# True Blood



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

VAMPIRE PORNO FTW ahahha but seriously I love this show


----------



## Slyakin (Aug 11, 2011)

Never heard of it.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Aug 11, 2011)

You just had to remind me what I'm missing by not having HBO.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

damn, your missing out on it, Its a great show


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Aug 11, 2011)

I've got some bodily fluids to donate to Jessica.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> I've got some bodily fluids to donate to Jessica.



Would you ever be so kindly to "Donate" some to me? Your friendly Temp Vampire?


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Aug 11, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Vulpes Abnocto said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

sinharvest24 said:
			
		

> Skyrix said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Would you be kind enough to "Donate" to your friendly neighbourhood vampire?


----------



## Narayan (Aug 11, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> I've got some bodily *fluids* to donate to Jessica.



red or creamy white?


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Aug 11, 2011)

Narayan said:
			
		

> Vulpes Abnocto said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If it's red you should go see a doctor.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

sinharvest24 said:
			
		

> Narayan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Whats wrong with you man?
We are talking about blood, not... what ever your talking about. SICKO  [whispers] white [/whispers]


----------



## koimayeul (Aug 11, 2011)

i got 2 seasons of this sitting on my hd for like, a year.. seen 2 episode i think lol.. isn't the chick from x-men ?


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 11, 2011)

Im watching it right now, season 2 episode 5


----------



## Gahars (Aug 11, 2011)

Ive seen parts of it and just hated the damn thing.

I'm sorry, but I cannot stand this recent vampire craze that Twilight kick started. When you want to make Vampires into monstrous, horrific creatures again, we'll talk. Until then, no thank you.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 12, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Ive seen parts of it and just hated the damn thing.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I cannot stand this recent vampire craze that Twilight kick started. When you want to make Vampires into monstrous, horrific creatures again, we'll talk. Until then, no thank you.



Twilight Kick started..... Im sorry but you are so wrong its funny, True Blood has nothing to do with twilight, and previous and still continuing vampire movies like dracula have nothing to do with the sparkling vampires of twilight


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Aug 12, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Ive seen parts of it and just hated the damn thing.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I cannot stand this recent vampire craze that Twilight kick started. When you want to make Vampires into monstrous, horrific creatures again, we'll talk. Until then, no thank you.


True Blood is what Twilight should be. And a lot of the vampires in True Blood ARE as you say "monstrous, horrific creatures". There are good guys and bad guys, just like normal people. Makes more sense to me that way, actually.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 12, 2011)

PLus on further note from ^

You need to watch more than a couple episodes to be sucked into the actualy story of the show.


----------



## Gahars (Aug 13, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The books may have existed well before Twilight, but the show would not have existed if Twilight hadn't hit the mainstream and made vampire romance "hip" and "sexy". So yeah, they are related.

As for "continuing movies like Dracula"... when did the last serious horror movie (mainstream, theatrically released film) featuring him as the villain come out? Face it, in the eyes of the public, the sparkling Twilight vampires and the creatures Stoker invented (or at least, popularized) are one and the same. (Hell, the upcoming Fright Night remake is the first film in a long while to have traditional vampires as the villains, and it's a horror comedy.)

As for the good people and bad people thing, yeah, that can work, if handled well. However, the dynamic in the show seemed to be between "WANGST" and "CHAOTIC STUPID EVIL" than anything believable.

So yeah, I just find the whole supernatural romance genre to be pretty insipid. I tried to be fair to the show, but it just wasn't working for me. For starters, from what I've gathered, the show tries to use vampires as a metaphor for gay people ("God Hates Fangs!" - Seriously, who wrote this?), which has some... _unfortunate_ implications, to say the least. Plus, the X-Men comics have been using this angle for how many years now? Plus, any attempt at seriousness goes out the window with the addition of a werepanther. *Werepanthers*.

Just... no.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 13, 2011)

Valid Point
+1


----------



## shareyou (Aug 17, 2011)

Heh I love this show.

Blood sports instead of water sports...


----------



## KingdomBlade (Aug 17, 2011)

Seriously, people are so over-defensive about their fictional creature lore. I mean, Twilight is shit (well, not totally, the 3rd movie was, I must admit, remotely enjoyable for some reason), but True Blood is actually decent. I'm willing to bet that if they made their own original creature instead of using vampires, no one would get butthurt over these insignificant things. Not everything has to be Bram Stoker suck blood Bela Lugosi kills you all.

On topic, as I mentioned, True Blood is actually a decent show that gets pretty enjoyable at times.


----------



## Gahars (Aug 17, 2011)

They could call the creatures "Angst-pires", or any other name, and it still wouldn't solve the stupid supernatural romance at the center of the show and the laughably bad and narmy metaphors for the gay community.

And, you know, *werepanthers*.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> They could call the creatures "Angst-pires", or any other name, and it still wouldn't solve the stupid supernatural romance at the center of the show and the laughably bad and narmy metaphors for the gay community.
> 
> And, you know, *werepanthers*.


" the laughably bad and narmy metaphors for the gay community" You the spokesperson for the gay community are you?

WerePanthers are f**king epic man


----------



## Gahars (Aug 18, 2011)

Spokesperson? Actually yes I am. Right on the payroll, too. 

Obviously no, but come on. The show has to obnoxiously hit you over the head constantly with this crap. The creators might as well walk out and yell, "It's about gay people! Vampires represent gay people! It's topical!" to the audience. We're not stupid; a five year old could pick this up.

I'd be fine with it if it was more subtle (Using fantastical creatures/settings/etc. as allegories for contemporary issues is an old idea that can be great, if done well). But it isn't, at all. It's painful to have to sit through. It isn't clever or original; it is just grating and stupid.

As for werepanthers...



Spoiler












I'm sorry, even without the poorly handled metaphors, there is simply no way to take this seriously in any context. Awesome for a comedy, bad for a dramatic series.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Spokesperson? Actually yes I am. Right on the payroll, too.
> 
> Obviously no, but come on. The show has to obnoxiously hit you over the head constantly with this crap. The creators might as well walk out and yell, "It's about gay people! Vampires represent gay people! It's topical!" to the audience. We're not stupid; a five year old could pick this up.
> 
> ...



And you could make a better show?
Dude if you dislike it this much because of the "gay metaphors" why f**king watch it up to the second season, since the werepanthers come out in the 2nd season, and the "gay metaphors" are heavy during season 1


----------



## Gahars (Aug 18, 2011)

"And you could do better" is the worst possible response. The issue isn't whether or not I could make a better show, but the quality of the show itself under the current creative team. Just as a heads up, that argument betrays a sense of desperation from the person who uses it.

I didn't watch it up to the second season; why would I waste so much time on this dreck? The werepanther thing is kind of infamous. Not just on the internet, either; if I remember correctly, Joel McHale had a good bit about it on The Soup.

Because, hey, if they can keep an audience even with the stupid romance plot and anvilicious metaphors, they might as well jump over as many sharks as they can find!


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

Well the fact still remains that its one of the most popular tv shows out there at the moment, you cant argue with the facts


----------



## Westside (Aug 18, 2011)

I only watch it for the fuck scenes.


----------



## Telal (Aug 18, 2011)

I blame Anne Rice for the current state of vampires...

Still there's always 30 days of night (And the sequel) as well as Prowl if you want to watch vampires that aren't looking for love and brooding over immortality...


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

For me True Blood is my fave vampire show at the moment, I cant see anything better


----------



## Gahars (Aug 18, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Well the fact still remains that its one of the most popular tv shows out there at the moment, you cant argue with the facts
> 
> So now you're resorting to the popularity argument? Alright...
> 
> ...



That is because there are no *good* shows about vampires on tv.

Here, do yourself a favor. Go online, find From Dusk Till Dawn, Nosferatu, the graphic novel 30 Days of Night (Telal, thanks for reminding me it existed. It's been awhile since I read it), or Bram Stroker's Dracula (among other classics) if you must watch vampire fiction. Otherwise, you're just wasting your time on crap.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

But the thing about popularity with True Blood is that because its a *TV SHOW* people have three seasons to decide whether or not to continue so it cant be equivelant to a turd sandwitch like you said about transformers


----------



## nando (Aug 18, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Skyrix said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Being Human


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Aug 18, 2011)

nando said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



exacly


----------



## Nathan Drake (Aug 18, 2011)

nando said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fixed with the best show ever.


----------



## Gahars (Aug 18, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> nando said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That still doesn't mean anything. After all, people still tune in in droves to shows like the Jersey Shore, Two and a Half Men, The Secret Life of the American Teenager, etc., but that still doesn't those make shows good in any way.  Plus, some of the greatest television shows of all time were tremendously unpopular. Star Trek, Freaks and Geeks, and the like were all unpopular when they first aired, but have since gained a legacy of being classics. Like I've been saying, the amount of people who like something has no effect on its actual quality.

So yes, it can still be the televised equivalent of a turd sandwich.

*EDIT* And Nathan Drake, you are a funny man.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 18, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Well the fact still remains that its one of the most popular tv shows out there at the moment, you cant argue with the facts
> 
> So is Glee and that thing is a fucking piece of shit unless you enjoy classic songs being bludgeoned to death by flamboyant high schoolers.
> 
> QUOTE(nando @ Aug 18 2011, 07:29 AM) Being Human



I'm pretty sure that's about a vampire, werewolf, and ghost sharing an apartment together or something like that.

Vampire Diaries looks like even larger shit than True Blood.

I enjoy shows that portray an important message but having it slap you in the face so hard as True Blood does is often too much. It's essentially just riding this whole popularization of "hot vampires" in culture today, even if it was "before" the Twilight craze. It's riding that wave as much as the Vampire Diaries are.

Honestly, vampires were designed to fuck-ugly monsters who want nothing more than to suck the life force out of you. This "popularization" of them as hip and modern is just stupid.

Also, werepanthers basically negate any counterargument. There's jumping the shark, nuking the fridge, and werepanthers.


----------



## Urza (Sep 12, 2011)

The idea got stuck in my head after the episode and I had to make it.

Sorry.


----------



## Nujui (Sep 12, 2011)

Popularity never defines how good a show is.

@Urza: lol.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Sep 12, 2011)

Wow, good job on bringing up a dead topic


----------



## Nujui (Sep 12, 2011)

Eh, like it matters. It's not wrong bring dead topics back, if it's in the right place.


----------



## Urza (Sep 12, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Wow, good job on bringing up a dead topic


A topic isn't "dead" if it's cogent with current events, and seeing that the season finale is tonight, that seems fairly cogent.

Take your silly attempt at proclaiming violation of forum bureaucracy back to the kiddie pool. If you have nothing useful to say, don't post.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Sep 12, 2011)

Its only on tonight for you, Ive watched a while back


----------



## Urza (Sep 12, 2011)

Skyrix said:
			
		

> Its only on tonight for you, Ive watched a while back


If by "a while back" you mean "yesterday," then yes. That still however falls within the realm of "things that have happened recently which someone may enjoy discussing." 

If you don't want to, that's fine. However if that is the case, then you shouldn't be populating the thread with your irrelevant garbage posts.


----------



## Zarcon (Sep 12, 2011)

...season 4?
Episode 48?

How'd you see the episode "a while back" that's scheduled for the first broadcast tonight?


----------



## nando (Sep 12, 2011)

Zarcon said:
			
		

> ...season 4?
> Episode 48?
> 
> How'd you see the episode "a while back" that's scheduled for the first broadcast tonight?



he probably watched the previous season.


----------



## steveo1978 (Sep 12, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> The books may have existed well before Twilight, but the show would not have existed if Twilight hadn't hit the mainstream and made vampire romance "hip" and "sexy". So yeah, they are related.



True Blood first aired two months before the first twilight movie.


----------



## Chikaku-chan (Sep 12, 2011)

I thought he meant season 3, Sorry.


----------



## Urza (Sep 12, 2011)

Product placement at it's finest.



Spoiler


----------



## Gahars (Sep 12, 2011)

steveo1978 said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And the first Twilight book was published in 2005. You know, the crappy books that kickstarted the vampire craze and were later made into crappy films?

And Urza... It's like somebody saw the opening to Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me and went, "What if we did that, but got some product placement in too?"

Stay classy, True Blood.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 12, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> And the first Twilight book was published in 2005. You know, the crappy books that kickstarted the vampire craze and were later made into crappy films?



Are we establishing a timeline?
Because Dead Until Dark (the first book of the series True Blood is based on) was published in 2001.

As for product placement, Nintendo got in on it too.


----------



## BoxmanWTF (Sep 12, 2011)

heh, I'm about to watch the newest episode (season Finale) 


Spoiler



SCREW DAT WITCH!!


----------



## Urza (Sep 12, 2011)

Gahars said:
			
		

> And Urza... It's like somebody saw the opening to Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me and went, "What if we did that, but got some product placement in too?"


Uh, what? Are you actually implying that partial frontal nudity was invented by a bad movie in the 90's?

That would be pretty funny if you were.


----------



## BoxmanWTF (Sep 12, 2011)

ok... just finished season finale... 
W
T
F 
?


----------



## steveo1978 (Sep 12, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah and no one is gonna copy the idea from twilight that vampires can not go in to sunlight cause they sparkle from twilight.


----------



## Gahars (Sep 12, 2011)

Vulpes Abnocto said:
			
		

> Gahars said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think I have already mentioned this when I was arguing with Skyrix, but it doesn't matter that the True Blood books came first. I've stressed this point repeatedly: Twilight created the recent vampire craze. That's why True Blood became a tv show. 

And Urza, while Mike Meyers obviously did not invent that, the whole joke of that sequence was he was being censored by the most obvious, convenient, contrived, and suggestive things possible. So yeah, I would definitely say making the connection isn't a huge leap.

And seriously, Austin Powers: SWSM is bad? Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, ex-zip it A.


----------



## Satangel (Sep 12, 2011)

Just started with season 1, first time I'm watching it. At episode 5 right now, pretty good so far. Wondering how the story will develop. And damn, sooo much sex in it, fuck.


----------



## Paarish (Sep 12, 2011)

Satangel said:
			
		

> Just started with season 1, first time I'm watching it. At episode 5 right now, pretty good so far. Wondering how the story will develop. And damn, *sooo much sex in it*, fuck.


I am now intrigued


----------



## yusuo (Sep 12, 2011)

Sigh Vampire craze, I love me some vamps, but I don't believe twilight or true blood started this craze I think vampires were bought into the mainstream and made cool (for our generation anyways) by Blade back in 1998, as soon as blade hit thats when all these books/tv shows/films made an appearance. For example, Hellsing, Underworld and Twilight all were released off the success of the Blade series I can't think of any other quite so well liked vamp films prior to this apart from the lost boys and From Dawn to Dusk, but they never co-existed with humans

Alot of them follow the same plot line as blade as well.

Civilizations of vampires co-existing with humans but theres always a trouble maker and theres always a human/vampire (sympathetic towards humans) to sort it out, In blade it was obviously blade, in twilight it was the main vampire (robert patterson) sticking up for bella and in true blood it was bill compton who helped sookie and friends against vampires and other demonic characters alike.

Now I know vamps have been around in the media since Nosferatou, but for this generation I think Blade sparked the craze.

Plus the last episode of true blood was rubbish, they had a 12 episode quota, but wrapped the season up in 11 episodes, the last episode was a drag out episode, alot of it could have been resolved in episode 11, but they needed something to meet the 12 episode quota so dragged out and closed alot of the sub plots


----------



## nando (Sep 12, 2011)

blade wasn't even popular. out of all vampire movies i think blade is the last to pop in peoples minds specially in the 90s where interview with the vampire was the vampire defining movie. also buffy was a very popular show in the late 90s.


----------



## yusuo (Sep 12, 2011)

nando said:
			
		

> blade wasn't even popular. out of all vampire movies i think blade is the last to pop in peoples minds specially in the 90s where interview with the vampire was the vampire defining movie. also buffy was a very popular show in the late 90s.



I stand corrected, blade was popular, well according to box office total grossings, but Buffy didnt come to mind for a second, thinking back on it Buffy would of started the craze, Interview with a vampire was a very good film but it didn't receive the notoriety it should of and in the opinion of alot of my old media students was considered a bit of a cult hollywood movie.


----------



## Gahars (Sep 12, 2011)

Blade was modestly successful, or so I remember; successful enough to encourage Fox to put the X-Men movie into production.

And as for vampire craze, Twilight absolutely kick started it. Buffy wasn't really popular besides its devoted fanbase, Blade performed decently (as mentioned above), and from what I've read, the True Blood book series (Sookie Stackhouse Mysteries? The actual name evades me) was successful enough to warrant multiple sequels. Although I don't remember any of it, I'm pretty sure that Anne Rice's vampire stories were pretty popular as well; popular enough to get a movie with Tom Cruise, anyway. None of them, however, captured the public's attention like Twilight.

You don't remember this? It was a mini cultural phenomenon - everything vampire was suddenly in. Millions upon millions of fans, mostly preteen to teenage girls, devoured Meyer's "novels", vampires were all anybody talked about in terms of literature, and anything relating to vampires filled store shelves/movie and tv screens to capitalize on their sudden surge of popularity.

Please note, I'm not saying this because I like the series or anything; I detest it with the staunchest of the haters. Unfortunately, those are the facts. Luckily, it seems to be fading, and soon the next cultural fixation will take hold for a few years.


----------



## nando (Sep 12, 2011)

i guess depends where your eye is looking from. i'm long out of high school so the only times i've heard of twilight is my co worker mentioning how sick his daughter is of her friends talking about it. but i guess if you are still in high school you'd be more exposed to twilight than true blood. 

i heard about the southern vampires mysteries long before i was aware vampires sparkled, so to me twilight had little effect on the vampire craze which isn't even a craze. we've had consistent vampire lore every year non stop. but then i don't come into contact with kids. 

in my town, interview with a vampire was a huge hit. kids in my school talked about it for days on end and my english class even took a field trip to the movies to see it. 

but really the reality is that there has been a steady stream of vampires non stop and just because you are surrounded by teenage girls, doesn't mean that twilight can claim credit to making vamps popular.


----------



## Gahars (Sep 12, 2011)

Again, while the other series may have been popular, Twilight still was/is a craze that made vampires insanely popular.

You don't remember the magazines that sprung up, devoted to the series? Entertainment Weekly featured it on its cover; hell, even Time magazine had a story detailing the whole thing. Then there were the fast food chains (I remember Burger King's especially) have had promotions with it. I also remember seeing it crop up all over television. Not to mention the fact that, sadly, the Twilight movies have broken box office records. 

It's the reason why we've had this recent crop of classic horror icons being repurposed into romance stories. Red Riding Hood (Werewolves and teen romance mixed with little red riding hood) and the Teen Wolf (Yeah, not making that up)series on MTV are just two examples. True Blood and The Vampire Diaries 

Sure, I probably experienced more of the fandom first hand, but it still was everywhere. It... it was kind of hard to miss, actually.


----------

