Hi guys, im doing a study on vampire movies, and twilight is the main focus. I was hoping you would comment on the twilight movies, whether you like them or hate them? Also, how do you feel about modern day vampire movies their changes in convention from films like nosferatu?
thank you.
[deleted]
I watched the first Twilight and I think it's a great movie for 15 year old girls who probably don't care about movies such as Nosferatu. I won't bother watching the second..
shareTwilight is the scum of pop culture. Thanks to Mrs. Meyer, vampires are no longer horrible monsters that are meant to be feared. They're glittering jokes. You would think those stupid Twilight fans invented the genre.
As for Anne Rice, I ( ironically, apparently) actually like her books for the most part. They aren't literary gems or anything, but they're nothing like Twilight.
I totally agree. I think twilight put the vampire universe to shame. Since Bela vampires have been sexually appealing, but still they were vampire! Rice may have contributed to the fall of the vampire, but atleast they were still vampires! Meyer just stuck the nail in the coffin. I hate how twilight fans treat it like literary gold, but they have no idea who bram stoker even is. Its ok to like something, but when vampires go from nightmarish creatures to a girls fantasy and wetdream, and the creator of the modern vampire is overlooked, then I just think it went too far. I had a fight with a twilighter whom held the books like a bible and bashed dracula!Atleast dracula wasn't a bitch, excuse my language. Yup, twilight is indeed the scum of pop culture.
If life is so fair why do roses have thorns.
Twilight fans think Meyer did invent the genre. :P
Not sure which movie discussion it was on.. One of the Underworld's in relation to Underworld 4? But fans are "highly annoyed" at movies like 30 Days of Night for "ruining vampires". Which is deliciously ironic and rather amusing from a Nosferatu fan's point of view.
[deleted]
There is a difference between interpretation (that's what Rice did) compared to a complete disregard for what a vampire is. Why sparkle? Meyer created a mockery that has little connection to the original nightmarish creatures, and turned it into a farce as opposed to a legitimate take on them. It's the same as if I wrote Halloween all over again, and turned Michael Myers into a homosexual with a fetish for wearing replica masks of Hollywood legends. It just makes no sense, and there is almost nothing that connects it to the foundation from which it was written. Vampires are ugly drink blood (Stoket). Some vampires have feelings, yet they must indulge (Rice). They sparkle, go to school, look hot, and have the emotional depth of a paper cup. Even if I accepted the stupidity of Meyers vampires, there is no emotion to support any of it.
If life is so fair why do roses have thorns.
I haven't even watched Twilight because the entire "erotic vampires"-premise infuriates me. I fail to see how anyone who's not an utter pervert can consider an undead human parasite "sexy" or "cute". What's next? Bin Laden in a porn?
Count Orlok would be the definitive vampire portrayal as far as I'm concerned, and I sure as hell wouldn't call him sexy!
You know..glamorized vampires came along long before Twilight..they just didn't sparkle.
I prefer my vampires evil and not at all sexy because, as someone else said, hello..they're DEAD. Necrophilia isn't my kick.
Twilight gets a bad rap and wouldn't get said rap if it called these things something other than vampires. If they were called "glowies" for example, who just happen to need blood to survive, I don't think people would go so nuts.
Authors have been killing the evil vamp mythos for a long time, though. Off the top of my head, not even counting Ann Rice, who did more to kill vampires than a week of daylight on Holy Water Garlic Island during Pin the Stake in the Heart week, you have Mary Janice Davidson, Charlaine Harris, Laurell K. Hamilton, LJ Smith..pretty much all of the new breed of vampire authors do it. TV is no better..I love, love LOVE Buffy...to geekdom levels I love Buffy but that show did vampires a disservice as well..castrating them even. Tru Blood, Midnight, Forever Knight, that show on Lifetime based on the Tanya Huff books, which I should have added to the book deal up there, that old Cliffhangers series, Vampire Diaries, hell even Dark Shadows didn't do vamps any favors.
It all depends on what you want from your vampires. To answer the question, I loved Nosferatu and consider it to be a defining and groundbreaking film, BUT I have no problem with Twilight and, in fact, like it very much. But in a different way.
Is minic a bhris béal duine a shrón.
Personally I feel that Twilight sucks and that there is absolutely no comparison with Nosferatu eine Symphonie des Grauens.
It would be like comparing a 4 y.o. drawing of an adult with the Mona Lisa. It's absurd.
I also think Anne Rice pretty much killed the whole vampire thing, even though I enjoyed the movie Interview with the Vampire.
I suggest watching :
- Nosferatu Phantom der Nacht by Herzog W.
- Martin by Romero G.A.
- Låt den rätte komma in by ALfredson T.
to some extent
- Bram Stocker's Dracula by Coppola F.F.
not
True blood, or Moonlight series, or 30 days of night..............
as for the college film student
why not compare Herzog and Murnau's interpretations of Stoker's story and in extenso mention Shadow of the Vampire by Merhige E. E.. I know the third movie should not be mentioned but as it some view of the Nosferatu filming as well, why not.
[deleted]
Exactly. Such a comparison denigrates the reputation of Nosferatu. These people are nauseating adolescents. Another comparison I'll add to that is Dreyer's Vampyr, even though Nosferatu is such a singular work of art it defies comparison, invirtue of the fact it's a film all of it's own, unlike the homogeneous pus they peddles as cinema that you see today. It's like when the director of Van Helsing said that people who loved Browning's Dracula and Whale's Frankenstein are guaranteed to like his desecration of 30s horror. What a very bad joke.
shareI don;t really think the two films appeal to the same people. Twilight is essentially a film for teenage girls, thats it. Different genre.
shareTwilight are not vampire films. They are films about high school drama and nothing more. Let the Right One In was the last great vampire film, the best vampire film I've ever seen.
Steven: Wait. There's another tradition.
[looks at Charlie]
Steven: Always check your candy.
Twilight is an attempt to feminize the vampire. I don't like it.
shareI. Hate. Twilight.
:D
I didn't hate the first movie completely, and I rather enjoyed the soundtrack for both the first and second.
But.. I don't watch a vampire movie to see how they've been turned into legal fetishes for the masses. I watch vampire movies to see mindless beasts kill people. Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens and 30 Days of Night for example. Top predator being relegated to shiny fetish is just annoying.
Having said that, I rather like Queen of the Damned and Underworld (first one). Underworld was stylish, reasonable action. Well done in my opinion. Queen of the Damned.. Not sure, stylish/arty? 'shrugs' I like it.
And I'll watch the Blade's.
But that's about it for pretty vamps. Walking talking ads for your local BDSM group does not make a good movie.
The main problem with movies like Twilight is that they do what other movies have done, but they do it badly.
I love Rome, and the sex in that wasn't exactly non-existant. :P But I despise True Blood, Rome did something well, someone threw vamps in and did it badly, the vampire equivalent of Spartacus Blood and Sand atually. Lots of sex, violence when there's no sex, and thoroughly boring otherwise.
And I'm repeating myself but it's still a valid point.
I. Hate. Twilight.