Trin’s review of Twilight (Twilight, #1) > Likes and Comments

488 likes · like
Comments (showing 1-50 of 111) (111 new)    post a comment »

message 1: by Samantha (new)

Samantha LOL, wonderful review! I agree with all of this completely.

message 2: by Trin (new)

Trin Heh, thanks. This was one of those books that was really nice to be able to vent about.

message 3: by zabira (new)

zabira hee! i enjoyed this book on some other-than-my-brain level, cuz it's set in my home state, in places that i've loved since childhood, but MAN! i am SO with you about the ISSUES. to pick one: hello, puritanical! what's that about? it irritates me to no end, the conflicting sexual messages in this book, WHICH IS AIMED AT TEENAGERS. like, way to muddy the already muddy waters...

message 4: by Trin (new)

Trin I hate to say this, because I am probably perpetuating stereotypes or whatever, but sometimes, these things are true: the author really is a Mormon. I wasn't kidding about that. And Mormons: not so fond of the premarital sex, from what I've heard. Therefore, your 100-year-old vampire boyfriend is DE-NIED.

message 5: by zabira (new)

zabira ya know, i get that, and actually (though i personally am against puritanical values on principal) i get that not everyone thinks pre-marital sex is a great idea. what freaks me out about this book is the 'trying to have your cake and eat it too' thing. it's SEXY. there is actually SEX in it, of a sort. there is CERTAINLY a sexual relationship that is only technically not consummated. so, please: pick one, is all i'm saying. don't get us all hot and bothered and THEN tell us it's wrong for us to do so. or am i over-simplifying?

message 6: by Kelly (new)

Kelly I have friends who are school librarians and they say they can't keep these books on the shelf! According to one librarian, the BOYS are the ones taking these out at her school. Another librarian friend said:

It is on our summer reading list and is very popular. I think that part of it is that she uses the vampire's awareness of the scent of blood as ametaphor for sexual attraction and longing that is being repressed. The boyvampire loves the girl but her blood smells oh so yummy and he resists...but it is so hard! And frankly, they are hot! But chaste. Go figure.

So now I want to read these and see which side of the fence I fall on.

message 7: by Trin (new)

Trin A lot of people seem to love them, I know, hence my wanting to give the series a shot. But I have a feeling that a lot of those people are too young to have seen Buffy (I know. How freakishly young is that?), and post-Buffy especially, these books just seem DUMB. But I'd be curious to see what you think, either way.

message 8: by Ami (new)

Ami well, i am 28 years old, so I know Buffy :). but i do love this series - though i think more on the idea of it on book 1. book 2 - the appeal drop a bit because though i like few characters, few storylines started to get a bit annoying. i haven't read book 3 though.

message 9: by Trin (new)

Trin Sorry, I meant that as a generalization—and a cranky, mean one at that! I wish I had liked the book more—as you can see I wanted to like it, I started out liking it, but it just totally fell apart for me and started annoying me VERY MUCH. It does not encourage me that you think the second book is even worse!

message 10: by Wordsmith (new)

Wordsmith Johnson "Instead, what Edward and Bella apparently CAN do is be very emo and teenage about their twu luv (despite Edward actually being over 100 years old)..."

...although permanently trapped at freaking seventeen, forever. What a rotten age to have to play out eternity at! No wonder the emo.

Shannon (Giraffe Days) I loved these books, but I also love your review! And I would be surprised indeed if everyone liked them - funnily enough, they're the kind of books I would expect myself not to like, but at heart I'm a sucker for romance!

message 12: by Josephine (new)

Josephine Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Thank you for your review. Seriously.

message 13: by JJ (last edited Feb 27, 2008 12:26PM) (new)

JJ Loved your review. Seriously, I don't know what all the fuss was about, especially the comments about people loving romance. I am a sucker for romance too, but I didn't think this book was romantic at all, on any level, or at any age.

Besides that, the plot was so lame, only to have something happen in the last few pages. I could have seriously done without.

message 14: by Carol (new)

Carol I liked your review but not your language.

message 15: by Toni (new)

Toni Well, it is pretty ridiculous for a century old vampire to be in high school. XD

I guess the only available explanation would be that it would be a cover. I haven't read the books so I can't be sure, but that has to be the only logical explanation.

message 16: by M. (last edited Mar 12, 2008 11:45AM) (new)

M. Weaver Ahaha, this was a glorious review. Kudos to you! I won't touch these books with a ten foot pole.

This is directioned at Toni (I'm not trying to be rude or call you out, I just want your reasoning too :]): Okay, so wait. Let me see if I can understand this. If Edward is a century-old vampire who looks like a high school student (forever, because he's not aging physically), how would this work as a cover? He can't be there forever (although technically he could, but all jokes aside) and he'd have to graduate like every normal high school student. What does he do after that, and when he doesn't age people who knew him and recognized him in high school will notice MORE than if he just became a recluse and hid in the forests of Washington all his life rather than walking around in broad *sparkling* daylight at a public school.

If he was an actual character with, you know, normal thought processes, he would have never even considered going to school at all. It makes absolutely no sense! It would just harm him and his identity in the end. Can't blame it on naivety, because he's 100 + years old! Ugh, I don't understand. Please, someone enlighten me. Am I missing something here? Why did he just happen to show up at school one day? No one knows? I don't know if it's explained in the other two books, but I'm just confused at this point. The best thing I can come up with is that Bella and Edward HAD to meet, and this was the only way the author could come up with.

message 17: by Toni (last edited Mar 12, 2008 12:58PM) (new)

Toni Response to Chelle: I've seen other series where the vampire moves around. If he/she is young enough, they may pose as a student, at least if they're at their location temporarily (a couple of years).

If it's a permanent move (and sometimes even if it isn't), the logical thing would of course be to keep a low profile.

message 18: by M. (last edited Mar 13, 2008 05:23PM) (new)

M. Weaver Ohh I see. That actually makes sense (given that they want to attend high school for some reason that I'm still not aware of XD), although... does this happen in the story at all? :\

message 19: by Amy (new)

Amy S This is a YOUNG ADULT book. If you want sex, go buy danielle steele. it is not appropriate to have steamy sex scenes in a YA book. I didn't realize there were people who needed it that badly in a book that they will say a book sucks because of it. too bad for jane austen. she could have been WAY more famous and sold more more books if she just would have porned it up a bit.

message 20: by Trin (new)

Trin Sorry if you misunderstood: I never said I didn't like the book because there weren't sex scenes. I said I didn't like the book because I couldn't understand the characters' motivations for behaving the way they did. Some of that involved issues related to sex, but where did I say that I wanted sex scenes? If I want that, I can read porny fanfic for free. From a novel, young adult or old adult, I want a compelling, convincing story. This, I felt, was not one.

message 21: by Rebekah (new)

Rebekah Word.

message 22: by Jon (new)

Jon what's wrong with you people. this is an amazing book and all you guys are concentrated on are your misconceptions and hypocritical view points. seriously i doubt any of you didn't like the book, it's just you're too stubborn to really think about the book (or anything else for that matter), or maybe you're just all liars (and bad ones at that). either way, i don't like any of you, and i judge you all. and I'm not sorry for it.

message 23: by M. (new)

M. Weaver LOL.

message 24: by Jon (new)

Jon Ugh, care to elaborate?

message 25: by M. (last edited May 06, 2008 03:59PM) (new)

M. Weaver Oh, yeah, sorry about that. I was just caught up in the hilarity of it all.

Your claiming that this book is 'amazing' without any evidence to back you up does nothing to prove your point. If anything, it makes your comment more lol-worthy. If you are unaware, people's tastes are relative. So saying that we're hypocritical and stubborn and liars because we don't care for a book, just because you like it, is pretty malicious and narrowminded at best. I don't like this book because I feel it's shallow, the characters are cardboard, the writing style rubs me the wrong way and I don't like the plot. You may not feel any of these things about it and that's fine because we obviously have differing tastes. You can hate me all you want over something trivial and I honestly wouldn't care less. Go have fun reading Eragon.

message 26: by Jon (new)

Jon first of all, i will have fun reading Eragon, thank you very much. secondly, i could have spent a long time giving you a list of proof to back up my claims, however i don't like to waist my time trying to teach stubborn people who are incapable of looking deep into a situation (in this case a book). also, you seem pretty obsessed about this book, considering how much you like to talk about it, be it good or bad. you know what i think, i think that you really love this book, you just wish you didn't cause maybe your friends don't like it, or maybe you think people will laugh at you, whatever the reason is i have a feeling that I'm right. lastly, i don't hate you because you don't like Twilight, i don't like you because if you didn't like Twilight that means there's a good chance you don't like Bella, therefore you can't be like Bella in many ways (unless you hate yourself), and since Bella has almost every good quality a person can have it's possible, if not probable, that you are a terrible person. have fun slaughtering puppies.

ok, that was a little mean and I'm sorry (for the most part), I'm just having a bad day. i still mean most of that, though.

message 27: by M. (new)

M. Weaver Aw, you're an Eragon fan too? Geez, and I thought I could cut you some slack... Anyway, I'd have a great time discussing with you the "deep" things of actual literary pieces, like A Clockwork Orange or The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or The Grapes of Wrath. This trash is nothing short of those $.10 drugstore romance novel and there is nothing "deep" to discuss about Twilight. I assure you I don't secretly love this book. There's nothing to like, in my opinion. I don't understand why you can't grasp that I really, REALLY just don't like it? A number of my friends actually liked the book and I don't care what other people think so your awful theory doesn't hold any water. I think you're delusional in saying that everyone who dislikes Twilight secretly loves it and is afraid of what others would think. Like I said earlier, different people have different tastes. Sometimes it's as simple as that.

Oh, and I'm not obsessed with Twilight, far from it, although I do enjoy arguing with people about it and angering them ;). Call it a hobby of mine. is hating yourself a good quality in a person? And I'm sure Bella really hates herself because she's such a deep character /sarcasm. You don't know the first thing about depression or truly loathing yourself (and either does Bella), so please, leave that out of the discussion. I'm really done arguing over this. Personal attacks on my character isn't a healthy way to argue. You have your opinion, I have mine, let's just leave it at that, hm?

message 28: by Jon (new)

Jon ugh, you just see what you want to, don't you? that's not very healthy. I'm done talking to you.

message 29: by M. (new)

M. Weaver ( ̄▼ ̄ )/ Bai bai!


message 30: by Aimi (new)

Aimi You guys are so funny! To answer the sex issue. It's not a matter of the fact that Stephenie is a Mormon. It's actually Edward that is the culprit. Edward refuses to get too involved with Bella because he might loose control and actually end up killing her. Bella doesn't ever realize the potential dangers that are involved with vampires. You could say that she is pretty selfish and only thinks of her wants.
I don't see why the instant popularity in her high school is so ridiculous. It happens all of the time in my school. The new kid becomes somewhat of a novelty because they are different and new.
FYI: Most of the questions raised in this comment section are answered in the next two books.

message 31: by Amy (new)

Amy Oh man. Your review was so funny I was laughing out loud. I totally agree.

message 32: by Amy (new)

Amy Ha! Excellent review. I could not agree more, especially with the way your view changed from one point of the story to the next. I too was initially very entrigued by the book and was quite dissapointed with how much a let down it was.

message 33: by Melissa (new)

Melissa I agree about Edward being so old and hanging out with high school girls and yet never explaining why Bella is so different in personality than millions of girls he'd met over the century; he only talks about not being able to read her mind and that she smells Delicious--yuck! Anyway, I'm interested in giving the series a chance, but I'm with you most of the way--would prefer less language though.

message 34: by Corinne (new)

Corinne I had the same moment of clarity when I realized the author went to BYU. Seriously, our main character is dating a man that she can't help but tempt to, um, hurt her because he can't control himself around her smell? And she thinks this is totally romantic? Ugh.

message 35: by Staci (new)

Staci Perfect review. I couldn't put my finger on why the book bothered me. There was too many things that got on my nerves and I think you listed every one of them. My incurable curiosity just has me reading the rest of the them. I don't know, maybe I just like to tick myself off.

message 36: by Staci (new)

Staci Me too! Thank you for taking the words out of my mouth.

message 37: by Amy (new)

Amy I have a masters degree in Composition and Rhetoric, have studied and taught a lot of literature (in the canon and otherwise), and have watched Buffy. I enjoy the review because sometimes, I want to read books that don't make me think very much. I don't consider these books fine pieces of literature. I think the relationships of the characters (whether you love or hate them) are engaging and my enjoyment of the novel is probably some kind of reflection of my insecure high school nerdy self still desparately wishing (12 years later...) that the hottest guy in school, vampire or otherwise, would have fallen madly in love with me and "saved" me, literally or metaphorically. I love Jane Austen, Kurt Vonnegut, and D.H. Lawrence (I don't consider "A Clockwork Orange" a fine piece of literature...). I think it's okay to read mindless, engaging books--I think there is value to that. I'm not one of those people that rolls her eyes at Oprah's bookclub, not because I think the books on it are all necessarily fine examples of fantastic literature,(the Lovely Bones, read for a bookclub, may have been one of the worst books I've read in the last 10 years, but that's just my opinion), but has resulted in many people reading books they may not have read on their own, or at all. I think this book does the same thing--how many teenage boys sit down and read four books 500+ pages each? (I read another review pointing out that these books are hard to keep on the shelves of high school libraries and it's in large part due to high school boys.) I would rather have people and students read books that engage them, even if those of us who are "masters" in writing and literature don't consider it up to par with the works of a handful of old, white, British males, than to force students to read that very handful of authors and teach students that reading has to be painful, boring, and about things they cannot relate to in any way.

Again, I don't think these books are fantastic examples of literature, but I grow weary of the holier than thou "this isn't great literature" attitude. I've studied great literature. Sometimes I like light reading that doesn't involve disseminating it's meaning, dissecting the social implications of the characters actions, or analyzing how true to reality the character's actions/reactions are; the book is about vampires. Vampires aren't real, so is it really so unbelievable that vampires go to high school?

message 38: by M. (new)

M. Weaver I honestly have nothing against people who enjoy these books. A couple friends of mine are rather avid about the books, and that's just fine with me. Really. It's not that I look down on people or cop a "holier than thou" attitude toward people who exhibit a liking for such books (as you so put it), despite the fact that I may not care for anything Meyer has to offer.

What I do mind is when people assume and make flimsy conjectures about me as a person because I have an opinion that differs from their own. I was trying to have a reasonable conversation with Toni, as he/she obviously had more insight regarding the book than myself, and I find myself getting attacked by a very passionate fan. Jon informed me that I was incapable of looking into 'deep things,' whatever that could possibly mean, and I felt the need to defend my stance. Then I get this harangue that was very obviously directed at me.

I'm not denying that you are obviously more learned regarding literature as a whole than myself, and I do respect that you seem to be very level-headed on the matter. The fact is, I enjoy mind-numbing stories too, as I'm sure most people who appreciate writing do, just not this particular story. I found the relationship shallow and borderline abusive, not engaging. The way it was written was detached and made me feel anything but sympathetic toward Bella and Edward. Of course, this is just one person's opinion, but it kept me from enjoying any of it.

With that said, I have a bittersweet feeling regarding people reading books who wouldn't have typically done so. As a writer (and with the goal of some day publishing), the mere fact that people are gaining an interest in reading again is a great thing. In a world where everthing is digitized, books seem to take backstage to other forms of stimulating entertainment. So to hear that people are so engaged in books again, well, it's encouraging. However, it bothers me that people are drowning themselves in poorly written novels when there's so much more to offer out there. Many people claim that books like Twilight or Eragon are gateway books, and in that instance, I don't mind. I just find it sad that such terrible books are taking the limelight to truly talented individuals and their stories, though that's a whole different ball of wax that really has nothing to do with quality of work.

Just because a book is mindless, that doesn't give it the permission to disregard common sense, or simple reason, really. Meyer's plot and setting is just laughable to me, weak at best. Likewise, vampires might not be real, but they sure as hell are a real entity present in literature, and in like manner, follow certain rules. Changing the rules is fine (rules are meant to be broken, etc., etc.) and can even be innovative, but come on. Sparkle? How can you take a story like that seriously? Way to bastardize a mythological creature in a single series.

message 39: by Staci (new)

Staci I can go either way with these books but you're right. Sparkle? What IS that?

message 40: by Amy (new)

Amy I read Christopher Pike and R.L. Stein Books in high school...I like to think that books like Pike, Stein, Meyer, etc. are gateway drugs for finer literature in the future. You have to start somewhere, right?

The thing I find most annoying about these books are the author's attention to constantly describing Bella's clothing choices, as well as what other characters are clothed in. This is a throwback to Christopher Pike and Nancy Drew Files books for me and a reminder that these books were written for young adults. I don't recall those books having particularly thick plots either, but there was a point when I couldn't get enough of them...

message 41: by Farzana (new)

Farzana Ok so even though I hgave the book my own quite favourable review, possibly because I was in the mood for it and hooked on it, I DO agree with parts of your review.

I'm a Muslim and the refusal to be intimate thing did annoy me a lot actually! Is she really a Mormon?

message 42: by Kirby (new)

Kirby Grimes Honestly, what's it matter if she's a Mormon or not?

message 43: by Trin (new)

Trin The reason I mentioned it is that I think it's weird that she applies Mormon values to non-Mormon characters. I'm Jewish; if I wrote a book in which a bunch of non-Jewish characters kept kosher, that would be weird, right?

message 44: by Staci (new)

Staci What? It's a book written for entertainment. It was fun when it wasn't annoying. I highly doubt the author meant for it to be "deep" or become a classic. How many people pay money to see a blockbuster movie just for the mindless entertainment. It's for an escape. If you want something deep read one of the classics.

At some times I felt I was wasting my time and yet at times I really enjoyed the mindlessness of it. There are hundreds of books out the to stimulate the mind. Try the "Prophet" from Khalil Gibran.

This book is mind candy.

message 45: by Trin (new)

Trin So, by this logic, all things that are "mindless entertainment" should be judged equally? Every comedy that comes out, every action movie, every romance novel, every paperback thriller—they're all exactly the same simply because they're designed to entertain? I don't think so. Some are good and some are bad and most are in between. But I clearly wasn't holding Twilight up against The Great Gatsby or Moby-Dick in this review. You'll note that the one other work I compared it to was Buffy the Vampire Slayer—which I think was marvelous. Twilight failed for me even as "mind candy" and I don't understand why you feel it's inappropriate to say so.

message 46: by Kelly (new)

Kelly Trin didn't like the book, so she wrote a review reflecting that dislike. I fail to understand why so many people have to argue with her about her opinion -- she just didn't like it!

Also -- I kind of feel that all this invoking of "the classics" is like the Godwin's law of GoodReads. Telling someone to go read "Middlemarch" instead of Twilight is not going to make them enjoy Twilight any more than they did.

message 47: by [deleted user] (new)

lol, actually, the horrible author Meyer IS mormon.

message 48: by Marissa (new)

Marissa I do agree with part of your review. However, at one point you state something about Bella and Edward being unable to have sex and claim it is because Meyer is either morman or because of a book she read. If you had bothered to read any of the other Twilight books, however, you would find that Bella and Edward DO have sex. So you can not say that Meyers didnt incororate this point beacuse of a book or her religion. Finish the series before you make a review next time so that you can get all of your facts straight.

message 49: by Trin (new)

Trin When I wrote this review, only the first two books had come out. And Bella and Edward don't have sex until after they're married in the final book, which fits with the Mormon belief system and the point I was trying to make. (The thing about "Man of Steel..."—an essay, by the way—was a joke.) But neither of those things really matters, as my comments had to do with the treatment of sex in this book and this book only. One is not required to read all the books in a series to review the first one—if that were the case, just imagine how long it would have been before anyone was "allowed" to comment on Harry Potter!

message 50: by Kaila (new)

Kaila I agree completely. When I read the first book (kind of before every girl, boy and their moms and their mom's cousin twice removed read it) it was great! I read the second one, and it was still good but I started losing a bit of interest. When I read the third book, I just stopped liking it. I couldn't even read the third book. Not that I'm saying your views and mine are completely alike, but I think the book would have been great if it was left off at the first two.

« previous 1 3
back to top