First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Series Discussion: Twilight
Moderator
2257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/19/09
Now before I begin, I have a few things to say. First and formost is that this review represents MY point of view, as such I am not saying that you a wrong for being a fan, so I ask that you extend me the same respect. Secondly, I encourage active debate on topics, however if your post is along the lines of "OMFG, Twilight does not suxxx, Edward is soo dreamy. U r an idiot." I will delete it. (Handy moderator powers).

So to the review:

Basically in overview the book is discriminatory to women, literature and several cultures.

It discriminates against literature in that it contains so many modifiers for every noun used that it makes the english literature major in me cry tears of sorrow. You do not need that kind of 'Purple Prose' in any sort of decent literature, even romance novels. All that it does is create excess pages (J.K. Rowling anyone?) and fills impressionable teenage heads with glittery and useless sentence structuring. This tween market will grow into the next generation of authors and artists, so do we really want them to be influenced by one such as Meyers? I grew up to Orwell, whose motto is 'Never use a long word where a short word will do." Now, not to be pedantic but one of these two authors is recognised as a true litterary great, while the other is Stephenie Meyer.

Secondly, the abuse and misrepresentation of cultures, mostly in Forks, is truely sickening. Meyers has not researched into any of the tribal or historical discourses surrounding the Sioux Native Americans, instead inventing her own interpretation and horrifying the locals in the process. This is not to say that authors shouldn't have leeway in creating or altering events, however showing no regard to their culture and actually perverting some of their customs is another issue altogether.

And finally we reach the crux of my passionate dislike of Twilight, its blatent Sexism and discriminatory views on women. Which, coming from a male must mean something. Firstly Bella(Meaning Beautiful) Swan, the 'plain' girl who becomes the sexual fantasy of five men. Five! The main focus is the vampire Edward Cullen, a 900 year old 'Adonis-like' vampire. However, going against such works as Bram Stokers 'Dracula', He does not prey upon humans, but rather animals. Now so far this sounds like nothing more than a male gripping about a romance book, however lets just look at certain elements of the book that show sexism at it's worst.

Bella, our 'Heroein', is unable to go a chapter without needing to be rescued by one boy or another. Next, the fact that Bella gives up her ambitions and plans for college to get married to Edward. Finally her relationships with her 'admirers' are all dangerously unhealthy and are probably the worst thing we could be putting in our young childrens hands.

I will expand upon these points more, however I have a dinner appointment that I need to get ready for now.

Look forward to more indepth analysis later on, but for now I leave you to discuss what I have thus far posted.

Shiro.
Moderator
1459 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Hell. Glad you a...
Offline
Posted 4/19/09
I have got to start doing reviews again... thanks for the inspiration Tortoise Sephiroth.

As for the review itself: Couldn't agree more. Creativity is important, but really, getting your facts straight is important. I can see how it would appeal to a demographic of people who probably find that they want to kill me after three minutes of conversation, but outside of that demographic... how the F*CK? does that bad drama get any awards? At least Rosario + Vampire takes more of a "Some Like it Hot" approach and reverses a few of the normal stereotypes. I honestly think Americans might benefit from a good harem anime.
...
Except good leaves the Rosario + Vampire anime out... and even though the manga was decent i tend to favor books more because it forces you to use your mind to fill in the blanks left by the lack of pictures.
...
Anyway, i'm interested in seeing the replies this will get. Will there be educated defenses, or will it just be "STFU LOSER" like what you can see on YouTube?
Moderator
2257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/21/09
At least youtubers have a modecrom of intelligence. What im really looking for is a 4chan troll to review.
Moderator
23257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / In an Ideal World...
Offline
Posted 4/22/09 , edited 4/22/09


Lol very nice. You did leave out the teenage pregnancy theme though, such a great example for teenage girls. I've heard stories of girls who had abusive boyfriends but refused to break up with them because they felt they were just acting like Edward, and were just over-protective. Proof of the horrible effect Twilight is having on people.

I thought the HP books were great.

Lol Twilight is good for something though, the laughs. XD

You know SMeyer said she felt her vampires were mostly science than magic and attempted to explain the science of her vamps? XD I'm curious to see how you can explain beings with skin made of disco balls.

I'm very disappointed to see I'm the only female replying at this thread. Those Twilight fangirls give us sane females a bad name.
Moderator
2257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/23/09
Ah, but since you still retain your sanity amongst the wash of fangirls you were given mod powers.

But you do raise a point I was going to later on, namely that if you wish to explain something with science, you should probably understand the science first. I have completed an undergraduates degree in cellular and mollecular biology, does this count as enough qualification to talk about the biology (or lack thereof) within Meyers books. I say yes.
Moderator
1459 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Hell. Glad you a...
Offline
Posted 4/23/09

turtle_herder wrote:

Ah, but since you still retain your sanity amongst the wash of fangirls you were given mod powers.

But you do raise a point I was going to later on, namely that if you wish to explain something with science, you should probably understand the science first. I have completed an undergraduates degree in cellular and mollecular biology, does this count as enough qualification to talk about the biology (or lack thereof) within Meyers books. I say yes.


It hardly takes a pro to point out obvious flaws like the stuff in Twilight. I'd take a 4 year olds word for it with how glaringly obvious the flaws are.
Moderator
2257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/24/09
ahh, but if I am more qualified than Meyers, the twilight fangirls cannot call me wrong. Unless they hold a masters or higher I am still the most reputable source in this article.
Moderator
23257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / In an Ideal World...
Offline
Posted 4/24/09


Thats true, but even if you give a Twi-tard irrefutable logic, they'll just defend it by saying 'its just a story!'
Member
1940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / F / Scotland
Offline
Posted 4/24/09 , edited 4/24/09
alright i have read way better vampire and lycanthorpe books than twilight. there was something missing character wise, focusing only one the one character, now we know why she had to write another book to cover this. For the sack of HP fans I think (and not just my view) JK sooooo stole Tamora Pierce books , proberly next she'll write about harrys childre (whoops she already mention them, then shell go back so many years in the past (whoops again she's done that too), so why doesn't she just write word for word what Tamora wrote and just change the characters names and put them in a slightly different enviroment, and keep the bad guy getting killed in each book to be reserected in each book. wait a minute that how the Alanna book's go?


Member
1940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / F / Scotland
Offline
Posted 4/24/09
"vampire Academy" (series) by Richelle Mead , "marked" (series) by P. C. Cast and Kristin Cast and the first couple in the series which start with "glass houses" by Rachel Caine are way better, the characters are better, more beeper. On a similar track to twilight, but not so lovey dovey. These girls kick ass.
Moderator
23257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / In an Ideal World...
Offline
Posted 4/24/09 , edited 4/24/09

Before I say anything, may I ask whether you have read the Harry Potter books? I've often seen people say one author stole something from another series of books without actually reading the books themselves. There are many plot devices and such that are used in many books, that can hardly be called stolen ideas from other books, and even if they are similar to another series, its all in the writing. One author could write about a school of magic, and another could do the same, but because of different writing styles, the result could be completely different. (For ex. Children of the Red King series, as compared to Harry Potter.)

There's plenty of books where the story continues on with the main character's children, not to mention time-travel. Though just because its mentioned that Harry has children, doesn't mean she'll write about them, she has said HP 7 was her last book and she's not continuing the series.

But what do you mean by that, that J.K. has already done that too? The only instance in all 7 books when time travel occurs is with the Time-Turners, and those don't go back years, they go back hours, they're only ever really used in the 3rd book anyway. And Voldemort is not resurrected at the end of every book, he has never died, just been overcome for the time being, which is a common thing in many series. The villain is beaten back over and over again, until he is defeated at the end, that's very common.

And if you have ever written anything, can you honestly say you haven't used ideas from books you've read or haven't been influenced by someone else's writing? Its impossible not to be. The Inheritance Cycle, I think is similar to Lord of the Rings in many ways, though the stories are far from the same, because the writer was a fan of Tolkien. It in no way means that he stole Tolkien's story.
Member
1940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / F / Scotland
Offline
Posted 4/25/09
i've read all the books in the hp series. she finishes the last one with harry and his children standing at the station. (she said that it would be the last book she wrote about harry, didn't say in maybe afew years or 10 she might write about his children.) Then there beadle the bard, telling tales from before the hp timeline (she never said that she might not write about the world before harry potter, just not another harry potter book.


Member
2874 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Stuck between sle...
Offline
Posted 4/25/09
Wow, how did I not see this thread. I very much agree with every point made in the opening post.

I however can only add a not-so-serious yet scathingly sarcastic review from another non-fan, that I wrote on Goodreads:


Escapism at its worst.

In fact I'm still a bit curious as to who would want to escape to such a sparkly, scintillating, perfectly sculpted, incandescent, glistening, dazzling place that shines like an angel from above as if carved in some unknown stone, smooth like marble and glittering like crystal.

This is the part where I'd like to point out that a thesaurus a day does not keep the poorly written fanfiction away. Not to mention all that sparkling, dazzling and glittering can't be good for the eyes.

The only redeeming point this book has is it can be painfully humorous. After all, not many books can boast that they manages to satirize themselves albeit unintentionally.

I'm still waiting for the mastermind that is Stephenie Meyer to come out with the whole: "Muahaha you fell for it! That's right you've all been dazzled!"
Moderator
1459 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Hell. Glad you a...
Offline
Posted 4/25/09 , edited 4/25/09

mlaaaa wrote:

Wow, how did I not see this thread. I very much agree with every point made in the opening post.

I however can only add a not-so-serious yet scathingly sarcastic review from another non-fan, that I wrote on Goodreads:


Escapism at its worst.

In fact I'm still a bit curious as to who would want to escape to such a sparkly, scintillating, perfectly sculpted, incandescent, glistening, dazzling place that shines like an angel from above as if carved in some unknown stone, smooth like marble and glittering like crystal.

This is the part where I'd like to point out that a thesaurus a day does not keep the poorly written fanfiction away. Not to mention all that sparkling, dazzling and glittering can't be good for the eyes.

The only redeeming point this book has is it can be painfully humorous. After all, not many books can boast that they manages to satirize themselves albeit unintentionally.

I'm still waiting for the mastermind that is Stephenie Meyer to come out with the whole: "Muahaha you fell for it! That's right you've all been dazzled!"


Here. Let me sum that all up with my review:


Twilight
A review by a cynical unbiased a-hole

I'm a big fan of horrors, ranging from the classics to the modern. I loved Silence of the Lambs, loved Silent Hill, loved Army of Darkness, and most importantly, loved Dracula. But then two things came out, Twilight and the Resident Evil movie, and the monster genre goes to hell.

So, what did the writer do wrong? Well, for one, she brought another teen drama into existence. I can understand... or at least pretend to understand why you get people who like that, but c'mon! There are so many bad dramas that you could fill the grand canyon with them. So, you get another typical teen drama about a girl leading a boring life who suddenly finds some freaky guy and her life is changed.
So what's so different about this one? The guy Bella finds is a vampire. He can go out in the daytime. Now, this isn't the first time this happened. Vampires in the daylight isn't that rare of a liberty. But this is the thing: he's sparkly. A sparkling vampire. The last time i saw someone sparkling, i was high from bleach fumes.
So Edward and Bella fall in love, but Edward's family doesn't approve and he saves Bella's worthless butt. Real original. The vampires have a certain power, are all strong and fast, and apparently their sparkly skin somehow makes them immortal or something like that. I don't know. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes made more sense.
I hate to break it to the writer, but one new element doesn't make a completely original story. I bet the worthless Twilighttards will disagree with me. But i hold them in about as much regard as i hold the Narutards. Just because the bad drama has monsters doesn't make it original. Shaun of the Dead was more original even, and at least that was funny.

So, what can i say about Twilight? Well, at least the people who read from that series are reading books. Maybe they'll move onto something better.
What can i say about the movie?
Well... nothing really. Peddling things to dumb teens is almost as easy as selling Star Wars crap to sci-fi nerds.
Moderator
23257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / In an Ideal World...
Offline
Posted 4/25/09


So you're saying J.K. is stealing from Tamora Pierce because of something she might do? Besides this, we should probably move this discussion somewhere else, this thread is for discussing Twilight only.



Lol I was waiting for your appearance here. :P



Gah, you see that's my biggest problem with Twilight. It isn't that its a disgrace to literature or even that it has vampires with skin made of disco balls. (Those though annoy me beyond belief) Its because of its popularity. If it was just another crappy vampire novel that sat in the back of the library, getting dustier and dustier, occasionally read by some crazed vamp fangirl who needed another vamp romance book, I really wouldn't care. But what is it about Twilight that is so special to girls?

And about the "at least people are reading books", thats another problem. I thought this way too, but then I noticed a trend among Twilight fangirls. They read Twilight, but then they don't read anything else. They'll read Twilight over and over, but they'll never touch another book, unless its another crappy vamp drama.

I mean if you look at people who read Harry Potter, Eragon, or another of those popular books, after not liking to read, most often you see that reading those books and loving them caused people to like reading and read more, but whats the use in loving to read if you will only read one book?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.