|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 5, 2009 16:31:20 GMT -5
As I promised, here's the thread for rewatching and reviewing the Angel eps. Post your thoughts on the episodes (in chronological order) here - the only real 'rule' is that anyone who wants to contribute should try to stay in sync with the others (so we don't get some people seasons ahead of everyone else). For this reason, please don't 'double-post' reviews - keep them one per post, and wait for someone else to voice their thoughts (and read yours, paving the way for agreement/disagreement/discussion) before moving onto the next ep. For any and everyone who takes part: have fun!  |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 5, 2009 16:39:18 GMT -5
1x01: "City Of…"
Episode Rating = 9
A near-flawless introduction to both the season and the Angel series, “City Of…” is probably the best opening episode of all twelve Buffyverse seasons. I imagine that Joss Whedon and David Greenwalt wanted to ensure that Angel would have a strong start in order to validate its creation – and they more than achieved their goal.
What I liked about “City Of…”:
- The episode’s themes and style are noticeably darker than what we were used to on Buffy, which grants the series a distinct identity right off the bat. While ‘vampire detective’ is a rather overused supernatural trope, the concept works well (such as in Angel’s opening narration), and the noir influences in the cinematography are a perfect compliment to it.
- The plot is interesting, well paced, dramatic, and deviates from predictability through the shocking twist of Tina’s death. It’s great when you’re watching a show and something manages to blindside you without being incoherent in terms of narrative, and this is a great example of that. Given the show’s influences, I’ve always thought it was homage to “Psycho”, with the individual who appears to be the leading lady being suddenly killed so that the real story may commence.
- Besides being gripping, this episode has a lot of great comedy moments. Between Angel acting drunk at the start and later jumping into the wrong car, Cordelia’s “Are you still grr?” and verbally deducing that Russell’s a vampire, and Doyle’s crashing into the “good gate”, there are many genuine laughs to be had. That’s not to mention the consistently witty dialogue, with Angel’s encounter with Oliver, having travelled during the/”my” Depression, and basically every other Doyle line being hilarious.
- The spot-on balance between the drama and comedy. The two elements mingle perfectly to maintain tension, preventing the show from becoming too heavy or light.
- The fights are beautifully choreographed and filmed. I love the double-stake action, and Angel’s closing “can you fly?” to Russell before kicking him out of the window was brilliant.
- Russell. He wasn’t great, but served as a nicely sleazy villain, and provided an interesting opportunity to introduce Lindsey/Wolfram and Hart.
- Tina. For a damsel-of-the-week, she was a rounded and sympathetic character. I liked that she was initially suspicious regarding Angel, and her gradual opening up to him about her troubles (and later freakout when she saw her name on the paper in his apartment) felt real.
- The excellent introduction of Doyle, and the believable character development for Angel and Cordelia. Both are living the kind of lives you would expect half-a-year post-Sunnydale, and their predicaments (his renewed bloodlust; her nonexistent career and obvious self-doubt) provide them with additional depth. The ending (with the trio banding together and Angel deciding he’s game) is funny, a little emotional (Cordy’s veneer cracking as she says she hopes Angel will find a use for her) and effectively establishes the rest of the season.
What I felt was a mixed bag about “City Of…”:
- The vampire make-up looks good, but is way overdone. Why the sudden loss of subtlety?
- I wouldn’t have minded a bit more info on Margo (the redhead who organised the showbiz parties). Was she aware of what Russell was doing (giving him the videos she’d made of the guests; being the one to inform Cordelia that he wanted to meet her), or was it just an unfortunate coincidence?
- The score music is generally good at capturing the emotion of the script, but it’s a bit loud and overdone in places.
- Angel trusts Doyle a bit too quickly (random half-demon enters your home and professes to know about your past and future – and you just go off with him?) I see why the past-scene flashbacks were necessary, but I didn’t need them any more than Angel did (though his response was humorous).
What I disliked about “City Of…” :
- Russell’s reflection in the skyscraper windows as he plummeted down. It wouldn’t be a problem – but the ep made so many references to vamps and mirrors that the crew and editors should have spotted it.
- Some of the stunt doubling is a bit obvious.
Do I like this episode more or less than the last time I watched it?
It was excellent then, and it’s excellent now. A fantastic introduction that works both as an individual story and series touchstone.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 7, 2009 5:57:40 GMT -5
As always, I'm going to be reviewing an episode before I've seen any other reviews, so I don't fall into a pattern of saying 'yeah I agree with what you said, dunno what else to say'. And even if I find faults, it doesn't necessarily mean I dislike the episode, it only means I love nitpicking. I watched this episode right after seeing 'Not fade away', it was interesting seeing how much the show had changed, and also sad, knowing cordelia and doyle (and of cource glen quinn) would not make it to the end. I liked the teaser scene, where angel kills some vamps, rescues two girls, and tells them to leave because he's tempted to drink their blood. It's funny seeing angel drunk (or at least faking it), and those hidden wrist stakes were cool (and they appear in later eps, right up till the last episode). Already within about a minute or so, we've been shown more sides to him then we've ever seen on buffy. Doyle tells angel his own life story which he already knows, because it's really a recap for the audience, and to let us know what angel's been up to since graduation day. At least they draw attention to the fact that angel is being told what he already knows. Doyle tells angel he needs to become more of a people person, so as not to see the people he rescues as food. Angel seems to have worse social skills in this episode than later ones, even in flashbacks or in stories of his past (he apparently hung out with the rat pack) but that's a fault of the later episodes, and it's not a big deal anyway. So the basic story is he tries to help some girl named tina, but in the end he's unable to save her because she can't see him (a vampire) as a good person, and she runs away from him, and gets herself killed. Angel decides to avenge her death, even though she saw him as a monster, because it's the right thing to do, and because the bad guy was still out there. There seems to be a lot of focus on tina and russel, two characters we'll never see again, but that's ok because it's the effect tina has on angel that matters. And through russel the show introduces the wolfram & hart storyline, which won't become a main part of the show until about halfway through the season. There's even a nice little cameo of lindsey, who won't show up again for another 17 episodes. And it seems like russel has been using W&H's necro-tempered glass in his bright, sunny window-filled office. The only real problem I had with this episode was the lack of cordelia. She doesn't show up until about halfway through, and that's just a cameo at first. It's not until the final few minutes she really plays a part. This really annoyed me the first time I watched this episode - I wasn't a big fan of angel when he was on buffy, I watched his show pretty much just to see what cordelia was up to. Still, the scenes she was in were all great. I especially enjoyed her realising that russel was a vampire, telling him, and then taking in back. I liked the little tie-in to the freshman, with angel calling buffy. There were a few funny moments in the show (angel getting into the wrong car, doyle driving into the gate, doyle telling angel to reach out to people then telling a homeless lady to get a job), and some great action scenes (it turns out russel can't fly), but the episode as a whole was pretty dark, in terms of subject matter and lighting. Not that that is always a bad thing, but the story was kind of slow and dank. I loved this as a first episode, but if they took the basic story and made it into a mid-season episode, I know I wouldn't have liked it as much. I give this ep a 7. I want to save higher ratings for episodes I enjoyed more, though there were no real faults that stood out as bad for me, aside from the lack of cordy as I said. Then again, if I were to enter nitpicking mode and look for faults... How did doyle know so much about angel's life? If it was from a vision, it must have been an exceptionally long (and painful) one to get so much info across. How did doyle get a vision that said 'tina, coffee spot', why did doyle not see what happens to her in the vision? It seems like the visions work differently in this episode than in all later ones. Why would angel leave that note lying around right next to tina as she slept? Why did russel lie to tina right before killing her? If his intention was to meet up with her just to kill her, why go to the trouble of making up a story about her dead friend to reassure her? Why would he kill her when she's right in the middle of talking about a guy who might pose a threat to him, shouldn't russel wait to see what else she had to say? Why did the vampires all look so blotchy and weird? I can buy that russel was an old vampire and might look different, but angel looked different as well. I can only assume that was a failed experiment to make the show look different to buffy. |
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 7, 2009 6:19:00 GMT -5
Partcynic- It looks like we agree on a lot. The only thing I really disagree with is that you said you consider 'City of...' to be the strongest opening ep of any buffy/angel season. I'd put 'Welcome to the hellmouth', 'The freshman' and 'Conviction' higher. And that's as an opening, I enjoyed 'Anne', 'Buffy vs dracula', 'Judgement' and 'Heartthrob' more, but they weren't as good if you veiw them as openings. - I wouldn’t have minded a bit more info on Margo (the redhead who organised the showbiz parties). Was she aware of what Russell was doing (giving him the videos she’d made of the guests; being the one to inform Cordelia that he wanted to meet her), or was it just an unfortunate coincidence? I would have liked more of a background on her too. I assumed that she works for russel/W&H, but we never found out for sure. Certainly she knows russel, and I'd imagine the fact he hasn't eaten her means he considers her an asset. Btw, I don't think it's such a good idea for us to put all our reviews in this one thread. I'd rather give each review it's own seperate thread, and post them in the (mostly empty) season sections. |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 7, 2009 10:19:47 GMT -5
I'm glad we agree! Just wait til we get to S3. I could go either way on the openers - generally, Buffy and Angel have stronger finales than starts. I'd put "City Of..." about parallel with "Welcome To The Hellmouth" and "Anne" if I were rating both series together - they're all really good eps, though you're right about "Anne" - I think of it more as a S2 underline than a S3 introduction. I like the rest of the eps you mentioned too, though I'd keep "City Of..." higher. "The Freshman" has an excellent villain but recycles themes we've already seen (and Buffy's 'oh my, college' behaviour is way overdone - she's studying in her home town!), and I don't find the plots of "Conviction" or "Judgement" that compelling. "Hearthrob" is one of my S3 faves, but I agree with you that it's not necessarily a great opener (as opposed to what it would be like as a second or third ep). For the moment, I'd like to keep it to one thread (at least until Clare has the free time to start those for the individual eps on the season sub-boards). Perhaps we can compromise and have a new thread for each of the five seasons. |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 7, 2009 12:31:43 GMT -5
1x02 "Lonely Heart"
Episode Rating = 5
A nice, average monster-of-the-week episode, “Lonely Heart” lacks the spark and creativity that characterised “City Of…”, but is fun nonetheless, showing the Angel Investigations gang working on their first real case together. While I’m not a huge fan of this ep, I appreciate it more knowing that entertaining standalone stories would eventually be cut from the show’s output.
What I liked about “Lonely Heart”:
- This type of monster plot has been done by many series, but I still enjoyed it. The mystery of the demon’s changing identity was moderately interesting (I especially liked the musical montage, which strongly emphasised that it could be anyone), and the concept worked well with the single people/connections metaphor the episode utilised. The HIV/AIDS analogy (creature jumps from body to body via sexual activity, causes the destruction of the host and has to keep ‘hopping’ to survive) was also decent – and fits with Angel’s more adult-oriented storytelling.
- Although it was overdone, I liked the whole ‘loneliness’ angle. For all of their superficial glitz, the nightclub patrons felt desperate, and the two brief scenes of couples post-sex had a really sad undercurrent to them (helped out by the score music).
- I always think of this episode as being low in humour, but there are a number of funny/witty moments. The confusion over the business cards, Angel telling the guy he wasn’t hitting on him, Kate/Angel’s “Go to hell/Been there, done that” and Cordy’s “you look troubled… or is that just your lazy eye?” all made me chuckle. I also enjoyed Kate’s reaction to Angel’s Batman gizmo, Doyle and Cordy being mistaken for a pimp and hooker, and her tactlessly reminding Angel about his curse (as well as allowing him to enter her apartment only after being assured he wouldn’t go evil).
- The twist with Sharon calmly getting dressed beside the dead man (after it was strongly implied that he was the monster) was nice, and the reveal regarding Kate's profession a good surprise.
- Doyle and Cordelia work beautifully throughout their scenes together. The ep does a great job of building on Doyle’s romantic interest in her, reflected in his nervousness during their demon discussion and claims that they’re at the club ‘together’. Elsewhere, Cordy’s “non-dairy kerplooey” was a cute line, and I loved her pointing out just how vague and useless Doyle's visions seem to be.
- The nice, parallel structure with Angel starting and ending the episode in the dark, alone and in his office.
What I disliked about “Lonely Heart”:
- Sharon being ‘Sarah Plain and Tall’. In what universe would that girl be considered unattractive? Hollywood needs to get real and realise that taking a hot actress and giving her no make-up does not equal dowdiness. I dread to think of the meltdown that would ensue if someone truly ugly appeared on the show.
- The early bar fight was a bit tacked-on.
- Kate. She was okay in her first and last scenes with Angel (and Elisabeth Rohm made her character’s romantic awkwardness and disillusion believable), but there was little chemistry between the two – which put a dampener on the ‘potential love interest’ vibe the writers were aiming for. Was Kate supposed to be in undercover mode during that first scene, or was that her true self we saw?
- Kate being the most clueless cop of all time. She enters a suspected serial killer’s place of business (which she found how?) without any kind of backup and performs an illegal search. Why? Given her witnessing Angel run out to Sharon’s place, finding him with a mutilated corpse and being assaulted as he resisted arrest (both crimes in their own right), is there any judge who wouldn’t have given her a warrant? Not to mention that Kate should be aware that any evidence she found during her search would be impermissible in court – and if Angel were the killer, it could have resulted in any trial collapsing (and his being set back on the streets). Also, why doesn’t she try and trace the location of the phone Angel used to call her (which could have led her to Cordy and Doyle, and thus new info)?
- The weirdness with the third act break. It’s suggested that the demon can only jump bodies after some kind of sexual relations, yet no such thing happens with Kate and the bartender. Clarification of the method would have helped – as is, it’s almost implied that he sexually assaulted her while she was unconscious. Also, how did Angel know where Kate was (after all, they’d arranged to meet at the club, which doesn’t imply one of the storerooms)?
- Kate should have been physically dazed after that head injury. I can understand how Slayers and vampires can get right back up, but impact damage on regular humans should have serious consequences (and require a hospital visit). To be fair, this is a problem for the entirety of Buffy and Angel, and not just this episode.
- How long has this monster been in LA for? From what we were shown, it seemed to be changing bodies every single night in order to survive. Shouldn’t quite a few more eviscerated remains have been discovered?
- Did anyone not know how the monster was going to be destroyed the instant they saw the tramps and the flaming barrel?
Do I like this episode more or less than the last time I watched it?
I feel the same way. “Lonely Heart” is far from brilliant, but it’s a respectable episode that I’m willing to cut a little slack (since it had to be quickly written after the network rejected the original second ep “Corrupt”), and it also works well in providing each of the three main characters with a little development.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 14, 2009 11:00:52 GMT -5
This was an ok episode, it didn't have many memorable moments, but then again wasn't too flawed either. It's notable for establishing doyle's attraction to cordy, and for introducing kate (possibly the least interesting side character on the show, in my opinion).
The basic story is that doyle gets a vision of a bar (as cordy points out, the visions are pretty lame, surely the powers would give a bit more of a clue then that?) so team angel checks it out and discovers a demon parasite has been posessing people, and passing itself from one host to the next during sex.
The theme for this episode is trying to make a connection- the demon wants to find a host body that is right for it to live in, but it can't so it keeps going from body to body. This theme works as a reference to people trying to meet someone they can make a connection with, something we can all relate to at some point in our lives, but I'm not really buying it as the demon's motivation. Just what kind of connection is this demon looking for? Someone it can relate to, or just a 'comfortable' body to live in?
Angel makes a connection too- kate, but they both discover their new friend isn't what he/she seems. I liked seeing angel and kate bonding at the start, when first watching this episode I was sure they would become a couple later on.
This episode had a few funny moments (angel's failed grappling hook, cordy's messy home) and some that didn't work (those calling cards clearly have a picture of an angel on them), an ok 'theme', and some nice twists and turns. Overall though it isn't the kind of episode I'd like to watch again and again. My rating- a high 4.
Nitpicking mode!
How does the burrower make people strong? It's not like a demon essence filling the body, its just a little demon animal thing living inside. Why would it keep going back to the same bar, even after it discovers angel is on the case? I mean sure it can become anyone it wants, but there's no reason to stay in one place like that, it could have taken a new body to mexico, or wherever. And what makes angel thing kate would be a big help in tracking a demon that could look like anyone? Why did he even assume she'd been tracking it?
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 14, 2009 11:23:26 GMT -5
- Sharon being ‘Sarah Plain and Tall’. In what universe would that girl be considered unattractive? Hollywood needs to get real and realise that taking a hot actress and giving her no make-up does not equal dowdiness. I dread to think of the meltdown that would ensue if someone truly ugly appeared on the show. Agreed. Though a lot of shows are guilty of the same thing. - How long has this monster been in LA for? From what we were shown, it seemed to be changing bodies every single night in order to survive. Shouldn’t quite a few more eviscerated remains have been discovered? Yep, especially if it stays in one place. - The weirdness with the third act break. It’s suggested that the demon can only jump bodies after some kind of sexual relations, yet no such thing happens with Kate and the bartender. Clarification of the method would have helped – as is, it’s almost implied that he sexually assaulted her while she was unconscious. Also, how did Angel know where Kate was (after all, they’d arranged to meet at the club, which doesn’t imply one of the storerooms)?? I didn't think sex was essential to the body-jumping, it was just a convenient way for a two people to put their bodies close together, all that was needed for the jump was close proximity. As for angel discovering kate, maybe he just overheard what was going on, or even smelled her fear? |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 14, 2009 11:43:16 GMT -5
I'm pleased to see a new review - I was feeling lonely here! I completely agree about Kate. Her two big showcase episodes in S1 are among my least favourites, and she drags "Somnambulist" down quite a bit too. I was very pleased when they wrote her out. I got the impression that he arranged the meeting more to try and clear his own name than for tracking the monster. He had reason to believe she'd been aware of the killings as when she tried to arrest him, she stated that she'd been tracking him since the previous night - implying she knew something dangerous was happening at the club. When I first saw the episode, I originally thought that she was undercover in her first scene, suspected Angel, and was playing the vulnerable woman card in some kind of sting. I don't think that's the case now, but I'd have preferred it if it actually was. |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 14, 2009 15:43:06 GMT -5
1x03 “In The Dark”Episode Rating = 6 This episode is a perfect example of why I occasionally need a ‘mixed bag’ category when reviewing; being a combination of highs and lows throughout its duration. Although I enjoyed watching it quite a bit more than “Lonely Heart”, “In the Dark” felt much more uneven, with fewer ‘good vs bad’ components and more ‘good, but flawed’ and ‘weak, but redeemable’ ones. It doesn’t help that the ending’s silly pseudo-philosophy closes things on a bum note. What I Liked about “In the Dark”:- Spike’s introductory monologue where he ‘dubs’ Angel and Rachel’s conversation. It’s the funniest part of the episode and effectively establishes Spike’s character for Angel-only viewers. - Cordy’s early excitement over having a customer is very cute, as is her gradual deflation when Doyle informs her that they probably won’t be getting any cash. - All of the scenes with Oz are good. His monosyllabic catch-ups with Cordy and Angel are humorous and in character, and it was good to involve him in the plan to take Spike out. - Good old, nasty Spike. He had great line after great line, including (but not limited to) having a plan but ‘getting bored’, his backhanded compliment to Cordy about her weight, taunting Angel about Buffy/Parker, and his final ‘big bad’ talk before being set aflame by the sunlight. - Cordelia and Doyle have a wonderful dynamic, with both the characters and actors working well together. The hangover scene was good (something about Doyle calling Oz ‘my little Bam-Bam’ makes me crack up – would love to have seen the three of them at the pub), and their later discussions and collaboration were excellent, with equal amounts of playful teasing and genuine motivation/concern for Angel’s welfare. - The end fight at the pier was fun. I enjoyed Marcus’ ‘uh-oh’ face as Angel wrenched the ring from him while he was impaled. - Angel: “I don’t know about you, but I had a nice day. You know, except for the bulk of it, where I was nearly tortured to death.” What I found to be a mixed bag about “In the Dark”:- The mini-story with Rachel and her abusive boyfriend. I liked seeing the gang taking on a client, but both characters were very one-dimensional. It was nice that Rachel got away, but I just wasn’t interested or invested in what happened to her. - Although his dialogue is great, Spike feels off throughout the episode – made more apparent by comparing James Marsters’ acting here with Buffy eps from the same timeframe. I’m assuming that the director just wanted Spike to be a straight-up villain (since the Angel audience might not have been aware of his backstory) – but I missed the character’s nuances. What I Disliked about “In the Dark”:- Spike’s plan to capture Angel is to have one vampire choke him with a chain? And it works… despite the fact that Angel doesn’t need to breathe. - The Angel/Marcus scenes dragged. I appreciate that censorship limits what can be shown, but torture needs to include actual torture. For all of the talk of how Marcus was some mutilating expert who’d invented some of the classics, impaling Angel with rods and shining sunlight on him were pretty lame. I guess that Angel was right – the real technique was to bore him with all of that witless psychobabble. - Spike’s behaviour during the ring showdown is a bit odd. He recoils the instant the van crashes in instead of grabbing the gem that was an inch away from his hands, then stays put while Oz aims crossbows at him (from a poor position and distance that would near-guarantee a missed shot). And did he really not notice Marcus move in front of him to grab the ring? - The gang’s ‘let’s get Angel to the hospital’ discussion. Why? It’s not like Angel’s physically endangered. What would a hospital visit achieve besides freaking out medics who would take his pulse only to find he doesn’t have one, yet is still walking around? - Marcus is a paedophile, so Angel knows he’ll have gone to the beach. Hmm… I’m sure that there are plenty of places in LA that have young kids. And would looking for prey necessarily be the first thing Marcus would do, even if he’s a child molester? - The episode takes a few too many liberties with vamps and sunlight exposure. Spike’s alley lurking and Angel’s tenure in the back of the van should have resulted in some burning, as should the pier fight scene. - The ending was a mess. With the Gem of Amarra, the writers put themselves in a corner. Obviously, they had to get rid of it to prevent Angel from becoming a boring, invincible hero – but they couldn’t get it to make sense. Does Angel seriously think that he couldn’t help more people by being invulnerable? Perhaps he could simply opt to keep the ring but not use its powers during the day? He’d better hope that all coming apocalypses come solely after sunset.  Do I like this episode more or less than the last time I watched it?Once again, my opinion’s the same. “In the Dark”’s high points are really high, but the flaws are significant enough to drag it down to ‘above average’ status.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 24, 2009 17:20:15 GMT -5
In the dark is one of my personal favourites from season 1. With (evil, 'old') spike making an appearance, this episode was full of comedy. Especially the first scene, where spike stands on a roof and makes fun of the (already cliche) angel-rescues-a-girl scene.
Speaking of, I don't see why that subplot had to continue. The rachel/lenny storyline had nothing to do with the rest of the episode, and it just kind of fizzled out halfway through the episode, aside from a little mention at the end. IMO that story should have been nothing more than that first scene wth spike on the roof. Though I did notice a subtle little reference to wolfram and hart that I didn't pick up on the first few times watching.
Oz became pointless after the first scene where he gives angel the ring. On buffy he was mr cool, but on this show he always came across as the least cool guy in the room. He really felt out of place, and why was he even cast at all? Why not have buffy deliver the ring?
Notice how even though spike met doyle, doyle's name was never mentioned in front of spike, thereby allowing the lindsey-is-doyle subplot of season 5 to make sense.
Marcus was an interesting villain. He has a great, creepy look about him, and I loved his constantly questioning angel while torturing him (not that there seemed to be any point to it, I guess marcus was just curious).
As for the ending, well I understand why angel chose to destroy the ring, but I don't fully agree with his reasoning. Doyle was right, there are more people he could help if he could go out during the day. And I don't see how he would forget the people in trouble at night, not after spending decades fighting evil at night. Surely if he's on a mission for redemption, he would be trying to help people as much as possible, day or night?
In conclusion like with most episodes there were a few flaws, but this was a highly enjoyable episode I could watch over and over again. A definite highlight of season 1. My rating- an 8.
On to the nitpicking!
- Why did spike attack angel, knowing angel had the invinsibility ring (and must have assumed angel would be wearing it)?
- Spike told cordy, who pointed a crossbow at his chest, "you'll be dead before that arrow leaves the bow". Not at that distance. I understand that he was trying to make her doubt that she could kill him so she wouldn't try (and it worked) but still, she could have easily killed him from there.
- They really bent the 'vampires must stay out of the sun' rule for this ep. Angel spent a good long time in the sun fighting marcus under the pier. I guess if he's barely in the shadows it's ok, and the sunlight all around him won't affect him.
- Angel looks really pale in the sunlight in this episode, but not in any later ones, not even when he becomes human or goes to a sunny demon dimension like pylea.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 24, 2009 17:43:06 GMT -5
-- The Angel/Marcus scenes dragged. I appreciate that censorship limits what can be shown, but torture needs to include actual torture. For all of the talk of how Marcus was some mutilating expert who’d invented some of the classics, impaling Angel with rods and shining sunlight on him were pretty lame. I guess that Angel was right – the real technique was to bore him with all of that witless psychobabble. You're right, we didn't get to see much actual torture. I guess all the more horrific torturing took place offscreen, like whatever it was that spike did with those needle-nose pliers. - Marcus is a paedophile, so Angel knows he’ll have gone to the beach. Hmm… I’m sure that there are plenty of places in LA that have young kids. And would looking for prey necessarily be the first thing Marcus would do, even if he’s a child molester? Again I agree. You'd think if marcus was going after kids, that he'd head for a school. |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 25, 2009 7:00:02 GMT -5
Yay - new review! I like that we're agreeing so much (at least so far  ). Thanks for pointing that out - I hadn't noticed. Clever. I liked Oz, but it did feel a bit like stunt casting. I guess they just didn't want to have the Buffy/Angel angst in this ep (especially if they'd already planned for "I Will Remember You".) A very good point. And it makes it even odder that he's scared of Oz's crossbows in the warehouse, when Oz was in a much poorer position to shoot him than Cordy was. |
|
|
|
Post by partcynic on Jun 25, 2009 7:08:34 GMT -5
1x04 "I Fall to Pieces"
Episode Rating = 4
A watchable but laborious edition, “I Fall to Pieces” tries to look at a dark subject, but stumbles in choosing to pair its stalking themes with a campy plot. Despite having a large number of good lines, this unevenness prevents the episode from being successful.
What I Liked about “I Fall to Pieces”:
- The teaser was pretty good; introducing Angel Investigations’ money issues and exploring both the material and ethical consequences of charging people for help. The dialogue was humorous (the bad coffee; Doyle having a vision and requesting “Pen… paper… single malt scotch”), and the best gag of the ep came in Doyle’s response to Angel’s sweeping departure.
- Melissa. Like Tina before her, she was a simple character, but likeable and sympathetic. The brief scene with her messing about with the cake for her co-worker’s birthday was fun, and her abrupt tonal change upon receiving the flowers a good way to cue the audience to her troubles. Her material with Doyle at the office was also charming (I loved his saying that Angel had had four cases, with three of the clients being very much alive), and it was good to see her finally lay the law down with Ronald at the end, and then get back on with her life.
- The concept of a man who could sever and attach body parts at will was an intriguing one. It was also cool to see what Andy Umberger looked like without his D’Hoffryn makeup on – and he played Ronald with the right amount of unhinged malice.
- One or two moments are mildly creepy, namely the scene outside the bank where we first see Ronald (and he gives a word-for-word description of what Melissa had done at the office earlier); and the later segment where his disembodied hands were sneaking under the bedcovers as she slept.
- Kate. She’s far from being my favourite character, but the way she was used was fine. I wouldn’t have minded her appearances in future eps if they’d kept the scenes brief, and included them only when necessary.
- Cordelia is in particularly good form here. Highlights include “Get over it! I mean that in a sensitive way”; pointing out Angel’s black-on-black outfits (and his consequent clothing change); wondering if stalking is the most popular sport among men; “You’re a lot smarter than you look – of course, you look like a retard”; the line about how dating a doctor should be a good thing, and questioning whether she could give Doyle a vision by hitting him on the head. All funny.
What I Disliked about I Fall to Pieces”:
- The story just isn’t that interesting. You immediately know how it’s going to end, meaning you have to follow the predictable ride.
- This episode tried hard to be frightening, but was anything but for most of its duration. Besides the two quick moments mentioned earlier, the stalker plot quickly veered into camp – and when a study of voyeurism is unintentionally making you laugh (Ronald spitting his teeth into Angel’s arm – oh dear), you’re in trouble. To think of it, this episode reminded me of “Ted” quite a bit. As well as being written by the same people, both eps suffer from combining two disparate elements into one story, so they end up oscillating between heavy-handed preaching and silliness; failing to become a coherent whole.
- All of the female empowerment speeches. It’s not like there wasn’t truth to them, but they were stated in the most cliched and unimaginative way possible.
- It’s a bit coincidental that the book Angel is drawn to in Ronald’s office is that one that cracks the case open. I also felt that the scene where Angel met with the reclusive author was stilted, with poor acting from the guest star complicating some already tricky exposition.
- How do Ronald’s hands manage to move around so effectively in Melissa’s apartment? It’s almost like they can see on their own. Isn’t that what he needs to detach an eye for?
- Angel’s physical reaction to the drug Ronald injects him with. I’m assuming it was a sedative that would have killed him via paralysing the cardiac muscle and diaphragm, but it’s not like Angel needs to worry about his heart or lungs failing. It would have been better for him to drop in response to being shot and fake being in pain, and then to have cleanly gotten up when Ronald had left. As it is, it seems that the drug did work (his sweating and blurred vision) despite the fact it couldn’t really damage him physiologically.
- Since Ronald’s not particularly stable, why didn’t he just kill Cordy and Doyle?
- Angel showing up at the perfect moment to save Melissa was rather contrived.
Do I like this episode more or less than the last time I watched it?
I like it a fraction less, but nothing that would change my overall opinion. It’s a reasonably entertaining episode that tried something new – and while it didn’t really work, I appreciate the effort.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyclica on Jun 25, 2009 14:15:47 GMT -5
I fall to pieces was an ok episode, nothing special. There were some good scenes, like angel pretending he has a wife who needs surgery after being caught by ronald, kate telling angel that melissa needs to fight ronald herself or she'll always feel like a victim, and just about every scene with cordelia or doyle. I especially loved doyle's line- “Don’t you worry. When Angel is finished with this case I can guarantee you’ll be wanting to jump off a bridge again.”  The main story however, like the main villain, just falls apart. How is it that he is able to detatch his body parts? There was no supernatural explanation, beyond saying ronald had studied with 'psychic surgeons'. How is ronald able to know where his hands (and other parts) are going? Unless maybe he sends an eye to follow his hands, but that didn't happen in the melissa's bedroom scene or the end scene. Why has no one ever just ran into parts of ronald, especially if his eye follows her around when she's at work? How are his severed parts so strong? And why does ronald fall to pieces at the end? The story seems to imply that he needs to concentrate to keep his parts together, like his natural state would be a bunch of floating parts, and the emotional turmoid breaks his concentration. Which is just ridiculous. Overall it was an ok episode with a few good scenes, but the main plot was too over the top and didn't make much sense. I give this ep a low 4. Fun things I noticed mode! - The cop who was (somehow) strangles by ronalds' severed hands comes back in 'The thin red line' as a zombie cop. - Cordelia says to doyle at the end, “If I hit you on the head, will you have a vision?”, in an interesting parallel in season 2 wesley asks cordy is she would have a vision if he hit her on the head, with one of his big old books. |
|
).