Smallville 3x13 - Velocity; Angel 5x13 - Why We Fight

[butterfly]

I've really been enjoying Clark and Lex recently. Have you seen that show? It's constantly being interrupted by a lesser show that's called Smallville. SV is mostly cheesy, with some good bits - all of C&L, though, is amazing. It's a wonderful show. I highly recommend it. It has two great actors as leads, as well as some amazing supporting actors. The show is centered around Clark and Lex's journeys to who they will become. It features fascinating glances at what nature and nurture mean, as well as a chilling look at how destiny can trap larger-than-life figures. So far, Clark's appears to be a journey of trumping nature, nurture, and destiny, while Lex is the tragic mirroring fall of submission. Think Angel and Cordy in Tomorrow without the sucking.

Oh, I am in love with Clark Kent. This is a bit unfortunate, as he doesn't actually exist. But I adore the set of his chin and the strength in his eyes. I love that he's taking responsibility for his choices - he should, no matter what his parents told him. He made a choice and because of that choice, people got hurt. He has to deal with that. That's what will make him the Clark Kent of legend. In this, he does more than his parents can do. He's growing past their teachings and their protectiveness and becoming a man to admire. His parents invariably choose Clark over anything else and they do it without guilt. Clark has never hidden his secrets easily.

In regards to Pete - See, Clark, this is what happens when you ignore people. They do stupid racing things. Actually, it does makes sense to me. And the chick that was macking on Pete was pretty cute.

The Chloe/Lex stuff is great - it's nice seeing them dive into privacy violation when they don't have affection for the person they're investigating. The difference between how they treat Adam and how they treat Clark is fascinating. Apparently, Clark is in a category of his own, worth lying for even when you think that he's intentionally trying to kill you (Delete).

Every scene that Clark is in only confirms our love. I think it helps that he hasn't had any scenes with Lana yet. He's great with Martha, with Jonathan, and with Pete. His expressions have gotten so much better, so much more subtle.

Wow, that was, like, the shortest Clark/Lana scene ever. I approve.

It becomes clearer by the episode why Superman is created - Clark is learning that he needs to find a way to make of himself a law. He keeps trying the legal way this season, and he keeps getting smacked down. And now Pete is trying to guilt him into betraying his own morals. "There has to be another way." And Superman is that way - the vigilante that was so successful, powerful, and charismatic that he was sanctioned by law and government.

If Superman weren't Clark Kent, that would be a much more terrifying thought.

"I hope you're happy. I lied for you. Stole for you, and now I'm going to cheat for you." Seeing Clark find out ways to do things that aren't for him... it's painful. That conversation withn Lex was agony, but the moment after was still worse. God, poor Clark. But sometimes you do need to make bad choices to learn what choices are good. And he's learning which ways don't work for him. It's hard and painful, but Clark has shown time and time again this season that he is learning.

Overall - very good episode. A great one for Clark and Lex's growth into who they'll be - Lex has a scientist again, but this one may prove more trustworthy. Clark is learning where his boundaries are. And I'm very proud of him for not smiling away what he and Pete did. He's growing up. Very wow. So much better than the preview promised.

And I love that flash of Kal in his eyes in the preview for next week. Mmm. Leashed power is attractive.



So, Nazis. One of Xander's fears. I've always thought that was a particularly wise fear - Nazis and that entire mind-set is more terrifying that most anything that I can think of.

Fanatics are dangerous because they believe that they know the One True Way.

I've never been a believer in any One True Way. I think that there is a divide though - there are ways that work and ways that don't work. Any system of life has two questions that it should answer - is it sustainable and is it efficient? For me, not much else really matters - I don't have many 'squicks' and even the ones that I do have are carefully marked as my own. I have a very 'live and let live' policy. I do believe that some things are... impolite. I have a great regard for courtesy and for honesty.

All of this means that I'm going to be looking at this episode's Angel very carefully, because he crossed a line for me last week when he declared himself to be better than Lindsey (not in those words, but that was very definitely his implication - and, of course, claiming superiority over Lindsey is easy to do, he's done that since Lindsey first appeared - in retrospect, it really feels like a set-up, to have him fooled by one of the few people that he would be willing to definitively say that he was better than.).

Angel is much easier to trust when he doubts himself. Any hero is easier to trust when they don't believe that they have a direct line to Right and Good (I really should write about the Case of Buffy and why I don't lump her into this category, because I do have reasons for why I trust her). One of the reasons that I like Smallville is because we get to see how Clark builds his beliefs - we see him becoming a person that I would trust to have superpowers (there's an essay there, too, on how that trust is built - on feelings and logic).

Mostly, this is because Angel has, on occasion, believed in his own sense of right before. And that hasn't actually gone too well. Ever. His track record, instinct-wise, sucks (as opposed to both Buffy and Clark, who have wonderful instincts - they're good judges of character, those two, even when they don't realize it. And when it comes to supernatural doings, they've never been wrong - because they're innately supernaturally gifted and accept it, whereas Angel is always fighting his supernatural side. Buffy and Clark are willing to trust their inner weirdo - Angel knows that his inner weirdo comes with the fun bonus of sadism.).

Right! Episode.

Promising opener. That guy is really cute, in a Peter Smith-Kingsley way (Which is a Jack Davenport way, which is a very good way). Liked the update on Eve and the SP deal - and is Gunn's mojo wearing off? Hmm. Wes' adorable answer to Angel's plea that they come back and spend more time with him in a few hours was, well, adorable.

I love flashback episodes. Have I mentioned that?

Okay, the hot guy keeps distracting me. Whenever he's onscreen, I get all hypnotized by the pretty. Mmm.

Yep, he's a vampire, all right. And really, really hot. Am I obsessed here? Hmm. I mean, there's all this deep stuff, and I'm all thinking about is how much I'd like to suck on Lawson's lower lip.

That was... far too hot. I may develop a complex. Because Lawson getting vamped by Angel? Wow. He has gorgeous eyes, full of determination and life. Gah.

Have I ever been this smitten by a guest star? He'll probably get dusted, but I hope not, because... yeah. Wow.

Lawson breaks my heart. Also? Wow, feel the Connor echoes. There are almost too many to count.

Is that would have happened to Darla, had Angel sired her in Season Two?

Poor, beautiful Lawson. I adore him and his desperate, questing, lost longing.

Comments

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

Any hero is easier to trust when they don't believe that they have a direct line to Right and Good (I really should write about the Case of Buffy and why I don't lump her into this category, because I do have reasons for why I trust her).

I think it's in part because Buffy very rarely sets herself in that position, and when she inches closer to it, hates to have to. She's been a very grey character who draws a lot of lines because it's often necessary - not because she's inherently a black/white character. IMHO, her moral/ethical system appears to have been heavily worked through, and very complex.

Is that would have happened to Darla, had Angel sired her in Season Two?

I think Darla would have been in S2, the same as what she was whether Angel or Dru sired her. Because IMHO, it's about the person you were, and what your ambitions and motivations were - and then the circumstances you face - not who brought you across.

Lawson spent 60 years doing all manner of Evil Bad. That it didn't work for him - is mostly rooted in the man he was. Morally/metaphysically, I don't think he's any different from Harmony.

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I think it's in part because Buffy very rarely sets herself in that position, and when she inches closer to it, hates to have to. She's been a very grey character who draws a lot of lines because it's often necessary - not because she's inherently a black/white character. IMHO, her moral/ethical system appears to have been heavily worked through, and very complex.

The difference between righteous and self-righteous, perhaps? Buffy is willing to call herself the law in situations where she is the only agent who can deal with a problem, but she doesn't enjoy it. Whereas Angel can too easily believe in himself as mission.

I think Darla would have been in S2, the same as what she was whether Angel or Dru sired her. Because IMHO, it's about the person you were, and what your ambitions and motivations were - and then the circumstances you face - not who brought you across.

Lawson spent 60 years doing all manner of Evil Bad. That it didn't work for him - is mostly rooted in the man he was. Morally/metaphysically, I don't think he's any different from Harmony.

Probably true - certainly Angel seemed to feel that way. It's just interesting - the choices that he made. That he only went after Angel after Angel put himself into a position of power.

But there was an odd thoughtfulness to Lawson - though again, that was probably because of who he was in life. We just don't see too many thoughtful people who are vamped.

If Angel had sired Darla, she probably would have been different, because Darla would have been different if he'd made that choice. But, again, that would be rooted in her, not him.

Well, that was a roundabout way

Re:

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

The difference between righteous and self-righteous, perhaps?

I think so. Buffy sometimes skirts the edges, when she's too beset by her issues to follow through on her morals. (see her treatment of Spike and Faith in S7, which was both unequal and poor politics)

Whereas Angel can too easily believe in himself as mission.

In a lot of ways, I think Buffy and Angel are very similar, save that he's taken moral lessons from her and gone much further. He's very Catholic in the way he pursues his personal Redemption - it's all faith and good works and the belief in the mission. Emotionally, it's something he needs. Whereas Buffy is a bit more small scale.

I think the other difference between them is the way he feels the weight of immortality versus her painful awareness of her own limited lifespan.

It's just interesting - the choices that he made. That he only went after Angel after Angel put himself into a position of power.

Definitely. I'm waiting for someone to do a Lawson - Penn comparison. I found both of those characters interesting.

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I think so. Buffy sometimes skirts the edges, when she's too beset by her issues to follow through on her morals. (see her treatment of Spike and Faith in S7, which was both unequal and poor politics).

Though that can be partly attributed to Buffy's need to believe in the magic of a new soul. Still, definitely agree she had a double standard there. I just understand why.

In a lot of ways, I think Buffy and Angel are very similar, save that he's taken moral lessons from her and gone much further. He's very Catholic in the way he pursues his personal Redemption - it's all faith and good works and the belief in the mission. Emotionally, it's something he needs. Whereas Buffy is a bit more small scale.

I think that he's very like her because that where he learned how to be a 'hero'. Buffy's the one who taught him how. And then he adds his Catholic twist to it.

I think the other difference between them is the way he feels the weight of immortality versus her painful awareness of her own limited lifespan.

Very good point. Forever versus a handful of years. It would make a difference in perspective.

I'm waiting for someone to do a Lawson - Penn comparison. I found both of those characters interesting.

The vampire that Angelus built and the one that Angel set loose. Both of them relentlessly traveling on the path that he put their feet on, both of them trapped until they meet him again. Of course, Penn ran into him by accident, whereas Lawson sought him out.

I liked Penn a lot, too, now that you've reminded me of him. He called Angel a father figure, too.

Re:

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

Forever versus a handful of years. It would make a difference in perspective.

Whats funny is that they follow through in somewhat ironic ways. Generally, it's the person most aware of mortality who is more driven to make a lasting change - do something that outlives them - and be so focused on legacy. But Buffy is, for the most part, rather fatalistic. Faced with the enormity of her situation, she retreats from it and works on a smaller scale. It's actually pretty rare that she'll go out and deliberately do something with legacy in mind, like empower all the slayers. Most of her legacy occured as byproduct rather than product.

Angel, who has lived for centuries, should be the fatalist - he's commented more than once about how little people have changed since he was a human, even as the world has. Most of his life, he does seem to fixate on how pointless a lot of what he does is in "the grand scheme". But, because of that, when he does involve himself, he's far more focused on doing something that really *will* change things. Make a huge difference.

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Most of her legacy occured as byproduct rather than product.

True, though she gives great byproduct.

Angel, who has lived for centuries, should be the fatalist - he's commented more than once about how little people have changed since he was a human, even as the world has. Most of his life, he does seem to fixate on how pointless a lot of what he does is in "the grand scheme". But, because of that, when he does involve himself, he's far more focused on doing something that really *will* change things. Make a huge difference.

True. He wants to make the big difference, Buffy wants to do the battle in front of her and tend to make a big difference either by accident or, as you said above, a byproduct. Making a difference isn't generally her goal.

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

For some reason, lj is cutting me off.

Where was I?

That was a roundabout way of saying, "After thinking it over, I agree with you."

[livinglaurel.livejournal.com]

Lawson breaks my heart. Also? Wow, feel the Connor echoes. There are almost too many to count.

I KNOW! Towards the end I kept tugging anxiously on the spousal overunit's sleeve saying "He wouldn't dust Lawson, would he....I mean he's evil and all, but he wouldn't dust him, would he?" Spousal overunit wisely refused to answer.

Really felt it with the Connor heartbreak. "I don't think it works that way, son." Ow ow ow ow ow. But in a good-angsty way. I'm now a lot more optimistic about the rest of the season....except the next episode looks kinda....wacky.

moi

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I KNOW! Towards the end I kept tugging anxiously on the spousal overunit's sleeve saying "He wouldn't dust Lawson, would he....I mean he's evil and all, but he wouldn't dust him, would he?" Spousal overunit wisely refused to answer.

Angel is all about avoiding the hard road with his 'sons'. Penn, Connor, Lawson - each of them, he created and broke. And he gave up on each of them, though I'd argue that both Connor and Lawson could have been rehabilitated (Lawson could have done a Harmony - he just wanted a purpose and if Angel had given him one, he would have followed, I think). Perhaps even Penn, if Angel had taken a different approach - Penn was worshipful over Angelus.

Re:

[livinglaurel.livejournal.com]

avoiding the hard road with his 'sons'

Aw, that's disturbingly true. Boo. I guess if you squint Spike sorta escapes that, although Angelus was really his grandsire (insert wank about "You were my sire, man! You were my Yoda!" here). Oh, I SO WANTED Lawson to be rehabilitated. I was like, "Sixty years isn't so bad! Spike did evil for a lot longer than that, and everyone lets him off! The poor guy didn't even enjoy any of it! Just lock him in the basement and get him off the human blood and then there's that opening in the mailroom!" But for me it was a really good example of what Virginia Woolf described as the tension between not wanting the character to die, and realizing the character has to die because that's the way the narrative's been set up.

I usually like Angel, but I really disliked his turning Lawson to save everyone and then more or less just dumping him -- "Next time I see you I kill you, goodbye" -- maybe one reason Angel does so poorly with his "sons" is that they're like mirrors reflecting the parts of himself he least likes to see.

moi

Re:

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

I really disliked his turning Lawson to save everyone and then more or less just dumping him -- "Next time I see you I kill you, goodbye" -- maybe one reason Angel does so poorly with his "sons" is that they're like mirrors reflecting the parts of himself he least likes to see.

In 1943, I guess he just doesn't know what to do with Lawson. He feels too guilty or obligated to just kill him. But his experiences with Darla's retinue in 1898-1901 tell him that souled and soulless vampires can't get along.

And he has a lot of weakness in that regard - paralyzed by a difficult case, he abdicates a decision. The last scene on the sub was Angel kicking Connor out of the house.

Re:

[livinglaurel.livejournal.com]

Poor Lawson. What with Angel calling him "son" twice I was like "Oh, he's dead. Well -- yeah he's technically dead, but he's dust."

moi

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

In 1943, I guess he just doesn't know what to do with Lawson. He feels too guilty or obligated to just kill him. But his experiences with Darla's retinue in 1898-1901 tell him that souled and soulless vampires can't get along.

And he has a lot of weakness in that regard - paralyzed by a difficult case, he abdicates a decision. The last scene on the sub was Angel kicking Connor out of the house.

Very much agree - that was Angel not wanting to deal. It's not 'tough love', it's avoidance.

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Aw, that's disturbingly true.

More than that - it's a progression. Someone else (Kate) kills Penn, Connor's death isn't a death from Angel's point of view, but then he killed Lawson straight-out. He's escalating.

I guess if you squint Spike sorta escapes that, although Angelus was really his grandsire (insert wank about "You were my sire, man! You were my Yoda!" here). Oh, I SO WANTED Lawson to be rehabilitated. I was like, "Sixty years isn't so bad! Spike did evil for a lot longer than that, and everyone lets him off! The poor guy didn't even enjoy any of it! Just lock him in the basement and get him off the human blood and then there's that opening in the mailroom!" But for me it was a really good example of what Virginia Woolf described as the tension between not wanting the character to die, and realizing the character has to die because that's the way the narrative's been set up.

Spike gets the benefit of the Dru loop-hole, I think. Dru's the thing that he was most horrified about - she's the worst crime he ever committed. And he is, I think, incapable of killing her - he'll hurt her like hell, but he won't kill her.

I usually like Angel, but I really disliked his turning Lawson to save everyone and then more or less just dumping him -- "Next time I see you I kill you, goodbye" -- maybe one reason Angel does so poorly with his "sons" is that they're like mirrors reflecting the parts of himself he least likes to see.

True. He sucks at parental stuff. He was actually better at it as Angelus.

I'm not so sure

[bhadrasvapna.livejournal.com]

Lawson could have done a Harmony - he just wanted a purpose and if Angel had given him one, he would have followed, I think).

I think this was maybe the main point of the episode. Not necessarily "why we fight" but where that sentiment comes from. How do we develop the answer to that? Can it be something that is "given" to us? Maybe we are supposed to tie this back to Harmony, who really doesn't have a purpose. She is doing what she needs to survive. When she tortured Eve in "You're Welcome" for the team, it reminded me of "Doomed" when Spike discovered he could get his violence back on. It wasn't about finding a purpose so much as finding an acceptable way to be violent. We can take that to Lawson who doesn't get that vamp thrill out of violence.

I've got a post gelling in my head along these lines. I hope it solidifies tomorrow.

Re: I'm not so sure

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I think this was maybe the main point of the episode. Not necessarily "why we fight" but where that sentiment comes from. How do we develop the answer to that? Can it be something that is "given" to us? Maybe we are supposed to tie this back to Harmony, who really doesn't have a purpose. She is doing what she needs to survive. When she tortured Eve in "You're Welcome" for the team, it reminded me of "Doomed" when Spike discovered he could get his violence back on. It wasn't about finding a purpose so much as finding an acceptable way to be violent. We can take that to Lawson who doesn't get that vamp thrill out of violence.

Right - Spike, Harmony, and Lawson all have different motives. But Spike and Harmony both learned not to go for human blood. Lawson would have needed a different system, but I think that it could have been found - especially since 'blood was like ashes' to him.

[aelora.livejournal.com]

Lex has a scientist again, but this one may prove more trustworthy

She can't be more trustworthy. That's the same scientist who was sitting in Lionel's limo in 'Phoenix' and testing Clark's blood. She's just going to tell Lionel everything Lex knows.

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Really? Wow, I need to go rewatch Phoenix.

...

Lex really does have horrible luck in minions.