Isn't that where all those books should have ended up in the first place?[/QUOTE]
Awww...I was going to say that...
andreas_mercury · Member since
the girl in the twilight movie is ABSOLUTELy sex....
«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» · Member since
Just wondering is there anything that you people like???
What's wrong with Twilight anyways??
I liked it.
andreas_mercury · Member since
i think it was a sweet movie [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]couldnt be bothered reading the book[/QUOTE]
Lexx · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» wrote: [/b]
Just wondering is there anything that you people like???
What's wrong with Twilight anyways??
I liked it.
[/QUOTE]
They're pixies......
It's stupid.
john bodega · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» wrote:[/b]
What's wrong with Twilight anyways??
[/QUOTE]
The protagonist is a stalker. The dialogue was ridiculous. The plot is almost completely aimless. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]I'm just talking about the movie, I haven't read the books so I can't comment on those.
[/QUOTE]
«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Zebonka12 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» wrote:[/b]
What's wrong with Twilight anyways??
[/QUOTE]
The protagonist is a stalker. The dialogue was ridiculous. The plot is almost completely aimless.
[/QUOTE]
I'm just talking about the movie, I haven't read the books so I can't comment on those.
Well here are the box office numbers..
Domestic:
$191,465,414
+ Foreign:
$190,667,886
[b]
= Worldwide:
$382,133,300
[/b]
Not bad for a plot that is completely aimless......and I'm sure the sequel will gross allot too.
john bodega · Member since
I utterly hate doing this, because it's usually the catchcry of the mediocre ...
But box office receipts really don't mean anything. Titanic made more money than Gandhi, but Gandhi was in every respect a superior film - even though it was made fifteen years earlier using less sophisticated technology.
Twilight appeals to teenagers. You don't need any more explanation for the box office receipts. I don't think that's an inherently bad thing; if something appeals to the masses, then fine! Go for it, folks.
Mass appeal and high art do not always go hand in hand. They can, but that doesn't mean they must. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]If you are going to defend the story, start by telling me what's good about it. Don't tell me about it's mass appeal, because Rick Astley used to have that too and he really hasn't stood the test of time. Neither have the Spice Girls.[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]If your only defense is 'people like it', then that's cool, seriously - it's the truth, it works for some people. You only have to put 'Twilight sucks' into Google though, to see some pretty definitive lists of what is actually wrong with the book itself. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE](You also have to skim past a lot of morons just going "IT SUCKS IT SUCKS" but that comes with the territory).[/QUOTE]
queenside · Member since
i hate twilight! that's one of those movies i really don't understand what all the fuss is about (like da vinci code a few years back but that was controversal so i understood that and the movie wasn't that bad), plot, characters and story is stupid beyond words as well as realization of the movie (direction). that movie is like some cheesy teen tv show with bigger budget and like the worst possible episode of that kinda show. 2 hours i'll never got back
«¤~Mrš. BÃD GÛŸ~¤» · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Zebonka12 wrote: [/b]
I utterly hate doing this, because it's usually the catchcry of the mediocre ...
But box office receipts really don't mean anything. Titanic made more money than Gandhi, but Gandhi was in every respect a superior film - even though it was made fifteen years earlier using less sophisticated technology.
Twilight appeals to teenagers. You don't need any more explanation for the box office receipts. I don't think that's an inherently bad thing; if something appeals to the masses, then fine! Go for it, folks.
Mass appeal and high art do not always go hand in hand. They can, but that doesn't mean they must.
[/QUOTE]
If you are going to defend the story, start by telling me what's good about it. Don't tell me about it's mass appeal, because Rick Astley used to have that too and he really hasn't stood the test of time. Neither have the Spice Girls.
If your only defense is 'people like it', then that's cool, seriously - it's the truth, it works for some people. You only have to put 'Twilight sucks' into Google though, to see some pretty definitive lists of what is actually wrong with the book itself.
(You also have to skim past a lot of morons just going "IT SUCKS IT SUCKS" but that comes with the territory).
Zeb:
I can see your comparing Gandi to Twilight...but Rick Astley and the Spice Girls??? I think that's a really shallow comparison by any means.
You must remember this movie and its novels are more geared towards a "teenage" audience. While you may think the movie "sucked" all those devoted fans (including my own daughters) would argue otherwise. I watched it and actually expected something much worse. I just didn't find it that horrible. Anyone can dissect "any motion picture" and find something wrong with it.
p.s. You can put any movie title into "Google" and "sucks" to observe the negatives.
john bodega · Member since
Quick note; I was actually comparing Titanic with Gandhi, not Twilight. And the only reason I brought up Gandhi, Titanic, Rick Astley or the Spice Girls was that you brought up the issue of box office receipts. As only one of those four examples deserved the amount of money they've earned, I figured it might illustrate my meaning. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]As I've explained to Treasure Moment, even if something stinks (like Twilight), the fact that it has key features that appeal to a lot of people means that it does (on some level that doesn't work for me, obviously) have inherent quality. It's the same with My Chemical Romance. They're awful, but it works for a lot of people, so that in itself is a talent... I guess![/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]You are correct; any movie + 'sucks' can turn up a result on Google. Not all of them come up with very convincing results though. I won't fill the page with links here but I found some very juicy stuff on Twilight and I had to wonder if they were just making it up to make the movie/books sound bad...[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]But no, I've been told it's all true. And again; if escapism works for some people, then more power to them. If one were to evaluate the books on grammar alone though, they aren't worth wiping bottoms with. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]PS. I've made a couple of grammar boo-boos in this post, but to my credit I'm not trying to get a multi million dollar franchise started from my post.[/QUOTE]
Mr.Jingles · Member since
Twilight is pretty much a non-sense fad that will come and go.
In a way you could say the same thing about Harry Potter, but at least Harry Potter has sort of compelling and interesting story filled with twists and turns.
Twilight is a cheap romance novel for the 'Hot Topic' crowd of teenage girls. What makes Twilight so awful is that it compiles the same old forbidden love cliches, along with pretty vampires who happen to have super hero powers. That alone tells you what pile of crap those novels are. I'm actually surprised Stephanie Meyer didn't give vampires lightsabers.
