Twilight.

[Dreamtongirl]

S'cuse me?

[jemathonical]

Well I finished reading Twilight last night to see what all the hype was about (girlfriend won't shut up about it).

 

And I was very surprised with it, I never read, but I really enjoyed the book. I'll probably watch the movie on DVD.

 

At first it was all lovey dovey and girly but when it started getting into the vampire stuff and all the characters I couldn't put it down.

 

 

 

It's not just for fat girls pureprayer, instead of being ignorant, give it a read, then judge.

 

 

 

Wow. I used to pay out Twilight to my girlfriend, and she really hated it, and I can see why now. I got some apologising to do hehe

[Kiriyama]

Hmm, well, wouldn't all the other vampire books/movies be considered cliche then? I mean if they all follow the same myth and whatnot. Twilight could be unique because of the good vampires and due to the fact that they don't drink human blood i guess?

 

 

 

Go on wiki and look up the Angel TV series, good vampire, yet still better than the "vampires" in Twilight.

 

 

 

Twilight is not unique in the respect of good vampire. Its is unique in that it has completed bastardised vampires.

 

 

 

EDIT: Okay, after reading up more on Vampires, I have concluded that these "vampires" take many traits from different folklore sources. Most notably feeding on Cattle. However, the modern stereotype is now more accepted, and the only notable aspect they and these "vampires" share, is somewhat the appearance, of which, we mainly think of the Translyvanian appearance. However, I doubt that the Author has actually done research on old Vampiric folklore and instead tried to create a "good" "vampire".

[Shazarabbit]

Hmm, well, wouldn't all the other vampire books/movies be considered cliche then? I mean if they all follow the same myth and whatnot. Twilight could be unique because of the good vampires and due to the fact that they don't drink human blood i guess?

 

 

 

Go on wiki and look up the Angel TV series, good vampire, yet still better than the "vampires" in Twilight.

 

 

 

Twilight is not unique in the respect of good vampire. Its is unique in that it has completed bastardised vampires.

 

 

 

EDIT: Okay, after reading up more on Vampires, I have concluded that these "vampires" take many traits from different folklore sources. Most notably feeding on Cattle. However, the modern stereotype is now more accepted, and the only notable aspect they and these "vampires" share, is somewhat the appearance, of which, we mainly think of the Translyvanian appearance. However, I doubt that the Author has actually done research on old Vampiric folklore and instead tried to create a "good" "vampire".

 

 

 

Actually she did a ton of research, the research scenario of bella looking for information on the cold ones is just a replica of her researching for the character of Edward.

[Dreamtongirl]

S'true. And I'm sure she didn't want to make them exactly the same. So therefore the Cullens are different to other fictional vampires.

[pureprayer]

I mean its the fat girls (the one in the movie/book) fantasy published.

 

 

 

(yes I KNOW she is not *fat*)

[Kiriyama]

S'true. And I'm sure she didn't want to make them exactly the same. So therefore the Cullens are different to other fictional vampires.

 

 

 

Yeah, but theres making a slight change, and then there's this...

[Nom]

The fact is she's made a complete perversion of the vampire myth and they can hardly be called vampires at all. They don't die in sunlight, therefore they don't have to stick to the night hours. -1 scary point. They don't drink human blood. -1 scary point. They are amazingly beautiful. -1 scary point.

 

 

 

The vampires Meyer has created exist for the sole purpose of being immortal sex symbols. Take everything scary about a vampire, everything that makes a vampire away, and you're free of all those possible wrenches in a love story. Oh, but they still have craving for human blood, see! Bella cut herself and vampire boy went crazy! CONFLICT!

 

 

 

Uh, no.

 

 

 

Her research certainly didn't serve her well when she invented a ludicrous biological explanation for why the vampires sparkle. Or when she termed menstrual blood "dead blood" to explain why Edward goes crazy over a paper cut but not when Bella has her period.

[Tennis_Ace]

You knew about the dead blood? For hating Twilight, you sure have done your research!

 

 

 

The story isn't just a vampire story. You people need to get past that. I'll admit that the sparkling aspect is completely ridiculous though. You obviously haven't read the story. The Cullens are one of two known groups that don't drink human blood. Stephenie Meyer chose to focus less on the cliche killing and more on the whole relationship.

[tripsis]

So now you guys are upset because she actually has a little creativity and hasn't copied every single other vampire story? So people get upset if you're too unoriginal and if you're too creative? Living proof that you can't win in this world I guess? :P

[Omar]

I'm almost done the 4th. It's so predictable, I'm very disappointed. No [cabbage] it wants blood :roll:

[jackal_55]

so, i decided to give this series a shot, and got the first book from the library...

 

all i could think the whole way through was

 

 

 

What have they done to the bad guys from all of my favorite horror movies/books! :cry:

 

 

 

you'd think that after, say, a century, someone would get over their [bleep] teen angst crap, honestly, if i want to see one thing involving Edward, its him meeting Alucard from Hellsing. that would set him straight, teach him how a real vampire does it.

 

Vampires feeding on livestock... what a load of crap, Dracula would be turning over in his grave. -.-

 

and on another note, what the hell is someone over a hundred doing hanging around in school?

 

 

 

Lmao, well that was amusing to read. :

 

I haven't actually read Dracula.. Who wrote it? I think I'm going to do an experiment. (Not much of one ;)) I'll read Dracula and.. Hellsing, was it? Idk, people tell me the best vampire books yeah? And then I'll read Twilight again and see which I like. Maybe I will like the "Real" vampire stories. :o

 

 

 

Bram stoker wrote Dracula. -.-

 

 

 

the Hellsing i was refering to is an OVA anime series, its on youtube, in english, which basically takes Dracula, removes reason, physics, and any semblance of sanity, replaces it with a raging mass murdering psychopath who likes to torture his victims, and puts him in an expensive suit.

 

and incredibly large guns.

 

uhh, don't watch it if you're squeemish, or religious though... :-w

 

Edit: forgot to mention, he's the good guy.

[Dreamtongirl]

Damn you're pessimistic NOM. Determined not to see the book's good points eh?

 

 

 

Tennis, didn't Meyer say something like it still tempts Edward but not nearly as much or something? Correct me if i'm wrong (probably am) I just heard that.

 

 

 

tripsis, I guess you can't make anyone on this thread happy. XD

 

 

 

harrinator1, yeah it's kind of weird, Breaking Dawn.. I have to say I was surprised though. Everything that was meant to happen, set out to happen, happened. Asides from the pregnancy. But I honestly didn't think it'd happen, I thought something would go wrong, and maybe Jacob and her.. >_>

 

 

 

Okay okay, I shall read Dracula. Forgive me for not knowing the author. :-# Is it scary? The book?

 

Lmao, HE'S the good guy? The one who's a psychopath and torches his victims of which he goes around killing? Jeepers, Twilight's sounding like a field full of bunnies atm. XD

 

Who's the bad guy in this anime then?

[Kiriyama]

So now you guys are upset because she actually has a little creativity and hasn't copied every single other vampire story? So people get upset if you're too unoriginal and if you're too creative? Living proof that you can't win in this world I guess? :P

 

 

 

Thing is, she's copied too many parts that she liked from folklore, then put it into a damn lovestory.

 

 

 

Vampires were always seen as evil omens, they should stay that way.

[pureprayer]

So now you guys are upset because she actually has a little creativity and hasn't copied every single other vampire story? So people get upset if you're too unoriginal and if you're too creative? Living proof that you can't win in this world I guess? :P

 

 

 

Thing is, she's copied too many parts that she liked from folklore, then put it into a damn lovestory.

 

 

 

Vampires were always seen as evil omens, they should stay that way.

 

Its kinda like saying dragons dont breath fire (or any element) and they can bond (kinda like eragon) with humans.

 

 

 

Eragon was cool because of the mass war though

[Nom]

So now you guys are upset because she actually has a little creativity and hasn't copied every single other vampire story? So people get upset if you're too unoriginal and if you're too creative? Living proof that you can't win in this world I guess? :P

 

 

 

Thing is, she's copied too many parts that she liked from folklore, then put it into a damn lovestory.

 

 

 

Vampires were always seen as evil omens, they should stay that way.

 

 

 

Exactly, glad someone gets it. The point is not that she changed the vampire myth, it's that she changed it to fit her wet dream of a love story.

 

 

 

Damn you're pessimistic NOM. Determined not to see the book's good points eh?

 

 

 

The book has no good points that I can see.

[tripsis]

So now you guys are upset because she actually has a little creativity and hasn't copied every single other vampire story? So people get upset if you're too unoriginal and if you're too creative? Living proof that you can't win in this world I guess? :P

 

 

 

Thing is, she's copied too many parts that she liked from folklore, then put it into a damn lovestory.

 

 

 

Vampires were always seen as evil omens, they should stay that way.

 

Its kinda like saying dragons dont breath fire (or any element) and they can bond (kinda like eragon) with humans.

 

 

 

Eragon was cool because of the mass war though

 

People have been writing stories about dragons bonding with humans for a long time. Don't give Christopher Paolini credit for that :P

 

 

 

---------------------

 

 

 

I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to do what she wants. Who are you to say, "I don't like the way she made something her own, so the book sucks." Okay YOU don't like it, and YOU may not like what she did, but that doesn't make it a bad book. Why do we all have to follow "rules" that have already been set? Why do we all have to write about myths the same? Why can't we change something? It is, after all, a myth. I applaud her for writing something out of the ordinary, as that's not something that many writers do... like Christopher Paolini, for instance. In my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better to take a myth, change it around, make it your own - something original.. than to take a bunch of writers' work that ISN'T your own creation, shove it all into one story, and then slap your name on the cover.

[Tennis_Ace]

From Kelly Clarkson's blog:

 

and by the way, im now on eclipse of the twilight series and so is my mom, my sister and all of my friends ..you could say were a bit addicted and all searching for our very own personal edward ..and yes, in the most pathetic way possible ha :)

 

 

 

ooh!! and the soundtrack to the movie twilight is awesome! i cant stop listening to flightless bird, american mouth! the production is breathtaking!

 

 

 

Yay, she's a fan too. Would LOVE if she could put a song on the next movie's soundtrack. She and I have similar taste in music too. I've had Flightless Bird, American Mouth on repeat for the past few days. Can't get enough of it.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Anything that goes down well with teenage girls, Kelly Clarkson's there.

 

 

 

*GW hides the Kelly Clarkson album*

[Nom]

I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to do what she wants. Who are you to say, "I don't like the way she made something her own, so the book sucks." Okay YOU don't like it, and YOU may not like what she did, but that doesn't make it a bad book. Why do we all have to follow "rules" that have already been set? Why do we all have to write about myths the same? Why can't we change something? It is, after all, a myth. I applaud her for writing something out of the ordinary, as that's not something that many writers do... like Christopher Paolini, for instance. In my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better to take a myth, change it around, make it your own - something original.. than to take a bunch of writers' work that ISN'T your own creation, shove it all into one story, and then slap your name on the cover.

 

 

 

I have the same beef with Meyer that you and I share with Paolini - they both published pieces of crap.

 

 

 

Meyer changed things, yes--but in incompetent hands, change is just as bad as boring cliche and plagiarism. The only reason she changed the vampire myth is because she wanted to add a fantastical element to her love story. It serves no purpose at all other than that. None. Edward being a vampire doesn't get in the way of their relationship; in fact since he's now had every dangerous aspect of vampirism taken away he's nothing more than an immortal pretty boy. Which is what she wanted. She wasn't out to tell a vampire story but a romance. The vampires might as well not be there, but then she wouldn't have an excuse for the immortal pretty boy.

 

 

 

That just screams BAD from even a basic level of fiction writing. You don't invent a character for the sole purpose of being a sex object (or, in more widely used terms, the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST), much less inject an entire race and with it the fantasy element. Just like you don't throw in a stock race of elves and shake them up with ludicrous tweaks to try and mask their true purpose as philosophical mouthpieces and producing the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST. See? The transition from Meyer to Paolini was rather smooth, don't you think? It's the same basic writing crime.

[tripsis]

I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to do what she wants. Who are you to say, "I don't like the way she made something her own, so the book sucks." Okay YOU don't like it, and YOU may not like what she did, but that doesn't make it a bad book. Why do we all have to follow "rules" that have already been set? Why do we all have to write about myths the same? Why can't we change something? It is, after all, a myth. I applaud her for writing something out of the ordinary, as that's not something that many writers do... like Christopher Paolini, for instance. In my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better to take a myth, change it around, make it your own - something original.. than to take a bunch of writers' work that ISN'T your own creation, shove it all into one story, and then slap your name on the cover.

 

 

 

I have the same beef with Meyer that you and I share with Paolini - they both published pieces of crap.

 

 

 

Meyer changed things, yes--but in incompetent hands, change is just as bad as boring cliche and plagiarism. The only reason she changed the vampire myth is because she wanted to add a fantastical element to her love story. It serves no purpose at all other than that. None. Edward being a vampire doesn't get in the way of their relationship; in fact since he's now had every dangerous aspect of vampirism taken away he's nothing more than an immortal pretty boy. Which is what she wanted. She wasn't out to tell a vampire story but a romance. The vampires might as well not be there, but then she wouldn't have an excuse for the immortal pretty boy.

 

 

 

That just screams BAD from even a basic level of fiction writing. You don't invent a character for the sole purpose of being a sex object (or, in more widely used terms, the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST), much less inject an entire race and with it the fantasy element. Just like you don't throw in a stock race of elves and shake them up with ludicrous tweaks to try and mask their true purpose as philosophical mouthpieces and producing the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST. See? The transition from Meyer to Paolini was rather smooth, don't you think? It's the same basic writing crime.

 

 

 

I disagree with you that what Meyer did is just as bad as plagiarism. Making something your own isn't a crime and isn't morally bad. People, including you, may disagree with it and not like it and that's fine, but I fail to see how it's a morally bad thing to do.

 

 

 

Edward being a vampire does in fact get in the way of their relationship. Being with someone is difficult if you cannot have an intimate physical relationship (I can tell you that from personal experience). That difficulty probably could have played a bigger role in the novel, but it was still there. I also think you blow up the whole "sex object" idea. Edward isn't just some sex object, there's a lot more to their relationship than that. Yes he could have been human and there could have been no vampires at all, but it would have made the book a lot less unique and interesting, and I think that's why so many people like it. I think that one of the reasons why it's as popular as it is is because it presents a NEW idea. If we just stuck to the same ideas, we'd never get any new ones or any originality. Yes the books are primarily about romance, but why can't you have romance and vampires? It's certainly not a CRIME, like you are suggesting.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong because there are plenty of things that I don't like in the books. I don't like how in the second book onward, Bella finds herself attracted to Jacob and he always brights up her day, but for some reason she can't explain, she HAS to be with Edward even though he's the one who hurt her. I can relate to Bella's undying pull towards Edward on some level, but I think it's taken a little bit to the extreme. Sometimes it feels like Bella doesn't even know why she loves Edward, which is probably where you get the idea of a "sex object," I also have a big problem with the "like two guys at once" thing (and I've always had a bit of a problem with it in "real life").

[Kiriyama]

[hide=Quotes]

I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to do what she wants. Who are you to say, "I don't like the way she made something her own, so the book sucks." Okay YOU don't like it, and YOU may not like what she did, but that doesn't make it a bad book. Why do we all have to follow "rules" that have already been set? Why do we all have to write about myths the same? Why can't we change something? It is, after all, a myth. I applaud her for writing something out of the ordinary, as that's not something that many writers do... like Christopher Paolini, for instance. In my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better to take a myth, change it around, make it your own - something original.. than to take a bunch of writers' work that ISN'T your own creation, shove it all into one story, and then slap your name on the cover.

 

 

 

I have the same beef with Meyer that you and I share with Paolini - they both published pieces of crap.

 

 

 

Meyer changed things, yes--but in incompetent hands, change is just as bad as boring cliche and plagiarism. The only reason she changed the vampire myth is because she wanted to add a fantastical element to her love story. It serves no purpose at all other than that. None. Edward being a vampire doesn't get in the way of their relationship; in fact since he's now had every dangerous aspect of vampirism taken away he's nothing more than an immortal pretty boy. Which is what she wanted. She wasn't out to tell a vampire story but a romance. The vampires might as well not be there, but then she wouldn't have an excuse for the immortal pretty boy.

 

 

 

That just screams BAD from even a basic level of fiction writing. You don't invent a character for the sole purpose of being a sex object (or, in more widely used terms, the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST), much less inject an entire race and with it the fantasy element. Just like you don't throw in a stock race of elves and shake them up with ludicrous tweaks to try and mask their true purpose as philosophical mouthpieces and producing the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST. See? The transition from Meyer to Paolini was rather smooth, don't you think? It's the same basic writing crime.

 

 

 

I disagree with you that what Meyer did is just as bad as plagiarism. Making something your own isn't a crime and isn't morally bad. People, including you, may disagree with it and not like it and that's fine, but I fail to see how it's a morally bad thing to do.

 

 

 

Edward being a vampire does in fact get in the way of their relationship. Being with someone is difficult if you cannot have an intimate physical relationship (I can tell you that from personal experience). That difficulty probably could have played a bigger role in the novel, but it was still there. I also think you blow up the whole "sex object" idea. Edward isn't just some sex object, there's a lot more to their relationship than that. Yes he could have been human and there could have been no vampires at all, but it would have made the book a lot less unique and interesting, and I think that's why so many people like it. I think that one of the reasons why it's as popular as it is is because it presents a NEW idea. If we just stuck to the same ideas, we'd never get any new ones or any originality. Yes the books are primarily about romance, but why can't you have romance and vampires? It's certainly not a CRIME, like you are suggesting.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong because there are plenty of things that I don't like in the books. I don't like how in the second book onward, Bella finds herself attracted to Jacob and he always brights up her day, but for some reason she can't explain, she HAS to be with Edward even though he's the one who hurt her. I can relate to Bella's undying pull towards Edward on some level, but I think it's taken a little bit to the extreme. Sometimes it feels like Bella doesn't even know why she loves Edward, which is probably where you get the idea of a "sex object," I also have a big problem with the "like two guys at once" thing (and I've always had a bit of a problem with it in "real life").

[/hide]

 

 

 

Some things are better left unchanged.

 

 

 

Really, Edward isn't much different from a human apart from the fact he is immortal. (though hopefully some garlic'll deal with him. Or a stake through the heart. Two things which we commonly associate with Vamprism.)

 

 

 

There can be the balance of romance, and vampires. Hell, I wouldn't mind that a lovestory had a vampire, as long as said vampire wasn't some glorified human. What makes a lovestory unique, is not what races are involved, rather the characters, what hardships they face, and the overall story.

 

 

 

I could create a lovestory about an Incubus, who actually attends school, and doesn't do the things that are traditionally associated with an Incubus. Really, I've just made this demon have the same traits as a human, and that pretty much looks like a human too. Oh, I guess my idea is unique too, does that make it interesting?

[tripsis]

[hide=Quotes]

I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to do what she wants. Who are you to say, "I don't like the way she made something her own, so the book sucks." Okay YOU don't like it, and YOU may not like what she did, but that doesn't make it a bad book. Why do we all have to follow "rules" that have already been set? Why do we all have to write about myths the same? Why can't we change something? It is, after all, a myth. I applaud her for writing something out of the ordinary, as that's not something that many writers do... like Christopher Paolini, for instance. In my opinion, it's a heck of a lot better to take a myth, change it around, make it your own - something original.. than to take a bunch of writers' work that ISN'T your own creation, shove it all into one story, and then slap your name on the cover.

 

 

 

I have the same beef with Meyer that you and I share with Paolini - they both published pieces of crap.

 

 

 

Meyer changed things, yes--but in incompetent hands, change is just as bad as boring cliche and plagiarism. The only reason she changed the vampire myth is because she wanted to add a fantastical element to her love story. It serves no purpose at all other than that. None. Edward being a vampire doesn't get in the way of their relationship; in fact since he's now had every dangerous aspect of vampirism taken away he's nothing more than an immortal pretty boy. Which is what she wanted. She wasn't out to tell a vampire story but a romance. The vampires might as well not be there, but then she wouldn't have an excuse for the immortal pretty boy.

 

 

 

That just screams BAD from even a basic level of fiction writing. You don't invent a character for the sole purpose of being a sex object (or, in more widely used terms, the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST), much less inject an entire race and with it the fantasy element. Just like you don't throw in a stock race of elves and shake them up with ludicrous tweaks to try and mask their true purpose as philosophical mouthpieces and producing the DESIGNATED LOVE INTEREST. See? The transition from Meyer to Paolini was rather smooth, don't you think? It's the same basic writing crime.

 

 

 

I disagree with you that what Meyer did is just as bad as plagiarism. Making something your own isn't a crime and isn't morally bad. People, including you, may disagree with it and not like it and that's fine, but I fail to see how it's a morally bad thing to do.

 

 

 

Edward being a vampire does in fact get in the way of their relationship. Being with someone is difficult if you cannot have an intimate physical relationship (I can tell you that from personal experience). That difficulty probably could have played a bigger role in the novel, but it was still there. I also think you blow up the whole "sex object" idea. Edward isn't just some sex object, there's a lot more to their relationship than that. Yes he could have been human and there could have been no vampires at all, but it would have made the book a lot less unique and interesting, and I think that's why so many people like it. I think that one of the reasons why it's as popular as it is is because it presents a NEW idea. If we just stuck to the same ideas, we'd never get any new ones or any originality. Yes the books are primarily about romance, but why can't you have romance and vampires? It's certainly not a CRIME, like you are suggesting.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong because there are plenty of things that I don't like in the books. I don't like how in the second book onward, Bella finds herself attracted to Jacob and he always brights up her day, but for some reason she can't explain, she HAS to be with Edward even though he's the one who hurt her. I can relate to Bella's undying pull towards Edward on some level, but I think it's taken a little bit to the extreme. Sometimes it feels like Bella doesn't even know why she loves Edward, which is probably where you get the idea of a "sex object," I also have a big problem with the "like two guys at once" thing (and I've always had a bit of a problem with it in "real life").

[/hide]

 

 

 

Some things are better left unchanged.

 

 

 

Really, Edward isn't much different from a human apart from the fact he is immortal.

 

 

 

There can be the balance of romance, and vampires. Hell, I wouldn't mind that a lovestory had a vampire, as long as said vampire wasn't some glorified human. What makes a lovestory unique, is not what races are involved, rather the characters, what hardships they face, and the overall story.

 

 

 

I could create a lovestory about an Incubus, who actually attends school, and doesn't do the things that are traditionally associated with an Incubus. Really, I've just made this demon have the same traits as a human, and that pretty much looks like a human too. Oh, I guess my idea is unique too, does that make it interesting?

 

If you gave it some interesting elements, it could be. But the way you described it makes it sound boring. You could describe Twilight as a vampire, who is a completely normal human in all aspects except having the title of a vampire, who attends school and falls in love with a human. The end. Yes that sounds boring, but that's barely even part of what the story is about. What makes the story interesting are the small, but intricate details throughout all of the books. I'm sure a lot of people, including myself, can relate to some of the drama and emotions in the book, which also make it enjoyable to read. When my sister first described the series to me, she did it in a similar way that you described your example. She just said it was about a vampire who falls in love with a teenage girl. To me that just sounded stupid, ridiculous and a huge stretch. I was amazed that something like that could become popular. When I read the books, I formed a completely different opinion. Because it's the details that make the book. Meyer makes it very easy to relate to and fall in love with the characters. Yes it was a predictable book, but an enjoyable read nonetheless.

[purfishx]

 

Who's the bad guy in this anime then?

 

 

 

A naked guy with a cool gun.

[jackal_55]

 

Okay okay, I shall read Dracula. Forgive me for not knowing the author. :-# Is it scary? The book?

 

Lmao, HE'S the good guy?

 

 

 

i don't really think i'm a good person to judge whether or not a book is scary, but i wouldn't say it is, i mean, it was written around 1900.

 

 

 

The one who's a psychopath and torches his victims of which he goes around killing? Jeepers, Twilight's sounding like a field full of bunnies atm. XD

 

Who's the bad guy in this anime then?

 

he also eats a few people.

 

the bad guy is a guy that was trying to mass produce vampires for Hitler, and want to start a world war simply because "war is fun."

 

although i do warn you, if you intend to watch it, the TV series is terrible, you'll have to make sure you add in "OVA" to your search criteria.