Book Review: Twilight by Stephanie Meyer

I've done a lot of positive book reviews on here. This one is very negative. Twilight is currently my number one least favorite book - I haven't read too many bad books (I suppose I'm good at judging them by their covers, ha), but this one SUCKED. I don't feel like telling the actual plot, but here's what I thought it would be:

Bella Swan (Swann? Oh, I don't care) falls in love with a vampire who doesn't sparkle. She knows it is wrong but there is no cliche for that yet, so she goes ahead and does it. Edward has a part which threatens to take over and kill Bella (Gollum-like), and he cannot control it. He could attack her once and maybe she'd ward him off with garlic or something. Vampire hunters would come into play, and Edward (being the guy from the preface, no James) and Bella flee, but are led into a trap. He loses it again and lunges at Bella, and is shot at the last moment with a stake of ash or holly, or maybe a wooden bullet. Bella cries over Edward's ruined body and the hunter tells her it was for the best, he is saved now. As she walks away, Bella begins to feel an itch on her neck. She slowly reaches up to touch it and

THE END. No sequels. Every damn book nowadays has to be in a series, it seems.

Probably not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than the real thing. But I was severely disappointed: Edward saves her Aslan style, meaning he defeats the bad guys by basically blinking (not literally). Defeats the purpose of conflict and tension, say I. I prefer the bad guys to have the high ground, so that the stakes, too, are higher. Plus Meyer butchered a fascinating concept (see previous post) and taught young girls that abusive relationships are OK. I've heard that all the books end by him saving her, and she does nothing to earn his love. She's lucky (or not) to be with him. As lucky in the being saved sense (not the abuse sense) as Meyer was to publish this trash. No originality, sloppy writing, weak characters, and sexist message. I hear she doesn't read vampire fiction herself because it upsets her to see anything too close to or far from her own fairies. Blegh. And she'd never even written a short story. Makes me and a lot of other honest writers want to vomit, I'm sure. I know it makes me.

And for those of you comparing it to Harry Potter: just don't. It's nothing like that. Not only is in infinitely worse than Rowling's gem, it's a different type of story. As a dear friend of mine says, "Apples to kiwis!"

'K, I'm done.

Final grade: F

Slaying and Butchering

Slaying vampires is freaking awesome. Butchering their concept is not. What has happened to media!? It might have started with Twilight, my all-time least favorite book, but now they have an entire section at the bookstore devoted to paranormal romance. And now, apparently, there is paranormal erotica. If Count Dracula were still undead, he'd bite garlic, stake himself, or maybe run into daylight. And I'm sure Bram Stoker is spinning in his grave.

I think I'll do a numerical list:

1. They do not bloody sparkle! That is the least menacing thing ever.
2. Don't date them! They will bite you and have you drink their blood in exchange! Eek!
3. Why are they made out to be sexually attractive? If I fell in love, I'd prefer my partner to be, well, alive. Ugh.
4. You YA romance writers are crowding out most chances of us actual fantasy and/or horror writers publishing vampire stories. It's become a cliche and horror publishers are apt to assume that we are writing about fairies as opposed to bloodsucking demons.
5. What ever happened to the awesome backstories? Satan, the Reaper, werewolves, snakes, bats, crows and ravens, underworld, Hell, necromancy, wolves, spiders, rats, mist, smoke, curses, and so on? Now they are just overdone humans.
6. As a continuation of #5, where did the scary go? The only reason Edward makes me shiver is that he watches Bella sleep, and teenage girls find it acceptable. Vampires, nosferatus, used to be an emblem of terror. Watch Dracula or Salem's Lot (both the 1979 versions - year of vampires?) and you'll see what I mean. Undead Mina approaching her father under the cemetery and saying "Papa?" (Dracula) and demonic Danny Glick tapping on Mark Petries window (Salem's Lot) are both spine-chilling. The books of both are even better, although I loved the appearance of Kurt Barlow (Salem's Lot master vampire) ,and Count Dracula's ability to crawl down walls was beyond really cool.
7. Werewolves. I actually thought the ones in the New Moon film were pretty cool, although I have no plans to read it, and I don't consider the wolves to be "were-". They are supposed to change at the full moon, not by will, and they become a wild beast instead of fully-in-control teddy bears. If you want good werewolf movies, watch any Wolf Man film (I've seen the newest one and half the 1941 version), The American Werewolf in London, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, or Van Helsing - VH is not a perfect film critically speaking, but the vampires are really cool, as are the werewolves. It's a fun watch. And it also has the Frankenstein monster and Mr. Hyde - a bit of a mash-up of horror beasts.

I suppose that is all. I have school tomorrow and this is my third post tonight, so I'd better hit the hay!

Long (unlive?) the true meaning of necromancy and vampirism! Sanguis bibimus! Ave Draculea!

Living, breathing love from,

Lewis

Poem: The Queen of Sprites

Her Majesty Queen Darkpetal

Of the sprites of Nimbling Wood

Has yet to ascend to full spritehood.

She must find her namesake,

A bird’s tooth, a snake’s eyelid,

And the marrow of a human

To become wholesome.

Created by a dragon’s tear

Striking a blue rose on summer solstice,

She is incomplete, but no sprite yet

Has become whole; she is the first of the kind,

And will become the first whole one.