Twilight is substandard fare and all the books the follow

Post Reply New Topic

As you can see from the post I don't like what S.M writes because of some weird garbage she writes, rewriting what was something increditbly because such as "love" and turning into lust filled adventure, with pedofiles and stalkers with the supernatural element to give the concept of the "mary sue" a whole new level crap. Anyone who tries to defend it is mentally sick and should be place in a asylum.

For your viewing pleasure, I provided a video for all those whom enjoy a good laugh.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1glNuQiE77E[/youtube]

Personally, I do like vampires, but the reason I don't like Twilight because I dislike the modern vampire concept of "vampires being misunderstood creatures that need to drink blood". I perfer the classic vampires that are cold-hearted killers that feed on innocent victims and have to follow a bunch of rules to survive, because those vampires are actually scary and I'm one who likes horror.

I don't like Twilight for a very different reason: I got bored with it. About a third of the way in, just when it was pretty much saying that Edward Cullen was a vampire, I lost interest. If I wanted to read something involving teenage angst and vampires, I'd read Doctor Who: The Curse of Fenric. Or, better still, I'd watch the actual TV story the book was based on.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fMB5TwYb7U[/youtube]

Oh, and the book Carpe Jugulum by Terry Pratchett. Oh, there's teenage angst, but there's also geriatric angst as well. Not to mention witches and the Discworld equivalent of Smurfs on steroids. And one of the most dysfunctional vampire families in a book.

But I am a little surprised at one of your allegations, DenzenGrey. I don't understand the pedophile bit. Bella's 17 in the original novel (I dunno where you live, but in Australia, age of consent is 16), and, although I know Edward's meant to be over a century old, it speaks more to me about a major age gap relationship than anything else. I would imagine, then, that you would feel the same way about the relationship between a nineteen-year old human, and an alien over 900 years old?

In any case, vampires, unless they have a very good twist from standard (both old and modern) folklore, bore me.

I don't really see twilight as a vampire story.

It's a love story between two people who can't be together interspersed with random slight acts of violence. Pretty much the same as Romeo and Juliet.

For me, it's the first book that I've read which succeeds in recapturing the emotional heartburn that teenagers feel when love or infatuation goes wrong. Of course, since I don't generally read romance books, it might be quite a common topic.

Trying to treat it as a vampire book/film is just wrong.

Want vampires, go see Dracula or even better, Nosferatu 1922 or 1979. No, I wouldn't recommend the curse of Fenric as a Vampire film/book. Other good vampire flicks... Martin by George Romeo, Salem's lot (the book is better than the shows).

If you want borderline vampirism, try "Love at first bite".

My favourite vampire books of all time are Brian Lumley's Necroscope series. Those vampires wouldn't simply eat Edward Cullen for a snack, they'd use his skin to make a flying manta-beast or simply line the interior of their aerie with it.

A friend picked up the first book and left it at that. He said that it read like bad fan fiction.

I took him at his word, and haven't been tempted to see for myself

I feel left out because I've never read it. It sounds absolutely terrible, but I want to find that out for myself.

I'm going to borrow a copy from someone at school, just so I can see how awful it really is.

I read all the twilight books in about a week because I'm an avid reader irregardless of how much I like or dislike a book. I outgrew my vampire reading phase years ago, Interview with a Vampire was probably the last vampire book that I found at least amusing - the following ones by Anne Rice seemed to bludgeon this topic to death. Twilight was remarkably dull yet I read on in the slight hopes that the characters did something cool enough to merit all the praise and hype I kept hearing. Sadly, no. While the masculine part of me dreamed of explosions, of Edward snapping out of the "argh! I'm so dangerous you can never love my mysterious goth appeal" and turning into a psychotic blood sucking machine, or at least some battle that didn't involve lame vampy powers.

Jacob winding up as a werewolf was so obvious that he might as well wrote it on his forehead. Again, I was hoping for some epic beat down between the vampires and werewolves rather then the sap fest that followed. The soul mate concept was aggravating, their telepathy with fellow werewolves seemed like a remarkably lazy way of getting around the communication issues, and again you'd think that some huge bad ass werewolves - teenager werewolves, no less! - would be much cooler.

The real scary thing is not how much the vampire/werewolf misunderstood star crossed lovers theme has become so cliche and predictable, but that a genre aimed at teenagers is so readily applauded by ADULTS. I'm talking about thirty to forty year old's at work that are constantly gushing over the series. New Moon making it's movie debut was one of the most talked about events at my work, to the point I was tempted to shout at my co-workers " PLEASE GOD MAKE THE HURTING STOP! ENOUGH ABOUT ROMANTIC CHICK FLICKS!"

I'm so glad that I'm not the only one that is annoyed by this topic. Thanks for giving me an outlet.

The Twilight series is a teenage equivalent of those cheap, "New York Times Bestseller" novels you find at a bookstore for at least a dollar. 'Nuff said.

The only time I read a Twilight book. I thought it was some sort of parody. There was no way someone could write so poorly and create such wooden characters and have their books considered to be "sensations".

I also dislike the fact that many of my favorite bands have been participating in the soundtracks of the movies. While some (Bon Iver, St. Vincent, Grizzly Bear) I can understand because of the money that came with it (you can't pay the bills with critical acclaim), others (Muse, Thom Yorke, Death Cab for Cutie) are baffling, considering how bloody rich they are. Why can't they leave my indie/alternative music alone and find some more suitable emo prattle for their soundtracks?

I read an article about Stephanie Mayer today. says she's mormon and there's no sex, drugs or violence in any of the books.

so I just thought I'm gonna stick to the new Philip Roth then.

They're on my "would quite like to read from curiosity, but only buy second-hand so as to compensate the author as little as possible" list, along with such classics as Battlefield Earth and The Da Vinci Code.