lirazel | The worst idea since having Greedo shoot first?

There are several things that make me…not optimistic about it and several differences from something like Batman or Bond being rebooted (for me at least. Just my opinion). You can reboot comic books superheroes a thousand times because they were originally comic books with no actor attached to them. Same with Bond—that part was created so that any actor could slip into the role. And yes, our show was a remake of a movie, but we had seven years of SMG living inside the skin of that character. I cannot imagine anyone else being Buffy now. As I said upthread, I’d watch a future movie starring SMG if it was well-written and made, even if Joss wasn’t involved (I’m a much bigger Sarah stan than I am a fan of Joss, honestly). But I feel like the timing of this makes it seem like it’s trying to capitalize on all the other big vampire pop culture phenomenon, and that makes me think that they’re more interested in money than in the film itself. And I’m sure the writer will do his/her best, but movies get ruined by studios pretty easily, as we can see from looking at the original Buffy movie. Plus…the show hasn’t been off the air for a decade. I just don’t see the need to reboot it at this point unless you’re just doing it for the money.

There's a couple reasons why this doesn't bother me as much as the announcement almost two years ago.

1. No Kuzuis to muck it up. Warner Bros and Atlas Entertainment instead.

2. A woman screenwriter--A WOMAN--is writing this script. Hell to the motherfuckin' YEAH. I want this woman to write a blockbuster Buffy movie. WOMEN WRITERS FTW. (and let's be honest, Joss brings a lot of effed up sexual issues into his stories about women. How much we wanna bet this woman won't do that because she's not writing about a woman from a position of privilege? AKA Buffy won't be sexually tormented and abused by the kyriarchy and she also won't buy into the victimhood. This is my hope, at least.)

3. This writer approached the studio to do this project. She wasn't hired. She has a vision. She's a fan. She grew up with this show in her heart and it sounds like she loves it the way you and I love it.

I would love more than anything for SMG to play Buffy again. But I think she's happy being a mom and I think she's kinda done with it. She's not gonna do it without Joss (or so she's said in the past) and Joss never seemed to make it happen the second time around. He's had the opportunity to make a Buffy movie for almost seven years now and instead he's gone on to other projects and also gone down the convoluted rabbit hole of Season 8.

Basically, I have seven seasons of Joss and SMG. Golden years are golden. But I would love to have another kickass women pick up the mantle and play Buffy. I'd rather she lived than fade away on a set of DVDs they won't even sell in Blu Ray.

You know what I would love to see? A vampire slayer movie. About Nikki Woods or Xing Rhong or Fray or anyone. I think that would be beyond awesome. Make up a new Slayer! I just am so deeply attached to Smidge. I just love her as Buffy to little bitty bits and I don't want to see anyone else in her part. I'm being petty.

I think fandom at large is going to be upset about the lack of Joss, and the hardcore fans will probably boycott. Me, Joss not being involved? Not the deal breaker. But I don't think that other fans will feel that way.

But I do agree with all of your points, and they're great ones--ESPECIALLY a woman writer. YAY YOU.

I AGREE. I wish we had a Slayer movie. But I understand that they're working with the name brand there.

I think hardcore fans will go see in spite of themselves. Either to convince themselves of how much it sucks. Or if there's good buzz.

I do think this will potentially fracture fandom between Old School and New School. But whatever. I think this fandom needs to get shaken up a bit and the new blood could be good.

WOMAN WRITER YES.

I like what you're saying about the fandom getting shaken up. We could certainly use that. At any rate, the whole thing will be very interesting if/when it happens.

WOMAN WRITER ALWAYS!

A helluva big "YES!" to Your second point.

Joss brings a lot of effed up sexual issues into his stories about women.

Arno Schmidt once said he prefers old (male) authors because these bring (on top of super ego, ego and id) impotence to their writing, hence avoiding all the really disturbing sexual issues the subconsciousness brings forth when developing and writing a story (the old male author writes about sexuality from experience, not the subconsciousness). Maybe we should hope that Whedon gets very old very fast? ;-)

. No Kuzuis to muck it up. Warner Bros and Atlas Entertainment instead.

Did the Kuzi's sell all their rights?

ETA: I see they more or less did. Still, that still means that what they have the rights to is the original movie, not the TV series.

Edited 2010-11-22 23:12 (UTC)

"Warner Brothers optioned the rights from creators Fran and Kaz Kuzui, and from Sandollar Productions (Sandy Gallin and Dolly Parton), for Atlas and Vertigo to produce."

So essentially the Kuzuis have signed over the right to produce to Warner Bros for a period of time (however long they agreed) and then set Atlas and Vertigo to produce the film.

It's hard to know the exact details because I know option agreements vary from case to case, but this isn't the Kuzui's project from a year ago (or was it two years?).

BUt it's the Kuzi's selling their rights, not Joss, Mutant Enemy, or FOX. So what we're talking about is the right to the title and to the singular character of Buffy (or any character from the original movie) not the characters from the show. The show had to keep the Kuzis name and Sandollar as producers because they owned the rights to the title "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and to the character "Buffy". That was the extent of their involvement with the series. SO that's all that they own the rights to and that's all that Warner Brother's can have optioned (or at least that's all they discussed having optioned). That means that anything that wasn't in the original Swanson movie still belongs to Joss, Mutant Enemy, and FOX (i.e. most of the franchise) -- Warner Brothers doesn't have rights to it. So unless or until someone states otherwise saying that Fox and Mutant Enemy have become part of it, we're still talking only what the Kuzis sold their rights to -- the original movie which amounts to the title and the titular character with the background she was given in the original movie. Nothing more.

Right. I've been working under that assumption this entire time, though.

It's a Buffy the Vampire Slayer reboot. Essentially a "what if she never went to Sunnydale?" AU.

And again, why even bother? They could have just as easily chosen Anita Blake or the Dead Witch Walking series. The concept-- as they own it -- is pretty interchangeable with a large group of properties. Everything that made BtVS BtVS isn't included.

As I said above, the essence of Buffy's character is not merely generic rogue demon hunter or Anita Blake.

Everything that made BtVS BtVS isn't included.

I think it's too premature to judge that.

Going all Heidegger, at what point does a thing lose it's essential thingingness.

If it isn't Whedon dialog or Whedon ~~sadism~~ angst, if it's not the relationships between characters or even any of the characters that aren't Buffy, if it's not the cast, if it's not the mythos, if its not the character history, then... I'm not sure what it is other than a name. ::shurg::

The core mythos of the Slayer is there. Buffy is there. Whedon's dialogue--talented writers can emulate that and some can intuit and reproduce it instantly (Goddard, wassup!).

It's a reboot. A remix. And personally as a writer, I enjoy seeing how things go in a different direction and I'm particularly interested in seeing how a woman writes for Buffy. Because some of what makes Whedon Whedon, I don't like (like the sexual obsession and punishment crap or the no-couples-can-be-happy-DIE crap).

I feel like I've entered bizarro world. Like I've spent the past year or so arguing on Whedon's behalf for Season 8 because there's stuff in there I do enjoy, but it's inarguable that Whedon does crappy storytelling choices a lot of the time and to me it seems like a majority of fandom are against his chosen continuation of the 'verse in comic form.

So it's like... if people don't want what Whedon's offering, why be dead set against someone else playing in the 'verse because it's not Whedon when you don't want what Whedon's offering?

I WAS JUST THINKING THIS. Like, it's making my head spin.

I knew fandom would respond this way (see the post), but I'm not entirely against the idea of someone else reinterpreting this world--I mean, what do we do when we write fic? I just want it to be good. And I'm going to have a hard time getting over Sarah.

Haha, it's like 99% of the time fandom is spitting on what Whedon is doing in writing the Buffyverse. My head is getting spun by this.

I love Whedon. Seriously. But I realize he does stuff that's annoying and he's got privilege issues and feminism issues--and I'm excited by the idea of this young woman reinterpreting Buffy.

I know. Sarah's a huge stumbling block. But I kinda feel like all the actors are over it. I dunno. I feel like if a Buffy movie was gonna happen, it would've happened. And now Marsters is getting close to too old--or maybe even passed it.

I feel like what I ideally wanted is never gonna happen, so it's time to look for other ways in which it can be good.

Oh, there are so many things that Whedon does that I will not miss. If Jane Espenson decided to reboot Buffy, there would be no hesitation on my part--I would be flipping out with excitement. My loyalty doesn't run to him; it runs to the character of Buffy and the story.

And I totally support the actors being over it. I don't think they owe us a thing: they gave us the wonderful gift of seven years of television magic. And of course they can move on now. I'm just going to miss her. I'm also having a difficult time imagining anyone embodying everything Buffy is as masterfully as Smidge did. She was flawless.

OKAY, I KNOW WHAT MY NEXT CASTING PROJECT IS. Want to help me fan-cast this movie? We could have fun!

Because as tired and old as the X-Files got, I sure as hell wouldn't want someone who isn't Chris Carter exploiting it. It's bad enough that CC exploits it himself.

Same with Whedon. I may hate what he does with his characters, but they are at least his characters.

If you don't have any of the relationships I care about in a BtVS continuation, if you don't have any character but Buffy and even she has to have her history re-written then I just don't see the point. At some point you've lost the thing you loved in the first place and this is looking rather exploitative to me.

Imagine if the studio decided to do a Harry Potter movie but it couldn't be an extension of the original series, use the JK Rowling books, would be without any imput from Rowling, couldn't have Hogwarts, and couldn't any other character in the series except Harry. What would be the point?

I just honestly don't get the point. It looks suspiciously like the cheapeast and easiest way for WB to think they can capitalize on the vampire frenzy without having to develop a propery since they own the rights to this one.

Honestly, what matters to you isn't what matters to me on a basic level. And that's fine.

Do I care about all those details and foundational relationships in the TV series a hell of a lot? You betcha.

But I also care about the concept and the basic premise of the Buffy's character journey. And that can live in another framework and I want to see it.

But the concept from the original movie boils down to High School cheerleader is called to fight ookie vampires... and...er... was there anything else?

Everything else came from the TV series.

The basic mythos of the Slayer is in the movie. The quippiness in the face of darkness is in the movie. The Watcher's Council is in the movie.

The basic ideas that were in the movie germinated and grew into full bloom in the TV show, but that doesn't stop mean they weren't already there in the movie.

It's also notable that basic ideas can vary wildly based on the nuanced interpretation and execution of the work. Basic ideas are a good place to start. A feminist hero who turns around and fights the monsters attacking her is always a good place to start.

... thank you emmie you talked me off a ledge. granted the ledge is about 2 feet off the ground (it was the only one available.)

you just made me kind of excited to see what this new movie has to offer.

I have to point out that even with Batman and Bond reboots, they got more to it than the lead character.

With Batman you at least have Alfred, a 'parents died' backstory, and Gotham. With Bond you have Q and M and the spy thing.

If the rights are to the movie, Buffy's background isn't the same. There's no single mom in Joyce. No daddy abandoment issues (were there?). There's no Dawn. There's no Sunnydale. There's no Faith. No Willow or witches. No 'soul' canon. No Angel or Spike, etc. The mythology is pretty empty and all the trappings have to be different.

Basically, you have the "one is chosen" mythology and the fact she blew up the gym in high school. FOr all intents and purposes, they have the rights to the name of the lead character but very, very little of her origin story and virtually no claim to any of the events that formed the character. This Buffy could effectively be anyone.

It's as if they wanted to have the Trek reboot with Kirk... but only having the rights to his having been a farm boy in Iowa.

Edited 2010-11-22 22:43 (UTC)

The worst idea since having Greedo shoot first?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject