Twilight?

A slow, analog alternative to the internet

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26531
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby SecondTalon » Mon May 18, 2009 12:02 pm UTC

alitheiapsis wrote:I find interesting the sheer amount of merchandising involved. There's a Twilight game, you know. A Harry Potter game? Understandable. There is a plot. But a Twilight board game? I don't get it....what do you actually do?
Player 1 is tasked with being spiteful and in lacking depth of character. Player 2 has the same character requirement, but must also sparkle.

Players 3 and onward are tasked with playing Settlers of Cataan or something else, the only requirement being that it's actually fun.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

cathrl
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 am UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby cathrl » Mon May 18, 2009 8:03 pm UTC

alitheiapsis wrote:I've entertained people on occasion by reading aloud excerpts from Twilight extremely dramatically. The dazzle scene is a personal favorite.


I'm impressed. I'm physically incapable of reading that scene out loud without having hysterics.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby GhostWolfe » Tue May 19, 2009 12:58 am UTC

[off-topic] According to Film Facts, the movie script for Twilight was completed in only 6 weeks. Doesn't really seem like something to be boasting. :roll: [/off-topic]

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Tue May 19, 2009 4:38 am UTC

Mini-update to my blog: Imprinting is sick:

This is from another entry on twilightsucks.com, but proof that "imprinting" is explicitly sexual. For those who don't know, SMeyer has her werewolves "imprint" - when they see their soulmate, they become obsessed with her. One falls for a girl who rejects him (he's her cousin's fiance), so he brutalizes her and she accepts. One guy falls for the girl who adored him, but who he never gave the time of day. And two imprint on children: a two-year-old and an infant. The ones who fall in love with children become constant fixtures in those little girl's lives, with the expectation of one day having a sexual relationship with them, While SMeyer says, 'Oh, they're just big brothers.... until the girls are old enough!' Imprinting is explicitly sexual because SMeyer is an awful writer. She tells us it's not sexual, but shows very plainly that it is. Proof that imprinting is sexual, even on the babies:

"He'll just have to be patient for a few decades." Eclipse, page 121. Why would he have to be patient if he just wanted to be her big brother? He can be big brother her entire life.

"And then, when she's grown up, they'll be as happy as Emily and Sam." Eclipse, page 121. How can that be if Quil (and everyone else) does not expect a sexual relationship? Jacob says that it isn't romantic, but it obviously is, because he's waiting on her to grow up, so they can be "as happy as Sam and Emily". (Sam is the one who ripped Emily's face off, causing her to realize she loves him)

"But why wouldn't she choose him, in the end?" Eclipse, page 121. Jacob does not understand that obsession is not necessarily reciprocated. Also, no matter how much he states to the contrary, he is expecting this to become a sexual relationship. He is not expecting Quil to simply worship the object of his affections to the end of his days, like he should if imprinting is not sexual. But because it is, Quil is just waiting for Claire to get old enough before telling her that he wants to hit that good.

“Cwaire pway wid Qwil aaaawl day. Cwaire nebber gowin home.” Breaking Dawn, page 97. If that doesn't set off your creep alarm...

"No matter what stage they were in—about to tie the knot like Sam or just a much-abused nanny like Quil—the peace and certainty they always radiated was downright puke-inducing." Breaking Dawn, page 97. Quil is certain that Claire will choose him when he decides to make his move. The idea that she might say no never occurs to him.

"You never saw a real parent so jazzed to play whatever stupid kiddie sport their rugrat could think up." Breaking Dawn, page 98. Because Quil has to be perfect, or Claire won't sleep with him.

"Though I did think it sucked that he had a good fourteen years of monkitude ahead of him until Claire was his age—for Quil, at least, it was a good thing werewolves didn’t get older." Breaking Dawn, page 98. The monkitude. Jacob knows that this is sexual, no matter how much he pretends otherwise. Monks are celibate. Jacob says Quil is going to wait to end his celibacy until Claire's 17 or so. Magnanimous of him.

"He was worse than any paranoid, overprotective mother." Breaking Dawn, page 99. Because no mother is waiting for her child to grow old enough to have sex with.

"His hands flew up to touch Claire, as if making sure she was still there." Breaking Dawn, page 99. CREEEEEEEPY!

"I tugged lightly against his hold on Renesmee, and he just stepped closer to me." Breaking Dawn, page 289. Jacob just can't let go of his sex object.

"Staring at her like… like he was a blind man seeing the sun for the very first time." Breaking Dawn, page 289. But no, that's not sexual, especially not for a grown man looking at an infant.

“You stupid mutt! How could you? My baby!” Breaking Dawn, page 289. Why would Bella be so upset if she didn't know perfectly well it was sexual? If he was just going to be big brother to her little monster, why would she care?

“I can share,” he said pleadingly as he retreated across the lawn." Breaking Dawn, page 290. Generous of him, considering that he's talking to the baby's mother.

"“You think you’ll be part of my family as my son-in-law!”" Breaking Dawn, page 290. Because there's no way he's not going to marry her someday.

"“You’re going to stay away from her,” I hissed up at Jacob.
“I can’t do that!”" Breaking Dawn, page 290. Proof that imprinting is about the imprinter, not the imprintee. He only cares about being around her, not what she or her family wants.

"“He was watching Nessie sleep, his mouth hanging open like the moron he is," Breaking Dawn, page 315. He is sexually fascinated by this infant.

"“I’m not going to think about that for approximately six and a half more years.”
Edward laughed and then sighed. “Of course, it looks like he’ll have some competition to worry about when the time comes.” Breaking Dawn, page 474. Yes, because letting your best friend bang your daughter is so much better at 7 than at 6 months. But still, they're admiring Jacob's restraint in not banging her until she looks grown up.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby GhostWolfe » Tue May 19, 2009 4:57 am UTC

Yeah, the imprinting on babies thing creeped me out too. When I realised that Jakob had imprinted on Renesmee, the first thing I thought was eewwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Spacemilk
Posts: 936
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:03 pm UTC
Location: Hugh ston
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby Spacemilk » Tue May 19, 2009 6:39 pm UTC

Kendo_Bunny wrote:Mini-update to my blog: Imprinting is sick:

This is from another entry on twilightsucks.com, but proof that "imprinting" is explicitly sexual. For those who don't know, SMeyer has her werewolves "imprint" - when they see their soulmate, they become obsessed with her. One falls for a girl who rejects him (he's her cousin's fiance), so he brutalizes her and she accepts. One guy falls for the girl who adored him, but who he never gave the time of day. And two imprint on children: a two-year-old and an infant. The ones who fall in love with children become constant fixtures in those little girl's lives, with the expectation of one day having a sexual relationship with them, While SMeyer says, 'Oh, they're just big brothers.... until the girls are old enough!' Imprinting is explicitly sexual because SMeyer is an awful writer. She tells us it's not sexual, but shows very plainly that it is.


Sort of an aside: I thought Sam tore up Emily after she fell for him? Also, he "brutalized" her because he didn't know how to control the shapeshifting, and she happened to be there when he lost control once. In all fairness, it's not quite the same as beating her because she wouldn't accept him, but I can't really remember how it all happened anyway.

I agree with you about the disturbing-ness of imprinting. SMeyer clearly thinks obsession >= love. Seeing that someone is obsessed with you, you can't help but fall in love with them. Or: the power of the obsession is so great that you'll wait forever for them. At least it makes sense why she shows E&B's obsessive, codependent relationship as a good thing - because clearly, to her, that is better than (or at least the same as) true love.
milk from space is good for you!



User avatar
alitheiapsis
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:29 am UTC
Location: Just behind my eyes, between my ears.
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby alitheiapsis » Wed May 27, 2009 5:51 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
alitheiapsis wrote:I find interesting the sheer amount of merchandising involved. There's a Twilight game, you know. A Harry Potter game? Understandable. There is a plot. But a Twilight board game? I don't get it....what do you actually do?
Player 1 is tasked with being spiteful and in lacking depth of character. Player 2 has the same character requirement, but must also sparkle.

Players 3 and onward are tasked with playing Settlers of Cataan or something else, the only requirement being that it's actually fun.


I propose a Player 3. Player 3 would actually attempt to achieve a regular life until being manipulated by Players 1 and 2 and being sucked into their creepy world.

Players 4+ could play Settlers of Catan or Risk or something.

cathrl wrote:
alitheiapsis wrote:I've entertained people on occasion by reading aloud excerpts from Twilight extremely dramatically. The dazzle scene is a personal favorite.


I'm impressed. I'm physically incapable of reading that scene out loud without having hysterics.


The frequent bouts of laughter actually heighten to the effect. I have yet to do readings from New Moon or Eclipse, not owning those, but I could totally see myself reciting some particularly "emo" bits. I giggle just thinking about it. :)

GhostWolfe wrote:[off-topic] According to Film Facts, the movie script for Twilight was completed in only 6 weeks. Doesn't really seem like something to be boasting. :roll: [/off-topic]

/angell


Cracked.com has this wonderful piece titled "If 'Twilight' Was 10 Times Shorter And 100 Times More Honest". It goes back to that script people were discussing a few pages ago, but this one is a slightly different take on things.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby GhostWolfe » Wed May 27, 2009 6:00 am UTC

The scene: 4pm, office is almost silent. No one's really working, they just want to get through the last hour and go home.

Who's the albino Wolverine?


I was burnt by cheese. People gave me funny looks. :D

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2575
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby suffer-cait » Wed May 27, 2009 9:25 am UTC

alitheiapsis wrote:A Harry Potter game?
there is harry potter clue! it is awesome! not only is it harry potter, but it is more complicated than regular clue. so, you could know the answer, and be waiting to guess and win, and LOSE before it gets to your turn! it's hillarious, and wonderful
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
MHD
Posts: 630
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:21 pm UTC
Location: Denmark

Re: Twilight?

Postby MHD » Fri May 29, 2009 9:43 pm UTC

I have three fangirls in my class... And I have always been sceptical.

Maybe I should read it, puke because of it and photograph me puking from reading twilight, just to show them how bad it is.

Good god! It sounds like some of the early of my own stories...
Gods vs. men + aliens + demons + demigods.
Guy is kinda hobo because he is a shapeshifer who has to eat a lot. Goes to military academy and leanrs how to fight super fast because of his shapeshifting. Meets girl with six arms, fights beleiver in the cafeteria. Graduates. Goes to war, and the war is won because of him.
EvanED wrote:be aware that when most people say "regular expression" they really mean "something that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike a regular expression"

User avatar
michaelandjimi
Isn't Even Playing
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:21 am UTC
Location: Citizen of the World
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby michaelandjimi » Sat May 30, 2009 5:53 am UTC

MHD wrote:Guy is kinda hobo because he is a shapeshifer who has to eat a lot.
Pure genius. Write this, now.
Whelan wrote:Relax, have a good time, and hope for the bees ;)

User avatar
teamcorndog
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Q4

Re: Twilight?

Postby teamcorndog » Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:03 am UTC

Oh my. The other day on NPR there was a short bit where a guy suggested that more men should read Twilight. Nooooo. The worst part was that he says the book could help boys understand girls. Grrr. :evil:

cathrl
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 am UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby cathrl » Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:07 am UTC

It'll help them get dates?

News flash, Mr Meltzer. Any teen boy who reads Twilight and decides that's the way he should treat the girl he's dating - you know, a real girl, in 2009, not a sheep who thinks she's from 1950 - is going to find himself with an exceptionally sore face in about ten seconds flat. We're equals. We expect to be treated as equals. All the care and love and politeness and courtesy in the word won't make up for you treating us like idiots who have to be protected from our own mistakes by the men in our lives.

Kangaroo
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:39 pm UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby Kangaroo » Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:01 pm UTC

I don't like the stereotype view he has on sex, and the differences between the two genders. Also, I fail to see how it would help me to understand women if I read the Twilight books.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Twilight?

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

Oh God no. So he's encouraging moms to tell their teenage sons to read a series in the hopes of educating them to treat girls like possessions and value nothing about them besides their fragrant smell physical beauty? To teach them that the ideal girl is one whose only life goal is to get married and have babies right away without a thought of career or college? That juvenile crushes = true love? Did this guy check his brain somewhere?
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26531
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby SecondTalon » Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:19 pm UTC

Also, sex is okay when she's asleep because it'll hurt her less.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

cathrl
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 am UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby cathrl » Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:18 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:Oh God no. So he's encouraging moms to tell their teenage sons to read a series in the hopes of educating them to treat girls like possessions and value nothing about them besides their fragrant smell physical beauty? To teach them that the ideal girl is one whose only life goal is to get married and have babies right away without a thought of career or college? That juvenile crushes = true love? Did this guy check his brain somewhere?


I don't think he has one. I seriously considered signing up with the site just to point out a few salient truths to him, but comments were already locked. He's gone on my personal "what a pillock" list.

User avatar
teamcorndog
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Q4

Re: Twilight?

Postby teamcorndog » Thu Jun 04, 2009 4:24 am UTC

Kangaroo wrote:I don't like the stereotype view he has on sex, and the differences between the two genders. Also, I fail to see how it would help me to understand women if I read the Twilight books.


I agree. It's aggravating when men act like women are some mystical creatures that can only be understood by reading popular novels :roll:

It's hilarious that he claims to have studied "Are You there God? It's Me, Margaret" as a way to understand girls when he was younger. That is a bit squicky to think about. I can just imagine him as a pre-teen, going up to girls and saying "Hey baby, have you started Shark Week yet? I know how anxious you are about that... no? Come back here! I know a great way to increase your breast size! Let me show you!..."

Edit: apparently a certain word for menstruation gets changed to "Shark Week" on this board. How droll.

missbittens
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby missbittens » Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:54 am UTC

One of the things that a bunch of younger fans say is "it's forbidden love!" Except it isn't. Charlie makes no attempt to forbid it whatsoever. Nor does Carlisle. The parent figures are complete nonentities here. Just what a thirteen year old wants - freedom from Mum and Dad telling them what to do.

But...not being told what to do? Having to make your own choices and for them to have huge consequences? That's pretty darn scary when you're thirteen and have never done it. So what do we get? We get the perfect boyfriend to pick up the slack, taking on the role as her parent. All those things he does - checking she's OK when she sleeps, trying to keep her from making dreadful mistakes, grounding her when she misbehaves... those are deeply abusive when done by a boyfriend to a girlfriend. But they are completely normal behaviour for the parent of a child. Bella gets to have her cake and eat it - all the safety of someone to look after her, but no nasty parents trying to control her. On the face of it, it sounds good - and the target audience is simply too immature to realise that in practice being controlled isn't any more palatable when it's your boyfriend than when it's your dad.

Word. It's the same thing with any of the intimate moments in the book - the way it's described, it's like a sex scene, without the sex*. So to the younger readers, it's sensual and thrilling, but also completely safe, because they don't even make it to first base.

*Incidentally, there's this little webseries I've seen some of, PG Porn, which is porn without the sex. Although it's not just softcore porn like Twilight is, it's a parody of porn. It's rather amusing, although NSFW because of the title.

According to Film Facts, the movie script for Twilight was completed in only 6 weeks. Doesn't really seem like something to be boasting.

On a similar note, some of the fans like to boast about how Meyer finished the book in only three months. And I'm just like "Yeah, it shows." Finishing a large book that quickly while also taking care of three kids would probably mean she didn't take the time to fix it up, to really think about what she was writing and to go back and improve things where it was needed. It's not something the fangirls should be goddamned proud of - it's a signal that she's a lazy, amatuerish writer.
Image
Click the egg, help it hatch. Or else it dies.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Twilight?

Postby podbaydoor » Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:52 pm UTC

Image
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2575
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby suffer-cait » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:23 am UTC

um....
fathers are sometimes pedophiles too
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26531
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby SecondTalon » Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:14 pm UTC

And also can be stalkers. And, assuming Vampires exist, one would also assume they could also fall under that heading. So... some fathers are Edward Cullen.

(Yeah, I think the graph would be improved by the removal of the fathers of ill children bit)
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2575
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby suffer-cait » Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:55 pm UTC

well, actually acording to the 4th book, yes.
though i don't know if the demon child will ever get sick.
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:52 pm UTC
Location: Away from you

Re: Twilight?

Postby Vanguard » Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

I saw the movie, and hated everything it stood for.
Part of me wants to read all 4 of the books that my Mom got and is all gaga over, just so I can be more educated in it's failure. But do I really need to? I've read MULTIPLE synopsis, blog posts, reviews, and Tvtropes all on this series.

I get the idea that it's simply; terrible.
Image

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2575
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby suffer-cait » Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:11 pm UTC

you know the saying "don't knock it till you try it"
well, it goes for bad things too
also, your opinion holds more water if you've read the books.
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:52 pm UTC
Location: Away from you

Re: Twilight?

Postby Vanguard » Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:15 pm UTC

suffer-cait wrote:you know the saying "don't knock it till you try it"
well, it goes for bad things too
also, your opinion holds more water if you've read the books.


Maybe, but my opinion isn't completely null and void, as I do have acquired knowledge of it.

I didn't tell you how long some synposis's(o_O?) are.

*gauges eyes out*
Image

User avatar
rat4000
r/ratsgonewild
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:51 pm UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby rat4000 » Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:09 pm UTC

Yes, your opinion is null and void until you've read the books. Synopses do not tell you anything about style and mostly fail at telling you about character creation. The synopsis of Eragon is quite possibly more interesting than that of Lord of the Flies, but I don't think there's anyone, even Eragon fans, who would argue that Lord of the Flies is the worse book (if you hate Lord of the Flies just substitute something else which you love that isn't about the story: Ulysses, some of Bradbury I guess, Silverberg's Dying Inside, whatever you like. Also, I do not want to turn this thread into the "no book is better, they're all different" argument I've had a couple of times: I wanted to say that Lord of the Flies is not worse, not that it is better).

And reviews tell you nothing about how well you would like the book if you read it. There're people who love the same books as me, mostly, and love Twilight while I quit reading it 200 pages in.

Seriously, the only way to know how good the book is for you is to READ IT.

User avatar
Kewangji
Has Been Touched
Posts: 2255
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:20 pm UTC
Location: Lost in Translation
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby Kewangji » Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:05 pm UTC

I read the beginning of Twilight and it sucked. Do I have to force myself through some two-hundred more pages of that to have a valid opinion?
If you like my words sign up for my newsletter, Airport Tattoo Parlour: https://tinyletter.com/distantstations

The Great Hippo wrote:Nuclear bombs are like potato chips, you can't stop after just *one*

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby GhostWolfe » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:21 pm UTC

rat4000 wrote:Yes, your opinion is null and void until you've read the books.
And yet, even once you've read it, the fanpires won't listen to you anyway. Despite your pleas for them to try reading a real book for comparison. :roll:

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:52 pm UTC
Location: Away from you

Re: Twilight?

Postby Vanguard » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:33 pm UTC

Kewangji wrote:I read the beginning of Twilight and it sucked. Do I have to force myself through some two-hundred more pages of that to have a valid opinion?

^This, so far, is what happened to me.

I don't rag on people who don't vote when they know it's worthless, so I don't think THEY have any less of an opinion.

So I'll bitch about Twilight anyway.
Image

User avatar
thatguy
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:25 am UTC
Location: MPLS
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby thatguy » Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:03 am UTC

Walked into Wal-Mart the other day, and they had Twilight in, playing the special features. Someone on the DVD was going on about how they had this amazing thing called "pre-viz" that let them see the special effects before the were done and it was so amazing!!!!!11111one

I almost slow-slapped at the TV array. Way to hype something that literally every studio-made move does.

Chai Kovsky wrote:Thatguy, you are my Big Damn Hero!
Thank you! You win the day!

cathrl
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 am UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby cathrl » Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:57 am UTC

Vanguard wrote:Maybe, but my opinion isn't completely null and void, as I do have acquired knowledge of it.


At which point all you can really do is quote someone else's opinion. It's only your opinion if you've read the book yourself.

However, "I read the first few pages and they were appalling, I didn't bother with the rest" is a perfectly valid opinion. It's just only an opinion on the first few pages.

User avatar
rat4000
r/ratsgonewild
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:51 pm UTC

Re: Twilight?

Postby rat4000 » Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:39 pm UTC

cathrl wrote:However, "I read the first few pages and they were appalling, I didn't bother with the rest" is a perfectly valid opinion. It's just only an opinion on the first few pages.
Ponies.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Twilight?

Postby Izawwlgood » Tue Jun 16, 2009 2:53 pm UTC

I read the RedEye, a quick and crappy publication put out by the Chicago Reader, as it's free and has about two pages of world news I can glance over on my commute (plus sudoku, but anyway). It's a constant and annoying shock how often Twilight makes it's way into the thing, either through the half page column of twitters from moviegoers (ugh) or celebrity gossip.

Everytime I see someone reading it on the subway I'm tempted to ask them if they're just reading it to be ironic.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
thatguy
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:25 am UTC
Location: MPLS
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby thatguy » Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:51 am UTC

I've solved the problem of friends talking about it by matching their enthusiasm, but instead of gushing about it, pointing out flaws in a totally serious delivery. Examples:

"I really like how Bella was able to have her baby!!"
"Yeah, and it's great how his 100 year old sperm were still viable!"

"Imprinting is so romantic!"
"Yeah! I really liked the pedophilia, too!"

Chai Kovsky wrote:Thatguy, you are my Big Damn Hero!
Thank you! You win the day!

Gentlelady
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:06 am UTC
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby Gentlelady » Wed Jun 17, 2009 7:31 am UTC

thatguy wrote:
"I really like how Bella was able to have her baby!!"


At first I was confused and thought to myself, "She had a baby?" Then I remembered that the kid tried to rip her from the inside out.

That is how reality works. Babies are horrible creatures who try to tear open a woman's uterus trying to get out. It's the miracle of childbirth.
d33p wrote:And Karma rode upon a pale horse, and GentleLady followed behind.
sleepygamer wrote:Once you go sleepy you never go backy.

User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:52 pm UTC
Location: Away from you

Re: Twilight?

Postby Vanguard » Wed Jun 17, 2009 4:27 pm UTC

Well to get peeps off my back I actually have begun reading them (my mother bought all 4 a while ago).

I think the author is a bit too detailed. I mean, she goes into every intricacy(sp?) of Bella's actions. Half of which I don't care about. The upside is, it paints a very good picture in my hea. But I use some of what I saw in the movie anyway so it's unnecessary for me.

Secondly, why the FUCK did Bella choose to exile herself in this town? She calls it her own hell in the first 20 pages. Whhyyyy.
Image

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26531
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Twilight?

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:29 pm UTC

Wikipedia wrote:Isabella "Bella" Swan moves from sunny Phoenix, Arizona to rainy Forks, Washington to live with her father, Charlie, while her mother, Renée, travels with her new husband, Phil Dwyer, a minor league baseball player

Now... I don't know about Away from You, but here in the US it's fairly cost prohibitive, even for a minor league baseball player, to afford a private tutor for a high school kid that meets the various requirements to count as being in school. There's also the issue of her mother quite possibly wanting to spend some time alone with her new husband, or whatever. Maybe her mother went nuts and kicked her out, I don't know.

Point being that I don't think Bella had a choice in the matter. She was a minor, and minors usually don't get to make many choices on their living arrangements.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:52 pm UTC
Location: Away from you

Re: Twilight?

Postby Vanguard » Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:31 pm UTC

Fair enough. Why didn't she explain that in the start though? It would have just taken a couple sentances >_<
Image

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Twilight?

Postby natraj » Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:38 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Point being that I don't think Bella had a choice in the matter. She was a minor, and minors usually don't get to make many choices on their living arrangements.


In the book it did say she had a choice, though. The book was written like her mother was too flighty/immature to really be making much of any decisions and Bella was the mature one, and she voluntarily decided to move away to give her mother time alone with her new husband.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he


Return to “Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests