thedeadlyhook (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
thedeadlyhook) wrote2010-11-13 10:08 am
thedeadlyhook) wrote2010-11-13 10:08 am
Well, that's nice
Talk about handy for research purposes! I just realized that all of BtVS is available on streaming Netflix. As well as the Buffy movie, which I'm rewatching right now.
Wow, I'd forgotten that Hillary Swank was one of Buffy's valley-girl crew in this movie. She does disdainful like a champ. (She seems to be the proto-Cordelia character.) And whoa, David Arquette is Luke Perry's best friend!
I do love me some Rutger Hauer, but Paul Reubens really stole this film.
It's funny; Buffy in the movie was a character I'd quite liked, although she is different from the TV series. Part of it is simply that Kristy Swanson comes off as less vulnerable and fragile than Sarah Michelle Gellar; this is Buffy as ass-kicker even without knowing about her powers. Likewise, the YouTube clip of the promo reel for the Buffy Animated Series that never quite materialized is also quite instructive in that that Buffy is more unapologetically superhero-ish and has a kinda Gothic-looking character design, which makes her... well, a bit more like Faith or something. Interesting.
ETA: Huh. I'd note that in the movie, vampires can't just waltz into the high school gym. Buffy has to come outside to deal with them. And I'm strangely enchanted by the bit where Luke Perry gives Buffy his leather jacket so she doesn't have to fight them at a full prom-dress disadvantage. There's a lot of things the movie does right.
Then again, there's also a lot of rip-off sources in clear view: Valley Girl, Salem's Lot and Carrie, most obviously. The film plays as a parody of these sources, so it isn't what you'd call a problem, but it doesn't much count as a display of originality, either - only Buffy herself feels fresh, and that's only if you haven't seen Nightmare on Elm Street 4. (Seriously, all the pieces are there: the horror-movie final girl, the gymnastics, the special powers, the blonde...)
ETA 2: Not that I'd, like, recommend Nightmare on Elm Street 4. It's honestly not the best of the NoES sequels (that would probably be the one in 3D, IMHO - 6, I think - which plays a bit like a dry run for Freddy vs. Jason; it's not perfect, but gets points for cool ideas), but there is this one moment with a training sequence where you go, whoa, this chick is like a proto-Buffy or something.
Wow, I'd forgotten that Hillary Swank was one of Buffy's valley-girl crew in this movie. She does disdainful like a champ. (She seems to be the proto-Cordelia character.) And whoa, David Arquette is Luke Perry's best friend!
I do love me some Rutger Hauer, but Paul Reubens really stole this film.
It's funny; Buffy in the movie was a character I'd quite liked, although she is different from the TV series. Part of it is simply that Kristy Swanson comes off as less vulnerable and fragile than Sarah Michelle Gellar; this is Buffy as ass-kicker even without knowing about her powers. Likewise, the YouTube clip of the promo reel for the Buffy Animated Series that never quite materialized is also quite instructive in that that Buffy is more unapologetically superhero-ish and has a kinda Gothic-looking character design, which makes her... well, a bit more like Faith or something. Interesting.
ETA: Huh. I'd note that in the movie, vampires can't just waltz into the high school gym. Buffy has to come outside to deal with them. And I'm strangely enchanted by the bit where Luke Perry gives Buffy his leather jacket so she doesn't have to fight them at a full prom-dress disadvantage. There's a lot of things the movie does right.
Then again, there's also a lot of rip-off sources in clear view: Valley Girl, Salem's Lot and Carrie, most obviously. The film plays as a parody of these sources, so it isn't what you'd call a problem, but it doesn't much count as a display of originality, either - only Buffy herself feels fresh, and that's only if you haven't seen Nightmare on Elm Street 4. (Seriously, all the pieces are there: the horror-movie final girl, the gymnastics, the special powers, the blonde...)
ETA 2: Not that I'd, like, recommend Nightmare on Elm Street 4. It's honestly not the best of the NoES sequels (that would probably be the one in 3D, IMHO - 6, I think - which plays a bit like a dry run for Freddy vs. Jason; it's not perfect, but gets points for cool ideas), but there is this one moment with a training sequence where you go, whoa, this chick is like a proto-Buffy or something.
no subject
Pee WeePaul Reubens was the best thing about it. Which — what with Donald Sutherland and Rutger Hauer also on board — was a bit of a surprise. Also, I was surprised at not hating Luke Perry, since I had Formed Opinions from 90210 (which I never watched, so there you go). I've had it on the Netflix streaming queue for a month, so one of these days I'll rewatch.Also, one of my favorite fanfic Easter eggs is when Pike makes an appearance in the "real" Buffyverse...
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
Nightmare 4 came out.....after Buffy, didn't it? I mean.....that movie was out and gone for a while, as far as i know.
*checks the 'net*
Yeah, Buffy - '82, Nightmare 4, '88. So they were riffing on Buffy in Nightmare, heh.
I loved the movie. I thought Kristy Swanson was awesome, totally more believable as a girl who could kick-ass, and much less whiney. Now, don't get me wrong - Buffy-on-tv was awesome, and fun, and i loved it for most of it's run ,but the movie is not *nearly* as 'awful* as some people seem to want to make it out. It was neat! And hilarious, and apparently Donald Sutherland drove Whedon nuts, which makes me smile. :)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)