The Disney-owned streaming platform has pulled the plug on its much-anticipated “Buffy the Vampire” revival, a year after star Sarah Michelle Gellar confirmed the series was officially in the works. A “really sad” Gellar delivered news of the pre-debut cancellation to fans in a brief Instagram video shared Saturday. She was set to executive produce the series, tentatively titled “Buffy: New Sunnydale,” with Oscar-winning filmmaker Chloé Zhao set to direct.
“I never thought I would find myself back in Buffy’s stylish yet affordable boots and thanks to Chloé I was reminded [of] how much I love her and how much she means not only to me but to all of you,” Gellar said. “This doesn’t change any of that.”
She added: “I promise if the apocalypse actually comes you can still beep me.”
Gellar’s bittersweet announcement prompted Los Angeles resident Bren O’Brien to organize a rally on Monday outside Hulu’s headquarters in Santa Monica. O’Brien, a lifelong “Buffy” fan, displayed several posters urging the streamer to reconsider its decision along the sidewalk. One bright red poster read “Bring Buffy Back!!” scrawled in black ink. Another, bearing Gellar’s likeness, asserted, “Canceling Buffy Isn’t smart, the world needs a hero!”
“I’m really sad. This was a moment that I’ve been waiting decades for,” O’Brien said.
Hulu officially began production on the “Buffy” sequel series after years of careful consideration by Gellar. Last year, the cast for the pilot was assembled while Gellar vowed , “We will only make this show if we can do it right.”
The “Buffy” star did not share additional details about the cancellation in her weekend post, but Zhao said at the 2026 Academy Awards red carpet that she was “not surprised” by Hulu’s decision.
“I had an incredible, incredible time with Sarah, with all the cast and crew doing this. We, first and foremost, see ourselves as the guardians of the original show,” the “Hamnet” filmmaker told Variety on Sunday. “Our priority for Sarah and for us has always been to be truthful to the show, to be truthful to our fans. So, things happen for a reason, and we keep our hearts open and we welcome the mystery.”
Actor Ryan Kiera Armstrong, who was set to lead the show as a supernatural slayer opposite Gellar, lamented the cancellation on Instagram. “Your slayer,” she captioned a photo of herself in costume.
“Buffy” premiered in 1997 and aired on the WB until 2001 when it moved to UPN. Though the series ended in 2003 , it spawned the spinoff series “Angel” which aired from 1999 to 2004 on the WB. Other prospective “Buffy” revivals, however, reportedly struggled to make it past development. Additionally, several actors in recent years have accused “Buffy” creator Joss Whedon of misconduct.
After Gellar broke the cancellation news, “Buffy” fans reacted online, with many of them slamming Hulu for its “terrible decision.” A representative for Hulu did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.
O’Brien, among the disappointed fans, said he began posting about the cancellation online, creating posters and promoting his rally. He said he was surprised by Hulu’s decision because “Buffy” is “such a valuable IP to have,” considering its generations of fans.
“It’s just a no-brainer,” he added.
Erin McClory, a fellow “Buffy” fan, joined O’Brien outside of Hulu’s headquarters and held a poster depicting a wooden stake through a broken heart. She said she hopes rallying around the slain “Buffy” series can help persuade Hulu to reconsider its decision or prompt another network to pick up the show.
“It seems crazy for them to not even give it a chance,” she said.
Though both O’Brien and McClory say they’re eager for new “Buffy” material down the line, their support for the show remains steadfast.
“We’ll just keep doing what we’ve been doing and keep sharing Buffy edits [on social media],” O’Brien said, then sighed. “I want new content.”
The saga of “A Court of Thorns and Roses” will continue.
Author Sarah J. Maas announced on Alex Cooper’s “Call Her Daddy” podcast Wednesday that two new books will be released in the hugely popular romantasy series, ending a five-year drought since the fifth installment, “A Court of Silver Flames.” The sixth book will be published on Oct. 27, 2026, and the seventh on Jan. 12, 2027.
“It took me a while to find the right story and to be in the right headspace. And then, like what poured out of me was this and it poured out very quickly,” the author told Cooper. “The story that was finally ready to come out of me was big. Really, really big.”
Maas first teased the sixth book on Instagram in July, with the caption “First drafts DONE” on a video that drew nearly a million likes.
Maas did not share details about the book titles, cover art or whose point of view the stories will follow, but did mention that the character’s perspective was “one of the surprising things” for her while writing.
On Instagram, Maas thanked her fans for their patience, passion and “never letting the world fade.”
“I know how long you’ve waited. I know how much these characters mean to you. And I also know these stories deserve more than speed and deadlines. They deserve my best self. They deserve the right moment,” Maas wrote. “I’m so honored by the way you guys have always embraced Prythian as your own. I truly hope it feels like coming home for you like it did for me.”
The first installment of the “A Court of Thorns and Roses” series was released in 2015, but the franchise gained popularity on BookTok — a TikTok subcommunity dedicated to literature — during the COVID-19 pandemic. The books follow Feyre Archeron in the faerie lands of Prythian and her love story with the High Lord of the Night Court, Rhysand.
Maas has sold more than 70 million English copies between her interconnected “Throne of Glass,” “A Court of Thorns and Roses” and “Crescent City” series, according to her website. Maas is a major player in the romantasy — a portmanteau of romance and fantasy — genre, which has soared in popularity on TikTok.
“This is going to sound silly, and you probably won’t believe me, but just talking about things like legacy is beyond for me,” Maas told Cooper. “I’m still very much that girl in middle school or high school sneaking off to watch anime or drool over Legolas and getting to go play in these worlds in my head and do the thing that makes me come alive every day, that’s incredible.”
AUSTIN, Tex. — The lobby walls of the Driskill Hotel are hung with the portraits of figures of Texas political lore, men like Sam Houston and William B. Travis of Alamo fame. But on a rainy evening, a rather demure-looking woman in a conservative black suit and tidy tucked hairdo is the center of attention.
First, Texas Democratic Party chairman Bob Slagle comes up to hug and say hello. They chat briefly about how well things are going in the presidential campaign.
Then two young women walk by, one whispering to the other, “Is that Sarah Weddington?” They turn back and stop to introduce themselves. As the two say goodby, one adds: “Of course, it goes without saying how much I admire you.”
Weddington is used to this by now. The 46-year-old lawyer gained fame from her first case, Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1972 Supreme Court decision.
Since then, Weddington has spent almost two decades advocating abortion rights. Today, she has been in her adopted hometown of Austin signing copies of her new book, “A Question of Choice: The Lawyer Who Won Roe v. Wade,” for a parade of admirers. Longtime friends presented many of the almost 500 copies she signs; young women like the two who paused to thank her offered others.
Weddington stood for more than five hours at a podium, first at a university bookstore and later in the hotel ballroom, signing in a consistently elegant hand. Everyone is greeted with a smile, some with hugs. An aura of restraint surrounds her, an almost Victorian quality in a woman some see as a sort of virago, a demon of the left who has led the charge for legalized abortion.
Some friends describe her as “ladylike”; almost all say she is very private.
And yet her book begins with a revelation that she had kept a very personal secret. In 1967, while a young, unmarried law student at the University of Texas, this daughter of a minister and graduate of a small Methodist college, traveled to “a dirty Mexican border town to have an abortion, fleeing the law that made abortion illegal in Texas.”
She was accompanied by her then-boyfriend and later husband, fellow law student Ron Weddington. Divorced amicably in 1974, they kept the secret until the publication of the book. “I am a very private person and would never have talked about this if I hadn’t felt that I wanted to do everything I could to help win it again. That I can’t win it in the courts, nobody can. That’s where we have to win is at the ballot box. And it was like I had to give it everything I had and it was the one thing I had never given. . . .
“My own thoughts about it are that if I had to write a caption it would be ‘giving up privacy in order to save it.’ I feel like I’m giving something very precious up and that is the ability to live my life in privacy. . . . We always had an agreement not to talk about this without talking to the other, and he (her former husband) always observed it.”
Journalist Linda Ellerbee, a friend and fellow Texan, suggested that Weddington humanize her book to make it more accessible to readers. The first draft, Weddington acknowledges, was long and perhaps too legalistic: “First, I wanted to write the perfect book, and I couldn’t write that book. Then someone said, ‘Why don’t you practice writing the book,’ and I could do that because I was freeing myself.”
Weddington admits that a more likely publication date would have been 1993, the 20th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. But in the last few years, it became increasingly obvious to her that the landmark decision was in jeopardy: “In the book, I say if anybody had said to me in 1969 or 1973, ‘You will still be talking about this in 1992,’ I would have thought they were crazy.”
As president of the National Abortion Rights Action League, she had witnessed the first skirmishes of what she calls a war of attrition during the early years of the Reagan presidency. But at that point, she says, “We still had the trump card, the Supreme Court.”
Reagan, who she notes signed California’s liberal 1967 abortion law, then began to make conservative appointments to the high court. And at that point, Weddington says, “I began to say I was for mandatory life support systems for older justices.”
The 1989, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services decision was the real turning point, she says, and now she sees the battle lines on three fronts: the Supreme Court, the Congress, which is considering the Freedom of Choice Bill, and state legislatures.
Her book’s publication, just two months before the fall election, is no accident. President Bush, she says, made “a pact with the radical right” in 1988, and abortion-rights advocates cannot risk more of his court appointments: “The sands of time ran out when Clarence Thomas was confirmed.”
Weddington says Bill Clinton would sign the Freedom of Choice Act. But even a Clinton victory will not persuade her to sit back and say the fight is over. The Arkansas governor has supported some restrictions, as Weddington describes them, particularly regarding abortions for minors. “We are trying to educate him; it’s not a natural,” she says. “I don’t think you can elect Clinton and say, ‘Well, let’s forget about that.’ ”
For this activist lawyer, who drew her strength from the women’s movement in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s, the fight is not over on other fronts, either. She sees a need to engage the younger generation and to remind Americans why Roe was so important.
“Intellectually, they believe that choice should be available, but emotionally, they have never known what it was like for it not to be,” Weddington says of younger Americans. “You can’t expect them to have the same emotional memories and commitments, and yet I don’t think you can preach to them.”
The book’s final section is a call to arms, a detailed plan for action that gives Roe defenders a game plan. Weddington expects the fight to continue well into the next century and plans to continue the battle.
“I think this issue is so basic you can’t desert it, and while it’s in trouble, you’ve got to keep plugging,” she says. “I see a new group of people who haven’t been as active, but I think they will be more comfortable with a broader focus.” That focus, she says, should include family issues and support for birth control programs.
*
In one sense, Weddington admits, her career peaked at age 27 when she stood before the U.S. Supreme Court and argued her case for a woman’s right to choose. But the legal fight that began at a garage sale fund-raiser in 1969 and culminated in Roe–and her subsequent service as a special assistant on women’s issues in the Carter White House–was heady stuff for a young woman from Abilene.
She also served as one of the first women in the Texas House of Representatives (1973-1977) and was frequently mentioned as a candidate for statewide office, long before Ann Richards, her former legislative aide, won the governor’s race. Privately, a few friends admit that the stellar political career has passed Weddington by.
Elective office is not likely at this point. “I have a question whether the price is worth it,” she says. “There’s no money, and everybody is in a sour mood. When I ran, I ran to do something, and right now I don’t see that you can do that much. . . .”
For her beliefs, Weddington has paid a high personal price. She is dogged by activists opposed to abortion. At the Austin bookstore signing, several security guards were on hand.
But Roe v. Wade has also given Weddington opportunities to spread her message. For several years, she and Phyllis Schafly toured on a sort of abortion cross-fire show. Apart from not sharing the same views, they never even shared the same car. “We once tried to find something to talk about, and the only thing we agreed on was airplane coffee was usually bad,” Weddington says.
Now, Weddington plans to continue to teach part time at the University of Texas, speak around the country and ready herself for the barrage of publicity next year on the 20th anniversary of Roe. Should Clinton be elected, she would not mind serving as an adviser, but she would not want to have a full-time position in Washington. And she would like to write another book or two.
Not the least of her contributions is the impact Weddington has had on young people, particularly women. Time after time, during her Austin book signing, women in their 20s approach her, say that they had heard her speak before and tell her that she has changed their lives.
And at the last minute, three young women dash in from the rain and ask Weddington to sign their books. All three are recent graduates of the University of Texas law school and all three are Texas Supreme Court clerks. When Weddington asks how many women are in their law class, they say about 150.
Weddington smiles and says there were five when she graduated 24 years ago.
SACRAMENTO — Backers of a ballot measure that would require parents to be notified before an abortion is performed on a minor acknowledged Friday that the 15-year-old on which “Sarah’s Law” is based had a child and was in a common-law marriage before she died of complications from an abortion in 1994.
Proponents of the measure recently submitted an argument for the state voter guide saying the death of “Sarah” might have been prevented but her parents were not told she had had an abortion and so did not know the reason for her failing health. The proposal, Proposition 4, will appear on California’s statewide ballot in November.
In court papers filed in her home state of Texas after her death, the man with whom she lived declared himself her common-law husband in an effort to secure custody of the child. Texas recognizes common-law marriage and does not view a married 15-year-old as a minor, according to an attorney for Planned Parenthood.
A lawsuit co-sponsored by Planned Parenthood Affiliates and filed Friday in Sacramento County Superior Court asks the secretary of state to remove the girl’s story and other information it deemed misleading, including any reference to “Sarah’s Law,” from the material submitted for the official voter guide.
“If you can’t believe the Sarah story, there’s a lot in the ballot argument you can’t believe,” said Ana Sandoval, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood and the campaign against Proposition 4.
Backers of the initiative said they learned the details after submitting the ballot argument last month and would review the lawsuit before deciding whether to amend the language for the voter guide.
“However, she was still 15 and was not equipped to make medical decisions on her own, whether she was living with the father of her child or not,” said Erica Little, a spokeswoman for the campaign supporting the proposition.
She confirmed that “Sarah” was Jammie Garcia Yanez-Villegas, who died in Texas in 1994. The name Sarah was used to protect her identity.
“We will modify the way we present Sarah to be accurate with the information,” Little said. “But we don’t think the use of her story is marred.”
Planned Parenthood argues that the Sarah story should be dropped from the voter pamphlet because a parental notification law would not have applied in her case.
Proposition 4 would amend the California Constitution to prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies the minor’s parent or legal guardian.
State voters have twice rejected similar measures.
Supporters of the measure, including Orange County Dist. Atty. Tony Rackauckas, signed a ballot argument that cites “Sarah’s” death as an example of why the law is needed.
“Had someone in her family known about the abortion, Sarah’s life could have been saved,” the supporting argument reads.
Sarah’s story was challenged in the rebuttal argument filed for the voter’s guide by a group that included Kathy Kneer, president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California.
“Nothing in Prop. 4 would have prevented her tragic death,” the rebuttal says.
Viewers of ITV’s new true crime drama The Lady, starring Natalie Dormer as Sarah Ferguson, have voiced concerns about the timing of the series amid ongoing royal controversy
22:13, 22 Feb 2026Updated 22:42, 22 Feb 2026
ITV The Lady airs tonight and is based on a true story(Image: ITV)
ITV’s The Lady debuted this evening, prompting immediate reaction from viewers just minutes into the Sarah Ferguson drama.
The four-part true crime series chronicles the devastating story of Sarah Ferguson’s royal assistant, Jane Andrews, whose trajectory from humble beginnings to palace life ended with her being convicted of murdering her partner, Thomas Cressman, in 2000.
According to the opening episode’s description, “Working-class woman Jane Andrews wants more for her life and is unlucky in love.”
It continues: “On the brink of losing all hope, she receives a letter inviting her to interview for a job with Sarah, Duchess of York, at Buckingham Palace. Securing the job, she moves to London – but life in the palace is gruelling, and Jane struggles to fit in, but she and Sarah find common ground in their experiences of love and betrayal.”
Mia McKenna-Bruce portrays Jane Andrews in the ITV production, whilst Natalie Dormer underwent a transformation to embody Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, reports the Express.
Within minutes of broadcast, audiences flocked to social media to voice their opinions, with numerous commenters branding it “poor taste” and “bad timing”.
One viewer declared: “Quite possibly, the worst-timed launch of a TV series, ever. #thelady,” whilst another questioned: “Was it the best time to show #TheLady, considering all the controversy around Andrew Windsor and Sarah Ferguson?”
However, a third viewer observed: “ITV couldn’t have timed this any better. It’s pretty good too #TheLady.”
Other viewers concurred, with one stating, “Bad taste at the moment showing anything to do with Sarah Ferguson,” whilst another remarked, “I don’t think this drama could have been timed any better #TheLady.”
For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website.
The production also garnered widespread acclaim, with one fan writing, “Ok tunes have me hooked already…..”
Another viewer shared their enthusiasm: “#thelady ok 15 mins in, and I’m hooked! Quality-made drama.”
Tomorrow evening’s second episode, which can be streamed on ITVX, promises: ” Jane meets dashing businessman Luis Castillo, and the two begin a relationship, but tensions soon erupt on a holiday in Greece and she becomes increasingly unstable.”
The synopsis continues: “As Jane’s carefully constructed composure starts to fracture and puts her position with the duchess at risk, a lifeline appears in the shape of the charismatic Tommy Cressman.”
The third episode will subsequently be broadcast next Sunday at 9pm on ITV.
The Lady continues tomorrow evening at 9pm on ITV, with episodes currently available to stream on ITVX.
Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source.** Click here to activate**** or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.**
The cast of “Scrubs” knows that the show’s creator, Bill Lawrence, has a habit of building communities with his series, which include “Ted Lasso” and “Shrinking.” But the “Scrubs” crew knows they are the closest.
“Since I work on all those shows, I can say that we’re the tightest-knit group,” says Zach Braff on a video call with his fellow fake doctors Sarah Chalke and Donald Faison. “We vacation together.”
Lawrence, just a day later, has to concede that Braff has a point. “It’s annoying because I have to admit that they are right,” he says. “We’ve stayed the tightest because we all still spend way too much time together.”
And now the gang is back together for a new, nine-episode season of the beloved series premiering Feb. 25 on ABC, and the next day on Hulu. When “Scrubs” debuted in 2001, narrator J.D. (Braff), his best friend Turk (Faison) and on-again, off-again love interest Elliot (Chalke) were interns at Sacred Heart Hospital. Now, J.D. is a concierge doctor, while Turk and Elliot have advanced to leadership positions at Sacred Heart. There’s a new batch of interns, a new cheery hospital representative (Vanessa Bayer) whose job involves making sure no one gets offended, and a new doctor (Joel Kim Booster) who is not too fond of J.D. But there are also other familiar faces including John C. McGinley as J.D.’s begrudging mentor Dr. Cox and Judy Reyes as nurse Carla, who also happens to be Turk’s wife.
“Scrubs” then and now: Sarah Chalke, Zach Braff and Donald Faison in the original series, left, and in the ABC revival.(Chris Haston/NBC)(Brian Bowen Smith/Disney)
In the Season 8 finale — before the show reset with a medical school setting — J.D., always prone to elaborate fantasy sequences, sees a vision of how his life is going to turn out. His reality doesn’t exactly resemble that.
“We say midlife crisis or whatever, but it’s a time of questioning, a time where you take stock of your life,” says showrunner Aseem Batra. “That’s really a cool time to catch up with our characters because when we saw them last, they were in their quarter life.”
Batra herself has followed a similar path to the characters. After working as an assistant at ABC, her first writing gig was on “Scrubs.” Now she’s in a position of authority. “Truly, it was the best job I had and it was my first job and I’m doing it again out of pure love,” she says. (Longtime “Scrubs” writer Tim Hobert was originally announced as co-showrunner but departed the project.)
Lawrence, who serves as executive producer on the new incarnation, can also see a parallel between his path and that of his fictional creations. “I’m only good at writing about stuff that’s at least tangentially part of my life and the idea that of those young goofballs who are the students now being the teachers, it’s very much part of my life right now,” he says.
“Scrubs” creator Bill Lawrence has handed the reins to Aseem Batra, who is the showrunner of the revival. “Truly, it was the best job I had and it was my first job and I’m doing it again out of pure love,” she says.
(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
Still, Lawrence says the reason the revival of the show was able to work is because of the closeness of the original cast. Faison and Braff are still constantly collaborating whether that’s on a podcast or commercials, and even though she’s decamped from Los Angeles to Canada, Chalke makes a point to keep in touch. On a boisterous Zoom call, we spoke about returning to their beloved characters.
What were your reactions coming back to this world?
Donald Faison: Please. Please. Revive it. Do me that solid and revive it.
Sarah Chalke: I manifested it. A couple years ago, I was like, “Oh, I miss ‘Scrubs.’ I want to do a comedy like ‘Scrubs’ that shoots in Vancouver, and then it all happened.”
Zach Braff: To be honest, I was very surprised when it actually started happening that ABC was going to put it in prime time. I thought it might be something on Hulu. That felt like a giant audience with Hulu the next day and a really big scale and really a belief in the project. That was really exciting.
Why do you think the show’s legacy is so strong that there is that belief?
Braff: I think that it’s Bill’s unique mix of comedy and pathos and emotion and fantasy. It’s such a unique recipe. But in execution, as he did with the first pilot, it was undeniable. It was so groundbreaking at the time. No one had done that in the network space. It was also at a time when there was no streaming. So, the show was on at 9:30 and Bill was trying to push what you could still do on network [television]. That’s why it was a more risqué version of what we’re doing now. I think now the goal was — well, there’s streaming for that. What’s a show that we can have on at 8 that pairs with “Abbott Elementary” that parents can watch with their kids? Maybe some jokes will fly over the kids’ heads, but it’s not trying to compete with what people are doing on streaming.
What do you remember about getting cast? You were all in your 20s.
Faison: I was the oldest one. Still the oldest one. I remember how big of a deal it was. This was the pilot of the season. I remember everybody and their mama was talking about how great the script was and how they wanted to be on the show. I remember my agent telling me, “This is a big one. The creator of the show really likes you. Let’s see what you can do.”
Chalke: I didn’t know this until two days ago. Our casting director came up to set to visit, and she said I was the first person to audition on the first morning of casting. In the character description, it said she moves and talks at a faster pace than normal humans. And in every single job, I’ve been told, “Slow down.” It felt like the luckiest thing; I’ll never forget when Bill called me and said that I got it and I truly couldn’t believe it. And the experience far exceeded any expectation I could have had about what it was going to be.
When I think back on it, what I remember is what that felt like to be at work every day, genuinely laughing so hard to the point where it would get late at night and there was one sound that Zach and Donald could make that would make me laugh.
Sarah Chalke on being cast in “Scrubs”: “I’ll never forget when Bill called me and said that I got it and I truly couldn’t believe it. And the experience far exceeded any expectation I could have had about what it was going to be.”
(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
What was the sound?
Faison: It’s almost like a fart.
Braff: No, it’s not a fart.
Faison: I’m not trying to make a fart joke. But do you know how when you fart, it always sounds like a question mark. So, that’s the sound.
Braff: Esther, do not use this, please. It’s a high-pitched noise like this [does noise]. We would do it quietly enough that no one would hear we were doing it. And then she would break down laughing and ruin the take and we’d be like, “Sarah, what are you doing? It’s late. We want to go home.”
Zach, what were your initial thoughts about the project?
Braff: I was waiting tables at a French-Vietnamese restaurant called Le Colonial at Beverly and Robertson [in L.A.]. And I had to wear a tunic, which I put into “Garden State.” I’d been auditioning for so many things and not really getting much traction in the sitcom space, but I read this and I thought it was so funny. I was like, “Oh, I think I could really sell this because I find it so funny.”
How did you know the chemistry between the three of you was going to work?
Braff: When we were shooting the pilot, I was just like, “Wow. I really love these people.” I was obsessed with Sarah. I thought Donald was the funniest person I’d ever met. And then Bill was legitimately the funniest person I’ve ever met. I just felt in really good hands.
Chalke: We were all so excited to be there and we’d just hang out and watch the other scenes that we weren’t in. And I remember just being by the monitor, watching everybody else work and just being so blown away.
Braff: We would hang out after we were wrapped, which Sarah still does occasionally. This time Donald came early because there’s this really weird coffee robot in the production office that Donald seems to think is amazing coffee. So, I caught him a few times coming in early for the coffee robot.
Faison: That’s not why I came in early. I was notoriously late and unprepared the first go of “Scrubs.” I heard Tom Hanks talking about how he was a young actor and a very established actor kept forgetting their lines. And the director finally goes, “Ah, come on, come on guys. Three things. Show up early, know the text, have an idea. Let’s take 10,” and walks away. And Tom Hanks goes, “Oh, if that’s what it takes, I can do that s—.” So, I took that to heart and this is the second opportunity.
Braff: I thought it was the coffee robot.
Zach Braff on his co-stars: “When we were shooting the pilot, I was just like, ‘Wow. I really love these people.’ I was obsessed with Sarah. I thought Donald was the funniest person I’d ever met.”(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
But Sarah would hang out after you wrapped?
Chalke: We are all executive producers on this. Zach is producing and directing and editing and writing and doing all of the things, and that’s been really neat to watch. I legitimately do want to learn. Obviously, there’s a balance of that with also going back into work full-time and having two kids.
Braff: Sarah gave me this whole speech at the top of the show. She’s like, “Hey, I really do want to learn this stuff. I want to sit by your director’s chair. I want to ask you questions. I want to learn to genuinely [executive produce], genuinely direct.” And I was like, “Great.” The first week I was like, “All right. Sarah, we’re going on a big tech scout. It’s probably going to be about…”
Chalke: “In a van for seven hours.”
Braff: I go, “You’re going to learn more on the tech scout than you could in film school.” And she’s like, “No, I won’t be able to do that.” And then by the end of the nine episodes, Sarah was like, “I think my EP thing is morale.”
Faison: I want to piggyback on something Sarah said though. Zach has done a lot, these nine episodes. For this revival, he’s done so much and has worked so hard on this. And that’s made us all feel very safe and secure also because we know we have the No. 1 guy on the call sheet who cares about the show completely putting in 100% to make sure that we’re coming out the gate with something very, very, very, very strong and undeniable for the fans.
What were your conversations about where your characters would be after all these years?
Braff: One of the big conversations we had was we wanted to reground the show because the show got really broad over the years and we wanted to dial it back and go back to where we started, where it exists in a real place. We have the luxury of the fantasies where we can be super silly. And obviously, we dip our toe over the line sometimes and stuff is a little broad. But for the most part, the new show is back to Season 1 and grounded again.
As we all know, especially when you reach 50 years old, a lot of things in life don’t turn out the way you hope they would. And that’s why we opened the show with J.D. living this fantasy that he is this heroic trauma ER guy when in fact he’s fixing toes in the suburbs. Also, I think with regard to me and Donald, [Lawrence] said, “I want them to be silly as those two guys are in real life, but … when they drop in and they’re teachers, they’re really good teachers.”
Donald Faison on returning for the revival: “When we did the table read, I laughed so hard when the first voice-over kicked in, when Zach read the voice-over.”
(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
Was it easy to fall back into your rhythms?
Faison: When we did the table read, I laughed so hard when the first voice-over kicked in, when Zach read the voice-over.
Braff: The whole room did. It was really funny because no one had heard me do that voice in 20 years.
Chalke: One of the coolest things that helped with the show was Bill would just write to everybody’s strengths or write to their quirks or write to their personalities and weave it in. That happened this season, but it happened all through the first eight years. And so, to a certain extent, the lines blurred sometimes between ourselves and our characters. So, stepping back into them, there’s a reason why it felt so comfortable.
Braff: Sarah is a fast-talking klutz.
Chalke: I am. We met all the interns and Zach said, “So, guys, Chalke’s going to come in every day and something’s going to be broken. Every day there’s going to be a story.” And then I proceeded the very next day, which was the day before filming, to fall and break my finger. So, I did have to come in on the first day and say, “So, I broke my finger.”
How did you break your finger?
Braff: Walking.
Chalke: It’s part of who I am, but it’s also part of who Elliot is.
Braff: I think if we put in the show how really klutzy you are, people would think it’s too much.
Was there anything you were nostalgic for that wasn’t in the new incarnation?
Chalke: Sam Lloyd.
Braff: Sam Lloyd who played the lawyer was such a big part of the show and not only a fan favorite, but our favorite. He was just the funniest, nicest man. And Bill calls people like Sam Lloyd “comedy assassins.” They come in and they have one line and you’re laughing. And he was one of the greats.
Faison: It’s not the same “Scrubs.” And I kind of miss a little bit of that. There are so many new stories to tell. And you get nostalgic when you see the stuff that we’re doing in it, but I do sometimes miss some of the stories that we told in the past. It’s like capturing lightning in the bottle again, and I feel like we did it. I really do hope we have that opportunity again. I really do hope that this isn’t just nine. But it’s important for the audience to know that we’re definitely older. That’s just real talk. I’m not a 26-year-old man anymore. I’m 50.
