True Blood In The Media
#1
Posted Sep 2, 2008 @ 2:12 PM
#2
Posted Sep 3, 2008 @ 8:55 AM
An AP review calls it “anemic” (har, har) and the reviewer also loses points for referring to Bill as a “stud muffin”… Really? Couldn’t use a phrase from this decade?
After Elton likes it (“With shows like Pushing Daisies and the Doctor Who franchise breaking new ground in fantasy and sci-fi, True Blood sidles up nicely next to Dexter in giving the horror genre a fresh coat of (red) paint.”)
#3
Posted Sep 4, 2008 @ 2:53 PM
#4
Posted Sep 5, 2008 @ 8:14 AM
#5
Posted Sep 5, 2008 @ 11:36 AM
#6
Posted Sep 5, 2008 @ 12:54 PM
On a completely shallow note, in the red carpet premier photos, the actress that plays Maudette looks so much better in real life. Bon Temps must be harsh place.
#7
Posted Sep 5, 2008 @ 9:09 PM
#9
Posted Sep 8, 2008 @ 6:24 PM
Yeah! Michelle Forbes - I remember her vividly from BSG.
#10
Posted Sep 8, 2008 @ 7:00 PM
#11
Posted Sep 8, 2008 @ 7:13 PM
ETA: Nevermind, found the original article.
Edited by alynch, Sep 8, 2008 @ 8:11 PM.
#12
Posted Sep 8, 2008 @ 8:35 PM
Bumping this to post that Michelle Forbes is joining True Blood in a regular role. This must be for season 2, as season 1 has already wrapped filming. Who is she going to play? Bills's Lorena or the Maenad?
From what I've read, both those roles show up in the first season.
Edited by girlwithbook, Sep 8, 2008 @ 8:36 PM.
#13
Posted Sep 8, 2008 @ 8:59 PM
#14
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 2:00 AM
This isn't also the first time I see some reviewer saying that he's watched the first 5 episodes. I wonder how they got to watch them.
Edited by Zengar, Sep 9, 2008 @ 2:32 AM.
#15
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 10:18 AM
#16
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 11:08 AM
#17
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 12:10 PM
Edited by bvamp, Sep 9, 2008 @ 12:15 PM.
#18
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 12:32 PM
I realized the brown-haired man sitting in front of me was Alexander Skarsgard.
Poor woman, it's a wonder she was able to see anything!
#19
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 7:35 PM
Edited by alynch, Sep 9, 2008 @ 7:36 PM.
#20
Posted Sep 9, 2008 @ 8:04 PM
Several people in my circle of friends got HBO just to watch TB.
#22
Posted Sep 10, 2008 @ 10:16 AM
I don't know what kind of numbers they were expecting.
Maybe the next Sopranos, which is not very realistic. Luckily HBO is not driven by ratings the way the networks are. I think we have a chance of getting more than one season.
To put things in perspective - look at the ratings for the Showtime hit Dexter here - now of course The Sopranos and Sex In The City got much higher ratings, but they were cultural phenoms and the exception, not the rule in pay cable.
Edited by cyberducks, Sep 10, 2008 @ 10:31 AM.
#23
Posted Sep 12, 2008 @ 4:59 AM
#24
Posted Sep 12, 2008 @ 12:27 PM
Edited by Door, Sep 12, 2008 @ 12:44 PM.
#25
Posted Sep 13, 2008 @ 10:34 AM
Several people in my circle of friends got HBO just to watch TB.
And I can see that happening more and more if the series gets good reviews as it progresses. Genre fans will go where the entertainment is, HBO would be wise to play to them. Having genre material mixed in with the more serious "real world" fare will help premium cable channels look more diverse. Like they're just like any other network when it comes to content, except with little to no reality-TV and no censorship. It's a smart move. Carnivale got the attention of a whole lotta viewers too who normally wouldn't go for The Sopranos or Deadwood or Six Feet Under. Personally I don't understand folks who only watch genre programming (the same as I don't get people who only watch non-genre shows), I go where the good stories and acting are. Even giving subgenres a try when you never thought you'd be interested in them can yield great results (I hate most cop material on TV, but I love The Shield and Dexter).
#26
Posted Sep 15, 2008 @ 10:28 AM
Looks like the dog painting caught some attention. The article also asks some interesting questions that I didn't think before.
#29
Posted Sep 16, 2008 @ 12:49 AM
#30
Posted Sep 17, 2008 @ 2:35 AM
I don't expect everyone to be as obsessed as I am about the details, but if you're a professional TV columnist, you should be able to do better than that guy.
It doesn't make sense to assume that Sam is some variety of vampire because, as far as we've been shown/told so far on the show, Sookie can't hear vampires' thoughts. She heard plenty of Sam's in the first episode.
Also, there's no reason to go beyond the theory of Sam being some sort of were-dog or shape shifter, there's nothing in the show to suggest that he's also a vampire (fine, we've only seen him at night), so I don't know why you'd make that leap. When Bill and Sookie are talking in the grave yard and she's asking what vampires can do...she asks if he can turn into a bat or any other kind of animal. His response is, "No, but there're those that can". It really sounded like he was speaking for vamps as a race, not just himself. Which I take to mean, vamps don't shapeshift, but there are people who can turn into animals in True Blood's reality. I could turn out to be wrong on that point, there might be vamps who can shapeshift, a whole lotta people seemed to read Bill's answer that way...but I really don't think Sam is a vamp.







