“Once Upon a Twilight Dream”

So it's okay to complain that girls don't like comic-con, and that girls don't like our general nerd-dom interests. And then when they find something that they do like, perfectly within genre conventions (and Twilight is, whether you like it or not), you yell that they're not butch enough, or something?

I bet you never get laid, either.

Tool.

And I bet "Chris" is short for "Chrissy".

Of course I'm going to make fun of it, because it sucks - as I've said before, it has no literary value (or cinematic in the case of the movies), and doesn't deserve the attention it's garnered.

--Kyle

The point is that 95% of the crap nerds likes sucks, too. Vampire anything is, almost by definition, shit. Have you seen Transformers? Superman Returns? GI Joe? Any Image comic? Or sadly, Watchmen?

Have you seen the crowds go wild when Megan Fox shows up? Or Olivia Munn? Did you know that Cameron Diaz got proposed to at her panel? How is our behavior any different?

If girls want a seat at the table, let 'em have it without resenting them. We're all taking bites out of the same shit sandwich. Its a little disingenuous to imply that if you like it it has value, and if girls like it it has none (although admittedly, Twilight is bad). It's genre crap - its all bad.

"Blade" and the Anne Rice books don't suck, and are vampire stories (or "genre crap" as you put it). That's why it's different.

End of story.

--Kyle

I'll give you the first 2 Blade movies, and as bad as 3 was, it did have Jessica Biel.

The Anne Rice books? That is so sweet...

Did you read any of them? I read Twilight before bashing it.

Also, are you not aware of the "reply" button?

--Kyle

Oops. Reply. Got it.

Twilight is dreck - virtually unreadable on any level. But that's not the point.

I look on the entire series like I look at the Harry Potter books - they're not that good, but if they get people, and especially kids, reading, its a good thing. Likewise, if Twilight (or to a lesser degree, Sailor Moon or Strangers in Paradise) gets more girls into the party, how is that bad? The Twilight crowd isn't what has begun to ruin comic-con. That distinction goes to Hollywood in general. Why in the fuck are they having a panel on the new Patricia Heaton sitcom?

I still love comic-con, but years ago I used to go for 2 or 3 days. Now one is all I can manage, and that's because its so overrun anymore that it's just not as much fun.

I'm not really worried about someone "ruining Comic-Con". I'm more concerned with the fact that millions of people consider the "Twilight" novels to be exquisite pieces of literature.

Note the distinction: it's not that the fans love the books but realize they aren't worthy of unilateral literary praise, but that they believe (somehow) that the books are an example of what all novels should be, and these are the greatest of all.

I have no problem with people reading, even if it's crap - people should do more reading and I applaud that. It's when a overhyped dimestore smut novel reaches mainstream and gets praise for something that it's not that I have an issue. And this continues when the movies follow the books' precedent as being total crap and getting huge amounts of praise.

Not to mention all of the underlying themes and ideas that are being instilled in the supple minds of young girls everywhere - if you look past the surface (barely), Mormon ideals are rampant and that is NOT what children/teenagers need today. C.S. Lewis used Christian themes in a way that wasn't indoctrination, so why should Meyer be given praise for overtly attempting to indoctrinate?

In case you haven't already found out my deep opinions on this, I suggest you look at this, with close attention to the conversation thread on Goodreads that I reference: http://www.kyle-brady.com/tag/twilight/

--Kyle

Again, I couldn't agree with you more about Twilight. My 13 y/o daughter loved them, when she was 12, but now they bore her to tears. My point is that there is no such thing as vampire "literature," despite your protestations about Anne Rice, and Twilight just happens to be on the very low end of the quality scale.

I don't believe in the concept of gateway drugs (ie weed leads to heroin), but in this case maybe they do. If some Twilighter makes the leap to Laurel Hamilton, and then to Rice, and then to Stoker (God forbid someone read the original), it's just not a bad thing in my book. Let 12-year-olds set their own market - we both agree that Meyer isn't writing for us. Thank God.

I did read 1 1/2 of the Lestat books, but the prose was a tad purple for my taste, and couldn't get through the 2nd.

And if you want to see a GREAT vampire flick, rent "Let The Right One In" before Hollywood fucks it up.

chris

Sorry for the delay - I was out of state for the last two weeks, and things got a little crazy for a bit. But I'm back.

I think the definition of "literature" is inherently snobby, so I'll agree with you, but probably for different reasons. I consider Anne Rice to be elegant and well written, just like many critics, unlike certain Mormon authors.

I'll check out your movie suggestion, but I'm not sure what you mean by Lestat being "a tad purple"...

--Kyle