I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about good television and film. More often than not, I can keep up in a conversation about the underlying social commentary in Godard’s work and I can discuss the moral dimension to The Wire and the inherent meaning of the technical decisions regarding the kinds of cameras used and the casting decisions. Which is to say that my liberal arts education and my yuppie upbringing has primed me for complaining about not just independent and foreign films or TV shows, but about shows on premium cable*. Today we will discuss my utter confusion about the adoration of so many for a show that leaves me bemused. That show is HBO’s True Blood.
Now, there have been numerous times where I watch something, think it’s terrible, and it receives the adoration of the critics and/or the masses. (See: Gosford Park and American Idol, respectively.) But while with most things I just shrug it off, read the Sunday NYT (see the aforementioned trained since childhood to be a yuppie comment), and have some coffee, I feel like True Blood’s attention and adoration is a personal affront to me because I have a deep-seated desire to love and appreciate all things related to vampires. I’m a nerd on multiple levels, and to top off my love of comic books, sci-fi, shakespeare, and all things related to ninjas, I also really, really like vampires. I’d read everything I could, I’ve seen every (American) TV show involving vampires, and for nearly 10 years Alicson and I would go to every movie that had vampires in it. And I say all of this to show that I want to like this show, I really really do.
True Blood is based on a Southern Vampire series of books written by Charlaine Harris. Vampires can live out in the open and among us regular folk thanks to Tru Blood, a Japanese-created synthetic blood that allows vampires to stop it with the whole “killing humans to live..undead-ly” thing that made us distrust and dislike them so much in the first place. Now, two years later, the vampires are trying to gain mainstream acceptance into society. And the show primarily centers on two characters: Sookie (played by Anna Paquin), a psychic waitress, and Bill Compton (Stephen Moyer), a nearly 200-year old vampire. Sookie should be fascinating because, while many of us wish to have telepathic powers and be able to read the minds of those around us, how could we really open up and trust if we can immediately read someone else and find doubts, secrets, layers, and lies? Then she finds this vampire and she can’t read him, and suddenly we have, for the first time in Sookie’s life, a real relationship built on trust, trepidation, and faith.
But poor acting and campy dialogue make this really interesting dynamic fall flat and, to paraphrase a far better writer, it becomes a tale that means nothing, brash words and action…full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.
Have I grown out of my vampire-fascination? Maybe. But then I started thinking about what books, shows, or movies I really like. And the ones that I like, the ones I really get into are the ones that use the unique qualities of vampires – the blood lust, their eternal lives, their inherent “other-ness” and disassociation from societal norms – as a metaphor for our own lives. How many times have we loved or wanted something or someone with fierceness but to touch it means to harm it or destroy it? How many times have we felt as if we wander with no purpose or to feel distinct from all of those around us? Those very vampiric attributes become the stories of us. Us as a people and us as individuals. And in this show specifically, there’s the additional metaphor of vampires “coming out of the coffin”. Get it? Because the vampires and the gays are the same! But with bloodlust and really sharp teeth! So are we supposed to take these issues seriously? But then there’s the total campiness of the show – littered all over the place with cheesy dialogue, poor acting, and terrible accents – and it doesn’t balance out in the end. Are we taking it seriously or are gleefully watching poor television for the idea of sex and violence?
Am I taking the show too seriously? Not seriously enough? Am I missing the point? Should I give it another chance? (Season 2 is starting up.) What is it that I’m missing?
*I’ve recently made the acquaintance of a certain lady friend who seems to have never had cable…ever. And I’m not talking about HBO, but cable. Like, All Of It. No Mad Men, no Talk Soup, no Ice Road Truckers, no Jon & Kate…This may be the most shocking thing I’ve heard all year.
Comments (3):
Give it another shot, I think. I really liked the show, only because I really really loved the books. It takes everything I liked about Twilight and makes it so much sexier. Most of the things I don’t like about the show are the parts that deviate from the book – the books stick more to Sookie’s storyline.
Whoa. Did I just read a line from Macbeth while reading a blog entry about True Blood? Was not expecting that.
Erin, Do you think I should start with the show or with the books? I’m certainly willing to give it another try.
Victor, yup. From Macbeth’s soliloquy after he receives the news that his wife died. “Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow.” Nice catch. Btw, King Lear in playing at the Shakespeare Theatre this summer.