Comments | gateraid: I was wrong

gateraid

I was wrong

Jul 07, 2010 00:00

A while back, I posted about True Blood. Having only seen up til the end of s1 at that stage, I'd like to amend some of my comments re the sexual content. At the time, I said I didn't find it gratuitous. Wow, there really must be something in the water in this town, coz it's just sex sex sex in s2. Some of it is relevant to the plot, however much ( Read more... )

true blood

Comments 6

ugahill July 6 2010, 18:22:27 UTC

ITA on the True Blood thing. Just could never get into it (and I secretly love Vampire stuffs--but of the gothic kind, not much into sparkling people or veggie vampires or the uber kink.) Vampires are fun because of the seduction aspect but actually seeing that tied into what became soft porn in my book was not my cup of tea. I'm glad people enjoy it and get their kicks out of whatever it is they get their kicks out of, but to me it's just a poor excuse to push the envelope so they can 'SHOCK PEOPLE!' Yeah, whatever. HBO introduced and tired out that concept with The Sopranos. And that show actually had decent writing.

I'm the same. No news being good news, though, eh?

gateraid July 7 2010, 07:48:28 UTC

I'm growing a little tired of the multitude of different takes on vampires now. Plus the much older man (like 100+ yrs) with young girl (usually a teenager) weirds me out.

There's also the fact that I never really got why being a vampire made one super strong. Surely lack of blood flow means that one would be weaker, not stronger?

There are aspects of True Blood I like. For example, they could teach TPTW of SGA/SG1 a thing or two about how to do an arc properly. And it's nice to see that after a year (of the show) they still acknowledge the death of one of the characters (which was a pretty brutal and pointless murder).

The trouble with the SHOCK factor is that once you've done it, you have to dial it up somewhat to keep shocking people. I can see where this is headed with TB.

ugahill July 7 2010, 12:33:00 UTC

Yeah, and you haven't gotten to the end of the season orgy or the SHOCKING scene from this season yet. ;)

I think the idea of vampires being strong and semi-invincible came from them being, well, dead. Or undead. But yeah, stuff like Edward from Twilight no longer breathing--and yet somehow capable of having the 'stuffs' required to father a child--makes you kinda go "HMMMMMMMMM".

gateraid July 8 2010, 08:06:17 UTC

Oh noes, I'm not sure I want to be SHOCKed.

What? Edward is a daddy? I guess you could argue that if they need blood, then it must circulate to some extent (to be used up). So the extension of that is 'stuff'. The thing I always struggled with is having a 'soul' in relation to sci-fi shows. Vampires might be evil (or not), but they still feel. The same with sci-fi androids.

lady_xan July 7 2010, 02:00:10 UTC

Well, you did wonder where all the porn had gone...obviously True Blood has it all. LOL This show is on my list to try, but I don't have a lot of hope.

Wait a minute. You didn't like Ensign Ro? *g*

gateraid July 7 2010, 07:52:54 UTC

That's a good point - I hadn't considered that. LOL. It's not bad. I hesitate to recommend it due to the sex, but in the first season, I didn't think it was too gratuitous. It's odd too, the eps are longer than the standard length.

TBH, I can't really remember Ensign Ro that well. I believe she was supposed to be the Colonel Kira character in DS9, but Michelle pulled out and the role was reinvisioned. TNG didn't do that well with characterisation, esp with women. Troi is the worst/best example. But that's typical of shows from that period.