Well duh read your history books

Lol! 

In general I tend toward the world imposing natural handicaps vs personal ones.  This, however, is more due to my long RPG background and personal need for system balance, and well as my aptitude for world-building which far outweighs my somewhat stilted ability with character development.  That being said one thing that has worked for me somewhat it to take the uber-awesome character, and make that the character at the end, then think on what it would to get there.  Its basically coming at it from the other direction.  You think about situation where the character might manage to overcome certain things, and the limitations that lead there will often naturally fall out.   Dont know if that's helpful, or even makes much sense, but it works for me. 

Sounds like a pretty decent way to me. I tend to start with flawed characters and work from there but this way of looking at things could offer a nice new perspective on some of my budding new characters. Thanks! 

Glad I'm not the only one.  I will admit James Dean looks a little like James Franco as well, who is actually cast to play him in a movie if I'm not mistaken. Whatever features of Marsters that don't look exactly like James Dean are covered by James Franco. (What is it about all these boys names "James...?") 

Elvis spends his time between Las Vegas NV and Memphis TN.

I've seen him in both places. Never seen him in Kansas.

Oh, but multiple waitresses have seen him there. 

Don't worry, I totally agree with you guys. This place just wouldn't we the same if everybody got to run their mouths about everything. Only the fun and harmless stuff. I just love your wording...firm but funny.

I'll email you the rest of my thoughts if you like. We're kinda going overboard on the OT posts on this board, lol.

Thanks, I'd appreciate that! 

*picks more aerodynamic tomatoes*

*bones up on physics as it pertains to spherical objects in flight*

Not what I said, original premise of the show was that vampires, having no soul's, can't feel love.  Anything they did with Spike after that, before he was ensouled, was pure fan-wanking.

I guess should have used the word "love" a little more in my explanation but I still think it applies. Spike's character was written inconsistently so the way he was portrayed at different times was mutually exclusive of other attitudes and behaviors. And other claims made by the show. The show said that vampires couldn't feel love but then they proved themselves wrong by showing obvious displays of genuine love in Spike. Yet at other times they strenghthened their argument by playing up his affects as creepy and misguided. Not to fault the show...what they did was very effictive in keeping interest and investment in the ship alive. But I still maintain that it was artistic "cheating" of sorts, if that makes any sense.

So tell me again that soulless Spike can't feel.

Excellent argument! (Poor Spike.) I think the crux of the issue lies in the inconsistency of the way he is written, making you go "well, duh...of course he feels" one minute and then be like "wow, that's creepy" the next. Take episode 5.18 "Intervention" for example. The Buffy-bot is obviously way creepy and, in my opinion, very out of character for the character I consider to be the "real" Spike. But in the very same episode he withstands torture and quite possible death for the sake of protecting Buffy and the people that she cares about, obviously an act of love ("greater love hath no man...".) Whether you consider his relationship as creepy or not overall depends simply on which actions you consider to be the "real" him, (since I feel that both sets of actions cannot truly come from the same person.) Although certain sets of episodes make me lean in the other direction, I feel that ultimately, because his feeling actions and behaviors far outway his creepy actions then I, like you, consider the feeling Spike the "real" Spike. (And thanks for that post! You've helped me sort out some confusion I've struggled with for years about my views on his pre-soul character.) 

Liked both shows, but the fact that Spike was considered 'relationship material' while he was still a soulless monster is way too creepy for me.  I was always of the faction that stuck with Wheedon's original point, no soul = no capacity for love, only creepy obsession.   

Okay, I have to agree with you on the whole creepy thing just a bit. I found his advances very interesting even before he had a soul but only after he got his soul back could I truly ship him with Buffy. I know that there are a lot of people who shipped Spike with Buffy regardless of soul status, but he's a cool enough character and that I can ignore the somewhat creepy views of the masses. It's not Spike's fault, after all...and he ended the show - both shows - with his soul so any creepiness has been vindicated for me. I see your point but I can't help loving his character anyway.