Can TWILIGHT get ANY MORE SICKER?

[Rachel]

I have to agree with your rant. Twilight is a bit sickening. I don't thing that SM is an all-together terrible writer (The Host was pretty good, if some what weird) but come on! Did she really have to go into so much detail about everything? I don't think so.

[Jo]

*Can Twilight get any sicker.

Plaese use correct grammar.

[Kim]

Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re nominated ..."

Did you seriously write up 100 reasons why it sucks ? that's true dedication.

Yeah, yeah we ALL know that twilight is lame and we can fight the twi - hards until zombies walk BUT the book is STILL gonna be here, loser tweens are still going to read and BUY this sickening series, and Stephenie Meyer is going to roll in her millions until she croaks.

Yes, this series has nooo depth whatsoever, I considered this my "transition read", the book you read after you finish or are waiting for an epic novel or something.

Do I like it? No way. Do I complain? daily. But ranting isn't going to make Stephenie's writing and Kristin Stewart's acting any less disgusting. Silently cringe? Go nuts. But jeez lord SHUT UP ALREADY !.... please :)

Plus everyone knowsss, Harry Potter is better. Even Stephen King says so.

[Kirby]

ha ha, kimberly, those were gonna be my EXACT words (er, well, probably what you meant to say)!

[Jessica]

Natalie, i think you make some good points. And I also believe I know how to end this whole discussion thread with one question- what is the reason we read? To be educated? To feel some sort of emotion? To make connections? To enjoy ourselves? The answer may be different to all of us and with that said, this discussion is fairly moot. Whether Stephenie Meyer wrote a good book or not is completely up to the reader and their own, individual expectations. I myself did not pick up SM initially, completely turned off by all the teenage girls who bombarded her. It was given to me as a gift. When I finally did begin reading it, I knew I didn't have a life-changing book in my hands, one that will go down with Dickens (whom I hate, by the way) and Shelley. Regardless of that fact, I consumed all four books in a week because something about them pulled me in. I found what I was looking for- enjoyment, a load of conflict, and emotions that are not often generated by books.

It is on your back if you want to hate the books as much as you do; I don't really understand what you gain from smashing it incessantly except wasted time but I suppose you wasted enough when you read the series and expected something more than what it is- a young adult novel geared toward girls.

[Jo]

Kim wrote: "Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re no..."

Actually, I wrote one or two per day.

[Nurlely]

I think you did it well with Twilight Jo. At least you know very well why you hate Twilight. It is way better than someone who said I hate this book with no reason given.

[Mickey]

@Jo,

I've been wondering how Twilight is like Jane Austen books. Can you elaborate?

[Valerie]

Why is everyone so worked up about Twilight? I mean, Breaking Dawn's even worse

[Amy]

LOL

[Rachel]

Kimberly,
I agree that detail is good, I just meant when Edward and Bella where getting into it. I get these mental images in my head when I'm reading and I did not need that picture in my head.

[Rachel]

Rachel wrote: "Kimberly,
I agree that detail is good, I just meant when Edward and Bella where getting into it. I get these mental images in my head when I'm reading and I did not need that picture in my head."

I went through this phase for a week when I loved Twilight, but not anymore. It's not that I don't like SM, I think that she is very gifted. I love the Host.

[[deleted user]]

As to the whole Victoria and Albert thing I was only trying to show that excessive mourning when taken to the extreme can be damaging to the people around you,and in the case of Victoria that included her subjects. And, only my opinion, but I think if it had ever got to the point of deposition she would have had a change of attitude at least superficially. I don't see the old girl relinquishing the throne without a fight.
I understand Twilight is a fictional romance and that the characters are young with relativity little responsibility, but it doesn't change my exasperation at the female dependency on male characters which was exhibited.
It honestly just felt like I was being lectured to about how I should feel men,marriage, sex and relationships. I felt that I was being told if I didn't completely fall apart if the man I loved left me or died than my love was not true or less worthy.
This may be the authors opinion and of course she is entitled to it but the tone of her writing came across as preachy. It seemed as if she were talking to two groups; those who were of a similar mind and therefore already understood where she was coming from and took it for granted that Bella's attitude towards sex and relationships was the right one to have. And the people who needed to be reached as if maybe she could change our minds and that we would be happier living her way.I'm already a lost soul when it comes to this stuff so it doesn't truly bother me. I'm a firm believer in the validity of free love and it would take a hell of an argument to shake my opinion.
I've had people say to me 'if my boyfriend left me or died I'd want o die to'. But my argument is always that if he just leaves you then he wasn't right for you and while it may hurt you could be wasting other opportunity's for happiness whatever they may be. Also if the person I loved dies I would keep in mind that they would still want me to be happy and since they invested so much of themselves in me I would want to go on living to repay that investment. If that applies well to the Victoria and Albert scenario. As well being husband and wife they were also cousins,and members of a great dynasty who were well used to the duties of being a ruling family. After the interest he had taken in the running of Britain would he have been glad to think that his death was the cause of even greater distress to the people than was necessary?And would he have wanted for her to have lost that which had been the point of her life since she was a teenager?
But I think this also depends on you belief and interpretation of the idea of truelove and soul mates, which I do think is closely linked to religious beliefs. I don't believe in fate or truelove, again just my opinion I understand other people have a right to, and part of this because I truly believe that may existence and that of my partners is entirely coincidental. It was coincidence that I was conceived at all and on a bigger scale the coincidence of evolution itself reinforces my faith in the sheer randomness of life. I think the idea of 'the one'is a good device for story telling but after a while it bores me, hence why I grew bored of twilight. I much prefer to read out couples who work to make a relationship and fall in love with each other based the strength of that relationship and a deeper understanding of each others characters. One of the best examples of this is actually King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York.
I only take it so personally because, the tone of the book did dismiss the validity of the idea of freedom of choice that I believe in.I know it doesn't have to support my idea but still I am allowed to be insulted by it.Of course I'm not saying it shouldn't be published and that there is no merit to Meyers point of view but people should be allowed to object to it and I certainly understand how people may find sexist and also quite racist,I didn't notice this as much at first but when others brought my attention to it I was amazed I'd missed it.

[Amy]

I have to say one thing. Meyer, if nothing else, found a way to get people 'talking' and debating about her subject. And has pulled so many passionate fans and naysayers to her side, that I'm not surprised that everyone in the literary community who is getting published right now seem to write books all about vampires. Not saying I like it, because there are other books out there that are great, but Meyer certainly got paid for this 'movement.'

[Jessica]

At Amy: You are absolutely right. Despite whatever is being said here, no one can discount that SM did something right because she's making millions of dollars on the series and movies, has thousands of fans and just as many naysayers. Bad publicity is still publicity.

[Amy]

Amen to that. :)

[J.D.]

Amy's right. it's so cool that people, especially young people, are talking about books and writers so much!

[Valerie]

Suzanne wrote: "As to the whole Victoria and Albert thing I was only trying to show that excessive mourning when taken to the extreme can be damaging to the people around you,and in the case of Victoria that inclu..."

Well put. :3 I agree.

[Valerie]

Kimberly LoVe wrote: "Details actually show a very strong writing quality and make the story more interesting. (Ex. of not using details and therefore making a horrible book: JK Rowling.)"

I didn't see a lack of details in Harry Potter. :/ I was able to picture things so well in those books... gosh, the beautiful pictures the author painted... I thought it was wonderful. Description is not what makes writing good. Twilight was full of description, it was overdone, and that is where you get purple prose. It's so descriptive, it detracts from the plot. And, another element of purple prose is descriptions that don't make any sense because they're so.... flowery. Meyer wrote crap like "His eyes were wet from the rain." After Jacob pulled Bella out of the water. Um... he could've just been wet all over? Or crying?... However, Twilight doesn't actually have a strong plot.... sooooo.... it still sucked.

[Valerie]

Valerie wrote: "Why is everyone so worked up about Twilight? I mean, Breaking Dawn's even worse"

Eh, when I talk about Twilight, I usually talk about it collectively, under the quartet's first title. P:

[Kim]

Kimberly LoVe wrote: "Details actually show a very strong writing quality and make the story more interesting. (Ex. of not using details and therefore making a horrible book: JK Rowling.)"

Either you don't have the mental capacity to understand Harry Potter or you've never read it, because Harry Potter is on another level when you compare it to Twilight.

No one ever wrote a book about the Twilight phenomena or held philosophy classes based on the underlying messages of the story. Why? Because it has no layers. Therefore eliminating the need for details. Twilight is so one dimensional.

[Mickey]

Kim wrote: "No one ever wrote a book about the Twilight phenomena or held philosophy classes based on the underlying messages of the story. Why? Because it has no layers. Therefore eliminating the need for details. Twilight is so one dimensional."

On the contrary, there's a book called Twilight and Philosophy from Blackwell Publishing.

You are saying that there are no layers [to Twilight] and that eliminates the need for details. You understand that she's saying that Twilight has more detailed writing than Harry Potter, not less?

Kim wrote: "Either you don't have the mental capacity to understand Harry Potter or you've never read it, because Harry Potter is on another level when you compare it to Twilight."

No, that's her opinion. Some people don't like the Harry Potter series. If you can't handle other people having opinions that you don't agree with without being insulting, then maybe Goodreads isn't for you.

[Kim]

Mickey wrote: "Kim wrote: "No one ever wrote a book about the Twilight phenomena or held philosophy classes based on the underlying messages of the story. Why? Because it has no layers. Therefore eliminating the ..."

What are you the Goodreads police? Great to know we can turn to people like you who don't know how to mind their own business and misinterpret things you say.

But then again, silly me, that's YOUR opinion. Great thing that freedom of speech still works.

Yes, she was saying Twilight is more detailed than Harry Potter and I was disagreeing. She thinks it has more details, I'm saying that book is so one sided there's no need for them.

[[deleted user]]

Kali wrote: "Suzanne wrote: "One of the best examples of this is actually King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York."

Just out of interest, are you basing that opinion on any fictional account of their relationship..."

From a long lost David Starkey documentary that I re discovered on a VHS that my mum recorded probably some time in the 90's. I don't think it was part of a series or anything I'm not that aware of his earlier TV work. But he also revisited their relationship in his channel4series Henry VIII Mind of a Tyrant,as well
some mentionings (not sure if that's a word but I quite like it) his book the six wives of Henry VIII, and I think it was inferred to in the Elizabeth- The Struggle for the throne.
You may have guessed I love David Starkey.I do indulge in a bit of research myself and consult other historians, but I do trust Starkey and his research. His passion and dedication to history is beautiful.
p.s I wasn't having a go or anything just a big Starkey fan and I like an opportunity to rave about him.

[Kirby]

Kim wrote: "Kimberly LoVe wrote: "Details actually show a very strong writing quality and make the story more interesting. (Ex. of not using details and therefore making a horrible book: JK Rowling.)"

Either ..."

I think it's little ludicrous to suggest that an adult on a site catering to serious readers doesn't have the mental capacity to understand a CHILDREN'S book (unless, of course, I'm somehow misinterpreting what you said). seeing as how I loved war and peace and les miserables but found HP too simple and juvenile to enjoy, I don't really think that your theory holds water...

[Jessica]

I'm curious as to how Harry Potter ended up on this thread. Have you all become so bored bashing twilight that you needed to extend your verbal destruction to another series all together? Regardless of your opinions, let's stick to the topic shall we? Twilight was not very well written at all but then again, SM did not need to be an incredibly talented writer to draw attention (or loathing). I think at the end of the day, that's the point. Because even three months after this thread started, we are all still talking about it.

[Nurlely]

Many people that I know read HP series for several times. Young children above 9 years old, teenagers and older people. Male and female. They created Indonesian fans base.

Many girls and women I know read Twilight series and watch the movie for more than 3 times.
Boys and men do not seem to read or watch the movies, unless their girlfriends or wives sort of force them to watch. They created Indonesian fans base and meet from time to time.

When in January 2011 our government banned imported movies, lots of people petition for HP movies. HP was the first movie granted to enter Indonesia.

If you ask the people here which one they love more. The girls will say Twilight and both boys and girls will say Harry Potter.

[Kimber]

I'm just happy to finally see a post about Twilight where the issues (both good and bad) about the series are being discussed rather than four pages of "Team Edward!" "No! Team Jacob!"
I clicked on this listing fully expecting the usual nonsensical and juvenile blather and was extremely and happily suprised to find (with some exceptions) a thoughtful and deep (even though those words are rarely heard in the same discussion as Twilight) discussion on characters, plot and theory. Bravo! This is what Goodreads is about folks. :D

[Nurlely]

I think the readers were on to the topic for the first 100 comments. It was so boring that the topic changed slightly.

[Mickey]

Nurlely wrote: "If you ask the people here which one they love more. The girls will say Twilight and both boys and girls will say Harry Potter."

So, is your point that because boys like Harry Potter, it's a better series?

I'm not sure about the culture in Indonesia, but in America many boys will not read a book with a female lead. That's generally how they decide whether a book is a boy's book or a girl's book, if the main character is a boy or a girl. I remember trying to persuade my nine year old niece to read the HP series, she was reluctant because she said it was a boy's book. I said that the author was a woman (a fact which was consciously hidden by the use of her initials in order to tempt boys to read it). It's an accepted fact that a girl is more likely to read a boy's book than vice versa, because the perception is that a girl's book is inferior and somehow not worth a boy's notice. I think it's sad that there's this separation in books between male and female and that female literature (or chick lit) is not given the recognition it deserves.

[Nurlely]

Mickey wrote: "So, is your point that because boys like Harry Potter, it's a better series? "

Well...we did not petition for HP movies (and Transformer, FYI) not Twilight. You need to conclude that yourself.

I like Twilight for its romance although Jacob's part is annoying and terrible. Twilight's fantasy world is so messy.

Are boys in America like that? That's funny. Hunger Games series is so famous and won Goodreads' competition for fantasy novels. Do they hate the series too because Katniss is the leading role? Many of my male friends read the series too but refused to read Twilight.

It is probably sad to separate books by gender, but unfortunately that is the fact. Twilight fans are girls (women) who love romance novels. Most of Twihards here claimed that Twilight series was their first fantasy novels. The vampire they first read and knew was Edward. Is that because the series is good? And because their selection of books is exquisite?

[Monisa]

Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re nominated ..."

that was a bit harsh.... don't you think?

[[deleted user]]

Just checking is the rape victim people are referring to Rosalie?

[Jessica]

yes

[Valerie]

Kimberly LoVe wrote: "Kim wrote: "Kimberly LoVe wrote: "Details actually show a very strong writing quality and make the story more interesting. (Ex. of not using details and therefore making a horrible book: JK Rowling..."

Uh... excuse me? Lower? Harry Potter is about friendship, courage, good and evil. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend! I found the writing in the later books far more eloquoant than Twilight, it flowed better, it made more sense. J.K Rowling is a terrific writer, Meyer is not. Why do you find HP to be so lowly? I think Twilight is far more childish and shallow.

Bella was whiney, she complained about her realatively perfect life. Meanwhile, Harry is an orphaned young wizard has to save the world, and he rarely complained, he had been throuhg much more than Bella had. That character took everything that was thrown at him rather gracefully, though he was reluctant. But reluctance is part of the hero's archetype, before you say anything about that.

Stephen King said so. He compared Rowling to Meyer.... and they just do not compare. Rowling is the technically better writer. Stephen King = novel god. He knows his stuff. I've read both series (I also read Harry Potter as a teenager, a few months ago in fact, and I didn't find them childish.), and the author of Harry Potter has more skill than the author of Twilight.

Rowling doesn't need fancy words to write well, meanwhile Meyer overuses them and they lose thier power. Also, Bella's speech didn't sound like a teenager's, even a well-read one (which I don't think she is. Her reading was pretty much show-and-tell. We only saw her read things that had relevance to the "plot") Nobody talks like that. I'm pretty much a walking dictionairy, I have a huge vocabulary, but geez... Bella doesn't really use slang. I don't care where her social group is, all kids use slang in one form or another.

It's just.... blllaaahhh.... I hate Meyer's writing style, among other things. I prefer simpler, straighforward writing, none of her flowery crap. I love writers like Scott Weserfeld and Suzanne Collins as well. They're simple, straighforward, and efficient.

Also, when it comes to descriptions, fancier is not better. If an author uses words the average person doesn't know, it gets confuseing, or the description gets misinterpreted. Or, the descrption could be so full of similies and metaphors, it doesn't make sense.

[Valerie]

Mickey wrote: "Nurlely wrote: "If you ask the people here which one they love more. The girls will say Twilight and both boys and girls will say Harry Potter."

So, is your point that because boys like Harry Po..."

I've read "boy's books" ever since I learned how to read, and I am female. Girly books were/are boring. I loved Animorphs and Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. I don't separate books by the gender of the main characters.

The reason why Harry Potter crosses the gender gap is because there are female characters like Luna, Cho, and Hermione to read about alongside Harry and Ron. The Hunger Games also does this with Peeta. Guys like this character, a lot of boys I know read the books and loved them. And there's the fact Katniss is a straight up badass, and that romance is not the center of the story (though a part of it. Not all men hate that.).

The reason why Twilight is popular among women, yet it's generally dissed by men is the fact it provides wish fullfilment. Women want men like Edward to come in their lives (unless if they're like me, who finds him utterly boring, mean, and downright abuseive. I can see through his 'perfectness', there's nothing underneath but possesiveness, and a lack of humor.) And, they enjoy it because it gives them a rush, being with a 'bad boy.' They can step into Bella's empty shoes, and become her. That character is a blank slate, really. Anyone can pretend to be her. (which is not good from a technical literary standpoint)While many heterosexual women enjoy living this fantasy, straight men do not. (Though... a few straight men do like it. I'm not stereotypeing gays, btw. Lots of them don't like it either.)

That's the reason why Twilight is so popular, especially with women and girls. Wish fullfilment for the reader.

[Amy]

I'm gonna go with you on one point, Mickey. I believe that women and girl's want that wish fulfillment, but I really hope everyone out there isn't realing looking for an Edward. I think girls have come a long way, and nowadays they're more independent and fearless than they used to be. I really hope they're looking for someone handsome, strong and really intelligent! A bit of a sense of humor is a real plus too. LOL.

[[deleted user]]

I never considered Harry Potter to be a boys book when I started to read the first book,just a children's book. But then I was only eight or nine when I they kicked off so I was probably only aware of my enjoyment and not the reasons for that enjoyment.I do sometimes wish I could return to that and simply fall in love with a story without analysing it too much but now its harder to switch off. I admit I probably would have liked Twilight if I had read it when I was twelve.I suppose its the same as my not liking certain aspects of Disney anymore after being clued up on the more unpleasant ideologies.

[Jessica]

Nothing wrong with that Amanda. Such is the genre- a paranormal young adult romance. There are people like Bella all over the world- you can call them shy, maybe even socially paralyzed. Not everyone can act with grace and poise and honestly, the critics on this board, I find, are overly harsh considering the lack of manners and etiquette being used on a daily basis in our society. She was a good person. Period. Does it matter that she was a bit weird? No; generally that's what makes a story compelling. Who wants to read about normal people all the time?

[Nurlely]

Just curious. How do you define normal people? Bella is not a special girl, just like most girls. She is pretty, that is why boys are after her. But that is all. She does not have excellent skill. She is even clumsy. Bella is most of the teenagers in the world. What is more than normal about Bella?

[Mockingjay]

Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re nominated ..."

Hahaha this is brilliant! I agree with every point on here!

[Mockingjay]

Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re nominated ..."

Hahaha this is brilliant! I agree with every point on here!

[Maggie]

LOL. Pathetiic. Here's an idea! if you dont like the book, DONT READ iT. Fuck off, and let authors express themselves, or go write a book that gets as much money, movies, and fans as Twilight does.

[Maggie]

Vixenne wrote: "Religion is a man-made power construct. It's sole purpose is control. Contrast that with FAITH, which is powerful and personal and doesn't rely on dogma to give guidance. Faith doesn't discrimin..."
wait, im confused, and i mean this as a question and im not like trying to be rude, but like, what does Twilight have to do with religion? im honestly wondering.

[Nurlely]

Maggie wrote: "LOL. Pathetiic. Here's an idea! if you dont like the book, DONT READ iT. Fuck off, and let authors express themselves, or go write a book that gets as much money, movies, and fans as Twilight does."

This is a discussion forum. If you do not like what she said about Twilight, you can serve her with what you think is the best about the series.

And what was that with writing a book suggestion? Did you mean that when you dislike or hate certain books, you must be able to write one too? I am curious if you love all books or ever wrote one for each book you hate.

[Maggie]

Nurlely wrote: "Maggie wrote: "LOL. Pathetiic. Here's an idea! if you dont like the book, DONT READ iT. Fuck off, and let authors express themselves, or go write a book that gets as much money, movies, and fans as..."

i dont hate any books. theres books i prefer to read over others, but i respect all authors for expressing themselves

[Nurlely]

Maggie wrote: "i dont hate any books. theres books i prefer to read over others, but i respect all authors for expressing themselves "

If you ask the haters to write a book to each book they hate, it is quite obvious that you would answer that.

There are even books that are considered bad, on Goodreads and Amazon.

This is a discussion forum. If you dislike any comment, it is best for you to give away your own instead of asking the reader to fuck off.

[Mickey]

This is in response to Kali's post:

Writers hate other writers' work all the time. Tolstoy didn't like Shakespeare's work. James didn't like Tolstoy's work. Nabokov hated Austen. Byatt hates Rowling. I doubt you could find a writer who every other writer agrees has merit. To say that Stephen King's opinion holds more weight than any other person is wrong. People should make up their own minds.

When I heard that Stephen King had criticized Stephenie Meyer, I was a little disappointed in him, especially the oft repeated quote of Twilight being about the importance of having a boyfriend, because I think that's not true and a real cheap shot. It doesn't surprise me that King prefers Rowling over Meyer. King writes fantasy, not romance. King has not written (I haven't read all of his books, but I have read the majority, so correct me if I'm wrong) a convincing romance. His love scenes tend to focus on sensory details and not on any transcendent, romantic qualities. This isn't a criticism at all; I don't want him to change or think his books would be better if they were written diffferently, he does his thing and I like the results. But I can like Meyer's work, too. They strike different nerves.

I think calling King 'one of the best writers living' is a bit of a stretch. I'm not even sure he would go that far. His writing, while popular, is far from technically perfect. He still tends to flub endings, in my opinion. I've heard him refer to his own writings as salami before. I find it funny that a person (I think it was Valerie?) who is complaining about the ornate style of Meyer (which I personally don't see) would, in the same post, invoke Stephen King. He regularly comes out with huge books and he loves to give details upon details. There was a spoof about his writing style when he came out with It that was incredibly funny.

Being a good critic and being a good writer are two different things. There are book critics that are considered some of the best (Edmund Wilson) who were not strong writers. There are writers who aren't good critics. I would love to know the scientific evidence that proves the contrary, because I doubt it exists.

[Meeeriams]

Jo wrote: "100 Reasons Twilight Sucks.

1-It is too copied off Jane Austen’s books. I hate that. Although JA also sucks...
2-The actors at the movies SUCK. Why can’t people get that when they’re nominated ..."

Prerak wrote: "Well, to say that I am a Twilight Book hater would be wrong...I dont hate it, BUT I DONT FIND ANY REASON TO LIKE IT EITHER.
I mean, what the hell is this book and why the hell is so much HYPE abou..."

ABSO-BLOODY-LUTLEY FAN-TASTIC, and I am saying that BECAUSE I actually think the only reason why people fell for the Twilight bullshit was the 'love' involved in the first place.
The films were shit.
The actors were SHITTER.
i HAVE STARTED to DETEST the word twilight, despite the fact that twilight used to actually be my favourite word and time of day.
I used to like the name 'Edward'. It has been ruined for me, because everyone automatically assumed I want to name my kid after Edward Cullen "retches"
WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP.
Stargirl?? You cant compare reneesme to Stargirl, she doesnt even come within twenty million lightyears.
I hate the fact that its all hanky dory.
WHAT IS THE POINT OF STARTING A WAR IN BREAKING DAWN TO JUST STARE AT EACH OTHER FOR A FEW HOURS AND THEN TURN BACK AND GO HOME???
CALL THAT WAR?
Mate you live in a bed of roses and need to be thrashed about a little.
It's sissy! Its like when my friend used to say fairies live in bushes.

[Jessica]

Honestly Mereworth, if you are going to come onto this thread and just verbally bash the series with nothing more than some unoriginal destructive vocabulary, then I think it best you leave. This is meant to be a civilized conversation, between people with a modicum of intelligence who can actually argue their point with detail and support coming from their backgrounds. You are missing the point. Go find a twilight haters anonymous if you desire to rant and rave; spare us our eyes and our dignity.