Buffy Reboot - Characters that can't be recast

MarieVampSlayer

Bloody hell, Sodding, blimey, shagging, knickers..
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
1,515
Age
38
Location
Québec, Canada
Sineya
Hi all,

In the wake of the new Buffy rebbot (if it ever happens), I was wondering if there was any characters that you just can't recast. All we know for sure is that Buffy will be back but let's imagine that they keep the original characters.

For me, the character I can't see recast is Spike. No one but James Marsters can be Spike to me. He made his character so charismatic that he stayed on the show for the full serie. That to me means something.

How about you? What are your characters that can't be recast?
 
For me, the character I can't see recast is Spike. No one but James Marsters can be Spike to me. He made his character so charismatic that he stayed on the show for the full serie. That to me means something.

Same here. Not only that but Spike was so blunt and to the point, he wouldn't be allowed to exist in a modern day reboot without being heavily sanitised. To even try and recast Spike would be a huge error.

Another one who I'd say couldn't be recast is Drusilla. JL and JM played off of each other so well and had such amazing chemistry that it would seem wrong to have Dru without Spike and vice versa.
 
MarieVampSlayer
MarieVampSlayer
I agree with Dru too!
Wouldn't it depend on what tone the show decided to take? The sanitization of Spike I mean?
As long as they dont trot out a bleach blonde dude with an accent, Spike 2.0, then I think there is hope. Lol. But if hey'd make him feel like the original Spike and I think that's where it'd go wrong!

For me it's Buffy who can't be recast. The rest I can't say the same for, even if I can't imagine them recast either. Too attached to the past!
 
Wouldn't it depend on what tone the show decided to take? The sanitization of Spike I mean?

I don't think they'd let him go round calling characters "poofters" and "wankers" in today's climate, or refer to native americans as "the bloody Indians".
 
I'm most worried about Angel. Looking at who they cast as Edward and Stefan (as lookalike as they are right down to the hair), there's just a gaping huge chasm between these types of younger-feeling, less Alpha, less intimidating personalities that feel like they were trying for softer and cuddlier versions of Angel, but palatable for much younger girls. Buffy's taste in men in general (well, the ones that she was with for any considerable amount of time) all feel more mature and masculine than current tastes. The fact that DB went on to play law enforcement and military types and is one for the moms and grannies after the show kind of says it all about his physical type.

I think there's a generation gap here in taste in men. Baby Boomers/Gen-X and Gen-Y/Gen-Z have different ideas (and I'm saying this as a Gen-Y, but one who has almost always favored the old-fashioned men).

Also, the whole straight, white male Alpha trait (Joss talks about feeling he needed to tear Angel down as the only way he could understand the character and had trouble making the spinoff for 5 years because of it) and guys that are going to get girls way easier than him that his shows have been cast with despite his petty hangups (sometimes against his will in DB's case--thank Gail Berman and Marcia Shulman for overriding Joss) is something that has felt like Joss has been itching to attack for a while. I don't really want to see him take out his freaky issues about men (the jocks who used to bully him and the attractive male actors who get laid easier--the latter creepy rant was to James) using Buffy's new boyfriends. I think we can safely say Buffy is not going to end up with his self-insert Xander as he wanted originally by reason of pure marketability of human/vampire forbidden romance soaps that overrode all of his original instincts, but that tendency to see himself as a "nice guy" who is more deserving is something I emphatically don't want to see rear its ugly head.

Seeing straight, white males torn down as either all evil or by becoming the butt of the joke is something that's going to be a real turnoff for me.

I'm also a bit protective of Angel's dramatic, introverted and depressive personality while constantly selfless and his extremely relatable and inspirational falling down and getting back up given that he's one of my bigger identification figures as an Aspie. Joss liking to tear him down and make him the butt of the joke rather than just utilize his lovely deadpan or morbid humor is ick for me for another reason, too.

And I have a feeling that Angel's protective streak (which he shows around many characters), tendency to take his destiny into his own hands that isn't just doing everything Buffy wants and Buffy's source of paternal wisdom isn't going to translate well in the current environment either. Thing is, I happen to love those traits about him. And I don't want to see Buffy spouting off 'don't need no man' stuff. The Buffy I know and love was often seeking out an understanding, wise ear to voice her struggles to and someone she could trust or talk to about things she wasn't comfortable saying to Giles or Willow whom she came for the advice of. The Buffy I know and love was often very sad about how she felt alone with the weight of the world on her shoulders. Angel shouldn't be downplayed as a character who was able to lift some of that weight off and be a hero in his own right.

I don't want this reboot to be afraid of strong, male characters right next to the strong, female characters. If the female characters are written as realistic, varied people who have many personalities (NOT just "feisty"!--Joss at least was always better about this than a lot of crappy writers who seem to think "strong women" means having only masculine traits or feisty), there shouldn't be fear about allowing male characters like Angel, Spike, Wesley, etc... to exist who are also hugely part of the narrative.

Also, I'm a straight female. I feel like some feminist media seems to forget about women who are attracted to men and want to see ones that they'd actually give the time of day to and, yes, fantasize about. Straight women largely don't just want to look at other women!
 
Last edited:
Same here. Not only that but Spike was so blunt and to the point, he wouldn't be allowed to exist in a modern day reboot without being heavily sanitised. To even try and recast Spike would be a huge error.

Another one who I'd say couldn't be recast is Drusilla. JL and JM played off of each other so well and had such amazing chemistry that it would seem wrong to have Dru without Spike and vice versa.

Absolutely Drusilla. She is my very favorite character in the whole wide Buffyverse, and nobody could dare try to mimic the beautiful, dreamy physicality that she has with every single line. Juliette Landau's performance is inimitable.
 
I don't think you can show him smoking anymore, either.

Omg give me a break. Can we calm down please? Contrary to this hysteria, we haven’t gone back to the days of Reefer Madness propaganda ok? People still smoke on tv, and bang, and show ::gasp:: titties!! They even...and prepare to take a breath at this one folks, they even use curse words!!!’ The majority of cable networks have actually gotten even more graphic these past few years, and you will be surprised at what even Network tv will allow. And again, none of that is even relevant because this show is going to be on a CABLE STREAMING platform, which is extremely lenient anyway. Some of these posts read like the censorship board of the 50s have taken control of the television shows which is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Omg give me a break. Can we calm down please? Contrary to this hysteria, we haven’t gone back to the days of Reefer Madness propaganda ok? People still smoke on tv, and bang, and show ::gasp:: titties!! They even...and prepare to take a breath at this one folks, they even use curse words!!!’ The majority of cable networks have actually gotten even more graphic these past few years, and you will be surprised at what even Network tv will allow. And again, none of that is even relevant because this show is going to be on a CABLE STREAMING platform, which is extremely lenient anyway. Some of these posts read like the censorship board of the 50s have taken control of the television shows which is ridiculous.


I said that, then looked it up and realized I was wrong, amended the comment, then deleted it. I made a mistake. I'm sorry. But I don't need to calm down, I am perfectly calm.
 
Anyanka Bunny Slayer
Anyanka Bunny Slayer
There's no need to apologise. :)
@GraceK "poof" and "Poofter" are derogatory names for gay men that would not be spoken by any character on the "hero" side of things in modern television. Any character that said that to another character would be beaten up as some form of karmic justice because of saying it. Spike's commentary at the beginning of "In the Dark" about Angel "prancing away like a magnificent poof" would not be seen as humorous (even though it was then) but would be complained about by SJWs if it was aired today and treated as humour.

Spike, as the character we know him, can not exist in today's overly sensitive climate because people would inevitably get offended at some point by the stuff he said.
 
I'm actually hoping that they don't recast Angel or Spike. Cause they don't have either character on the show. I'm kind of hoping that, other than the core scoobs, all the other characters will be new.
 
@GraceK "poof" and "Poofter" are derogatory names for gay men that would not be spoken by any character on the "hero" side of things in modern television. Any character that said that to another character would be beaten up as some form of karmic justice because of saying it. Spike's commentary at the beginning of "In the Dark" about Angel "prancing away like a magnificent poof" would not be seen as humorous (even though it was then) but would be complained about by SJWs if it was aired today and treated as humour.

Spike, as the character we know him, can not exist in today's overly sensitive climate because people would inevitably get offended at some point by the stuff he said.

That’s a bleak outlook. I’m a pretty liberal and left leaning person and I still think that scene was hilarious. I loved scream queens and thought Chanel oberin was fantastic. Maybe I’m just old though. I agree that there is a certain demographic that is extremely sensitive and annoying but I don’t think they are the majority. And a lot of shows on cable tv are not saccharine sweet and politically correct. Just because some SJWs will bitch about stuff in the reviews or on Twitter doesn’t mean they control the show. I’m willing to at least try to keep positive until I have more information about it anyway.
 
@GraceK "poof" and "Poofter" are derogatory names for gay men that would not be spoken by any character on the "hero" side of things in modern television. Any character that said that to another character would be beaten up as some form of karmic justice because of saying it. Spike's commentary at the beginning of "In the Dark" about Angel "prancing away like a magnificent poof" would not be seen as humorous (even though it was then) but would be complained about by SJWs if it was aired today and treated as humour.

Spike, as the character we know him, can not exist in today's overly sensitive climate because people would inevitably get offended at some point by the stuff he said.

I am sorry, but what? What the heck are you even saying? Have you seen any show recently? 😱 If anything, television shows creators are much more free nowadays to do what they want with their characters. What a joke!

Spike could and would still be able to say whatever fits his character. That was the thing about him, he was honest about what he thought and what he wanted. Same with Cordy and Anya. And anyway, Spike was far from being a troublesome character if you want to consider all the 'isms'. There is a ton of worse characters on television even at this moment.

As for the OP, I do not want anybody recast. Make your freaking own new characters and bring back the REAL characters/actors from the Buffyverse. Why are people even making so many threads about recasting when nowhere has it been implied that this is what they are going to do (aside from an African-American actress having the lead role and possibly being named Buffy)? This is just ridiculous.
 
That’s a bleak outlook. I’m a pretty liberal and left leaning person and I still think that scene was hilarious. I loved scream queens and thought Chanel oberin was fantastic. Maybe I’m just old though. I agree that there is a certain demographic that is extremely sensitive and annoying but I don’t think they are the majority. And a lot of shows on cable tv are not saccharine sweet and politically correct. Just because some SJWs will bitch about stuff in the reviews or on Twitter doesn’t mean they control the show. I’m willing to at least try to keep positive until I have more information about it anyway.

Idk how old you are, but I'm 24 and very liberal, but I still found that scene hilarious. I also just watched Buffy & Angel for the very first time like 3 years ago. So the first time I viewed I was 21 and still found the line very funny.

I don't take TV so damn seriously though. I think it is okay to poke fun at stereotypes as long as it's obvious that it is meant to be funny. People need to stop being so sensitive over everything, coming from a pretty darn left liberal saying this lol.
 
GraceK
GraceK
I agree 200%. Also I’m 31 :)
Nothing is off the table as far as recasting goes. A lot will depend on whether there will be characters who are clones of the ones we have with similar stories or modifications of the existing characters or new characters entirely.

For example, Willow is cute but not beautiful on Buffy and therefore she must be a geek because there is no possibility that an attractive woman would be in STEM fields. Get over it. The best-looking woman I have ever met in my relatively long life was a Dutch engineer I worked with. The unattractive geek is a trope that needs to be annihilated forever and this has already happened on other shows like CSI and NCIS. Marg Helgenberger and Pauley Perrette are good models for geeks.

Angel may be still the brooding vampire with a soul but maybe he enters the sphere of motivational speakers and tries to stop brooding over guilt but keeps sinking back into it. Angel attending a Tony Robbins lecture and getting a brief boost in confidence followed by a slide back into guilt could be an interesting story angle that plays like tragicomedy.

Xander does not need to be as academically hopeless as he appears to be but he could be in the same position as Cordelia - qualified to go to university but having no financial hope of doing so. He is a good candidate for being Hispanic, so maybe Xander becomes Xavier.

Maybe the girl on top of the social order is not a bitch like the original Cordelia. When I was in high school, the sorority girls were classic bitches but others were generally pleasant. Other than in "Go Fish", we see little of the power of jocks and other than university boys, we see nothing of fraternities or sororities which are generally trouble for anyone not in them.

Giles doesn't have to be the stuffy Britisher. There are male and female watchers from a variety of races and backgrounds on the original show.

If we have a Spike, he will have a long way to go to live up to James Marsters but if he is in a different set of circumstances, a new one could survive comparison.

Finally we get to Buffy. If the new Buffy is going to be black, make her interesting. Is she going to be from the slums or a well-to-do area? I asked the question in this forum about the original Buffy movie of whether a black girl could be in contention for top of the social order and I was told it could be possible (I had not known whether LA at that time would be like that). Maybe she does not have to be as unintellectual or just plain stupid as the Buffy we know. She will have to be badass and kickass and have quips at the ready just like the original but there is plenty of room for a different take on Buffy.

A lot of casting decisions are going to be based on whether the show intends to recreate the same stories or get some fresh ones where a character is not automatically compared to the original show.
 
Why does everyone keep calling Buffy stupid?
Buffy was academically LAZY and preoccupied with SLAYER duties.
She was NOT academically stupid.
She may not have been genius smart like Willow, but she was far from stupid.
Buffy did very well on her SATs. She could have went to a better college if wasn't for her SLAYER duties.
The very first principal and a teacher in s1 both saw potential in Buffy. Unfortunately, both were killed off so Buffy was left with no academic faculty that believed in her.
I'm sorry, but I just don't get where people get this idea that Buffy is stupid.
She may have ditzy moments, but hell so do a lot of very academically intelligent people as well.
The only one on the show that seemed to truly struggle academically was Xander. But, he was apathetic as well, so we will never know if it was the smarts or just pure utter apathy.
 
BTW @BuffyBot22 she also got to lead a discussion group in one of her university courses (just to make your list complete).

One of her slayer duties, had she decided to accept it, was reading the Watchers' Handbook like Kendra did.

Look at Buffy in "Doublemeat Palace". She could have been a millionaire along with Willow after the discovery that the "meat process" had no actual meat in it. And what does she do? She negotiates getting her old job back. The episode should have been "Burger, Fries and a Shakedown".

When the final showdown came in Season 7 and so many people had left town that everything was open to her for the pillaging, what did they do? They got groceries (including Jaffa cakes) at the supermarket and first aid supplies from the hospital. Why not get a tank truck full of gasoline, open the hellmouth, pump in fuel and throw in a match?
 
Back
Top Bottom