Comic Vs TV what do you prefer?

[lady_windermere]

sueworld2003 said "Trouble is as beautifully done as they are, they mainly served to push home to me how much I miss seeing those characters in a live action format." I was wondering how many others felt the same. Two polls under the cut.


[Poll #1129330]

Comments

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

Amongst the many shocking twists and turns the series took Buffy already died twice and I seem to remember Faith going to jail at one point.

I meant Buffy being killed for real, by police. And Buffy, not Faith (supporting character), going to prison. But it's a RL outcome, not suitable for a genre narrative.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

Your version of RL seems far more prone to people inevitably getting their just deserts than mine. But that aside what do you make of the scaling effects point?

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I don't understand you. What do you mean by "scaling effects point"?

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

The points that I quoted stormwreath and myself making in the comment that you just replied to. About the near inevitability of of bank robbery type issues arising from there being hundreds more Slayers than before.

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

I see the problem from a different angle. For me, it's not about the change of the situation, it's about the change of the genre. I'm absolutely sure that Joss could write a compelling story without turning Buffy into a criminal. But he has changed the Buffyverse ethic and morality according to new genre demands.

In a Jerry Bruckheimer type of universe "bank robbery type issues" are inevitable. As well as kidnapping presidents or stealing CIA secrets (Mission Impossible). Shocking plot twists are crucial to move the plot forward in such movies; and Tom Cruise and Nic Cage are still good guys, even when they trespass the law.

As to inevitability, I wonder if you mean Buffy or Joss. The Buffy I saw on TV show doesn't need satellite system. It's Joss who needs shocking, garish plot twists to create a successful comic franchise.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

But you present no evidence beyond logically flawed arguments from analogy that the genre has changed whereas we can both agree that the situation has. There's no need to generate all these unsupported theories about Joss having motivations beyond that of writing a story that follows on from what went before and explores the characters in interesting ways. That gives them new challenges and imagines how they might respond. As to who has changed I mean Buffy. Buffy on the show didn't need a satellite system because she only had to communicate with 3-4 other people all based in the same town.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

I'm absolutely sure that Joss could write a compelling story without turning Buffy into a criminal. But he has changed the Buffyverse ethic and morality according to new genre demands.

I'm afraid I'm just not seeing the same change in genre you are. Consider my icon. Buffy and her friends were stealing deadly military hardware from an army base way back in season 2. In season 7 Anya was even robbing banks, and it was played entirely for laughs. When a young girl committed suicide in her home, Buffy didn't inform the police... she secretly buried her body in an unmarked grave. How many laws was she breaking there?

The show has always showed this sort of thing without making a big deal of it, most of the time. Occasionally, though, it pulls out the rug from under us by telling us the real consequences of what were watching. They fdif it in 'Dead Things'. And with the 8.11 preview, I think they're about to do it with Buffy's bank robbery.

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

There was a real threat, real urgency in season 2. And in season 7 both Buffy and Anya were under a spell. Here I see only two options:

1) there was an urgency, a big threat but Buffy can't talk about it, even to Willow so she concocts some lame excuses. In this case we have a complex conspiracy plot that will be unraveling during the next 5 years

2) it's played for laughs

In both cases it's not typical for Buffyverse

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

3) There was an urgent, big threat so Buffy broke the law to counter it. Then there was a not quite so urgent, not quite so big threat, and Buffy broke the law to counter it. Then there was a fairly routine threat, and Buffy broke the law to counter it. Then Buffy thought there might be a big threat some time in the future, so she broke the law to counter it. Slippery slope.

4) There are 2,000 girls who are now Slayers. Their lives are in danger, and Buffy is completely responsible for their current situation. Every one of them who gets killed makes her feel she's got blood on her hands. So anything at all - even crime - is justifiable if it will save their lives. And how else can she find lots of money to buy semi-legal military equipment quickly?

(4) is my favourite.

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

(4) is my favourite.

You frighten me. :)

But, seriously, it's the kind of logic bolsheviks used when they did the revolution and established communist regime. They considered themselves responsible for the suffering of the poor. To save poor people from their lot they overthrew the legal government. They thought it was justifiable if it will save people's lives.

[aycheb.livejournal.com]

But that logic is hardly unique to the bolsheviks. And for every Russian or French revolution there's an American or an English one. Which kind Buffy might end up being involved in is the big question (and not one addressed much by action movies).