Abridged Version of Twilight

[Blank]

The article

Though obviously written to poke fun at Twilight, I can't help but at the very least sense there is a grain of truth to it all.  That's why I refuse to touch the books plus I still have the Sword of Truth books and my Survival Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse to read... And that finance book I still need to read.  Hmm.

Though I am wondering now... Did the story really take place in Washington?

[Josietta]

Yes the main setting was in Forks, Washington.

[Oniya]

That's right everyone, this whole movie is a two-hour-long setup for a joke about the Pacific Northwest.

*laughs uproariously*

[Doomsday]

What the hell are you waiting for Blank?! Wizards First Rule is waiting for you.

[Covert Revulsion]

Holy shit.

That was hilarious.

It's brilliant!

[Doomsday]

Never read the book myself; my sister read it and gave me a first hand account of how horrible it is. And I consider her reading level far below mine, as she's reading the Eragon series, which I refuse to touch.

I found this passage hilarious, and I'm not even done.

"KRISTEN STEWART

Wow. I guess this is what it looks like when the unpopular fat girl's pathetic daydreams get written down and published into a bestselling book. Aren't well-written characters supposed to have flaws?"

"KRISTEN STEWART

Hmm. The only way I will believe you is if you carry me up a mountain using special effects from the 70s.



He DOES."

ahaa.. AHAHAHA!

[Ordell]

Wow, that was such a refreshing article and really started my day off with a smile.  I just feel bad because I have a friend and she has seen the DVD 9 times in the past 72 hours...wasting 18 hours of her life she'll never get back. 

[Josietta]

Since I'll probably be the only one to do this I will just say it...

I found the books to be great. They kept my attention enough that I read through the first one in three days. If I had, had more time I probably would have gotten it done in one day. That's how much I liked the book. I thoroughly enjoyed the first two, the third one was not as good but still decent, but the last one disappointed me. 

I -JUST- saw the movie last night on PPV. I was going to buy it and I'm glad I didn't. While the acting wasn't horrible... there was a lot in it that just made the books look bad. I will give the whole sparkling skin thing to any one who wants to bash it. It was horrid, it just looked like they distorted the picture and added some light rendering. It was sad.  The movie was a little above B rated, as far as the sheer quality of graphics and picture quality/angling.  I think there was A LOT they could have done with it and didn't. They tried to squish in a great and fairly long story into a short film and it just didn't work well, IMHO.

So.. while i enjoyed the books immensely.. the film... not so much.

[MusicNeverDies]

*snickers* That was fantastic. I actually forced myself to read the first three books, so that I could not be told I hadn't read them by the fangirls, and could more get away with insulting them. Also, it gave me a lot of solid basis for all the flaws and things I dislike. Of which there was no great lack.

This script seemed to pinpoint most of the ridiculous author-insert, anti-feminine, Gary Stu issues! Bravo!

*Goes off to send it to friends*

[Ket]

-dies laughing-

I haven't, nor will I, read the books, as vampires do nothing for me.

My best friend has the movie, so I broke down (after she gushed about it for like 2 hours and sat through the movie I had that joked hardcore about Minnesota, her home state) and watched it.  I was nice and kept my comments to myself during the movie...but WOW. Tacky to the extreme. 

I like this abridged version MUCH better. 

[ShrowdedPoet]

"KRISTEN STEWART

Wow. I guess this is what it looks like when the unpopular fat girl's pathetic daydreams get written down and published into a bestselling book. Aren't well-written characters supposed to have flaws?"

That's a really cruel bitchy thing to say. 

And I will admit.  I read them.  I enjoyed them.  Every single one of them.  Got the last two for my last two birthdays.  Borrowed the first two from a friend of mine.  They may not have been the most fantastic works of fiction or really super well written novels but they were enjoyable.  I started reading them before they got all popular just like I started reading Harry Potter before it got all popular.  And yeah, I liked it too.  Again, maybe not the best written but it was still enjoyable.  And before my reading level is called into question, I was reading at a college level in the 6th grade.  Sometimes though, I do enjoy the teenage "trash" novels.  I do complain often that it was so sexually frustrated and even in the last book where there were sex scenes they didn't go into detail. . .THAT irritated me.  But overall, I enjoyed them.

Now the movie on the other hand, I REFUSE to watch it.  Likely to be pure crap.  And all the merchandise, VERY rediculous and I would never waste my money on it. 

[consortium11]

That's a really cruel bitchy thing to say. 

True, but there's a good deal of truth in it as well. It's more tactless (which is kinda the point of those reviews) than untrue.

I read the 1st book, pretty much to find out what the hype was about, partly because I wanted to relive my younger more gothy days and partly because I wanted to see if it was a series that could replace Anne Rice's as my most over the top overwraught vision of "the lonely one's" (or insert other generic term for vampires)

The main character is a near perfect example of the mary sue school of fan-fiction...

[Avi]

I read the first two books, and I noticed many of the same things other people have mentioned.  That being said, I can see why it is so popular, because there are parts that really sparkle with originality (No pun intended).  I can't say that I enjoyed them, but I was glad that I gave them a chance, rather than what some people have done. 

[Sho]

I do have to say, it bothers me when people who haven't read books or seen movies decide to bash them. That said, I actually enjoyed the books. Are they a great classic/will they go down in the halls of the most incredible literature ever written? No. Were they an enjoyable read? For me, yes. Frankly, I give Meyer credit for coming up with an idea and being able to put it into words that other people clearly understood and enjoyed, given the sales. I also enjoyed the movie. I suppose everyone's allowed their own opinion, I just...honestly, don't see why people have to be so mean about it.

Also, I'm not exactly certain why the book is labeled as anti-feminist...as a woman, I didn't think the ideas were particularly repressive.

[MusicNeverDies]

I do have to say, it bothers me when people who haven't read books or seen movies decide to bash them. That said, I actually enjoyed the books. Are they a great classic/will they go down in the halls of the most incredible literature ever written? No. Were they an enjoyable read? For me, yes. Frankly, I give Meyer credit for coming up with an idea and being able to put it into words that other people clearly understood and enjoyed, given the sales. I also enjoyed the movie. I suppose everyone's allowed their own opinion, I just...honestly, don't see why people have to be so mean about it.

Also, I'm not exactly certain why the book is labeled as anti-feminist...as a woman, I didn't think the ideas were particularly repressive.

Personally I don't think repressive so much as Bella's utter dependence on Edward, and even Jacob (In New Moon). She agrees to most anything he suggests and simply follows him as a faithful pet. In New Moon she is utterly destroyed because she loses him, and does not improve in her mood until another male fills that void. Also, she is almost always seen doing the housekeeping with Charlie. That is what I see as anti-feminist in it. *shrug*

And yes, I have read the first three, so I'm not one of those non-reader-bashers.

[Ket]

The thing is, they are poking fun of the movie, not the books.  And from watching it, it really does make her seem like a supremely stereotypical masochistic submissive.  Which, according to my friend, doesn't happen so much in the books.

I still won't read them.  I have no desire to.  For those who like them, nifty for you.  But please, pretty please, can all the merchandise be stricken from the mall?  It's quite difficult to go make-up shopping without having to see it all.  And no, sorry ladies, but the guy who plays Edward is not my opinion of ultimate hotness. 

[MusicNeverDies]

And from watching it, it really does make her seem like a supremely stereotypical masochistic submissive.

There actually is a line where Edward calls her a Masochistic lamb. I havn't seen the movie and don't know if it is in there. But at least the author acknowledges it!

[Covert Revulsion]

I've read all the books, though by far, the movie could have been a lot better. The books were nice, I actually liked it, though the movie seemed plain boring and pretty dull. My sister commented on a lot of things that I noticed too: the scene where she's the stereotypical new girl and suddenly makes friends in less then a day? Where guys just suddenly kiss her on the cheek and have dibs on her? Never seen that happen before.

The scene where she had been bitten by James, had to be by far, the worst acting I've seen. It did not look like she was in pain.

Over all, they could have picked a better actor then Kirsten Stewart, then maybe I'd give the movie at least three stars.

[Josietta]

There actually is a line where Edward calls her a Masochistic lamb. I havn't seen the movie and don't know if it is in there. But at least the author acknowledges it!

Actually the line was somethign like.. 'the Lion fell in love with the Lamb."  "Stupid Lamb."  "Masochistic Lion."

[MusicNeverDies]

Actually the line was somethign like.. 'the Lion fell in love with the Lamb."  "Stupid Lamb."  "Masochistic Lion."

*Shrug* I don't generally learn direct quotes that I don't find quote worthy.

[Josietta]

I only remember it because I saw the movie 2 nights ago.. *shrugs*

[ShrowdedPoet]

The merchandise is VERY annoying.  Poet walks into hottopic. . .takes a quick glance around, all she sees is stupid twilight fan crap. . .she swiftly walks back out cursing stupid fan girls. 

There is nothing wrong with being a masochistic sub and in the last book she is finally a strong self reliant woman.

[Mnemaxa]

Also, I'm not exactly certain why the book is labeled as anti-feminist...as a woman, I didn't think the ideas were particularly repressive.

Much of it stems from the utter dependence Bella has on Edward, as well as Edward's exceedingly stalker type activities towards her.  There is also the part where Edward offers the werewolf the chance to sleep with Bella if he can convince her to get an abortion, the sexual and physical abuse implied in their violent coitus, and him trying to force her to get an abortion as well, despite her wants (setting aside the fact that having the baby will kill her). 

[Inkidu]

Honestly I'm not going to bash the books.

I'm going to bash the vampire genre in general. It's been so glossed over from the old Germanic tales it's quite sad. I mean I'll never say I never enjoyed a vampire movie, I like the old Christopher Lee stuff and could sit through 30 Days of Night. That was mainly for scenario more than the bloodsucking. Blade is still one of my favorite Marvel characters of all time. I loved Van Helsing.

However, it's just become gushy. It's like lets make zombie romance novels, oh wait no that necrophilia... well why wouldn't vampires count. The thing is Twilight's scenario sort of struck me as funny. In the... chemistry of it. Most vampires are fifty-plus in the range of years. That strikes me as a rather big age gap to be calling on minor booty. Even as vanilla as the books are supposed to be.

I also not that they're walking around in daylight. Now, Blade, he's half, Dracula tends to not or be so pure it doesn't matter. However, a lot of newer material just does away with that. Oh why not throw garlic, and stakes out of the  equation.

It's like saying, lets make zombies not-dead it just doesn't work. You end up with something else. I think the genre has become a walking romantic cliche.

/end rant of fictional racism.

[Vandren]

Honestly, couldn't stand the books, but forced myself through at least the first one because of a member of my diss committee who decided (after he saw them at an airport and never read them) that they should be included in my diss.  I nixed that one pretty quickly, as did my director . . . this happened about a month before the defense.

My reasons are pretty much what's been stated already . . . which is why I'm amused by the article and by my local paper's review of the movie (everything the local reviewer stated as flaws in the movie were 100% faithful to the book).

And I consider her reading level far below mine, as she's reading the Eragon series, which I refuse to touch.

Actually, Eragon's not too bad.  It's not great, but not bad.  The first book, at least, definitely reads like it was written by a high school-er who recently read Tolkien.  But, the writing's no worse than Tolkien's and lacks the bad attempts at poetry.   ;)  Eoin Colfer and Jonathan Stroud are much better, in my personal and professional opinions.