Tuesday, June 24, 2014

True Blood: Where Did It All Go Wrong?

I am a die hard fan of Charlaine Harris. So when I heard, oh so many moons ago, that there was a television show coming out on HBO based on her books, I jumped on the True Blood bandwagon like so many other fans of Fangtasia have since the show's inception. For those of you who are not familiar, let me break it down:


Sookie Stackhouse (blond, perky, kinda dumb) is a telepath who has always been a little out of place with the other humans in her world. Now the books are a bit different in some ways than the show, and for a long time, that was ok. The show needed to be different than the books for people to want to watch it, but there were elements from the books that made it into the movies. But I digress. So, in Sookie's world, there are vampires who are trying to mainstream; that is, fit in with human society and not feed off of them like cattle anymore. The invention of a synthetic blood drink called "True Blood" is born (that is just one of the brand names of this synthetic blood, according to the books).


The show began with fun and irreverent parts but also that dogged intrepidness of Sookie that readers of Harris's books have known and loved. The show was great for the first several seasons and everyone I talked to loved it.


But now...well, things sorta went south (readers of the books and fans of the show: pun not intended). The show bears absolutely zero relation to the books whatsoever and I find myself watching this final season out of a sense of duty rather than real excitement to see what happens next in Sookie's life and the lives (and undead lives) of those around her. Where did it all go wrong?


For me, the last great season of True Blood was way back when we met the maenad; you fellow watchers remember that one? Where at the end of the season on the last show, Sam ended up naked in front of a bull? That was Season Two and it was great! I loved it. I guess I was still pretty interested clear up through Season Three. Then Season Four came around, the one with the witches, and then Season Five was just weird with that whole Terry Bellefleur/ifrit thing. None of those things were in the books. I firmly believe that once the series stopped loosely basing its seasons on the books, it lost a lot of its luster for me.


So that leads me to the following question: how much deviation is allowed for a movie or series when based on books? I hear from Game of Thrones fans that they couldn't be happier with their show. And I've really been tempted to see it, but then again...I read all the books. Will I be disappointed?


On the other hand, too much closeness to the book is not desirable either. It interferes with whatever mental images I developed in my head while I was reading. The first three seasons of True Blood were perfect in that regard: they were enough alike to be interesting but not too much alike to ruin my enjoyment.


The fact that the show is filled to the brim with beautiful women and drool inspiring men should be enough...but it's not. Granted, I will never read those books again without picturing a certain tall, blond actor as Eric Northman. And that's ok, because he was how I pictured him anyway. The same with several other characters as well; in fact, kudos to the casting department on True Blood. You nailed it.


Will I continue to watch this, the last season? You bet your ass I will. But not because I want to...because at this point, I have too much invested in it to turn away now. Who knows? Maybe it will redeem itself in this, its final hour.





True Blood is on HBO, Sundays at 9 PM. Only nine episodes left!







No comments:

Post a Comment