[NGTM-1R]

It's just your average self-insertion Mary Sue. No need to go thinking there's anything else there. I don't hear a single thing about the Twilight series that hasn't already been extensively done in Mary Sue fanfiction. People who don't know how to deal with actual human interaction love that ****.

No. No it's not. I know your average Mary Sue far too well; I admin for a fiction site tuesdays. This ain't her.

...Wait. What the hell did I just say? 

I think you were describing Laruell K. Hamiliton's Anita Blake books, only she wouldn't be stopped by mere parts problems. My sister was terminally weirded out when I pointed out Anita makes reference to "enjoying extra bits" while sleeping with a werecat. What extra bits do cats have?

Barbs.

[MP-Ryan]

While I won't dispute the first movie was crap and I expect the second is equally as bad, I'm curious about one thing:

How many of the commentators here have actually read all four novels?  I only ask because I actually have, and there are a great many points worthy of discussion, but I'd rather not bother if people are judging the series based entirely on their experience seeing the movie(s) or having read only 1 or 2 of the books.

And no, it is definitely not a BDSM fantasy.  That isn't even a creative or deep-reading interpretation - it's just plain stupid.  No offense to you personally.  Did you read the four books?

[Mongoose]

Why in God's name would we subject ourselves to that hell?

[NGTM-1R]

And no, it is definitely not a BDSM fantasy.  That isn't even a creative or deep-reading interpretation - it's just plain stupid.  No offense to you personally.  Did you read the four books?

I did warn you it's softcore, right? Right? You didn't actually read what I was saying, did you? Or are you just not familar with the subject material? Admittedly I don't have an abnormal pyschology degree or anything, but with all the weirdos I hang out with in the dark corners of the internet who freely admit their weirdoness and will explain it at length, I think I'm at least a tiny bit qualified here. What's your source for how such people think, Ryan?

Of course I did. Legally. Without paying for them. I wouldn't rag on them if I hadn't read them. Did you? Because I'm not talking about the movies; bad though they are, they're better than the books (talk about your damn with faint praise).

[Scotty]

You know, discussions like this make more sense if you read the entire post.

How many of the commentators here have actually read all four novels?  I only ask because I actually have, and there are a great many points worthy of discussion,

Anyway, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that hanging out in dark corners of the internet makes you qualified for ANYTHING.

FWIW, I disagree with your statements as well.  Bella loves Edward, as neurotic and ill-advised as it is.  Circumstances alone do not provide sufficient evidence for any kind of contrived reasoning like that. 

(I have read books 1 and 2, and while I didn't particularly like them, I don't think they were steaming piles of ****, either.)

[MP-Ryan]

I did warn you it's softcore, right? Right? You didn't actually read what I was saying, did you? Or are you just not familar with the subject material? Admittedly I don't have an abnormal pyschology degree or anything, but with all the weirdos I hang out with in the dark corners of the internet who freely admit their weirdoness and will explain it at length, I think I'm at least a tiny bit qualified here. What's your source for how such people think, Ryan?

I did read what you're saying, I just happen to think you're wrong.  The author is a devout follower of a relatively strict religious sect writing for a young teen audience through a series designed to age with them - proceeding from early stages of infatuation through marriage and early child-rearing.  It's an idealized linear progression of average growth and development experiences told through a literary device (mythical creatures) in order to make it more interesting.  The characters themselves, however, are fairly predictable and ordinary, mythic nature of some of them notwithstanding.  Bella is an ordinary, albeit infatuated, teen girl - if anything, a somewhat sexually repressed one and certainly not meeting the fairly consistent characteristics of a "submissive" (which usually reflect a less-severe Borderline Personality Disorder).  At some point you have to consider the author here; we're talking a religious culture in which women are fairly passive in general.  Meyer explicitly DIDN'T write about sexuality through most of the novels

Source:  Psychology degree, with abnormal psychology and literature courses.

Of course I did. Legally. Without paying for them. I wouldn't rag on them if I hadn't read them. Did you? Because I'm not talking about the movies; bad though they are, they're better than the books (talk about your damn with faint praise).

I already said I've read all four.

[iamzack]

[Colonol Dekker]

I don't know who she is but I wouldn't mind sharing if you don't . . . .

[Rian]

Top 30 most disturbing Twilight products.

Lawlz.

[Nuclear1]

I don't know who she is but I wouldn't mind sharing if you don't . . . .

Stephenie Meyer, author of the Twilight series.

[Flipside]

Well. I've never read the books or watched the show, but it sounds like an attempt to break into the Goth and Furry markets simultaneously...

[NGTM-1R]

Bella loves Edward, as neurotic and ill-advised as it is.  Circumstances alone do not provide sufficient evidence for any kind of contrived reasoning like that. 

That has absolutely no bearing on my interpretation. (I know, that breaks brains too on occasion.) It actually helps, in fact.

Well. I've never read the books or watched the show, but it sounds like an attempt to break into the Goth and Furry markets simultaneously...

That's Hamilton. Meyer's not quite that delibrately crazy.

[MR_T3D]

Well. I've never read the books or watched the show, but it sounds like an attempt to break into the Goth and Furry markets simultaneously...

that made my break from tedious project modelling keyboard worthwhile

[mxlm]

I think you were describing Laruell K. Hamiliton's Anita Blake books, only she wouldn't be stopped by mere parts problems. My sister was terminally weirded out when I pointed out Anita makes reference to "enjoying extra bits" while sleeping with a werecat. What extra bits do cats have?

Barbs.

The Meredith Gentry books were far worse for that, surely?

Well, I only read the first Gentry, and stopped reading AB after the cluster**** (har har) that was Narcissus in Chains, so maybe not.

[Nuke]

first of all i never really liked vampires (or warewolves for that matter). i was always been a zombie and frankenstein kinda guy. the reason i dont like vampires is because the historical figure whom the dracula character is based on is far more interesting than any vampire movie ive ever seen. vlad the impaler was just a total brutal badass, vampires never impaled anyone in the ass with a rather large timber, theyre immortal so no threats to their existance. and they arent always being attacked by turks (and then impaling them).

but twilight isnt even a real vampire movie. its a lame ass attempt to capitalize on the ignorance of teenagers who wouldnt know a good story if it bit em in the balls (or the place where those balls would inevitably grow if only they would stop being a whiney emo kid). its a movie for teenagers and i dont really see the point of wasting a couple hours watching it.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

What is Twilight?

Titanic with monsters and no ship.

Or.....

Hanna Montana making Bram Stoker puke.....

Or.....

More Hollywood Entertainment for the Fecal Masses.

my best definition.....

Garbage.

[Stealth]

I'd always wondered why everyone raved about the Twilight movie.  Two weeks ago my sisters and I decided to watch it to see what all the hype was about.  Note that neither of us had read the books, and we don't ever plan to either.  After watching it, I can honestly say it wasn't a horrible movie.  It's not my favorite movie by any means, but it wasn't all that bad - it kept me entertained watching it, and that's how i judge movies   There were some realllly cheesy parts (like the dazzling vampire), but otherwise wasn't all that bad.

Last Sunday the three of us went to see New Moon.  Again - not too bad.  I wouldn't watch it twice, and more than likely won't buy the DVD, but not too bad

Now go ahead and judge me.

[Nuclear1]

I'm not going to judge you--I actually kinda liked the first movie too.  Not to the point of giggle fit like all the 12 and 13 year olds in the theater, but there were some entertaining scenes at least.  Lots of cheesiness, but overall it was alright.

[MP-Ryan]

first of all i never really liked vampires (or warewolves for that matter). i was always been a zombie and frankenstein kinda guy. the reason i dont like vampires is because the historical figure whom the dracula character is based on is far more interesting than any vampire movie ive ever seen. vlad the impaler was just a total brutal badass, vampires never impaled anyone in the ass with a rather large timber, theyre immortal so no threats to their existance. and they arent always being attacked by turks (and then impaling them).

but twilight isnt even a real vampire movie. its a lame ass attempt to capitalize on the ignorance of teenagers who wouldnt know a good story if it bit em in the balls (or the place where those balls would inevitably grow if only they would stop being a whiney emo kid). its a movie for teenagers and i dont really see the point of wasting a couple hours watching it.

There's so much vampire garbage out now that it isn't really worth critiquing any of it based on history, but rather on its own merits in establishing a mythos separate from history.  Vampirism as a disease is based on the symptoms of severe sickle-cell anemia, but you'll find virtually no reference to that in any modern film, television, or book.  Trying to look at the vampirism from history in today's context is a pointless exercise when critiquing entertainment media.

That out of the way, the Twilight series of novels really isn't that bad, considering the audience it's written for.  I'm not really surprised the majority of comments around here are negative - it's not written for males in general, teens or otherwise.  Hell, I read it purely out of literary interest to see what all the fuss was about, and while I generally found the books enjoyable (excepting New Moon) you can tell throughout exactly who the target audience is, and the books are written solely for them.

[Commander Zane]

Vampires shouldn't sparkle. Period.
It's a movie about ****ing fairies, not nocturnal beings that people should fear.