UNDERWORLD VS. TWILIGHT
POSTED BY: jameron4eva
UPDATED: Sunday, October 4, 2009 22:18
VIEWED: 9687
PAGE 5 of 6
Hey Rose,
Just so you know, I only saw the Twilight movie a few months ago, mainly because I wanted to know what all the fuss and hoopla was about. But I have not read the books (although I know many who have including my 13-year-old niece) and I'm just not interested because it doesn't appeal to me - period.
I found the movie to be fleeting and kind of like eating Chinese for dinner - within the hour I wanted to see something else. I couldn't remember a thing other than the scene where he stops the truck from hitting her. I found it very stylized and slick, but it was missing something.
I don't know, gravitas - it had no weight. I get that they tried to make a romance tweeny film out of the series of books. OK, let me stop here because I don't want to bash.
Here's the thing. I remember a few years back I was watching Siskel & Ebert (the original At the Movies) and Ebert said something that stuck with me. He said it to Gene Siskel. There are all kinds of movies for all kinds of people, our job is to review them for what they are. He was referring to Siskel bashing a particular movie and the people who went to see it. My guess is that Roger felt it was insulting to those who found it entertaining.
Then he reminded Gene Siskel of their panning of the movie Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, which some consider to be a classic farce (including me). They thought it would tank horribly at the box office. Who knew?
Ok, what am I saying with this. Everyone has their Ace Ventura/Twilight/fill in the blank. We can all think of a movie that was the worst waste of film ever in history and yet, there's someone that says to you - Are you kidding me, that was a classic.
Whatever flaws this movie, and for that matter, the book series has; there will be those that will not see what you see. I think for the most part folks here are pretty good about exchanging opinions and having intelligent dialogue as to our fav books, movies and such. But there will be those moments when someone will take a comment personal and as an affront to their character.
But everyone here is entitled to express their opinion, that's what the site is for.
What's the saying? You can lead a horse to water..............
SGG
Tawabawho?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wish to start with the truth contained in the characterization of Twilight as 'girl porn'. There are products that are aimed at different market segments, 'Twilight', like 'Titanic', is clearly aimed at the adolescent female. I've always thought of 'Cosmmopolitan' as girl porn, far more salacious than any of the Lad Mags such as Maxim. But there is clearly a large interest in what they sell, or it would not be so profitable a venture. No one is compelled to buy this twopenny trash. So much of the critique of 'Twilight' that calls itself feminist strikes me as being righteous overmuch.
As for the claim of abusive relationship promotion, I don't know that is consistent with the facts of the writing. Doesn't the handsome young male vampire marry the female protagonist, and they live happily (sort of) ever after? Sounds like a very tame, moraline tale to me.. Strikes be more like a recasting of "Wuthering Heights" with bloodsuckers. There's been a trend here, as we see with "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies", recasting old product into new. Like the song goes "Every old is new again".
Now, perhaps there are those who argue that any story of a younger female enraptured by an older 'bad boy' male are abusive. That is a different argument.
As more me, I love the T-shirt "And Buffy Staked Edward".
So, ladies and gentlemen, sharpen your stakes and let the contest continue!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
Saying that Twilight is 'girl porn' is about the same as saying a brutal beating and rape video is 'guy porn.' Either statement can be quite offensive. While it might be true for certain members of the population, some of us are disgusted by the Abusive Stalker Undead boyfriend and the Simpering Colorless Vapid Codependent Underage girlfriend. Idealizes abusive relationships? And how. Also, with the complete disregard of any accepted vampire mythos, which I assume is to serve the story in some way.
When I first read the description, I thought it was a rip-off of Buffy, at least part of Buffy. When I tried to read the book, I thought my eyes were going to bleed and I put it down. I didn't think about it again until I started seeing the ruttin' movie advertised, and all the squealy hype surrounding the whole thing told me, more and more, that it lacked anything resembling Girl Power. It was about a girl hopelessly devoted to someone because he stalked her and felt 'protective' and oh, she would just curl up and die without her creepy protective stalker, or some other creepy protective beastman. She could do nothing for herself and was defined by her relationship and by her helplessness. At least Buffy killed Angel when it was necessary, and she certainly didn't need constant protection from the evils that walk the world.
It isn't 'girl porn.' It's 'totally dysfunctional unhealthy' porn. And I think it's badly written. How badly written abusive tripe becomes popular is one of the great mysteries of reality.
About Underworld I don't care too much. Yes, hotter chicks. Yes, better butt-kicking. And hey, some following of mythos. But it didn't make me care much; I found it rather empty and uninteresting.
Couldn't have put it better myself
******************************
http://www.myspace.com/muddy_waters
http://www.freewebs.com/hobbleit
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I really don't think calling Twilight a modern day Pride and Prejudice is accurate. For one, unless I'm really missing something, I'm unaware of Twilight having any commentary on wealth, social class, and the break-down thereof. Unless vampires can be construed as such?
Wuthering Heights is also more about a misunderstanding that results in a break-up and then the vengeful ex-lover returning to ruin everyone than it is about women requiring someone to protect them from all the evil (the other vampires) of the world.
Lastly, you seem to be saying that all's well that ends well, with marriage being a "good ending" in the case of what seems to be a relationship associated with a lot of danger, violence, and unhappiness. I could be mistaken, but I would have to disagree on principle.
EDIT: or perhaps you're making a comment about how land generally was generally inherited by males in the Victorian times, and that women born in certain socio-economic circles would need to eventually marry to secure a home for themselves, or live with their parents their entire lives?
In which case, perhaps there are some similarities to Twilight.
I note, however, that the Victorian times in general were not very empowering for women. The repression represented in the books in question were more an artifact of the times that the books were written in than anything that can be held against the books. Twilight is a modern book: there is no reason for it to be promoting Victorian era perspectives unless it is a parody, satire, or other sort of commentary. I don't think it can be argued that it is.
Of Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice and Northranger Abbey are the only two books that I like, and that's only really because they're comedies.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Shinygoodguy, you have a valid point.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
WOW! lotsa postiness since my last visit.
Digesting.
Also, I am not a "Twilight hater" - I enjoyed it.
Couple points:
I suspect I don't adequately embrace drama queens sometimes. Or is that "simpering weak girls?"
This might be portrayed as a discussion of Vampires as victims - yea or nay.
If given the chance, I suspect many teenagers in high school would love to spend the rest of their lives in that situation - for many, it was the pinnacle of their lives.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by CaliforniaKaylee:
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...
Are there other anti-Twilight threads on this board, are they common?
I kinda thought this was just a discussion, other than the OP.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
Hehe, thanks SGG.
You know, it's interesting in a way, because there have been times I felt less-than-welcome because I didn't like Twilight. I felt as though there was this opinion that anything involving vampires was automatically good, no matter what the underlying metaphor may be. I'll admit, I found it frustrating, but I just didn't talk about it because I figured my opinion would be scorned and possibly be upsetting. Finally seeing some backlash, some other people coming out and saying 'no, this is not a good thing, it's not a good metaphor, it's not a good lesson, it's not a good story or use of the story' etc. made me feel a bit better, but there was still an overwhelming, almost crushing kind of feeling that most people thought this was brilliant romance, and that to think anything else made me less female somehow, or cynical and dead inside, or in some other way... not right. Soooo, I eventually snapped. And maybe it was overblown, maybe it was upsetting, maybe it makes other people feel the way I felt, and maybe I could have said it more... diplomatically. But it is just my opinion, and I'm not the only one who has it and I'm glad I'm not the only one who has it, and it doesn't mean I automatically hate you if you're a Twilight fan or something, it just means I don't understand where you're coming from.
And for the record, it isn't about how much it isn't Buffy. I am a fan of Buffy - a fairly recent fan, actually - but that doesn't mean I hate anything that isn't Buffy. Twilight has certain things in common with Buffy, what with the vampire dating a 16 year old girl, so it lends itself to comparison, but I don't hate it because it's not Buffy. The reason I brought Buffy up at all was because the underlying metaphors in that story, the dimension of the characters, the overall writing style, I happen to prefer. A lot. I think it has some good things to say with that particular metaphor, and I think Twilight uses the same metaphor in a kind of gross way. If Buffy had never existed or I had never watched it, I would still not like Twilight. Actually, I'm pretty sure that I attempted to read the first book before I had even watched Buffy, though after I had heard enough about it to know a lot of key plot points.
Anyway. Dancer made a good point, and one that I will vouch for from experience over the same issue. Feeling unwelcome over one opinion should not be enough to drive you out of an unrelated fandom. And I certainly didn't intend to drive anyone away with my opinions on an unrelated fandom, and I'm sorry if I did. It doesn't change my opinion.[/sig]
I oft enjoy your posts. Thoughtful at least. Many times I think "what would PR post about this topic/thread." And then despondent when she doesn't.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark: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."
The only reason Twilight supposedly has more people watching it is, the 9-30 varient of the Female of the species. Yes it's the girls who watch that prissy crap Twilight, and only because they read the books.
And the storyline and acting is much better than Twilight. Sorry to Pattenson, and Stewart, but i mean does Twilight have an actor the caliber of Kate Beckinsale?, Or a Bill Nighey? I think not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh and by the way, who the hell goes to a movie because of the critics ratings anyway? We all know the best movies get reviewd the worst by them, so by that token, Underworld easily trumps Twilight. So take your critics reviews and stuff them!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pcch7:
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.."
HOORRAAHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME