XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: davidjohnston29@block.com   
      
   On 3/11/2017 11:33 PM, Your Name wrote:   
      
   >>>> That's not becaue Buffy's worse.  It's because the Charmed Ones are   
   >>>> easily replaced by another set of three.  You'd have to wait a lot   
   >>>> longer to before recasting the part of Buffy would fly.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nah. She's easily replaced ...   
   >>   
   >> You are of course wrong.  The character is still very much identified   
   >> with the actress.  That won't stop an eventual reboot, but the turn   
   >> around time is going to be around 40 years same as for Star Trek.   
   >   
   > You do realise that Gellar herself was the replacement for the actress   
   > from the movie version?   
      
   I do.  But 2 hours of a movie flop doesn't ingrain itself the way 7   
   seasons of a fairly successful TV series does.   
      
   (I have a vague, possibly wrong, recollection   
   > that Gellar was even the second choice for the TV role.)   
   >   
   > EVERY actor is replaceable in Hollyweird. Nobody thought they'd be   
   > stupid enough to re-do MacGyver since Richard Dean Anderson *was*   
   > MacGyver, but they still did (and it's horrible).   
   >   
      
   Macgyver is from 12 years earlier than Buffy.  And didn't have the same   
   kind of fanatical following that Star Trek or Buffy did.  Macgyver has   
   547 fanfics on fanfiction.net.  Buffy has 49.714.  Consider what those   
   numbers mean in terms of the shows respective ability to inspire lasting   
   devotion.  MacGyver was ultimately pretty forgettable.  Literally.  I"m   
   straining to remember any of the episodes I watched. Oh, I remember the   
   time he finally used a gun...by throwing it.  And the time he dropped   
   the unkillable assassin down a mineshaft.  That's about it.  But Richard   
   Dean Anderson was great on Stargate.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)