BUFFYVERSE

Is Buffy passe' now in light of more current vampire movies & series?

POSTED BY: CHRISISALL
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 3, 2009 09:32
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3504
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:48 AM

CHRISISALL


I SAY HELL NO!!!
Eff Twilight & Thirst or whatever the Hell that crap TV show is- Buffy is Queen of all vampire stories!!!


The undead Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:55 AM

RIVER6213


Not really. BtVS series will always be considered one of the great, TV, vampire shows.

River

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:57 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by RiveR6213:
Not really. BtVS series will always be considered one of the great, TV, vampire shows.



You know it, babe.


The slaying Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:57 AM

STORYMARK


There's always going to be new Vampire stories. There has been a vampire centric TV show of soe sort on almost every season for the last few decades. Some will make an impact, others not.

And whatever the new one is will be the best one to it's fans. And as those fans get older, they will look at whatever the next new thing is, and say "It's not as good as mine."

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:57 AM

CYBERSNARK


Hell no.

If anything, the Buffyverse has made it impossible for me to watch any other vampire stories without getting bored out of my skull. (Not that I had a high tolerance for vampires anyway. I'm more of a werewolf fan.)

Blade, True Blood, Moonlight, Twilight --hell, I only watch Underworld for the Lycans. It's like Hollywood's not even trying. I keep wanting to see Angel (or Spike) stroll up and mop the floor with these melodramatic wannabe bishounen/gothlolis.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:12 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Not at all me ol' mucka!

You see the thing with Buffy is that it's essentially about a girl growing up into a woman and battling her demons.

...Well that's going to be infinitely relatable. And seeing as how those sorts of shows, with strong females at thier core are so rarely tackled, and rarer still -tackled with such accomplishment- means it'll be a good long while before Buffy is removed from her very high perch.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:14 AM

FUTUREMRSFILLION


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I SAY HELL NO!!!
Eff Twilight & Thirst or whatever the Hell that crap TV show is- Buffy is Queen of all vampire stories!!!


The undead Chrisisall



Of Course not...but Buffy was about a Vampire SLAYER not a vampire.



I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Yes We Did!




“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 1:53 PM

BIGRICHARD


It's gotta be said, I'm really enjoying True Blood, although I'd say it's completely different to Buffy, vampires or not.
Also, if anyone has the chance, check out the film Let The Right One In. It's...Swedish? I believe? and based on a book, both are brilliant. It's completely different to Buffy, I just mention it because of the whole 'vampire' thing.

But yeah, I've got to agree with the Twilight thing, couldn't see any appeal in that. Especially in the film. Apparently the vampires can go outside when it's overcast? And even if they do go out in the sunlight, they don't get hurt, they just look sort of crystal-like, and so people will realise there's something weird about them, so they don't go into the sunlight. How is THAT a vampire. They also don't have fangs. Or Willow and Xander.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:11 PM

BYTEMITE


Now, I admit I dislike vampire stories in general, because they're overdone nowadays and I don't get the bizarre romanticization of the bloodsuckers...

But I think True Blood is just BAD. I expected the whole metaphor about minorities and civil rights in our culture to be an interesting twist... But I just find the writting to be shock value (violence and sexually explicit), poor attempts at humour, and not so great characterization. First few minutes of the first episode, who are we introduced to? The stock perky innocent southern belle and the stock tall dark and mysterious (and a vampire!). Yeah. Gotta give it points for originality... <_<

At least it sounds like Buffy had other flavours beyond the vampires, and there was probably a significant amount of parody involved in the vampire depiction itself. Not to mention the trademark Joss storytelling, humour, and characterization.

So yeah, I'm going to have to agree with Chris... And I'm going to have to watch some episodes, too.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:21 PM

BYTEMITE


Ooh, although Let the Right One In gets everything right for a horror vampire story. Nice one.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:29 PM

BIGRICHARD


...tuo siht tros I ecno ylper lll'i...ko..zeej....sdrawkcab gnipyt si draobyek ym

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:42 PM

KAREL

Flying on duct tape and a damaged registry.


Everything since Buffy is passe', at least in a "been there, done that, got many tee-shirts" sort of way.


"Whatever is wrong with you is so right for me." -- Marillion.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:49 PM

BIGRICHARD


Yeah, I kind of agree. But it's not really just Buffy. All TV that isn't Whedon TV just isn't as good.

And as I was going to say before, before my keyboard started typing everything backwards, True Blood isn't as good as Buffy, I'm not saying that, but it does actually have some interesting characters and ideas and such, and I think it's worth watching. Although it is more graphic than Buffy and not meant to be particularly funny. But yes, for vampires, I really liked Let The Right One In.

Did anyone here actually read and like Twilight though? Because I'll probably end up reading it eventually, my sister is loving it, unfortunately and she always uses the "you liked BUFFY!" excuse, and says "can't judge a book by it's cover!" and all that, so I'll have to read it to shut her up I think.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:01 PM

BYTEMITE


Maybe I stopped watching True Blood before it got better then, or something. Well, and it's probably just not for me. Thanks for not taking it personally, I came on a little strong there in my anti True Blood rant. :)

Have not read Twilight... Not sure it's intended for folks out of high-school. <_< *shrug* I don't really relate to that crowd, and didn't really IN high-school either. Go go outcast clique!

And romance, blargh. There isn't much romance I can take. >_>

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:42 PM

CYBERSNARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
At least it sounds like Buffy had other flavours beyond the vampires, and there was probably a significant amount of parody involved in the vampire depiction itself.


Yeah. Vampires are hard to do well.

There's an instinct to do them seriously, but the human-like vampire as a literary archetype (i.e., Dracula) is rooted in Victorian cultural mores. Vampires are the transgressors, who are terrifying in their intelligence (as opposed to being savages, who were easy for the Victorians to look down on --they were less civilized, so it's understandable that they'd be "monstrous"). Vampires choose to be terrible and inhuman. Without that context, they inevitably seem to go all melodramatic and angsty/poetical (which, of course, is exactly how the Victorians wanted them. We however, are not Victorians).

Trying to correct this tendency just results in slavering flesh-devouring monsters without any human personality --the very thing the Stoker-esque vampire was crafted to stand as a counterpoint to.

Joss' strength was that he saw the inherent absurdity of the vampire; the only times he played them straight were when he was going to poke fun at them, or have them suddenly break character. Hell, even Dracula himself was sneered at by Spike (and Buffy, and eventually Angel too [in the comics]), precisely because he was an overly melodramatic dandy.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:46 PM

BIGRICHARD


no problem, I know you weren't being personal. It quite possibly isn't for you, I'm often quite easily pleased, and True Blood isn't one of those things I'm crazy about (like Firefly, Buffy, etc.), I just enjoyed watching it. That said, I'm not sure I'd miss it if it were cancelled, which says something.

Yeah I don't like any of those things either (aside from Harry Potter), I was just interested in seeing whether ANYONE outside the young teen girl age bracket actually liked the Twilight books. Guess not.

Unfortunately most vampire movies/books ARE romance tales, the only one I can really think of that isn't is 30 Days of Night, which I enjoyed, both movie and graphic novel. And possibly Interview with a Vampire, but I haven't seen that in ages, so I could be wrong.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 5:11 PM

BYTEMITE


So smart, thinking to put a VAMPIRE STORY in ALASKA in WINTER. Just awesome premise.

Ahh, Stoker's Dracula. Now there's a real look into the darkness of people, without a whole lot of vampire fluff, and without going overboard too. Of course, I still find Stoker's Dracula a bit too romanticized and sensual for my tastes, but that's more a sign of those times, so I can't really fault that. Though it DID give rise to every future bad vampire representation in the future. Outside that context though... Good stuff.

And you know, it's weird. Just before Dracula claims each new "bride" so to speak, you might almost think the bastard cares. Hates the women after he turns them, though. Classic example of ruining what you touch and blaming the victim, I guess.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 5:20 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
Yeah. Vampires are hard to do well.


CS, your whole post was EXCELLENT!!!

Btw, I find Christopher Lee's Dracula flicks strangely alluring....


The dripping Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 15, 2009 8:17 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
a VAMPIRE STORY in ALASKA in WINTER.

Intriguing.


The Sol-challenged Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 1:48 AM

BIGRICHARD


have you not read/seen 30 Days of Night Chrisisall?

Both (the film and the graphic novel) have things I'd change about them, but it's an absolutely brilliant idea, and executed much better than most other vampire stories.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 4:59 AM

JLIN


I read and like Twilight and all the other books in the series. Of course, I went into it knowing that it was written for young adults and probably not something that was going to make me take a long hard look at anything. That being said, it's a love story and there are werewolves and it hints at other things.

Just by coincidence, I began watching Buffy at the same time I started reading Twilight and I've enjoyed both. I don't think I have to dislike one or the other. I actually think Stephenie Meyer must be a Buffy/Angel fan because there are too many similar things. It's almost transparent where her inspiration came from and if Joss doesn't have a problem with it, then neither do I.

Also, the movie was no where near as good as the book but that could be due to the fact that the theatre was filled with giggling teenage girls.

Thank Universal for airing Firefly in HD at
http://universalhd.com/Firefly/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 6:05 AM

GWEK


I've heard the TWILIGHT books are good (well, at least the first one), but the movie is the first time I've ever walked out of the theater in the middle of a movie.

EVER.

I'm almost 40 and have probably seen 1500 or 2000 movies in the theater. A lot of them have been garbage, but I managed to sit through all of DON'T MESS WITH THE ZOHAN and even EYES WIDE SHUT. Couldn't do that with TWILIGHT, making it quite literally one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

In other news, I kinda enjoyed MOONLIGHT, but would've liked it more if I didn't keep comparing it to ANGEL.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 11:01 AM

ALIENZOOKEEPER


Twilight, smi-light. I didn't care for Vampire films, or vampires in RPGs, like WoD, but Forever Knight, Buffy and Angel, while each very different, got me past my normal inclination of- Hell No! (Nothing higher than humans on the food chain... 8-)

I liked Blood +, the anime series, but none of the other vampire anime does it for me, either, which is saying something, since the Japanese seem to love vampires...

Vince

PS- I walked out of Zohan, after holding on for 3/4s of the movie, thinking, gods and ancestors, it can't really be this baaaad!!!!!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 12:33 PM

GWEK


Then DON'T see TWILIGHT. :)

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 12:44 PM

FUTUREMRSFILLION


Alan Quartermain: King Solomons Mines. Went with a group of friends back in the day (actually the entire football team and a few girls) we walked out en mass. It sucked. Royally.

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Yes We Did!




“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 7:15 PM

OPPYH


30 Days of Night is way better.






April Fools!!!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 7:29 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by BigRichard:
have you not read/seen 30 Days of Night Chrisisall?



I will give it a shot on the strength of the recommendation of a fellow Browncoat, BR, thanks.


The Alaskan(not) Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 16, 2009 8:20 PM

BIGRICHARD


Ahh see, now I'm worried you won't like it and will never trust me again!

It's good, the graphic novel is very interesting, although I'm not sure if it's worth a purchase.

The film is very well done, although it is NOT a Buffy style character piece. It's more of a survival/thriller type film. Don't go in expecting a funny, Buffy-style time.

Oh, also, since you're here, you've probably already read it, but on the subject of vampires, Fray is a great read.



(oh, and just a heads up for everyone, 30 Days of Night: Blood Trails is NOT worth buying. I saw "cult mini-series prequel", thought "oh wow! a mini-series prequel, only $10!" and it turned out to be a web-series of 8 5-minute shorts which made a mini-prequel, was good, but not worth the money, and an extremely annoying DVD, which had you back to the main menu after every episode, each episode had about 1.5 minutes of 'previously', and credits, which made the whole thing extremely irritating.)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 18, 2009 11:44 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by BigRichard:
Ahh see, now I'm worried you won't like it and will never trust me again!


No way, if I don't like it, it just means it's not my cup of Earl Gray.


The replicating Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 18, 2009 5:41 PM

TUJIAOZUO


Is Buffy passe' now in light of more current vampire movies & series?

The answer is no, vampire pieces are actually now held up to Buffy's standards when critiuqed. I know when I was trolling for Twilight reviews one was quick to mention that Twilight was decent but nothing like Buffy/Angel, and those are big shoes to fill (I think someone also reviewed True Blood and said the same thing). Joss set the bar for the Vamp Genre.

The Vamp Genre for me is something I'm picky about because it can't be the usual blood sucking stake fest (same thing with the werewolves). Buffy is brilliant, Underworld as a great concept but failed miserably with the sequel, and as I've been doing research I dig most of what Twilight has to offer because it's a great spin on such an old myth. It more or less says 'all that stuff you know about us? Public panic, myth.... except for the eating thing.' Which is I think an imaginative way to address what people have feared for centuries. All three franchises are unique in their own way, and that's why I have been drawn to them.

I actually just got home from seeing Twilight. Now I didn't read the book first because A) all of my friends into Twilight have been all 'it'll never be as good as the book!' which is true with anything I've watched after read. And B) Meyer wrote it in the POV of a 16 year old girl, I don't like POV pieces and I seriously don't want to get into the head of some lovestruck 16 year old. So I dragged my brother along and went without anything to compare it against, no bias at all.

Movie sucked.

It wasn't the story itself, the concept was fresh and intriguing, but the execution of it was painful. It started out excruciatingly slow, and only felt like it actually had a decent pace when it reached halfway through.
While I loved the color pallet and the extensive use of the Washington St. backdrop (Favorite state), the camerawork was horrible. They were doing things they tell you not to do your first semester of film school before they even let you film. Constantly cutting 360 pans with intense close ups in between exterior shots and breaking the 180 line, it's confusing as hell. Then with the big fight scene the editing continued to be choppy so you couldn't even see the fight which was taking place in this massive space full of mirrors (that's total visual porn, they could have shot with wide shots and it would have been epic).
Makeup was excessive on the vamps at some times. While they should be pale, there were some times then they were sheet white with bright red lips which looks rediculous.
The score was random and didn't keep with a core tune, it seemed to wander aimlessly with the rest of the movie.
And finally the acting, the acting for the most part was strong, and they had some great character portrayls (particularly the non-humans, LOVED the Cullins, AKA the vampire family. As unnatural as being undead is they felt natural, real, fascinating and kinda sweet in their own nontraditional way) but a lot of the scenes felt weighed down because of the girl playing Bella. Her facial expressions were off a lot of the time, she constantly and excessively blinked. stuttered and scoffed, lacked personality and unfortunately chemistry with the guy playing Edward. The Vamp failed on some deliveries (it felt like the director either held him back or didn't push enough), but she seemed to not engage in nearly all of her scenes (and the movie is in her persepctive). I kept on waiting for some kind of chemistry spark, something to make me want to invest in, but in the end I just came out wanting to see the Vamps play another round of baseball (which was a sweet scene, definitely one of the better ones and it was the one where Bella barely had a part).

So yeah, there is my 2 cents. Ain't Buffy, and I sense it will be a long time before someone surpasses that bar.

Your Indian Pirate Lord,
Ash

EDIT: Whoa sorry on the above overkill of a critque. I get anal.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 19, 2009 2:07 AM

BIGRICHARD


I'm all for new takes on the old myth, and True Blood does a similar thing in saying "a lot of the stuff you've heard was myth". Although in True Blood I like that he actually says that the vampires made up some of that stuff so that they could prove they WEREN'T vampires when need be. Like if someone says "Vampire!" and rushes him with a crucifix, he's fine and they think "oh, that proves it, he's not a vampire". But Twilight does the 'myth' thing and then adds a whole bunch of little 'powers' and 'attractions' and stuff. Not my cup of tea at all.

Just thought of another actually, although I'm fairly sure it's older than Buffy.

George A. Romero (of Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, etc. fame) directed a film called Martin. Which is a very odd film, and CERTAINLY not for everyone. I can't say I absolutely loved it, but it's an interesting film nonetheless, and you should check it out if you've seen/liked his other films, or appreciate different takes on the vampire myth. It's less supernatural and more...realistic...I guess you'd say.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 19, 2009 4:39 AM

PSYCHOTIC


True Blood is certainly not BtVS caliber, but it's not supposed to be. It's different. If Buffy was 10/10, I'd give this 8/10. I liked it.

The acting is superb. And I lol'ed the first few episodes. But, the story arc wasn't clear to me until late in the season, and ends suddenly in the finale. I think it could have been done more elegantly and satisfying. Vampire deaths were more B-movie funny than realistic.

That said, Season 2 seems to have a lot going for it. Hopefully, the creators have more experience and budget. Interesting things happened in Season 1, and I'd like to see how a certain vamp will progress.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 19, 2009 5:03 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by BigRichard:


George A. Romero (of Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, etc. fame) directed a film called Martin.

Saw it in the theatre, it was somewhat unsettling.


The sneakin' into R's Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 19, 2009 5:38 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


BigRichard wrote:

Quote:

have you not read/seen 30 Days of Night Chrisisall?

Both (the film and the graphic novel) have things I'd change about them, but it's an absolutely brilliant idea, and executed much better than most other vampire stories.



I saw 30 Days of Night and I thought it a very cool vampire flick. Up there with Near Dark. The look of it is fantastic. Great premise.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 19, 2009 6:23 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

I saw 30 Days of Night and I thought it a very cool vampire flick. Up there with Near Dark. The look of it is fantastic. Great premise.



Oh now I just HAVE to see it!!!


The determined Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 7:55 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I SAY HELL NO!!!
Eff Twilight & Thirst or whatever the Hell that crap TV show is- Buffy is Queen of all vampire stories!!!


The undead Chrisisall



Buffy? You're KIDDING me! That's like sooooooo 1997. OMG! Get with the program, grandpa. Hello, this is the 21st century! Heard of y2k much ?

Buffy... hah!







It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager


" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:02 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Get with the program, grandpa.

Why, in MY day, vamps couldn't go out in daytime....


The ancient Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 1:47 PM

BYTEMITE


I remember when vampires liked kittens and hugs!

*senility?*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:55 PM

EMBERS


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
I SAY HELL NO!!!
Eff Twilight & Thirst or whatever the Hell that crap TV show is- Buffy is Queen of all vampire stories!!!

The undead Chrisisall


Ah, once again we have a thread started by ChrisIsAll so that he can respond... and argue with people who have been lured into the argument....

I got the first three books of Twilight from a friend who clearly doesn't know me as well as I had thought she did....
And believe me, they are NOT Buffy. I don't know why they have hit the Best Seller lists, but in writing, plotting, excitement, and love story even (we won't compare humor because the books are devoid of humor) these books cannot touch Buffy...

I have to confess that I only watched 20 minutes of HBO's 'True Blood' and the bad Southern accents were just making me grind my teeth... and I can't afford to see the dentist at the moment.

Vampires can be so cheesy, and evidently Cheese is VERY popular at the moment!

I hope people are still watching Buffy, because she is the BEST.
(but full disclosure, I have to confess that I enjoyed 'Moonlight')


New Firefly fans should check this out: http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=2&t=15816

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 9:27 AM

CALIFORNIAKAYLEE


This is probably the wrong crowd for this, but I wanted to put my vote in as a non-teenage-girl who loves Twilight. I’ll be 28 before the end of this month, have been happily married for 6 years now, and read the entire series over Christmas vacation on my mother’s recommendation. And my 36 year old husband stayed up until 2:30am last night finishing the fourth book. In fact, I don’t know anyone under the age of 18 who likes Twilight. Of the several dozen fans in my family and friends, all are adults.

I actually saw the movie before reading the books, and liked the movie enough that over the next few days I kept thinking about the characters, until finally I snuck into the library at my parents’ place and started reading the book, just to see what happens after where the movie left off. At first I didn’t want to get sucked in, but now I’m glad I didn’t pass up the opportunity to get to know these characters. After I finished reading the first book I went to see the movie again, and liked it even better. After I finished the fourth book, my husband (who had been rolling his eyes at it the whole time) said he figured he should see what I was all wrapped up in, so took me to see it again. The next day he bought the first book “for me”, and 15 days later had read all four books straight through, with no urging from me whatsoever.

I have to say that I find it very ironic that people on this board of all places are this opposed to trying out something with a cult following. I also find it painfully ironic that some of you are willing to watch hours and hours of a show about a girl in high school, but can’t be bothered to pick up a book about a girl in high school. And seeing the movie Twilight and then dismissing the books as crap is like watching the Buffy The Vampire Slayer movie and then assuming the show would be at least that bad.

Now, I liked Buffy a lot when it was on TV. It started during my sophomore year of high school, with Buffy also a sophomore, so a lot of the things in the show matched up with my life very well. For several years, I was totally wrapped up in Buffy. But somewhere around the 5th season, the show lost me and I stopped watching. I went back for the last couple of episodes of the 7th season when I heard the show had been cancelled, but never really got back into it. When I saw that Hulu had a bunch of episodes up, I tried to watch them all over again, but I couldn’t get through it. Buffy represents a time in my life that I am past now, and I’m not particularly interested in revisiting it now (I won’t be going to my 10 year high school reunion this summer either).

As far as Twilight goes, I think it’s important to go into it thinking as little about Buffy as you can. The author has stated that she didn’t watch Buffy before writing the books, and has carefully avoided watching anything Buffy while writing, so her stories won’t be influenced. Yes, there are similarities, but if you actually read the books, you can tell that she hasn’t watched Buffy – the similarities would be much more self-conscious if she had. Try to think of the Twilight vampires as a totally different species as the Buffy vampires. Who knows, you might actually enjoy yourself.

Anyway, I just wanted to get another point of view out there, so people don’t read this thread and think that Twilight isn’t worth the time. I have found it to be more than worth the time, very enjoyable and some of the best books I’ve read in a long time, despite the YA reading level. But just like Firefly, Buffy, and all the other geeky cult following things that people around here love, you won’t know if you’ll love it until you try it. If you read the first book and decide it isn’t for you, that’s fine too. I can’t stand “Once More With Feeling” and barely made it through “Dr. Horrible”, but I know there are tons of people who love both. To each their own.

The lesson of loving a show named “Buffy The Vampire Slayer” is that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. It’s deeper than you may think.


~CK

You can't take the sky from me...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 9:32 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by CaliforniaKaylee:
But somewhere around the 5th season, the show lost me and I stopped watching.

Funny, I liked the last two seasons better than the rest... I felt it achieved a more adult level that what had preceded.
Quote:


The lesson of loving a show named “Buffy The Vampire Slayer” is that you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. It’s deeper than you may think.



Very fair to say. I will give the flick a rental.


The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Is there life after Buffy...??
Sat, January 26, 2019 17:27 - 7 posts
Felicia Day On Escape!
Sat, December 22, 2018 10:09 - 1 posts
Buffy Comics Reading Order?
Thu, July 19, 2018 03:00 - 3 posts
BUFFY BRACKETOLOGY - Round 7
Wed, January 31, 2018 20:35 - 1 posts
BUFFY BRACKETOLOGY - Round 6
Wed, January 31, 2018 20:30 - 1 posts
Just finished watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer for the first time
Mon, October 31, 2016 23:08 - 17 posts
Chop wifes head off... get a free hug
Sun, October 30, 2016 12:30 - 3 posts
Sarah Michelle Gellar wins People Choice Award 2014
Wed, April 20, 2016 18:51 - 4 posts
Xander goes wild ! Nicholas Brendon arrested for rowdy antics in hotel room.
Thu, September 3, 2015 08:16 - 9 posts
SMG is a dork
Wed, April 15, 2015 04:09 - 4 posts
SMG gets reality TV series for sane people
Fri, April 10, 2015 16:31 - 1 posts
SMG in beastiality fiasco
Fri, April 10, 2015 16:22 - 3 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL