bler144: With both Buffy and Angel, Whedon farmed out a lot of the writing. So it's hard to tell what he should get credit for (vs. say Jane Espenson) and what he should get blame for. Buffy in particular was a series with some truly fantastic episodes, and some really bad ones.
Though personally I loved a lot of the humor. Xander's "love spell" episode probably isn't technically one of the best, but it's pretty enjoyable.
It's not that i dislike parodies and campy humour. It's just that it becomes difficult to believe the more serious tones of a show when the very same show gets totally parodistic at times. To a certain point, comedic relief is nice and it improves the overall quality, but if it gets too cartoonish then it kills the seriousness of the edgier episodes. I find it hard to be emotionally involved in a character that is sacrificing himself in an eroic effort when the very same character two episodes ago was singing in a "special musical episode" or was acting like a total buffoon completely out of character.
I'd rather have parodies being parodies and drama being drama, with maybe bits of comedy.
Buffy at times (i recall the cyborgs episodes, for example), is as serious and believable as let's say, Power Rangers. It's just too campy for my taste.
Angel had some Whedon's campyness as well in a few episodes (the lucha libre superhero being a perfect example) but for the most part it was more dark, with enjoyable but not too over-the-top humour and that made the show better for me.
Spike was awesome in both, anyway. ^_^