A Buffy By Any Other Name...

[white avenger]

We've all said basically the same thing any number of times, both here and elsewhere, that if the role of Buffy (or Willow, Xander, Giles, Angel, Spike, any or all) were ever recast that we wouldn't ever watch the show again, but do we really REALLY mean it? As much as I love these shows and the actors who starred in them, is "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" really that different than "James Bond," or "Tarzan," or "Sherlock Holmes," or "Superman," or "Batman," or any of the other fictional characters who have been portrayed by more than one actor?

What got me to thinking about this was an article about the (shudder!) temerity of the producers to actually re-cast the original characters of "Star Trek." Granted the new actors will be portraying the beloved Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc as younger versions of the characters, but still, it's a change.

So, why are Sarah, Alison, Nick, James, or Anthony so irreplaceable when Sean Connery, Johnny Weissmuller, and Basil Rathbone weren't?

 

[Blondie Bear]

I think it might take some adjusting, but I could watch it as long as they got a good bunch of actors. And didn't just switch people mid-series (though that can't happen now that the TV series is over). They would have to be phenomenal, though, at least as good if not better than the originals.

 

[Fake Shemp]

I dont think Ive said that, it would be hard to adjust if they were recast mid way through the run but the show is too good to let that stand in the way. The writing is the show.

 

[white avenger]

I think it might take some adjusting, but I could watch it as long as they got a good bunch of actors. And didn't just switch people mid-series (though that can't happen now that the TV series is over). They would have to be phenomenal, though, at least as good if not better than the originals.

I dont think Ive said that, it would be hard to adjust if they were recast mid way through the run but the show is too good to let that stand in the way. The writing is the show.

It's not without precedent, though. Before the time of most of the Board members, the tv show "The lone Ranger" switched actors not once, but TWICE within 3 seasons. Clayton Moore, the original LR, was replaced for one season by another actor whose name escapes me, then returned the following season. There were even two Silvers. Also, the role of Darren, Samantha's husband on "Bewitched" was replaced, and the show ran for several more years with no loss of fans. I know that both of those examples are not recent, but it HAS been done in the past, and with a degree of success.

 

[Fake Shemp]

I remember (from repeats lol) the switch in Bewitched, and I liked both Darrens. I think its something we would have lived with, and for people who wouldnt watch it with a cast change (which there was.... Nikki) I think its there loss. More people would stick than not imo.

 

[dromeda]

I'm searching deep down, and finding I have a prejudice against any other actors taking up the parts on TV. I feel that truly excellent TV ensembles are rare, and that the writers, cast and crew make up that ensemble. That being said, there are instances when actors who take up a role later manage to put such a spin on it that you fall in love with the character in a new way. I think the transition from one cast to the next would be easier to swallow if the actors weren't able (age, infirmity, madness) to take up the role. That leads me to another thought. Would it be easier to accept a whole new cast, or to have some return, and others replaced?

 

[white avenger]

I personally would prefer an entire new cast, which just seems to me would be easier to judge on its own merits. The "James Bond" franchise managed to pull off retaining the same "M" and "Q" for quite awhile, but that only worked, I believe, because both played very minor roles in the movies. Having, for instance, the original Willow while replacing everyone else would only serve as a reminder of the "old guard" that had been replaced.

 

[Superstar]

Are the parts re-castable? Absolutely.
Any part is re-castable.
Will it be successful is another question.

Soap Operas do it all the time. Movies do it often.
Even TV series have done it.
Bond, Batman, Superman these are icons. There are more.
Even Buffy herself (SMG) is a recast from the movie version.
New icons up for recasting and success (as you mentioned): Star Trek with Kirk, Spock and McCoy et al.
These may even be called the absolute epitome of re-casting.
Here's a sample pic for ya WA (also located in my .sig).

If Buffy could return with a re-casting, I think it would do well.

 

[white avenger]

Yeah, I've seen that before. I wish that they would show a picture of the two Spocks in full makeup, though, with Nimoy back during the original series. This new guy just doesn't look right to me. His facial structure seems wrong.

 

[Superstar]

I wish that they would show a picture of the two Spocks in full makeup, though, with Nimoy back during the original series.

How's this?

 

[Lou]

I think I'd still watch. I don't ENJOY recasts, but as long as it was done in a non-stupid manner I'd do it.
Now, if suddenly one week Buffy showed up as someone else like on the soaps, I'd be upset.
But, if, say, they just started the show back up with the same characters but different people....I can't say I'd turn my back.

 

[VisionGuy]

I would defintely watch it. Especially if they were to start from the beginning and do their own interpretation of the Buffyverse.

 

[Superstar]

I would defintely watch it. Especially if they were to start from the beginning and do their own interpretation of the Buffyverse.

I have been championing this idea in comic form!

 

[Ripper 08]

a change in cast if the show was re-made/picked up again with different actors wouldn't stop me watching the show,but it wouldn't be the same as the originals there was just something about that particular bunch that made it special.maybe it was just the length of the show that we got used to everyone in there parts/roles. if any one is a car fan i can only describe it as being like an alfa romeo,alfa make cars to be as good as a car can be for the breifest of moments.and although the show lasted for 7 seasons looking back it seemed such a short time but had such a magical esence about that i dont think could be achived by any other actors/actresses no matter how good they are the original would lways be the best,but a new cast or re-make wouldn't stop me watching the sho if the writting was still good.(to be honest i'd probably still watch it if it was rubbish lolz hehehe)

 

[Superstar]

Star Trek update
white avenger, here's an updated pic with more Star Trek crew.
Thought you might be interested.
Kept in this thread since we kinda started it here.
May make a new one concentrating on this topic later though.

 

[horrorshock666]

Wow... what a question?

For me it would depend who was recast. Like for example... if they recast Willow and it wasn't Ally anymore i would be devastated and don't think i could bring myself to 'love' the character as much. That isnt to say i wouldn't give it a chance because Buffy is Buffy and i love it and so i would... but it would depend wouldn't it? I mean if they only changed minor characters and had the same characters for the Scooby gang and stuff then i do feel it would be okay and pretty much the same... because after all the scooby gang ar the most important thing i beleive... but if they were to change the scooby gang then i may find it hard to adjust easily... if at all.

I think it would mostly depend who took over. I mean if they got for example Kate Winslet to play Buffy... i dont think i would watch. Not because i don't like Kate but because for me it just wouldn't fit. I mean maybe instead of replacing the cast if they came up with a whole new concept set in sunnydale based on the kind of same stuff then that would be okay... but i would find it hard for a new bunch to step into legendary shoes.

I have gone on too long. ha ha.

I think James Bond and stuff are okay because they are only films and its a two hour or so thing and they are not with you as much as a TV show... thats not to say its okay or whatever but you get me hopefully. I do think though that such as Doctor Who with the regeneration thing is fine because although you get new people it is justified character wise.

Oh i dont know... its too hard!

 

[lemst6]

I think there's something, not sure what it is, set into peoples minds that it's okay to have movies that replace actors with other actors, but not for television shows. I don't really know what it is, but lets just think about it for a second. When ER loses an actor, they don't replace the actor with someone who plays the same character, but instead, create a new character. Or for instance, anyone playing Grissom other than William Petersen on CSI, would create an uproar, people would probably stop watching it etc. I don't know why that is, but I think that most of us have that mind set when it comes to casting in movies and television shows, so yeah I think that it would still be a problem if they casted different actors to play the Buffy characters.

 

[Crazy Flakes]

Well, I don't think recasting really works in shows like Buffy. It's different in movie series and soap operas because they go on for such a long time, and it can work in sitcoms because there usually isn't such huge character development. If they decided to remake Buffy in the future, recasting would be fine, but if it was a continuation of the series, then no matter how good it was, I really don't think it would seem like the show we've all grown to love.