Twilight.

[pokelda]

Re: Twilight.

This is the one thing I disagree with. Niche-marketing is not art. If I wrote dirty words for 300 pages because 13 year old boys love swear words, it might do well in bookstores, but is it art? No way.

Im going to go write books now brb

[STD_Sappy]

Re: Twilight.

Because it's the right thing to do. What if somebody was driving on a road that was closed? You'd warn them not to continue down the path. If they found out themselves, they'd be dead. =/

Honestly, use common sense, it was never a good series to begin with. It's been done hundred upon hundreds of times.

So it's the right thing to make someone avoid something, and make them base that something they were curious about off of an assumption? No. That's pretty ignorant, and if anything, it's hypocritical. Have you read the series, by the way, NFD? Just wondering.

[NFD]

Re: Twilight.

I read the SparkNotes, and that's close enough. It was horrible.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Twilight.

So it's the right thing to make someone avoid something, and make them base that something they were curious about off of an assumption?

What?

I'll just point you right back to the smokers argument. It's bad for your health. It has been proven to give you cancer. But millions of people do it anyway. It boils down to personal choice in the matter. Those who don't smoke still know how harmful it is.

What we're running into here is more problematic. Reading Twilight, and considering it 'good' is not only harmful to yourself, as it is trashy, manipulative romance that runs around under the guise of chivalry, but harmful to society, as it says, 'these are the books we want to be reading, give us more domineering male characters and impotent females'. While you may not look at it like that, thinking, 'oh, it's just a book,' then think again. There are fans that go up to Robert Pattinson with cuts on their arms asking him to suck their blood because 'they were meant to be together'.

What's more is that the novel highlights a chaste relationship until book 4 - making the readers think that chastity is the way to go, which it may very well be, but they'll once again be waiting for a chaste, domineering man to make their decisions for them, and that's not how it's supposed to work. There is no equal partnership between Bella and Edward. He will forever - at least, until she vamped up - be superior to her. Always. Hell, even as a vampire he will be. There's nothing she can do. No place on earth she could if she decides she doesn't love him. And at the end of book 4, she's locked in. Eternity is an awfully long time, and you bet that he'd chase her down if she ever tried to leave.

I got side-tracked, so I apologize. These books aren't just books, they're detriments to society. When people acknowledge that the books are not good, just empty junk, then I'm fine with it. I really am. That's why I didn't tear in to the poster up there - she was well spoken and made her point. When people say that it's the best thing ever, the highlight of romance, well, that's when I want to hit them. They're delusional.

It is not romance. It is abuse. And it's a blight on contemporary literature - and even worse, it is shaping the minds of impressionable youths that read it.

[tha Guardians]

Re: Twilight.

missed spelled

....
lmao

[devonin]

Re: Twilight.

Okay. Let's see here.

tha Guardians, tone it WAY back unless you want some trolling/flaming bans to the face. You're the veteran here, and I'd expect to not need to remind you of the rules before you follow them.

cherrygirl1223, you seem to be under some misapprehension about just how these forums work. If you post a thread saying "What do you think about X?" you simply cannot adopt the stance of "If you feel how I do, yay you're awesome, if you don't feel how I do, you're simply incorrect because it's not how I feel."

When someone lodges reasonable objections to your point of view, you have two choices: Pretend they don't exist, or respond to them with your own reasoned logic. Telling them they're idiots because they don't like it, or they aren't allowed to say that it is actually -bad- because in your -opinion- it is good, just doesn't work.

They are saying "In addition to not liking it, I think it is actually just bad because of A, B, C" If you can't actually address A, B or C in a meaningful way, then guess what, you've lost the argument.

This is especially true when the discussion is about books, and several of the posters are both avid readers and accomplished writers. Very few people in this thread have written as much or as well as Mal has, so he has a lot more credibility on the subject of what makes good writing than most of us. That doesn't mean he's right, or that you should not question him because he knows what he's talking about. It DOES mean that you can't just dismiss his objections and pretend they don't exist.

He raises several very good points about the potentially dangerous effect on young female culture a book like this would have, and the way that it simply plays in to ignorant juvenile fantasy where every girl wants to be a princess and live happily ever after the end, before they understand that life is pain, and anybody who tells you different is selling something. (And if you don't get that reference, you really shouldn't be talking about books -or- movies ever)

Point is, he's raised several informed and reasonable objections, and you've just started taking a tantrum that anybody would tell you that you're wrong.

As Mal said, you're breaking plenty of rules already. Completely independant of your actual point, if you persist in trolling and flaming other users who are posting legitimately, you will be banned.

You'll notice that I didn't include any personal opinion of Twilight into the discussion. I haven't read the books, I haven't seen the movie, and from all reports from anybody who has done either whose taste I respect, I don't intend to do either of those things. As a result, I'm not entering the discussion.

Let's all follow that shall we? If your only contribution to this thread is "I haven't seen the movie, but I bet it sucks" then Don't. Post. Here.

[tha Guardians]

Re: Twilight.

tha Guardians, tone it WAY back unless you want some trolling/flaming bans to the face. You're the veteran here, and I'd expect to not need to remind you of the rules before you follow them.

It's hard to resist.
She bugs the life out of me v.v'

If she makes an attempt to post rationally and maturely, this should be no problem for me.

If she persists acting the way she is, the ban very well may be worth it.

[STD_Sappy]

Re: Twilight.

What?

I'll just point you right back to the smokers argument. It's bad for your health. It has been proven to give you cancer. But millions of people do it anyway. It boils down to personal choice in the matter. Those who don't smoke still know how harmful it is.

What we're running into here is more problematic. Reading Twilight, and considering it 'good' is not only harmful to yourself, as it is trashy, manipulative romance that runs around under the guise of chivalry, but harmful to society, as it says, 'these are the books we want to be reading, give us more domineering male characters and impotent females'. While you may not look at it like that, thinking, 'oh, it's just a book,' then think again. There are fans that go up to Robert Pattinson with cuts on their arms asking him to suck their blood because 'they were meant to be together'.

What's more is that the novel highlights a chaste relationship until book 4 - making the readers think that chastity is the way to go, which it may very well be, but they'll once again be waiting for a chaste, domineering man to make their decisions for them, and that's not how it's supposed to work. There is no equal partnership between Bella and Edward. He will forever - at least, until she vamped up - be superior to her. Always. Hell, even as a vampire he will be. There's nothing she can do. No place on earth she could if she decides she doesn't love him. And at the end of book 4, she's locked in. Eternity is an awfully long time, and you bet that he'd chase her down if she ever tried to leave.

I got side-tracked, so I apologize. These books aren't just books, they're detriments to society. When people acknowledge that the books are not good, just empty junk, then I'm fine with it. I really am. That's why I didn't tear in to the poster up there - she was well spoken and made her point. When people say that it's the best thing ever, the highlight of romance, well, that's when I want to hit them. They're delusional.

It is not romance. It is abuse. And it's a blight on contemporary literature - and even worse, it is shaping the minds of impressionable youths that read it.

You're not going to let this go, are you? I understand that YOU think Twilight is horrible, honestly, with all my heart, I understand that. I still think, if you're so confident with your judgment, let people find this out for themselves. Also, stop insulting people who enjoy reading the series, it makes your opinion less and less important. They obviously saw something in the book that you didn't see that made them like it. Twilight is great, call me whatever, but I am enjoying reading the series, as it is. I'm fine, not poisoned, not brainwashed, not anything, it's just like any other book I've read. Some I've enjoyed more then others, some less. The whole cuts on their arm thing, that's a bit spooky, I'll agree, but I still think you're making false assumptions over people who enjoyed the series.

[STD_Sappy]

Re: Twilight.

I read the SparkNotes, and that's close enough. It was horrible.

I rest my case. Awful.

[All_That_Chaz]

Re: Twilight.

I don't think it's a case of Mal not picking up on something. I think it's more that he's unhappy that people are impressed with what this series of books brings to the table.

[PlaceboFX]

Re: Twilight.

I just spent the last hour of my life consumed in this thread. While reading each post very carefully, I simultaniously googled Twilight interviews of the main characters, I read articles....hell I'm ready to read the books myself for the soul purpose of psychoanalyzing the author through her text. I don't regret a single moment. This was extremely entertaining, to say the least. I give credit to cherrygirl. An obnoxious troll, perhaps...but this is quite possibly the most entertaining post I have seen thus far.

[Squeek]

Re: Twilight.

I'm great with analogies. Here's what you sound like to Mal:

I love Burger King.
It has really good food.
Even though it's fast food,
it's the best.
No, really, the best.
It's better than any restaurant.
It's the best food ever.
You should all eat at Burger King.
Let's all discuss how great Burger King is.
I love Burger King.

Now, we all know there are better restaurants out there. There are restaurants that everybody in America equates with quality restaurants. Restaurants that everyone knows the name of and only a handful of people dislike. Food critics love the place. The average everyday person loves the place. On the contrary, it is widely established by food critics that Burger King is not a real restaurant. Sure, you can get food, but it's not a real restaurant. So my argument saying that it's the best restaurant doesn't hold water.

So let's look at what critics say.

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/twilight2008

Q: When is a vampire not a vampire? A: When it goes out in daylight, sees itself in a mirror, doesn’t drink human blood, and still manages to suck.

I've had mosquito bites that were more passionate than this undead, unrequited, and altogether unfun pseudo-romantic riff on Romeo and Juliet.

While the movie attempts to find an compelling middle ground between gothic supernaturalism and teenage romance, it usually winds up stumbling into the inane territory implied by both descriptions.

A disappointingly anemic tale of forbidden love that should satiate the pre-converted but will bewilder and underwhelm viewers who haven't devoured Stephenie Meyer's bestselling juvie chick-lit franchise.

Despite questionable casting, wooden acting, laughable dialogue and truly awful makeup, nothing is likely to stop young girls from swarming to this kitschy adaptation of Stephenie Meyer's popular novel.

Sometimes sensitive and often silly but really, essentially, beneath his pallor and her panting and their intertwined frustrations, it's just two long hours of coitus interruptus.

This adaptation of the best-selling novel by Stephenie Meyer never rises above the level of a teen soaper on the CW, and its pale, sulky boy toys are more silly than scary.

The average score is a 54. That's absolutely horrid.

[sumzup]

Re: Twilight.

Twilight is just a self-insert for Stephenie Meyer and the millions of fangirls...there's no other way it could be so popular.

[robertsona]

Re: Twilight.

54 isn't even close to horrid

[foxyroxy2693]

Re: Twilight.

I felt as if I was watching a lifetime original movie with extra cheese on the side, which I like.