New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
Twilight fans, please explain to me What the appeal is?
I don't get. I read the books. I saw the movie. I live with a hardcore fan. My vampire lore enthusiast self cringes at the grand liberties taken with the form (they sparkle!?) and my self-respecting feminist self gets the heebie jeebies from the relationship between Edward and Bella. However, my marketing and sales oriented self does have to tip my hat at Meyer's remarkable talent for pulling in teen girls and their parents' money. I am genuinely impressed by that. So please. I would like to hear it from the perspective of a fan of the series what's so wonderful about it. [Edited 8/9/09 17:25pm] "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Nobody? "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
meow85 said: Nobody?
 |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And while your at it can someone explain the appeal of Adam Sandler films???? What you don't remember never happened | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Ex-Moderator |
This is how your thread reads:
I can’t for the life of me understand your personal taste and don’t have an open mind about it at all. Really, I just want to rant about something I don’t like. Does anyone care to argue with me about it?
No?
 |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me.
Are the Anne Rice books worth reading? What you don't remember never happened | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
endymion said: Imago said: Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me.
Are the Anne Rice books worth reading? For such a specific genre she paints a world of myth that's quite satisfactory. I would start with Interview with the Vampire then The Vampire Lestat. Her vampires ache and experience tragedy in ways you seldom see in pop culture fiction. Plus her descriptions of certain periods in history is so vivid you'd swear you were reading a 'period piece'. She was a guilty pleasure for me back in my 20's. Kids who loved Twighlight should graduate to Ann Rice. Of course, Ann Rice is downright blasphemous in her books though. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CarrieMpls said: This is how your thread reads:
I can’t for the life of me understand your personal taste and don’t have an open mind about it at all. Really, I just want to rant about something I don’t like. Does anyone care to argue with me about it?
No?
Believe it or not, I actually am curious about why people like it. I can't fathom it myself, so I'd like to hear a good argument for it. I actually plan on not arguing back about it and everything. "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
endymion said: And while your at it can someone explain the appeal of Adam Sandler films????
That too, actually.  "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
double post [Edited 8/10/09 8:52am] "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me.
When I was about 14 I LOVED Anne Rice. I do still have a certain fondness for Lestat as a character, but her whole "all vampires are bisexual except they don't actually have sex with anybody and they're totally immortal but they're not except for Lestat who can't be killed and they're all psychic and can fly unless they're Brad Pitt" thing got pretty tired, especially after partway through the 4th book in the series when it becomes really blatant that Ms. Rice had run out of good ideas and the only reason she kept plugging through was for the guaranteed bank. Crossovers with the witch series didn't help matters any. Neither did her conversion to devout Catholicism and subsequent renunciation of her vamp work. Still though, the lady does hold a certain special place in pop culture vampire history, because without her it's unlikely the vampire characters in Buffy would've been written the way they were, (who are Spike and Angel, really, but Lestat and Louis 2.0? ) or that Twilight would even exist.  "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: Imago said: Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me.
When I was about 14 I LOVED Anne Rice. I do still have a certain fondness for Lestat as a character, but her whole "all vampires are bisexual except they don't actually have sex with anybody and they're totally immortal but they're not except for Lestat who can't be killed and they're all psychic and can fly unless they're Brad Pitt" thing got pretty tired, especially after partway through the 4th book in the series when it becomes really blatant that Ms. Rice had run out of good ideas and the only reason she kept plugging through was for the guaranteed bank. Crossovers with the witch series didn't help matters any. Neither did her conversion to devout Catholicism and subsequent renunciation of her vamp work. Still though, the lady does hold a certain special place in pop culture vampire history, because without her it's unlikely the vampire characters in Buffy would've been written the way they were, (who are Spike and Angel, really, but Lestat and Louis 2.0? ) or that Twilight would even exist. I think suspension of disbelief is a given with anything in this genre
The reason I liked the book is not because her vampires had this or that power, but because they ached. At times their isolation was complete. Even the ones that at first seem comfortable in their own skin, as later books revealed, were not. But I liked the bi-sexual concept because it helped solidify the fact that their bodies were essentially 'dead'. The reproductive systems died the day they became vampires making their genitals worthless. After decades of isolation, a reproductive system that doesn't work, and the slow decay of their mortal coil, I can see how the gender of a life-partner to a vampire would become a non-issue. We have to remember these characters are often very lonely and isolated. But yeah, the later books are more pop fiction than anything. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: meow85 said: When I was about 14 I LOVED Anne Rice. I do still have a certain fondness for Lestat as a character, but her whole "all vampires are bisexual except they don't actually have sex with anybody and they're totally immortal but they're not except for Lestat who can't be killed and they're all psychic and can fly unless they're Brad Pitt" thing got pretty tired, especially after partway through the 4th book in the series when it becomes really blatant that Ms. Rice had run out of good ideas and the only reason she kept plugging through was for the guaranteed bank. Crossovers with the witch series didn't help matters any. Neither did her conversion to devout Catholicism and subsequent renunciation of her vamp work. Still though, the lady does hold a certain special place in pop culture vampire history, because without her it's unlikely the vampire characters in Buffy would've been written the way they were, (who are Spike and Angel, really, but Lestat and Louis 2.0? ) or that Twilight would even exist. I think suspension of disbelief is a given with anything in this genre
The reason I liked the book is not because her vampires had this or that power, but because they ached. At times their isolation was complete. Even the ones that at first seem comfortable in their own skin, as later books revealed, were not. But I liked the bi-sexual concept because it helped solidify the fact that their bodies were essentially 'dead'. The reproductive systems died the day they became vampires making their genitals worthless. After decades of isolation, a reproductive system that doesn't work, and the slow decay of their mortal coil, I can see how the gender of a life-partner to a vampire would become a non-issue. We have to remember these characters are often very lonely and isolated.But yeah, the later books are more pop fiction than anything. That sounds interesting trouble is with adding things to your 'must read list' is something else has to get bumped off I just need a yr alone on a desert island to catch up on reading  [Edited 8/10/09 9:17am] What you don't remember never happened | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: meow85 said: When I was about 14 I LOVED Anne Rice. I do still have a certain fondness for Lestat as a character, but her whole "all vampires are bisexual except they don't actually have sex with anybody and they're totally immortal but they're not except for Lestat who can't be killed and they're all psychic and can fly unless they're Brad Pitt" thing got pretty tired, especially after partway through the 4th book in the series when it becomes really blatant that Ms. Rice had run out of good ideas and the only reason she kept plugging through was for the guaranteed bank. Crossovers with the witch series didn't help matters any. Neither did her conversion to devout Catholicism and subsequent renunciation of her vamp work. Still though, the lady does hold a certain special place in pop culture vampire history, because without her it's unlikely the vampire characters in Buffy would've been written the way they were, (who are Spike and Angel, really, but Lestat and Louis 2.0? ) or that Twilight would even exist. I think suspension of disbelief is a given with anything in this genre
The reason I liked the book is not because her vampires had this or that power, but because they ached. At times their isolation was complete. Even the ones that at first seem comfortable in their own skin, as later books revealed, were not. But I liked the bi-sexual concept because it helped solidify the fact that their bodies were essentially 'dead'. The reproductive systems died the day they became vampires making their genitals worthless. After decades of isolation, a reproductive system that doesn't work, and the slow decay of their mortal coil, I can see how the gender of a life-partner to a vampire would become a non-issue. We have to remember these characters are often very lonely and isolated. But yeah, the later books are more pop fiction than anything. Anne Rice seems to write her vamps as becoming bisexual as a matter of course the moment they die, regardless of what they were in life. Lacking functioning reproductive systems and looking more for companionship, I can see the logic behind that. And when I was reading the books I was drawn to the fact of openly bisexual characters because I knew by then that I was, and many people in my social circle were coming to the realization of their queerness too, if they hadn't already. The reason it became unbelievable for me was because of her assertion that existing as a vampire makes you "more what you are". Many of the characters would have, in life, come from places and times where open sexual and romantic practice even of the hetero variety was frowned on. I would have liked to have seen, along with the otherwise well done characterization, some evidence of a person having to come to terms with something they'd been educated in life to be wrong and immoral, as other long-held beliefs of theirs didn't just slip away because their bodies died. "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: Imago said: I think suspension of disbelief is a given with anything in this genre
The reason I liked the book is not because her vampires had this or that power, but because they ached. At times their isolation was complete. Even the ones that at first seem comfortable in their own skin, as later books revealed, were not. But I liked the bi-sexual concept because it helped solidify the fact that their bodies were essentially 'dead'. The reproductive systems died the day they became vampires making their genitals worthless. After decades of isolation, a reproductive system that doesn't work, and the slow decay of their mortal coil, I can see how the gender of a life-partner to a vampire would become a non-issue. We have to remember these characters are often very lonely and isolated. But yeah, the later books are more pop fiction than anything. Anne Rice seems to write her vamps as becoming bisexual as a matter of course the moment they die, regardless of what they were in life. Lacking functioning reproductive systems and looking more for companionship, I can see the logic behind that. And when I was reading the books I was drawn to the fact of openly bisexual characters because I knew by then that I was, and many people in my social circle were coming to the realization of their queerness too, if they hadn't already. The reason it became unbelievable for me was because of her assertion that existing as a vampire makes you "more what you are". Many of the characters would have, in life, come from places and times where open sexual and romantic practice even of the hetero variety was frowned on. I would have liked to have seen, along with the otherwise well done characterization, some evidence of a person having to come to terms with something they'd been educated in life to be wrong and immoral, as other long-held beliefs of theirs didn't just slip away because their bodies died. I think Lewis was the embodiment of that a vampire grappling with his upbringing (religious) and the fact that he had become one of the damned. Her descriptions of romantic yearnings and such weren't much different than something you'd read from Alexander Dumas really, exept the vampires accounts are rather explicit, I mean having given the accounts in the late 80s and 90s. Also, already being 'damned' I would imagine them having few inhibitions about speaking their minds.
The problem I have with her characters mainly is they're too beautiful and too perfect. It's like the crew of the new Star Trek movie but with fangs. Other than that, they were a refreshing jolt to a genre that was stagnant. . [Edited 8/10/09 9:22am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This quickly turned into a Vampire Chronicles thread! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Imago said: meow85 said: Anne Rice seems to write her vamps as becoming bisexual as a matter of course the moment they die, regardless of what they were in life. Lacking functioning reproductive systems and looking more for companionship, I can see the logic behind that. And when I was reading the books I was drawn to the fact of openly bisexual characters because I knew by then that I was, and many people in my social circle were coming to the realization of their queerness too, if they hadn't already. The reason it became unbelievable for me was because of her assertion that existing as a vampire makes you "more what you are". Many of the characters would have, in life, come from places and times where open sexual and romantic practice even of the hetero variety was frowned on. I would have liked to have seen, along with the otherwise well done characterization, some evidence of a person having to come to terms with something they'd been educated in life to be wrong and immoral, as other long-held beliefs of theirs didn't just slip away because their bodies died. I think Lewis was the embodiment of that a vampire grappling with his upbringing (religious) and the fact that he had become one of the damned. Her descriptions of romantic yearnings and such weren't much different than something you'd read from Alexander Dumas really, exept the vampires accounts are rather explicit, I mean having given the accounts in the late 80s and 90s. Also, already being 'damned' I would imagine them having few inhibitions about speaking their minds.
The problem I have with her characters mainly is they're too beautiful and too perfect. It's like the crew of the new Star Trek movie but with fangs. Other than that, they were a refreshing jolt to a genre that was stagnant. . [Edited 8/10/09 9:22am] Lewis? What's up with Yanks pronouncing/spelling Louis (loo-ee) that way? Is it actually different in American prints of the books?  "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
dannyd5050 said: This quickly turned into a Vampire Chronicles thread!
Seems it did. No answers on the Twilight fron though. "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
This has been discussed already, and as a "Twilight" fan, to put it simply, you either like them or you don't.
I find them enjoyable, light reading. They struck a chord with me, I've had a lot of fun  'in out over them and I love them .
Others don't. I'm firmly planted in denial |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: CarrieMpls said: This is how your thread reads:
Believe it or not, I actually am curious about why people like it. I can't fathom it myself, so I'd like to hear a good argument for it. I actually plan on not arguing back about it and everything. My trainer at the gym LOVEs the books and movie  She'll  on and on
even when I have been quite blunt leaning towards rude to try to get her to STFU I'll ask her WHY she loves it so, and she'll just go back into mode about HOW GOOD it is - NEVER explaining why she loves it
Last week I requested a new trainer BECAUSE of her TWILIGHT bullshit - I mean STFU and do your job 
. [Edited 8/10/09 10:49am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Mach said: meow85 said: Believe it or not, I actually am curious about why people like it. I can't fathom it myself, so I'd like to hear a good argument for it. I actually plan on not arguing back about it and everything. My trainer at the gym LOVEs the books and movie She'll on and on
even when I have been quite blunt leaning towards rude to try to get her to STFU I'll ask her WHY she loves it so, and she'll just go back into mode about HOW GOOD it is - NEVER explaining why she loves it
Last week I requested a new trainer BECAUSE of her TWILIGHT bullshit - I mean STFU and do your job
. [Edited 8/10/09 10:49am] That would cheese me off to and I love Twilight! I try not to out about it with non-fans, but I know I do to some extent.
What is it about them that is so good to those of us that love them? I can't even really say. Stephanie Meyers is not a great writer and especially the last book was cranked out way too fast. For me, the books are all about Edward, first, then, I love the triangle between Edward, Bella and Jacob. It's not "the classics" and if they start getting called "the NEW classics" I'll be  because they are very light books.
For me that's part of why I love them. Very simple and enjoyable...and a little tingly for me which is lovely. 
 I'm firmly planted in denial |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Nothinbutjoy said: Mach said: My trainer at the gym LOVEs the books and movie She'll on and on
even when I have been quite blunt leaning towards rude to try to get her to STFU I'll ask her WHY she loves it so, and she'll just go back into mode about HOW GOOD it is - NEVER explaining why she loves it
Last week I requested a new trainer BECAUSE of her TWILIGHT bullshit - I mean STFU and do your job
. [Edited 8/10/09 10:49am] That would cheese me off to and I love Twilight! I try not to out about it with non-fans, but I know I do to some extent.
What is it about them that is so good to those of us that love them? I can't even really say. Stephanie Meyers is not a great writer and especially the last book was cranked out way too fast. For me, the books are all about Edward, first, then, I love the triangle between Edward, Bella and Jacob. It's not "the classics" and if they start getting called "the NEW classics" I'll be because they are very light books.
For me that's part of why I love them. Very simple and enjoyable...and a little tingly for me which is lovely.
Oh I am all into peeps loving what they love and usually really cool with that EXCEPT when imma tryin to get my groove on working out and some chick is about something I don't like AND I made it VERY clear that I dont'
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: What the appeal is?
I don't get. I read the books. I saw the movie. I live with a hardcore fan. My vampire lore enthusiast self cringes at the grand liberties taken with the form (they sparkle!?) ... [Edited 8/9/09 17:25pm]
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: Imago said: Ann Rice's vampires have ruined the genre for me in the sense that I don't think of vampires any other way now. Sparkling teenage vampires seem like a 'must miss' cinematic event to me.
When I was about 14 I LOVED Anne Rice. I do still have a certain fondness for Lestat as a character, but her whole "all vampires are bisexual except they don't actually have sex with anybody and they're totally immortal but they're not except for Lestat who can't be killed and they're all psychic and can fly unless they're Brad Pitt" thing got pretty tired, especially after partway through the 4th book in the series when it becomes really blatant that Ms. Rice had run out of good ideas and the only reason she kept plugging through was for the guaranteed bank. Crossovers with the witch series didn't help matters any. Neither did her conversion to devout Catholicism and subsequent renunciation of her vamp work. Still though, the lady does hold a certain special place in pop culture vampire history, because without her it's unlikely the vampire characters in Buffy would've been written the way they were, (who are Spike and Angel, really, but Lestat and Louis 2.0? ) or that Twilight would even exist. Read her website. She has not renounced any of her past work and clears up all those misconceptions in a pretty lengthy essay... If you will, so will I | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CarrieMpls said: This is how your thread reads:
I can’t for the life of me understand your personal taste and don’t have an open mind about it at all. Really, I just want to rant about something I don’t like. Does anyone care to argue with me about it?
No?
Exactly.
I can't stand cauliflower. I just don't get what tastes good about it. I could ask people to explain what they like about cauliflower, but it's not like I'm really going to understand why they like it. They just like it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PunkMistress said: CarrieMpls said: This is how your thread reads:
Exactly.
I can't stand cauliflower. I just don't get what tastes good about it. I could ask people to explain what they like about cauliflower, but it's not like I'm really going to understand why they like it. They just like it. When I was in high school, we had to watch this safe-sex special in health class, and I swear, the genital warts looked just like little bunches of cauliflower growing on the woman's labium  If you will, so will I | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Mach said: meow85 said: Believe it or not, I actually am curious about why people like it. I can't fathom it myself, so I'd like to hear a good argument for it. I actually plan on not arguing back about it and everything. My trainer at the gym LOVEs the books and movie She'll on and on
even when I have been quite blunt leaning towards rude to try to get her to STFU I'll ask her WHY she loves it so, and she'll just go back into mode about HOW GOOD it is - NEVER explaining why she loves it
Last week I requested a new trainer BECAUSE of her TWILIGHT bullshit - I mean STFU and do your job
. [Edited 8/10/09 10:49am] One of my roommates does that. I've tried asking her about it, but all she can say is how awesome it is, but not explain why it's enjoyable. How can a person like something if they don't know why they like it?
Usually when someone questions me about my taste in things I can provide reasons if asked. And God knows I've been challenged about my likes often enough. (Backstreet Boys?  )"A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
johnart said: meow85 said: What the appeal is?
I don't get. I read the books. I saw the movie. I live with a hardcore fan. My vampire lore enthusiast self cringes at the grand liberties taken with the form (they sparkle!?) ... [Edited 8/9/09 17:25pm]
Ms. Brite is supposed to sparkle. Something that feeds off human blood isn't. "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Twilight seems to me to be another "phenomenon" in the vein of High School Musical that has absolutely no relevance to me.
When I was young it was Flowers in the Attic, and I never read that either. My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
