Pop Culture Curmudgeon hbo » Pop Culture Curmudgeon

Ten reasons The Vampire Diaries is better than True Blood

We’re trying something new here at Pop Culture Curmudgeon – a joint post between our two regular contributors, Jen and Katie. As we’re sure you’ve realized by now, we’re fans of genre fare of all kinds. We’ve put together a post that you may find surprising if you’re a newcomer: 10 reasons The Vampire Diaries is better than True Blood.

“WHAT?!?” you ask. HBO’s True Blood is one of the most popular, talked about shows in pop culture today and it has in an impeccable pedigree. How can The Vampire Diaries, a show on the barely there CW network, compare? We’ll show you how.

In no particular order – we had too hard a time choosing! – here are our 10 reasons why The Vampire Diaries is better than True Blood. Oh, and just for kicks, see if you can pick out who authored which reason.

* Nina Dobrev. At first she seemed adequate as Elena. Then I saw her as Katherine and was wowed. She has created two completely different, fully realized characters. You can tell them apart just by expressions and mannerisms. It really is amazing.

* Unlike a certain other vampire show, the plot lines actually seem to connect the dots. (And, there aren’t any terrible Southern accents.)

* Chemistry between actors. Check out this dance sequence with Elena and Damon. They practically have sex just by looking at each other while dancing at a Cotillion-like event. It’s not just that pair either – the cast is filled with actors that have great chemistry together, as a large group and in pairs.

* Someone on the writing staff has an amazing ability to take (sometimes) borderline unlikeable characters and make them sympathetic. Witness Tyler’s transformation from jerky high school jock to semi-tragic, sometimes charming werewolf and Caroline’s change from bossy queen bee to funny, charming, amazingly supportive friend (but still bossy) queen bee.

* Ian Somerhalder. His portrayal of Damon has made him into an extremely interesting character, a sensitive bad boy with a sly sense of humor and an unpredictable dark side. And he has that eye thing… someone’s gone to the trouble of cutting them together, so enjoy.

* Pacing. Each episode of TVD seems to move forward, rather than rehashing everything ad nauseum until it all wraps up neatly in the last two episodes of the season. Filler is acceptable in a 24-episode season, but if you can’t keep a 13-episode season tight and well paced, well, I can’t help you.

* No unnecessary nudity. Now I am fine with the boobs and blood genre that is so prevalent on pay TV, but sometimes TB seems to put in plot points simply because we can see Anna Paquin’s boobs or Ryan Kwanten’s butt. (As a nod to my co-author, Joe Manganiello may remain shirtless forever.)

* A serious take on the genre. TVD is a drama; TB is camp. Enough said.

* A sense of realism. Yes, there is a certain necessary suspension of disbelief involved in both shows, unless you believe vampires and werewolves are real. Which is fine; I’m not here to judge. But TVD balances the unbelievable with a slate of characters who act in ways that are completely believable.

* Strong women. Many of the women on True Blood are capable and have supernatural powers. In fact, TB had one of my favorite characters, Nan Flanagan, a no-nonsense PR flack whose entire goal was to promote the pro-vampire agenda. But our main ladies are constantly needing rescue from the gentlemen of the show. Elena does stupid things (really, Elena, you want to go alone into the woods full of werewolf-vampire hybrids?), but she also takes care of herself when she has to.

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike

Does HBO Hate Women?

Last Friday on Cocktails with Patrick, Patrick and his guest Jensen Karp were talking about how douchey the guys on Entourage are and how horribly they treat women. I have always thought that, but it got me thinking about the treatment of women on the other HBO shows as I was watching Sunday night.

Other than Sex and the City, most HBO over the years have been dominated by the male perspective. And, Sex and the City did have a male showrunner, though it has a lot of female staffers and writers.

I remember watching Dream On and The Mind of the Married Man and thinking how marginal the women were. I wasn’t able to watch either of these shows for their entire run because I just didn’t find them enjoyable in the long run.

The women of Six Feet Under were more developed, although Nate’s love interests seemed to be cast in typical Madonna-whore symbolism.I enjoyed where they took the mother’s character over the years as she learned to be a fully realized woman rather than just her husband’s wife.

Arliss’s Rita Wu held her own in a male-dominated world, and the world of sports agenting comes with an inherent level of sexism, so I don’t expect a lot of female-centric storylines. As does the fantasy genre covered by Game of Thrones.

The women on Sunday’s episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm existed solely to service Larry, fight his battles and do his shopping, or serve as comic relief.

Entourage was pretty par for the course, with Turtle being upset that his girlfriend might have her own life and career and Ari freaking out that his wife might find someone who treats her better than he does.

True Blood is a pretty equal opportunity character torturer, so I will give it a pass.

What do you think? Do you think HBO needs more realistic portrayals of women? Or am I just being hypersensitive after listening to a couple guys rip Entourage a new one on the radio?

As an aside, Patrick and his guest thought Entourage was totally unrealistic, but Angelica Bridges said it was completely accurate but doesn’t go far enough in depicting how Hollywood is on Sunday’s episode of Hollywood Uncensored.

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike

Why HBO Leads the Emmy Nomination Field

Katie and I have both long lamented the state of network television. The only high-quality shows on the big 4 seem to be canceled before they finish their first seasons (a few notable exceptions include Chuck, which struggles each year and is now entering its final season; Supernatural; and Glee.)

Cable is a bright spot, with shows that feature smart writing and interesting characters. And pay cable leads the pack, with envelope-pushing genre shows such as True Blood, interesting period pieces such as The Borgias, and character-driven comedies such as Entourage.

Why can the cable networks succeed where the big boys fail? Pure economics.

The networks sell content that consumers watch, but they aren’t selling to the consumer. Instead, they are selling to the businesses that will advertise on the shows. The investment these businesses make in the shows is big. Not only do they pay the networks to use their airtime to speak to consumers, but they also pay the production costs of the shows and the residuals to the creative personnel each time those commercials run.

For these commercial slots, pure numbers speak. The highest audience numbers command the highest value to these advertisers looking to speak to us. Because the content is being sold to the businesses instead of directly to the consumers, the shows need to be appealing to a wide audience, not offensive to some group who might boycott the business, and likely speak to older clients than the actual viewers will be.

And, each show is a single commodity. Yes, ad slots can be packaged to run over multiple shows, but each show must appeal to these advertisers or else its production costs can’t be justified.

The cable networks are still selling to businesses rather than consumers, but the costs to the businesses are lower, so they can handle a smaller audience. Businesses buy these slots to play commercials they have already produced for the major broadcast networks, and they are not required to pay residuals for commercials that run on cable. In addition, cable networks make a portion of their revenue from subscription fees, so ad rates can be even lower.

Pay cable is the only group that sells its content directly to the consumer. They have to create content that keeps people subscribing month after month, rather than satisfying advertisers first. They can take greater risks because they sell a slate of content, from original series and movies to reality shows and studio and independent films. One risky show may fail, and many on the pay cable nets have. But it is not likely that one show will cause a subscriber to cancel the network. They will just choose to watch something else during that time slot.

As far as HBO’s continued success, I think it is mainly that they are the most established of the pay nets as far as creating original programming. The others are getting better, and their Emmy nominations will continue to increase as they continue to increase their quality and viewer appeal.

What do you think? Are the economics I have outlined enough to explain HBO’s domination of the Emmy field? Or is something else at play?

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike

The TV Schedule Is My Enemy

I forgot to watch My Boys last night. I regularly forget to watch the TNT, HBO, and Showtime shows I like. But I always remember the shows that are on the major broadcast networks, even if they are only meh, e.g., 90210. What is that about? Am I not smart enough to handle episodic television on more than 5 channels? (Yes, I include the CW because I watch it regularly, more regularly than the other 4 networks.)

Do I need a spreadsheet? A set of auto timers that change the channel for me? A clue?

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike

The Trouble with HBO Shows Spoilers for True Blood

In general, I am a fan of HBO series. They have tighter writing, they aren’t constrained by sponsor input or censoring, and they tend to get some of the best actors–those who wouldn’t think of doing network television are still drawn to HBO shows.

After watching the cliffhanger of True Blood last night, though, I was reminded of the worst part of getting hooked on an HBO series: the horribly long hiatus. We have to wait until summer 2009 to find out how the cliffhanger elements play out.

* Spoilers follow *

At least seven months to find out what is up with Mary Ann. Seven months to find out where Sam is going with all that money. Seven months to find out just how annoying a newly created vampire with a Christian chip on her shoulder can be. And seven months to find out whether my wonderful Lafayette is dead, knocked out, or turned into a vampire.

I think I will have to read the entire series of books by Charlaine Harris. I don’t know if I can stand to wait so long to find out what is up.

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike