Yeah, I know there's already one of these in this club, but I'm going to do another one. :)
Just a few points on certin parts of Twilight.
Bella Swan-
Oh dear me, Bella Swan. When one says her name, what comes to your mind? A young heroine? A clumsy sweetheart? Or perhaps a useless idiot?
For me, the latter comes to my head. I don't like Bella as a person, and feel she is lacking in certin qualities I admire in the hero of a story. But, why should the main character be a good person in order for the storyline to be good? I myself, am a huge tagahanga of the Harry Potter books, do not like Harry himself as a person. But to me, one weak charecter doesn't make a story bad. And if you do happen to like Bella as a charecter, well all the better.
Edward Cullen-
Is he the perfect boyfriend? I was having this discussion with my two mga kaibigan the other day, debating the best fictional boyfriend (Haha, sad I know) and the argument was Peeta Mellark vs. Edward Cullen. (Incase you didn't know, Peeta is the Edward Cullen and the Ron Weasley of The Hunger Games.)
My fellow Hunger Games friend was saying 'But why do you like Edward so much? He's s perfect it's sickening.'
Then, my Twi-hard friend, who hasn't read the HP books, but has seen the pelikula made a point that made me wonder; 'But you're such a big tagahanga of Harry Potter. Hermione is also so perfect. I mean, yeah her hair isn't great at the start, but as the pelikula go on...'
And yes, if you haven't read the Harry Potter books, and have only seen the movies, Hermione I think is a perfectionist. The pelikula leave out everything bad about her charecter - her strange obsessions with SPEW, her teeth, her frizzy hair (Yeah we saw it in the first film, but where did it go then?)...
So, when a Harry Potter tagahanga is arguing about how 'perfect' Edward is, I think they should think of the movie version of Hermione.
Sparkling-
Yes, it's rather strange. And yet, that's a word I'd use to describe Luna Lovegood. How does it sound so good when describing Luna, and yet so stupid when describing Edward?
I personally think it was Meyer's twist on vampires. Give them a bit madami originality. Why stick with the old rules? And to me, there's nothing wrong with that. Think outside the box. Rowling did that when she did a few of her creatures. Taking an example from the sixth Narnia book, the giants are cunning and crafty, wheras in Harry Potter, they are madami stupid. Or look at Dahl's classic, The BFG. They are bloodthirsty creatures. Rowling turned giants into stupid beings, giving another interesting way to look on them. Meyer did the same, only with vampires. Not that different when you think of it.
The acting-
'Kristen Stewart has one emotion' This is a common argument. But you know what? I've seen her smile and laugh. To me, she's rather like Jo. She doesn't enjoy the spotlight, but is part of a huge movie francise. And as for her acting, okay, maybe it was a little stale in Twilight, but really, I feel she captured the character of Bella pretty well. And yeah, I'm anti Twilight, but I admit I did get a bit sniffly during Jacob's scene in BD part 1. Rob is pretty much a legend. He's a really talented person, Cedric or Edward.
The fans-
Some people have ibingiay the Twi-hards a reputation of being crazy and hysterical. Also, I don't know why, but bad grammer is quite commonly asscoiated with Twilight fans.
In my class, I would consider myself to be about third smartest. Topped sa pamamagitan ng the class maths nerd, and a Twi-hard. My friend Kelly is a huge fan, but yet is one of the most intelligent people I know. Some of my best mga kaibigan are Twi-hards. And they're very intelligent. And look at the Twi fans here. Cassie, youknowit, Katii...they're all strong debaters, and very intelligent.
And admit it Potterheads. If you saw a Potter bituin coming down your street, you would be as crazy as those Twilight fans you see at the premires. I know I would. ;)
So there's my humble opinion, and just a few points on Twilight.
BREEZE OUT BITCHES.
(Heh, what's life without an AVPM quote?)
Just a few points on certin parts of Twilight.
Bella Swan-
Oh dear me, Bella Swan. When one says her name, what comes to your mind? A young heroine? A clumsy sweetheart? Or perhaps a useless idiot?
For me, the latter comes to my head. I don't like Bella as a person, and feel she is lacking in certin qualities I admire in the hero of a story. But, why should the main character be a good person in order for the storyline to be good? I myself, am a huge tagahanga of the Harry Potter books, do not like Harry himself as a person. But to me, one weak charecter doesn't make a story bad. And if you do happen to like Bella as a charecter, well all the better.
Edward Cullen-
Is he the perfect boyfriend? I was having this discussion with my two mga kaibigan the other day, debating the best fictional boyfriend (Haha, sad I know) and the argument was Peeta Mellark vs. Edward Cullen. (Incase you didn't know, Peeta is the Edward Cullen and the Ron Weasley of The Hunger Games.)
My fellow Hunger Games friend was saying 'But why do you like Edward so much? He's s perfect it's sickening.'
Then, my Twi-hard friend, who hasn't read the HP books, but has seen the pelikula made a point that made me wonder; 'But you're such a big tagahanga of Harry Potter. Hermione is also so perfect. I mean, yeah her hair isn't great at the start, but as the pelikula go on...'
And yes, if you haven't read the Harry Potter books, and have only seen the movies, Hermione I think is a perfectionist. The pelikula leave out everything bad about her charecter - her strange obsessions with SPEW, her teeth, her frizzy hair (Yeah we saw it in the first film, but where did it go then?)...
So, when a Harry Potter tagahanga is arguing about how 'perfect' Edward is, I think they should think of the movie version of Hermione.
Sparkling-
Yes, it's rather strange. And yet, that's a word I'd use to describe Luna Lovegood. How does it sound so good when describing Luna, and yet so stupid when describing Edward?
I personally think it was Meyer's twist on vampires. Give them a bit madami originality. Why stick with the old rules? And to me, there's nothing wrong with that. Think outside the box. Rowling did that when she did a few of her creatures. Taking an example from the sixth Narnia book, the giants are cunning and crafty, wheras in Harry Potter, they are madami stupid. Or look at Dahl's classic, The BFG. They are bloodthirsty creatures. Rowling turned giants into stupid beings, giving another interesting way to look on them. Meyer did the same, only with vampires. Not that different when you think of it.
The acting-
'Kristen Stewart has one emotion' This is a common argument. But you know what? I've seen her smile and laugh. To me, she's rather like Jo. She doesn't enjoy the spotlight, but is part of a huge movie francise. And as for her acting, okay, maybe it was a little stale in Twilight, but really, I feel she captured the character of Bella pretty well. And yeah, I'm anti Twilight, but I admit I did get a bit sniffly during Jacob's scene in BD part 1. Rob is pretty much a legend. He's a really talented person, Cedric or Edward.
The fans-
Some people have ibingiay the Twi-hards a reputation of being crazy and hysterical. Also, I don't know why, but bad grammer is quite commonly asscoiated with Twilight fans.
In my class, I would consider myself to be about third smartest. Topped sa pamamagitan ng the class maths nerd, and a Twi-hard. My friend Kelly is a huge fan, but yet is one of the most intelligent people I know. Some of my best mga kaibigan are Twi-hards. And they're very intelligent. And look at the Twi fans here. Cassie, youknowit, Katii...they're all strong debaters, and very intelligent.
And admit it Potterheads. If you saw a Potter bituin coming down your street, you would be as crazy as those Twilight fans you see at the premires. I know I would. ;)
So there's my humble opinion, and just a few points on Twilight.
BREEZE OUT BITCHES.
(Heh, what's life without an AVPM quote?)
