Ugh...don't even give this fake crap the light of day. Blah. It says "Josh Whedon" at the top, they have no validity.

Gage | March 05, 00:21 CET

It's pretty clear the site just promotes different actors (hence the link to more pictures). They did something similar with a Wonder Woman thing a few weeks ago.

Biff Turkle | March 05, 00:35 CET

Yeah, this would be the first that I heard that Joss didn't create Buffy and if it had any truth to it I think we would've heard about it a long time ago - especially with the success of the series, it's spin-off and all the merchandising. Someone would've been suing for the rights to the name "Buffy Summers" or "Buffy the Vampire Slayer". Seems like a bunch of bullsh*t to me.

Firefly Flanatic | March 05, 00:44 CET

"They wanted something 'Whedonesque' but didn't really give me any details about what the project was."

That's almost evil, invoking this site even if it was only indirectly. Man, I wish I could take back my hit on that page. Curiosity got the better of me, and now I feel all dirty.

Wiseblood | March 05, 00:46 CET

Its probably true that the kuzui's got some sort of rights over the Buffy character but I doubt the rest of this is true.

And Joss did come up with the concept, the original concept involved some sort of..super waitress? He talks about it in the buffy biography A&E special on the bufy season 6 DVD.

[ edited by eddy on 2005-03-05 08:01 ]

eddy | March 05, 01:00 CET

OK, I don't believe a word of this. Joss's story has always been consistent and straightforward: he came up with the idea of a young petite blonde girl who would go down the alley with the bad guy and end up kicking butt. Whether he came up with the name Buffy Summers - and I've never heard otherwise until this piece - is not the point; he *created* "Buffy" in every respect that matters.

And Joss got the BtVS movie as a "write-for-hire job"!? Goes against everything I've ever read or heard about the genesis of the project. JW has talked at length in numerous interviews about his early writing and the creation of Buffy. And now suddenly we're supposed to trust the word of an unnamed Sony exec? Give me a gorram break . . .

And the frozen Buffy concept? Buffy Summers in the 25th Century? Uh-huh . . .

SoddingNancyTribe | March 05, 01:09 CET

I'm waiting for the bloodlust to die down...I can't believe this! I mean it had better be false. A new buffy series F**k no!! I mean the idea is slightly interesting...but maybe for a 15 min short or crappy direct 2 vid movie...but nothing more. This is outrageous!! I dont wanna see "Buffy 2525" where unfrozen Buffy(Please how many times has this frozen and thawed out in the future crap been used? I mean I really don't wanna see "Cleopatra 2525" all over again, with cleopatra's name changed 2 Buffy...remember that horrible space show starring Gina Torres?) fight futuristic deomns/vamps/aliens and whatnot. Now if they wanna go and make there own little "male slayer" thing...then go ahead...just ake sure to keep it as far from the buffy we know and closer to that crappy(but somewhat funny) movie buffy. This whole concept in general angers me. Why don't they "pull a Fray" and make there own slayer series, thats losely connected to the Buffyverse...and then when it fails we can all laugh. Hey I have an idea...Buffy and Angel are transported onto Mals ship, and they together have to work to stop some demonic cult on a space ship...huh? Could be fun to watch. And back in our time buffy/angel freinds are working together to get them back and what not...now there one hell of a crossover.

Gio | March 05, 01:17 CET

Umm...wow.

Can I scream blasphemy? Bloody murder?

I feel very insulted just reading that!

Emma Frost | March 05, 01:18 CET

I so wish Joss would comment on this. Although, I'm sure it's not worth his time.

Willowy | March 05, 01:53 CET

Maybe ol' Joss can shed some light on this for us... Though, I really think we all know the truth already. ;)

Daburcor | March 05, 01:56 CET

What a sad and pathetic pack of crap!

And I would have been concerned had I not remembered that the same sorry pack of wankers had some WW page up a few weeks ago (promoting some unknown actress) doing essentially the same thing - trying to start some story off in the hope some big site will pick it up and then give it momentum (which happened to some small extent with the WW one).

This one however is so stupid that no-one should be fooled!

catalyst2 | March 05, 02:00 CET

That is such bull crap! What a stupid premise! I would love to see a new Buffy series, but with Joss behind the wheel. The only thing that wasn't Joss that came close was this virtual season eight.

BufSlyAngel | March 05, 02:58 CET

Why would Sony have anything to do with the project? It'd be like Nintendo taking over development of Halo 3 because the story wasn't originally Bungie's.

The Dark Shape | March 05, 04:12 CET

WTF?!

I'm hyperventilating with anger and frustration right now. If I didn't need a monitor I would have punched my hand through the screen. That is one of the most upsetting things I've seen in a long time.

Okay, really not that angry (or upset)... Just perplexed by the idea of such a lame publicity stunt.

[ edited by ShadowKatie on 2005-03-05 12:08 ]

ShadowKatie | March 05, 04:17 CET

Before people get completely carried away, this is a cheap way to get some publicity. Once I've had a cig I'll explain the whole process.

Simon | March 05, 04:37 CET

Bottom line, this holds about as much truth as the average Party Political Broadcast. Let's not let it ruin our day, we all know the real story anyway, forget about it.

The Arcane | March 05, 04:55 CET

A Buffy show without Whedon, without Willow or Giles or Xander or Spike or Angel etc. Right.

This's the stupidest "commercial" idea ever. I can't help but laugh. ShadowKatie I'm sure, it's a fake report to get publicity like Simon said.

pelinxf | March 05, 04:56 CET

One Malboro Light later.

Anyhow, what's mentioned in this article is drivel and not very good drivel at that. The whole purpose behind this article is to get publicity for Richard O'Sullivan. Those with long memories will remember about the "script" for Angel season 5 episode 1 that appeared at AICN. It was leaked in such a way so he could get maximum publicity.

This Buffy article will get picked up by webmasters and journalists who lurk here and so there will be a couple of days of "New non-Whedon Buffy series?" headlines at the usual sites. Which in turn will cause more consternation among Buffy fans.

Cast your mind back to this Wonder Woman article that came from the same site. It got mentioned at Whedonesque, moviehole.net picked it up as a result and so in turn did other sites. And of course, there was no truth in the article.

Quite frankly this Buffy article is a disgrace and a highly cynical attempt to get noticed. The best thing to happen would be for this article not to get mentioned anywhere else.

Simon | March 05, 05:00 CET

Couldn't agree more, Simon. This sort of thing is why i don't spend any time at other, how can i say this politely, less thoughtful posting boards anymore.

As you have said, this will most likely spread like wild fire throughout the Buffy fan community and eventually be treated as truth, that is just the way things work on the net. Rumours and lies about the cast and crew of television series get repeated on the net so often that they become urban myths of the world wide web.

I can certainly appreciate why Saturn Girl posted this here but the best thing to do would be delete the story from Whedonesque before any other source is able to use the site to help validate the story, however it is probably already too late for that.

Maybe a "bullshit" disclaimer added to the original post might help?

The Arcane | March 05, 05:13 CET

Complete hog wash.

Madhatter | March 05, 05:34 CET

Oh lord, this is so obviously a fake story that it's not even funny. Whether it's a creation of the authors themselves, or if it's directly from some unscrupulous, lying executive, the rumors are ridiculous. The Kuzuis likely do have some controlling interest in the Buffy franchise, since they were not only involved with the movie, but with the ensuing series, but that's as far as it goes. This concept for a supposedly new series would never fly. And if this had any actual basis in the truth, the story would have leaked ages ago, without a doubt. I'm more annoyed than angry with this article. We and Joss know the truth.

ariana75 | March 05, 05:44 CET

Nearly the dumbest thing I have ever heard (read). I can't believe I am commenting on this.

Spikecam21 | March 05, 06:23 CET

While it's obviously fake, it's annoying because some places will pick it up as fact.

Ghost Spike | March 05, 06:50 CET

Can you give it a humour tag?

giles (yes, it is my real name) | March 05, 07:07 CET

That's horrible to say he didn't create Buffy when he did.

charisma | March 05, 07:45 CET

After reading all your comments I won't dignify this site with a hit!

Passion | March 05, 07:58 CET

Whoa. This thing reads like gibberish of the highest order. I think a chain-whipping is in order for everyone involved. I get dibs on any culprits in Missouri.

Ocular | March 05, 08:48 CET

From Wikipedia: "Disinformation is the spreading of deliberately false information to mislead an enemy as to one's position or course of action. It also includes the distortion of true information in such a way as to render it useless."

Robert Anton Wilson of the Illuminatus Trilogy has mentioned before in a radio interview I can't find readily at my fingertips something about this. He was talking about conspiracy theories and how sometimes one lie is created to create a smokescreen that hides something else entirely. It's a fascinating concept actually, and what the tv series X-Files was based upon: at least in early seasons. Are there aliens or is it a government coverup? Chris Carter's eventual answer to that in the context of his series was "yes." To both. However, the early exploration of maybe/maybe not was more fascinating than the actual answer.

Personally I think it's plausible that the recent 'breakup' of Anniston and Pitt was to create publicity for the Pitt/Jolie film that came out around that time. Was Anniston really jealous of Jolie and Pitt spending so much time together during and after that film's production? Maybe she was. Maybe she was pretending for the paparazzi. Maybe the producers of the Jolie/Pitt film leaked out lies about arguments the actors were having behind closed doors, to make people think something was happening that really wasn't. Maybe it was all true, and the movie's producers had nothing to do with it. I'm too pessimistic to believe that last one, but the point is we don't know and we may never, and does that matter? Do we really have to know the objective truth about everything? Is it really our business to know the minds of actors off screen? We MAKE it our business often, but if they're able to occasionally pull the wool over our eyes, my hat's off to'em.

I'd probably invent lies about myself all the time if I were famous. It'd be like a hobby. =) This sorta crap happens every day in trash publications like the National Enquirer or the New York Post. Then the media wonders why the public doesn't trust them anymore. It's nothing new though. William Randolph Hearst made a career out of it in his publications. It's why Orson Welles went after him in the film Citizen Kane. No one should have the power to effect subjective reality on such a grand scale.

James Randi has made a career out of debunking such attempts to affect subjective reality, choosing to use logic and science to demean any attempts by others to take advantage of the populous' ignorance. In our own much smaller way, we here at Whedonesque are doing the same thing to any and all stories regarding our favorite writer and the many talented people he's worked with over the years.

In this case though, it's harmless because it's so transparent. Worse laid transparencies have done far more damage though in the past. Ironically, if Joss Whedon came forward and denounced these ridiculous claims, he'd inadvertently help to legitimize that the concerns deserved discrediting. This thread's primary link is a snowball. Left unchecked it could turn into an avalanche, and that sort of thing happens all the time. Eternal vigilance is the key. =)

ZachsMind | March 05, 10:40 CET

I'm so not reading this article. As Roadrunner would say to Wile E. Coyote . . . bled-ldl-ldl-lup . . .

[ edited by Drifter on 2005-03-05 17:55 ]

Drifter | March 05, 10:55 CET

ZachsMind, are you saying you think Anniston and Pitt might have broken up simply to create publicity for a film, or that the producers seized on the timing of the break-up to afford themselves some additional publicity for their product? You seem to be suggesting the former, which I just find very hard to believe. The latter, although very cynical, is easier to imagine.

Maybe I need to cultivate a more cynical outlook, but it does seem to me that sometimes these people can't break wind without having us scurrying away in search of a hidden agenda.

alien lanes | March 05, 11:34 CET

oh woe, the article was found and posted at fireflyfans.com
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=9&t=9057&m=122186#122186
I hope you don't mind Simon, I quoted your explaination.
I felt it was important to get the truth out there since the lie already was....
sigh

[ edited by embers on 2005-03-05 18:42 ]

embers | March 05, 11:40 CET

Ah quote away embers, at best this'll be a two day wonder and then we'll all forget about it. Though in future, I'll discourage delete links from Lost Colony. Goebbels said "The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed". Let's hope in this case, the Buffyverse fandom will see this article for what it is and not be taken in.

Simon | March 05, 12:00 CET

Loved BtVS, but in seasons two, three and five, I loved Angel a little bit more - and what about Firefly? Loved Buffy Summers, but loved Willow, Anya and Spike a little bit more and Xander, Giles, Tara and Dawn just as much. I'd watch a sequel with almost any combinaton of characters, but with Buffy alone? Without Joss!? Bottom line: that article could be entirely true. The Kuzuis could own the Buffy Summers name - and have exactly nothing as far as I'm concerned. It was the character and the characters of the 'verse I loved, not some concept of a blond girl.

cmbackshane | March 05, 12:16 CET

What a joke.

Angel TheVampire | March 05, 13:09 CET

I still don't underderstand why anyone would write an article like this other than as an April Fool's joke.

Needless to say, I hope Richard O'Sullivan's career never gets off the ground. He seems to have very few ethics.

Invisible Green | March 05, 14:00 CET

Also? The concept of a blonde girl kicking butt can't be copyrighted. If I invented Suzie the Demon Hunter right this second, had her be a perky blonde teenager by day and axe-swining busty ninja by night, and even had her played by SMG? There is no infringement. So even if it wasn't Joss's sandbox originally (which I am sure it is), the sand castle is most certainly his.

Daromaius | March 05, 14:45 CET

Even though this article is complete bullshit, I sort of liked the idea of Buffy being frozen in time and then waking up in a 100 years. It seems a little bit interesting for me to find out what they would do with her character if that ever happened. Either way it would belong in a novel or a comic mini series, but never a movie or show. Sarah is the only Buffy and that's that.

SpikeBad | March 05, 14:48 CET

Well, if I had read this at any point before today I would considered it to be bull.
BUT today I watched the commentary for "Not Fade Away". And during the ending credits Jeffrey Bell mentions something about producers that FOX forbid him to mention. Looking through the credits list I realized that the only possible candidates for that statement is Fran Rubel Kuzui and Kaz Kuzui. They have never been mentioned at any point during the series or on any of the commentaries. So I begin thinking why that is...
Now I read this article. And after hearing the Jeffrey Bell commentary I actually believe this is all true. That could explain why FOX don't want the Kuzui's mentioned at all, nor do Joss I believe.
Finally, the thought of making anything Slayerverse related without Joss Whedon stearing the ship sounds like absolute lunacy. Seriously, who honestly believes that the fans of Buffy would support something like that. And placing it 90 years into the future and never even MENTION Willow, Xander, Angel, Dawn etc, that would probably eventually alienate the handful of fans that actually tuned in. This idea is completely farfetched and should be buried somewhere quickly.

Djungelurban | March 05, 14:51 CET

The problem with things like this is that once they're out there they're out there for good. I guarantee that in five years someone will still say "Actually Joss Whedon didn't create Buffy, he was just hired to write it" and the fantastic thing is that after I beat them to death with their own leg it would actually be ME that would end up in court!

Check IMDB. I know they're not the most accurate thing ever but anyway. They credit Joss with "Written By". See IMDB for their explanation of story credit as decided by the WGA. This is VERY important, it makes a vast difference in money, royalties, rights etc. If you're given credit by the WGA then it's yours. If somone else came up with the idea they get 'Story' credit and you get 'Screenplay' credit. And NO produce would ever give away such a credit to a writer-for-hire.
See here for Gladiator or Alien Resurection where they seperate the script and the character creation for example.

And if someone else really owned the character then would they really have sat around for eight years and let Joss get all the glory AND establish 'ownership' of such a valuable franchise? These rights have to be protected otherwise you lose them. You wouldn't wait eight years and then sorta do something half heartedly....

[ edited by zz9 on 2005-03-05 22:02 ]

zz9 | March 05, 14:56 CET

I do wonder, however, exactly what did go on with the Kuzuis. The fact that it there's a good chance it was them that Jeffrey Bell wasn't supposed to discuss doesn't really mean anything specific -- except that, I'm guessing, there's some kind of agreement that resulted in them getting a screen credit on every episode of the series and probably some kind of gag order.

Appropos of very little, has anyone else here seen Fran Rebel Kuzui's autobiographical debut film, "Tokyo Pop", which I guess is supposed to be the story of how Fran Rubel and Kaz Kazui got together. Pretty slight stuff, but, as I remember, better than the BtVs movie.

bobster | March 05, 15:13 CET

Zachsmind, the Pitt/Jolie movie doesn't come out until July.

eddy | March 05, 15:24 CET

For what it's worth, here's a link to an interview with Fran Rubel Kuzui, conducted at the time she was directing the 'Buffy' movie.

http://members.aol.com/morgands1/closeup/text/kuzui.htm

She says, "... Buffy was a film that I owned", although she doesn't take credit for creating the character. In another passage in the interview she says, "That all happened two months before I found Buffy."

I don't know if this is of any interest, or of any help, but since Fran Rubel Kuzui and Kaz Kazui have been mentioned I thought I would pass on the information.

alien lanes | March 05, 15:50 CET

About the Kuzuis, there's something I can add: In the recent Angel-essay book, Dan Kerns, a set crew member on Angel from day one (became gaffer) says:

"At least 2 of the executive producers have never seen the set of Angel. A business deal signed at the outset of Buffy the Vampire Slayer feature film gave those a financial stake in all things 'Buffy. They've received credit and sizable checks for the duration of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel for doing absolutely nothing.(Names furnished upon request)"

He's obviously talking about the Kuzuis here, and though he can't mention them by name, he makes no attempt to hide that it's them. I don't clearly remember but I've read similiar things for years. They worked themselves in at the beginning, and despite them royally screwing up the movie, they've been making money off Joss' babies for years now. They've never been involved since, and have never once contested the fact that Joss created the entire concept of Buffy. If this article had even a grain of truth, why wouldn't the Kuzuis have screamed bloody murder when a guy who was just a 'writer for hire' on the movie went off and did a Buffy show without them? Or at the million times when Joss explained how he came up with Buffy??

(It's actually funny when you look at Joss' work and then at the Buffy movie that it's obvious the Kuzuis didn't come up with the core concept, because they don't GET the actual core concept of the 'girl in the alley'. That's why the movie was so bad!)

No, like Simon explained, this site excels in cheap publicity stunts that do nothing but stir up dust that will hopefully get name recognition for people like this. The most shameless site I've ever seen in that regard I might add.

The Kuzuis should be on their knees daily thanking any possible Powers that Be that they managed to get a good contract up in the beginning for them, so that they could continue to get loads of cash from something that they initially as good as destroyed and then (thankfully) never worked on again.

(PS thanks dashboardprophet, that's one of those things I remember reading, but didn't know where.)

[ edited by EdDantes on 2005-03-05 22:57 ]

EdDantes | March 05, 15:55 CET

That's why the movie was so bad!

I am not trying to give the Kuzuis any credit here, but I rather like the film. I always thought Kristy Swanson was pretty good in the title role, and once we got to see how 'Buffy' should be done, it became easy to spot the bits of Joss Whedon's script that made it through intact.

We all know that Joss is responsible for 'Buffy', and any claim to the contrary is, frankly, bollocks. This nonsense will blow over soon enough.

alien lanes | March 05, 16:06 CET

I don't think from what I had heard previously that the Kuzui's had created Buffy, but a few years ago I met a Dutch guy who had interviewed Fran Rubel Kuzui and they said that she insisted that they still owned Buffy and that they intended to make a movie true to THEIR vision of the Buffy franchise they envisioned. The guy told me that she still believed in her vision of Buffy. She felt that the movie had been the right way to go with the character (how misguided?).

It sounds like something from that interview has surfaced and been rehashed to allow someone somewhere to ride on Joss's coat tails and think about a whole "new" version of our beloved slayer but I think I speak for all fans when I say we would boycott any Buffy work that did not have the blessing of Joss.

fade2dust | March 05, 17:09 CET

I used the Pitt/Jolie/Anniston thing as an example. I could care less if the movie's already out or will be in six months. Was it intentional or accidental? Who knows? Producers and publicists wouldn't care. It could have been invented, blown out of proportion or the whole thing coulda been true and people around them leaked it out to fuel the fire. The point is they got in the papers. We'll never know the actual truth, predominantly because those reporting this kinda crap don't care about truth. They want sensationalism so they can sell papers. Why anybody buys the damn things in the first place I have no idea. Guess most people aren't interested in truth either.

For all we know this Kuzui thing really is true and the real reason why Whedon isn't doing television anymore is because the Kuzuis influential friends who got him blackballed. I doubt it, but see? That possibility is now filtering in your brain and looking at other things in your brain to verify its validity. Some will dismiss it. You might be one of them. Others out there won't dismiss it and might even find legitimacy in their own subjective reality. That's how disinformation works.

Read through this thread again. The ones who are looking for validation in this? That's a microcosm of how the media world works, and by proxy the populous at large. It's how Roswell New Mexico became UFO capital of the world. Spooky, eh?

ZachsMind | March 05, 17:33 CET

People are stupid.

NekoDono | March 05, 18:24 CET

Some more than others.

SpikeBad | March 05, 18:36 CET

I don't doubt, and don't have a problem in principle, with the Kuzui's getting royalties from the spin offs from "their" movie. If Joss wrote Buffy as a spec script (which I vaguely seem to remember reading) then maybe the Kuzui's were the only people interested in making it. If they hadn't then maybe it, and the TV series, may never have happened. If they saw the potential, bought the script and got it made then they deserve some props.
Remember Jack Nicholson got massive royalties from Batman II and he wasn't even in it! That was the deal he made.

It is standard practice in Hollywood for a writer to sell a spec script and thats it. The producer or the studio gets everything. Ownership, sequel rights, merchandising, creative control the lot. That's what they mean by "Buying" a script. It is VERY rare for someone to get a second chance and wrest back some creative control in the way Joss did.

Maybe the Kuzuis are assholes, maybe they're sweet nice people, who knows. There does seem to be some issues here but Joss seems to hold certain actors to blame for things that went wrong with Buffy. Reading that interview it looks like it could have been an inexperienced and overawed director not standing up to strong willed actors and insisting things were done their way.

But if they really do own the right to make a movie, or really think they do, then why havent they done it?

zz9 | March 05, 19:08 CET

Obviously the Kuzuis had a right to make a contract like that and most people in Hollywood probably do just in case something hits it big. In this case it did, even though it was no thanks to them. And obviously they saw something there they were willing to try when few or no others would. But really, wouldn't Joss actually had an even BETTER chance with the WB to make Buffy if the generally despised movie hadn't come out? I know myself and many others took years to give the show a chance just because we hated the movie.

That the Kuzuis still cling to their 'vision' is interesting, (and to me, rather deluded) but apart from it being perfectly legal for them to still reap the benefits from Joss, work I personally find it an ugly side to the busines. (Nickolson making millions off Batman II while doing no work for it is just another example for me)

Something that doesn't happen however is a script writer who is hired on a 'work for hire' basis and who is NOT the creator winding up owning most of the property and moving on with it. But then Fran Kuzui has already been quoted as saying she 'found' Buffy and has never once contested Joss' claims of being her creator before (And technically, still hasn't. This article doesn't quote her at all.)



Right. After 8 years of doing absolutely nothing to stop Joss and actually getting paid nicely as a result of his success. That makes sense.



Well any information that one reads is always filtered and tested on it's validity when compared to existing knowledge. And in this case this possibility is very easily discarded as drivel. And not because I'm a Joss fan and will "stand by him no matter what" or some nonsense like that, but because it doesn't gel with numerous facts of Buffy's history, the aspects of the business and the public statements of the people involved.

EdDantes | March 05, 20:23 CET

The concept sounds cool, but I agree that I'd rather have him at the helm too.

I wonder though how it would fit in with Fray...

Watcher's Pet | March 05, 20:46 CET

Quite sad that this is getting around, it's on slayerverse now. The whole thing is so clearly not true (the writer of a fanfic that got mistaken for an actual episode script being given a series, yeah, I'm sure that happens all the time).

And this guy so clearly doesn't get it, he had a male slayer in his Angel script, and now here it is again, by saying that that's what the second Buffy movie would have been about.



Because the movie was a failure, a flop. The only guaranteed audience for a Buffy movie are the fans of the show, and they know that if we found out that the movie was going to be a sequel to a movie that even the biggest fans (for the most part) of the TV series don't like, we wouldn't be best pleased, and we'd do our best to let people know that it wasn't a movie of an excellent TV series, but a sequel to a poor movie. It just doesn't make sense to make a movie that would mostly appeal to a very loyal fanbase, that would continue from a 90 minute movie, rather than 8 years of plot and character development.

[ edited by Ghost Spike on 2005-03-06 04:03 ]

Ghost Spike | March 05, 20:52 CET

Buffy.nu listed it earlier today too. I went back to see if anyone has commented to see if people were believing this and it was nice to see that they added at the top of the article that it's a hoax. I hope the other websites that are showing this do the same.

Firefly Flanatic | March 05, 22:40 CET

SpikeBad - there's an excellent fanfiction story called Phoenix Burning that features Buffy waking up 350 years in the future.

Airawyn | March 06, 00:13 CET

Personally, I read this article a couple days ago and discounted it after the first couple of paragraphs were it came up with the nonsense that Joss didn't create the character of Buffy. Any true fan of Buffy knows this to be bull. And the idea of a Buffy series/movie without Joss' involvement is even worse and wouldn't get the time of day from the majority of Buffy fans.

Cider | March 06, 10:26 CET

Uh...there is a strategic possibility that there could be something to this. I got to tell you this is a writers nightmare scenario. You create a project, write a project...but in order to get it made...you sell the project. A writer works for hire or sells the script completly to the producers of the film. The producers require this so they can have the felxibility to make changes. It is essential in making a film.

That's why you hear writers howl so often about what happens to their projects post facto...they have no control. If Joss retained exclusive rights, I would be very surprised. A lot of writers become directors so the vision can be maintained and copyright retained.

If he negotiated for the rights for the TV show why wouldn't the Kuzuis say yes? The key is...did he obtain exclusive rights to Buffy The Vampire Slayer when he proposed the TV show. Or did he obtain PERMISSION? That's the difference. And why wouldn't the Kuzuis say yes? If they didn't sell--it wouldn't infringe on their copyright and it would mean more money in their pockets.

And a project could be coming forward now because they recognize the timing. There is a Buffy void and while Joss is busy doing other things and the market still seems keen for more stories, somebody might be seeing a Bonanza. And it seems they have put some thought into how to develop and progress the theme in a way that might appeal to the market.

The storyline they propose would move Buffy from old world view to new. From royal dynasty to tolerance and a self created world. From a feudal state to democracy...this is the hoped for progression in our world. Very, very interesting timing for an interesting premise.

I'm not saying this is real...but it is possible. If they stay away from all the characters created by Joss...I can see how this might not infringe on Mutant Enemy's copyright.

And if this is disinformation; somebody went to a lot of trouble. And remember disinformation is also a means to test the water for similiar projects. Hook into the vibe and get the public reaction from fans.

Joss may have created Buffy...but he may not hold exclusive rights.

It may not be real...but it is possible.

BforBeth | March 06, 10:35 CET

Well, the way i see it, whether they have the right to make their own version of Buffy or not is beside the point. How many of us here will even bother to watch it?

The truth is that anyone who likes the show already does so because they like Joss' version, characters, backstory, mythology and all, therefore they aren't going to care about another version just because it happens to have the same name. Those people that don't care about Buffy the Vampire Slayer already most likely aren't going to be into the new version either.

So i say, if this story has even the tiniest amount of truth about it and they do have the right to use the basic concept, let them do what they want. Let them waste their time, money and effort on creating this new version that nobody will want to watch. It won't effect our love of the one, true version now will it?

The Arcane | March 06, 12:06 CET

Is it Kazui or Kuzui? The lack of consistency in spelling makes the whole article look unprofessional.

Ilana | March 06, 12:35 CET

With all due respect, the fact that people are even acknowledging this with "maybe it could be just a little bit true"-type thoughts is exactly what Richard O'Sullivan was going for.

Per his "About Us" page:



This is nothing more than a "controversial" way for him to make waves. His victim of choice has been Joss Whedon and Joss's still loyal-fanbase. It started with the Wonder Woman stories, then he probably checked his referrer reports and realized he could make waves by continuing to focus on Joss.

Consider this thread. There's 58 posts here, and all the other sites that tend to follow Whedonesque's cue have picked up the story and there's multiple posts in those threads as well.

So, again, the mere fact that a handful of people are thinking, "Well, what if," has made this a success for O'Sullivan. I predict more fables from his site in the future.

[ edited by J.Monique on 2005-03-06 20:02 ]

J.Monique | March 06, 13:00 CET

I think that most of us here, certainly myself at least, are not so much believing that this actually is true, more along the lines that we wouldn't really care even if it was.

We all know who was the real creator of Buffy and the guy in question knows that we know. That is all that matters.

The Arcane | March 06, 14:43 CET

This guy wrote for a single sitcom in the late 80s, wrote and directed an unreleased comedy film (whose only recognisable actor is a porn star called Jasmine St. Clair), and now he's writing a DVD magazine series with that same porn star.

No wonder he's desperate for attention.

Going by how much info can be found on his IMDB biography page, as compared to how little work he's actually done, I'm thinking that he's probably updating it himself.

Gonnas | March 06, 15:04 CET

Richard O'Sullivan should consult his WGA MBA. even if these claims were true, Kaz Kuzai would have no right to the character of Buffy. She isn't a paid member of the WGA and thus barred from any creative rights, and you have to be a member. The WGA judge and enforce all credits and creative rights. Copyright is Fox's

Of course given O'Sullivan isn't currently member of the WGA either, one must wonder both how he could consult his WGA manual, and even more importantly what studio heard his pitch. Certainly it wasn't Fox, or anyone else that wished to employ a WGA writer in the future.

[ edited by Ocipital on 2005-03-06 22:09 ]

Ocipital | March 06, 15:08 CET

Don't want to give that piece any credit, but: I still wonder what the situation with the Buffy rights is these days. I think it's clear that Joss doesn't own Buffy, but sold the original movie script or even wrote it for hire for Fox. And obviously the Kuzuis have rights to Buffy, otherwise they wouldn't have got the exec producer credits on every ep of Buffy and Angel (Angel not even being a character from the original movie ...)

I know that he was approached by Fox to write for the series more as an act of courtesy, where he was expected to pass the offer to another writer. I don't think it was Joss pitching the Buffy series to the WB in the first place ...

So, instead of screaming and yelling how evil O'Sullivan is, it would certainly be of some help if the people in the know could try to shed some light on the Buffy copyright issues.

Who owns what and why and which roles play Fox, the WB, the Kuzuis, Sandollar, Joss, ME ...?

TIA, PTTP

[ edited by PowerToThePeople on 2005-03-07 00:48 ]

Udo Schmitz | March 06, 17:22 CET

Those of a delicate nature may not wish to see the update at the bottom of the linked page. It's gone from bad to perverse. I don't know how anyone can twist Joss ending his TV deal and shutting down Mutant Enemy to "Fox Television has completely divested itself from Mutant Enemy".

I'm beginning to wish I had deleted this thread in the first place. Ah well. More fool me.

Simon | March 06, 17:41 CET

When it comes to rights always assume The Studio owns them. Rights are gold mines. They're the thing that can be making millions decades down the line, in ways you never dreamed of. Studios, in return for risking millions of dollars on a project, would have to have a very, VERY, good reason to surrender any rights. The right to put Knight Rider stickers on lunch boxes in East Timor is worth money, an will generate income long after they Terraform Mars. (NASA that is, not a studio)

So my guess is a studio own the ultimate rights to Buffy Summers, Joss did a deal giving him creative control and the Kuzuis excercised some clause they had over sequels or spin offs and settled for a producer credit and some royalties in return for letting it happen.

Its always been known that the TV series was based on the "Original" movie script and not the changed version the Kuzuis, and some actors, ended up making. This would make it easier to say they do not owe them any credit or royalties. Had the Kuzuis created a character in the movie and Joss wanted to have that character on the show they would have had to pay for the right to use that character.

I have my doubts about the point of this sort of publicity for this writer/director/producer. He could fool millions of people in cyberspace but if he wants to get finance for movies it's what the studio suits think that matters, and they sure as hell wont fall for this crap. He's trying to impress the wrong people.

And Simon, as a respected, informed, website hopefully people will come here to check these things out. Better they see it and read the evidence instead of falling for it hook line and sinker.
Leave it up and rationialy debunk it.

Additionial: The one big movie project that they have completed, according to their website, stars "Brian Heffron (from "National Lampoon's Dorm Daze 2: Semester at Sea")." Didn't I see him at the Oscars? (No.)

[ edited by zz9 on 2005-03-07 00:58 ]

zz9 | March 06, 17:50 CET

Agreeing with zz9. It's much better that this was covered here at Whedonesque and that we have been able to, hopefully, show it as being the utter rubbish that it is rather than it only be covered at other sites that may not be quite as informed as the majority of us are here.

That recently added update on the linked article has only gone to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this guy is making it up as he goes along. Half truths distorted into his own version of reality, he should write for a British tabloid.

The Arcane | March 06, 18:11 CET

Rule of thumb, ANYONE who runs a website and posts "news" articles about himself written in the third person should never be trusted.

zz9 | March 06, 19:06 CET

Judging from the "breaking news" update, how much do you wanna bet that this guy reads this thread?

kylie | March 06, 21:00 CET

Here is an interesting question- who owns the rights to the characters? This is not so obvious. We all know that if you are going to write a Buffy novel, you must write it according to canon, or you cannot obbtain permission to write the novel. Therefore, someone holds those rights and it is undoubtedly not Joss Whedon; I believe it is the network that does. This then creates a very interesting dilemma is this 'verse is to move forward. Not only would Joss have to negotiate for the actors for, say, a Spike movie, he would also have to negotiate for the rights to use the characters he created. I do not think the Kazuis hold those rights, however. So this is quite messy, indeed, and it seems the disreputable person has played off that confusion, likely to stir the pot and see where the internet goes with this.

Which, btw, is how the government sometimes works. :-)

Dana5140 | March 06, 22:40 CET

Twentieth Century Fox film corporation owns all the rights. Any Buffy related merchandise you buy will have that on it somewhere.

Firefly Flanatic | March 06, 22:44 CET

I don't know why people are still discussing about this. Here are somethings:
1) The Buffy movie is worst than the worst thing in the word
2) Joss vision of the Buffy universe, with the characters, vampires, demons, relationships, more, more and more are way better, way cool, way... Joss than the movie
3) SMG did the Buffy as ED did Faith. They are a fact. That Swanson girl was just a stone in the way
4) Why don't do a slayer thing in the future like they did with batman or spiderman? They could talk about a famous slayer named Buffy and not put Buffy in there.
5) Ok... so Buffy will rise in a world were vampires and demons and humans get together. SO? Will we have a slayer who don't slay?!
6) Even if they have the rights to do a new Buffy, I don't think that they would do anything near the time that Joss used. It was the time that made people so fan of the whole series and Angel. The time to say the right joke (Xander) or the time to be the school girl (miss CC) or the right time to say "hi... I'm gone kiss you, but I have a little secret... I'm a vampire" (Angel) or be strong and kick some ass in the right time (Miss Buffy Anne Summers). All what each one of the characters did IS JOSS! They can't touch it!

Angeluffy | March 07, 01:04 CET