![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thessalianTrue Blood is a rather fine series, but as much as I have been enjoying catching up on S2, and expect to enjoy S3? It's also a little bit depressing, and I will tell you why. See, I read the first Charlaine Harris novel before I watched the show, and I thought it was okay. Then I saw the show and read the first book again, and a couple of the others, and the comparison brought me to a sad and sorry conclusion - the books are kind of crap.
I mean, let's start with the characters. In the books, we see the whole thing from Sookie's point of view, and Sookie ... is ... let's face it, hugely self-involved. The only real difference between her and Bella Swan is that Sookie has powers right from the get-go, doesn't want to be a vampire and at least has some semblance of wanting to do right by the people around her, as dismissive of them as she can often be. Anybody else? Even the love interests? We get nothing on them. If I was going to be really forgiving, I'd say it's to do with the first-person narrative, but someone who's good at first-person narrative can actually give the secondary characters personality (paging Jim Butcher and Kim Harrison, just for a start), so that's no excuse. Whereas the show's writers gave everyone some damn personality, from Tara and Arlene to the bloody Bellefleurs. Even the characters without names are more than just ciphers to make Sookie look more angelic because of how ignorant they are. So ... yeah, for once, the characterisation on a TV version of a book kicks the book version's arse.
And then there's plot. Look, I've read a few of the Charlaine Harris novels, and plot is something that kind of just ... creeps up around the edges of "Sookie Discovers Brave New World of Supernatural Weirdness". It's not important that Things are Happening. It's only important that Sookie is Speshul, and horny, and finally able to do something about the horny. Except not because all these guys want her but are essentially shits. But she still wants them. Yadda yadda blah. It's like Twilight without the sparkles and with yet more supernaturals trying to get into Sookie's knickers. At least, that's the book version. The TV version has Things Happening, and said things actually being more important than Sookie Stackhouse's libido and relationship issues. I've heard a few people complain that the writers must be hardcore Sookie/Bill 'shippers, but hell, I don't care who the show's writers pair her up with so long as they just stop her love life being the centre of attention all the damn time.
In short, loving the TV show. Never touching another of the books again. It's just not worth it. But it says a lot about the way this 'paranormal romance' stuff is going that a TV show can actually do a better job of telling the story and give characters life than the book can. It never used to be that way because of the constraints of not being in characters' heads. At least in the case of Harris, I guess there wasn't much in the heads of the book characters to get into in the first place.
I mean, let's start with the characters. In the books, we see the whole thing from Sookie's point of view, and Sookie ... is ... let's face it, hugely self-involved. The only real difference between her and Bella Swan is that Sookie has powers right from the get-go, doesn't want to be a vampire and at least has some semblance of wanting to do right by the people around her, as dismissive of them as she can often be. Anybody else? Even the love interests? We get nothing on them. If I was going to be really forgiving, I'd say it's to do with the first-person narrative, but someone who's good at first-person narrative can actually give the secondary characters personality (paging Jim Butcher and Kim Harrison, just for a start), so that's no excuse. Whereas the show's writers gave everyone some damn personality, from Tara and Arlene to the bloody Bellefleurs. Even the characters without names are more than just ciphers to make Sookie look more angelic because of how ignorant they are. So ... yeah, for once, the characterisation on a TV version of a book kicks the book version's arse.
And then there's plot. Look, I've read a few of the Charlaine Harris novels, and plot is something that kind of just ... creeps up around the edges of "Sookie Discovers Brave New World of Supernatural Weirdness". It's not important that Things are Happening. It's only important that Sookie is Speshul, and horny, and finally able to do something about the horny. Except not because all these guys want her but are essentially shits. But she still wants them. Yadda yadda blah. It's like Twilight without the sparkles and with yet more supernaturals trying to get into Sookie's knickers. At least, that's the book version. The TV version has Things Happening, and said things actually being more important than Sookie Stackhouse's libido and relationship issues. I've heard a few people complain that the writers must be hardcore Sookie/Bill 'shippers, but hell, I don't care who the show's writers pair her up with so long as they just stop her love life being the centre of attention all the damn time.
In short, loving the TV show. Never touching another of the books again. It's just not worth it. But it says a lot about the way this 'paranormal romance' stuff is going that a TV show can actually do a better job of telling the story and give characters life than the book can. It never used to be that way because of the constraints of not being in characters' heads. At least in the case of Harris, I guess there wasn't much in the heads of the book characters to get into in the first place.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:11 pm (UTC)HBO can do no wrong as far as I'm concerned right now. Watching Justified and Treme, all good.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:30 pm (UTC)I found the series first, loved it madly, and (of course) sought the books out for more of the same. It was more than a little disappointing. Compared to what HBO is doing with these characters, Harris is flat and uninteresting and FAR too L.K. Hamilton for my tastes. I want to hear about Tara's misadventures, and Jason's dumb luck, and get hints of Eric's backstory. I emphatically DO NOT want to hear about Sookie's unending quest to have sex in every room of Bill's house (though somehow they manage to make even that relationship interesting in season 3).
Apparently Jessica isn't even in the books? She's one of the best things about the series, and to me she kind of sums up the difference. (Shan't say more, because I'm not sure if you have gotten to Jessica yet.)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:32 pm (UTC)I also find that the show answers the big question I had throughout most of the books I read, namely, "...What does Sookie see in Bill beyond the fact that she can't read his mind?!?"
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:46 pm (UTC)As for Jessica: Just the fact that she exists speaks volumes for how much work the show is putting in to fleshing out the world. Every series needs someone to notice how mad all the other characters are. (I'm thinking Jenks and Molly Carpenter.) But what they've done with Jessica, using her to really examine what being a vampire means in this setting, and how it changes someone's life... She's kind of our "everyman" vampire, and I love her for it. I very much doubt the books have anyone similar.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 06:54 pm (UTC)*facepalm*
That. I...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGo31JR-iTI
My response to this starts at 1:15.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-08 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-09 02:46 pm (UTC)...Jessica please.
I don't think I'll bother reading any more of the books. Pretty much all the awesome bits are in the TV show, along with extra awesomeness like Jessica and Alexander Skarsgard's face.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-09 03:27 pm (UTC)Favor...tell me if you think the King of Mississippi is a Ventrue Antitribu or not. My bf and I been having this argument for months. He's at least Sabbat. No question there.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-09 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-09 04:54 pm (UTC)And, by definition, aren't all Gio's fucked-up? :P
no subject
Date: 2011-05-09 04:55 pm (UTC)Well, yes, but I mean fucked up by the definition of a Gio. :P