Why Don’t Critics Take The Vampire Diaries Seriously? TV Guide Weighs In
It’s a question we’ve often asked ourselves: Why is The Vampire Diaries, with its well-executed plot lines, smart dialogue, and delicious host of attractive actors, one of the least-talked about supernatural shows when it comes to awards season?
OneTV Guide reader recently posed this very question to the magazine’s Matt Roush, who responded very poignantly with his reasons TVD doesn’t make every critic salivate like Ripper Stefan before a blood binge.
Roush begins with this disclaimer: “I like Vampire Diaries and probably give it more consideration than many critics do… but this is one of those shows I classify as more of a ‘guilty pleasure,’ and while I can enjoy the over-the-top twists and turns, it just doesn't feel serious enough as a supernatural drama for me to take it terribly seriously.”
Of course, Roush notes there’s what he dubs a “CW factor at play,” saying it’s laughable that we’re supposed to believe the characters — portrayed by actors who are well into their 20s — are still in high school. “Plus, the various authority figures are so shallow, and Mystic Falls seems to have at least one major social event every week where someone ends up dead or missing,” he adds. Okay, we gotta give him credit on that last bit. Mystic Falls is one very active — and oblivious — little town.
But Roush isn’t just picking on TVD. “True Blood is just as campy,” he writes, adding that the Bon Temps drama isn’t top 10 material either. In fact, the only supernatural show making this critic’s Top 10 list this year is Fox’s Fringe, which he says “blew [him] away with its creative ambition and worlds-colliding risk-taking.” Roush says there’s “nothing derivative or silly about that show.”
How do you feel about Roush’s claims, fang girls and boys? Is TVD a ‘guilty pleasure’ for you, or do you appreciate it as a serious drama and think others should too?