What about Lie to Me? Quotable, not too much backstory, plus it makes fun of Vampire wannabes and Angel.

Or possibly Halloween and Band Candy.

While Halloween (or Nightmares) is a good starter ep, Band Candy requires to much pre-knowledge.

Personally, I've found that Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest makes one of the best conversion combos. I think it didn't get seen by a whole lot of people until later, but as far as season one goes, they were as strong as any episode.

Angel's not bad either as a starter.

OK, do ya' think I've been deathmatching too much because I was tempted to just write ...

Go Phases! Choose Phases!

????

"WttH/The Harvest" is pretty good, being the set-up introduction to the series. Personally, I think "Nightmares" and "Lie to Me" are better at giving one a feel for the way the series runs without a lot of backstory being needed. Both start out very creepy, have some good character interactions, and highlight the kind of responsibility Buffy's been chosen for.

Lie to Me is good because it shows the darkness. It's got snark and darkness in abundance. Plus some slick early Joss directorial moves.

Okay, I think I need to pay closer attention to this discussion. My new roomie, who is a big fan of For Love or Money 2 and Meet My Folks but otherwise a very lovely and intelligent person, just totally dissed buffy and CONFUSED IT WITH SABRINA.

Somebody hold me.

I'm going to ask her what she looks for in a tv show (besides *CRAP) and try and figure something off that.

* and yes, i'm large with the America's Next Top Model love, but still...

Buffy Journal Does Spikefen

And hey, I'm a cited source.

That was a good article. I think I'm seeing some of the conflict more clearly now.

I've always been a fan (in as much as I've enjoyed watching him) of Spike. But, I've never understood the need for Buffy to treat him any differently than she did, or the anger at her when she failed to. (The article raised a side note about reaction to Xander's treatment of him, but I think it's pretty well laid out that Xander's a white knight kinda guy and greyness confuses and angers him so I have no idea why they'd be angry that he's not more sympathetic to Spike). But, now I see that it's an interpretation based on personal feelings that I'll never get.

I think that the writer misses an interesting perspective, in that that the Fundie Spikefen choose to completely ignore the negative aspects of the character to the point of hysteria, in order to bolster the point of view that he is a wuv cuddle wuddle poo.

It's a smaller cult of insanity that claims to love Spike, but hate 80% of what makes the character interesting. It's the Mary Sue-ification of Spike that's maddening, and to explore the reasons behind that particular subculture of tin foil hat wearers would be interesting.

I understand redemptionistas, i understand Spuffists, (i don't agree with either, but get where they are coming from) I don't understand Mary Spuke.

Fascinating article. I've never taken my Spike-fannishness to such a degree that I thought Buffy was a bitch what done him wrong, but that article helped me make sense of how they got there. And on the other side, I have more understanding/sympathy for the writers, since I was reminded just tonight at writers group just how tough it is to strike a balance when you're trying to show a character's gray areas. (I have a character who's supposed to be a kind, decent person, but kind of a pompous, chauvinistic ass at the same time. At first, my readers saw only the kindness, and said, "Why can't he end up with the heroine? We like him!" So now I've stressed his pompous assitude to such a degree that my readers can't believe the heroine doesn't see it, which would ruin the story if it happened too soon. Fortunately I can tweak all I want to until I strike the right balance before I try to take it public, but I feel a new sympathy for TV writers who lack that luxury.)