PDA

View Full Version : Twilight - Love it, or Hate it?



Pages : [1] 2 3

Moonshadow
2009-05-31, 12:14 AM
Personally, I hate this literary travesty. I think it is one of the most over hyped pieces of garbage ever to be taken from those million monkeys on their typewriters. I don't think it is good by any literary means used to evaluate it. Yes, it is popular, but that popularity is, IMHO, due to the ever expanding mass of mindless fan-sheep who wouldn't know good literature from the writing on the back of a cereal box.

I mean, seriously. Sparkly vampires? With poisonous bites? And telepathy? Pedophiliac werewolves? Undead babies, who quickly gain the body of an 18 year old, and stay that way.

Caesarian Section performed by mouth, because the baby has SUPAH HUMAN STREEEENGTH?

Oh, and ladies, in order to enjoy sex, you have to be taken by a guy whose wang probably feels comparable in temperature to an icicle, while he grip you so tightly you're lucky to escape with just bruises.


To me, the books/movie feel like being beaten with a 2 by 4 with the engraving STOOPID running along its length.

And this is why I hate Twilight. Don't hate me because I'm a hater, hate me because I know what real literature is.

(I am open to your opinions on why Twilight is/isn't a good series of books, but they will most likely be laughed at from the comfort of my computer chair)

SurlySeraph
2009-05-31, 12:19 AM
The Twilight series idealizes an abusive and creepy relationship, has little stylistic merit, and has sparkly vampires in it.

So no, I definitely do not love it. I don't find it compelling enough to truly hate it, but I can see why many people do.

Faulty
2009-05-31, 12:21 AM
The movie version is one of my favorite movies ever, and I'm going to see the second movie as soon as it comes out with my friend Laura, who will be visiting me at college to go see it. I thought it was awful. :smallbiggrin:

Xuincherguixe
2009-05-31, 12:28 AM
Right from the start, I thought, "This is going to be a bad movie." And I decided I just wouldn't watch it. And it turns out that basically everyone I know hated it.

Now, there are some movies that everyone hates that I enjoyed. My sense of taste is a bit different than most peoples. But... I have no reason to believe this could possibly be worth watching.

I dislike Ann Rice, and this seems to be an even worse an extension of that take on Vampires.

And awhile back I found it was also pretty anti feminist too.


I don't understand it's popularity, but the occasional strange dream otherwise I am not a 14 year old girl.

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 12:32 AM
I find Twilight to be a good story but with not very good execution. it would have been better if it wasn't for the following things:
(bear in mind, I only read the first one)

1) The main male character is a Marty Stu. He was designed so that every woman who read him wanted to be with him right away, and while this does appeal to the key demographic, which sells more, it subtracts from the story's literary value.

2) The main female character is a Mary Sue, but insists she isn't. In a way, this may be an Informed Ability: "I'm not very pretty or very smart or good at anything." Yeah, except every male in the story wants to be with you, teachers love you, and you're good at cooking, cleaning, and generally taking care of yourself.

3) Another issue I found annoying is that males, like myself, are very likely to enjoy romance stories. But if we do, we'd appreciate it if the main female character doesn't spend every waking hour describing to me how oh-so-perfect the main male is, both physically and........ what the heck? Just physically. She kept describing every feature like she was analyzing a work of art.

4) Vampires who don't die in the sunlight: Fine. Vampires who are attractive: fair enough. Vampires who have feelings for humans: No problem at all. Vampires who SPARKLE in the sunlight: Are you kidding me?

Kane
2009-05-31, 12:33 AM
Sir Stephen King, Ultimate Troll (Thanks, 1d4chan!)

http://1d4chan.org/images/7/7f/King_Troll.jpg

Yah. I'm holding this on the level of the Inheritance Trilogy Cycle (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InheritanceCycle).

And that's nothing compared to my English teacher. She read it so she could 'know what the kids are reading these days'. The. Whole. Series.

She despises it. She makes fun of anyone who admits to liking it in class. She HATES it.

Trizap
2009-05-31, 12:35 AM
vampires don't sparkle.

HATE.

(and I've never even read it, but still....no vampires sparkle)

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 12:52 AM
*snip*

Well, I don't really care much about what Stephen King says... but the other day, I walked into this bookstore here, and it was advertising Stephenie Meyers's new book with the following line:

"The new book by Stephenie Meyers, the MOST SUCCESSFUL AUTHOR OF ALL TIMES!"

......the most WHAT now?

In just the last five years she gets beaten by Stephen King, Danielle Steel and J.K. Rowling, let alone "all time".

raitalin
2009-05-31, 12:53 AM
I haven't read it but everything I've heard, even from fans, makes me want to read it even less.

Like someone else said, I wasn't particularly keen on Rice's brooding whiny bloodsuckers, though those books managed to hold my interest for 4-5 volumes because of an interesting and well-developed back story. I couldn't handle another The Vampire Lestat, though.

Its just so far from the traditional mythos. These aren't vampires so much as super-human pretty boys that drink blood. And freaking sparkle.

Starscream
2009-05-31, 12:57 AM
Hate 'em. Hate 'em so much. And not just because it's fashionable. I've actually read three of the bloody stupid things. Had to. Was writing a report on popular fiction for an English class, and there were already too many people doing the Harry Potter series.

Professor suggested it to me. Jackass. Hate him too. I've seen the movie as well. Didn't want to, I was trapped at work while others were watching it in the same room. Wanted to chew through the desk to escape.

They are the worst books I've ever read. They are drivel unfit for a lightbulb commercial. They are so much concentrated suck that they threaten to become a black hole and consume all light and matter in the solar system. They are actually inferior to their own fanfic (which I also had to read for the report), something I had hitherto not considered possible.

If I had three wishes the first would be that the books don't exist.

The second would be a million dollars to each of the fanfic writers if they promise to never touch a keyboard again.

The third would be five minutes alone with Edward Cullen and a red hot waffle iron.

There's probably already fanfic for that.:smallannoyed:

Trizap
2009-05-31, 01:02 AM
Hate 'em. Hate 'em so much. And not just because it's fashionable. I've actually read three of the bloody stupid things. Had to. Was writing a report on popular fiction for an English class, and there were already too many people doing the Harry Potter series.

Professor suggested it to me. Jackass. Hate him too. I've seen the movie as well. Didn't want to, I was trapped at work while others were watching it in the same room. Wanted to chew through the desk to escape.

They are the worst books I've ever read. They are drivel unfit for a lightbulb commercial. They are so much concentrated suck that they threaten to become a black hole and consume all light and matter in the solar system. They are actually inferior to their own fanfic (which I also had to read for the report), something I had hitherto not considered possible.

If I had three wishes the first would be that the books don't exist.

The second would be a million dollars to each of the fanfic writers if they promise to never touch a keyboard again.

The third would be five minutes alone with Edward Cullen and a red hot waffle iron.

There's probably already fanfic for that.:smallannoyed:

go on, keep ranting.......let all your anger out......Rant Therapy will calm you down soon........right after a long rant you will realize that the Twilight series, like the Eragon novels, are a 15-minutes of fame kind of thing and will never become a classic and soon fade into obscurity and all will be right with the world.

The Extinguisher
2009-05-31, 01:03 AM
Can I park somewhere in the middle, with my apathy banner on the ground, reading books I like. Does anyone else want to join me? We have shade and we don't judge you based on what you read.

Anyone?

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 01:03 AM
@^: Oh, come on. We're expressing opinions here.


go on, keep ranting.......let all your anger out......Rant Therapy will calm you down soon........right after a long rant you will realize that the Twilight series, like the Eragon novels, are a 15-minutes of fame kind of thing and will never become a classic and soon fade into obscurity and all will be right with the world.

I agree on pretty much all the negative stuff about Eragon... But I seriously prefer it to Twilight. It might only be because I am a male, but still....

Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins
2009-05-31, 01:03 AM
Well, I've only really watched the movie, and read a bit of that MSTing thread on these forums.

I dunno, maybe I just love crappy movies, I guess, but I.... kinda liked the movie. Plus, I got all sorts of sarcastic comments after the Sparkly Reveal. Which was a lot more subtle than I had thought/hoped.

But then again, I sat through Silk. There is no accounting for taste.

Raistlin1040
2009-05-31, 01:03 AM
Literary Merit=Zero. None to speak of. The intellectual equivelent of a Pop-Tart. A BURNT, SPARKLY Pop-Tart.

Compared to classics that some 15 year olds (myself included) read, like A Clockwork Orange, 1984, Wuthering Heights, The Phantom of the Opera, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, the Twilight Series is akin to very, VERY poorly written fanfiction. Even when compared to other novels marketed for that demographic, the series does not stand up. The two main characters are awful at worse and tolerable at best, where the side characters have occasional moments of brilliance, when Meyer isn't shoving them off to the side because they're getting in the way of her...I'm sorry, Bella's perfect lovestory.

At the core, that is the book's problem. I dislike the term Mary Sue, and the definition, because it implies that a character that is a stand-in for the author is inherantly bad. I disagree with that. In fact, in many cases, it's quite the opposite. A good author knows themselves so well that they can take their own successes and their own flaws and impart them into their characters, and create a personality that feels like a real person. Some of the best characters in literature are largely composed of a side of the author who created them.

The problem with so-called 'Mary Sues' is when the author has an inflated ego. A well-written stand-in has flaws. The author has looked at himself and seen the good and the bad and says 'Yes, I've made something good of myself, but I am not flawless. Even if my character is too blind to see it, he isn't perfect.' Authors like Stephanie Meyer do not see their own shortcomings, so when they project what they percieve as their personality onto their character, the result is often 1-dimensional. Meyer isn't a complete idiot, she understands that the 'perfect' character is unrealistic, so she makes Bella have self-esteem issues...and then makes sure every character think she's perfect.

The relationship between Bella and Edward, as many have noted, is abusive and frankly, disturbing. I've seen my friends have their facebook status as 'Is just a girl looking for her Edward' or some variation thereof many times. The idea of a perfect boyfriend is fine. Whatever. Associating perfection in a prospective mate with Edward Cullen is *not* fine. Every action he takes that would be seen as unacceptable were he a human boy is explained away either because he loves her, or because Bella sees nothing wrong with it. She's too busy commenting on his ethereal beauty to see anything wrong with his actions. If even a small percentage of teenage girls grow up thinking that is a perfect relationship, either A) They will never allow a flawed, human male to be with them because he's not Edward Cullen (See the Hank Green song on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbn9F32TaA0) for details) or B) Will find themselves in an abusive relationship.

The book has a nice idea, and is enjoyable to think about, in theory (read: with better execution). I read all four, and saw the film, and I agree, it's fun. It's fluff, but it's fun. If you read the book with any intellectual thought (including the thought of what a proper sentence should sound like) you will not enjoy it. If you read it on a sort of autopilot, it's enjoyable. People shouldn't base their lives upon it, or take it as anything more than it is: Trashy teen romance.

With regards to writing skill and intellectual maturity, the series gets an F. With regards to being a light, fun read, it gets an A. It's not the book's fault it was popular, don't blame the rabid fangirls on the series itself. There are a billion better books out there, but there are also a billion teen romances of exactly the same quality. One would have become popular for horny teenage girls, it just happened to be Twilight.

raitalin
2009-05-31, 01:05 AM
go on, keep ranting.......let all your anger out......Rant Therapy will calm you down soon........right after a long rant you will realize that the Twilight series, like the Eragon novels, are a 15-minutes of fame kind of thing and will never become a classic and soon fade into obscurity and all will be right with the world.


Except Twilight's almost certainly going to be getting more movies, and if the repeat viewership of teenage girls tends the way it usually does, the whole series will hit the screen.

The Extinguisher
2009-05-31, 01:07 AM
@^: Oh, come on. We're expressing opinions here.


No, your really not.

Expressing opinions is where you go, "I don't like it but you do so we will end our disagreement there". Not screaming bloody murder at anyone who happens to glance at it.

Trizap
2009-05-31, 01:07 AM
@^: Oh, come on. We're expressing opinions here.



I agree on pretty much all the negative stuff about Eragon... But I seriously prefer it to Twilight. It might only be because I am a male, but still....

well since I've actually read the Eragon novels, yes Eragon is a little better than Twilight, in that through some serious alternate character interpretation you can see the rebels as evil, Eragon a designated protagonist and the king a good person who just wants to repopulate the dragons and make a better order of Dragon Riders without the previous ones flaws.

they are still pretty bad though.

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 01:10 AM
Literary Merit=Zero. None to speak of. The intellectual equivelent of a Pop-Tart. A BURNT, SPARKLY Pop-Tart.

Compared to classics that some 15 year olds (myself included) read, like A Clockwork Orange, 1984, Wuthering Heights, The Phantom of the Opera, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, the Twilight Series is akin to very, VERY poorly written fanfiction. Even when compared to other novels marketed for that demographic, the series does not stand up. The two main characters are awful at worse and tolerable at best, where the side characters have occasional moments of brilliance, when Meyer isn't shoving them off to the side because they're getting in the way of her...I'm sorry, Bella's perfect lovestory.

At the core, that is the book's problem. I dislike the term Mary Sue, and the definition, because it implies that a character that is a stand-in for the author is inherantly bad. I disagree with that. In fact, in many cases, it's quite the opposite. A good author knows themselves so well that they can take their own successes and their own flaws and impart them into their characters, and create a personality that feels like a real person. Some of the best characters in literature are largely composed of a side of the author who created them.

The problem with so-called 'Mary Sues' is when the author has an inflated ego. A well-written stand-in has flaws. The author has looked at himself and seen the good and the bad and says 'Yes, I've made something good of myself, but I am not flawless. Even if my character is too blind to see it, he isn't perfect.' Authors like Stephanie Meyer do not see their own shortcomings, so when they project what they percieve as their personality onto their character, the result is often 1-dimensional. Meyer isn't a complete idiot, she understands that the 'perfect' character is unrealistic, so she makes Bella have self-esteem issues...and then makes sure every character think she's perfect.

The relationship between Bella and Edward, as many have noted, is abusive and frankly, disturbing. I've seen my friends have their facebook status as 'Is just a girl looking for her Edward' or some variation thereof many times. The idea of a perfect boyfriend is fine. Whatever. Associating perfection in a prospective mate with Edward Cullen is *not* fine. Every action he takes that would be seen as unacceptable were he a human boy is explained away either because he loves her, or because Bella sees nothing wrong with it. She's too busy commenting on his ethereal beauty to see anything wrong with his actions. If even a small percentage of teenage girls grow up thinking that is a perfect relationship, either A) They will never allow a flawed, human male to be with them because he's not Edward Cullen (See the Hank Green song on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbn9F32TaA0) for details) or B) Will find themselves in an abusive relationship.

The book has a nice idea, and is enjoyable to think about, in theory (read: with better execution). I read all four, and saw the film, and I agree, it's fun. It's fluff, but it's fun. If you read the book with any intellectual thought (including the thought of what a proper sentence should sound like) you will not enjoy it. If you read it on a sort of autopilot, it's enjoyable. People shouldn't base their lives upon it, or take it as anything more than it is: Trashy teen romance.

With regards to writing skill and intellectual maturity, the series gets an F. With regards to being a light, fun read, it gets an A. It's not the book's fault it was popular, don't blame the rabid fangirls on the series itself. There are a billion better books out there, but there are also a billion teen romances of exactly the same quality. One would have become popular for horny teenage girls, it just happened to be Twilight.

My, I didn't know you were such a critic. :smalltongue:

Either way, I agree with pretty much everything you just said.


No, your really not.

Expressing opinions is where you go, "I don't like it but you do so we will end our disagreement there". Not screaming bloody murder at anyone who happens to glance at it.

Look, man, with all due respect, if you're gonna be offended by our opinions, don't read them. I, for one, I'm trying to analyze it from a critical point of view, but you don't have to take that as "anyone who reads it is this and that".

As Yahtzee once said "If you personally enjoy it, what everyone else says shouldn't get to you."

The Tygre
2009-05-31, 01:11 AM
I feel Cracked.com has already summed up my feelings (http://www.cracked.com/topic/36-twilight/) about Twilight and what it's done to vampires (http://www.cracked.com/topic/69-vampires/), but I'll say my piece anyway.

Now, when Twilight first started becoming a phenomenon, somewhere between the books and the movie, I found myself growing to hate this orgiastic celebration of pseudo-goth-emo subculture idealism. But I assumed it was only a passing hatred, grown out of frustration with society more than anything else. As I 'hated' Celia in Order of the Stick, 'hated' Ruby Tuesday's after I ate there too much, and 'hated' the Geico gecko, I assumed it would pass and I would much like the aforementioned subjects. (Indeed; I find I am now rather fond of said subjects.)

But then, a curious thing happened. The hype died down, and I found myself still hating Twilight, still gnashing my teeth at its very name. So I thought, 'Maybe I'm being too harsh, being to unjustified. I don't want to be an un-fanboy, I'll do some investigating. Maybe then I'll stop hating it."

I was wrong.

In fact, upon reading this literary tripe which I can best compare to strangulation of the testicles with barbed wire, my hatred increased ten-fold. I don't know where to begin; sparkling vampires? A cesarean section with his teeth?! Pedophile werewolves?! SINGLE PAGES DESCRIBING A MONTH?! SWEET LORD ARIOCH, WHAT IS THIS PAIN YOU INFLICT UPON ME?!

I'm not even sure where to begin, I sure as hell don't know where to end, and I will be damned if I have to explain it bit by bit. Y'know, there was a time I thought Anne Rice was the nadir of vampire writing, the lowest possible, responsible for the destruction of the entire image. God help me, I miss LeStat. LeStat had style, LeStat was cool, and HE SURE AS HELL DIDN'T SPARKLE.

I'm not sure what to compare it to; part of me wants to say 'Manos: Hands of Fate', another part says the Bataan Death March. In one fell swoop, Twilight has successfully destroyed 10,000 of the vampiric storytelling tradition, ruined its image, shattered its dignity, and whored the remains out to whoever will take its battered form. What man would want you now, vampiric storytelling tradition? What man would want you now?!

But the only thing worse... is the FanFiction. Sweet Jesus the horror. THE HORROR. Pray that you never know a pain so exquisite and overwhelming as the things I have seen. Lord Arioch protect us from the things beyond our mortal ken...

Oh, and she should have gone with the werewolf in the second book. Yeah, that's right. I know. I know too much for my own good.

Lord Seth
2009-05-31, 01:12 AM
well since I've actually read the Eragon novels, yes Eragon is a little better than Twilight, in that through some serious alternate character interpretation you can see the rebels as evil, Eragon a designated protagonist and the king a good person who just wants to repopulate the dragons and make a better order of Dragon Riders without the previous ones flaws.

they are still pretty bad though.How does anything of what you just said make Eragon better? Everything you just said was reasons to dislike the series even more.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 01:12 AM
actually i prefer twilight because of all the vampires and the whole history of the rival between vampire and werewolf.
also most of us as humans don't except change but there is a small percentage that do.

eragon for me is alright but if it is supposed to be in the olden days then the language used should be more cockny, but the dragon fight at the end is cool.

Lord Seth
2009-05-31, 01:14 AM
Oh, and right when this started, I predicted this would turn into a Twilight-bashing thread, and I was right. Hooray?

Raistlin1040
2009-05-31, 01:14 AM
My, I didn't know you were such a critic. :smalltongue:

Either way, I agree with pretty much everything you just said.


Heh. English (and by extension, writing, and by extension, analysis of writing) is my THING. Favorite subject.

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 01:15 AM
@^: Mine too. :smallwink:


How does anything of what you just said make Eragon better? Everything you just said was reasons to dislike the series even more.

*cough*

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t288/Vaarsuvius89/sarcasmdetector.jpg

Innis Cabal
2009-05-31, 01:15 AM
No, your really not.

Expressing opinions is where you go, "I don't like it but you do so we will end our disagreement there". Not screaming bloody murder at anyone who happens to glance at it.

No thats called discussing an opinion....we're just saying how we feel.

As for my personal view....any Vampire novel that references diamonds and they are -not- stolen.....no thanks

Trizap
2009-05-31, 01:19 AM
How does anything of what you just said make Eragon better? Everything you just said was reasons to dislike the series even more.

exactly what I'm talking about, despite being that horrible, its still better than twilight

Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins
2009-05-31, 01:22 AM
Okay, I give up trying to type out an argument as to why it's not a big deal that the entire freaking series will be..... movie-ized. Everytime I start either it looks stupid or an argument-breaking thought pops into my head.

And then head-hurting things happened.

And I'mma go back to SMBG now, 'kay? Buh-bye fancy mans.

Dumbledore lives
2009-05-31, 01:25 AM
I don't hate Twilight, that much, but only because I don't like despising a series I haven't actually read or seen. I plan to read them at some point, then my hatred can be justified. Unjustified hate is just not as proper.

Twilight did destroy vampires though, and that is unforgivable.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 01:25 AM
ok i have to agree the only reason twilight gets a bigger audience than eragon is becuase it attracks female teens becuase of edward, (he's fit)
and it does attrack males becuase of the fact well there all vampires
and they have a little half vampire half human baby:smallbiggrin:

Joran
2009-05-31, 01:32 AM
Can I park somewhere in the middle, with my apathy banner on the ground, reading books I like. Does anyone else want to join me? We have shade and we don't judge you based on what you read.

Anyone?

My only experience was the movie. The makeup was awful. All the vampires reminded me of the early days of glam rock, just because they were slathered with pale makeup. Not sure why Robert Pattinson became some sort of sex symbol, he kind of bored me.

It wasn't a terrible movie though, just very conventional.

JackTheTripper
2009-05-31, 01:36 AM
Twilight was bad. Parts of it were... Mindblowingly awful. Half of it's own fandom hates the last book in the series, or so TVTropes says, even. It had some good parts, though. For example... Whichever book was mostly without Edward was sorta tolerable to me.

The series DID get me back into actually reading books, which helped me. However, once I got into reading again, almost everything I got my hands on instantly, from the first few pages, crushed Twilight. Only Hydrogen Steel came off as more dull than Twilight to me.

Now, the way I see it, Twilight offers the barest glimpse of good writing. Don't ask me where, it's been a long time since I touched the books (the ending of the last book stopped me from liking them anymore, and prompted me to find something better), but there were some good moments. Unfortunately, I remember that they were buried in mountains of crud, like tiny islands in a pitch-black sea of bad writing.

So... Hate it, though it gets the barest glimmer of appreciation from me for drawing me in, repulsing me away, and therefore prompting me to find better literature again.

PS: Thanks for ruining Jacob, Myers. Only halfway decent character in the series, and you made him into a pedophile jerk. WOnderful.

Moonshadow
2009-05-31, 01:39 AM
On the topic of women on dating sites who put "Looking for my Edward Cullen" that makes me *facepalm* epically. Its disturbing on many levels. They're just... attracted to mr Marty Stu and his perfect appearance, and its like they have barely even read the books, and seen all the abusive actions he does.


It fills me with despair that some many people are taken in by this madness.


Also, funny thing about Eragon, if you take a synopsis of the first book, and then compare it to Star Wars: A New Hope, well.... see for yourselves.

The Tygre
2009-05-31, 01:47 AM
ok i have to agree the only reason twilight gets a bigger audience than eragon is becuase it attracks female teens becuase of edward, (he's fit)
and it does attrack males becuase of the fact well there all vampires
and they have a little half vampire half human baby:smallbiggrin:

Ok, let's look at the half-vampire men like:

http://www.globalgear.com.au/images/blade-trinity_snipes.jpg

Now let's look at the common ground for genders:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/09/Vampire_Hunter_D_-_American_Wasteland.jpg

And here is the ravenous hell-beast from Twilight:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BEsL3M7Cd2c/RlMS-XpIZBI/AAAAAAAAAA0/RINfWQSjFmw/s320/vampire-baby-wide.jpg

Now, something's off here about this last one. He just doesn't seem to fit in with the other two somehow...

Finn Solomon
2009-05-31, 03:05 AM
The human body is made up of billions of individual atoms. If the word HATE was stamped on every single one of them, it would not express one-billionth of a percentage of the loathing I feel for this series.

(Bonus points for guessing the reference!)

Turcano
2009-05-31, 03:13 AM
Twilight did destroy vampires though, and that is unforgivable.

Not exactly. Vampires took a savage beating from Anne Rice, and then another one from White Wolf. Meyer just delivered the coup de grace.

Also, for those unfamiliar with it yet, there's Sparkledammerung (http://stoney321.livejournal.com/317176.html). Long story short: the Cullen family is an allegory for Mormonism (and Meyers apparently really wants to bone a sparkly Joseph Smith).

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 03:18 AM
vampires are cool and all but the film twilight i have to admit makes a mockery
of them skin made of diamonds vampires as good guys they are dark creatures not cuddly toys for goodness sake.:smallfurious:

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 03:20 AM
Ok, let's look at the half-vampire men like:

http://www.globalgear.com.au/images/blade-trinity_snipes.jpg

Now let's look at the common ground for genders:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/09/Vampire_Hunter_D_-_American_Wasteland.jpg

And here is the ravenous hell-beast from Twilight:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BEsL3M7Cd2c/RlMS-XpIZBI/AAAAAAAAAA0/RINfWQSjFmw/s320/vampire-baby-wide.jpg

Now, something's off here about this last one. He just doesn't seem to fit in with the other two somehow...

ok i get your point but it's only what my mate told me ages ago because she has read all the books and is a twilight finatic

doliest
2009-05-31, 03:31 AM
ok i get your point but it's only what my mate told me ages ago because she has read all the books and is a twilight finatic

HPsauce, you really do need to improve your grammar. It's a general rule of thumb that if you consistently fail to capitalize at the start of your sentences then you really aren't worth talking to, atleast in my book.

As for Twilight what annoys me is people comparing it to Eragon which is bad but substantially less creepy than Twilight.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 03:41 AM
Whats wrong with my grammer and it is worth talking to me even if i don't think about these things when i'm typing.

Anyway, Eragon is better than Twilight then yes or has someone got a counter arguement

doliest
2009-05-31, 03:46 AM
Whats wrong with my grammer and it is worth talking to me even if i don't think about these things when i'm typing.

Anyway, Eragon is better than Twilight then yes or has someone got a counter arguement


Generally speaking, poor grammar tends to make reading something an eyestrain.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 03:53 AM
Ok, it is kind of hard for me to concentrate on my grammar, thanks for the advice dude.

The_Snark
2009-05-31, 03:57 AM
Whats wrong with my grammer and it is worth talking to me even if i don't think about these things when i'm typing.

Anyway, Eragon is better than Twilight then yes or has someone got a counter arguement


What's wrong with my grammar? And it is worth talking to me, even if I don't think about these things when I'm typing.

Anyway, Eragon is better than Twilight then, yes? Or has someone got a counter argument?

Doliest could have put it a bit more tactfully, but grammar does affect how people think of you on the Internet. Without tone of voice and body language, good grammar (and emoticons, I guess) are about all you've got to help get your mood across.

Nobody really expects perfect grammar, because the English language has a lot of nitpicky rules about exactly where to put commas, but just making sure all the right words are capitalized takes only a few seconds, and it can really make a difference in the impression people get of you. :smallsmile:

Anyway, on topic: Haven't read the books, don't plan to; even if I hadn't heard so much about them from friends (who either hate them, or enjoy them as a guilty pleasure while acknowledging they're not well written), romance and vampires have never interested me much, and the combination less so. The more extreme fans are rather baffling. Happily, like the rest of Twilight they remain something I've had contact with only through reading about them on the Internet.

doliest
2009-05-31, 03:57 AM
Ok, it is kind of hard for me to concentrate on my grammar, thanks for the advice dude.

Wasn't intending to offend, just pointing out that good grammar makes people more willing to respond to your comments.

Turcano
2009-05-31, 04:03 AM
Anyway, Eragon is better than Twilight then yes or has someone got a counter arguement

Twilight's just creepy and messed-up in the head, while the Inheritance Trilogy potential never-ending Jordan-a-thon Cycle is almost like a parody of The Sword of Truth. To give the arguably most infamous example, Paolini has the good guy run down an unarmed enemy soldier and strangle him while he begs for mercy. The good guy. I'm dead freaking serious.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 04:04 AM
You know dude, your alright.
Anyway, twilight good points and bad points:
1) Vampires:smallbiggrin:
2) Diamond skin:smallannoyed:
3) No blood and gore:smallannoyed:
4) Good Vampires:smallannoyed:

Verruckt
2009-05-31, 04:23 AM
<insert .gif of Edward Norton as The Narrator punching himself in the face over and over and over again here>

It wasn't when my girlfriend at the time took me to see the movie that this things started to tick me off. Nor was it when the series took a monster, Nosferatu, already having taken a savage beating by being turned into a bisexual french scientologist by that other woman, and made it into something slightly more frightening than a well mannered beanybaby with teeth.

It wasn't when they sparkled, nor was it when the vitriol spilled into my beloved Chans (which is a bit like kerosene spilling into an already raging oil field inferno, but it was noticeable). Nay it was not even when the jacket of The Host proclaimed that Meyers was a "Modern day combination of Stephen King and Isaac Asimov" (please god, if such an author exists do tell me, perhaps Stephenson, but surely not Meyers).

No, it was when I looked at the teaming throng of tweens and their mothers lining up for an early evening showing of the movie and I realised what exactly this series is telling people.

Young impressionable girls are getting a relationship archetype that is founded on manipulation, emotional control, stalking, violence and abuse. The books essentially outline this as a good thing. To me that is utterly unacceptable. It's irritating that a no talent author has been made into the Crystal Dragon Mecha Jesus of the writing world because she knows how to pluck on the vulnerable strings of her readership, but that's all it really is, irritating.

What is infuriating is the fact that the characters and scenarios that she presents are imprinting themselves in the minds of impressionable young readers and conditioning them to accept emotional abuse. HOW THE **** IS THAT OKAY?

Harry Potter had witchcraft, good writing, and compelling characters and it gets burned at the stake in some circles. Twilight on the other hand promotes codependency and spousal abuse and mothers buy their daughters T-Shirts with lovely quotes like "Your blood is my own personal Heroin" plastered across the back, am I the only one who sees a problem here? The characters these people are Idolizing are a young girl with some major self esteem issues in need of counseling and a guy who one would more often find as a feature on the 8 O'clock news "Suspect shot dead when attempting to flee from police after being questioned in connection to several local disappearances and his collection of little girl's shoes. None mourned his passing."

/2 a.m. rant.

But seriously though, it's just a bad book series that teaches some ****ed morals to young kids. Hell, I read Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, Animorphs and Dungeons and Dragons manuals in Junior High and that's not entirely responsible for the cynical misanthropic transhumanist I am today right?

edit: and while I'm in my image folder hunting for that .gif, have this handy recognition aid:
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w22/Jerisalem/rocketscience2.jpg

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 04:34 AM
That is so true, you rock dude.
Lets punch him in the face.:):):):):):):):):):):):)
I'M CRAZY DUDE!!!

Verruckt
2009-05-31, 04:36 AM
That is so true, you rock dude.
Lets punch him in the face.:):):):):):):):):):):):)
I'M CRAZY DUDE!!!

No more mountain dew for you.

Anteros
2009-05-31, 04:41 AM
There is a lot of irrational hatred for this series on this board, mostly from people who haven't even read the books.

Let me start of by saying, by no means is this series good. In fact, it's pretty mediocre. However, it does not deserve the hate it gets.

It's written in a style I found very similar to what you'd find in the Harry Potter novels. It's not going to win any awards, but it is clear and concise. This makes sense as the series appeals primarily to a younger crowd.

Secondly, the fact that the vampires "sparkle" in the sun evokes a great deal of nerd-rage. I understand that you want your vampires to be dark and edgy, but you need to understand that dark and edgy isn't very appealing in a romance novel targetted at young girls. I do agree that it's somewhat silly, but honestly it only comes up once or twice within the books, and it's hardly the first attempt by an author to add their own flavor to the vampire mythos.

Third, vampires in these books are not "good guys." It's true that there are a handful of good vampires, but the vast majority of the vampire population in these books are soulless monsters. A minority of good vampires among an society of evil is hardly a new or inventive idea, and getting upset over it is particularly silly.

The books do have some severe problems, (I'm not even going to touch the vampire baby plot, or the "stalking is romantic" thing..) but I rarely see anyone take issue with the actual problems of the series. More often it's just people calling it "an insult to literature" or making fun of "glittery vampires!"

In short, please actually read literature before you critique it.

Lord Loss
2009-05-31, 05:01 AM
Sorry Guys, but it's just not a compelling storyline. The people are TOO Perfect. i already don't like the theme. THEY PUT BACK THE CREATION OF HARRY POTTER6 A YEAR TO BUILD THIS... yeah, It's not my favorite movie.

H. Zee
2009-05-31, 05:06 AM
Looky here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEq0XSjEJms) At about 3:17 onwards.

My respect for Robert Pattinson just increased tenfold, and the look on the interviewer's face is hilarious. Even the guy who plays Edward hates these books!

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 05:18 AM
No more mountain dew for you.

I suppose so, but it's so nice (yummy) Moutain dew :smalltongue:

revolver kobold
2009-05-31, 05:26 AM
For Verruckt,

http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/ww110/draper13_2009/1335328727469d26504e5c9.gif?t=1243765508

Verruckt pretty much sums up my feelings about the movie. I haven't read the books, and only watched the film as it was all they were showing on a flight I was on. Badly filmed, badly scripted, badly acted, and just plain old boring.

Drascin
2009-05-31, 05:40 AM
I actually started indifferent to Twilight. I could read by fragments posted in the web that it was really, really bad, yeah, but so are many things. So, you know, whatever. Another piece of badly written stuff. Not like everything I read is the pinnacle of literature.

But then, one of my friends read it, and liked it. And so, I could hear a lot more details, doused in the amount of fan-gushing I myself reserve only for SHnY, and even then, only in the company of fellow fans. I have even read bits of it, in the interest of fairness. So, now... yeah, I can see why people hate it. I mean, the whole thing is almost offensive (he's a bastard and a stalker and a creep, but everything's forgiven 'cause he's pretty! Yeah, not seeing how risking thirteen year olds believing that line of reasoning could be a problem, no siree *facepalm*. How the girls themselves don't take any issue with it is beyond my understanding), the characters are Horrible with a capital H, and, as a more minor point, the stylistic choices for the creatures are just plain weird.

So, yeah. I don't really bother with the energy expenditure needed to truly hate a work of fiction, but Twilight is certainly something I dislike.

Yarram
2009-05-31, 05:53 AM
I read romance sometimes when I'm bored, and I borrowed Twilight from a friend because I was bored on a bus so we swapped books...
I got about half-way, then I just had to put it down. Vampires just don't sparkle... It really peeves me when authors try and find a way to let Vampires go into the sun in the first place, but being so beautiful that it hurts is not a character weakness.

Narmoth
2009-05-31, 05:59 AM
Back in ye olde days, a vampire was a creepy old (at maybe not in appearance) man, that sneaked into young girls rooms, or charmed them, and then, ehm sucked their blood, or did something else, which all the bloodsucking is an euphemism for (there's no way in heck for me to spell that word right)
Morale of the story: don't let creepy men that claim to be something they're not get to you, and before marriage, suck your virgin ehm, nevermind. Childrens forum and all that.
Anyway. Back from my 2 min break. My point being, that just like werewolves, the vampire was a seducer to stay away from. Warning spelled in blood to all the young girls.
Characterizing feature: evil, virgin-attacking undead monster that needs to kill humans to survive (by drinking their blood)

That's what characterized the original vampire.
Now, what characterize the twilight version?
First thought:
he bl..dy sparkles!


I read romance sometimes when I'm bored, and I borrowed Twilight from a friend because I was bored on a bus so we swapped books...
I got about half-way, then I just had to put it down. Vampires just don't sparkle... It really peeves me when authors try and find a way to let Vampires go into the sun in the first place, but being so beautiful that it hurts is not a character weakness.

I read a comic that solved that quite nice (sorry, don't remember the name)
They had the vampire cover their skin completely in bandages or something, making them look quite creepy and out of place in daylight

Shademan
2009-05-31, 06:01 AM
short answer: HATE!
long answer: HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE!

stole that from yatzee

Nameless
2009-05-31, 06:01 AM
I love. Why? Because it’s SO easy to make fun of how bad it is. If you took away Twilight, you would be taking away all my fun. :smalleek:

The Dark Fiddler
2009-05-31, 06:17 AM
I like the first three books. Almost oxymoronically, I also like to make fun of them. The last book was crap, more crap, and probably a bit of extra crap roasted in cheap crap on the side. The movies suck. Period. The best part about them is we get a few good flashes making fun of it on newgrounds.com. Seriously, there's a few good ones there.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/7/74/TwilightSucks.jpg

llamamushroom
2009-05-31, 06:18 AM
I enjoyed Twilight. It's badly written, in a purely literary sense, but it is written addictively. That is a talent which many authors with wonderful literary skills and original ideas lack, unfortunately.

Also, I completely agree that the relationship is... disturbing, but it's not that much worse than the majority of relationships one sees on TV or in movies, is it?

Finally, Bella definitely should have gone with Jacob - they actually had a conversation which wasn't a variation on

"You're so pretty! Why do you love me?"

"Your blood is my own personal heroin."

"But you're a vampire! You're perfect! I wanna be a vampire!"

"Not until you're over the age of consent."

Seriously, that was all they ever talked about. At least Bella/Jacob wasn't too self-destructive. Though the guy is unhealthily protective ("He looked at you? MOTORCYCLE RAGE!").

...

E-hem.

I was trying to be neutral, so I'll finish by saying that I enjoyed it, didn't mind the sparkle, and think Meyer should have left it at book 3.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 06:47 AM
What gave the director of the movies the idea for "diamond" skin, it is so lame and stupid.
They've got super speed and supe strengh and then he goes and spoils it by putting diamon skin.

The Dark Fiddler
2009-05-31, 06:51 AM
What gave the director of the movies the idea for "diamond" skin, it is so lame and stupid.
They've got super speed and supe strengh and then he goes and spoils it by putting diamon skin.


I think that'd be the books. :smallamused:

Kris on a Stick
2009-05-31, 06:53 AM
The books themselves apparently. One of my best friends (and rabid fangirl) overheard me talking about how bad the sparklies were in the movie. She agreed that the movie effects were cheesy that it was much better in the book. I then assumed that the sparklies in the book must have been more of a glaring reflection off the paleness of his skin, because, really, that's probably the only way to make shiny vampires work. She replied that no, in the book Edward's skin was described as being like diamonds. I gave up all further attempts at injecting logic into the book.

Edit: Oh look, sepulchral-scorpion-fiend-zombie-half-dragon-violin-horned-ninja-monk. Now I've seen everything. *shoots self*

The Dark Fiddler
2009-05-31, 06:56 AM
Edit: Oh look, sepulchral-scorpion-fiend-zombie-violin-horned-ninja. Now I've seen everything. *shoots self*

Yay, I give people purpose. :smallbiggrin:

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 07:04 AM
The cover on the first book is the only good thing about the book to me because it shows the whiteness of the skin.
The rest of it is just horrible and boring al i did was read the blurb and chuck the book in the recycling it was that bad.

Lord of Rapture
2009-05-31, 08:24 AM
The human body is made up of billions of individual atoms. If the word HATE was stamped on every single one of them, it would not express one-billionth of a percentage of the loathing I feel for this series.

(Bonus points for guessing the reference!)

I have no mouth and I must scream

To be honest, I never read the series or watched the movie, so I don't hate it, simply because I prefer hating something I actually have knowledge of besides its existence.

I probably will never hate it, since I got better things to do with my time anyway.

Nameless
2009-05-31, 08:28 AM
I
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/7/74/TwilightSucks.jpg

It's so trruuuueeee. :biggrin:

Zencao
2009-05-31, 08:28 AM
I think we've wandered under a bridge here people...

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 09:31 AM
I guess we have wondered under the bridge, like you said there are always going to be good points and bad points and some of us may of never even heard of Twilight.

Zencao
2009-05-31, 09:35 AM
I guess we have wondered under the bridge, like you said there are always going to be good points and bad points and some of us may of never even heard of Twilight.

Living under one you would probably know :)

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 09:38 AM
what do you mean by that?

Zencao
2009-05-31, 09:49 AM
what do you mean by that?

I'm accusing you of being a troll.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 09:51 AM
HOW DARE YOU!
Why would you even think that i have never said anything to offend you and i'm new to this website anyway you said it first so your the troll.:smallfurious:

The Dark Fiddler
2009-05-31, 09:51 AM
You should've linked to the SRD and made a joke about how the encounter'd be easy. That's always funny.

Zencao
2009-05-31, 09:56 AM
HOW DARE YOU!
Why would you even think that i have never said anything to offend you and i'm new to this website anyway you said it first so your the troll.:smallfurious:

We hold these truths to be self evident...

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 09:58 AM
i don't like you.
You have been nothing but rude to me and i haven't insulted you in any way but you had forced me to retaliate

Zencao
2009-05-31, 10:00 AM
i don't like you.


Well I love you :smallamused:

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 10:02 AM
Yeah you love me, love to annoy me.:smalltongue:

Zeta Kai
2009-05-31, 10:04 AM
My sentiments are similar to llamamushroom's above: the series is compellingly-written & intriguing, although deeply flawed & repetitive. I liked reading the series with my wife, & I'm glad we did, although I've read much better books. There's much better fantasy novel series, much better vampire books, much better young adult stories, much better novels written by women, much better yadda yadda yadda. But I still enjoyed it, despite its flaws.

The thing is, yes, when you break down the story to its component elements, the whole thing comes off as an insane melodrama, full of schmaltzy love, horribly unbalanced relationship dynamics, & enough squick to veer into nightmare fuel. But all of this actually works (somehow) in context, which is no small feat. Stephanie Meyer pulls off one bizarre plot point after another, mostly through the power of her characters, & the pace & flow of her writing. It's like you're on a roller coaster: you have some fun, it's pretty cool, but when it's over you look back at the tracks & see just how rickety & dangerous the whole thing is.

Another strength of Meyer's writing is her ability to handle supernatural abilities. Many writers have difficulty handling mental powers like telepathy & precognition. Writers tend to forget that their characters have some powers sometimes, or deliberately switch them off when the plot kicks in, lest the powers ruin the storyline. You see it all the time: why didn't Dumbledore or Gandalf or Raistlin or whoever use their power to do X? Because it would've ruined the plot & the story would've stopped then & there, sans climax. But Meyer tackles both in more depth & scope than I think I've ever seen, & nails them both well. Edward's mind-reading & Alice future-sight are explored over & over again, & the implications & limitations of both tie into the plot very well. If there's anything the Meyer is really good at (besides plowing ahead with stories that other writers wouldn't touch, for good reason), it would be her masterful grasp of how superpowers affect a plotline.

Like I said, I read all the books, & I can't say they were a waste of time. It's sometimes funny to look back, & poke fun at some of the weaknesses of the series. But I believe that overall, the flaws of the novels are outweighed by their strange strengths. Meyer's ability to polish garbage is admirable; it's not a path that I would take as a writer, but you have to give her credit where it's due.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 11:37 AM
I agree on pretty much all the negative stuff about Eragon... But I seriously prefer it to Twilight. It might only be because I am a male, but still....

The Eragon novels have one real bonus though: the insanely obsessive fans will end up learning an actual language (old Norse) which although extremely limited in use, has some advantage.
Better than Harry Potter fans spouting rubbish pseudolatin, and Twilight fangirls becoming Mormons (http://stoney321.livejournal.com/317176.html) and wanting their future boyfriends to stay awake all night watching them sleep (because that's not creepy at all).

http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/77905539/3675688

Robert_Frazer
2009-05-31, 11:50 AM
I find Twilight... reassuring.

Tossed about rudderless in this strange and topsy-turvy, brave new modern world in which we live, Twilight is a rock of stability to cling to - its reception shows that girls can still be, well... girly. :smallsmile:

Starscream
2009-05-31, 12:13 PM
(Bonus points for guessing the reference!)

I actually considered using the full version of that quote in my little rant, then remarking that the reason for AM's emotions was that he had clearly been uploaded with the complete text of the Twilight novels.

Yeah, I need to stop posting at 2 am when I'm under a lot of stress.

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 12:21 PM
Twilight is nothing but someones ideas of what he thinks vampires are like when they are not the good guys they are the blood sucking evil villains and should always remain.
And at the end of the film Bella is biten on the wrist instead of the usaul place the neck which was a mistake to make for him.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 12:26 PM
Twilight is nothing but someones ideas of what he thinks vampires are like when they are not the good guys they are the blood sucking evil villains and should always remain.
And at the end of the film Bella is biten on the wrist instead of the usaul place the neck which was a mistake to make for him.

No, Twilight is one woman's idealised sexual fantasies. Don't take it too seriously.

Seraph
2009-05-31, 12:41 PM
But the only thing worse... is the FanFiction. Sweet Jesus the horror. THE HORROR. Pray that you never know a pain so exquisite and overwhelming as the things I have seen. Lord Arioch protect us from the things beyond our mortal ken...


the only good thing to come of twilight is crossover fanfiction where Alucard gets to roam free in the twilightverse.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-05-31, 12:44 PM
Best shirt seen at A-Kon:

"...and then Buffy staked Edward. The end."

Narmoth
2009-05-31, 12:51 PM
No, Twilight is one woman's idealised sexual fantasies. Don't take it too seriously.

The disturbing part being to print your personal fantasies and hand them out for all to read


the only good thing to come of twilight is crossover fanfiction where Alucard gets to roam free in the twilightverse.

Link please?
Not that Alucard, especially in the remake, isn't a pathetic Marty Stue in his own right.

Then again, being overpowered is the main problem with vampire protagonists, especially since their vampiric drawbacks often are removed (sunlight, blood supply, running water, inability to enter without invitation and so on)

Prime32
2009-05-31, 01:33 PM
First of all, I haven't read Twilight. Even if I heard nothing but glowing praise, I probably wouldn't read a romance. :smalltongue:

I have a (female) friend who believes that Stephanie Meyer read Wuthering Heights (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WutheringHeights)... and missed the point. (WH was a deconstruction of romance cliches, where the "bad boy" really is a Complete Monster (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CompleteMonster) who cannot be redeemed, and Catherine's love for him ruins her life, Oh, and Heathcliff is subtly implied to be some kind of supernatural entity.)

Oh, and I object to comparisons between it and the Inheritance Trilogy. Inheritance is slammed for being unoriginal. Twilight is slammed for being too original, taking old story elements in bizarre new directions.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 01:52 PM
Twilight is slammed for being too original, taking old story elements in bizarre new directions.

No, no, Twilight is slammed for a lot more than that...



On the subject of obvious Mary-Sue:


"In my head, Bella is very fair-skinned, with long, straight, dark brown hair and chocolate brown eyes. Her face is heart-shaped—a wide forehead with a widow's peak, large, wide-spaced eyes, prominent cheekbones, and then a thin nose and a narrow jaw with a pointed chin. Her lips are a little out of proportion, a bit too full for her jaw line. Her eyebrows are darker than her hair and more straight than they are arched. She's five foot four inches tall, slender but not at all muscular, and weighs about 115 pounds. She has stubby fingernails because she has a nervous habit of biting them. And there's your very detailed description."
http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/twilight_faq.html#bella
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/5/51/Stephaniemeyer.jpg

I lol'd

Haruki-kun
2009-05-31, 01:56 PM
http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/77905539/3675688

I was drinking a coke when I saw this. Damn it! :smallbiggrin:

Prime32
2009-05-31, 02:00 PM
No, no, Twilight is slammed for a lot more than that...And so is the Inheritance Cycle, but that's not my point.

(Incidentally, I found the Inheritance Cycle rather entertaining. Well, the first two books of it anyway.)

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 02:28 PM
i my conclusion Twilight as a film is crap and Twilight as a book is a little bit better than the film, am i correct with the mojority?

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 02:29 PM
i my conclusion Twilight as a film is crap and Twilight as a book is a little bit better than the film, am i correct with the mojority?

Unless you're a Mormon.

source (http://stoney321.livejournal.com/317176.html)

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 02:38 PM
Now that is a bit harsh and thats coming from a desent of a irsh woman.
anyway i was right yah me:smallbiggrin:

thegurullamen
2009-05-31, 02:40 PM
The human body is made up of billions of individual atoms. If the word HATE was stamped on every single one of them, it would not express one-billionth of a percentage of the loathing I feel for this series.

(Bonus points for guessing the reference!)

You know what would save vampires as literary characters? A short story from Harlan Ellison. Nihilism and horrible, horrible things happening to people described in the bleakest ways imaginable = perfect.

The Dark Fiddler
2009-05-31, 02:41 PM
No, no, Twilight is slammed for a lot more than that...



One of the things being Bella's abusive relationship with Edward. Which pretty much every Twilight fangirl wants to emulate. Sad really, Twilight is sounding like a book trying to get women back to belonging to men. I hate it even more now, through my own fault.

Dragonus45
2009-05-31, 02:42 PM
Y'know, there was a time I thought Anne Rice was the nadir of vampire writing, the lowest possible, responsible for the destruction of the entire image. God help me, I miss LeStat. LeStat had style, LeStat was cool, and HE SURE AS HELL DIDN'T SPARKLE.



Can i sig you for that?

HPsauce
2009-05-31, 02:44 PM
I bet there is a group of girls right now kissing Edward cardboard cut outs or something and they have a shrine

Kane
2009-05-31, 02:55 PM
The human body is made up of billions of individual atoms. If the word HATE was stamped on every single one of them, it would not express one-billionth of a percentage of the loathing I feel for this series.

(Bonus points for guessing the reference!)

I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream, if I'm not mistaken.

And... I haven't read it, but isn't that a bit... excessive, considering the context of what you're referencing?



Really, I'm not to fond of vampire protagonists. About the only one I happily put up with is Thomas, of the Dresden Files, and that's because his 'curse of awesome' actually sucks, as far as he's concerned.:smallconfused:

chiasaur11
2009-05-31, 02:58 PM
You know what would save vampires as literary characters? A short story from Harlan Ellison. Nihilism and horrible, horrible things happening to people described in the bleakest ways imaginable = perfect.

Look. If Mike Mignola writing a whole novel of Vamps as flesh eating nightmares that caused the 1918 influenza epidemic didn't do any good for the public perception, I doubt one short story (no matter how good, morbid, nihilistic and horrible it is) can do the job by itself.

Heck, the trend other than Twilight was going all the way to "Nightmarish murder machines with so... many... teeth". It's a shame.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:03 PM
What we need is fiction that portrays vampires as slightly pathetic desperate haemovores with no other powers that pointy canines, to lose some of their coolth.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 03:05 PM
The books? Garbage. But, useful garbage.
Why?
In a way that is in no way flattering, personality wise, I resemble Edward Cullen. Yes, I'm creepy, overbearing, and borderline sociopathic. But? This happens to be exactly what the boys who want Edward want. Well, that and frigid, white skin and no pulse. I'm still working on those. I'm getting close, too.

Narmoth
2009-05-31, 03:06 PM
meh, seems I have no choice but to actually draw my "midnight hobo" -vampire comic that I gave up because it took all to long to draw

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:10 PM
meh, seems I have no choice but to actually draw my "midnight hobo" -vampire comic that I gave up because it took all to long to draw

Or just script it and convince someone else to draw it for you.

It worked for Neil Gaiman, and now he's up to his neck in goth chicks.

Dragonus45
2009-05-31, 03:16 PM
Goth chicks, tell me more.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:18 PM
Write the equivalent of this and they'll be all over you. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sandman_(Vertigo))

Narmoth
2009-05-31, 03:21 PM
Or just script it and convince someone else to draw it for you.

It worked for Neil Gaiman, and now he's up to his neck in goth chicks.

Nah, I'll just take the time.
I think I'll be able to do the introduction/first chapter, and maybe the 2nd chapter this summer. Maybe another chapter around Christmas

Nameless
2009-05-31, 03:25 PM
Twilight is for 12-14 year old female Goth-wannabe’s who think that being a Goth is all about being sad and miserable. All these people care about in a book is for it to have a hawt guy.
Ladies, if you want some fictional sex, go to Google and search “Hentai”. I promise you that this will be much more sexually pleasing then reading an abomination to fantasy/horror/love/vampire novels. :smalltongue:

Anyone else who is not the type of person I described above just has a bad taste in books. :smallbiggrin:

Twilight is to novels what My Immortal is to fan-fics.

There, I've said it. :smallsmile:

That was a joke by the way, don't take it personally.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:27 PM
Twilight is for 12-14 year old female Goth-wannabe’s who think that being a Goth is all about being sad and miserable. All these people care about in a book is for it to have a hawt guy.
Ladies, if you want some fictional sex, go to Google and search “Hentai”. I promise you that this will be much more sexually pleasing then reading an abomination to fantasy/horror/love/vampire novels. :smalltongue:

Anyone else who is not the type of person I described above just has a bad taste in books. :smallbiggrin:

Twilight is to novels what My Immortal is to fan-fics.

There, I've said it. :smallsmile:

That was a joke by the way, don't take it personally.

If they were after fictional sex, they wouldn't be reading Twhylight would they?

Collin152
2009-05-31, 03:30 PM
If they were after fictional sex, they wouldn't be reading Twhylight would they?

Right, Twilight is all about fictional notsex, with vaguely arousing almost sensual dialogue. I mean, they occaisionally had skin to skin contact! Outrageous!

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:31 PM
Right, Twilight is all about fictional notsex, with vaguely arousing almost sensual dialogue. I mean, they occaisionally had skin to skin contact! Outrageous!

And the sex that eventually occurs in the series leaves our heroine covered in painful bruises. Because that's what the modern woman wants from her lover.

Nameless
2009-05-31, 03:31 PM
Right, Twilight is all about fictional notsex, with vaguely arousing almost sensual dialogue. I mean, they occaisionally had skin to skin contact! Outrageous!

Yes but sex is expected from that book. And have you red the sexual scenes? The words used to describe it are horrible. :smalleek:

FoE
2009-05-31, 03:32 PM
If they were after fictional vampire sex, they wouldn't be reading Twilight would they?

No, they could read Anita Blake for that.

Prime32
2009-05-31, 03:33 PM
Really, I'm not to fond of vampire protagonists. About the only one I happily put up with is Thomas, of the Dresden Files, and that's because his 'curse of awesome' actually sucks, as far as he's concerned.:smallconfused:
Try the Saga of Darren Shan (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheSagaOfDarrenShan) for a realistic/gritty take. I'll admit he's not the best storyteller, but the setting is interesting and I enjoyed the stories as a kid. His vampires are basically Klingons. With all the culture and abilities of Klingons. Except for slowly dying in sunlight (bad sunburn after a few minutes, progresses to incapacitating pain after an hour at most).

They can die in the same ways as humans, though they are quite a bit tougher. Many of the beliefs like "can't enter a house uninvited" or "can only be killed by a stake through the heart" are explained as distorted versions of various aspects of their culture (they use pits of stakes in executions). One character recalls an attempt to kill a sleeping vampire with a stake - the pain woke the vampire up, and he nearly killed his assailant before bleeding to death.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 03:40 PM
And the sex that eventually occurs in the series leaves our heroine covered in painful bruises. Because that's what the modern woman wants from her lover.

To say nothing of the fact that said lover is also a frozen, unliving killer fighting off the urge to kill her. Really, as often as she describes him as a statue, she must have some kind of sexual abnormality.

Raistlin1040
2009-05-31, 03:43 PM
Twilight is for 12-14 year old female Goth-wannabe’s who think that being a Goth is all about being sad and miserable. All these people care about in a book is for it to have a hawt guy.
Ladies, if you want some fictional sex, go to Google and search “Hentai”. I promise you that this will be much more sexually pleasing then reading an abomination to fantasy/horror/love/vampire novels. :smalltongue:

Anyone else who is not the type of person I described above just has a bad taste in books. :smallbiggrin:

Twilight is to novels what My Immortal is to fan-fics.

There, I've said it. :smallsmile:

That was a joke by the way, don't take it personally.

No. You do not bring Goth into this. It's an *Emo* wannabe's paradise.

Erts
2009-05-31, 03:45 PM
What we need is fiction that portrays vampires as slightly pathetic desperate haemovores with no other powers that pointy canines, to lose some of their coolth.

Exactly!
These books play to some strange side in the depths of teen girls mind (no offense.)
Also, they defy logic in several strange ways.
Think about. Isn't a heartbeat needed to do certain acts? Mainly, breed?
Think about it.

They also have the most unrealistic charecters I have ever seen.
The sad thing is, while this has gotten many teen girls reading again, it means they will continue to read these books.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 03:50 PM
Also, they defy logic in several strange ways.
Think about. Isn't a heartbeat needed to do certain acts? Mainly, breed?
Think about it.


Nah, Edward was always described as beign as hard as rock.
Ba dum tis.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 03:56 PM
No. You do not bring Goth into this. It's an *Emo* wannabe's paradise.

No, it's a wannabe-Goth* and a fully-fledged emo's paradise.

SUBCULTURE ELITISM! WOO!




*Twilight is why they're wannabe's and not actual Goths...

Satyr
2009-05-31, 03:56 PM
I really dont dare much about the books, but ever since a friend of mine - a very intelligent girl otherwise- had a phase of droolin over Edward and not shutting up on it, I fantasize over Max Schreck pummling the sparklepires with the power of being bald and scary. Hell, make it Klaus Kinski. That man was a lot less scarrier when he played a soulless abomination than in real life.

tribble
2009-05-31, 03:56 PM
ehhh. I liked the twilight movie. great comedy. that Edward Cullen dude is so funny...eheheheh.


And the sex that eventually occurs in the series leaves our heroine covered in painful bruises. Because that's what the modern woman wants from her lover.

because i'm feeling contrariwise, I'm going to say that some women probably like it rough, and there doesnt have to be anything wrong with that, right?

Raistlin1040
2009-05-31, 03:59 PM
No, wannabe Goths want to be goth. Twilight fans are prone to hating on the goths, in my experience. And they're wannabe Emos because Emo is definitely a late 80s offshoot of hardcore punk, and the label got nicked and applied to horrible groups such as Fall Out Boy and Panic at the Disco (which Twilight fangirls LOVE). But we're drifting into another topic.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 04:04 PM
Oh, almost forgot--
I'm going to write a musical parody of Twilight, using tounge in cheek musical numbers and dialogue to give the thing a nice thorough bashing.
But I'm afraid to look through it for about 6 points in the... story... that could conceivably be important enough for a song to go there... Maybe one of the less explodey haters can help me?

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 04:07 PM
because i'm feeling contrariwise, I'm going to say that some women probably like it rough, and there doesnt have to be anything wrong with that, right?

Of course there's nothing wrong with that in a healthy relationship where both parties know their boundaries.

But in a relationship between a young woman and a stalkerish man hundreds of years older than her? Hmm...

tribble
2009-05-31, 04:07 PM
because it takes an equal and opposite charge of awesome to cancel horribleness, I recommend you put in a Pirates of Penzance thing.

I am the very model of a sociopathic parasite
I've information of a chick who wants a blond hermaphrodite...
I dont know, I'll leave this to better writers than I.
(he said, disqualifying Stephanie Myers.)

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 04:08 PM
I've information of a chick who wants a blond hermaphrodite...


Androgyne, not hermaphrodite.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 04:09 PM
because it takes an equal and opposite charge of awesome to cancel horribleness, I recommend you put in a Pirates of Penzance thing.

I am the very model of a sociopathic parasite
I've information of a chick who wants a blond hermaphrodite...
I dont know, I'll leave this to better writers than I.
(he said, disqualifying Stephanie Myers.)

I was kinda hoping to use more original material. I mean, I might be able to snake my way into making it official, if I can get it just subtle enough. I mean, I have contacts the old cow might care about.

tribble
2009-05-31, 04:11 PM
Androgyne, not hermaphrodite.

but Androgyne doesnt rhyme with parasite...
(Im jes wonnerin... is that a hard G, or a soft one?)

Zombie Nixon
2009-05-31, 04:14 PM
Twilight is inspiring.

They say all you need to strike it rich is one good idea, but twilight is proof that you can still get rich even if you have a horrible, awful idea.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 04:15 PM
Twilight is inspiring.

They say all you need to strike it rich is one good idea, but twilight is proof that you can still get rich even if you have a horrible, awful idea.

And soon, I'll prove you can get rich off of someone else's horrible, awful idea.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 04:16 PM
but Androgyne doesnt rhyme with parasite...
(Im jes wonnerin... is that a hard G, or a soft one?)

Soft, like a J.

and-roh-jine

Erts
2009-05-31, 04:33 PM
Nah, Edward was always described as beign as hard as rock.
Ba dum tis.

Heart beats are required to get hard....
Really. It makes no sense.
Also, they killed charecters.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 04:43 PM
Heart beats are required to get hard....
Really. It makes no sense.
Also, they killed charecters.

Innuendo beats common sense. As does the Rule of Cool.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 04:51 PM
Heart beats are required to get hard....
Really. It makes no sense.
Also, they killed charecters.

If you're going to pick nits, nothing about vampires makes any sense.

Dead, ergo no metabolism, yet drink blood?

Dead, ergo dead, yet move?

Lord Seth
2009-05-31, 05:01 PM
If you're going to pick nits, nothing about vampires makes any sense.

Dead, ergo no metabolism, yet drink blood?

Dead, ergo dead, yet move?Easy answer: Magic.

Otherwise we're going to have to start wondering how Xykon moves around despite being, y'know, dead.

chiasaur11
2009-05-31, 05:08 PM
Easy answer: Magic.

Otherwise we're going to have to start wondering how Xykon moves around despite being, y'know, dead.

O-Chul needed an enemy, and the laws of physics have learned not to disagree with him.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 05:14 PM
Easy answer: Magic.

Otherwise we're going to have to start wondering how Xykon moves around despite being, y'know, dead.

In which case, what differance does it make how the vampire can have sex?

Fan
2009-05-31, 05:18 PM
In which case, what differance does it make how the vampire can have sex?

Because in all vampire mythos they actually go through the process of dieing, even in Twilight, to become a vampire, and in order for Bella to have gotten pregnant, those fluids which were VOIDED when he died, would have had to been present, and weren't?
Also, Stephine Meyers claims her vampires work by Biology, so we CAN nit pick this.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 05:37 PM
Because in all vampire mythos they actually go through the process of dieing, even in Twilight, to become a vampire, and in order for Bella to have gotten pregnant, those fluids which were VOIDED when he died, would have had to been present, and weren't?
Also, Stephine Meyers claims her vampires work by Biology, so we CAN nit pick this.

Well, firstly, that's discussing pregnancy, and I'll be the first one to say that it's more than possible to have sex without there being any chance of pregnancy.
Secondly, considering that, again, the vampires exist in utter defiance of what it means to be dead, it really isn't relevant. It's possible that they metabolise blood into venom and some substitute reproductive fluid. Why else would they need to consume it?
In any event, there's really nothing more unreasonable about this than anything else about vampires, besides the fact that nobody else does it, and what kind of argument is that?

Fenix_of_Doom
2009-05-31, 05:44 PM
Another strength of Meyer's writing is her ability to handle supernatural abilities. Many writers have difficulty handling mental powers like telepathy & precognition. Writers tend to forget that their characters have some powers sometimes, or deliberately switch them off when the plot kicks in, lest the powers ruin the storyline. You see it all the time: why didn't Dumbledore or Gandalf or Raistlin or whoever use their power to do X? Because it would've ruined the plot & the story would've stopped then & there, sans climax.

I might have failed my sense sarcasm check but anyway.

You mean like how Edward can read mind except for Bella's? At least that was one of the arguments I heard against twilight.

I'm also curious what instances you refer to when you named Gandalf and Dumbledore, everyting was explained eventually IIRC. The only strange thing I can remember is Gandalf suddenly throwing lightning exactly once in the hobbit.


I personally dislike twilight because I used to have names associated with twilight(the word), now I need to wait at least a decade before the hype moves over before I can use them again without wrong associations.

Innis Cabal
2009-05-31, 05:54 PM
Stephine Meyers claims her vampires work by Biology, so we CAN nit pick this.

Then we'd not have a story. She's clearly an idiot

Kane
2009-05-31, 05:57 PM
You know... I'd like to think that she could be that stupid, but I just can't believe it.

She didn't really say that, did she?

The Tygre
2009-05-31, 06:03 PM
It's so obvious to me now. God intended me to hate this series. From the moment, nay, before I was born, God looked down from on high and declared 'This one will hate Twilight'. As the mongoose must hate the cobra, as meerkat must hate the scorpion, as the great white must hate the killer whale, as the chimpanzee hates the baboon, as the army ant hates... anything that moves too close to it, so must I hate Twilight. It is my purpose.

KIDS
2009-05-31, 06:08 PM
The sparkling vampires, mary sues, marty stus and all other stuff mentioned in this thread had a big part in making me dislike Twilight, but it was Vampire Baseball (TM) that put the final nail in the coffin for me. There are just some places where writers/directors shouldn't go, and that is one of them.

Fan
2009-05-31, 06:08 PM
Well, firstly, that's discussing pregnancy, and I'll be the first one to say that it's more than possible to have sex without there being any chance of pregnancy.
Secondly, considering that, again, the vampires exist in utter defiance of what it means to be dead, it really isn't relevant. It's possible that they metabolise blood into venom and some substitute reproductive fluid. Why else would they need to consume it?
In any event, there's really nothing more unreasonable about this than anything else about vampires, besides the fact that nobody else does it, and what kind of argument is that?

Except she claims her vampires follow basic biology, so your arguement is moot as per word of the writer they have to follow the most basic laws of boilogy: Voiding the bowels (this includes the testicles), happens to include that, and a substitute fluid wouldn't impregnate a woman anymore then a dog, or any other species could... Also the drink blood to STAY UNDEAD rather then dead, so that blood is already being used. If the Writer says they do you don't get to ignore it simply because it's a negative factor to your support argument Collin.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 06:12 PM
Except she claims her vampires follow basic biology, so your arguement is moot as per word of the writer they have to follow the most basic laws of boilogy: Voiding the bowels (this includes the testicles), happens to include that, and a substitute fluid wouldn't impregnate a woman anymore then a dog, or any other species could... Also the drink blood to STAY UNDEAD rather then dead, so that blood is already being used. If the Writer says they do you don't get to ignore it simply because it's a negative factor to your support argument Collin.

I thought we established that the writer is an idiot with no system of internal consistancy.
I fail to see why a non semenal fluid impregnating a woman is any less believable than a dead organism staying not quite alive simply by consuming blood.
The issue here is that "biological vampire" means absolutely nothing here, because these vampires are already biologically impossible--immortality and, as you said, undead, are not biological concepts.
As such, any argument against any one aspect of these vampires is fruitless without attacking the state of vampirism as a whole.

Fan
2009-05-31, 06:17 PM
I thought we established that the writer is an idiot with no system of internal consistancy.
I fail to see why a non semenal fluid impregnating a woman is any less believable than a dead organism staying not quite alive simply by consuming blood.
The issue here is that "biological vampire" means absolutely nothing here, because these vampires are already biologically impossible--immortality and, as you said, undead, are not biological concepts.
As such, any argument against any one aspect of these vampires is fruitless without attacking the state of vampirism as a whole.
((Warning, High School health class grade content coming forth))
Well, on that note, Vampirism as a whole is violating the entire concept of biology, but seriously. The egg that a woman puts out during her period is designed to recieve a set of chromosones from a male sperm cell. A non seminal fluid simply cant supply the correct chromosone's to cause a baby to form in the first place. Once something is dead it cant cause something living to create life. That's almost as ridiculous, even by vampire standards, as a ZOMBIE having sex, and impregnating a woman.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 06:26 PM
((Warning, High School health class grade content coming forth))
Well, on that note, Vampirism as a whole is violating the entire concept of biology, but seriously. The egg that a woman puts out during her period is designed to recieve a set of chromosones from a male sperm cell. A non seminal fluid simply cant supply the correct chromosone's to cause a baby to form in the first place. Once something is dead it cant cause something living to create life. That's almost as ridiculous, even by vampire standards, as a ZOMBIE having sex, and impregnating a woman.

Remember, again that this entire ordeal was caused by the woman whose grasp of biology was lax enough to let her say that becoming a vampire gives you two extra chromesomes.

And I'm sorry, but I refuse to accept that, in a world where viruses exist to do nothing if not subvert the intended purposes of cells and genetic compositions, it is impossible for a creature that already defies biology in its very existance to do so again by impregnating a woman against all odds.

Fan
2009-05-31, 06:58 PM
Remember, again that this entire ordeal was caused by the woman whose grasp of biology was lax enough to let her say that becoming a vampire gives you two extra chromesomes.

And I'm sorry, but I refuse to accept that, in a world where viruses exist to do nothing if not subvert the intended purposes of cells and genetic compositions, it is impossible for a creature that already defies biology in its very existance to do so again by impregnating a woman against all odds.

Except the world is stated to work by all known laws of biology, and science, by the writer herself, so what your saying is that you simply refuse my argument because you don't believe in the laws of biology.
Disbelieving doesn't work in real life Collin.
Also, Vampires ARE possible within biology to a degree, just read I AM LEGEND for a good explanation.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 07:04 PM
Except the world is stated to work by all known laws of biology, and science, by the writer herself, so what your saying is that you simply refuse my argument because you don't believe in the laws of biology.
Disbelieving doesn't work in real life Collin.
Also, Vampires ARE possible within biology to a degree, just read I AM LEGEND for a good explanation.

Except that even though she said that, it's simply not true. There's no way her vampires could operate within the laws of biology. She also said her main character wasn't a self insert, but should we believe that too?
Making attacks on me doesn't make my argument less sound.
And while I doubt those vampires are indeed plausible under commonly accepted biological theory, they're not the subject of dispute here. My point is that Meyer's vampires in no way conform to biology, and thus attacking a specific reason why they do not is nonsensical unless you hold the same disdain for all aspects of their nature.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 07:05 PM
almost as ridiculous, even by vampire standards, as a ZOMBIE having sex, and impregnating a woman.

HAWT. Somebody should request that in the Fanservice thread.

Verruckt
2009-05-31, 07:15 PM
Innuendo beats common sense. As does the Rule of Cool.

I know the Rule of Cool has many applications, but I'm pretty sure one of them is not explaining how Edward Cullen violently pummels Bella while implanting her with an evil mind reading chestburster makes love to his wife.


HAWT. Somebody should request that in the Fanservice thread.

I'd like to direct you over to /d/ on one of the darker places of the web, you will leave sated, if not sane.

Any way, can I get some fanart depicting Cassidy and Alucard (horrifyingly overpowered? Yes. Mary Sue? No. He's never really depicted as anything other than the complete monster that he is, other than power lust and a bitchin' hat he has no sympathetic qualities.) Doing what needs to be done with Eddy.

Chiefly nailing him to the roof of a church, and since he won't burn like a proper blood sucker they might need to get inventive with a magnesium flare...

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 07:21 PM
I'd like to direct you over to /d/ on one of the darker places of the web, you will leave sated, if not sane.



Psssh. I eat /b/stards for breakfast and use /d/ to floss my teeth. My sanity is unbreakable.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 07:22 PM
Lies. What needs to be done to Edward Cullen is making him sing on a broadway stage a la Springtime for Hitler. It will be great.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 07:24 PM
Lies. What needs to be done to Edward Cullen is making him sing on a broadway stage a la Springtime for Hitler. It will be great.

No, we need to flay him then use his skin as a cheap substitute for diamonds.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 07:26 PM
No, we need to flay him then use his skin as a cheap substitute for diamonds.

Come now, where's the productivity in that? Why, his skin is made of ink, paper, and film!

Verruckt
2009-05-31, 07:26 PM
You know... I'd like to think that she could be that stupid, but I just can't believe it.

She didn't really say that, did she?

Not only did she say it, certain less mentally fortified friends of mine believed her, and trumpeted said "realism" as a praise of the series. Which made me... well...

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w22/Jerisalem/facepunch.gif

neoseph7
2009-05-31, 07:34 PM
I'm going to discuss first the books, then the movie.

The Books: They lack literary merit. It's true. I'm pretty sure everyone reading it who liked it did so for the love story and the fact that it's an easy read. There are more flaws in the writing and story than I can shake a stick at. But after spending three semesters cuddling with reactor physics books (getting a real college degree. not one of those cracker jack box degrees for which analyzing the literary merit of sparkly vampires means something) an easy romance novel is quite a treat. If I wanted a book to challenge me, I'd play video games instead (oh wait...)

The movie: I don't care how much of a spark Kristen Steward and Rob Pattinson had on their first day in the set. That boy is a loooooser. With a bad hair cut. And Rosaline was supposed to be hot. I feel cheated!

The Tygre
2009-05-31, 07:39 PM
Good, good. Now let the hatred flow through you...

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 09:06 PM
Good, good. Now let the hatred flow through you...

And hatred leads to the Dark Side! Which, I would argue, would be liking the Twilight books.


They don't deserve the respect of your hatred. They deserve your contempt and possibly your disgust and loathing.

mercurymaline
2009-05-31, 09:29 PM
Because in all vampire mythos they actually go through the process of dieing, even in Twilight, to become a vampire, and in order for Bella to have gotten pregnant, those fluids which were VOIDED when he died, would have had to been present, and weren't?
Also, Stephine Meyers claims her vampires work by Biology, so we CAN nit pick this.

If all they consume is blood, all their fluids are blood. Semen, saliva, skin oils, etc. They'd be a big bloody mess. Biologically.

<.<
>.>

That is all.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 09:50 PM
If all they consume is blood, all their fluids are blood. Semen, saliva, skin oils, etc. They'd be a big bloody mess. Biologically.

<.<
>.>

That is all.

Which would imply that nothing happens to the blood, in which case, why are they consuming it?
No, the only fluids these vampires secrete at all are venom and something capable of impregnating women. The only thing they consume is blood. Bob's your uncle, Fanny's your aunt...

Erts
2009-05-31, 10:29 PM
It comes down to the fact that to impregnate someone, a certain organ must become erect, and to become erect, it fills with blood. From a heart.

Enough with the biological stuff.

These aren't vampires. They are mockery's of horror.
The author has never has a decent charecter flaw in them! And, there is no depth to them either.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-31, 10:32 PM
It comes down to the fact that to impregnate someone, a certain organ must become erect, and to become erect, it fills with blood. From a heart.

Enough with the biological stuff.

These aren't vampires. They are mockery's of horror.
The author has never has a decent charecter flaw in them! And, there is no depth to them either.

I see plenty of character flaws. I just don't think the author intended them.

Or realised them, for that matter.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 10:54 PM
It comes down to the fact that to impregnate someone, a certain organ must become erect, and to become erect, it fills with blood. From a heart.

Enough with the biological stuff.

These aren't vampires. They are mockery's of horror.
The author has never has a decent charecter flaw in them! And, there is no depth to them either.

...No, that's not right.
See, when you say, "it comes down to", you state a fact that then logically leads to all other points; the top of the tree, the base of the river, etc.
Inability to get an erection? Not the crux of the issue.

Furthermore, you don't need a heartbeat to get an erection. It just needs to fill with blood. Gravity does this well when the blood has nowhere better to be. It's a common effect in hanged men.
But if we're splitting hairs, there are much bigger problems in their impossible biologies.

The Glyphstone
2009-05-31, 11:05 PM
http://xkcd.com/591/

A more perfect moment could not exist.

Starscream
2009-05-31, 11:09 PM
http://xkcd.com/591/

A more perfect moment could not exist.

I was just about to post that. As always, xkcd hits the nail on the head.

Now the question is: which one of us is secretly Randall Munroe?

thegurullamen
2009-05-31, 11:11 PM
http://xkcd.com/591/

A more perfect moment could not exist.

Here's here, isn't he? One of us is Randall Monroe and just wrote a comic based on this discussion that he just now posted.

EDIT: Ninja'd by the red, chimichanga-eater above me.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 11:15 PM
Whoever he is, he really needs to stop following me around. He keeps doing that! It's almost troublesome, but so darn clever. I wonder who he is.

chiasaur11
2009-05-31, 11:17 PM
I was just about to post that. As always, xkcd hits the nail on the head.

Now the question is: which one of us is secretly Randall Munroe?

Well, he's ex NASA.

Anyone here ex NASA?

Starscream
2009-05-31, 11:19 PM
Whoever he is, he really needs to stop following me around. He keeps doing that! It's almost troublesome, but so darn clever. I wonder who he is.

You think he's following you? I'm a computer science student. Every time I learn something (which has been known to happen on an almost monthly basis) it shows up in a strip the very next day.

It's like he's scrying me. I hope he doesn't start adding facial features to his characters, because I just know I'll actually turn up in the strip. And if it gets deleted, I'll probably keel over dead. :smalleek:

Collin152
2009-05-31, 11:19 PM
You think he's following you? I'm a computer science student. Every time I learn something (which has been known to happen on an almost monthly basis) it shows up in a strip the very next day.

It's like he's scrying me. I hope he doesn't start adding facial features to his characters, because I just know I'll actually turn up in the strip. And if it gets deleted, I'll probably keel over dead. :smalleek:

Good lord... he's everywhere!

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-05-31, 11:21 PM
Robert and Kristen: Celeb Antis?


Twilight dawns
But star Kristen Stewart is too sensible to be fazed by the cult-like hysteria.
Jamie Portman , Canwest News Service
Published: Wednesday, November 19, 2008
She didn't know the book, and at first she didn't even want to do the film version, even though it promised to be a surefire hit.

She may be the object of cult frenzy, but don't expect her to be drawn into it. She'll maintain her distance, thank you very much.

And no, she's definitely not into vampires - not even young, handsome and soulful ones.
Kristen Stewart only turned 18 a few months ago, but that doesn't stop her from speaking her mind about everything from sexual attraction to the clamour of expectation over the arrival of her new movie, Twilight, which opens at midnight tonight, in which she plays Bella, a lonely high school girl who falls for Edward, a morose but alluring vampire portrayed by Robert Pattinson.

Kristen Stewart is Bella, a lonely high school girl who falls for a dishy vampire in Twilight, based on the popular book.
Peter Sorel

She doesn't mind being provocative in her views - which might dismay the huge international fan base for Stephenie Meyer's best-selling quartet of novels about vampirism in the Pacific Northwest. For example, don't expect Stewart to get all gushy and gooey about the romance between Bella and Edward.

"I'm interested in unhealthy, neurotic people," she says flatly. "That's what I found in both the characters.
"The power balance is really interesting because you have this one (Edward) who's really perfect, but he's the one who's really afraid and tortured and not confident ... She (Bella) is the sure-footed strong woman who at the same time is willing to subject herself and give up power. The most powerful, strong thing you can do is to relinquish that, and I think an innately female quality is to say - OK, I don't need this but you can have it, big man."

Still Stewart didn't want to do Twilight on the basis of the synopsis initially sent her.
"This one was like forced on me ... and I was like: Wow! That's not what I'm into doing. I don't want to be part of something that's presenting this ideological idea of what love is to such young girls. I just didn't like that, It was very shallow and vain to me. She's in love with this guy because he's the hottest thing she's ever seen. That's not what I'm into."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz5hNRW9RKg
0:53 He mentions how the Edward character is flawed, but that Bella ignores all of said imperfections.

1:45 "He's not that great a guy at all, it's just how she sees him."

3:16 *from his perspective as Ed* "-and it's like: there's definitely something wrong with her, and there's very obviously something wrong with me."

4:17 "There's so much to the story that it's kind of melodramatic in a way. It's like: Life. Or. Death. All the time"

4:30 "It's always such a bizarre situation for him especially. I mean, he's like 'what am I doing with this kid? I'm 108 years old and I've fallen in love with this girl who sits next to me in biology.'"

I get the impression from this interview alone that he's just as confused as the rest of us about what makes this story so great. =P


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fREjpeShur0&feature=related
4:44 Kristen basically says that out of the 498 pages of information, everything that mattered had been put into the movie. That's... not exactly high praise for a book.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YQVwMEOUWo&feature=related
1:19 Every single stupi- every paragraph is like a, thing, um. I remember I stopped reading it when it said that even in the rain he looked like he was in an underwear commercial or something..."

He then continues that his initial impression of the role would have to be a little silly / campy or something.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Hu5wj8xOs0&feature=related
He begins responding to the interviewer by saying that since this is all from Bella's perspective, his character could be anybody because this is just Bella seeing a creature, and anyone you're in love with you can't see their flaws.


(As a side note, I got started on this project simply because I kept bumping into signs that the theory named in the thread title is true. Now... I keep watching these bloody clips because Rob sounds like a really cool guy despite being a lazy slob. I totally would hang with him so long as I got to drive, and he didn't smell too musky.)


There is the crowning glory interview that sparked this whole search, that I have now lost, in which Rob starts in on the book and how it reads like Meyer's sick private fantasy and how much he dislikes the character he plays. I'm SO (=P) broken up over the loss of the link. It was the best laugh I'd had in a few days though.

In any case, here's my little black gem for you lot to take as you will. I'm not intending to offend with this so much as I've been having fun looking things up and I wanted to share with non-antis since hearing the same old series bashing comments and raw hatred gets old. Fans, please consider this a tongue in cheek jab with no real venom behind it. I really am just having some fun with you all. XD

PS: I feel dirty for my newfound fondness of Rob's mentality and attitude though. That will haunt me for Bawb knows how long. >_<

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=D8BxWZ5Nc3A&feature=related

XD hahahahaha

^The above is taken from my mega post at the bellaandedward forum. My zeal has died down a lot since I did the research, and I'm looking forward to seeing the next movie. It's the series I love to hate, but I find myself eager to see how the screenplays will continue to improve upon the bland base material.

Collin152
2009-05-31, 11:28 PM
Hadrian! You support my efforts of writing a musical parody, right?

Kane
2009-05-31, 11:32 PM
I only let him hang around because he keeps the velociraptors away (http://randallmunroefacts.com/).

chiasaur11
2009-06-01, 12:09 AM
I only let him hang around because he keeps the velociraptors away (http://randallmunroefacts.com/).

Well, it's more the grape juice.

He just steals the credit on that one.

Talwar
2009-06-01, 06:28 PM
Issues of biology and relationships aside, why would anybody pretend to be a teenager and endure decades of high school when one could pose as a youngish-looking recent grad instead?

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-06-01, 10:17 PM
Hadrian! You support my efforts of writing a musical parody, right?

Hell yeah I'm for it! Call it: "Sparkle Motion" or "Dazzle!" :smallbiggrin:

Collin152
2009-06-01, 10:39 PM
Hell yeah I'm for it! Call it: "Sparkle Motion" or "Dazzle!" :smallbiggrin:

Well, any self respecting musical has an exclamation point in the title.
I'm suddenly struck by the thought of calling it "Forks!" and giving it a mild country theme...

Yulian
2009-06-01, 11:30 PM
Sir Stephen King, Ultimate Troll (Thanks, 1d4chan!)



I don't think it speaks very well of the fans of Twlight that the response often seems to consist of accusing Stephen King , who is, like him or hate, one of the most influential modern writers not just in horror, but in all of literature, of jealousy of what seems to be, quite frankly, a flash-in-the-pan like Meyers.

One can hardly overstate King's importance in the field of literature, both in terms of helping codify modern horror to a great extent, providing a great deal of inspiration to up-and-coming writers, encouraging them, and helping to get the public at large buying a great many more novels and anthologies than they might otherwise have done.

His philanthropic works have helped many, and he doesn't like to publicize that.

So many of his stories have lent iconic images and characters to popular culture in general. Who doesn't know the names Christine, Cujo, Pennywise, or Carrie?

I highly doubt, and this is speaking objectively, that in 20 years the public at large will have much of a clue who "Edward Cullen" or "Bella Swan" are. King is a giant, Meyers is a blip.

I will say again, I essentially read Twlight by accident. I was given a box of books a number of years back, that happened to be one of them. I burned through it in, I think, 2 days, and promptly forgot it until it became a "thing" and I recalled I had once read it.

Really, the relationship described in the novel does have all the hallmarks of a literal abusive relationship, yet it is portrayed in a positive light. What makes it reprehensible is the fact that this isn't done ironically, or even sadistically, but with total sincerity.

It's not even that the vampires are "different". There is no standard, after all, it's a literary monster that can change with the times and need of the author. Here, go look up The Vampire Diaries by LJ Smith. It's another young-adult vampire romance series.

In fact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vampire_Diaries

There are some notable similarities between the two series. Guess which one was first published in 1991? It's probably just a coincidence, retreading the same ground and all.

But Meyers took it to an extreme seldom seen in a widely published author. She, in essence, neutered the concept. Which, given her background, makes perfect sense.

Honestly, I'm hoping there's an upcoming backlash against well...not to put too fine a point on it, "***** vampires". I found 30 Days of Night to be a breath of fresh air when they made a movie of it. Here were the long-forgotten, grave-crawling monstrosities so many cultures feared.

- Yulian
(Oh heck, go look up my username here and see what sort of vampires I like. Google the words "Yulian" and "Necroscope". My avatar is from the book series as well.)

Flame of Anor
2009-06-01, 11:37 PM
Well, any self respecting musical has an exclamation point in the title.
I'm suddenly struck by the thought of calling it "Forks!" and giving it a mild country theme...

In Forks, they Spoons.

...and stalk each other.

Yulian
2009-06-01, 11:57 PM
Remember, again that this entire ordeal was caused by the woman whose grasp of biology was lax enough to let her say that becoming a vampire gives you two extra chromesomes.


*Falls over laughing*

You know what else extra chromosomes gets you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome

BAAHAHAHAHAHHA!

It explains so much!

- Yulian

Lord Seth
2009-06-01, 11:57 PM
Yugi: I only just realized, Pharaoh, but you haven't got a reflection. Is there something you're not telling me?

Yami: Yugi, I'm an ancient spirit living inside your body. Of course I don't have-

Yugi: Don't lie to me! You're a vampire, aren't you?

Yami: It's the middle of the day.

Yugi: Well, that proves nothing.

Yami: I never should have let you read Twilight.

Ah, Yu-Gi-Oh Abridged. How I love thee. (that was from Episode 32 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFwAEiGLCk4) for those curious)

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-06-02, 09:22 AM
I like "Forks!"

My mom jokes that the series can be fixed by simply having the dumb cow wake up in a hospital, after the events of Breaking Dawn, only to learn that everything since the van was just a drug addled dream. She was actually hit on the head during that incident and had been in a chemically induced coma since. :smallbiggrin:

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-02, 10:43 AM
Issues of biology and relationships aside, why would anybody pretend to be a teenager and endure decades of high school when one could pose as a youngish-looking recent grad instead?

Well he does have this thing for watching young girls sleep apparently...

Dirk Kris
2009-06-02, 10:49 AM
Creepy. And sparkly vampires, really? Give me a break.

Also, why is it remarkable that a 17-year-old girl wants to spend FOREVAH with her boyfriend? As far as I recall, EVERY 17-year-old girl is like that, whether her boyfriend is a vampire or not. :smallamused:

Morty
2009-06-02, 10:52 AM
Okay, not that I'm ever going to read Twilight - not my type of literature and reading the first chapter of the first book made my teeth hurt - but can anyone explain the "sparkly" thing to me?

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-02, 11:11 AM
Okay, not that I'm ever going to read Twilight - not my type of literature and reading the first chapter of the first book made my teeth hurt - but can anyone explain the "sparkly" thing to me?

Twi-vamps sparkle in the sun. They don't burn, don't even do anything, they just sparkle.

Morty
2009-06-02, 11:13 AM
Twi-vamps sparkle in the sun. They don't burn, don't even do anything, they just sparkle.

Sparkle, as in become shiny and covered in tiny glistens of light?

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-02, 11:18 AM
Sparkle, as in become shiny and covered in tiny glistens of light?

As in that, yeah. I believe it's described as diamond-like.

Dirk Kris
2009-06-02, 11:19 AM
Think...disco ball.

Linkavitch
2009-06-02, 11:55 AM
Hate. Vampires don't twinkle, and they're not angsty teenagers with hair that looks like they hung upside-down from somewhere and put on hair spray. They also aren't compulsed to eat people, they just do, 'cuz that's what they eat. Twilight seems to me to make them be addicted to human, and the one family is trying to break the addiction. It's like you and a hot dog.(asuming you're not a vegetarian.) You don't get hungry and find the nearest hot dog stand cuz you're addicted to hot dogs, It's cuz hot dogs are what you eat. Or tacos, or pizza or whatever.

loopy
2009-06-02, 11:59 AM
Just going to quote my post from the relationship thread because its pretty much all relevant.


Just came from reading the Twilight thread. Figured out what is was about the books that repelled me so.

Basically, when a girl mentions that I remind them of Edward, or how much they like the Twilight series, they are saying to me "Look, here are a set of tools that you can use to manipulate me however you want*."

Now, I am a manipulative bastard, but still trying to be a 'good' guy at heart (albeit mainly for reasons of public image). I know many people who aren't as nice as me, who are gaining the exact same tools.

This is disturbing. Also, yes, I am a despicable human being. The most disturbing thing is that girls still keep falling for it.

* What a guy hears will also have something further attached: "...but be prepared to use and discard me because you will never match my idealised version unless you are willing to put the effort into changing my romantic perceptions or constantly lie through your teeth."

Lord Seth
2009-06-02, 01:16 PM
Okay, not that I'm ever going to read Twilight - not my type of literature and reading the first chapter of the first book made my teeth hurt - but can anyone explain the "sparkly" thing to me?Apparently, when vampires go into sunlight, rather than burn or anything like that, they just sparkle. Which is why they try to avoid it, as it would give them away or something.

Honestly, there have been so many renditions on vampires I'm a little perplexed as to why Twilight gets all the hate in that regard.

Of course, Dresden Files has my personal favorite take on vampires.

Prime32
2009-06-02, 01:19 PM
This hasn't been mentioned yet? For shame...

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/troll_slayer.png/ (http://xkcd.com/591/)

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-02, 01:21 PM
Actually, it was linked like a page ago :smalltongue:



Of course, Dresden Files has my personal favorite take on vampires.

Everything from Nosferatu to Dracula to Anne Rice to World of Darkness all mashed together.

...the scary part, it works.

loopy
2009-06-02, 01:21 PM
This hasn't been mentioned yet? For shame..

It had actually. Most of last page.

Prime32
2009-06-02, 01:33 PM
It had actually. Most of last page.
These boards keep getting the last post I viewed wrong. :smallfrown:

H. Zee
2009-06-02, 01:44 PM
There is the crowning glory interview that sparked this whole search, that I have now lost, in which Rob starts in on the book and how it reads like Meyer's sick private fantasy and how much he dislikes the character he plays. I'm SO (=P) broken up over the loss of the link. It was the best laugh I'd had in a few days though.


I linked that particular interview on page... 3? I think? Of this thread.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-06-02, 03:17 PM
I linked that particular interview on page... 3? I think? Of this thread.

I know. It's just part of the mega post I had made on the another board last year. :smalltongue:

mangosta71
2009-06-02, 03:44 PM
This (http://hijinksensue.com/2009/05/29/rebuffed/) pretty well sums up my thoughts, even though it was written with a different intent.

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-02, 05:01 PM
I liked Twilight.

Now, before people start screaming at me and blaming my lack of Y chromosome, let me explain that I do acknowledge it as literary crap. However, I do believe a lot of the hatred of Twilight has less to do with its writing which leaves quite a bit to be desired, and more to do with the fact thirteen year old girls (and women who never really outgrew the desire for a perfect, dark, quiet, sophisticated man who dotes on them) obsess and set unreachable goals in terms of lovers.
And threaten to kill those who dare cross their fandom o.o

Its a bit like hormonal Narutards, in my opinion.

Anyways, I liked the book series when I read it on a basic level. When I gave into the little girl inside of me, and read it as a young, innocent child, the book was cute and interesting.
Of course, I know when to turn off the child and become my typical jaded to romance self, and know that there are no Edwards, and if there were, I wouldn't want them anyways.

I just find it a little trying to read men go "EL OH EL TWILIGHT SUCKS AND YUR STOOPUD"

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-06-02, 05:27 PM
RabbitHoleLost: EL OH EL TWILIGHT SUCKS AND YUR STOOPUD

:smallwink:

Ganurath
2009-06-02, 05:29 PM
RabbitHoleLost: EL OH EL TWILIGHT SUCKS AND YUR STOOPUD

:smallwink:"Cero."

In all seriousness, I find myself agreeing with Rabbit. Twilight is alright reading material for the intended audience. It's just... really bad for most outside that demographic.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-06-02, 05:32 PM
The accursed series is the McDonald's of the literary world. It's quick, easy, and appeals to a large audiance. However, it is of a very poor quality and not even remotely good for you.

PhoeKun
2009-06-02, 05:39 PM
Anyways, I liked the book series when I read it on a basic level. When I gave into the little girl inside of me, and read it as a young, innocent child, the book was cute and interesting.
Of course, I know when to turn off the child and become my typical jaded to romance self, and know that there are no Edwards, and if there were, I wouldn't want them anyways.

I miss having the ability to do that. You have no idea how much. But, alas, I pursued a degree in English. In writing, even. Creative writing. And I have that degree. I've learned a lot, and my writing has improved so much that I don't even recognize the scraps and scribblings from even four years ago as coming from me. It's weird.

And when I'm reading a legitimately good book, all that academia shines as brightly as a vampire in the sun (...apparently), and the subtleties I pick up on increase my enjoyment a thousandfold. But when I sit down to read something that I know on some inner, childish, or guilty level... and is otherwise tripe, all I can manage to see is tripe. All the more so because I've learned to take the lash to these things so that they don't appear in the stuff I write.

I read a lot less than I used to, now. There aren't that many books on the market I can enjoy. I'm worried I've lost touch with my inner child. At the very least, she doesn't come out when I'm reading. So... to anyone and everyone who recognizes that Twilight and its ilk are not well written, but can manage to not care about that and have fun: I'm so jealous of you.

Oh, and to the authors of these books? The ones without literary talent, who find success anyway because the majority of people buying books either don't know or don't care about such things? I loathe you. I despise you. I do not hate your books, but I am furious that you have written them. Take a long walk off a short pier, and bring your muse with you.

Fan
2009-06-02, 05:40 PM
IF you can give it that, I equate it to more of the road side Carnival food of literature... Greasy, over hyped as far as the cotton candy (Edward) goes, liked by the younger groups who have NO idea what "Mole rat on a Stick" is, and is the literal crap of the food industry.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-02, 05:41 PM
I miss having the ability to do that. You have no idea how much. But, alas, I pursued a degree in English. In writing, even. Creative writing. And I have that degree. I've learned a lot, and my writing has improved so much that I don't even recognize the scraps and scribblings from even four years ago as coming from me. It's weird.

And when I'm reading a legitimately good book, all that academia shines as brightly as a vampire in the sun (...apparently), and the subtleties I pick up on increase my enjoyment a thousandfold. But when I sit down to read something that I know on some inner, childish, or guilty level... and is otherwise tripe, all I can manage to see is tripe. All the more so because I've learned to take the lash to these things so that they don't appear in the stuff I write.

I read a lot less than I used to, now. There aren't that many books on the market I can enjoy. I'm worried I've lost touch with my inner child. At the very least, she doesn't come out when I'm reading. So... to anyone and everyone who recognizes that Twilight and its ilk are not well written, but can manage to not care about that and have fun: I'm so jealous of you.

Oh, and to the authors of these books? The ones without literary talent, who find success anyway because the majority of people buying books either don't know or don't care about such things? I loathe you. I despise you. I do not hate your books, but I am furious that you have written them. Take a long walk off a short pier, and bring your muse with you.

I would suggest you read Peter Morwood's The Horse Lord, purely because it's one of the best-written books I have ever read. The plot is good too.
The main downside is that each of the two books which follow it are only half as good as their predessesor.

Kane
2009-06-02, 05:51 PM
Further, as with Eragon, there's the complaint that kids are reading this thoroughly mediocre writing. (and that's being generous.) and forming conceptions about books in general. Not necessarily either the author's or reader's fault, but it still happens.

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-02, 07:05 PM
Further, as with Eragon, there's the complaint that kids are reading this thoroughly mediocre writing. (and that's being generous.) and forming conceptions about books in general. Not necessarily either the author's or reader's fault, but it still happens.

I'm not seeing this as a fault, considering both series influenced children/young adults who wouldn't normally read to do so.
Ala my sister.
Who hates reading.
Who read the entire Twilight series in a week.
And who was then easily convinced to read An Abundance of Katherines by John Green.

I thank Stephanie Meyers for that, atleast.

Helanna
2009-06-02, 07:47 PM
I just ducked into this conversation to say:

Nerd-o-Rama, I go to a high school FILLED with Twilight-obsessed girls. Not one day goes by without me seeing at least two different Twilight-related shirts or bags (Hey, in my tiny school that's a lot).

So thank you SO MUCH for posting about that "Buffy staked Edward" T-shirt! I have located it online and am currently trying to get enough money to order it.

Also, I agree with everyone that says that Twilight, although a literary abomination, is fine so long as you don't take it seriously and remember that it's aimed towards teenage girls. It's just that those teenage girls suddenly decided to latch onto it . . .

I really, really hate Twilight fangirls.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-02, 08:04 PM
Glad I could brighten someone's day with an otherwise pointless, half-relevant post.

tribble
2009-06-02, 08:41 PM
Twilight is like really really cheap seafood: it's mediocre, bad for you, and in some cases immediately dangerous.
Eragon is more like a Macburger: it's mediocre and bad for you, but hey, I'll take it.
series like LOTR and The Chronicles of Narnia are like Steak, they are delicious, excellent, and if cooked correctly (read: READ, not watched in a movie) good for you.
Dr. Seuss is like if someone found a way to make Brussels Sprouts taste like Peanut M&Ms. Delicious, nutritous, and fun for people of all ages.

Zencao
2009-06-02, 11:45 PM
Twilight is like really really cheap seafood: it's mediocre, bad for you, and in some cases immediately dangerous.
Eragon is more like a Macburger: it's mediocre and bad for you, but hey, I'll take it.
series like LOTR and The Chronicles of Narnia are like Steak, they are delicious, excellent, and if cooked correctly (read: READ, not watched in a movie) good for you.
Dr. Seuss is like if someone found a way to make Brussels Sprouts taste like Peanut M&Ms. Delicious, nutritous, and fun for people of all ages.

Hey! The LOTR movie is the ham sandwich, hardly unhealthy, quite enjoyable, yet lacking the true substance of a proper steak :P

Kane
2009-06-02, 11:58 PM
Dr. Seuss is like if someone found a way to make Brussels Sprouts taste like Peanut M&Ms. Delicious, nutritous, and fun for people of all ages.

Good metaphors, and they're all true enough. Just that the last one leaves you with a funny taste in your mouth if you are aware of the all the (http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll/dspolitic/pm/10429cs.jpg) wartime (http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll/dspolitic/pm/1942/20728acs.jpg) propaganda (http://www.morethings.com/images/theodor_seuss_geisel/dr-seuss-fifth-column-1943.jpeg) Dr. Seuss (http://www.tfaoi.com/am/8am/8am206.jpg) made (http://www.ccsd.edu/link/lms/ww2/gasolinePolCar.jpg).

Flame of Anor
2009-06-03, 12:03 AM
Hey! The LOTR movie is the ham sandwich, hardly unhealthy, quite enjoyable, yet lacking the true substance of a proper steak :P

Although I am a vegetarian, I seem to remember something about ham not being made from steak... :smallwink:

Lord_Gareth
2009-06-03, 12:09 AM
I hated Twilight, for reasons that have been extensively covered. I also hated the LotR books. Yes, Tolkein did some fantastic worldbuilding - but he kept forgetting to tell the damn story while he was showing off that world of his. And the archaic writing style is completely friggin' unnessecary...

Darklord Bright
2009-06-03, 12:51 AM
Wait... you mean Twilight isn't satire?

Oh good lord.

Mr. Scaly
2009-06-03, 09:44 AM
Alrighty then, I'm going to play Devil's advocate and say that I LIKE Twilight.

No, I've never read it...well, one page or so and I thought it was boring as all get out with even the climax written in a wooden emotionless fashion. But there are two reasons that I'm glad it was written.

1) It's getting people to read again. So what if it's tripe? It's gateway tripe! If someone reads Twilight then the door is open to all kinds of novels.

2) Hearing about how people hate the books never fails to make me laugh. So in a way it's brought me laughs. :smallwink:

My sister for example. She read all four books in a week and keeps bugging me to try and read them. If asked, she openly admits that they're not very good. But, to quote her, "It's hilarious!" I think that says it all.

Dervag
2009-06-03, 10:44 AM
1) It's getting people to read again. So what if it's tripe? It's gateway tripe! If someone reads Twilight then the door is open to all kinds of novels.The problem is that there are plenty of gateway novels that are generally agreed to be better. And that don't open the door to domestic abuse as wide as they open the door to literature.


My sister for example. She read all four books in a week and keeps bugging me to try and read them. If asked, she openly admits that they're not very good. But, to quote her, "It's hilarious!" I think that says it all.OK. That's a fairly healthy attitude, I think. Someone who can read them and laugh at any bits that are bad about them... that's not alarming. Someone who reads them and can't laugh at the bad bits, either because their brain seizes up with hatred or because they don't realize that something very wrong is happening in-story... that's more of a problem.

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-03, 10:50 AM
The problem is that there are plenty of gateway novels that are generally agreed to be better. And that don't open the door to domestic abuse as wide as they open the door to literature.
Yes, but for some reason those "better" gateway novels don't want to be read. You have to remember, those who are using Twilight as their start into novel-reading didn't like reading before. They don't think like us seasoned readers.
They don't think "Well, this is a poorly written book with two horribly conceived main characters", they think "Aw, its vampires. And love. Yay <3"
As for the domestic abuse, I think we don't give girls enough credit. Nearly any romance novel you pick up has atleast undertones of creepy stalking. Many girls don't connect creepy behavior in their boyfriends as okay because Edward snuck into Bella's bedroom and watched her sleep at night.
When girls say they want an Edward, they don't really want Edward, they want the romance. Its the same as when girls used to say they wanted their prince or their hero or their knight in shining armor.
They don't really want that, they want their "soul mate". Or they want someone as "attractive" as Robert Pattinson, or whatever his name is (obviously, I don't find him at all attractive...)

Dirk Kris
2009-06-03, 10:53 AM
Me neither. Except that one time.

The only, ONLY time I found Edward at all attractive was when he is kissing Bella in the gazebo and it looks like it pains him. I was like "I want to love and kiss you so badly it hurts! <3"

That is all.

Nameless
2009-06-03, 10:54 AM
Yes, but for some reason those "better" gateway novels don't want to be read. You have to remember, those who are using Twilight as their start into novel-reading didn't like reading before. They don't think like us seasoned readers.
They don't think "Well, this is a poorly written book with two horribly conceived main characters", they think "Aw, its vampires. And love. Yay <3"
As for the domestic abuse, I think we don't give girls enough credit. Nearly any romance novel you pick up has atleast undertones of creepy stalking. Many girls don't connect creepy behavior in their boyfriends as okay because Edward snuck into Bella's bedroom and watched her sleep at night.
When girls say they want an Edward, they don't really want Edward, they want the romance. Its the same as when girls used to say they wanted their prince or their hero or their knight in shining armor.
They don't really want that, they want their "soul mate". Or they want someone as "attractive" as Robert Pattinson, or whatever his name is (obviously, I don't find him at all attractive...)

So basically, a good way to get into reading is by choosing to read an abomination to literature? :smalltongue:
Actually… I guess that makes sense, if you don’t like reading books, it makes sense that you might start off by reading something awful. :smallbiggrin:
I got into reading with Darren Shan, which isn’t anything amazing but it does it’s job in a way. (apart from the Demons series- what the hell was that all about?)

EDIT: Also, didn't Rober What's-his-face say he didn't like the book or movie? :smalltongue:

EDIT II:


Me neither. Except that one time.

The only, ONLY time I found Edward at all attractive was when he is kissing Bella in the gazebo and it looks like it pains him. I was like "I want to love and kiss you so badly it hurts! <3"

That is all.

Speaking of which, how was the movie? As bad or worse then the book? :smalltongue:

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-03, 11:16 AM
Me neither. Except that one time.

The only, ONLY time I found Edward at all attractive was when he is kissing Bella in the gazebo and it looks like it pains him. I was like "I want to love and kiss you so badly it hurts! <3"

That is all.

I thought the actor was attractive.
As Cedric Diggory.
:smalltongue:

@ Nameless: As I said earlier, it worked for my sister. She hated reading, omnomnom'd Twilight right up, and was on such a withdrawal once she was done, I could easily convince her to read other books of merit. Sort of. They either had to have romance or vampires, and had to be kinda modern.
But that gives me a little leeway. Ala John Green (NERDFIGHTERS WOO)

Nameless
2009-06-03, 11:21 AM
@ Nameless: As I said earlier, it worked for my sister. She hated reading, omnomnom'd Twilight right up, and was on such a withdrawal once she was done, I could easily convince her to read other books of merit. Sort of. They either had to have romance or vampires, and had to be kinda modern.
But that gives me a little leeway. Ala John Green (NERDFIGHTERS WOO)

Tell her to read "Interview with the Vampire" <333333333333333333333
*drools*

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-03, 11:23 AM
Tell her to read "Interview with the Vampire" <333333333333333333333
*drools*

Neh. I read it at her age, and I don't think she'd be so much into the ghey vampires.

Nameless
2009-06-03, 11:28 AM
Neh. I read it at her age, and I don't think she'd be so much into the ghey vampires.

They're gay?

Actually, to be fair I haven't read it, I've only seen the movie...
But it's a book I REALLY do want to read.

... What? It was the best Vampire film I've ever watched... and the first time I watched it was when I was 6. :smallbiggrin:

Starscream
2009-06-03, 11:29 AM
Neh. I read it at her age, and I don't think she'd be so much into the ghey vampires.

Please. Even Lestat wasn't so effeminate that he sparkled. He could be downright badass at times. A fight between him and Edward Cullen would end after thirty seconds, when Cullen gets his hair mussed up and runs away in tears.

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-03, 11:31 AM
Please. Even Lestat wasn't so effeminate that he sparkled. He could be downright badass at times. A fight between him and Edward Cullen would end after thirty seconds, when Cullen gets his hair mussed up and runs away in tears.

Hey, I was a big fan of Anne Rice when I was younger. However, my sister is your typical teenaged girl, and I don't think she'd so much like the atmosphere of the Anne Rice universe.
It'd, like, disturb her.

Nameless
2009-06-03, 11:32 AM
Please. Even Lestat wasn't so effeminate that he sparkled. He could be downright badass at times. A fight between him and Edward Cullen would end after thirty seconds, when Cullen gets his hair mussed up and runs away in tears.

I would quote that if my sig wasn't so long. :smallbiggrin:


Hey, I was a big fan of Anne Rice when I was younger. However, my sister is your typical teenaged girl, and I don't think she'd so much like the atmosphere of the Anne Rice universe.
It'd, like, disturb her.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I book with good grammar and a thick story line can be scary to some people. :smalltongue:

RabbitHoleLost
2009-06-03, 11:36 AM
Yeah, I know what you mean. I book with good grammar and a thick story line can be scary to some people. :smalltongue:
:smalltongue:
Well, yeah, that and, like, you know, the undertones of homosexuality(Lestat/Louis, Louis/Armand) and pedophilia (regarding Claudia), and the direct looks into suicide, death, and human nature your typical teenaged girl can't really comprehend.

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-03, 11:37 AM
They're gay?

Actually, to be fair I haven't read it, I've only seen the movie...
But it's a book I REALLY do want to read.

... What? It was the best Vampire film I've ever watched... and the first time I watched it was when I was 6. :smallbiggrin:

Not exactly, it's more along the lines of extreme Ho-Yay.

Word to the wise: the book is a bit dry, especially compared to the movie. The Vampire Lestat I thought read a bit better.

HPsauce
2009-06-03, 11:37 AM
Speak the truth Nameless!
Preach it out to everybody.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:37 AM
series like LOTR and The Chronicles of Narnia are like Steak, they are delicious, excellent, and if cooked correctly (read: READ, not watched in a movie) good for you.


No, LOTR and the Chronicles of Narnia are packaged as health food but secretly are extremely bad for you. Too much thinly veiled allegory, gender-related bigotry (Susan), paternalism, social-class snobbery and racism (Calormenes and Southrons) in the diet can lead to coronary heart diseases.

Also, the whole "It gets kids to read" only counts when they go on to read adult books afterwards.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-03, 11:41 AM
Please. Even Lestat wasn't so effeminate that he sparkled. He could be downright badass at times. A fight between him and Edward Cullen would end after thirty seconds, when Cullen gets his hair mussed up and runs away in tears.Oh they're not effeminate (fabulous, maybe, but not effeminate). Just really, really into each other.

Nameless
2009-06-03, 11:41 AM
:smalltongue:
Well, yeah, that and, like, you know, the undertones of homosexuality(Lestat/Louis, Louis/Armand) and pedophilia (regarding Claudia), and the direct looks into suicide, death, and human nature your typical teenaged girl can't really comprehend.

"AHHHH! CHARACTERS WITH REAL EMOTIONS! It burns! IT BURNS!"
:smalltongue: :smallbiggrin:


Not exactly, it's more along the lines of extreme Ho-Yay.

Word to the wise: the book is a bit dry, especially compared to the movie. The Vampire Lestat I thought read a bit better.

I'll defiantly get round to reading Ann's books once I finished the Dune trilogy, a Terry Pritchett book I'm read and the LotR trilogy. (actually I might forget about the other two books)


Speak the truth Nameless!
Preach it out to everybody.

:smalltongue:

EDIT: Twilight + Lost Boys = :smalleek:

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:42 AM
:smalltongue:
Well, yeah, that and, like, you know, the undertones of homosexuality(Lestat/Louis, Louis/Armand) and pedophilia (regarding Claudia), and the direct looks into suicide, death, and human nature your typical teenaged girl can't really comprehend.

And that's exactly why they should read that sort of literature, otherwise they'll never comprehend it.

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-03, 11:42 AM
I'll defiantly get round to reading Ann's books once I finished the Dune trilogy, a Terry Pritchett book I'm read and the LotR trilogy. (actually I might forget about the other two books)



My advice is stop after Queen of the Damned. Quality takes a nose-dive around that point.



EDIT: Twilight + Lost Boys = :smalleek:

= Kiefer Sutherland kicking the crap out of Cullen for 24 hours.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:44 AM
My advice is stop after Queen of the Damned. Quality takes a nose-dive around that point.

Speaking of nosedives, Children of Dune and beyond...

Terry Pratchett, on the other hand, just gets better as he writes more. The way that experience is supposed to work.

Lord_Gareth
2009-06-03, 11:47 AM
I'd also highly reccomend anything by Neil Gaiman, but especially Neverwhere, Stardust, and The Graveyard Book. Personally, I think American Gods is his best work, but you gotta ease up to it.

Malfunctioned
2009-06-03, 11:48 AM
EDIT: Twilight + Lost Boys = :smalleek:


I can't get the image of Edward getting Death By Stereo!'d out of my head. (Yup, that exclamation mark is mandatory :smalltongue:)


EDIT: How did I get so many damn typoes in there? :smalltongue:

Malfunctioned
2009-06-03, 11:49 AM
I'd also highly reccomend anything by Neil Gaiman, but especially Neverwhere, Stardust, and The Graveyard Book. Personally, I think American Gods is his best work, but you gotta ease up to it.

I quite like Books of Magic too.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:52 AM
I'd also highly reccomend anything by Neil Gaiman, but especially Neverwhere, Stardust, and The Graveyard Book. Personally, I think American Gods is his best work, but you gotta ease up to it.

American Gods is beyond good. Neil Gaiman also has the advantage of having different works to suit your maturity:

The Day I Swapped My Dad For Two Goldfish & The Wolves In The Walls - small children.

Stardust & Coraline - adolescents

The Sandman - moody teenagers

American Gods & Anansi Boys - Grownups.

Not to say you can't enjoy everything he wrote at any age. Because he's good.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-03, 11:53 AM
Speaking of nosedives, Children of Dune and beyond...

Terry Pratchett, on the other hand, just gets better as he writes more. The way that experience is supposed to work.On the other hand, occasionally he just has an off-six-months and phones something in while he rests up and thinks for the next book. This is how I explain things like Moving Pictures and the Moist novels.

Dirk Kris
2009-06-03, 11:53 AM
I thought the actor was attractive.
As Cedric Diggory.
:smalltongue:

Quite. I was sad when he died. THAT'S RIGHT - HE DIES!

Movie was baaaaaaaad. Didn't read the book because I didn't feel like devoting longer than...2 1/2 hours?...of my time to it. Will probably not watch the others unless dragged into it by a female friend - again. Will NOT ever spend money on them, ugh.

Wanna see some people hate on me? A) I haz a new Recaiden dolly that is hella kewt, and B) I LOVED THE WHEEL OF TIME SERIES!

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:56 AM
On the other hand, occasionally he just has an off-six-months and phones something in while he rests up and thinks for the next book. This is how I explain things like Moving Pictures and the Moist novels.

I like reading through Moving Pictures and trying to spot every single reference. And I quite enjoyed the Moist novels. Going Postal was much better than Making Money, and they're no Night Watch, but they're amusing enough and I don't want Discworld to get too noir.


* Actually, Making Money was pretty bad.

Morty
2009-06-03, 11:57 AM
On the other hand, occasionally he just has an off-six-months and phones something in while he rests up and thinks for the next book. This is how I explain things like Moving Pictures and the Moist novels.

Well, the first Moist novel wasn't bad. It's when the second one looked exactly like the first one but in different decorations that something started to look wrong.

Lord_Gareth
2009-06-03, 11:57 AM
On the other hand, occasionally he just has an off-six-months and phones something in while he rests up and thinks for the next book. This is how I explain things like Moving Pictures and the Moist novels.

Do not blaspheme against Moist Von Lipwig. He has the most badass name of any protagonist ever.

@Irish - I've noticed that younger children (8-12) think Coraline is a wonderful adventure, and adults (20-death) tend to walk around the house turning on all the lights after reading it.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-03, 11:59 AM
@Irish - I've noticed that younger children (8-12) think Coraline is a wonderful adventure, and adults (20-death) tend to walk around the house turning on all the lights after reading it.

When I read Wolves In The Walls to my little sister she went around the house with a stick looking for them. Neil Gaiman is obviously an excellent tool for raising your children.