spike, who would love to believe this lie, knows it isn't true- "No, you don’t. But thanks for saying it." Buffy and Angel have a similar kind of deep friendship, but I think there was still romantic potential there, whereas with Spike there won't be.

Never mind the fact that Angel had been going out with Nina for a few months.

I just felt that instead of focusing on such a tired and quite infantile story, they could have dealt with the subject just as successfully without devoting a whole episode to it. I do appreciate that they basically gave Buffy/Angel and Spike/Buffy fans both what they wanted (that the other man didn't get her) and what they still want (for him to get her), but I just didn't feel that the issue was that important. I mean Cordelia is barely mentioned after she dies, but they can devote a whole episode to Angel and Spike looking for Buffy?
Razor, that's not the way i saw it. Ofcourse we are all entitled to our own opinions. My opinion is:
For me Buffy/Angel endend the moment he left sunnydale after season3. Nor did i believe in that soulmates crap from the previous seasons. I did think that Spike/Buffy were beginning to have a REAL(trust,love,partnership,...) relationship, but never got to see the light since Spike died and they had to find reasons to make him stay on Angel's show. My whole problem with the episode "the girl in question" is that Buffy is moving on(so is Angel with Nina), yet Spike is still looking as pathetic as ever trying to be Buffy's lapdog.
I hope that if there comes a tv-movie that he will have a new love-intrest who is worthy of his love.

[ edited by sethsky on 2005-11-24 23:17 ]
I agree with the idea that Spike was portrayed as some sort of dog that wants Buffy, but I felt that they did the same thing with Angel. Season five had been positive for him in many ways, and moving on with Nina was part of that, but then right at the final stretch they decide to go back on any development either Angel or Spike has made, and basically say that they are both defined by their relationships with Buffy. And that Nina doesn't even matter to Angel at all.
And here I thought a lot of the episode was how the subject of Buffy ignited the competition between Angel and Spike and pointed p how much they had to get on with their lives in various ways. People can get so crazy about ex's in so many ways even when they have, mostly, moved on.

Not crazy in love with the episode, but understood that they were running out of time and had to do everything they wanted to in a few episodes, and under a lot of pressure.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home