I am a woman

NOT a Twilight fan!!!

Well than your a woman with taste....oops now i done it heh

I enjoyed the books WAY more then the movie. Generally I always do. But I'll probably go see New Moon, for the heck of it, and I like werewolves, so Whoo!

It did the teen-angsty stuff, and was way drawn out, but heck, that's most teen movies.

I don't understand the whole twilight phenomenon. I have read all of the books and watched the movie only because once I start a series I have to finish it, no matter how terrible it is.

Some of Stephanie Meyer's ideas were decent but the books weren't written well. Perhaps they would have been better if she had written more beforehand. Then again they could have been just as terrible, who knows.

I'm curious as to whether she was writing to go to big screen? I don't recall much of a time distance between when the books came out and when it went into production?

I could swear Harry Potter had a break between the start of the first several books and the movies.

Underworld>twillight.

Kate beckinsale

Bramstokers dracula>underworld

No, Stephenie Meyer never even really planned to write an entire novel, let alone a series. Initially, it was just a story in her head that kept growing as she wrote it down. She was shocked at the popularity of the books herself.

As far as time from book to movie? Twilight the book originally came out in 2003. The movie wasn't in theatres until November 2008. (And she was still writing the last book of the series during the filming of Twilight.)

As far as her writing style? I believe the books are infinitely better than the film (so far). Though I do intend to watch the others. Granted that she had not had any books published before Twilight. But honestly, for an author who has written only a 4 book series along with the single title The Host....and ALL 5 are being made into movies? That is some spectacular luck, especially for a newer author.
(The Host for those who don't know has no vamps/wolves--it's a sci-fi novel and very different.)
The way I see it, even if her style of writing is not your "cup of tea" you should at least respect her in a professional capacity.
And if you didn't like the lines written in for the movie--that's all the screenwriter, Melissa Rossenburg. Casting, IMO left much to be desired for some characters. But essentially Rossenburg kept as close to the original story as possible.

Books and Movies are 2 entirely different mediums for entertainment, and so really can not be judged the same. You invest more time in a book, and so naturally, you will hear most of the people who have read it say they like the books more. And naturally in a roughly 2 hour span of film-time, there is no way to fit an entire book into that time frame.

Though I WILL agree that many of the various movies listed above are better films than the original Twilight Film (But Twilight was extremely LOW budget and the others in the series are spearing no expence so they should be better, along with bringin in a newer, more experienced director.)
Many of the above vamp-flicks are in my personal collection at present. --And I don't believe Queen of the Damned was mentioned yet. John Carpenter's Vampires? From Dusk til Dawn? The Lost Boys? just a few off the top of my head that have not been mentioned.

Exactly.

yeah they fukked the ending up from the original comic, but that still doesn't mean the vamps in the flick weren't badass

The only "Twilight" I care about is Rod Serling's "Twilight Zone".

How about Twilight verses Underworld? Now THAT would be a hoot!!!

tf73

hahaha werewolf rips edward in half as he's trying to apply his eyeliner

well, I suppose I'll put in my two cents.

1. I didn't like Twilight (book). It was okay...but I'm not going to waste my time reading the rest of the series. (I have no idea why people are so crazy about it.)

2. The movie ALWAYS ruins the book. (or at least every time ive read a book, then seen the movie) So it is even worse in movie form, I'm sure.

and that's all i have to say about that.

never even heard of it

I need to get out more

Ok, first off the Twilight series is geared to Tweens. They are the driving force behind the media hype and the ticket sales. To critique a movie for that age group without having a tween mindset is silly. Not every movie is or has to be of great cinamatic art to be a good movie for the age group it targets. Some times its just fun to see a silly movie for silly's sake. Would you be getting your knickers in a knot over the movie- Lilo and Stich? Probably not, but it was a movie that garnered rave reviews and had a long run with the under 6 set. Remember this, if there were not bad movies how would you know when a good movie comes along?

Case in point-- I love the movie May. I think it is the best acting by the lead actress ( I cant think of her name now of course ) and the cinamatography is without comparison. But not many people have even heard of it, much less seen it. Wrong target audience? Bad critiques by one or two movie critics? Not being sold by the big movie makers? Could be. But that doesnt make it a bad movie, nor does it mean it should be in a film archive.

JMO

I agree. They have made, and are going to make, alot of money off of that age group. (btw...Lilo and stitch was awesome. )
However, I personally don't like the movie, or the books for the simple fact that while they aren't bad, there are much better books and movies out there, and to cause this much fuss over something so blah...is mindboggling to me. It was the mindless crazed fans that made me nearly loathe twilight.

Mindless, crazed fans--That remindes me of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Fawned over, ranted and raved over, to this day still droves of people showing up dressed in costume to watch it, and yet I wont go see it. And thats ok. I can let them have their fun, just leave me out, thank you very much. Who I am to say that that movie is bad or good.

I'd like to see Rocky Horror. I have alot of friends who like it, but then the reason i read twilight was because i wanted to see what all the hoohah was about.

oh my, "Interview" was a horrible film. bad casting, bad acting, cinematography was marginal at best. movies are supposed to take you to a place you have never been and that piece of crap took me to a place i hope i never go to again. it seemed to me that everyone (yes, everyone)involved with this film sleepwalked through it just to cash in on the overrated hype of a fairly mediocre book...sound familiar?

see it in a theater

the audience is 90% of the entertainment

so I've heard. Well, it's on my list of things to do before I die.