Lurch77 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Let's help all the vampire related subtopics from infecting the rest of the threads by keeping it all boxed up in here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youbastards Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 What about Count Chocula? Vampire.....or rodent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurch77 Posted November 18, 2011 Author Share Posted November 18, 2011 The talk so far: Try watching Twilight with Rifftrax audio. My stomach hurt from laughing so hard. I am convinced it is the only way to watch the Twilight movies. I blame Anne Rice for popularizing the idea of a vampire as a sympathetic character. Whedon's Angel raised the bar. (but Angel's humanity and soul were a punishment, his "true" vampiric self was very much a monster) Meyer just took it to a new extreme. I shudder to think of what the next step in the vampire's "evolution" will look like.But let's be clear, Vampires are not cuddly sympathetic characters, they are undead monsters who see humans as a food source. The do not sparkle, they do not smell good, and their main interest in young girls is to feed on them. You might find one or two that are trying to retain or regain their humanity and not feed on the living, but the are the extreme exception, and most fall off the "wagon" eventually. I blame Anne Rice for popularizing the idea of a vampire as a sympathetic character. Whedon's Angel raised the bar. (but Angel's humanity and soul were a punishment, his "true" vampiric self was very much a monster) Meyer just took it to a new extreme. I shudder to think of what the next step in the vampire's "evolution" will look like.But let's be clear, Vampires are not cuddly sympathetic characters, they are undead monsters who see humans as a food source. The do not sparkle, they do not smell good, and their main interest in young girls is to feed on them. You might find one or two that are trying to retain or regain their humanity and not feed on the living, but the are the extreme exception, and most fall off the "wagon" eventually.Vampires also aren’t real, their “power” sets are going to vary from culture to culture, most of what we consider to be “vampire lore” in the Western world is not from medieval times but from Braum Stoker and people extrapolating from his work (the exploding in the sun thing for example comes from “Nosferatu” and that only came about because they got hit with a copyright infringement suit from the Stoker estate and had to make a new ending for their Dracula rip-off). As far as I’m concerned writers can do whatever the hell they want them as long as it’s entertaining. Is Twilight entertaining? I don’t think so, but I’m also not a 12 year old girl, somethings are meant for very specific audiences and they can have whatever entertainment they want until the world becomes completely digital and all media is store in a giant cloud system so the existence of things like “Twilight" and "Justin Bieber" start deleting from the world record things like “Thank you for Smoking” and “Weird Al” then those things being in the world become my problem.If Twilight really bothers you ask yourself: why? how does its existence actually effect your life? Vampires also aren’t real, their “power” sets are going to vary from culture to culture, most of what we consider to be “vampire lore” in the Western world is not from medieval times but from Braum Stoker and people extrapolating from his work (the exploding in the sun thing for example comes from “Nosferatu” and that only came about because they got hit with a copyright infringement suit from the Stoker estate and had to make a new ending for their Dracula rip-off). As far as I’m concerned writers can do whatever the hell they want them as long as it’s entertaining. Well if you'd like to dip into older Vampire legends, or those from Eastern lore, they get even more monstrous and less human in behavior, certainly less urbane as Stoker's hybrid Dracula. Exploding in the sunlight is a Hollywood creation, but the general consensus of the old legends was that any undead had to return to the grave before dawn, usually because they could only be animated in darkness. (yes, aside from comics, one of the other subjects I know a lot about are the monsters of old legends, and modern cryptos. I and a veritable fountain of completely useless information) And "real"... well considering how far back and widespread legends of life draining undead, if one were to make the arguement that reality is defined as much by perception and belief as scientific fact... well you see where I'm going with that. No, I don't think Vampires are real. They are, or for hundreds of years were, an embodiment of a primal fear- the monster in the night that passes for a man. The danger you don't see coming until it's too late. The terror that flaps in the night! The ingrown toe nail on the foot of crime! Wait... no... that's Darkwing Duck, sorry. Unfortunately he was more entertaining and menacing than Meyer's interpretation of vampires. They are, or for hundreds of years were, an embodiment of a primal fear- the monster in the night that passes for a man. The danger you don't see coming until it's too late.You do realize this describes LeStat right? If Anne Rice started the wussifying of vampires as you claim, then why is he predator who sees humans as nothing more then a food source? Because LeStat is handsome? Dracula was “sauve” so really Dracula ruined the true vampire.No modern interpretation of the vampire is correct, you want to talk early European? How many movies show their vampires as ‘bloated corpses’ (one of the earliest and most common descriptions)Blade and 20 Days of Night are as much bullshit fancifying of vampire myths to suit a target audience’s wants as Twilight and Anne Rice, I just think it’s stupid to pick on Twilight for ruining “vampires,” It’s meant for 12 year old girls, you know how much crap for 12 year old girls is garbage? Let them have their fun watching something that is decidely not a vampire romance a girl and soon someone will make up a movie for grown men were vampires have souless black eyes (but are other wise unbloated humans) who hunt in packs with their superior smell (despite the fact they can’t breathe) and only Bruce Campbelle’s chin and Michelle Rodriguez’s tank top can save us. I have no clue who any of these characters are other then Galactus,sigh. that’s maure, I voted for Morg by the way, I hope it burns you up knowing I voted based on looks and got who I wanted but you have to wait for Air Walker and Fire Lord who you can probably write an 8 page essay on.let’s end as friends though, not enemies (or at least frenemies): you like Cyrptids (me too!) and hate BS fast and loose descriptions of monsters: Do you hate ratty dogs being called “Chupacabras”, I’m so tired of that... I mean let’s say that ugly ass dog is a new breed of dog and it gets called a ‘chupacabra’, then some Mexican goat farmer shoots and kills a REAL chupacabra (with the two feet, the big red eyes, the spikes, and FANGS) what then?! We got to call it something else!Ratty Dogs are to Chupacabras what Twilight is to real vampires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkerbean Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 (edited) The wife and i are currently watching True Blood,its very good Me and the wife are doing the same thing, just about to finish season 3! Anna Paquin gets naked a fair bit!!!! Edited November 18, 2011 by winkerbean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karamazov80 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 (edited) LOL. I really apologize about starting all that. Twilight really did suck. The vampires in Salem's Lot (book) are real f$*ing vampires. In movie form, I like the ones from Near Dark. . .apart from the chick, who would have fit right in in Twilight Anna Paquin gets naked a fair bit!!!! Whoa! I'll have to watch this one. . .because of the vampires and whatnot. . .yeah, that's the ticket. . . Edited November 18, 2011 by karamazov80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirymate Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 (edited) You do realize this describes LeStat right? If Anne Rice started the wussifying of vampires as you claim, then why is he predator who sees humans as nothing more then a food source? Because LeStat is handsome? Dracula was "sauve" so really Dracula ruined the true vampire. No modern interpretation of the vampire is correct, you want to talk early European? How many movies show their vampires as 'bloated corpses' (one of the earliest and most common descriptions)Blade and 20 Days of Night are as much bullshit fancifying of vampire myths to suit a target audience's wants as Twilight and Anne Rice, I just think it's stupid to pick on Twilight for ruining "vampires," It's meant for 12 year old girls, you know how much crap for 12 year old girls is garbage? Let them have their fun watching something that is decidely not a vampire romance a girl and soon someone will make up a movie for grown men were vampires have souless black eyes (but are other wise unbloated humans) who hunt in packs with their superior smell (despite the fact they can't breathe) and only Bruce Campbelle's chin and Michelle Rodriguez's tank top can save us. No, not LeStat, he was very much a monster. Louis, on the other hand, was a sympathetic, troubled puppy of a vampire. And then you portray him in the movie by a doe eyed Brad Pitt... Fortunately the movie was terrible, mostly because while a book can make that much dialouge and monologues entertaining, it makes for a ponderous film. And in some ways Dracula did change the vampire in "negative" ways, not the book per say, but the 1930's movie, with tux and cape and widows peak that have come to define vampires' attire. And you forgot the trickle of blood from the mouth of said bloated corpse, the sure sign of what they've been eating that's bloated their stomachs like that. "12 year old girls"... if only. No that may have been the intended audience, but like Harry Potter was originally a kids' book, it has ballooned into something more all encompassing. Why does Twilight bother me? Because since it hit, I'm tired of being treated like I'm the uncultured troglodyte because I don't like it. I'm tired of the phrase "But I thought you liked all that kinda vampire/werewolf kinda creepy stuff? You watched Buffy and stuff, right?" And the glazed over look you get if you try to explain your objection. Yes all thatirritatess me and serves to increase my dislike for it the whole "phenomenonm". On another level, it's just weird to watch a mythology change so much within my lifetime. From souless monsters to sparkely heart throbs in the 30 years I've been old enough to pay attention. Just kinda weird. Edited November 18, 2011 by Mirymate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gambitron Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 (edited) Thank you for starting this thread so that I didn't have to wade through crap about Twilight while trying to read about Galactus. My wife loved the Twilight books and I have seen the movies only because she wanted to watch them. Two things 1. Twilight sucks! If I am going to watch a movie with Vampires andn Werewolves I want there to be some blood and gore and overall darkness not sparkly glowy vampires who frolick in the forest, and a brooding teenager who is on my list of worst actresses in all of ever. 2. At SDCC four years ago or so Summit Entertainment had a panel with upcoming movies like Push and Twilight. My wife wanted to go so we got in to see that panel. This was in Hall H which holds like 4000 people or something like that. When the cast of Twilight came out my eardrums nearly exploded from all of the high pitch screaming teenage girls. I have never heard anything like that in my life. I imagine it would be akin to going to a Justin Bieber concert. Edited November 18, 2011 by gambitron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mini nugget Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 its been interesting reading peoples opinions, especially on this whole twilight debate. as a teenager i do know a lot of girls who like twilight, my last two girlfriends were big fans(one liked comics so she was deemed nedily worthy) personally i agree that twilight is aimed at teenager girls therefore people like us(i think i can say that) probably wont enjoy it, books or films i personally dont enjoy them, it varies to much from the classic vampire and werewolf depiction in my opinion, i prefer vicious bloodsuckers not as others have mentioned pale and sparkly. on the other hand some recent depictions of vampires have been interesting, let the right one in/ let me in for example i believed were quite interesting. however i have recently been looking into older depictions and i still think bela lugosi's portrayal of dracula still maintains appeal today. irecently watched a documentary (with some guy from buffy, not sure his name but his voice was soothing) exploring the history behind the vampire myth and i think the whole bloated and original aspects couldnt translate to a modern audience thus more recent takes work just as well, and surely werent myths meant to be retold and reimagined? i hope my insight is helpful in some form, continue the discussion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karamazov80 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 Thank you for starting this thread so that I didn't have to wade through crap about Galactus while trying to read about Twilight. If I'm gonna check my bias against movies targeting the lowest common denominator of tweens, Twilight just wasn't a well made movie. The effects were bad, the editing and pacing were bad, the acting was mediocre, the fight scene was terrible, etc. Just wanted to comment on that for those who might not have seen it. Knowing how popular this franchise is, I expected it to at least be well made crap (a "polished turd," if you will). But no. It was Sci-Fi channel fare in just about every way. The one thing it had going for it was Edward, though. He's a very charismatic guy, even though they had him acting like a buffoon in the movie. I can see him going on to bigger and better things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurch77 Posted November 18, 2011 Author Share Posted November 18, 2011 I've read the Twilight series to help justify my wife's claim that they're not complete rubbish; the books are ok. Meyer is a good writer. I don't think the Twilight books are as good as Anne Rice's ones and neither grouping is anywhere close to the greatness of Stoker's Dracula (I haven't read Salem's Lot yet, I need to put that on my audiobook to-do list). The Twilight movies however are complete rubbish; the acting is absurd, the pacing is really bad. But will this keep it from making a bazillion dollars at the box office? Not one bit I lucked out of having to see the last one; not so lucky on this one. I'll be stuck in a sea of Twihards tomorrow night, pray I make it out alive (perhaps I can sneak my mp3 player in and snag a copy of Salem's Lot to pass the time ) The one thing it had going for it was Edward, though. He's a very charismatic guy, even though they had him acting like a buffoon in the movie. I can see him going on to bigger and better things. He was in something big, he's gone downhill since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karamazov80 Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 (perhaps I can sneak my mp3 player in and snag a copy of Salem's Lot to pass the time ) You won't be disappointed if you do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkRedShadow Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 (edited) My mom dragged me to breaking dawn,although I didn't pay for it,it felt like a rip off.They honestly could have called this movie "Edward and bella's honeymoon!"Because that's all this movie about.It felt like a really cheap way to make 2 parts. Oh yeah and the acting by Kristen Stewart was horrible.I was actully laughing when she started grunting when the baby first kicked.It was also funny because a bunch of twihards where all starring at me like I made fun of something HUGE. Some of the effects where terrible,especially when the Cullen boys kept jumping to the window of Bella's house,and when they ran. also what happend to vampires "sparkle in sunlight"?They where dearly in the sun at some parts.....It's sad that the director and editor's could forget something so big Edited November 20, 2011 by darkredshdow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.