Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

A Buffy The Vampire Slayer film, possibly without creator Joss Whedon


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#1 of 48 Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted May 25 2009 - 07:10 PM

'Buffy' in for feature relaunch

A Joss Whedon-less 'Buffy' movie: Worst idea ever of the year | PopWatch Blog | EW.com

In a nutshell:

Original 1992 Buffy movie directing/producing team of Fran Rubel Kuzui and her husband Kaz Kuzui, who were in-name-only executive producers of both television shows are in talks to remake/relaunch a new big-screen version of the character, with or without Buffy/Angel creator Joss Whedon's involvement.

They had nothing whatsoever to do with either TV series, other than collecting royalties for their involvement with the 1992 film, and will not involve any of Whedon's established characters or universe, using the "in each generation, a Slayer is born" idea Whedon developed for the history of vampire slayers.

Thoughts?

Hate speech is more than welcome on this topic!

#2 of 48 mattCR

mattCR

    Advanced Member

  • 9,840 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted May 25 2009 - 07:24 PM

Somehow, I am reminded of a remake of "Psycho". This just seems like a doomed idea. Piss off your own fan base, take the writing talent out of it, and start with new characters?

The comparison to Star Trek reboot being successful is a laughable reason. Gene Rodenberry was dead when Star Trek (Abrams) version came out, and Majel & Rod had given her blessing.

Here you have Joss who is physically around and you've built a mini empire as they point out with games, dvd sales, franchise rights, syndication residuals.. why would you bother to f- that up?

This may be one of the dumbest ideas ever. I mean, Highlander 2 type bad.

People forget that in-between stage with Star Trek.. you know: TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT.. plenty of series of different stories. I'd advise them, if they want to make money on the Buffy franchise, fine. Do one of two things:

Talk to Joss and license "Frey" and do a futurist vampire killer flick.

Or, just drop the "Buffy" bit and follow a slayer awakened in season 7 somewhere near some other place (I suggest Cleaveland) and call it good. Like "Lucy, The Vampire Slayer" or whatever.

And even those ideas seem "iffy" But to re-make the movie.. which was "eh" some good moments, but not great, bad idea.

The best thing about the movie is Peewee Herman, who is flat out awesome in an almost Monty Python way.

My short hand: No want.

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#3 of 48 Pete-D

Pete-D

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,746 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2000

Posted May 25 2009 - 08:39 PM

So wait ... these two are the creators of the Buffy concept/character?

Shrugs ... sounds to me like it's their property, wouldn't this be more like if Roddenberry was still alive and took back Star Trek from Berman?

Would they go for someone like Megan Fox as Buffy?

#4 of 48 Brian^K

Brian^K

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 06 2006

Posted May 25 2009 - 11:17 PM

Yes, Pete, I think that it is pretty unreasonable to preclude the actual owners of a concept from the right to develop it further, as they see fit. What I think a lot of people don't understand is that making a new (insert franchise here) doesn't take away anything from the earlier iteration of the franchise. It is possible for the later iteration to be better (as the Buffy television series was better than the movie; as the 1939 Wizard of Oz film was better than the 1910 film; as the first set of Batman feature films were better than the television series). It is also possible for the later iterations to be not-as-good, and that's okay too.

I think the Buffy mythos is so rich that it could indeed stand a reboot, especially hinged, as asserted in the article, on the "in each generation, a Slayer is born" concept. This could be a series presented from the perspective of many times, perhaps with some parallelism between a few different slayers the crux of every episode. This is a device not unlike the flashback device used in the first couple of seasons of Lost, and the flash-forward device used in the later seasons of Lost. There is clearly a lot of promise, and interest, these days, in presenting things using time as a plot device.


#5 of 48 Craig S

Craig S

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,428 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2000
  • Real Name:Craig Seanor
  • LocationLeague City, Texas

Posted May 26 2009 - 12:06 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete-D
So wait ... these two are the creators of the Buffy concept/character?
Uhh, no. Not sure where you got that idea. The original concept of Buffy is entirely Whedon's. As to the Kazuis, Wikipedia says:
Quote:
Fran Rubel Kuzui and her husband, Kaz Kuzui, were credited as executive producers but were not involved in the show. Their credit, rights, and royalties over the franchise relate to their funding, producing, and directing of the original movie version of Buffy.
To be fair here, the Kazuis were instrumental in getting the original movie made. And Ms. Kazui is a talented director (her debut was the critically acclaimed 1988 film Tokyo Pop). But her lighter take on the "Buffy" concept did not match Whedon's darker vision. The result was a very uneven film.

The Kazuis clearly have the legal rights to do this remake. And if she gets a screenwriter who is in sync with her vision of the concept, it might even be good. But it definitely won't be "Whedon-esque". This will be the Never Say Never Again of the "Buffy" franchise.

Three truths about movies, as noted by Roger Ebert:

 

* It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.

* No good movie is too long, and no bad movie is short enough.

* No good movie is depressing, all bad movies are depressing.


#6 of 48 Sean Laughter

Sean Laughter

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,385 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 1999

Posted May 26 2009 - 12:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian^K
I think the Buffy mythos is so rich that it could indeed stand a reboot

To be clear, I haven't seen the original film in years and I never really followed the TV show very closely, though I'm loosely aware of its trappings.

With that said, to say the "Buffy Mythos is so rich" is really saying that Whedon's Buffy Mythos is rich, as I don't remember the original film as anything but a rather pedestrian Vampire movie with a painfully stereotypical cheerleader-character lead - and directed as such.

Granted, one can develop characters more throughout the run of a television show, but I always had a hard time buying that the Buffy in the show was the same one from the movie (I'm assuming it was supposed to be based on some lines in the pilot), simply because the character was far more nuanced even in just the pilot episode than she was in the movie.

If the tone of the original movie is what they're wanting to go for than I think it will fail miserably.

#7 of 48 Scott-S

Scott-S

    Test Subject

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,017 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2001
  • Real Name:Scott Sturdevant
  • LocationThe Land of Zion

Posted May 26 2009 - 12:57 AM

As I recall, when Season 7 of Buffy ended, there were lots of Slayers. This sort of cancels out the whole "in each generation" idea.

I would love to get more Buffy, but not without Joss's involvement.
-----
Scott

View My DVD Collection
Stop the on-screen Bugs!!!!!!

#8 of 48 Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 7,939 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer

Posted May 26 2009 - 01:24 AM

The sadist in me loves this. The fan outrage will be spectacular, it'll be better than the Serenity debacle.

I love Buffy. A reboot doesn't change the brilliance of the show.

But watching people react like it does is better entertainment than reality TV.

I drink your milkshake. I drink it up!
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#9 of 48 Brian^K

Brian^K

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 06 2006

Posted May 26 2009 - 01:26 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Laughter
With that said, to say the "Buffy Mythos is so rich" is really saying that Whedon's Buffy Mythos is rich
And the article explicitly asserted that the Kazuis would be capitalizing on one of those things that Whedon contributed to the mythos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Laughter
If the tone of the original movie is what they're wanting to go for than I think it will fail miserably.
See above.

#10 of 48 Brian^K

Brian^K

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 06 2006

Posted May 26 2009 - 01:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott-S
As I recall, when Season 7 of Buffy ended, there were lots of Slayers. This sort of cancels out the whole "in each generation" idea.
If I recall, James T. Kirk died in one of the feature films.

And going back to the Wizard of Oz example, I believe Dorothy made it home in 1910.

#11 of 48 Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted May 26 2009 - 02:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer
The sadist in me loves this. The fan outrage will be spectacular, it'll be better than the Serenity debacle.
I'm almost tempted to see if a certain ex-HTFer has a blog or Facebook page or something, just to see the resulting expression of pure rage would look like. Or if it would be empty, because the man in question died of acute anger upon reading this.

(Fortunately, I know better than to subject myself to that sort of thing on purpose)

To be totally honest, I don't think going back to the beginning on Buffy is a terribly bad idea; as much as I'm enjoying the comics, I think it's a case where mythology and serialization has often overwhelmed the original core appeal.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#12 of 48 Lew Crippen

Lew Crippen

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 12,060 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2002

Posted May 26 2009 - 02:08 AM

I'm in agreement with Chuck.

Love the series and the potential outrage will be even more entertaining.
¡Time is not my master!

#13 of 48 Scott-S

Scott-S

    Test Subject

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,017 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2001
  • Real Name:Scott Sturdevant
  • LocationThe Land of Zion

Posted May 26 2009 - 02:25 AM

They could have a whole movie that takes place in Doppleganger Land.

Posted Image
-----
Scott

View My DVD Collection
Stop the on-screen Bugs!!!!!!

#14 of 48 Andy Sheets

Andy Sheets

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,371 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2000

Posted May 26 2009 - 02:42 AM

I can't find it in myself to get indignant about this because IMO Whedon had run the show into a ditch by the time it was over. I know some folks like the comics he's currently doing that continue the series but from what I've seen they're nothing special and a movie with his involvement would likely be building off all of that.

OTOH, I'm not sure I see the point of remaking Buffy because even at the show's height it was always more of a cult thing. They tried like hell to sell it to mainstream viewers and it simply never broke through, so I'm don't know what they're hoping for with a new movie. But maybe they're right and throwing a lot of money at it will help it stick Posted Image

#15 of 48 rvanward

rvanward

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 07 2009

Posted May 26 2009 - 03:04 AM

The only really real Buffy is Joss's Buffy. If you want that you currently have a great comic, 7 seasons of unbelievably good tv and bad movie. For those of you who enjoy only the movie. This is great news.

#16 of 48 TravisR

TravisR

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 20,764 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 26 2009 - 04:43 AM

Who are they making this for? The Whedon devoted have probably already made a blood oath to die before watching a Joss-less Buffy movie and outside of that existing fanbase, I don't see too many people being interested in Buffy.

I doubt this will get off the ground (I don't care if it does because it's not like it gets rid of Whedon's Buffy stuff) but I just wonder who they think will be interested in this movie.

#17 of 48 mattCR

mattCR

    Advanced Member

  • 9,840 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted May 26 2009 - 05:03 AM

Bryan:

First, it's (partly) their product, if they decide to do whatever they want with it, they can.. however, just because you "can" doesn't mean you should. I think my example of "Psycho" remade is on point, or the remake of "Omen" or several other films.

Right now, Buffy is a cash cow for them, so the opportunity to go back to the well seems like a good one. The problem is, the financial motive is not as good.

Buffy was and always will be a kind of cult show; a very rabid, dedicated following, but let's be honest, it never won it's timespot, and most people who found it discovered it long after the fact via DVD or syndication.

While a reboot could possibly be interesting, the audience is very narrow, and largely uninterested in a non-Whedon effort.

Imagine this as a concept: tomorrow they announce "We're doing a reboot of Mystery Science Theater 3000" another show with a cult following. "Except we don't want Micheal J Nelson OR Joel Hodson or any of the writing staff, it's going to be a whole new concept"

Would people show up? The show had a limited, but super-rabid fan base that buys up tons of the memorabilia and has injected it's one liners into modern pop culture. But beyond that, is there an audience out there that is clamoring for an MST3k movie without the mains? Or is there an audience out there clamoring for a Buffy movie that isn't a whedon-fan?

You reboot a franchise when the odds are it will have a chance to make a ton of money, or when a franchise is ailing because past efforts have screwed it up. You rarely reboot a currently successful one. Imagine if for the next Batman movies, they decided "this kind of sucks, can we reboot again and bring Tim Burton back on board or could we have Michael Keaton mentor a young Dick Grace character?" Sure, they -can- do it, they own the rights.. but would it make money at the box office?

Yes, they can. No, they shouldn't. Posted Image

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#18 of 48 Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 7,939 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer

Posted May 26 2009 - 05:16 AM

I don't think there is any money in the reboot myself. Serenity, which was much EASIER to market and shared a lot of the core fanbase, completely tanked. And I think that represents the upper bound of potential sales.

This might piss some fans off, but they would be stupid to make it for the hardcore. Twilight made more money off of the same basic concept with almost no cultural penetration. The new Trek movie isn't making its money off of Trekkies. If they are serious about the business side, they'd blow Whedon and the fanbase off. The fanbase isn't worth $20M at the box office.
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#19 of 48 TravisR

TravisR

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 20,764 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 26 2009 - 05:19 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer
This might piss some fans off, but they would be stupid to make it for the hardcore.
Definitely. I just wonder how they could do make Buffy for the non-fan. I'm sure there's a way but I just can't see what they'll do get that mainstream audience.

#20 of 48 Brian^K

Brian^K

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 06 2006

Posted May 26 2009 - 05:27 AM

I think it is very easy to say "should" and "shouldn't" but impossible to prove or disprove it. It is perhaps very gratifying to make such self-serving pronouncements, but we should keep it very clearly in mind that fans will be fans and will make judgments based on their feelings rather than logic.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow