Sarah's Reviews > Twilight

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Feb 27, 2008

did not like it
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 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 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.
2599 likes · flag

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

Reading Progress

01/29/2016 marked as: read 2 comments

Comments (showing 51-100 of 1,066) (1066 new)

Emma  Blue Roxana, I feel the same way. Twilight is the only hate community I'm involved in. Um, my group is called Libba Bray Lovers??

message 52: by Sarah (last edited Jun 25, 2008 10:58PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah Wow! I can't believe my review is so popular!

To Kendra: Believe me, there are A LOT of people on the internet who don't like Twilight, we're in the minority unfortunately, but we're here... you just have to look a little hard to find us! I'm glad you liked my review though!

To Autumn: I didn't know you would be notified as well! I thought I was the only one simply because this is my own review, interesting... anyway, joining a group dedicated to hating something is a really good place to rant, really, it is. Also, I agree with everything that Roxana has said about them as well.

To Jennyanydots: Haha... thanks! I'm glad you liked it!

message 53: by Katie (new) - rated it 1 star

Katie I agree with you on all of the points except the Harry Potter issue at the end. Harry Potter is better than Twilight, I will admit, but only because of the plot. JK Rowling and Stephenie Meyer could have used a fictionpress account as both of the their writing is terrible.

A good example is how suddenly Harry and Genny (sp?) where in love with each other; she could have developed something between them in the previous five books, but instead she threw it in our faces. I don't see their connect either.

I also dislike most vampire fiction. The only reason I read Twilight was to better understand what all the teenage girls at my school were talking about...and I'm disappointed that I did.

Wonderful review though. I hope you made quite a few people angry. Actually, I'm sure you did.

message 54: by Autumn (new) - added it

Autumn Doughton Roxana-the person that attacked you was ridiculous.
Anyway... I think I just missed the forum groups and posting craze by a few years and I might be too old and busy now to really get it. I'm not really a person who posts and what you described about your blog does indeed seem pointless to me, so I guess I just don't understand. But, from even making this one post I can see how it would be addictive :)

message 55: by Molly (last edited Jun 26, 2008 12:27PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Molly Siegel I just wanted to say that in my opinion Sarah, you wrote a very intelligent and insightful review which I thought was spot-on. I appreciate that someone was able to think the book over thoroughly and comment appropriately on it.

message 56: by Al (new)

Al Oh wow, I thought I was the ONLY one who hated this book!!

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, I know has read this book. They love it! They walk around reading these books...from 12 year olds to 40 year olds!

I finally broke down and read it, my daughter wanted me to love the book. I hated it. You got it right on all points.

message 57: by Shae (last edited Feb 25, 2009 02:51AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shae Sarah, I really liked your review.
And I agree on pretty much everything you had to say. But I myself am a fan, or I guess you could call me a fan.

I do not obsess over the series though. Even though I thought it was okay, and have the fourth book on pre-order, I'm not like "OMG Edward!!11!!!1!!". Or in other words, I'm not obsessed.

I agree with you on what you said about Bella.
She has no back bone, a complete damsel in distress, can't do anything for herself.

I found her quite annoying in New Moon and Eclipse. But I feel like you're assuming that the girls in high school/ jr high now are so independent. And a lot aren't.

I've seen SO many girls crying about their boyfriends breaking up with them when they've only been going out for three days to a week.
Or the girls that have a new boyfriend every few months.

I personally, wouldn't call these girls independent.

And I some-what agree on the vampires not being the 'beasts' you would expect. But, and all though saying this probably has no point but I will, Edward doesn't want Bella to see what they're like when they eat. They become vicious and anything could happen, like attacking her. But, there really isn't enough bad to balance out the good. If that makes sense.

This series makes me think of Romeo and Juliet.
Stupid teenage love.

Emma  Blue True, not all girls are independent, but why encourage them to be dependent? Wouldn't it be better to show them you can fall in love and still have a backbone and a personality?

message 59: by Shae (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shae Yes, it would be.

So that /is/ a down fall to the series, but at least she was being a little realistic in that part.

I think making Bella have a back bone would be great for the story but at the same time it would ruin everything.

Girls like it so much because it is sappy.
This book is /like/ a perfect example of what many girls day dream about.
Finding that one true love.

Emma  Blue Completely dissagree there. Not all teenagers are going to like Twilight aka unrealistic drama. Give teens a chance!

message 61: by Shae (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shae No one said /all/ teens loved the Twilight series.
But the majority of teenage girls love it. I've seen guys reading it, but I don't know of any who obsess like the girls.

message 62: by Emma (last edited Jul 06, 2008 05:24PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Emma  Blue Maybe thats true, but even then, a lot of them still have good taste. I know a lot of teenagers who have also loved The Gemma Doyle Trilogy. I'm just saying, not all teenagers like unrealistic crap.

message 63: by Shae (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shae And that's fine.

And I don't mean that every girl who reads it is an obsessive freak and that Twilight is the only thing they think about.

I read it and I liked it.
But I'm not obsessed with it.

message 64: by Claire (last edited Jul 09, 2008 09:28AM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Claire sorry that comment i made that rude, even though i do agree with a few of your points, like giving bella a backbone. i thought that she was way too dependent on edward in twilight and throughout the rest of the series. and i do have to admit having someone watch me in my room while i was sleeping is really creepy. i do have just one question about your review. don't you think that some people obsess over harry and who harry "belongs to" just as much-if not way more- than they obsess over edward?

message 65: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Claire:

Excuse me?

It's so long because I had a lot of problems with it.

message 66: by Shae (new) - rated it 5 stars

Shae To Claire:// Get over it?

There is really no limit to how long a review can be. You're on a reading site, what do you expect?

Armina Okay, I really like Twilight, and I wanted to see what opinions other people have about the book. So, I decided to read your review, and I'm glad I did. I see that you're very much against it, but there are many points in your review which you cannot back up.
For instance,
1.Bella loving Edward just because of his looks.
Did you not pay attention at all when you read the book??? In the beginning, she was fascinated by him because of how he was looking at her. She is definitely not that shallow to love him because he is so gorgeous. He saved her life twice before she started loving him. And what about Edward's personality? Don't you think you might be a little surprised if you met a 17-year-old guy that talks in a very formal manner? What if that same guy likes the same classical music as you? Do you find that many teenage girls and guys like classical music? That's something they have in common already. And what about Edward? First he realizes that he can't hear Bella's thoughts, and then he is overthrown by a scent much more powerful and delicious than he has ever smelled. Don't you think that would make him just a little bit curious? And Bella is so much more perceptive than any other girl. She was probably the first person to notice that his eyes change color. Edward hasn't met any other human that is so drawn to him and his family, (because most people stay clear of them) and so Bella fascinates him.
2. Bella being selfish.
Bella is not selfish. She moved to Forks (a city she despised) just for her mother. And in Eclipse, she didn't even want to get married, but she agreed anyway. That doesn't sound selfish to me.

I do think that Bella should have more of a backbone, but I think the way she's described (as a self-conscious danger magnet who is very dependent) gives the story a kind of "vibe" that it wouldn't get if she were very independent. I agree, she is a bit too dependent, but, as I said before, the way she is described changes the way the story sounds. Also, the way Bella and Edward love each other would be much more different.

I do not agree with you when you say Edward is possessive and stalkerish in a bad way. It's in his blood, and part of his personality to protect Bella like he does. Think of how many times Bella could have died if he wasn't there to save her. And yeah, sure, staring at someone while they're sleeping can be sort of creepy (I actually thought Bella had an unnatural reaction to this when it was mentioned for the first time in Twilight) but because of Edward's personality, and his reasons for it, it's not so weird.

If you had a hard time picturing the characters in your head, then maybe you don't have that wide of an imagination. I think most people can picture them perfectly because of all of the detail Stephenie Meyer puts in.

I agree, the plot could have been explained a bit more, so that one can point it out clearly. But, I disagree when you say the author just throws it in there, because the few chapters including James and the whole situation with him is the highest part of the Rising Action and the Climax.

You're right, it is a stupid reason to say "Well, it is a fictional book," when talking about other people not noticing that the Cullens do not age. If that were the sentence the author herself used to back this up, then I would assume the book is much too much unrealistic, and I would not like it as much as I do. But you have to keep in mind that many people are not very perceptive. And to add to that, many people keep their distance from the Cullens, so they wouldn't notice anyways. Also, if someone was acting strangely, would you assume they're a vampire? Or a werewolf? Or any any other creature mentioned in stories? No, you wouldn't, because normal everyday people know that these creatures do not exist, but that is not the case in Twilight.

You're right, Meyer has every right to create her own ideas about vampires.

How do you know that the author has never watched any vampire movies?

The messages you think come out of the book are not true. No offense at all, but I do believe that you were paying too much attention to how much you hate the book, and very small attention to anything else. I think that this is why these were the concluding messages that you got out of book. Maybe you should put an effort into reading it over, and try to be more optimistic next time.

I think that you should refrain from insulting the author and the book to the extent that you did.

I believe that your review was very well thought out and in some cases, that what was said is true. But, I also think that if you would have avoided using the minor cuss words that you did use, your ideas could have been much more respected. I am glad that I was able to discover other opinions about Twilight.

message 68: by Sarah (last edited Jul 09, 2008 04:11PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Minnie:

Thanks for your comment... I'm just answering you so I can clarify a few things...

1. It's my belief that Bella only liked Edward because he was hot...every time she saw him she was talking about how good looking he was. I did not need to be reminded about his hotness every other page. That, to me, presents herself as being somewhat shallow. I never noticed that they had anything in common, that was probably due to the fact that Bella's many descriptions of Edward and his hotness overshadowed that. To me, it seems that they only like each other for physical reasons. Sorry, but that's just how I interpreted their relationship.

2. I, personally, think Bella is selfish... yea, she moved to Forks for her mother, but she complained about it so much in the first couple of pages that it made her seem to be somewhat selfish, at least in my eyes. She just kept complaining about it... it got to be very annoying. Oh, and she's also willing to leave her friends and her family for a guy... I'm sorry, but to me, that is very selfish of her.

3. I, again, think that it's stalkerish of Edward to sneak into Bella's room at night and watch her sleep before they even know each other that well and without her even knowing. If a boy did that to me, no matter how hot he was, I would simply file a restraining order against him without a second thought.

4. And, I DO have an imagination... don't just go assuming that I don't simply because I was unable to see the things in this book in my head. I'm a writer and an avid reader, so I have a pretty active imagination. Every other book I have ever read, I've been able to picture EXACTLY what was happening in my head, that was not the case with Twilight.

5. To me, the plot felt thrown in... because it happened around page 400. And, to me, I think that the plot of a book shouldn't take that long to start. Like I said in my review, it was not explained well and went by way too fast and it didn't help that Bella was unconscious during most of it either. Those things all lead to me thinking that Meyer just threw it in because she realized that something needed to happen besides the whole romance between Bella and Edward.

6. I know that Meyer has never read vampire novels (except for The Vampire Lestat by Anne Rice) or watched vampire movies or tv shows because she said so herself, it's in an interview that can be found over on Amazon.

7. The messages are TRUE, in my opinion. I'm sorry you don't agree, but those are messages that were very clear to me while I was reading. I'm not going to reread the book... mostly, because I don't have the time or the patience to do so. Those are the messages I got and I don't think that rereading the book is going to change that.

8. I'm not insulting the book or the author. I'm critiquing it as well as Meyer. There's a difference. As an author, I very well know how much constructive criticism helps my writing grow. Sure, praise is a good ego booster, but if you get nothing but praise all the time, how are you to grow as an author? No one is perfect, every author CAN improve. I don't think Meyer will ever see this (or any of the other reviews on here that are critiquing her series), but if she does, all these reviews would help her grow as an author. I know, she won't ever see them, but this is how I review books that I think need a TON of work, I like to analysis books (both good and bad) and learn from the authors mistakes, so I know not to make those mistakes in my own writing. As of now, Twilight is the only book that has made me write such a long review because I felt that it could have been MUCH better.

9. And, I really don't see what the big deal is with the cussing... I think I only said one curse word. But, I apologize if it bothered you. This review was pretty mild when it came to the language, I wouldn't recommend reading some of the other review on here if it bothers you that much.

Anyway, I hope my response has not offended you at all. I respect that you like the book. I respect that your opinions are different than my own.

Armina To Sarah:

Thank you for the clarification. You can be assured that I was not offended by your response at all. It is good to know that there are other people with opinions that are different from my own.

message 70: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Claire:

Thank you for apologizing.

And to answer your question: I have never come across a Harry Potter fan who is as obsessed with Harry, Ron or one of the other male characters in the series like the fans of Twilight are with Edward. I'm not like that and I know no Harry Potter fan who is like that either. I'm not saying that they aren't Harry Potter fans out there like that, but I have never met them and I think they are in the minority of the fandom. Unlike with the Edward obsession which seems to include 75% of the Twilight fandom, at least that's what I have come to see.

Emma  Blue I completely agree with Sarah on this, but, I dissagree with Bella being selfish. She's not selfish because she gives up her life for a boy, she's STUPID because she'd do that.

Claire To Sarah:

Ok thanks for clearing that up. I guess that I may have met a few people who really care about Harry as a person per say but the majority of the people that i have met (met, not heard about or seen) aren't obsessed with Edward. And i agree with you most people are obsessed with Edward but there are numerous people like myself who could care less about his "to-die-for" looks and "overwhelming" personality.

message 73: by Roxana (new)

Roxana I know that you guys cleared things up with each other, but on the topic of the attraction between Bella and Edward, I think it can be easily said that neither love each other for their personality. Bella did in fact start getting fluttery over Edward very early on because of him noticing her all of a sudden, and it can't be said that it's JUST because a boy noticed her in this new town and new school, because plenty of boys noticed her before Edward did and she was well aware of it. The reason Edward stood out was because he was gorgeous, and that's all. For the next books, that's all she ever talks about. You can tell Meyer threw in a few Mary Sue traits by suddenly having them like classical music, which I myself really enjoy, and feel that it was very basic for her to pick Claire De Lune. Not that it's not a great piece, it's just an easy throw-in in my eyes. Other than that you see nothing of their love for each other's humor, or talents, or hobbies, etc.
As for Edward's love, you mentioned that he can't read her mind, and this bother's a man who can read everyone's mind, right? So what does that mean? That means that Edward was bored with all the people he's ever met, and not this girl broke his boredom. This girl's humor didn't make him laugh, this girl's hobbies didn't interest him and make her particular in his eyes, it's just that she had some accidental trait that says nothing about her at all that broke his boredom. And her smell? Also something that says nothing about her personality, and only says something about his vampirism. It's not an ingredient for love to smell good to your lover. And what's to happen when Bella becomes a vampire? What if she no longer smells the way she does? There goes the one of two reasons that Edward loves her.
If you can give me real, hard evidence that persists through the books. Constant examples of them speaking of their future dreams (and that doesn't count Bella obsessing over being a vampire) then sure, I'll accept that.
Also, Bella is most definitely selfish, on top of a bunch of other horrible traits. I mean, have you noticed the way she behaves with her parents? It's ridiculous, but I won't get into that, it'll take another page of ranting.

message 74: by [deleted user] (new)

Honestly, I think you need to get a hold on your self. If you really hated the book sooooo much, and yes, if you didn't notice, you made it pretty darn obvious in the last few sentences in your beautifully written review, why didn't you just quit reading it when you saw how how "Stupid and annoying" Bella was? You didn't have to write all of that pretty cruel stuff on here. And it IS a FICTIONAL STORY. If you don't like how Stephenie Meyer USED HER IMAGINATION in a FICTIONAL STORY then why don't you go out and get some non-fictional book about vampires? Sounds like you would enjoy something like that.

message 75: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Chloe:

Excuse me?

I finished it because I felt that that was the only way that I could give a fair review of the novel. I was also thinking that it would get better, but it didn't. I'm so very sorry that I dared to finish the book simply because of that because I had hopes that it would get better... because I have read books like that before where I haven't liked it at the beginning, but I kept reading and I ended up loving it by the end. Unfortunately, this did not happen with Twilight. And, I'm sorry you don't agree.

I was not "cruel" as you put it... I was critical in my review. I had a lot of problems with the book and I thought it was only fair to mention all of them, once again, I'm sorry you don't agree.

You obviously didn't read my review carefully... I'm a huge vampire fan, I've read Anne Rice, Dracula, the Anita Blake vampire hunter series, Sunshine... just to name a few. And, you know, those, like Twilight, are all FICTIONAL as well... and the authors all used their imagination just like Meyer. The major differences between them and Twilight is they're, in my opinion, written much better than Twilight

If you don't agree with my opinion, that's fine... I don't care if you like the series, I even respect the fact that you do. What I don't respect is your comment, it was quite rude.

message 76: by Erin (new) - rated it 1 star

Erin Okay, I have been reading the back-and-forth on this review by Sarah for a few weeks, and I just have to give my two cents. First of all, I really liked Sarah's review of the book. She was articulate and honest. On the endless topic of Bella and Edward's relationship... one thing seems very obvious..

For Edward it is all about trying to resist going for the kill. He is clearly ashamed of the act itself. Think of that as analagous to "sex". For Bella it is about the commitment. She wants "marriage" - a.k.a. to become a part of "his family" and to be joined with him literally forever. So, the struggle here is guy wants sex, girl wants lifetime commitment.

Is that not obvious?

message 77: by Autumn (new) - added it

Autumn Doughton Except for the fact that she is ashamed of getting married. She thinks that she wants the forever commitment, but each time she considers the true consequences (no children, never seeing her parents again, losing out on so much), she quickly begins to think of something else.
Edward, on the other hand, talks about the "lifetime commitment" constantly. He wants her to understand that turning is far more of a commitment than a normal marriage. I think that he doesn't want to bite her for exactly the reasons he says: he doesn't think she has a full grasp of what she would be giving up and if she had more time and aged some, then she might see the bigger picture.
Of course, I'm an Edward fan... so I hope she turns anyway.

message 78: by Autumn (new) - added it

Autumn Doughton BTW: Chloe, I'm a HUGE Twilight fan, but your comment was rude. This is a site about reading and reviewing books...
I didn't agree with all of Sarah's points either, but she can certainly make them. I think that joining anti-Twilight groups and stuff like that is ridiculous, but giving a negative review of a book on a site designed for people to share their thoughts about books is perfectly fine.

Melissa Although I agree with you on many things, like Bella's character being dependant and such, I also think you're wrong about some things. It seems quite obvious to me that you missed out on A LOT of things in the book. Like a simple fact: the Cullens moved to Forks only 2 years before Bella did- I'm sure that the people in Forks would have noticed that the Cullens weren't aging, IF they had been there any longer. This was a very obvious thing in the book, and if you missed it, then you probably missed a lot of other important parts in the book. You're so worried about Stephenie Meyer's writing, but maybe you just need to try reading more carefully.
Most of the people who read this book were looking for a sappy love story. You just read it because it was popular.
And honestly, the vampires in this book DO suck. But I'm sure it's not because Stephenie didn't do any research. It seems to me that she just wanted to create a vampire that wasn't as dark as the traditional vampire. So, yes, they are very human. But this book was meant to be a YA romance, not an Anne Rice novel.

message 80: by Sarah (last edited Aug 22, 2008 01:32PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Autumn: Thank you very much for your comment, I'm glad that you liked my review and thanks for respecting my opinion. It's nice to come across a sane, mature Twilight fan every once in awhile.

To Chloe: Thank you very much for apologizing... we all have our moments.

To Dringer: You're right, I probably did miss out on a few things... though, that was because I was so distracted by how poorly written the novel was. The purple prose and repetitiveness, was very hard for me to ignore. And, where in the novel does it say that they moved there two years ago? But, I apologize if I got that little fact wrong, because I honestly, don't remember reading it. Though, I DID write this review a month after I read the book and I didn't have the book with me at the time.

"You're so worried about Stephenie Meyer's writing, but maybe you just need to try reading more carefully."

And, um... I think you contradicted yourself here... you say that I shouldn't worry about her writing and yet, you tell me I should read more carefully? To me, it's hard to ignore poorly written sappy purple prose.

And, I DID read it because it was popular, but also because, like I said, I'm a huge romance and vampire fan. And I love reading vampire romances. I had heard bad and good things about the series by haters and lovers alike and I was just sick of it and I wanted to read it and get my own opinion on it. And, to be honest, I had expected to love it... really, I did. I wanted to like it, but I just... couldn't.

And, she did no research, which to me, is important when one is writing about something that is popular in today's society. You might not agree, but that's just how I feel about it. She read ONE vampire novel before she wrote it... which, to me, as a (amateur) vampire writer myself, that is just unacceptable in my eyes.

I respect your opinions though and I'm glad that we agree on some points, but I just wanted to clear a few things up with you.

message 81: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah Oh, also... I forgot to add that I am a HUGE hopeless romantic, and I love sappy love stories... I just have standards when it comes to my sappy romances and Twilight, unfortunately, didn't meet them.

message 82: by Beth (new) - rated it 2 stars

Beth I think the problem with this series is that they are kid's books, and with the ability of so many series to cross over into the adult realm, this would be a natural addition. However, this is an immature book, plain and simple. The definition of love, the self-involved mindframe of the protagonists, all of these are very "teen" feelings. Unfortunately, the book doesn't wink at these emotions. It's as if the author herself has never matured past this level. I love kids books, when the author has a depth and scope to the human aspect of the characters. This is just a romance novel for the tween set.

message 83: by Autumn (new) - added it

Autumn Doughton I disagree. I read "The Host" as well and that is about a whole different kind of love, a much more mature and sedate romance. I doubt that many on this thread will read it, but I don't want to give away the meaning of the book so I won't go farther than to say that Meyers definitely understands a deep and different kind of love.
I am a happily married woman with two children, but I can still remember the out-of-control agony of my first break-up and the first time I thought I was in love. It was so intense and looking back it seems silly but these emotions definitely felt real and justified when I was sixteen and seventeen... God, even when I was twenty!
So, I don't think that the way Bella is swept up into love is stupid or unrealistic at all. I've experienced many of these emotions over boys that I can hardly remember now (some not so great honestly), so I can only imagine how I would have felt at seventeen to be confronted with a dazzling man who was utterly taken by me. I'm sure I would have swooned too.
I know that many of you have complained that teenagers aren't like that at all... but some of them are--I was!
I've also been thinking a lot about many of your comments about Bella's lack of characterization. After I read "The Host" I realized that the same was true of the main character in that book and I had a revelation. In many ways, I feel more understanding of Edward and even Alice than I do of Bella, but it doesn't seem to matter because I insert my own thoughts for hers. She's very bland--very "every girl." She has no distinguishing interests or hobbies, no specific traits other then unathletic. Even if you think she's weak and ridiculous, I would bet that everyone has felt that way at least once in their lives. That's why I think people get so obsessed... they don't want Bella to choose or for things to happen to her--they want it to happen to them.
Just a thought.

message 84: by Kaitie♥ (last edited Jul 30, 2008 12:29PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kaitie♥ I thought that you had a great point and great reveiw. I personally love the series. But it's a leisure reading book, it would be great if it had fabulous english lit. in it and stuff, but it is filled with detail in every page. It makes it seem life like.

Vampires: Stephenie Meyer has her own point of veiw on vampires whether she's seen old classic Dracula movies or not. People can create their own image of vampires. Like Rat de bibliotheque said, the book is mostly for people along the age of 12-16 who really don't care all that much about the literature.

Great reveiw though I very o' so strongly disagree, try not being so criticial, think about maybe WHY she might make vegetarian vampires and stuff.

message 85: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah To Katie: Thank you very much.

I would just like to clarify one thing: It's my opinion that Meyer should have done SOME research about vampires before writing the book. I'm a vampire author myself (although amateur) and I've read several books on vampires just to give myself a general idea about what vampires are to the general population then I made them my own by giving them some qualities that were different, but still made sense. Meyer's vampires, in my opinion, were just stupid and pathetic.... and I hated the fact that they sparkled. Like I said in my review, I would have been able to respect her ideas if she did some research prior to writing the book.

Thank you again... it's nice to come across a sane fan every once in awhile.

message 86: by Kaitie♥ (last edited Jul 30, 2008 01:03PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kaitie♥ To Roxana

Wow. Just GREAT job insulting a writer with a english lit. degree.

K8teebug I also completely agree with you. What a terrible book. You all should be watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer instead of wasting your time with these books!

message 88: by Roxana (last edited Feb 25, 2009 02:15AM) (new)

Roxana Kaitie, does that bother you? I didn't know she had an english literature degree, but even then, it makes no difference. In fact, it makes things even more ridiculous. Degree or not, I still heavily dislike her writing, and considering the way things have been going lately in reference to Breaking Dawn, that'll probably never change.

message 89: by Emma (last edited Jul 31, 2008 09:28AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Emma  Blue Another thing is, the university she got it in is a religious college, it's not exactly Harvard.

K8teebug The fact that she has an English Literature Degree makes it even more sad that her writing is terrible.

message 91: by Jenn (new) - rated it 1 star

Jenn Thank you Sarah for writing this!!! It's refreshing to see that someone else dislikes the series as much as i do. and from the other negative reviews that I have read none of them pointed out the purple prose thank you so much!! I did not think there were that many people who caught that. aside from the clear misogny this bothers me the most.

Danielle Great Review! I agree with you. I couldn't get through it. Too anti-feminist and shallow for my tastes.

Catherine Grant Stephenie Meyer mentioned on her web site that she had never aspired to write a book, she just did it so that she could remember a dream that she had and the dream just developed into a novel. Then she was encouraged by her family to pursue publication. She makes it sound like, VOILA, she got an agent and then a book deal in one easy step and the rest is history. Personally, after reading this book, the whole story makes me want to scream in frustration. She is a terrible writer, and although the story is interesting and Twilight was fun to read, I doubt she will be anything more than a flash in the pan unless she seriously develops her writing skills. But why should she? She is getting published, and from the glaring errors and terrible style and prose, her editor is apparently on an extended vacation. I will file this book on the same shelf as Eragon.

message 94: by Marwa (new)

Marwa Nice review. I am now not going to read the book. I saw it in the shop the other day and I read the first page, I didn't like the writing style. But you have now confirmed that this is not the book for me.


message 95: by Lori (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lori First off I want to start off saying what a great review you wrote and I respect it deeply.

I am a huge fan of the series and got hooked very quickly, but I do find myself questioning some of the things you have mentioned as well.

I do have to admit that Bella was annoying and the fact that she depended so heavily on Edward got on my nerves. And as I read, aside from the gorgeous looks and great body, Edward had no real personality. But together, I love them! I like the romance of it (no matter how annoying it really did get).

As much as I love the book, I have to agree with you on the plot. The fact that it took till the end of the book to finally have a plot bothered me a bit (and it continued like that throughout the series!!!)I didn't care so much for the "sparkly" stuff. I found it to be corny and unrealistic (even if it is a fictional book.) There has to be some boundries in the book when it comes to what's acceptable and what is just plain wrong (don't even get me started on the 4th installment of the series!! I was surprised on how much I hated that book!!)

I also agreed with you on the bad message it was sending girls. But in my opinion I felt that there was one good message hidden in the book: you CAN have a relationship that is meaningful and passionate without having sex. I, being the mother of a little girl, think that that would be a great message to send (although I will also tell her not become so dependant on any guy).

Overall, this was the first vampire novel that I've ever read and I did love it. But my quest to find better vampire novels is not over. I'm sure there are better ones out there than this one and I will keep looking. I loved the book because I love romance novels (as I have said before) and I thought this one was rather sweet and cute. It was an easy read and I enjoyed it.

But again, bravo on your review! I respect your opinion (although I may not agree completely with it).

As a side note: I get pissed when people compare Harry Potter to Twilight as well since I happen to be a huge Harry Potter fan and it is insulting to have thhem both mentioned in the same sentence!

message 96: by Emma (last edited Feb 25, 2009 02:16AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Emma  Blue Loriana, a lot of it WAS sexual tension though, and in the end, they did have a child together. (Not to mention that sex was mentioned FIVE times in Breaking Dawn).

message 97: by Lori (last edited Feb 25, 2009 02:16AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lori Emma,
Yes they did have a child BUT they were married first. They did it the right way. Marriage, sex, and then child. But technically this review was about Twilight, not Breaking Dawn. In Twilight...they didn't have sex.

Emma  Blue True, but you were saying that it showed you can have a loving relationship without sex. Yes, that is true...

Avolyn Fisher I think you were reading wayyyy too far into this book. It is not a self help book or a work of non-fiction. It is FICTION and is meant for the enjoyment of the reader. It isn't a book to live by or something to base your own life on and i don't think it was ever trying to be that. For you to dislike it because it doesn't set a good example is ridiculous, it is ADULT fiction and in that case most adults have already fashioned themselves into who they want to be and most ADULTS are old enough to know when not to take a book seriously.

message 100: by Sarah (new) - rated it 1 star

Sarah Just so you know, Twilight is a young adult novel, not an adult novel.

I'm sorry that you think that just because I gave the book a nice long review means that I read too far into it. I didn't. I read it, and my review is exactly what I think of it.

And, a lot of the really rabid fangirls DO live by this book. They think it's real. Obsessed fangirls are dumping guys because they're not Edward Cullen and sending death threats to those who don't like the series. To me, there is something REALLY wrong with that.

I also think that this book is giving girls the wrong idea about guys and relationships in general. So many young girls are reading it and obsessing over it and thinking that it's real. That's the problem.

There's nothing wrong with reading and enjoying a book, but there IS something wrong when you start thinking that the book is real and Edward is real. At least, that's what I think.

I respect the fact that you like the series. And I even have more respect for you because you aren't an obsessed fangirl who runs around claiming that the book is real and threatening to kill me because I don't like the series. So, thank you very much for that. Though, I wish that your comment had been phrased a little better.

back to top