Twilight.

[Nom]

^ Which begs the point, Have you read them?

 

 

 

Don't know who this is addressed to so I won't answer, but whether or not someone has read them is not a point. It makes no difference. We have quite a few articles and reviews cited here whose authors HAVE read the books, and their opinions are concurrent. It is a breakdown of logic to conclude that someone who has not read the books in their entirety using the SAME arguments is less credible.

 

 

 

I have not read Brisingr, but I don't need to to know that Paolini still has problems with purple prose, needless fluff, cardboard characters, and massive Gary-Stuism. Nor do I need to read it to know that he has improved in some of those areas, because people who have read the books have reported so through presentation of instances in the book. Citations, if you will.

 

 

 

To take an example out of Brisingr: Roran has a 200-odd kill count at the end of a certain battle. Did I read this? No. Is it still utterly ridiculous and the mark of a Gary-Stu? Yes.

[Hawks]

It is a point, people are entitled to their opinion but honestly, don't knock the books if you haven't bothered to read them.

[Powman3]

I'm not even gonna see it.

 

 

 

My sister loved the book, but she completely despised the movie.

 

 

 

NO, she's not a stupid horny teen chic, for all of you idiots.

 

 

 

Anyway, this book and movie will never compare to LoTR and Harry Potter. Ever.

[DarkX99]

Never saw the movie and not planning on reading the books.

 

 

 

In my school, girls seem to love it and guys love to hate it.

 

I go with love to hate it.

 

My opinion's not much since I haven't seen or read. :-#

[aquariusman]

 

 

 

A little more off-topic, I want to read the new Artemis Fowl book, but I might have read it already. After the eternity code I know I read like 2 other books but I don't know the names or what chronological order they are in.

 

 

 

 

 

This is Wongtong's friend. Argue time. :D

 

 

 

Ewuh, Justin isn't good looking. Plus, he can't sing for crap - sounds like a total girl. He isn't an 'Abusive' boyfriend, at all. He's over protective, yes, but his girlfriend is being followed around by a savage vampire desperately wanting to kill her, and most of the time she could probably injure herself, so duh. Course he's gonna be protective, he wants her to survive. That so bad?

 

It is most definitely a bestseller book, actually. And yes, i do have time to read them. Because they DO have plots. But of course you wouldn't know that because you obviously haven't read them, so therefore you have no idea whatsoever you're really talking about.

 

 

 

 

 

Six posts in a row, and this is the only one I can consider an actual contribution to the thread. There is something called an edit button right beside the quote button.

 

 

 

"Ewuh, Justin isn't good looking. Plus, he can't sing for crap - sounds like a total girl. He isn't an 'Abusive' boyfriend, at all. "

 

 

 

Wait, when did we say Justin Timberlake was was an abusive boyfriend? Never. I ask of you to proofread, and more importantly be aware of your pronouns.

 

 

 

 

 

For the actual argument, Edward is completely over protective. Worry over whether your girlfriend is going to trip and snap her pretty little neck is beside the point; I don't think she injured herself at anytime in the book.

 

 

 

Also, there are 5 key elements of a book, as far as I'm concerned. Theme, Plot, Setting, Character, Style. I think it is clear that there is no solid Theme in Twilight, at best it's be careful around people who vant to suck your blood. Style. There is nothing above ordinary about SM's Style in the book Twilight, I found it quite boring really. At best you can say her purple prose and overly-detailed descriptions of things completely unimportant to developing any of the other elements Style. Setting comes next, as like I said, there are no beautiful descriptions, wonderful metaphors, sneaky puns, or anything else worth noting to say that Setting stands out as an element of Twilight.

 

 

 

Style, Theme, and Setting are crossed out, so surely Plot and Character MUST be prime elements in the story. No, actually, they aren't. The so called "Plot" of this 400-page book is:

 

 

 

Girl meets strange boy

 

Strange boy turns out to be vampire.

 

They mess around for 200 pages.

 

Another vampire comes into town and kidnaps girl.

 

Boy and family rescue girl.

 

Happily ever after.

 

 

 

I do not think that this plot, spread over 400 pages, is even worthy of a description that long. Most of the book is spent with Bella drooling over Edward's perfection in school, then them just staring at each other, Bella captivated by his perfection, Edward drooling over how good she smells to eat.

 

 

 

But Bella and Edward are such wonderful characters! How could you possibly say that Character is not a key contributing element to the book!

 

 

 

I can say it, because there is next to no Character development in the book. Halfway through the book, I was predicting every move Bella and Edward made. Not that they made any moves unless they were forced to stop drooling over each other. You see, Bella is a shy, average girl. That's about it. She has good intentions but just wants to have some fun every now and then. That is all there is to Bella's character. Edward on the other hand is a stalker loner boyfriend who's lived for decades. Did I mention he's a vampire? He watches Bella sleep at night, is pretty much her shadow, and she is the only person he talks to outside of his Vampire family. There no point even mentioning the other characters, because they may as well not be mentioned in the book. Bella and Edward are too busy starting into each others' eyes to notice or care about the people around them.

 

 

 

So, is there anything that makes Twilight a good book? Yes, I mean I guess it just HAS to be good if every teenage girl is absolutely crazy about it. And teenagers know everything. amirite?

 

 

 

Oh yes, and have you read Twilight again? I'd like to know if it's even possible to bear reading it twice.

[Dreamtongirl]

This is Wongtong's friend. Argue time. :D

 

 

 

Ewuh, Justin isn't good looking. Plus, he can't sing for crap - sounds like a total girl. He isn't an 'Abusive' boyfriend, at all. He's over protective, yes, but his girlfriend is being followed around by a savage vampire desperately wanting to kill her, and most of the time she could probably injure herself, so duh. Course he's gonna be protective, he wants her to survive. That so bad?

 

It is most definitely a bestseller book, actually. And yes, i do have time to read them. Because they DO have plots. But of course you wouldn't know that because you obviously haven't read them, so therefore you have no idea whatsoever you're really talking about.

 

 

 

Let me point you to this quote, or rather, wave it in front of your face with large epilepsy-inducing letters:

 

 

 

Actually there are many things wrong with Edward despite the descriptions of his ultimate perfection. Im reminded of medication advertisments that extol their amazing products and then list off noxious side effects in a speedy, reluctant whisper. Try Edward Cullen today and feel the sparkle return in your life. Relax and never make a decision again; hell think for you. Never worry about being gangraped in a dark street; Edward Cullen can whisk you away in style!

 

*tinkling piano music*

 

Studies have shown side effects may include nauseaspousalabusebloodlossmanicdepressivethoughtsanentiref*ckingwolfpackonyourassandbruisingaftersex. If Edward Cullen disappears, go to Italy or call us at the number on your screen. Enjoy life. Enjoy Edward Cullen.

 

 

 

And can you honestly say that "I like to watch you sleep" is not an extremely creepy thing to say, much less do? And then there's the bruising after sex bit. No, that's not abusive AT ALL.

 

 

 

No one disputed that it's a bestseller. As a matter of fact, Twilight was the first book to knock Deathly Hallows off the #1 bestseller spot. But it's not a bestseller on literary merit, not one bit. Which is the scary part.

 

 

 

Arguments can't simply be thrown out because the person making them hasn't read the book. Faulty logic, there. Even more faulty is the assumption that he hasn't read the book just because he disagrees with you and so is OBVIOUSLY wrong. As a matter of fact, the literary merit of these books is pretty much undisputable. From a critical standpoint, they're bad. Really bad.

 

 

 

 

 

I didn't mean Justin was an abusive boyfriend, genius. I had done with the Justin topic. Was talking about Edward there. Okay, bruising after the sex bit isn't really the point. They both agreed to do that, and Edward didn't mean to give her bruises. He'd do anything she wants, and that's what she wanted, so he didn't resist. Plus, he bet himself up for it afterwards.

 

 

 

"For the actual argument, Edward is completely over protective. Worry over whether your girlfriend is going to trip and snap her pretty little neck is beside the point; I don't think she injured herself at anytime in the book."

 

 

 

Know why? Because Edward was there, funny that! For one example, if he wasn't there in the first book, when the van was coming straight at bella, she would be dead if he hadn't stopped it.

 

 

 

It is a love story, also. You should have known that to begin with. So why read it if you're gonna trash it, eh?

[Nom]

It is a love story, also. You should have known that to begin with. So why read it if you're gonna trash it, eh?

 

 

 

It is a point, people are entitled to their opinion but honestly, don't knock the books if you haven't bothered to read them.

 

 

 

CONTRADICTION.

 

 

 

STOP. This is not arguing, it is pure pettiness. Instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and throwing up strawmen the size of a [bleep]ing Titan, actually respond to the arguments made.

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, bruising after the sex bit isn't really the point. They both agreed to do that, and Edward didn't mean to give her bruises. He'd do anything she wants, and that's what she wanted, so he didn't resist. Plus, he bet himself up for it afterwards.

 

 

 

You just played right into that spoof ad. Don't worry, Edward is just so AMAZINGLY beautiful and Adonis-like that anything resembling a problem in a real relationship is completely fine when he does it. All relationships are healthy with Edward Cullen!

 

 

 

The van was a blatant plot device. You can argue that it is an example of how perfect and sparkly-awesome Ed is, I can argue that SM showcased some bad writing. Woohoo.

[Dreamtongirl]

"You just played right into that spoof ad. Don't worry, Edward is just so AMAZINGLY beautiful and Adonis-like that anything resembling a problem in a real relationship is completely fine when he does it. All relationships are healthy with Edward Cullen!"

 

 

 

Woah honey, Itza book remember. :-s Not every girl wants an Edward in their relationship. And not every girl knows they're going to get an Edward in their relationship.

[AdioLovesSquall]

"You just played right into that spoof ad. Don't worry, Edward is just so AMAZINGLY beautiful and Adonis-like that anything resembling a problem in a real relationship is completely fine when he does it. All relationships are healthy with Edward Cullen!"

 

 

 

Woah honey, Itza book remember. :-s Not every girl wants an Edward in their relationship. And not every girl knows they're going to get an Edward in their relationship.

 

 

 

Haven't you heard? Every girl who likes Twilight wants an Edward. Every guy who likes it wants one too. Also, Twilight's purpose, obviously, was to be compared to books like LOTR and Harry Potter, despite...major differences in....everything. Regardless, I guess we're rest assured now that Twilight is indeed serious business.

 

 

 

oh please i loathe all 3 of the mentioned series(ES?!): yeah twilight sucks, lotr sucks, harry potter sucks, but, i don't argue on and on about it. stick to your books, let them stick to their books - as i do you guys without picking apart every book series mentioned. its books, if they want to waste their time reading 400 some pages about edward and bella cuddling, okay, then let them. i highly doubt books such as artemis fowl or harry potter really offer any progression from that, so i think, but, forget about it. cause this is getting rather dumb lol.

[Dreamtongirl]

Ah, he has a point. You don't like either of the series, though? Odd.

[Jaziek]

"You just played right into that spoof ad. Don't worry, Edward is just so AMAZINGLY beautiful and Adonis-like that anything resembling a problem in a real relationship is completely fine when he does it. All relationships are healthy with Edward Cullen!"

 

 

 

Woah honey, Itza book remember. :-s Not every girl wants an Edward in their relationship. And not every girl knows they're going to get an Edward in their relationship.

 

 

 

Haven't you heard? Every girl who likes Twilight wants an Edward. Every guy who likes it wants one too. Also, Twilight's purpose, obviously, was to be compared to books like LOTR and Harry Potter, despite...major differences in....everything. Regardless, I guess we're rest assured now that Twilight is indeed serious business.

 

 

 

oh please i loathe all 3 of the mentioned series(ES?!): yeah twilight sucks, lotr sucks, harry potter sucks, but, i don't argue on and on about it. stick to your books, let them stick to their books - as i do you guys without picking apart every book series mentioned. its books, if they want to waste their time reading 400 some pages about edward and bella cuddling, okay, then let them. i highly doubt books such as artemis fowl or harry potter really offer any progression from that, so i think, but, forget about it. cause this is getting rather dumb lol.

 

 

 

so please, your literary highness, tell us which books ARENT crap.

[AdioLovesSquall]

"You just played right into that spoof ad. Don't worry, Edward is just so AMAZINGLY beautiful and Adonis-like that anything resembling a problem in a real relationship is completely fine when he does it. All relationships are healthy with Edward Cullen!"

 

 

 

Woah honey, Itza book remember. :-s Not every girl wants an Edward in their relationship. And not every girl knows they're going to get an Edward in their relationship.

 

 

 

Haven't you heard? Every girl who likes Twilight wants an Edward. Every guy who likes it wants one too. Also, Twilight's purpose, obviously, was to be compared to books like LOTR and Harry Potter, despite...major differences in....everything. Regardless, I guess we're rest assured now that Twilight is indeed serious business.

 

 

 

oh please i loathe all 3 of the mentioned series(ES?!): yeah twilight sucks, lotr sucks, harry potter sucks, but, i don't argue on and on about it. stick to your books, let them stick to their books - as i do you guys without picking apart every book series mentioned. its books, if they want to waste their time reading 400 some pages about edward and bella cuddling, okay, then let them. i highly doubt books such as artemis fowl or harry potter really offer any progression from that, so i think, but, forget about it. cause this is getting rather dumb lol.

 

 

 

so please, your literary highness, tell us which books ARENT crap.

 

 

 

everything on my shelf, you knave. i am very glad that you recognize my superiority though, it's always good to get recognition for my hard, strenuous years of reading. ;)

[Nom]

I would love to see you explain exactly why LOTR and HP are bad. Instead of labeling every popular piece of literature as sucky, back up your claims.

 

 

 

Also . . .

 

 

 

Woah honey, Itza book remember. Not every girl wants an Edward in their relationship. And not every girl knows they're going to get an Edward in their relationship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

They disagree.

[AdioLovesSquall]

I would love to see you explain exactly why LOTR and HP are bad. Instead of labeling every popular piece of literature as sucky, back up your claims.

 

 

 

Also . . .

 

 

 

I adore Paradise Lost, Kafka's work, H.P Lovecraft's work, Don Quixote (it's even better when read in Spanish), Faulkner's work, Tolstoy's work, and Heart of Darkness, amongst others. Last time I checked, these were pretty popular pieces of literature...but I guess I've been in a grand delusion, eh? Anyways, if you really want an explanation, I'll prepare you a self-made one...instead of looking up "Harry Potter Sucks" and using others arguments for it, and pretending I've read/know the books. Even worse is outright stating you haven't read it and then calling it bad. At least have the decency to read it...

 

 

 

Btw, 2 girls really constitutes "every girl" huh?

[Nom]

When did I say I never read the books? Oh . . . I didn't. The only book I have criticized and not read is Brisingr, and I've read the first two books so my general complaints should withstand even the lame "you haven't read it so you can't criticize it" line. As far as the articles go, the ones from A-S are quite familiar to me seeing how I've been a user on the site since summer.

 

 

 

Yay, you've read the classics. Good for you. Mentioning them now as an attempt to discredit me in what I said in response to the only books you had previously mentioned is a poor way to go about arguing. It also doesn't work to name drop what many see as literary gods by pure name association.

 

 

 

Google. There are thousands of pictures of girls just like them. For the sake of forum code and my own time, I posted one example.

[AdioLovesSquall]

When did I say I never read the books? Oh . . . I didn't. The only book I have criticized and not read is Brisingr, and I've read the first two books so my general complaints should withstand even the lame "you haven't read it so you can't criticize it" line. As far as the articles go, the ones from A-S are quite familiar to me seeing how I've been a user on the site since summer.

 

 

 

Yay, you've read the classics. Good for you. Mentioning them now as an attempt to discredit me in what I said in response to the only books you had previously mentioned is a poor way to go about arguing. It also doesn't work to name drop what many see as literary gods by pure name association.

 

 

 

Google. There are thousands of pictures of girls just like them. For the sake of forum code and my own time, I posted one example.

 

 

 

1. Wasn't directed at you, but alright (but I understand how you might've thought it could've been directed at you). Good for you, you gave it a chance, moreso than most of the people discrediting the book can say. I commend you, I really do.

 

 

 

2. I think discrediting a classic (which that in itself usually means its a rather popular piece) is a much stronger way of "hating the popular", much better than calling a children's book sh*t (thus the strong response when I called LOTR [cabbage]!). I think I attacked your point quite fine, unless you were looking for something in the sense of modern literature? Regardless, I could list every book I enjoy from these "literary gods" - and I'd still be saying the same thing. I don't know what more you want from me?

 

 

 

3. In your own words, that "is a poor way to go about arguing"? I think so. "Every girl who reads Twilight wants an Edward" is quite the point to prove, but it's simply not true. I could agree that many do, but not all.

[Nom]

1. Okay, cool. I still hold that an argument is not automatically dicredited simply because the presenter hasn't read the books, because that just leads to stupid strawmen paradoxes like the example I posted earlier.

 

 

 

2. All I'm saying is that you never made a mention of any other book that you actually liked, but I guess since now you did I am disproven. Though it was a rather careless use of "every" on my part. Also, many people would associate these books with "awesome" simply because they're classics, without having read them. Consequently I'm not a fan of bringing them into a debate about a more modern book.

 

 

 

3. Another bad use of an all-inclusive . . . I'm not really trying to prove that every girl wants an Edward, only to bring to point to some people's attention that there ARE girls out there who are disturbingly obsessed over him and they aren't a minority. Which was the implication from the post I quoted.

[aquariusman]

 

I didn't mean Justin was an abusive boyfriend, genius. I had done with the Justin topic. Was talking about Edward there. Okay, bruising after the sex bit isn't really the point. They both agreed to do that, and Edward didn't mean to give her bruises. He'd do anything she wants, and that's what she wanted, so he didn't resist. Plus, he bet himself up for it afterwards.

 

 

 

"For the actual argument, Edward is completely over protective. Worry over whether your girlfriend is going to trip and snap her pretty little neck is beside the point; I don't think she injured herself at anytime in the book."

 

 

 

Know why? Because Edward was there, funny that! For one example, if he wasn't there in the first book, when the van was coming straight at bella, she would be dead if he hadn't stopped it.

 

 

 

It is a love story, also. You should have known that to begin with. So why read it if you're gonna trash it, eh?

 

 

 

The van isn't an example of Edward saving Bella from her clumsiness, it's him saving her from an out-of-control van. It's essentially what introduced him to her, and made her realize that something other than being anti-social is up with him. Still, name any place in the book where Bella's own clumsiness puts her in danger. Then name the times Edward has put her in danger: if you go by Edward's point of view, that is every single moment they are together. I remember 3 times when Edward actually saved Bella. The van, whe Bella was followed by the four men, and then the whole deal with the other vampires (His fault by the way). Now, the van and men are actually completely unrealted incidents of misfortune. The vampires could also be considered bad timing, or just Edward's fault. Also, his brother and sister must be very bad at tracking if Bella managed to escape in a washroom.

 

 

 

Also, I knew you weren't calling Justin an abusive boyfriend, I was making a joke on your poor use of pronouns.

 

 

 

Why read it if I'm going to trash it? Curiosity killed the cat. I also mentioned before that while I was reading the book, I actually liked it. However, my brain was screaming when I bothered to try and think of the book as a novel and not a bed time story. Oh, and if the annoying fan girls at my school are pissing me off with their drooling over the book, I feel obligated to make them realize that the book does not deserve to be called a piece of literature.

[AdioLovesSquall]

1. Okay, cool. I still hold that an argument is not automatically dicredited simply because the presenter hasn't read the books, because that just leads to stupid strawmen paradoxes like the example I posted earlier.

 

 

 

2. All I'm saying is that you never made a mention of any other book that you actually liked, but I guess since now you did I am disproven. Though it was a rather careless use of "every" on my part. Also, many people would associate these books with "awesome" simply because they're classics, without having read them. Consequently I'm not a fan of bringing them into a debate about a more modern book.

 

 

 

3. Another bad use of an all-inclusive . . . I'm not really trying to prove that every girl wants an Edward, only to bring to point to some people's attention that there ARE girls out there who are disturbingly obsessed over him and they aren't a minority. Which was the implication from the post I quoted.

 

 

 

1. I guess this is where we disagree, but maybe it's better to never say.

 

 

 

2. Well, I guess I can see your point about overflowing it with classics (although, I would've stated some 'non-classic' book series if I was arguing in terms of something like that), but I was just doing that because we were speaking of popularity. In regards to stuff where popularity is a non factor, Italo Calvino's "If On A Winter's Night A Traveler", James C (the name escapes me atm) Shogun, Steven Erikson's Malazan series and some of Stephen R. Donaldson's books are all rather good.

 

 

 

3. I agree, lots of them do. I find it rather creepy too, but, that's that.

 

 

 

aquariusman: Good, good. You gave it a chance and you even enjoyed yourself!

[Dreamtongirl]

 

I didn't mean Justin was an abusive boyfriend, genius. I had done with the Justin topic. Was talking about Edward there. Okay, bruising after the sex bit isn't really the point. They both agreed to do that, and Edward didn't mean to give her bruises. He'd do anything she wants, and that's what she wanted, so he didn't resist. Plus, he bet himself up for it afterwards.

 

 

 

"For the actual argument, Edward is completely over protective. Worry over whether your girlfriend is going to trip and snap her pretty little neck is beside the point; I don't think she injured herself at anytime in the book."

 

 

 

Know why? Because Edward was there, funny that! For one example, if he wasn't there in the first book, when the van was coming straight at bella, she would be dead if he hadn't stopped it.

 

 

 

It is a love story, also. You should have known that to begin with. So why read it if you're gonna trash it, eh?

 

 

 

The van isn't an example of Edward saving Bella from her clumsiness, it's him saving her from an out-of-control van. It's essentially what introduced him to her, and made her realize that something other than being anti-social is up with him. Still, name any place in the book where Bella's own clumsiness puts her in danger. Then name the times Edward has put her in danger: if you go by Edward's point of view, that is every single moment they are together. I remember 3 times when Edward actually saved Bella. The van, whe Bella was followed by the four men, and then the whole deal with the other vampires (His fault by the way). Now, the van and men are actually completely unrealted incidents of misfortune. The vampires could also be considered bad timing, or just Edward's fault. Also, his brother and sister must be very bad at tracking if Bella managed to escape in a washroom.

 

 

 

Also, I knew you weren't calling Justin an abusive boyfriend, I was making a joke on your poor use of pronouns.

 

 

 

Why read it if I'm going to trash it? Curiosity killed the cat. I also mentioned before that while I was reading the book, I actually liked it. However, my brain was screaming when I bothered to try and think of the book as a novel and not a bed time story. Oh, and if the annoying fan girls at my school are pissing me off with their drooling over the book, I feel obligated to make them realize that the book does not deserve to be called a piece of literature.

 

 

 

Mm, i really don't like your arguments anymore.. >___>

 

Bella's plenty clumsy, and would've injured or probably killed herself many times if she didn't have someone watching out for her. Remember when she was with Jake in new moon? And she loses control of the bike and gets a big gash in her forehead? Or the many times she trips and inflicts minor injuries on herself. When she jumps from the cliff, but doesn't think of the water underneath - she would've died if Jake hadn't pulled her out. Yes, Bella is also always in danger of Edward killing her, so what? Everyone knows that. Your point?

 

 

 

"your poor use of pronouns." Shut up. -.- Your spelling isn't too great yourself.

 

 

 

"I feel obligated to make them realize that the book does not deserve to be called a piece of literature" You're pathetic. They obviously don't care about your opinion on it. You don't like it, yes, we've gathered that already. You want good literature? Go read classics. Other than supposedly LOTR and HP. Go read Wuthering Heights and some Shakespeare. Then you can say your opinions on them.

[Nadril]

Your spelling isn't too great yourself.

 

 

 

Might I ask what exactly he has misspelled here?

 

 

 

 

 

"I feel obligated to make them realize that the book does not deserve to be called a piece of literature" You're pathetic. They obviously don't care about your opinion on it. You don't like it, yes, we've gathered that already. You want good literature? Go read classics. Other than supposedly LOTR and HP. Go read Wuthering Heights and some Shakespeare. Then you can say your opinions on them.

 

 

 

Hehe, so wait? You're saying that it isn't good literature? What are you arguing about then?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways, continue on.

[saif]

woah what the hell.

 

 

 

I just browsed through Movies forum today and was surprised that my thread got so big :lol:

 

 

 

anyways most people say twilight sucks. get over it.

 

 

 

and as usual the book is WAY better then the movie. Well at least that's what i heard.

 

 

 

I don't read :)

[raven_gaurd0]

EAT IT. EAT IT. EAT IT.

 

 

 

Twilight was just...if your brain has been trained to pin literary mechanics and follow the plot of a story, the book was torture.

 

 

 

Movie. Right.

 

 

 

Well, I went out to see it because of my girlfriends garish desires, and whatever morbid affection I hold for her overrode my common sense.

 

 

 

The experience was bad enough, with all the girls (who were dressed like goths, wearing Twilight Cultist clothes, and had obviously seen this movie 20+ times) cheering and screaming whenever Edward showed his big ugly I'm-a-[bleep]ing-vampire face. But the movie was also pretty awful. It epitomized how entertainment has dropped from a mode of communication to a form of brain-dead waste of two hours. I mean, Citizen Kane at least had some form of legitimate moral and symbolic message in it, but Twilight was just...awful.

 

 

 

[cabbage]ty effects. [cabbage]ty acting. The characters felt like strangers throughout the entire movie, and, if I hadn't read the first novel (God forgive me, and, if He's nice, He'll give me a nice bout of amnesia) I wouldn't have understand any of the goofy jokes and gimmicks. (I mean, Vampire Baseball? What the hell?)

 

 

 

It's been said before, but I'll say it again: this plotline isn't a plot. It's hollow. These characters aren't characters. They're hollow shells that socially inadequate gauche girls can pour themselves into. Bella serves as a perfect comparison for those angsty teen girls, and Edward serves as the perfect little mould for those same girls to pour their 'Model-Man' into.

 

 

 

Grow up. Please.

 

 

 

And put on some decent clothes.

[aquariusman]

Dreamtongirl, I have not read any other books in the Twilight series other than the first. I do not plan on it. I have not criticized the later books in anyway, because while I do agree with N0M that you don't need to read the books to debate about them, it definitely helps. I'm also going to drop the whole poor use of pronouns, because it was just something I was pointing out that can confuse some people.

 

 

 

Now, to me your points concerning New Moon mean nothing to me. There is still not even one line in Twilight in which Bella is injured, enough to be considered serious, as a direct result of her clumsiness. We are claiming that Edward is over protective, and that usually means that Edward is hurting Bella overall (Whether it be socially, emotionally or physically). You see, if Edward being near Bella puts her life in danger, then I think we can say that because he is over protective, always being near her, he is actually being counter-productive. So while anyone who reads the book will acknowledge that Edward is a danger to Bella, it still underlines the point made about Edward being over-protective.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't tell off the fan girls of Twilight because it makes me feel big, or because I enjoy it. I do it because they aggravate me to no end always chirping about how wonderful an author Stephanie Meyers is, and how well written the book was. I think you agree with me and others that Twilight is not a good book, like Nadril so kindly pointed out.

 

 

 

 

 

To reply to you on "Go read classics.": just because something is considered a classic does not make it good. I do, however, read books that I cconsider lassics: Nineteen Eighty-Four, The Wheel of Time series, Frankenstein and others.

[Dreamtongirl]

Yes, Edward is over-protective and he is also a danger to Bella at all times. Well, before she became a vampire anyways. He states both points himself in the books. What is your point, though? Everyone knows that.

 

 

 

Also, you can't stop fans being obsessed over something. I'm sure you have, or have been obsessed over something before, (even if you haven't realized it) that has pissed people off extremely and they've wanted you to go die in a hole. You might've thought whatever it was, is/was awesome etc, but others might've thought you're r3tarded and need help. Just like you think about the people who enjoy Twilight and call it a piece of literature.

 

 

 

True, but a lot of the time they are.