I can see exactly where you're coming from with your argument.
Personally, I enjoyed the Twilight books; we all need a little cliche every now and then. I like to curl up and read a love story every so often (although they seemed to fall in love a bit too quickly for my liking). This was the first vampire novel I ever read (apart from Dracula) and it was nice to see a different view on vampires, but the animal blood so little was a bit. . . meurgh.
Although, in agreement with your argument, it got a little bit boring when I was sure I'd worked out what was happening and I was turning the pages going 'Come ooon, Bella' *Waves hand* She can be an irritatingly slow character at times. Especially in the sequel 'New Moon', when Jacob was a werewolf. I was sat going 'Come on, you idiot. It's not [i]that[/i] hard to work out'.
Yeah. . . anyway. You made a good argument. . . and yeah. . .
Also, I've heard of Anne Rice before, would you reccommend her?
respect your opinion, although I just have to say, your "UNVAPIRENESS" section... I liked how she changed things a little (or a lot. whichever..), because it kept the "vampire" part from falling under your "CLICHE" section. ;)
p.s. The didn't go out in broad daylight, or they would be sprakly. Not very Deadlt, but alarming to bystanders nonetheless.
p.p.s. I Kiiinda... agree with you that it is a little predictable, but I still couldn't put it down..and to tell you the truth, it makes me feel super smart when I guessed right. =)
just bought Breaking Dawn, but am finishing reading Eragon first...and I do NOT plan on watching the movie, because it will most likely (no offence to ANYone) suck. and I like to keep my visuals of the characters. (already past that in HP, ebcause I saw the movies & read the books in a funny way..)
"watch 1st movie, read 2nd book in class, go see 2nd movie, read 3rd, fourth, 5th book, watch 3rd, 4th movies, read 6th, 7th book, watch 5th movie." funny huh? That was kinda irrelavant but I feel chatty today.
peace and love and such. I loved the books, but I respect your opinion so long as you don't take every chance you get to trash it. (then you become just as bad as the Edward lovers who daydream about him constantly) but usually, when it comes to vampire.--or any sci-fi//fantasy book-- it has to be your type of book. exactly. your type of book. otherwise you hate it. It is DEFINITELY a black&white kinda of genre(s). I actually love both Jacob && Edward, as most people who love the book do. I just didn't fancy about them all over the place. Only when reading the book do I allow myself to get all dreamy. lol. Now I'm seriously done. Insanity.
I agree with most of what you've said.
The book is very weak and there are many holes in the plot.
I was wondering why Meyer never mentioned anything about Bella having her period. It is a monthly occurence after all .
>_<
I take it you never read Amilia Atwater-Rhodes.
She writes vampire novels too, and I absolutly adore her. But in her stories, vampires can see their reflection in a mirror, only as they age and become more powerful, the image starts to fade.
Her vampires too can go out into the sun, only their black eyes are too sensative to the light so they prefer to stay indoors.
In all, all vampire stories are different. Don't base all books off of one - fantabulous - author such as the - fantabulous - Anne Rice. (GO LESTAT!)
I believe that I do... somewhat, agree.
Though not entirely.
If you ask me, J.K. Rowling writes very simply. I find Meyer's descriptions, if even only slightly more complicated and complex, more nonetheless. And perhaps Meyer to Rowling is a bad comparison, but that's my opinion.
A good book if you ask me. I'd type more, but I can't at the moment.
i'm sorry but i absolutely love the book.
i thought it had a very good plotline
and although in places its slightly predictable.
sometimes predictable is good.
I love books and wide vocabularies.
However sometimes it's just nice to have a nice simple book.
I thought it was fantastic when I first read it-
But when I reread it, I started to think over it-and it made me agree with some of these points. I mean, there are quite a lot of flaws. I can't describe it-but I began to see weaknesses in her writing style.
But I don't mind it-it's a nice, easy book to read. Some of it is totally unbelievable, and unrealistic, and jumped into too soon-
but no book's perfect...
I personally love Twilight and the rest of the series. I also noticed the small use of grammer. Like big words or whatever. I think thats good because I dont have to time to look up the words. I do have mental things wrong with me and I don't want to sit there for hours on end starring at a dictonary trying to find a compilacated word I dont understand. And I think personally that the book was based off of 'love as first sight' or something along those lines. Stephanie Meyer [i]did[/i] dart off to another idea of what vampires could do. For example, like go out in the sunlight. I dont see any proof of the fact that vampires [i]can't[/i] go out into the sunlight. Do you? [b]Nope, I dont think so.[/b] I think the way the book is plotted it what makes it different and unique. I believe thats why so many people [b]love[/b] the book. Well, thats just my opinion. And sorry if I pissed you off in anyway.
Personally I liked the book before I was famous.
I still like the book now.
It's not a cliche as you think.
All the over vampire book has the same story line.
Evil vampire chases girl.
and all the vampires act the same.
Stephanie Meyer dared to be different. She changed things a bit.
And she made it real. So you can actually belive what she writes is true unliek some vampire books that are so fiction that you can't believe.
I've read the vampire cronicals and I do beliveve stephanie meyer is not as great as Ann Rice but she is a great author.
That's just my opinion
im not trying to argue, but it even says in the book that they DONT wear black. and the only reason they come out in the day is because they live in forks. where the sun never shines. and they DO have consiquences, they sparkle in the sunlight. read the otehr 2 and it points that out more.
and i agree that it has cliches, but you see that her cliches got her best selling author for a year?
I agree with every single point in this article. The book, when I read it, was a better lullaby than a nursery rhyme. My friends love it, and I try to be enthusiastic with them, but I just never really got into it. The book wasn't entertaining for me at all. It was more of a descriptive piece than a story for the good first chunk of it before the conflict came in.
But enough about the content. You wrote this really well, and I admire how you put at the end that you weren't trying to upset the author/readers. Great job. :]
Book_Freak, she wasn't addressing the movie, she was addressing the book. I agree too. It has very little realistic situations, now of course its because it's a vampiric book, but honestly, there can be realistic situations and a lot less cliches
Personally, I enjoyed the Twilight books; we all need a little cliche every now and then. I like to curl up and read a love story every so often (although they seemed to fall in love a bit too quickly for my liking). This was the first vampire novel I ever read (apart from Dracula) and it was nice to see a different view on vampires, but the animal blood so little was a bit. . . meurgh.
Although, in agreement with your argument, it got a little bit boring when I was sure I'd worked out what was happening and I was turning the pages going 'Come ooon, Bella' *Waves hand* She can be an irritatingly slow character at times. Especially in the sequel 'New Moon', when Jacob was a werewolf. I was sat going 'Come on, you idiot. It's not [i]that[/i] hard to work out'.
Yeah. . . anyway. You made a good argument. . . and yeah. . .
Also, I've heard of Anne Rice before, would you reccommend her?