D_Tilly_De_Toilet
Experimental Member
I don't put much stock in IMDB ratings, but it's pretty amusing that this movie already has a 4.3/10
It's all intertwined. Isn't that what we're told women do? Confuse sex and love?i know rubi, but let's face it, the teen idol phenomenon is not based on young women's sexual libido, so much as it is based on their somewhat sexual, but primarily fantasies about love, relationships, etc.
Once again (with feeling) this genre of teen fiction is directed at young women ages 14-18. I don't know any 14 year old girl who reads Tiger Beat. 12? Maybe.they buy teen magazines where you can learn everything about the idols, from their favorite color to their favorite food...the pictures are non-threatening and smiley...17, Tiger Beat, all that stuff is to sate young girls' burgeoning fascination with being loved or in love...sex is the secondary directive, love is the first...
You still haven't explained what this has to do with anything. For the record, my girlfriends and were reading every smutty book we could get our hands on when we were teenagers. Not that we weren't interested in how guys looked but we found we responded better to the written word.guys do not want to know what kind of music Megan Fox listens to...they want to know if she can put her legs behind her head or put her whole fist in her mouth.
Flashy, sometimes you make one want to pull their hair out by the roots. Your original post states that you don't understand what the fuss is all about with the Twilight Saga and surrounding media frenzy. I explained it to you and you refuse to accept it. You wrote this long diatribe about how teenage boys and girls operate differently with regards to sexual awakening when it has nothing to do with your original statement. You claim not to know why girls are ga-ga over this momentary phenomenon then claim to understand how young girls think.i do not think msbliss is able to separate the fact that while girls do indeed have sexual thoughts at a young age, the teen idol fascination is based on the want and desire for love, and an idealized man to be in love with, that they project these exxtremelyy intense emotions on <snipped for brevity>
I don't put much stock in IMDB ratings, but it's pretty amusing that this movie already has a 4.3/10
Just got home from seeing it and it was exactly how I thought it would be. I was expecting to cry from laughing so hard and did more than once. I had also never been in a room with 200 screaming 13 year old girls, so that was interesting. Actually it was more like half of them were screaming and the rest were yelling at them to "shut the fuck up".
Conclusion: Terrible movie, I highly recommend you see it.
have you read the book? it wasn't that bad was it?
i just saw the midnight showing and i loved it. in my opinon, new moon was better than twilight, and for the most part it stayed true to the book with the exception of a few minor details.
and its even cooler when you know a friend of yours is in the movie...
Then I would be a Meyer Scholar, which must be worth something.all i'd like to say is, don't bash twilight until you've read all four books and the fifth unfinish draft and you understand the story in its entirety.
twilight is the new fixation of vampires and werewolves, for a new generation. it's one of the reasons why people of all ages don't quite understand what it's really about. the plot is very teenage love story-ish, but it deviates from the norm and is nothing like the typical vampire stories that've been told over and over again. it's no buffy, it's no bram stoker's, it's no underworld, and it's no true blood. it's something totally different and in a class of its own. if you've read the books and you enjoyed them, then you know what i'm talking about :wink:
as for all the media hype... some people love twilight and others hate it. some people love the books but hated the movie. others don't even want to give it a chance. yes, the media makes it out to be bigger than it really is with Robert pattinson's bushy hair and TMZ bashing kristen stewart's smoking habit. however, before the movies were even released, twilight wasn't even as mainstream as what it had become within the past year. the movies are what made the books larger than life.
and as for the books, they are always better than the movie of course. but that also doesn't mean i didn't get my presale tickets for nothing. all i'd like to say is, don't bash twilight until you've read all four books and the fifth unfinish draft and you understand the story in its entirety. meyer is a great author with a huge imagination and i can't wait to see what else she has in store.
have you read the book? it wasn't that bad was it?
Wouldn't that suggest that he probably wont like the books if it didn't deviate from it all that much?
Then I would be a Meyer Scholar, which must be worth something.
But isn't it asking a bit much?
Not because of the time and effort involved (though that is worth pointing out), but because the parts of a whole must be able to stand on their own?
Each Godfather film, for example, told part of a larger story ... but each had to be a good movie in its own right.
While I have enjoyed reading everyone's POV regarding the Twilight phenomenon and I am inclined to agree to a certain extent. There are other aspects to this bru ha ha that have peaked my interest. I am less phased by the teenage girl hormone aspect, I am more impressed by the author.
The PR people and Hollywood machine have much ado about how Stephanie's work is promoted. It is, after all, a medium for making the big bucks. It always has been about high dollar entertainment. Aspects of which I find completely annoying and gross.
Stephenie Meyer graduated from Brigham Young University with a degree in English literature. She is educated and she is for all intent purposes an American success story.
I would say, back away from the hype and look at where this woman is trying to make her mark as far as her work goes. I have all of the books, the last one in the series I personally consider the best. (and the most violent, because of the blood involved.)
I admire Stephenie for being so creative, in a sense making such a remarkable attempt at reinventing the romance/horror genre, which is ALIVE and well here in the US. Most importantly for using her education and skills to pay back what is probably now a zero balance on her college fees.
Who can fault her for that? The fault is with Hollywood's greed and avarice in making a buck and forcing those of us to gag in order to relieve the nauseating teen phenom-drama over their interpretation of Stephanie's work.
I would have loved to see Anne Rice meet with this kind of success with her vampire series.
I enjoy the lore, reading it and because it is an form of art that I admire and appreciate.
I refuse to be further affected by the hype. As for Robert Pattinson, to me his has a flat face and in 10 years will look like several miles of bad road. Taylor Launter is fine as hell. lol
Props to the casting director for this franchise, they have certainly hit the mark in my estimation.
You go Stephenie!
No, I haven't. But a friend (who genuinely loves the series) suggested I read the books after I saw the first one and was talking about "how good it was" (I guess she didn't catch the sarcasm or maybe she didn't care). I humored her and said they would go on my books-to-read list. Fortunately, that list is a mile long and I'll probably be dead before I get to that part of it haha.
I do think it was that bad. I suppose it just comes down to why you watch films and what you look for in them. So I find no real value in these kinds of movies (with the exception of being 'so bad they're good') just like I find no real value in Adam Lambert or Lady Gaga when it comes to music. Pop culture is 'meh' to me.
yes and no. movies always leave out big parts of the books, which is why it's better to read the books so you can actually understand why things happen and the reasons behind it.