Anyone else tired of the current low state of Hollywood originality?

[Kean]

[MENTION=7585]Kean[/MENTION]


Because being a man is not what makes Hamlet well, Hamlet. His identity is not based on gender or skin color. Buffy's is. I don't think that a man could portray Buffy because the challenges Buffy faces are very much tied to her gender ( while Hamlet's are universal ) just like her identity is tied to her being a white woman. If you're not a white woman you can't struggle against the stereotype of a dumb blonde nor a valley girl. An Asian actress, for example, playing Buffy is like an Asian actor playing the lead of a Blaxploitation movie. Sure, you could try but WHY? It's ridiculous.

The main idea for Buffy was to subvert the idea of the girl going into the dark alley and getting killed. Yes, blonde was mentioned but the idea was to subvert the idea of a girl being inherently vulnerable, not her being "dumb" or superficial. Even if the crucial element of Buffy was that she was a "Valley Girl" there is no reason why she still couldn't be a woman of colour. Suggesting only white woman could be "Valley Girls" is falling into similar line of stereotyping that Buffy was trying to subvert. There's probably more but off the top of my head I can think of three black characters from the early 90s that were "Valley Girls": Lisa Turtle in Saved by the Bell, Dionne from Clueless and Hilary Banks from The Fresh Prince of Bel Air. If Buffy's socio-economic and social background are core to who her character is (and I don't think they are) there is no reason why she should be white by default.

 

[The Bronze]

Buffy doing chicks? Comics. Coming out scene? It's on the show, well, kinda, when Buffy tells Joyce that she is the slayer in season 2. It's a blatant coming out metaphor, like, nobody's even pretending there.

I think we've only had Buffy doing chick from the comics. I've not seen her show any romantic interest in another woman before or since Satsu. Half of their conversations seemed to be about how not gay Buffy is. I'd say at the moment Buffy sexuality would include men, vampires and Satsu. Could very well be wrong of course.

I certainly see the coming out metaphor. Buffy comes out as the slayer and that could easily strike a cord with a real life coming out conversation to your parents. I'm not sure that I'd stretch it to Buffy was coming out herself though.

 

[thetopher]

The main idea for Buffy was to subvert the idea of the girl going into the dark alley and getting killed. Yes, blonde was mentioned but the idea was to subvert the idea of a girl being inherently vulnerable, not her being "dumb" or superficial. Even if the crucial element of Buffy was that she was a "Valley Girl" there is no reason why she still couldn't be a woman of colour. Suggesting only white woman could be "Valley Girls" is falling into similar line of stereotyping that Buffy was trying to subvert. There's probably more but off the top of my head I can think of three black characters from the early 90s that were "Valley Girls": Lisa Turtle in Saved by the Bell, Dionne from Clueless and Hilary Banks from The Fresh Prince of Bel Air. If Buffy's socio-economic and social background are core to who her character is (and I don't think they are) there is no reason why she should be white by default.

Exaxtly, instead of the 'dumb blonde' always dying, it could be the 'black chick' always getting it first in the slasher/horror movies, or the 'trashy girl who is wild and sexy' type gets killed as some sort of morality thing. (i.e- Faith.)

'Buffy' the character doesn't have to be a blonde, white girl to subvert the sterotype- just pick another trope to subvert- it's still 'Buffy-like'

But, to be clear, I'm not in favour of a reboot, jusy saying that its possible. 🙂

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=7585]Kean[/MENTION]
Do you know how many times Buffy is called pretty girl, not that bright or I didn't think I'd find you here...I think you can read and similar stuff because of her mannerisms and hair color? A whole lot, OK? Buffy's looks are an important part of the character.

Suggesting only white woman could be "Valley Girls" is falling into similar line of stereotyping that Buffy was trying to subvert.

Yes, there are some non-white valley girls but valley girl is still a white woman stereotype and I don't see why the character that is build around struggling against it should be portrayed by somebody who is not a white woman. It makes no sense to me.

You know what, I'm going to be an ass but whatever. Tell me, why do you want Buffy to not be white? It seems racist to me. If you're a racist, that's OK but at least be honest about it. What's wrong with Buffy being a white woman?
[MENTION=12614]thetopher[/MENTION]

just pick another trope to subvert- it's still 'Buffy-like'

Then why not just pick another gender or sexual orientation and call her Billy? Or make her hunt werewolves, 'cause vampires are so passé these days?

 

[Kean]

[MENTION=7585]Kean[/MENTION]
Do you know how many times Buffy is called pretty girl, not that bright or I didn't think I'd find you here...I think you can read and similar stuff because of her mannerisms and hair color? A whole lot, OK? Buffy's looks are an important part of the character.

And again I ask, why does she have to be white for any of this to happen? The three black characters I mentioned in my previous post were all constantly met with those type of questions and remarks.

Yes, there are some non-white valley girls but valley girl is still a white woman stereotype and I don't see why the character that is build around struggling against it should be portrayed by somebody who is not a white woman. It makes no sense to me.

Why are you putting so much importance on Buffy being a Valley Girl? Fans of the show knew nothing of Buffy's superficial past until the end of S2 and it didn't turn the verse on its axis when it was revealed. Buffy was created to subvert the idea that women were inherently vulnerable. That's all women, not just "Valley Girls."

You know what, I'm going to be an ass but whatever. Tell me, why do you want Buffy to not be white? It seems racist to me. If you're a racist, that's OK but at least be honest about it. What's wrong with Buffy being a white woman?

That's the thing, I don't care what colour Buffy is at all. The point I have been arguing is that I think she could be any colour and still be Buffy Summers, you are the one who is insisting that she must be white and are not providing any legitimate reason why that is.

If Buffy was to be rebooted I'd want to her to break new ground, not cover the old. That's why I'd like the next carnation of Buffy to be a woman of colour, LGBTQ, or come from a different socio-econmic background. I don't believe the core of the Buffy character has anything at all to do with her having previously been a "Valley Girl."

 

[EVIL UU]

[MENTION=7585]Kean[/MENTION]

Why are you putting so much importance on Buffy being a Valley Girl?

Because the character is rooted in this very cultural concept. Her looks, her fashion choices, her mannerisms, her hobbies, her attitude, her ludicrous obsession with the image she projects, the way she shops, talks, yeah, that famous Buffy speak for crying out loud, are lifted from the valley girl style. Isn't that like common knowledge in this fandom?

you are the one who is insisting that she must be white and are not providing any legitimate reason why that is.

But I do, you just decide to ignore it.

If Buffy was to be rebooted I'd want to her to break new ground, not cover the old.

And she can't do that while being white? A white female character cannot break a new ground, is that what you are saying?

That's the thing, I don't care what colour Buffy is at all.

if a new Buffy was to be done, I think she should be a woman of colour

Yeah, sure.

I ask again, what is wrong with Buffy being white? Why do you want to change the skin color of a character that is deeply rooted in a subculture of white women? I'm sorry, but if it looks like racism and it sounds like racism, yeah, you know the rest.

 

[brinkster130]

Just a friendly reminder...lets try and stay away from labeling people while having a discussion. 🙂

 

[Kean]

[MENTION=7585]Kean[/MENTION]


Because the character is rooted in this very cultural concept. Her looks, her fashion choices, her mannerisms, her hobbies, her attitude, her ludicrous obsession with the image she projects, the way she shops, talks, yeah, that famous Buffy speak for crying out loud, are lifted from the valley girl style. Isn't that like common knowledge in this fandom?

But we are talking about a reboot. What you are describing is a copy paste job. The idea of a reboot is to discard canon and start from scratch. You retain the basic architecture i.e young girl becomes a hero. But have the freedom to rebuild everything else.

But I do, you just decide to ignore it.

I'm not ignoring it, I'm disagreeing/rejecting it as a compelling argument.

And she can't do that while being white? A white female character cannot break a new ground, is that what you are saying?

Of course they can, I never said they couldn't. But again, we are talking about a reboot. And that gives you the freedom to move away from the established canon. My entire point is that Buffy could be any colour, any creed, any sexuality and be Buffy Summers. I am arguing for possibility. That's it.

Yeah, sure.

I ask again, what is wrong with Buffy being white? Why do you want to change the skin color of a character that is deeply rooted in a subculture of white women? I'm sorry, but if it looks like racism and it sounds like racism, yeah, you know the rest.

There's not a damn thing wrong with Buffy Summers being white. She's my favourite female character of all time. I adore Buffy Summers. But if we are discussing a reboot of the story then I am open to seeing her as something other than a straight, white, Californian young woman.

If you find someone making an argument for the inclusion of all races in the recasting of a white character racist, then maybe you need to look at yourself and stop pointing fingers.

Literally all I have said is that this is something that could happen, something that I'd personally like to see happen. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Robb Stark]

This is getting weird.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Let's get the thread back towards the general state of Hollywood, we can discuss the non existent reboot when Shonda Rhimes announced she's rebooting it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chasesummers]

Have been tired of the media and it's bullsh*t in general for a long time now lol.

 

[Buffy Summers]

People vote with their wallets - if people didn't go see all the remakes, sequels etc, they wouldn't make them.

🙂

 

[AndrewCrossett]

I think the death of a culture happens when it has no new stories to tell. Remake after reboot after remake. Re-imagining instead of imagining. Songs made up from samples of older, better songs. Endless reruns.

We're not there yet, but we're getting there.

(Yes, I'm aware of the old saying that "there are really only seven stories," but it's not true. There may be seven basic plot structures, but that's not the same thing. There are millions of different stories. I don't think we're running out of stories, we're just running out of interest.)

 

[Buffy Summers]

We're too afraid to give new storytellers a chance to tell their stories 😉

 

[Ethan Reigns]

I think the death of a culture happens when it has no new stories to tell. Remake after reboot after remake. Re-imagining instead of imagining. Songs made up from samples of older, better songs. Endless reruns.

We're not there yet, but we're getting there.

(Yes, I'm aware of the old saying that "there are really only seven stories," but it's not true. There may be seven basic plot structures, but that's not the same thing. There are millions of different stories. I don't think we're running out of stories, we're just running out of interest.)

I told my daughter (who has a master's degree in mythology) that there were only twelve basic plots and she said, "No, there is only one: the hero's journey." Everything in the Whedonverse does fit that description.

---------- Post added at 10:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 AM ----------

We're too afraid to give new storytellers a chance to tell their stories 😉

True - the studios in Hollywood get proposals to do about 20,000 scripts a year. About 250 movies a year get made. But it's even worse than that - if Scorsese or Cameron or De Palma write a screenplay, it immediately gets prior consideration so the 1.25% probability of a screenplay getting made into a movie is even less if you are not an "element", one of the luminaries in the business like a famous actor, director or producer. More screenplays get made, but they are purchased and lie on dusty shelves somewhere or go through "development hell" where they are tweaked and prodded into something totally different from what they originally were.

The independent movie scene is a bit more conducive to originality, but as the saying goes, you have to kiss a lot of frogs before you find a prince.

 

[Buffy Summers]

What will be interesting is with DSLR cameras (and subsequent lower priced updates) is to see how long before we get a really large portion of our content not made by studios. Kind of a return to the early days of film when it was about the craft and not throwing millions of dollars at something. We're not there yet, but getting there.

---------- Post added at 12:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 AM ----------

Ethan Reigns agrees: Check out "The Guild", a series about gamers by Felicia Day (Vi on BtVS and Margaret on Dollhouse).

I hate Felicia Day lol