Back to Reviews

Reviews Comments: Why all the bashing? And Expanded Universe discussion Twilight whole series review by The Ultimate Fangirl

I am a Twilighter, and I love the series. I will wait for the rotten tomatoes to stop hurtling in my direction. I don't see why so many people have to bash on the series- it's a freaking series, not a political document! If you don't like it, why ruin it for those of us who do? I can see why Your Mileage May Vary on this series, but this is my opinion as a person who had a positive experience reading the book.

I am not a big fan of the human characters, Bella included, but I find the supernatural ones (vampires and werewolves) to be far more interesting. The vampires all come from different backgrounds and situations, so that makes them more interesting in the present. Take, for example, the effects of being the son of an Anglican pastor on Carlisle. This upbringing sticks with Carlisle through him believing that being a vampire has not cost him his soul, and that he still has the potential to be good. Rosalie's vanity originates in her beauty being used by her socialite parents to raise their status. In the Twilightverse, Meyer explains this as a part of Our Vampires Are Different, saying that each vampire's most prominent human quality was amplified in their conversion to a vampire. This helps build the Expanded Universe of the series by encouraging readers to build backgrounds for each vampire based on their personality.

The werewolves' world, as Edward states in Eclipse, is "like a soap opera." Each one of the pack members is affected by being a werewolf in a different way. Sam, the alpha wolf, is forced to abandon his relationship with Leah as a result of imprinting on Emily. Jacob's transformation into a werewolf instigated the conflict between him and Edward over Bella. Their attempts to reconcile themselves to their respective fates leads to their Expanded Universe. It gives a lot of insight into Team Jacob's case for their relationship to Bella.

In later books, the Vampire Universe expands into different countries and times as various vampires enter the plot, especially in Breaking Dawn (with vampires from all over the world coming to the aid of the Cullen Clan). It makes for a very interesting read to try and connect all the different characters with their histories and to compare them with other forms of vampires in literature (again, a case of Our Vampires Are Different).


  • Ronnie
  • 21st Apr 09
It's not the series itself, it's mostly that the majority of the fandom is Fan Dumb that refuse to acknowledge it has flaws. This, of course, speaks volumes for the human race. And a disturbing amount of teens I know are taking Ed and Bella as the blueprints for an ideal relationship, which is just plain creepy. On so many levels.
  • CleverPun
  • 22nd Apr 09
Between the Purple Prose and Fan Dumb, I'll admit I never gave the series much of a chance.

Good review, though.
  • fleb
  • 24th Apr 09
No real opinion on the series, but: Other people griping about the series in no way 'ruins it' for those who happen to like it, so I really don't get the complaining-about-complaining. (Great, now I'm c-about-c-about-c.)
  • dragonfire5000
  • 25th Apr 09
Because the story had no research done on it, the characters are badly characterized (with Mary Sue and Gary Stu as the main characters and worst offenders), badly written romance, and especially the fangirls (Sane fans are alright; Twitards are just plain stupid). Also, considering Meyer said that her romance was better than those written by the likes of Jane Austen and William Goldman, it's no surprise that many bash her for it.
  • Cherry
  • 6th May 09
Why the hate? Because, speaking of it as a story, it's a piece of fluff. Two-thirds of Twilight is just Bella gushing about Edward and contains very little substance whatsoever.

So what? Other pieces of fluff exist? Sure. But they don't have Twilight's popularity. It's just undeserved, that's all. It should just be a little blip on the radar. But it's not. *shrug*

Also, the aforementioned fact that Meyer claims her romance is better than the classics. A bigheaded author sort of kills the enjoyment of the work, whatever enjoyment there is to be had.
  • Doktor von Eurotrash
  • 6th May 09
Quote from the OP: "In the Twilightverse, Meyer explains this as a part of Our Vampires Are Different, saying that each vampire's most prominent human quality was amplified in their conversion to a vampire."

In other words, she's admitting that her characters are one-dimensional. That doesn't inspire a lot of confidence.
  • Gerkuman
  • 22nd May 09
Also, some Twilight fans have tried to kill other people. I mean, I can see the irony of me pointing this out due to the fact I believe in The Bible, but still...
  • Anonymous Apathy
  • 29th May 09
A few years ago, when I first picked up an unknown little novel called Twilight, I can honestly say that I had no expectations whatsoever. And I was still kind of disappointed, but not spectacularly so - it wasn't anything I hadn't seen before in poorly written fanfiction. I found the experience mildly unpleasant, but ultimately forgettable; as soon as I finished the book I didn't think about it again.

Then it got popular.

Suddenly, we have a generation of girls (and some boys, and even parents - who really should know better) worshiping mediocre Purple Prose as a literary masterpiece and preaching the values of Edward and Bella's "pure" relationship.

And remember, all you young, impressionable girls out there! The moral of this story is: If you have a boyfriend who follows you around without your knowledge, breaks into your house to watch you sleep, and disables your car so that you can't see your friends, it must be True Love!

Basically, though series is bad, I would have probably be more lenient toward it if the fan reaction wasn't so utterly ridiculous.
  • Psychopomp
  • 10th Jun 09
Me? Vampires don't sparkle.
  • spiritsunami
  • 3rd Jul 09
Wonderful. I'm glad someone else recognizes Breaking Dawn as an important part of expanding the vampire mythos—most fans (the ones who were only interested in the pulpy romance parts) hated that book because of how different it was from the earlier ones. I am of the opinion that the novels were at their best when they weren't trying (and failing) to be romantic (yes, I agree with Anonymous Apathy; Edward is kind of a creepy stalker type, not to mention a real jerk), and Meyer's supposed lack of talent as a writer is all but non-existent in Breaking Dawn and in her lone non-Twilight novel, The Host (which is actually pretty damn good). So, yeah, Twilight is nothing special, but the Twilight series is great.
  • Molly Walker
  • 10th Jul 09
I don't want to get into the rest of the series, but Breaking Dawn was especially disappointing because of the reasons listed - vampires from all over the world were gearing up to fight the Volturi, which had been built up for three books the Big Bad of the entire series, and...they have a polite conversation and everyone skips happily off on their merry ways. It was incredibly anti-climactic.

The way everything just falls into place at the end was annoying. Jacob imprinting on Nessie felt like the worst offender - it was as though S Meyer thought "There are people who think Bella will end up with Jacob, and not Edward? Well, I'll nip that in the bud. No one ruins my perfect romance, mwahahahaha!" Not really like that, but you know what I mean. It felt contrived, especially when she went through all of the trouble to establish a relationship between Leah and Jacob, only for Leah to be snubbed once again by the imprinting process. Ouch.

Again, the fans are possibly the worst part of it all - well, not the fans, the Twitards. And the fact that S Meyer is being hailed as the next J.K. Rowling is, imho, an egregious downplaying of Rowling's talent. As I heard it described - "If you think Twilight's fictional world is a deep as Harry Potter's, try to imagine seven books written solely about Harry and Ginny's romance, with any other semblance of plot removed." So I'll agree with Anonymous Apathy on this one - the fan reaction is what makes the antis so so crazy hating on the series.
  • whatever
  • 20th Jul 09
Personally, I bash the series not because I'm trying to ruin it for you, but because I find it interesting, amusing, and fun to mock it and pull it to pieces. If that has the side effect of ruining it for you, sorry, but that's your problem.
  • armiece
  • 19th Aug 09
I bash the series for 2 reasons. A) Because the rampant sexism, domestic, emotional, and just general abuse and stalking being portrayed as 'OMG THE BEST ROMANCE EVAAAAAR!!!1" is just sickening and offensive. These books have no redeeming qualities. NONE. It doesn't help that Meyer seems to think she's a genius for writing something you could dredge up off of, and her dumb fans agree. Having been in an abusive relationship myself I find Edward disgusting.

B) Because what people write in response to these is delightfully witty and satirical. Check out Cleolinda's Twilight Recaps, as well as's forums for links to studies of the Mormon influences, Universe rule breaking, abuse studies, and so on.

  • Roihu
  • 10th Sep 09
I dislike Twitards and a couple of extremists at Twilightsucks and other places. Really, I while reading this, I kept hoping it was a joke of sorts. I thought she kept up the charade because she wanted the money. I'm still hoping she's a genius mastermind and once she's made all the cash she can, she'll tell the whole world, "lol you gaize fell for it. these books are everything a relationship shouldnt be and i cant believe you fell for it LOLOLOLOL" or something like that. Really, if she came out with a statement like that, I would worship the woman. If she was so smart as to market this book as a romance and was aware of everything she wrote and all the subtext it could be gotten from it, she could be considered one of America's greatest authors, IMO.

Of course, there's an extremely low possibility of any of that happening...
  • 25th Sep 09
Personally, I don't think ANY of the characters were very interesting, but I loved your review and how you admitted that you liked Twilight, what with the... unreasonable extreme fans and haters. Honestly, I think the extremists are part of the reason why everyone complains (not to mention the Complaining About Shows You Don't Watch aspect). Thank you for showing people that, yes, there ARE intelligent, non-rabid Twilight fans. Now excuse me while I try to influence my classmates NOT to dress up as Bella and Edward for Halloween.
  • Darkblade
  • 4th Oct 09
No offence meant but if you can't take people insulting your subject of your fandom you really need to grow up (as said by a die-hard Evangelion, Haruhi and western comics fan). Nothing is all good or all bad. Reacting to people pointing out flaws with violence an personal insults is terribly imature so I aplaud your attempts at rationally explaining your points about the series.

I have only read the first book at the insistence of an ex-girlfriend and after being utterly disgusted with Edwards actions and Bella's fondness for them I decided to never touch the series ever again. So I can not comment on anything passed the first book but in the first book the vampires seemed even more flat and less interesting as characters than the humans with the exception of Edward who seemed to be an abusive psychopath stalker. So yeah.
  • PlusSizeAngel
  • 6th Oct 09
Twilight is mediocre work all the way. I prefer more Gothic vampire stories like Dracula or Hammer´s Universe - stories with Gorgeous period costume and Victorian London, Uberwald and Haunted castle - and bland teen infatuation does not work as elegant supernatural love story, either. However, my problem is the obsessed Hatedom - the raging haters and their "Stephenie Meyer is fat mormon beep who should be killed" crap are, well, just crap.

  • TheManWithoutABody
  • 8th Oct 09
I will freely admit that I've never read Twilight. It clearly isn't geared towards my demographic. I have, however, read Dracula, and Carmilla, and a wonderful short story called The Room in the Tower, and even Polidori's The Vampyre: A Tale, as I went through a brief vampire-lit phase during my teenage years. Nosferatu remains one of my favourite movies ever, and Rabid (which is sort of a vampire movie) is another brilliant picture. And I find the fetishization of the vampire, frankly, to be insulting. Oh sure, there was always a sexual aspect, but it was deceptive and/or rapacious, not Romantic. Normally, I wouldn't take such issue with Twilight, as it's not the first to do this. However, because there's such a craze over it, and it's constantly shoved in my face, you can't blame me for getting a bit reactionary. And although I've never read the book or any of the sequels, I've read brief excerpts, and from what I could see, the writing was pretty bad. When Meyer is touted as "the next J.K. Rowling", this bothers me, too. I'm not really a huge Harry Potter fan. I've read all the books, and I think they're overrated, too, but at least they're consistently pretty decent. What Harry Potter had was mainstream appeal. Anyone can read it, and most people can get some enjoyment out of it. The Twilight fandom is pretty much limited to teenage girls and housewives - a sure sign that rather than having quality, what they have is appeal. Also, from what I've heard of it, it reinforces hideously chauvinistic (or even misogynistic) ideals of love. This sounds like a pretty unhealthy, pseudo-hegemonic way of depriving women of their self-worth. Also, although I've never read Meyer's The Host, the only Host I know is a Korean movie about a giant tadpole.
  • Morgie
  • 11th Feb 10
THANK YOU for writing this review, I'm very happy that there are people trying to spread the word that the books are not OMGSUXORZ.

Thanks to spiritsunami, you took the words right out of my mouth.

Also, the series doesn't actually have as ridiculous a Fan Dumb as everyone thinks it does. It's a mix of a really bad Vocal Minority and fans joking around with people by playing up the sterotype. I know I've done the latter.

And again, we don't take the Accidental Aesop the book presents as true. Many people seem to believe this. If you think it's true, then come and meet my friends.

Good to have gotten that off my chest.
  • mivacto
  • 24th Apr 10
I prefer Anne Rice novels or the Richelle Mead series. Maybe that's just me, but those books have more what I'm looking for in Vampire Fiction. I went the opposite route and read the partial draft of Midnight Sun before watching the movie or reading the Twilight book. The purple prose got on my nerves after awhile. I think it would have been more interesting if you have the Cullens in a more "impoverished" role—-Beautiful, but not living in a mansion or driving designer automobiles. Why not break the stereotype of wealthy vampire dwellers? Make them run of the mill like everyone else. Edward seems like a narcissistic control freak. Bella doesn't have a spine. While I'm sure it would have weakened Meyer's plot, I wonder what would have happened if Bella didn't chose any of them—-Disregard Jacob. Ignore Edward. Stand strong and move away from them and concentrate on her own life. It shouldn't have taken more than two books to transform/convert/change her into a Sparkly, Beautiful as Diamonds Vampire. Oh yeah, that's right. It wouldn't sell books. I mean, you need a plot where a girl is rendered helpless and pathetic if she doesn't have a man by her side. So Edward uses mind fornication to have her "bedazzled" by his charms. And to think all of this came from Meyer's dream? I weep for this new generation of vampire books. Bram Stoker wouldn't be a happy camper.
  • ezzierae
  • 25th May 10
I just want to say that I am a pretty big fan of this series, not because it's THE BEST ROMANCE EVER!!! (And fyi, Meyer never claimed her books were better than Jane Austen's or other classics - whoever thinks that has taken some comment or something way out of context and twisted it around. In fact, she never claimed to be much of a writer at all - she originally wrote Twilight for herself.) I'm a fan because the story is fairly engaging, even if it is poorly written and wasn't really aimed at my age-group (I'm over 20 - not a squealing tween - and, really, most of the Twilight fandom is very diverse, with many cultures and age groups represented fairly evenly.)

"Personally, I bash the series not because I'm trying to ruin it for you, but because I find it interesting, amusing, and fun to mock it and pull it to pieces."

As far as making fun of Twilight is concerned, many of us so called Twitards love doing this just as much as haters do. For example, several websites and blogs that I love reading are thoroughly and completely dedicated to the Twi books and movies, but make fun of them all the time. We can see how ridiculous this obsession is, we can see very clearly how bad the books and movies are, but we love them anyway, because they're a good story (in our opinions, of course).

I don't want to be one of those people who complains about people complaing, but bitching about Twilight is getting to be really annoying, mainly because all the good arguments have already been made (and were usually first seen and made by people that still like the books), but also because most of the people complaing or giving it bad reviews are those who have a very poor idea of either/both the books themselves and the fan base. We are not all immature tweens dreaming of our own Edward, nor are the rest of us Twilght Moms who have nothing better to do all day while their kids are at school. At least know what you are talking about before you go and whine and criticize it.
  • 6th Jun 10
I want to cosign ezzierae. The fact that most of haters don't even read the books (really reading what a friend says it read and/or reading the first book and resume of the others does not count as reading), is really annoying. We could have a very rational interchange of ideas if they respect us enough to read the books, repeating the same tired points or making up stuff that never happened so the other people get horrified is not the best way to show other people "the light", IMO.
  • 10th Jun 10
Twilight gets a lot of hate not so much because of the premise, but because the characters are annoying, few of them have any personality, there is little conflict in each book until like halfway through or near the end, and because of the sheer amount of Wall Bangers. Plus both Edward and Bella are both horrible people and sickening sweethearts.

If you want a more in depth opinion, I'll be happy to tell you.
  • 17th Jun 10
I read the books a couple years ago. And I liked them for a little while. And then I actually started reading real literature and really started getting into writing. So I went back and reread them, and realized what overall crap they really were. And I continued to read them because you can't really judge until you get the experience. Basically all the characters are one-dimensional. While she could have made all of the Cullens backstories so much more interesting, they're limited to a couple paragraphs of just telling the anecdotes of when they were alive and how they were turned. The only character that goes through any sort of development is Jacob, and that's really only because he's going through his shapeshifter period. Any advances that you think are going to happen in Breaking Dawn just crumble by the end of it. Meyer blatantly retcons points made in earlier books. The whole series leads to a fight with the Volturi, and they just walk away. She introduces potentially interesting characters and then confines them to throwaway rolls.

Oh, and they sparkle. Really enough said with just that one line.
  • 19th Jun 10
the series doesn't actually have as ridiculous a Fan Dumb as everyone thinks it does. It's a mix of a really bad Vocal Minority and fans joking around with people by playing up the sterotype. I know I've done the latter.

I'm sorry, I have to ask... why are you upset that people stereotype Twilight fans as dumb when you deliberately play up that stereotype?

My first exposure to this series was a fanfic someone wrote. They asked for my earnest feedback, not telling me it was based on a published book. When I read about sparkly vampires, I struggled not to laugh. When I realised it was someone else's idea I felt like less of a jerk, but was also surprised such a book got published. I've never read the series, but the sparkly vampires do not work for me.
  • 28th Jun 10
"Sparkly Vampires" is something that would be AWESOME in a parody of vampire stories, you know? I just can't believe Meyer developed this as a serious element of a dramatic work (It fits in with some of the other weirdness, I'll say that)!
  • WolfgalX
  • 2nd Jul 10
Thank you. Thank you for trying to inject some sense into this mess.

I'm neither fan nor hater, but personally I really do hate all the effort that's been put into bashing this series. I used to have fantastic conversations with my best friend, but now they all just degenerate into either holding up Harry Potter as the Best-Work-Ever, or talking about how everything related to Twilight is stupid. That's not how this should work. Someone should not be so deeply entrenched in EITHER the fandom or hatedom that they literally can't talk about anything else. That's sad. Especially so when someone points out that this book is pretty much subjective. It's an average piece of literature that's gotten many people riled up about it because other people are riled up over it.

And for anyone asking why it's ruining someone's fun when you bash their series, imagine how it feels when you're stuck in that movie theater with the guy who literally will NOT SHUT UP. It's like that, but everywhere, whenever anything even slightly related to it is mentioned, and the guy's decided he hates your shirt.
  • LOLin8or
  • 9th Oct 10
Wait... you had a positive experience reading it? IMPOSSIBLE!!
  • 29th Nov 10
The novel is outside of my demographic, so I've only read excerpts in passing. However, as an English Teacher, the most grating part of the novels was the consistent punctuation abuse, poor word choice, and twisted grammar. I'll give you an example: she uses the phrase "his angel's face" a few times. That's the sort of non-English I would expect from FATAL. "Angelic" is an adjective just for that occasion.

I would be willing to give Smeyers room here - after all, it's the job of the editor to catch these kinds of mistakes and fix them. I write, and I've made some pretty dumb typos and mistakes. At the same time, though, she bears some responsibility, because you're supposed to proof your own work. I proof my own work, in addition to relying on Beta readers. These are seventh and eighth grade mistakes that anyone speaking English could catch with the help of an extra set of eyes. Her editor and her Beta readers failed her, and it shows in the quality of the books. To this extent, it reads a lot like The Left Behind Series. Finally, the dialog tags are just annoying. Good dialog speaks for itself, and doesn't need a tag after it.

And the fan reaction is terrifying to me. I don't ascribe to a prescriptive view of grammar, but I still have difficulty believing anything with this many grammatical mistakes and errors can be considered literature, and sell as well as it has. This is a rough draft at best - if I were grading Smeyers on her book, I would tell her to go back and fix the errors first, and then I'll go over the story later. It's like people forgot how grammar works, or they just don't care. It's a horrible message to be sending to young people - especially in a country where we have enough problems with education as it is. There are rules when you write that you have to follow (unless your name is e.e. cummings - but then, he knew what he was doing wrong, and that makes it alright. I doubt Smyers knew what she was doing wrong, and that doesn't make it alright). It makes it easier to read the story. I weep - not for the content of the book, which I'm indifferent too, but simply because the grammar and writing is godawful and just plain wrong.
  • ChrisWWII
  • 25th Jan 11
I have to say that you are right, the background characters are extremely interesting. I was actually into what Rosalie's, Jasper's and Alice's backstories were, and I was once again interested in all those vampires from around the world. What is with those Romanian vampires? How did the Volturi overthrow them? What happened? As was pointed out, Carlisle and the other vampires do indeed have interesting character traits, and this makes me actually care about them and what happens to them. The universe does not revolve around them, and this is really really a benefit.

In all honesty, Twilight was ruined by Bella and Edward. These two are the only non-interesting characters, just because they're intended to be that way. They're intended to be blank slates that a reader can write their own stories into. Young girls longing for 'true love' can write themselves into Bella's shoes, and change Edward's personality so that he's perfect for them. In that sense, Meyer has found a way to make a lot of money in that by having blank main characters people can place themselves in and feel like the story is about THEM not about the actual main characters. Of course, for others this ruins the story as Meyer has an admittedly interesting and awesome universe....she just has us following a very boring character in that universe. If she were to honestly go out and write about some of the other characters? (And NOT just retell the same love story like she did with the Bree Tanner novella) It could be quite a good, interesting read.
  • 31st Jan 11
"personally I really do hate all the effort that's been put into bashing this series. I used to have fantastic conversations with my best friend, but now they all just degenerate into either holding up Harry Potter as the Best-Work-Ever, or talking about how everything related to Twilight is stupid"

That sounds more like a problem between you and your "best friend" than anything having to do with the general public. I know several people who have read "Twilight," and aside from a couple brief comments about the movies, I've never, ever talked to them about it. Seems to me you could change the subject next time you and your "best friend" conflict.
  • 31st Jan 11
"I'll give you an example: she uses the phrase 'his angel's face' a few times. That's the sort of non-English I would expect from FATAL. 'Angelic' is an adjective just for that occasion.

I would be willing to give Smeyers room here - after all, it's the job of the editor to catch these kinds of mistakes and fix them"

That is not a "mistake." Possessive nouns can act as both nouns and adjectives. It's pretty common, actually. You can complain that she uses it too often, but that doesn't make it in and of itself improper.
  • YemiHikari
  • 6th Jun 11
The reason there is so much hate is because certain fans try panning the series as good, if not better then classical literature, and this includes Meyer. AS for the whole Our Vampires Are Different thing, fine and dandy except for the fact that I've seen this trope pulled off much better, like with the series Sola, which uses Japanese mythology to create a different vampire.

If you read a LOT of the stuff on that trope page, it pales in comparison to what other people did to make vampires different. Actually, the things she threw in were major Mary Sue traits to make her vampires more special then all the other versions, which is one of the worst thing you can do in writing.

Actually, one of the major problems when one speaks of the fans is the fact that a good deal of them, Twilight was their first vampire novel, or werewolf novel and they look at all others as being wrong, even to the point of voicing that older works are based off of Meyers work and are STEALING her idea.

Fans of the vampire fandom have a very hard time not making fun of Twilight's Our Vampires Are Different due to the level of Willing Suspension Of Disbelief involved, or more of not involved.
  • szaleniec1000
  • 8th Jun 11
@ 6 months late, I know. Only just discovered this thread. It is indeed valid to use a possessive as an attributive, it's just awkward to do this in conjunction with another possessive. "He had an angel's face" would have been fine. "His angel's face" reads as "the face belonging to his angel" at first glance. A phrase can be inelegant without being absolutely wrong and this is one such case.
  • lyricalxenigma
  • 17th Jun 11
In response to the Expanded Universe section of the review, I actually agree. I'm no big lover of Twilight (though I'd hardly place myself within the hatedom— it's more of a neural position), but the potential for some of the backstories is staggering. I personally found Jasper's retelling of his days in the Civil War highly entertaining, and Rosalie's origins were interesting to read, too, though it seems the character development promptly vanished after that scene (*sigh*). Carlisle's and Alice's stories were underdeveloped but fascinating, while Edward's, Emmett's, and Esme's were left ambiguous. While I'd prefer a panel of different authors take on the backstories, should they ever be expanded— not for hatred of Miss Meyer's writing style, as I find it mediocre at best/worst, but rather because I'd prefer developed voices for each character. But I'm rambling. In short, interesting idea, though it's unlikely to be expanded upon.
  • YemiHikari
  • 20th Jun 11
@lyricalxenigma - I am going to say, I actually agree with you on this one. I would love to see the characters like that expanded, but not by Meyer. Sorry, but she just isn't good with characterization, end of story.
  • AgentDragonhunter
  • 20th Jun 11
People bash the book because they simply didn't like it. The things most people don't like are the characterization, purple prose, lack of research, no resemblance to traditional, respected vampires, and the fact that Edward and Bella are portrayed as an ideal couple, among other things. If you don't like a book, nobody should mind if you state the facts logically, like "I don't like this book because it has some very Unfortunate Implications. For example, Bella's relationship with Edward is portrayed as an ideal teenage romance, even though he watched her sleep from way before they were dating, and she wants to throw her whole life away for him..." So and so like that. Sure, that's not addressed in-book, but it's fairly blatant despite being unintentional. Although I'm not denying that Hate Dumb does come into play sometimes. Just look at the anti-twilight posts on My Life Is Twilight and TELL me that you didn't beat your head against the wall from their spam and homophobia.

But just to put this out there, a Hatedom as a whole is not Hate Dumb like many people, including some people this wiki, are convinced. In a series like this where opinions vary greatly, there is 'Dumb from all sides. This includes the haters who say "stop readin twilite it suks and its gay!!1", the fans who say "how dare u not lik da bookz u rabidz!!12" and the neutral parties who say "sthutup bout twilite all of u cuz haterz ar jus as rabid as da fanz if not a millon timz moar!!11!!!". Yes, rabid neutrals DO exist, and they're actually fairly common.
  • Theenmityofages1994
  • 22nd Aug 11
What people get pissed about is less that its bad, more that people think it is a handbook to relationships and the characters are good role models. Because they aren't. The reasons have already been mentioned, so I won't bother repeating. Also, the ridiculous filler, ridiculous form of vampirism (I mean, sparkling...really? How in God's name is that meant to make sense?) and utterly ridiculous rabid fans (ladies, I'm just putting it out there, in my opinion fixating on a creature that thinks of you as a tasty snack (and then angsts about it all the flipping time) is not a healthy idea.)
  • drdeathray
  • 31st Aug 11
Why all the bashing? It wouldn't be all this bashing if it was a good book. But it's a badly written book. Badly written characters, badly written relationships, badly written plot, a lot of Did Not Do The Research problems, and all the Purple Prose gives me an headache.

Sure there are other badly written books, because 90% of everything is crud. Most of these books don't sell, they are forgotten. But in the case of Twilight, Its Popular So It Sucks. There are real writers out there, who are unknown because Twilight has stolen their well deserved spotlight. And then it's the media, who loves comparing it to Harry Potter. Harry Potter is a wonderful piece of literature, so comparing it to Twilight is an insult. It's also the Twilight fans, who keep obsessing about it and try to force others to like it.

After a few years, the Twilight fanbase will mature, will grow up, and look at the Twilight series saying "Wow, I must have been really stupid for liking this". Wait this has already stared. Compare the fanbase of the first book to the others. It has diminished noticeably, because from 2005 to 2011 (6 years), the 13 year old girls, are now 19, have matured. As for the Twilight moms, I can explain this as Middle Age Crisis.

Good review though!
  • eveil
  • 1st Sep 11
^Sounds like jealousy to me.

This book got popular and mine didn't, I hate it!
  • Ailedhoo
  • 1st Sep 11
^Jealousy it is not.

It is not a matter of it being popular, it is a matter of Twilight not living up to the hype.
  • eveil
  • 1st Sep 11
There's apparently plenty of people who do like the book. Your opinion =/= Fact.
  • Ailedhoo
  • 1st Sep 11
Having the largest army does not equal victory as such be tought in the Art of War.
  • eveil
  • 1st Sep 11
So you're one of those "my tastes are better than everyone else's" kind of person?
  • Ailedhoo
  • 1st Sep 11
Actually its more of a "observation of the product's value then mear judging it via commercial earnings." This means I do not judge it by populity: a elitist I am not, just noting the conclusions of the sources.
  • eveil
  • 1st Sep 11
And yet a product's value is subjective, meaning that the closest thing you have to determine whether it's objectively better is by its commercial earnings.
  • JackAlsworth
  • 1st Sep 11
There's a very huge difference between "objectively better" and "more people like it" (which I equate to commercial earnings, although they aren't quite the same).
  • eveil
  • 1st Sep 11
^Thanks for completely missing the point.
  • JackAlsworth
  • 1st Sep 11
Okay, sorry, I read the wrong thing out of your post.

[/hurriedly backs out of debate]
  • desdendelle
  • 2nd Sep 11
(Obligatory 'has not read Twilight' disclaimer)
Well, this review is rather, balanced, so kudos for that, but I think that the Twilight series is problematic in two major ways.
1) The amounts of Fan Dumb it generated is atrocious; as was said before, thinking that a series is 'OMIGOSH PERFECT' is rather grating. I don't have a problem with being a Fan Boy / Fan Girl, and I am a Fan Boy of a few things myself (Star Wars, Forgotten Realms and The Battle For Wesnoth in particular) but refusing to admit that the object of your... fannage? is not perfect is downright annoying.
2) From what I gather, this series has a plethora of Unfortunate and just plain Creepy Implications, and (like The Bible), people take a little bit too seriously.

In order to post comments, you need to

Get Known