?

Log in

No account? Create an account
StephenT [userpic]

Season 8 pictures

7th April 2007 (23:31)
Tags: , ,

I've been playing around with Photoshop this evening, creating a whole bunch of Season 8 icons. I'll be posting them shortly.  However, there are also three larger compare-and-contrast images that I thought people might be interested in seeing... 

First, the mysterious stranger in Buffy's dream. People have been concentrating on the clothing, but the pose did seem to ring a few bells too. See what you think:



Secondly, Buffy's skimpy clothing in the tied-to-the-bed scene has drawn some criticism on the basis that we never saw her wearing that sort of thing to bed before, so why has she started now? Well, it's not like she doesn't own such items, even if she doesn't normally sleep in them:



And lastly, Willow's clothing in the final scene. I've seen I'm not alone in thinking it was similar to Tara's dress in OMWF, so I dug up a picture from that episode. It's actually not quite the same: Tara was slightly more cleavagey (if not slutbomblike); but it does suggest that Willow's now buying her clothes from the Wicca Emporium:



Anyway; icons to follow.

Comments

Posted by: Mrs Darcy (elisi)
Posted at: 7th April 2007 22:47 (UTC)
believe by buttersideup.

Nice. Looking forward to icons. :)

Posted by: ibmiller (ibmiller)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 00:51 (UTC)
shoes

Icons! Icons! Icons! Icons! Icons!

(Does dance of joy)

Great finds! I think the figure has Spike-like hands, for some reason.

Posted by: Molly May (molly_may)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 02:16 (UTC)
Buffy with axe - awmp

Heh, I also immediately thought of Tara in OMWF when I saw Willow at the end. Oh, those witches and their corsets!

Buffy's skimpy clothing in the tied-to-the-bed scene has drawn some criticism on the basis that we never saw her wearing that sort of thing to bed before, so why has she started now? Well, it's not like she doesn't own such items, even if she doesn't normally sleep in them

It's not her clothes I object to (Buffy owns many a skimpy outfit) so much as the clothes *in addition* to the pose. Tied down, legs spread, back arched. It's an incredibly sexually vulnerable position for a woman, totally passive, completely submissive. A victim. It's the kind of pose that she was *never* in in the show (and I'm not talking about handcuff fun with Spike -- that was consentual). In her yummy sushi pajamas the sexuality of the pose would at least be toned down a little bit, but in the sexy negligee she looks like she's about to be raped and pillaged.

Posted by: StephenT (stormwreath)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 11:30 (UTC)

It is a shocking image - as I've said elsewhere, I think it's a deliberate echo of the "virgin tied to a sacrificial altar" image that goes back a century or more. I wonder if they would have hesistated doing this scene with a real actress, but feel they can get away with it in comics?

Anyway, I'm reserving judgement until next issue, to see if Buffy manages to free herself or if she needs rescuing. (Currently, I'm guessing her dream might turn out something like the Faith/Angel dream in 'Orpheus')

Oh, and 'Reptile Boy'? (I'd add 'Crush' too, but despite being non-consensually chained up in that episode, Buffy's attitude was the opposite of passive...)

Final point: if you see the panel in its context, Buffy's spreadeagled position in real life matches her impaled on the demon's claws in her dream - but in the dream she's not passive. She's struggling to understand what's happening, trying to use dream-logic (the wishes) to change her situation. She's fighting back, just not physically.

Posted by: aycheb (aycheb)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 13:52 (UTC)

Buffy's skimpy clothing in the tied-to-the-bed scene has drawn some criticism on the basis that we never saw her wearing that sort of thing to bed before, so why has she started now? Well, it's not like she doesn't own such items, even if she doesn't normally sleep in them

The outfit from First Date was a camisole top worn over jeans, her normal sleepware is cami or tanktop over pajama bottoms although she does dream herself in a matching silk nightie to Dru's in Suprise. I think molly_may's right though it's the arched pose emphasised by the slit in the nightie that eroticises her helplessness and makes the image disturbing. Having said that she's only shown in that light for that first frame - given the intention to shock the comic doesn't linger on the scene more than necessary, in subsequent panels she's not the focus or we only see her face. I think it would be more difficult to get the same impact on TV without the camera obviously seeming to drool over that first image.

Posted by: Molly May (molly_may)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 20:25 (UTC)
Bargaining Buffy - earth_vexor

I wonder if they would have hesistated doing this scene with a real actress, but feel they can get away with it in comics?

Probably so. But just because you *can* get away with something doesn't mean you *should*.:) I agree though, in the future a lot of the interpretation of the scene will come down to whether Buffy frees herself or not, and I'm guessing that ultimately she will. I certainly hope so!

Oh, and 'Reptile Boy'? (I'd add 'Crush' too, but despite being non-consensually chained up in that episode, Buffy's attitude was the opposite of passive...)

Nah. It's not the chained up part so much as legs spread, on a bed, showing lots of skin, back arched in an erotic way.

if you see the panel in its context, Buffy's spreadeagled position in real life matches her impaled on the demon's claws in her dream

Oh yeah, I get that, which is why I would find the scene far less objectionable if she were in pajamas. It's the combination of all the elements that make it disturbing, not *just* the pose or *just* the nightie.

Posted by: Herself_nyc (herself_nyc)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 04:39 (UTC)

I really hope that's NOT Spike in the first one.

And hi, I just added you.

Posted by: StephenT (stormwreath)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 11:32 (UTC)

Welcome!

My immediate reaction was "No, it's not Spike", and I still think so: it's just that the pose reminded me so strongly of the scene from 'Chosen'. The clothes look 19th-century to my eyes, incidentally...

Posted by: Herself_nyc (herself_nyc)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 16:40 (UTC)

The clothes look 19th-century to my eyes, incidentally...

Not to me ... I think that's a tee shirt.

Posted by: Herself_nyc (herself_nyc)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 16:41 (UTC)
Brian QaF by Raelala

Looking at it again, I'm sure ... it's a red tee shirt under that jacket, and the shadows of the head on the neck and chest make it look like there's detail that isn't there.

Posted by: StephenT (stormwreath)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 17:24 (UTC)

Perhaps... I'd interpreted what's above the brim of the red thing as a high-collared white shirt with a black tie (and the red thing as more of a jumper); but if we interpret the black as just a shadow, then it does look more like the white area is bare neck (presumably a person with very pale skin, such as a vampire...) above a t-shirt.

Posted by: Herself_nyc (herself_nyc)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 17:31 (UTC)

That's what I see, bare neck, tee shirt. Which is kind of Spike like.
But I think it's a fake-out.

Could even be Caleb, maybe ....

Posted by: geralyn (ellalthea)
Posted at: 26th April 2007 00:35 (UTC)
pinkdoll

where did you get that icon from? My friend found it from a friend, so no one can figure where it is from. He is having a cross stitch made out of the picture though:)

Posted by: StephenT (stormwreath)
Posted at: 26th April 2007 19:14 (UTC)

Sorry - are you asking about herself_nyc's icon, or something I posted?

Posted by: geralyn (ellalthea)
Posted at: 26th April 2007 19:37 (UTC)
pinkdoll

oops, herself_nyc, thanks:)

Posted by: geralyn (ellalthea)
Posted at: 26th April 2007 19:38 (UTC)
pinkdoll

hi, just wondering where you got that icon from:) Awesome picture!

Posted by: Herself_nyc (herself_nyc)
Posted at: 26th April 2007 19:41 (UTC)

I made it from a pic I stole from gawker.com.

Posted by: Shapinglight (shapinglight)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 09:58 (UTC)

I tend to think (along with various other people) how inappropriate that nightie is for a draughty Scottish castle.

Poor Buffy must have been freezing!

Posted by: StephenT (stormwreath)
Posted at: 8th April 2007 11:37 (UTC)

Scottish castles aren't necessarily freezing... those metre-thick solid stone walls give excellent insulation. :) (And given the high-tech communications equipment installed there, underfloor heating probably isn't an impossibility either. I'm guessing the castle used to belong to the Watchers' Council.)

Maybe Buffy thought an old-fashioned nightie was appropriate wear for an ancient European castle?

Posted by: Shapinglight (shapinglight)
Posted at: 9th April 2007 11:03 (UTC)

Maybe. In which case - all these people specualating that the headless person in her nightmare is Dracula could well be right. Buffy's nightie is completely appropriate getting-bit-by-Dracula wear.

20 Read Comments