Writer's Block: Twilight becomes you

[deathpixie]

[Error: unknown template qotd]

And I thought the whole Harry Potter insanity was annoying. Those, at least, are palatable compared to the tripe that Stephanie Meyer turned out and the Twi-hards are even worse in terms of fangirling. Death threats because people are criticising a series of books? Seriously?

And yes, I attempted to read at least the first one. I got half-way through the first chapter before my spine leapt up my neck and strangled my brain in an attempt to preserve my sanity. Not only is the concept horrible, the characters cardboard cut outs with stereotyped personalities, but Meyers is a hack writer who is in sad need of an editor with the balls to tell her she can't write for crap. J. K. Rowling was derivitive but at least she had a decent vocabulary and didn't have to pause to thump us over the head with how sparkly the main characters are.

(also, I quite like the Harry Potter movies - they cut out the extraneous description and get into the meat of things, as it were, which was actually a good story)

It'll be funny when they try and film the last book. The whole "vampire baby breaks her mother's spine and daddy has to perform a Ceasarian with his teeth" ought to make a wonderful trailer.

I think this sums things up nicely. :)

Watch on YouTube

Comments

[threnody.livejournal.com]

I made it through two books and about two chapters into the third before I called it quits. I kept waiting for it to start being good, and it never did. I still don't know how I managed to make it that far without killing myself or anyone else.

[hopeness.livejournal.com]

But sometimes, you just have to eat the candy, even if you know it's bad for you.

[ms-maree.livejournal.com]

The worst part for me (well apart from the fact that everyone at work is reading it, although I'm making inroads with reccing them Charlaine Harris's Sookie Stackhouse series. Is that it is so very popular, despite it being so crap.

I think I'm naive, I thought generally the masses had better taste, but I should have known, just look at how successful Dan Brown and Matthew Reilly have been, and those books are horrendous.

[ataventure.livejournal.com]

IDK. I liked A&D. It wasn't prize winning or anything but it was a page turner.

As to the Twi-ness, I never understood it. I read some really hilarious reviews when Book 4 came out, but that was literally the closest I ever came to "reading" the books. The fact that they took the raw sexuality out of a VAMPIRE tale just baffled me. It still does. Is that the kind of world we live in?

Srsly, I live in a town where people are too SCARED to celebrate Halloween. Do I also have to live in a world where people have to dumb down the vampire mythos to a bunch of stunted, politically correct, half-assed abstaining-from-sex teenagers?

I miss Buffy. So fucking much.

[ms-maree.livejournal.com]

fact that they took the raw sexuality out of a VAMPIRE tale just baffled me.

That baffles me too, over the last couple of years I've read dozens of urban/fantasy romance vampire stories, and while they all differ on how good vampires are (from totally evil to just like humans more or less), they all have them as very sexual, and that sex appeal is used as a predator's arsenal.

I think Meyers misses the whole point. But the lack of sex also makes me wonder how anyone could see it as escapist. If Bella got it on with Edward, even suggestively (for the teens), no matter how badly it was written I'd get the appeal.

[ataventure.livejournal.com]

Or at LEAST come up with some decent sexual tension. I was/am a huge Buffy fan. And while they only got it on one time (on the show...twice if you count Angel), the sexual TENSION was intense! And there was a perfectly valid reason not to go all humpy. And it wasn't, hey, I'll rip out your cervix and hand it to you on a plate, which I believe is the reason for the Twi lack of humpies. IDK for sure.

C'mon with the TENSION. Everybody is doing it. Hop on the freakin' wagon.

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

So here's my thoughts.

before I ever heard of twilight, I found THE HOST (and for some odd reason, I am really behind the times in what is popular). While everyone was raving about the twilight series, ignorant me had never heard of stephanie Meyer and yet, she was sitting comfortably on my bedside table, unable to put down the host which I found was well written and enjoyable.

Then I heard about twilight, bought the first book and read through the first chapter (then died a thousand deaths). So the first book sucked. I didn't read it and sorry I ever bought it. First movie sucked too (I blame the director on this cours because Eragon was an awesome book and the movie blew which blew the whole thing out of the water, so eragon had a similar bad movie taste).

I watched new moon. It was awesome. Okay, it was geared towards teens but it was a good pace (though I could have done without the updates of the month in one scene in particular) and then ending was fab.

I bought the third book because I had this idea that she must have picked up better in writing style after two books. I was right. the book is good, it moves along and Im half way through it in four hours (okay, I peeled through this book) and it explains everything in that book that was previous to the other two movies.

So that's my suggestion. Although I have to say, bella is pathetic. Edward is a little posessive but I really like the rest and it explores a lot of the other character's backgrounds and why things are the way they are. :D

Though I do agree with you. The first boook SUCKS.

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

And I just want to say, in the third book, the characters have more appeal because there's a lot of backstory that ties into why the vampires are paired up (and how) without the sexual tension. They're more life companions which appeals to be (more behind the person than their sexual interests). I notice from above that no one likes that there's no sexual tension but I think im really dry up on the sexual tension thing. The sexual tension between edward and bell is something I ignore because it bores me to tears and most vampire movies bore me because its an old song sung in all vampire movies/books. actually, overall, I think im just dry on the bella/edward thing. I just like more story to the characters and thats what she's giving in the third book (without having to read through the first and second - seriously, never read either). More focus on the others and very little on edward and bella (though I have a feeling all these things tie into bella in some weird obsessive way. I havn't finished the book, so I don't even know yet.

The movie was interesting enough to make me buy the third book (and READ it). I have a feeling the second book is equally bad as the first, but I think all the good action starts in the third. The movies basically sum up the books (im just assuming) because it was really easy for me to pick up the third and know exactly what they're talking about, give or take a few minor details taht weren't mentioned (but you got the jist of it in the movie).

[deathpixie]

So, out of a series of four books, only one is worth reading (because I'm sorry, I've read enough synopses of Bella's vampire baby birthing in Book 4 to know it's probably the worst writing ever seen).

Having read this review, which has some interesting insights into the Mormon background of the author and how it is heavily used in the themes of the books, I'll pass, I think.

That said, if people enjoy them, fair enough. I'm just sick to death of the complete and utter saturation Twilight's had on the media. It bugged the crap out of me with Harry Potter and it annoys me even more now, since in my opinion, the Twilight series doesn't even have the benefit of being well-written or actually imaginative.

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't read reviews. I think I like to take things in on my own and find out for myself. Harry potter was a good read. I read three books before the fourth movie ruined the book I was half way through. Decided I would read the books after the movies came out. Explains a lot more about the movies, which I found interesting.

With Twilight, Im trying out book three and seeing how its done. But I don't know anything about book four, so I really don't have an opinion that's fair to it. Nor do I have an english lit degree behind my back so I think my opinion of a good author is what grabs me and keeps my interest.

It's like... hm.. If I wanted to get into authors I really hate, I would say Stephen King is the worse Author I've ever read. He's boring and I polished off two of his books in no time and could have done without.

Michael criton, same thing. Wealth of knowledge, well put together science but there was no grab. I polished off that book too (a little more knowledgable too since he researches a lot of what he writes) but man, slow as hell plot wise.

George R.R. Martin, Marvelous, although his latest writings (other books) have been somewhat dry. Not the song and ice and fire series (Which I know you're reading, right?). Though I havn't read the fourth. Im waiting for the fifth to come out because I'd rather not wait another four years in anticipation (Although I think I have to reread the books again to update myself).

My point is I try to be objective and give things a more concrete approach before I give out my opinion. I don't care what the author's background is (unless your the authord of The God Delusion, then my interest is peaked) but that's more theory than anything.

I should stop while Im ahead. This could have me going on and on, adding more to that journal post than I like. XD Seriously, I should just give you a short response and be done eh?

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

It'll be funny when they try and film the last book. The whole "vampire baby breaks her mother's spine and daddy has to perform a Ceasarian with his teeth" ought to make a wonderful trailer.


okay ew. LOL is that what the fourth book is about? haha oh god. I must have skimmed over that part, or missed it because I just reread your post and I was all like uh! o.O

Oh. Maybe I should stop on the third book once I finish eh? heh.

sigh.

[deathpixie]

The fourth book is basically about Bella and Edward getting married as soon as she's done high school, she gets pregnant, the baby nearly kills her being born (breaking her spine and pulping her internal organs - as someone who's been through childbirth, you'll either find it hysterically funny or gut-wrenchingly gross) and Edward bites the baby out of her with his teeth. Oh, and Jacob does that creepy werewolf imprinting thing on the baby. Oh, and Bella is finally made a vampire and straight off the bat she's the bestest, most beautifullest vampire evah!!!!

Apologies for spoilers, but you'll probably thank me for saving you the trouble and the expense of buying it.

Which is why I do pay attention to reviews and opinions. I don't have a huge budget for books and I like to get something I'm going to read and re-read if I'm buying it. And yeah, perhaps I've done far too many literature classes to just sit back and enjoy pulp for pulp's sake - just like watching certain movies or television shows, I tend to get bored very quickly if there's no substance to it.

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

hm.. Yes I think I will thank you, although the ideas are alittle off kilter there with the .. uh... hmm... I don't even know what to say about book four (haha) and yes, ew to the imprinting. Im not sure what that's about in book three (I think I did the 'ew' thing). but now that I know what happens, I have a little more time to read something else. I will finish book three, just because Im itching to know what goes on and learn more about the cullen family (preferably Jasper and his horrific background - which is, historically interesting).

And really, the imprinting thing? I think she was trying to go somewhere with it that was spiritual and failed. Hmm, the more I talk about this, the more I seem to have against the characters. *sigh*

Yeah Im the same way with movies and tv shows. I better like it if im goign to waste my time on it but I have the completely opposite view of books. for some reason, I tend to be more forgiving and read through a 1/4 of a book and if it fails, then I drop it, take it to a used bookstore and get a new book!

And just for an aside, your internet lingo makes me cringe lol ILU.

[deathpixie]

The imprinting is apparently based on a Mormon concept, that your family and future partner are all chosen for you before you're ever born, by God. It's just a matter of finding them. So you obey your family, no matter what, because they were chosen for you by God and when you find that destined partner, you forsake everything else to be with them, marry them and have lots of little Mormons with them.

That review I linked to? It's by a former Mormon who actually has a lot of interesting insights into the Mormon imagery and themes that appear in Twilight. It actually was interesting to read in that light, since it became an anthropological exercise. She also does funny pictures with bad MS Paint. ;)

And yeah, I scare myself when I go all L33T speak. I think I'll stick to my habit of dropping the pronouns off the start of my sentences when I'm in a hurry and that's it. ;)

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

Wow. Let's throw the God Delusion at them. I havn't read that book yet but Ryan's been on this Darwin Kick for a long time and while im sitting there, tryin to write, im actually slow because im listening to Darwin and Richard Dawkins lectures.

He was here a few weeks ago and we missed it. I would have liked to go to it but shut all the religious questions up because he seems to be really more interested in talkinga bout evolution rather than why he doesn't believe in god. (seriously, it comes up in EVERY interview and really, evolution is so fascinating - ryan has rubbed off on me. blame him).

You know what. I really need to change my icons. I have nothing that goes with this.

[deathpixie]

*grins* Yeah, I'm kind of wondering what all those Edward-obsessed teenies would think if they realised just how much of Meyer's stuff in Twilight is based on Mormon ideology? I seriously went through all four articles that were written and was floored at how much there was (in between the macros and illustrations done with Paint, that is). It actually helped the books make some kind of sense, too.

And like you, the person who wrote those like the vampire backgrounds best. ;)

I remember Richard Dawkins from my days of my ex - he was a philosophy major and rather a fan. I know I enjoyed what I heard/read of him myself - I ought to pick up something more recent than 20 years ago. ;)

[fixeight.livejournal.com]

haha thats cool. Yeah, wow, see, enlightenment is awesome. I knew there was a reason I babbled in here so long. Im going through a bit of pain so if all my posts seem choppy is because im stopping and going when it lifts.

Yeah its really good. Stephen Hawking (theoretical physicist) is another one we've been listening to too. So im inundated with alot of science. maybe thats why I find the no brainer novels interesting, because it drifts me away for a moment into imagination and not science (Although I love it that Ryan plays these things, so interesting). Except hte part about americans convinced they can time travel and used seven year olds to do it. I had a hard time wrapping my head around that one. (no offense to the americans, its just something I heard in an interview!)