Twilight sucks?

[PrometheusMFD]

Even given the subject matter (lampooned as "One girls decision between bestiality and necrophilia), it had potential. But Meyer spent most of the book fawning over Edward as well as developed terrible, one dimensional characters. It's exacerbated with Bella's inability to function without Edward. She also uses long, confusing words to both lengthen the book and make it seem more intelligent, when prose relies on describing as much as possible with as few words as possible. There is very little redemption for the first book (which is the only one I could get through, and even then I had a migraine as a result).

[Icy]

[quote name='Yin' timestamp='1282810654' post='4567031']
By originals? You can't use that word.....there's so many different versions. There's sort of an accepted version about Vampires, and Stephanie Meyers just stepped too far away for it for fans of Vampires (not the extreme fans I mean) to be comfortable with.
[/quote]

THIS! AND ONLY THIS! Everything else is relegated to personal opinion and should not be discussed so harshly.

[PrometheusMFD]

[quote name='JoshIcy' timestamp='1283619303' post='4599122']
THIS! AND ONLY THIS! Everything else is relegated to personal opinion and should not be discussed so harshly.
[/quote]

Actually, you can count the fundamentals of writing as well as character development and action as an objective thought, since those are easily proven and common in critique

[Hydra of Ages]

[quote name='PrometheusMFD' timestamp='1283627202' post='4599747']
Actually, you can count the fundamentals of writing as well as character development and action as an objective thought, since those are easily proven and common in critique
[/quote]

Well said.

I honestly don't care about Meyer's version of vampires. Truthfully, they're not that different from usual varieties, just heavily romanticized, idealized and given paper-thin justifications (for how their biology functions). What I do care about is how shoddily written the whole thing is.

One of the biggest sins a novel can commit is saying in multiple sentences what could be said in one. The flow of all the books crawls at a snail's pace, because Meyer doesn't have a clue that pacing and level of description are directly related.

She also doesn't know how to write characters instead of thinly disguised audience surrogates and escapist-style fantasies, but that's another matter altogether.

[Jack of All Spades]

She soils the good name of vampires! SOILED! They sparkle when they're sunlight. C'mon, DISINTEGRATE! And what'syourfaice with the muscles? Yeah, cut that **** out and kill those vamps. And, whoah, Vampire+love=IT'S A TRAP! Edward doesn't care about you, silly girl. Now run back to Fairyland where everything is happy.

[Darkest Hour]

It's setting a trend now. Vampires will no longer die in the sunlight from now on, which is great because now Anne Rice wannabes can continue to butcher vampires to the point where nobody will like them anymore except for women, and I will never have to put up with a retard telling me they are a vampire ever again.

[radio414]

There was once a time when "Twilight" was only a time of day...
I miss those times.

In Meyer's defence, almost every person I know who has read the books liked the first one, or found it good enough to finish.
Book two was read by die-hard fanatics, and any others thought that it was mediocre. Still, fanatics and others pressed on. Most others only finished Ecpipse because they thought the "saga" was a trilogy.

Breaking Dawn has been agreed to be utter bs.

To me though, I have not read them, do not plan on reading them, and dislike only die-hard fanatics, not the book itself.

[Taion]

There are only 2 reasons why I hate Twilight series:

1: The idiot author killed the vampire myth
2: Its a love story between beastiality and necrophilia

But thats just my opinion.

[General Smiley]

lol. Funny coincidence. They just came out with a movie called "vampires suck", and it is just an hour long presentation making fun of twilight. I don't know. I thought twilight was okay. They said "vampires suck" was a movie for the father in the family who didn't care for the twilight. Funny thing was, my dad loved it, and so did my mom. My brother and I watched it, and the second and thirds ones. Probably not my favorite movies of all time, but not the worst either.

[Smashsquatch]

Well let's see why Twilight Sucks!

A vampire who's a total wuss!
A werewolf who won't put a f**king shirt on!
A group of vampires who look like the Black Eye Pea's!

None of that sounds not gay!

[Lost Soul]

i love twilight. literally 90% of the male population (im a guy) hates twilight. so i know what your talking about. on the internet its just a lot worse.

[Catman25]

You can't be hating if they be making 100000x more money than you. ;3

[Umbra]

[quote name='Älfred-Kün' timestamp='1282779045' post='4565696']
For the record, Buffy's vampires are the best.
[/quote]

Now that it has actually hit the States, watch Let Me In. True vampires.

@Person Who Said Something Along The Lines Of "You've Never Seen A Vampire, Your Argument Is Invalid": The vampire is part of traditional folklore, and thus exists as a very well known concept. Thus, you are wrong.

[Merci]

Not for me, it doesn't. I like the series.

[Golden Loaf]

[quote name='Pikadude' timestamp='1282720435' post='4563591']
If you read the book and NOT the movie, this thread wouldn't exist.
[/quote]

Yes it would, the book is so poorly written it sickens me.

[DARKPLANT RISING]

Mainly because the vampires in it don't look like vampires.

If I would choose the best Vampire book ever (excluding the ever-famous Dracula,) it would be Cirque Du Freak. Much, much better. Not really gory, but great.

[Merci]

Even if I'm a Twilight fan, I have to admit that the above is right.

[Larxene]

I hated Twilight before it was cool to hate Twilight. Someone I used to know (that b**** Maren) told me to read it once, about 3 years ago. I got tired of it less than halfway through and never bothered reading any more afterward.

Also f*** yeah Cirque Du Freak.

[.:Incognito:.]

[quote name='true_madara_uchiha' timestamp='1284320055' post='4621471']
i love twilight. literally 90% of the male population (im a guy) hates twilight. so i know what your talking about. on the internet its just a lot worse.
[/quote]
99.999999999999%

[Catterjune]

[quote name='Cаtmаn' timestamp='1284325557' post='4621838']
You can't be hating if they be making 100000x more money than you. ;3
[/quote]
Tell that to the legion of Bieber haters on the internet.

[CrabHelmet]

[quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1292278620' post='4849942']
Tell that to the legion of Bieber haters on the internet.
[/quote]
Forget bad artists; people like Tony Whatsisname The BP Guy are several orders of magnitude richer than I'll ever be, and they cause direct damage to the world beyond merely creating bad books and songs.

Regardless of what the Republican Party claims, wealth does not equal goodness.

[Dr. Cakey]

[quote name='Hydra of Legend' timestamp='1283036577' post='4576252']
I hate Twilight because it's a horrible book.

It's just an opinion of course, but I could back up my reasoning of why I think so.

I honestly don't care about her interpretation of vampires- as a writer in the Fantasy genre, she has the right to interpret mythological creatures however she so desires. Vampires sparkling in sunlight is odd, to say the least, but it really doesn't harm the narrative. Often, I find people who complain about the sparkling are the ones who are the least informed- as, trust me, there is a lot more to hate Twilight for than the vampire's reaction to light.

For the record, I don't dislike genre romance. I'm rather fond of genre romance. While it isn't my favorite type of novel, I can sit down and enjoy it whether it happens to be the main focus of a novel, or just a smaller B-plot. I don't have anything against emotion, mushy sentiments or the development of relationships between characters.

I still hate Twilight. Its romance is bland and uninteresting, painful to read, and distinctly unnatural. The action is often just as bad, and even when it becomes tolerable, it's still never that great. Each book could probably be cut to half the size just by reducing the purple prose, and you still feel like what actually got accomplished could have been reduced to about five chapters or so per novel. It wouldn't be too difficult to reduce the entire Twilight Saga into a single book, and it would probably be a lot better for it too.

I've never seen the movies, so I can't comment on them. Friends tell me they were just as bad as the books though, if not worse, and I'm inclined to believe them given the reviews on Rottentomatoes.
[/quote]


[quote name='PrometheusMFD' timestamp='1283618075' post='4599018']
Even given the subject matter (lampooned as "One girls decision between bestiality and necrophilia), it had potential. But Meyer spent most of the book fawning over Edward as well as developed terrible, one dimensional characters. It's exacerbated with Bella's inability to function without Edward. She also uses long, confusing words to both lengthen the book and make it seem more intelligent, when prose relies on describing as much as possible with as few words as possible. There is very little redemption for the first book (which is the only one I could get through, and even then I had a migraine as a result).
[/quote]


[quote name='PrometheusMFD' timestamp='1283627202' post='4599747']
Actually, you can count the fundamentals of writing as well as character development and action as an objective thought, since those are easily proven and common in critique
[/quote]


[quote name='Hydra of Legend' timestamp='1283640627' post='4600518']
Well said.

I honestly don't care about Meyer's version of vampires. Truthfully, they're not that different from usual varieties, just heavily romanticized, idealized and given paper-thin justifications (for how their biology functions). What I do care about is how shoddily written the whole thing is.

One of the biggest sins a novel can commit is saying in multiple sentences what could be said in one. The flow of all the books crawls at a snail's pace, because Meyer doesn't have a clue that pacing and level of description are directly related.

She also doesn't know how to write characters instead of thinly disguised audience surrogates and escapist-style fantasies, but that's another matter altogether.
[/quote]
[quote name='Dr. Cakey']Anyone who hates the vampires bcas tehre sparkly needs to do a bit more thinking. All it is is an unnecessary detail, and as us writers know, anything unnecessary damages the story. The problem isn't even that the vampires aren't 'evil'.

The romance of vampire and human is fascinating because it is a predator-prey relationship. Love may be present, or it may not, but the vampire's two-fold desires of romance and hunger are what spin the story. It creates a wondrous paradox: the vampire's lover is something he wants nothing more than to kill, but also is something he would do anything to protect. In attempting to tackle it, an author is trying to put Stockholm's Syndrome into words and multiply it a thousand times over. The only reason I haven't done it yet is because I'm not sure if I can.

And that is why Twilight is bad.[/quote]
These. Yes, the last one is me.

[Catterjune]

Why are there two topics about Twilight on the front page?


To get back to my quote on that other topic
[quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1292284093' post='4850265']
It romanticizes disturbing behaviour like stalking, suicide, misogyny, and pedophilia, giving readers an unrealistic and downright frightening idea of what love is.
[/quote]

Stalking - Before the two are dating, heck, before they even having a meaningful conversation (though in their defense, even after they're married they never really have a meaningful conversation) it is said, in no uncertain terms, that Edward Cullen literally sneaks into her room at night and watches her sleep. And Bella is entirely cool with it! She thinks (and by extension, Meyer wants the audience to think) that Edward is just being protective of Bella because it's tru wuv and what not. There is literally nothing to protect her from until 2/3rds of the first book.

Suicide - At some point in the second book, the on-again-off-again couple is currently off. Edward hears Bella died or wants to marry Jacob or something and decides to kill himself by exposing his sparkleness to a noonday sun, which is probably fatal to lesser vampires, but not so for supergodmoddy hax Edward. Bella (incorrectly) hears Edward killed himself, and decides to kill herself too amazingly quickly. This isn't treated with much scorn, or with great difficulty from Bella, but just plain natural, and the right thing to do. In fact, it's only by trying to kill herself that Edward somehow, through their magical psychic love bonds realizes she's still alive and goes to save her. They suffer literally no consequences from their poor and ill-formed decisions, once again hiding behind the mask of "tru wuv".

Misogyny - Well, not so much misogyny as emotional (and implied physical) abuse towards women (particularly Bella). You know, others have written essays and analyzed the dynamics between the characters in a far more coherent manner then I could possibly do, so I'll just copypasta one of them.

[spoiler=tldr - Edward purposely causes Bella to feel isolated and alone many times, and commits various acts through out the series that can be seen as abuse.]When it comes to media influences, we are most concerned with what our heroes do. After all, they are supposed to be the most admirable of people. A villain’s actions are assumed to be questionable, but the hero is, well, essentially noble. Why is it, then, that no one seems to be concerned that Edward Cullen, hero of the bestselling books Twilight and New Moon, is an abusive boyfriend? His actions repeatedly demonstrate a dangerous mentality of dependency and control.

The first thing any girl hears in a dating violence discussion is that jealousy is not love. Yet Edward is critically jealous of Jacob Black, one of Bella’s family friends. Edward pushes Jacob aside from the end of Twilight where, when Jacob asks Bella if she’d like another dance, Edward answers “I’ll take it from here.” Perhaps Bella would prefer to dance with Edward – but it’s her decision to tell Jacob that, not Edward’s. The situation only escalates as Jacob becomes closer to Bella. In a confrontation at the end of New Moon, Bella is genuinely afraid for Jacob’s life. Fans of the series might say “Oh, but Jacob is a werewolf – they’re historical enemies.” Would this excuse an English beau from threatening an Irish friend?

Moreover, in Eclipse, Edward is intent on keeping Bella from associating with Jacob at all. When she says in the first chapter that she’s planning on visiting Jacob without Edward if necessary, he says simply “I’ll stop you.” That is to say, he is willing to use physical force rather than let his girlfriend see one of her closest friends. And it does come to force – to removing a vital part from Bella’s truck and bribing Alice to keep Bella under house arrest when he isn’t around.

A general dislike of Jacob would be understood. But taking steps to prevent your partner from spending time with someone that you dislike is abuse, plain and simple. And his surprising calm after Bella kisses Jacob seems more indicative to me of a cycle of abuse and reconciliation than any real resolution.

Jealousy is a control tactic. As such, it is often paired with isolation – a technique most familiar in cult dynamics. As soon as Edward and Bella begin dating, Edward criticizes her friends as ‘shallow.’ Bella soon stops going anywhere with other friends. Not having formed strong bonds before Edward appears on the scene, Bella never bothers to form them at all. The isolation is so complete that when Edward leaves in the beginning of New Moon, Bella spends three months in a depressed state before rediscovering her other friends. Yes, it’s understandable to want to spend time with your boyfriend. But when you have quite literally no life outside of them – when their absence leaves you so utterly lost – that is unhealthy. And it is wrong of Edward to encourage it. As already demonstrated with Jacob Black, Bella is capable of forming strong friendships when Edward isn't monopolizing her time.

Moreover, a part of this isolation is fully and unarguably intentional. When Edward leaves Bella, he flat-out forbids Alice, Bella’s best friend at the time, from seeing her. His motivation? To ensure a “clean break.” But it is Bella’s right to decide when and how she wants to forget about their relationship. Presuming to dictate her healing process for her is the height of control – it is assuming that you have the right to a person’s thoughts.

Abandonment is yet another control tactic. It is emotionally jarring, disruptive, and, if timed properly, can convince the target that their life is less worthwhile without the abuser. I have been the subject of this treatment myself – and, if it were not for my close friends, it would have worked. Thanks to isolation, Bella has no such friends. When Edward resurfaces, she immediately clings to him more desperately than before. He has become her only lifeline.

Of course, Edward resurfaces in that he attempts suicide. I don’t care what Romeo and Juliet says: suicide is not romantic. Apart from being mentally unstable, this is characteristic of abusive boyfriends. Many abused women remain with their boyfriends because they believe that they still love each other. They often feel responsible for their boyfriend, who tells them “I can’t live without you.” For obvious reasons, Bella doesn’t want to be responsible for Edward’s death. But because of this fear for his life, she stays in a self-destructive relationship.

Perhaps Edward didn’t realize that Bella was alive when he tried to kill himself. But that just proves that he was unstable enough to go through with it – he had made the threat long before he made the attempt. Bella did not laugh off the threat – it shocked and horrified her. If Edward hurt himself, she felt it would be “because of her.” And that puts a burden of responsibility on her that no person can or should be made to bear.

This sense of responsibility for his welfare also extends to lying to her father. Encouraged deception is a red flag for an abusive relationship. Yes, you can argue that Bella shouldn’t tell her father about Edward’s vampirism for the same reason that she wouldn’t tell anyone if he had AIDS: respect for privacy. But it is expected that she would tell her father when she is with her boyfriend. Lying is unnecessary. You can argue that Edward does not encourage her to lie, instead asking her to tell someone where she is. But this statement is consistently followed with ’So I know that if I kill you, I’ll get in trouble for it.’ (“To give me some small incentive to bring you back,” p 214) Predictably, it has the opposite effect: Bella, out of her sense of responsibility for her boyfriend, keeps their dates secret. Thus serving Edward’s ends. Many teenagers will lie to their parents about their dates without a second thought. But this doesn’t make it right. In fact, it only shows that Edward can’t plead ignorance regarding how Bella would react to his statement. Any mind reader will know what she’d do.

Time and time again in Twilight, Edward frightens Bella. Fear is emotional abuse. It can also be used to assert control. Fans might say that Edward is constantly telling Bella how much he wants to kill her and giving unnecessary displays of strength in order to convince her not to stay with him. Why, then, doesn’t he take the lead and stay away from Bella? Why didn’t he stay in Alaska? Why didn’t he simply switch Biology classes? Because he’s “selfish.” If he is unable to stay away from her, he has no right to scare her. Calmly explaining the danger – once, as accurately as possible, without hyperbole – will suffice. And then a boy who really cared would help her take necessary precautions for her safety. For example, telling Charlie when they would be together. Or, having Carlisle chaperon. Or by having a double date with Alice and Jasper, or by sticking in public places, or any of dozens of other measures, since Edward clearly doesn’t believe that feeding often is precaution enough. But that would prevent Bella from swooning over his “devotion.”

For that matter, why is he under the impression that seeing the dents his shoulders left in a car is insufficient to remind her that he is, in fact, stronger than your average human?

Finally, Edward refuses to allow Bella to make her own decisions. She insists she does not want to go to the prom – he brings her there without telling her. She insists she doesn’t want a birthday party – he gives her a surprise party. She does not want to leave Charlie while James is loose – he throws her in the back seat and tells his brother to hold her down. When she resists, he either works around her back or manipulates her decision, kissing her until she forgets her argument. Real boyfriends respect their girlfriend’s right to a decision. Abusive boyfriends must make all the decisions – using force if necessary. It doesn’t matter whether he thinks he’s acting in her best interests or not. Free will is non-exchangeable. And it should be.

The circumstances of their engagement is a perfect example of his inability to let her make her own decisions. He agrees, at the end of New Moon, that he will change her into a vampire if and only if she marries him first. Marriage is not a bargaining tool. Vampirism and marriage are both commitments – but they are separate commitments, and should be discussed separately. The fact that he never intended for her to make that bargain, that he used it as a delay, is not an excuse. Rather, it is further evidence of a need to manipulate the relationship according to his wants and needs.

Likewise, when Bella decides that she does not want to apply to Dartmouth, he ignores her and forges her signature on the paperwork. Going to a college outside of the Ivy League will not place Bella’s life or even her general contentment in danger. Yet he resolves that it is his decision to make, not hers.

A parallel incident can be found when he forges a note to Charlie in her handwriting on the day he leaves her in the middle of the woods. Yes, it turned out to be a good thing that Charlie knew that she was out there when she went missing, but no, that doesn't excuse forging a note when it would have been just as easy to write the note as himself: "Hey, Chief Swan, it's Edward. Bella and I are going for a walk in the woods. Be back soon."

For those fans who insist on some definite physical, non-negotiable sign of abuse, recall how Edward enters her house after leaving her in New Moon and hides every one of her personal possessions associated with himself. Destroying someone’s stuff is never OK and always an abusive act. Even – especially! – when he’s trying to control her healing process. Add the fact that Edward is prone to watching Bella while she sleeps – repeatedly, without her knowledge – and you have one very unhealthy relationship.

Yet in Eclipse, we seem to have a point of some resolution. As Eclipse moves on, Edward makes the radical decision to let Bella take some control of her own life and her own friendships. As it draws to a close, he even comes to realize that it was wrong of him to think he knew what was best for her. Awareness, I have always thought, is the most crucial step in dealing with an unhealthy relationship. Does this mean that Edward and Bella have finally worked their problems out?

Unfortunately, I don’t think that this is the case. First of all, there is the fact that this "realization" is handed down as a proclamation from Edward, a statement of how he intends to act. True to the pattern of their relationship, Bella has nothing to do with this statement, and merely accepts it passively, without trying to discuss with Edward how they can have a more balanced relationship. Lack of communication implies a lack of any real development in the relationship. Translation: Meyer is trying to appease the critics by slipping in this speech of Edward's. And then Edward goes ahead and invites Jacob to the wedding even after Bella specifically said that she didn't want to invite him. Was it a good idea to have Jacob there, a gesture of reconciliation? Maybe. But maybe it was twisting the knife, and it's Bella's right to make that call.

And there remains one crucial element of domination in this relationship that has not been addressed – possessiveness. Talking of marriage, Edward says, “I want the world to know that you’re mine and no one else’s.” This is not normal, and it is not healthy! Even married couples have a life outside of each other. That sentiment, “You’re mine,” might seem a mark of devotion, but it is a denial of Bella’s full humanity. That mentality remains whether the couple is aware of it or not. And it will resurface eventually.

That, I think, is more dangerous than any poison could be. The fact that such a deadly emotion could hide under the mask of love. The most frightening part of the story of Edward and Bella is not that he hurts her, is not that she loves him regardless, it is that when in the height of Edward’s controlling madness Jacob asks if he could possibly be an abusive boyfriend… Bella does not even consider the thought.

The difference between love and obsession is not an idea to be ignored. [/spoiler]

Pedophilia - In werewolves, there's a thing known as imprinting. To us non-werefolk, it means that a werewolf (male) can imprint on a female and she will instinctively fall in love with him. Forever. This happens between werewolf Jacob and Edward and Bella's daughter, Nessie. (Nessie is her nickname. I don't feel like looking up the actual name.) Nessie a newborn at the time he imprints on her. Sure, for some reason the vampire magic makes her age up to a reasonable age (IE: One where she can talk) but that doesn't make the idea any less creepy. This is not seen as horrible, or terrible, or at all a problem by anyone in the series. Bella is more annoyed that Jacob nicknamed her Nessie then that he decided to permanently make her newborn his soul mate.

And that's why Twilight is not only a terrible book, but also a dangerous one due to the rapid fanbase and the romanticizing of the aforementioned acts.

[.Frostpaw]

Hate to break it to ya Pika, but actually, Edward's sister, Alice has a vision of Bella jumping off a cliff. Jacob is at Bella's house for some reason, and Edward calls and asks to spek to Bella's dad. Jacob says "He's at a funeral." The funeral was actually for the werewolves' leader, who her dad knew. Edward didn't know this, and assumed it was Bella's funeral. He decides it was his fault, and decides to go to the city where the 3 vampire kings are, expose the fact that he is a vampire to all of the humans there, which would force the kings to kill him. Alice had a vision of this, told Bella, and they went to stop him.

[~NOiSE~]

[quote name='~jAcEtHeMiNdScUlPtOr~' timestamp='1292462414' post='4855873']
Hate to break it to ya Pika, but actually, Edward's sister, Alice has a vision of Bella jumping off a cliff. Jacob is at Bella's house for some reason, and Edward calls and asks to spek to Bella's dad. Jacob says "He's at a funeral." The funeral was actually for the werewolves' leader, who her dad knew. Edward didn't know this, and assumed it was Bella's funeral. He decides it was his fault, and decides to go to the city where the 3 vampire kings are, expose the fact that he is a vampire to all of the humans there, which would force the kings to kill him. Alice had a vision of this, told Bella, and they went to stop him.
[/quote]

That doesn't make his points any less valid. I read all the books when they first came out and I liked them then, but as I've gotten older, I see how the behaviors of the major characters are very destructive. There is not a main character with common sense in any of those books.