True Blood - Time Bomb to I Will Rise Up (S2)

[shadowkat]

LJ is still obsessed with Sherlock Holmes and True Blood S3. (and quite upset about the fact that both shows are sort of ahem unpolitically correct? They are *just* tv shows people. Lighten up. TV shows aren't supposed to be politically correct, sort of foils the whole point of being a tv show - you know as in the mindless and often offensive entertainment? We aren't exactly talking literature here. We're talking fun pulp! Which I'm guessing was never meant to be analyzed. We're talking about a medium that produced such critical gems as Three's Company and Manimal. Although, Sherlock Holmes is supposed to show up on PBS this fall - the closest thing the US has to a literary tv network. Only the most lofty of British and American tv shows make it to PBS. And well, anything with Sherlock Holmes in the title because Sherlock Holmes is British and like Shakespeare, Jane Austen and Agatha Christie must be literary.)

After seeing the episode I Will Rise Up - True Blood S2 (I have not seen S3, I know, I know I'm behind everyone on the tv stuff...but it is what it is.) - I get why people fell in love with it. This episode was hilarious and moving.

Ball's team of writers are better at dialogue than Charlain Harris - this is a lot funnier than I remember.

Sarah shoots Jason with a paintgun.

Jason: (totally serious) I'm dead? No, I'm not. Oh, it's a miracle. God has saved me! Thank you, Jesus.

Sarah: It's a paint-gun, grow a brain cell already.

Me: Hee. Honey, you haven't figured that out until now? And I think he needs to grow more than a brain cell. Maybe a whole brain.

Jason to Sookie: I'm really stupid Sookie. I have a brain but it only appears to be taking up space in my head.

Sookie: No, you're not stupid. You are just letting your brain sit there and take up space.
That's just being lazy. It ain't the same.

ME: Sookie darling, pot calling kettle black here.

Also, have to admit - the sex scene with Sookie and Eric is the only hot sex scene I've seen on this show and this show has a lot of sex scenes. I credit Alexander Starsgard for that one. Also is it just me or is Stephen Moyer who plays Bill starting to resemble a ghoul or skeleton? That man is far too skinny. He looks gaunt. And sort of creepy as a result. I mean, he really resembles a starved vampire. I understand that Bill doesn't drink human blood and he wants to fit the role - but I think he's taking this a bit too far. Starting to remind of Scorpius and this is not a good thing.

I laughed when Sookie found out Eric had suckered her into sucking his blood. I remember that from the books. It's how the author got Eric and Sookie together - they ended up with a blood bond or being bonded by blood. This made no sense to me - because, hello, she also drank and shared blood with Bill. I'm guessing Ball may play with this in a different and far less romantic manner than Harris and Anita Blake and Anne Rice did. Might be wrong.

Loved the Eric/Godric and Godric/Sookie scenes - the actor playing Godric was quite good.
And Anna Pacquin sold that scene -reminding me what a great actress she truly is. She actually did a better job of selling it than Starsgard. Although the Eric was rather interesting in these two episodes - you get the feeling that he is confused by what he is feeling. This was a particularly good line:

Sookie: You care for him because he's your maker?
Eric: don't use words you don't understand.
Sookie: you love him?
Eric: don't use words that I don't understand.

Much more entertaining relationship. Actually, I find Bill and Eric more interesting than Bill and Sookie. Jason and Sookie are more interesting, and for a moment there - I was actually beginning to wonder if we were going to have an incest storyline. Wouldn't be surprised if we did.

At any rate, I'm highly entertained. Laughed my head off during the last two episodes. Maryanne is hilarious, so is Eric and Jessica Tuck in the role of vampire media mongol. Also the dual themes of religion have been expanded to explore two types of religion, chaos and order or rather the worship of chaos, and the worship of rules and order. Both derail but in different ways.

Comments

[petzipellepingo.livejournal.com]

I find the series to be basically blood soaked cotton candy, all fluff with lashings of blood and sex. Totally silly and just fun to watch.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

No, that would be Vampire Diaries and Supernatural.

I actually think Alan Ball has something to say here. There's quite a bit of wicked satire - in the credits, and in what bits and pieces he's picking up from the books. That said? I wouldn't take it too seriously. More like a hot fudge sundae than cotton candy.

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

"They are *just* tv shows people. Lighten up."
Thank you!!
I have a friend who really pissed me off for calling Stephen Moffat misogynistic because he writes male centric stories and he thought Rose's romance w/the 10th Doctor Who was stupid (and laughed at the fans for taking it too seriously).... And I'm just so tired of people using this hyperbolic language... A writer isn't racist just because he kills off a character of color, and isn't misogynistic because he doesn't respect your 'ship'!

It is just TV... not life and death!
*sigh*

Actually I think it is the same Rose/Doctor#10 fan girls who are attacking 'Sherlock' because they want to prove that Moffat IS misogynistic...

Sorry about the rant, it is just entertainment and I shouldn't get so annoyed at my 'friends', but I just wish they could argue their opinions without all the name calling. For one thing I think it devalues the really horrible actions of real life misogyny!

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

You're welcome.;-)

Stephen Moffat misogynistic because he writes male centric stories and he thought Rose's romance w/the 10th Doctor Who was stupid (and laughed at the fans for taking it too seriously)....

Hmm. I thought the Rose/Doctor 10 ship was stupid too and laughed at fans for taking it seriously - guess that makes me misogynist?? (Although I was admittedly quiet about it - there's a lot of Rose/Doc 10 shippers on my flist, along with Buffy/Angel shippers,
neither of which I understood - but eh, I don't get the Bones love either, so... mileage varies?)

Well, he is male. What's he supposed to write female centric stories? Besides - it is a story about a male protagonist! And why aren't they blasting JK Rowlings - who wrote nothing but male centric books? Not that I found the fifth season all that male centric, I actually thought seasons 1-4 were male centric. This season has been more female centric. (shrugs)

Yep. The term misogynist has gone way beyond its saturation point. Sexist is a far better term and can well be used in far more situations. Fandom methinks needs to broaden its collective vocabulary.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Is that where the "Moffat is a misogynist" meme came from? I've seen it in some journals and I've always been confused by it because I could never think of anything particularly misogynistic in his Who scripts or even in Coupling for that matter (he did write Coupling, didn't he? I might be confused). I'm sure that he may have his flaws, I've just not noticed anything so glaring as to call it 'misogynistic.'

[wenchsenior.livejournal.com]

My husband and have apparently been watching in parallel with you...we just finished S2 last night. This show is monstrously entertaining crack. Really well-cast, too, and the guy who plays Jason is just brilliant.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Whoever is playing Jason is brilliant. I think it is Ryan Kwatel. He's managed to make the guy adorably funny.

And you are right - it's highly entertaining crack - with some wicked satire regarding religion thrown in. Ball is a wickedly good satirist.

[empresspatti.livejournal.com]

I'm always behind on shows like True Blood and Dexter - I refuse to pay for cable. The dvd's will be out eventually and I'm fine with being less cool than the cool kids.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I pay enough for basic/standard just so I can get NY1 and TV.
But I draw the line at Premium Cable. I can find enough to watch without adding those shows, besides they come out on Netflix eventually. And I've discovered they are much more fun to watch on Netflix - less waiting around for the next episode. Serials work better if you watch them in one gulp, as opposed to one a week.

[empresspatti.livejournal.com]

Since I worked for years at CNN, I can say with authority - television isn't worth paying for! We have an antenna on the roof and get broadcast channels. We pay for fios - hello Hulu & similar sites.

I couldn't agree more re watching in dvd format in one gulp - WITH NO COMMERCIALS!!

I don't know what I'd do without Netflix online!

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Hee. It is if you rent an apt, can't have an antenna on the roof,
and are at the mercy of a city with horrible antenna reception.
Plus - I happen to like NY1 (weather and transit report, plus inside city hall (I don't watch the other news), USA, and Syfy. It's actually a bundle - roadrunner and cable and DVR combined. (Fios and Verizon sucks in my area, seriously, sucks. Time Warner is oddly better - they don't charge for cable issues, Verizon? Does.)

So - like everything else? YMMV. ;-)

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

Yeah in Iowa (at least where I live) a big antenna will pull in one station... two if it is a very clear night (most nights aren't that clear). So paying for TV is necessary if you actually want some TV, but we do have choices now days... four companies competing (amazing in a small town) actually keeps the price down a bit.

Just a tv show?

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

Is this not the same person that wrote thousands of words on Buffy? Is this an evil robot 'kat who has taken over?

Seriously though I don't look to fluffy shows for high art and intellectual themes, but I don't think it's too much to ask that they don't slap us in the face with cliches and stereotypes. Whatever we want to call it's still lazy story-telling and lazy thinking. If you have time Moff's Law (http://www.racialicious.com/2009/12/21/and-we-shall-call-this-moffs-law/) offers an excellent and thorough rant in defence of analyzing any damn thing we want no matter how trivial. :)

Re: Just a tv show?

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh, I never took what I did all that seriously. Hence all the typos, and mistakes. It was for fun! Or at least I was having fun with it. (Some people knit and count for fun, I analyze cultural things and post about it on the internet - weird I know, but there it is. (Ugh, stupid yogurt container wouldn't open - it's icelandic style skyr strained non-fat orange and ginger yogurt by Siggis (which I'm currently addicted to)). Yes, on my lunch break - can't you tell? ;-)

The internet and political correctness. Where to start? Ugh.
Let's just say there's often not always a tendency towards hypocrisy and hyperbole when it comes to this topic. I've had my analysis attacked by the politically correct police. And sigh,
people do take themselves and their tv shows far too seriously sometimes.

That's not to say you shouldn't do analysis on this topic or that excellent analysis has not been done. It has. Can't think of any at the moment, and don't have the time to read the link posted above.

Seriously though I don't look to fluffy shows for high art and intellectual themes, but I don't think it's too much to ask that they don't slap us in the face with cliches and stereotypes.

True. Sometimes I wonder if I've forgotten more tv shows than most people online have watched? Should do a meme or something to find out, would if had the time. At any rate - I have a list of tv shows that slap us in the face with cliches and stereotypes all the bleeding time. Moffat, from what I've seen of his work to date (haven't seen Sherlock Holmes) - isn't that bad. Actually he's a lot better than RTD and JJ Abrhams - who can at times make me cringe with their stereotypes and cliches. And don't get me started on Bones. But as in all things mileage varies.

okay off to get chocolat, then back to the grindstone.