The Problem With Twilight

[wooty]

You know what Bob, I never looked at the series like that before. Thank you for providing me with some valuable pub ammo to use against my friend who thinks that Twilight is the definition of novel writing.

 

[LewsTherin]

While the craptasticality of the series is undeniable, I think you just might be reading into this a bit overmuch.

 

[DancePuppets]

Twilight really worries me, I think most men are above desiring girls like Bella though so hopefully most women will realise that it's utter nonsense.

 

[Smokescreen]

Bob-this was a fairly solid read, I just have one critique:

This article reads like a talkie, and not like an essay.

Take my opinion for what it's worth, of course, I just feel that this would be served better if it didn't read with the same kind of cadence and flourish as your video reviews have. Your logic is sound, your ideas are all there, I just think you've allowed a little too much speaking voice to overrun your writing voice, if that makes any sense.

Otherwise, keep fighting the good one. Cheers.

 

[RaphaelsRedemption]

I hate Twilight, and I've only just understood why...

Bella (whiny little ***** that she is) has no social skills and no friends. She makes no effort to know those classmates in her school... or just about anyone. I know this, I read the books.

Look, that's ok, I did that too. But the thing is, Bella gets a boyfriend. No, scratch that, she gets two hunky immortal types who fight over her. This is not real, girlies! You Twihards need to understand being introverted and unsociable does not gets you the continued interest of men!

I got a boyfriend eventually... when I was 21! Ok, living proof right there. And I had to work hard on communication and friendship and stuff first. That's really what I hate about Twilight. As far I can tell, it leads girls to believe that it's ok to be social inept and not to care about others, only about yourself. That your worth is determined by the number of immortal hunks fighting over you, even though you have the personality of a wet tea towel, and that it could really happen.

I mean, I want to see the ending where both the vampire and the werewolf realise what a brat Bella is and walk away. So she can grow a personality. And hopefully a brain.

 

[stickmangrit]

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?

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.

in New Moon, Bella repeatedly engages in recklessly suicidal behavior. she does this not while accomplishing anything noble(cop w/death wish taking unnecessary risks) or out of desire to accomplish something(Lois Lane repeatedly wandering into deathtraps out of a patholigical need to "get the story."), but because when she does so she hallucinates that Edward is warning her not to do this shit.

as Moviebob and many others have so eloquently put it, the problem with Twilight is that not only does the entire narrative collapse the instant you apply any amount of logical thought to it, but in doing so you find numerous, numerous unfortunate implications. the personality of every other character reads like a DSM entry, every other bit of dialogue that isn't people gazing longingly into each others eyes sounds like it was lifted whole cloth from an after school special on abusive male partners or rape, the driving source for every problem to be overcome in the plot is "Edward won't fucking bite Bella," and the solution to every one of these problems is "Bella nobly self-immolating until Edward finally turns her."

it combines the worst kind of fictional romance, places it front and center to the derision of anything that might actually be interesting, and just gets progressively creepier as it goes on.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

I remember Spoony over at The Spoony Experiment wrote an addendum to his New Moon review saying that Bella's neediness and selfishness borders on sociopathic. Good times: http://spoonyexperiment.com/2009/11/22/vlog-11-22-09-new-moon/

Anyway, I thankfully belong to a family that is comprised of three men that have nothing but detest for a series that is disgusting as this. I once told my mother about Breaking Dawn's end and her jaw dropped. Unfortunately though I have a LOT of female cousins and they somehow think this is an acceptable series. At XMas I should have yanked my one cousin's boyfriend to the side and A) Step up your game, because if she's watching this shit that's a bad thing or B) RUN.

 

[Mordwyl]

The Problem With Twilight

It's more than just bad moviemaking.

Read Full Article

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.

Go read the Iliad.

 

[Ridergurl10]

The Problem With Twilight

It's more than just bad moviemaking.

Read Full Article

I'm so glad someone else sees the problems with this series that I do.

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

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?

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.

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.

Try reading anything by J.D. Robb for example. Her books are about a strong female lead who is married (after the third book at least), but she has a life without her man. Both main charactors in that particular series have issues and rely on eachother to get through them, but it goes both ways. In the Twilight books Edward is ALWAYS the one saving Bella, she can't do ANYTHING without him.

For me its all about going both ways in these books. Bella is always being saved, never doing the saving. She thinks life is over when Edward leaves, while he apparently continues to function (even though I'm sure he misses her). Bellas is just not the kind of role model I think is good for girls who are still developing their sense of self. They should be looking at female leads who can save themselves, not rely on a man to do it for them (I swear I'm not some crazy feminist, I just hate books when the girls are TOTALLY useless without their men)!!

 

[SideburnsPuppy]

What problem I had is a message that's not even thinly-veiled. She pretty much outright says, "The only way I can possibly be happy is to marry my first high school sweetheart the god damned moment I turn eighteen." And it's not just Twilight. Nearly every drama a female acquaintance of mine has gone through an even brief obsession with (e.g. One Tree Hill, The OC, and, of course, Twilight) has ended with the couple who was together in high school getting married as soon as they legally can, which just isn't all that likely to happen in real life.

Also, why the hell does she hate her dad so much? I read the first chapter of the first book, and every other sentence was a reiteration about how much of a dick he is. She even whined and bitched when HE BOUGHT HER A CAR.

 

[Foolishman1776]

"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.

On a bit of a tangent, it reminds me of the line you made in your review of Splice. Something about traditional movies on the subject being "preachy about 'not messing in God's domain'". I suppose you could characterize it that way, but I would offer an alternative view on the subject. Maybe the point is "you're not as smart as you think you are, you're very fallible and the chances of causing bad things to happen when you screw around with the rules of genetics/the universe, there's a fairly good chance something bad will happen.".

 

[Talvrae]

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.

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 purpose

"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.

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]

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...

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]

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...

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.

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 her

 

[Foolishman1776]

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...

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.

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 her

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?

Edit: put the wrong poster in the original quote at first, fixed mine, but not yours.

 

[Talvrae]

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?

Edit: put the wrong poster in the original quote at first, fixed mine, but not yours.

Bite me on that... i dont have read them eighter... Not even watched the movie but the first half of the first movie... I'm simply basing what i said from what i have read elsewhere...

 

[Foolishman1776]

The movie is just bad, bad bad. Seen all three movies and it's fucking hilariously pathetic. Those movies aren't ART!

To bring up a bit of a deeper question, can pornography be art?

 

[Talvrae]

The movie is just bad, bad bad. Seen all three movies and it's fucking hilariously pathetic. Those movies aren't ART!

To bring up a bit of a deeper question, can pornography be art?

I don't have seen any that could qualify as art... But.. Why could it not? If the porn movie was well writen well filmed, well directed... maybe it could qualify... remember me of a bit of news i saw this week... searching it in english to see if i can find it back

edit found it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_Diaries

 

[stickmangrit]

The only concern I can see over the views you are presenting, and specifically over the suggestion that this movie might define or influence behavior in young women, is that it seems to be the same error that conventional critics and the media in general makes constantly toward the movies and games so prevalent in our gamer/nerd culture. Suggesting that the women who enjoy Twilight will be inclined to develop anti-feminist, submissive and/or powerless roles against stalker/domineering males sounds very close (in my mind) the popular assertion that if I love to play Modern Warfare 2 then I must either be a gun nut, prone to violence in real life, or otherwise am easily influenced in some way for the worse. We know the people who make such assertions about our gamer culture are full of it, because we know that we, as people, are not so shallow, desperate for guidance and malleable that playing a violent game or watching a violent movie will otherwise change our very nature as people....so why are we assuming that the average Twilight fan is so gullible?

comparing this to the influence of violent media is inaccurate. consider instead how many male geeks have plunged headlong into doomed, unhealthy relationships with clearly damaged goods since Annie Hall introduced the concept of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl. how many times have young male geeks done reenactments of The Offspring's "Self Esteem" in pursuit of a wholly fictional ideal mate archetype? i've seen it more than a few times, and now socially awkward females have their own mentally unstable fictional ideal who happens to have all the qualities of an abusive douchebag to pursue. wheee!

 

[Sovvolf]

Snippy Snip

That is the biggest problem with Belle... She is the most stereotypical damsel in distress ever to be placed in a piece of fiction. Heck Louis Lane was more independent and was a much stronger character. She's written in an attempt to pass her off as deep or complex but she is in every way a damsel in distress. This could have worked though if she had gotten stronger. I mean, the problem with the character is that she really doesn't progress. She stays the same whiny, dependent ***** all the way through the series. She has moments here and there where she takes a couple independent actions but they are to few and far between to give her any character.

Now I could accept her being naive and dependent in the first movie, she's new to all this and not sure whats going on and with this discovery of Edward being a vampire along with there being other vampires in the area... Yeah, she'll be confused and dependent on the first friendly Vampire she comes across.

However in the second movie... This is where she should start becoming more self-dependant and starting to be able to look after her self. When Edward leaves, she should have been mournful yes, sure, her boyfriends just done a runner. However now he's gone she should be learning to take care of her self and snap her self out of her vulnerable state.
She doesn't, instead she tries killing her self a good amount of times and then finds another big muscular male to take care of her. This doesn't show progression, she just seems more of a parasite, way too dependent on the others.

Then she stays this way through the rest of the books... She doesn't develop... Okay, refusing to have the abortion despite it killing her shows an amount of strength in the character but it's way too late in the series for it to amount to anything.