UNDERWORLD VS. TWILIGHT
POSTED BY: jameron4eva
UPDATED: Sunday, October 4, 2009 22:18
VIEWED: 9687
PAGE 3 of 6
Quote:
And, as a side note.... shouldn't the thread title be Underworld v Twilight? Underworld x Twilight sounds like multiplication. And I shudder to think of what we'd get when multiplying Underworld by Twilight.
Ha, I can drink to that. Cheers. Although if it were a crossover, I wouldn't mind seeing Edward get torn apart. Just sayin'.
Is 'x' used as an symbol for "against" in any places? It seems like I've seen that usage somewhere, something to do with attacking.
PR: >_> It's Firefly related. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by jameron4eva:
It can be either way, and so you know, that's your opininon, about UNDERWORLD, i just don't subscribe to it.
AND TWILIGHT WILL NEVER BE NUMERO UNO!!!!!!!
"Take my love, take my land, take me where i can not stand."
Yep, just my opinion. And so you know.... your view is just an opinion, too.
As for being "NUMERO UNO"... well, I have said I'm not even very fond of Twilight.... but the fact is, by any quantifiable measurement, Twilight is far ahead of Underworld.
At the box-office, Twilight alone made almost as much money as all 3 Underworld movies combined, and Twilight also has far better reviews overall (with a Rotten Tomatoes score roughly that of any 2 Underworld movies combined).
Just sayin'....
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
The sparkling thing is just too ridiculous for my tastes, though, I'm sorry. I've never really had much respect for Anne Rice's vampires anyway, so I don't consider "reflective fingernails" something that redeems the sparkiliness. It's pointless, there's no REASON for them to sparkle in sunlight. And it ruins whatever farcical attempt at mood the author is trying to establish.
These are vampires, aren't they? Seriously, what the hell? They're CORPSES. They're a monster/horror trope and if not an exploration of the dark beastial side of human nature, then speculation on the supernatural at work preying on the human population and the very human fear of death and dead things. Sparkles? Seriously?
I think it's kinda silly, too, and didn't like the way they did it in the film, from a visual perspective.
But it does make a bit of sense as presented storyline-wise. From an ancient-world perspective, it would be beneficial for a predator to have physical characteristics which draw prey in - and simple minded creatures like shiny things. Being corpse-like works in terms of atmosphere and dread when dealing with a straight horror story, but that's not what this is (or Buffy, or a number of other vamp tales), but as applied to a predator/prey situation, it would be highly detrimental. And if you are looking at Vampires as highly evolved predators as some tales do (as opposed to reanimated corpses), it would make no sense for them to be repulsive. Plus, it gives them a reason to stay out of sunlight and still avoid the immolation cliche.
Quote:
Perhaps the main problem is that I don't like the DIRECTION that the pop-culture vampire and vampire story seems to be headed. So maybe it's not so much whether they conform to the last twenty years, maybe it's about how they SHOULDN'T.
I think it's cyclical to a degree. This is hardly the first time that touchy-feely vampires have been popular. And I think the vampire concept is rich enough that it allows for broad interpretation, both in the literal way the creatures/characters are constructed, and their metaphorical use. I like my undead scary bloodthirsty vamps, and I like characters like Angel and Lestat.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That's a pretty good explanation. It seems like after many years in the world, though, and there being people who don't like vampires, that eventually the sparkles would become a detriment, a way for the savvy to identify and destroy.
I have to admit I'm not super familiar with the mythos of the Twilight series, are vampires here reanimated, or are they a human genetic variation? Or are they magical/necromatic in nature?
Is this similar to the concept of a glamour, and if so, why shouldn't the vampires here be able to turn it off like in other similar interpretations?
And if the sparkles are for mesmerizing, why don't they hunt at day more often?
Well, it's still an interesting interpretation. I do think they would have been better without sparkles, power going away in the day, and just having a glamour they can turn on and off.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
That's a pretty good explanation. It seems like after many years in the world, though, and there being people who don't like vampires, that eventually the sparkles would become a detriment, a way for the savvy to identify and destroy.
Good point.
Quote:
I have to admit I'm not super familiar with the mythos of the Twilight series, are vampires here reanimated, or are they a human genetic variation? Or are they magical/necromatic in nature?
No idea. I've only seen the movie, and listened to a handfull of student book reports on the fourth book. If I were to guess, I'd lean toward the magical explaination, but who knows. It may never have been addressed at all in the books.
Quote:
Is this similar to the concept of a glamour, and if so, why shouldn't the vampires here be able to turn it off like in other similar interpretations?
And if the sparkles are for mesmerizing, why don't they hunt at day more often?
To the former... no idea. To the latter - I'd guess the answer is along the lines of your question at the top - it's just not beneficial to them anymore.
Quote:
Well, it's still an interesting interpretation. I do think they would have been better without sparkles, power going away in the day, and just having a glamour they can turn on and off.
I'm not a fan of the sparkles, but I'm open to new variations on the concept, so while this one didn't exactly fly with me, I can't fault them for the effort. I'd guess being able to turn the glamour on/off, or having their powers go away, would have been detrimental to the star-crossed-lovers conceit at the center of the story. That's what it's really about, all the Vampire stuff is just a device to drive it home.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I did some research.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Twilight
Quote:
These books contain examples of: Our Vampires Are Different - they're sparkly golem-like creatures made of diamonds that run on explosive oil strained from human blood, without fangs (even cute little ones) and have no problem with the sun, holy symbols or garlic. Hell, Twilight is practically the embodiment of this trope!
...o_0
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There's some very creepy info about fans of the series in there....
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, that seems accurate with what I have observed and cowered from. There is some WEIRD stuff in the books, it sounds like.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I love Underworld 1.. 2 & 3 are ok, but Twilight is absolutely awful.. Basically any vampire movie you can think of, I like more then Twilight
"Summer Glau can simply walk into Mordor.."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
FYI:
It seems to me that the vast majority of Buffy and Firefly fans need a serious attitude adjustment. Over the past year, you guys have lost 10 hardcore Browncoats that I know personally – and many others, I’m sure, who aren’t brave enough to speak up about it – to this inane bullshit.
So you personally don’t like Twilight. So fucking what? Why should I, my husband, my parents, and my siblings all be made to feel unwelcome in Browncoat ranks because we happen to like it? Well guess what, that’s 10 fewer Browncoats right there, because of this ridiculous attitude in the community. How many others are you going to drive away with pointless hate?
I loaned my Firefly DVDs to a friend a while back, and I’m going to tell her to keep them. I’m done.
~CK
You can't take the sky from me...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME