Welcome to Sucker Punch, the only blog post that ranks the gaudiest moments on this week’s episode of True Blood.
This week, despite some unusually confusing and formless writing from Alan Ball, we still get all kinds of tacky goodness, including one particularly freaky scene with a giant egg.
To read all about it, just follow this link to The Huffington Post.
6 responses so far ↓
1 Jenn // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:11 am
I am so confused! This episode really drove me nuts and Evan Rachel Woods acting was horrible.
2 folkthat // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:23 am
My take on why Maryann summoned by a fake healer -
1. Assuming the Queen and Maryann’s claim that ritual has power, then
2. Maryann picked up on the ‘ritual’ and thought that Miss Jeanette had some power and was a potential vessel for her ritual.
3. Thus, she killed Miss J, obviously to no avail.
Dunno if this makes any sense, but that was my only way of puzzling it out.
I agree that the inclusion of the Queen seems to be pointless. However, considering we already know that Ball intends to work another story arc around her in season 3, I can only assume that her inclusion here is an attempt to make her a relevant power player, and perhaps even lay some groundwork for the story to come. Perhaps some of her meaningless (and in my opinion over acted) chatter relates to good things to come.
Love your sucker punches. Keep them coming.
3 Michael // Aug 31, 2009 at 8:05 pm
For me, the question hovering over the episode–written by Mr. Ball himself–is: “What joke is he making?”
Okay– a few things did please or interest me: Hoyt’s mother continues to shock and awe me; and I found something poignant in the new image of Maryanne as a doomed worshipper of a Godot-like god who never comes, a murderous, earthbound Flying Dutchman–there’s a pathos there that in some way rounds out the powerful-harpy-from-the-soaps thing she’s been doing all along. And–at! last! an explanation of why she’s singled out Sam Merlotte as the sacrifice (and maybe a new edge to her creepy delight at discovering Sookie’s powers– her “What ARE you?” now sounds acquisitive). I’m grateful for any relief from these conundra.
Now, the story of how Maryanne came into this sphere through Tara’s exorcism is indeed muddled. And so is Tara’s character–I have no idea who she is at this point in the story, and not in a good way.
But what I can’t get past is the whole Queen-of-the Vampires thing: what the hell is Ball getting at? The deliberate anticlimax (the queen of the supernatural forces is a nitwit starlet who likes Yahtzee, lounging by the pool, and setting up man-on-man action? Bram Stoker would be SO proud) must be a joke on SOMETHING–but what? On vacuous youthful celebrity culture? On the whole vampire culture the series has set up–immortality is just an extended, spoiled adolescence? Or is it a joke on US for getting caught up in the suspense in the first place–aha! let’s immobilize Bill (once the hero of the series, remember?) AGAIN so he can once more be useless, while annoying vampires who outrank him can refuse to care about the story we’re following? Honestly–what is the idea here? What’s the joke?
I am genuinely concerned about Option 2 above: the idea that as imagined in True Blood immortal life just makes you more and more selfish, uncaring, decadent (Bill’s maker, Eric, Pam, this ninny queen . . . ) , that you age without maturing, that vampirism does not deepen your experience or make you value life more, but indeed makes you more blase and smug–this idea is a stunning downer to me. Godric and Bill are in this current scenario amazing exceptions–but when the queen herself is case of spoiled, arrested development who doesn’t care for humans except as willing sacrifices (Schmoos with abs and hairgel)–WHO CARES ABOUT VAMPIRES ANY MORE? A a series flaw in the series just went into overdrive.
Mark–I owe you some acknowledgment and late agreement about your perception (in convo last week) that the season seems to be structured on an Apollonian (Church of the Sun)/Dionysian opposition–both tendencies offering up unwilling, innocent sacrifices. Great observation of that deep structure. But I’m still allowed to carp, I hope, about how they’ve written that opposition: if we’re supposed to feel, as you apparently do, that there is something positive Maryanne can liberate in these people, with the single exception of the PTSD character, I don’t think they’ve worked it into the writing. I think there’s been a lot of silliness and sloppiness in the writing.
But I guess i’ve said that enough already–that for me, this season is gaudier but not richer. Today, I think I’m just joining in the universal WTF of it all. Hope someone can explain–
4 Rommate Joe // Sep 1, 2009 at 11:58 am
I’m not sure we can just shove Godric and Bill aside as “amazing exceptions” to the vampires as decadent children when a) we’ve only really encountered less than a dozen major vampire characters and two of the most prominent ones are indeed Godric and Bill, b) vampires like Nan Flanagan seem to represent a segment of the vampire population that have at least evolved into bureaucrats, and c) that the struggle for vampires to advance beyond wallowing in their most base instincts is, as advanced by Godric, a major thematic point of the show.
5 Michael // Sep 2, 2009 at 9:48 am
Roomate Joe: If you’re right–and I really hope you are–if the struggle for vampire culture to advance beyond narcissism and indulgence is a major thematic point in the show (which was much more clear to me in the first season), I wish they’d make it active, make it an issue that goes beyond a few isolated and ineffectual characters, while so much screen time and theatrical energy goes to vampires being snotty, amoral, and enviably ubercool. With Godrick gone, I hope the writing can return to focusing on Bill’s internal struggle to be a vampire who is morally responsible to humans, or maybe Bill’s effort to be a different kind of maker who sees to his charge’s moral education, or even Bill’s efforts to change the tone and intentions of the vampire subculture, entering into the internal politics he abhors–as is, he’s just been sullen and barred from action and, in terms of the plot, basically unimportant. If this is a major theme, they could handle it better. Here’s hopin’.
6 InfoMofo // Sep 2, 2009 at 10:16 am
Clarification Michael- at least from some of the commenters on huffpo, it appears that she is not Queen of the Vampires, but “Queen” is a title, like “Mayor” or “Magistrate” that indicates a certain rank in the vampire hierarchy for their local government.
While I agree this ep seemed to have some unnecessary fluff in it, I was still entertained, and the ending with the Egg (and Eggs? I just got that), and Lafayette’s Eyes just left me wanting more. Consider myself suckerpunched.
Leave a Comment