Question Do you consider the BTVS movie CANON?

I consider the Origin comic to be the canon version of this story, and apparently so does Joss. (His original script doesn't work as canon anymore, because it has elements that don't match up with the TV show... such as Buffy being a senior instead of a freshman.) And there are big parts of the movie that don't fit with canon either. (Like the explanation of the Watchers, which Donald Sutherland took upon himself to change, making it nonsensical.)

But I've come to appreciate the movie a lot more than I used to. Most of Joss's most important stuff is still in there, most of the good dialogue is still there. Most of the acting performances were pretty decent, except for Rutger Hauer's hamminess (this was no Blade Runner for him). There were even some moments in the film I thought worked better than the script, such as Merrick's death and the final confrontation between Pike and Benny at the school dance. Stephen Root's monologue as ex-stoner guidance counselor Gary Murray was hilarious and was probably the moment I became a fan of his.
 
I third with Origin! The stuff with her burning down the school and Pike is generally canon, but a lot of things are different. Like Buffy not having a birthmark and vampires turning into dust 🙂
 
I don't, but it doesn't mean I don't enjoy the movie 🙂

I'm glad they didn't keep the cramping as a sign vampires are near though.... 😀
 
No I don't consider the movie canon. But I do like some of the elements that were kept, like her burning diem the school gym and her first watchers name bring merrick. It's a nice nod to the movie without making the whole movie canon. There's a lot of stuff that is different. Like vampires can fly and don't dust. I like the shows version of vampires better.

Athena said:
I'm glad they didn't keep the cramping as a sign vampires are near though..
Click to expand...
lol. Yes! That was pretty terrible. Lol
 
Sort of. Maybe like a movie made about a real incident (which are typically warped from actual events, sometimes to the point that it should be classified as fiction only loosely based on real life events). I haven't read the comic version (though I've heard of it before) and that sounds like it's worth taking as canon.
 
Not really. I'm glad they never got into retconning the backstory in. It works better if she's already the slayer.

Both the movie and the comic require a heavy dose of accepting she had a massive personality transplant from one to the other.
 
I consider the movie to be source material, but not totally canon. To begin with, the movie Buffy was a Senior, not a Sophomore, her movie mother was even more flighty and air headed than she was, and her greatest ambition in life was to "tour Europe, marry Christian Slater, and die." Our REAL Buffy would more likely have been a John Travolta girl, with "Staying Alive" (ironic title, considering her new calling) as her inspiration.
 
I just saw this and thought to share...it's mostly on the movie, and even spends a few moments contrasting it with the comic version that ties into the series.

 
smgismyqueenjpg said:
Do you consider the movie CANON? Cause I know I do.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. I'd been putting off watching it for about 10 years, and when I finally did I was not surprised to find out that the movie is just complete ass.

I read 'The Origin' though, every time I rewatch the series. I mean, the events of the movie canonically happened. ...might as well not hate myself and humanity while experiencing it.
 
Haha I'm with @The Ferg. I've seen the movie once and that was more than enough. The Origin comic works well enough for back story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom