My wife laments that most 20th century authors were hemmed in by Dr Freud, and left out the best parts of their books because they realized that Freud would have a field day with it. As Stephenie Meyer is a Mormon (wonderful people, congenitally nice, but hopelessly sheltered) and freely admits she has never seen a vampire movie nor read a vampire story because she finds them squicky, she is also (probably? undoubtedly?) sheltered from from Freud’s teachings and, one assumes, endlessly entertaining from an armchair psychoanalytic standpoint.
BellaMom; “Are you being safe?”
Kevin Murphy; “Are you using garlic?”
I’m Harpo!!
watch out for the appearing/dissapearing stuffed armidillo in Science class though, that thing’s a killer (and as posited by Rifftrax, is Science class the only class in the school?)
Twilight should only be watched with Rifftrax enhancement, otherwise it’s just craptacular, I’d rather watch the un-MSTed version of Manos; Hands of Fate than an un-Rifftraxed Twilight
<suspiciously> I thought all vampires were hetero… I’m so naive! I’ve only read one Anne Rice book (couldn’t stand her or LeStat) and I never watched Buffy, so I’m not up on vamp lore.
I went on the Riff website, but there was too much text. If I read the snark there, I’d miss the very dialogue etc that I was attempting to snark.
Ms Meyers should be brought to The Hague for crimes against human culture. When you have (like I did) a fundamentalist Christian who used to babysit for your kids saying that Meyers went “odd places” with her story, you know you’re way out in left field somewhere…
Frankly, (flame away) vampires are boring. Very boring. So much melodrama. So much Pain. :rolleyes:
If James was such a bad ass vamp, how come it only took 2 of them to hold him while some girl tore off his head, eh? What a pussy.*
Maybe I’ve misunderstood what you mean here, but stpauler was recommending that you buy the RiffTrax audio file for Twilight, not that you read the website. If you purchase and download the audio file you can sync it up with the movie and hear people who are funnier than us mock the movie. Go to http://www.rifftrax.com/rifftrax/twilight and click the “Watch Sample” button on the right to see what it’s like.
I thought the movie was worse. The book had a lot of internal dialogue–which, granted, was bad internal dialogue but at least you had some action going on. The movie replaced all that with awkward silences, which isn’t really an improvement from a film POV.
Also quite a few things that didn’t translate well at all into film (laughable running scenes, sparkliness) came off better in the book in that you at least knew that they were supposed to be good things in theory.
I didn’t like the book, but I would rather read it again than have to sit through the movie again.
Only in the movie – I just finished the book, and there wasn’t any hot human/vampire action.
Forget Freud, too bad Mike and/or Joel and the 'Bots aren’t around anymore.
Well, to be fair, I hated the book. The movie had a decent sound track and I thought the movie makers did the best they could with crap material. I could sure see how the movie could have been way worse than it was.
Depends on how you read Dracula. I think a pretty strong case can be made that penetration=sex, in which case he did score with Mina and Lucy, and there was some kinky S&M stuff going on at Dracula’s castle with Jonathan, and not just with the three brides. “He belongs to me” indeed.
I haven’t seen the movie, but from what I read of the book (about 1/3 of it) I feel like leaving out Bella’s internal monologue could only be an improvement. I’ve never hated a first-person narrator as much as I hated Bella “I am Princess Emo and I am so much better than everyone else” Swan. Not having to hear her constant whining, bitchy remarks about her classmates, and lengthy, overwrought descriptions of how hot Edward is would seem like a big plus to me.
However, a coworker of mine who has seen the movie was basically in agreement with you. She said the internal monologue was replaced with endless scenes of Bella and Edward just staring at each other, which doesn’t make for gripping cinema either.
I completely misunderstood. :smack: But then, I’m not about to spend even one dime on this nonsense: I got both the book and the film from the library. Did you know the Borders near me has an entire section devoted to Twilight et al? Gah.
Zsofia–I couldn’t stand the one Rice book I did read. What I remember most about it is the first vampire being “birthed” out of a oak tree. I have no recollection whatsoever of the sexual orientation of any of the vampires in her books or in general. That said, I have always vaguely thought that vampires were heterosexual. If I had to think about it and give an opinion, the act of plunging their fangs into someone’s lily white, virginal neck acts as a substitute for penile penetration, so perhaps they’re all sublimated frustrated passive/aggressive types? Armchair psychology only takes me so far…
It wasn’t a horrible, awful movie. There are worse movies out there. It was merely boring (for me). I like the Native American kid, Bella’s friends (not her male friends). Even the one spunky female vampire (the one who sees things) had some appeal. Dr Cullins (is it Collins?) was creepy as hell and seemed to be some kind of pederast, but swung both ways (if that’s possible). None of the elements of vampirehood as delineated by Meyers were believable–in the book or in the movie. Thunderstorms have to cover up the noise they make playing baseball? For real? :rolleyes:
I will say that I DID like Pattinson as Cedric in Goblet of Fire. And if I were ten years younger, I’d probably be crushing on him like mad, instead of Ewan McGregor.
