Why was Sarah Michelle Gellar known as the 'Duchess'? by rkwalsh

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

From what I have read in many accounts online and in interviews on websites RKWalsh, SMG was a real Diva wannabe. She was said to be rude, inconsiderate, and extremely stuck on herself. Seems she thinks she has a lot more talent than she does.

Personally I liked BtVS, but I have never really thought her acting ability all that stellar. She is good, but I would not say she was any better than say James Marsters, Alyson Hannigan, or Anthony Head. She was just not that believable when she tried for rage or anguish.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 8:35 AM

RKWALSH

oh thanks for the info but i have got to say that when buffy was raging i was scared and when she was crying i was also in tears. so i got to give her props on talent but there's no need to be an ingrate and a wench to others on the show since BtVS was her vehicle to fame she should be grateful and gracious and boo hiss to her if she wasnt

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 9:10 AM

INVISIBLEGREEN

Wasn't Michelle Trachtenberg was Sarah's Maid of Honor or something? I'm pretty sure she was at the wedding. I think Eliza Dushku was also. Not sure about the rest of the cast.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 9:14 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

I remember reading that SMG did not show up for the wrap party when the show ended, and from what was said @ SciFiwire the cast were relieved she did not appear. Apparently she has a knack for getting under people's skin.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 9:41 AM

CAPTAINCDC

From what I have read Sarah and Freddie Gellar are snobs. I have heard several times that SMG was no stranger to diva like behavior. Also, I believe in the commentary for the pilot Joss is talking about how great Nathan was on set but if you wanted to make him cranky, "like 7th season TV star cranky" hang him from cables to do a scene. This to me is a direct shot at SMG. And I think it was horrible that she did not show up for the wrap party for Buffy. I don't care if she was making the awful sequel to the awful Scooby Doo, she would not have had the opportunity to make big time movies if it had not been for her star making role on Buffy. May be wrong, but from what have heard about her, I don't think I am. Having said that, I think she was a great actress on Buffy not to mention incredibly hot.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 9:48 AM

CHAEL

Quote:
the awful sequel to the awful Scooby Doo,

Oh. The sequel is out already? I'd been meaning to keep an eye out for it when it hit theaters. When'd you catch it?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 10:00 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by chael:
Quote:
the awful sequel to the awful Scooby Doo,

Oh. The sequel is out already? I'd been meaning to keep an eye out for it when it hit theaters. When'd you catch it?

Not out yet, but I believe shooting is done.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 10:13 AM

CAPTAINCDC

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that I had seen the sequel already. I just was not a fan of the first one at all, so I assume that I would not like the sequel. No interest in it what so ever.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 10:29 AM

There is a danger here. An insensitivity. As fans we must be aware that at best, our knowledge about behind the scenes events is tertiary. Meaning it's gone through at least two other individuals or organizations before it gets to the general public. Such information probably wouldn't be accepted in a court of law, and yet we use it to judge celebrities without a second thought. Now, I'm just as guilty as the next fan in regards to negative comments made about SMG, but perhaps we should give her the benefit of a doubt. The truth is we don't know, and we should realize and preface all our opinions with this mantra. Even fifty years from now when someone produces a quickly forgotten tv movie that tells about the behind the scenes exploits of Whedon and the gang, based on the memoirs of a gracefully aging Emma Caulfield, we won't learn the real truth, just one deeply filtered side of the multifaceted story.

IF SMG behaved as a Diva during her time on BtVS, it is perhaps not forgiveable behavior, but it is understandable. She was proud of her work on that show. She was playing the lead character of a show named after the lead character. It is to her credit that the series survived as an ensemble work. She allowed the limelight to be shared by a great deal many others, both in front of the camera and behind the scenes, because she knew it'd only make her look better. There were many times where had she made an appearance publically, at say a convention or whatnot, she would have stolen limelight from others. Whether her real reason was selfish or selfless, it all worked out for the best.

We seem to forget that SMG, like all the players who brought BtVS to life for us, is above all else, human. I'd like to see anyone walk in her shoes for a mile and not feel a bit egocentric about her accomplishments and place in life. What some may call spoiled behavior, another might see more as survival in a spoiled Television City world. Don't hate the playa. Hate the game.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 11:20 AM

JUSTDAVID

I disagree with ZachsMind somewhat. Of course the info we get is likely to be less than perfect, but if similar sentiments come out from several different sources, then I think that's enough for us to form opinions and discuss them.

I also don't agree with the "Television City" absolution. People are responsible for the way they treat others.

I do want to point out that I think she can do some excellent acting. Without which BtVS wouldn't have been nearly as good. That became very obvious to me in season 7 when she seemed to just phone it in and the show suffered greatly for it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 12:26 PM

Didn't mean it as an absolution. Just that, if one is to (pre) judge SMG's behavior, it's not like she's the only diva from TV City.

It's much more believable to assume that all the regular actors in BtVS had been at it for close to a decade and just wanted a break. Even Charisma Carpenter left ultimately. The whys and wherefores have been purposefully left vague, and one can imagine there's cat fights and heated bitter words shot like cannons across some political landscape only M.E. is privy to..

It's equally plausible to surmise that anything made public is done on purpose, and that they want us to think there's ire when truly they just like to see us grabbing at straws and endlessly arguing over the whys and wherefores in forums like this, because it stirs up publicity, or at least it did at one time, and why stop now? I prefer to believe they're having one on us, and quietly chuckle amongst themselves that we even care whether or not SMG sent out Christmas cards to anyone this year, and who she snubbed at the last awards program, et cetera.

I mean, really. DOES it matter? Either way, show's over. My lips are sealed. I take the fifth. Nothing to see, move it along. I'll never tell.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 1:18 PM

JUSTDAVID

Hey, no fair quoting the musical!

Quote:
Originally posted by ZachsMind:
.... My lips are sealed. I take the fifth. Nothing to see, move it along. I'll never tell.

Now my head is filled all the good times I've had thanks to that episode. I can't debate a gorram thing with all these positive emotions going on. That's just cheating.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 12, 2004 1:28 PM

JASONZZZ

Selma Blair, on the other hand, is talented! Anyone who can deliver that much humour with a complete deadpan manner is just incredible. And that 10-paks a day throaty voice (Jaime Pressley as well...)...

Quote:
Originally posted by rkwalsh:
I know people dis her often but i really admire her as an actress. She's quite talented Buffy was an excellent showcase for her and i hope she appreciated it. She and Selma Blair made Cruel INtentions

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:11 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincdc:
From what I have read Sarah and Freddie Gellar are snobs.

Whenever this word is used, I have to smile.

Someone recently informed me that the word derives from French, and was used to describe members of the upcoming and increasing more wealthy bourgeious who attempted to affect the attitudes and behavior of the aristocracy, and getting it horribly wrong.

We've all met people who have "arrived" who are considered, for good reasons, to be the best at their particular profession, job, or goal. And we've also met those who aren't there yet, but are pretending to be, with their excessive self concern, and their rude dismissal of lesser beings.

In the military, its easy to spot the Majors, Lt. Colonels, and Commanders, those who have not made Colonel, or (in the Navy) Captain. The difference in attitude toward enlisted folks is startling.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ZachsMind:
IF SMG behaved as a Diva during her time on BtVS, it is perhaps not forgiveable behavior, but it is understandable. She was proud of her work on that show. She was playing the lead character of a show named after the lead character. It is to her credit that the series survived as an ensemble work. She allowed the limelight to be shared by a great deal many others, both in front of the camera and behind the scenes, because she knew it'd only make her look better. There were many times where had she made an appearance publically, at say a convention or whatnot, she would have stolen limelight from others. Whether her real reason was selfish or selfless, it all worked out for the best.

I have to disagree with you whole-heartedly...

I don't think SMG brought anything special to BtVS.. I can think of a number of actresses that would have played the role better and more convincingly. I only ever watched the show for the rest of the cast, and dreaded the time she was on screen... It seems to me from numerous interviews and articles that she didn't get along too much with Joss, (especially near the end) and I don't think she ever really appriciated what BtVS did for her.
There have been numerous interviews with her and Joss stating she has been asked to do any kind of appearances on Angel now that buffy is no more, and simply put, she's not interested in coming back.... she's moved on with her life.. yes.. on to scooby doo... a terribly written and badly animated 2 film series.. wow.. what a springboard.

The only reason I feel so negativly about the kinds of things she's said and done after Buffy is that I've seen so many more actors retire from a show just as long and be so damn gracious about it. Look at the countless star trek actors who really do appriciate the fans and the show they were on... Hell, look at Firefly.. I know it was only half a season and who knows what the future would have brought.. but there are 9 people.. 9 lives.. 9 personalities.. who are all willing to drop anyhting thing to come back and make a movie.. they have all expressed a wish to return to the show.. this could be because they haven't done it for 7 years.. hell it proly is.. but in my mind these are good actors with great personalities as people. I've been watching Nathan since his fiirst episode on OLTL and he's always been this awesome guy off screen.. funny, nice, humble.. SMG from all the info I have read/seen... not so much...

~~~Robb of Winterfell~~~
~ http://winterfell.org ~
~High Fantasy Heavy Metal~

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 4:33 AM

Ugh. What a thankless task to defend this woman. I will grant you that the role of Buffy could have been played by any number of actresses, and in fact there was a time when I questioned why they couldn't just drop SMG and go with someone else. One of the predominant reasons why I was late in the game with BtVS was because I found SMGs performance lackluster in those few episodes I caught early on (predominantly the ones with Oz in them, as I thought Seth Green was capable; to do so much with so little). She turned me off from the show. I found her performance little more than that of a daytime soap opera star, phoning home emotions externally and not bringing the audience into the experience of the story.

Even today, there'd be a line of women half a mile long at Joss Whedon's door if he announced a reprisal of the series with an all new cast, and they'd all wanna play Buffy. SMG is painlessly replaceable and she was painlessly replaceable a decade ago, excepting of course for something Joss Whedon has shown repeatedly: loyalty.

(The following was added in edit format as an afterthought)

"It seems to me from numerous interviews and articles that she didn't get along too much with Joss..."

THIS IS WHAT I'M ARGUING AGAINST. Not whether or not SMG was brutal or 'a duchess' but that we don't know. Everything we get is scant and questionable information at best. You assume everything you read from the press to be true? That's idealism. No, it's not idealism. It's ignorant arrogance, the very thing some of you are accusing of Gellar. I have never met SMG personally, nor do I wish to ever meet her. I suspect anyone who reads these words has never met her personally, certainly not in any meaningful way that would indicate one actually knows her on a personal level.

We can't jump to conclusions. As fans of the series it is diminishing to be hateful or spiteful towards any person who brought one of Whedon's works to life. And isn't this supposed to be a Firefly forum? Why use this place to bash Gellar? What's she done? She breathed life into a character who under Swanson's efforts would have fallen into oblique obscurity. Gellar did something right. She should be commended, not showered upon by the groundlings.

(end afterthought)

Judge not lest ye be judged. We can sit on our high and mighty pedestals of armchair quarterbackdom, wielding our remote control sceptres and claiming that we'd have done it all differently. We are not Joss. Nor would anyone in their right mind wish to walk in his shoes. Yet metaphorically we must. He had his reasons. He obviously does not wish ill on her. He jokes now and then but certainly the people at Mutant Enemy would be upset if their fan base were this petty and superficial, as to kick at Gellar when she's down.

There's also the karma factor. Whatever she deserves, good or ill, will come in its own time. Don't like her? Don't support her future efforts. I for one have no interest in Scooby Doo 2, The Grudge, or Romantic Comedy, although I am happy for her that she can still find work after Buffy. I don't wish her ill, but except for a few impressive, scatterd moments in BtVS seasons five and six I wasn't moved by her performances as Buffy, so I'm not inclined to blindly follow her in whatever future efforts she portrays.

And maybe that's why SMG doesn't put a lot of stock in the fans of BtVS, because not all of us put a lot of stock in her. If the fanbase for a series named after my character found me to be the weakest link, I'd want off the island at the earliest opportunity too.

SMG's attitude may be, "let them watch reality game shows" much in the same way Marie Antoinette said "let them eat cake." But then, there's no evidence Marie Antoinette actually said that bit about the cake. Yet everyone believes she did.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_334.html

Funny how a lack of evidence can make people believe in anything.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:03 AM

Zachsmind,

I appreciate your contributions to this (to me) tiresome, seemingly never-ending discussion of whether SMG is evil or not. Her talent and portrayal of Buffy is definitely up for discussion and evaluation, but honestly, unless you were a member of the BtVS cast or crew, what the heck can you really say with any authority about her as a person? It's all speculation. Gossip and rumors repeated and spread around on websites and crappy newspapers ain't necessarily the truth. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Who's to know for sure? And, as you rightly point out, even if you were someone close to the set, whether someone is evil or nasty or whatever is your own subjective opinion.

I am not a SMG fan. I suspect that where there's smoke, there's fire -- so many hints of strained relations between SMG and at least some of the BtVS cast/crew towards the end of the series probably means that at least at some point, things got strained. But when? Why? How? To complicate the situation you hear also really good things late in the series about SMG as a person from various actors -- James Marsters, Michelle Trachtenberg, David Boreanaz (until his most recent statement to TV Guide, revealing his frustration that she won't make an appearance on Angel this season), and D.B. Woodside. Joss himself said in an interview with Entertainment Weekly that he and Sarah had gone through periods when they'd been friends and when they hadn't gotten along. To me, anyway, this makes it a bit more complex of a situation than a straight-ahead, simplistic "SMG is an out-and-out bitch" theory. Sure, she may have been a total bitch at times or all the time. But unless you've got some sort of real insider evidence, how can you say for sure? And perhaps more importantly, what's the point of saying it?

This is a discussion board so people will and should discuss anything they want to. Go for it. For my part, I'll say that I think Zachsmind best captures what I'm thinking.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:09 AM

Okay, before anyone jumps down my throat to tell me that the Times isn't a crappy newspaper, I'll hasten to add, that's not what I meant. The Times is a perfectly respectable newspaper. But the "duchess" comment that was included in the Joss story in the Times doesn't mean anything to me one way or another. It's just tossed into the story without attribution. I'm not sure if the duchess comment is (a) something Joss repeated himself, (b) something the reporter has heard from various members of the BtVS crew, or (c) something the reporter read or heard elsewhere, which makes it third-party info.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:09 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

I don't claim to have any first hand knowledge, and would be more than willing to listen to the opinions of anyone from the cast or crew who had good things to say about SMG. The problem is we have only what we have heard to formulate an opinion. All that we have heard paints SMG as a spoiled Diva who walks off the set if things are not to her liking, who is late and holds up production, and who treats her costars as lesser beings.

Captain CDC wrote:

Quote:
Also, I believe in the commentary for the pilot Joss is talking about how great Nathan was on set but if you wanted to make him cranky, "like 7th season TV star cranky" hang him from cables to do a scene.

I actually laughed when I heard this. Who else could Joss be talking about but SMG? There are just too many unflattering comments flying around about SMG to discount them out of hand.

I agree that one should be hesitant to believe all that they hear, but when all the voices talking are saying the same thing, it is hard to ignore.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:30 AM

That little quip from Joss on the Firefly commentary cracked me up, too, and was clearly about SMG. Who else could he have meant? But here's the thing, is it so crazy for someone who works their tail off for seven years to get cranky? I know very few people who never snap at any time under pressure. Maybe SMG turned into a bitch on wheels under the pressure. Or maybe she was born that way.

To complicate the situation, here are some recent positive comments made by people who know her: D.B. Woodside said something like, I love SMG. She's extremely funny and talks a mile a minute. David Boreanaz said something like, I'd do anything for Sarah. Michelle Trachtenberg said something like she's wonderful, she's helped me out so much on set, etc. James Marsters said something like, she's great; she's got a lot of power on the set and she uses it to see that the rest of us are comfortable.

Notably absent in recent years have been glowing statements about SMG from other members of the cast -- if they're asked, they all repeat the mantra about how SMG is so incredibly "professional."

I think it's pretty clear that things went sour between SMG and at least a portion of the BtVS cast/crew along the way. But again I'll say that I doubt it's a simple story. Painting the players in this sorry situation in simple black and white terms is, well, kind of un-Jossian, isn't it? And more to the point, all this nasty talk about someone none of us know as a person sort of depresses me. Just my feelings. I guess lots of other people feel differently.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 7:50 AM

I guess it boils down to "if ya got nothing good to say, say nothing" and that is admittedly what other performers are doing in recent years. What else could JW refer to regarding the seventh season whiner remark? Anyone else who had been with BtVS for seven seasons, as well as Charisma Carpenter from Angel, who started on Buffy. Again. We don't know.

I DO know that the other performers are smarter than we are, keeping their mouth shut about it. And they ARE the insiders. We could learn a lot from their example. Ultimately it's none of our business whether SMG was an angel or a demon. If the cast & crew alumni of BtVS wanted to air dirty laundry publically, we'd know a lot more about it. It's just not important.

Whedon needs to move on anyway. I think he should start on a new tv series set in the Firefly world but with a whole new cast of characters. Start from scratch. Take what worked and learn from what didn't. Keep flyin'. Don't look back with anger.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:00 AM

LORDJ

Hello, marketing!

I have found it tough not to get involved/interested in these kind of questions. But ultimately I think whatever comments one has access to are ultimately there for marketing.

For example: Boreanaz's public crankiness over SMG's refusal to guest on Angel quite obviously had less to do with an assessment of her personality than the fraying thread keeping A GOOD SHOW DARNIT on TV. They had planned her two-episode guest spot to air during May sweeps to boost Angel's ratings and hopefully get the show renewed. Boreanaz's comments about "the fans" barely papered this over.

A lot of SMG's wierd comments indicate to me that she sees her work as a job rather than purely as art (BtVS as good "product," criticizing the 6th season because it deviated from the TV successful formula and cost the show ratings, etc.). I personally would love to believe that SMG etc. all think Joss is a genius and think BtVS was as great as I think it was, but it's also a job to them as well. Just like Mal, SMG's gotta keep flying in whatever she can.

I am reminded of how disappointed my wife was when she found out he dude who played Chris, the DJ/resident intellectual on Northern Exposure, confessed later that he rarely understood his lines. ACTING! GENIUS!!! THANK YOU!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:25 AM

Oh, Zachsmind, you're so right! JW could have been referring to any of the BtVS/Angel stars whom he's worked with for seven seasons -- which includes many of the BtVS cast (not just SMG) and both David Boreanaz and Charisma Carpenter from Angel.

Thanks for pointing that out. Comments that appear to have an obvious origin may not be what they seem.

Onto other, more positive things, like Joss's next creation(s)......

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:32 AM

Quote:

I DO know that the other performers are smarter than we are, keeping their mouth shut about it. And they ARE the insiders. We could learn a lot from their example. Ultimately it's none of our business whether SMG was an angel or a demon. If the cast & crew alumni of BtVS wanted to air dirty laundry publically, we'd know a lot more about it. It's just not important.

Whedon needs to move on anyway. I think he should start on a new tv series set in the Firefly world but with a whole new cast of characters. Start from scratch. Take what worked and learn from what didn't. Keep flyin'. Don't look back with anger.

Yeah... again.. not on board with you here..

1) I'm not of the mind that everyone need place so nice. That whole, say nice or say nothing is overrated, especially on the net.. imagine these message boards if no one said anything offensive to someone else.. if no one critisized anything about the show or the actors, there'd be nothing to do but compliment each other and that'd be a hell of alot of "boring".. to me anyway..

2) As far as new show with new cast in same verse? no way.. I'd watch it of coarse, but what a cop-out.. Joss has the balls to follow this show/idea/cast and I hope he does it all the way to the box office and second TV series..

Plus... the cast is the biggest reason I love Firefly in the first palce.. (and why IMO buffy can't compare to it)

::shrug::

~~Robb of Winterfell~~
~ http://winterfell.org ~
~High Fantasy Heavy Metal~

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:49 AM

JAREDAN

Since I can contribute two first-hand stories (okay, one's second-hand, but it's my wife) that are at least food for thought, I'll share them.

First, my wife was an extra on "Buffy" during season 4 (you can see her in the ep "Primeval", in an orange shirt during the scene where Sarah, Alyson, Anthony and Nicholas are talking on the campus quad). As she relates the story, three of those actors were very friendly and talkative with the crew and extras, and one (guess which) was distant and dismissive. Apparently, Sarah also had a dog that did not take kindly to certain people (as dogs sometimes do). However, if that dog were to bark at someone, like an extra, they were removed from the set.

Second, we attended the LA Sci-Fi/Comic Convention where Joss and the cast appeared and signed autographs last month. My wife asked them all a question about the remarkable comeraderie (sp?) on "Firefly". When she mentioned that "on some shows, one cast member will become the star and be a real diva and make for tension in the cast", the entire panel laughed out loud-- primarily Joss, Ben Edlund and Tim Minear. Joss even replied in heavy sarcasm, "I don't know what you're talking about."

That said, I think Sarah was a remarkable actress on "Buffy", and I think it's just a shame that what appears to be one person's unfortunate attitude is so detrimental to so many other people.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:09 AM

EMBASSY

I withhold judgment until I have walked a mile in her stylish yet affordable boots.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:10 AM

CAPTAINCDC

Of course I don't know for sure who JW meant by that comment, but there is only one person who has been the star of one of his shows for seven years and that is SMG. Boreanaz and Carpenter have been on two different shows and were not the stars for the entire time. I still think it was SMG he was referring to. Also, I would not expect her fellow actors to diss her publicly all the time, there are still some professionals in the business that do not air their dirty laundry in the press every day. What I base my opinion on of SMG off camera is from her own interviews, words from her own mouth and from her actions (like not showing up for the wrap party). Personally, I loved her acting on buffy. I am glad she was the one that portrayed the title character and not another actress. I think she needs to recognize and respect the people that have put her where she is today: the producers and crew, her fellow actors and actresses, and her many fans. I don't think she does those things, at least not with the producers, crew, and fans.

Quote:
Originally posted by phlebotinin:
Oh, Zachsmind, you're so right! JW could have been referring to any of the BtVS/Angel stars whom he's worked with for seven seasons -- which includes many of the BtVS cast (not just SMG) and both David Boreanaz and Charisma Carpenter from Angel.

Thanks for pointing that out. Comments that appear to have an obvious origin may not be what they seem.

Onto other, more positive things, like Joss's next creation(s)......

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 9:19 AM

Firstly, JAREDAN thank you so much for offering more direct examples of SMG's behavior than what I've read elsewhere in this thread. I've read a lot of positive and negative comments about SMG over the years. Rarely have I seen such anecdotal evidence so detailed and well worded. Again, thank you.

And now dear WINTERFELL:

"not on board with you here.."

We can agree to disagree. I certainly have no misconception of changing anyone's mind. Simply stating my piece and attempting to argue on behalf of decency and common sense.

"imagine these message boards if no one said anything offensive to someone else.. if no one critisized anything about the show or the actors..."

Imagine there's no heaven...

So the only way to keep things interesting is to be insulting and degrading to the very people and organizations that presented Whedon's works in the first place? That's nice. This obviously won FOX television over, us going around saying how stupid and cruel they were for dissing Firefly. I hear that because of our efforts as a bunch of whiny crybaby fans, Fox is going to start showing season two of Firefly three weeks ago next Wednesday.

That was sarcasm, by the way.

"As far as new show with new cast in same verse? no way.."

That's the same mentality that ended BtVS. No Gellar? No Buffy. Personally I think some creative writing woulda allowed for a season eight and nine without SMGs face ever showing again. I woulda done a Freaky Friday with Buffy, Willow and Tara, with Buffy's body being the odd one out. But that's just me. Plenty of other ways to do it.

Angel would have never happened with that attitude. The Firefly movie should have the same cast, but if/when it returns to TV it should do so with a new attitude and a look to the future not the past. It's a big 'verse. Lotta interesting people in it.

I love the cast of Firefly, don't get me wrong. However, if some or all of them are doing fine elsewhere, the show must go on. I'd rather see Firefly fly again with a few changes in cast than to see it grounded permanently just because getting nine talented people back together, is not unlike corralling cats.

Let's be reasonable and sensible here.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:03 AM

"And now dear WINTERFELL:

We can agree to disagree. I certainly have no misconception of changing anyone's mind. Simply stating my piece and attempting to argue on behalf of decency and common sense."

me too...

"Imagine there's no heaven...

So the only way to keep things interesting is to be insulting and degrading to the very people and organizations that presented Whedon's works in the first place? That's nice. This obviously won FOX television over, us going around saying how stupid and cruel they were for dissing Firefly. I hear that because of our efforts as a bunch of whiny crybaby fans, Fox is going to start showing season two of Firefly three weeks ago next Wednesday."

I imagine that everyday actually.. but truthfuly I don't remember my comments falling into that category.. but sure if ya wanna stretch my comments to unrealistic proportions...

"That's the same mentality that ended BtVS. No Gellar?.... Plenty of other ways to do it.

Angel would have never happened with that attitude. The Firefly movie should have the same cast, but if/when it returns to TV it should do so with a new attitude and a look to the future not the past. It's a big 'verse. Lotta interesting people in it.

I love the cast of Firefly, don't get me wrong. However, if some or all of them are doing fine elsewhere, the show must go on. I'd rather see Firefly fly again with a few changes in cast than to see it grounded permanently just because getting nine talented people back together, is not unlike corralling cats.

Let's be reasonable and sensible here."

hmm.. seems to me to be all just speculation based on your opinion of how/why BtVS ended, angel, and firefly.. I am thinking there were tons more involved than just one state of mind.

Personally, as far as firefly goes, I hope what I have always hope (as futile as it may seem) that the movie works, a new series is made.. and the original cast gets to do what it never had the chance to.

Aparently.. you obviously had other things in mind.. but hey.. to each his own..

cheers mate

~~~Robb of Winterfell~~~
~ http://winterfell.org ~
High Fantasy Heavy Metal

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:20 AM

Speculation? There is a difference between official announcements that talent has a contract with a firm for a movie or tv show outside the Mutant Enemy umbrella, and alleged interviews or hearsay that indicates talent A thought talent B was a random derogatory insult.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ZachsMind:
Speculation? There is a difference between official announcements that talent has a contract with a firm for a movie or tv show outside the Mutant Enemy umbrella, and alleged interviews or hearsay that indicates talent A thought talent B was a random derogatory insult.

------------------------------
"Hang on, travelers..."

I can only assume you're talking about your firefly comments.. the 9 folks being hard to get together because of contracts and such. If so, I can't say that i disagree.. it would be tuff, but worth it. The Speculation I was referring to was: on continuing the firefly series without the original cast and it working... plus your comments about the fate of BtVS and Angel.. these seem to be your idea of how the shows would work if you were in charge..

From what I have read about Joss, I don't think he'd agree.. and it's his show.. so.. ::shrug::

~~Robb of Winterfell~~
~ http://winterfell.org ~
High Fantasy Heavy Metal

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:52 PM

ANGELDOVE

I feel that in the end it isn't really about what type of person SMG is, we are just disappointed, as obviously David and Joss are, that she is unwilling to do her duty and appear on Angel again as David did on Btvs for her. I really do believe that it is a slap in the face to the loyal fans of Btvs for her to just walk away never to pick up a stake again. And although Angel will do just fine without her, isn't so much left untapped that never got the chance to play out? Of course this is just my opinion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:21 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by Jaredan:
That said, I think Sarah was a remarkable actress on "Buffy", and I think it's just a shame that what appears to be one person's unfortunate attitude is so detrimental to so many other people.

I mentioned something earlier about snobbery, but don't think I touched on something.

Has anyone ever thought that perhaps SMG's actions and attitudes were the manifestations of a deep seated insecurity?

Think about it. She made tons of money, is recognized world wide, for being Buffy. When you sit down and try to discuss it, it boils down to being a famous ex-cheerleader who kills vampires, except the ones she falls in love with, (or who fall in love with her)

Joss made the shows interesting and "real" the best way I can put it. But as high art, it will never get the recognition as such. She's just this gal, you know. She was being told how great she is, for doing something that when you think about it, is kinda silly.

She is not a doctor, saving lives. Not a fireman, inventor, or anyone else that has a major impact on society. She will never get the acclaim that Elizabeth Taylor, or Meryl Streep get.

Don't get me wrong. I love Buffy. It was a great show. But I have to admit I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to sit down and watch it. The premise is ludacrous on the surface. And if Buffy never existed, I and most of us, would never miss it.

Also, for the rest of her long career, she will be Buffy. She will always be the girl who was Buffy, a part she devoted a good chunk of her life. 7 years ain't nothing to an old fart like me, but at her age, its a good chunk of time.

So this has got to impact her self esteem, and that may in turn manifest itself by seeking validation, by acting like a diva and seeing if folks respond as if she is important.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:22 AM

JASONZZZ

IMHO, good analysis.

wait, too much analysis though.

Everyone has a choice in what they do and how they behave. smg chose to do this at some point and also chooses to continue doing this. There are at least 6+ other examples of how else to behave. The correct response is not to support this sort of behaviour. Fortunately, this one is easy to do - as smg is as talentless as she is without redeeming qualities. Time to move on to better actor/actresses and better people/shows in general.

Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:34 AM

NEVETEXTOR

Quote:
Originally posted by Angeldove:
I feel that in the end it isn't really about what type of person SMG is, we are just disappointed, as obviously David and Joss are, that she is unwilling to do her duty and appear on Angel again as David did on Btvs for her. I really do believe that it is a slap in the face to the loyal fans of Btvs for her to just walk away never to pick up a stake again. And although Angel will do just fine without her, isn't so much left untapped that never got the chance to play out? Of course this is just my opinion.

Duty?

Do you really mean that?

I mean, I'll criticize her for dumping Buffy in order to go do a bunch of movies that sound... lackluster at best, sure. I'll criticize her for being a prima donna, happily. (And I am among those who think that between the papers and the explicit comments made by Joss et al that Gellar was a diva. Where there's smoke and whatnot.)

But I have real trouble with the notion of a duty to continue playing a character after one's contract to play that character has ended...

I mean, hell, if one of the Firefly actors lands a job as a regular on a show that turns out to be a Seinfeld or Friends level hit, are they obliged to drop that should Firefly ever come back? (Because, though Firefly might be successful, it is pretty unlikely that it's going to become the next Friends-sized hit)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:31 AM

ANGELDOVE

Quote:
As reported in the current issue of TV Guide magazine, Sarah Michelle Gellar will not be back as Buffy this season, after all. The former star of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was in talks to do a two-episode arc on Buffy spinoff Angel. However, says Joss Whedon, creator of both supernatural series: "She feels it's not the right time." Asked about Gellar's decision to bail, Angel vamp David Boreanaz bares his fangs...

"I honestly don't know what happened," he grumpily tells TV Guide Online. "Why don't you ask her about it? I'm sure she'll come up with a good answer."

After simmering down — good thing his face doesn't contort monstrously, like it does on TV! — the actor looks to the future. Should Angel's fifth season turn out to be its last, Boreanaz hopes Gellar will at least do the final episode, if only to help him bite the dust in style. "If Sarah wants to come back for a final farewell — like I did for her on her series finale — that would be fantastic," he says. "Now, that's something for her to decide. That would be great, to have her. I think it would be great for the fans to see that.

"I think it's a responsibility to do those [farewell] shows and give the appreciation for the fans that are watching this," Boreanaz adds. "Those are the people that tune in and have made us who were are today. It's not like you do 50 or 100 episodes of a show and say, 'Screw you.' You have a responsibility to your fans, and that's important. You give as much as you can responsibly, as long as you're having fun with it."

Are you listening, Ms. Gellar? Buffy's fans are staking their hopes on it.

Yes I mean duty and my feeling came directly from this article that says I'm not the only one who thinks this way. And I am not saying do this forever, be Buffy forever, I just strongly feel that two or three episodes are very little to give back to those fans who have made her the star that she is. Yes and I just pissed off a lot of SMG fans with that last line, but I am a fan as well, but of Buffy, and now that SMG has played this part, we are all stuck with not seeing anyone else in this part. Can you imagine trying to have someone else fill in for her to do some guest shots on Angel to play out that side of her character, no, and it would never be done. That is the point I am trying to make. At this point she has all the control on whether we will ever see Buffy again, and I feel if not just for the fans, but for David and Joss, swallow your pride do a few eps, is it going to kill you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:44 AM

NEVETEXTOR

I imagine that she is justly afraid of being typecast.

I would be if I played the same role for 7 years on a popular cult show with a dedicated fandom.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:14 PM

ANGELDOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Nevetextor:
I imagine that she is justly afraid of being typecast.

I would be if I played the same role for 7 years on a popular cult show with a dedicated fandom.

But don't you feel she already is at this point, but no need to beat a dead horse deader, I would just really love to see her do a last dance on Angel.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:23 PM

SPIKESPIEGEL

Nice discussion going on here. Let me offer some thoughts:

1. SMG has NO "duty" regarding Buffy. She got paid to do a job. On the one hand, she got money and fame, on the other, she runs the risk of typecasting. Her fans watched the show, but so what? We own her future career decisions? I would hope she'd have generally pleasant feelings toward us, but she is not my trained monkey, required to perform at my will.

2. I recall seeing a probably-overly-politic "official comment" saying that Sarah felt the "time wasn't right" to bring Buffy back. Anyone recall that? What if she really DOES think that? What if the story ideas Joss pitched were unattractive to her? I'd also heard she and JW were sometimes at odds over the direction of the show and the stuff Buffy went through. Now that she's no longer employed by Mutant Enemy, SMG has as much right to turn down an Angel script as she does any feature script that she might not like.

3. Has she had a film released since Buffy wrapped? Can you blame her for not wanting her first post-Buffy move to be ... playing Buffy? Give the girl a freakin' break.

4. This idea of diva ... what if she's a bit of a pain in the ass? What if she's not all that chummy on set, or unafraid to voice her opinions or use her status? She's ON A JOB, not at a junior-high sleepover. Professionalism is all that's required, and if we want to take the subtext of everyone calling her professional to mean yeah, professional, but not nice ... well, if she's nice enough to still be labeled professional, she's nice enough.

I do hope to see Buffy again ... maybe if Angel gets a next season, SMG will be up for it. But if not, then not.

"Bang."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:23 PM

DARWIN

since everyone's talkin about angel. I pray to some kind of god that The O.C. (which is a good show) doesn't take any audience away from Angel, seeing as they've got the same time slot.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 12:53 PM

JUSTDAVID

SpikeSpiegel, here's my thoughts on your thoughts.

Quote:
1. SMG has NO "duty" regarding Buffy. She got paid to do a job. On the one hand, she got money and fame, on the other, she runs the risk of typecasting. Her fans watched the show, but so what? We own her future career decisions? I would hope she'd have generally pleasant feelings toward us, but she is not my trained monkey, required to perform at my will.

I think that a person in her position should feel a sense of duty to Buffy fans, and her apparent lack of that is what many of us are disappointed with.

Quote:
2. I recall seeing a probably-overly-politic "official comment" saying that Sarah felt the "time wasn't right" to bring Buffy back. Anyone recall that? What if she really DOES think that? What if the story ideas Joss pitched were unattractive to her? I'd also heard she and JW were sometimes at odds over the direction of the show and the stuff Buffy went through. Now that she's no longer employed by Mutant Enemy, SMG has as much right to turn down an Angel script as she does any feature script that she might not like.

This could be the last season of Angel, therefore the only time possible, and if she just didn't like the script, I bet they'd be willing to modify it enough to appease her concerns.

Quote:
3. Has she had a film released since Buffy wrapped? Can you blame her for not wanting her first post-Buffy move to be ... playing Buffy? Give the girl a freakin' break.

I think an appearance on Angel would only boost her audience for whatever project comes next.

Quote:
4. This idea of diva ... what if she's a bit of a pain in the ass? What if she's not all that chummy on set, or unafraid to voice her opinions or use her status? She's ON A JOB, not at a junior-high sleepover. Professionalism is all that's required, and if we want to take the subtext of everyone calling her professional to mean yeah, professional, but not nice ... well, if she's nice enough to still be labeled professional, she's nice enough.

Being professional is fine, but that should include treating her co-workers with respect.

Haken needs a new development system. Please donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:16 PM

MAAREK

Anyone remember that Jeff Pruitt and Sophia Crawford mess? Jeff publicly stated that he basically hated Sarah and Sarah was the reason they got fired. At the end of the fourth season.

And he claimed Sarah was a huge diva. Of course, he was pretty sour after being fired, but he did work there.

Jeff was the stuntcoordinator and Sophia was Sarahs stunt double. After their firing the stuntwork went way down.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 2:45 PM

SPIKESPIEGEL

Hey Justdavid, I'm gonna strongly disagree with you, but don't take it personal:

Quote:
Originally posted by JustDavid:
I think that a person in her position should feel a sense of duty to Buffy fans, and her apparent lack of that is what many of us are disappointed with.

Yes, but that's where the problem lies. You think she "should," but she doesn't have to. She owes us nothing. We owe her nothing. If she owes it to us to reprise Buffy on command, what else will you demand? Since we're fans of her as a tough, empowered heroine, perhaps she "owes" it to us to never play a weak/passive/victimized woman? Or maybe we should hold her obligated to never play a villain?

When you say she "should" do something, you have no basis for that demand. You're essentially restricting her freedom to make choices, to control her career, based on what? That you used to watch her show? What about a fan who loved her as a soap actress and thought she owed it to her soap fans not to do some silly vampire show when she SHOULD be on daytime TV?

Quote:
This could be the last season of Angel, therefore the only time possible, and if she just didn't like the script, I bet they'd be willing to modify it enough to appease her concerns.

Your "bet" there is too speculative. You don't know what her concerns were. We only know they didn't succeed in getting her. The fact that she's NOT doing the show tells us one thing: They did NOT pitch her a story so good, it overcame whatever other resistance she might've had. And as for it being Angel's last season, maybe. Not her problem. Again, being Buffy is no longer her job, and it's not her obligation.

Quote:
I think an appearance on Angel would only boost her audience for whatever project comes next.

You think that. But she might think otherwise. Clearly, the fact she turned down the gig means that she didn't find that possibility so compelling that it overcame whatever other reasons she had for not doing it.

Quote:
Being professional is fine, but that should include treating her co-workers with respect.

That's what I said. She doesn't have to be their friend, and she doesn't need them to like her.

Her career is her business, her art (one presumes) and her future, and she owes it to HERSELF to manage that as she sees fit. You think an Angel shot would be a help. She might think that after seven years as Buffy, an ep or two of Angel ain't gonna do anything more. She may think that it's time to devote herself to her movie career, considering that other than Buffy, her work to date has been slight. She's at a very delicate transition right now, and meeting the demands of fans who feel an entitlement to her fictional persona should not be on her agenda.

"Bang."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 2:51 PM

SUCCATASH

Well, we can all agree she's being selfish. SpikeSpiegel's point is that people have a right to be selfish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 3:08 PM

SPIKESPIEGEL

Yes, Succatash, with the caveat that I don't really know why she said "no," so selfish might only apply in the sense that almost any decision can be seen as selfish (I work at this job here because they pay me enough money. I spend time with my friends because they're nice to me ...).

In fact, since we don't know what they wanted her to do (say, a wearisome ep rehashing her affairs with Spike and Angel ... sigh ...) she might have been very much living up to any "obligation" to her fans by not giving us something disappointing.
('course, if that were the motivation, she should've bowed out of most of the last two seasons of "Buffy," but that's another impassioned thread ...)

"Bang."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:11 PM

JASONZZZ

Well, those people who think otherwise about SMG's selfishness and poor choices can certainly make an attempt to influence her decisions. You can do so with a positive spin or a negative spin. Send her big fan letters to let her know how much you appreciate what she has done as an actor - maybe remind her that there are still lots of fans out there and lots of history. Or you can choose to do so with some negative influence, actively boycott and influence others to boycott her shows and work; send letters to her director, agencies, studios - maybe after she will ready to reprise her role then...

Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 14, 2004 6:23 PM