"You like Buffy? You'll LOVE Twilight!"

[Tasha]

not to open a can of worms or anything, but i think people dislike Twilight because of how 'overrated' and popular it is,


ha is that silly?

i tend to dislike things that are popular,

 

[Flannen]

not to open a can of worms or anything, but i think people dislike Twilight because of how 'overrated' and popular it is,


ha is that silly?

i tend to dislike things that are popular,

No, I don't think that's silly at all. Many people tend to steer away from what's popular.

I think its funny that there this notion that if you like Buffy or the vampire genre in general, then you are going to LOVE anything and everything to do with vampires.

Personally, I tend to stay away from anything that I don't consider to be what I class as 'classic' vampires. But that's only down to my personal opinion. I like the more Polidori/Stoker-esque vampire characters of Victorian vampire literature, which is something I felt I recognised within Joss' vampires. I don't like change so I just like sticking to what I know, it's what appeals to me 😛 So I tend to steer clear of more contemporary Vampire films/fictions because I don't find they satisfy what I find most intriguing about vampires.

 

[Perny]

^I agree... I tend to take a step away from popular things in sheer fear of ending up like a sheep! But I gavbe Twilight a chance(Any Vampire book deserves that), and became mortified. Clearly this was aimed at teen girls, and making money. I also have a suspicion that S.M. makes it up as she writes

 

[BuffyElevated]

Well, the first book was written around a dream that she had. She herself has said many times that she did not set out to write a book or series; she just wanted to see what would happen to these two characters if she let her imagination run.
You're definitely entitled to your own opinions, and I'm happy that the ones of you who gave it a fair chance did so, even if you still don't like it. But reading 5 pages and then putting it down is not a fair chance, honestly. The books definitely get better as they go along. I, personally, like the first book for what it is, but my favorite book of the series is the third, "Eclipse" because THAT, to me, is where the story gets GREAT. 🙂

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

Well, the first book was written around a dream that she had. She herself has said many times that she did not set out to write a book or series; she just wanted to see what would happen to these two characters if she let her imagination run.
You're definitely entitled to your own opinions, and I'm happy that the ones of you who gave it a fair chance did so, even if you still don't like it. But reading 5 pages and then putting it down is not a fair chance, honestly. The books definitely get better as they go along. I, personally, like the first book for what it is, but my favorite book of the series is the third, "Eclipse" because THAT, to me, is where the story gets GREAT. 🙂

I'd agree that 5 pages isn't enough to judge a book on, but it's definitely enough for me to decide if I'm going to bother continuing with it. The first few pages are critical for that. So, while I agree that it's not fair to make generalised statements after five pages, I would say it's giving the book a fair chance.

But then again, if you do only give it five pages, you'd have to be prepared for the fact that you might be missing out on something that's great. Or, it might continue in that vein and be a dreadful book. Or, it might continue in that vein and be a wonderful book that you're just destined not to like.

What was my point again?

 

[BuffyElevated]

I guess it's just me, but I have always made it a rule to read at least the first chapter. If after that, I'm not interested in reading any more, then I will stop and just say I didn't like it.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

I guess it's just me, but I have always made it a rule to read at least the first chapter.

Hmmm, I should have used that rule for Dan Browns books - I'd only have to read half a page!

 

[Lou]

I'm not one that can stop like that. At least not to make a conscious effort to stop. If a book doesn't grab me, it will end up on the shelf because I forget to go back to it. But, I sit down with an effort to actually read the book, not to see if it's good.
I would agree that the 5 pages rule is good for writers, but I don't think it's a rule I would ever use as a reader. I like my stories to have build up and to get attached to the characters. I can see being "sucked in" by the first few pages, but it's certainly not something I find mandatory. I can count lots of great books that I'd have been bored to tears with and not read if I had done that.

I went into Twilight thinking it was a "teeny-bopper" book, so I wasn't surprised that it was geared toward people younger than me and not put off by it at all. In fact, I was kinda impressed with how UN-teeny-bopper it was compared to what I had envisioned.
I don't mind the teeny-bopper parts though. It's a story.

Personally, I think it was well written...maybe not in the CONVENTIONAL sense of the word (it's not Oliver Twist) but well written for what it was. I was up all night reading because of the way the chapters were set up. (sneaky move on her part, S.M.) I could breeze through it in no time. Which is saying a LOT for me, because of the ADD, and I wasn't even on my medication. And I really wanted to know more, which was also good.
I think she let it drag a while in New Moon when we could have had some other story lines to juggle, but it still wasn't awful.

I don't like the insane fan-girl screaming and yelling and I saw the guy from the movie on some interviews and he seems to be a complete dolt....or he's SUCH a good actor he can come across that way for fun.

I understand the not liking it, but the EXTREME hate is a bit weird, other than trying to make sure everyone knows you're NOT a crazed fan girl person.

Still, it really doesn't matter. Anything that gets teenagers to willingly READ something is a good thing to me. It got me to willingly read and over CHRISTMAS of all things when I have no time at all.

 

[Silum]

I understand the not liking it, but the EXTREME hate is a bit weird

That comes from not just reading a few pages, but being obessed with something else (ie Buffy).

It brings out the irrational (dare I say it??!) moron in people.

How many other books have I read, disliked after 10 pages and put down. I certainly didnt feel the need to write an essay on my horrific experience!

 

[PrincessCrayon]

Ha ha, people being obssessed with twilight brings out the irrational moron in me!

Hopefully I don't offend anyone when I say Bella is the polar opposite of Buffy. Buffy is someone who can look out for her self, does not need a man (or a woman) to complete her, believes in herself, and is exactly the big sister I want!
Bella...well, the girl can barely walk across a flat surface without help.

Oh, and Edward? Essentially a stalker. I am actually really creeped out that all these tweens think that having someone watch you sleep without your knowledge for weeks is romantic.

But if you do like twilight, we can still be friends! I will not discriminate the twilighters!

 

[Lou]

Oh! A DEBATE!

Except, I DO agree with the Edward stalking part. He just is creepy.

I didn't see Bella as all that wimpy. She did get a bit floundering in Book 2, but she didn't just jump out a window...there was nothing she could do. Just stuck. When she DID have something to do, she did it. And she was very good at telling Edward off, even as much as she loved him.

Buffy, I see as MORE wimpy and whiny than other people do. It may be why I don't like Bangel. She gets VERY much "Oh, Dreamy Angel, I'm in love with you for no reason and I can't live without you". and he gets very "Oh, Buffy, I'm madly in love and you're my reason for not living in the sewers anymore" and why? Because she looks cute sucking on lollipops?

Granted, Buffy gets tougher, but (oddly enough) she seems to get tougher around the time she's dating Riley. And then gets weirder with the whole Spuffy thing.

Buffy's always complaining that she doesn't WANT this life and wants to be normal, although she seems to just natural STINK at normal. She complains a lot about not being able to do it and even goes flat into a nut like trance when Dawn gets taken that she has to be snapped out of. She goes off her rocker at the end of S2 and things get tough so she just cuts out and disappears?
Anyway, I see lots of times when Buffy gets JUST as wimpy and she has super powers.

Granted, I should probably add that Buffy was my least favorite character (MAIN character, Scobby, Ben was worse) and I really don't feel much about Bella either way. But, I didn't see her as wimpy, at least not compared to Buffy.

And people should also take into account that being anti-Bangel might help me like the books more. At least Bella went off and married the guy, and shut up and went on with their happily ever after. Buffy and Angel just wanna DRAG OUT the drama from now until the end of time.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

I find the books (yes, all four) are annoyingly written and not my cup of tea and the film, well the ONLY reason I enjoyed it was because I saw it with a friend and we just ripped it.

My reasons for disliking it have been said by the people genuinely interested in the debate of the books, and not the instant dislike that seems odd.

I think Bella is a flawed and damaging character to young girls because the message she seems to give, especially in the first book, is that you aren't anyone until someone loves you.

Edward is a flawed and damaging character because he tells young girls that you should be dependant on the man in your life.

Why its not like Buffy, well when Willow had an issue of dependance, it truly dealt with that, the repercussions of it AND how to live on afterwards.

 

[Harley]

Somone once said that Bella and Edward was the retarded version of Bangel. I hate Bangel but not even I would dare to say that! It's an insult to Bangel, to Buffy, to Joss!
Twilight is to me a collection of different vampire stories through time, with an attempt of making it look wellplanned. Twilight vampires are a discrace to everything vampire related!
Bram Stoker the poor thing must be turning around in his grave !

I meant to disagree with you.

It's ignorant to lump together different vampire legends and lore and compare them as far as who's better, not whos different. There is no absolute vampire legend. Not even Bram Stoker can claim that. The idea of vampires were around before he wrote Dracula. Stephenie meyer wrote her vampires as sparkly people who are cold and hard and have to fight a need to eat people.

Bella and Edward werent written as Buffy and Angel who werent written as Romeo and Juliet. None of this is original.

 

[Flannen]

^ Bram Stoker can't claim that, but he should be able to 😛 Or maybe Polidori? He came before but it was a teeny weeny story, still had a similar vampire figure though!

 

[HABEAS CORPSES]

I read about half of twilight a few weeks ago going to pick it up again it is a bit slow and drearie, and some of the characters are a bit boring and whinney and the plot is not moving alot for me its sort of stuck in a void of " He loves me, oh wait does he? No wait he does. oh great he is a vampire but hes a vegie Thats somthing" but its somthing i am going to read so i can give a valid opinion on it.

 

[anyalover17]

I read all of the books, and saw the movie.
Hated. them.
Stephenie Meyer is an idiot who needs a thesaurus, and she just really can't write.
Edward Cullen is an abusive stupid, controlling idiot.
Bella is a whiny Mary Sue.
Yeah, I'm gonna stop....

 

[Airam]

I do want to give props to those of ya'll that say you dislike it but have read all 4 (or even 1) books to back up that opinion. I am curious though as to how and why you guys forced yourselves to read 4 books that you were disliking so much, I mean Breaking Dawn was like 750 pages long! I just know I couldn't do it, if I read a book and really wasn't into it all there's no way I'd spend time reading its 3 sequels. Why'd ya'll keep going?

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

I do want to give props to those of ya'll that say you dislike it but have read all 4 (or even 1) books to back up that opinion. I am curious though as to how and why you guys forced yourselves to read 4 books that you were disliking so much, I mean Breaking Dawn was like 750 pages long! I just know I couldn't do it, if I read a book and really wasn't into it all there's no way I'd spend time reading its 3 sequels. Why'd ya'll keep going?

Well, I admit I read the books out of curiousity, and did enjoy them. It was only after giving it some critical thought, that I've decided I dislike the series. Sometimes that happens.

 

[hazzard]

while i am a much more "serious" buffy fan, and i know that buffy has had such a profound cultural impact and will continue to influence tv and culture for many years more, i did enjoy twilight. i ordered my "and then buffy staked edward" t-shirt and wear it with great joy haha, but i still like twilight.

i was ashamed to admit it at first, because i didn't want to be grouped into the 14-year-olds-in-love-with-edward category or the oh-you're-just-trendy category. but now i don't really have a problem with it.

it's not as good or profound or whatever as buffy--it's entertaining and i don't think stephenie meyer is as bad a writer as everyone says.

i read and liked all four books just for what they were, and i saw the movie and enjoyed it for what it was. nothing can touch my devotion to buffy or my respect for buffy, but i think twilight isn't worth such the hard bashing that people give it. it was entertaining and an interesting take on a vampire cultural obsession, but i think that's all it is. it will fade with time, just like all trendy things.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

I do want to give props to those of ya'll that say you dislike it but have read all 4 (or even 1) books to back up that opinion. I am curious though as to how and why you guys forced yourselves to read 4 books that you were disliking so much, I mean Breaking Dawn was like 750 pages long! I just know I couldn't do it, if I read a book and really wasn't into it all there's no way I'd spend time reading its 3 sequels. Why'd ya'll keep going?

I work from home and my job takes me like 2 hours from 7am to 9am.
My friends work the London 9-5 (which is 8:30 to 6) which means I have ALOT of hours to fill, so I read anything and everything.