Vampires: BTVS Influence

I suppose it depends on whether Buffy was your introduction to Vampire mythology; I mean, after seven (or 14, I suppose) seasons of Joss' rules, anything different would be a little greating. If you were familiar with other less substantial bodies of work first though it would probably be easier to accept.
 
Tueuse de Vampires
Tueuse de Vampires
how do you get to 14?
^ Good point. I got my intro to vamps via Dracula and then Interview, so maybe that's why I don't see Buffy as definitive. I like that every interpretation is just a little bit different.
 
L
Lou
True, Gotta love Spike's Blanket, but then again Spike hanging wallpaper could probably make me laugh like a hyena!
I suppose it depends on whether Buffy was your introduction to Vampire mythology; I mean, after seven (or 14, I suppose) seasons of Joss' rules, anything different would be a little greating. If you were familiar with other less substantial bodies of work first though it would probably be easier to accept.


I would tend to agree with that. Although, I saw lots of vampire stuff before Buffy.
I think the difference for ME is that they all kind of plopped into the same category as all other movies...Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lady and the Tramp....nice stories, but all just stories.
Buffy was the first one (or Angel really, since I watched it first) that honestly had me believing that Vampires could really "blend" with my world. It kind of leaves you questioning, "Do I REALLY know there is no such thing?"

Interview With A Vampire kind of did that, but still they kind of kept to their own. It was more believable than Lost Boys or even the Buffy Movie, but still not quite enough to make me think that my world and "that" world could blend. Does that make sense?

I still watch Bones and honestly expect Booth to go "bumpy" at any given moment. It's a good thing most of it is shot at night or inside (and that Angel was able to drive those WR&H cars) because it's really hard to draw the line and remind myself he's not REALLY a vampire. I watched Scream 2 last night with SMG in it and was REALLY TICKED that she was acting like such a wimp and let herself get killed.
I think the shows, as a whole, did a GREAT job of making people believe this could REALLY be going on. And, at least for me, going from that "real" thing back to "stories" is really hard.
 
L
lemst6
When I first saw Bones, the first scene was a daytime shot, and I was like, "it's really weird seeing him in sunlight!"
Heh, I kept getting that when watching Bones too! I was like, "Watch out! It's Angelus!! Can't you tell???" I seem to remember one line that he said in the middle of Season 1 that seemed to be directly referencing the Buffyverse...but I can't quite pin it down!

It was even worse watching Tru Calling. I kept forgetting that she didn't have Slayer strength! She would get into a dangerous situation and anyone else watching would be all on edge, but I was just sitting thinking, "She could take him easy..."!

I totally agree about the reality thing though. The Buffyverse really could slot in nicely to our own. Although I do sometimes think that the residents of LA must be ridiculously dense, especially in Season 4....at least in Sunnydale they have the old "Hellmouth made me forget" excuse! I like that in Buffy the Vamps aren't partcularly extravigant too. I mean, you get the occasional Angelus and Darla, but most of them could pass you on the street without you thinking twice. They blend well, I suppose. And how do we know we don't have a Mayor Wilkins covering it all up....



I think I'll be sleeping with a crucifix near my bed tonight.....
 
^ Well... we residents of HelL. A. may not be the brightest bears in the woods. Consider: we sit in two hours of traffic both ways, yet make only a minimal effort (for a metro area of our size) to maintain and promote fast, cheap, and reliable public transportation; we endure earthquakes, flash floods, mud slides, and wild fires; we pay out the nose for everything, especially housing; we think a temperature of 60 degrees constitutes use of the word "cold;" and we pretty much accept as commonplace people of every possible description (who's to say some of them aren't demons?). For all of this, we get in return... um... the appeal of excellent weather? I mean, with some part of the city always on fire and strange-looking folks like rock stars and Hollywood types being part of the daily scenery, who's to say the demony stuff would really stand out?



That said, I always thought the Interview with the Vampire vampires had a high reality quotient, too. They are a lot like the Buffyverse vamps... human/monster hybrids instead of just monsters. I tend to like any vamp mythology in which the vamps have a lot of blendability, you know? Of course, I do maintain that right before he eats the 18th century fop, Lestat's face is one of the scariest things I've ever seen. No WAY he blended into the rest of society. I'd take one look at that guy and get a major case of the run-in-the-opposite-direction wiggins. Maybe they just thought he had TB or something (which, you know, still should have prompted the "Danger! Danger Will Robinson! vibe).
 
I can't stand Interview With The Vampire.

Though that may be because it's an Anne Rice creation. If the film had been ABSOLUTELY NOTHING like the book, and had been written and directed by Joss, and had Joss' rules, and been interesting and stuff, I probably would've liked it.
 
Kemy
Kemy
Ditto, I watched it all of once and was bored most of the time...
I can't stand Interview With The Vampire.

Though that may be because it's an Anne Rice creation. If the film had been ABSOLUTELY NOTHING like the book, and had been written and directed by Joss, and had Joss' rules, and been interesting and stuff, I probably would've liked it.

I think I've seen that! It was a TV show...Buffy the something or other. Can't quite remember....

Social Suicide said:
Social Suicide agrees: how do you get to 14?

Well, 7 of Buffy plus season 8, added to 5 of Angel plus After the Fall.
 
Dracula sleeps in a coffin. Totally wrong.

Umm, the Dracula of Buffy has coffin time too. Remember he first made his presence known with a burst of wood splinters and potting soil . :: vampire

As for those who can't watch a vamp show that doesn't follow Buffy rules, remember Joss did not invent this genre he just put a fresh spin on it. You can't expect everyone to follow his lead. I agree that Whedon did a bang up job giving "life" to the vampire myth, but his way is not the only way. I know some of you were obviously introduced to vampire/ demon mythology through this show, but there is a lot that came before.

Whedon was inventive and original with his interpretation, but its been building process to get to that point as far as the concept of the modern vampire is concerned. Its the old/ ancient myths (the Greeks, the Slavs, etc.)+ The Romantics+ Stoker+ Freud+ finally the Post- Modern/ Modern vamp of today. The writers of each era took something old and "re-vamped" it for their purposes and also fused something of their own times into it.

The oldest incarnations of the vampire were ancient myths and legends that explored death and the unexplainable. The Romantics looked to the vampire as vehicle to convey the macabre and to explore sensuality and other emotions. Stoker brought back the vampire, but wrote in an age that valued objectivity and Victorian ideals. In some ways he did explore some themes that defied literary convention at the time, but mostly his contribution was the creation of a template that provided the main base modern writers have built upon since. Then Freud revolutionized how we look at our selves and fictional characters. His exploration of the human psyche, moved writers to create characters with psychological depth.

Today we look for a vampire that is more than a bloodthirsty corpse, but rather has complexity and even struggles at times with that inner demon. Anne Rice was one the first modern writers to truly craft a vampire character with more complexity- to elevate the vampire from just some ravenous stiff. Joss Whedon took that further. He took a demon and fused it with something more human and relatable. In many ways the vampires of the Buffyverse serve as the pinnacle of vampire mythology, but to get to this peak Joss had to stand upon the shoulders of others. He may outshine them wth his interpretation, but in no way does he diminish their efforts. Rather he is simply this generations father the of contemporary vampire myth- putting a spin to it that is modern and relevant to the times and to our ideas of characterization.
 
Today we look for a vampire that is more than a bloodthirsty corpse, but rather has complexity and even struggles at times with that inner demon. Anne Rice was one the first modern writers to truly craft a vampire character with more complexity- to elevate the vampire from just some ravenous stiff.

Not even close. Writers have been working with the concept of the "conflicted" vampire for generations - even in film as far back as the 1930s (see "Dracula's Daughter", 1936, with Gloria Holden.) Barnabas Collins and "Dark Shadows" pre-dated "Interview" by seven or eight years.
 
The beginning of the Vampire as this more complex Human like character began in the 1800's with "The Vampyre" and continued in the Victorian era with "Varney the Vampire", "Carmilla" and of course "Dracula". All of these were written and popular before 1900. (I own three, still can't find The Vampyre).

The Univeral Horror films of the 1930's brought these characters to the screen, putting a face to them for the first time and entertained audiences who now saw Vampires with a Humanity to them, not just corpses, not just monsters. Charismatic people in their own right.

Then Hammer Horror in the 1960's brought another legion of fans to the Vampire genre with Christopher Lee's performance of a nobleman to which the Demon was an aspect of a much larger personality.

Anne Rice was simply another author in a long line of people who had brought Vampires to the public, her take on it was probably the least entertaining and most embarrassing of any. Reducing them to less than Human things that toiled endlessly trying to end their miserable existence and seemingly completely emotional crippled despite having an existence others would kill for. The world, the future opened up to them and they shy away and cry for centuries.

Look at Spike, he enjoyed being a Vampire, convincingly so and it made him a character that endured for years and won the hearts of millions of fans. What appeals to Anne Rice readers is not the character, but the angst and depression. I will never understand the appeal of her work or her characters, but to claim that her work and her Vampires are somehow ground breaking or better than all before them is flawed at best and highly offensive at worst.
 
The beginning of the Vampire as this more complex Human like character began in the 1800's with "The Vampyre" and continued in the Victorian era with "Varney the Vampire", "Carmilla" and of course "Dracula". All of these were written and popular before 1900. (I own three, still can't find The Vampyre).

By John Polidori? Go here:

http://www.sff.net/people/DoyleMacdonald/l_vampyr.htm
 
Kemy
Kemy
Thanks :)
Back
Top Bottom