the TWILITE thing
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
RobertScorpio
Pariah
Well, who cares? We're talking about movies here Marian. And if these girls like these kinds of movies, then who are we to tell them they are wrong for doing so. Guys like movies about fast cars, and fast women. Do you want boys to grow up like that?
Rob
I agree it's a fucked up message to be promoting. Simply because it perpetuates the ideal of "The bad boy with a heart of gold". The whole "I can change him" belief that some women have about men that are douches and should be kicked to the curb.
And I wonder about some of the audience for these books. Whenever I take the wife for a check up, I can count at least one or two middle-aged women sitting in the waiting room reading one of these books. Last time there was a couple of women carrying on about the new movie like a couple of schoolgirls and how romantic it would be to have a man like that in their lives.
....I wonder how much alcohol I can sneak into the theater in a winter coat???
My cousin worked at the local theatre for years and I worked at the local drive-in.... You'd be suprised.
Keep them in seperate pockets to avoid glass clinking or can tings, make sure you have bottles or something that don't make a loud *Fitzzz* sound (avoid cans then) and so long as you don't try to haul in a 12 pack under your coat, they won't search you.Then again, this is Canada where I live where we're so apathetic.... we...... well..... *shrugs* Meh, what'ya gonna do?
What makes Twilight such a hit with the kiddies?
Because apparently from what my wife and her friends say, the books are impressive and the movies follow along them decently. She's sorta hooked into the whole thing as well.
Besides your typical Dark Super Hero boyfriend / passion machine that can protect you, looks all hot and is so into you like a fricking stalker..... the other aspect I noticed in this little thing is the typical out of place girl thing starting out all new in a new school, whiping all past crap and history from the old school....... and not only that, but did you notice how just about anytime the two main characters are talking or doing something together, they're completely alone, he's got his own sporty car, and her father doesn't seem to give too much of a damn in regards to keeping her under his thumb.......
..... thus you have a nice fantasy movie were they could pretty much screw each other anywhere, anytime they pleased..... Oh but they can't because he'd go all nutz and tear her apart..... Kinky.
It's just your basic love/fantasy movie for this generation that tries to take all the good things from all the other teen'y bopper movies and cool flicks from the past and make something bigger that attracts the older teenaged/younger adult audience, rather then your Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings crews.
I got stuck watching the first movie when it came out on DVD.... oh.... about 5 damn times..... but she was forced into watching Star Trek movies with me, so I guess it was sorta fair..... since now she's also a ST fan
The movie ins't horrible... it could be a lot worse, as another mentioned, High School Musical. *Side Show Bob Shudders* Nnniiiiierrrraaagg'grraaaa......
That's pretty much it in a nutshell. She doesn't like people, not very social and all she wants to do is screw around with this guy.....
However the next movie is more about warewolves I guess and how she starts getting a little close with one of the other characters cuz her old squeeze took off, blah blah blah.
Perhaps you underestimate the Vampire following?
Slap Vampire on anything and you'll pretty much sell it.
Come on people, do I need to bring up the violence in video games debate, in paticular, GTA? How many people do you know of who take the messages in that game to heart and live their lives like that?
It's just entertainment people and if people are going to revolve their lives and how they view the world based on one movie or one video game, then that their own fault.
The problem isn't the media, the problem is with the viewer.
Don't like the message it teaches young kids? Don't let them watch it.... it's not geared for children anyways (Nor is GTA). And I'm told the second movie is supposed to be a bit more on the sexual side.
If your children are all into it and start acting out, or if your children are into GTA and playing all the time in your home..... who's fault is that?
Oh no... won't someone please think of the children?!!
It's a little fantasy people.... I'd think I wouldn't have to remind people of this in a STAR TREK forum, lol.
I used to be right into Ninja Turtles and when the movies came out I thought they were real.... I didn't get abducted by some Turtle Keeper in a costume who worked at the local zoo, I didn't decide to go venture into sewers to go looking for them..... give the children a little bit of credit and benefit of the doubt with their common sense.
Generally speaking, If it's your own child in question, give em a little faith in their common sense, I'm sure you brought them up well.
I saw the first movie and I was not impressed. Bored me to tears, full of cliches, clearly not meant for me. It doesn't bother me that people like it, but it bothers me that something so unoriginal in every single detail has garnered so much attention. Even the special effect shots were crap, which was the only thing I figured would have salvaged my viewing experience.
I've heard the books are not well written, even by the typical standards of teen-oriented sci-fi/fantasy.
OK, can you please stop writing it in all caps like it's a frigging acronym for something?
And it's Twilight, not Twilite. Twilite isn't a word.
I've heard the books are not well written, even by the typical standards of teen-oriented sci-fi/fantasy.
OK, can you please stop writing it in all caps like it's a frigging acronym for something?
And it's Twilight, not Twilite. Twilite isn't a word.
Best description I've ever read of the Twilight series: "This is what happens when your little sister hits puberty and starts writing "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" fanfiction."
I've really tried to make through at least the online excerpts of the novels, I just can't do it. I end up MST3King the damn things.
I've really tried to make through at least the online excerpts of the novels, I just can't do it. I end up MST3King the damn things.
I really do beg to differ as I find the Harry Potter material to be devoid of anything other than the most basic message of heroic fiction - be good, be brave, loving friendships are good, cruelty is wrong. These aren't really themes or motifs, they are simply part of the narrative form.
Don't get me wrong, I like Harry Potter - but I think it's wrong to discuss it as if it had any weight. A lot of fantasy literature does - LotR and its extended meditation on death, His Dark Materials and its elucidation of innocence versus experience, etc. But HP doesn't explore anything except rip-roaring adventure and there's nothing wrong with that.
Everyone keeps speaking of Twilight as if all young women are into it. They aren't. A particular demographic enjoy it, and even though that is a broad swath of the population, it's hardly everyone. I also enjoyed Leia and Ripley - but most of the other girls I knew were into the chicks on Dallas and Dynasty with all their shallow consumerism and self-destructive guy obsessions. Such is what soap operas are made of.
Just as a broad swath of the American population enjoyed The DaVinci Code despite it being poorly written claptrap, and just as a broad swath of the population of American guys have made mindless violence porn like 300 wildly profitable - it will probably always be true that material that panders to the lowest common denominator of fantasy wish fulfillment will have a big audience. The more over the top it is, the more people enjoy it because we all love our trash entertainment.
Most young women will always enjoy stories about semi-dangerous guys who fight their darker impulses for the sake of love, because young women are out there dealing with a bunch of horny guys who are often unconscienable in their efforts to get laid. Twilight is giant metaphor about sex and pregnancy for adolescent girls who are trying to understand the dangers of awakened sexuality and its consequences. I went through that period when I was about 13 - sex and pregnancy are scary for girls in a way guys really can't understand. Nothing grows in your body for a year after sex. You're not going to hemmorrhage while trying to deliver a baby. Yes, there's a weird masochistic twist to Twilight - but there's a reason for it. Just like there's a weird sado-masochistic twist to 300 - and there's a reason guys get off on that. Neither one is mature or deep or particularly good, but neither are either of these kinds of stories going away.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
So she's like 90% of the attractive women in a big city?
sorry, that was wrong of me. anyways, I don't really like Twilight, but I'm not supposed to really, it's romance for teenage girls, it's "geek for women". There were lines of them at comic-con trying to see the trailer for the second, and though I think it's tripe, it's really no different than geeky guys cramming desperate for a view of the next superhero trailer or LOST panel.
Look, personally, I think Twilight sucks personally, but I found it a little disconcerting how easily genre hardcore fans slipped into the "language" that people usually use to belittle fervent sci-fi/fantasy/comic fans for being devoted to your usual suspects... to relentlessly bash the fans of Twilight.
Really, most superhero comics, for instance, are as thinly written as your average Twilight book or movie.
Agreed.... I personally feel Twilight does a bit better job in the originality department then Harry Potter. The only thing unique about the Potter series is that it's a kid wizard rather then an adult..... that's it.
Hell this isn't anything new.... check out the greater majority of RPG video games of the last 25 years that the majority of the main characters were all kids around his age, trying to learn magical powers and abilities, only ending up in the end to figure out that they're the one everybody's been waiting for to save the world.
*smacks cheek in suprise*
Wow! Who woulda Thunk it?!Actually, speaking as someone who had to sit and watch the thing 5 times, I wouldn't exactly call her a Victim as she had multiple opportunities to cut the strings and walk away from the whole situation, but chose not to..... why?
Probably because she lead a boring life.
And the guy might have been a "Creepy Stalker" if he actually posed a threat to her well being, never admitted to it, and eventually planned on doing something about the stalking, like making a full body flesh suit from her body.
"IT PUTS THE LOTION ON ITS SKIN OR GETS THE HOSE AGAIN!!!"
Anyways, I don't see anything different about this "Stalker" relationship compared to say Superman and Lois' relationship where he always seemed to be around at the right time to save her sorry butt.
Or how about Spiderman and Maryjane?
When you think about it in regards to Super Heros, it would seem many superheros we all looked up to over the years were just as bad as this guy for Stalking somenoe and their women they chased after or attempted to avoid (which this character did both at time) were all passive victims who's lives all seemed to revolve around their super hero.
I don't see what the big deal is.
Hey whoa, back up there for a moment chief..... 300 wasn't porn and I don't remember anything porn related in that movie at all. It took me three attempts to watch that movie all the way through, as it wasn't my biggest thing either and was slow starting off..... it was violent, but I couldn't say it was pornographic.
It was a movie based on a historical battle that based on history, did occur. It touched base on the Spartan Culture and why they existed for as long as they did, and why they had the reputation they did.
Wen it comes to the movie 300, it wasn't anymore violent then Braveheart and had less nudity and sex in it then Braveheart...... yet everybody thinks of Braveheart as some wonderful masterpiece.
300 isn't my favorite movie, but I enjoyed the effects, I enjoyed the storyline, the fight scenes were decent and I have respect for the movie as it was a lot more then what I originally thought it was going to be.
But to each their own.
A agreed with pretty much most of what you said above until this point.
You don't think Pregnancy is scary for guys as well? That was the whole reason why I didn't decide to have sex until I was well out of High School.... I was scared shatless over the thought of the first time me having sex would end up having a kid coming along the way soon enough.... or catch some virus/infection, etc. etc.
I don't know what guys you've been hanging around with, but the majority of the ones I know don't think of having a kid as a pic nic and many of the younger ones I know are cleary scared about having a kid because they don't even believe they grew up enough yet for such a responsibility.
It takes two to tango and the consequences are also pretty equal, minus of course the physical carrying of the child.... but if the roles were reversed and I had to carry the child, the situation would remain the same..... it takes two.... at least, and having a child directly affects both involved parties.... and both can be equally scared over a number of reasons.
I take mild offense to your trivializing of what pregnancy means to males and the claim that we have no idea of just how scary getting pregnant may be. Whether it's physical, mental, financial or social (among many reasons why having a child can be intemidating and/or scary as hell) in my view, they're all equally valid.... and if/when my wife does become pregnant, I will be just as concerned as her over the whole matter, her health, her well being, etc. as she probably will be, because I am equally responsible for not just what happened to her, but the child that will come to be.
Her health and well being is just as important as my own..... and yes, I know some males are idiots and simply couldn't give a crap about what they did..... but you're generalizing all men as you have above, which I do not relate in any fashion to, and I feel I must voice myself as I am..... no offense.
Doesn't matter and I know if the roles were reversed, you'd be saying the exact same thing to me as I am saying to you. Studies have shown women can and are equally sexually active as men, sometimes more.... the difference lies in society's stigma on what a nice lady is like.
I also know many women who are not scared of pregnancy, some who have already had children and are looking forward to more.
You also seem to ignore the actual impact a child has on a male, both physically and mentally and seem to imply our plights are trivial and you also seem to try and use the typical argument of physical alteration of hosting a fetus as your end-debate argument, which I have seen many times before in the past and I have yet to buy.
But this is a totally different subject......
Get off?
I can't even remember the last movie I ever "Got off" from, if there ever was one, and it certainly wasn't 300.
I personally think you're looking way too deep into this in regards to society and genders, but to each their own I guess.
These movies will come out, people will rave and rant about them, people will put posters up on their walls of their fav actors..... and then before you know it, they're just another Titantic movie that everybody got sick of and no longer wants to hear about.
And life goes on like it always has..... as the World Turns, these are the Days of Our Lives.
Yeah I found that a bit ironic as well and attempted to point it out.... but it seems some don't see the connection..... or refuse to.
I didn't mean sexual pornography. "Violence porn" is a term that means stories (usually in the loosest sense of the word) that pander to base instincts through thinly connected scenes of extended violence, the way pornography is just thinly connected scenes of extended sex.
300 referred to an actual historical event - but that's all it did. Its representation of Spartan culture and the history of the actual event was complete fantasy. And, in its defense, it makes this completely clear with the 7 foot tall Xerxes the Queen. My main point though was that Twilight and its fans are being bashed for enjoying something that is poorly written, trashy and that panders to immature fantasy wish fulfillment - there is also an underlying thread that girls are stupid for enjoying this kind of thing. I'm merely trying to point out that guys have similarly stupid and immature material that they love - and 300 is a good example of this. It is utter trash that panders to male fantasies of melodramatic violence in much the way Twilight panders to female fantasies of melodramatic romance.
I did not mean to belittle the repsonsiblity most men feel in regards to making a child, however I was referring specifically to the physical risks inherent to the female, which you rather blithely dismiss in your last phrase here. You can say "if the roles were reversed" all you want, but they aren't and they never will be and this makes facing initial sexual encounters fundamentally different in one hugely important aspect for males and females. Are there some shared anxieties? Of course. Meanwhile, a guy will never, ever, have to face the possibility of death (thousands of women die in America each year while delivering children), or the other physical consequences of sex that a girl has to face. So when Bella eventually becomes pregnant with a vampire child who endagers her physical health and even her life, but who she carries out of love for Edward, this is a metaphor specific to young women's anxieties regarding sexual awakening.
I apologize if you find my comments offensive as they are not intended to minimize the deep feelings most guys have regarding the consequences of sex, child bearing and child rearing. But it's still different for women due to the physical demands of childbirth.
Is the entire novel a holodeck adventure where Dracula reflects on it in order to make a big decision during the events of his titular novel?
To be perfectly honest? "Breaking Dawn" was so stupidly, horridly boring that if faced with the choice of either reading it again or relenting and accepting TATV as canon.... Welcome to the family, TATV!
That's how horribly stupid "Breaking Dawn" was.
Tell me you're not equating a work of vision like "300" to boring dreck like "Twilight"? 
300 had more style, more flair, more panache in any given thirty-second segment than Twilight had in its entire first hour (more than than, I cannot speak to, on account of an hour being as much as I could stand). It was also, ironically, the more sensual film (and I'm not just talking about the occasional female characters, but the underlying homoeroticism that those who call the film homophobic somehow manage to miss); for a film supposedly about young love, Twilight is dryer than a 70-year-old Amish spinster. For fuck's sake, a vampire is a built-in sex metaphor; how you go from there to a feature-length advert for Silver Ring Thing is beyond me.
But most of all, 300 evinces a constant sense of irony, the awareness of its own hyperbolic nature, that complicity with the audience that the text they are reading can be read literally, but to do so would be to miss the really good stuff. 300 is a tremendously funny film whose highly stylized production continuously, deliberatly undermines the content and reveals the artifice behind what is, essentially, a pastiche of propaganda set in the distant past. By adopting (admittedly, late in the game) the metanarrative of the War of Terror and exaggerating it to grotesque proportions it reveals the underlying ugliness. The impossibly bombastic physical violence is the carnivalesque uprising of the ideological violence. Great film. And of course many other 'genre' films contain this kind of humourous self-referentiality.
Twilight, on the other hand, seems entirely lacking a sense of humour. Ponderous, turgid, utterly unreflective, the damn thing is filmed with a kind of breathless trauma, as though every moment is supposed to scream THIS. IS. SO. IMPORTANT.; when, in fact, it is trite beyond my ability to express, and its inability to acknowledge this makes the film's vainglorious character all the more risible. It's more self-involved and masturbatory than George Lucas on a bad day. In fact, that's not a bad analogy, since watching this steaming pile o' was rather like being made to watch all the Anakin/Padmé scenes from Attack of the Clones in a row, minus all the intervening content and beautiful backgrounds.
As for some kind of fear of sex/pregnancy metaphor, I don't see it, but it is hard to see beyond the overbearing foreground. Still, it's nothing the Buffy and Alien franchises haven't done, and much better at that.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
300 had more style, more flair, more panache in any given thirty-second segment than Twilight had in its entire first hour (more than than, I cannot speak to, on account of an hour being as much as I could stand). It was also, ironically, the more sensual film (and I'm not just talking about the occasional female characters, but the underlying homoeroticism that those who call the film homophobic somehow manage to miss); for a film supposedly about young love, Twilight is dryer than a 70-year-old Amish spinster. For fuck's sake, a vampire is a built-in sex metaphor; how you go from there to a feature-length advert for Silver Ring Thing is beyond me. But most of all, 300 evinces a constant sense of irony, the awareness of its own hyperbolic nature, that complicity with the audience that the text they are reading can be read literally, but to do so would be to miss the really good stuff. 300 is a tremendously funny film whose highly stylized production continuously, deliberatly undermines the content and reveals the artifice behind what is, essentially, a pastiche of propaganda set in the distant past. By adopting (admittedly, late in the game) the metanarrative of the War of Terror and exaggerating it to grotesque proportions it reveals the underlying ugliness. The impossibly bombastic physical violence is the carnivalesque uprising of the ideological violence. Great film. And of course many other 'genre' films contain this kind of humourous self-referentiality.
Twilight, on the other hand, seems entirely lacking a sense of humour. Ponderous, turgid, utterly unreflective, the damn thing is filmed with a kind of breathless trauma, as though every moment is supposed to scream THIS. IS. SO. IMPORTANT.; when, in fact, it is trite beyond my ability to express, and its inability to acknowledge this makes the film's vainglorious character all the more risible. It's more self-involved and masturbatory than George Lucas on a bad day. In fact, that's not a bad analogy, since watching this steaming pile o' was rather like being made to watch all the Anakin/Padmé scenes from Attack of the Clones in a row, minus all the intervening content and beautiful backgrounds.
As for some kind of fear of sex/pregnancy metaphor, I don't see it, but it is hard to see beyond the overbearing foreground. Still, it's nothing the Buffy and Alien franchises haven't done, and much better at that.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I've seen the first film, it was then that I finally understood why animals will gnaw off their legs to escape a trap. Its boring, predictable, and insulting to anyone intelligent. I thought Edward was creepy as hell, he tells Bella on a regular basis that he could kill her at any minute and he watches her sleep. Bella is a complete idiot, going to take on a powerful vampire by herself, despite having two friendly vampires with her at the time. Then from what I can tell from the trailers for the newest film, as soon as Edward leaves Bella gives up on life and acts like she has a death wish.
Also the vampires have no weakness, they're basically good looking, strong, fast, and powerful immortals. Who wouldn't want to be one?
Also the vampires have no weakness, they're basically good looking, strong, fast, and powerful immortals. Who wouldn't want to be one?
I think the book was better than the first movie. It'll probably be the same with the second, though it looks like they actually got a decent special effects budget this time.
I've never tolerated the idealization of weak, passive female characters in science fiction, either. I don't see any double standard here.
No doubt. I didn't mean to imply that things were better for my whole generation. Just that *I* made better choices in role models than have Twilight fans. And just as there were shallow bimbos in the 80s, there are probably at least some strong female characters in today's media.
Marian
I thought Harry Potter was quite interestingly complex, by the end. One of Rowling's strengths as an author is that she doesn't devote significant space to overt consideration of ideas, instead usually raising them by implication when she describes events. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is at least as complex as the Illiad, which is still widely taught.
While it wasn't beautifully written, it certainly wasn't claptrap. The ultimate conclusions were goofy, but much of the underlying information about the history of mythology and religion was quite accurate. The assertions about the Priory of Sion, were ridiculous, but much of the other material is supported by a great deal of 20th Century academic work. I particularly recommend This Believing World: A Simple Account of the Great Religions of Mankind, by Lewis Browne, an American rabbi.
Similar threads
