"Buffy" Movie Re-Launch - Without Joss Whedon

[RTGoodman]

So, I just saw this via Felicia Day's Twitter (http://twitter.com/feliciaday):


'Buffy' in for feature relaunch
Players meeting with writers for new take on the franchise

By Borys Kit

May 25, 2009, 11:00 PM ET

A new incarnation of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" could be coming to the big screen.

"Buffy" creator Joss Whedon isn't involved and it's not set up at a studio, but Roy Lee and Doug Davison of Vertigo Entertainment are working with original movie director Fran Rubel Kuzui and her husband, Kaz Kuzui, on what is being labeled a remake or relaunch, but not a sequel or prequel.

While Whedon is the person most associated with "Buffy," Kuzui and her Kuzui Enterprises have held onto the rights since the beginning, when she discovered the "Buffy" script from then-unknown Whedon. She developed the script while her husband put together the financing to make the 1992 movie, which was released by Fox.

Kuzui later teamed with Gail Berman, then president of Sandollar Television, bringing back Whedon to make the TV series, which was produced by Fox TV and launched on the WB in 1997. Kuzui and Sandollar received executive producer credits on "Buffy" and its spinoff, "Angel."

The new "Buffy" film, however, would have no connection to the TV series, nor would it use popular supporting characters like Angel, Willow, Xander or Spike. Vertigo and Kuzui are looking to restart the story line without trampling on the beloved existing universe created by Whedon, putting the parties in a similar situation faced by Paramount, J.J. Abrams and his crew when relaunching "Star Trek."

One of the underlying ideas of "Buffy" allows Vertigo and Kuzui to do just that: that each generation has its own vampire slayer to protect it. The goal would be to make a darker, event-sized movie that would, of course, have franchise potential.

The parties are meeting with writers and hearing takes, and later will look for a home for the project. The producers do not rule out Whedon's involvement but have not yet reached out to him.Speaking from Tokyo, Fran Kuzui said the company is constantly approached not only about sequels but theater, video games and foreign remakes for "Buffy." When Vertigo's Lee contacted them, they were intrigued.

"It was Roy's interest in taking Buffy into a new place that grabbed us," she said, noting that original exec producer Sandy Gallin also was consulted. "It was based on our respect for what he does, and his particular sensitivity to Asian filmmakers, that we wanted to work with him."

Kuzui, who is prepping do direct a movie in Japan in the fall, added: "Everything has its moment. Every movie takes on a life at some point, and this seems like the moment to do this."

Now, I'm not a HUGE "Buffy" fan (I've seen most of the episodes and enjoyed most of them, but I'm more of a Browncoat as far as Joss goes), but man... this seems like a TERRIBLE idea. Like I said when we discussed the "Three Stooges" remake a while back, why can't Hollywood just STOP with this kind of thing?

EDIT: Original article HERE (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i666afabc28491e6a5d5861d83ae30855), by the way.

[Blackjackg]

Oh, I don't know... I don't approve of leaving Joss Whedon out of the process, but I don't think a movie set in the Buffyverse circa AD 1200, or AD 1900, or even AD 2099 would cause any harm to the extant mythology, or indeed be any worse than any of the other fantasy-superhero-epics that are clogging our theaters these days.

[Hazkali]

I was a fairly big "posthumous" Buffy fan- I only got into it during the last season, and then worked my way through seasons 1-4 on VHS/DVD before other things took over.

Personally, I don't think it would survive the transition. To be frank, as much as I loved it, there are gaping holes in the background and mythos, and the idea itself (a teenage girl fighting vampires) is quite silly.

The reason that it worked is the same reason that Harry Potter worked- despite the holes, the fantasy element was a perfect medium in which to develop lots of character drama. The reason that we were all glued to the sets wasn't the next rubber-faced monster, but the agony and the ecstasy that that invoked in the characters.

They could bring back the old characters, but that would be a whole pile of fail. It's been 12 years since Buffy started (and 6 since it finished). The actors are all off doing other things, playing other roles. The day-job chemistry between them will have faded. Better to leave well enough alone, in my book.

That, and Whedon's writing was razor-sharp. A feat he repeated in Firefly, he created reams of brilliant one-liners, quips and comebacks that sparkled without the cheese of Moore-era Bond.

So, without Whedon and without the scoobies, what is there? Actually, a fairly big world to explore (the advice for different sorts of campaigns in the Buffy RPG gives a couple of interesting ideas) but it would take a Whedonesque genius to convert any of them into a film that will appeal to fans (most of whom will have moved on to other things anyway) and simultaneously to the general public.

So, my prediction: they'll knock out a film. Lots of people will get excited. It won't do particularly well. The franchise will be axed. Lots of people will be disappointed. This will just be chalked down as another film that should never have been made, which will quickly be forgotten.

[Haven]

So, my prediction: they'll knock out a film. Lots of people will get excited. It won't do particularly well. The franchise will be axed. Lots of people will be disappointed. This will just be chalked down as another film that should never have been made, which will quickly be forgotten.

Yeah, this is probably what's going to happen. :/ But it...could be awesome?


Oh, I don't know... I don't approve of leaving Joss Whedon out of the process, but I don't think a movie set in the Buffyverse circa AD 1200, or AD 1900, or even AD 2099 would cause any harm to the extant mythology, or indeed be any worse than any of the other fantasy-superhero-epics that are clogging our theaters these days.

That would be pretty cool, but it's a little unclear whether it's supposed to be set in the Buffyverse or if it's going to be a reboot. It seems like it's going to be the latter, but their note that "One of the underlying ideas of "Buffy" allows Vertigo and Kuzui to do just that: that each generation has its own vampire slayer to protect it", hints that maybe they're thinking at new Buffyverse live action material.

Which has problems: during the course of the series, all Slayers are accounted for, and after the series, all potentials are Slayers. We know what most of them are up to, but as has been shown, not all, so that could be interesting, but the Slayer army might be too high profile for that to work out.

And in the future beyond that series, since "Fray" is also canonical, we know that nothing happens for a hundred years. But that's up to being retconned, so who knows.

But as cool as fleshing out unexplored questions about the Buffyverse would be, setting it in a different time or place to accommodate continuity would make things more difficult for the writers, who'd have to get the audience to accept a different setting on top of the Buffy premise. So I'm thinking it'll probably be a reboot.

Hey, maybe they'll get Christian Bale to play Buffy.

[lisiecki]

Hey...

this is THE woman who was incharge of the script for the 1992 movie.
and that was...
Well
It was...
They tried I guess



Yeah, this is probably what's going to happen. :/ But it...could be awesome?

[JadedDM]

A Buffy movie without Joss Whedon would be like doing Terminator without James Cameron!

Oh, wait...

Yeah, this is just another remake Hollywood is churning out to make a few more bucks. It won't be good. They aren't going to put that much work into it.

Heck, they're even remaking Flight of the Navigator now.

[Trazoi]

I'd be a bit excited if the original Buffy movie wasn't so completely forgettable. It sounds like they're just attempting to capitalise on the success of the francise. It might be interesting but if they haven't sharpened up their film making skills since the movie it will flop, and flop bad.

And not having Joss Whedon involved is a really bad sign.

[Mauve Shirt]

Here. (http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/05/new-buffy-movie.html?xid=rss-feed-todayslatest-%27Buffy%27+without+Joss+Whedon?+NO!) I voted "When and where is the riot occurring?"

[Innis Cabal]

I disagree....this is probably the best thing to happen to the movie.

[lisiecki]

I disagree....this is probably the best thing to happen to the movie.

What?
It being controled by the people who gave us the FIRST Buffy movie?

What i find hard to understand is the complete lack of the TV show supporting cast.

With out them, you have what Buffy and Donald Sutherland?

[Rutskarn]

No.

This text is just here to fill space. I just want to make that clear. My response is entirely encapsulated in the above syllable.

[lisiecki]

No.

This text is just here to fill space. I just want to make that clear. My response is entirely encapsulated in the above syllable.

I just don't get the point of leaving out the supporting cast.

The ONLY characters in Detective Comics 27 that were in the batman movie are Batman and Gordon, but they still had Alfred in there...

[Rutskarn]

To elucidate: My response is not to what you said, it's to the whole damned idea of a Buffy remake.

[RTGoodman]

Oh, I don't know... I don't approve of leaving Joss Whedon out of the process, but I don't think a movie set in the Buffyverse circa AD 1200, or AD 1900, or even AD 2099 would cause any harm to the extant mythology, or indeed be any worse than any of the other fantasy-superhero-epics that are clogging our theaters these days.

You know, I'd be okay with a past- or future-oriented time-line, but I'm almost willing to bet money that, should this all come to pass, it'll be set in modern times, and'll try its hardest to be hip and dark and edgy. (Probably with a "Twilight"-esque romance thrown in, since that's what's popular in vampires nowadays.)

[Blackjackg]

With out them, you have what Buffy and Donald Sutherland?

You leave Donald out of this! It wasn't his fault the first movie sucked. Plus, he was one of the Dirty Dozen. Were you one of the Dirty Dozen? I didn't think so.

Grr.

EDIT: I hope you take my excoriations and susurrations as loving in intent. 'Cuz they are.

[lisiecki]

. (Probably with a "Twilight"-esque romance thrown in, since that's what's popular in vampires nowadays.)

Buffy the TV series HAD a "Twilight" esque romance thrown in.

It was a major plotiline for the first 3 sessions...


You leave Donald out of this! It wasn't his fault the first movie sucked. Plus, he was one of the Dirty Dozen. Were you one of the Dirty Dozen? I didn't think so.
Grr.
EDIT: I hope you take my excoriations and susurrations as loving in intent. 'Cuz they are.

Its ok. I blame Luke Perry.
Actually I LIKED Donald in there and his whole thing about making shoes.

Im just not sure, given ONLY the first movie to work with, what the point of a reboot is.




EDIT

Its ok, i understand
after all I AM Donald Sutherland
Didn't see that coming, did ya :P

[Philistine]

I just don't get the point of leaving out the supporting cast.

The ONLY characters in Detective Comics 27 that were in the batman movie are Batman and Gordon, but they still had Alfred in there...
If the "reboot" is based on the 1992 movie, then there is no supporting cast to speak of - Donald Sutherland's character died. Luke Perry? I don't know of any "Luke Perry." What is this "Luke Perry" of which you speak?

I don't think it exists. It needed to be said.
____________________________________

Buffy the TV series HAD a "Twilight" esque romance thrown in.

It was a major plotiline for the first 3 sessions...
And a minor, occasionally reoccurring plotline during the last 4 seasons. Plus the new vampire love interest over the course of the last 4 seasons...


Its ok. I blame Luke Perry.
Actually I LIKED Donald in there and his whole thing about making shoes.

Im just not sure, given ONLY the first movie to work with, what the point of a reboot is.
Luke Perry? I don't know of any "Luke Perry." What is this "Luke Perry" of which you speak?

I don't think it exists. It needed to be said TWICE.

I also don't see a point of a "reboot" in this case. It's either awfully late to try to continue the story with the original cast and characters, or awfully early for a "complete re-imagining and updating of the concept."

[Hands_Of_Blue]

Buffy without Joss Whedon?

How does that work, at all?

[lisiecki]

And a minor, occasionally reoccurring plotline during the last 4 seasons. Plus the new vampire love interest over the course of the last 4 seasons...


Well, I don't want to hurt your head by making you say it a third time ;).
I have to assume that that poster was being sarcastic.

Not only did Buffy have the twilight esque romance. Trying to be "Hip" was a VERY large part of the show. (That in MHO it succeeded at for the first 3-4 years) And. well, the OP specifically said that the movie would be darker.

Boy, Darker than the 1992 movie THATS going to be hard to manage

My head hurts less now

[Aotrs Commander]

*Distant sounds of skull on wall and expletives in languages that would make Cththulu wince, fortunately too muffled to be heard*