The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

In your opinion, what would make a Vampire sparkle like in the Twilight series rather than burn up or turn to dust like everywhere else? I think the whole sparkling thing is ridiculous, but that's just me.

Well they had to do something to attract teens....I dont think they would love them so much if they just burnt up...Besides that the author needed some other way to let them exist in sunlight....To her and the followers its more "beautiful and romantic" if they glitter like diamonds.....

The sparkling is just a new idea for another author to tackle an obvious vampire/human coupling issue... I only watched the movie but i recall him being repulsed by his 'sparklyness'. Maybe the author explains the sparkling origins in the book???? Perhaps it is part of a curse or something??? Other than the curse of being a Vampire...

I think a true vampire would prefer the burn to the sparkle.

Yea but what do You consider to be a TRUE vampire, there are so many versions you can't say for sure what a 'real vampire' would prefer. Or even if they DO burn out in the sunlight.

Some don't even burn, period.

It's all up to the writer, anyway. Both of these ideas are 100% fiction and ridiculous notions to people who call themselves *real vampires*. But when we're talkin' fiction, there are no boundaries with imagination. I believe anyone trying to tell writers what they can and can't do with their imagination should take a trip somewhere book burning is commonplace- and realize you'd have a likelihood of getting burned as well just for liking vampires. Just don't read or watch it.

I find Twilight gets so much advertisement here it is ridiculous, and not by the fans. People who hate Twilight give it all the bright lights- they are making more and more money for the series.

True, but the "Twilight" version is the latest and most popular. It is a recreated myth. I have no trouble with the storyline because each generation of vampire story has, by necessity created it's own myth/legend.
Dracula has little relation to much earlier incarnations.
I am simply speaking from a very personal mythical persuasion. I find the "youth" version of the vampire much more satisfactory in "Let The Right One In" than in "Twilight." But that is a very personal reaction.

'Let The Right One In' is not even in the same category as 'Twilight'- that's nearly like comparing 'Interview With The Vampire' to 'Once Bitten' :P

With absolute respect for your opinion, Twilight is so incredibly "Hollywood" and Let The Right One In is original. Of course it is being remade in Hollywood so it will become as commercially cold as Twilight.

Movie tastes are subjective. Many people disregard things for the sheer reason of popularity- and that doesn't always equate to a bad product.

Or a good one. But agreed.

I think I agree with you both. Although I am not one for overly fantastic movies, it is interesting to see -as said before- each generations idea of the perfect vampires...but I must say I prefer the older versions and ideas of the romantc vamp, from the times of hunting and castles....not so much the over- glamorized seventeen year old vamp.

burn yes sparkle no the fact is that alot of movies are taking after the harry potter movies and trying to make it "kid" friendly the point is vamps do not sparkle

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying Twilight was Oscar winning material (even then it would have been jumping the shark and panned by people for popularity)... I'm just sayin'- gods I have seen worse and I don't get the big deal here.

I prefer the older tradition of burning in the movies rather than the "pretty" sparkling in twilight to attract teen and younger audiences

Why not both? start by sparkling and then little by little burning, I mean instantaneous combustion by sun ray exposure sound so lame and quick, I would like to see the effect like on hard metals when super heated in its way to ebullition into a molten state, like sparkling> and then scorching.

As for the debate on traditional vs. modern overview of "vampire" is biased in both cases, to take a side in fiction and the exploration of authors is irrelevant, for instance one can critique and have preferences but to say who is right and wrong is just dumb when you aren't the one writing, and to say: "well thats not the real vampire portrayal" then the question remains open why not? then one can conclude that the exclusion of turning into bat or being ghouls that rape in the shadows in lust for human flesh and blood have being vastly evaded in many other stories that most in here embrace and I don't hear any complains as for sacrifice of traditional or more so pure mythos of cultural compilation, as for "real vampires" in any case the book was wrote in the displayed or presentation of a "real" thing, is a story and people jump to many fences over a simple fictional point of view, I do not like the stories but to incline in a direction is to be ignorant of the history of the creature in mythology in contrast with theatric perspectives.

When I first heard about them sparkling I laughed and was like wtf were they thinking...I prefer the old traditional ways of vampires...this Twilight stuff should have just come up with a different name for the beings but I guess that wouldn't have attracted so many as it did...Now I am switching movie genres as a comparison...It's like the new James Bond, Daniel Craig... They should have named him another name but in the same service...They to wanted the brand name of it to get people to watch the movies...All I got to say is they (Twilight) did one helluva job marketing this movie to target a specific audience with great success unfortunately...

The author is Mormon. She purposely wrote the story the way she did because she wanted a fantasy series that she felt comfortable with her children reading (which are pre-teens and teens, by the way)... so they were written for 12 year old screeming, excitably, overly obsessive girls, to begin with!

with that in mind, i enjoyed the story. Made me laugh made me cry, made me angry... yeah, I'm a sap lol

all that being said.. I think the sparkle is a bit rediculous, but very romantic. The series was first a love story, and second, a supernatural story.. not the other way around... its a nice touch.. had something like that been in The Ann Rice Vampire Chronicles, I wouldn't have enjoyed them as much... but it was her take on vampireism.... my only hang up is that she's Mormon, but in my opinion, made Vampires (a source of known evil), very Angle like.... if that makes sense. :)

Yes i agree with the comment above.. She wanted teens to fall for the vampire characters. So she had to find a way for them to be in sunlight.

I will say that I did enjoy watching twilight, but it just wasnt my type of favorite movie....and just for clearance sake, as a writer, I would never ever say that someone was wrong for writing something in a manner that they saw fit. I have my right to critique, but I would never say that it was right or wrong to write it that way.

.... I miss the vampires we once knew as monsters....
HOW THEY STARTED OUT~
not love icons...
but I'm very much into horror...so...


ignore me...LMAO

They been a 'love' icon since the very first pop culture vamp: Dracula.

In my persective, the MORMON comment was uncalled for within this thread as religion has nothing to do with vampires. This would be stereotyping the vampire in to a religious debate rather then a burn vs sparkle debate.

Just because a mother disapproves of the way the vampire is depicted, does not mean her religion has to be an excuse for the presentation of the vampire myth. To feel comfortable with a sparkle instead of burn is a mothers instinct and by no means religious. Keep the kids safe from molevolent exposure by saying "the pixies sparkle instead of bite." What nonesense.

As far as the content of this thread relating to a "movie" that is still being hyped by those who supposedly "hate" it, I think those individuals need to think of something original rather then feeding the flames. Leave the subject be already... ~DJJarak~ I know you are really trying for new threads, but the same subject in a differant context over and over again is getting a bit irritating... Something bothering you?

Yeah! exactly what I meant. If we were to say that it broke the rules of the Mytho vampire creature of various cultures, blame it there to begin with. People need to think before judging, one thing is the traditional cinematics and another thing is the cultural mythos, and if you dismiss the originality of a particular author one has to dismiss all of them, unless you are addressing contrast between to perspective of the vampire imagery in the theatrical aspect independently.

Two^

Been holding back giving my opinion on the topic...but here goes.

Twilight like all vampire stories are made up...like vampires themselves.

Twilight was written for teen girls...in a teen format.Not all vampires burn up in the sun...many vampire stories have them walking blissfully in the sun.Yes the sparkle thing is quite silly but who really cares.Some people love the Twilight series and some do not...why bash people who do??

Some vampire stories it is called a virus or disease that causes the change.Yet no one whines about that....in other stories they have vampires as a monster in the shadows and in others they are dreamy people with flowing hair and expensive clothes.Each writer has their own version of how a vampire should be.

Darkwolfman I think that you are right...I think we have all been to busy bashing the writer and movie, when we should have just been discussing the creative point of view that the writer took, and yes some like it some dont...

Never claimed to like or dislike, I am just tired of multiple threads regarding the same subject matter.

Absolutely, need to let it rest already. Stop bashing the movie/author, if ya don't like it, walk away from the thread and perhaps the "multiple" threads on same subject will start to disappear finally.

P.S... The Mormon comment...that was not necessary for the topic of this thread.

~GothicRavenGoddess~ where is your proof of this allegation: "She purposely wrote the story the way she did because she wanted a fantasy series that she felt comfortable with her children reading (which are pre-teens and teens, by the way)... so they were written for 12 year old screeming, excitably, overly obsessive girls, to begin with!" toward the author? Is there an article of some sort pertaining to this? If this is pure speculation and judgement, keep it to yourself.

You all need some chill pills lol...

The Author said in a TV interview she wrote it after having a dream.She IS Mormon and explained why there is no adult situations in the stories so her kids and other teens could get it and understand the relationships better.Without worrying about having teen sex or being pressured into it.Her religion is valid in the talk about the Twilight series...even if some people dislike the religious talk.

Though it is getting tiresome about the many threads on the same topic.

Alrighty then... ~Darkwolfman~ provided the information. I still think the Mormon comment was unnessessary nonetheless. Thanks for the info ~Dark~.

blah blah blah... shes a mormon.. books are temple approved... blah blah blah
they twinkle cause tinkerbell got to them first...

*Eats popcorn as he watches the thread... Diminish horribly.*

Ok we're done with this one. Please refrain from opening another such thread. Alrighty then.