Log in

No account? Create an account
27 April 2006 @ 10:47 pm
Buffy Vamps vs Supernatural Vamps  
So...I finished my second of my two four page papers due next Monday (YAY ME!) so I took some time out to rewatch "Dead Man's Blood" since I recorded it on my TV Sunday morning and hadn't gotten to watch it on TV yet. Which got me thinking about the SPN-verse's vamps in general, and naturally comparing and contrasting them to the Buffy-verse vamps. I'm obsessed with vampires, and I have been since my first day of Buffy. So I don't know if I'm totally wanting to look into it more than I should, but I couldn't help but thinking about this stuff while watching "DMB."

So, according to John Winchester, "Most vampire lore is crap. Crosses won't repell them, sunlight won't kill them, and neither will a stake to the heart. But the bloodlust, that part is true."

Well, it's definitely a different set of rules than Buffy vampires have since crosses do repell them and both stakes and sunlight turn them into ash. I actually kinda like the SPN rules. I think it's in the LKH series (Or another book series...?) where crosses only work if there is real belief behind them by the user - do you actually believe in actual the religion behind the cross or is it just two sticks of wood nailed together? But then a part of me also wishes that the SPN vamps went more along the conventional lines, mainly because it seems like these vamps are practically invulnerable. If sunlight, crosses (and thereby I'm assuming holy water and churches in general won't work on them??), and stakes won't work, what's to stop them from killing millions of people a year?

Also, the SPN vampires do mate for life. Now THAT is right out of practically every vampire romance written! ;) And it's in a lot of fan fiction for Buffy, but not so much with the show itself. After all, Angelus was sleeping with Dru and Darla and there definitely wasn't any type of commitment shown in the Buffyverse vamps...the closest thing I would say is Spike and Dru, but even that fell apart. So...mating rituals are a big check for the SPN vamps I'm assuming. Ahhhh, I want another SPN episode about vampires and the background in this verse!

Now, what got me thinking the most of all was this: what about the whole notion of a soul/conscience? For the Buffyverse, as we all know, the vampire loses its conscience/soul when they become a vampire. That's the real motivation behind their lack of care for killing hundreds of people. No conscience = no guilt = vamps like Pre-souled Angelus and Pre-falling-in-love-with-Buffy Spike who are known for their brutality with killing thousands of innocents. The whole idea of a soul and lack thereof is definitely driven home in Buffy (and Buffy yelling at Spike about it).

But what about the SPN vamps? Do they lose their moral thinking and capacity for guilt? Is it the whole notion of a "soul" that gets lost once the person becomes a vampire? Or are they still a person where the vampire aspect overrides the person's guilt when feeding? Aside from the episode itself, another reason I'm wondering about this is due to all of the AU vamp!Sam or vamp!Dean stories that are being written where they're still Sam or Dean, they're just a vampire now. Is that how it would really work y'think?

All of the vampires we've seen in the Buffyverse (except souled-Angel and Spike in general) are ultimately evil. Even Harmony, despite her facade of being a white hat and peppy and positive, is ultimately evil. Is that how the SPN vamps work? Or are they just trying to make it through their life and they know that the ONLY way to do that is to feed? From their crazy vampire logic, they're just trying to get through and they feel as if they're doing what's perfectly within their right?

I really wish we'd get another episode about vamps (S2 anyone?) to learn more about them since there is just so much lore about vampires in general, and I'd love to see more of Kripke's take on them.

But anyway, if anyone else has any comments, I'd love to hear them. I think I did think a bit too much about this, but after years and years of Buffy being the main vampire influence in my life, I'm very interested in the new SPN one.
Current Location: Pollen-land
Current Mood: thoughtfulthoughtful
Current Music: "Soul Meets Body" - DCFC
UncagedMuseraemcn on April 27th, 2006 09:50 pm (UTC)
I actually kinda like the SPN rules. I think it's in the LKH series (Or another book series...?) where crosses only work if there is real belief behind them by the user - do you actually believe in actual the religion behind the cross or is it just two sticks of wood nailed together?

I'm also a vamp nut and that line right there the first thing that popped into my head was Fright Night, the movie. The cross did nothing if you didn't truly believe in it's power. LOL Completely cheesy, fun movie but that was one of the vamp lore aspects of it.

I liked a lot of the vampire things they came up with in this ep of SPN but I thought the world should have been over run by vamps if it was so hard to kill them. They must only see killing as a necessity to feed or humans would have been destroyed a long time ago.
Rachel_sin_attract on April 28th, 2006 08:35 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I definitely thought that too. I mean, especially if SUNLIGHT won't kill them, then I don't know how they aparently got so close to extinction to begin with.

Hmm...but yeah, I really want another episode about vamps - and some more Buffy references! ;)
Finn: SN- Laylatallisen on April 28th, 2006 01:01 am (UTC)
Great musings! I'm still muling it over myself. :)
Rachel_sin_attract on April 28th, 2006 08:35 pm (UTC)
Well I'd love to hear your thoughts and opinions when you get it all sorted out!
Finn: SN- Laylatallisen on April 28th, 2006 09:00 pm (UTC)
I'm thinking they went more for a human side of the demons with the ones in Supernatural. They had a whole natural feel to their pack, like wolves ya' know? It felt more natural than the gothic emo ones we were shown in Buffy and Angel. The vamps in Supernatural were just a group of people who went out to feed (and of course they played with their food. Lots of animals in the wild do that) and were close nit. They seemed to actually care for each other, unlike the vamps in Buffy who seemed very selfish, if ya ask me (you know, like, if something benefits them? Good. If it happens to benefit another vamp at the same time? Meh, it's okay but they'd prefer it for themselves).

As for the Supernatural vamps not being stakable or vulnerable to the sun, I kinda liked that. It didn't feel so silly that way. It was more believable in a way. I mean, the boys have gone up against Wendigos and demon possessed people, and dopplegangers. To be able to kill a vampire with a piece of wood seems to easy.

The only thing that really rubbed me the wrong way was their 'second set of teeth'. That was just weird and random and completely lame in my opinion. But I still loved them more than the vamps in Buffy (not that I still don't like the individual vamps like Spike and Angel. Just the overall race of vampires).

I sure hope this doesn't sound too confusing... uhm.. I just really like the feel to the Supernatural vampires. They were...different. But nice. And I'm right there with you in wanting to learn more about them in Season two. Kripke has a unique angle.
Rachel: Supernatural Distraction_sin_attract on April 28th, 2006 09:14 pm (UTC)
Yeah, what really stuck me was when Luthor said something like "why can't you people just leave us alone? We deserve to live as much as you do." And that's when I was like, hmm...maybe they're a bit more than just your basic vamp, y'know? But I'm guessing that these vamps pretty much think it's within their right to go out and eat people - since that's what they have to do to survive. I guess their mindset changes once they become a vamp and the idea of killing a person isn't bad since they aren't one anymore...

I didn't like the teeth either. I thought it was kinda like Kripke sitting there and going, "well, we need something vampiric that'll be different and it can't be this, that, or this." I LOVED how the eyes did that cool reflective thing though - LOVED it!

Kripke could do so much with vamps - because they aren't just urban myths and he's already got a great start, he could just keep building and totally create a whole new history on the SPN vamps. And yeah, in case you can't tell, vampires are pretty much my favorite paranormal aspect. :P
Nucking Futs Brat42brat42 on April 28th, 2006 04:13 am (UTC)
I have not seen the episode that you're talking about, but I can get on board with you about the obession with vampires. I was obsessed with vampires before Buffy. I'd always been fascinated by the lore of them, but I think it really took hold when Interview with the Vampire came out. I think that was when I thought, "I want to be one!" Now,I'm not a freak! Well, I am, but no more than most. LOL.

Anyway. I prefer the Anne Riceian vamps to the Buffyverse vamps. In fact, I never really liked Joss's vamps. The whole soul having or not having was a cool concept, but the Anne Riceian vamps didn't even have that notion. Louie knew right from wrong it was just a matter of choice -- as we've seen with Lestat.

I think my main gripe with the Buffy vamps was the face change. I didn't like that. To me, a vampire is sensual and the whole reason WHY a vampire is 'scary' is because not only will it suck your blood, but it's got the element of surprise going for it. You've got this good looking vamp you're out with and you don't know he's a vamp until he starts sucking you dry. The whole face change takes away from that. Vamps are so sensual and beautiful. They're catlike and graceful. If their face changes however, they cease to be beautiful and the element of surprise is no longer.

Just my thoughts. :)
Rachel_sin_attract on April 28th, 2006 08:38 pm (UTC)
Yeah...the vamps in SPN have a 2nd set of teeth that descend right about before they kill the person but it looked as if their faces stayed the same. And their eyes did this cool reflective thing rather than just turn gold.

I liked the Buffy vamps and think I still like them best from all of the movie/tv/book verses that I've looked into.

But these Supernatural vamps, I'm still trying to figure them out. So hopefully we'll have another episode with some vamps - and Buffy references, since I still can't get over the SPN Geek squad chanting WWBD!
phantomasphantomas on April 29th, 2006 07:48 am (UTC)
Well, the sun light doesn't kill them right away but John did say that it burns their skin, iirc, and that they do have to sleep during the day anyway.

Beheading works for killing them, which is good, I think, because it does imply some sort of fight, and also, dead man's blood poisons them.

I really liked what Kripke & co. have done with these vampires, and I liked Luther's plea for his own life - after all, animals do kill for their food, so he doesn't see what he's doing that's so wrong.

Chaotic Neutral Human Sorcerer (4th Level): [SPN] Driver [carmendove]myniamh on April 30th, 2006 08:12 am (UTC)
These vampires were very interesting.

Their social structure was so different from past versions, they weren't the romanticised emo/goth, monster or olde worlde vampires. They did remind me of a 'pack', with only a few going out to hunt and an established alpha pair/couple. Oddly human notions like keeping 'stock' to feed on over time were what connected them back to being very human for me. We've been shown already that humans are perfectly capable of killing other humans for fun or food (Dead in the water, Scarecrow, Wendigo, The Benders) so their having 'souls' isn't a stretch for me. They aren't even shown to be really very demonic, holy water doesn't seem to work as no one tried to use it and the Winchesters don't look like they'd be caught without that stuff. So I think they could still be classified as human, in the same way the Wendigo was. Very similar really, now I think about it, apart from the flammability stuff.

Their blood lust is almost presented as an addiction, not in the omgIwantitnow! way but as one of the vampires says to the woman they 'turn', "I'll take you so high you'll never come down" (iirc). If she turned that quickly you'd think it was a de-souling thing but it just doesn't feel like it, more like they were changed by their consumption of another vampire's blood physically and mentally as well as not being able to survive without it as a food source.

Here from spn newsletter.
Livi: dean-masturbatebeluga on May 6th, 2006 09:38 am (UTC)
Vampires...love them. I believe they're my fave supernatural beings. I basically embrace all vampires, be it the ones in Buffy, Van Helsing, Supernatural, Anne Rice, Dracula, Dusk til Dawn etc.

I think my fave vampire must be Lestat -with Spike as a close second.

And I think the vampires in SN were cool. I quite liked that crosses didn't have an affect -Christianity is a 'young' religion after all...
And as mentioned -they behaved as a pack of wolves.. which is my fave wild animal.. :-D