[Jordan]

why is sarah michelle gellar a star? She is not that attractive, she can't dance, sing, or even act that well. What is her star quality?

And what is the deal with buffy the vampire slayer? How long can you keep killing the same thing for untill it gets boring? I dislike that show on so many different fronts.

[civilian_number_two]

And what is the deal with buffy the vampire slayer? How long can you keep killing the same thing for untill it gets boring? I dislike that show on so many different fronts.

This reminds me of a teacher I had in high school who once suggested that looking at Playboy was boring because "Once you've seen one naked woman, you've seen them all." I guess he was tyrying to convince young boys not to look at Playboy.

Of course BUFFY is not actually about fighting the same thing over and over again. It's a soap opera with over-the-top fantasy elements. Essentially the stories are about the characters. One season's big finale was actually about whether a character was going to leave the group (and, as it happened, destroy the world as we know it).

But back to the Playboy analogy: to assume that one naked woman is the same as the next is, after all, not to get the point of wanting to look at naked women. And what I say is, if you don't get it, what's the point of criticizing it? Best you stick to what you know.


PS: as to the critique of SMG: she was good for that role. I suspect that outside the show she'll never quite hit the mark. So I sort of agree.

[Jordan]

Good points. I guess I dont like the show because sarah is in it.

[Supes]

This reminds me of a teacher I had in high school who once suggested that looking at Playboy was boring because "Once you've seen one naked woman, you've seen them all." I guess he was tyrying to convince young boys not to look at Playboy.

But back to the Playboy analogy: to assume that one naked woman is the same as the next is, after all, not to get the point of wanting to look at naked women. And what I say is, if you don't get it, what's the point of criticizing it? Best you stick to what you know.

Ha! This has to be one of the best analogies I think I've ever read. Buffy, as seen in the eyes of Playboy.

[Jordan]

Sex triggers a different reaction then watching TV. Your analogy does not work. "once you've had sex who needs to do it again, it gets boring". And play boy is related naturally. For most people their body and mind craves sex and things of sexual nature.

[civilian_number_two]

Sex triggers a different reaction then watching TV. Your analogy does not work. "once you've had sex who needs to do it again, it gets boring". And playboy is related naturally. For most people their body and mind craves sex and things of sexual nature.

Sure the analogy works. I was not comparing BUFFY the television show with Playboy the magazine. I was comparing your statement about BUFFY the television show ("And what is the deal with buffy the vampire slayer? How long can you keep killing the same thing for untill it gets boring?") with my old teacher's comment about Playboy (which I paraphrased as "Once you've seen one naked woman, you've seen them all.")

This is not to say that I think sex and tv are similar, or that watching a thing and doing another thing are triggered by common urges. Or even that I said anything of the sort. The comparison is between the statements, which both come from the same place. You don't like BUFFY because you believe that it is an endless series of similar slaying stories; it isn't that at all. It's a soap opera with fantasy elements, and surely that's enough reason to dislike it, if you wish. My teacher believed that the notion behind looking at Playboy was simply to see what naked women looked like, and that once a fellow had satisfied that curiosity, he ought naturally to get bored. And I say (and I think Playboy'a accountants will back me up) that there is something else to the idea of naked images than mere curiosity. So: my teacher didn't get it (or pretended not to get it).

Simply put, my teacher did not appreciate Playboy because my teacher did not appreciate Playboy; you do not appreciate BUFFY because you do not appreciate BUFFY. That's the analogy, and it's 100% balls-on accurate.

[Jordan]

Simply put, my teacher did not appreciate Playboy because my teacher did not appreciate Playboy; you do not appreciate BUFFY because you do not appreciate BUFFY.

Who needs an analogy for that? Analogies are made to help prove a point, to solve a problem, to clairify.

Me not liking something and your teacher not liking something? Ok it's obvious that neither of us understand/appreicate/or like something. Who needs an analogy for that?

I over complicated it I guess because it seemed like the above was too obvious.

Once you've seen one naked woman, you've seen them all

I took the above statement and linked it to what I said

How long can you keep killing the same thing for untill it gets boring

[civilian_number_two]

Simply put, my teacher did not appreciate Playboy because my teacher did not appreciate Playboy; you do not appreciate BUFFY because you do not appreciate BUFFY.

Who needs an analogy for that? Analogies are made to help prove a point, to solve a problem, to clairify.

Me not liking something and your teacher not liking something? Ok it's obvious that neither of us understand/appreciate/or like something. Who needs an analogy for that?

I over complicated it I guess because it seemed like the above was too obvious.

Once you've seen one naked woman, you've seen them all

I took the above statement and linked it to what I said

How long can you keep killing the same thing for untill it gets boring

What are you talking about?

[Chefelf]

why is sarah michelle gellar a star? She is not that attractive

Which Sarah Michelle Gellar are you talking about?

[Jordan]

Chef I was only aware of the one.


Civil Number 2. I confused your analogy with a different one.