Twilight.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Twilight.

Chill everyone! (I'm lookin' at you MelReynolds) It's just a movie. I say it was decent not that great with all those chickflick-ish scenes and all, but yeah it was okay.

No, you can tell me to chill when I go on an abortion rant, or an immigration rant, or a rant about vacuums, but not about this bull****. This is some of the worst literary and film diarrhea to hit shelves and the screen, and the fact that so many vacuous consumers eat it up just shows me that they like to eat poop. They would eat poop if it were in front of them.

Jesus, the books have NO redeeming qualities. NONE. They tell the story of a selfish, uninteresting girl who magically gets WHATEVER THE HELL SHE WANTS by the end of the story. What does she want? A possesive, overbearing, abusive boyfriend -- he removes her car engine at one point to stop her from seeing other guys -- marriage, a child, her love problems solved. Even her father, who relies on her throughout the entire series meets a woman at the opportune time for Bella to leave the proverbial nest.

It's not even candy. Candy is a joy to eat, despite the fact that it has no redeeming nutritional value. The books are a poorly written exercise in tedium and bland description of how hot, smoldering, sexy Edwards eyes are (smoldering eyes? really?) that teach young people that the kind of romance featured in the books is the kind of romance they should be out looking for.

It's literal ****.

But if you want to eat it, that's fine. Just don't make anyone else smell your breath.

[STD_Sappy]

Re: Twilight.

No, you can tell me to chill when I go on an abortion rant, or an immigration rant, or a rant about vacuums, but not about this bull****. This is some of the worst literary and film diarrhea to hit shelves and the screen, and the fact that so many vacuous consumers eat it up just shows me that they like to eat poop. They would eat poop if it were in front of them.

Jesus, the books have NO redeeming qualities. NONE. They tell the story of a selfish, uninteresting girl who magically gets WHATEVER THE HELL SHE WANTS by the end of the story. What does she want? A possesive, overbearing, abusive boyfriend -- he removes her car engine at one point to stop her from seeing other guys -- marriage, a child, her love problems solved. Even her father, who relies on her throughout the entire series meets a woman at the opportune time for Bella to leave the proverbial nest.

It's not even candy. Candy is a joy to eat, despite the fact that it has no redeeming nutritional value. The books are a poorly written exercise in tedium and bland description of how hot, smoldering, sexy Edwards eyes are (smoldering eyes? really?) that teach young people that the kind of romance featured in the books is the kind of romance they should be out looking for.

It's literal ****.

But if you want to eat it, that's fine. Just don't make anyone else smell your breath.

I wouldn't eat poop, and I love the series. I think you're misunderstanding everything. The point that the author was trying to create was a new view on vampires, as opposed to the stereotypical vampire (moats, ugly, stupid) made a lot of people have a new perspective on what vampires can really be (beautiful, charming, and like normal people). That's how I see it, she gave a new vision on something that was pretty old and the same at all times. And, by the way, a book can never have the "perfect" girl, or "perfect" guy, EVERYBODY has their flaws, so insulting it senselessly is just rude for the people who enjoy the series.

[Squeek]

Re: Twilight.

The point Mal is trying to make is that there was no reason to re-create vampires. If you want to change what a fictional thing is, then make up a new fictional thing.

Either that, or he's trying to say that if you're going to re-invent the wheel, don't make it a square.

[thechild]

Re: Twilight.

No, you can tell me to chill when I go on an abortion rant, or an immigration rant, or a rant about vacuums, but not about this bull****. This is some of the worst literary and film diarrhea to hit shelves and the screen, and the fact that so many vacuous consumers eat it up just shows me that they like to eat poop. They would eat poop if it were in front of them.

Jesus, the books have NO redeeming qualities. NONE. They tell the story of a selfish, uninteresting girl who magically gets WHATEVER THE HELL SHE WANTS by the end of the story. What does she want? A possesive, overbearing, abusive boyfriend -- he removes her car engine at one point to stop her from seeing other guys -- marriage, a child, her love problems solved. Even her father, who relies on her throughout the entire series meets a woman at the opportune time for Bella to leave the proverbial nest.

It's not even candy. Candy is a joy to eat, despite the fact that it has no redeeming nutritional value. The books are a poorly written exercise in tedium and bland description of how hot, smoldering, sexy Edwards eyes are (smoldering eyes? really?) that teach young people that the kind of romance featured in the books is the kind of romance they should be out looking for.

It's literal ****.

But if you want to eat it, that's fine. Just don't make anyone else smell your breath.

mmmmm yes because I lovvvveeee poop. that is SO TRUE

[Bojack2424]

Re: Twilight.

one of my friends went with a few people expecting the theatre to be packed, but turns out only a few were there

[MalReynolds]

Re: Twilight.

The point Mal is trying to make is that there was no reason to re-create vampires. If you want to change what a fictional thing is, then make up a new fictional thing.

Either that, or he's trying to say that if you're going to re-invent the wheel, don't make it a square.

We operate on the same wavelength.

Of course, that's just one of my many, many problems with the series, but you hit the nail right on the head.

[thechild]

Re: Twilight.

We operate on the same wavelength.

Of course, that's just one of my many, many problems with the series, but you hit the nail right on the head.

It's a good thing they recreated vampires. Before they were the lamest fictional creatures in existence. And if that is the only reason why you hate the movie and book, try to hear/read 'vampire' as something else. That shouldn't be a big deal.

[phe0nixblade]

Re: Twilight.

lmao mal wrecked this thread, ps i heard the book sucked so i never got around to reading it or watching it

[Squeek]

Re: Twilight.

It's a good thing they recreated vampires. Before they were the lamest fictional creatures in existence. And if that is the only reason why you hate the movie and book, try to hear/read 'vampire' as something else. That shouldn't be a big deal.

And you're another person who believes that red cape + fake accent + slick hair = vampire, I assume?

They're only lame because of movies like this trying to re-invent what they are.

[thechild]

Re: Twilight.

And you're another person who believes that red cape + fake accent + slick hair = vampire, I assume?

They're only lame because of movies like this trying to re-invent what they are.

Are you saying the cape + accent + slick hair isn't lame?

[Tokzic]

Re: Twilight.

i like how the only way the twilight fans can refute mal's trouncing is taking his analogy literally

"yeah well i don't eat shit so clearly you're wrong OWNED"

ps thechild: twilight is probably attempt number seven million or so at reinventing vampires, nothing she's doing has an ounce of originality

[tha Guardians]

Re: Twilight.

I wouldn't eat poop, and I love the series. I think you're misunderstanding everything. The point that the author was trying to create was a new view on vampires, as opposed to the stereotypical vampire (moats, ugly, stupid) made a lot of people have a new perspective on what vampires can really be (beautiful, charming, and like normal people). That's how I see it, she gave a new vision on something that was pretty old and the same at all times. And, by the way, a book can never have the "perfect" girl, or "perfect" guy, EVERYBODY has their flaws, so insulting it senselessly is just rude for the people who enjoy the series.

There were seven season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
A show that didn't suck.

This was not a new view, nor does anyone give 2 ****s about dumbass vampires trying and muggles having crackbabies.

It's a good thing they recreated vampires. Before they were the lamest fictional creatures in existence. And if that is the only reason why you hate the movie and book, try to hear/read 'vampire' as something else. That shouldn't be a big deal.

Van Helsing and The Underworld were pretty badass movies IMO.

[Squeek]

Re: Twilight.

Are you saying the cape + accent + slick hair isn't lame?

I'm saying it is lame.

Because that's not what vampires are.

That's what Hollywood made them.

[thechild]

Re: Twilight.

i like how the only way the twilight fans can refute mal's trouncing is taking his analogy literally

"yeah well i don't eat shit so clearly you're wrong OWNED"

ps thechild: twilight is probably attempt number seven million or so at reinventing vampires, nothing she's doing has an ounce of originality

haha you make me laugh, i'm not mocking you i seriously found that funny though lol. anyways yes it's been attempted alot yeah but this one was pretty different in my opinion.

when ffr'ers that hate fanboys become fanboys of being against fanboys. wait wut

[STD_Sappy]

Re: Twilight.

[QUOTE=tha Guardians;2909200]There were seven season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
A show that didn't suck.

This was not a new view, nor does anyone give 2 ****s about dumbass vampires trying and muggles having crackbabies.


It was a new view, you just chose to ignore it, that was a pretty ignorant statement. You should be able to think whatever you want, it's a shame you couldn't be a little more open minded and tried to enjoy the book. I know I did, I also thought it was gay at first.