Well for starters, they like Twilight, that says a lot right there. But in a more serious answer, the argument that obvious fantasy will negatively impact an otherwise normal individual's life is why the videogame nonsense is nonsense - the problem with this series is the troublesome elements have nothing to do with fantasy at all, but the all too human and extremely unhealthy relationships that are being glamorized. Vampires are fiction, stalkers are fact; it's therefore worrisome that Twilight fans are idolizing a character that, when stripped of any supernatural qualities, is basically a scumbag.camazotz said:so why are we assuming that the average Twilight fan is so gullible?
My sister is 26, and all attempts to explain the unsavory core message of the franchise have met with the same angry and irrational defense you just posited. The problem is clearly not one limited to youngsters.BlueInkAlchemist said:It's a shame most young girls interested in Twilight won't read this or, worse, will claim that you "don't get it" as they defend their beloved fandom.
That is my main complaint that nothing happens and the books are very badly written.Carnagath said:Sometimes my friends and I rent bad movies just to make fun of them. This is usually guaranteed entertainment, especially when the movie takes itself seriously (See Battlefield Earth). But with both of the Twilight movies, we had no fun at all. Watching the first one was like trying to play with Barbie dolls and unavoidably ending up just staring at them, unsure what to do and why little girls like this.
With the second one we came in more determined to setup our off-screen stand up comedy show, but oh dear God, it just robbed us of our spirit and our will to live. 115 minutes of absolutely nothing happening and 5 minutes of something that resembled what might come out of Dan Brown's retarded cousin's imagination. 115 minutes and the only things I can recall happening are 1) a papercut that made a vampire go "yum" 2) half naked male models 3) lots of mountains and rain 4) Edward appearing in a vision to warn Bella that motorcycles are dangerous. Un-fucking-believable. The whole movie was like a black hole. It is quite an accomplishment really, to make something that empty and draw it out so long. Not many people could do it.
Therefore I conclude that every Twilight fan out there MUST be retarded and I wouldn't go anywhere near them, in the same way that I wouldn't go anywhere near someone who eats dogshit and claims it is delicious.
here's the thing, were the characters in question accomplishing anything else during their self-destructive streaks, and were the characters in question given firmly established personalities prior to these self-destructive escapades? because the answer in Bella's case is no to both.Seldon2639 said:For perspective's sake, though, is the "your life revolves around your life interest" any different from any romantic comedy? I mean, a review of even some of Gaiman's work would have some very similar undertones of female vulnerability, male heroism, ect.
Every form of media focused on romance is based in large part on the premise that "my life revolves around my love". I mean, come on, from D.N Angel and Full Metal Panic to Stardust, to John Cusack's extended resume, it's all about obsession (perhaps love) being the driving force in someone's life.
True, the male-centric stories tend more toward the deed of daring do, but even that's tinged by the "manipulative *****" aspect; and if we assume that young men are just as empty-headed as young women, then the entire catalog of tropes in that genre are doing just as much harm.
How about we count it all as escapist fantasy, and assume that the readers (male and female) can distinguish between fiction and reality.
On the issue of Bella's self, sacrifice, though, it does raise an interesting question. If the roles were significantly reversed, and a guy had to harm himself/endanger his life in order to protect or aid his love interest, would we bat an eye? When Richard in the Sword of Truth series does stupid shit in order to protect Kahlan, do we consider it wrong? When Harry Dresden becomes self-destructive and retarded after the loss of his girlfriend (and, arguably, the love of his life), do we view it as self-indulgent crap, or as legitimate character development?
Go read the Iliad.Not G. Ivingname said:Silly Bob! The Middle ages didn't have wars fought over a single woman. That is the stone age we are talking about! Hit girl with club and she is yours to drag to your cave! Get your history right.MovieBob said:The Problem With Twilight
It's more than just bad moviemaking.
Read Full Article
I hate to disagree but you couldn't be more wrong. While you do make some good points about the whole self sacrifice thing on Bella's part, that isn't really what I meant about her being so reliant on the boys in the story. I have read plenty of books where the female leads sacrifice just as much as the male leads, and do so without being so wimpy. Bella has NO existance wthout Edward, her life literally revolves around him.Seldon2639 said:For perspective's sake, though, is the "your life revolves around your life interest" any different from any romantic comedy? I mean, a review of even some of Gaiman's work would have some very similar undertones of female vulnerability, male heroism, ect.Ridergurl10 said:I'm so glad someone else sees the problems with this series that I do.MovieBob said:The Problem With Twilight
It's more than just bad moviemaking.
Read Full Article
Although I worry much more about teaching girls that their lives should revolve around a guy (or two), then brainwashing them into thinking they have to stay virgins. An entire generation of girls who can't think for themselves just scares me, thats all there is to say.
There are SOOO many better books for teenage girls with MUCH better messages . . . not to mention better writing. Although I'm pretty sure I've read elementary school book reports with better writing than this series
Every form of media focused on romance is based in large part on the premise that "my life revolves around my love". I mean, come on, from D.N Angel and Full Metal Panic to Stardust, to John Cusack's extended resume, it's all about obsession (perhaps love) being the driving force in someone's life.
True, the male-centric stories tend more toward the deed of daring do, but even that's tinged by the "manipulative *****" aspect; and if we assume that young men are just as empty-headed as young women, then the entire catalog of tropes in that genre are doing just as much harm.
How about we count it all as escapist fantasy, and assume that the readers (male and female) can distinguish between fiction and reality.
On the issue of Bella's self, sacrifice, though, it does raise an interesting question. If the roles were significantly reversed, and a guy had to harm himself/endanger his life in order to protect or aid his love interest, would we bat an eye? When Richard in the Sword of Truth series does stupid shit in order to protect Kahlan, do we consider it wrong? When Harry Dresden becomes self-destructive and retarded after the loss of his girlfriend (and, arguably, the love of his life), do we view it as self-indulgent crap, or as legitimate character development?
Maybe I'm spending too much time defending a series I don't have any actual affection for (and I have defended the mythological "everyone makes shit up" aspect of vampire stories), but it seems like the same behavior we deride in Bella (and consider antediluvian) we would praise in a male character.
I can talk about the "virginity/honor killing" thing another time, it just feels like we're not being entirely fair.
Oh i can see why she would do that just fine... Religious belifs... But i dont giver enough crdit to have done that on purpose.. She is just not good enough a writer to have done it on purposeShadowKatt said:I had absolutely no idea that this series embodied that much evil.
In all seriousness, there is no way that Meyer thought of all that when she wrote it. I mean, I can't imagine why she would. If Bobs analysis is on the ball(And it usually is, he's pretty damn good), then it's taking a step back to when women wouldn't have been able to write a book in the first place. I think it's all pretty well coincidental, though that doesn't make the impact any less real. However, I think the saving grace to this are the fangirls. The utterly moronic fangirls that are just showing up for fan service and NOT reading into this at all. They're just there to see pretty boys and that's it.
He talk not really about mariage per say... But traditional mariage where the woman have to be submissive and passive and the man being domminant and oppressive...Foolishman1776 said:"Patriarchal virginity worship... that characterizes the lowest points in humanity"? Are you serious? Marriage is now bad? Come on guy, I dare you to qualify that statement. You sound like a male feminist, sorry to nitpick a line, I really hate to do that, but I can't stand statements like that. Marriage is not oppressive to women anymore than it's oppressive to men, please, prove me wrong.
I was raised in a traditional family, with conservative parents. My understanding of traditional marriage was mutual submission, and division of responsibilities. That the person earning the money for the family (in most cases, the male) had the responsibility to see that it was spent, well, responsibly made sense. Beyond this even in the most traditional marriages, that I am aware of the woman's power in the home borders on absolute, and most decisions were made mutually. I despise that people characterize the whole institution by the most dysfunctional people involved in it, even if they are a minority.Talvrae said:He talk not really about mariage per say... But traditional mariage where the woman have to be submissive and passive and the man being domminant and oppressive...
But it's not what Stephanie Mayer promote... look at how Edward treat bella and you will understand that he would go with nothing less than absolute power over herFoolishman1776 said:I was raised in a traditional family, with conservative parents. My understanding of traditional marriage was mutual submission, and division of responsibilities. Even in the most traditional marriages, the woman's power in the home borders on absolute, and most decisions were made mutually. I despise that people characterize the whole institution by the most dysfunctional people involved in it, even if they are a minority.ShadowKatt said:He talk not really about mariage per say... But traditional mariage where the woman have to be submissive and passive and the man being domminant and oppressive...
She doesn't treat him a whole lot better, based on what VERY little I know of the series (most of it second hand). I seem to remember that she flakes out on him more than once for not being her perfect man statue. I think even more disturbing than the implications of the book is that no one even tries to see things from the male's perspective. She seems to expect just as much worship from him, he doesn't really seem to expect much from her, other than her agreeing to exclusivity. Again, I don't know much about the series, but frankly, from what little I know, I almost feel sorry for the character, Edward, is it?Talvrae said:But it's not what Stephanie Mayer promote... look at how Edward treat bella and you will understand that he would go with nothing less than absolute power over herFoolishman1776 said:I was raised in a traditional family, with conservative parents. My understanding of traditional marriage was mutual submission, and division of responsibilities. Even in the most traditional marriages, the woman's power in the home borders on absolute, and most decisions were made mutually. I despise that people characterize the whole institution by the most dysfunctional people involved in it, even if they are a minority.ShadowKatt said:He talk not really about mariage per say... But traditional mariage where the woman have to be submissive and passive and the man being domminant and oppressive...