True Blood from the creator of 'Six Feet Under' starting 7 sept
#51
Posted 17 September 2008 - 07:06 PM
*cough* I'm not a prude or anything, but I do think there was a little too much of Jason and his sex life. Some of that wasn't really necessary, but I guess it draws viewers!
#52
Posted 17 September 2008 - 09:00 PM
#53
Posted 17 September 2008 - 10:02 PM
of course hbo can make it more pornographic, for the older audience i guess the sex scenes are fine, as for the youngins though, that would be a different story.
i'm just imagining those 12-16 year old Twilight'ed fans thinking that this show is going to be a spin off of their beloved vampire love story book.
i think the show is okay, but i guess i'm just too concerned for the younger audience... like the age 18 and under group
i saw the preair of the 3rd episode this morning on release but when i came back tonight to see if it's still there it was gone!
#54
Posted 18 September 2008 - 03:39 PM

I'm not the one lacking intelligence dear.
#55
Posted 18 September 2008 - 04:29 PM
There was this topic on imdb that the show is a metaphor for homosexuality. I think it's ridiculous, but the topic poster seems set on it. And it's because of words. The use of 'fang-bangers', for one. He/she says that represents people in the gay community who want to get AIDS/HIV. So it relates to how the women invitingly have sex with the vampires. Also that 'God hates fangs' thing. The poster is most set on this quote. Basically he/she just said to take the 'n' out of fangs.
Most people on imdb think they've just had too much to drink, buut whatever. Though it'd be interesting to bring up.
And with the whole sex thing. I honestly wouldn't mind if they toned it down a bit, but if they kept it as it is, I wouldn't really give, either. I know what Suki is saying, with the younger audience and all, but there is so much sex nowadays... but with the Twilight thing, I agree. I'm sure that many people will give the show a go because they're Twilight fans, and I guess they're in for a surprise, but you know, there's not much we can do.
By the way, I'm thinking of reading the books. I didn't really want to because I wanted to treat this as a tv show rather than an adaptation of a book, but it seems like many are saying the tv show is pretty true at the moment. I just don't want to be disappointed in the show once I read the book, you know? Should I start reading the books? D:
Oh, and I just went and looked up the dog that seems to be everywhere.
And erm, is it just me or is the dog being Sam really freaking obvious? They just kept shoving it into our faces. I pretty much knew before I even looked it up. What, with the whole 'he must live close by' or whatever Sookie said, and the picture on the wall behind Sam in that one scene...
Aaand that Eric guy.
He's in episode 3, is it? People said ep 4 but on imdb it has him in ep 3. Anyway, since I haven't read the books, I kind of.. got curious. This is all so confusing cause all I know is that Sookie and Eric get together and Sookie and Bill's relationship gets real complicated and and...
maybe I should go read the books. I'm too curious, but I do not want to spoil the show by reading spoilers. I'd rather the books. T_T;;
#56
Posted 18 September 2008 - 07:02 PM
and the books, i can totally relate to how you feel, im scared reading them will damage the show for me. but you know, if they are as good as everyone is making them sound, might as well give it a shot, incase the show ends up sucking and not being awesome hahahahah i dont know
thats my thought right now, i gotta go request it at the library now

I'm not the one lacking intelligence dear.
#57
Posted 18 September 2008 - 08:35 PM
There was this topic on imdb that the show is a metaphor for homosexuality. I think it's ridiculous, but the topic poster seems set on it. And it's because of words. The use of 'fang-bangers', for one. He/she says that represents people in the gay community who want to get AIDS/HIV. So it relates to how the women invitingly have sex with the vampires. Also that 'God hates fangs' thing. The poster is most set on this quote. Basically he/she just said to take the 'n' out of fangs.
Most people on imdb think they've just had too much to drink, buut whatever. Though it'd be interesting to bring up.
And with the whole sex thing. I honestly wouldn't mind if they toned it down a bit, but if they kept it as it is, I wouldn't really give, either. I know what Suki is saying, with the younger audience and all, but there is so much sex nowadays... but with the Twilight thing, I agree. I'm sure that many people will give the show a go because they're Twilight fans, and I guess they're in for a surprise, but you know, there's not much we can do.
By the way, I'm thinking of reading the books. I didn't really want to because I wanted to treat this as a tv show rather than an adaptation of a book, but it seems like many are saying the tv show is pretty true at the moment. I just don't want to be disappointed in the show once I read the book, you know? Should I start reading the books? D:
Oh, and I just went and looked up the dog that seems to be everywhere.
And erm, is it just me or is the dog being Sam really freaking obvious? They just kept shoving it into our faces. I pretty much knew before I even looked it up. What, with the whole 'he must live close by' or whatever Sookie said, and the picture on the wall behind Sam in that one scene...
Aaand that Eric guy.
He's in episode 3, is it? People said ep 4 but on imdb it has him in ep 3. Anyway, since I haven't read the books, I kind of.. got curious. This is all so confusing cause all I know is that Sookie and Eric get together and Sookie and Bill's relationship gets real complicated and and...
maybe I should go read the books. I'm too curious, but I do not want to spoil the show by reading spoilers. I'd rather the books. T_T;;
i'm not sure if i want to read the books either, since i haven't yet and i started with the show i want to see how they go first and if it ends up sucking i can always just go and read the books instead? hehe
win-win situation!
still waiting on episode 3!
#58
Posted 19 September 2008 - 01:01 AM
There was this topic on imdb that the show is a metaphor for homosexuality. I think it's ridiculous, but the topic poster seems set on it. And it's because of words. The use of 'fang-bangers', for one. He/she says that represents people in the gay community who want to get AIDS/HIV. So it relates to how the women invitingly have sex with the vampires. Also that 'God hates fangs' thing. The poster is most set on this quote. Basically he/she just said to take the 'n' out of fangs.
Most people on imdb think they've just had too much to drink, buut whatever. Though it'd be interesting to bring up.
The show *IS* in some respect a metaphor for homophobia, not just homosexuality itself. People aren't entirely wrong to think so, like I said earlier, the show is pretty heavy-handed about its allusions to homosexuality. But I have to say it's not only about homophobia, but also you know, what it's like to be an outsider, strange and different for the others.
Yeah, that's just my two cents
#59
Posted 19 September 2008 - 02:41 AM
I never even thought of the topic of homosexuality, or more specifically, homophobia before I read the topic. Maybe that's just me. The show definitely represents the subject of one being an outsider, which is also very evident in a lot of other shows.
It might just be me, but a lot of the time with shows I don't think too much about the issues it conveys. I just watch it. I think I'll need to watch a few more episodes of True Blood, but so far I just watch it for the entertainment value and what is essentially within that. But then again, that's different with a show such as.. I don't know, Queer As Folk which deals with so many issues in the gay community. But I guess it has to have these issues within it, considering the nature of the show.
And I don't even know why I am talking about Qaf. I went off on a tangent there.
#60
Posted 19 September 2008 - 05:37 AM
Granted, some films and shows do allude to such things and make it central to the plot, but not to the point where it's like having some biblethumper at your front door condemning you for not listening to the word of God.
A bad show, is a bad show, regardless of what kind of message, if any, they're trying to send.
Maybe if TB was some sort of matter-of-fact docu, I'd feel differently.
deviantart - twitter - tumblr
#61
Posted 19 September 2008 - 05:44 AM
And the whole metaphore thing about gays is ridiculous, if anything if I had to choose some kinda metaphore, I'd go for racism (Fellowship of the Sun = Klu klux clan, vamp discrimination) or religion fanatism (hardcore Christians, like the pope, think vamps are evil because the Bible said so and must die. Permanently.) first. I remember there was this whole discussion on Charlaine Harris' forum about this, where the writer joined in, but it was some time ago. I think she was just talking about 'outsiders' in general, but transferred it into a world with vamps.
And the quotes, the Sookie Stackhouse series is just filled with funny quotes and this kinda snarky/dry/sarcastic humor. I consider them Sookie Stackhouse trademarks. I don't think you should think about them too much, just laugh about them.
About the books... Well, I think it's obvious how I feel about the books. I love them. So duh, I think you should read them. Especially since there are 8 books and the first season of True Blood will apparantly cover only the first book. And truth be told, the first book is very good and well-written, but some other books in the series are just WAYYY better.
I do have to mention that there is one big difference (which might make you read the books), which I don't think is a huge spoiler. True Blood starts with the mentioning of the results of the Katrina Hurricane. But since the book series is written in the present and the series started in 2001, the Katrina Hurricane is mentioned only in the latter books. And the influence of the hurricane does have some interesting results for the vamp world. I feel that if you read the books in the not so near future, you might think the latter books are a bit dated, because of the hurricane. So it might be better to just read it now, though it might just be me.
On a sidenote, I do wonder how Alan Ball is going to fit this in the storyline of True Blood.
Edit:// Hehe, finally found some information about the ratings for ep2 (and 1) from hollywoodreporter.com:
''True Blood averaged 1.8 million total viewers at 9 p.m. Sunday, up 24% from its series premiere a week ago (1.4 million). A 10:30 p.m. repeat drew another 800,000 viewers for a total of 2.4 million, up 14% from a week ago (2.1 million).
Meanwhile, the show's viewership tally for its first episode now stands at 4 million total viewers cumulated over eight airings.''
So is 1.8 million good? It sounds good. And it's on HBO, a paid channel. I'm not from the US, so I don't know how many viewers a tvshow must attract to be considered a huge succes. Anyone know that? Or at least some site where I can find the tv ratings from future True Blood episodes?
#62
Posted 19 September 2008 - 11:54 AM
Btw, I saw the pilot episode (like the first 10-20 minutes of it) and ehhh........not sure if I want to watch it. ^^;;
#64
Posted 19 September 2008 - 01:07 PM
#65
Posted 19 September 2008 - 02:01 PM
I always wanted to make a thread before True Blood started, but I didn't know if there would be enough fans on Soompi. But apparantly more fans or at least people who want to give the series a try are appearing. So yay, here is the new thread for the bookseries.
Link to Sookie Stackhouse series/Southern Vampire Mysteries (the bookseries)
#66
Posted 20 September 2008 - 02:48 AM
Wait, how big are these books?
#67
Posted 20 September 2008 - 10:10 PM
Wait, how big are these books?
They're not very long. You should be able to find paperbacks.
#68
Posted 21 September 2008 - 09:58 AM
Wait, how big are these books?
#69
Posted 21 September 2008 - 10:51 PM
I am liking the show. It's definitely mature that is for sure. Someone said something about being prudish. I am a little bit that way too. I kind of avert my eyes a little.
Anyone see tonight's episode? All I can say is wow. lol
It was interesting to meet some new vampires and that one bald headed freak.
I do like how Bill is somewhat nice and somewhat not nice. He's a vampire with some dimensions to him. I like that. I guess another word for it is com-pli-cated. lol
Sirce,
It most have done really well because HBO paid for more episodes (another season).
What do you think of the opener? Alan Ball has such a way with graphic openers. Look at Dexter. The music and the imagery, so haunting.
#70
Posted 22 September 2008 - 12:45 AM
Hopefully I can steal someone's internet and get the show...























