Twilight, good or bad? Help me decide.

BAD.
RLY BAD.
There is no decider. If you want vampires, go read Dracula.

But why is it bad

>>3 Too many reasons to count. But to put it bluntly, the entire series has the literary value of a piece of wheat toast nailed to a two by four.

Well i suppose I'll never set eyes nor fingertips on that cover.

On the contrary, my english teacher said that her seniors have reading groups, and there was one guy in a group of girls, and the girls chose Twilight just to spite him. He apparently loved the book and fell in love with Bella and had mindbabies or something or whatnot. But for me, i don't really have a say....

read them and find out. :T

>>5 Lmao! XDD

I personally think the book is good, but the movies suck. I read like half of the first book and watched the movie. They were missing a few things in there! >.<

Twilight was... harmful to the eyes, to say the least. I read it back in intermediate school; the librarian had reccomended it when I asked what some decent books for my age group were. I believe I read about thirty pages before I silently placed it back on the shelf and walked away. I don't know if some editor got a hand of it for later prints after it got popular, but that one had so many errors, the book would have been covered in ink had I taken a red pen to it. The story itself never caught my attention, and it seemed like Meyer was randomly placing words whose definitions were larger than her comprehension all throughout it. There were some lines that I read and just... I think I cried a little on the inside from how misused some of the words were.

Also, I completely dislike her take on vampires, but that's just me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion regarding that; just as I dislike her vampires sparkling in the sun, I'm sure others will dislike the way my vampires are just as equally.

Worst of all, to be frank, was Twilight's fanbase. It seemed like every site had been over taken by its fans. I only spoke to three or four who could write properly, and if you dare comment on your distaste for it, they would all join together on caps lock rages about how you're an idiot who doesn't know what you're talking about and needs to die. It was ridiculous. You couldn't help but just facepalm and think, "I should die because my opinions are different..? For God's sake, it's a book."

However, if the fan is a logical human being who won't randomly rage because other people don't like it, then I have nothing against them, but I, personally, dislike the book.

>>7 I agree.

>>7 Lol! Well said!!! X)

>>7 i agree much

The books were like "edward is perfect" all the time, hes a damn stalker that watch her when shes sleeping...

Im on the Edward Elric Team!!

ofc, this is just a personal opinion^^

>>10 This. Absolutely this. Almost every sentence seemed to be talking about how amazing Edward was. I think Meyer was more in love with him than Bella was.

Stwphanie Meyer isnt a bad authour. Just read "The Host" by her. She has talent. However, Twilight is an atrocity. Some parts of it were so cliché it was cheesy, like the best friend being a sexy 'werewolf' (If you actually know your mythology, youd know that Jacob is only a shapeshifter) and the girl being head-over-heels in love with a vampire. However, the majority of events were so uncliche and far enough away from the social norms to be anything but good. Vampires dont sparkle. They dont impregnate humans. They dont marry humans. They dont drink animal blood. They dont attempt to blend into society to save humans or continuously repeat high school. They kill humans and suck their blood. Stephanie Meyer might be a good authour but Twilight is complete bullshit.

I'm sorry. But I enjoyed reading the books. Yes the vampires sparkle but other than that it is a good series. And if anyone wants some shit about me liking the books I DON'T CARE!

Dude, chill. Its cool if you like the books. Nobody is gonna bitch at you for you having an opinion.

they have potential but some ideas need to be removed

^this

>>16 That^

I had too...

"I'd like to talk about a book I read called 'Twilight' ...... It Fuckin' sucks!:)" "READING RAINBOW!"

Twilight killed vampires, she can go fuck herself (she-means the author)

this is a question?

Aw, guys. Be nice. Just cuz some people hate Twilight doesnt mean that its COMPLETELY horrible... Maybe in some alternate universe there is a culture that worshops Stephanie Meyer. :P

>>22 What's alternative about it? Have you talked to a 14 year old girl recently?

Personally I detest the books. I find nothing appealing about the main characters. Some of the SIDE CHARACTERS have more interesting shit going on than them. But I don't begrudge it for being published. Believe it or not there's worse sludge out there than Twilight.

The Twilight series has too much romance, and its way too dramatic. Twilight is basically made for teenage girls.

>>24 Yea... a bit TOO much romance and the drama makes me want to rip the pages apart.. DX

I felt this was related.

>>26 Gahahahhhahah!!!!!!!!!!! XDDDDDDDDDDDD

>>26 Nice find XD

By the way, I've spoken to literature instructors in 3 high schools, and one at a college in Minnesota. The unanimous consensus was that the Twilight Saga is not considered "Literature". It's considered a middle-school-class novel. Not as if it should be read by a middle-schooler, but as if it was written by one.

>>26 xD

>>26 And there was much rejoicing when I discovered that little easter-egg.

>>26 Holy shit... I can't breathe! XD

bump

>>33 This.

Its alright but I didnt care much for it

To be honest, it's not worthy of the attention it gets. Positive or negative. It deserves to just fade away and be forgotten, at least then the author would stop making money off it.

Sorry but that's not gonna happen.

Harry potter is about valiance, courage, friendship, overcoming the impossible, and good triumphing over evil
Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend.

nuff said.

This isnt literature, its a fire starter.
I think that answers your question op

No open mindednes. I say be open minded I say read it then put your opinion. Be more open minded.

The books are okay when you have time to kill. The movies fail. The side characters are better than Bella and Edward could ever be. Bella is an idiot who can't live without a boyfriend. Edward is the worst vampire I've ever read about.

Needs much more improvement.... Its ok but boring as hell

>>41 I read the entire series with an open mind. It sucked like a black hole.

Ok that's your opinion not mine

I use to like the books, I have all the saga... but now I´m dissaponted thanks to the movies

Hm... Well, as Zombie-girl said, it's your opinion. If you're curious, why not read it? :)

I'm sorry, but i cannot bring myself to read these. I have very strict ideas and parameters on what a vampire is, and Edward isnt a vampire.
#1: Vampire+Sun=Dead Vampire
#2: Vampires dont go to school unless its necessary
#3: Vampires and werewolves shred each other to pieces, not fight over a self-absorbed, personality-less girl

fuck that shit. stupid fucking woodelf. she shuldnt be alowd to use the word Vampire, or Werewolf. I hate that bitch for writing those pieces of flaming dog shit.

ok but jacob is NOT a WEREWOLF. he is a SHAPE SHIFTER!!! just need to put that out there again. in the 4th book it explains that jacob and his pack are SHAPE SHIFTERS. not werewolves. they shape shift and they are on 4 legs not 2.

>>50 yeah it makes sense. If they were werewolves, then they would be bipedal and more humanoid. But instead they are abl;e to turn into a giant wolf.

>>51
Next time, learn that once something is made public, everyone has every right to talk about something in very way they feel is possible. They can talk shit about it, the readers, the writer, the concept. Everything.

Once they FUCK up a general thing people loved for many years, and make them into FAIRIES they need to know they will get flamed for being retarded.

Get over it. People will talk shit whether you like it or not.

Every*

>>52 there is nothing wrong with them transforming into giant wolves. i personally love wolves.

>>5 Same here.

I just don't like the series in general.

I saw the first part of the last movie...

Disappointing.

I personally don't care for the Twilight series. I read the first one. I didn't like it. End of story. I won't get too much into it.

>>51 >>57 By the way, next time you feel the need to make it seem as if someone agrees with you, you might want to use a different computer. Your ID is the same for both of them. FAIL.

>>59 Oh, Internet tough guy.

>>60 Don't feed it :V

People please this is turning into a war of "It's the best book ever go shove it asshole!" and "Get the hell off the internet because you're a faggot!" Like really all they asked was if the books were okay. A simple yes or no then leave it don't go around bashing eachothers heads in like you're flogging baby seals...

Hunger Games is better than twilight and Harry Potter as well

>>62
Why should we give a yes or no, and nothing else? We have a right to an opinion.

I went and saw one of the movies with an ex and I hated it.
Then I decided to skim through the books to give the internet my opinion.
I still hated it.
Here is my critique on the series:

Bella is a bitch. Seriously...I would have beat her with my vampire powers and then hooked up with one of those saucy vampire ladies. There is a lot of teenage girl feelings in this book. Some of the passages made me hate being on this planet. Some made me uncomfortable. Others made me want to kiss Robert Pattinson right on the mouth.
It's not an exciting read but it will change the way you view the world we live in. While the author may not be very bright, or talented, or even attractive, one must admit that anyone who reads her "books" will look at life in a new light.
For me that new light was wanting to be dead.

-Love Chrome

The one who played Bella in the movies, is just a bag of '1 emotion'. She has the same blank stare for everything that she does.

Happy:
'-'
Sad:
'-'
Pissed:
'-'
Confused:
'-'
Orgasm:
'-'
Dying because people hate her:
'-'

>>66 lol'd

>>63 >>62 hunger games is for sadists, and harry potter is not the same as hunger games, no way to compare.

>>33 Demyx Time... :)

>>68 Hunger Games isn't "for sadists" as you say. And it IS fair to compare Twilight, Hunger Games, and Harry Potter because they are popular among the same audience even if story wise they're completely different.

>>70
If you get so mad over the Internet, that you break your mouse, over and over again, you need to be locked up and evaluated. Go seek help, now.

>>71 This.
Although, honestly, it's probably exaggerated bullshit aimed to "intimidate" us twihaters.

>>72
The chosen picture he also used, doesn't help the situation for him, either.

Holy "Crow"!!! XD LOL! Seriously... That lady has a hard time writing a swear word... XP

Annnyway. Twilight. My friend recommended me that book. In fact it was my birthday present. I tried real hard to like it. Buuut. I thought it stunk.

Bella is a whiny, no personality, selfih, hormone-driven, Mary Sue Bitch.
Edward is an abused, creepy stalker boyfriend with a god complex.
The villans aren't villans at all.
Conflict is last minute.
And the stereotype thing is so unbearable! I mean, come on! DX
Plot? What plot? Edward's sexy abs are What's important! Pfft! Who needs Plot anyway!

*Abusive

>>76 Finally.
Took you long enough.

>>76 We have no ACTUAL goal, for fuck's sake.

I actually enjoyed the Twilight books when I read them, but it's really something you should read at around 13-14.

Watch Alex reads Twilight on YouTube! It's fricken hilarious :')
Oh Nerimon X'D

>>76 Oh, come on. That was what I thought when I read the book. It's not a crime to not like the same thing. You can still like it while I can still hate it. :P

Well, although I support and laugh at these "Still less gay than Twilight" posts (because I hate the screaming teenage fangirls arguing with everybody about Edward being the best), I enjoyed some of the books. I think it just became too much Jacob-take-your-shirt-off and Love-me-Edward.(and yes, I'm stupid teenage girl :D)

>>7 This.

if you want the more compelling vampire book, i'll tell you without blinking, "Queen of the Damned", or, "Interview with a Vampire". there were also some certain anomalies in the book. the medieval women were plump not as thin as Rosalie or Esme.
besides, where was the vampire i loved, the one that loved blood, the one that liked to kill. the one that stalked their prey in the night and bit them without them even knowing? where's lestat? where!?

i'm not biased to say that she's a horrible writer as >>12 had said, "The Host" was good. She should stick with that style.

>>68
"The Hunger Games" and "Harry Potter" would be a lot better because the characters have more emotional depth than that of "Twilight". I mean look at Bella, she jumps from so happy to so depressed in almost seconds. she is a shame to women i dare say. however, unlike twilight, the first two mentioned has its character feeling different things. anyways, setting-wise, harry potter wins the prize, being the most extensive setting that there could ever be. its author had drawn elements from all the stuff that there could be on magic. on originality, it'd be on hunger games, unless the author read battle royale. and twilight? first prize on making the awesome vampires look pansy.

Th cullens arent vampires. They sparkle, they live in th woods, the jump far enugh to call it flying...they're faries, NOT vampires. Just so ya know.

oh my gawd! please forgive me for even thinking of such a thing! the horror!

>>82 I haven't read The Host, but it still stands that Twilight was far from well-written. If she wants to be seen as a good writer, than she should display her talents in every piece she does. It's inexcusable to release something like that and then defend it by saying, "Well, I'm not a bad writer - see how nice I wrote this other book!" It's equally bad for anyone to defend her using that sort of defense.

Stephanie Meyer is an incoherent wannabe author who tried too much to create a fictional tale that could relate to teens. She ruined the reputation of vampires by turning them into sparkling faries. Vampires do not SPARKLE in sunlight, they die. They dont have super powers, they just suck peoples blood. There is NO such thing as a "vegetarian" vampire, because they are incapable of feeling human emotions and have no other motivation than to kill HUMANS. When exposed to crosses, theyre weakened. When exposed to garlic, they are repelled. In the first Twilight movie, Edward eats a slice of Bella's pizza. This isnt possible for two reasons. 1) THERE IS GARLIC ON PIZZA. 2) Their bodies cannot digest food because everything inside of them is dead. BECAUSE everything inside of them is dead, they are incapible of impregnating a human. Sperm is living, therefore that is not even possible. Half-vampire, half-human babies do not exist, and even if they did, they would feast on blood and then die at an adult age. Not feast on blood, and then suddenly stop growing when they reach a certain age. Werewolves cant read eachother's minds, they simply turn into blood-thirsty dogs, and they most definately cannot freeze their age while waiting for a 2 year old girl to be old enough to date.
In conclusion, Jacob is a pedophile, and "The Count" from Sesame Street i more of a vampire than Edward will ever be.

Also, this >>85

>>86 Holy........freaking...........shit.........I accept you as my new god.

>>86

Where the fuck have you been, saying 'Vampires' only suck blood?
Everything else I agree with, other than the fact they are meant to be stronger than humans. That is obviously super human powers. Not just blood sucking parasites that don't die from normal situations.

Super powers can be seen in different ways. (Hence super human.) Like being really fast, or strong. Which in most stories about Vampires, they show a lot of power and speed. Reason they have to suck blood. There were more reasons, but in a few, it's because to keep their powers, and not able to die, they must feed on the blood of the living. It's sort of like how (in many stories), if making a contract with a demon, and you have to do shit to keep your powers or whatever else.

The whole argument over Twilight is that its basically poorly written, the author made VAMPIRES sound like they're humans that sparkle in the sunlight yet have to feast on blood to stay alive, and made one girl the center of all the bull crap. the end of the last movie part 1 was seriously weak. She DIES from having a VAMPIRE BABY, and yet she COMES BACK TO LIFE. She'll need to be a REAL VAMPIRE then, as in has to suck on blood, dies in sunlight, allergic to garlic which means she'd be repelled, crosses and holy water would have to weaken/kill her, and she'd basically STILL be an emotionless robot that she was programmed to be.

In short the author had this in mind, "Hmm.... I should write a crappy book that will make me be hated!"

I mean, they fucking meet in SCHOOL, Edward's forever old and Bella's like in her late teens and yet he still marries then impregnates her after THREE BOOKS.

Book 1: They meet

Book 2: The SHAPESHIFTERS NOT WEREWOLVES and VAMPIRES NOT FAIRIES fight

Book 3: THEY MEET DRACULA

Book 4: THEY MARRY, SCREW, SHE DIES HAVING A BABY THAT JACOB KNEW WAS KILLING HER AND THEN SHE COMES BACK AS A TRUE VAMPIRE.

If it takes you FOUR books like this to make the two main characters marry then have a kid which kills the girl but actually brings her back too, then you are in fact a terrible author. Case closed.

Vampires suck blood, die in sunlight, are literally dead, and are basically just around for killing.

Werewolves will tear into a vampire and vice versa, its a lycan-hemophage (watched the movie Ultraviolet, hemophage is the word used to describe vampires) war that makes them literally want each other dead.

The vampires in Twilight are obviously just a disgrace to the vampire name.

The "werewolves" as she calls them, are merely people who can turn into giant freaking wolves, they are in fact SHAPESHIFTERS. Werewolves can't read each others minds, but she was correct with the pack thing, that's the ONLY thing she got right, along with vampires drinking blood, not sleeping, and being strong-fast, eyes able to change color on mood, and of course the whole vampire mind reading thing.

I have the movies, they make my eyes want to boil and my ears want to bleed.

---

*Rage moment over*

>>89 I accept you as my second god

>>89 You forgot something. I didn't want to say anything because I didn't want to get the hate. You forgot to put the werewolves were cute and fluffy. Werewolves aren't supposed to be cute and fluffy. Not all wolves are cute and fluffy. Not all dogs are that cute and fluffy. So the author just made a group of hot muscular guys that have a tattoo on their arm and grow their hair long only to cut it short when they can then transform. When they transform, they all transform into cute and fluffy wolves.I want to just cuddle them all, except fro that one that you don't want to piss off because he mauled his wife's face.

'Nuff said.

Ah, Twilight. I flung it against a wall in the middle of class.

The summary might as well be like this: This is crap, go read a rock.

And I am drastically pissed that a lot of new books are following the Twilight direction.

moving on...

Twilight set the standard for really lame vampires.

I didn't like it much. I read it and watched the movies, and neither of them tickled my fancy. The only Twilight I'm gonna be watching anytime soon is Twilight Sparkle.

>>97 Brohoof? Brohoof.
But yeah, I find the Twilight series to be a muddled, steaming pile of bullshit 'story' which, all at the same time, enforces christian morals.

BAD!

ragebumping

Poorly written. Also fucked up gender roles on both sides.

very bad.... fails at all levels

The epitome of crap. The characters suck, the plot sucks, every aspect possible was messed up. So in other words, it sucks

I dun like it the story was too...mushy plus the plot was completely WRONG

Just to not be like "omfg that's gay" like some idiots that haven't even tried it, I'll go into detail. Personally, Twilight's a 6/10 for me. Yes, I've read all the books. I've even seen all the movies and have all but one soundtrack. Stephenie Meyer (sorry if misspelled) is an awesome author, and her wording is beautiful. But the plot is typical and nothing really ever stands out...the most "original" part is the baby coming along. It's a typical teenage girl's book. It's just...average. I don't hate it, but I'm no Twihard by any means, either. So...there's my piece :)

Let me tell you where it's good first.
1) Popularity. It's INCREDIBLE how popular this series got, especially with the copious amount of better Vampire-based fiction out there. I can't dock the author for marketing; the teenage love triangle SELLS HARD.

Now let's see where she went bad...

1) EVERYWHERE ELSE. The plot could have gone the same way without a vampire, a werewolf, and the blatant disregard for vampire biology. Contrary to popular belief, Bella ISN'T a good female lead or role model--she jumped off of a cliff to make her inconsiderate supernatural boyfriend come back to her. Worst yet, she's a tease because she kisses her werewolf friend and leaves him for the cold slab of marble with no facial expression.
Like I said above, Edward's just an inconsiderate asshole hiding the aforementioned trait under the "oh I don't want to turn you" excuse. BS, asshole.
And Jacob was fine until he got all jealous possessive best friend and THEN "imprinted" on the baby of his best friend who was turned into a vampire WHILE her child was destroying her from the inside out.
Oh, and the writing is terrible. Comma usage inappropriately through the roof, shitty dialogue, all that.
Overall, I give it a 4/10. Because Meyer's a fucking genius when it comes to marketing.
Clever woman.