According to Julia. Here, I'm speaking of the books (Twilight (The Twilight Saga, Book 1)
Here's one review. A metareview, actually:
- Log in to post comments
More like this
My review.
The last movie of this genre I watched had Christopher Lee as the Werewolf Hunter. In this movie, the Werewolves engaged in a periodic orgy in which a newly converted nubile female would would be converted into a wolf-like form to have repeated dog-like copulations with a male vampire…
1) No matter how secure the secret government facility, there will always be an unguarded network of tube-like service entrances;
2) The head of the most important secret government agency, charged with the greatest of responsibilities, will be a knuckle headed moron;
3) No matter how many people…
We braved ice and fog to go down to see Harry Potter this morning. And yes, it was indeed icy, which was a bit traumatic for me. Last time I was walking on glare ice, I fell and seriously injured my knee. That was last February and I'm still doing physical therapy and taking the occasional pain…
I've received a few queries about the end of the Battlestar Galactica series, and I can't offer an opinion — I didn't watch it. Since there seems to be enough fans here, though, I'll turn you loose on it. Great? Sucked? Eh?
I didn't watch it because I haven't watched much of the series at all.…
The young girls love this, but it's not anywhere as good as the books.
Sadly, the books themselves borrow very heavily from some previous adult series, including the Lindsay Sands books and a touch of Charlaine Harris. One of my daughters, who used to think that this series was totally original, was very disappointed to see that the major elements were not so original after all.
The makeup in the movie was truly bad... while some of the effects and cinematography was very good. Unfortunately, you can tell a lot more of the movie had been recorded and hit the cutting room floor will-nilly (well, if there were still literal cutting rooms) because there were plenty of references to things that hadn't been said in the movie.
The whole thing was really designed to be eye candy for teenage girls already engaging in "not sex" fantasies about Edward and Jacob.
Happily in my house, the twins are split, so we don't have the teen fantasy jealousy going on that I heard outside the theater (which was surprisingly empty.) One "likes" Edward (the vampire) the other Jacob (the shape shifter) and if I hadn't heard enough discussion of these fantasy characters over the last year, it seems I'm going to get an earful now.
I am proud to say that at least my teen girls (who are media majors in our film and media charter school) both were able to see the flaws in the movie and were not so totally blinded by all this, despite all the stars in their eyes going into the film.
For the record, I haven't read Stephanie Meyers' books, nor have I seen the film. And I don't plan to. While I loved the Harry Potter series(and I'm a grownup), I am sick and tired of vampires in popular culture! The whole theme has just been too overdone!
So while I can't speak to whether the film is good, bad, or indifferent, I think I can speak about the originality(or lack of same) in the "Twilight" series. Very few pieces of literature are truly "original"; even Shakespeare didn't do anything "originl". He borrowed many of his themes from the extant French and Italian literature of his time. It is what he did with them, that is "original". You can probably say somewhat of the same about Stephanie Meyers.
So she borrowed some of her themes frm Lynsay Sands? Well, Lynsay Sands is a romance writer, and these Stephanie Meyers books appear to be romances aimed at the teen market. I'm not particularly bothered by this, for the reasons I've outlined above. Furthermore, this kind of review rather irritates me(though it is aimed at the film not the books0, because similar criticisms were aimed at the Harry Potter series, mostly by "literary snobs" who didn't think the books were "serious" enough, but were probably envious of J.K. Rowling's success. I suspect the same kind of thing is going on here, and I really don't like it.
Anne G
Frankly, I'm not very concerned about the presumed lack of originveality in this "vampire" series, or the film. For the record, I've never read the books(unlike the Harry Potter series, which was rely appealing), nor do I plan to. I am just sick and tired of vampires in literature! Same for the movie. But, to get back to the theme of originality(or not), very few pieces of literature are truly "original". Even Shakespeare didn't write anything "original"; he quite frankly borrowed from histories and the then current literature of the time(often French or Italian stories of various kinds). It didn't matter; what he did with these stories was what was "original". So Ms. Meyers borrowd from Lynsay Sands(basically a romance writer, and apparently these are romances aimed at the YA market)? So what? I, personally, don't care. Furthermore, certain "literary snobs" have leveled the same kinds of accusations at the Harry Potter series
They get usually resistant readers into reading. That's my firm opinion of them and I'm sticking to it - from this, they start realising that they CAN indeed read a 200 or so page book and it's not that big a challenge to get them into other books after.
My overview of the series (and the 'what's the deal with the sex with vampires meme??'): http://podblack.com/?p=1039
The books are anti-feminist, pro-religious bull shit. Also, they are horribly written. Ugh. TWILIGHT SUCKS. IT IS SHIT. Serious, gross shit.
Harry Potter was at least decently written and had a fairly unique story.
The writer of Twilight fucked up the vampire lore to fit her religious needs. Ick Ick ICK.
If anyone wants to read some awesome, dark, noir vampire novels, pick up Charlie Houston's Already Dead series.