Did Twilight really suck that much?

[Frank Inktomi]

Hmmm, Twilight.

I don't know if I am really qualified to criticize Stephanie Myers fiction or the movies for that matter since I haven't read any of the books or watched a solid 30 seconds of the movies above the advertisements.

But I am an older guy who grew up on the classics: Bram Stoker, Nosferatu, Bela Lugosi's Dracula, Peter Cushing as Dracula in the Hammer film classics of the 60's and 70's and even Stephen Kings classic Salem's 'Lot.

I think the problem that people who have with the Stephanie Myer's version is that they are too romanticized. Which is sad, because the original Dracula is partly a romance novel. But we, speaking from the old school vampire camp, liked my vampires a touch more on the evil side. To a vampire, you were food, its that simple. If you happened to run into a vampire at night, he/she/it sucked your blood and depending on what fictional standpoint you stood from, you either caught the virus and became a vampire or died from all your blood leaving your body.

Women found it dark, sexy and romantic to be taken against their will by a dark stranger in the night, on the other hand Men find it downright terrifying.

To me its just a matter of choice, instead of reading tweeny romance novels about vampires, I gave Salem's Lot another readthrough. I would also suggest Justin Cronins' The Passage for the post-apocalyptic approach to vampires, its a trilogy that has already sold its movie rights and is a very good read.

As far as movies are concerned, there are too many to choose from if you are looking for demonic, serial-killer style vampirism. But if you like your vampires more human than monster, overly protective and sporting a bad hairdo, then Twilight is for you.

Thanks for reading.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Hi! I just popped in to say people don't hate Twilight because it's popular. They hate it because it's awful.

 

[BoTTeNBReKeR]

I never read the books, I never watched the films and I don't mean to.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Oh, and finally, people hate it because in the writing world, self-inserts are severely frowned upon. Bella is Stephanie Meyer's flawless self insert (hell, even her name means "Beautiful Swan"). The second you write yourself as the main character, the temptation is to make your stand-in perfect (a common syndrome is making them "clumsy" as a flaw, except its rendered in the cutest way possible and doesn't seem like a flaw at all), make your character get the guy, make every other character in the work practically love you (Bella's schoolmates) etc etc.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue

There is a TV Tropes page for every situation, my friend.

 

[Wait...What]

Okay this is a bit off topic but people saying Vampires do not sparkle is a stupid argument. Vampires do not exist, someone made it up to begin with and made up all there rules and what not. So what's wrong with Meyer making up her own rules and applying them in her story, If anything its original. Granted the execution was poor but at least it shows a bit of originality on her part.

OT- Im not a fan of the Twilight series but i can see that objectively its not terrible. Its like Justin Bieber it appeals to its target audience and if you don't like it just don't watch it. Ive never understood peoples hatred for it. If it doesn't appeal to you just steer clear of it.

She can make up her own rules when she creates her own monsters. Vampires have had the same traits ever since Stoker first made people all over Europe shit their pants in terror. Those traits have stuck for so long, because those traits work.

Suddenly some Mormon housewife rocks up and says "oh by the way vampire fans, sunlight doesn't kill them any more, it just makes them sparkle like glitter." sorry, but no. I don't buy that and nobody else should either. The fact that the sinister and kinda terrifying figure of Count Dracula has been reduced to sparkling in sunlight and angsting over a totally unremarkable teenage attention whore just pisses me off.

I'd be able to tolerate it if the story was at least good, but it's just horrible, boring, bland and badly-written. It's like Meyer just thought to herself "I need to write this bland story, but nobody will buy it. I know, I'll add vampires and werewolves to it! And make the vampires have no weaknesses! Brilliant! Pass the cocaine please!"

Twilight exists within its own universe. If you don't want to accept those rules, then don't. Just stay away from the book and films and stick to the classic vampire stuff as obviously that suits you. There no need to put it down (as aggressively as you did) as some people obviously like it. My main point was that if you don't like it, just ignore it. Some people do like it....so let them

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I suppose people hate it for the same reason people hate Call of Duty. Because it's popular. Or something.

I hate it because its single players has become worse and worse and its multiplayer hasn't done anything new since Call of Duty 4. I hate it because the community is horrible. I hate it because the writing and story line is simple to predict and its story is awful. No one hates anything just because its popular, that came from the people who like the movie, game, book, etc and want to feel like the hate is unjustified.

To answer your questions though, people hate the twilight books not because its popluar, but because its badly written and because its characters are about as fleshed out as a cardboard box. It isn't an interesting read and the only reason it became popular was because with the end of the Harry Potter books, people reached out for a new series (Enter Twilight, Hunger Games, Percy Jackson and the Olympions.) , series that would try to capitilize on the now rising Teenage fiction. The big difference is that while the others are at least interesting, Twilight is just a wet-dream for woman. You can ask any female who saw the twilight movies, they didn't watch it for the plot or the story, they watched it to see Taylor and Robert take their shirt off.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

There no need to put it down (as aggressively as you did) as some people obviously like it. My main point was that if you don't like it, just ignore it. Some people do like it....so let them.

Some people liked "Who Let The Dogs Out" too, and look what happened there. I think the real lesson here is "some people" need to be protected from their own terrible tastes.

 

[spartan231490]

I suppose people hate it for the same reason people hate Call of Duty. Because it's popular. Or something.

exactly.

It's not bad at all, people just hate it because they want to hate things. it makes them feel better about their own pathetic miserable lives

God forbid anyone dislike anything ever, right? We should all be forced to like everything, all the time! Or else we have pathetic miserable lives and we aren't just discerning individuals who put thought into what we spend our money on and what entertainment we consume. I'm allowed to say I don't like something, deriding me for it is ridiculous.

Also, it's funny, do you come on message boards to deride people for their taste in entertainment to feel better about your own pathetic, miserable life?

There's a difference between dislike, and hate. And there's a difference between hating something, and going around bashing it at every single opportunity. Tell me: think of someone you hate. Do you go up to them and insult them repeatedly every single time you see them, or do you avoid them because you can't stand them?

Also, I never said their lives were pathetic because of how they acted. In fact, I pretty much said exactly the opposite, that they acted the way they did because of how much their lives suck. I think everyone's life sucks 90% of the time.

I stand by my statement.

 

[spartan231490]

I suppose people hate it for the same reason people hate Call of Duty. Because it's popular. Or something.

Wrong. People hate it because it was a terribly written book, demeaning not only too females, but everyone who has to read the tripe.

I suppose people hate it for the same reason people hate Call of Duty. Because it's popular. Or something.

exactly.

It's not bad at all, people just hate it because they want to hate things. it makes them feel better about their own pathetic miserable lives

People don't hate it because it is popular, they hate it because it was a terribly written book.

No, it's not. It's not well written, but it's not poorly written either, it's pretty average. Especially as it is a young adult book. It's well above average for a young adult book.

 

[EternalFacepalm]

I suppose people hate it for the same reason people hate Call of Duty. Because it's popular. Or something.

This makes me automatically think of you as a twat.
You see, some people follow the herd and hate something that's popular; howeevr, most people don't. The same goes for Call of Duty: some people simply don't like the fucking thing.

Moving on: People hate it because it's terribly written, cliché in every thinkable way and its plot is insanely generic and filled with plotholes. This goes for the movie and the book.

 

[spartan231490]

Not really. as I said above, I've read it, and it's not nearly as terrible as everyone says. It's certainly not great, but it's not really below average either. Hell, if you limit yourself to young adult fiction, which is what twilight is, it's a fair sight above average.

As for Steven King, I haven't been impressed by anything he's done. I certainly don't consider him much of an authority. I form my own opinions, using my own observations, I really don't care what who said about what.

I dislike a great many things, people, books, purse-dogs, spinach, Mr. Boston Vodka, the list goes on. I don't make a point out of "hating it" all over the internet. I truly believe that people who do that with anything; whether it's twilight, or CoD, or Bieber; are just trying to make themselves feel better about their own horrible lives.

So by making a point out of hating the haters, online, you're trying to make yourself feel better about your own pathetic, miserable life, as you put it? Now if I was a betting man, I'd probably say you're going to disagree with this portrayal of your rationale, if not the condescending assumptions about your life. When you see why you reject that claim, you will also see why we reject yours.

I'm not hating haters, I'm offering my opinion because I don't think that this trend should prevent people from reading a book that isn't all that bad. There are definitely better things to read, but there are a whole lot worse too.

You guys are the ones who keep quoting me, I'm just defending my position because I believe that it is valid.

Also, fyi, when I want to feel better about my life, I hate on stupid people. And american cartoons. I never claimed I was above this, although I certainly don't do it very often. It's really the same thing as bullying except on a larger scale, by putting others down, you are artificially elevating yourself above them. By putting down the book, you are artificially elevating yourself above all those who like it. Which is why people tend to hate on things that are popular, because it elevates them above a larger group of people.

 

[Jakub324]

I managed to sit through 45 minutes of it and can confirm that it is one of the most boring films to come out ever.

 

[lunam-kardas]

I read my sister's copies of it to be sure and I can now tell you with all certainty: Yes, yes it is that bad. I'm not going to insult anyone by repeating the issues this book likes to punch in the face, we all know what they are. Do a damn google search if you're that curious.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

I managed to sit through 45 minutes of it and can confirm that it is one of the most boring films to come out ever.

Believe me, you got off light. I've seen all 3 currently-available films multiple times and that shit will haunt me forever, knowing that I've wasted hours of my life on it.

 

[Asita]

I'm not hating haters, I'm offering my opinion because I don't think that this trend should prevent people from reading a book that isn't all that bad. There are definitely better things to read, but there are a whole lot worse too.

So wait, when we say we don't like the book we're 'hating" and doing so to 'feel better about [our] pathetic miserable lives'. But when you make a claim belittling the people expressing their dislike of the book you're just expressing an opinion? No, that's a double standard.

 

[Snotnarok]

The hate came from bad writing followed by people getting attacked for having an opinion. There was as a guy who got jumped at his school by a 'pack' of twilight fans who beat him up with text books and scratched him. Nice bunch.

there whole forums that have stories of people getting attacked for not liking twilight

Ah well there you are then, the more you know and all that.

 

[Krantos]

The issue, I think, is that it's mediocre and popular. Much like the Dan Brown books in that way. Elitists hate when sub-par material becomes rampantly popular.

Why? IDK. My guess is they're afraid of it bringing the medium down.

My biggest issue is that it is basically porn for 14-year-old girls/guys. Bella is just a blank slate girls/guys can project themselves into. The two Guys in the book are basically nothing more then the two archetypal Ideal Boys: The Holier-Than-Thou-Gentleman (Edward), and Forbidden-Bad-Boy (Jacob).

It's all an adolescent fantasy, no more so than a hetero teen wanking off to his favorite actress. Harmless, but nevertheless irritating when it becomes this popular.

 

[A Distant Star]

As a book Twilight is kind of trite, it's writing is poor but strangely engaging. It's no worse then any of the old pulp romances... which is to say that it's throw away literature, but that doesnt make is unenjoyably. I didn't much like it myself, but as a male in his late 20s, I am far from the target demographic.

Where Twilight is a big problem is in it's politics. It's politics are at best anachronistic, at worst dangerous. Twilights attitude towards relationships and sexuality are, well... creepy. Not that I inherently find that to be a problem, I read Chuck Palahniuk and China Mieville books, but there's a self awareness to both those authors books. Choke is a depraved book about a sleazy sex addict. But at no point does it present it's characters as being admirable, it doesnt bestow the virtues of showing up at sex addiction anonymous meetings to pick up chicks as being virtuous. And that right there is the crux of Twilight. It is completely unaware of how creepy it is, and so is most of it's fan base.

Sneaking into a girls room to watch her sleep is not romantic, it's creepy. "Imprinting"* on the new born child of the woman you have spent the past 3 books lusting after is mega fucking creepy. I dont hate Twilight, but I fear the lessons naive teen age girls will take away from it. How it will shape the attitudes towards relationships and sex of these so called "Twihards".

On the other hand, maybe I am over estimating the impact it will have on developing young girls. (Hint: I probably am) Maybe they will out grow there obsession and Twilight's childish attitude towards sex and romance for something more real and healthy. Only time will tell really.

*For those how have not read the book. Imprinting is something Werewolves do to young children to create a sexual and romantic attraction between themselves and the child when the child becomes older (Its been a long time since I read the book, but I think the age was 14). Basically you look at a baby and say, one day you will be my wife, and to make sure you dont have a say in the mater, I'm going to do some mystical werewolf mumbo jumbo on you so I will be totally hawt when you grow up. Out of everything in the Twilight books it is the thing that creeps me out the most... it's basically the ultimate form of date rape.

 

[spartan231490]

I'm not hating haters, I'm offering my opinion because I don't think that this trend should prevent people from reading a book that isn't all that bad. There are definitely better things to read, but there are a whole lot worse too.

So wait, when we say we don't like the book we're 'hating" and doing so to 'feel better about [our] pathetic miserable lives'. But when you make a claim belittling the people expressing their dislike of the book you're just expressing an opinion? No, that's a double standard.

You would think so, wouldn't you.
I didn't initiate this convo, I was asked for an opinion, and I offered it, you're the one who keeps pushing it. As you conveniently left out of the quote, I already told you that I'm not above hating to make myself feel better. I'm just not doing it right now.

 

[Asita]

You would think so, wouldn't you.
I didn't initiate this convo, I was asked for an opinion, and I offered it, you're the one who keeps pushing it. As you conveniently left out of the quote, I already told you that I'm not above hating to make myself feel better. I'm just not doing it right now.

I left it out of the quote because it wasn't relevant. I never made the claim that you don't do it at all. I said you're doing it now and making use of a double standard to claim that your opinion on the topic was more valid than those with contrary views by characterizing your perspective as 'just an opinion' and the opposing views were simply belittlement for the sake of the speakers feeling better about their 'pathetic miserable lives'. Do you really expect that people won't pick up on the implicit value judgement there? Or how it's used as an out of hand dismissal of opposing views without actually examining their merit?