Sarah's Reviews > Twilight

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
949071
's review
Dec 04, 13

bookshelves: vampire-supernatural, romance, teen-young-adult, 2008
Recommended for: no one, not even my worst enemy
Read in May, 2008

** spoiler alert ** Okay, I have to say that I picked this book up partly due to all the hype (and partly because it's involved two of my favorite genres)... I mean, so many people had recommended it to me and I finally got sick of hearing about it, so I picked it up and read it... or as least tried to.

Let me first say that I am a huge romance and vampire/supernatural fan, so when I first heard about the book I was really excited to read it because it combined two of my favorite genres.

But, I really regret ever buying and forcing myself to finish it (I hate not finishing books, even if I hate them), it was so bad. Though, let me tell you that I really wanted to like it, really I did... I'm one of those people who likes a lot of popular things, Twilight was popular, so I figured... I would love it just like everyone else, but I was very, very wrong.

A lot of fans wonder why I hate the book so much and here is my list and it's a pretty long one, so get ready:

1. Lack of characterization:
Bella- Okay... I absolutely hated this girl. She was the worst female protagonist I have ever read about! She's stupid, shallow, selfish and just plain annoying! Not to mention she's pathetically dependent on Edward... I mean, come on, NO girl should be that dependent on a boy, not only is that pathetic, but it is very unhealthy. She was also a clumsy little damsel in distress who was dumb enough to get herself into situations that she couldn't get out of. I would have loved for Meyer to have given her a backbone, so she could have done something useful instead of whining and doing stupid, idiotic things that no remotely intelligent teenage girl would actually do. Not to mention the fact that she is apparently very "plain" looking... if that's the case then why are there several guys fawning over her? (And, according to Meyer, one of them is a teacher... um, ew). Bella is a Mary Sue, simple as that. And I hate Mary Sues.
Edward- Okay, this boy is just way too possessive and stalkerish (it is not romantic of him to sneak into Bella's room and watch her sleep! It's creepy and wrong!) Oh, and "bad boys" usually don't sit there and say "I'm dangerous, stay away" etc. all the time... I also hated the fact that Bella described some part of his body every other page. It was completely UNNECESSARY!! Okay, we get the fact that he's hot, Bella... now MOVE ON!

I could go on and on about all the characters... every single one of them was a flat, cardboard cut-out that did not seem realistic at all.

2. Writing style:
Purple Prose- Ew... to this... seriously, all the purple prose made me want to throw the book across the room. Enough said.

3. Descriptions:
I know I said up there that I got sick of reading about how gorgeous some part of Edward's body was every other paragraph... and if that wasn't bad enough... what's worse than is the fact that even with all that unnecessary description of him and everyone else (though mostly him, since Bella is that shallow) I still had a hard time picturing him or any of the characters in my head, for that matter. I also had a hard time picturing a lot of the setting and the action in my head as well. It's kind of sad really... there was so much description, you would think that everything (Edward especially) would be embedded into my brain, but no. That's what makes me wonder why so many fans find Edward so "hot", I never got a clear picture of him in my head to even begin to form an opinion about whether he was "hot" or not.

Seriously, Meyer completely abused the dictionary and the thesaurus while writing this book (so much so that I think she should never be allowed to look at either one ever again)... there are so many big descriptive words used that could be replaced by smaller words that look and sound better. Half the time the words that she does use doesn't really go with what she's trying to say. Simply put: Stephenie Meyer is a moron and doesn't know that when writing you are supposed to use the thesaurus sparingly (aka: only when it is truly needed and not any time you damn well please), it really ruins everything if it's used too much... as Meyer has perfectly portrayed with this atrocious book.

4. Plot:
Okay, the plot gets it's own category because it pissed me off so much. I mean, seriously... where was it?! It was nothing but sappy, gag worthy fluff between Edward and Bella until page 400 or so, when something finally happened. And, even then... it went by so fast and was not explained well at all (since Bella conveniently fainted during it, which is such a cop out). It seemed to me that Meyer just threw it in there, and it was only put there in the first place, so that she could point at it and say, "Look, there's a plot right there.", when people like me came around and said otherwise. But that's not a plot!! The plot should not take 400 pages to start! And no the whole "romance" between Bella and Edward is not the plot! This is especially the case since we knew from the beginning... thanks to the moronic give away on the back cover that states that Bella and Edward were going to fall in love... speaking of that, who the hell thought it would be a good idea to give away the fact that Edward was a vampire on the back cover?! I mean... really?! That took away any suspense/mystery the book might have had for the reader about what he was... so, while Bella was stupidly wondering what he was, I was sitting there yelling at her for being such a moron and not seeing what was right in front of her.

5. Plot holes
The one thing that drove me absolutely CRAZY was the the fact that no one in the small town of Forks noticed that the Cullens never aged! And the "children" never graduated and went on to college. I mean, if they've been there for more than four years, than I'm assuming that someone would have noticed! I mean, the town could not be full of that many morons! (Okay... I've been told several times that Cullens have only been living in Forks for about two years... I guess all the purple prose distracted me from reading and remembering that little detail...) Speaking of school, why in the world would they willingly choose to take high school over and over again? Especially since they all have several college degrees (which leads me to wonder why, since they are so "human loving" they can't do something useful with their education like Carlisle, instead of sitting on their butts all day and just being useless) I know they need to "fit in", but seriously.. . that's just stupid... they could always pretend that they're home schooled (it's not that uncommon these days). Since that's how the Cullens fit into society, that means they have to move every four or five years to avoid suspicion, right? Wow... that must really suck. However, they wouldn't have to do that if they didn't put the younger ones in school since if they were in the workforce (and being useful to society) then they could stay for a lot longer before people started wondering why they don't age. But, I think I know why Edward and his "siblings" tortured themselves day after day by going to high school... Stephenie Meyer wasn't creative enough to come up with any other way for Edward and Bella to meet. It would have made more sense for them to have been neighbors or something. I can come up with several nice ideas about how that would have turned out and it would have been much better.

I've been told that there are more, but those are the two that really bugged me. Though, I love the fans response to the mention of any plot hole (the rabid ones, not the sane ones, of course). It usually goes like this: "Well it is a fictional vampire book." That's a stupid reason. Just because it's a book with vampires doesn't mean it's exempt from having to be realistic and not having glaring plot holes.

I've also been told that there are even more in later books, but I'm not about to torture myself by reading the rest of the series just to find them and list them... I have better things to do with my time... like reading books that are actually good and not a waste of my time or money.

6. Vampires
Like I said before, I'm a big vampire fan. But, this book is an embarrassment to vampire fiction. The vampires are pathetic, sweet, innocent, almost "misunderstood" creatures. I know that Meyer has every right to create her own idea about vampires. And, to be honest, I was okay with her idea about vampires until they started sparkling. VAMPIRES DON'T SPARKLE! To have them sparkle takes away the evilness of the myth of the creatures (since, they are creatures of the devil...at least, originally, they were). Evil creatures do not sparkle, the idea's laughable at best. Most normal people are not scared of something that sparkles in the sun. I mean, I know if I saw someone sparkling; I would not immediately think "vampire" and run. Not only because I don't associate sparkling with vampires, but also because how the hell is sparkling evil or scary?! By the way, the whole sparkling vampire idea just seemed to be there because Meyer wanted a reason as to why the vampires could even walk around in the daylight to begin with. The idea was just a convenient way for her to write the vampires. Since, she's incapable of coming up with a better, much more creative idea. I don't mind the fact that they could come out during the day (since that's not unheard of in vampire fiction nowadays), but I wish that Meyer had come up with a better idea that didn't make me laugh uncontrollably at the thought.

All the other myths about vampires are nonexistent. Holy water and garlic won't bother them (just like the sun), stake through the heart won't kill them either, even beheading them won't get rid of them. She made her vampires practically invincible (which is annoying). The only way to really kill one of her vampires is to rip it apart and burn the pieces or to blow it up. Two things that a human would have a hard time doing... which, makes me wonder why, if they're so invincible, they live in secrecy? Especially since (from my knowledge) most vampires don't live like the Cullens, they could careless about humans. If most other vampires were so cruel, why don't they come out to humanity and take over? It makes a lot more sense since a mere human would have a very difficult time killing just one vampire. The fact that they had no weaknesses annoyed the crap out of me. Along with being almost invincible, they all had these special "powers", but they didn't have the bad side effects with them, only the good. All in all, her vampires were perfect.

I don't like my vampires to be blood thirsty monsters that kill everything in sight. But, I also don't want them to be so pathetic and innocent either. The only two vampiric qualities that are there are the ones that are well known among everyone: drinking blood (well, sort of since the Cullens are "vegetarian" vampires; an idea that seriously made me laugh) and being immortal. Otherwise, the Cullens are disgustingly human like.

I think the thing I have the problem with the most is the fact that Meyer has never seen any vampire movies/t.v. shows or read any vampire novels. There's this saying in regards to writing: "Write what you know". Stephenie Meyer knew nothing about vampires when she wrote this horrible excuse for a vampire novel (which is probably why it was so awful in comparison to other vampire novels, whether those books are in the romance section of the bookstore or the horror/sci-fi section). A good author always does their research (whether it's fiction or non-fiction is irrelevant). This doesn't mean that she needed to go by the other myths, it just means that she should have done a little research to see what she was getting herself into. If she had done this, I would have been able to respect her ideas more because at least then she would have done her research.

Where the vampires are concerned, this novel is an embarrassment to vampire/supernatural fiction.

7. Messages
I am somewhat appalled at the messages that this book sends out.. they are so anti-feminist, it's disgusting:
1. It's perfectly okay to have no goals or aspirations or even an education, just get yourself a man and he'll take care of you. (All Bella wants is to be with Edward, some aspirations, huh?)
2. It's also perfectly okay to like someone because of their physical features... this is not love people, it's lust! They have nothing in common! He likes her because she smells nice and she likes him because he's hot. (Bella goes on and on and on about how hot some part of Edward is every other page)
3. When you have several guys fawning over you pick the hottest one of them all because looks are so very important. (Mike and Eric pretty much say the same thing to Bella on her first day of school, but she's nicer to Mike than Eric because the latter wasn't very attractive. Also, she picks Edward because of his looks as well)
4. It's okay if the guy you love sneaks into your bedroom and watches you sleep at night (before you even know him all that well)... that's completely normal and romantic... not the the least bit creepy or stalkerish. (It's completely disgusting to hear girls talk about this. They swoon and gush about how romantic it is... seriously, what is wrong with people these days?!)
5. It is perfectly okay to become completely obsessed with your boyfriend and depend on him for everything.(Bella's obsession and dependence on Edward sets feminism back a couple hundred years or so)
6. It also teaches that not only is it okay to change yourself for a guy, but it's also okay to give up EVERYTHING for him as well. (Bella wants to become a vampire and leave her family and friends to be with Edward. What. The. Hell.)
7. Your life is not complete until you find a man. (This is nothing but a LIE. Girls do not need a man to be complete)

Like with the plot holes, I've been told that there are many more terrible messages in later books and once again, I'm not about to go out and read the books. However, I will say this... from what I've heard, they sound worse than the ones I've already listed.

8. The Obsession:
Well, this gets its own category, mostly because I just don't understand what all the obsession is over... it's a book, and a poorly written one at that. I run across girls all the time arguing over who Edward "belongs" to... it's pathetic and kind of scary. He's a book character... he doesn't belong to anyone, but Meyer, since she's the one who created him.

I also hate the fact that I can't go into the book store now without being bombarded with a huge display dedicated to this crappy series... makes me sick to see such praise and popularity for a mediocre book series when there are so much better authors out there that are virtually ignored since they write real fiction and none of this poorly written wish fulfillment fantasy crap.

This was obviously a fulfillment story that I would expect a preteen to write on her livejournal. This is not a book I would expect a thirty something year old woman with a college education to write and actually attempt and then succeed in getting published. And, it was a degree in English... seriously, I would have expected much better from someone who had that degree... since she spent college studying books and analyzing them etc. you would think that she would know how to write one the proper way...

Meyer could have made this book great, but no... instead she took the easy way out: a cliched, simple, overused plot and added vampires to it(as if that made it any different).

Honestly, I've read better over on fictionpress.com... and that's really sad, because most of the authors over there are between the ages of 14 and 26 and are amateurs in the field. Maybe, if Meyer had posted this up there first, it would have been a much better story because the good writers over there would have set her straight. Maybe then, I would have been able to get through the novel, because it might have actually been good!

And, oh just for the record... Twilight is NOT the next Harry Potter, nor is it better than Harry Potter... I say that not only because JK Rowling actually has talent, but also because they are in completely different genres and can't really be compared.

Though, it does make me sick to see Harry Potter even mentioned in the same sentence as this piece of crap... (unfortunately, that couldn't be avoided in this review) and it's an insult to JK Rowling to have her amazing writing compared to the horrible writing of Stephenie Meyer.

EDIT: I found this site, and thought I should share with everyone: http://reasoningwithvampires.tumblr.c...
The creator of the above site has scanned copies of the Twilight books on to her computer and has taken it upon herself to point out the many issues that the books have (these are mostly grammatical in nature). If you are a fangirl who believes that Twilight is perfect and has no flaws then you should really take a look at this.
2101 likes · likeflag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Twilight.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-50 of 891) (891 new)


Jennifer I couldn't agree with you more.

This book was AWFUL, for all of the reasons you said.


(G)Emma That was the best review I have ever read of Twilight.


message 3: by Jennifer (last edited May 15, 2008 08:21PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jennifer Wardrip I was so glad to read this. Although many of my reviewers RAVE over TWILIGHT (the entire series, really), I couldn't even make it through the first book. I hated it; totally, completely, and absolutely. And there's not a whole lot that I hate. :)


message 4: by Roxana (new)

Roxana I absolutely agree with you. Still, because the books were getting so much hype, and because I need to be solid in my position in an argument, I continued reading the other two books in the series. All those things you mentioned up there get so much more worse. Like, it's sickening. In fact, when I was done reading the third book, I felt extremely exhausted by the ton of angst that this series vomits at you. It's infuriating, the kind of message Meyer sends out about how a girl should be if a total hottie happens to take notice in her is disgusting. Not to mention her messages on love are extremely unrealistic. Throughout the series she repeats the idea that love is a matter of forced fate, not a matter of meeting, getting to know each other gradually and then eventually falling in love. And it gets a million times worse when the werewolves come in. Not that they're even really werewolves, since like the vampires they have all the good traits and none of the bad. They don't feed on human flesh when they're in wolf form, and they can turn to wolves when they please and aren't forced to turn when the moon is full. It goes on with a bunch of other Mary Sue nonsense.

And the Edward description? I actually managed to get an idea of him in my head, and it really creeped me out, so I sort of blur it when I imagine him. Meyer must not actually use her brain when she writes, otherwise she'd see how horrible this stuff is.


(G)Emma I applaud you for attempting to be educated about your viewpoint!


message 6: by Roxana (new)

Roxana Thank you, :D I never like to discuss things if I've no idea what the hell I'm talking about. On top of that I work at a bookstore so I'm often better off reading some of the popular books since people often ask for my opinion. I've no idea what I'll say the next time I get asked about these.


(G)Emma ahhh I see. Well rock on!!


Mounica Though I am quite obsessed with this series, I have to say I agree with some of your points. Awesome review!!


message 9: by [deleted user] (new)

It is refreshing to find someone else who was as disturbed by the Bella/Edward romance as I was. Thank you for your review.


Rat de bibliothèque 1st. I'm not looking to start a fight. I read your review because I wanted to see what those who hated the book ad to say.

2nd. I'll admit it. I can be the type who decides to cry at I dunno the movie Happy Feet. - So this book would probably be good for a person who was somewhat LOOKING for some sappy ass story. Honestly I wasn't. I read it because my best friend was and I wanted to encourage her to read more.

3rd. About no one every questioning their age. I wondered the same thing too. In fact I wanted to hear a bit more about what EXACTLY caused them to leave Alaska. Something obviously happened there to bring them to Forks.

4th. The term vegetarian was supposed to be the family joke. I don't read tons of vampire lit however I must say I have an increasing interest to find out what else is out there - and I don't doubt that once I have more under my literary belt my feelings towards this book may change. But I wasn't sure why you called that out - from what I've seen the concept of vampires avoiding drinking human blood is not a new one.

5th. Educational aspirations. Edward tells Bella how Carlisle spent a lot of time educating himself. I felt that may have been worth a mention.

6th. Liking someone based on physical appearance (and Edward liking Bella's scent). Bella does mention that there is more to know than what he looks like. But yes there are an infinite amount of references to his "Adonis"-like looks. Yes, Edward was intoxicated by Bella's scent but I had the impression his secondary attraction was more one of arrogance. He couldn't read her mind - so he was fascinated.

Overall though I thought your review was put together well.


message 11: by Sarah (last edited Jun 11, 2008 01:47PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Ver De Levre:

First, I want to thank you for presenting yourself and your opinions in a nice, respectable way. It's refreshing to come across a Twilight fan who can actually respect the fact that I don't worship the series.

Now, I'm don't want to argue either, I just want to clarify a few things.

First, the vampires in the series, are too human like for my tastes. I mean, the only vampire qualities they have are they drink blood, they're immortal and they all seem to have a special power. Along with that, they have none of the bad things that come along with being a vampire... they can go out during the day, their powers really aren't that bad, I mean, that their powers have no consequences or bad things with them.

Like I said above, I felt that Meyer only added the "sparkling" to give a reason for the vampires to be out in the daylight to begin with. To me, I think she could have been much more creative in coming up with a reason as to why they could come out during the day. I'm sorry, but I thought the whole sparkling thing made them even more pathetic than they all ready were. At least, in my opinion it did.

The whole education aspirations thing, I was talking about Bella... since she seems to not care about her education, as long as she has Edward, she's all set. At least, that is what I got from it. And that is a REALLY bad message to send to the young girls who are reading this series.

And, I didn't remember reading anything about Bella and her love for Edward that went deeper than just looks. They seem to have nothing in common. If they do, it was not made clear enough for me to be able to see it.



Rat de bibliothèque Hey no problem. The internet is far too full of people who are all too quick to start net arguments. This is a site that should be treated as above that sort of thing.

I'll agree. They were incredibly human. Which was a bit .... odd. And the special powers. Totally new to me. I'm not sure if I liked that or not. I'm leaning a little towards not. I think it may stray a bit too far from what keeps it in the realm of vampire fiction.

The going out during the day. I looked at it this way. It's like how Douglas Adams and other sci fi writers would come up with reasoning for why certain things worked certain ways. It was her infinite improbability drive by saying it was a myth. However, I feel that that's somewhat of a vampire staple and perhaps would have been best off left unchanged.

As for Bella ans her education. I'm not sure I've made up my mind on that. I just began the second book and they are at least making a concentrated effort to show the Cullens family pushing to insure she goes to college. I saw no reason to really mention that in my last comment since we were discussing the first book - this tidbit I considered a bit off topic.

Now - if we are looking as this as a vampire novel. And that is what you wanted and expected when picking it up. Yeah - I could see how people would see this as a piece of shit.

If you had no expectations and like myself can just be a retarded 6th grader and go all to pieces over gooshy unnecessary romance - then yes. It's just fabby.


Brigid *Flying Kick-a-pow!* well, i kinda disagree. i'm not really into romance books, and i typically don't like books that everyone else likes (ex: i HATE harry potter, the inheritance series, inkheart/inkspell, stuff like that) and i when i picked up twilight i didn't expect much from it. but i personally loved it; it kinda surprised me. sure, bella is a little annoying and whiney sometimes, but i don't think it takes away much from the actual story.


Rat de bibliothèque Brigid-
You're right. I'm most of the way through Eclipse and after three books I am seeing how Bella can indeed be very whiney.


Brigid *Flying Kick-a-pow!* i haven't even read eclipse yet, but i'm going to... and i'm gonna read the fourth one too once it comes out


message 16: by [deleted user] (new)

That's not how Bella is meant to be at all. She is more of an awkward teenager who has never found love before, and now her first love is a dangerous but deeply seductive vampire. Quite beautiful really. And SELFISH!??! You've got to be kidding me. She moved all the way out to Forks for her MOTHER'S SAKE, and she almost got herself killed so that her mother could live. As for being a damsel in distress, what would you do if a car came flying at you or some crazed vampire dude wanted to kill you?

I agree that the writing wasn't the best I've ever written, but it was still pretty good, and your description of bella is completley wackadoo!


message 17: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Emily:

So, is that the only thing in my review that you don't agree with? And... yes, she IS a selfish, stupid damsel in distress, at least I think she is. Yea, she moved to Forks for her mother, but she didn't WANT to and that is made very clear at the beginning of the novel.

She is "brave" for going after this vampire all by herself just to save her mother, but, it wasn't the BEST idea in the world. Especially since when she gets there she acts like a stupid damsel in distress... she barely even tried to fight back. I know that he's a vampire and she probably couldn't fight back THAT much, but COME ON... she could have at least TRIED. I know she had a broken leg or whatever, but come on! I would have fought for my life even if I knew it wouldn't do anything because if I was going to be killed I sure as hell wasn't going to make it EASY for him... even if it didn't do any good.

That is my opinion, I'm sorry if you disagree with it, but you are not going to be able to change my opinion and I am not going to be able to change yours. I am not going to argue about this... I don't really care if you read the book and you liked it, I even respect your opinion... even though you could have presented it in a better way.


Rat de bibliothèque To Emily -

You may see I responded to this review some time ago. I have been watching it ever since.

From someone who liked the book:
I'd have to say after reading the review I started to look at it from the reviewers perspective. I believe she offers a bit of a feminist perspective. If you look at the book independent of your own rationale and approach it with her eyes you can see where she is coming from.

Yes, Bella IS awkward like many teenagers - however in her case it's more awkward than most. Yes, she does act a lot like a teenage girl. I remember those days in high school where you have something on your mind and the rest of the days events are a blur. But this CAN also be seen as this girl spending the majority of her days worrying about as well as "mooning over" Edward Cullen.

The damsel in distress was a blanket statement. Bella's attack by James was only one portion to take away. Bella can be seen as a girl who is waiting for some sort of event to whisk her away from her unhappiness and discontentment.

In closing. I also support your right to hold your own opinion. But - a book review should never contain the word "wackadoo." If nothing else it detracts from reasons to see you as serious.


message 19: by [deleted user] (new)

I know, I'm not trying to change anybodys opinion, but the point of goodreads is saying what you think about books. The book was just supposed to be romantic, and if Bella had been all tough and independent and a crazy feminist nazi the book wouldn't have the same appeal. It's a gushy romance book about an awkward teenage girl who falls in love for the first time with a mysterious, handsome and seductive vampire. That's what the book is. Period. It's not the type of book you anaylze over.


Jennifer Emily:

You said that the point of goodreads is to say what you think about books, but then you also say that "Twilight" is not the type of book you analyze. You've contradicted yourself.

Sarah read the book, and wrote an insightful and thorough review of what she thought of it. She had to analyze the book in order to determine what she thought of it. I think that the hundreds of other people who have written reviews (positive and negative) about the Stephanie Meyer's series would disagree with you that this book shouldn't be analyzed. There isn't a book in the world that can't be analyzed and thought about from many perspectives.

If Bella was a "tough and independent and a crazy feminist nazi" then perhaps the book wouldn't have appealed to YOU, but it might have appealed more to other people. I know it would have definitely appealed more to me if Bella had been a bit more independent and not so lovesick.

Sarah - I think that your "wackadoo" description of Bella is right on the money!




message 21: by [deleted user] (new)

When I said that I meant that on goodreads you can express your opinions about books, but some books are simple and you don't need to go into great detail about them. Twilight is what it is, and people overanaylze the book too much. If these books are so terrible, how do you explain over 5.3 million copies have been sold?


(G)Emma She's not talking about overall perspective of the books, shes talking about HER persspective of the books. And who says a feminist has to be a nazi? Who says a feminist can't fall in love?


message 23: by [deleted user] (new)

It wouldn't be as appealing if Lois Lane was Superman's sidekick, would it? And this is the last thing I'll say--she's a teenager! A teenager in love, can you blame her for the way she acts? What I loved about the book was the sort of tragic romance element to it. The way that Edward was torn between loving her and thirsting for her blood. How she fell so hard for him even though she knew he was dangerous. We can all relate, we've all fallen deep in love with someone we shouldn't fall for. It's a nicely crafted love story, and I believe it's meant for girls ages 12-16, so if you're 30 and you're complaining about how you didn't like the book, go figure.


message 24: by (G)Emma (last edited Jun 11, 2008 01:25PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

(G)Emma Maybe it wouldn't be as appealing, but Lois doesn't have to always be the damsel in distress to make it interesting. In fact, the ones where the women are strong and stubborn happen to be the best ones.


Rat de bibliothèque Here here I personally love literary characters like Elizabeth Bennett.

As for who this book is meant for - aren't you 19? This does not fall between the ages of 12 - 16.

Also - your profile is correct. If you'd like to become a writer - you should consider reading a tad more. But you should also grab better hold of your "emotions" during literary discussion.


message 26: by [deleted user] (last edited Jun 11, 2008 01:37PM) (new)

no im not 19. as a matter of fact i am an excellent writer though, im not just saying that. as for holding onto emotions, i dont see how ive gone over the top, besides calling her description wackadoo which everyone seems to find so absurd.


message 27: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah Wow... I'm gone for an hour, and look what I come back to.

Seriously... I'm sorry you don't agree with me and my opinion, but I'm not "over analyzing" anything... just because I actually rip the book apart doesn't mean that I am. There are a lot of things wrong with the book in my eyes and I thought it was only fair to mention them all.

And, I'm was a teenager once and still can be considered one... I didn't act like her with my first boyfriend, nor did any girl I know. I'm not saying girls don't act like Bella, but I have never seen a girl act like her when it comes to a boy liking her... so, to me, her actions are completely unrealistic.

And, the love between them was pretty much based on physical characteristics... which is not "love", it's "lust"... and it's something that should not be portrayed in a young adult novel.

And it's a young adult novel, that is the shelf it can be found on. I am a young adult... therefore, I'm in the proper audience for the book. Please don't say stuff like that, really... it doesn't do anything for your argument. Just because it's a book for young adults doesn't mean an adult can't read it because it was recommended to them by several people. If they don't like it, then they have the right to write a review about it... whether it was recommended to them or not, doesn't matter.

Oh, and popularity does not equal quality... just ask all the people who don't like Harry Potter, they would probably agree with me.


message 28: by [deleted user] (new)

Not everything I said was directed at you. Popularity may not equal quality, but generally if more people like something it means its better. Ever see those weird indie films that never made it to the big screen? Yeah, they're shit. If this book was shit, it never would have made it this big. Let's agree to disagree, I hate people who get in heated fights over the internet.


message 29: by Sarah (last edited Jun 11, 2008 03:10PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah I'm not trying to argue with you, but you're the one that seems to think it's appropriate to call some of my ideas names simply because you don't agree with them. I'm sorry, but I don't appreciate you doing that... it doesn't make you look that mature...

Ver de Livre left comments disagreeing with my review, but she was able present it in a much more mature way... so instead of feeling offended or threatened, I just felt compelled to clarify a few things that she mentioned. That's called a discussion... when two people sit down and discuss something without calling the other's ideas names or just the person themselves a name.

I don't mean to be rude, but you did present yourself in an somewhat immature way.


Jennifer I'm 30 and I didn't like "Twilight". I must have disliked it simply because I'm 30. No doubt if I was in the "target audience" of 12-16, I would have loved it. I'm sure that the poor writing style, endless descriptions of things that didn't pertain to the plot and poorly developed characters didn't contribute to my dislike of this book.

You want to be a writer, so surely you've read books that were not targeted to your specific age group. Did you like them? According to your reasoning, you shouldn't have.

Not everything I read fits into my "target age" group. This book was my book clubs monthly selection, which is why I read it.


Rat de bibliothèque Who on earth mentioned your writing. I haven't read it. Nor did I say you were the worst writer on earth.

And if you aren't 19 then be warned that your profile says you were. I made the leap to that conclusion from reading the information you put out there about yourself.


message 32: by [deleted user] (new)

I still think you are all being too hard on this book. Yes, the writing was less than the best I've ever read and there were lots of unnecessary details. Edward's character was unrealistic. I don't really care that this book was completley antifeminist, but I mean what do you expect, Meyer's a morman and a housewife. Overall though, it really wasn't THAT bad...and the plotline was intruiging. Like I said, this book is just a fun-read...not the type that you read for English and write a twenty page thesis on it...


message 33: by [deleted user] (new)

P.S. just FYI the reason that nobody noticed that the cullens never aged was because they had just moved to forks two years before...and not everybody's looks change in two years.


message 34: by [deleted user] (new)

P.P.S. haha i just read your whole review for the first time now...that made me laugh.


message 35: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah You know, it seems to me that you are just saying that because you actually liked the book, and you don't like reading reviews by people who didn't like it.

I've already said this in my review, but I will repeat myself... there was NO plot line, at least none that I could see. It was nothing but Edward and Bella proclaiming their love for each other. Nothing actually happened, until around page 400... and even then it went by way too fast and it was not explained well which gave me the impression that Meyer just added because she realized that she needed something to happen to give the book some sort of a plot besides the whole gag worthy romance between Bella and Edward.

Well, isn't Edward apparently the youngest looking? If I remember right he was either a sophomore or a junior, as was Bella... so, aren't some of his "siblings" older than him (or they look older then him)? So... wouldn't they be in a higher grade than Edward? If that's the case then wouldn't it be weird if one of them was a junior two years before, but was still there two years later? That's NOT realistic at all... and it's a HUGE plot hole.

And, you didn't even read my entire review before you decided to comment?!?


(G)Emma Okay, first off, just because something isn't popular doesn't mean it's crap. They're so many wonderful books out there that are unknown. And there's popular stuff thats crap. And again, I agree with Sarah when I say this "What plotline???" And how can you possibly over-analyze a book? People who love it are, they're just over-analyzing every single amazing moment. And you hate people who get into heated fights over the internet? Uh, your one of them right now.


Jennifer Emily:

I'd suggest that next time you decide to criticize someone's review of a book that you actually read the entire review.

Why do you care if we are "being too hard on this book"? I'm glad you enjoyed the book. The rest of us didn't.

Good for you that you didn't mind that the book was anti-feminist. It bothered some of us.

I'm glad you think "the plotline was intruiging". The rest of us didn't.

If you really want to be a writer, I think you might want to get used to opinions that differ from your own. When you get into college and start writing, it's going to be ripped apart. That's what will help make you an even better writer.

I have to disagree with your comment about "Twilight" not being the type of book that you would "read for English and write a twenty page thesis on it". Have you seen how many reviews of "Twilight" there are just on this site? Would it be read in a high school English class? Probably not. Colleges are totally different. My college had a "Popular Literature" class every semester, and it wouldn't surprise me if this book made it onto the reading list.


Rachel I LOVE this review. Thank you. Thank you. <3

I have a lot to say about it, but Twilight was basically horrible. D: The characterizations were so stereotypical you could PREDICT what cheey line was going to come out next, and Stephenie murdered vampires by making them 100 year old stalkers going after 17 year olds [plus they SPARKLE in the freaking sun and have, pretty much, no weaknesses.] I'm sorry, but the writing in the book also made me want to chuck it. "marble tribute to some forgotten pagan god of beauty"? Please.

By the way, I'm 15. And I'm still intelligent enough to see how much Twilight sucks.


Olivia LOL! I actually really like this series and found your review to be pretty damn dead-on about it. Bella annoyed the hell out of me. She was such an empty character who had no aspirations except to fit in and blend. Edward was the most emo vampire ever who can seem to tell the different between desire for sustenance and desire for attention/love.

I enjoyed the books because they were cute and because I'm obsessed with vampires, but they really were the weakest vampires ever. I'd be interested in hearing more about the Alaskan family though...


Autumn Doughton I really enjoyed these books for what they are: escapism at it's best. I've recommended them to several of my girlfriends and we all agree... they're like dessert: you can't live off of it, but you can certainly enjoy it.
A note about the comment. What do you care how well Meyers "researched" vampires? It's a fictional novel and I hate to break it to you: vampires are a fictional character. As far as I'm concerned, fantasy writers have every liberty to create a... fantasy. Meyers can write about whatever kind of vampire she wants. That's the beauty of being a writer.
(Also, they had only lived in Forks for 2 years before Twilight took place) It's explained briefly that people avoid interacting with them or questioning them because they are uncomfortable around the Cullens.
I think the books are a blast and I would recommend them to any girl (not woman) that I know who has any interest in fantasy.


(G)Emma I agree with you that every author should be able to create their own world. Completely agree, what fun would it be to read fantasy without it?


message 42: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Autumn:

It's my personal opinion that I think Meyer should have at least watched some vampire movies (or even Buffy for that matter) or read some vampire novels. I personally, don't like the way she created the vampires, but I would have been able to at least respect them, if she had at least done her research prior to writing. Yes, vampires are fictional, but at the same time, they're very popular in literature at the moment (at least in the young adult section)... when that is the case, I think it's important that she at least go out and at least see what other people are doing and then go from there.

I'm a writer currently working on a vampire romance and I actually did go out and look at what the popular myth of vampires really was and made them my own... but, not only did Meyer not do that, but she pretty much threw every vampire myth out the window. I wouldn't have minded if she had done that as long as the vampires actually HAD at least one flaw, but she didn't... she made them out to be perfect.

I mean, I thought her vampires were not only very pathetic, but also sickenly flawless (not talking about their looks, I don't care if they are very good looking since that would attract their prey to them)... they had absolutely NO flaws... they could go out during the day, they all had "powers" of some sort that didn't have many bad things come with them, garlic didn't bother them, they could control their blood lust around a bunch of humans on a day to day basis (Dr. Cullen especially since he worked at a hospital, but then again he had such good control didn't he... so, what about the "children", I mean... human girls DO get their period, from my understanding they can't control themselves as well as their father, wouldn't that pose a problem?) etc... what I'm getting at is the fact that they had NO weakness whatsoever... they were perfect, and it was disgusting.

I am a writer... so, I can't look past the poor writing, bad characterization and horrible plotline (among other things) to see how this book is one of "escapism"... I really can't. Though, my opinion about the vampires is a very small problem I had with the book.

That's my opinion and I'm very sorry if you don't agree with it. I do respect your opinion though, I just don't agree with it.


message 43: by Roxana (last edited Jun 22, 2008 12:02PM) (new)

Roxana It's true that their perfection was sickening, but the worst of that is that it allowed for weak conflict as opposed to seriously entertaining ones. Even in the later books, when there's Victoria looking for Bella, the vampires are all confident that nothing will really go wrong. They're all skilled, they've even conveniently have Jasper who happens to have trained newborns years ago and therefore knows all of their workings. The drama of that comes from Bella's perceptions. Other than that real drama in these books is from the love triangle. Even the werewolves are made perfect. They don't crave human flesh, they don't fall victim to the changes of the moon. They become strong and lean and handsome in days, like they've hit super puberty or something. It's not fun to have that perfection, not fun at all. And I'd hate to go and compare HP to this series, but I can recall reading about werewolves in HP and wondering whether any minute now someone's going to get eaten alive. That's entertainment for me, that and so many other books where life isn't so pretty, and perfect, and sparkly.


message 44: by Erin (new) - rated it 1 star

Erin Like you I picked up the book because of the hype, and had to finish it.... well, because I started it.

The one plot problem that was never addressed was how Bella ran away to Phoenix (as far as Charlie knew breaking up from Edward at the same time) and then suddenly Edward's father just happened to be in Phoenix when she "fell down the stairs" to save her life? Why would Edward's father have followed Bella to Phoenix? How could Charlie not be incredulous/suspicious about that strange turn of events - and simply be grateful to him?

Did I miss something?


Autumn Doughton Edward's story was that he went to Phoenix to convince Bella to come back with him and Carlisle was his "parental supervison."
I enjoy that in life people have different opinions--that's why there are so many flavors of ice cream--and I still have to say that I really enjoyed these books. They're fun :)


message 46: by Erin (new) - rated it 1 star

Erin Ah, I guess I did miss something. Thanks Autumn! That makes sense!


message 47: by Kendra (last edited Feb 25, 2009 02:51AM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Kendra So I am commenting on behalf of myself as well as my sister (she hates posting anything online). I read the book first and thought it was okay. I think Meyer actually did a good job of grabbing her reader but there are still MAJOR problems with the story. But I daren't criticize the book for all my friends love it and would therefore crucify me. My sister just finished it and also fears discussing it with her friends for similar reasons. I assured her she had at least me to complain to about it (though I will admit that I have read New Moon, am currently reading Eclipse and she just started New Moon but really just so we can continue to defend our dislike of the series).
So we were discussing the book and she decided to try to find some negative reviews of the book to see if there is anyone else on the planet that agreed with us. It took some searching but then we find all of (well, some of) you. We would like to thank so many of you for pinpointing so many of the book's flaws and putting into words what we could not. Especially that Edward is a CREEP for watching her sleep, unbeknownst to her for TWO MONTHS! Before he takes her out to the woods to "test" himself to see if it's safe for him to be around her.


message 48: by Roxana (new)

Roxana Haha, no problem. I thought there were too few of us before, but now I'm being corrected. If you go to livejournal.com (and this if for anyone reading this looking for a safe haven) you'll find quite a few Anti-Twilight communities. I made i_hate_twilight, then there's stfu_twilight, roast_lamb, twilight_sucks, and the_venom_apple. All are great sites and full of people that make great discussions about this whole monstrosity of a series.


Autumn Doughton I didn't realize when I posted a comment on here that I would get an email when anyone else commented, so I guess I'm learning something...
Anyway, I really did like reading Sarah's review even if I don't agree with all her points. But, Roxana: joining and chatting with anti-Twilight groups? That seems like a such strange waste of your energy. I understand that you don't like the series but I can't imagine that the books are hurting you in any way. Try being positive and joining communities to discuss things that you actually like, that seems like a healthier focus. It just makes me sad that anyone would get so involved in being negative about anything that doesn't really matter... it seems so futile.

By the way--good luck and much success with your book Sarah!


Jennyanydots sarah, you said EVERYTHING (almost) i have to say about this cheap mutilation of literature. you go girl!


« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 17 18
back to top