Vampires سوالات for vampire شائقین & Twilight شائقین

bendaimmortal posted on Apr 08, 2009 at 05:06PM
I'm sincerely curious and very frustrated.

When I use CAPITAL LETTERS - I am not shouting. I am marely putting weight on the word.

When I talk about Twilight fans I don't really mean to offend anyone, it's just my impression on MOST of the fans seeing to all those I've come across. I do not claim I'd have met them all and I do not claim all of them are like that. Please don't fly at me in fury, it's not meant to be anything personal to you.

1.) Are there any old-school / old-fashioned / real-vampires's fans who ALSO like the Twilight...vampire?

- I have troubles calling the Twilight creatures that because I SO think they are not even close to a vampire. But instead like someone in DeviantArt so well said - they're "blood-sucking fairies". So I, am not liking them.

2.) Are there any THE VAMPIRE CHRONICLES fans whho also like Twilight?

- The series are like from a completely different planets in every possible matter and I think it's CRAZY that people assume !anyone! who likes the Chronicles is also into Twilight. I mean, sure any other vampire-related story is from a completely different planett seeing to Twilight but Anne Rice vampires and their stories are that even more with the Chronicles being infinitely more original and colourful in characters and storylines. Of course if a Twilight fan doesn't know anything of the Chronicles or Anne Rice vampires (which is very likely)...but they should first investigae the matter before...

3.) SO - Must "all" those who came to be "vampire" fans by Twilight, always assume that every vampire fan is into Twilight? (I'm not saying every vampire fan would be into The Vampire Chronicles either. This question is just a lead-up of the previous one.)

- Couldn't they think and look into the vampire myths before embracing the fandom with all "OMG You must love Twilight!!11 Vapmires rock, man!!11 EDWARD!!11 *drool-swoon-laeah*" GOSH. Or just...ASK before throwing Twilight in your face... Especially when Twilight is weighting on a teenage romance ((first from a teenage girl's point of view)) which wouldn't get to all of us anyways.


4.) How many of you wants to hit the Twilight author for calling her creatures vampires and thus becoming to twist the image of this creature for those who weren't familiar with them before reading Twilight, and making the old vampire fans' life in the fandom a pain?

- Me! Though if I got the chance I probably wouldn't because it wouldn't change anything and it is just a book. But I still want to. If you create something THAT different, you should also give the creature your own original name, so the creature that's been there for thousands of years known and loved, could be at peace with it's fans. I KNOW that when it's a fictional creature based only on myths, different visions are not wrong "because they can be anything one imagines!!" - but the point is what they ORIGINALLY and for sooo long have been thought like (in this case, demon-like and dying in the sun and so on)... you just CAN'T make them sparkle in the sun like fairies and have them able to live 95% normal human life (and not have the legendary fangs, of which absense also adds to the too-human point.) I'm sorry but that extremeness just crosses the line of good taste, in my opinion. She should've named the creature something her own - it could've been SIMILIAR to the word "vampire" but not the same creature.

So... there. Share your opinions, please. (:
last edited on Apr 12, 2009 at 09:25PM

Vampires 13 جوابات

Click here to write a response...
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک Ovybo said…
Yes to all your questions except #3. I didn't bother to read the rest.

Edit: Wait! I don't wanna hit Stephenie Meyer! She's an awesome author!
last edited پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک pixie09 said…
big smile
i think what we are all forgetting just a tiny bit is that "twilight" is a romance and i dont care if anyone says that it is a vampire book because it is not. stephenie meyer says herself that "the best part of a story is the romance." and the romance is the point of this story, not vampires.

ok now we have that sorted ...

yes they sparkle. yes this is wierd and different. and i think "blood-sucking fairies" would suit the CULLENS better than perhaps "vampires." .. but the cullens are not the only vampires in the book. the nomadic vampires (excusing the lack of scary fangs and sparklyness) are much the same as traditional vampires, are they not? .. plz tell me if that isnt true because i dont know heaps and heaps about the technical anatomy of traditional vampires.

okay .. i have kind of forgotten what the question were but i think that the general idea of the topic was that the twilight "vampires" and traditional "vampires" are too different to have the same laybel, yes? well i dont think so. stephenie meyer just twisted it a bit to fit her story, which all authors do and is fine, in my opinion anyway.

and again, this is my opinion, i love the twilight series, you can call me a gushy teen girl, its probably true, but im not going to abuse you because you dont like it, that is so immature and i hate the twilight fans who give us that kind of steriotype. to me it seems that if you say that you like twilight, people hate you because they think you are crazy, which i am not (hehe) i just like the book. alot of people hate the book fo certain reasons and i respect that.

so i kind of agree with what you are saying, but i dont think that it really matters because, like i said, twilight isnt about vampires, it is about the relationship between a girl and tormented boy, the vampire bit is an excuse

and i dont know if that answers your questions or not, i havnt read the series that you have mentioned, but might look into them coz i love reading, but that is just my opinion on twilight and vampires and everything .. idk :S
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک pixie09 said…
big smile
wow i didnt realise i wrote that much :D
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک bendaimmortal said…
"i think what we are all forgetting just a tiny bit is that "twilight" is a romance and i dont care if anyone says that it is a vampire book because it is not. stephenie meyer says herself that "the best part of a story is the romance." and the romance is the point of this story, not vampires."

I'm not forgetting that. My point has always been that that's exactly what makes it so fucking annoying and frustrating. I personally can't not-care that 99% of everyone but the author herself doesn't seem to comprehend that Twilight isn't a vampire book but that it's hyped as if it is a vampire book. Making it something epic in vampire fandom, where it doesn't really even belong. (Not that I'd think it should be praised as epic anything anyways, as it is quite an avarage book / story / plot with forbidden teenage romance and werevolves vs, vampires stuff.) So, I'm not forgetting that thing, that thing is exactly what makes this Twilight/traditional vampires fandom thing so...wrong.

"to me it seems that if you say that you like twilight, people hate you because they think you are crazy"

Now I wiash to make clear I don't think Twilight fans crazy and I don't hate any of them. How could I think teenagers liking teenage story, crazy or hate someone I don't even know? My problem always has been and for unknown long time from now, will be, that Twilight's labeled a vampire book, when it's not and it's abusing the traditional fandom. It's not just the physical appearance of the Twilight vampires, though it is a big part but everything with them. So it's not that easy to dismiss if you've been passionately in love with the traditional since before you learnt to walk... ok, ok, a little over-killing, lol, I learnt to walk when I was 1 and I fell in love with vampires when I was 5.

I don't hate anyone, I just disapprove Twilight fans not thinking and paying attention to what the book really is about and (with that) not caring about / respecting the traditional vampire fandom either - and those two matters combined....

"and i dont know if that answers your questions or not, i havnt read the series that you have mentioned, but might look into them coz i love reading"

Well, you answered on your behalf all that you were able to having not read The Vampire Chronicles. And yes, do read at least the three first parts, they're really great books. Not as worhsipable as the most fanatic fans make them seem like but truly great vampire books anyways.

And thanks for obviously reading my whole post. It's quite discouraging to have a reply that states "I didn't bother to read the rest"... Like, thaks for caring about what I had to say. :P
last edited پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک Ovybo said…
Well you can deal with me not reading all of it. Why should I read your bad reviews for one of my favorite books? I agree with pixie09 and I didn't bother to read any of your comment besides the last paragraph.
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک bendaimmortal said…
It was of course clear you like Twilight since you said yes to certain questions but since you by that also appear to like traditional vampires, I didn't get the rest was that unpleasent for you. As it didn't come too clear it's one of your favotiye book... So yeah, well, enough of that I believe since it was just misunderstanding and this is going off-topic.
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک musiclikelove said…
the twilight vampires are obviously very different. they are not much like the traditional vampire. at all. but the basic definition of a vampire is a blood sucking creature. there is no real set of rules on how vampires must behave, or how they must be affected by certain things. nobody knows what vampires are really like, or even if they really exist. most people see it as a myth (though i don't agree with that). so i think it's okay if people write about vampires differently than the "traditional" vampire. the twilight books were all based off of a dream, so it's not like Stephenie set out to change the way vampires are seen. she just made it her own and got creative with it. she didn't plan to originally publish the book, or for it to get as popular as it is. but it did, and it is the media that makes twilight appear as something "epic" when it's really just a twisted love story. it's the media feeding off of what a vast majority of people like. because that's their job. i'm a twilight fan myself and twilight is the first extraordinarily popular thing that i've been really interested in, but i know that the concept of vampires and what they are is completely different outside of twilight. i just love the books because they capture my attention and make my imagination run wild, which i don't get to do very often because i live mostly in reality. i'm not offended by your opinion, and i hope you are not offended by mine. i respect your opinion, and it makes complete sense. but it's the fact that i completely forget that the characters are vampires when i'm reading about them. i like to anylize, so it's sort of like seeing behind the scenes. it's like seeing what other people don't see in vampires. it interests me. i hope i don't get slapped for this, but it reminds me of wicked in a way. it's like things are not always what they seem, and sometimes there could be more to a story that people don't know. but from what i understand, that is exactly what you don't like about the books. but i just think that you're entitled to your own opinion, but i think differently. it always happens. all i can say is that everyone has their own reasons for feeling the way they do and these are mine.
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک pixie09 said…
big smile
i just want to make clear that when i said
"to me it seems that if you say that you like twilight, people hate you because they think you are crazy"
i wasnt refering to you, it is just the vibe that i get from people in general lol.

and yes i do see your point. with the whole "twilight vampires not being as they should and not even being renamed" thing coz im sure that if it was something that i loved being made out to be .. idk, sparkly .. or whatever, i would be annoyed :D and anyone who says that they wouldnt is lying, and anyone who says that its irrelevant altogether, well it isnt coz its the vampire spot not the twilight spot ..

and i dont think that it is meyers fault that the whole "best vampire book ever" title is being given to twilight because it is advertising. YES, she did give the "blood sucking fairies" (lol thats caught on with me thanx :p) the name "vampire," but she wasnt even going to publish the book origionally. i think that the title of "vampire love story" sells better and to a wider audience than either "vampire" or "love" storie on their own.

and yea .. thats all i can think of right now :D
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک Ovybo said…
Mkay.

All I have to say is:

Yes, the Twilight vamps are not "traditional" but they're unique. There.
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک Ovybo said…
You all have alot to say.
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک DarkSarcasm said…
LOL, blood-sucking fairies. XD

I tried reading Interview with a Vampire a while back... Got about halfway through before I decided it was boring and quit. I don't know about Anne Rice vampires being 'original' - don't they mostly fit the profile of the classic vampire?

Long before Twilight, there was The Lost Boys. That's when I really became interested in vampires. As a general rule, Twilight fangirls are younger teens who make generalizations, like I just did. =P They just can't see how anyone could dislike Twilight, I guess. Also, they're not used to the concept of originality yet. ;)

I don't think Stephenie Meyer did anything wrong when writing her vampires differently. She's a writer with a good imagination. One of the things I liked most about the books was the spin on the traditional vampire. Keep in mind that we can't know for sure exactly what a vampire is. We pick and choose characteristics that we think should fit a vampire, but there's no way (until a real blood-sucker reveals themselves, anyway) to know exactly how vampires work. Sure, they probably don't glitter in the sunlight (*snort*) or knock up humans and make sure they live to tell the tale, but that's my point - if there's no official story on record, why not make up your own story?
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک bendaimmortal said…
"i just want to make clear that when i said
"to me it seems that if you say that you like twilight, people hate you because they think you are crazy"
i wasnt refering to you, it is just the vibe that i get from people in general lol."

I know you weren't refering to me, but I wanted for my behalf, to make clear I for one am not one of those people you were generally talking about. :D

DarkSarcasm,

"I tried reading Interview with a Vampire a while back... Got about halfway through before I decided it was boring and quit. I don't know about Anne Rice vampires being 'original' - don't they mostly fit the profile of the classic vampire?"

Firstly; please, please give The Vampire Lestat book or The Queen of the Damned book a chance. (The film Queen of the Damned slaughtered teh story and characters, don't trust it, don't judge the book by it.) In the rest f the books after Interview with teh Vampire, more interesting characters come in, the stories are very different in tone (due to the narrator being Lestat instead of Louis) and Lestat himself is VERY different in personality. (Anne Rice literally had to have him say Louis was lying.) So, even if you don't enjoy Interview with the Vampire - you might very well enjoy the other parts of the Chrnicles.

Secondly; Yes, Anne Rice vampires pretty much fit the profile of a traditional vampire BUT they have been stripped of the unnecessary stuff such as stakes through the heart, no reflection and such cliches AND most importantly - they're characters and sociaty, heir world, has been taken into very in-depth, using the common vampire myths that remain after stripping the Hollywood cliches. So her vampires may be more regular, but their so very in-depth thought and written as vampires and as individual characters that it's still something positively different in point of view to the vampire world and character.

When I said the Chronicles are infinitely more original than Twilight, I meant the characters as they are (having nothing to do with if they're vampires or humans) and the storylines. Twilight characters are unoriginal and rather shallow, and the storylines are cliche, compared to the colourful and in-depth characteristics and storylines in the Chronicles.

"I don't think Stephenie Meyer did anything wrong when writing her vampires differently. She's a writer with a good imagination."

Yeah, well, I just wish she'd have used that imagination on making the STORY original, and left the creatures more like they're used to be.
last edited پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک
پہلے زیادہ سے سال ایک Rebekah_Mik said…
1.) Are there any old-school / old-fashioned / real-vampires's fans who ALSO like the Twilight...vampire?

Yes, that would be me. ;-;

2.) Are there any THE VAMPIRE CHRONICLES fans who also like Twilight?

Me ^-^

3.) SO - Must "all" those who came to be "vampire" fans by Twilight, always assume that every vampire fan is into Twilight? (I'm not saying every vampire fan would be into The Vampire Chronicles either. This question is just a lead-up of the previous one.)

No ;-;

4.) How many of you wants to hit the Twilight author for calling her creatures vampires and thus becoming to twist the image of this creature for those who weren't familiar with them before reading Twilight, and making the old vampire fans' life in the fandom a pain?

I don't want to necessarily hit her but I do think some of the concepts of Twilight are a bit.. much. Like the sparkling... :L I think the bad reputation that Twilight has was mostly caused by the first Twilight movie, which in my opinion was not very good at all and made people not take Twilight as seriously as she could have... I mean, the books are actually pretty good. (In my opinion)