Y'know, i have to admit that as much as i am not exactly thrilled that Tru Calling was pretty much the only new genre show to get a second season this last year (scary thought huh!) after reading that article i'm really conflicted as to what i feel is the right thing to happen.

I don't like the show! So what? It's not like i have to watch it.

Eliza seems to be very fond of her current job and so what else really matters? If Tru Calling goes on to be a success, even if that is at the expense of Faith ever getting a series of her own, then great. I may even grow to like the show given time (unlikely but i can hope) and if not maybe there will be more variety of new shows next year (again being hopeful beyond reason).

Ultimately there was never a guaranteed Faith series anyway so Eliza may as well try her hardest to make Tru Calling a success.

Us slayerverse fans will just have to look elsewhere for our next leading hero.

You listening Mr Marsters? :)

Disciple of Spike | July 19, 23:30 CET

Ya know, I think that any day now, the suits will get together and decide that Eliza and Sarah and David and James, are simply "too old" now for the Buffyverse, and that they should be looking for "fresh" young stars for any future productions.

And I fear that unless we get a Jossverse movie, etc, REAL soon, we will end up not getting *anything* for some years and then get served up a whole new, young cast to attract the next crop of teenagers coming up, and not us at all.

wissxwe | July 20, 00:32 CET

There is always the thought in the back of my mind that BUFFY and ANGEL weren't that great during Season One. That Joss needed some time to introduce the characters and work out the kinks, and we should give Tru Calling creator Jon Harmon Feldman, his writing staff, and Eliza (who we all adore) the same leeway.

But there's another thought (more towards the front of my mind) that says Feldman will NEVER come through with anything better than we've already seen on the screen. That he's a hack who doesn't have a tenth of the writing talent of a Joss Whedon. That we're stuck with this melodramatic claptrap disguised as a fantasy series until Fox decides even they can't stomach it anymore, no matter how cheap it is to produce.

Feldman had a perfect opportunity to spin the entire series on its axis when he introduced Jack (Jason Priestley). He could have actually thrown Tru's mission into doubt, explored the possibility that her gift may not have come from a beneficent higher power, that her alterations may have had some harmful effects on the order of the universe.

But that would make things complicated, you see, and nothing I have seen of Feldman's writing indicates that he's capable of the subtleties and complexities of Joss and Mutant Enemy. (Remember, this is the guy who wrote a scene where Tru ran into an operating room--without anybody on the surgical team batting an eye!--to plead with little brother Harry to send her back in time to save his life.)

Of course, I could be wrong. Jane Espenson is now on the staff, after all, and I love Jane E. But Jane was never involved in planning the overall arcs of BtVS, and I fear that Feldman still steers the ship. Will I watch the start of Tru 2? Sure. But if I see more of the same nonsense, I'm out of there.

cjl | July 20, 00:40 CET

I'm sure as long as Joss is behind the project, the storylines would be great, but we all know it wouldn't be the same without the characters we love and hate. It might stand a chance if the show had a different slayer or something along those lines, but if they tried to make a show with Buffy but not Sarah, I'm not sure how I would feel. A Spike that isn't James? It just isn't the same. Who could possibly bring true broodiness to Angel without David? I understand the conflict, though. Vampires don't age, and it's hard to keep an actor looking the same after so many years. It just wouldn't isn't the same!

Illyria | July 20, 00:41 CET

I very muich doubt that he would just make another Buffy with different actors, and have no problem whatsoever with a new cast. Honestly it's not so long ago that Buffy was an entirely new cast, and Firefly was a whole new and wonderful cast of characters. It could be along the lines of the next generation, new adventures featuring new characters but with simialar stories and feel.

The thing about Buffy and Angel season 1, which is not the same as with Tru season 1, is that both exhibited signs of their brilliance within the first season.

Angel had it's fair share of wonderful episodes in season 1, and Buffy had a few very good ones, but already had it's characters and writing interesting enough to draw me in.

Nothing about Tru has grabbed me, not it's stories, not it's characters, not it's writing. I do not even believe that Eliza is all that strong in her role. I hope that it does improve greatly in the next season, but i kind of doubt it.

With that said, I am pleased that Eliza is happy with her role. I hope that it finds it's fanbase, I however am so far not one of them.

rabid | July 20, 01:30 CET

I've said this before here and at several other boards but i honestly don't care that David and James are looking older than they were when they first started playing their respective roles.

Sure they play supposedly ageless characters but at the end of the day i would rather ignore the fact they the actors themselves are aging if that means that we get another few years of the real Angel and Spike.

I mean, we suspend our disbelief enough to sit and enjoy these supernatural based series in the first place. It shouldn't be all that more difficult to ignore a few extra wrinkles and a little added weight should it?

And for those of you that are adamant in your continuity just look at it this way. Angel and Spike are the only vamps in history to have regained their souls, therefore it is completely unknown what kind of effect that would have on the vampire physiology. Maybe a gradual but still massively retarded aging process could be a side effect of the soul being restored into the vampire form.

Just a thought ;)

Disciple of Spike | July 20, 01:50 CET

And for those of you that are adamant in your continuity just look at it this way. Angel and Spike are the only vamps in history to have regained their souls, therefore it is completely unknown what kind of effect that would have on the vampire physiology. Maybe a gradual but still massively retarded aging process could be a side effect of the soul being restored into the vampire form.

Just a thought ;)

And the 'no prize' goes to..... : ) I blame my husband that I even know that term.....

We've been watching early Buffy seasons and I must say that DB made a much more imposing Angelus after he 'growed up' a bit. It's hard for me to imagine that skinny dude from season 1 with long hair, manhandling Dru in front of Spike and talking about hunting with a real man. He just looked too young and it wouldn't really have been that intimidating next to a newly turned Spike. It was better that he got some beef and character in his face. Season 1 he was just hair and lipstick.......

Rogue Slayer | July 20, 02:11 CET

I love how Angel and Spike have managed to grow into their roles and evolve accordingly. I personally don't mind them growing older...they just get better with age. ;)

Illyria | July 20, 02:20 CET

It bothers me when people discard Tru Calling because "it's the only thing keeping Eliza from a Faith spin-off". Was there even ever an official word from ME that a Faith spin-off was EVER considered?

If you're gonna hate the show, hate it because the writing sucks (hey, BtVS's first season wasn't the best ever), not because of some rumor.

Bah.

Cabus | July 20, 02:51 CET

As i think i made clear in my original post up at the top i personally dislike Tru Calling based on it's own merits. After two thirds of a season i have yet to see an episode that i would watch again and that isn't good as far as i'm concerned.

Again though i feel that as long as Eliza wants the show to succeed i will wish her well regardless as to whether i bother to watch it or not.

There were discussions about a Faith series happening according to comments Joss made but Eliza wanted to branch out so the idea didn't go very far. The fact that Joss considered it though is promising to me. It means that he would like a third slyerverse show to happen eventually.

Rogue Slayer, it's been a long time since i heard 'no prizes' mentioned. Aah, the bygone days of Marvel Comics letters pages! ;)

Disciple of Spike | July 20, 03:18 CET

I'm glad someone is!

Yeah I'm one of those that hope for a Faith spin-off...
I hope she does well, has a good viable couple of seasons, so the networks see she can carry a show; then a Faith Show.

If she doesn't do well with Tru Calling, I can't see them giving another show...

ultran | July 20, 03:22 CET

I would love to see a Faith spin-off (then again i think I would watch a Clem spin-off)but if Eliza wants to try and make a go of it with a new role that is her perogative. I have tried watching Tru Callings but found it tough to get into. I felt that they could of done a lot w/ Jason Prestley's character when he was introduced but in the end it just didnt help.

Krall the Conqueror | July 20, 03:23 CET

Ok, I am about to do something wildly off-topic here. Probably won't get a response but just kinda curious if anyone watched last night's Six Feet Under.

The show's been mentioned here a couple of times and was curious to people's reaction to last night's episode.

I tried the TWOP board on it (never been to a TWOP board before) and I have to say that the level of discourse was not that encouraging.

Oh, if this is some kind of massive violation of the rules feel free to spank me, in honor of both SFU and Angel's obsession with this particular sexual deviance.

Unitas | July 20, 05:31 CET

*waives* Hi there, long time reader, first time poster. (i've always wanted to say that . . .)

My problem with Tru Calling is that there weren't any surprises. As soon as they announced Jason was joining the cast, I figured he would be evil. Why else would they bring in a totally new character so late in the series? And then *spoiler alert for anyone that missed the finale* Tru's dad used to have the same power as her and Jack, and now Jack works for him? A small surprise, but considering we already learned he hired a hitman to kill Tru's mom, not really an earthshattering revolation.
Throw in the flashbacks after every commercial break and you have a show that gets on my nerves. I watched a lot of the episodes purely because Eliza is on the show. I'll give it a try again next season and see if they can make it better, but it's not appointment television like Buffy and Angel were.

As for a show needing time to find it's footing, that's a very valid point, but as was pointed out before, Buffy and Angel at least showed sparks of the future greatness in the first season. They also had interesting stories, characters that you could care about, and plot twists that you wouldn't expect but that made sense. Tru hasn't had any of this, at least not as far as I can tell.

thekey1313 | July 20, 05:34 CET

Rogue Slayer, it's been a long time since i heard 'no prizes' mentioned. Aah, the bygone days of Marvel Comics letters pages! ;)
Speaking as someone who didn't grow up reading comics, Marvel or otherwise.... Anyone care to explain what the "no prize" is/refers to? I got lost somewhere back there....

acp | July 20, 06:16 CET

The "No Prize" was the "non-award" given to readers who correctly explained away some niggling continuity issue or troublesome plothole. All Marvel comics used to have a letters page (nowadays, not so much), and when one letter would raise a question and another letter answered it, the editor would officially award the clever reader the "No Prize"... basically meaning they got nothing but to see their names in print acknowledging that they answered something the writers/editors couldn't or wouldn't.

That's how it started anyways. From there the "no prize" sort of got given out for any ol' thing.

Haunt | July 20, 07:34 CET

Aha. Thanks for clearing that up, Haunt. From that description, I would say BtVS/Angel viewers are masters at the "No Prize." In fact, I think Jane Espenson talks about it on the commentary for Rm w/ a Vu, how whenever the writers goof up, the fans are there to come up with some theory, however outlandish, to keep the 'verse consistent (in that case, it had to do with food, I think – the inconsistencies about when vamps eat food other than blood, what they can taste, why Spike loves, say, onion rings while Angel says no food has taste for vampires, and Angel's inconsistent utterings about coffee/caffeine). In 12 seasons of the buffyverse, there are certainly plenty of plotholes/continuity gaps to keep No-prize seekers busy.

acp | July 20, 07:57 CET

My problem with Tru Calling is that there weren't any surprises... As soon as they announced Jason was joining the cast, I figured he would be evil... Throw in the flashbacks after every commercial break and you have a show that gets on my nerves.

Welcome, thekey1313. You've pretty much laid out my feelings regarding Tru Calling in your post.

I have a couple of TV rules by which I attempt to sift out the majority of scripted-TV dreck: If I can correctly predict the way the plot's going to go within five or ten minutes of tuning into a show, it flunks. (Life's unpredictable; good TV should be, too.) If I watch a show all the way through a second time and it still flunks, it doesn't, generally speaking, get a third chance. TC is guilty of both offenses, even given the fact that I've broken rule #2 by watching it more than the aforementioned two times after flunking because Eliza is pretty and there's absolutely nothing else on. Well, I take that back. Thursday night is British comedy night on PBS, so if Jane Espenson can't work some sweet, sweet magick on Tru's S2 plotlines, I'm thinking Hyacinth Bucket it is over Tru Davies, pretty or not.

I also had middlin' hopes for the Jason Priestly character, which is funny to say since I'm not overly fond of him. But the change in the series' stale formula was a godsend, and I sincerely hope the writers don't shy away from having Tru address the darker philosophical issues his presence should highlight. I'd like to think the creator and writers already had that tangent planned, but the character dynamic and ulterior motivation are simply being established at a slug's pace. (This is a rosily-tinted outlook, granted, considering the way the finale ended.)

Which leads me to comparisons. I suppose what makes TC so disappointing to me personally is the way Buffy and Angel have so much going on, even in less pivotal episodes to the central plots. I've come to expect a certain level of intelligence and fearlessness from ME, where I am taken into mental places I might not necessarily put myself into voluntarily, yet that teach me more about what I think and believe than shows that never push the bounds of my presumptions about the way the world works. Unfortunately, it's caused me to require more than a bunch of running around and an A and B plot that seldom connects or concludes in a deeply satisfying manner (by which I mean, not so neatly and tidily) to keep my attention focused for an hour (by which I mean the 40 or so minutes I'm not being shilled to death by advertising).

Wiseblood | July 20, 11:47 CET

Hah! My wife is making 'No-Prize' jokes! My work is done....

Seriously, most people here dislike Tru Calling because the quality of the show has been dissappointing. I personally would prefer to love the show, especially since there's practically nothing out there I find worth watching. And I do watch Tru, because I like Eliza, and because of the hope that THIS week it will finally get better and actually utilize the possibilities of the concept. So far, no go.

And Wiseblood, I agree with your post up there (especially about the slug's pace. Oy. Joss' shows usually get to the point quicker)

But another element in Tru is that...well here we go again with the probably unfair BtVS/AtS comparison....can't be helped. In Joss' shows, the scenes, the dialogue, everything is entertaining even when nothing is really happening. When we're just opening the episode, or we're just having exposition. There are always at least some gems in there that make me laugh, that surprise me, that lift the veil of a particular character.

With Tru, the characters are underdeveloped and bland, as is their dialogue. I mean the morgue guy (With the beard. His name escapes me for the moment) is practically her 'Giles' with the research, the explanations and the mentor-like relationship. But he's a cypher. He looks worried and knows stuff. That's about the extent of his character. Even in BtVS S1 where Giles was often the butt of jokes, he was a real character that we got to know better and better just through the interaction and dialogue of normal episodes. (With normal I mean eps not even devoted to him in particular.)

Tru's writing is just sub-par. Or mediocre at best. And while Eliza's enthusiasm is inspiring and endearing, what she says doesn't fill me with hope. Tru is he hero, Jack is the villain and here we go. Exactly the simplistic white hat/black hat stuff I saw them turn it into at the end of last season.

"I've come to expect a certain level of intelligence and fearlessness from ME, where I am taken into mental places I might not necessarily put myself into voluntarily, yet that teach me more about what I think and believe than shows that never push the bounds of my presumptions about the way the world works. "

Beautiful line, Wiseblood. I bow.... And it's indeed one of the most important aspects of Joss' shows: every ep there is always something that surprises me. And I'm not easy to surprise anymore.

EdDantes | July 20, 13:06 CET

As people have said here, we have been spoiled by the high quality that was Buffy and Angel. Those two shows never assumed that the audience was, to want of a better phrase, dumb. Tru Calling fell into the trap of having to constantly remind the viewers of what happened five minutes ago.

But I do like Eliza's character and I do like Davis. The rest of the characters, howver, feel a bit superfluous.

Simon | July 20, 13:07 CET