Wednesday, November 19, 2008

I love reading. It's like a guilty pastime of mine. I'll ready just about anything, provided that I can understand it. I really enjoy fantasy and historical fiction; however scifi, mysteries, and nonfiction are just as good. Granted, I know that most people don't read a lot. Watching TV is apparently so much better. Though the tweens and teens of this day and age are finding that good books aren't so bad. But, I do have one problem: When a book is touted as the "best thing since sliced bread"...and it's really not, I can't stand it.



Like.......................Twilight, by Stephanie Meyers.



Now, I liked the Harry Potter series (the ones I've read so far) by J.K. Rowling. It was enjoyable, her writing style was fantastic, it made you think, and yaddayadda. It had it's down points as well, mostly that it could become too wordy and she kept characters and killed others off who I disagree with, but that's another blog.

Whenever I read the Twilight series, I felt it after reading them that it was very shallow. Bella is so wrapped up in her own life it's sickening and having a character like Edward fall into "puppy dog romance" with her and follow her around everywhere just got old after a while. Mostly everything is from Bella's point of view, so it's really one sided. Yes, she does cook for her father every night (though he managed to do it for, what, 16 or 17 years himself before she came to live with him?), and her mom is flighty (but apparently she knows a lot about relationships and suddenly seems smart when she speaks about them) so she had to raise herself. But, honey child, she ain't experienced nothing I haven't (with the exception of a vampire) by the time I hit 17. Her character is a loner, a thinker, a pretty wall flower. Well, at least that's what I thought when I first read the first part of the first book. But Mrs. Meyers could of expanded on Bella's character so much more than she did. And everyone else's too! It seems that the way she wrote everyone they were just "fillers" for Bella and Edward-who become the stars of the play. It didn't matter what anyone else said, did, or think because "little miss emo princess Bella" was going to have her way!

And on that note, what's with the Cullin's being so damn perfect? I mean, they are all beautiful, rich, and talented. They have expensive cars. They have a gigantic house in the middle of no where full of windows and priceless objects. I know Bella makes an excuse that it was through Alice's gift. To me, that's an excuse, not an explanation. If Mrs. Meyers worked so hard through the mouths of Bella and Edward to drive the point down that Alice's gift varied with people's mind's changing, then how could it be so accurate with the stock market? Unless she saw it crash, or go up, but then again, isn't that illegal? And in today's market, if someone played it like they knew what was going to happen, well, expect an investigation. I know, I know, I'm thinking too much into it. Okay, so that part is a write off. After all, what good guy in fictional stories isn't rich or somehow seemingly all powerful?

So then why is James, the main protagonist character, ugly? Bella commented on how even though he was a vampire, he was still...lacking in the looks department. Which meant he was very bad looking as a human. That's so cliche. Seriously. It's cliche enough to have the good guys rich and perfect. But to have the bad guys linked to a nomadic existence and the main baddy not so good looking when the good guys are all....again rich and perfect, it's ANNOYING. Life isn't like that. Good fiction isn't like that. At least with the HP series, HP himself doesn't flaunt his money like the Cullins do by wearing super expensive clothes, driving overly nice cars, and all.

Plus, the other books really stretched the series out farther than it needed to go. Especially in the last book, I felt there was a sense of her writing just to write. It got really wordy, really detailed, and the story started sucking. Bella gets everything she wants, and even though she endures some pain, she comes out a perfect newborn vampire. More perfect than any before her, apparently. Because, we didn't see that one coming.

Okay, so I've dogged it a bit. Now, why did I actually read the entire series? For "the best thing since sliced bread" it is not, but it had some good points. Mrs. Meyers is good at detailing emotion through thought (albeit emo-ness emotions). She's also good with character interactions and character confusions. Her thing with Bella and Jacob was expertly well written. This I know because of how many people hated Jacob for trying to steal Bella from Edward, when when Edward left her and did such a horrible thing to her. Believe me, having someone leave you when you've wrapped yourself around them so completely isn't easy. I can relate to her feelings. Her way of dealing with this loss is realistic, as is her behavior when he comes back. She loved him no matter what, and would forgive him for anything. This kind of thing happens in real life too, though usually it ends badly. Basically, I read it because the character interaction was good and I had nothing else to do at the moment.

Now, onto the movie.

I loved the movie. The book was a guilty pleasure, as was the movie, but the movie was better. By far. It dealt more with the outside world, not Bella's views. True, some things were changed, but it wasn't so bad. There was still a lack of character development, but the fashion choices sort of made up for it. It seemed that people's personalities were really given through their clothes. However I doubt it's anywhere near the feelings I have for Batman Begins or The Dark Knight. Haha, sorry, but those are way higher up on my list.

I think that if Mrs. Meyers decides to publish another novel she'll need to work more on character development and to not be so cliche with her story lines. Maybe even cut back on what to write. When a story felt like it could of ended at two other points along the way (It could of ended after the first book, or even after Bella had her baby), then let it end. There is always room for more. She could publish a series about Bella's daughter. Or, do what she intended to do before an editor decided to muddle her fun by illegally posting a copy of her early concept for a book that mirror's Twilight by making it from anothers perspective. I've not seen many that jump back and forth between people's perspective and keep it flowing like Mrs. Meyers did. That could be a signature move should she decide to keep going.

6 comments:

TracelessTiger said...

Good review.
I laughed through some of it. ^_^
Granted, I haven't read the books, but I can relate with the feelings about cliche's in books and movies.
Its always refreshing to see someone try something new, granted it can be done.
Characters that get too all-powerful and make the story seemingly boring have happened in other famous books as well, such as Frank Herbert's Dune.

One things for sure, this makes me want to see the movie more now, perhaps just to be a critic?

Eh, who am I kidding. Maybe I want to see it for the romance. Lol... :3

TracelessTiger

SelenaMeeka said...

Ewww...romance has cooties. ;p

TracelessTiger said...

You have cooties. ;p

Anonymous said...

I enjoyed reading your review. However I disagree with some of your opinions. Reading is for me also, a huge consumer of my time, and no books more so than the Twilight Saga. I'll be honest, I thought the first book was a mite slow to begin, but by the end I was reading non-stop for hours at a time. It became less a 'guilty pleasure' and more my single passion by the time I'd got through books two, three and four.

In my opinion, the books are fantastic at a number of levels. The main character, Bella, is a helpless, quiet outsider, something that most teenagers and indeed young adults can associate with. To that end, people's subconscious minds fantasise that their own worlds could have the potential to become supernatural and extraordinary. The reader identifies strongly with Bella from the outset and like Bella, craves the unknown and the dangerous.

The initial relationship she forms with Edward is analogous to the intense, often short lived relationships teenagers experience during growing up. Another winner for the author and publisher alike. Bella’s frustration with the physical constraints of their relationship can be viewed equally from a male or female perspective. But the strength of their attachment is the over-riding factor that binds them together. It gives the reader hope that they too can experience such passion.

By the conclusion of the series, their relationship has developed into a lasting, binding tie, transcending time and death. I don’t know if I speak from a minority viewpoint, but I find Edwards commitment to singularly putting Bella’s health and well-being first inspiring. His devotion to her is unparallel even though at times he makes the wrong decisions. After all, we’re all only human?

I realise that many readers feel that Bella’s flaunted meekness and uselessness could be construed as sexism and an insult to the female sex. I personally would love to meet the kind of person who could Love as completely and unreservedly as Bella. She literally devotes her heart and soul to Edward. Being of a young generation myself, I think that level of commitment is increasingly becoming a rarity. Further to that, her apparent self-centredness and clumsiness are merely tools to make her juxtaposition to the series’ heroine and ultimate saviour more apparent.

As for the main protagonist being James? I couldn’t disagree more strongly. Edward and Jacob’s blood feud and Love triangle is one of the strongest themes, and the source of greatest contention between the three lead roles. James solely provides an ‘action-packed’ script for the movie directors.

I’ve waffled for long enough anyway. I look forward to reading your responses.

SelenaMeeka said...

*hugs Anon* I love that you left a great review. Where you said:

"The main character, Bella, is a helpless, quiet outsider, something that most teenagers and indeed young adults can associate with. To that end, people's subconscious minds fantasise that their own worlds could have the potential to become supernatural and extraordinary. The reader identifies strongly with Bella from the outset and like Bella, craves the unknown and the dangerous."

I agree. That's probably why I enjoyed them so. However, I felt that most of the time, in the books, she was overly dramatic in an emotional way. So much so that sometimes I'd yell at the book for her to snap out of it. And the self-centeredness she possessed was too much for my tastes.

And, I know that the vampires were supposed to be beautiful to lure in their prey, but the way Bella described herself and them made me think "Mary Sue". As in, Bella was the author's Mary Sue character. She was able to get everything in the end. Life isn't like that.

Her relationship with Edward...meh. It was cute, yes, but very flat. I think it was because being that I'm already a divorced woman (and young...only 24, who knew) feel she should of dated more. She didn't have enough time to evolve into herself, she'll always be a part of Edward. While that's romantic to some, I don't find it that way. I think it could of been expanded upon by having them separated for years and having her date other people and grow up some. She could of found more of herself and maybe found that Edward WAS the one for her, and she'd love him just that much more. I guess that's easier to understand or think about after you've been in a relationship where you were part of another (and no, nothing is like being married, not even dating, so there is no other comparison) and having that ripped from you makes you see things differently. The love is different. You view things different. It is unhealthy to be so devoted to one person so much. When they leave you, whether it's a choice or not (think of death) how do you cope? I see their relationship as...how would Bella cope is someone killed Edward? But, that's just what I see, what I feel, how I view it. Also, I'm not into so much romance and mushy stuff. It's just not me. :D

Also, their level of commitment is a rarity for any generation. If you read biographies of politicians, high profile people, etc...in every era adultery was a main problem. It was such a problem that laws were invented to try to snuff it out even in ancient times. It is very rare for couples even today to have no cheating - whether both partners know or not.

I think for the first book James was the main villain, just like in the second it was Victoria. For the entire series it was Jacob/Edward. Their feud spanned the books. Also, I don't see that as a protagonist as much as a plot device to keep things interesting. It's a typical thing and, really, gets old. However, I do understand Bella's conflicting emotions, and I believe that's why, in the end, Jacob was able to imprint on her daughter.

And Bella's amazing ability to just "get it" being a new vampire was...weak. She should of attacked, or Edward should of stopped her from attacking, those hikers. It would of given her depth. Maybe explored her angry side. But, as a vampire she's even more flat as a character. She's too perfect.

And...ummm...lastly, the writing style was very...basic. I don't mean that it took me only hours to read, Harry Potter did as well, I meant that it was flat. She has talent, but it was like she could only barely touch it with the books. And the third and fourth ones...geeze. Especially the fourth. It went on FOREVER. That was way too much. I felt that it could of ended so many times and yet...kept on going. She really should of split it into a five series or something. So many parts felt thrown together and there wasn't a lot of thought. I didn't like it.

Yeah, these are just my opinions. I'm glad you liked the books and I'm glad you enjoyed my review and were honest enough to disagree.

Anonymous said...

lol twilight.

That's all I have to say about that.

-K