Whedonesque : Comments on 20481 : Joss speaks out on Whedonless Buffy movie!

In fact its mostly ausiello trying to score some page impressions *g*

[ edited by Bruce on 2009-05-27 07:37 ]

Uggh. I feel like I might vomit. I hope this whole thing turns out to be an elaborate hoax. Is anyone else getting physically sick from this?

(I am exaggerating just a bit.)

Giles_314 | May 26, 23:15 CET

I tip my hat to Joss. That's a classy remark, good for him.

Simon | May 26, 23:16 CET

I am also getting physically sick. This is just an absolute nightmare.

Every time I try to compose something to express how I feel... there just aren't enough words to describe what I am thinking.

Shelly | May 26, 23:18 CET

I agree with Simon. And I wouldn't expect Joss to say anything more on the subject, especially at this point.

jcs | May 26, 23:18 CET

Yeah, he chose the diplomatic response that won't get him into trouble. And also won't incite a lot of badgering follow-ups.

Polter-Cow | May 26, 23:19 CET

Totally classy, and practical: Joss doesn't own the rights, and he can't get the rights. But I'm pretty sure we can all feel confident that Fox will fight this: they are still selling merchandising rights to Buffy and they can't very well let someone undercut that without a fight. So personally I don't plan to worry about it (and of course I never plan to see it, I really disliked the original movie those people made).

[ edited by embers on 2009-05-26 23:22 ]

embers | May 26, 23:21 CET

Simon Pegg's reaction to McSpaced pretty much resulted in it getting cannned. I hope Joss is aware of this. Classy is great, but there comes a point when it'a time to be honest, and I hope he will be.

Andy Dufresne | May 26, 23:22 CET

Thats not the response i would have thought he'd say. I know that i'd be furious if my all time greatest creation was being re-booted because i'd feel as if it wasn't good already.

@ Bruce They may even try to make it go all the way to the cinemas, because lets face it, Buffy is HUGE. They will probs try and fail at the idea because of hopefullness.

gingyfromshrek | May 26, 23:23 CET

SPOILER ALERT! My post contains spoilers about "The Chronicles of Narnia." I don't know what the procedure for that is, but be aware.

This whole thing just really makes me feel icky. It's like something and someone I love is being attacked, and even though it'll be all right, it still hurts. It reminds me a little of the feeling I get while watching the sequence of Aslan getting killed. You know he'll be all right, and he's real cool about it, but still! Why hurt somebody I like?

streetartist | May 26, 23:23 CET

Hey, you deleted the Morena comic - oh well, glad I got to see it :)

Hunted | May 26, 23:26 CET

I expected something like that as a response. Also, I'm almost sure that Joss has prepared himself emotionally for absolutely everything bad that could ever happen to him.

Jayme | May 26, 23:28 CET

#buffymoviefail #nojossnobuffy Joss Whedon: "I hope it's cool." #OMGWTF?! Sign Petition PLS! http://www.twitter.com/whedonesque

ZachsMind | May 26, 23:32 CET

@Bruce: And unsurprisingly, S. Darko is the worst movie I've seen all year. And I've seen both Attack of the Giant Gila Monster and Angels & Demons this year.

@Andy Dufresne: Yeah, I've had the Spaced comparison in my head all day. The situation was very similar, and Wright's, Pegg's and Hynes' reactions buried that piece of crap. Of course, Whedon fans seem to be up in arms already, so it's not like Joss has to rile us... like everyone said, a classy reaction.

beergood | May 26, 23:33 CET

Jayme, that comment made me laugh quite a bit.

Well put.

silent knight | May 26, 23:34 CET

[ edited by Bruce on 2009-05-27 07:38 ]

Bruce | May 26, 23:34 CET

Once again, I love Joss Whedon!

brinderwalt | May 26, 23:36 CET

...ASLAN GETS KILLED? OMG!!!1!

...actually, I read the books when I was a boy. J/K

ZachsMind | May 26, 23:36 CET

I think this is Joss saying he expects it to actually happen and if it does, he hopes it's good because otherwise, it'll destroy the rep he built for the Buffyverse.

Or maybe not.

LOUiE | May 26, 23:37 CET

[ edited by Bruce on 2009-05-27 07:38 ]

Bruce | May 26, 23:39 CET

I think Joss is just too cool a person to let something like this bother him that much.

Suave man!

brinderwalt | May 26, 23:41 CET

But why would Joss want it killed? His great work stands there, on its own... no bad movie could put a stain on that. Heck, there already IS a bad movie that doesn't stain it. The basic idea behind Buffy, the idea Joss came up with, is a good one. Joss Whedon made it great before - sounds to me like he wants to see what someone else could do with it.

I know it's blasphemy, but I'm starting to warm to the idea. (But it would only work if the Kazuis went nowhere near it... sigh.)

daylight | May 26, 23:42 CET

This is really pissing me off. I am not okay with this at all.

ria | May 26, 23:45 CET

I agree with Joss. I hope it's good. Because otherwise, in a few years, we'll probably all be hearing comments along the lines of "You like that TV show? Really? I saw the new movie and it sucked."

jkalderash | May 26, 23:50 CET

Well, I doubt anyone hopes it's bad. I think we more hope it just doesn't happen, good or bad.

I can be kind of stubborn on this point. I'm big on the creator's vision being seen through. I still haven't watch season 5-7 of WW--not because I think they'll be bad, but I'm really only interested in what Sorkin had planned for these characters. If that makes any sense. Along the same lines, I really only care about Joss's vision--or the vision of those he's declared capable of carrying it on (his writers, etc.).

As I said. I'm stubborn.

Jobo | May 26, 23:54 CET

Erm some several thousand people are probably going to kill me for saying this but...I'm looking forward to the movie.

shesmyeverything | May 26, 23:55 CET

Hadn't really thought about the movie being any good. That would be uhm... cool, I'd guess. Maybe they could get someone who's inspired by and get's Joss awesomeness, but sadly I don't really see it happen under these conditions. Still, hoping for the best seems like a healthy attitude.

the Groosalugg | May 26, 23:56 CET

shesmyeverything, is your name a Losing Lisa (BF) quote?

Jobo | May 26, 23:56 CET

Almost every time an Ausiello story is linked here, the link never works for me. I can never tell if the site is down (EW down?) or what.

Nolan | May 27, 00:01 CET

Well everyone did want a Buffy movie......right?

;)

didifallasleep | May 27, 00:02 CET

I feel like this is pretty straightforward. If (like me) you aren't interested in a Buffy movie without Joss, don't see it. If you are, go see it.

I think Joss's reaction is 100% appropriate.

Kiba | May 27, 00:05 CET

What is Whedon's relationship with Kuzui Enterprises? I apologize if this is a stupid question. I honestly don't know. I just found out today they were executive producers on both Buffy and Angel. Was that in name only? Or were they funding the tv series? What's the story?

I mean if Whedon is obviously not upset about this, if he's gonna get paid whether they are successful or not, maybe we shouldn't tilt at this windmill? If he IS mad, WELL OF COURSE we'll tar and feather them and run em outta town on a rail. I'm just sayin' I don't want us all storming Fran Kuzui Castle with torches and pitchforks if The Monster's really a nice gentle giant of a guy who likes children and flowers, y'know? Maybe we shouldn't jump the gun.

Or is it that Whedon wants us to storm Fran Kuzui Castle, but he's powerless to say anything? And how can we tell?

ZachsMind | May 27, 00:05 CET

@didifallasleep - I am totally fine with never getting a Buffy movie. The series ended on its own terms and everyone involved has moved on to other projects. It doesn't have to be another Star Trek-style mega-franchise to be successful. And a bad movie could cast the show in a bad light for millions of potential viewers.

jkalderash | May 27, 00:05 CET

No Jobo, it's a Willow quote :P

shesmyeverything | May 27, 00:06 CET

I feel about everyone hating the unmade movie the same way I did about all the Dragonball fans hating the DB movie. I had seen some of the DB series and loved the movie, so depending on who they get to play in the movie I will keep an open mind. I thought the Buffy Movie was awful, but think the TV series is the best thing ever on the small screen.

rehabber | May 27, 00:08 CET

It just bugs me that travesties like this can get funding, but nobody is interested in doing the Spike or Illyria movies? Or a direct to dvd Serenity sequel? How come so much crap can get made but films that are competently done rarely manage to get through the system? *ugh*

AnotherFireflyfan | May 27, 00:12 CET

This is, in some ways, similar to the dude who had the film rights to the James Bond movie Thunderball, but only that movie. He waited until the 1980s and remade Thunderball as Never Say Never Again. It had nothing to do with the other James Bond movies before or since (though it did have Mr. Connery in it) and it hasn't changed my enjoyment of other James Bond movies. If this ends up being good (unlikely), fine, but otherwise it won't take away from my enjoyment of the real Buffy.

The Operative | May 27, 00:14 CET

I don't think we should take Joss' words as meaning that he's ok with this. What else is he supposed to say? I'm still 100 % against the idea. Will not be seeing it.

ShanshuBugaboo | May 27, 00:17 CET

I, too "hope it's cool."

And by that, I mean I hope the idea is taken, crushed, locked in a impenetrable safe, transported to the Antarctic and buried under thousands of tonnes of non global warming affected ice.

Yeah, that would be REALLY cool.

missb | May 27, 00:23 CET

He doesn't seem to be worrying the slightest bit and neither should we, IMO.

In saying that, if the Kazui's really do get as many inquiries a day they claim to about a Buffy movie, perhaps it is time for Joss to lay down the law and show em who's boss by making the damn movie already. He did say no one has ever approached him about one, though.

This whole thing is stinking worse than a day old Fox executive's PR snafu.

buffyfest | May 27, 00:25 CET

I can't help but think of that old Raymond Chandler quote (at least, I usually hear it attributed to Chandler), when someone asked him how he felt about Hollywood ruining his books: "They're not ruined. They're right there on the shelf."

As for a bad movie scaring potential audiences away from the series - I doubt it. After all, it survived the relative suckiness of the original fairly well. Also, it's a fair bet that the internet will be loaded with articles saying "Movie's crap, but hey, check out the TV show!", which would increase awareness. And in the long run, the S. Darko's and their ilk fade away quickly. The good stuff remains.

Winther | May 27, 00:32 CET

Well if he says he hopes it's cool, that may mean anything. But I say the best idea is to make a Slayer movie, and get Joss to look it over, and do it right. Just name the Slayer anything but Buffy. It'll just be the old Buffy origin story but it happens to someone else. If it's done right, then have the Sarah Michelle Gellar cameo. It would be so Spock-like, buit it would show Kuzui Enterprises is in the right direction and should stay there.

impalergeneral | May 27, 00:35 CET

Works of fiction are constantly reworked/reimagined/reinterpreted. Just because there is one absolutely wonderful vision of Buffy in existence doesn't necessarily mean that there's no room for other visions. I enjoy both the old black and white King Kong and the new Peter Jackson King Kong, after all. Many enjoy both the old and new BSG. I do think the producers in question are a little premature in wanting to relaunch Buffy when it hasn't been off the air that long and the comics are still going. But I'll wait to decide if it's a movie I want to see until there's more information about plot and cast.

And Joss's statement is very classy, and I sort of agree. Any geeky film turning out well only helps the greater geek cause, yes? :)

mysoulisbrown | May 27, 00:38 CET

Hmm, I read it as noncommittal rather than not worried. At this stage what else could he say? If he'd come out and ranted about it he wouldn't have looked very professional. Who knows what is happening behind the scenes (that is the hope I'm clinging to).

Leaf | May 27, 00:39 CET

The mandatory Facebook boycott group.

MonkeyJoe | May 27, 00:40 CET

In my native language, "cool" means "buried deep in the earth and forgotten by history". So I agree with Joss.

dispatch | May 27, 00:43 CET

As well as the James Bond Thunderball example, the second Airplane movie was made without the Zuckers, who say to this day they have never even watched it as it would be too painful.
And I liked that film....

zz9 | May 27, 00:50 CET

If you want a New Buffy/Slayer movie why don't you do everything you can to get Joss on board? Am I missing something? It just seems logical to get the guy who created the universe involved. They could either go with "season 8" time frame or even a reboot. The world could still be slightly AU with a season 1 time frame with Dawn. They would have to have young actors but I'd take that to get Joss involved in this if it must happen. Heck perhaps Joss could do a movie version of when Buffy goes to Fray time and then start a Fray franchise. Joss has created a wonderful universe and I don't want it wasted on stuff Joss has no input on.

beckyboo | May 27, 00:52 CET

I hate Hollywood.

Sly | May 27, 00:54 CET

YOU CAN'T MAKE A "Buffy" MOVIE WITH OUT JOSS!!!!
Sorry for the caps, but that kind of pisses me off that their doing it without him.

Allen Doyle | May 27, 01:02 CET

Okay. With all this said. Some five hundred replies later, and noting that at the moment the online petition has less than five hundred signatures, from this I can surmise that the people behind this travesty of justice or even common sense will not be making this Buffy Reboot for us. They'll be making it for Everybody Else.

Anyone who hasn't yet heard of Buffy. Anyone who is not a diehard fan of whatever stories Whedon wants to tell. Anyone who has an open mind because they just don't care about the old Buffy stuff and want Fresh and New and Different.

In other words: the same people who made Abrams Star ~~Wars~~ ~~Trek~~ Abomination such a success. Sure it was pretty. Had all kinds of beefcake and explosions and such. Called itself Star Trek. Wasn't Star Trek, but it made hella money. So it's Star Trek now, and what I grew up with? Worthless. Nothing. They spit on it.

This reboot won't be for us and it won't be for Joss. It'll be for $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and there's no fighting that. I won't go. Just like I haven't seen the new ST thing and I don't plan to see it. Just like I didn't support any of the Batman movies because I don't feel they capture Batman at all. Just like I didn't support Superman Returns because that guy looked more like Ambush Bug in that outfit. I swear.

Makes no difference. I boycott, and I shake my fist at the heavens, but other people continue going to see this shit. So shit is exactly what we get. Jerry Springer's show didn't stay on the air as long as it did because someone felt sorry for him. People tuned in to watch that crap. Advertisers knew it. The money kept rolling in. The fact I didn't? Didn't matter. When the money stopped rolling in, that's when Springer left television. Not before.

...I didn't know the second Airplane! Movie was made without the Zucker Brothers. Explains a lot. The first Airplane movie grossed over eighty million dollars. The sequel grossed less than thirty million. That's the ONLY reason there wasn't an Airplane three.

When the new Buffy movie comes out, we won't go, but other people will. Probably anyone under 20 who isn't already smitten by the DVDs. Or maybe they'll go even if they are smitten, because this Buffy will be THEIR Buffy. Their age. Their time. And that's kinda alright cuz every generation should have their own y'know? It's only right. It's fitting. Buffy should be timeless. For their sake. Not for ours. We already have ours. Maybe it's time to let go. This isn't for us.

...

I hope it's cool.

ZachsMind | May 27, 01:18 CET

ZachsMind - Poignant words but I'm of the generation to have two versions of Buffy. Kuzui's Buffy was awful. Whedon's Buffy was awesome. I know which I prefer in my old age. It's sure as hell not the Kablooey one.

Just Another Fan | May 27, 01:25 CET

This is frickin' REAL? *sigh*

Well, crap. And I liked the first movie, bought the VHS and everything. It was those beautiful lines of Joss's that just shine through the you-know-what.

I can't see anyway that this isn't a mistake except for whomever green-lit it and expects somehow to make money off of the cool association and vampires and- You know, I take it back. This is gonna suck. I just hope it doesn't tarnish the franchise too much.

BreathesStory | May 27, 01:27 CET

@ZachsMind

Yep.

Der JagerMeister | May 27, 01:27 CET

I have to say, it'd be interesting if JJ Abrams pops up to an writers audition or whatever.

Because, at the moment, its a Free-For-All, right?

Jayme | May 27, 01:34 CET

Not the answer I wanted.

Riker | May 27, 01:35 CET

The one thing that people DO seem to be missing is that in the article (the original, not the Ausiello) the Kuzui's did not say that it would be without Joss. It was stated that the Kuzui's were in talks trying to get input and a general idea of what the project was supposed to be.

The person writing the article says "Buffy without Joss Whedon" and then contradicts itself later by saying the Kuzui's haven't committed to that. Judging by the reaction, I don't think they will. I'd say it was bad writing on the reporters part, but judging by the hits he's getting I don't think so.

In fact, it explicitly says that Kuzui didn't rule out Whedon's involvement which you have to assume was a direct question by the interviewer because... how could you not ask?!

It could very well be that the Kuzui's are trying to scare up cash for the project before they approach him. And considering how many false starts Whedon projects have had, that might not be a bad idea. After all, if they are part owners of the franchise, they're going to want it vital as long as possible. If Joss can't scare up the money himself but they can, why WOULDN'T they?

[ edited by azzers on 2009-05-27 01:38 ]

azzers | May 27, 01:37 CET

I guess we should be careful what we wish for.

korkster | May 27, 01:39 CET

I had no problem with a Star Trek reboot. After mediocre Voyager and terrible Enterprise there was nothing left you could call Trek in the same way you can look to Joss Whedon and say here's a good guy making good art against the odds. A person, a movement, you can actually support and care about because it's Good, not just because you're a nostalgic fan. Buffy sans Whedon is an insanely bad idea.

doublemeat | May 27, 01:40 CET

I would make signs and protest this.

Just like those nutty religious folk who protested Kevin Smith's "Dogma."

.... need to buy some paint.

bionicvapourdude | May 27, 01:41 CET

I really real just don't think Fox and Sanddollar will go along with this, once it's said and done. Rupert and Dollie don't hire fools.

DaddyCatALSO | May 27, 01:42 CET

Yeah, bla. I won't be watching ReBuffy either (thank you, Brian Lynch, for that moniker) - unless Joss is involved.

Well, hmmm.

Maybe I will.

But only if the Angel character is sparkley.

[ edited by SignalAddict on 2009-05-27 01:52 ]

[ edited by SignalAddict on 2009-05-27 01:52 ]

SignalAddict | May 27, 01:48 CET

As a person who grew up on Star Trek TOS, I thought JJ's version was genius. Absolutely made this trekkie giddy with delight. Loved every second and am salivating for more.

TamaraC | May 27, 01:49 CET

Just like those nutty religious folk who protested Kevin Smith's "Dogma."
Including Kevin Smith himself? :)

I really real just don't think Fox and Sanddollar will go along with this, once it's said and done. Rupert and Dollie don't hire fools.
They don't have to "Go along" with this. If the Kuzui's own the movie rights they can make the movie. The fact that they have been talking about this for a while, and got a partner who (we assume) would have checked the rights and that Fox has not slapped them down suggests they still have the movie rights.

zz9 | May 27, 01:52 CET

I think with any property that a creator makes where s/he doesn't own the rights, you accept that someone else can come along and play in your sandbox without your permission. I'm guessing Joss knows this, Jerry Siegal and Jo Schuster certainly worked it out. I'm more interested in following the work of particular creators than in particular franchises, and I guess in general I think people should work on their own ideas rather than someone else's, but I love the revamped BSG into little bits, and for that matter Joss' X-Men run, so it's hardly a hard and fast rule.

And I don't think all the rubbish stories written featuring Alice in Wonderland detract from the brilliance of the original one iota.

The issue of whether these are the best people to do it, and whether they have the right to claim some of Buffy's existing success as their own, well, on that, I can get cranky but it won't change anything. Whatever they create can be measured on its own terms.

sojourner | May 27, 01:57 CET

TamaraC: "As a person who grew up on Star Trek TOS, I thought JJ's version was genius. Absolutely made this trekkie giddy with delight. Loved every second and am salivating for more."

I got misty when the Enterprise rose up from the red clouds of Titan. :) Somehow I don't see the Kuzuis coming up with such a strong vision, but you never know and I too can only hope it's cool.

cabri | May 27, 02:00 CET

Including Kevin Smith himself? :)

hahaha I forgot about that :)

bionicvapourdude | May 27, 02:04 CET

With this Boycott the Buffy Remake Facebook thing, how come "Related Groups" features "10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Is Wrong" but it also has "10,000,000 supporters for Gay Rights." That's kinda weird.

ZachsMind | May 27, 02:08 CET

Well, dunno why the Buffy Re-boot group calls forth either of these groups, but the "10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Is Wrong" group is a parody group; the reasons include:

1) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

and one of my personal favorites:

5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

QuoterGal | May 27, 02:14 CET

I hope one day I'll be as cool about something uncool as Mr. W. is there.

Craig Oxbrow | May 27, 02:16 CET

This is a NIGHTMARE

mossoholic | May 27, 02:40 CET

For me, the issue isn't so much just that there might be a new Buffy movie made without Joss's unput, although that's bad enough. But at least if there was genuine, creative talent involved then it might actually turn out decent, which is what Joss seems to be hoping for with his comment. The problem however, is the people behind this proposed movie are most definitely NOT creative or visionary or even remotely talented in my opinion.

The reason the Star Trek and Batman reboots worked is because they had talented filmmakers in Abrams and Nolan who genuinely cared about the material and it showed in the end result. Who do we have working on this? The same people who ruined the original movie in the first place. The Kazuis are just in this for money, nothing else. Projects made for no other reason than as a cash grab almost never turn out well.

My fear is that the new movie will end up even worse than the original movie and the general public's perception of the franchise will be tainted even more than it already is. I hope I'm wrong about that but that's what I'm afraid of happening.

SteveJ2008 | May 27, 02:55 CET

I hope it's cool.

So judicious. And I hope that, speaking of tipping in Simon's post way up there, that Joss says nothing further that would in any way tip his hand as to what action he might take about this.

On the down low, on the down low, on the down low. That's how to play this one.

Tonya J | May 27, 02:56 CET

Just like I didn't support any of the Batman movies because I don't feel they capture Batman at all.

ZachsMind, does "support" mean "watch", and if so, how did you reach that conclusion?

I hated the campy live action TV series, but I thought the first Batman movie was a reasonable mix of late Fifties/early Sixties comic book Batman and The Dark Knight Returns. It was true to the character and the feeling, and the Gothic/Deco art style translated to the big screen very well.

janef | May 27, 02:58 CET

Joss is classy and cool.

This is an awesome response.

I think we kind of need to recognize that he has, perhaps more than many of us, moved on. He's really done a lot with the Buffy story and it's quite possible that he's not really as dying to make a Buffy movie as some of us are for him to do so.

If the movie sucks, it's not going to make the show any less good. If the movie is cool, well, that would be good too.

Septimus | May 27, 02:59 CET

I would make signs and protest this.

Heh... The end is nigh.

Sly | May 27, 03:22 CET

Just Another Fan: "I'm of the generation to have two versions of Buffy. Kuzui's Buffy was awful."

Oh I remember Swanson too. I don't call her MY Buffy, but to be fair, Swanson was the reason why I didn't give the tv series a fair shake until almost too late. Gellar never completely won me over, but the rest of the cast did.

I saw Kuzui's movie. It was awful. I saw it because it had a great cast. Sutherland. Hauer. Reubens. How could anyone fail with this lineup? Well, I found out that day. It wasn't the acting. It wasn't even the cinematography or the music or the sound effects. The necessary pieces of the puzzle were there but they weren't in place. It was the fact that a great idea was poorly executed. The directing killed that movie.

I'm a strong believer in being on board for any WorldView in fiction no matter how crazy, so long as said WorldView sets up its own rules early in the film, and then stays true to them throughout. This is why I love Doctor Who so much. It's effin' crazy absurd stupid wild farfetched unbelievable. BUT it sets up its rules and then it stays true to them. For example, the TARDIS can go anywhere in space and time, but driving it is like manhandling a runaway garbage truck. It doesn't stop on a dime. You have to know what you're doing and even then you are never going to hit the bullseye. That's fun! I can't recall The Doctor ever aiming for Tuesday at 7:20am on the nose and making it. Driving the TARDIS is far more... poetic.

There were things about the Kuzuis BtVS movie where the script would set up a rule and then the visuals wouldn't hold true every time. I had issues for example with Buffy getting cramps every time vampires were near, cuz she didn't always get cramps at the right time, and sometimes she'd get cramps just cuz she was cramping. Not a very dependable device. What coulda been a great running gag ended up being treated like a throwaway gag that then stuck to the movie's shoe like toilet paper as it walked out of the public restroom. Another example, the plans of the bad guys were kinda vague and 'as necessary to the plot'-y. Very lame. I could go on but the movie wasn't good enough to deserve dissection - it simply doesn't hold up under scrutiny like the TV show does - why? CUZ the TV show sticks to its own set of rules.

Although you gotta admit, Reubens' death scene? Classic!

Technically, I've had two Buffys. I'm old enough to remember two of them. I may live long enough to see three. I've yet to claim one as my own. I am haunted by the scene at the start of season six where Willow stands atop a mausoleum, telepathically giving orders to the other Scoobies and corralling the vampires into a planned attack as if they were rats in a maze. I guess Willow, Xander, and Giles are my Slayers, in a sense. Gellar didn't win me over, but the other actors did. I'd be happy if we had WILLOW THE SERIES thank you very much. or RIPPER THE SERIES or XANDER THE SERIES. Those windows of opportunity, had they ever been open, are now I fear closed for ever. Moments lost in time. Like tears in rain. Just remember. It's ALL connected. =)

ZachsMind | May 27, 03:29 CET

I think we kind of need to recognize that he has, perhaps more than many of us, moved on.

I really don't think that this is the case; no matter what people think about the Season Eight Comics; Joss seems to be very involved in them, and as most fans should know, Whedon and Scott Allie have already talked about Season Nine.

And this is not to start another 'canon discussion', but I remember Joss talking about not being into the non-canon stuff related to the franchises that he likes as a fan, so I don't think he likes the idea of them making a movie without him; especially not when it contradicts the established storyline.

Rosenberg | May 27, 03:37 CET

Yes, Joss is clearly involved with and interested in the comics. But, somehow I still get the impression that his enthusiasm for, say, doing a BTVS movie pales in comparison to the desire of some fans for him to do so.

Septimus | May 27, 03:45 CET

So are you saying that you wouldn't be happy to have Willow recast by another talented young lady? The fact that SMG didn't win you over makes your other post in the other thread make a lot more sense to me. :)

I wouldn't and won't pay a dime on a non Joss Buffy project. I don't care if everyone around thinks it's the next best thing ever. It's just wrong on so many levels to do this to Joss and to Buffy.

cheryl | May 27, 03:48 CET

One of our readers (AndrewCrossett) brought up the fact that the Kuzuis do *not* own the rights to Buffy. Everyone seems to assume this based on the poorly-researched article that started this whole thing. Fox owns all Buffy copyrights and trademarks, and they've been working with Joss on this franchise for 15 years, and still are now.

He was also ticked off that people are treating this movie as a done deal when, in fact, there's no way. I fully agree with him...this really does seem like a non-issue. When push comes to shove, Fox will simply not allow this.

BTW, you can look up all of Buffy's trademarks by searching for the word "Buffy" here (although I suppose there could be other fine print we don't know about):

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4007:c4fttj.2.7

[ edited by buffyfest on 2009-05-27 03:54 ]

buffyfest | May 27, 03:53 CET

How about Spike the series, without Spike I would not have watched the last 4 seasons of Buffy, never cared for SMG unless she was playing against David or James. They brought out the best in her.

rehabber | May 27, 03:54 CET

Is it cool yet?

The One True b!X | May 27, 03:55 CET

Yeah, 'Septimus', I get your point... His 'lack of interest' might also be related to the fact that unless they already had the discussion, he doesn't even know, if he should expect the entire cast to return and it might be really hard to recreate the magic.

If he was so make a movie, I think he would do his best not to let fans down, and there will always be a lot of uncertainties. If he had any current plans we would presumably not here anything, unless he had all or at least most things in place.

[ edited by Rosenberg on 2009-05-27 03:57 ]

[ edited by Rosenberg on 2009-05-27 03:59 ]

Rosenberg | May 27, 03:56 CET

Buffyfest...I pray that is true. Wouldn't you think Joss would have said as much...knowing how worked up we are?

cheryl | May 27, 04:02 CET

Well how much does Joss even know? I assume he knows more than us, but I only found out last night, and it seems to be in an extremely preliminary stage. Whatever we are hearing now could change completely in a few months time.

Giles_314 | May 27, 04:15 CET

i also think part of the reason why joss responded in this fashion was not to put himself out of the running. in commentaries and other interviews, they've already acknowledged the fact that the movie wasn't great, but he wouldn't blame anybody directly. if he trashed them when it was still possible for him to be involved, wouldn't that be the wrong move?

fav | May 27, 04:26 CET

Buffyfest, that does make you wonder why Fox have not slapped this down already.
I think I can assume that if I were to announce I was going to make a Batman movie I would have lawyers at my door within hours.

Are you saying that Fox, the Fox that will take action against websites that have a few Buffy screencaps, read this announcement and just thought "Nah, It'll blow over" and done nothing?

It is a fact that different rights can be held by different people for one property. Just as the James Bond producers owned the rights to James Bond, except Thunderball which belonged to someone else. That is a fact and that happened.
If this person is stating for a fact that the Kuzui's sold the movie rights to Fox then how does he know that?

Because if DC sell the rights to make a Superman movie to a studio then that studio has the right to make a movie. No matter that DC still own the copyrights, they no longer own the movie rights rights, for the life of that deal.

I am speculating, but based on standard contracts that are common and on what we are seeing happen (or not happen with Fox's lawyers) today.

How does that person know that Fox own the movie rights?

Because it looks like he's just speculating like the rest of us.

zz9 | May 27, 04:26 CET

I agree with zz9. And, I'd go even further and say that it's unlikely that anyone would announce plans to produce a movie and state that they had the rights to do so when they actually do not. Plus, it's also possible for both the Kuzuis AND Fox to have movie rights to Buffy; it all depends on the license the Kuzui's granted to Fox (and, for that matter, the license that Joss granted to the Kuzuis).

(Buffyfest what you linked to was a trademark search. There are, obviously, Buffy TMs owned by FOX - most of the ones on the search seem to be for the Drippy Buffy-font title - but this is a question primarily about copyrights, not trademarks. All evidence seems to indicate that the Kuzuis own at least some form of copyright in Buffy.)

Septimus | May 27, 04:40 CET

Those trademarks look like they're just for merchandise, which isn't the issue here. http://cocatalog.loc.gov/ shows the Kuzuis share ownership of the original film; I have no idea what it means for any future films.

hacksaway | May 27, 04:45 CET

I agree Septimus, and the fact that they have a third party, established, company like Vertigo on board is more evidence that they do own rights to do what they are trying to do.
Because the very first thing any producer would do is make sure they own the rights. You really do have to assume that they have seen the actual contract and satisfied themselves they are getting into bed with the right people.

This isn't some two-bit wannabe producer from nowhere. These are serious people well used to dealing with movie rights.

zz9 | May 27, 04:57 CET

These people are unfreaking believable. It's so undeniably ludicrous that I don't know if we should laugh hysterically or cry.

cheryl | May 27, 05:15 CET

This probably won't win me any friends here but if Joss is okay with this, then so am I. I'd even pay to go see it.

Squishy | May 27, 05:15 CET

Depressing. I already said it but no Whedon, no Sarah, no thanks. I guess everything in the end has to get ruined eventually, it was only a matter of time. If this does happen of course.

GhostsWatcher | May 27, 05:21 CET

Cheryl: "So are you saying that you wouldn't be happy to have Willow recast by another talented young lady?"

Not at all! I'd love to see another actress' take on Willow. I'd love to see a whole new cast! It'd be great! Alyson Hannigan has moved on and is very successful on another show. No reason for her to walk backward. As I said, if there ever was an opportunity for those spinoffs, that time has passed.

I haven't played the video games myself but I understand another actress did the voice over for Buffy in Chaos Bleeds. The other performers reprised their roles but Gellar didn't participate, and the end result was not adversely affected by her absence. I've heard some of the audio and can't tell a difference myself.

Now, if Joss Whedon doesn't want to do a BtVS show of any sort without SMG by his side, I'd fully support his decision. I'm just saying that actors are simply more interchangeable than creators of a series.

Kuzuis may do the reboot, but the odds of its success are not good, and it's far too risky a financial option. They think lightning will strike again, after seeing what Abrams did to Star Trek. It won't.

If I were a gambling man (and i'm not but if i were) I'd say this idea will die on the vine. It'll wallow in development hell for years, further frustrating all Whedon fans who have been down this road countless times before. From our perspective it's a no brainer. Hollywood just can't get it right. But again, I hope I'm wrong. For their sake and not ours, "I hope it's cool."

ZachsMind | May 27, 05:21 CET

I'm wondering whether I'm missing everybody's point here? What are we going to loose by this happening? We being Joss' fan base and people who love Buffy in all it's present incarnations.

OK it's likely to suck - or just maybe it could be good. (OK probably it will suck.)

Worst case scenario it's bad and bombs and they don't make another one - or they don't make another season of the TV show - or the animated Buffy doesn't happen - or Ripper never gets off the ground. In fact it would be no different to now. We have comics, the DVDs and we're not really honestly likely to get anything else.

But on the bright side maybe people will like it and the Buffy / Angel DVDs will sell more. Maybe a whole new generation will discover Buffy and Angel, and Joss' work and popularity will increase. Maybe more people would watch Dollhouse, Cabin in the Woods and what ever comes next. Maybe we'll just get more Joss.

There doesn't seem to be a Buffy related downside, but there seems to be a potential wider Whedonverse upside.

merceroz | May 27, 05:26 CET

You got that right ZM, for every hundred movies that are "Announced" maybe five actually get made.

zz9 | May 27, 05:26 CET

Is it cool yet?

The One True b!X | May 27, 05:26 CET

This probably won't win me any friends here but if Joss is okay with this, then so am I. I'd even pay to go see it.

I seriously doubt Joss is "ok" with this considering what he's said about the Kazuis in the past. Buffy is his baby, and I just don't see him being perfectly fine with someone else doing a Buffy project without his consent or any input from him at all. He probably realizes that there's nothing he can really do to stop it so all he can is shrug his shoulders and say he hopes it turns out well.

As I said in my previous post, it comes down to who is actually making this. If a competent writer and director came aboard, someone who could truly bring a fresh perspective, then I might be more open to it. But if the Kazuis make it themselves, with Fran directing, I don't see how that could turn out any better than the original film they already botched. If that's the case, no way would I pay to see it.

[ edited by SteveJ2008 on 2009-05-27 05:28 ]

SteveJ2008 | May 27, 05:27 CET

Neither SMG nor Alyson did Chaos Bleeds and both replacements sounded terrible, IMO.

hacksaway | May 27, 05:43 CET

I think to assume Joss is "ok" with this is about as naive as believing him when he said that redoing the pilot of Dollhouse was his idea. He has to say things like this. They own the rights to his baby. Him saying "I hope it's cool," does NOT make what they are doing ok, IMO. They are tarnishing a brand name that means a lot to people, with no respect for those fans or for Joss - all in the name of making money off it. It's the worst kind of vampirism, and I, for the life of me, can't imagine why anyone in this fandom would be ok with it. But that's just me. Maybe we should split off into Whedonesque and Kazuiesque?

ShanshuBugaboo | May 27, 06:20 CET

Maybe we should split off into Whedonesque and Kazuiesque?

Oy.

The One True b!X | May 27, 06:22 CET

Kazuiesque? Why do people keep spelling that with an 'a'?

cabri | May 27, 06:35 CET

Possibly for the same reason people keep writing "effect" when they mean "affect," "its" instead of "it's," and so on. But so long as we don't get into "who's a real fan" territory, it's cool. Oh wait . . .

SoddingNancyTribe | May 27, 06:46 CET

I'm a real fan of SoddingNancyTribe. Are you?

The One True b!X | May 27, 06:47 CET

Sigh. My fanbase has diminished in proportion to my productivity here, b!x. Perhaps if I posted something controversial? ;-)

SoddingNancyTribe | May 27, 06:50 CET

Sorry, I spelled their names wrong. I certainly know "it's" from "its" though. Had a hellish bad day and this doesn't make it better. Best for me to step away from the internet, methinks.

ShanshuBugaboo | May 27, 06:54 CET

Why do people keep spelling that with an 'a'?

Kuzui we can.

p.s. nice to see thing have settled down a bit.

Simon | May 27, 07:25 CET

Just got back from a WGA event (where I didn't think anything Whedon related was going to happen) and they asked about the Buffy reboot - here's what the script writers for the new Star Trek movie had to say.

BrownCoat_Tabz | May 27, 07:26 CET

I'd say Joss's extensive remark actuallay could be interpreted as: It's beond my control, so I wont waste much of my time fretting about it. Hopefully they'll do something good with it. Or something like that :/

Satai (with Punsch) | May 27, 07:28 CET

Great comment.

And look, guys, there is good here. The person who had this idea is obviously not working in a nuclear power plant, is not a brain surgeon or in charge of large, heavy machinery. He's found a job where his, uh, talents are put to a use that is, if not good, then at least not dangerous to life and limb. He could be installing the brakes on cars instead, or packing parachutes, or unloading oil tankers. Be grateful!

[ edited by scotws on 2009-05-27 11:00 ]

scotws | May 27, 08:12 CET

Hmmm, away from a computer for a while and the whole world goes bananoos. Haven't read all the comments yet but put me down as surprised and confused - surfused perhaps...

onthedrift | May 27, 08:14 CET

"surfused perhaps... "

Whedonesque realy expands my English vocabulary. Amazing place, both educational and fun ;)

Satai (with Punsch) | May 27, 08:42 CET

I wonder if the Kuzuis approached Whedon already. Maybe he told them to go ahead but not to put his name on it, as they probably weren't offering him creative control. They could have then decided to spin things their way, claiming they hadn't talked to him at all, giving him the opportunity to change his mind.

He may not have the ability to veto the whole project, or he may not want to act ungratefully towards the people who helped him get Buffy off the ground in the first place.

Roy Lee's quotes in Variety suggest to me a very business-oriented approach without much passion or understanding for the underlying "franchise" he wants to reboot. I think the best thing would be to let this die as quietly as possible - the less publicity, the better. (But maybe it's already too late for that approach.)

Sorry if anyone's already speculated along these lines - it's late and I've been skimming.

zoinkers | May 27, 09:34 CET

Is it just me, or did the article really say that Joss is the worst idea in the history of creation? Bit harsh; I kinda like the guy.

Response is a good example of less is more, and how to keep us fans guessing. Anyway, he's busy, which must be good.

MutantFriend | May 27, 09:49 CET

Nice answer, Joss!

A Buffy movie without Joss (God, that was painful to type!) will be crap. I'm thinking Joss can say 'I hope it's cool', because he knows it won't be. Without him, it won't be.

Cool guy.

I'm still hoping that all this will turn out to be some sort of joke, though.

Shep | May 27, 11:50 CET

I actually liked the movie.

zaphod | May 27, 19:18 CET

I actually liked the movie.

So did Pauline Kael, or whoever was the New Yorker's movie critic at the time.

janef | May 27, 20:48 CET

Re: The trademark discussion, yes I certainly have no clue how this thing works and I do agree that SOMEONE (anyone, please???) would have knocked this trademark/copyright discussion off the shelf by now if it wasn't true. Then again, to quote Bitsy, things "come out in the wash" sometimes. Still hoping it's a case of that.

buffyfest | May 27, 21:25 CET

May 26 2009