Kat Garoux wrote:

Michael Sheen is Aro
...

omg Michale sheen as switched sides! werewolf leader to vampire royalty!

I've never read the books or saw the movie (not really planning on seeing this one either) but if he's gonna be a vampire then I know that I preferred him as Lucian in "Underworld".  Not that I'm, y'know, biased... anything <_<

Mythologically a werewolf is a human that can turn or was turned into a wolf, all else is splitting hairs.
If they are 'real' werewolves or not, who cares?

And I find this whole OMG she totally screws with Indian folklore that's going on to be a tad absurd.

Last edited by Daninsky (2009-08-08 08:04:40)

Point taken, Delta.  Nonetheless, using Meyer's own words is a moot point.  She could call them carebears if she wanted, they'd still be werewolves.  To me, that passage just demonstrates Meyer's unfamiliarity with werewolf lore.  She's certainly entitled to poetic license, but I also find it distasteful when a Mormon lady from the Southwest presumes to write about a Native American tribe in the Northwest.

As I said, however, I think our sentiment on all this Twilight business is mutual.  I went to the bookstore yesterday to look around and was taken aback by the amount of knock-offs arising. 

I take it as a queue to werewolf novelists to get to work defending our beloved creatures.  The vampire novelists failed (for the most part), and we cannot abandon the werewolves to the same fate.

Sorry, like it or not, they're werewolves.  If I make a creature that is shaped like a horse and has a horn on its head that prances around rainbows, but I call it a herjaflutzit, it's still a unicorn.  And Meyer has already demonstrated her lack of folklore, so anything she says is kind of questionable.  She's hardly a cryptozoologist.

Last edited by Mymloch (2009-08-08 12:30:28)

Mymloch wrote:

Point taken, Delta.  Nonetheless, using Meyer's own words is a moot point.  She could call them carebears if she wanted, they'd still be werewolves.  To me, that passage just demonstrates Meyer's unfamiliarity with werewolf lore.

From everything I've read, she's also admitted to never actually reading up on vampires so there's no reason to think she'd put much thought into her werewolves (or whatever).

Part of me is all for anything that gets people out there actually reading books but I wonder  if any of the tweeny-boppers out there getting hooked on these glampires will ever graduate to anything better or if they'll just go back to MySpace and Twitter. Or worse yet, grow up to write (and publish) more of the same tripe.

For me, a werewolf could be anything that the director/writer/artist could imagine about it... tecnically speaking. It is also true that we all have some "common" ideas about them, and they could be considered "the truth" about werewolves. But going back to this movie (and some others) a "poof" transformation is an insult to our intelligence. It is hard enough to create a "believable" monster, and they insist on turning into a wolf with an abracadabra.
But as I said in a post before, the target of this film are teenagers and vampire lovers.

Mymloch wrote:

but I also find it distasteful when a Mormon lady from the Southwest presumes to write about a Native American tribe in the Northwest..

Sorry but that's saying that Indians should only write about Indian tribes and Jews only about Jews and so on...
that just doesn't sound right for me and would leave nobody left to write about Aliens.

ArcLight wrote:

Part of me is all for anything that gets people out there actually reading books but I wonder  if any of the tweeny-boppers out there getting hooked on these glampires will ever graduate to anything better or if they'll just go back to MySpace and Twitter. Or worse yet, grow up to write (and publish) more of the same tripe.

I think there's hope, lord knows I used to read horrible, horrible tripe when I was a young teenager. Completely embarassing stuff, now that I look back on it. I like to think I've got much better taste now, although I have gotten so picky it's hard to find anything to enjoy.

Last edited by Viergacht (2009-08-08 20:53:40)

Agreed, I guess respect demands that you give it at least a bit of research, but long as nobody gets actively slandered in her writing (apart from Vampires maybe *te-hee*) I don't care that much.
I freely admit I didn't even now that that was a real tribe she was writing about.
It is only fiction at the end of the day. *shrugs*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv4SCfEuYqg

The new trailer ist out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs79_5n848Q

There is a book titled "New Moon: The Official Illustrated Movie Companion" coming out on October 6th, 2009. Here's the link to it at amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/New-Moon-Official … amp;sr=1-3

Wasn't stressed about the acting, thought it was fine. The CGI of the wolves looked not as good as the first clip, but that's cool.

The whole fact that one lady's childhood fantasy about a highly unrealistic ever-doting powerful dangerous boyfriend is getting this much attention, and that yes, it really is that shallow, just astounds me.

Seriously, don't these folks have anything better to do? This lass apparently has no life without him, but I'm not sure why, except for the fact that he's 'dangerous' and 'exotic' and 'sparkly'. He does nothing at school but glower and get highly offended by the way people smell.

He on the other hand, has lived for over a hundred years, and for some reason, this 'poor ol' me' chick in this class of this high school is the ONLY lass he's ever loved. W.T.F..
His only dangerous trait is his absolute lack of a personality.

</rant>