‘New Moon’: Selling Your Soul for Puppy Love
by Ted Baehr“The Twilight Saga: New Moon” is the second of four vampire stories by Stephenie Meyers, a Mormon. It continues the love story between Edward and Bella, two unique teenagers. Bella spirals down into a deep hole of depression when the vampire she loves leaves her, in an effort to protect her. She finds herself picking up the pieces of her broken heart with her best friend, who happens to be a werewolf.
Picking up where the first movie left off, “New Moon” opens with Bella (played by Kristen Stewart), having recovered from the vampire attack that almost claimed her life, starting her senior year of high school and celebrating her 18th birthday with Edward Cullen, a vampire who refuses to attack humans, and his family. After an ill-fated accident resulting in Bella’s blood being spilled at the Cullen residence, which is almost too much for certain members of the family, Edward (played by Robert Pattinson) decides to leave Forks. He believes he is protecting Bella from the dangers of the vampire world by doing so. He asks her to promise him not to do anything reckless.
Bella, utterly heartbroken and losing all semblance of functionality to the point of becoming zombie-like, is haunted by the memories of her time with Edward and seems incapable of pulling out of her new depression. Finally, after about four months, Bella makes an effort to reconnect with old friends, one of whom is a childhood friend, a Native American named Jacob Black (played by Taylor Lautner). During this time, she accidentally discovers that, by being reckless and putting herself in dangerous situations, she is able to see images of Edward in her mind more clearly and hear his voice. Desperate to be with him no matter the cost to herself, she purposefully continues to put herself at risk.
With Jacob’s help, Bella rebuilds an old motorbike to further her dangerous escapades. She soon comes to discover that Jacob might be exactly what she needs to heal from the hurt of her broken relationship. She begins to feel alive and happy again, even though the memory of Edward is still painful. Her friendship with Jacob, a member of the Quileute tribe, leads her to a new discovery concerning the secrets of their heritage, as Jacob must deal with a newfound ability to transform himself into a werewolf. In the midst of this, Bella’s life in is danger with the arrival of Victoria, the vampire mate of James, who was killed by Edward and his family in the first movie.
The emotional tension and plot slowly culminates in the end where Bella must save Edward from deliberately provoking the Volturi (a secret vampire society that regulates the laws over others of their kind) into killing Edward. Like Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet,” Edward has received information leading him to believe Bella is dead, and he believes that, by provoking the vampire leaders, he can end his misery.
Fans of “New Moon” will love it, but many critics will groan! Also, those who go into the film expecting lots of action and excitement probably will be disappointed, because the movie isn’t so much about that as it is about Bella’s heart-brokenness and the boy/werewolf who brings her back from her depression and helps her feel alive again. Those who have not read the books will still enjoy it, but may not be able to understand everything, as the finer details will be lost to them. It’s obvious, therefore, that Director Chris Weitz is catering to the fans with his adaptation as opposed to the critics, and fans won’t be disappointed.
The production values of “New Moon” are held to a higher standard than the first movie, “Twilight.” For example, it does a much better job of staying true to the book than the first movie, and the character portrayals are much more believable as they demonstrate greater emotional depth. Although the actors give excellent performances, it is Kristen Stewart who carries the movie to the end. The screenplay is also well written, although some scenes had to be arranged differently than they were laid out in the book, but, overall, the movie is a fair and accurate representation.
***SPOILERS AHEAD***
The content of “New Moon” includes many positive, moral elements – surprising for a movie about vampires, werewolves, and teenage romance. For example, Bella is willing to give up her life for Edward if that means saving him. Also, Bella and Edward do not let their relationship go any farther than just kissing. Furthermore, Edward consistently refuses to give into Bella’s demands to be turned into a vampire because he is afraid that she will lose her soul and be damned to Hell, although in the end he acquiesces on the condition that she marries him first. Lastly, the vampires who drink human blood are shown to be the evil, bad guys, and though the good vampires struggle with the temptation to do so as well, they do not give into their bloodlust.
That said, there are many reasons to be concerned about the content in “New Moon.” For example, Bella makes it very clear she wants to become a vampire and doesn’t care about her soul. She even tells Edward he can take her soul as long as it means that she will get to be with him forever. As the heroine of the story, someone that young, impressionable girls would idolize, this message is potentially dangerous and misleading. Along these lines, the intense relationship between Bella and Edward is disconcerting. The impression is given that neither of them is capable of existing without the other. This kind of love is more like a combination of love, lust, and obsession rather than true love. In that light, the movie is filled with high emotion and teen angst to the point where characters are unable to function properly. Thus, the message being sent to teenagers and young adults is that this is what love really is – a message that is encouraged as the characters are portrayed as truly knowing their hearts and having an accurate understanding of what love entails.
Other elements of concern include some unresolved discussion concerning whether vampires still have souls and if they are ultimately destined for Hell. Because of this uncertainty, Edward is greatly opposed to turning Bella into a vampire, but Bella’s constant insistence finally wins out, though this particular event doesn’t take place in this movie.
Taken together, these elements, and “New Moon’s” strong Romantic worldview, its occult and pagan content, brief violence, Bella’s reckless behavior, and Edward’s suicidal actions, are unacceptable viewing for media-wise moviegoers.
“The Twilight Saga” and “New Moon” make the world of vampires and werewolves look very attractive. Parents and children should be aware of this and use appropriate discernment.
Ultimately, the driving question raised by “New Moon” is: “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36).
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
187 Comments
Why the heck does "a Mormon" need to be in your opening sentence? What does it have to do with the article?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Big Hollywood, Michael Chavez, DNC DUDES, Hollywood Gossip, Mr. Pink and others. Mr. Pink said: ‘New Moon’: Selling Your Soul for Puppy Love http://tinyurl.com/yg4clwm [...]
I agree with wag. So Meyers is a Mormon? OK , I already knew that. So? What's the point? Is she also a vegetarian or a Gemini or is her blood type negative? What's the point?
So which came first? Buffy the Vampire Slayer and her good vampire friend/lover, Angel, or this movie and the previous one? There seem to be some similar plot elements.
Her blood type is Negative???? THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING…. those rotten stinky Negatives!!!! they ruin everything!!!! UP WITH POSITVES!!!!
Nice to know the Vampire Anti-Defamation League is busy rehabbing the vicious, bloodthirsty image of vampires as demon spawn…
I remember when vampires were frightening monsters, not pouty emo kids filled with guilt-ridden angst…
I miss the scary…
I think there's supposed to be some Freudian weird thing in there, those nice Mormon kids writing about all this repressed horniness…
I mean really, where do you hear outside of some strange "Brokeback Mountain" remote sheep ranches where someone has fallen in love with dinner?
Spoiler alert… The land of werewolves, vampires, and unicorns isn't real. Unbunch those panties, no impressionable youngsters (or middle age ladies – that's the real story Ted) are going to offer up their soul to an emo.
Buffy was first.
The land of werewolves, vampires, and unicorns isn't real.
That is why I spend so much time here in reality on the internet.
The abstinence and loyalty themes are nice, but I find it dangerous when a movie suggests that a teenager's happiness depends so completely and precariously on her love life.
The Vampire as some depressed anti-social lost soul…..Dark Shadows was first.
What is the message sent by The Dark Knight?
There is still a massive hidden "icky" factor, where 200 year old vampires, who have had a very long time to learn how to precisely manipulate people into giving them virtually anything they want, are "falling in love" with people who are underage (first movie) and still too young to think clearly. How can this be acceptable? If this is so great, then people should just keep quiet anytime a 50 year old guy and an underage girl hook up, nothing different there.
Oh wait, isn't that a problem dogging the "unofficial" Mormons right now? If vampires can have "completely consensual" child brides, well then…
This movie sounds like crap. Getting boned IRL would likely do the fans a far better world of good.
my male friends think nothing of long discussions about Star Trek, or Star Wars; the younger bunch love "Transformers"; etc etc.
And ONE movie and book series adored by MILLIONS OF WOMEN receives nothing but sneers from the cognoscenti. Oscar, go back to your cave and chew on your own bone.
For the love of…
Saw part of the first one, hated it, not interested. But seriously? The one series, the ONE series out there that DOESN'T promote sex and God knows what, THAT'S the problem?
There is so much out there that deserves to be nailed to the wall, why are we having to dig into the least destructive, most popular one to find something to whine about?
It really put me off the Moonlight series to see how people were expected to accept these vampires as "just people like us," who have lives, and sometimes kill people, and have crews dedicated to eliminating the evidence so the families of the dead never find out…
An elite society, invitation only, normal people have to tolerate and accept despite the better-than-you mentality while wielding life-or-death powers over mere mortals, without any consequences for their actions except for some mentioned self-policing which really seems concerned only with never letting the truth get out… Do you think Reid and Pelosi look like they may have shared a pint between them?
Only the BEST MESSAGE EVER: Every problem can be solved by wearing a costume and punching things.
I apologize in advance to Fans of this movie for what I am about to say…
Any Vampire movie where said vampire does not burst into flames and die when hit by sunlight is not a vampire movie. I found myself hoping for this while I was watching the first movie. I have never been so dissapointed. (ok that last scentence was exaggeration.)
I'm waiting for "Oscar, the ordinary zombie," who just wants to be loved… Forget that "killing people and devouring their flesh" nonsense, he actually works at an organ bank and just consumes "leftovers." Right.
Just because something caters to one's moral values doesn't mean it should get a pass on criticism. The book, as pro-abstinence as it is, sucks. The movie, as it follows the book,sucks.
Bless it's heart for having some moral values, but… if something sucks, it sucks.
*MissQuinn*
Corollary: you can do anything so long as you've inherited a fortune from your dead parents!
Look up the Movie "Fido" It's hilarious.
Vampires should not sparkle, I agree. I have no plans to see the film or read the books, but I know many otherwise intelligent, hardworking women who adore this stuff, and as someone who happily reads the True Blood books I can't exactly mock them. I kind of love that they've proved for a second time that women can drive the box office to riches. So maybe we'll get some more quality "women's films" in the future…
Agreed, it sucks, but my point is that it IS moral. Ish.
One little error in your summary: Edward does not relent on turning Bella into a vampire on the condition to marry himOne little error in your summary: Edward does not relent on turning Bella into a vampire on the condition to marry him, he agrees to do it himself on that condition because he no longer has a say. Carlisle is going to change her whether he wants it anymore or not.
You also don't quite understand the whole "soul" issue. Bella SAYS that she is willing to give up her soul for Edward, but she only tells him that because HE is the one who believes she would lose it. She DOES NOT believe it is even a point of contention–she believes 100% that vampires have souls and are not damned!
Also, the issue of suicide must be taken in a different light because VAMPIRE suicide has a little different implications than human suicide. As a rule, in the world of Twilight, when a vampire loses their mate, they follow soon after, usually by trying to exact revenge. Of course, the only way a vampire ever loses their mate is if they are murdered, except in the case of Edward and Bella. He has ALWAYS planned to follow her in death, and his family understands this, though it does mean that Carlisle changes his mind about changing Bella.
I concur. The Mormon comment was an odd point to make. There was no follow-up in the article to explain relevancy, making it a non sequitur.
Stephenie Meyers, a Catholic
Stephenie Meyers, a Jew
Stephenie Meyers, a Democrat
Stephenie Meyers, a former convict
Stephenie Meyers, a Satanist…
Without context, what is Baehr saying? Mormons shouldn't write about Vampires? Mormons are subversive? Mormons are great Christians?
the whole 'let's all sneer and giggle at Twilight" reminds me of Tina Fey and her friends. Some remarks from
rotten tomatoes:
"Bella Swan is loathsome and not aware how insipid, self involved, narcissistic and whiny she is. "
"Shallow, vapid and cheesy, proving that melancholy eternity themes can sometimes be drenched in tedium – except for ferocious Twi-hards."
Now, this is a movie that broke records set by The Dark Knight. The book series has been the reason the book industry is still financially viable.
And even here, a commenter feels able to make a disgusting remark (you, Oscar)… something that, I might add, Edward would NEVER do when ladies are around. But then, Edward, and the saga, is infused with respect for 'old fashioned' virtue.
I can't get my head past the first sentence of this article… "“The Twilight Saga: New Moon” is the second of four vampire stories by Stephenie Meyers, a Mormon."
What the hell difference does it make if Stephanie Meyers is a Mormon?
Your use of unofficial in quotes implies skepticism that the FLDS aren't unaffiliated with Mormons. Perhaps you haven't heard. Mormons haven't practices polygamy since 1890.
If I were to ask my wife to make room for a second wife today, there are a few things that could happen. 1) My wife, who is also Mormon, would file for divorce. or 2) If my wife agreed (which is contrary to all our doctrine), she and I would be excommunicated. One thing is certain: 3) I would be arrested.
Mormons believe in obeying the laws of the land. Polygamy is against the law. Therefore, Mormons don't practice polygamy. If you want to suppose they would if it wasn't against the law, then you need to know that polygamy would have to be brought back in via revelation. Currently, however, the fastest way toward legalizing polygamy is thru legalizing homosexual marriage, and you must know how the Church stands on that. Polygamy being officially practiced by Mormons again is highly unlikely. You'll see it pushed by Hollywood before you see it pushed by Mormons, officially speaking.
Double negative. I meant "that the FLDS *are* unaffiliated with Mormons".
To the curmudgeon who wrote the original article here: one of the more interesting discussions between Edward and Bella is about marriage, and about chastity outside marriage being a positive virtue. There is, throughout the books, a concern for one's soul (Edward is convinced he has none, and therefore is doomed to Hell; and in the end he allows himself to hope that he has not lost his); and constraining one's natural impulse to be evil (ie, the Cullen vampires reject their desire for human blood, and in return, are able to form strong loving relationships among themselves)
That money is the greatest superpower of them all!
Chick dig cool cars.
The FLDS and other splinter groups are not Mormon, "unofficial" or otherwise, unless you consider Anglicans and other Protestants to be "unofficial" Catholics. They broke off from the Mormon church, just like all those other groups broke off from the Catholic church, but they are separate religions. They read the Book of Mormon, but that's no different from other Christian religions reading the Bible. It doesn't make the religions the same.
Stephenie Meyer is Mormon. She is not encouraging polygamy or child brides, she just wrote a (fairly stupid, badly written) series of vampire novels. The main vampire, despite being 120 years old or so, is still trapped in his 17-year-old state. He still has the same wacky hormones and deluded mentality of a high school senior. He's just been that way for a lot longer than the girl has.
I agree. There's a double standard here. Mindless pap for men featuring sexy women & things that blow up: good. Mindless pap for women featuring hunky men & angsty love: bad.
Twilight is disgusting garbage that promotes abusive relationships and pedophilia. Keep this far, far away from your children. The success of this makes me embarassed to be a 20 year old girl (aka the target audience).
Because Mormoms are evil pagans and don't care if everyone loses their souls, don't you know? J/k, I am a Mormon. Not sure why the author felt that was relevant, but whatever…
We have Islamist terrorists right here under our noses but the real threat to our young people is emo Vampires!
Good to have our priorities straight!
irrelevant correlation is irrelevant
When I was about 5, or 6 years-old, that show scared the schnikes out of me. It literally gave me nightmares. Then when springtime occured my friends and I were outside riding bikes and doing normal kid stuff, and didn't watch it, at least I didn't, after school anymore.
Good one. Mankind devised monsters and the scary for good reason, they were lessons in the purely evil, them versus us, and they sure weren't about understanding monsters and their redemption.
Sorry, but, with Meyers and Hollywood it has devolved into the stupid.
Give me a good horror flick any day.
Excuse me, but wasn't great umbrage recently taken here at the mere use of the term "Mormon"? As it stands, despite your misleading example, the "official" church has no great claim to the term, any more than a particular church can claim what are "official" Baptists or Lutherans. You follow the teachings of Joseph Smith then you are a Mormon, period.
I also note, somewhat amusingly, that both of you automatically jump to the "We don't have polygamy anymore!" defense when that wasn't mentioned. Curious, very curious indeed…
So, should he "convert" her, and they both remain hormonally messed-up teenagers for centuries to come, or should she stay human and grow old, and at some point we can talk about whether a 40-ish "cougar" is taking advantage of "someone who is only mentally" a 17 year old horny boy?
Dang, after hundreds of years you are still as stupid as when you were converted? Strange how the vampires leave that out of the sales pitch for would-be converts…
What, you're buying into the disinformation campaign?
So… Romeo and Juliet faking death/dying for their love is''dangerous''?
Give me a break. When you read Romeo and Juliet, you KNOW it's a story.
Same with the Twilight series.
I said nothing about the LDS church praciticing or not practicing polygamy, only that Meyer wasn't advocating it , or anything similar to it, in her book. When people say "Mormon," they mean a member of the official LDS church. As members ourselves, we don't tend to use it as much anymore as saying we're LDS, but we know what church is being referenced when people say it. I was using the term because it's what you used in your comment and I was relating my comments back to yours.
And, since this comment was too long to let through, I'll have to make a separate post to get to the main thing I wanted to say.
That movie is a work of genius.
The fact is that the FLDS church – the one that has been in the news for the past year because of "child brides" – is not the LDS church. They are not Mormon, and they are not associated with us. They broke off from our church more than 100 years ago. They are no different than the Anglican church compared to the Catholic church: each splinter religion broke off from the main one a long time ago over marriage issues. They are entirely separate religions, and to imply otherwise is fallacious.
Your use of the word "Mormon" in this context, and implying through your use of quotation marks that they're still fully-fledged members of the LDS church, is incorrect, as is the argument that anybody who believes Joseph Smith was a prophet is Mormon. The LDS church has made it very clear that these other religions are not linked with ours, and haven't been for quite some time, and has pointed out on multiple occasions to the press that the term Mormon is trademarked to our church, as holders of the copyright to the Book of Mormon, and use of the term regarding any other religion is incorrect.
Personally, I think it shoots both ways. The men like their mindless pap and dis the women's stuff, and the women diss the men's mindless pap in return. Each accuses the other of buying into fantasies, and both are correct.
Meanwhile, the larger culture (the ones who watch sports and sitcoms) considers both forms of fantasy to be trashy.
In the books, she becomes a vampire at age 18 or 19, and stays the same age forever, along with him. The vampires go through college repeatedly, so I'd assume they gain knowledge as they go along, but emotionally and mentally, they're the same age. Whether that's good or bad or right or wrong, I don't know and I don't really care. The point I was making is, they're just about the same age, regardless of how long he's been that age.
The somewhat harmless zombie is already appearing in paranormal (primarily chick-lit) fiction. The whole chick-lit thing is ruining all the good monsters.
[O]ne of the more interesting discussions between Edward and Bella is about marriage…
And when Bella divorces Edward, he will have to pay lifetime alimony. He'll wish he was a regular human!
How about Islamo-terrorist vampires?
The book series has been the reason the book industry is still financially viable.
Uh wow. Got any stats to back that up? Unless you can verify that outrageous claim, your whole post goes down in flames due to a massive lack of credibility. And, last time I checked, the one publisher who put out the "Twilight" books did not constitute the whole book industry. Not by a long shot.
Females have sold their souls for much less of a fantasy, for the will to believe makes it so.
I know! What happened to standards? I don't know why it bothers me that grown women like this– it really shouldn't. But it seems so adolescent.
I think the whole "sparkly" vampire thing is why some women like it. It's very non-threatening. They get to think they're flirting with something dangerous, but really, it doesn't go far beyond tepid.
What really bugs me about the twinkly vampires is that if a vampire could come out in the daylight, they'd be hugely more dangerous to humans and we'd all end up as food. They wouldn't be hiding in the woods somewhere trying to hide. It pretty much kills the vampire myth by taking away the weakness that allows humans to hunt them. I feel like Meyer has a total lack of understanding of what the vampire myth should be. This is just a teen romance with a chick-lit version of the bad-boy boyfriend who is "redeemed" by love. Ugh.
oh come on. the first vampire movie was made in 1909. the legend has been around for longer than that in literature. This movie or series is no more or less evil than any of the previous ones. Fun is fun. Not everything has to have a moral and a purpose.
I'm still trying to deal with zombies who move fast, so sparkling vampires are just as puzzling, but since both are fantasy I can accept it, with one sure thing you shoot them in the head.
Oh goody, you have "restated" my talking about those following Joseph Smith's teachings into 'believing Joseph Smith was a prophet.' You know, there are those who accept Mohammad as a prophet without following his teachings or being Muslims. But then, Prophet Joseph Smith, Prophet Mohammad, same difference…
There are now several Mormon, excuse me, LDS groups out there. Why not talk about the RLDS, now know as Community of Christ? They seem to have as much of a theological claim to being the "official" church as any.
FROM http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2009-01-1...
Stephenie Meyer sold more books in 2008 than any other author (22 million, according to her publisher) and did what no else — not even J.K. Rowling — has done in the 15 years of USA TODAY's Best-Selling Books list: She swept the four top slots in 2008's best sellers with her Twilight series about a romance between a girl (mortal) and boy (vampire)….In a year when publishers and booksellers struggled with a dismal economy, Meyer carried the holidays, accounting for about one in every five books sold since Thanksgiving. Her dominance has continued this year.
AND AT WIKIPEDIA:
As of November 2009, the series has sold over 85 million copies worldwide[3] with translations into at least 38 different languages around the globe.[4][5] The four Twilight books have consecutively set records as the biggest selling novels of 2008 on the USA Today Best-Selling Books list[6] and have spent over 235 weeks on the New York Times Best Seller list for Children's Series Books.[3]
Wow – you have to be really stupid or intentionally offensive to draw a parallel between vampires and someone's religion. You do realize that vampires aren't real, right? Sometimes a vampire book is just a vampire book. To imply that Meyer was writing an allegory about her religion is idiotic.
Middle age women swooning over teenage, glitter wearing emos…
Sorry ladies, but we get to have FUN with this one
Way to solicit responses from all the smart alecs. Bravo.
So vampires can gain knowledge. Like how to manipulate people to get virtually anything they want, which takes us right back to the original post. And what do horny teenage boys want? Which is not going to change when they become vampires, no matter how old they get?
Thus we have returned to "ick." A sex-obsessed eternal teenager who knows how to manipulate confused young girls being passed off as "normal," without parental objection? Definitely icky.
and with vampires, 'lifetime' MEANS 'lifetime' as in ever after…
Doesn't anyone use garlic anymore?
Dude. U R hilarious.
So, as I get it, white boy vampires that only covets your daughter to suck the blood out of her veins and render her the living dead is on a higher moral plain than normal white boy teenager that wants into her pants. I think I read somewhere that this is what makes it all so "refreshing". How stupid is that. If I wanted to describe the end point stupidity of our current male loathing feminista driven culture it couldn't get better than this. Hey, normal guys, they really do hate your guts. The silly versus the sincere pick stupid metaphors.
I like my horror story/movie metaphors kept in the classic mode of good versus evil. It's fits with the human condition. I'll take Ripley's response to the Alien any day, you go, girl, over Stephenie Meyer's and Hollywood's mindless fluff.
I am a Charlaine Harris fan, and can boast of reading all of her books, except the last couple of Sookie ones. It was the fairy grandfather who did me in, altho I also faltered badly at the goblins in the slum bar.
Twilight is a woman's quest, ending in her making her family and way of life safe from the evil Volturi. Sookie, on the other hand, jumps from one weird lover to another (the vampire, the flying vampire, the tiger guy, the collie dog, and then… the fairy grandfather.) Sort of aimless, and finally, from Harris' point of view, increasingly desperate attempts to find another exotic being to magic up Bon Temps.
And I don't think there will be any 'women's films' in the future, except by accident.
what is this thing about "Mormons"? Is it some sort of prejudice I hadn't heard of before?
There are definitely things to be concerned about regarding this particular book, not least of which is Bella's reckless behavior in her heartbreak. Knowing teenaged girls as I do, this is an enticement if ever I've read one. They will try to emulate Bella's behavior because it's just so angsty and romantic. I will never forget some of the antics of my friends when I was a teen.
I don't think parents should stop their kids from reading the Twilight saga, but I think the big YA craze is something parents should definitely explore. So they know when they see their kid purposely doing dangerous things they'll know where it came from and how to help their daughter find some perspective.
And they should also be getting their kids interested in good writers. The Twilight saga is fast food lit and there are actually some very good YA writers out there — Neil Gaiman and Megan Whalen Turner to name two. Paranorma is big everywhere, so it's big in YA as well.
I just think it's a good idea to know what your kids are reading and watching. But trying to keep them from reading these things will only make them read them outside of your purview.
Yeah, I don't care for the whole fairy thing either; sadly, I think you're right about intelligent women's films, but a gal can hope!
In the novel, Dracula could walk in daylight.
Seriously. You don't think the publishers share revenue do you? I'm pretty sure the industry would have survived without "Twilight," even with a bad economy. In fact, I'd go so far to say that The Twilight series wasn't the only thing booksellers sold last year. Read the rest of the USA article. It mentions Oprah book club selections as well as other teen fiction as big sellers. Yes, she dominated during 2008. But Meyer isn't the industry in and of herself.
Good point. I think I always think of what I've read is traditional lore in that vampires have very little power in the daylight. But you're right, there's nothing to suggest Dracula couldn't have moved in the daylight. I kind of presume that vampires would be too powerful for humans to defeat if they didn't have the daylight advantage.
True, but he couldn't exercise his hypnotic/paranormal powers if I can remember properly.
*MissQuinn*
This is why I really dislike what vampires have become. Traditionally, they were undead animals who preyed on humans. They're dead. They're damned. But once you remove them from that moral and religious context, they become superheroes that dress like rock stars whose only downside seems to be that they can't walk around in the sun.
I read the first book and saw the first movie. Just about every woman I know is obsessed with these books and movies other than me. I don't get anyone over the age of 25 being obessed with this. I have friends in their 30s, 40s and 50s obessed like they are 13 year girls over these books. It was enjoyable book and movie but nothing grand. I don't find Robert Pattison that spectactular. He looks like a child to me. I prefer Anne Rice's books over this. Near Dark is my favorite vampire movie. I just saw the Swedish film based on John Ajvide Lindvist's "Let the right one in" (currently being remade by Hollywood as "Let Me In") and I thought it had more depth than "Twilight". The movie and book are very disturbing compared to the romance and fluff of a "Twilight".
I am SO glad you weren't going for the easy pun there…
And why are grown women liking this? Haven't you been watching all those teachers and those slightly pubescent boys lately?
Ick factor ^…very ^…
I'm a male science fiction and fantasy geek who has have plenty of discussions about Star Trek, Star Wars, and also vampires but my wife reads romance novels and I also really like romances to the point that I've read books on writing romance novels. The reason why I enjoy them was summed up pretty well in one of those books on writing romances. It said that, at their core, romance novels are about the victory of the female reproductive strategy. That is, they are about women taming boys to become dedicated and monogamous lovers and fathers. Despite being male, I know that societies are built by family men, not aloof adventurous boys. As such, it's a fairly conservative genre which is why you'll not only find romance novel series where the sexual content is toned way down but also religious romance novels. So I'm not about to sneer at romance novels or the women who enjoy them.
That said, I think it's legitimate to question to moral milieu and messages of a work like this and the set-up described here seems better suited to a tragedy than a romance. And given that vampires are traditionally damned undead creatures with an uncontrollable hunger to kill, I consider it a bit of a cop-out to water down the death, damnation, and/or hunger, turning them into perpetually young superheroes who dress like rock starts and who are allergic to the Sun.
"Do you think Reid and Pelosi look like they may have shared a pint between them?"
Surely you didn't think her face looked that way from the botox, did you?
I was going to go into a philosophical treatise on the nature of good and evil and the constant tension between liberty and security in a democratic society, but given the previous postings on this thread, I'll just say: If you want to have some fun, use explosives. Lots and lots of explosives.
Not this 40 yr old!!!!!
Just took my daughter and a couple of her friends to the midnight showing…sat through two hours of excruciation teen angst and while I could appreciate how and why the teen girls were so agog over Twilight/New Moon, for myself, I was getting bored to the point of extreme irritation. I found neither Pattison or Lauton (whatever his name is) appealing (although my daughter loves the Jake character because "stalking and watching someone sleep is creepy" and she likes Native Americans) and the whole "Im hurting you so you dont get hurt" to be WAY over done and over used. I also do not like the character of Bella (most teen girls I know are essentially sweet and funny and just lovable – this girl made me want to slap her) or the actress who plays her, whose entire range of emotion seems to be a waffle between Pain and Indignance, with Coldness thrown in for good measure. I decided after having to sit through a movie (with an audience that did indeed have just as high a population of middle-aged women squealing over Jake taking off his shirt or some such) that I will NEVER read the books now simply because I find this kind of pandering distasteful.
So I assure you I am NOT one of those 40 yr old Mamas who find herself giggling and squee-ing over the same teen heartthrob her teen daughter does. Give me my husband! Or Russell Crowe or Gerard Butler or John Wayne!! I get hot for real men…like men in uniform whom I know will lay down their lives for their country and their families, men I know who understand the meaning of the word service, sacrifice, honor, integrity.
I hated being a teen-ager…I remember angsting then, but then it was because I knew I wasnt old enough to meet up with mature men yet, and I so wanted to meet one. The boys of my own age were just that…boys.
My whole thing is; there seems to be this thing nowadays to "rehab" the monsters image all the time now, like they all got together and hired a publicist…
Zombies used to be a "hive mind" thing that; no matter how many you took out, the rest would overwhelm you and eat you alive. Struggle as you will, these dead but slowly moving, inexorable creatures that once were friends and family will destroy you; the conclusion was set in stone that you will eventually fall. That was inevitable, like PelosiCare.
Vampires are now just misunderstood stressed out kids that are always looking for love at all the wrong lunch counters…bleah…Vampires were frightening in that once one locked on to you, and it had permission from you to get inside your home, you would never be rid of it until it consumed your very essence, living off your death. Invisible to the world, (no reflection thing, night hunting, etc.), it would drain the very life from you until you joined the minions…
In a way, our female fatale IS food…Bella is already living only for Edward; he just hasn't had her FOR, excuse me, over TO dinner…
The "Twilight" novels are certainly huge sellers, but let's not kid ourselves: the book industry would still be humming along if they had never been written. They're important to the industry, but not vital.
I am not a Mormon, although I have a couple of friends who are, but I think you would do better in this case to leave off what seems to be verging into an anti-Mormon thread. Not only do I hate the movie, having seen it practically under force, but I do sense the moral implications bound up with the genre that were mentioned above. Those should probably be the point of discussion here. I have many problems with Mormon theology–and let's face it, although only fringe members still practice polygamy, the church only gave the practice up because the government made them–but on the other hand, they're not blowing themselves and innocent women and children up, either. Unlike some people.
I give Stephanie Meyer props for the fact that, according to her own account, she made the entire series up based on a really intense dream she had once. You have to admit, that shows some creativity. But it doesn't mean the novels and/or movies themselves are any good.
Like Bram Stoker's Dracula. If there is anything it is not, that would be a vampire movie. He walked out in the open in broad daylight. He should have been toast. What is up with that? Oh wait, the book also has him walking around in broad daylight without harm. Whatever.
“The Twilight Saga: New Moon” is the second of four vampire stories by Stephenie Meyers, a Mormon."
For a second I thought this was going to be written by a Prop-8 supporter. When I got to the end I read "Taken together, these elements, and 'New Moon’s' strong Romantic worldview, its occult and pagan content . . .," it turned out it was an Evangelical Christian. Oh well, same difference; intolerance masked as moral superiority.
"I hated being a teen-ager…I remember angsting then, but then it was because I knew I wasnt old enough to meet up with mature men yet, and I so wanted to meet one. The boys of my own age were just that…boys."
I think you hit on one of the reasons teenagers love these books without realizing. Edward is more than a boy.
I meant a gay Prop-8 antagonist.
Bless you for saying what so many of us are thinking. It's irrational for the whole phenomenon to bug me. What does it matter if other women like this stuff? But I feel like the tastes of teenage girls is taking over the box office and killing a genre I used to like.
My point was that I am a bit aghast that grown women are finding this story/these actors so attractive because they should be well past that teenage stage. I told my daughter that if I were fifteen I would probably be all fangirly myself. But since Im not, dont expect me to join you in the fandom. And even with that caveat Im not so sure I would be hooked because when I was fifteen, men (or who I thought was a man) like Harrison Ford and Pierce Brosnan were the ones I drooled over…not Sean Cassidy or Rob Lowe or any of the teen heartthrobs of the 70s/80s.
And Im really not sure what youre point is in saying that Edward is more than a boy. He's in the body of a teenager, consorts with teenagers, and looks and acts like a teenager.
Saw both of them. Found them boring, emo and silly. I would have loved it at 13. At 43, I rate it 4 maxipads & 6 Midol. Hide the razor blades if your tween is overly emotional. Otherwise, this too shall pass.
I really liked the first book a lot. It reminded me of how sweet, powerful and erotic just a kiss can be. Then I read New Moon. What the hell? I've had it up to here with the "Byronic hero." Stupid pansy. And the "change me into a vampire" stuff? Ugh. I still saw the movie, and actually I liked it more than the book. Movie Jacob was way more likable than book Jacob.
I really wish they'd turn the Anita Blake series into a movie (or at least books 1-8, before it got way too S&M and waaayyy to much sex) Anita's the type of gal who shoots first and asks questions later; and understands that the bad guys are evil. At least she waits until book 6 to get it on with the vampire. Alas, I don't think the American movie going public would like such a strong female, she's not passive and indecisive enough for the masses. Sad but true. Sigh.
She definitely deserves credit for tapping into something that people connect with. I'm not sure why it's so polarizing, I fall prey to the WTF reactions (as my comments demonstrate), but hey, I'm all for success.
I'm waiting for "Oscar, the ordinary zombie," who just wants to be loved
Yakumo Fuji from 3×3 Eyes?
Granted an Uu isn't really a zombie, so there might be a translation error from Japanese into English. For one thing, zombies usually don't seem to contain at least twice as much blood as your average human.
Of course, I think PVP Online already hit on what's next with the vampire craze:
http://www.pvponline.com/2009/10/16/milking-it/
You must be logged in to post a comment.