Reboot canceled likely too woke?

I agree but the idea and definition of "Woke" is so subjective. What is woke to one may seem normal to someone else. I would take it that in this day and age they did their best to tiptoe through any minefield like that to make the show as neutral as possible to try to please as many they could. But that's not how the original show so great.
 
Moptop said:
I agree but the idea and definition of "Woke" is so subjective. What is woke to one may seem normal to someone else. I would take it that in this day and age they did their best to tiptoe through any minefield like that to make the show as neutral as possible to try to please as many they could. But that's not how the original show so great.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but there are characters here who speak to both "sides". With some of the characterization, it seems that they were attempting to call out the "problematic" parts of the original show, but also solidify that we're all complicated people with complicated thoughts. At least, that's how I viewed it.
 
Woke is usually indicated by preachy divisive identity politics paired with piss poor plotting, pacing, characterization, etc plus the only answer to legitimate criticism of woke media being to sight progressive credentials before calling the critic a bigot.

But I would be surprised if wokeness were the sole reason that the show was cancelled, nor is there any real evidence to suggest that it was, in fact, piss poor woke garbage. The script lines could have any number of meanings in the context of the show.
 
Assuming this wasn't clickbait designed to rile someone up and promote engagement...
  1. They wrote a series that was just fine for the politics of 15 year olds, but was far too left for forty year olds, after they were told not to.
  2. They hired writers who cover for their lack of talent with their ability to write woke politics, after they were told not too.
  3. They were explicitly told this project was important, needed to appeal to as broad of an audience as possible, and avoid political themes.
But those are weak guesses on my part. If that was really the problem, you can always cut the most egregious lines and hire different writers for the series. That's why I would lean towards, it's not that they made it too woke, it's that they were told not to do that, and did it anyways. But again, I don't place much credence in this story. Sounds too much like clickbait.
 
AlphaFoxtrot said:
But again, I don't place much credence in this story. Sounds too much like clickbait.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's very hard to trust what the media puts out these days. I just passed it along as it presented a different theory as to why it was suddenly dropped!
 
AlphaFoxtrot
AlphaFoxtrot
Indeed, but as we really don't know what happened, even the rumors and lies may have some truth in them, it's a worthy topic of discussion.
Even some of the people online who rant against wokeness don't have a problem with diversity (and frequently enjoy Buffy) whereas many people who proudly proclaim themselves and their work woke also say they're first and for modern audiences (as opposed to what came before) despite that diversity has been with us for several decades, so I'd say there's a difference between "diverse" and "woke."

Granted, "woke" has become a fuzzy term with no shared definition. I dislike how that can happen to words and happens too often.

As for the pilot, I'll look at the script later, but I don't know. And lines given as examples of the pilot being woke could sound a lot different depending on the tone of voice it was delivered in.
 
NotASlayer
NotASlayer
Yes; the problem with a script is that it lacks the emotional depth of a book.
N
NoShip
And also lacks the interpretations of the actors.
thetopher said:
Woke is usually indicated by preachy divisive identity politics paired with piss poor plotting, pacing, characterization, etc plus the only answer to legitimate criticism of woke media being to sight progressive credentials before calling the critic a bigot.

But I would be surprised if wokeness were the sole reason that the show was cancelled, nor is there any real evidence to suggest that it was, in fact, piss poor woke garbage. The script lines could have any number of meanings in the context of the show.
Click to expand...

John Rocha really goes to town on Gellar over the script
Ok. @#£% THIS. Sarah Michelle Gellar's people and maybe even HULU are trying to throw Chloe Zhao under the bus over Buffy. Nope. Not letting this happen to an INCREDIBLY TALENTED woman of color. I was gonna stay quiet with the other stuff I'd heard, but nah. Let's do this.

Since my post 48 hours ago, I've had sources tell me that:
- Gellar was the issue from the beginning
- this was just an "IP grab" to stop that SLAYERS project from proceeding (which my sources had heard from a person involved with the original series)
- Gellar wasn't terribly interested in rebooting the series (which was why her role was very limited, but was going to be more than one line)
- Gellar had intentionally courted a creative who had a mixed history as a showrunner, but was a known“fan,” so that it would easily fall on her as the reason for the series’ failure.
- that there was "a lot of love bombing from SMG to Chloe Zhao" before this latest excuse was put out there blaming Zhao and throwing her under the bus
- Gellar constantly shouted down or cut off execs and production people who were trying to fix the issues with the show
- One even said that what Gellar wanted to make changes to the Buffy character and the established canon of the series that would "piss off 90% of the fanbase"

And now it just came out from @THR that Gellar doesn't want you reading the script that is being leaked. No surprise. It would show all the mistakes she approved of that were going to wreck the show and the canon.

Btw these are sources I trust and who have given me correct info in the past. Some of y'all might have to put down your rose colored fan glasses and put on some clear ones.
 
Buffy Summers said:
it’s enough to say she’s incredibly talented, her sex and race have nothing to do with it. It’s like saying, “She’s talented…for a woman.” 🙄
Click to expand...
I totally agree with that! Talented Woman should be more than enough descriptive to satisfy anyone. One must be careful, I've heard that bus's also have a reverse!
 
Okay, I'm trying to stay open minded and non-committal, but,

-Who didn't want Slayers to proceed, and why?

-Who courted Sarah to become involved with the straw reboot she apparently had no interest in? Why does the received narrative have Zhao contacting Sarah for her project, if it's the other way around?

-When did Sarah develop a deep hatred for BTVS. I'm sure she has a mixed relationship with the property, but it's her only hit. She and a lot of people she knows are still making money off it, she'll never fully escape it, and her fans are also Buffy fans. Has she made an candid statements over the years?

I'm not saying this is false, it just doesn't fit what we currently know. What we know doesn't have to be true, but we would need more information.

Re: Woke; Okay, this is the streaming service that airs The Handmaid's Tale. In all fairness, I've never seen the show, but it comes off as ... Critical of the current administration. If you are comfortable with producing that show, you probably aren't uncomfortable with feminist themes.
 
AlphaFoxtrot said:
Okay, I'm trying to stay open minded and non-committal, but,

-Who didn't want Slayers to proceed, and why?

-Who courted Sarah to become involved with the straw reboot she apparently had no interest in? Why does the received narrative have Zhao contacting Sarah for her project, if it's the other way around?

-When did Sarah develop a deep hatred for BTVS. I'm sure she has a mixed relationship with the property, but it's her only hit. She and a lot of people she knows are still making money off it, she'll never fully escape it, and her fans are also Buffy fans. Has she made an candid statements over the years?

I'm not saying this is false, it just doesn't fit what we currently know. What we know doesn't have to be true, but we would need more information.

Re: Woke; Okay, this is the streaming service that airs The Handmaid's Tale. In all fairness, I've never seen the show, but it comes off as ... Critical of the current administration. If you are comfortable with producing that show, you probably aren't uncomfortable with feminist themes.
Click to expand...

She tried to do a Cruel Intentions show too that also flopped. Contrary to what's on Buffy fan boards she's not a huge mega star. She's primarily known for Buffy.

Like it or not if the pay cheque is big enough that person will agree. Assaid she wasn't going to be in it very much just a reoccurring role.

Buffy was a job from 20 years ago. Yes Buffy is a show people love on here but to her and the cast it was always just work
She worked really long hours on it with a boss she had a very rocky relationship with. I can see why she wouldn't love it.
I mean how many people on here still love there 20 year old jobs ?

Let's be frank the only reason she's asking people not to read the script is because she knows it's not very good.
She says it will be different from the final product, true but not that different. The Welcome to the Hellmouth with the different Willow is different to the aired version but not by a huge amount. You can watch it on YouTube and see
 
Re: @Btvs fan ; Oh, I'm an 80s era Trek fan. I Am Not Spock and Get A Life and all that. And when you need your fans for Tek War and the Star Trek films you directed, it turns out I am Spock after all. And then you look back on your career and life, and realize the key to happiness is treating the people who loved you a little better. I understand the property relationship is complicated.

But I am not questioning that. Per this rumor, Sarah is both powerful enough and emotionally invested enough to 1. Sabotage the hiring of a show runner for a new show (Also , was brought into the show before Zhao was hired) and 2. Sabotage the production of a pilot episode for the new show, and 3. Be compensated in such a way that she has nothing invested in the success or failure of the project.

To put it in Star Trek terms, this is like Leonard Nimoy getting the Director's chair for Star Trek III, cashing in the downside guarantee, spending a year making it the worst movie he could and retiring from acting afterwards. Not, getting paid for a profitable film, parlaying it into a successful career as a director et al.

An Executive Producer credit is usually an honorific for an actor. Her involvement in the show's production is going to be limited.

So sure, she could be doing that. But I think the most credible theory is that she and the rest of the cast and crew made a bona fide effort at making a pilot, but for some reason, it wasn't picked up. I am leaning towards the proposed production schedule reason, but that still isn't official yet.
 
Although I do think this project was why Slayers wound up being cancelled rather than getting a second season, which it probably would have, the idea that this was an IP grab seems more than a little bizarre. Who are they grabbing the IP from? Themselves? It's not like Slayers wasn't a licensed project given the go ahead by the IP owners. The same owners who gave the go ahead to this.
 
AlphaFoxtrot said:
Re: @Btvs fan ; Oh, I'm an 80s era Trek fan. I Am Not Spock and Get A Life and all that. And when you need your fans for Tek War and the Star Trek films you directed, it turns out I am Spock after all. And then you look back on your career and life, and realize the key to happiness is treating the people who loved you a little better. I understand the property relationship is complicated.

But I am not questioning that. Per this rumor, Sarah is both powerful enough and emotionally invested enough to 1. Sabotage the hiring of a show runner for a new show (Also , was brought into the show before Zhao was hired) and 2. Sabotage the production of a pilot episode for the new show, and 3. Be compensated in such a way that she has nothing invested in the success or failure of the project.

To put it in Star Trek terms, this is like Leonard Nimoy getting the Director's chair for Star Trek III, cashing in the downside guarantee, spending a year making it the worst movie he could and retiring from acting afterwards. Not, getting paid for a profitable film, parlaying it into a successful career as a director et al.

An Executive Producer credit is usually an honorific for an actor. Her involvement in the show's production is going to be limited.

So sure, she could be doing that. But I think the most credible theory is that she and the rest of the cast and crew made a bona fide effort at making a pilot, but for some reason, it wasn't picked up. I am leaning towards the proposed production schedule reason, but that still isn't official yet.
Click to expand...

Or its less Trek 3 (which was an enjoyable film just A they changed Savak actress and B brought Spock back, neither of which should've happened)
And its more Trek 5 where Shatners ego is unleashed and he's unable to do what he wants either at the same time
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom