That Buffy movie

[shapinglight]

Wasn't going to say anything about it myself, but then I opened my newspaper this morning and saw
this, and on page 3 no less. :)

Okay, so, as one of the commenters points out, they've edited Joss's words to make him sound much more annoyed than he really was, but I still love this article, and Lucy Mangan's comments (follow link), with which I entirely agree (ie. if the movie's good then great, more Buffy, if it's crap we can just ignore it, and either way it doesn't affect Joss's canon), because, unlike all the US coverage, which has been illustrated with Buffy/Angel semaphore flags at dawn type pics, the Guardian goes with two Buffy/Spike pics. What's more Spike gets name-dropped in the article.

This takes me back. Anyone else remember the Guardian article about Weetabix, which featured those two Weetabix lovers, Spike and the Queen Mother?

Just me, then.

Comments

[elisi]

What a wonderful article! :)

Anyone else remember the Guardian article about Weetabix, which featured those two Weetabix lovers, Spike and the Queen Mother?
Maaaaybe. I probably heard about it from you.

[shapinglight]

Maaaaybe. I probably heard about it from you.

Well, it really does exist. See the next post after this one.

[constance-b.livejournal.com]

Editing out that Avengers crack is sneaky and misleading - I expected better of the Guardian! Though you can't say they don't have their priorities right. Except for the part where this wasn't on page one.
Personally I don't think I've seen any outrage at all. Just a lot of people shrugging and wondering if it could possibly be worse than season 8.

[shapinglight]

Though you can't say they don't have their priorities right. Except for the part where this wasn't on page one.

:) True.

Personally I don't think I've seen any outrage at all. Just a lot of people shrugging and wondering if it could possibly be worse than season 8.

There was a bit of outrage on Whedonesque. I also saw mention of a petition. However, I think the comic has changed a lot of people's minds about this.

[gillo]

The Grauniad has always been Buffy-positive, and it was good to see two Spike pics to illustrate the articles. And I did like Lucy Mangan's last line - if they mess it up, Sunnydale's going to burn.

But I'm still not impressed by the idea, because all the omens are bad. And the show is too recent for me to see an all-new Buffy in an all-new setting.

[shapinglight]

I agree the omens are all bad, but that's okay. If the film is terrible we can just ignore it.

In fact, it'll be a lot easier to ignore than the comics (IMO) precisely because Joss has nothing to do with it and it won't feature any of the show characters apart from Buffy.

[jamalov29.livejournal.com]

Great article and indeed Joss sounds more annoyed. But yay for a Spike/Buffy pic , it's a better illustration for me - at least when they decide to show Buffy with her lovers , they should do it in all fairness= they were two vampires falling in love with her after all.

[shapinglight]

they were two vampires falling in love with her after all.

True, though as usual all the American articles (that I saw) ignored Spuffy.

[kathyh]

That Lucy Mangan article was absolutely spot on. Many thanks for the link.

As a fan of the Highlander TV series I can tell you that it's incredibly easy to ignore bad film canon *g*.

[shapinglight]

As a fan of the Highlander TV series I can tell you that it's incredibly easy to ignore bad film canon *g*.

:) Pretty much mandatory, I would imagine. Those films really were bad.

[infinitewhale.livejournal.com]

My annoyance is totally selfish in that I don't want to deal with the inevitable comparisons comparisons later. I already get annoyed with people saying the first movie is better than the show, now I'll have to listen to someone doing the same for this one.

Other than that, I don't really care. It won't be Buffy at all. No Joss and Sarah=No Buffy.

[shapinglight]

It won't be Buffy at all. No Joss and Sarah=No Buffy.

I agree, and therefore I personally feel indifferent to it. I'll find it a lot easier to ignore than the comic.

[kseenaa.livejournal.com]

Now those two articles were quite nice. :-) I don't understand the negativity. I am carefully optimistic. And damn curious. So I'll be watching out for news on this, and probably go see it when ever it goes up on the big screen. :-)

[shapinglight]

I'm not sure if I'll bother. Will have to see some reviews first.

[ex_peasant441]

Spike/Queen Mum Weetabix fic anyone?

[gillo]

I so want to read this!

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

Especially given that when she was a girl, the Queen Mother's nickname was 'Buffy'... Seriously!

(Was that mentioned in the original 'Guardian' article?)

[shapinglight]

I shan't be writing it. Someone else can have a go if they want.

[helenkacan.livejournal.com]

Ugh. How can someone be considered a journalist, yet alternate the spellings of "Kazui" and "Kuzui" throughout? And, yes, so, SO tacky to have cut out the self-deprecating parts of Joss's reaction (especially my fave bit, made cheaper in Toronto).

[gillo]

Not to mention the random apostrophes. Of course, the Grauniad is legendary for spelling and grammar blunders, but even so...

[shapinglight]

It was a bit tacky. Typical journalist, I suppose. And, as gillo notes below, the Guardian has always been notorious for typos.

[hello-spikey.livejournal.com]

Y'know, I'm basically pumped. And I think a hostile fandom may be just what the movie team needs to push them to make a truly awesome reboot.

I'm fond of reboots. Isn't that what 80% of fanfic is?

And there's no such thing as bad press, when it comes to drawing more attention to the property, which revitalizes fandom. After all, where would we be without comics wank and complaint?

:D

[shapinglight]

I'm fond of reboots. Isn't that what 80% of fanfic is?

Absolutely.

After all, where would we be without comics wank and complaint?

True enough. Having something to hate on does help keep a fandom ticking over.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Good article, but wow thats's some creative editing of Joss. I really hate when journalists do that.

Still, yay for mentions of Spike!

[shapinglight]

Still, yay for mentions of Spike!

We're pretty fond of him this side of the Pond. :)

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

Mike Goodridge, the editor of the trade paper Screen International, feels it is too soon to write the film off. (...) "Remember, Buffy was nothing as a movie"

Which is only one of the many reasons we're writing it off.

[shapinglight]

ROFL.

You never know. It may not be so bad. I shall probably wait for the DVD, though.

[thespikeofit.livejournal.com]

I suspect I'd be more annoyed if I hadn't read the threads at Whedonesque and found I was more annoyed by the hyperbole and over-reaction there. So, while I can't imagine that this film will be something I'll go and see I'm open to the idea that it might not be awful purely on the basis that it won't include Joss.

[shapinglight]

I suspect I'd be more annoyed if I hadn't read the threads at Whedonesque and found I was more annoyed by the hyperbole and over-reaction there.

Yes, it was a bit much, wasn't it? I understand there's some kind of petition now. All in all, enough to make me root for the movie, even if I never go and see it.