I can't find it in your link but here's an article from rté.

Boobie | September 02, 16:40 CET

It will fall around sweeps, guaranteed. Whether it happens to be episode 100 or not. This means either late November or mid February. A lot of people will tune in just cuz it'll be Buffy, Angel & Spike altogether. Yay. So whut? Big deal.

Personally I'd rather see two or three of the supporting cast from Btvs rather than just SMG. I bet Limon, Brendon and Trachtenberg combined would be cheaper than SMG by herself. Besides, ultimately SMG is half the reason why we don't have a Btvs season eight. She left tv to do movies, yet NOW has time to come back and do two eps of Angel? Am I the only one who feels that's a slap in the face? If she wants to do movies, write Buffy out permanently and let her do movies.

I'm for Marsters being on Angel because the actor has made it clear publically he is thankful for the fan support and understands which side of his bread gets buttered, y'know whut ah'm sayin'? Brendon's a hard-working actor too. Let the people who WANT to further the story participate. If SMG considers the role that got her where she is beneath her now, from beneath her it devours. Let her go do the sequel to Harvard Man or whatever. Let her run. The story no longer requires her.

I don't sound bitter at all, do I? *smirk*

ZachsMind | September 02, 17:28 CET

I'm also firmly in the "who cares" camp where SMG is concerned. I'd rather see more Willow and Xander, maybe even Andrew (but please, never,ever Dawn)!

They are hyping this to the gills however, just how prima donna SMG wants it. "Lets all make a huge deal about ME coming back..." Feh.

I am looking so forward to Angel this season though. especially with all the great spoilers I've read, it just makes me more anxious to see the eps.

Willowy | September 02, 17:42 CET

Hey! What you got against Dawnie? She's my favorite character. She almost hardly whined at all in almost the whole last season, and she finally stood up to her sister at the end. Twice. Which took major balls. So AtS could do far worse than bringing back Dawnie. ...Like bringing back Buffy for example.

But yeah, aside from Buffy's return, Angel Five is shaping up according to the spoilers. Major lookingforwardtoage.

ZachsMind | September 02, 17:56 CET

Sorry, ZachsMind, she just took up waaay too much screen time that could have been put to better use with our Scoobies. Obnoxious and boring she was, IMHO. We had already been thru the teen angst in seasons1-3. I had no patience for the revisitation. Joss's obvious infatuation with MT drove me nuts. She was always just a wrench in the works to me. I rolled my eyes every time she was on screen.

I usually agree with most of what you post here, is she REALLY your favorite??? I'm aghast. And I just realized this post doesn't really belong under this topic. Sorry gang.

Willowy | September 02, 18:56 CET

You sad, sad, ungrateful traitors. Sarah Michelle Gellar gave almost everything she had for seven years to make the show as good as it was. Her committment and professionalism were part of the things that made the show even WORK in the beginning. She had far more onscreen time than anyone else, and basically, for 8 months out of the year she did nothing but get up and go to work.

She has thanked her fans at awards ceremonies, the cast and crew of the show publicly in ads (in addition to private thanks, I'm sure), and has pushed herself to limits very few actresses would all for the sake of the story. She went through an entire year of the show of which she hated, because she believed in Joss' vision even if she didn't understand/agree with it (which is more than I can say about Ms. Benson).

And because, after all that work, she wants to finally go on to do something else, you hate her for it? The show was done people, I'm not convinced there would've been a Season 8 no matter how you slice it. Joss was tired too, he wanted a break...and you're not here spitting on him.

Buffy fans are the worst.

ringworm | September 02, 19:12 CET

I guess I'm going against the grain here...but I look forward to SMG on Angel...I would like to always keep that open...but please...NO cookie dough speeches...blah!

Coll | September 02, 19:13 CET

Uhm.. where else would we go to argue Dawnie's place in the WhedonVerse? I'm welcome to suggestions. Having no idea where else to go myself, I say we temporarily derail the thread. *smirk* Dawnie IS a Scooby. And yes she's my favorite post season four, with Tara being a very close second (woulda been first if they hadn't had Tara make Willow choose her or magic which I felt completely out of character for Tara). Oz was my favorite pre season four character.

I think Dawnie represents Joss at his most daring and creative. Convincingly writing in a baby sister for Buffy that late in the game? It was inspired, reckless and rewarding. You think she was obnoxious? She was supposed to be. In that, Joss succeeded. Speaking as the youngest in a family of four children, that's just believable writing. If Dawn weren't annoying, it would have been less believable.

And now in an attempt to square peg this back into the thread, I contend that Dawnie showing up on Angel for season five sweeps would be ultimately more rewarding and entertaining than Buffy. That is, if Whedon would let ME write it. =) I could pull it off.

ZachsMind | September 02, 19:13 CET

Ringworm, I think even the loyalest of fans has a right to not like something or someone on the show. I have been moved by SMG at one time or another on the show. Its her snotty behavior OFF SCREEN that has colored my image of her in a negative light. She refused to participate in show promotion, like the games or dvds, she almost never appeared at any fan functions, she ignored her co-workers, rarely gave interviews, and didn't even have any of the others at her wedding! (I know, she has every right, but its still odd) And her prima donna behavior on-set is legendary.
What mindless drones we would be if we simply slobbered on everything dished to us? Allow me my opinion.

Willowy | September 02, 19:41 CET

I agree with Ringworm. Willowy- You don't know SMG personally, and unless you were actually on set with her and witnessed her "prima donna behavior" yourself, I don't think you should judge her or hate her based on whatever made up rumors floating around. I've heard nothing but good things about her from interviews with Joss and other cast members. Okay, so she didn't participate in the dvds, but neither did other members of the cast like Alyson Hannigan. As for her rarely giving interviews, I have no idea what your talking about, she did do a lot of interviews to promote the Buffy series finale, and I've heard plenty of interviews from her in the past, and she's never said anything negative about her co-workers. She even had that "I Miss You Aly" sign when she hosted SNL.

I'm looking forward for SMG appearing on Buffy too. I don't think she's making a big deal about her appearance, she did agree to it in EW. It's just the WB trying to get Buffy fans to watch , and I really don't care if they do if it gets better ratings for Angel.

[ edited by samara1 on 2003-09-02 18:23 ]

samara1 | September 02, 20:17 CET

Okay. There's a little saying about being able to seperate the artist from the art. I don't know that her appearing on Angel has anything to do with SMG. It's more to do with the character she plays. You can make the distinction, right?

Secondly, as far as promotions (such as games/dvds) it's entirely possible that she's, I don't know, busy? But again, that has nothing to do with the insane amount of hard work she's done for the show over the course of seven years and is a pretty pathetic reason to hate her.

As far as interviews, she's a very private person. That's blatantly obvious. She simply doesn't like to promote herself in that manner. I don't see how you can hold that against her.

As far as her "legendary" prima-donna attitude on-set, nobody that has ever worked with her has said such a thing. Those are all third-hand reports. It's generally a good rule to not judge a person you've never even met. Many of her co-workers have stood up for her over the years. So what if she doesn't hang out with them off-screen? Some people don't like other people, I don't see how that makes her a bad person. What makes her a good person, though, is that she always came in and did her job. Which is what she was there for.

Over the years I've read and heard so many exemplary things about SMG from Armin Shimmerman to Seth Green, all of them are astounded by the fact that she never missed a cue, was always in frame, and never flubbed a line. To me, that's all I need to know about her. Seth Green, in fact, has stated many, many times that Sarah is often portrayed in a negative light simply because she says what she believes in and does what she wants. Which in fact, are probably the things that make her a great Buffy.

She's not my friend. I'll never, ever meet her. I'm not some crazy SMG advocate who liked (or even watched) Simply Irresistable. I'm a person who respects hard work, and doesn't believe everything he reads. Sure, she may not get along with other actors and actresses I like...but that stuff is just escapist fantasy for people who read US magazine.

The bottom line is that she worked damn hard for seven years, and despite anything else going on in her life, she did her best and always worked hard to provide us with a whole lot of entertainment.

We don't know the inner workings of the Buffy set. We don't know the extent of the main players' personal relationships. So I don't understand why fans are so quick to make judgements. And besides, utimately, it shouldn't even matter.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think your opinion is mangled by media bias and sensationalist reporting, not to mention rumors and heresay, that leads people to conclude things that probably never happened or exaggerates the way things really are.

P.S. I love Dawn too. I wish there had been a Dawn spinoff...she was one of the most interesting, and underutilized characters in the Buffyverse and I agree with ZachsMind about Joss being at his creative best when he cleverly inserted her into the show (another example of his ability to twist genre television cliche).

[ edited by ringworm on 2003-09-02 18:25 ]

ringworm | September 02, 20:20 CET

If we can discuss this without hurling insults at each other (or the actors, or the writers, or anyone), that would be - you know - great. Tone it down a little, please, everybody.

I'm not for or against SMG on Angel. I am against having her on for just having her on's sake. Like having Faith guesting on Angel and Buffy last season without a lot of story for her. If SMG can further the story on Angel, fine. If she's just there for sweeps... well then, bleah. And if it's going to be a love triangle thing... well then, bleah, too. But we won't know till it's on screen.

I thought Dawn was pretty cool in S7. And then they gave her sweet F.A. to do. What a pity.

Caroline | September 02, 21:20 CET

I agree with ringworm. Yup. Indeed! And how!

And once again for the record, ASH was at Sarah's wedding. There's a lovely photo of Sarah & Freddie where you can see the light refracting off ASH's glasses in the audience. The very small audience of 60 guests or less. I think that counts for something.

wren | September 02, 21:49 CET

I see that you have a spoiler tag on this item, but don't you think that the actual spoiler is in the title? Could it be a little more vague (former co-star to appear; possible guest star; etc)?

timepiece | September 02, 22:17 CET

Ringworm, I'm a fan of Buffy. I acknowledge SMG is very talented and utterly professional, but don't necessarily consider myself a fan of hers. Not anymore. I mean she was able to pull off Buffy - a role that in most other hands would have become laughable and absurd. Swanson's effort is an obvious testament to that. SMG is remarkable in that. God, somebody put her and David Morse in a film together, because that's one thing both talents can do: sell the impossible roles to an audience with emotion and faith.

I don't see what you do in SMG's 'level of commitment' to the WhedonVerse or its fanbase. Her actions belay that. The last two years have shown a Buffy performed by someone who no longer had her heart in the role. You can blame the material given her if you want, but the fact is SMG's heart was no longer in it. You can give a Shakespearean actor Hamlet for thirty years but if he falls out of love with the material, he's no longer gonna be able to sell it to the audience. That's what's happened here. SMG fell out of love with Buffy. I understand that.

Furthermore, her actions towards the fan base over the years have revealed that to her mind we are not the force that helped get her where she is. We're a necessary element to tolerate or obstacle to be ignored, which at times she deals with begrudgingly to get to wherever it is that she wants to be. When was the last time SMG went to a fan convention? Or participated in a Buffy oriented thing outside the tv show? Riddle me that, Batman. She wouldn't do the animated series. She wouldn't do voiceover for the games. She's too busy. And that is fine. That is her choice to be too busy to participate in the storytelling. To believe such things were beneath her to find time to do. Fine. She's made her choice. She believes Scooby Doo is more important. Whatever. Let her go. I'm more than willing to let her go. Give somebody else the stake and cross.

It's not a matter of hate. I'm a plotter not a shipper. We don't hate differing opinions. Plotters agree to disagree. Ultimately what's important is the furthering of the story. When a storyteller stops telling a story you want to hear? Time to let that storyteller go do its thing and find someone who will continue the story you want to hear. She's bored with the WhedonVerse? Fine. I'm not. Why DRAG her into sweeps with a big fat paycheck when that money can be better spent with people who actually want to further the tale? People who enjoy it?

Buffy may be over, but there is still a lot of story to tell. Whedon isn't done telling the story. He's just shifting to Angel, partly cuz Boreanaz is willing to continue doing his part to tell it. I'm saying those who WANT to tell the story should be allowed to continue, and those who don't should be let out to pasture. With SMG it's not dissing what she's done thus far. As I believe Janet Jackson once sang, "what have you done for me lately?"

Bottom line: She's giving up Buffy for DAPHNE. That's like dropping the role of Sherlock Holmes so you can play Encyclopedia Brown. If that's her trip fine, but don't drag her back into a journey she no longer enjoys, and don't drag us into having to watch someone who no longer loves the role or those who supported her in the past. She wants to go. Let her go. Her coming back NOW after insuring there's no Buffy Eight? It's a slap in our accumulative faces, whether you personally feel it or not.

ZachsMind | September 02, 23:44 CET

I agree with what most of what ringworm said about not judging SMG from secondhand backstage whining. The main players in front of and behind the camera have had nothing but nice things to say about SMG, and while there may not be a compelling reason to believe them, I don't think that there's a compelling reason to disbelieve them either.

I just wanted to add that I also strongly disagree with blaming SMG for the end of "Buffy" -- yeah, she may have been a/the main cause, but Joss has made it pretty clear that if the show continued, his personal involvement would have been even less than in Seasons 6 and 7. And I for on am glad that "Buffy" ended when it did -- although I have serious qualms with Season 7 as a whole, I thought that "Chosen" ended the series on the right note, and I'm glad that "Buffy" didn't keep drawing itself out to diminishing returns. More to the point, carrying a show for seven years is, by all accounts, an insane workload, and I think that it's petty to hold it against SMG because she wanted a break (hey, Emma Caufield wanted out after only four). Nor do I think that a guest starring turn by SMG would be a "slap in the face", but rather a sign that although she might not want to let Buffy dominate her life, she's still interested in the Buffyverse and in working with Joss.

bobothebrave | September 02, 23:53 CET

Well said bobo.

I never really said she had a committment to the WhedonVerse. I said she had a committment to her job. I don't ask any more than that, I recognize that actors are people too, and sometimes they need a little diversity in their life. SMG was saying she would guest on Angel well before talks were even initiated, which leads me to believe it's not about money.

In fact, nobody has ever made mention of money in this whole affair. There is no evidence that "big fat paycheck" brought her back, or even that she dislikes the role. So it'd be cool if people would stop making stuff up. Your imagination of what Ms. Gellar is like is not proof. She always speaks about her role of Buffy with affection and gratitude.

I think people are looking for someone to blame after a disappointing final season, and Sarah, being the lead, is the most visible. I think people need to stop being so selfish. All-in-all it was a great 7 year run, and by all accounts, Sarah worked harder than anyone else to make those years entertaining.

ringworm | September 03, 00:39 CET

ZachsMind--Don't you think that it's a little contradictory to call yourself a plotter but to diss SMG because she's not committed to her fan base? I mean, her main job is to be an actress, to help tell the story -- everything else is just a bonus; it's great if someone wants to do it, but if they don't, that's their business.

And two more general notes about being a "plotter": first, "Buffy"'s plot, like any other, has always been affected by things other than just pure story, be it surprise casting decisions or Joss's burning desire to make a musical; in interviews, Joss has always emphasized the need for adaptation and change.

Secondly, all good stories end. Given the way that Season Seven brought so many things full circle (and the fact that the writers didn't really seem to have a good idea about where to take Xander, Giles, and to a lesser extent Willow), it was a perfect time for that part of the story to end.

OK, after all that pissing and moaning, I do actually agree that it ain't such great idea for so many "Buffy" cast members to be popping up on "Angel" -- it smacks too much of a grab for ratings (too much like the stunt casting that "Buffy" never fell victim to) and an inability to let go. But hey, if the writers can do something interesting with it, and if those appearances further "Angel"'s chances of running for exactly as long as Joss, David Boreanaz, et al. want it to go, then so be it.

[ edited by bobothebrave on 2003-09-02 22:45 ]

bobothebrave | September 03, 00:41 CET

I agree with ringworm and also with bobothebrave.

Incidentally, where is it written that SMG owes the fans anything? Okay, yeah, we're the ones who watch the show, but can we not just be grateful that we HAD the show to begin with? SEVEN seasons of it no less? When someone associated with Buffy decides to do something extra (e.g. attend a convention) I think that's great. I certainly don't think less of them if they decide NOT to do it. And I certainly don't say, "Well, she didn't care enough about us to do X so as far as I'm concerned, she's got no place in any future Buffy projects."

I don't blame SMG for the end of the show either. And you know what? Even if she WAS to blame, I wouldn't care. Why? Because it's her life. Evidentally, she DOES want to do some guest appearances on Angel or she wouldn't have agreed to do them. Personally, I'm glad to have her.

Bat House | September 03, 00:49 CET

What story is she telling now? Scooby Doo? Puh-leeze.

SMG owes the fans nothing. Nor do the fans owe her. I say we call it even and cut her loose. There is still a story among the Scoobys but it doesn't have to involve Buffy. I say do what they do in the soaps. Write her out and move forward. Say Buffy's in Europe and never bother SMG again.

It's what they shoulda done with Faith. HAD Dushku said she wanted to do Faith the tv series, fine. The character was in jail so they'd need to bring her out. However, after all that finnagling to make Faith the logical replacement for Buffy, and though it was nice to see the character again, Dushku said no. Instead she opted to start a tv series which, let's face it, is gonna be Faith on prozac.

Faith's presence in Buffy Seven and Angel Four now leaves more unanswered questions than if they'd just left her in jail. And y'know Dushku ain't gonna make any special appearance on Angel Five until at least late in February to May 2004, if at all.

Some say the finale of Season Seven tied everything up in a bow? Not by a long shot. Maybe this is just a matter of leaving them wanting more, but to me it's like having read a book and realizing after I'm done reading that the author had one more chapter which the publishers opted not to include.

This story is not finished. I say find people who want to finish the story, let them do it, and don't bother the people who want to move on.

ZachsMind | September 03, 01:24 CET

ZachsMind -- you say, "I say we call it even and cut her loose." I say we let SMG and Joss make that decision since it actually IS their decision to make. I say that before we start whining about who might or might not do guest spots during sweeps, we all take a moment and celebrate the fact that Angel actually got picked up for another season. I say we stop being judgemental about SMG's career choices when 1) we don't know her and 2) it's none of our business.

Bat House | September 03, 02:39 CET

I agree with you ZachsMind, let her stay in Europe, and thanks for confirming her neglect towards the fans. I have not problem one with Buffy; its SMG I don't care for. And for those who say nobody has ever said anything bad about her, in effect, calling me a liar, I take exception.

I wish I could remember all the sites I've hit that listed articles quoting Aly, Emma, Joss, and even James at times talking about what a "challenge" she could be on set. And that's putting it mildly... They also have said nice things about her professionalism as well, but I didn't lie when I said there have been not-so-nice words tossed about on her behalf. Also, quite a few spoiler sites have on-set reporters that made mention of her bad set behavior. I wish I could be more credible and remember the sites or post the links or something, but again, I didn't lie.

Willowy | September 03, 02:45 CET

ZachsMind -- "SMG owes the fans nothing. Nor do the fans owe her." OK, that sounds about right. I think that she's a good actress, and if she works on interesting projects in the future, I'll go see them. But I don't feel much loyalty towards her, and certainly not enough to make me go see "Scooby Doo 2"

But I'm not sure I agree with the last-chapter-of-the-book-is-missing analogy. For one thing, by all accounts Joss (the author of the "book") is pretty satisfied with ending the series with "Chosen". Does it tie everything up in a nice bow? Of course not. Do I think that there's plenty of room for more exploration through spin-offs and movies? Sure.

However, I think that "Chosen" brings a major portion of Buffy's life to a close. If the show was about the conflict between Buffy's desire to lead a normal life and her responsibilities as the Slayer, hey, then Buffy's pretty much won. She's shared the power and the responsibility, she doesn't have to be the martyred hero anymore. And if the show was about the process of growing up, well, again, the show has successfully tracked Buffy, Willow, and Xander from angsty adolescence to (still angsty) young adulthood and maturity.

So sure, there's room for a sequel. But I don't see why you'd think that there's a chapter missing.

bobothebrave | September 03, 02:55 CET

Willowy- I didn't call you a liar, I have no idea if SMG is a wonderful person or the spoiled brat you say she is, but I've never seen any quotes from Aly, Emma, or Joss saying she was difficult. But you've never met SMG, you've never seen firsthand what she was like, and those spoiler sites and various sites could just have easily been making that stuff up to get attention. So unless there's some E! True Hollywood Story on Buffy later on, I don't think SMG haters out there should go around and say hateful things about someone they don't know and have never met.

And about Scooby Doo since we're all getting off topic here, I respect SMG for staying on with Buffy, and I respect her decision to do what she wants with her career, not what her "fans" want.

samara1 | September 03, 03:23 CET

i don't get all these people saying SMG is being unfair cos she's coming back to her Buffy role, while she abandoned it this year

she's filming movies full time now, a break for two weeks to film those two episodes in a character she owes her fame too isn't that much of a big deal for her schedule

aapac | September 03, 05:06 CET

This is the best conversation I've ever seen on this site.
Most great actors are somewhat neurotic, could you cry on que? I know I couldn't. I would guess SMG's emotions are always very close to the surface and it sounds like she's hyper-active so she probably is no picnic to deal with at the tail end of a 15 hour day. That doesn't detract from the fact that she was incredible for seven years as Buffy. I look forward to seeing her on Angel, I'm sure Joss will put her through the ringer and pull another great performance out of her.

vpecoraro | September 03, 05:18 CET

Let's remove SMG from the argument. Agreed. Fans don't know behind the scenes things. She could be a saint. She could be a demon to work with. Who cares? It's not important. Let's not dwell on the actors for a moment. Let's try to clean this argument up by focusing on the characters and the story.

"So sure, there's room for a sequel. But I don't see why you'd think that there's a chapter missing."

Buffy's suffered through seven years of being surrounded by people who love her and yet simultaneously being alone. She's tried to juggle between her normal life and her extraordinary responsibility to destiny. With Chosen she found the solution. She's no longer alone. She's got not one. Not two. But she's got an army of Slayers to take up the slack. She can retire now. She'd died three times for goodness sake. She deserves a retirement. Off to England or Euro Disney. Whatever. Buffy's earned it. She should go be cookies. Go live happily ever after. Her story's effectively over.

So. Where's the missing chapter?

Back in May, Robin Wood's laying there in the school bus bleeding to death. So is Rona, with Vi screaming in her face. Faith's still on the lamb and is either going to be running for the rest of her life or she has to return to prison and face the music. Willow's felt the extremes of magic. She's gone dark and she's gone white. What she hasn't found yet is some comfortable place in between the extremes. What she hasn't realized is that it's not magic but her control of the magic that she fears. There's an entire series with Willow alone. And now that she's succeeded with the scythe thing, you know her next step would be to consider trying to heal Xander's eye - which of course has got to backfire in a crazy way. Andrew's gotta deal with how he was ready to die but Anya took his place. He just took his first step into a larger world. And I STILL think Dawnie's a green glowy energy blaster just waiting to be triggered. Either that or she could affect reality around her in freaky ways. Kennedy, Vi, Dominique, and how many other Scythe Slayers survived? How many Awakened Slayers are there to be discovered? Trained? How many of them are gonna work for the good guys and how many are gonna use their new powers for selfishness and evil?

Buffy's story is over. Okay. There's still a chapter missing, to explain what happens to everybody else. So again. I ask you. Why are they bringing Buffy back when her story is completed, and it's everybody else whose stories are not done? I wish SMG the best of luck in whatever crap..stuff she does. More power to her. Let her step aside so we can see more of the people who have been making her look so good all these years.

ZachsMind | September 03, 08:46 CET

buffy's story is in no way finished

'buffy the vampire slayer', the show that went for seven seasons is finished, but the character still has much to explore

there could never be another episode of 'buffy the vampire slayer' - there's no longer any hellmouth, there's no longer any sunnydale, buffy is no longer the only chosen one and she doesn't have to figure out a way to "fit in"

the character didn't finish, just entered a new era in her life

aapac | September 03, 09:05 CET

ZachsMind -- OK, I think we're getting close to being on the same page here. :) I totally agree that most of the ideas you brought up are totally ripe for exploration and, in the right hands, would make for awesome spin-offs/TV shows/comics/whatever. My quibble then, is that I don't think that any of those stories are *essential* to the show's central arc (hence sequels, not final chapters). As long as these characters are alive and the world hasn't ended, then there will always be more stories to tell, but (I say this because you seemed to "blame" SMG for "Buffy" ending when it did) but not necessarily under the "Buffy" title.

bobothebrave | September 03, 13:08 CET

Zachsmind - Gotta agree with ringworm & bobothebrave about SMG leaving "Buffy" is not a reason why she should be blamed. And adding my part to the discussion, I'm not a SMG fan, but I think she's a good actress who gave us 7 years of great TV. Emma Caulfield wanted out, Joss decided to end "Buffy", and somehow SMG is not allowed to quit when she felt it's the right choice? So any actor who gave us a good role, is somehow morally bound to continue that role forever and ever?

As for fan appearance, I may be wrong, but I don't think Alyson Hannigan went to any convention either. And it's their personal choice whether to go or not, I certainly don't see every cast member showing up in conventions.

Back to topic, I really want to see Buffy on AtS. It's not just the question of which character from BtVS has the least completed story. It's also about how that guest star is going to interact with the characters in AtS. I agree that all those characters (Andrew, Xander...etc) you mentioned have a lot of story potentials, but why would Andrew show up in LA and bump into our Fang Gang? Buffy is the one who has the complicated history with both Angel and Spike. I for one think that it's almost hard to believe that, given the way her relationship with Spike has developed towards the end of Season 7, if she finds out Spike has returned, she wouldn't even bother to come to LA to check and see how he is. *unspoiled here, just had to join in on the discussion, please don't spoil me!* =P

[ edited by StarFaith on 2003-09-03 14:06 ]

StarFaith | September 03, 16:05 CET

"So any actor who gave us a good role, is somehow morally bound to continue that role forever and ever?"

Oh goodness no. I'm arguing exactly the opposite. Gellar wants to go do other stuff. Let her. Why drag her back into the spotlight when there's so many other more interesting characters which are not at a stopping point plotwise? Even if you must have Buffy in the mix, it doesn't HAVE to be Gellar playing her. Personally I'd accept Buffy performed by anyone talented enough to play the role. Of course there are people who wouldn't accept anyone else as Buffy. And a casting director would have to be VERY careful. Buffy's a tricky role. Go too far one way and she becomes a clown (i.e. Swanson's portrayal in the film version). Go too far the other way and she gets too brooding and morose and miserable, which arguably is where Gellar's been playing Buffy the past two years. You need an actress who can be serious and heroic, who can also shrug it off in a nanosecond and say, "So. Dead guy's dust. Who's for pizza?"

I don't recall ever saying "I blame SMG for the end of Buffy." I don't know the woman. I got nothing personal against her. I'd be more than happy to buy her a drink some time. Thank her for seven great years of stories. I'm simply frustrated that she gonna get face time when she's made it clear she wants to move on, and there's other, more interesting characters, not even being considered for Angel Five. Why is everyone assuming I'm blaming? But hey. If you want to go there? Let's go there. It is a point of public record that both Whedon and Gellar agreed this would be the last season. The show is named Buffy, and Whedon wasn't going to continue Buffy the Vampire Slayer without the actress that portrayed her. Gellar wants to do films. We're talking about facts here, not opinions. So if there's blame to spread around, Gellar and Whedon share it, but this isn't an issue of blame. The story of Buffy is at a stopping point. She figured stuff out, now she needs to go be cookies. That's not something that will be very interesting cinematically. It's an internal monologue for the character, and soliloquies went out with Shakespeare.

I am not interested in the past. I'm interested in the future. Where the tales from the BuffyVerse are headed, and in what forms they shall continue. I have been and always shall be more interested in the characters surrounding Buffy than in Buffy herself. This is the perfect opportunity to explore those other characters. Yet sweeps will concern itself with the self-admitted dough who is supposed to be off in Europe becoming cookies.

Alyson Hannigan has said she's willing to entertain doing a sitcom. It's not a far stretch to go there with the Willow character. No it wouldn't be BtVS. It wouldn't even be a pseudo horror thing. It could be whatever Hannigan wants it to be, so long as it's set in the Whedon Universe. Nicholas Brendon is talented enough to star in his own vehicle. Frankly, Xander could go a number of directions now. He tried doing a nonWhedonesque pilot earlier this summer and it didn't fly. I think an action comedy featuring Xander would be a lot of fun, and it's not like Brendon's busy at the moment. As for ASH, he's a bit more busy, but that Ripper idea is still awesome and yet it's perpetually left on the back burner.

I'm not talking about just Angel. In fact I don't think 'special guest appearances' on Angel Five is all that great an idea. Angel has proven it can stand on its own feet. Buffy returning next season to L.A. is two steps back for the Angel series. I'm talking about something wholly new, away from California, in the same Whedon world but with a wholly fresh outlook, starring characters which stood in Buffy's shadow before but are ready to step forward.

ZachsMind | September 03, 17:48 CET

ZachsMind...I always enjoy your posts and insight. But...sour grapes??? Life...SMG is living hers and I wish her nothing but success in her movie career. I think that if she did not care about the character of Buffy or her ex co-workers...she would be a total "DIVA" and tell them to stick it up their ass...BUT she is not...so what does that say...you cannot say it's money...jeez I'm sure she wouldn't do this just for money (I'm sure she has a little in the bank)...she is doing it because it is Joss, she is doing it because the Angel & Spike reunion calls for it, she is doing it because she WANTS to...no one is holding a gun to her head and making her. And one more thing...someone else play Buffy, UGH. Let me be clear here...I am not a SMG fanatic...just someone who enjoys the two shows and thinks that it is wrong to berate Sarah, someone we have not met, who has given us her all, and hopes to expand her career and HER life...more power to her. I am grateful for the show that we had and am grateful to still have Angel on the air. Period.

[ edited by Coll on 2003-09-03 19:01 ]

Coll | September 03, 18:47 CET

I simply don't understand your train of thought. It's obvious you either resent SMG or resent Buffy. Why do you think Buffy's story is done? It's not. What has ended is the FOCUS on Buffy. Buffy showing up in L.A. after nearly dying, destroying the hellmouth, and changing the world is not only in character for Buffy, but it would completely incomprehensible if she didn't.

You seem to be offended by the fact that they're "dragging SMG back into the spotlight". And you seem to think the fact that Gellar has decided NOT to work 20 hour days for 8 months out of the year that she doesn't want to play the character that she made famous anymore. Buffy, as a character, is not at a stopping point. She's at a new beginning, and personally, I'd feel cheated to not see how's she's doing.

ringworm | September 03, 18:54 CET

ZachsMind isn't sour grapes. He's honest and sometimes says a lot of things the rest of us don't want to.

I truly enjoy your comments, Zachs. We don't always agree, but your points are usually well thought out and muy valid.

Willowy | September 03, 19:03 CET

My lack of interest in this is that I'm really just not that excited to see Buffy return. Over the last season or two of BtVS, I just found myself losing interest in the character itself. She just seemed to be so much in the exact same rut and after so many false starts to get out of it, I'm just not as interested in watching her as I once was. I'll watch the episodes, most likely, but I just won't be as curious as I might have been.

kishi | September 03, 19:52 CET

See...that stagnation in the character of Buffy is actually of interest to me. It's a risky endeavor on television to write characters that are true-to-life, but that's what ME did with Buffy. Real people don't change, or if they do it's after many years of false starts. In real life people don't have problems and then find the solution the same week (or even day). Even realizing what's wrong in their life won't make most people change it for the better. That's exactly how Buffy was.

The thing that makes me interested in her Angel appearance is that, in the end, she finally got what she needed in order to make that change. To finally get out of that rut. That's why I think it's important that we get to see how her newfound freedom is affecting her.

ringworm | September 03, 20:13 CET

Ringworm, I totally agree. It's absolutely nuts (I was going to say simplistic, but...) to see Buffy's story as being over. This is absolutely a whole new beginning. Everything has changed for her. So now what? That's the big question. I think it's awesome that SMG is willing to come back and do guest appearances so that we may get glimpses of how the character is coping with life post-Sunnydale.

Bat House | September 03, 20:39 CET

"I look forward to seeing her on Angel, I'm sure Joss will put her through the ringer and pull another great performance out of her."

That is why I am looking forward to it, because I trust the writers of the show to make it sweet. Buffy is a good character and I look forward to seeing what they do with this.

And, also,

"...it ain't such great idea for so many "Buffy" cast members to be popping up on "Angel" -- it smacks too much of a grab for ratings..."

What's wrong with making a grab for ratings? If Angel doesn't pick up this year with a great lead-in like Smallville, then it's history. ME better step up to the plate and do whatever is necessary short of compromising themselves artistically. And I don't see how having Buffy, the person who all this started with, come on for two eps will do that.

brother_grady | September 03, 21:59 CET

Now with the resentment? I've already said like, twelve times I have no emotional baggage towards SMG whatsoever. I don't know her. She never stepped on my foot. Outside her role of Buffy the actress simply has shown me nothing I find interesting. Ugh. Honestly. This is like talking to a wall covered in graffiti. I'll try to explain my position one more time in as few words as I can.

She no longer wants to be the captain on the bridge of her own ship. Nothing wrong with that. Her seven year tour of duty is done. I'm saying let her stay off the boat cuz there's other people aboard who are more dilligent, who are not tired, who are just as talented at what they do if not moreso. It's not like I'm crying mutiny. (Some of) y'all're makin' me walk the plank? Sheesh!

I'm so much more interested in us meeting the scores of awakened slayers than I am in revisiting the one that wants to go to sleep. Frankly I'm shocked to find myself in the minority here.

ZachsMind | September 03, 22:07 CET

Wow, quite the heated debate. I'm a little apprehesive to post my opinion on this one, yikes! Alright here goes, I happen to agree with Zach about Buffy's story being "over", ok wait, before I end up on the above-mentioned plank give me a moment. When I say "over" I don't mean that Buffy should just stock up on sunscreen and move to Florida like the typical American retiree (or Europe as the case may be)and never be heard from again. I mean that Buffy's story as the Slayer is over. She is no longer The Chosen One. She is among The Chosen now. We all know she saved the world...alot. So, give her a break, let her bake already. I, too, would like to see new stories revolving around another slayer or slayers. Hell, even an episode of "Where Are They Now- Special Scoobies Edition".

However, I don't see anything wrong with Buffy dropping by LA for a visit with her undead ex-lovers. It's just a visit afterall and completely in line with what Buffy would do. Now if we saw a construction crew raising a big "& Summers" on the Wolfram & Hart building then we can all start shouting about letting sleeping slayers lay.

None of us need to be reminded that Buffy is still living within the JossVerse. We will all remember her with great fondness but it would be interesting to see her for those two episodes.

[ edited by Karen on 2003-09-04 00:00 ]

Karen | September 04, 02:00 CET