Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Dr.Strangefate

He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Messages
10,075
Location
New York, NY
Meh. At least wait another decade so you're doing a Buffy movie NOT in the wake of the TV series.

Like, Seriously. What is this bull****?
 

Zombipanda

My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
9,401
Location
Zoo Atlanta
I doubt it will happen. The fan outrage will be enormous, and the project will fade quietly.
 

Lynx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
4,489
Location
Orlando, FL
All the Buffy fans who loved the new Star Trek movie should embrace this news wholeheartedly.

Except there's several key differences. The original cast are all still active, the creator is still alive and an active writer, and the TV series only ended six years ago, rather than forty.
 

Hellsbuttmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Messages
3,300
Location
South Wales, UK
Honestly, I would LOVE a Buffy movie. Maybe something to round off the current comic series, or something that ends the world as it is like the description in Fray (the end of magic and monsters). You could have a tragic ending with the final battle with everyone facing <insert big bad>, with Angel and Spike helping Buffy, but knowing that only one of them will survive and one will Shanshu.

But by God I would rather nothing like this ever happen than have a remake, reboot or a project without Joss input happen.
 

Random

Didn't **** any of those *****es
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
13,680
Location
Philadelphia, PA
The thing here is that the only reason Buffy is a profitable title is because of Whedon's work. I recall hearing the original movie was a huge bust. I like HBM's idea, lets put a grand finish to this tale rather than start a new one that will probably suck.
 

Zombipanda

My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
9,401
Location
Zoo Atlanta
Except there's several key differences. The original cast are all still active, the creator is still alive and an active writer, and the TV series only ended six years ago, rather than forty.

Not to mention...

The last batch of Star Trek movies have been generally regarded as awful, whereas Buffy had a strong finish (I think. I was never a fan of the show, though, so I'm not certain).

There's still in-continuity product that's selling very well (i.e. the comic book) and while fans of both series are a pretty niche audience, the book seems to be selling outside of the fan community (albeit, in the slightly larger niche community of comic fans. Hell, I picked up a few issues).

Honestly, I would LOVE a Buffy movie. Maybe something to round off the current comic series, or something that ends the world as it is like the description in Fray (the end of magic and monsters). You could have a tragic ending with the final battle with everyone facing <insert big bad>, with Angel and Spike helping Buffy, but knowing that only one of them will survive and one will Shanshu.

But by God I would rather nothing like this ever happen than have a remake, reboot or a project without Joss input happen.

Heh. You're such a geek......

It sounds like it's going to be a remake or reboot, though.

Honestly, since I wasn't a fan to begin with, I think Brian K. Vaughan could do a hell of a job with the premise.

The thing here is that the only reason Buffy is a profitable title is because of Whedon's work. I recall hearing the original movie was a huge bust. I like HBM's idea, lets put a grand finish to this tale rather than start a new one that will probably suck.

Whedon wrote the original movie.

And Buffy's getting her grand finish in comics. I don't know. I guess it makes sense from a production stand-point. Buffy got as far as her legs would carry her in TV, and now she's found a comic book place, so it makes sense to reinvigorate the concept and give it legs again.

But damn it's soon. With so many licenses out there, I wonder why they're jumping on this one.


Anyway, it seems like this lady who's leading the project is just trying to desperately grasp onto Whedon's fame. She directed his original Buffy script, and as far as I can tell, hasn't directed a damn thing (or done much of anything) since.
 
Last edited:

Lynx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
4,489
Location
Orlando, FL
Not to mention...

The last batch of Star Trek movies have been generally regarded as awful, whereas Buffy had a strong finish (I think. I was never a fan of the show, though, so I'm not certain).

The last two seasons have mixed reviews, but I thought they were decent (Willow's magic addiction aside). Better than the last two series of Trek, anyways.

As for the reasoning it's being done, that's simple. Two words: The Kuzuis. While Whedon wrote the original movie, it was generally accepted that the director (Fran Kuzui) and the producer, her husband Kaz Kuzui, completely butchered his script. Ever since then, they've owned the rights (You can see this by them being listed as Executive Producers for both shows, despite having absolutley nothing to do with them).

With Buffy done and Joss Whedon having become a success outside of the Buffyverse properties, the Kuzuis want to capitalize on Buffy once again. This is how they're doing it and they're doing it without having to pay for Whedon. . .because they own the property.

It's a giant marketing play, which just so happens to be complete and utter bull****. It'll flop because the Kuzuis have no idea what they're doing or what made Buffy popular in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Joe Kalicki

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
10,297
Location
Awesome Town, USA
It's exactly the same as Star Trek. In fact, Buffy has been off the air longer than Enterprise.

And there are "in-continuity" Trek novels out there still, and Rick Berman, who's been in harge since Roddenberry died, is still around.

It's just people making up imaginary differences because it's their favorite thing getting the same treatment now.
 

Jaggyd

The member formerly known as skotti-chan
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
5,141
Location
Ohio
Or, there's the potential to make a movie that would erase the suck that is the TV show and comics.
 

Lynx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
4,489
Location
Orlando, FL
It's exactly the same as Star Trek. In fact, Buffy has been off the air longer than Enterprise.

And there are "in-continuity" Trek novels out there still, and Rick Berman, who's been in harge since Roddenberry died, is still around.

It's just people making up imaginary differences because it's their favorite thing getting the same treatment now.

Star Trek didn't remake Enterprise. It remade Star Trek, which is forty years old. The original writer of which, Gene Roddenberry, is dead. So are two of the original cast members.

And no, there are not "in-continuity" Trek novels. Trek canon explicitly states that everything that isn't a TV show or movie is not in canon. Even the Animated Series isn't canon.

Also, Star Trek had forty years of continuity. Twenty eight seasons and ten movies of in-continuity material. Buffy has twelve if you count Angel, the oldest of which came out only twelve years ago. It's still very accessible.

This would be like if, in 1976, some guy came along and said "Hey, I'm going to remake Star Trek! But **** Shatner, Nimoy, and Roddenberry." Hell, even the new Star Trek didn't do that. Nimoy was in it as Spock!
 
Last edited:

Zombipanda

My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
9,401
Location
Zoo Atlanta
The last two seasons have mixed reviews, but I thought they were decent (Willow's magic addiction aside). Better than the last two series of Trek, anyways.

As for the reasoning it's being done, that's simple. Two words: The Kuzuis. While Whedon wrote the original movie, it was generally accepted that the director (Fran Kuzui) and the producer, her husband Kaz Kuzui, completely butchered his script. Ever since then, they've owned the rights (You can see this by them being listed as Executive Producers for both shows, despite having absolutley nothing to do with them).

With Buffy done and Joss Whedon having become a success outside of the Buffyverse properties, the Kuzuis want to capitalize on Buffy once again. This is how they're doing it and they're doing it without having to pay for Whedon. . .because they own the property.

It's a giant marketing play, which just so happens to be complete and utter bull****. It'll flop because the Kuzuis have no idea what they're doing or what made Buffy popular in the first place.

That's the impression I got too, minus some of the fanboyism.

It's exactly the same as Star Trek. In fact, Buffy has been off the air longer than Enterprise.

You mean, that critically panned show with piss-poor ratings? ...... on UPN?

Joe Kalicki said:
And there are "in-continuity" Trek novels out there still, and Rick Berman, who's been in harge since Roddenberry died, is still around.

And that's exactly the problem. It's a franchise with at least five series, a dozen movies, and millions of ****ty books and spin-offs. Buffy has two series and a comic book.

But the big difference is motivation. Star Trek is a series with massive appeal, embedded into our pop culture, but which has always just appealed to a small fan base because of how complicated it is. It's an attempt by Paramount to take one of their biggest properties and bring it a mainstream audience it hasn't had for a long time. It's appealed to a small base audience, but it has the property recognition to appeal to a lot more.

Buffy is a niche property that doesn't have all that much name recognition out of its rabid fanbase. It's a franchise that didn't have much lasting appeal until Whedon added all the supporting characters that won't be included in the new series. Star Trek is Paramount bringing the series back to the root characters that Roddenberry envisioned. Buffy is taking the title and that's it. One's an attempt by license owners to clear the slate back to the early days. The other is, as far as I can tell, a desperate attempt by a nothing director to milk a franchise she was peripherally involved in.

Joe Kalicki said:
It's just people making up imaginary differences because it's their favorite thing getting the same treatment now.

Not really. I never dug the TV series. I enjoyed the movie when I was a kid, but would probably hate it now.

Or, there's the potential to make a movie that would erase the suck that is the TV show and comics.

Really? I thought you were a Buffy fan.

When I look at Buffy, I just say why? I never got into the series. To be perfectly honest, Whedon's cutesy dialogue really just kind of irritates me. But at the same time, the core concept doesn't seem all that great. I mean, we might as well see a Teen Wolf remake. "It's a valley girl who fights vampires!"

Really? Is that really a concept so strong that it demands a brand new, THIRD interpretation of the idea?

Besides.... Seriously.... Is there actually still a teenager out there, in this day and age, named Buffy?
 
Last edited:

Random

Didn't **** any of those *****es
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
13,680
Location
Philadelphia, PA
It's exactly the same as Star Trek. In fact, Buffy has been off the air longer than Enterprise.

And there are "in-continuity" Trek novels out there still, and Rick Berman, who's been in harge since Roddenberry died, is still around.

It's just people making up imaginary differences because it's their favorite thing getting the same treatment now.

There is a big difference, just about everything that can be done for Star Trek Has been done. There's almost nothing you can do with the original series except redo it. Most of the cast is very old and the character's future have already been mentioned in other series. I find reboots acceptable when either the original have written themselves towards an ending or enough time has past. The series ended 40 years ago exactly the last movie with the original cast was 18 years ago. I would guess that to bring the original cast together to hold their up their own movie would probably fail. And they have taken the property to numerous other series. They have reached the point where a reboot may be a good idea. Buffy has only been gone 6 years the same exact continuity is still going on in comics. Not maybe/maybe not canon novels. But solid continuing story. Whedon's Buffy is still in a sweet spot where it is potentially better to just continuing story already in place rather than starting over. In another 10 years or so I'd be behind a reboot.

It's all about that sweet spot from usable to unusable. 3 seasons and 40 years later is very different from 7 seasons and 6 years later
 

Zombipanda

My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
9,401
Location
Zoo Atlanta
There is a big difference, just about everything that can be done for Star Trek Has been done. There's almost nothing you can do with the original series except redo it. Most of the cast is very old and the character's future have already been mentioned in other series. I find reboots acceptable when either the original have written themselves towards an ending or enough time has past. The series ended 40 years ago exactly the last movie with the original cast was 18 years ago. I would guess that to bring the original cast together to hold their up their own movie would probably fail. And they have taken the property to numerous other series. They have reached the point where a reboot may be a good idea. Buffy has only been gone 6 years the same exact continuity is still going on in comics. Not maybe/maybe not canon novels. But solid continuing story. Whedon's Buffy is still in a sweet spot where it is potentially better to just continuing story already in place rather than starting over. In another 10 years or so I'd be behind a reboot.

It's all about that sweet spot from usable to unusable. 3 seasons and 40 years later is very different from 7 seasons and 6 years later

Not to mention, Star Trek is an elegant, simple idea that can undergo the strain of countless interpretations and still maintain the integrity of the central concept and the appeal of the audience. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is.... a valley girl fighting vampires.... Seriously. I say, just let Whedon have his little universe to play in, and when he's done with it or the audience just stops caring, PLEASE just let the license fade into obscurity.
 
Last edited:

Jaggyd

The member formerly known as skotti-chan
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
5,141
Location
Ohio
Really? I thought you were a Buffy fan.

When I look at Buffy, I just say why? I never got into the series. To be perfectly honest, Whedon's cutesy dialogue really just kind of irritates me. But at the same time, the core concept doesn't seem all that great. I mean, we might as well see a Teen Wolf remake. "It's a valley girl who fights vampires!"

Really? Is that really a concept so strong that it demands a brand new, THIRD interpretation of the idea?

Besides.... Seriously.... Is there actually still a teenager out there, in this day and age, named Buffy?

No, I am a fan of the movie, because of it's campiness. Hated the TV show and subsequent comics, again due to the dialogue, and execution of ideas. I'm a kinda passing fan of Angel because, well, they tended to act more like grown ups. Plus I adore Amy Acker.

Totally agree, Whedon's dialogue almost painful at times. It's why I never got into his Astonishing run, great ideas until people started opening their mouths.
 

Zombipanda

My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
9,401
Location
Zoo Atlanta
No, I am a fan of the movie, because of it's campiness. Hated the TV show and subsequent comics, again due to the dialogue, and execution of ideas. I'm a kinda passing fan of Angel because, well, they tended to act more like grown ups. Plus I adore Amy Acker.

I think that's exactly it. I just feel like it's a thoroughly 80's idea that should stay in the 80's.

skotti-chan said:
Totally agree, Whedon's dialogue almost painful at times. It's why I never got into his Astonishing run, great ideas until people started opening their mouths.

Well, that, plus.....

Dangeroom.PNG
 

Lynx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
4,489
Location
Orlando, FL
Not to mention, Star Trek is an elegant, simple idea that can undergo the strain of countless interpretations and still maintain the integrity of the central concept and the appeal of the audience. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is.... a valley girl fighting vampires.... Seriously. I say, just let Whedon have his little universe to play in, and when he's done with it or the audience just stops caring, PLEASE just let the license fade into obscurity.

Eh, I disagree. Buffy's core concept wasn't a valley girl fighting vampires. That was the original movie's concept. The concept was "High school is hell". Which it showed rather well, at least for the first three seasons. Then it became something else.

And, honestly, I think you'd be able to revive that idea down the road. Make it darker and less comedic if you think that's where it should go, but the problem is that it's way too soon to do something like that. Buffy's original story is still going and still being written by Joss Whedon. Hell, both Whedon and SMG said they'd be up for a new movie.

There's no reason for a remake now. And I'm definitely not up for a remake being handled by the Kuzuis. If in twenty or thirty years, some bright up and coming writer/director wants to revive the concept, then so be it. It's just ridiculous right now.
 
Last edited:

Jaggyd

The member formerly known as skotti-chan
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
5,141
Location
Ohio
I think that's exactly it. I just feel like it's a thoroughly 80's idea that should stay in the 80's.



Well, that, plus.....

Dangeroom.PNG

HAH!


Sorry, that was like my other big peeve with Whedon's Astonishing, every arc had been done before, and generally much better. I mean; The Cure, Danger, Traitor, Big Space Adventure. I mean, I understand you can only do so many stories, and so many ideas, but it was so painfully blatant.




As to Buffy, something that annoyed me was the pandering, like Willow's sexuality, I mean, it was nothing that really advanced the story. Hell, according to most interviews, it was supposed to be Xander that was supposed to be gay, but Whedon didn't want two guys kissing on screen.
 

Latest posts

Top