Did Twilight really ruin vampires? (Death of Vamps/Zombies)

[Taco of flames]

As has doubtlessly been stated before hundreds of times: It's the Twilight FANS that kill the vampire image, not the book itself. I've read them, they're a decent love story, although the vampire characters could easily be replaced with superheroes, seeing as every blood-sucking emo kid has some special power or other. But it's the fans, they are changing the public perception of our classic demons of the night. Two of my friends are currently doing some ridiculous thing where they attempt to bite each other's necks. I read them the passage from "Dracula" where Harker, Morris, Van Helsing, Seward, and Godalming see Mina and Dracula in the act of drinking each other's blood, which was, I think, a perfect example of what makes vampires scary: Cold, cruel, creatures that are evil just for the sake of evil.(Dracula gives Mina his blood so he can control her, for anyone unfamiliar with the aforementioned passage). They were absolutely unaffected, though I place some blame on my failure at social functionality. They're just, "So what?" I gave up at that point, and just make sarcastic comments about it. The point is, reading Twilight has given everyone a different view of vampires. Now they're harmless, beautiful beings that everyone wants a piece of. Some say vampires can't die as a genre, but there's that saying that failure to believe in something kills it just as surely as a clip of .50 caliber bullets unloaded into your face will kill you. People don't believe in the old vampires. They're dying, and Edward is what's rising from the ashes. If someone can create a new vampire horror story that brings it all back, then maybe we get our Draculas and Nosferatus back. Otherwise, the time is stuck at twilight.

 

[FinalHeart95]

It's not Twilight (mostly), but the fans. I swear to god, the next time someone mentions "Team Edward" I'm going to punch a hole in the wall. (In fact, I joined Team Hyrule, if anyone wants to join me there.) Not to mention that these are sometimes the same people that say gaming is such a waste of time while they Facebook about how they want to get bitten by a fictional vampire that they spend all of their time drooling over. A sparkling vampire at that.

Maybe if I go to school covered in glitter I'll be more manly...

 

[jboking]

bastardized the original myth.

Which one?

Due to cultural differences when I have this conversation with someone I typically like to stick with the first mention of the beast in english literature, though it can be traced further back to Siberia. The first major literary mention of them was in "Travels of Three English Gentlemen" published in the Harleian Miscellany in 1745

I should clarify for you, it is not necessarily bad that we are changing the myth, as it's point was to scare. If we need to change the myth to keep the idea alive overtime, so be it. However, we cannot pretend it is somehow the equal of the original(as it is not an original idea).

Example, I like blade, but I recognize that those vampires aren't of the original style. It doesn't stop me from enjoying blade, but I don't go around claiming blade is the definitive vampire myth(or that those vampires are better than Twilights ).

I will say that twilight did do one thing right if you read the books. It provided some fear of the vampires to any logical human, so it kept to the original wishes of the myth, just not the finer details and weaknesses(which is what would have been nice to see explained). Twilight isn't the worst that's ever been done to the myth. However, in my opinion, it is not a well written book and gets far more credit than it deserves. However, if Twilight is what it takes to keep the myth alive, so be it.

 

[War Penguin]

EEEHHH........ Not entirely. Action movies might be the prime suspect but let's face it, Twilight isn't really helping either. Sparkly isn't making vampires any scarier.

 

[A Weary Exile]

Besides Nosforatu (Spelling?) I've never found vampires scary or creepy in anyway, so to me Twilight is just another crappy action movie with psuedo-sexual undertones that appeal to shallow, pre-teen girls.

 

[SovietSecrets]

Twilight didn't destroy vampires, it just started an entire fetish with girls. Vampires to me are still pretty bad ass and I just need to play Bloodlines or read Dracula/Salem's Lot.

 

[Cryfear101]

Not really , dont think of it like that and i dont perticuly take any notice over what vampires are supposed to be like and all that fiction jazz.

Personally i like twilight and im seeing new moon opening night this friday.

 

[Zorg Machine]

I don't hate Twilight because it ruined vamps, I despise Twilight because the actors in the movie have about two facial expressions and both make them look like retards.
and btw why the fu*k do they sparkle?

 

[zana bonanza]

Twilight didn't ruin anything. That would be giving it way too much credit. It's just a sucky book series that happened to become popular. Granted, it has started a vampire trend, so I'm pretty much sick of hearing about vampires in general. And it's fanbase is annoying as hell, but there's plenty more where that came from. Really, if you think Twilight ruined something for you, you're just letting it get to you and need to get over it.

 

[Cain_Zeros]

I wouldn't say it's ruined them. It's bringing vampires themselves more attention, and Twilight fans could be persuaded to read more traditional vampire fiction, or watch more traditional vampire movie. That being said, Twilight was just a shit movie in general.

Also, they were never all that scary to me. Watching Queen of the Damned at 13 is definitely the origin of the vampire fantasies I've had ever since. Not because of anything actually related to the movie, but the thought of having a hot immortal chick choose to be with you forever. And biting, the biting helps too.

 

[asam92]

short answer, yes it did ruin Vampires,but it is not the first movie to do it.
Seeing as Dracula was not the first Vampire style flick I had seen properly depicting vampires I can't say that I have ever been scared of them, so my advice to kids would be not to see New Vampire movies first but see the old ones and at least get some $hi+ scared out of you before Van Helsing and Twilight go and ruin it for you this rule also applies to other stereotypically scary movie characters eg, Werewolves, Zombies, Aliens etc whatever it may be.

 

[Socius]

I just have to say it, Sthepanie Meyers Raped the Vampire genre, Killed it then raped it again! so yeah, Twillight is a meanece to humanity and should be terminated from existence!

 

[Ocelot GT]

To be fair, Buffy ruined vampires.

Twilight just ruined them moar.

Personally I just mentally block both of these and only think of Pen and Paper books and the lore from Vamp Bloodlines.

 

[GrinningManiac]

While that may be the case, the Sherlock pipe, Beam Me Up and the Sunlight thing have all become the standard because of these mistakes. To say "That's not what happens" because the original creator didn't mean it that way is irrelevant. Look at any event in history when misinterpretation has led to something completley different. The Charge of the Light Brigade, for (a morbid) example. Just because the order was misheard does not mean it didn't happen, and dosen't affect today. The Sunlight thing is practically interwoven with the vampire thing

Twilight, though? I dunno. The novelist in me (like I said) screams at the crappy writing and piss-poor setting. But to be honest, I think it boils down to arrogant, stubborn hatred. It's the same as when I hear a bigot scream something over the radio. It's a free country, it's his right to express his opinion, I tell myself. But, deep down, just as I tell myself people are allowed to choose and like whatever book they want, I just hate it and stop my feet like a little kid

My point wasn't that there can't be mutation to ideas, or even mythologies, much less memes and tropes, quite the opposite. My point is that no one snarls about how terrible it was for Tolkien to make up entirely new mythos to govern a bunch of creatures from Nordic mythology (and Old English, for that matter). I'm fine with misinterpretation, changes, and even intentional fucking with themes.

My problem is when people who fully accept "vampires die due to sunlight" then try to pull crap like "well, Twilight is totally destroying the concept of vampires". The concept of vampires, such as it is, is completely malleable. Ask any two authors to describe the powers and limitations of vampires, and you'll get three or four different answers. My point was not "nothing should change", but rather "given the fundamental changes which occurred when it came to vampires long before any of us were born, back off on that complaint".

You kind of made my point for me: "to say 'that's not what happens' because the original creator didn't mean it that way' is completely irrelevant". I wholeheartedly agree. So, with that in mind, let's do away with the argument about how Twilight is crappy because "What does everyone know kills vampires? Stake through the heart and sunlight", okay?

We can argue about whether the books are well written (I don't think they are), or overwrought (I think they are), or melodramatic (yeah), or pure soap opera (completely), but let's not try to make our argument stronger by pretending we're steadfastly holding on to a mythos which itself has already proven to be immensely changeable.

Ah! I completley misunderstood you

I thought you were defending Twilight, not the idea of malleable mythologies

I completley agree

May I shake you by the metaphorical hand?

 

[TikiShades]

Twilight didn't start the death of vampires, but it has been the biggest and most recent cultural blow.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0450405/

This movie basically says that the vampires who can't go into sunlight, don't age, turn into bats, and most importantly suck blood from people, are "stereotypical." In the trailer of the movie, they even called the shapeshifting thing "bull-" before the cutoff. Yeah, you're right. Who came up with that stupid crap? Dracula? Who's he?

At least Twilight had kept SOME of the stuff on the list. I don't even mind if a vampire doesn't have all of those. But to not have ANY of that stuff, and to even BASH what classified a vampire as a vampire, is what is really killing the vampires today.

This movie is a hammer to the stake that will end traditional vampires. Which, I assume, won't kill a vampire anymore than a regular person.

That trailer you posted is the Book/Movie I mentioned in my earlier post. Although I agree the movie looks terrible, the book is actually pretty good. As I said in my post, the book did get rid of some of the more subtle vampire aspects (such as turning into a bat). However, the vampires in this series stay true to the bigger lore (need blood to survive, over exposure to sunlight kills them, no reflections/can't be photographed). As for the things that were taken out, the Author actually gives reason for it which drives the plot, I won't say what it is in case anyone decides they'd like to give this series a try (Cirque Du Freak). I'll agree that the movie lends a hand to the downfall of vampires, but the books were quite good.

And I bet. I'm sure the story was good, and I think I would enjoy it. I just can't say the movie does well in the ways of a traditional vampire. I just remember reading the description and it bashing the traditional vampire, while the trailer made some weird new vampire things like "vampire powers" and slicing through trees with fingers. The trailer made me think the movie could be good, but it seemed to tack on the name "Vampire" just because they're marketable.

I enjoyed Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, too. It was a fun game with a fun new concept. But as far as Banjo Kazooie games go, it wasn't what I wanted. I just had to pretend it was a vehicle platformer that had nostalgia for Banjo Kazooie; I separated my enjoyment of Banjo Kazooie and my enjoyment of the game.

Similarly, I might enjoy the movie itself, and I do sometimes enjoy vampire. I just don't know if it'll so easily separated if they keep trying to tie them together with "Oh, yeah. We ARE vampires, and this is what they really are. Not what YOU think they are."

 

[PharunBanere]

Alright. I will add this to the mass of posts.
A) Edward lives in a forest
B) He sparkles
C) He does NOT drink the blood of humans.
Therefore, by that logic, Edward is not a vampire. He is a woodland fairy.
Also, according to traditional vampire lore, a vampire cannot solely sustain themselves on the blood of an animal. He would eventually go berserk, and kill a human for blood, or die of starvation. I *really* hope it's the second one.

 

[MassiveGeek]

I don't care if anyone else have written this, but here is the reason why Twilight "vampires" aka sparkly fairies claiming to be vampires suck so very bad and should not be categorized with other vampires;

A vampire is not genuinely a mythological creature, it's a symbolic for the moral of mankind. Humans eat meat, it's good for us, we enjoy it and it's a normal thing to do for a human. But we also treat the animals we breed to be our food very badly, we could choose to be vegetarians, but humans are designed to eat meat for us to grow and survive(yes I know we can live on mushrooms/be a vegetarian, but I'm trying to make a point here).
Vampires feed on HUMAN blood, and live on that in the same sense that humans live on animals, and by having to feed on human blood, they're seen as monsters, cruel scary creatures that are inhuman.

So why is this symbolic?
Because this brings up a question; how are we different from them?
They eat humans, in cold blood, because the have to.
We eat animals, mostly in cold blood, because WE have to.

This is symbolic in the sense that it's putting humans actions into perspective. And no matter who's version of a vampire it is, it always stuck to that moral question. Get my point?

HOWEVER, Twilight's so called "vampires" does NOT have ANY symbolic thing about them. They do NOT represent vampires in ANY. F*CKING. WAY. They're NOT vampires. They're rip-offs. Posers. Fake. Card-board cut-out one dimensional.
And btw, Meyer has admitted that she only meant for them to be pretty.

tl;dr: Vampires are symbolic, mythological creatures who question the human race's actions by bringing up the question how humans(who cold-blooded eat animals for survival) differ from vampires(who cold-blooded feed on humans for survival). Which is the whole basic of a vampire, and Twilight does not have any symbolic for their vampires, which ruins the idea of them.

Do you get what I'm saying?