These guys haven't even seen half the episodes and they're doing podcasts?

It irks me when Angel plays second fiddle to BtvS. "We love Buffy and people are loving our Buffy podcasts, so I guess we'd better do some for that spinoff with Buffy's boyfriend, even though we never bothered watching it"

o_O

Isn't there a podcast from a real Angel fan somewhere out there?

cowmuf | March 09, 12:15 CET

Judging from the podcast, they have seen it all of it before. At least, Randy has. They did watch all the episodes they talked about in this cast.

NickSeng | March 09, 12:47 CET

They said at the start that neither of them have seen all the episodes in the series. One of the guys has seen the first two seasons and Not Fade Away, the other guy has seen random episodes here and there.

cowmuf | March 09, 12:51 CET

I TOTALLY agree with you cowmuf. When I read the headline for this topic I was overjoyed... FINALLY Angel gets a little attention and respect on it's own merits. But after reading the comments here I'm worried that, well, maybe not so much.

I give props to Buffy for being first, for starting the Joss ball rolling, and for being great in it's heyday. But Angel is the better series (in my not-so-humble opinion only mind you), and it annoys the frak out of me that it doesn't just play second fiddle to the parent series, but now is almost entirely forgotten below Buffy AND Firefly (which I also love, so don't get me wrong).

*sigh* Oh well, I'll always love the underdog I guess.

Haunt | March 09, 19:23 CET

The underdog always seems to be my preferred flavour as well, but Angel is a lot more than that. I've always seen it as the greatest TV series ever made; something that really changed the way I see the world. I think it's a show very ahead of its time, and fifty years from now, when Buffy is all but forgotten, the public en mass will finally realise the greatness of the fang gang, and the prevailing message it sets forth.

In harder times, people will live their lives by Angel's mantra.

cowmuf | March 09, 19:53 CET

Angel is a magnificent achievement, and I think it hit its stride even more quickly than Buffy did. Personal preferences aside, I think Buffy maybe has a slight edge in quality, but the merest hair's breadth. My cousin and his wife are into Season 3 right now, and it is just taking their collective breath away--Billy is the next episode on deck for them--it's marvelous hearing how they totally get and love it.

I think Buffy gets more media love because Sarah is a bona fide big time star, and Aly is obviously on her way. David is now the star of a modestly successful (ratings wise, anyway) TV show, and his movies have been, well, not exactly blockbusters.

But Angel the Series, jeez, what a fantastic piece of work.

Oh, and I agree...how can you be pontificating about something you really don't have a full understanding of? Makes no sense to me at all.

Chris inVirginia | March 09, 21:30 CET

They're watching the episodes and doing podcasts on the episodes they've seen. What's wrong with that? You might not always get the as much of the "bigger view" aspect as if you've seen everything already, but that' ok.

ETA: Are you not allowed to review any episodes of a TV show until you've seen all of them?

[ edited by KernelM on 2006-03-10 02:00 ]

KernelM | March 10, 03:57 CET

How does a thread about an Angel podcast turn into "let's bash BtVS"? Personally I know people who prefer Buffy and people who prefer Angel. I've read books and articles about Buffy and books and articles about Angel. Why not deal with the merits, instead of tilting at windmills?

SoddingNancyTribe | March 10, 09:54 CET

Thank you.

I don't get all the negativity when the post is about a podcast about Angel. Sure, they might not be that versed in the verse as you'd like, but wouldn't that give them a fresh perspective?

If you'd listen to the podcast, you'd see that they mainly have good opinions about the series.

NickSeng | March 10, 10:20 CET

I listened to the whole thing on my mp3 player yesterday. I felt they could have gone into a lot more depth in various places. They didn't seem to have any grasp over the big picture (which is obviously to be expected). I also thought they talked about BtvS too much. They didn't keep talking about AtS in the Buffcasts, so why the double standard? Too many sentences started with "Angel and Buffy..."

One of the guys pointed out that in BtvS, Angel would just disappear when people were talking to him, but in AtS, the person/camera would actually see Angel leaving. That was something I hadn't noticed before. So that was really cool.

Something that irked me was that they retreaded ground with the BtvS episode "Pangs", complaining that Boreanaz didn't really do anything of value; which has nothing to do with the Angel show, and is a falling of the Buffy season 4 writers. Why waste time talking about a Buffy episode they've already talked about in a previous Buffcast?

I just think Angel has enough merit to stand alone, without the constant comparisons to Buffy. I don't mean to sound so whiny, but this is a pattern I'm seeing.

And I'd really love a series of podcasts from true Angel scholars to listen to in the car :P

[ edited by cowmuf on 2006-03-10 09:21 ]

cowmuf | March 10, 11:07 CET

To be fair, I could say the same about the Buffcasts as well.



Like it or not, Angel and Buffy are connected. And people will make comparisons and links and whatnot, especially when reviewing crossovers or even episodes that are somewhat similiar. And a lot of it has to do with the fact that the crew for both shows are basically the same, with most of the changing sides depending on the month and season. How can there not be similarities?

As for comparisons ... is that a bad thing? I don't recall them comparing Angel in a poorer light compared to Buffy. In fact, they seem to think Angel's season 1 was better than Buffy's.



Do one. I'd be happy to listen to it. :)

NickSeng | March 10, 14:01 CET