Firefly Contributing To The End Of Buffy?

POSTED BY: NewsAdmin
UPDATED: Monday, June 3, 2002 21:26
VIEWED: 10552
PAGE 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

NEWSADMIN

Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:20 PM

First Whedon drops the Iron Man movie and now it looks like he is taking a gamble and sacrificing Buffy in bringing Firefly to life and making it a huge success.

An article posted on the Firefly: Ultimate Resource website suggested that Joss's committment to turning Firefly into a successful series for Fox may be contributing to the demise of Whedon's other series, Buffy: The Vampire Slayer.

According to the article, Nicholas Brendon, who plays Xander on the series, was quoted as saying that it would be impossible for Joss Whedon to dedicate himself completely to both Buffy and Firefly.

"But in the end, it will come down to Sarah (Michelle Gellar) and how well Scooby Doo does," said Brendon.

"I have two more years on my contract and the show is still going strong, so maybe Fox could decide to go ahead without Joss," Brendon said.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens this Fall when Firefly hits the airwaves.

ZICSOFT

Saturday, June 1, 2002 12:17 AM

If Buffy needs Whedon's constant attention in order to prosper, I don't hold out much hope for either Buffy or Firefly. Good TV shows require creative input from a lot of different people. Shows where all the ideas come out of one head get stale fast.

But I don't think that's why Buffy's in trouble. Face it, the idea is getting old. It's a show about teenagers fighting evil -- with a cast that has aged into its 20s and 30s! The plot devices ("We'll make you care about her -- then we'll kill her off!") are getting stale.

Worst of all is the Villain Problems. The Bad Guys have always been the best part of Buffy. They're ao damned self-righteous and sure of themselves. The Master, Angelus, Mayor Wilkins, Adam, Glory -- they kept getting better and better.

Select to view spoiler:

But this season, they just ran out of interesing Big Bads. The best they can do is a rogue witch who goes to 12-step groups for "magic addiction" and goes ballistic when her girlfriend is killed. Gimme a break.

(Perhaps if they'd killed off poor Tara earlier and given Dark Willow more time to develop... But let's not play the "if it were my show" game. It's not, and a good thing too.)

My big worry about Firefly is that they won't be up to the all the plotting. A lot more important in SF than in Fantasy. I mean, there were plot holes in the Glory arc you could drive a truck through -- but Glory was such an appealing villain, you just had to let it slide. Won't work in SF, which is *about* details like that.

JONWES

Saturday, June 1, 2002 12:23 AM

Dude, you so need to put the special spoiler tags on a lot of that post! Some of the European people haven't seen the end of season 6 yet.

MOJOECA

Saturday, June 1, 2002 12:42 AM

Though I do think that show has gotten more melodramatic over the years to its detriment, I still enjoy it. Gotta say I don't agree with some of your opinions:

Quote:
Face it, the idea is getting old. It's a show about teenagers fighting evil -- with a cast that has aged into its 20s and 30s!

Well, the show has alway been about *growth*. These characters are no longer teenagers--they're now *in* their 20's. You can accept early- to mid-20's actors (Brendon, Hannigan) playing 17 year-olds, but you can't accept the same actors a couple of years later playing 20 year-olds?

Quote:
The Master, Angelus, Mayor Wilkins, Adam, Glory -- they kept getting better and better.

Adam and Glory better than the Mayor? Sorry, really don't agree. Though I do like Adam (contrary to consensus), I thought Glory was too one-note ("gotta have the key") to sustain over the entire season. I thought her a pale imitation of the Mayor. As for this season's villians... eh, the writers tried something different. The trio and evil Will had their moments, but I hear next year will be a return to form, so...

Also, Espenson said they *were* planning to reveal evil Will in mid-season, but they pushed it back. Probably because everyone called it after season 5, so they had to erase those expectations. Also, the nature of the transformation demanded a quick, explosive arc. If deus ex Will goes bad earlier, it becomes problematic -- difficult to bring her back from it, and also thinking of reasons why she doesn't melt everyone w/ her eyes right off. They used up all those excuses pretty quickly in the final 2.

--- Joe

ZICSOFT

Saturday, June 1, 2002 2:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jonwes:
Dude, you so need to put the special spoiler tags on a lot of that post! Some of the European people haven't seen the end of season 6 yet.

Right you are. My apologies.

NOVAGRASS

Saturday, June 1, 2002 2:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
Quote:
Face it, the idea is getting old. It's a show about teenagers fighting evil -- with a cast that has aged into its 20s and 30s!

Well, the show has alway been about *growth*. These characters are no longer teenagers--they're now *in* their 20's. You can accept early- to mid-20's actors (Brendon, Hannigan) playing 17 year-olds, but you can't accept the same actors a couple of years later playing 20 year-olds?

Indeed.

The entire series has always been about growth... *always.* From day one, the series was about a woman and her friends' growth into adulthood, changing and maturing through the years.

This season was exclusively about making bad choices and finally becoming full fledged adults. It was the reason Giles left... it was the reason the show became so much more experimental, to reflect the change more appropriately.

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

ZICSOFT

Saturday, June 1, 2002 2:43 AM

Quote:
I thought Glory was too one-note ("gotta have the key") to sustain over the entire season.

Matter of taste, I suppose. I've been told the same thing about Drusilla, that her wonkiness gets boring -- but I can't get enough of her either.

Yeah, Glory is a one-note character. As annother Whedon character would say, that's nessa. All her evilness comes from a simple inability to see beyond her own "issues". All too real!

I didn't mean to imply that Adam was a better villain than Major Wilkins. Actually, I rank the major Big Bads as follows: Glory, Mayor Wilkins, The Gentlemen, Angelus, The Master, Maggie/Adam (two characters, but in a very real sense one villain)..

Yeah, I know, the Gentlemen were only in one episode. But they belong on this list, because they are as interesting as any of the other Big Bads.

The Master sort of deserves to be higher up. But he was in the first, truncated season, and didn't get a chance to develop.

SHOE

Saturday, June 1, 2002 2:54 AM

Its too bad an actually good series may be sacrificed for a show that will tank.

ZICSOFT

Saturday, June 1, 2002 3:01 AM

Quote:
The entire series has always been about growth... *always.* From day one, the series was about a woman and her friends' growth into adulthood, changing and maturing through the years.

True enough. But when people grow and change, they start doing different things with their lives, don't they? They even become different people.

Hmm, now that I think about it, you've put your finger on the one big thing that I really disliked about season 6: no growth. In fact, the three main character rather regressed!

Buffy: she's rebellious and wilful, which was the basis of the tension between her and Giles. But they need to write out Giles, so all of sudden he has too leave because she's "over-dependent".

Willow: they go to all this trouble developing her as a geeky girl with hidden mystical powers. Which was a lot of fun to watch. But they need her to have a breakup with Tara (and I'm guessing they also need for her to lose her powers for season 7), so they decide she's a "magic addict". Hey, 12-step programs for witches! Now that's original!

Xander: the most disappointing of all. My favorite episode is "The Zeppo," which typifies this character's struggle to invent imself. He's come to terms with his weaknesses and built on his strengths. He's counquered his fears and shown his own kind of courage. But they needed him to break up with Anya, so all of a sudden he's afraid of the future. Oh well.

MOJOECA

Saturday, June 1, 2002 3:36 AM

We can argue around in circles on season 6. Some liked it, others didn't. Most would agree it could have been better, but...
Getting back on topic

IMO, Buffy should go out after season 7. And that's becoming increasingly likely. Sarah expressed a desire to leave (exhausted after season 6, she may change her mind in the midst of 7). The storyline (no spoilers) seems to be intended to bring closure. Everyone's contracts run out after next year -- bigger payroll, bigger budget. UPN's paying something like 2.3 mil/per, will they spend more? Whedon's spread kinda thin now: 3 shows, 2 more on the way. Hopefully he won't bow to FOX's greed, and instead go out on a creative high (relative to viewers' tastes, I guess).

--- Joe

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE