Posted by Shira Rosenblatt | June 29, 2011, 12:27 (EST) | 36 Comments
Category: TV Series
It’s the summer hiatus – and IT SUCKS. So to help wile away those lonely TVD-less hours as we await Vampire Diaries Season 3, we’ve rounded up a slew of guest bloggers (and huge Vampire Diaries fans) for a series called Ripping Open TVD. Each blogger will be focusing on one particular aspect of what we’ve just experienced in Vampire Diaries Season 2 and adding a hefty dose of Season 3 speculation. Remember: These are guest posts, so these are the opinions of the person writing them, not necessarily Vampire-Diaries.net. Cool? Cool. This week, Shira Rosenblatt makes the case for why death is no longer a “game changer” on The Vampire Diaries and why she hopes Season 3 will “reinvigorate” the stakes.
“There are more dead people than living. And their numbers are increasing. The living are getting rarer.” Eugene Ionesco, Rhinoceros
It is no surprise that death plays a major role on The Vampire Diaries. After all, two of the three main characters technically are dead. As much as we dread the killing of our favorite characters, whether we knew them a long time or fell in love with them at first guest starring sight, it is expected that on a supernatural show where the characters are in neverending life and death situations, we will inevitably say goodbye to some. In Season 1, Vampire Diaries excelled at killing characters at the right times for the right reasons, though I sometimes disagreed with the choice of character. In most cases, the major deaths last season moved the story forward or changed the story in ways that reverberated through to Season 2. When the show used the term “game changer” to describe a death, more often than not, the description was accurate.
SPOILERS! CONTINUE READING “RIPPING OPEN TVD: “DEATH” ON THE VAMPIRE DIARIES.
 |
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
Loading ...