# True Blood Sept 2008-Season Preimere (TV Only, No Book Spoilers Please)



## Truth Seeker (Sep 8, 2008)

*TRUE BLOOD*


Alan Ball, creator of Six Feet Under, returns to HBO with a new series based on the novel series Southern Vampire by Charlaine Harris. The series follows Sookie Stackhouse, a telepathic barmaid who finds comfort in the company of vampires since they have no brainwave activity for her to read. She and her brother Jason were raised by her grandmother after losing their parents in a flood and she tries to keep her telepathic ability a secret. Thanks largely in part to the creation of a Japanese-made synthetic blood called True Blood (where the series takes it name) vampires have made their existence known to the world. Sookie works at the bar 'Merlotte's' which is owned and operated by her boss Sam Merlotte who has a secret of his own.


​


----------



## warlord (Sep 8, 2008)

So I just watched pre-air versions of episodes 1 and 2. I hereby proclaim Alan Ball is the King  of Vampire Fiction, second only to the All Powerful God of Vamp Fiction Joss Whedon. This show hasd filled the giant void left the end of Buffy and Angel. Stephanie Meyer can go cry herself to sleep because Edward is so last year.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Sep 8, 2008)

I watched Episode 1 tonight, I thought it was pretty good. I quite like how while still seemingly keeping plenty of the traditional vampire stuff, it makes it unique and interesting by changing around the way humans and vampires interact.

It is also quite funny in parts.

Anyone else find the fangs remind them of viper fangs?

I am now wondering what other kinds of supernatural creatures exist. We got psychics and vampires right now, the way the dog appeared in the one scene for me screams "shape-shifter" (I dunno who, possibly Sam?)


----------



## Mistwell (Sep 8, 2008)

warlord said:


> So I just watched pre-air versions of episodes 1 and 2. I hereby proclaim Alan Ball is the King  of Vampire Fiction,




You might throw some thanks to the author as well


----------



## Grymar (Sep 8, 2008)

Watched Episode 1 last night and really enjoyed it.  The southern feel works well and the vampires have almost an X-men like feel to them as far as being outcasts and trying to come public after all of these years.

Spoilers below
[sblock]
OK, the big question is what is the deal with Sookie.  According to Vampire Bill she's "more than human." Also note the odd name.  Her friend and  brother both know of her mind reading abilities, but others just call her a psychic.  Also note her possible telekinesis in the fight.

On the mind reading, I think she can hear surface thoughts at will and as a matter of fact seems to need to concentrate to block them.  But she has to focus, and perhaps needs physical contact, to read deeper thoughts.

By the end of the episode I'm pretty sure she doesn't have physical abilities, but her mental skills are impressive.  Could Sookie be short for something like...succubus?  It would fit the sexual theme of the show.  [/sblock]




Fallen Seraph said:


> I am now wondering what other kinds of supernatural creatures exist. We got psychics and vampires right now, the way the dog appeared in the one scene for me screams "shape-shifter" (I dunno who, possibly Sam?)




Yeah, I noticed the dog too.  And the mention of werewolves ("but I know they aren't real") seemed to be a bit of foreshadowing.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Sep 8, 2008)

Yeah there is definitely something special about Sookie beyond being psychic. I hope it isn't any of the cliche "GASPS! Your destined to be so and so", would run counter to the feel of the show in my opinion.


----------



## Whitemouse (Sep 8, 2008)

My friend told me that he'd record it for me. Hopefully I'll be able to pick up the dvd in a couple of days; I can't wait to see this.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 8, 2008)

Grymar said:


> Yeah, I noticed the dog too.  And the mention of werewolves ("but I know they aren't real") seemed to be a bit of foreshadowing.




My guess would be the bartender (Sam?).

1) He's out of breath despite being just outside the bar
2) He's the only other one who knows the vampire is one (smell him?)
3) The vampire knows he knows
4) When he hugs Sookie he thinks about the smell


----------



## GSHamster (Sep 9, 2008)

The show is based off a series of novels by Charlaine Harris, just to let you guys know.

Spoilers are pretty weird in a situation like this.  i.e. what Sookie is. On the one hand, how well it maps to the books would be nice to know, but there also seems to be a lot of people who haven't read the books, but watched the tv show.


----------



## Whitemouse (Sep 9, 2008)

GSHamster said:


> The show is based off a series of novels by Charlaine Harris, just to let you guys know.




Well that certainly is interesting. Wasn't even aware.

I'm definitely going to have to check them out.


----------



## Grymar (Sep 9, 2008)

GSHamster said:


> The show is based off a series of novels by Charlaine Harris, just to let you guys know.
> 
> Spoilers are pretty weird in a situation like this.  i.e. what Sookie is. On the one hand, how well it maps to the books would be nice to know, but there also seems to be a lot of people who haven't read the books, but watched the tv show.




For the benefit of us all, since this thread is about the show can we please assume that no one has read the books?  Maybe start a new thread about the books?


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 9, 2008)

Grymar said:


> For the benefit of us all, since this thread is about the show can we please assume that no one has read the books?  Maybe start a new thread about the books?




I concur.  Truth Seeker, if you're going to be doing threads for this show, maybe you can put something like "NO BOOK SPOILERS" in the title?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2008)

Moderator request - please don't leave book spoilers easy to see.  At least spoiler block the things, folks!  We have the feature for a reason.

Watched the premier last night.  I am not familiar with HBO's previous series offerings, but I was caught a bit off guard by how graphic a couple parts were.  Not a problem, just a  mismatch of expectations, which may have colored my thoughts on the episode as a whole.  It was okay.  I have not read the books, but my wife has, and she was happy with it.  So, we'll give it another episode or two.


----------



## Grymar (Sep 10, 2008)

Umbran said:


> Watched the premier last night.  I am not familiar with HBO's previous series offerings, but I was caught a bit off guard by how graphic a couple parts were.




Yeah, it had some very graphic moments but to be honest, it can't compare to how graphic Tell Me You Love Me was...that was really pushing the softcore/hardcore line to the breaking point.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Sep 10, 2008)

I wasn't that shocked by the graphic nature of it. After watching all of Rome, I know that HBO can be graphic.

It is why it makes sense that Song of Ice and Fire is gonna be HBO, lots of sex and violence in it. It also is why, I think a WoD (specifically Vampire) series be perfect for HBO.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Sep 10, 2008)

Done...


LightPhoenix said:


> I concur. Truth Seeker, if you're going to be doing threads for this show, maybe you can put something like "NO BOOK SPOILERS" in the title?


----------



## Felon (Sep 10, 2008)

Grymar said:


> Yeah, I noticed the dog too.  And the mention of werewolves ("but I know they aren't real") seemed to be a bit of foreshadowing.




Maybe, but I hope not. I think the show is very much trying to establish the ground rules for viewers, and commenting on werewolves without making it clear that they aren't currently extant would confuse folks. They dropped a lot of little subtle clarifications, like showing that vamps can be caught on film. 

Personally, I think the rugged, laconic, super-stud vamp sweeping the demure young lady off her feet bit is rather tiresome and played-out. I'd much prefer to see Garth Ennis' Preacher series get an HBO series than this rather prosaic tale. The only thing worse would be vamps versus werewolves redux. But beggars can't be choosers, so I'll keep watching.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 11, 2008)

Truth Seeker said:


> Done...




Thanks Truth Seeker!


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 11, 2008)

Felon said:


> Maybe, but I hope not. I think the show is very much trying to establish the ground rules for viewers, and commenting on werewolves without making it clear that they aren't currently extant would confuse folks. They dropped a lot of little subtle clarifications, like showing that vamps can be caught on film.




I can't disagree with this statement enough.  The viewers are not dumb.

That said, the vampire pretty much implied that what we know about vampires can't be assumed to be the truth.  For example, vampires can be hurt by silver.


----------



## Krug (Sep 11, 2008)

Watched the first episode and was pretty impressed. Way, way better than *Fringe*. Anna Paquin has definitely grown up since *The Piano*. 

[sblock]I don't quite buy into the dog thing. I think having too many characters with special powers would hurt the series, especially something that seems so far out.[/sblock]


----------



## Felon (Sep 11, 2008)

LightPhoenix said:


> I can't disagree with this statement enough.  The viewers are not dumb.



What are you going on about? Where did I call anyone dumb? It's the first episode of a new series with a supernatural theme. If you don't establish the rules--and lord knows, vampires have a pretty convoluted and inconsistent set of rules--then viewers won't understand the world the characters are living in. That has nothing to do with being dumb. How is anyone to know that werewolves don't exist or that vampires can be filmed without until it's explained to them?

Then again, I suppose I do think it's ridiculous to assert that are no dumb people watching TV whatsoever.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 12, 2008)

Felon said:


> What are you going on about? Where did I call anyone dumb? It's the first episode of a new series with a supernatural theme. If you don't establish the rules--and lord knows, vampires have a pretty convoluted and inconsistent set of rules--then viewers won't understand the world the characters are living in. That has nothing to do with being dumb. How is anyone to know that werewolves don't exist or that vampires can be filmed without until it's explained to them?
> 
> Then again, I suppose I do think it's ridiculous to assert that are no dumb people watching TV whatsoever.




I perhaps over-reacted to the statement a tad.

I don't believe that viewers can't handle ambiguity.  Look at the numbers Lost still pulls in, and that's the poster child for convolution and consistency.  Just because something isn't spelled out doesn't mean viewers can't handle it.  

To me, the statement you made strongly implies viewers are dumb.  I would hazard a guess you didn't mean it, but that's how it comes off.


----------



## Felon (Sep 12, 2008)

LightPhoenix said:


> I don't believe that viewers can't handle ambiguity.  Look at the numbers Lost still pulls in, and that's the poster child for convolution and consistency.  Just because something isn't spelled out doesn't mean viewers can't handle it.



The premise of Lost was/is an enigma to viewers. Vampires, OTOH, are massively overexposed in fiction to the point where any new fiction about them is burdened with a host of preconceptions. And yes, many people like to know the ground rules. 



> To me, the statement you made strongly implies viewers are dumb.  I would hazard a guess you didn't mean it, but that's how it comes off.



"Viewers" is a term that encompasses a broadly heterogeneous group of people. I'm certain quite a few of them are as dump as fenceposts, but even an intelligent person can be misled by preconceptions.


----------



## Whitemouse (Sep 14, 2008)

So I watched this yesterday afternoon. It was pretty interesting. 

I wonder how it is going to turn out for the girl? My guess is that it was the two that tried to drain the vamp that beat the crud out of her.


----------



## Felon (Sep 15, 2008)

Whitemouse said:


> So I watched this yesterday afternoon. It was pretty interesting.
> 
> I wonder how it is going to turn out for the girl? My guess is that it was the two that tried to drain the vamp that beat the crud out of her.



Your guess? It's pretty clear that's who it was.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 27, 2008)

I got the first episode off a Chinese site, so I watched the unaired pilot and then watched the real one. Did you know that they recast and reshot the role Rutina Wesley plays, Tara? The prior actress was thinner, of lighter skin and much, much more uppity. It's a real shame that they didn't keep the casting. (She probably didn't test well with audiences.) 

They made a more expensive opening title sequence. It's now more lush and establishes setting; the prior one had a lot of filler shots of dental surgery, x-rays and MRIs, as if to "prove" that vampires exist. They also cleaned up the audio and added that viola and piano score for Bill.

The pluses for me with this series is that it's lush, it's got a nice bayou locale, they aren't afraid of sex, and the lead character. In addition, they confine the "vampires are real and I have superpowers" to the back story, which is good. The bayou should have an opportunity for them to delve into both Southern gothic and Vodun. (And, actually, Lovecraft's stuff too, as he had a cult situated in this area in "The Call of Cthulhu.") 

This Southern vampire book series is plowing ground started by the Anita Blake series 8 years earlier--vampires come out of the coffin, face distrust, commit lots of crimes, are sexual catnip, etc. Since I liked that concept, I'm hoping that this series can expand on that concept. (OT: The first book of that Blake series had great potential to be fantasy noir with a touch of badass, especially when the protagonist uses silver shells in her shotgun. Unfortunately, it went into soft-core romance by book 3. Not my thing.) My thing is exploring the consequences of making this one alteration to the world. 



Spoiler



The "their blood is an aphrodisiac" is new, however.



I really like Anna Paquin... but they've not really found anyone else. (They recast the other actress who was doing something interesting with her role.) 



Spoiler



This series also gets into the real headaches of mind-reading. BtVS, as a series on broadcast TV, had to fade out the nasty sexual thoughts when Buffy walked down the school corridor. This show rubs your noses in it.



And, 



Spoiler



it's disappointing that Sookie hasn't tried to profit off her power to aid her family, get a better job for herself, or find out what people think of her. I think they'll likely explain that in the backstory or part of her moral decline, instead of curiosity and excitement. The thrill of discovery is what's lost when you put the tedious "magic is real" bit in there. I'm most interested in figuring out what effect this power would have on people. I hope that the series will not simply make it a Paquin ex machina device.



Now, I'm hoping that Alan Ball did his homework on the special issues that the fantasy genre has when it comes to world-building. Because right now, my first question is 



Spoiler



how vampires came out the closet and successfully avoided the military-industrial establishment using them as super-soldiers or perhaps test bunnies for medical research. Remember how BtVS made sure to mention this possibility as early as "Out of Sight, Out of Mind"? I'm going to set a similar deadline on this series.



The teaser's revelation of the vampire face on Billy Joe Bob Yokel... is not really intimidating or strange or uncanny. 

Also, I'm not loving the camera swirling around the telepath/smart person while they think. You get to do that once per season and they blew that shot in the premiere.



Spoiler



The Bill Maher guest spot as exposition was good and really fit how the media might respond to this issue once the shock wore off.



The bartender is clearly 



Spoiler



a werewolf. Dog that just watches out for Sookie. An unexplained inability to find them in his parking lot. And they hung a lantern on "werewolves don't exist," which only ensures that they do.



I'm not loving the fact that they threw away the discovery of a 



Spoiler



love triangle when Sookie says that she can't believe that Tara can't see that he doesn't love her. That's just wasteful.


 Perhaps Ball thinks that such narratives are cliche, but I think he'll find that he needs some B story lines. Then again, he has some experience with that.


----------

