Well, you are right. One interpretation or spin on whatever fantasy monster or whatever isn't more right than the other. In that sense, yeah, the Vampires from Twilight are true vampires. However, they're nevertheless still a stupid take on the vampire. See this:
But why did they have to glitter?! It's not that it's too "original", it's that it's non-sentical and unfitting the general "image" of the vampire. Dark, moody creatures that... glitter? I suspect that the author simply ran out of superlatives and ways to describe Edward as the most beautiful creature ever, so she made him glitter in sunlight as well. "He's sooo prettyyyyyy..."
I find unlikely. I mean, I don't mind the vegetarian part. If you want to have vampires as good guys they need to have some sort of alternative food input. As long as they're still SUPPOSED to drink blood, they're still vampires (though this part is quite critical). I don't mind that sunlight don't hurt them, but still effect them, either. I rather like the spin that they have to keep out of the sunlight, or they blow their cover.Just because the execution is flawed doesn't mean that the idea of a vegetarian vampire who glitters like Lady Gaga when exposed to sunlight couldn't be interesting if done correctly.
But why did they have to glitter?! It's not that it's too "original", it's that it's non-sentical and unfitting the general "image" of the vampire. Dark, moody creatures that... glitter? I suspect that the author simply ran out of superlatives and ways to describe Edward as the most beautiful creature ever, so she made him glitter in sunlight as well. "He's sooo prettyyyyyy..."