Bringing Back The Buffyverse

[null 43626740570]

.

[stagmania]

Personally, I have no interest in bringing back Buffy in any form. The show was great, it ended very well, and I prefer to leave it to the imagination what happened to the characters from there. This is also why I pay no attention to the comics.

If anything, I could see a show focused on an entirely different slayer in the same universe in which Buffy activated all the potentials, without the involvement of any of the original Buffy cast, aside from a rare cameo. I think the concept definitely has potential, and could see it fitting in well on The CW or Netflix. 

[GreenScreenFX]

David Boreanez and James Marsters have aged out. There is no way I could see them as 20-something , I could barely see it then. Buffy very well could be nearing 40. I would love to see a continuation... Only if they got the right actors.

[Lazlo]

I do read the comics and they sort of fudge the aging issue - everyone is clearly several years older than they were at the end of Season 7 and the technology and culture are basically modern (Andrew uses Siri) but not as old as if they had aged in real time. It's probably most notable with Dawn who should be 30 years old (or at least have the memories and life experiences of a 30 year old) but is definitely written about ten years younger.

For the most part I like the comics but they do give me the feeling the creators would have a difficult time writing a late 30-something Buffy.

An entirely new series set in the Buffyverse might be interesting though. It has a rich mythology to mine.

[satrunrose]

If we were to get more Buffy, I would definitely prefer something in the same universe with cameos from the original scoobies. As Lazio said, I think there's a lot of room in the Buffyverse for a new show with different characters, especially in a world where there are lots of slayers (Are they publicly acknowledged? Is it helping reduce the number of vamps and demons? How do the public feel about superpowered girls and women with stakes, crossbows and rocket launchers? How are things in Cleveland? I should add that I haven't read the comics, so these questions are probably a little redundant for those who have).  Personally, I would really like to see a Slayer in college. There aren't enough tv shows about this stage in life and I liked a lot of what season 4 did with this until they dropped the ball in season 5. 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see SMG, AH, ASH, NB, DB, ED, MT etc. back in action but I can see a lot of problems. The aging vampires have been mentioned, of course, but I doubt a lot of the actors would be able to commit to a weekly show because they're involved in other things or, like Nicholas Brennan, maybe not reliable enough to handle it right now (which makes me sad, but that's another story). The other question is how do you write characters 15 years later so that they're still recognizably themselves but changed enough to be believable. Willow in her 30s using baby talk is...problematic, for example. 

[romantic idiot]

I'd still like to see them. I think Buffy herself is important and it's these characters I loved. I think raging vampires can be easily explained away in a world with magic and the supernatural - maybe they got made human for a bit again, some demon / witch cursed them etc. The master was completely wrinkled, after all. And I'd like to think a regular weekly show would be quite stabilising. 

So, I'd love to start up again with these characters, discovering how they've grown while I"ve grown and see their continuing adventures. 

[manbearpig]

I would love to see a Fray movie or miniseries.

[hello]

On 8/20/2016 at 10:19 PM, GreenScreenFX said:

David Boreanez and James Marsters have aged out. There is no way I could see them as 20-something , I could barely see it then. Buffy very well could be nearing 40. I would love to see a continuation... Only if they got the right actors.

Boranaez=47, Marsters=54, Gellar will be 30 in April. "Giles" (Anthony Head) is 63 in February. So: Angel and Spike both get their souls back (and begin to age appropriately), Buffy comes back as a kind of Watcher for the Slayers she created (she gets to see how tough being a Watcher is after heaping shit on Giles for so long), and Giles moves on with Willow to raise the next generation of (bumbling inexperienced) witches. Dawn? Wellllll, not a fan of the character so, she sacrifices herself and returns to being the Key (bye Dawn!) in exchange for restoring Joyce Summers (Hi Joyce!).

[secnarf]

7 hours ago, hello said:

Boranaez=47, Marsters=54, Gellar will be 30 in April. "Giles" (Anthony Head) is 63 in February. So: Angel and Spike both get their souls back (and begin to age appropriately), Buffy comes back as a kind of Watcher for the Slayers she created (she gets to see how tough being a Watcher is after heaping shit on Giles for so long), and Giles moves on with Willow to raise the next generation of (bumbling inexperienced) witches. Dawn? Wellllll, not a fan of the character so, she sacrifices herself and returns to being the Key (bye Dawn!) in exchange for restoring Joyce Summers (Hi Joyce!).

Sarah Michelle Gellar will be 40 in April. 

 

I don't want a reboot because I dislike the comics, which are considered canon. I am much happier pretending they don't exist. A reboot would have to ignore them for me to be remotely interested, and even so, the show's premise changed dramatically with the finale. 

This is one show I would rather they left alone. 

[hello]

Quote

Sarah Michelle Gellar will be 40

Can I buy your proofreading services? LOL Yup! You're right, my typo, 40 will be her correct age. And yeah, screw the comics, not nearly in the vein of the show we know and love.

But I'll disagree about no reboot, because they spent SO much time establishing this amazingly rich world and it would be a shame to not explore it again. Star Trek TNG was a hit, I'd like to see a Buffy reboot pull off the same thing. What's changed in the supernatural world in 10, 20 years? Are there still even vampires? Have they been magically enslaved by even-more-evil corporations to mindlessly sling patties at Doublemeat Palace? Or has the Initiative finally succeeded in "enlisting" them into covert military ops? Are they demanding the right to vote?

Maybe even some sort of Wolfram and Hart style, greed-worshiping demagogue has been elected president of the United States! With fiction, anything is possible!

[Willowy]

I'd definitely want to see them guest star. Buffy would need to visit Hellmouths periodically, I'm sure. They could use the comic books as a loose guide to the continuation (no reboot - to me that means start over with all different people playing B, Willow, Spike, et al... and that's a deal-breaker for me) of their world. Could even set it on the Sunnydale crater's edge. :D

[Glory]

I was watching Westworld Season 1 and with the technology they used to de-age Anthony Hopkins, they can probably de-age Marsters and Boreanaz enough for the roles. Easy peasy! LOL

[Joe Hellandback]

On ‎27‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 8:44 PM, Glory said:

I was watching Westworld Season 1 and with the technology they used to de-age Anthony Hopkins, they can probably de-age Marsters and Boreanaz enough for the roles. Easy peasy! LOL

Or we could have them aged as a result of the events of Not Fade Away? That they had been turned human as part of WR&H's punishment for them. 

[VCRTracking]

I'm for it. We didn't even have texting or social media when the 90s show aired.

[Jediknight]

I'm thankful for Joss creating Buffy, Angel, and Firefly.  That said, can we keep current Joss away from writing the episodes?  Be like Agents of SHIELD where the writing is done by everybody else, and Joss is just affiliated in name.  Don't need anymore Black Widow in Age of Ultron writing, or a camera attached to somebody's ass such as the camera that was attached to Gal Gadot's in Justice League.

[secnarf]

Aw I really don't want a re-boot. I prefer to let the original have all the glory!

[Joe Hellandback]

Mixed feelings, I would like to see a continuation of the Buffyverse world featuring the adventures of a new Slayer and her friends with original cast members dropping by for recurring roles every once and a while, call it just 'The Vampire Slayer'. I don't want them to say "Hey look, this girl is the new Buffy" and try to recreate things BSG style. And yes, Joss MUST be involved, he was what made Buffy special and his absence is what has me almost giving up on AOS. 

Edited July 21, 2018 by Joe Hellandback

[ursula]

This is just so confusing. Why does a Black Slayer have to be Buffy? Why can't she a brand new character set in present-day? We can get some guest stars from the old Buffy cast and information about what happened between the Buffy finale and present-day that has "reset" the world back to the One Slayer rule. Or it can be a period piece, featuring some Slayer from the past like Nikki Wood or even the First Slayer - now her story would have been extremely fascinating if done right. Sort of like Buffy meets Game of Thrones  in pre-BC Africa. **

The Buffyverse has the potential to be Potterverse-rich in terms of world-building and diverse stories and characters. It seems almost self-defeating that instead of branching out to explore it more, Joss's scope of imagination is to just reboot old characters.

**(No seriously, I would write for that TV show for free if you let me. Think Egypt and Carthage, throw in mythological creatures.)

Edited July 21, 2018 by ursula

[Halting Hex]

So now it will be "a haven for the brothers [and sisters] in the 'Dale"?  Or will Buffy be One Black Girl in All of Suburbia?  Tokenism lacks appeal, IMO.

Any news on whether other characters from the series will also be redone?  Remember, because Joss sold the initial rights to the movie, he doesn't own Buffy, Joyce or the Slayer and Watcher concepts.   OTOH, even though the Kuzuis and Sandollar had "executive producer" credits on the series, I do believe that Joss owns Giles/Willow/Xander/Cordelia/Angel et al, and they can't touch those characters without his okay.  Everybody getting an EP credit on the reboot might make it possible for all the characters to be "in play", but then again, perhaps not.  (And I'm not sure I want to see Asian!Giles, GayGayGAYRightAway!Willow, NativeAmerican!Xander, or "An-hel" the Vampire, anyways.  Yes, I'm cynical.)

Note: my baseball team shows some of its games on their local CW station, so I sometimes see one of the network's "Dare to Defy" branding ads.  These apparently include their upcoming fall shows (the football drama All-American is prominently featured) and at the very end we see three brunette girls looking very young and scared in a dark room.  Apparently, that's the Charmed reboot.  So very twerpy.  (It's going to be Power of Three: The Teen Years, or something.)  My heart weeps for the Halliwells, and cringes in advance over how bad this might be.

And, as noted, so unnecessary.  It's a Buffy-verse, after all.  Just do a sequel.  I'd even take Rona the Vampire Slayer, honestly.  (Hey, it's been 15 years.  Maybe "Indigo" has learned to act, somehow.)

[Chaos Theory]

I am 100% against an outright reboot bu making a new Buffy and just making her black.  It’s like someone said lets remake Buffy..,but black.   Plus the underlying theme of Buffy was always high school is hell even for those people who should have it easy.

That beings said the series finale left room for expanded stones and another slayer and a brand new Hellmouth.  That I wouldn’t be against.  

[Joe Hellandback]

6 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

And, as noted, so unnecessary.  It's a Buffy-verse, after all.  Just do a sequel.  I'd even take Rona the Vampire Slayer, honestly.  (Hey, it's been 15 years.  Maybe "Indigo" has learned to act, somehow.)

Oh god NO! I hated Rhona, I was so upset they killed my beloved Amanda and let her live! Now I'd be okay with Vi the vampire Slayer

[Halting Hex]

Felecia Day may be many things, but last I checked, she wasn't black.  I mean, she could probably play the part, but I'd understand if people took offense.

[Joe Hellandback]

2 minutes ago, Halting Hex said:

Felecia Day may be many things, but last I checked, she wasn't black.  I mean, she could probably play the part, but I'd understand if people took offense.

I didn't mean as a black Slayer. If I was to choose an actress for the role I'd choose

https://glee.wikia.com/wiki/Erinn_Westbrook

who has the look although she may be a bit old now. 

[tabularasa]

I'm not a racist but Buffy should be left alone. White or not. I'm afraid they'd try to be so "edgy" and as Halting Hex mentioned: "GayGayGAYRightAway!Willow, NativeAmerican!Xander, or "An-hel" the Vampire".

Besides, I'm petty but I have issues with friendships and romantic relationships. Buffy and Angel and Buffy and Spike were iconic. Buffy and Angel ended because David got his own show and made space for Spike. 

Would they go for a love triangle? Who will they choose as a romantic interest? Everything went so organically and the story was told. For 7 seasons..

How many tropes can they use?

[Delphi]

I'd watch the fuck out of a Nikki wood show set in the 80s.  Sure I know how it ends,  but black female slayer,  in the punk 80s of Manhattan being a single mom to boot.   Sign me the fuck up for those stories. 

[Perfect Xero]

I'm not sure if they're planning on doing an actual reboot or just a sequel series.

I'm on board for giving a reboot a shot though.

[Joe Hellandback]

2 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

I'm not sure if they're planning on doing an actual reboot or just a sequel series.

I'm on board for giving a reboot a shot though.

You see I'm 100% the opposite, fine for a sequel series with the original cast recurring from time to time. 

9 hours ago, tabularasa said:

I'm not a racist but Buffy should be left alone. White or not. I'm afraid they'd try to be so "edgy" and as Halting Hex mentioned: "GayGayGAYRightAway!Willow, NativeAmerican!Xander, or "An-hel" the Vampire".

Besides, I'm petty but I have issues with friendships and romantic relationships. Buffy and Angel and Buffy and Spike were iconic. Buffy and Angel ended because David got his own show and made space for Spike. 

Would they go for a love triangle? Who will they choose as a romantic interest? Everything went so organically and the story was told. For 7 seasons..

How many tropes can they use?

I don't know, when you look at BSG (the epitome of successful reboots) they were able to turn Starbuck into a woman, African-American Colonel Tigh into a white man and African American Boomer into an oriental woman.  

[Joe Hellandback]

9 hours ago, Delphi said:

I'd watch the fuck out of a Nikki wood show set in the 80s.  Sure I know how it ends,  but black female slayer,  in the punk 80s of Manhattan being a single mom to boot.   Sign me the fuck up for those stories. 

Absolutely, that's a great idea. Read a great fanfic once where Buffy and Faith travel through time Quantum Leap style experiencing the lives (and greatest sexual experiences because this was an adult fic) of all the previous Slayers.  

[Spartan Girl]

If it's gonna be a reboot/totally different character, then I hope they don't include Xander or a Xander-esque character.  Write a better character instead.

[Jack Shaftoe]

Don't they have any new ideas in Hollywood? Okay, you want to use an established universe with a fandom? Write new stories in it, not a reboot with the same principal character.

Quote

Producers Fox 21 TV Studios will pitch the Buffy re-do to streaming and cable outlets later this summer in a package bound to ignite a bidding war.

Bound to inspire a bidding war? Isn't that a little overly optimistic?

[illdoc]

22 hours ago, tabularasa said:

as Halting Hex mentioned: "GayGayGAYRightAway!Willow, NativeAmerican!Xander, or "An-hel" the Vampire".

You forgot about "Transgender Cord(y)"

[Future Cat Lady]

I'm all for the adventures of an non-white slayer with a diversified cast of friends. I think it would be great to have a slayer navigate today's world and all the issues that young people face today. But why does she have to be called Buffy?

I know that they want the show to have a recognizable name, but it would be unfair for the cast and crew working on it. Let them have their own identity. There was already a movie and a TV show about Buffy. Thar's enough. 

I think the Buffyverse could be like Star Trek and Star Wars, They could do multiple shows all set in the same universe. You could have a show about a slayer in 2018 and a show about a slayer in the 1700s. The Buffyverse has the potential to be a great franchise. 

So why not have a show with a brand new slayer and tell her story.  I think it should  a continuation of the original. It would be set in a reality where Buffy does/did exist somewhere. But that doesn't mean the original cast/character has to guest star on it. I'm actually not interested in seeing them in a new show. They could always have some small references to them, but the new show should live on it's own. 

Edited July 23, 2018 by Future Cat Lady

[ursula]

21 minutes ago, nosleepforme said:

Let's also not forget that Buffy the series itself was a reboot from the movie, even if they incorporated some of it into the show's back story - but that reboot turned out alright. The reboot of the movie as a series really added depth and perspective to something that wasn't really there before and was kind of flat in theatres.

 

I've seen this twice now and I have to say I disagree. The TV show didn't reboot the movie. TV!Buffy is the sequel of Movie!Buffy - high school cheerleader turned Chosen One, with a Watcher that eventually dies. Yes, Whedon cherry-pinked which aspects of the Movie to carry over to the TV show but again, how many stories (books, TV series, movie trilogies) manage to keep consistent continuity anyway? 

 

This new TV show is a different animal because - unless they're doing some kind of high school experiment where the show will play out the same way but with different actors - they're basically re-writing the existing canon. Not just creating new canon that may or may not fit perfectly into the old. 

5 minutes ago, Future Cat Lady said:

I think the Buffyverse could be like Star Trek and Star Wars, They could do multiple shows all set in the same universe. You could have a show about a slayer in 2018 and a show about a slayer in the 1700s. The Buffyverse has the potential to be a great franchise. 

 

This. THIS.

Like I said before, but it bears repeating, it really baffles me how in this present age of -verses and universes, Whedon has a ready-made one that he's essentially collapsing. 

[Jack Shaftoe]

Quote

Think Battlestar Galactica, which as a reboot went into a completely different direction than the original and was a critically acclaimed cult show.

I never watched the original Battlestar Galactica but as far as I know it didn't even have Cylons who could pose as humans and that's such a major plot element in the reboot that honestly the whole thing sounds like a radically different story. One which probably would have been successful if it had not been called Battlestar Galactica  and changed the names of the characters.

Quote

Like, imagine they bring all the actors as their original characters back, but they do something fairly horrible with them that kind of ruins and undoes all the growth and the world-building that the original shows did?

It can't possibly by any worse than seasons six and seven, so...

Quote

ALSO: I think there will be bidding war if it's a good pitch. Buffy is a brand name after all

It's popular in the internet, sure but it still doesn't even have a properly remastered Blu-Ray release, so I am not sure how popular it is for investors and networks.

[Jack Shaftoe]

Quote

I never watched the original BSG either, but I think that's how do you a reboot well, you build on the original, but create a radically different story.

But that wouldn't really be a proper reboot, more like a story in the same universe (and in BSG's case, not quite the same, with all the human-looking Cylons).

Quote

Have you read the comics? Seasons six and seven are not that bad in contrast.

I have read them and sure, they are terrible, but seasons six and seven are just as terrible, IMO.

And yes, a familiar name is the rationale behind all those reboots but most of them aren't exactly smashing successes, hence my doubt about the certainty of a bidding war.

[ursula]

16 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

the Buffy in the movie is a radically different Buffy from the one in the series (even with the vague little references that Buffy used to be like Cordelia, even a Cordelia-TV-Series Buffy would not have been like this), it is set in a different time (1992 vs. 1996),

A sequel is something that builds on existing canon. The movie is thereby not a sequel, because so many little things in it are different. The series is a reboot that pays homage to Whedon's original movie script but that is about it.

 

IMO, the little things don't count. For example the year setting. Its the fallout of the time gap between  the movie and the show, which was not planned at the time. What does it change really? How does 92 vs 96 affect Buffy's hero journey or her character arc or the apocalypses? Even the nature of the watcher--- again what difference does it make? What really matters is that Buffy's first mentor died. That's the character definining moment. Not whether he's half-immortal or human.

Usually, franchise handwave these discrepancies with the "unreliable narrator" excuse. Basically the movie isn't a narration of true events but someone else's interpreted, potentially whitewashed version.

As for radically different in tone,   AoS is a good example of a show that reinvents itself every season. Doll house started telling one story and evolved into another. Even Buffy starts as a monster-of-the-week show to #NotAllMonsters, so to speak; if you watched season 1 Buffy then season 7 Buffy, you'd think they were 2 different shows.

16 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

They're creating an alternative canon, an alternative world of Buffy. The other canon with the original characters still exists

But how does that fit into the existing verse? Is this a multiverse? And why does it have to be? 

The thing is - as illfitting as the movie might seem (for sake of argument), it's still one continuous story. As I said -unreliable narrator. This Buffy 2.0 can't be handwaved away. And IMO, it's just ridiculous to introduce things like dimensional mythology when there's so much "Buffy"mythology that hasn't explored. 

Edited July 24, 2018 by ursula
Shifted things around to make more sense

[Dee]

It's a great idea.

Original Recipe TV Buffy had a TON of ridiculously offensive moments when it came to diversity.

Plus it wouldn't change or erase what came before, just enhance it.

[Joe Hellandback]

14 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

If it's gonna be a reboot/totally different character, then I hope they don't include Xander or a Xander-esque character.  Write a better character instead.

Uh-uh! Xander is one of the things that makes the series great. 

13 hours ago, Jack Shaftoe said:

Don't they have any new ideas in Hollywood? Okay, you want to use an established universe with a fandom? Write new stories in it, not a reboot with the same principal character.

Bound to inspire a bidding war? Isn't that a little overly optimistic?

Not really, I mean Buffy has a fanbase and legacy that has stood the test of time, much more so than its' contemporaries, even Xena. 

[Joe Hellandback]

11 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

The tricky question is the "relevance"-part. Buffy was the first teen-genre-horror show and there have been many more like it. A lot of what Buffy did back in the day has turned into tropes and the new show will have to avoid these tropes. So, I'm not sure, should Buffy be in love with a vampire who turns evil in this version? Haven't we seen that before on too many other shows, can we tell a different story that isn't immediately defined by Buffy's love life? Should it be Sunnydale or should it be a Metropolitan city, considering that so much world building was done throughout the original Buffy run that the show became so big in scope that it sometimes seemed outright silly that all this stuff was happening in Sunnydale and that the only slayer would be drawn to this small-town?

  Hide contents

Illyria and Angel as a couple

 

I say keep it in  a small town, it works better that way and leaves things open for Angel. 

10 hours ago, illdoc said:

You forgot about "Transgender Cord(y)"

Given how badly Glee handled that subject I say no. 

10 hours ago, Future Cat Lady said:

I'm all for the adventures of an non-white slayer with a diversified cast of friends. I think it would be great to have a slayer navigate today's world and all the issues that young people face today. But why does she have to be called Buffy?

I know that they want the show to have a recognizable name, but it would be unfair for the cast and crew working on it. Let them have their own identity. There was already a movie and a TV show about Buffy. Thar's enough. 

I think the Buffyverse could be like Star Trek and Star Wars, They could do multiple shows all set in the same universe. You could have a show about a slayer in 2018 and a show about a slayer in the 1700s. The Buffyverse has the potential to be a great franchise. 

So why not have a show with a brand new slayer and tell her story.  I think it should  a continuation of the original. It would be set in a reality where Buffy does/did exist somewhere. But that doesn't mean the original cast/character has to guest star on it. I'm actually not interested in seeing them in a new show. They could always have some small references to them, but the new show should live on it's own. 

Exactly, Angel was able to succeed despite shedding any reference to Buffy herself in the title (unlike Stargate, CSI etc). Put Vampire Slayer in the title but not Buffy, 

10 hours ago, Jack Shaftoe said:

I never watched the original Battlestar Galactica but as far as I know it didn't even have Cylons who could pose as humans and that's such a major plot element in the reboot that honestly the whole thing sounds like a radically different story. One which probably would have been successful if it had not been called Battlestar Galactica  and changed the names of the characters.

It can't possibly by any worse than seasons six and seven, so...

It's popular in the internet, sure but it still doesn't even have a properly remastered Blu-Ray release, so I am not sure how popular it is for investors and networks.

Buffy still rules, the comics continue, new fanfic every week etc As for BSG in the follow up series Galactic 80 they did have human Cylons. 

[Joe Hellandback]

2 hours ago, Dee said:

It's a great idea.

Original Recipe TV Buffy had a TON of ridiculously offensive moments when it came to diversity.

Plus it wouldn't change or erase what came before, just enhance it.

Do point those out to me because I'm batting a maiden here?

[Joe Hellandback]

Okay, specifically what do we want to see? The BSG reboot is the standard to aspire to, sticking to the original premise but building on it and giving it its' own unique spin.  

1. Ideally I'd like a continuation of the Buffyverse but not recasting the original characters, having a new set of people with the originals popping in from time to time, like ST;TNG and its' spinoffs, call it Buffy; The Slayer Chronicles or something.  

2. If they DO recast then I still want the original cast to feature in recurring roles, not just in cameos, I'd love to see KS as Mayor Wilkins and NB as the commander of The Initiative (how good was Richard Hatch as Tom Zerek on BSG?). 

3. Let's have Dawn there from the beginning, filling in some of the gaps in how she interacted with everyone in the first 4 seasons. 

4. Have a crossover ep in an alternate reality where the Scoobs from this reboot run into the originals and we see how they're doing? 

5. Let's solve some of the mysteries of the series, what really happened between Angel and Buffy in season 6, Xander's lie in Becoming etc. 

[Halting Hex]

10 hours ago, ursula said:

IMO, the little things don't count. For example the year setting. Its the fallout of the time gap between  the movie and the show, which was not planned at the time. What does it change really? How does 92 vs 96 affect Buffy's hero journey or her character arc or the apocalypses? Even the nature of the watcher--- again what difference does it make? What really matters is that Buffy's first mentor died. That's the character definining moment. Not whether he's half-immortal or human.

I have to agree here.  Even though Merrick's death is never explicitly referenced on this series, it's part of the reason why Buffy is initially so guarded around Giles, why S1 is about building the trust between them.  Everything that really mattered to pre-series Buffy, the stuff she says in the "prepare me!" speech in WttH ("Prepares me for what? For getting kicked out of school? For losing all of my friends? For having to spend all of my time fighting for my life and never getting to tell anyone because I might endanger them? Go ahead! Prepare me"), that's all implicit in the world of the movie, the detail work and that varying tone aside.

The pain that Buffy brings into S1 (including her guilt over her parents' divorce), that all has its roots in movie.  Flying versus "they can drive" vampires notwithstanding.

Diversity OT:  was watching Penn & Teller: Fool Us for my weekly dose of Alyson :) and they're running commercials for their new Sunday night lineup, which is Supergirl and the Charmed reboot.  And apparently the three witches are, albeit all brunettes, one white girl, one [very light-skinned] black, and one Latino.  So either they've completely abandoned the "sisterhood" concept (which leaves "Power of Three" pretty hollow, IMO)…or that Penny Halliwell really got around. [/OT]

(Although the one girl does look like a young Alyssa Milano and their Leo seems well-cast.  But even so.)

[Halting Hex]

Holy fuck, I just had a WAY better idea!

Nikki, the Vampire Slayer…about the adventures of Robin Wood and Faith's biracial daughter.  Built-in roles for D.B. Woodside and Eliza Dushku (to whatever extent), opportunities for the original cast to appear, racial diversity a logical part of the premise, and fits neatly in the "slayer line" concept.  And, at 14/15, young Nikki would be the perfect age to start with. Or, if we can't launch until next year and she has to be a year older, still fine.

(And of course Robin would name his daughter after his mother.  That's not even a question.)

Stop the presses, Joss.  And send me a check.

[illdoc]

There was a fanfic series ("The Watchers Council") which at some point did indeed include Robin & Faith having a daughter who was named Nikki. In fact, in all the fan fiction I've read

Spoiler

(and that includes the comics)

, it is standard practice to name a child after a deceased loved one--Buffy's daughter is always named "Joyce"

Spoiler

(except in the current run of comics, where it's Dawn's daughter named Joyce)

, Xander's son is always named "Jesse", Anya's daughter is named Halley, etc.

[ursula]

1 hour ago, Halting Hex said:

Holy fuck, I just had a WAY better idea!

Nikki, the Vampire Slayer…about the adventures of Robin Wood and Faith's biracial daughter.  Built-in roles for D.B. Woodside and Eliza Dushku (to whatever extent), opportunities for the original cast to appear, racial diversity a logical part of the premise, and fits neatly in the "slayer line" concept.  And, at 14/15, young Nikki would be the perfect age to start with. Or, if we can't launch until next year and she has to be a year older, still fine.

(And of course Robin would name his daughter after his mother.  That's not even a question.)

Stop the presses, Joss.  And send me a check.

Oooh, this is almost too  perfect. 

[Joe Hellandback]

8 hours ago, illdoc said:

There was a fanfic series ("The Watchers Council") which at some point did indeed include Robin & Faith having a daughter who was named Nikki. In fact, in all the fan fiction I've read

  Reveal hidden contents

(and that includes the comics)

, it is standard practice to name a child after a deceased loved one--Buffy's daughter is always named "Joyce"

  Reveal hidden contents

(except in the current run of comics, where it's Dawn's daughter named Joyce)

, Xander's son is always named "Jesse", Anya's daughter is named Halley, etc.

Yeah, that was often the case. Read a fanfic once where after Chosen Buffy wakes up in the Normal Again asylum knocks on the door and tells the staff she's ready to go home. But calls her kids Dawn, Faith, Willow, Rupert and Alexander. 

[Joe Hellandback]

16 minutes ago, nosleepforme said:

No, I think that is an awful idea. Faith with a teenage daughter? By Robin Wood? Meaning that she must have gotten a child shortly after the series ended? No. Generally, I hate the idea of either Faith or Buffy having children who conveniently turn out to be slayers and I think when the original show ended, Buffy and Faith were still so young (21-22) and had still so much to figure out for their lives that I would hate to have children forced upon them so early as if a woman always has to conform to motherhood.

 

Speaking of Robin Wood, it always bothered me that him and Kennedy were somewhat dispatched in the comics. I know, they appeared in it from time to time, but given their prominent role in season seven where they were built up as new series regulars basically, I always thought that by ditching these two characters the comic always felt more like fan-fiction.

 

Honestly, the original Charmed ones were also never really believable as sisters to me in terms of looks. Shannen Doherty and Holly Marie Combs looked like they could be sisters, but Rose McGowan and Alyssa Milano didn't really fit in with them in terms of looks, IMO. Therefore, it doesn't really bother me with the new Charmed reboot that these three sisters look so different. It bothers me more that they seem to be so 'young' and that they dropped the best part of the pilot and the early episodes, the estranged and strained relationship between the oldest sister and the youngest sister. I'm not a big fan of Charmed, as opposed to Buffy, but that was drew me in for the first season, because Prue and Phoebe had a great dynamique with each other.

 

Those I think make great points though. It is kind of unfair that the black actress who would take over the part of Buffy would always be compared to Sarah Michelle Gellar, which is why this new Buffy would never be quite as iconic. I also think it's always nicer to create a new universe and new heroes. One reason why I am not quite as big on the DC and Marvel train is that it kind of bothers me that the same heroes get rebooted over and over again. Buffy is my favorite superhero, because  she is kind of her own thing. At the same time though, I would really like for Buffy to become a bigger part in current pop culture again, as I feel like the fandom has been thinning out and it is not quite talked about as much anymore.

I always took the opposite view, that Buffy and Faith know they live on borrowed time so would each drop sprogs a quickly as possible, especially when the Slayer legion give them that chance. As for the comics, Faith is probably better without a regular boyfriend, Kennedy does get side-lined pretty fast, she was never that popular and pretty much existed to tell Satsu that Buffy was just a fling.  

[Joe Hellandback]

38 minutes ago, nosleepforme said:

If you believe you're living on borrowed time and put a child into it because of that, then it is kind of irresponsible though and would make Buffy and Faith rather selfish. Besides, Faith never struck me as a character who would actually go through with a pregnancy, Buffy maybe. But her whole speech in "Chosen" was about how she is not finished, not done baking. So for her to get a child in only a couple of years' worth of time seems unrealistic to me. I could see Buffy having a child in her mid-30s, but then you couldn't build a reboot around her daughter now, since she would not be a teenager at this point (and who wants to see the adventures of the little kid slayer?).

 

Honestly, I never thought the Faith/Robin thing would last long anyway, and Robin was built up way before Faith even showed up, so it's not the only thing about his character. He could have been a more prominent part of the comics without being in a relationship with the slayer. I always felt like both Kennedy and Robin were written out/sidelined in the comics, because they were not popular with fans, which is such a fan-fiction way of dealing with them.

Well, both can let auntie Dawn and the Scoobs take care of their progeny. As for Faith, a baby might be what she needs to turn her life around. Agree on the write out though. 

[darkestboy]

It's a dreadful idea. Slapping a diversity tag will not make it a better show and if anything, it makes Whedon look like a sellout and Breen a coward for not trying to do something innovative within the genre itself. Hell, even the very group of people Whedon is trying to get back in don't seem to want the show given the reactions on social media the last few days.

If they wanted to tap into the Buffy universe again, they could've done a revival with most of the original cast, done that Giles spin-off that Whedon wanted to do in the early 2000s or even done a show about a new slayer set in the Buffy universe. Any one of those three would've a far better and more logical option.

Simply put, not everything merits a reboot.

[ursula]

5 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

I always took the opposite view, that Buffy and Faith know they live on borrowed time so would each drop sprogs a quickly as possible, especially when the Slayer legion give them that chance.

I see this, too, especially for Faith. I don't see Faith planning a pregnancy but I can see her realizing she's pregnant, considering ending it, and realizing, "f**k it, this is mine. I want it." She was always written as a rolling stone by circumstances, not choice, looking for someone to belong to, looking for a home. I can see her falling pregnant and deciding that she can be someone's home for a change.

 

3 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

If you believe you're living on borrowed time and put a child into it because of that, then it is kind of irresponsible though and would make Buffy and Faith rather selfish.

I don't know about selfish* but it is typical that people in high-risk jobs - military officers, police, fire service, etc - start families really early. Lots of stories of boys who marry their high school sweethearts just before being shipped off to war, hoping to leave a kid behind precisely because they aren't sure they are coming back. 

 

*(Not to get too meta but arguably, there is always an inherent degree of selfishness/egomania in the decision to procreate. Your DNA is just that vital that you need to add more numbers to an already over populated world? Your desire to raise a child cannot be satiated by the millions of parent-less children in the world--- but by your semi-clone? And no matter how "low-risk" your lifestyle is, there's no 100% guarantee that you'd live long enough to see that child to adult-hood. You're still introducing someone into the world with the risk of not being able to provide for that person adequately. And I won't even go into the people who are mentally/socially unfit to have children but do so anyway.)

Edited July 25, 2018 by ursula