Why Is Every Vampire Book A "Twilight Rip-off"?

[Paige Duff]

Stephanie wrote: "In my opinion, it comes down to some people have limited themselves in regards to what books are out there to read. In doing so they forget that Twilight wasn't the first set of vampire books or H..."

Very true, I have said something similar a few times.

[Teresa]

Stephanie wrote: "In my opinion, it comes down to some people have limited themselves in regards to what books are out there to read. In doing so they forget that Twilight wasn't the first set of vampire books or H..."

It's true that Author's write Books for the Reader to enjoy it. But you see, people do a LOT of nitpicking on Books, not just Twilight. They REALLY DO.
But Stephanie, what do you think about "SPARKLY VAMPIRES"? Just wondered.

[Stephanie]

Teresa wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "In my opinion, it comes down to some people have limited themselves in regards to what books are out there to read. In doing so they forget that Twilight wasn't the first set of ..."

I thought the whole "sparkly vampires" was unique and I liked it. I'm the type that won't finish a book if I don't like it. My favorite vampires will always be Lestat and Louis though.

[Paige Duff]

Stephanie wrote: "Teresa wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "In my opinion, it comes down to some people have limited themselves in regards to what books are out there to read. In doing so they forget that Twilight wasn't th..."

I still need to read those books. The first vampire book I remember reading was Salem's Lot, and then after that it was the Cirque du freak series, and those were in High School. I have always read books like goose bumps and the daughters of the moon series before that. I have seen the movies for those books though and have heard a lot about them, and before I watched Twilight thenn read the books I could never see a movie before reading the book because it spoiled it for me. I think since I have grown though I am able to read something even if I watched the movie.

[Teresa]

Stephanie wrote: "Teresa wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "In my opinion, it comes down to some people have limited themselves in regards to what books are out there to read. In doing so they forget that Twilight wasn't th..."

Now we're getting somewhere. Stephanie, Interview with a Vampire was more Vampire-like than Stephenie Meyer's Vampires, even Lost Boys Vampires.

[Christopher]

I can't fkn stand S. Meyer or any of her works of "literature." Those things are not vampires, no matter how she tries to make them that way. Vampires are monsters. Vampires are not your boyfriends. Vampires don't sparkle.

Werewolves? No. Those are a different mythological creature, one with its origins right here on our own shores, before we (those of European ancestry) colonized. The "werewolves" everyone talks about in this book are actually a creature from Native Mythology called a skinwalker, a person said to be so well in touch with the spirits that they could take the form of their guiding spirit.

No one seems to even know what the hell a werewolf is anymore. A werewolf does *not* control when they change. The change only occurs during the three days of the full moon, and nothing prevents it.

Furthermore, the werewolf does not transform into anything other than a *wolf.* Those hulking things people see in Underworld are purely Hollywood bullshit, created by the film The Wolf Man, which mistakenly called it a werewolf.

Just in case anyone thinks I don't know my stuff, here are a few references for you.

Raymond T. McNally and Radu R. Florescu In Search of Dracula, The History of Dracula and Vampires (Completely Revised)

Langley, C., Meeting the Medicine Men: An Englishman's Travels Among the Navajo.

[Nuran]

Christopher wrote: "I can't fkn stand S. Meyer or any of her works of "literature." Those things are not vampires, no matter how she tries to make them that way. Vampires are monsters. Vampires are not your boyfriends..."

I’m pretty sure mostly everyone here knows these vampires and werewolves are not the norm, they don’t fit with what people believe to be “real” vampires and werewolves. Even Bella makes a reference that these vampires are not what is widely known by people.

But reality check - werewolves and vampires are not real to begin with. And yes, religious stories are fiction in my eyes too.

I find this attitude towards fictional creatures and fictional stories incredibly strange. Their existence are not based on facts but usually on the imagination of scared people who didn’t know better about death and illness. There's no scientific reason to keep these creatures the same. Unless it is actually accurate account of history and/or facts, I believe anything can be manipulated and changed.

Fiction is fiction and rules can be broken in fiction.