Should the Buffyverse Outlive Its Makers?

[Buffyverse Fan]

At this point we've tragically lost three amazing actors before their times, but at some point, the actors will start to pass of natural causes. Do you think it would be wrong or right for the characters to outlive the actors who portrayed them?

 

[AndrewCrossett]

Depends on the medium. I wouldn't want to see Lorne, Doyle or Ethan re-cast in a movie or TV show, but I wouldn't mind seeing them still used in comics, books, etc. Maybe even in an animated show, though I'd want the voice actor to do a really accurate reproduction of the original.

 

[Robb Stark]

I'm one of the few who is really of the opinion that the characters and franchise as a whole absolutely should continue once the creators/actors/producers begin to pass away or lost interest. I really do believe that Buffy the Vampire Slayer and it's spinoffs have the potential to be a truly enduring franchise, in the same vein (if not the scope and size) of Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Superman, Batman and Spiderman.

And really, why shouldn't it? It's a great series, with tremendous characters. All of the original Superman and Batman creators are dead, and both of those franchises are as successful and as big as they've ever been. If Christopher Nolan or Christian Bale said tomorrow that they have zero interest in continuing the Batman line, I would have no problem with new minds taking it over, even though that series consists of some of my favorite movies ever. Likewise, if Bale passed away tomorrow, I'd be sad and upset, but I wouldn't want the Batman character to be retired from film and television.

I'm an avid comic book reader, and three of my favorite comic runs ever are Green Lantern by Geoff Johns, Captain America by Ed Brubaker and Avengers by Brian Bendis. Since I've been reading, I've never known another author on any of those titles. In the last four months, they've all finished up their epic runs on those titles, moved on to new things and been replaced by fresh writers. I'm not necessarily excited about the prospect, but I love the characters enough to at the very least give the new titles a try.

 

[Xin Rong]

I'm one of the few who is really of the opinion that the characters and franchise as a whole absolutely should continue once the creators/actors/producers begin to pass away or lost interest. I really do believe that Buffy the Vampire Slayer and it's spinoffs have the potential to be a truly enduring franchise, in the same vein (if not the scope and size) of Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Superman, Batman and Spiderman.

And really, why shouldn't it? It's a great series, with tremendous characters. All of the original Superman and Batman creators are dead, and both of those franchises are as successful and as big as they've ever been. If Christopher Nolan or Christian Bale said tomorrow that they have zero interest in continuing the Batman line, I would have no problem with new minds taking it over, even though that series consists of some of my favorite movies ever. Likewise, if Bale passed away tomorrow, I'd be sad and upset, but I wouldn't want the Batman character to be retired from film and television.

I'm an avid comic book reader, and three of my favorite comic runs ever are Green Lantern by Geoff Johns, Captain America by Ed Brubaker and Avengers by Brian Bendis. Since I've been reading, I've never known another author on any of those titles. In the last four months, they've all finished up their epic runs on those titles, moved on to new things and been replaced by fresh writers. I'm not necessarily excited about the prospect, but I love the characters enough to at the very least give the new titles a try.

I agree with you to an extent, but for me Buffy etc have not been standard tv/comics etc... they are more on a par with literature... so for me if the writer (joss) dies then the franchise dies. Shakespeare died and if someone wrote a sequel to Romeo and Juliet or Macbeth etc then it no matter how good it was then it would not be accepted in the wider world...

 

[Kean]

If it is an entirely new cast, I don't see any reason why those characters should not be recast too.

 

[Zeppelin92]

That is true, but Joss maybe the genius who created the franchise but there are so many talented writers still involved in the project and writing true to each and every character. So if Joss should so happen to get lost at sea, the Buffy comics can most definitely continue.

As far as the characters, I think that respectably the actors who hav e passed away who have portrayed these characters would be flattered to have their legacy continued. Basically it means that they did such a good job portraying a character that they continued to write for that character even after they passed because they had made the character so compelling to begin with.

 

[Taake]

I think it's always hard when it's something like this because we've seen 'the original' cast and can watch it over and over again. But I do think that a really good story and characters kind of take on lives of their own. Just like I love SMG as Buffy I may also have a favorite Lady Macbeth but that doesn't mean that someone new cant come along and really rock it 🙂

Naturally plays are different but my point remains the same. At the core I think the idea of Buffy can go beyond both Joss, the cast and us... 🙂

 

[fredthe3rd]

It could be like Star Trek (wow... iPhone auto-capitalises that!) and the concept continues on with new actors and characters. A new series with a new slayer in a different part of America with different friends would be preferable to me than a reboot of Buffy. It could run for decades in that vein as its a great basic concept.

 

[Xin Rong]

I think it's always hard when it's something like this because we've seen 'the original' cast and can watch it over and over again. But I do think that a really good story and characters kind of take on lives of their own. Just like I love SMG as Buffy I may also have a favorite Lady Macbeth but that doesn't mean that someone new cant come along and really rock it 🙂

Naturally plays are different but my point remains the same. At the core I think the idea of Buffy can go beyond both Joss, the cast and us... 🙂

I understand what you mean, but your analogy actually supports the argument that the show/franchise should not go beyond Joss. Yes you may have a favorite Lady Macbeth, but any Lady Macbeth is still working from the same Shakesperian Script, her story isn't rewritten or extended by anyone else, just re-performed. And yes Buffy has had some great writers, but they don't share Joss's vision, some of them have wrote none 'canon' stuff that is so far from removed from the show's continuity it borders on fanfiction... if we remove Joss from Buffy, then we end up with a Charmedesque franchise, which would be an abomination!

 

[Taake]

I understand what you mean, but your analogy actually supports the argument that the show/franchise should not go beyond Joss. Yes you may have a favorite Lady Macbeth, but any Lady Macbeth is still working from the same Shakesperian Script, her story isn't rewritten or extended by anyone else, just re-performed. And yes Buffy has had some great writers, but they don't share Joss's vision, some of them have wrote none 'canon' stuff that is so far from removed from the show's continuity it borders on fanfiction... if we remove Joss from Buffy, then we end up with a Charmedesque franchise, which would be an abomination!

I don't agree.
Though you hit your nail on the headset with my comment why plays are different I still stand by my point.

It might have taken years (or okay centuries) but look at how Shakespeare adaptions still bloom and grow in our days by the use of the mere core story. People have started to toss the script out, stepped beyond the iambic pentameter sometimes and started to re-create the works in a modern setting.

Lady Macbeth may be doomed to wash her hands of blood for an eternity, much like Buffy is tied to vampire slaying, but she is not longer bound to the rigidity of her castle, speech or surroundings. As a fictional character she can be re-envisioned out of her setting while remaining, at the core, a Shakesperian character. I believe the same goes for the Whedonverse even if it will take years to get there

🙂

 

[white avenger]

We've seen, or at least I have, recasts of Tarzan, James Bond, Batman, Superman, the Lone Ranger, Inspector Cleuseau, and even the Three Stooges, to name just a few, plus, of course the entire cast of the original "Star Trek," and while I still believe that Johnny Weismuller, Sean Connery, Clayton Moore, and Leonard Nimoy can never truly be equaled in their respective roles, I have still for the most part enjoyed the actors who followed in their respective roles. For me, it comes down to whether I love the character or simply the actor playing the role. Frankly, I haven't seen Sarah in anything else that really impressed me that much, but, if the role were properly cast and the story were properly written and directed, I have little doubt that I would still enjoy Buffy, with or without her Sunnydale friends. And, blasphemy that it might seem to some, I have no doubt whatsoever that there are any number of writers and directors who could do just as well a job as Joss could, if not even better. And while that wasn't exactly the answer to the original question, I do think that it is worth saying in order to answer by saying that I do believe that the Buffy franchise is strong enough to outlive any or all of the actors and writers we currently associate with it.

 

[Black Eye Guy]

Absolutely, tying it down to a certain group of actors and writing staff is such a waste of a great mythology and story. Since there have been so many good remakes I dont see why that can't apply to Buffy whether its a full on remake or a different story in the same universe. Either could be brilliant, and there are no short supply of great writers out there so there is a potential to out do the original.

 

[Xin Rong]

I don't agree.
Though you hit your nail on the headset with my comment why plays are different I still stand by my point.

It might have taken years (or okay centuries) but look at how Shakespeare adaptions still bloom and grow in our days by the use of the mere core story. People have started to toss the script out, stepped beyond the iambic pentameter sometimes and started to re-create the works in a modern setting.

Lady Macbeth may be doomed to wash her hands of blood for an eternity, much like Buffy is tied to vampire slaying, but she is not longer bound to the rigidity of her castle, speech or surroundings. As a fictional character she can be re-envisioned out of her setting while remaining, at the core, a Shakesperian character. I believe the same goes for the Whedonverse even if it will take years to get there

🙂

Yes but these reproductions are more often than not, pale imitations, with the exception of the Lion King, which clearly surpasses Hamlet 🙂

 

[Taake]

Yes but these reproductions are more often than not, pale imitations, with the exception of the Lion King, which clearly surpasses Hamlet 🙂

But that's a matter of taste 🙂 A generation later might not feel the same, they may feel the reverse, that our Buffy is a pale 'imitation' (original) of theirs. My brother eg would take "10 things I hate about you" any day over a production of "Taming of the shrew" which he considers both archaic and obsolete and I think the opposite. But I think that is what is beautiful about a story that can outlive its creator, but I suppose that is where we differ on this matter 🙂

 

[kittenpoker]

I feel like it's both at the same time. Which is what can make life so complicated. Actors become their characters (if they're good, in my opinion.... It's the story that's important. I gauge talent ability by the ability of the actor to become the character.