The great True Blood thread --(previously True Blood -- NOOOOO!)

I found this very uneven. I liked Anna Paquin and Lois Smith enough to give it another chance -- it's a good premise and could improve -- but I would say it fell well beneath my expectations.

Urban fantasy is not really my thing, so I came to it as a fantasy fan but not an urban fantasy fan. I also haven't read any of Charlaine Harrison's books, and I actively disliked Six Feet Under. I thought True Blood was great! Maybe if I had held expectations based on the book, I would have enjoyed it less, though. Good cast, good acting, decent spooky setting, decent writing. I would agree that the sex scenes were pretty unsavory. The plot is pretty predictable (as in, while the credits rolled on episode one we could pretty much determine the plot of episode 2), but I'm kind of okay with that.
I really liked Tara, Sookie's best friend. I'm sick to death of the sassy black best friend who snaps her fingers, dispenses wisdom and otherwise fades into the background. Tara's something of a twist on that stereotype by being an outright hostile b*tch to everyone and having her own (albeit minor) plotline.

callalily61 said:

w00t! Time Warner has a free weekend of HBO & Cinemax this weekend!

Of course, this just means I'll get instantly hooked on the series.

Click to expand...

Well, crapcrapcrapitycrap! I didn't see this post until just now. I missed it all.

I heard about the show, got excited, watched, and then felt let down and disappointed. The suggestion the characters were dumber than rocks was spot on and the sex scenes definitely done to drag in viewers. The whole thing had no real flow to it. It moved way to slow for me. The time they took to outline the main players was way too long and, in my opinion, should have been shorter. Then we could have gotten to the good stuff that much sooner.

I don't think i will be watching again.

I liked it. I don't envy Alan Ball having to follow up Six Feet Under (which IMHO was the greatest TV series of all time never to be matched) and I found myself slowly pulled in by this one. Like anything it may just take time to grow on you.

I actually liked it quite a bit. It had some flaws, but I can see it getting better.

The main thing is that the series is not Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire books. It's Alan Ball's take on those books. It's certainly not mine, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. And since according to Ball he is not a reader of urban fantasy, that take is going to be very different than someone familiar with the genre.

I thought the writing was sharp, the acting good, and in some cases excellent. The characters are sharply drawn -- no stereotypes there. And most important to me, it really has a distinctive tone, a style. Vampire stories in movies and TV, (and in books) tend to have a certain sameness about them, and this show definitely sets itself apart.

As a uf writer, I've found it difficult to set up a world from scratch, explaining all the rules and quirks and creatures without seeming to explain at all. Think how much harder it must be to do it when a large segment of your audience is new not only to the story, but to the entire genre as well. Plus, you don't want to alienate fans who know Harris' work and have their own expectations.

I'll definitely give it a chance, and I'm thinking after four or five episodes it might really hit its stride.

I finally watched this last night and I think I'm going to have to watch it a few more times in order to fully decide. I was a little disappointed with it, but a lot of shows take a few episodes to hit their stride, so I'll at least give another chance.
I still think Bill is a ridiculous name for a vampire. Who could be afraid of Bill the Vampire?

Just watched episode two on a pre-air.
Yes it's slow, yes it's dumbed down for TV, but it also has a charm.

Its like Naive Desperate House-vampire-wives. In a good way. Until the writers screw up, I'll be watching this.

True Bloodletting:
Premiere Only Draws 1.44 Million Viewers

HBO just can't catch a break.

After engineering a massive, multimillion-dollar marketing campaign to promote "True Blood," the new vampire series from Alan Ball, Sunday's premiere drew just 1.44 million viewers.

That's bad news for the cable channel, which hasn't been able to launch a new one-hour drama to any kind of ratings fanfare in some time. Without one of its previous powerhouse lead-ins ("The Sopranos," "Sex and the City") its new shows have floundered.

http://community.livejournal.com/ohn...59.html#cutid1

childeroland said:

True Bloodletting:
Premiere Only Draws 1.44 Million Viewers

HBO just can't catch a break.

After engineering a massive, multimillion-dollar marketing campaign to promote "True Blood," the new vampire series from Alan Ball, Sunday's premiere drew just 1.44 million viewers.

That's bad news for the cable channel, which hasn't been able to launch a new one-hour drama to any kind of ratings fanfare in some time. Without one of its previous powerhouse lead-ins ("The Sopranos," "Sex and the City") its new shows have floundered.

http://community.livejournal.com/ohn...59.html#cutid1

Click to expand...

Do the ratings now include DVRs and Tivos? I know that they didn't used to, but I don't know if it's changed. I DVRd this and watched it a few days later, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

I doubt it, since that article was published so soon after the premiere.

Blockbuster was giving away free copies of this show..I didn't even know that series started (read all the books). I thought it was entertaining and found "Vampire Bill" quite handsome...will be watching it (don't know how just yet since I don't have or not plan on getting HBO).

Did anybody watch the second episode last night? I gave up after the premiere but I would be curious to hear your reviews and if you think it's worth going back to.

The second episode is somewhat better than the first, but I'm still waiting to a) see something to like the characters and b) see some plot that really interests me. So far, there's only one mystery and the rest is just character stuff. But from the preview, it seems like something is going to heat up in the next episode or two when they introduce more vampires (including the bald guy).

Gah. I wish there was some way to view this without having to pay an extra $10 a month for a channel I'll only watch once a week.

Shadow_Ferret said:

Gah. I wish there was some way to view this without having to pay an extra $10 a month for a channel I'll only watch once a week.

Click to expand...

There is-download it on Itunes for a couple bucks per ep!

hlcorbin said:

I have an embarrassing confession to make—the girls accent was so thick, when she repeated the vampires name, I thought it was “Belle” and not Bill. I was laughing at that until I came on here and saw Bill….

Click to expand...

I thought his name was Bale. I think it's good, so far. It will be interesting to see the 'other' vampires.

I watched a leaked version of the first ep a few weeks ago, and was rather aghast. I like a hot sex scene as much as the next girl (hello Dexter), but was creeped out at the porny quality of it. Yes, we know you're HBO. Just because you can have graphic sex scenes doesn't mean you have to. I was also icked when one of the female characters used the C word (don't know if that made it into the final cut). When I'm watching The Sopranos I expect and appreciate those kinds of artistic decisions, but not so much when I'm watching a Southern vampire romp. It was probably also a bad sign that I hated each and every character. Except Sam, because he's, you know, Sam.

Good to know. Thanks for the reviews everyone. Maybe I'll give it another try this week.

hlcorbin said:

I have an embarrassing confession to make—the girls accent was so thick, when she repeated the vampires name, I thought it was “Belle” and not Bill. I was laughing at that until I came on here and saw Bill….

Click to expand...

I thought the same thing! And it was the most interesting part of the episode to me. Really dull. I'll admit I'm not a vampire fan. I watched it with my boyfriend who can't get enough of Anne Rice. But I thought that Alan Ball would put in some great dark comic moments as he did with Six Feet Under. The only character who made me laugh was the grandmother. Anna Paquin was boresville.

maestrowork said:

The second episode is somewhat better than the first, but I'm still waiting to a) see something to like the characters and b) see some plot that really interests me. So far, there's only one mystery and the rest is just character stuff. But from the preview, it seems like something is going to heat up in the next episode or two when they introduce more vampires (including the bald guy).

Click to expand...

I'm going to go against the prevailing trend. I like it, and after the second episode, am liking it more.

A lot of urban fantasy fans are impatient -- they want action, not character development. But for me, character makes all the difference -- without it, it's all the same old stuff repeated over and over. Character development is only boring when it's done badly, and I think this is done pretty well. I agree that not all of them are likeable, but they're interesting, at least to me.

BTW, did you notice the sheriff is played by the great William Sanderson? (Larry on Newhart and E.B., the hotel proprieter on Deadwood.)

The final verdict is still not in, but my feeling is that this series will continue to develop over time and get progressively stronger.

Of course, it's no Six Feet Under, but what is?