Retcon--- Why Blade is weaker

[Willowhugger]

A friend of mine asked why Blade had trouble with a single vampire when he was facing him down. I told him that Daystar had probably weakened him when he was infected with it.

That and "Dude, its the TV series. SOME things are different...like the vampires not all being *ussies."

Honestly, I never liked "Blade can wade through every vampire he encounters" because there was nothing terribly special about Deacon Frost. It wasn't like Alucard from VHD where his father is Dracula. Blade was 'just' a freak accident with Vampire Powers and No weaknesses. It's not as if he's a super-vampire.

Hence, while he's a better fighter than most....he's no stronger necessarily than the average vampire.

 

[Lantern Venom]

A friend of mine asked why Blade had trouble with a single vampire when he was facing him down. I told him that Daystar had probably weakened him when he was infected with it.


Hence, while he's a better fighter than most....he's no stronger necessarily than the average vampire.

He was never that much stronger than the average vamp. He was lethal in the movies because he was faster, more fluid and technically smarter than most of his opponents. However, he had trouble with the MA vamps in the house of Erebus ( including a young girl ) and ended up getting captured. He beat some MA vamps easily at the end but that was just after he had sucked a large amount of blood from Dr. Jensen. So ,he was "supercharged" at that point.
In he series, he's come up against more skilled vamps--the solider in the pilot eppy, Steppin' Razor and Charlotte's bodyguard who wasn't skilled but was twice Blade's size. So, I don't think it's illogical that Blade has struggled at times.

 

[Avalanche]

Blade is weaker because it makes the show more interesting. I'm sure the writers effectively said as much. To have him too powerful would take a lot of the fun out of the show.

 

[KenK]

I agree with both points; seeing Blade ploy through vamps effortlessly in every episode would have been boring, and like 49erVenom explained, most of the vamps Blade fought in the movies weren't as skilled at fighting as he was. Being a vampire and having superhuman strength and nothing else isn't going to cut it against someone like Blade. But against an equally-trained martial artist with vampire strength, you could give him a run for his money if you really wanted to.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I agree with KenK. But I would like to see more of the feared "vampire boogeyman" & less of the interfering nuisance.

 

[DarKush]

I think part of the problem is the writers should've explained from jump that Blade's strength or skills had diminished as a result of Daystar. That could've at least explained the differences in how movie Blade and TV Blade fought. It wouldn't been such a disconnect, and a better way to reference Trinity than the throwaway line about Sommerfield.

Keeping movie Blade's deadly aura and reputation, but showing something else different on the small screen was a bit confusing and frustrating early on in the series. Especially when an almost ready made explanation was there to be used.

Blade easily dispatching vamps would get boring after a while. But if I had watched the TV show and nothing else, it wouldn't make sense for the vamps to be all that afraid of Blade. In the earlier episodes he was getting handled by the vamps and Fritz put Blade on his ass. If I had been Marcus I would've let Fritz take Blade out before he had Chase or Krista kill him.

Also...when I think more about it, as another poster made note of, movie Blade didn't always have it easy. He took out 'minor' vamps fairly easily, but Frost when he turned into LaMagra gave him a good fight, Nomak pushed Blade to his limit, and was defeated by Drake/Dracula, or should I say they fought to a draw. If Abi hadn't been there, Drake would've killed Blade.

 

[Savage]

I believe that Blade is just as strong as he is in the movies but in the movies he's going around fighting what is pretty much cannon fodder. Freakin ravers and club dancers and crap. Of course he's going to have no problem with them. The martial artists and supers give him trouble. Always did...The only inconsitency I see is that on tv, their idea of a fair fight is that he gets his ass kicked and then wins out of nowhere. It's rinse and repeat when it comes to tv fights. "Uh oh. He's in trouble. Oh yaaay. He's winniiing.".

 

[MARVELous M]

Yeah I guess there were some instances were he probably should have been able to finish off the vamps without help or without a big struggle.

I mean, he did kill Dracula....................but I try not to think of Trinity too much.....

 

[MARVELous M]

In the show, Blade needed a challenge when he's facing some vamps to make it more interesting and exciting to watch every week. If he was all powerful and ashed every vamp with little effort, that wouldnt really be fun to see after awhile.

 

[Willowhugger]

Yeah I guess there were some instances were he probably should have been able to finish off the vamps without help or without a big struggle.

I mean, he did kill Dracula....................but I try not to think of Trinity too much.....

Well, ironically, you picked the one vampire Blade DIDN'T kill in the series.

;-)

 

[Lantern Venom]

Well, ironically, you picked the one vampire Blade DIDN'T kill in the series.

;-)

Technically, he did kill Drake since it was Blade who stuck the Daystar arrow in him. Although, once Drake turned into his vampiric form, he kicked Blade's butt for several minutes. If Abby hadn't intervened w/ the virus, it's logical to think that Drac would have killed Blade.

 

[Willowhugger]

Touche.

 

[Warhammer]

I always looked at Blade being stronger than most because:

- He is a better fighter/martial artist.
- He is a bit built and physically bigger than some that he has faced.

I think he is maybe a bit weaker in the series, but like people said, it was for better TV. I also agree with Savage when he said that TV fights aren't that well, anyway.

 

[Lt. Figgnuts]

I think part of the problem is the writers should've explained from jump that Blade's strength or skills had diminished as a result of Daystar. That could've at least explained the differences in how movie Blade and TV Blade fought. It wouldn't been such a disconnect, and a better way to reference Trinity than the throwaway line about Sommerfield.

I know what you're getting at, but realistically, the writers want to make the show as accessible to new viewers at possible.

If you start talking about the events of the films in the manner you suggest right from the get-go, it makes it required viewing. The audience is suddenly alienated and they feel as though they have to go back and watch the three films before they can proceed any further with the series. Not to mention, if Blade is walking around saying things like "I used to be stronger before such and such happened" in the first few episodes, some viewers will be like, "What? Isn't this the first episode? I never saw that!"

The Sommerfield line is a more appropriate way to reference the films in this situation. When it's worked in there as a throwaway line, it's not essential to the plot or the canon, and essentially says, "Hey, if you get that reference we can have a little chuckle about it, but if you don't that's okay too." The audience doesn't need to understand it to enjoy the show.

In these situations, there's got to be a disconnect between the films and the series. Basically, the events of the three Blade films happened, but they're not required knowledge to watch the show. Adding Daystar into the mix would change that to an extent.

 

[DarKush]

I know what you're getting at, but realistically, the writers want to make the show as accessible to new viewers at possible.

If you start talking about the events of the films in the manner you suggest right from the get-go, it makes it required viewing. The audience is suddenly alienated and they feel as though they have to go back and watch the three films before they can proceed any further with the series. Not to mention, if Blade is walking around saying things like "I used to be stronger before such and such happened" in the first few episodes, some viewers will be like, "What? Isn't this the first episode? I never saw that!"

The Sommerfield line is a more appropriate way to reference the films in this situation. When it's worked in there as a throwaway line, it's not essential to the plot or the canon, and essentially says, "Hey, if you get that reference we can have a little chuckle about it, but if you don't that's okay too." The audience doesn't need to understand it to enjoy the show.

In these situations, there's got to be a disconnect between the films and the series. Basically, the events of the three Blade films happened, but they're not required knowledge to watch the show. Adding Daystar into the mix would change that to an extent.

You make some good points. But I still wish they had dropped a line in there or something. Showing a pissed Blade angry about his lack of skills and Shen asking him something like, "Still haven't recovered from that tussle with Dracula" or something.

Sommerfield is more of a subtle reference that would mean less, but it still might get a few fans scratching their heads. Why not go whole hog?

But I do get what you are saying though.