Fantasy television series have come and gone, but some remain in the minds of genre buffs long after their run on the tube has ended.
Two of the most iconic are Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena: Warrior Princess.
Years after they wrapped, conventions are still held in their honor, millions remain devoted fans, and the actors who played the central roles have officially achieved break-out celebrity superstardom as a result of their performances.
And yet both Buffy and Xena had a counterpart series featuring a male hero that has seemed to fade into the background.
So why isn’t there love for Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and Angel the way there is for Xena and Buffy?
Perhaps a female action hero is innately more exciting to watch, both aesthetically and contextually. Despite whatever fighting abilities she has (supernatural or otherwise), she might seem to be more of an underdog when facing off against a larger opponent, making for better drama. The stakes might “feel” higher than if it were two dudes of equal size slugging it out.
Or it could be – and this is my thesis statement – that Xena and Buffy were simply the better-written shows. On Hercules, Kevin Sorbo played the titular son of Zeus as a peace-loving, sensitive, noble hero who always took the moral high ground, who only fought when it was absolutely necessary, and who (mostly) refrained from sleeping with the ladies he rescued on a weekly basis.
This is a sharp contrast to the mythological vision of Hercules, whom the ancients knew as a loud, boorish brute, a cocky demigod, and a notorious ladies’ man (and in true ancient Greek fashion, had an eye for the younger gentlemen as well). He was constantly getting into fights, and was the father of many children, both in and out of wedlock.
Which version would you rather hang out with? By reimagining Hercules as a champion of the underdog and a ‘90s-friendly sensitive male lead, they effectively neutered their main character.
Xena, on the other hand, was an antihero, a former villain seeking redemption. She had done terrible things in her past, and every good deed she performed was fueled by a crushing guilt, an urge to balance out her life and find redemption. She had a much darker streak than Hercules, was quicker to fight, and was far more aware of her sexuality, which she could wield as a weapon as easily as her chakram.
Is it any surprise people flocked to watch her far more than her parent show — and remember it more fondly?
Angel and Buffy had a different relationship. Angel, like Xena, was actually the darker show and the spin-off, and like Xena, the vampire with a soul was seeking forgiveness for the sins of his past … even though he didn’t technically commit them, since his soul had been taken.
(The show never explains exactly where a soul goes when one becomes a vampire beyond describing it as the “ether.” Apparently the ether is not too far away, as souls can be easily recalled. It’s probably best not to worry about it too much.)
And yet Buffy worked in a way that Angel didn’t. The strength of Buffy was that it featured teenagers facing troubles and issues the likes of which the adults in their world could never bear, which is why the show lost a lot of its steam in the final two seasons when the characters left school, got jobs, and became surrogate parents to Buffy’s sister Dawn.
What’s more, the heart and soul of Buffy was the relationship between its four core characters: Buffy, Giles, Willow, and Xander. This nucleus of the “Scooby Gang” was the glue that held the show together, despite the revolving door of “extended-family” characters, like Tara, Spike, Riley, Anya, etc.
On Angel, they made a valiant attempt to create an equivalent “Team Angel,” but it never really gelled until the fifth season, and by then the show had been canceled. It was a tragedy heard ‘round the Buffyverse: just as a show found its stride, it was given the axe. Actually, it was very much like a Joss Whedon plot twist.
It seems that those involved with Hercules and Angel will have to content themselves with the fact that their shows were extensions of a brand that was dominated by a more feminine hand.
Well, keep believing, boys. One day we’ll break right through that glass ceiling. One day.
Looking to buy Buffy or Xena on DVD (or any other media)? Support TheTorchOnline.com by purchasing it through this link.
![[Bloglines]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[Digg]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Fark]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/fark.png)
![[Google]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[Squidoo]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/squidoo.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Twitter]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://thetorchonline.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
Cool article.
I never managed to see much of Hercules’ later run of episodes, but I understand that the series did mature towards the end of its run (perhaps thanks to picking up the Dahak story-line from Xena and more partcularly dealing with the (temporary) death of Hercules’ sidekick Iolaus). I’d certainly be interested in sitting down and re-watching the series, but it never captured my imagination the way “Xena” did from the very moment she strolled on-screen in her barely-there red dress in “Warrior Princess” (and more particularly when the true “Xena” revealed herself in “The Gauntlet” (although the less said about “cheerleader” Xena in “Unchained Heart” the better)).
Although they shared the same “universe”, Xena was always the far superior TV show, at least in my mind. The fact they “separated” so early and that there was a clear intention by TPTB to give Xena its own more “mature” tone probably didn’t help matters either. Hercules’ reappearance in season 5 of Xena certainly made the difference in the two shows all the more palpable (although the reappearance was welcome since without Hercules there would be no Xena).
While I agree that Angel doesn’t seem to get the same recognition as Buffy, I’m at a loss as to *why* since to me they’re easily comparable in terms of tone and substance (with Angel perhaps featuring a slightly more mature tone, although that can be contradicted by Buffy’s sixth season). I suppose people may just see the two shows as one “universe”, particularly since Angel spent three (3) years messing about with jail-bait Buffy before snagging her trash-talking friend and heading to the big city for a series of not so solo adventures. I would certainly place Angel above Buffy in any “top TV” listing - but only just and I would much prefer to lump them together (although Angel’s finale left me wanting more, whereas Buffy’s finale made me wonder what had happened to the show I loved).
At the end of the day, it may simply boil down to the fact that Xena and Buffy were somewhat “revolutionary” for TV when they appeared whereas the “muscle-bound nice guy” and “dark, brooding hero” had already been done and done and then re-done in movies and on TV.
Wow, good article. Never really thought about it, but it’s true. I found Hercules especially to be unwatchable.
I think better writing is definitely the primary cause in the discussion of the difference between Buffy and Angel. Some issues I had with Angel:
The first four seasons are just the same 3 or four story lines told over and over and over and over and over until they got completely annoying. Every time it seemed like something got, I don’t know, RESOLVED, hey look, Darla again and BACK into the spiral again, thank you. Buffy’s use of seasons as story arcs was such a well used creation, it was a shame to see it not being used in Angel. I think Angel would really have benefited from more defined story lines.
All attempts to move plots forward involved going backwards into Angel’s past, instead of dealing with the present. All bad guys were past bad guys. If this was something they had done occasionally it would have worked, but it was really over-used.
Once the group gelled, all relationships existed within the group. Buffy used the core groups relationships to expand the cast (Anya, Oz, Tara, Riley, Angel, Spike). The group in Angel all just slept with each other and then wondered why things got so angsty all the time. This caused two problems: first, it added to the repetition problem Angel kept having (over and over again) and second, it deprived the audience of much needed “outsiders’” point of view that the various relationship characters in Buffy provided.
Good article. I have to say, though, that I was not a fan of Xena’s final seasons.
I watched the first few seasons of Buffy a lot more than I did the later ones - not out of planning, but because it was at a time when I was willing to watch TV! Angel was always a more interesting character to me when he was in Buffy - for some reason, I just never got into the show when he was on his own. I can see where it was probably the writing that threw me off.
And! I remember morning where my two younger siblings and I would get up to watch “Young Hercules” and “Zombies Alive” before school, then come home to watch “Hercules” at 4 when we got home. Hercules had more than one spinoff, but Xena was probably the best one.
Xena was great. Very complex writing and such, but one thing it didn’t have was Iolaus. I was completely in love with Iolaus as were my friends. I loved the humor he brought to the show. Yes, Xena was, overall, the better show but Hercules had Iolaus. ‘Nuff said.
As to Buffy vs Angel, I loved both shows equally. Sure, they both had their struggles with bad episodes, even whole seasons, but they were both great. One thing, though, was that when Buffy ended I was kind of relieved because it had gone on so long and had gotten rather tired. Angel, though, went out with an amazing season so I was rather upset by the cancellation. That show got so much better once Spike joined the cast.
Angel’s best season was definitely Season 5. I mean come on, Muppet Angel, Illyria, and less Connor. The show had great potential when it was canceled. I also feel that, while the show Buffy had tremendous wit and her snarkiness definded Joss Whedon’s writing personality, I laughed a good deal more while watching Angel. Especially in Season 5 where the interplay between Spike and Angel was priceless, in addition to the always reliable Lorne (RIP Andy Hallet) and Fred (I recall the episode in the hotel where Team Angel lost their memories and believed themselves to be in high school and Fred kept trying to score weed from the gang. LOL).
Also, Kevin Sorbo is a tool.
Haha, well said, Mank! Yeah, Season 5 of Angel was stellar - particularly the exchanges between Spike and Angel and the fascinating Illyria storyline. Sad we never got to see it pay off on TV.
People like stuff great and unordinary. Such as strong females. Females are not like that in actual life. Any guy can be strong, but females can not be. They need a guy to fight for them and if not they need strong motivation from others to do it themselves.
Wait, I know I’m late on this, but you’re joking right?
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you’re joking, because I don’t really have the time to go into a long rant about examples of strong women and motivation, being at work and all.
Seriously though, if you’re not joking, then you need to wake up and observe the world around you.
Like Paige Bruce I hope you are joking.
Because what you say is rubbish.
I am speechless and just keep hoping that there aren’t really people who are so closed-minded and stupid that they believe what you said.
Why isn’t your email feed enabled? I want to email this to someone!
PS What cave did that Neanderthal crawl out of?
A well-written article, giving all the wrong answers to a good question, probably because the right one is painful and unpleasant:
Why has Xena vanquished Hercules? Well, because dumbing a concept down until everyone can follow it is always more successful. Hercules: the Legendary Journeys was certainly in its time the best American tv had to offer - it had the highest production value at the time, it was beautifully shot and very carefully directed, it benefitted from creative, witty, fresh, innovative writing, it was superbly cast etc. And it was expensive in every respect: production-wise and in terms of how it expected its viewers to pay attention, to never take anything said upfront for granted, to follow the show in its twists and turns and humour and dark spots.
Then, they decided to cash in on the concept… and along came Xena. Production value dropped, visuals and stunts and choreography and the like became predictable to a dot and - frankly - amazingly boring, editing turned sloppy, the writing focused around the story of redemption with a slightly naughty subtext - pretentious kitsch that everyone can follow with eyes closed, and the first two, then three leads were picked by their ability to grimace in front of the camera convincingly enough to let even the dumbest viewer notice: “Oh, acting effort!” And - like Buffy - it displayed more female rather than male struggles, thereby making the femalöe masses proud and fulfilling the male masses’ phantasies.
So: why Xena rather than Hercules, Buffy rather than Angel (not that Xena, Buffy or Angel really could compare to Hercules)? Because it takes time and knowledge and brains and humour to view H:tLJ - while the others are simply chewing-gum for the mind. If you compare haute cuisine or even home-made cooking to McDonald’s, it will always be McDonald’s winning the day because it’s cheaper, faster and less of an effort. It is, of course, in the long run also less rewarding and basically turning one’s body into an unhealthy mass, just like the type of tv propagated by things like Xena and Buffy endow your brains - and your taste - with the potential of a vegetable. But then again, life as a vegetable is certainly nice and simple - as long as you don’t realize that this is what’s happening to you.
Wow. Such a harsh criticism of “Xena”. I would have thought that anyone who enjoyed “Hercules” would at least be able to tolerate “Xena” (even with Kevin Sorobo’s clearly expressed views of the latter).
I’d have to strongly disagree with the assertion that Xena was just a pale imitation of Hercules. They both clearly had their individual target audiences (with Hercules’ target audience being younger than Xena’s target audience), but I also think that Xena matured in terms of production, writing, direction and acting at a much faster rate than Hercules did.
All IMHO of course. And Hercules certainly started getting there in the end when the Dahak storyline transferred across to Hercules’ show. I would also freely admit that the “Twilight of the Gods” storyline from season 5 of “Xena” would definitely have been a better fit for “Hercules” and I think it was a real shame that story-line didn’t get to play out on Hercules (although I highly enjoyed Hercules’ final appeared in “God Fearing Child”).
No Roman, Xena vanquished Hercules because she is the more interesting character, intriguing and at the time, there were absolutely no female action heroes on television, which made her a trend setter. So yes, “girl power” may have been apart of the appeal. I suppose you have a problem with that? No need to be condescending. I see you even take a stab at the subtext of the Xena and Gabrielle relationship. Xena and Gabrielle are gay icons and hold a sense of pride and admiration within the gay community, and you’ll just have to accept that. That, in addition to stop blaming the consumer, as if most people are just not good enough to see how ~special~ Hercules was, on why they [majority] preferred Xena to Hercules.
Because they watered down Hercules to make the show more family friendly, it took a toll on just how much they can do with his character. It was fine during the original 5 movies and the first season, but it was beginning to become redundant afterward, especially when Xena was picking up more and more steam. She was new and exciting, and since she wasn’t based on anyone, it gave for more interesting stories.
X:WP had far more long story arcs and plots that need more paying attention to than anything HTLJ had ever done in its entire run, so I’m a left little baffled at your implication that Hercules was somehow this full course meal HBO’s Rome with Emmy award winning actors type show, while Xena was ‘chewing gum’ material who’s actors couldn’t POSSIBLY compare to the great Kevin Sorbo!
On Xena, in which Ares first appears in actor form, made better use of the character as well. He is a semi villain on Xena, granted, but he was never made to look like a fool. On Hercules, he was downright pathetic and never seemed to really pose a real aura to Hercules. The two Kevins had no chemistry with one another, which also made it hard to see the sibling envy Ares had with his younger half brother.
At the end of the day, viewers who are not fans of either show think both Xena and Hercules were cheesy, campy and low budget and that this whole discussion to begin with is utterly ridiculous. So we both lose.
i love buffy and angel they are both great i have the hole set for buffy the vampire slayer and its great and i still watch it everyday at 4:30pm on scifi on foxtel.I love Angel because i think he is cute and i like the story line and its just great.