So... Are we over hating Twilight now?

[Amazon]

Let's say you read the novel First Blood. Then you went to see the movie First Blood. Then you go see Rambo 2: Electric Boogaloo, which was previously titled Santa With Muscles, but Hulk Hogan dropped out so Stallone bought the rights and put John Rambo in the title role, but otherwise left the original script intact.

The novel and the movie would have different interpretations of the character. The second movie has a ridiculously rapid departure of the character. He is a fictional character, but he is not being presented as he was in either the book or the movie. Now, if you greatly enjoyed the book and the movie, it's fair to say you would very likely not enjoy Electric Boogaloo due the radical change in character, is it not?

But we are not talking about characters are we? We are talking about fictional creatures with self-containing universes, lore and structures.

[Peelee]

But we are not talking about characters are we? We are talking about fictional creatures with self-containing universes, lore and structures.

What's the difference between fictional people and fictional races? If I were to write a book about Drow, but made them 4-feet tall, stocky, and beards, would I still be writing about Drow?

[Amazon]

What's the difference between fictional people and fictional races? If I were to write a book about Drow, but made them 4-feet tall, stocky, and beards, would I still be writing about Drow?

Sure why not, why do dwarfs need beards and battle axes? Why do fairies need insect wings? Why does Santa need to use red? Why do vampires need do die in the sunlight?

They are fictional creatures they are not real. They weren't like that in their original sources anyway.

[Peelee]

Sure why not, why do dwarfs need beards and battle axes? Why do fairies need insect wings? Why does Santa need to use red? Why do vampires need do die in the sunlight?

They are fictional creatures they are not real. They weren't like that in their original sources anyway.

Because that's how the public at large perceives them, meaning significant deviations will likely be decried against, especially if the public finds the deviations to make such a creature less enjoyable.

John Rambo is a fictional character. He is not real. He wasn't like the movie version in his original source anyway. And yet, you would certainly expect most people to reject the Electric Boogaloo version.

[Amazon]

Because that's how the public at large perceives them, meaning significant deviations will likely be decried against, especially if the public finds the deviations to make such a creature less enjoyable.

John Rambo is a fictional character. He is not real. He wasn't like the movie version in his original source anyway. And yet, you would certainly expect most people to reject the Electric Boogaloo version.

We are not talking about characters we are tlaking about creatures.

To quote Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw:

"And there's something terribly weird about the standard fantasy setting, not least of which the fact that the phrase "standard fantasy setting" can be uttered without irony. Look at this, we're a civilization so steeped in escapism that we've managed to find mundanity in something that doesn't exist and never will, whatever your Otherkin friend might say. Why is it accepted fact that elves fire bows and arrows and commune with the trees? That was Tolkien's thing. Without him, elves would be just about qualified to sell Rice Krispies. And he made dwarves all have braided beards and wield axes. Real dwarves don't do that; they get hired by Lucasfilm or take corporate office jobs because they're an equal opportunities bonanza. Are we all but children playing forever on the same swing set while J.R.R. is the grumpy dad watching from the park bench and trying not to get aroused?"

[Maryring]

No. Not really. If someone were to talk to me about Twilight, I'd still argue it's a poorly written book. It still presents a creepy, possessive, abusive stalker as someone to be admired. While I never bothered to actively go around to tell people how bad it is, I won't recommend the books to anyone either.

[Lethologica]

re: Peelee, Amazon:
Since my comments about backlash appear to have triggered this line of conversation, let me point out that while Stephanie Meyer does not have the power to 'ruin' vampires as a whole, I doubt the critics would agree that the issue with Meyer's vampires is merely that they are nonstandard.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Dracula wasn't allergic to the sunlight in the original book.

[Rater202]

Dracula wasn't allergic to the sunlight in the original book.

He couldn't use his powers during Daylight hours, except during exact noon when he cast no shadows.

That's close enough.

[S@tanicoaldo]

He couldn't use his powers during Daylight hours, except during exact noon when he cast no shadows.

That's close enough.

But he didn't die and turn into a pile of ashes.

[Cikomyr]

But he didn't die and turn into a pile of ashes.

He was an epic-level vampire. He took some Resistance to Sunlight feats on the way

[S@tanicoaldo]

He's also not killed with a stake, they pierced his heart with a Bowie knife. :<

I used to think the wood in the heart disturbed the dark energies that keep the vampire "alive", boy color me disappointed.

[Blackhawk748]

But he didn't die and turn into a pile of ashes.

Nope, but it was a rather large inconvenience. Honestly not sure where the "destroyed by sunlight" thing came from in the first place, as AFAIK, that wasn't how it worked in the Eastern European myths, which Dracula is inspired from.

He's also not killed with a stake, they pierced his heart with a Bowie knife. :<

I used to think the wood in the heart disturbed the dark energies that keep the vampire "alive", boy color me disappointed.

The "wives" got staked, with legit wooden stakes, so thats where that came from. In Dracula, you just gotta ram a pointy thing into their heart and then decapitate them *que Brutal Legend gif*

[S@tanicoaldo]

Nope, but it was a rather large inconvenience. Honestly not sure where the "destroyed by sunlight" thing came from in the first place, as AFAIK, that wasn't how it worked in the Eastern European myths, which Dracula is inspired from.

It was the classic movie about count Orlok "Nosferatu", who used to be Dracula but got changed because copyrigth stuff(Copyrigth... Copyrigth never changes!)



I really like that movie because Orlok possesses none of his predecessor's aristocratic charm or seductiveness. He resembles historical folklore accounts of vampires, which were described as walking corpses inhabited by a demonic presence. And for some reason I love his outfit ^^

[Zmeoaice]

Nope, but it was a rather large inconvenience. Honestly not sure where the "destroyed by sunlight" thing came from in the first place, as AFAIK, that wasn't how it worked in the Eastern European myths, which Dracula is inspired from.



The "wives" got staked, with legit wooden stakes, so thats where that came from. In Dracula, you just gotta ram a pointy thing into their heart and then decapitate them *que Brutal Legend gif*

The first work where vampires were killed by sunlight was the 1922 German Expressionist film, Nosferatu.

Which is why I don't mind (and in fact would prefer) vampires that don't die in the sunlight. However making them sparkle is just ridiculous. They're monstrous creatures of the night, not a Disney fairy.

[Blackhawk748]

It was the classic movie about count Orlok "Nosferatu", who used to be Dracula but got changed because copyrigth stuff(Copyrigth... Copyrigth never changes!)

*pic*

I really like that movie because Orlok possesses none of his predecessor's aristocratic charm or seductiveness. He resembles historical folklore accounts of vampires, which were described as walking corpses inhabited by a demonic presence. And for some reason I love his outfit ^^

Cuz his outfit is classy as all hell.

The first work where vampires were killed by sunlight was the 1922 German Expressionist film, Nosferatu.

Which is why I don't mind (and in fact would prefer) vampires that don't die in the sunlight. However making them sparkle is just ridiculous. They're monstrous creatures of the night, not a Disney fairy.

I agree, i prefer my non flammable Vamps, but i mostly want them vicious, blood sucking and probably scheming. But not sparkly. Fey can sparkle. Then again, Fey can do whatever they want.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Cuz his outfit is classy as all hell. Fey can sparkle.

It sure is, to bad his face is the kind of face only a mother can love. :/

Weird my fey are horrible demons who feed on dreams and lost hopes, and give the most AWESOME parties.

[Blackhawk748]

It sure is, to bad his face is the kind of face only a mother can love. :/

Weird my fey are horrible demons who feed on dreams and lost hopes, and give the most AWESOME parties.

Thats the joy of Fey, pretty much any version is correct.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Thats the joy of Fey, pretty much any version is correct.

But I think the point the others are tring to make and i agree is that such thing is valid for all forms of fictional creatures.

For exemple what is a troll for you? (Besides an Ahole in the internet)

[Blackhawk748]

But I think the point the others are tring to make and i agree is that such thing is valid for all forms of fictional creatures.

For exemple what is a troll for you? (Besides an Ahole in the internet)

One of two things, the Grendel style (can't be in sunlight, is big strong and ugly) and the DnD style (big strong and ugly and regenerates unless burned.

Im fine with changing a thing, but it reaches a point where its been changed so much that you have to make a new name for it. See Peelee's example of the Drow that actually are Dwarves.

[S@tanicoaldo]

One of two things, the Grendel style (can't be in sunlight, is big strong and ugly) and the DnD style (big strong and ugly and regenerates unless burned.

Im fine with changing a thing, but it reaches a point where its been changed so much that you have to make a new name for it. See Peelee's example of the Drow that actually are Dwarves.

Oh boy you're in for a treat:

Spoiler

Show

They are all different and all equally valid.

[Peelee]

We are not talking about characters we are tlaking about creatures.

Again, what is the functional difference here?

[Dr.Samurai]

A troll can be anything. It can be a food you eat, a tool you use, a machine that drives you around, a natural weather phenomenon, a monster, a type of quadcopter, a mathematical equation, etc.

These are all equally valid examples of trolls.

And vampires actually.

[Lethologica]

Welcome to descriptivism, where everything's made up and the rules don't matter. (Which is partly true, but incomplete.)

[Rynjin]

A troll can be anything. It can be a food you eat, a tool you use, a machine that drives you around, a natural weather phenomenon, a monster, a type of quadcopter, a mathematical equation, etc.

These are all equally valid examples of trolls.

And vampires actually.

No, they're not. Words have context and meaning, and while both may change over time there needs to be some sort of consensus for that to happen.

In this case, the cultural meme of what a vampire (or a troll, or whatever) is always has some sort of canon core, the kernel that all lore of that type agrees on. For vampires, it's that they're undead, have some negative relationship with sunlight, feed off humans, and have an underlying connotation as being darkly seductive/representing the darker side of human lust.

By that token, by the by, Twilight vampires certainly fall under that loose canon and hits every single one of those main beats, though they shirk some of the more established accoutrements and established intensities of certain of those traits.

[Dragonus45]

Who's gender-swapping a main character?

I misspoke, they simply took the formulae and changed the gender of the main character, but they didn't swap the gender of any characters I know of.

[Rynjin]

I misspoke, they simply took the formulae and changed the gender of the main character, but they didn't swap the gender of any characters I know of.

I'm still confused as to what you're talking about, since you never mentioned anything by name, and nothing like that has ever been mentioned in this thread that I know of.

[Lethologica]

I'm still confused as to what you're talking about, since you never mentioned anything by name, and nothing like that has ever been mentioned in this thread that I know of.

I think he means that Wonder Woman is just like a Marvel movie except that it features a female lead, which he views as not particularly important to the film's Academy case.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Let's say you read the novel First Blood. Then you went to see the movie First Blood. Then you go see Rambo 2: Electric Boogaloo, which was previously titled Santa With Muscles, but Hulk Hogan dropped out so Stallone bought the rights and put John Rambo in the title role, but otherwise left the original script intact.

The novel and the movie would have different interpretations of the character. The second movie has a ridiculously rapid departure of the character. He is a fictional character, but he is not being presented as he was in either the book or the movie. Now, if you greatly enjoyed the book and the movie, it's fair to say you would very likely not enjoy Electric Boogaloo due the radical change in character, is it not?

Is this actually what happened?




Because that would explain a lot.

[Vinyadan]

Concerning vampires, just cut their feet off and fill their butts with onions.