(no subject)

[swatkat]

First things first - anyone who reads Buffy should go and read this fic now:Amoral Boundaries by wisdomeagle (Dawn/Illyria). I'd read this back when it was first posted and was completely blown away by the *power* of it all, but forgot to save the link. And now that I've found the link again, the fic is equally awesome on a re-read. Dawn maybe just a girl, but she's also the Key.

*

I want to squee about shows. Bear with me? *g*


Buffy

I probably shouldn't call this a re-watch - this is my real Buffy watch, without the fast-forwarding or skipping eps altogether (yes, I know, I can't believe it either - would you believe that I only saw Band Candy for the first time a few days ago? *boggle*), and man, this show is awesome. I still love Angel more, of course, but still. And S3 is the best season ever. S2 was good (and I think I ship Buffy/Angel. not surprising, because favourite female character + favourite male character + theirloveissotragic = OTP!!!), but it had some weak eps. There's hardly a weak episode in this one.

I love Buffy. The character, that is. *LOVE* her. I knew that I did - I loved her when I met her first in S6, where she certainly wasn't at her best - but this time I know it for certain. (however, the fandom doesn't seem too keen on her. what is it with my girls and fandom? *sigh*)

S3 has Faith. Does it get any better than this? And we *are* allowed to have two favourite characters, right?

I heart Cordy. She should be slashed with Buffy. Often. And Faith too, of course, and Willow, but Buffy first.

GILES! I saw Helpless yesterday - dear, dear Giles! The scene at the library? With Giles and Buffy after Travers leaves? Kills me.

The Zeppo - Xander is such an idiot sometimes (*smacks him for being such an idiot with the girls*), but I love him anyway. This ep reminds me why.

Bad Girls is like slash on a platter with a cherry on top. With extra helpings. And chocolate sauce.


LFN


I'm afraid I'm nearly not as enthusiastic about LFN S3, because this season? Is boring. The writing is boring (albeit decent compared to what follows) in the first half, and incredibly bad afterwards. Which sucks, because S2 ended so *brilliantly*, with Nikita facing what is perhaps the most important crisis in her Section life, and what do we start S3 with? Michael's sekrit spyfamily which is really a deep cover mission to capture the Big Bad Vachek. *rolls eyes*

Am I the only person to find the boy who played Adam a bit wooden? Cute, yes, but so… wooden.

I have nothing against Elena, but really, if they *had* to marry Michael off, why couldn't it be someone interesting, like another operative? Or oooh, even a terrorist? Someone strong and intelligent and pretty who'd be an equal to Michael and Nikita and therefore ideal for slashing Nikita with?

Gates of Hell's weepy!suicidal!Michael? Really does not do it for me. Yes, it's very sad and all, and my heart breaks in the cello scene, but I'd rather have his anger, his quiet despair in Hard Landing (gah!).

Imitation of Death is boring.

I love Cat and Mouse. Not only is Dominic teh awesome, but we also get to see sullen!snarky!Nikita, which I love.

I may be the only person in fandom who doesn't hate Greg Hillinger.

Maybe it's just the pervy HP fan in me, but am I the only one to see creepy Karl Peruze/Simon Peruze vibes in the ep whose name I can't remember? It's all nell65's fault.This episode is also mediocre (as opposed to pathetic and bad) – the let's-programme-Nikita thing (made worse by the over the top Michael/Nikita. I love the ship, but can we have some focus, please?) doesn't work the way it did in Brainwash, but the slap is worth everything. *Of course* Michael knew what was going on! I do love the Paul/Madeline/George bits in this ep, though. Paul's face when he sees the screen – there's that quiet despair again, which works way more than suicidal!Michael. Madeline's expression when she asks Paul what's wrong, and he simply walks away. Madeline's nervousness in the meeting with George. Birkoff's concern for Paul.

I hate to say this, but Paul and Madeline are, as my sister says, way cooler than Michael and Nikita. I *love* them when they're plotting and planning and being mysterious and sinister.


Alias

I'm not exactly attached to this show, and I watch it only intermittently, but yes, it's certainly not as bad as I thought the first time round. In fact, it's *good* (even though the plotlines often make as much sense as the Sex Police). The show's strength, I think, lies in the characters, who, despite the plotlines, somehow manage to capture your imagination with their complexity.

I like Sydney. I am so predictable. I also love that they allow her to laugh and cry and *emote*.

Irina Derevko? Words cannot express the fabulousness of Irina, and Jack/Irina.

Comments

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Which sucks, because S2 ended so *brilliantly*, with Nikita facing what is perhaps the most important crisis in her Section life, and what do we start S3 with? Michael's sekrit spyfamily which is really a deep cover mission to capture the Big Bad Vachek.

Yes! My reaction exactly. I LOVED the ending of S2 and thought it had so much promise for so many potentially fun plotlines, but what did we get? Soap opera city.

If they were going to do the MMWK thing, though, I actually agree with their choice of Elena -- I think the point there was to set it up so that Nikia would feel oh-so-conflicted, because it was *impossible* to dislike this poor woman, who was, after all, the epitome of one of the "innocents" Nikita feels so strongly about. (Although I agree with you about the lack of slash possibilities -- however, we still have Carla, no?)

I may be the only person in fandom who doesn't hate Greg Hillinger.

I love Greg Hillinger! I was even possessed by his voice a while back and had to write a ficlet for him to get him out of my head.

The Peruze episode you're thinking of is Under the Influence. I adore the O/M subplot -- I know that Nell might jump in here and point out that it shows how hypocritical Operations is, but that, actually, is part of why I adore it.

I hate to say this, but Paul and Madeline are, as my sister says, way cooler than Michael and Nikita. I *love* them when they're plotting and planning and being mysterious and sinister.

You won't get any argument from me. While S3 plots didn't make sense a lot of the time, and while the M&N angst really started turning me off that season, there were still many wonderful character moments for both O&M.

As for Alias

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

I've tried, and I just can't watch it. Not because of the goofy plots (although they sound pretty wacky) or even because I dislike the main character as a character (I haven't watched enough to come to any conclusion), but for the completely superficial reason of not liking to watch Jennifer Garner in the role. She is *such* a skinny stick figure that it makes me roll my eyes whenever she does any martial-arts-spy stuff. I may not have liked Nikita that much, but at least PW genuinely looked like she could beat someone up. But that's my own idiosyncratic issue. Too bad, though, because I'm quite sure I would adore Irina.

Hah!

[catsma.livejournal.com]

You don't like the MMWK storyline..you should have been around when the fandom got the news before the end of season 2 that they were going to go down this road. Needless to say, we weren't meant to learn it that early but people had friends in various places and the info got out.

All hell broke loose with flamewars all over the place between the "Michael is scum" and the "Michael is a poor misunderstood spyboy but isn't he cuuuute?" crowd. Then you had the "Nikita dump him, he's a 'ho" and the "how dare you malign my Mikey" bunches...LOL

And of course, on top of all that...the fandom lambasted the writers and producers all over the place. No matter what side people were on, they hated the storyline..LOL. I personally have to say that this whole thing was really the beginning of the end for me. I'd heard waay too many stories of backstage antics by that point and was just getting tired of the possibilities and storylines not used and the bad ideas the producers all seemed to think we'd like.

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

I know that Nell might jump in here and point out that it shows how hypocritical Operations is, but that, actually, is part of why I adore it.

Yes, exactly. If he wasn't hypocritical and selfish (among many other things), he wouldn't be Operations. Nikita too can be extremely hypocritical and selfish, BTW. It's a pity TPTB didn't do something more with the somewhat grudging respect - at times, even understanding - they seemed to be developing towards each other in S2. *sigh*

If they were going to do the MMWK thing, though, I actually agree with their choice of Elena -- I think the point there was to set it up so that Nikia would feel oh-so-conflicted, because it was *impossible* to dislike this poor woman, who was, after all, the epitome of one of the "innocents" Nikita feels so strongly about

Hmm, I suppose so. Okay, I just wanted another interesting female character to slash Nikita with, and heck, even to pair with Michael. What? I don't have to be reasonable about this, do I?

Although I agree with you about the lack of slash possibilities -- however, we still have Carla, no?

Yes, that we do. There can always be 'Carla didn't die' sequences. *g*

While S3 plots didn't make sense a lot of the time, and while the M&N angst really started turning me off that season, there were still many wonderful character moments for both O&M.

I have nothing against M/N angst, believe me, but it would have to make sense. The first half of S3 (except for MMWK) has very little Michael, and there is some interesting development for Nikita, so I don't mind that. And while the Sex Police plotline is absolutely pointless, I do like the WMS and the kissing in corridors and things like that. But apart from that, most of the M/N - Michael, expecially, annoys me. I heart Michael, but the developments in S3 are often illogical and soap-operaish. I'm sure the diehard fans love it, but it mostly leaves me cold.

I love Greg Hillinger!

Yay!

Swatkat

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Heh, I don't notice such things, I'm afraid. If I can watch SMG beat people up everyday in Buffy, I can also watch Jennifer Garner.

Too bad, though, because I'm quite sure I would adore Irina.

Oh yes, you would! The show is at its best when Irina is around. As far as I'm concerned, she's the most interesting and complex character in the show (even though I like Sydney more, for obvious reasons). Worthy of being slashed with Madeline, even. *g*

Swatkat

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

It's a pity TPTB didn't do something more with the somewhat grudging respect - at times, even understanding - they seemed to be developing towards each other in S2. *sigh*

Oh yes. There was a touch of it in I Remember Paris, though, when they went out into the field together. Those were fun scenes, and it's a shame there wasn't more of that.

I *know* we aren't the only Greg fans, though. Ms. Cyanide is fond of him, and I recall Lila saying she adored him as well. So we can form a club and write lots of Greg/Birky slash.

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

I can watch SMG because canon at least supplies an answer to why she's able to take on opponents twice her weight. But if I see Jennifer Garner kick some huge brawny guy and send him flying, I just snort in disgust.

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Right, I forgot about IRP! I intend to watch it soon - I do love the Paul in the field scenes. *g*

So we can form a club and write lots of Greg/Birky slash.

*sporfle* That should be good. I'm also suddenly overcome with the desire to read believable Nikita/Greg.

Swatkat

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

IRP had several plotholes an aircraft carrier could sail through, but it also had some fun moments.

Nikita/Greg? That could actually be sort of appealing, if you could find a way to make it work. (I have no doubt he would go for her given the chance, but the reverse?)

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Greg would jump at the chance. Nikita would not touch him with a ten-foot pole. It would be fun if someone could make it work, though. *g*

Swatkat

Re: Hah!

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

I do love your stories. *g* You know, I'm glad I wasn't around at that time for the crazies to ruin my fun.

Swatkat

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. Gelmanized Nikita, maybe? He'd moved to Oversight by then, but one could find a way to have them interact.

heheheh

[nell65.livejournal.com]

Obvioulsy you are not the only one to see pervy vibes in the Peruze brothers....

I like that ep - mostly because the Peruze brothers seem very 'real' and so very frightening to me, in the same spoiled pretty boy way that Suba does. I am sure the world of petty arms dealers really does crawl with creepazoids like them...

So, for having a decent villainous pair who were not either red cell or internal, I give this ep a thumbs up, actually! *g*

Re: Hah!

[nell65.livejournal.com]

I was around then - though I was already pretty firmly in the fanfic part of the fandom and was utterly oblivious to the other kinds of fans - and yeah - NO ONE, from any position or camp thought the MMWK plot line was a good idea - for about a million and one obvious reasons that have all been thrashed out before and since.

At least two (that I know of) intrepid fanficers tried their hand at it before it came out, and in fact the overt stupidity of the story line got my own writting jones to spill over onto the page for the first time.

Oddly enough - TPTB did, IMO a *better* job with the plot line than the fanficcers, and it played out far better than I for one thought it would when the news leaked out. The boring, surprising, utter and bone deep niceness of poor deluded Elena was the obvious trick that no one in fandom that I can remember ever spectulated on.

I mean - obviously - I wish it hadn't happened and like everyone else thought S2 ended with all sorts of brilliant possibilities opened and sadly unexplored, as it turned out, in later seasons.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

I um, haven't actually re-watched this one yet - still working my way slowly in order through the seasons (though I did just get S3 for my birthday! *g*) but, I can't actually recall the Madeline/Paul sub plot of this episode....so I can't jump in and call Paul anything at all! LOL!

I'm just about 3/4 of the way through S1 again (I know, I'm driving MrNell bonkers with my slow pace, but I don't get the TV all that often.....) and it isn't Paul's hypocrisy that bothers me, it's his capriciousness.

I just don't actually see that he's a particularly good leader for Section One and I don't think it is particularly well run by him..... which is a different sort of problem altogether.

N

[(Anonymous)]

This was the episode where he murdered the man who killed his son and got away without any punishment, thanks to Madeline covering up for him. You've mentioned this instance in the past in your criticisms of his character.

Myself, I think it reflects worse on Madeline than on Operations -- he was hardly in a rational mental state, but she had no such excuse. I think one could use it as a prime example of the hypocrisy of someone who was always going on about how Section couldn't make any exceptions in the rules for anyone -- except, apparently, when *she* decided it was OK.

But then the fact that she could be that hypocritical when it was in her own self-interest is part of what made her the delightfully flawed character I enjoy. *g*

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Oops. Forgot to sign in. That was me answering.

[nell65.livejournal.com]

Oh yes - I fully remember those scenes - I had just managed to completely divorce them from the Peruze bros episode that holds them.

My view of Paul is still in flux.....it will be interesting to see what I think about him once I've finally worked my way through to the end of S3 again.

I think it reflects worse on Madeline than on Operations -- he was hardly in a rational mental state, but she had no such excuse. I think one could use it as a prime example of the hypocrisy of someone who was always going on about how Section couldn't make any exceptions in the rules for anyone -- except, apparently, when *she* decided it was OK.

Yes - it does. And yet it never irritated me. Her ability to act in her own self interest, whatever she percieved it to be, even when it violates a tenant she claims to hold dear is part of what draws me to her.

I think, ultimately, what flumoxes me so about Paul is that, as far as I can tell, he never does anything *except* out of self interest, and on top of that he has a fairly short attention span -- with the possible exception of extracting romantic revenge.

So I'm quite hostile, even still -- because I'm a fannish nut and my one true character loves do not die, ever, apparently -- to the idea that he is a brilliant leader for Section but Nikita will obviously suck. Which makes me hostile to him, in hindsight. Perhaps unfairly........because I liked him well enough before the series finished and the fannish wars over the end of S4/5 began.

N

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

So I'm quite hostile, even still -- because I'm a fannish nut and my one true character loves do not die, ever, apparently -- to the idea that he is a brilliant leader for Section but Nikita will obviously suck.

I would never set up such diametrically opposing poles in the first place. First, because (as I've said ad nauseam before) I don't think Section as an institution is very functional no matter who's placed in charge. But second, because I don't actually think that Paul was a "brilliant" leader. (Honestly, I don't know anyone, even among the TRs, who *does* believe that.) Rather, my defense of his leadership consists more of reacting against the very common -- and in my opinion false -- argument that because they are more "moral" than Paul, Michael and/or Nikita would obviously and indeed necessarily be superior to him as leaders. Because I don't buy that, either.

I think he was a mixed bag as a leader. Certainly not ideal, but also not as terrible as many people assert. (OK, most of them Michael worshippers, but still.)

Then again, my liking for/interest in him as a character has very little to do with whether I thought he was an effective leader. I liked him because he had balance of personal qualities that I found engaging: blatant and ruthless ambition tempered by a genuine sense of honor and purpose, cunning, competitiveness, and a kind of cynical sense of humor. I loved to see just how much *fun* he seemed to be having when he outwitted an opponent. I don't think any of the other main characters ever really enjoyed themselves the same way he often did, and I found it extremely refreshing. Charming, even, despite all his negative characteristics (and yes, there were many). Thus he could have been a total incompetent as a leader (which I don't think he was) and I still would have enjoyed his personality.

Similarly, I don't think that discovering that Nikita turned out to be a brilliant and marvelously successful leader would change my opinion of her for the better. I'm not really drawn to characters for their competence (or lack thereof), but for other things entirely. Mind you, when I feel their competence has been unfairly maligned, I'll jump to their defense, but that has nothing to do with why I come to like them in the first place.

Does that make any sense?

[nell65.livejournal.com]

Oh yes - it makes quite a lot of sense. I like Paul's enjoyment of what he does too. It's one of his very best qualities.

I would never set up such diametrically opposing poles in the first place.

I know you haven't. But others' have.... ;-) And my fanish knee jerks to them. *g* Fanon especially regularly sets up stupid incompetent weepy Nikita against clever powerful Paul/Madeline - all the time - and it drives me bonkers. Especially when Michael has to come save the day......blech.

I don't actually think that Paul was a "brilliant" leader. (Honestly, I don't know anyone, even among the TRs, who *does* believe that.)

You are the first TR I got to know - and the only one with whom I've exchanged acres of meta with! - so I don't really react against the TRs. They are, mostly, forgien to me. It's the Nikita-haters (and usually Michael fans) I'm still arguing with. (No, I don't know why. I wish I could stop. They are long gone and wouldn't change their minds anyway.....but one, true fannish loves are demanding and jealous beasts, I'm discovering...again...). And the Nikita-haters were, by the end of the run, sort of TRs by default. I mean, they didn't (usually) give a fig for Madeline or Paul as individuals, but they approved of Madeline and Paul's dislike of Nikita and so, as things came crashing down, began to hold up their era of power as Section's golden age against which Nikita's would necessarily and obviously fail to measure up. Which in turn, soured me, almost permanently it appears, sadly enough, on Paul and his crocodile grin.

Rather, my defense of his leadership consists more of reacting against the very common -- and in my opinion false -- argument that because they are more "moral" than Paul, Michael and/or Nikita would obviously and indeed necessarily be superior to him as leaders.

Yes - that is a sickly sort of argument. I don't think I've ever made it - but I know it's been made. Though I do lose track and I have been known to wander away from my original point into the swamps of overblown verbiage... *g*

My own opinion, that I think Nikita was more than a little green but will rally and do fine as Operations (by the standards of that admittedly not very healthy organization), has far more to do with her basic intelligence, her ability to think on her feet, and her finely honed survival skills, than her morality. Oh yes, and her stubbornness. I think that will have a lot to do with her survival.

[(Anonymous)]

Fanon especially regularly sets up stupid incompetent weepy Nikita against clever powerful Paul/Madeline - all the time - and it drives me bonkers. Especially when Michael has to come save the day......blech.

Except actually, they're never really presented as being all that clever. Just cleverer than *Nikita*, who is generally profoundly and absurdly helpless (or worse, willfully obtuse) and therefore not really all that much competition. They're *all* dumbed down for Michael, in the end.

And the Nikita-haters were, by the end of the run, sort of TRs by default. I mean, they didn't (usually) give a fig for Madeline or Paul as individuals, but they approved of Madeline and Paul's dislike of Nikita and so, as things came crashing down, began to hold up their era of power as Section's golden age against which Nikita's would necessarily and obviously fail to measure up.

I see what you're saying here, although I would definitely disagree with "TRs by default." Because most of them were not just indifferent to Paul and Madeline but actively hostile, especially when dealing with the question of Paul or Madeline might *ever* have had decent or noble intentions about anything, or might ever be worthy of the slightest morsel of sympathy as people. So I see them as *just as hostile* to Paul and Madeline as they are to Nikita -- the difference is the area they choose to attack (competence when it comes to Nikita; morality/humanity when it comes to Paul and Madeline). Being a DON, you see the one side and consider them TRs by default; being a TR, I see the other side and consider them DONs by default -- in reality, they're warping all three characters.

**Rather, my defense of his leadership consists more of reacting against the very common -- and in my opinion false -- argument that because they are more "moral" than Paul, Michael and/or Nikita would obviously and indeed necessarily be superior to him as leaders.**

Yes - that is a sickly sort of argument. I don't think I've ever made it - but I know it's been made.

Essentially, that argument forms the underlying assumption of about 99.99% of all LFN fan fiction. (And yet I keep reading it all! Call me a masochist.)

It's interesting -- before I found fandom, I was pretty much indifferent to Michael and hostile toward Nikita. But the sheer Michael-centrism of the fandom has caused my N versus M preferences to shift radically. It's now Nikita whom I'm more neutral about (OK, she still has qualities that drive me crazy, but I'm more open-minded about her good qualities, too) and Michael whom I can't stand. Or rather fanon-Michael.

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Oops! Forgot to sign in again above. LOL.

pervy vibes indeed

[sk56.livejournal.com]

which almost makes me resigned to the "we have to drug her to get her to do a good job" idea -- almost.

[(Anonymous)]

Except actually, they're never really presented as being all that clever. Just cleverer than *Nikita*, who is generally profoundly and absurdly helpless (or worse, willfully obtuse) and therefore not really all that much competition. They're *all* dumbed down for Michael, in the end.

Gah. Willfully! Obtuse! Nikita can drive me to fits of violence. And you're right - in this, very popular, sort of fic - everyone has to be stupid so that a not noticebly brilliant Michael comes off as smart by comparison.

Being a DON, you see the one side and consider them TRs by default; being a TR, I see the other side and consider them DONs by default -- in reality, they're warping all three characters.

You're right of course - most of the DOMs didn't really think all that much of Paul or Madeline either - so mostly Section just goes down in a blazing pile of crap under that silly cow Nikita. Why poor Paul has born the brunt of my hostility to this view is anyone's guess. Probably got a lot to do with my own current dim view of "bosses'. ;-)

I know some of my obsession with figuring out a way to get back to a more sympathetic view of Paul is vague uneasiness with the way I've let all this fanon get to me.

rather fanon-Michael

In some stories I've started to wish that canon Michael would show up to kick the crap out of his fanon-counterpart. Something I suspect he could do without unbuttoning his jacket. Or wasting any time on anything so stupid as remorse. *eg*

[nell65.livejournal.com]

and that was me. the not-signing-in thing is catching.....