This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"We're robbing the place, we're not occupying it."
11973 members | you are not logged in | 30 October 2020


March 04 2010

The Vampire Diaries - Successor To Buffy? Yahoo! TV gives ten reasons why.

They make that show sound pretty damn good, I'll have to check it out
Ehhhhhhh. I can't be bothered to watch this. And who said that True Blood was Buffy's successor? Totally different shows; if anything, Supernatural is the closest thing I can think of to being Buffy's successor. True Blood is like Twilight + INTERESTING.
A lot of people compared True Blood to Buffy, CarpeNoctem. It's definitely a superficial comparison but it was made. I still need to watch Supernatural; everyone here seems to love it
The Vampire Diaries is... actually good.

And a lot better than True Blood.

The Vampire Diaries actually has a fascinating plot, likable characters and good acting.

The flashbacks and backstory are pretty strong.
I actually enjoyed the first 2-3 seasons of Dawson's creek (which Kevin Williamson was more involved with) before the show got beyond crap.. maybe I'll give vamp Diaries a go.
The Vampire Diaries owes a lot more to BtVS and AtS than it does Twilight or True Blood (particularly the tone), but with its own thing going. Which is all a plus.

And unlike the others, and like BtVS/AtS, there is that horror and mystery element that kept going missing.

BtVS/AtS always had that tone that acted like it was oblivious that it was supernatural. A lot of vampire movies/shows want to make their vampires more and more unearthly and sort of slinky/unnaturally moving. BtVS/AtS stuck with basic martial arts and even boxing. And the vampires were allowed to have mostly human personalities. The only thing that ever was added that was inhuman was the lion growls and prosthetics. And the bloodlust factor never became ridiculous-looking for the actors. The Vampire Diaries benefits from the WB/CW-style acting the same way that BtVS and AtS did, IMO.

The styles of acting is the same thing that made Interview With The Vampire a real movie with real acting performances and made the Queen of the Damned flick an absolute tonal travesty.

The 140+-year-old famished vampires were great and very eerie. Bonnie and Elena's doppelgänger pasts are a great mystery. Same with Stefan having to dig up his own father. That moment had a lot of heart, I thought.

I was originally worried about the vampires in daylight factor (AGAIN!), until they basically brought in the ring of Amarra explanation. LOL. But at least we see that most of the vampires outside of the really well-connected old ones all have sunlight problems. That is so refreshing. I was missing vampires that, outside of a mystical whoosit, are once again creatures of the night.

[ edited by NileQT87 on 2010-03-05 02:06 ]
I've got to agree with the notion that 'Supernatural' is the best idea for a successor to Buffy, although in the end I think Buffy is a league of it's own.
-Similarities include, devoted fanbase, and both are known as cult shows, the supernatural aspects obviously, dean and buffy's resurrections, SPN sometimes has a buffyesque oddball sense of humor, character development, etc. Also, it happened to start out on the same channel as Buffy and Angel the year after Angel ended. Differences include the feminism and lack of fantastic stand outs. It has some GREAT episodes just not OMWF, The Gift, CWDP, Becoming, Hush, You're Welcome, etc. level of greatness. I don't think SPN is anti-feminist so much as non-feminist, it just severely lacks strong and interesting female characters and any female who approaches being either of those things ends up dead.
Also, does anyone else think Castiel's humor with not understanding things about humanity such as sarcasm is kind of adorable and a bit reminiscent or Illyria and Anya, only you know... with an Angel instead of a demon.
I really enjoy Supernatural, and would recommend it to all of you. It's not anywhere near what Buffy is but it's a passably smart, often laugh-out-loud funny, well written, and interesting show that also has a few Whedonverse guest stars and writers. Tara, Harmony, Darla, Fred, and Holland Manners have all guested. Tara and Harmony both played vamps!
Oh right, and on the actual topic, this does make Vamp. Diaries sound interesting, but I wasn't that wowed by the scenes and adverts I saw. I might look into in someday but I'm focusing on Battlestar Galactica and Veronica Mars first on Joss's recommendations. I haven't seen either of those yet, besides a few eps and some of 'Caprica'.
Ramble over.
I love me some True Blood (which has a Buffy-level of sass), and Vampire Diaries is indeed good (think Dawson's Creek + Scream + vampires)... but for me Being Human and Torchwood really feel like they are carrying the Buffy torch these days... both emotionally and magically. However none of these shows, except True Blood now and then, have even 10% of Buffy's sense of humor.
To be fair, I only watched the pilot, but I found V.D. incredibly cliche and over the top (Welcome to the Hellmouth was pretty cheesy too,) but Elena seemed like "sad/deep girl" aka Bella aka way too many girl in pop culture these days. I didn't have an inkling of feeling for the characters and Ian Somerhalder just didn't do it for me.

I hope by Torchwood, you only mean "Children of Earth." Series 1 and 2 were both fun but pretty much directionless and rather contrived.

[ edited by marvelknight616 on 2010-03-05 02:06 ]
@marvel Nope. I meant the whole frakkin thing. Haters to the left.
I'm over here on the left then. I watched the first 6 episodes of season 1 and was inspired by its terribleness
I actually almost agree with this. I do think Supernatural deserves the "successor to Buffy" title, but we'll see how it goes after the main storyline ends and they continue the story.

Anyway, VD started off terribly. The first few episodes seemed like "Twilight: The TV Series." Then something unexpected happened: it got good. They started speeding up the pace, adding unexpected twists and intriguing plot points.

I'll have to let them finish the season and story before I can comment on whether or not it's Buffy-esque, but it's going pretty well right now. I can definitely see where they've been inspired by Buffy/Ats.
I haven't watched Vampire Diaries, but I do LOVE Supernatural... :)
I don't get the CW (strange DishNet contract squabble for the Hawaii market, and no broadcast network reception, here in my very rural area of the Big Island). So I haven't seen The Vampire Dairies. Will check if it's on Hulu.

I've only seen the first season of Supernatural, for the same reason. I wasn't impressed but I understand it got lots better. They're showing re-runs on TNT now, but in my time zone it comes on at 5 AM & I haven't been motivated to record it.
I haven't heard much at all about this show, but it sounds really good. I'll have to check it out. :)
This show is actually one of the more decent things on television right now. It hits my teen angst and fantasy buttons just right. The only thing it's missing is the comedy that was such a vital part of Buffy. Still, worth checking out if you haven't.
I've been saying this all season. I'm glad others agree.
I couldn't get past the cheesy commercials and previews I saw for VD. I watched some True Blood and the best thing I can say about it is 'meh' after violently disliking it initially. Torchwood has some brilliant bits and some really crappy bits (to be fair this can be said of most shows -- just not the West Wing ;)), but I still watch it. I have Being Human available to me, but haven't gotten around to watching it yet.
Oh, please, not.
Watched the first ten minutes of VD and had to switch it off. Too much angsty BAAWWW going on. And I can never get past vampires going to high school! Why would they punish themselves like that?
I heard you were a consulting producer, Dana ;) *how rumors get started* Although you just suggested a ban on killing characters played by Amber Benson, so... :)
It's funny, Supernatural fan that I am, I don't really compare it to Buffy. I guess I feel that the show is coming from a very different place in terms of tone and mood. Structurally, though, it is very similar (it probably doesn't hurt that Ben Edlund writes and co-produces for the show).

I haven't seen Vampire Diaries, but I might have to give it a look. I totally heart Ian Somerhalder, so at the very least there's that. As for True Blood, once again I think that while it does have the love story in vein (pun unintended) of Buffy and Angel, it's still a very different show, and anything beyond surface comparison doesn't really do it justice. The themes of the two shows are just way too different.

ETA: And I really have to get caught up with Being Human. I still haven't gotten past the second episode of season two. But out of all the shows mentioned here, I think I'd have to agree that it's probably the closest to Buffy. When it comes down to it, both shows are about learning what it means to grow and become your own person.

[ edited by deepgirl187 on 2010-03-05 04:29 ]

[ edited by deepgirl187 on 2010-03-05 04:36 ]
I have to second Being Human as the torch carrier from Buffy and Angel. It's a BBC show about a vampire, a werewolf and a ghost sharing a house in the UK, plus the wider vampire community and plenty more. (If that sounds like a silly set-up, remember how a one-line description of Buffy sounds.) For me it's the only supernatural show that's come anywhere near their quality and style and it comes damn close.

It has that same mix of genres (drama, humour, horror, romance, etc) and can change from one to the other at the drop of a hat just like Buffy and Angel. Crucially, it has great main characters that you really care for and they aren't that dissimilar to characters in Buffy and Angel (though the creator of Being Human hasn't seen either - I asked!). The main difference is in the show's British-ness - less epic, more grounded, more realistic "big bads". There's only six episodes in series one and eight in series two, which has just finished, so it's not a major commitment, plus the story is really tight (as well as awesome obviously, but I don't want to spoil anything). And there's a nice Buffy/Angel shout-out in the dialogue for you to come across too.

I seriously would recommend anyone reading this give it a go. I'm sure you can find it somehow. ;)
Damon Salvatore is ABSOLUTELY the number one reason to watch The Vampire Diaries. Seriously, Ian Somerhalder is stunning in this role.
What I love about Supernatural is what I loved about Buffy: even when deep into an arc, their episodes are still standalone without stopping the flow of the story (well, usually). I think it's a shame that standalone has, for many people, become synonymous with boring and unoriginal.
I mean no disrespect, but the topic made me laugh out loud. Not only does Buffy have no peers, it isn't a show that can be succeeded. I almost typed seceded but that would give an utterly different slant. I remember once there was a topic, last year or something, that posed the question (IIRC), Is Supernatural a Better Show Than Buffy?

One of the first people to post was Brian Lynch, who said, succinctly, No.
KaileeA42: I never noticed the similarities between Anya and Castiel, but it's kinda funny now that you mention it. He's kind of like her character inverted.

And every single one of Ben Edlund's episodes of Supernatural has been nothing less than unadulterated awesome.
I love the source material when I was a kid ten years ago. Cheesy and fun to read. The show started off terrible, but it has gotten much better and the pacing is excellent and better than the books (though I a few iffs). My main complaint at the moment is that there needs to be more action because it can be anti-climate sometimes. But I absolutely love the back story. But hey it's only the first season. BtVS first season wasn't the greatest, so TVD has time.

Can't really say about the successor part, but it does give the return to old school WB that I've missed. About what? 8 more episodes left?
wtf is supernatural?
All I can say is:

Read the books.

(Both Vampire Diaries and True Blood)
I refused to watch this show because it simply wasn't marketed to me and I absolutely couldn't stand Somerhalder on Lost. Friend convinced me to take another look when they repeated all the eps one week in December. I struggled through ep 4 and then this shit got good. Somerhalder has grown leaps and bounds as an actor since Lost and is really quite impressive now. Kinda like Padalecki and Ackles have grown since Gilmore Girls and Dark Angel. Dismissing this show out of hand would truly be your loss, but I'll keep watching.

I never would have stuck with Buffy if I hadn't started on season 2 after much urging from friends. So glad I didn't start on season one.

I also adore Supernatural and True Blood beyond all reasonableness. There is no competition between them and no ranking. Just lots of great TV. We are all so lucky that there is so much quality TV on these days. I really can't keep up with all the goodness.
Buffy was hardly the TV show to invent clever dialogue, good plotting, and deep characters. The thing that set Buffy apart and made it something worth remembering (in my mind, at least) was that its supernatural elements served a deeper purpose as metaphors for the milestones in a teenage girl's life. Vampire Diaries is a good show for what it is, but it lacks that sort of depth and is thus only a successor to Buffy in the most superficial of ways. I seriously doubt anybody will be writing essays of note about this new show years from now.

To weigh in on the True Blood talk being thrown around here: I've only seen a few episodes of it, but from what I've seen of it I think it is indeed in the same league as Buffy (I don't think "successor" is the best word for it, since it's so different tonally from Buffy; I think Veronica Mars holds that title, and I don't see anything around that's going to take it from her). True Blood seems to use vampires as a different sort of metaphor, representing a subculture trying to find its footing in mainstream society. In one of the episodes I saw there was some sort of elder vampire who was revered by the other vamps as a messiah of some sort, and he was preaching that vampires ought to forsake their ancient customs and learn to embrace life alongside humans. This made me think about ways real-life subcultures are often expected to subvert aspects of their heritage in order to fit in with mainstream Middle America. As far as I'm concerned, any TV show that gives me that much to think about is most definitely worthy of sitting side-by-side with Joss Whedon's better works. (And this reminds me, I really need to finally get around to picking up that True Blood Season 1 DVD set so I can really get with the program on this show.)
Torchwood has some brilliant bits and some really crappy bits...

Most of the first two seasons being the latter, and Children of Earth being the former. I almost didn't watch CoE because I simply couldn't stand the regular series because all the characters were morons.
I'm still shocked that VD turned out to be good. I need to check it out eventually.
I don't think SPN is anti-feminist so much as non-feminist, it just severely lacks strong and interesting female characters and any female who approaches being either of those things ends up dead.

I wish I still had the amusing supernatural flowchart for female characters. From memory the outcomes were either "Dead" or "Evil and Dead" depending on which brother the girl seemed to appeal to.
No. Being Human is. Or maybe Doctor Who. But not Hex or Demons.
Happy to see all the love for Being Human being given here. Excellent show. As for Vampire Diaries - it's very average. Not rubbish (once you get past the first few episodes, which were pretty poor) but it's not amazing either. And definitely not a successor to BTVS. Not yet anyway, but I guess it's still finding it's feet so maybe in time it'll get better. The trouble is with TVD is that the most compelling characters aren't 2 of the main 3 leads. Stefan and Elena are, thus far, a bit dull. I find myself more interested in Bonnie the Witch and Damon. Haven't ever watched Supernatural, I'm not quite sure why. Maybe I should start?
The appearance of the undead is not what makes a Buffy successor. If anything, the vampires was the least interesting aspect of Buffy and little more than a phlebotinum... The only show to ever be a worthy successor of Buffy is Veronica Mars...
Can't really be arsed to watch Vampire Diaries and with so much other quality TV already on my list I probably won't bother. Being Human, I've caught bits and pieces and it looks good. I may try to catch up in the Summer.

I do watch Supernatural and enjoy it occasionally, but it is not like Buffy (imo) and certainly not it's 'successor'. It's a whole different animal. Without an strong ensemble cast and living, non evil females, I find I get bored with the same ol' same ol' Sam and Dean angst show.
I am watching Vampire Diaries, as wife likes the books.

It is no comparision to Buffy, and is more like the OC meets Twilight. I'm not a fan...

I love Supernatural and is probably my fave non Whedon programme, really into True Blood too: great humour and a odd vibe which I love.
One of these days, we'll have to have a "which video games could be a successor to Buffy" thread.
I do think, that Vampire Diaries has a buffyish vibe to it - but who cares. The show is amazing!
Ian Sommerhalder is absolutly fantastic, the story moves forward rather quickly and they don't drag out storylines to long. And they are not afraid to kill main characters. It actually has a lot of the things, that we liked about Buffy.
So, it's well worth being checked out. Maybe the pilot is a bit soapish, but it's well worth it!
Well, different strokes - I could barely get through the first ep of Being Human and gave up halfway through the second ep.

As for Torchwood, I have to totally disagree with b!X. I loved pretty much everything about seasons one and two but thought Children of Earth was a big letdown, with a overly melodramatic gimmick and a death so unnecessary that even Joss would blush.
My feeling is that getting rid of all the interesting, edgy characters is just a way of making it more "family friendly" - i.e. less adult & controversial - if it comes back.
Oh well, I'll always have my DVD's. ;)
I thought CoE was the fandom event of last year. Though admittedly it did help that the five episodes aired one day after another.
One of these days, we'll have to have a "which video games could be a successor to Buffy" thread.

That would be a difficult and possibly short topic. Looking for a game with a strong story, great characters, supernatural elements, a female protagonist and a touch of feminism / female empowerment cuts the numbers down from however many to a handful. I'd suggest The Longest Journey and it's sequel Dreamfall as meeting those criteria (as well as being great games), but I wouldn't really say that they were Buffy-esque.

On Torchwood, I thought CoE was fantastic (topped anything that the new era of Doctor Who has done), series two was very good and series one was ok, but occasionally awful. Somehow I made it through True Blood season one, after people told me that it got better as it went along (and to be fair I might have stopped watching The Wire after a few episodes if not for the same type of comment), but I really don't rate it at all. Trashy entertainment maybe, but I couldn't buy into the characters at all. In terms of dialogue and their actions, even the humans seemed to only vaguely resemble humans. Unintentionally funny quite often though - Bill's attempt to save Sookie in daylight was one of the most amusingly awful things I've seen in a while.

[ edited by NotaViking on 2010-03-05 14:40 ]
When comparing S1 of Buffy to S1 of Vampire Diaries ... yeah I'd have to stay they stand up to each other fairly decently. It is entirely to soon to say whether or not they'll stand up to each other as a whole.

I will say this for Vampire Diaries, they did have Elena actually help to take care of herself. She's not begging to become a vampire, she's tried to stake a vampire (missed the heart, but did puncture a gut and a hand with a pencil). That right there earns her HUGE points after the %$#&$#$@ of Bella.
I like The Vampire Diaries and I love Ian Somerhalder as Damon, but I wouldn't compare it to Buffy at all. To me, Vampire Diaries has more of a Roswell feel.
Lost Season 1 SPOILERS follow:

Tamara said:
"I refused to watch this show because it simply wasn't marketed to me and I absolutely couldn't stand Somerhalder on Lost...Somerhalder has grown leaps and bounds as an actor since Lost and is really quite impressive now."

He was great before this. Rent the film, The Rules of Attraction, he's probably the best actor in it as Paul (although James Van Der Beek was pretty compelling as an abrasive drug dealing horndog as well). To be fair, Lost gave Somerhalder's Boone almost nothing to do, which is why I wasn't really feeling his death in Season 1. I suppose it was more about the other characters' reactions (Jack having to work on him and being expected to save him without the proper surgical tools and such) and it drove home the desperate, completely self-dependant situation the castaways were in, but I couldn't muster much emotion for Boone.

I watched the pilot of The Vampire Diaries and found it to be derivative, ultra-modern-vamp-cliche crap, but I've noticed many saying it got a lot better for the past few months. Was too busy, couldn't stick it out for more episodes for a show that had absolutely nothing in its premiere to hook me or indicate that it had potential (despite liking Somerhalder, I didn't believe--based on the premiere--that he would be given the opportunity to stretch his acting muscles much). The eye candy isn't enough to make me invest in a long-running drama (a film, occasionally, sure). Unfortunately, almost all the praise I'm seeing seems to be putting the show on Somerhalder's shoulders, though I've seen a few bits of acclaim thrown the way of the mythology as well. I'm not gonna tune in for one actor.

Did the lead girl get any more compelling ? She was a bore, like Liz from Roswell almost exactly (hey, I liked some of the actors on Roswell, but Shiri Appleby was crap).

[ edited by Kris on 2010-03-05 16:32 ]
Did the lead girl get any more compelling ?

No. And I only tune in to see Ian.
drops in and throws 2 cents on the pile:

Vampire Diaries: Watched the pilot and absolutely loathed it. In a bit of 'I didn't think it was possible', it actually seemed worse than Twilight. I instantly dropped it. Even reading this thread, I wasn't convinced to give it a second try (I mean, that pilot was really quite horrid :)), but TamaraC convinced me with her post up there. As soon as I have some time on my hands, I'll try to stick with it for a bit, but I'll be doing so with a healthy dose of skepticism ;).

True Blood: I know not everyone jumped on board with the show (I remember how much zeitgeist hated the pilot, for instance), but 'True Blood' has quickly become one of my favorite shows on television. The first season had some rough spots in the basic set-up - I was growing tired of all the Jason-has-sex-yet-again scenes as early as the pilot, probably ;), plus the vampires really did look incredibly cheesy, and the love-at-first-sight between Bill and Sookie was one romance novel cliché too many for me, but there was still something intriguing and fresh about the show that made me try episode two as well. And from that second episode onwards, they kept adding layers to their characters, gave all of them great lines and gave an involving, smoldering atmosphere to the whole show which gives it a very unique feel. It has only grown from strength to strength after that, with its second season probably 'on par' with many of Buffy's seasons in terms of 'quality of product' :). I simply love the show to bits and it deserves all the praise it's been getting.

The successor to Buffy: I agree with everyone who's saying that this is a silly game that the internet likes to play at. Buffy is a great show, a (pop)cultural icon and does not need a successor. There might be new shows with similar set-ups, but all this 'the successor to ' stuff seems silly. Percy Jackson is the new Harry Potter, Fringe is the new X-Files (which was the new 'The Night Stalker'), and now Veronica Mars Twilight Supernatural Moonlight The Vampire Diaries, is the new Buffy, after things like Dawson's Creek (Buffy without superpowers), Roswell (Buffy with aliens), Smallville (Buffy with superheroes) and Charmed (Buffy grown up) were all hailed as the new 'Buffy' at certain points during their inception, back when Buffy was still on the air. Heck, we've even had numerous instances of the new UK Buffy and/or Angel (Hex, Torchwood, Being Human and quite a few others, I'm looking at you ;)). And in any and all cases, these things invariably are, well, not Buffy. Some are great shows, some are not. Some I absolutely adore and others I loathe (or am quite ambivalent about). None of them, however, are Buffy. Which makes sense, because only Buffy can be Buffy. But that makes for crappy headlines, I guess ;).

(Oh, and Kris, I had a total tv-crush on Shiri Appleby's Liz, so I wouldn't say it was all bad ;))
The only thing you can really say about these topics that keep cropping up like is the new flavor better than Buffy, the new Buffy, if it has sharp fangs or characters who even a little bit crack wise, is it like Buffy, is that Buffy is the standard by which you can at least rate other genre shows who make an effort, because in some ways, consciously or not, there may be homage or intent to be Buffy-like. Look, all art is pretty much derivative of something else. It's what you do with it to make it your own, that counts.
I dismissed Vampire Diaries at first, because it just sounded too Twilight-ish, but one of my friends (who hates Twilight but loves things like Supernatural) convinced me to give it a chance. After struggling through 3 or 4 terribly bad episodes, it actually got good. And I love Ian Somerhalder on it, he has some of the best lines and has become such a good actor since the Lost days. The mythology and flashbacks keep getting better and although I found the lead character really annoying at first, shes starting to grow on me.
I can't actually bring myself to watch any of it! Being Human, True Blood (actually I watched about ten minutes of an episode and got icked out), Vampire Diaries, Supernatural. I found Buffy and Angel first and I can't help but compare every vampire story/show since to them. Besides, the current vampire craze is doing my head in, especially Twilight: I practically scream 'Buffy did it first!' to every Twilight fan.

During a discussion of gothic literature and the vampire mythology in English Lit class the other day, my teacher (who is a Joss fan :D ) mentioned the influence of Buffy and how she thought everything since has been a knock-off of it. This may not be applicable to everything and she may have just had Twilight in mind but my heart soared.

I may check one of the shows out someday but I think I'm too attached to Buffy. I think they all may contain elements of Buffy and Angel but Joss combined horror, humour, drama, mythology and fantasy in such a brilliant way. Season 1 of Buffy was by no means brilliant in terms of plot but the characters of the core 4 - Buffy, Willow, Xander, Giles were written fantastically and I formed an attachment to them by the first episode. Buffy and Angel also felt so real despite the horror/fantasy elements. Buffy became about more than just the small blonde kicking demon ass - it became about life and was chock full of metaphors - which also carried through to Angel. You often forget that the characters you see are vampires or demons (e.g Angel or Lorne) or slayers because they are so very human. And to me that's kind of the whole point: the ancient mythologies that exist arose because of our own human fears, anxieties, morals and Joss understood that so well. That's what people are failing to see in this whole vampire craze and the lack of this insight especially from Stephenie Meyer is what really pisses me off about Twilight. I don't mind changing the mythology slightly (i.e.exploding into dust) and having vampires becoming more romantic figures - it worked well with Angel and Spike but the diffreence is that most of the other vampires in the Buffyverse were souless monsters and the darkness and danger even stayed within Angel and Spike: they were not prancing around like twinkly mobile statues of Michaelangelo's David going all woe-is-me-because-well-woe-is-me-and-even-though-I've-done-sod-all-in-the-hundred-years-I-lived-I'm-a-monster-and-I-can't-live-in-the-normal-world-because-I-will-cause-a-traffic-accident. Meyer's vampires are so watered down that they aren't even vampires. The reason vampires can't go into the sunlight, touch holy objects, eat food is because they are damned and go against the laws of nature. They can live but they'll never be alive, they have to take the lifeblood of others in order to exist 'Blood is life...It's what keeps you going. Makes you warm. Makes you hard. Makes you other than dead', they can have sex but they can't make love (except when they have souls :P ) What Meyer presents in her books is basically her own fantasy.

Didn't mean for this to turn into a Twilight rant. Will be shutting up now.

Although, r.e. holy objects, one thing I've always wanted Joss to do is maybe have vampires repelled by a holy item from any religion. I know the crosses and holy water thing comes from Christianity but I like the idea of anything holy being a vampire repellent because it is what is revered by the living.

[ edited by Shep on 2010-03-05 19:03 ]
My feeling is that getting rid of all the interesting, edgy characters is just a way of making it more "family friendly" - i.e. less adult & controversial - if it comes back.

Too right, nothing like having the main character choose to allow a child (one related to him no less) to die to clear the way for fun and games, a move to CBBC and frequent Blue Peter interviews. Erm, wait...

I found large parts of S1 horrid and large parts of S2 boring, though there were brilliant eps in both runs and S3, though I had problems with specific bits of the pacing and plot arc, I thought was very powerful for the most part. I don't think that it was the Best Thing Evertm, but it was well done overall. Still, it'll have nothing on Moffat running things over on Doctor Who, eh?

from what I've seen of it I think it is indeed in the same league as Buffy... True Blood seems to use vampires as a different sort of metaphor, representing a subculture trying to find its footing in mainstream society.

I don't think it's even playing the same sport :). Also, it's not a metaphor if they simply ARE a subculture trying to find it's footing.
Ooh, thanks for reminding me thread *pops in video to record*. I've not had a chance to watch VD yet but I have been taping so I'm glad that some people have enjoyed it, and that I've been warned that it doesn't start off so well (but, uh, I liked The OC and the first few seasons of Dawsons so maybe I'll even like the first few episodes!). I did read the VD books as a teen and found them entertaining (but no Nightworld!).

True Blood I like (only seen S1 so far) but I do find some of the characters annoying (Sookie mainly) and the difference to other vampire stuff is in the characters rather than the storylines. But also... Alexander Skarsgård.

I like Being Human as well. I've had the good fortune to meet Toby Whithouse and he's a very nice guy. I saw some clips of the proper first episode (not the original pilot) before it aired and said to some of my friends I wasn't convinced by the new guy playing Mitchell. Yes, that's right, I rubbished Aidan Turner to them, you may throw the fruit and veg, as you can imagine I regret saying that now.

Torchwood I like (see, this is a theme, I don't think I 'love' any of these shows), but the events of COE have me hoping that it doesn't come back. Sounds strange as I really do like TW but because I don't 'love' it but rather was attached to the (now dead) characters, I'm not sure I could find myself that invested with another series (but would force myself to watch as I'm a completist).

With those opinions given, time to go watch Buffy.
So much TV, as GVH has noted, has been pitched as marketed as called the "new" Buffy, and in most cases - including this one - they are (un)dead wrong. (IMO, natch, as is all wot I write.)

In fact, they are frequently the UnBuffy and doubleplusungood.

As I recall, after watching Demons episode 1, I had to gouge my own eyes out - luckily, they grew back, but then I went and watched another two episodes just for the horrible fun MST3K bloodsport awfulness of it. Eye-gouging again, followed by, funnily enough, more regeneration of the visual orbs. (Phew.)

Hex = phooey, as does most of Torchwood, except for a few good 'uns mid-to-lateish season 1, and some of CofE. Couldn't make it past 2 or so eps of Being Human.

I quite like True Blood, but it took a few, and I still mostly hold it at arm's distance. I care mostly about Sookie, and the Bill-Sookie love story leaves me a little cold - I don't really care particularly about 'ships, and I don't go gaga over actors (as in crushes) - but the show does go to some interesting places. The acting is ace and it really has its own odd flavor.

I won't speak much of the Twilight stuff, as that dance does nobody any good ; >, but I will say that the LJ-parody that was going around a year or more ago really hit the spot for me. : >

As Djungelurban suggested, the vampires/supernatural in BtVS are the phlebotinum, and not what makes a show achieve Buffyesque quality. For me, Veronica Mars season 1 is the closest of any of these subsequent shows to the spirit and (realized) themes of BtVS.

The one newish show of those discussed here that interests me is Supernatural - I've somehow managed to skip right over it, but from what all y'all have said, maybe I'll give it a shot.

I remember when the BBC's "Signs of Life" was being promoted as the new Buffy - or rather and oddly: "Buffy meets horoscopes." Does anyone know wotthehell ever happened to it? I mean, was it well-received, or did it die a quick death or get ignored? (Although we can watch a - barely-viewed - trailer here on youtube, we Yanks were/are forbidden the joys of partaking.)

In summation: I found the Vampire Diaries kinda average-lame. And ha! Only Buffy the Vampire Slayer is Buffy the Vampire Slayer and that works just fine for me. Most of the rest is superplusdoubleungood, except for a few shows that succeed because they are themselves and don't try to be, seem or position themselves as another Buffy.
I watched the first couple of episodes of The Vampire Diaries and couldn't really get too into it. I also watched the entire first season of True Blood, and while I liked it, I remain not very invested in it either.

I think my general interest in vampires is probably dying until more official Buffyverse comes along to reignite it. :(
Eric, Pam and Godric coming on the scene enlivened True Blood exponentially. Lafayette is also a GREAT character. If there's anything better in this gritty, adult vamp drama series than (invisifonted to protect those new to the series) I don't know what it is. I thought the Marianne arc dragged on forever in Season 2, but Season 3 is bringing more new plot lines, some from the books and I am really looking forward to them.
Vampire Diaries has the problem of coming a little late. Sure the books were earlier, and I don't know how close the show is to them, but the fact is that despite its strong points, Vampire Diaries comes off as derivative. It also has some narrative problems I have a very difficult time getting past (like, the bad guy palling around with the good guys, even after he's unrepentently killed a bunch of people) ... but I digress. It's still better than a lot out there. Supernatural is, indeed, the closest thing to Buffy on TV right now.
I'm with QG on Veronica Mars S1 being the if-I-really-had-to-pick-a-successor (but I really don't) show. I like True Blood & Supernatural, but not enough to buy the DVDs & watch them multiple times.

Haven't seen Vampire Diaries--I just assumed from a couple of promos I saw that it was going to be dreadful--so I'm pleased to hear that so many people like it. I've no doubt I'll find the "successor" label greatly exaggerated, but now I want to check it out.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home