How would you restart Buffy the Vampire Slayer?

[The Romulan Republic]

Not sure if this belongs in Fantasy or Off-Topic, but here's the question:

In this, the golden age of reboots (see Star Trek, James Bond, Batman, Spiderman) and restarting old series (see Star Wars, the X-Files), how would you go about bringing this 90's classic back to the screen?

Film or television is an option. Live action or animation is an option. A continuation, spin-off, or full-on reboot is an option. Any of the original cast or all new actors are an option.

What would you like to see?

And yes, don't do it at all is a valid option, but its a boring one that isn't really in the spirit of the thread. More interesting is to say, if it had to happen, how you'd like to see it done.

[The Romulan Republic]

As I see it, their are three main options:

1. Full on-alternate continuity reboot. Maybe the alternate reality within the same continuity approach Star Trek used. Avoids issues with trying to get all the old actors back and Marsters and Boreanaz having aged, and gives a certain flexibility and freedom from old baggage, but will likely piss off a lot of fans and has a risk of retreading old ground.

2. Animated. Makes it easier to recast roles and get around aging issues while continuing the original series, but feels like it wouldn't fit stylistically with the rest of the live action series.

3. Continuation focusing on only some of the characters. A practical compromise, but likely to piss off fans whose' favourite characters are left out.

[Purple]

Buffy is not something you can do justice any more. It's a typical 90's thing with 90's tropes and thus really can't be replicated without looking dated. So what 'd do is not reboot it but make a spinoff series of an episodic nature. What I'd do is focus on various slayers throughout history and give each of them a few episodes, maybe a story arc. But basically keep them all completely disconnected. Than if that works out I'd slowly start weaving a common thread that would end in revealing some big underlying conspiracy that somehow ties into the original show. So basically a sort of huge 1000 years long prequel.

[Crazedwraith]

If anything I'd get the abortive Animated series up and on its feet. Get as much of the original cast who are willing and able to voice their characters without much vocal dissonance. Set in very broad strokes continuity of seasons 1-3. Missing adventures sort of style and go full monster of the week. Take advantage of the animated format to do weird and wonderful stories they couldn't in live action. (Like the actually preview for the animated series had Buffy fighting a dragon)

Go heavy on fun and humour, light on angst and you're good.

Aside from that I don't really see the need for a reboot. Any attempt at live action would be scuppered by the ageing actors. Especially in Spike/Angel's case.

[The Romulan Republic]

Buffy is not something you can do justice any more. It's a typical 90's thing with 90's tropes and thus really can't be replicated without looking dated. So what 'd do is not reboot it but make a spinoff series of an episodic nature. What I'd do is focus on various slayers throughout history and give each of them a few episodes, maybe a story arc. But basically keep them all completely disconnected. Than if that works out I'd slowly start weaving a common thread that would end in revealing some big underlying conspiracy that somehow ties into the original show. So basically a sort of huge 1000 years long prequel.

That's... kind of interesting, and dodges the practical casting issues, but also sort of lacks focus due to its scope. It also means little time to develop each individual era and character. But maybe its good if people don't get too attached to the characters when a history of the Slayers is pretty much a repeating cycle of "young girl is called, girl has awful life, girl dies horribly". And it has the usual prequel issue of knowing what's going to happen in the end (though that's not a deal breaker for me).

I'm not sure I agree that Buffy can't work in the present, though. I think what you have to ask is "what themes of the series are more universal and can be translated to a modern setting, and how would the themes and characters evolve?"

Still, its an intriguing idea. I'd kind of like to see them explore that in the current Buffy comics. Someone give Whedon and company a call.

[The Romulan Republic]

If anything I'd get the abortive Animated series up and on its feet.

I think I saw the mini-pilot for that. It was set during the original series, while Buffy was still in high school, right?

Not a fan of that. Its either got to be a reboot or really, really limited by continuity if its back while Buffy's in high school. And its retreading old stuff big time.

An animated sequel series or spin-off, though, is something I could probably get behind, as much as I'd love to see the characters and setting in live action again.

Get as much of the original cast who are willing and able to voice their characters without much vocal dissonance.

Well, from what I've read, Anthony Head would likely come back if available (I saw stuff recently with him saying he'd like to come back and do that "Ripper" spin off they talked about but never made). He's still in love with the Buffy franchise, I think.

Others, I'm not so sure about.

Set in very broad strokes continuity of seasons 1-3. Missing adventures sort of style and go full monster of the week. Take advantage of the animated format to do weird and wonderful stories they couldn't in live action. (Like the actually preview for the animated series had Buffy fighting a dragon)

It has some potential, but its very limited for reasons I described above.

Go heavy on fun and humour, light on angst and you're good.

Buffy was at its best when it was bouncing back and forth between the two, and having them effectively play off each other.

Aside from that I don't really see the need for a reboot. Any attempt at live action would be scuppered by the ageing actors. Especially in Spike/Angel's case.

Well, I'm a fan of reboots in general, because they let a premise be explored in a new way without having to deal with all the old baggage. And with a reboot, you could recast (though I have a hard time seeing anyone but Marsters as Spike).

[Crazedwraith]

If anything I'd get the abortive Animated series up and on its feet.

I think I saw the mini-pilot for that. It was set during the original series, while Buffy was still in high school, right?

Not a fan of that. Its either got to be a reboot or really, really limited by continuity if its back while Buffy's in high school. And its retreading old stuff big time.

You say below you're a big fan of reboots. Which is, at it's worst, nothing but retread. As I said below you don't need to keep very tight continuity in an animated series. Broad strokes is enough if you're doing half-length episodes you're not going to get into the nitty gritty. Its more important that the episodes are good taken on their own.

Go heavy on fun and humour, light on angst and you're good.

Buffy was at its best when it was bouncing back and forth between the two, and having them effectively play off each other.

Yes. But when you do an adaptation or reboot you've got to change things up a bit. I'd much rather see Buffy going softer and lighter than grim and dark for example. I'm not saying I'd get rid of the angst just slant the ratio more in favour of fun.

Well, I'm a fan of reboots in general, because they let a premise be explored in a new way without having to deal with all the old baggage. And with a reboot, you could recast (though I have a hard time seeing anyone but Marsters as Spike).

Reboots are in my opinion very difficult to pull off effectively. You've got to have sufficient similarity not to be in name only version of what you're remaking but sufficient differences and distinctions to make it actually worth doing so you're not just a retread with different actors in the roles.

Somewhat cynical but still most reboots are just attempts to screw cash out of fans of the original. They're attractive to studios because they have something of a built in audience. I'd much rather see creative types try something new and original than rehash old series.

I think the best reboot I can think of is BSG. It had the advantage of a great deal of difference from it's source material and the ability to take a radically different approach to the same material while still making sense. (because grimdark works when you're talking about apocalypse survivors on the run from their killers)

As for sequels. Well both Buffy and Angel were fairly open ended. (buffy more so) but how would you do a sequel? Would you keep the comics in continuity? film them? skip over them and do live action after their events?

[The Romulan Republic]

You say below you're a big fan of reboots. Which is, at it's worst, nothing but retread. As I said below you don't need to keep very tight continuity in an animated series. Broad strokes is enough if you're doing half-length episodes you're not going to get into the nitty gritty. Its more important that the episodes are good taken on their own.

A reboot that simply rehashes old stuff is a bad, wasted reboot. The point, for me, is to take the original premise and run with it in a different direction.

In other words, it depends on how its done, like a lot of things.

Yes. But when you do an adaptation or reboot you've got to change things up a bit. I'd much rather see Buffy going softer and lighter than grim and dark for example. I'm not saying I'd get rid of the angst just slant the ratio more in favour of fun.

That's a reasonable position. But at the same time, the fact that Buffy could pull off genuine horror and tragedy and strong emotional effects despite its campy premise and title and its penchant for wisecracking is part of what defines it and makes it a success. And I would argue that the variety and contrast between the two can be a strength. So maintaining a good balance is important.

But then, two of my favourite Buffy episodes are "The Body" and "The Gift".

Reboots are in my opinion very difficult to pull off effectively. You've got to have sufficient similarity not to be in name only version of what you're remaking but sufficient differences and distinctions to make it actually worth doing so you're not just a retread with different actors in the roles.

Somewhat cynical but still most reboots are just attempts to screw cash out of fans of the original. They're attractive to studios because they have something of a built in audience. I'd much rather see creative types try something new and original than rehash old series.

Well, completely original works are always welcome.

But I will say that to dismiss reboots in general as just exploiting fans for money is doing a disservice to a lot of talented filmmakers. Money is undoubtably a big factor in why studios make them (and films in general), but that doesn't mean the writers, directors, actors, etc. don't try to make something good.

I think the best reboot I can think of is BSG. It had the advantage of a great deal of difference from it's source material and the ability to take a radically different approach to the same material while still making sense. (because grimdark works when you're talking about apocalypse survivors on the run from their killers)

I'd cite the Daniel Craig Bond films and the Nolan Batman films as reboots that were mostly well done.

As for sequels. Well both Buffy and Angel were fairly open ended. (buffy more so) but how would you do a sequel? Would you keep the comics in continuity? film them? skip over them and do live action after their events?

The comics are an issue, but I imagine your average casual fan or new comer won't know much about them or particularly care about them. Which is fortunate, because I don't think you can really adapt the comics. The scale is grand, the stories long, and the continuity highly limiting.

However, you don't necessarily have to outright contradict them much either. I may be wrong, because I don't really know the comics that well myself, but they seem to take place a while ago. As I recall, they start up very shortly after Angel and seem to take place over just a few years (at least, from what I've read about them, they're only up to season ten). If we take them as covering three years and starting around the end of Angel, then they're only up to about 2007. So a sequel set in the present day could simply allude to the events of the comics as having taken place in the past.

The only thing I know I'd want to ditch is de-aged Giles. Because fuck not bringing Anthony Head back.

[The Romulan Republic]

As to what plot I'd use for a sequel- Well, an obvious thing, since the last episode of Angel ended on a bloody cliffhanger, is to follow up on Angel, Wolfram and Hart, and the Shanshu stuff. But oh boy does that run into the problem of an aging actor playing an unaging character.

[Joun_Lord]

I wonder how hard it would be to do a sequel series just on how the series (and Angel from what I've read, still gotta get around to watching that show) was left off. There are a ton of slayers around now, atleast part of the main cast is dead (I know for certain one died in the season final of Buffy but don't know if any others were killed off in subsequent stuff), an entire town is gone, and Angel was supposed to end with I guess Armageddon. And thats not even getting into whatever the frack happened in the comics (like the Farscape comics I've not heard much good about the Buffy comics despite being touted as actual continuations of their respective series).

It will run into the Avengers problem of "why not call in back up" any time someone gets in trouble and it can't really rely on the "supernatural is super secret" thing without doing some bullshit backbending like Stargate SG-1 did.

Now I'm not saying a sequel couldn't work but it would take a damn good writer and would probably piss off alot of fans any way its goes.

[Gaidin]

Buffy is not something you can do justice any more. It's a typical 90's thing with 90's tropes and thus really can't be replicated without looking dated. So what 'd do is not reboot it but make a spinoff series of an episodic nature. What I'd do is focus on various slayers throughout history and give each of them a few episodes, maybe a story arc. But basically keep them all completely disconnected. Than if that works out I'd slowly start weaving a common thread that would end in revealing some big underlying conspiracy that somehow ties into the original show. So basically a sort of huge 1000 years long prequel.

Honest question, why replicate it. How much did the new Battlestar Galactica really look like the old?

[The Romulan Republic]

I wonder how hard it would be to do a sequel series just on how the series (and Angel from what I've read, still gotta get around to watching that show) was left off. There are a ton of slayers around now, atleast part of the main cast is dead (I know for certain one died in the season final of Buffy but don't know if any others were killed off in subsequent stuff), an entire town is gone, and Angel was supposed to end with I guess Armageddon. And thats not even getting into whatever the frack happened in the comics (like the Farscape comics I've not heard much good about the Buffy comics despite being touted as actual continuations of their respective series).

It will run into the Avengers problem of "why not call in back up" any time someone gets in trouble and it can't really rely on the "supernatural is super secret" thing without doing some bullshit backbending like Stargate SG-1 did.

Now I'm not saying a sequel couldn't work but it would take a damn good writer and would probably piss off alot of fans any way its goes.

Two major characters died in the Buffy finale, but that's nothing. BtVS and Angel killed about a major character a season, and some of them came back (including Buffy herself, of course). As for Angel, it ended with Wolfram and Hart unleashing an army on LA, but I don't recall any confirmation that it was more final than any of the various apocalypses in the franchise (and the comics show that it was not).

The comics are a mixed bag. Their are some very dubious stories in their (Xander and Dawn as a couple and Giles being killed and resurrected as a kid come to mind). Their's some good stuff too though. I haven't read them all, however.

The destruction of Sunnydale was addressed in the comics, with military people blaming Buffy for destroying her home town and labeling her a terrorist. One of the interesting things about the comics is that magic is openly acknowledged now.

The lots of Slayers/back up thing isn't really an issue. Its a big world. Besides, not everyone who's a Slayer will want to fight evil full time, or at all. And now that their are a bunch of them, they won't have to. Even leaving the comics out of it, Angel established that their's a centralized group of Slayers, but I'd imagine a lot of them are off on their own, just living their lives or patrolling their local town and only calling in reinforcements if something really big happens.

[PREDATOR490]

I do not see Buffy managing to restart or reboot - The market has been saturated for super-hero / vampire shows and it is going to take a significant amount of work to throw another one in the mix without it falling flat.

Reboot - Buffy goes back to high school - Might as well be Twilight
Continuation - Trying to pick up the pieces after such a gigantic gap with some nasty story threads lying is going to be difficult to work with.

[The Romulan Republic]

I do not see Buffy managing to restart or reboot - The market has been saturated for super-hero / vampire shows and it is going to take a significant amount of work to throw another one in the mix without it falling flat.

Reboot - Buffy goes back to high school - Might as well be Twilight

That's hardly fair. I haven't read Twilight or watched the movies, but everything I've seen about them tells me that the writing his shit and the themes/plot outright offensive.

Now, to be fair, Buffy had its cases of appalling writing, but much of it was better than that, even when Buffy was in high school. So why would putting it back in a high school setting automatically take it down to Twilight's level?

I suppose the studio might deliberate try to make it a Twilight clone, but that would be the fault of specific individuals behind the scenes, not an inherent fault of the premise.

Continuation - Trying to pick up the pieces after such a gigantic gap with some nasty story threads lying is going to be difficult to work with.

Perhaps, but if the X-Files can do it...

Still, the X-Files really only had two actors who were pivotal to the show, for the most part. Buffy had a much larger cast you might have to try to get back.

[Simon_Jester]

The other big problem, as noted, is that the market is saturated. There are a LOT of shows out there with superheroic themes, paranormal themes, or both. Whereas in the '90s there were relatively few... Buffy was one of the founders that paved the way for the massive success of the genre, in fact!

The biggest problem would be making Buffy successful in a way that doesn't cause people to yawn and switch channels and watch Agents of SHIELD instead.

[The Romulan Republic]

And again, you can kind of say the same kind of thing about the X-Files coming back.

I guess the question is weather Buffy's qualities would stand out, and weather it has a large enough existing fanbase to support it. I think the answer to the former is yes, depending on the writers. For the latter... I honestly don't know.

[Simon_Jester]

We have yet to determine whether the X-Files reboot turns out to be a good idea in retrospect...

[Joun_Lord]

And again, you can kind of say the same kind of thing about the X-Files coming back.

I guess the question is weather Buffy's qualities would stand out, and weather it has a large enough existing fanbase to support it. I think the answer to the former is yes, depending on the writers. For the latter... I honestly don't know.

We don't even know if the X-Files is going to work or not yet. Certainly we hope but considering the sorry state of the movies to the point I wasn't even aware there was more then one and the.....not that great turn the series proper took towards the end, the X-Files can fail.

And like you said, for the X-Files there is only two people required to make it work. For the Buffy-Files for a direct continuation it needs more then just Buffy, its an ensemble show that requires the whole Scooby gang. On X-Files, who would really care all that much if the Long Gunman don't show back up? Or Skinner? Or the T-1000 and not-Scully? But the same probably cannot be said if Xander, Willow, and others who aren't important enough to mention don't come back.

And and the X-Files has the advantage of being much more popular. Even at its lowest ratings it was double the highest ratings of Buffy. Buffy always seemed more......I dunno "niche" compared to the X-Files. Thats probably because of the fact it was one a lesser network (or two) whereas X-Files was on a major network but still, that just means there is a larger pull of fans to get X-Files back on the air and done well (hopefully). I don't even think Buffy has the same cult following that X-Files still does. Its certainly got its fan though.

If Buffy was back on the air there would probably be more drive by the network to create a reboot and a reboot that is more "modern" and "hip with the happenin' crowd". What is popular is shit like Twilight, Vampire Diarrheas, and True Boobs so a network would mostly try to ape that. It would be another vampire romance show and its not like the foundation isn't there to do that.

[The Romulan Republic]

Granted that the foundation exists for that crap. Angel and his romance with Buffy (one of my least favourite aspects of the show) has long seemed to me like something that is reminiscent of Twilight shit.

But it would be a gamble to try to copy that kind of shit with a Buffy reboot. It would be gambling that you could get more people making yet another entry of that sort in a crowded market than you would lose existing fans by doing so. Some executives might make that call, but I'd say they'd arguably be stupid to do it, even leaving quality out of it and looking at it purely in financial terms.

Also, I probably would care if Skinner didn't show up in the X-Files, seeing as he's one of my favourite characters and I consider him the high point of the mediocre second film. Though according to the IMDB page for the X-Files return, they've got a lot of the old cast back. So it can be done.

[Joun_Lord]

The execs have to make the choice of reboots and sequels (and shows in general) appealing to only fans or appealing to a wider audience.

Fandom of cult classics like Buffy (god that makes me feel old that a show I watched in HS is old enough to be considered a cult classic) are certainly committed but may not have the numbers to make a show. A show like X-Files had its cult following too but appealed and presumably continues to appeal to a wider audience of regular shlubs.

Alot of shows that only appeal to a niche don't do very well in viewer numbers and therefore financially. Fantastic shows like Firefly just never seemed to get the numbers of a wide audience (though some of the reason that show failed is because of Fox dicking them around).

Now certainly rabid fans are the most vocal but again tend not to be that large in number. And as we see in video games, movies, and tv shows, stuff that the nerds, geeks, and whatever are really vocal about loving might not work (some indie games, Dredd, Firefly) and stuff they say is shit is doing extremely well (Call of Dooty, Transformers, and reality tv).

An exec might consider alienating some older fans worth it to appeal to a wider audience. Now if there is a Buffy reboot hopefully they don't do dat but it certainly wouldn't be a completely unexpected thing if they did.

[The Romulan Republic]

Oh, I could certainly see someone going for it.

It might be a moot point though. Because if Whedon was involved, I don't think he'd do that, and if he wasn't involved, earning the support of a lot of the fans would likely be a lost cause anyway.

Which brings me back to what I think the biggest issue is with doing an outright sequel/continuation- getting all the talent back. I recall that Marsters, Boreanaz, and Gellar have all said that they're too old (though Gellar has flip flopped a bit on it and has less reason to feel that way than the guys who played un-aging vampires). Whedon has been otherwise occupied of late (though to my knowledge he has no film or television series in the works right now). And Nicholas Brendan would be a risky person to cast for anything right now given his recent problems, meaning that sadly, there's a real possibility that he'd end up dead, in a hospital, or in prison part way through a shoot. And now I feel depressed.

Which is why if I was going to continue it, I might have it focus on Giles, Dawn, and Willow (the biggest characters who aren't obvious problems to bring back so far as I'm aware) and see if I could wrangle Gellar into a supporting role or at least a cameo so we can still call it Buffy the Vampire Slayer without it seeming ridiculous. And after that anyone else is optional and probably no more than a cameo.

As to Whedon, I could live with someone other than Whedon as a writer and director, but I'd want him on as a producer with a degree of editorial control, at least.

[The Romulan Republic]

I do think if I was bringing it back, I'd try my best to have at least one scene which reunites Giles, Buffy, Willow, and Xander though, even if it was just one scene. Just for nostalgia's sake.

Kind of like how one thing I really want out of the new Star Wars film is to see Han, Luke, and Leia together in one shot, even if its just once.

[Gaidin]

More partial to the BSG style use of them. Have them be their own new unique and different characters, like where old Apollo played the politician and have them guest star as storyline appropriate. It's been proven to work, and more interesting than just trying to geek out the watchers once or twice.

[The Romulan Republic]

Not a big BSG watcher, and I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Are you suggesting that you would keep the various main characters mostly separate, each with their own story, and only occasionally interacting?

Their is another reason to try to bring the group together though (or create a new group), which is that the group dynamic, and the banter and emotional connection between the characters, is part of the appeal of the show.

[Crazedwraith]

What BSG did was a complete reboot. But they did give a completely separate unrelated guest role to one of the original series actor's Richard Hatch, who got to play the reoccurring human Antagonist role of Tom Zarek. This was mostly a peace offering since the reboot scuppered Hatch's chances to do a the proper continuation series he'd been fighting for.

Gaiden's suggesting reusing actors but not characters for a reboot.