True Blood, the books?
DouhetSukd
about Shannara got, I am a bit anxious about asking, but...
What are your thoughts about True Blood? I rather liked the HBO
series. Not the 8th marvel of the world, but funny and something one
can sink one's teeth into. Is the series worth reading?
I like vampire novels, but...
Liked:
That dude what's his name, Bram something.
Fevre Dream by GRRM,
The Vampire Tapestry by Suzee McKee Charnas
The Empire of Fear by Brian Stableford
Another story (YASID) where the vampire or some other assassin kills
some victim after remarking that burglar alarm stickers are so helpful
in telling you to cut phone lines before B&E.
Tolerated:
1 or 2 Anne Rice novels, not sure which.
Some early Anita Blakes.
Twilight (had to read before my teen daughter, didn't finish, wouldn't
want to read all of it).
The Golden by Lucius Shepard
Disliked:
most later Anne Rice stuff
ditto Anita Blake
backcovers of Dresden Files (never read)
Poppy Z. Brite - intense dislike
Vampire$ by John Steakley - kind of unfair, I thought he was heavily
patronizing towards his wallflower female characters, but realized,
years after reading Dracula, that he was just making fun of Mina's
helpless self.
I don't mind lightweight so much, if it's good fun and True Blood
definitely is fun to watch. All the same, I wouldn't mind a story
with some philosophical musings, as long as it didn't take itself too
seriously.
So (already covering myself from the rotten tomatoes), would True
Blood be to read or not to read?
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Well there's not much philosophical musing..
IMHO the "Southern Vampire Mysteries" (which I believe is the official
tag for the Sookie Stackhouse series) started off quite well, but
the last two books have been sub par, and even before that Harris
seemed to write herself into corners and change direction between
books. The books are all told first person by Sookie, and she has
a definitely appealing narrative voice at least until she starts to
get worn down by events in the later books. I would say read the
first one, and if you like that you'll like the next three or so,
then if you like the direction change you'll be on board for the next
couple as well. After that, YMMV, but while I am still following the
series, I was quite let down by the last two.
I only saw most of the first season of TB, but I can say that certain
characters are quite different in the books than in the show.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
BTW, to follow up my own post: The Harry Dresden books deserve
more consideration than reading the back covers!
Michael Grosberg
> Guys and gals, after the blistering reception the gentleman talking
> about Shannara got, I am a bit anxious about asking, but...
>
> What are your thoughts about True Blood? I rather liked the HBO
> series. Not the 8th marvel of the world, but funny and something one
> can sink one's teeth into. Is the series worth reading?
I only read the first one, but I consider myself a True Blood fan. My
impression was that the show is much better than the book, at least
the first one is. The show added or expanded a lot of characters. The
things I liked most about the show - the Jason-Amy story (plus Eddie
the vampire), the characters of Tara and Lafayette - were all either
mentioned only briefly or don't exist at all in the book. Jason is not
as interesting (or stupid) in the book as in the show. The Maryann
subplot doesn't happen at all and neither does the Jessica subplot
(although for all that I know they may have been taken from other
books in the series in some form). Most importantly, the book didn't
have the bizarre sense of humor the show has. It was funny, in a way,
but it's a different kind of humor.
My exgf really liked them though, make of it what you will.
David DeLaney
>Guys and gals, after the blistering reception the gentleman talking
>about Shannara got, I am a bit anxious about asking, but...
>
>What are your thoughts about True Blood? I rather liked the HBO
>series. Not the 8th marvel of the world, but funny and something one
>can sink one's teeth into. Is the series worth reading?
MOST definitely. I ... am not buying it in hardback - but, for this series,
at least partly because I started buying in paperback and I HATE it when a
series decides, a few books in, to start coming out in hardback and making
people wait a year for paperback. Sookie rocks.
>Liked:
>
>That dude what's his name, Bram something.
>Fevre Dream by GRRM,
>The Vampire Tapestry by Suzee McKee Charnas
>The Empire of Fear by Brian Stableford
>Another story (YASID) where the vampire or some other assassin kills
>some victim after remarking that burglar alarm stickers are so helpful
>in telling you to cut phone lines before B&E.
>
>Tolerated:
>
>1 or 2 Anne Rice novels, not sure which.
>Some early Anita Blakes.
>Twilight (had to read before my teen daughter, didn't finish, wouldn't
>want to read all of it).
>The Golden by Lucius Shepard
It is a great deal better than Twilight. Not that that's saying much. (Have
I pointed to cleoland.pbworks.com/Twilight recently? Section iv, "Book
discussion entries".) It has not gone off into hardcore (or softcore even)
the way Anita did.
>Disliked:
>
>most later Anne Rice stuff
>ditto Anita Blake
>backcovers of Dresden Files (never read)
>Poppy Z. Brite - intense dislike
>Vampire$ by John Steakley - kind of unfair, I thought he was heavily
>patronizing towards his wallflower female characters, but realized,
>years after reading Dracula, that he was just making fun of Mina's
>helpless self.
I ... think you would like the Dresden Files, though you might want to start
with #2 and go back later for #1.
>I don't mind lightweight so much, if it's good fun and True Blood
>definitely is fun to watch. All the same, I wouldn't mind a story
>with some philosophical musings, as long as it didn't take itself too
>seriously.
If you have a local library, check the first couple out from it. I'm fairly
sure, given the above, that you'll be heading to the local bookstore to buy
them all pretty soon afterwards.
>So (already covering myself from the rotten tomatoes), would True
>Blood be to read or not to read?
Hey, those rotten tomatoes were specific to Shannara, not to "asking about
new series to read". As I noted there, I gave up after Wishsong, but did
read his Magic Kingdom series rather longer than I probably should have.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
James Nicoll
>tag for the Sookie Stackhouse series) started off quite well, but
>the last two books have been sub par, and even before that Harris
>seemed to write herself into corners and change direction between
>books. The books are all told first person by Sookie, and she has
>a definitely appealing narrative voice at least until she starts to
>get worn down by events in the later books. I would say read the
>first one, and if you like that you'll like the next three or so,
>then if you like the direction change you'll be on board for the next
>couple as well. After that, YMMV, but while I am still following the
>series, I was quite let down by the last two.
What he said. One still gets the sense the series is viable;
she stumbled rather than (what's a good metafore for "and then the
author discovered sex?").
>I only saw most of the first season of TB, but I can say that certain
>characters are quite different in the books than in the show.
>
Like a lot of Jason's jackassery being off-stage until the
dire consequences stage and IIRC the Black Best Friend being white
in the series (which means the books do not have the equivilent of
the scene in True Blood where Bill is proudly describing what a fine
slave his family's yard slave was, completely oblivious to the reaction
he's getting from a disgusted and outraged Tara*).
* On a related note, anyone here watch Disney's WEEKENDERS? There's
one episode where for some reason they don't want Carver (the black kid)
to go into a bathroom and Tina explains to Carver that this is a special
bathroom that Carver's not allowed into. Tino doesn't seem to see the
unfortunate implications but it's clear from Carver's increasingly POed
expression (which Tino can't see) as Tino gets deeper into his explanation,
he does.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Louann Miller
@mid.individual.net:
> The books are all told first person by Sookie, and she has
> a definitely appealing narrative voice at least until she starts to
> get worn down by events in the later books. I would say read the
> first one, and if you like that you'll like the next three or so,
What he said, with the addition that these are definitely Paranormal
Romance(tm) rather than fantasy/horror. I don't know your girl-cootie
tolerance.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Hmm. I don't see them that way. Yes, everybody loves Sookie, but
Something like Frost's Night Huntress series is PR and while the
Sookie books are closer to that than, say, the Kitty books they're
not *there* yet.
Ahasuerus
Hm. 2 parts fantasy, 1 part horror, 1 part mystery, 2-3 parts romance?
And don't forget to stir in a little bit of comedy and Louisiana hot
sauce while deep drying!
Wayne Throop
: I ... think you would like the Dresden Files, though you might want to start
: with #2 and go back later for #1.
Hm. What would you say to starting at #3, "Grave Peril"? That one seems
to me to be the better entry point; it's more typical of the later books,
and introduces the start of the really major plot arc that unites the
whole series (ie, the start of the courts/council war(s)). Mind you,
the earlier two have elements that (in retrospect, eg, in Turn Coat)
are interpreted as a precursor to the war(s), but still, starting with
Michael and Harry and vampires seems... somewhat better. At least,
in terms of comparison to True Blood. Though I suppose werewolves...
well. Anyhow.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Konrad Gaertner
>
> What are your thoughts about True Blood? I rather liked the HBO
> series. Not the 8th marvel of the world, but funny and something one
> can sink one's teeth into. Is the series worth reading?
I haven't seen the TV show, but the books are pretty good at what
they're trying to do. I've read all of the novels and some of the
short stories, and my biggest criticism is that the author doesn't seem
to have plan for where the series is going (the latest novel seemed to
say "Oops, I have too many plot threads, I guess I better kill half of
them off").
I like Harry Dresden better than Sookie, but haven't read anything
else you mentioned.
If you liked the concept of supernatural beings going public, also
try Patrcia Briggs and Carrie Vaughn.
--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - email: kgae...@tx.rr.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll
Jacey Bedford
<t...@loft.tnolan.com> writes
>BTW, to follow up my own post: The Harry Dresden books deserve more
>consideration than reading the back covers!
I've only read the first Dresden so far, but based on that I'm looking
forward to the rest.
Jacey
--
Jacey Bedford
Louann Miller
@parkhead.demon.co.uk:
The first is a little rocky. It was Butcher's first book ever. So if you
like that, you'll love the series when it hits its stride.
DouhetSukd
wrote:
Ted
>
> BTW, to follow up my own post: The Harry Dresden books deserve
> more consideration than reading the back covers!
Yes, I see that from several replies. I had a deep case of deja vu/
crappy vampire story when I reading the back, but no particularly deep
process of evaluation was used to reach that opinion. I think there
was another detectives + vampire series (besides Anita Blake) that
soured me on the genre.
I'll trust y'all and read the first, keeping in mind that they improve
as well.
David Harmon
thr...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote,
>
>Hm. What would you say to starting at #3, "Grave Peril"? That one seems
>to me to be the better entry point; it's more typical of the later books,
Only problem is that it contains major spoilers for one of the earlier
books, if you wanted to go back later.
Wayne Throop
:: to me to be the better entry point; it's more typical of the later books,
: David Harmon <sou...@netcom.com>
: Only problem is that it contains major spoilers for one of the earlier
: books, if you wanted to go back later.
Huh. Storm Front, and Fool Moon. I don't recall what Grave Peril
spoiled from those two. I guess it mentions the conflict in Storm
Front, but doesn't really give any spoiler-like details that I recall.
I mean, sure, that Harry survived and such, but given that we know it's
a long-lasting series, that doesn't seem very spoilerific.
What am I forgetting? (This seems like another of those cases
where I'll go D'OH when somebody tells me. But even so, I'm not
spoilerphobic, and I'd still recommend it as an entry point, even
if you wanted to go back.)
David Harmon
thr...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote,
>:: What would you say to starting at #3, "Grave Peril"? That one seems
>:: to me to be the better entry point; it's more typical of the later books,
>
>: David Harmon <sou...@netcom.com>
>: Only problem is that it contains major spoilers for one of the earlier
>: books, if you wanted to go back later.
>
>Huh. Storm Front, and Fool Moon. I don't recall what Grave Peril
>spoiled from those two.
My mistake. I was thinking of something else.