# Twilight will save vampire movies.



## Bungee Gum (Dec 12, 2009)

Despite what your thinking, it's not a twilight wank thread :/ i do love twilight but thats not the point.

Clearly, twilight hate is off the scale  and it made me think, it might just inspire all of those twilight dislikers to go out and grow up to make more legitimate vampire movies in order to save the vampire image as a whole. same can be said for all of the people who love twilight, but the drive to save the genre is probably much higher in those people who believe twilight ruined vampires for a whole generation. of course im not sure, and its just an idea, but i think that in the future past twilight, other vampire movies will become better in order to create the vampire image. im not saying vampire movies are bad besides twilight, i am saying they will get much better. i love sparkly vampires, but not if they were added to underworld :/


----------



## Chee (Dec 13, 2009)

> other vampire movies will become better in order to create the vampire image.



Vampires were _already_ created. Twilight raped them half to hell. 

It won't save vampire movies, Hollywood has taken a notice of Twilight's box office and they see a market for stupid teenage girls. If anything, it will go downhill. After all, thousands of Twilight ripoffs are being sold as we speak.


----------



## -Dargor- (Dec 13, 2009)

The abundance of more accurate vampire movies isn't the problem, its just the genre that doesn't appeal to loads of people. never was that big to begin with and probably never will be.

The only reason Twilight caught the attention is because of the pretty boys, the simple (yet still makes you believe you didn't waste X amount of hours on the book/movie)plot and it was something unexplored for most of the little girlies, hence made it unique.

Twilight may actually hurt the genre more than you'd think, I believe there were at least 2 vampire movies cancelled simply because Twilight was scheduled around the same time.

As far as books go, well, most of the stupid fangirls don't read anyway so nothing's changed there.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 13, 2009)

twilight is just trying to cash in on the current vampire popularity, vampires only need saving from twilight.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Dec 13, 2009)

Chee said:


> Vampires were _already_ created. Twilight raped them half to hell.
> 
> It won't save vampire movies, Hollywood has taken a notice of Twilight's box office and they see a market for stupid teenage girls. If anything, it will go downhill. After all, thousands of Twilight ripoffs are being sold as we speak.



Oh yes because making them stronger, faster, and harder to kill than ever makes them some how raped. 

Let's face it Vampires in the classical sense were OCD, couldn't cross running water and had a load of weird weaknesses tied to religion and other things that are seen as more outdated now. 

I think that Underworld pretty much took the path we should use for Vampires as a starting place, it was sexy, but not over the top, it was gothic, but not over the top with that either and they were strong but not ungodly overpowered. And it seems religious stuff has no effect on them.


----------



## Bender (Dec 13, 2009)

Twilight will destroy the movie industry and disgraces the very memory of the person who came up with the concept.


----------



## Chee (Dec 13, 2009)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Oh yes because making them stronger, faster, and harder to kill than ever makes them some how raped.
> 
> Let's face it Vampires in the classical sense were OCD, couldn't cross running water and had a load of weird weaknesses tied to religion and other things that are seen as more outdated now.
> 
> I think that Underworld pretty much took the path we should use for Vampires as a starting place, it was sexy, but not over the top, it was gothic, but not over the top with that either and they were strong but not ungodly overpowered. And it seems religious stuff has no effect on them.



No, they were raped because they became Calvin Kline male models with brooding angst.


----------



## Piekage (Dec 13, 2009)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Oh yes because making them stronger, faster, and harder to kill than ever makes them some how raped.
> 
> Let's face it Vampires in the classical sense were OCD, couldn't cross running water and had a load of weird weaknesses tied to religion and other things that are seen as more outdated now.
> 
> I think that Underworld pretty much took the path we should use for Vampires as a starting place, it was sexy, but not over the top, it was gothic, but not over the top with that either and they were strong but not ungodly overpowered. And it seems religious stuff has no effect on them.



I believe he's refering to Twilight's_ "questionable" _quality.

Creative variants and twists on classic/outdated ideas are fine, but how do Twilight Vamps resemble vampires? I've read some of the book, but I couldn't get through it, so it's an honest question. From what I've seen they have none of the traditional weaknesses, and the strengths they do have are a dime a dozen. What's the point of "updating outdated ideas" if your taking out what made them iconic in the first place? Sure, some of the vampire's original weaknesses are plain silly, but some of them, like sunlight, are a pretty big ones to change without a logical reason.

And there are plenty of vamps that would rape Twilight backwards.


----------



## Seany (Dec 13, 2009)

Chee said:


> No, they were raped because they became Calvin Kline male models with brooding angst.



 Pure brilliance


----------



## excellence153 (Dec 13, 2009)

Daybreakers is the saving grace until Eclipse hits theaters.  And apparently they're not making Breaking Dawn?

Honestly, I think we could *all* use a break from vampire movies.  It's tired, man.  Let's bring back mummies.


----------



## Disturbia (Dec 13, 2009)

On the contrary, Twilight has successfully ruined the world of vampires.

According to Stefanie Mayer:
• when exposed to the sun vampires sparkle instead of bursting into flames and crumbling burst into dust
• vampires easily fall in love with a damsel in distress who has no character development whatsoever
• vampires have characteristics of wussy fairies?

Is that the kind of concept that vampire movies should be based on?

Twilight isn't about vampires, it's about Stephanie Meyer's poor attempt at a novel.


----------



## excellence153 (Dec 13, 2009)

I'm going to go as far as to say that we're taking Twilight too seriously.  I highly doubt it will stand the test of time.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 13, 2009)

vampire popularity is cyclical, there's more to go, though there's a steady high interest in them


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 13, 2009)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Oh yes because making them stronger, faster, and harder to kill than ever makes them some how raped.
> 
> Let's face it Vampires in the classical sense were OCD, couldn't cross running water and had a load of weird weaknesses tied to religion and other things that are seen as more outdated now.
> 
> I think that Underworld pretty much took the path we should use for Vampires as a starting place, it was sexy, but not over the top, it was gothic, but not over the top with that either and they were strong but not ungodly overpowered. And it seems religious stuff has no effect on them.



What on Earth are you blathering about?

Twilight "raped" the vampire image because it was a horrendously written pile of shit with absolutely boring and shallow characters. And since when does power automatically make a series good? Oh wait, it doesn't.

Underworld was actually a well-written movie about vampires regardless of power. The characters were interesting and the story wasn't crap and teenage angst. That is also why older vampire stories are considered better than Twilight. 

Dracula is spinning in his grave.


----------



## Bart (Dec 13, 2009)

Disturbia said:


> On the contrary, Twilight has successfully ruined the world of vampires.
> 
> According to Stefanie Mayer:
> • when exposed to the sun vampires sparkle instead of bursting into flames and crumbling burst into dust
> ...



Testify!

Harris's Sookie Stackhouse books took the Vampiric Universe to a whole other level, especially with the True Blood series on HBO.

I don't think I need at all to mention King's Salem's Lot.


----------



## ez (Dec 13, 2009)

the only thing twilight will likely spawn is more movies like it


----------



## Banhammer (Dec 13, 2009)

Vampires had a long history of fixation by artists.

They were once just evil demons about as romantic as brain eating zombies
then they took the demon and made Dracula
Then there's also of cours, the methaphor of the tortured souls who are bound to live forever, destroy everything they touch as all their loved one die and wither around them, and while they are powerfull as shit, they're also to be forever cursed to never know true life, sunlight, or a life amongst others.
There was also the AIDSpire, who was also very solid
And the muck that eats itself from Buffy
And finally the fangless pretty sparkly marble chagrined bruting highschool going vegetarian woods frolicking night watching virgin, who wants to know your feelings and respect your body

Which one of these is more fairy than vampire?


So, in short

negnegnegnegnegnegnegneg


----------



## Slice (Dec 13, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> Underworld was actually a well-written movie about vampires regardless of power. The characters were interesting and the story wasn't crap and teenage angst.



Underworld was neither well written nor exceptionally good.

But it had a good portrayal of how a modern Vampire society and powerscale could look like.



And you simply have to respect the classics: put a Vampire into sunlight - he dies, if he does not die but instead sparkle you dont have a Vampire.

Movie companies are all about the money, the Twilight franchise effectively prints money. There will be more sparkling crap and less serious Vampire movies.

So no, it will not save the genre.


----------



## ROKUDAIMEHOKAGE (Dec 13, 2009)

*I dislkike the Twilight saga if I have to be honest, but I generally like vampires a lot, especially the classical ones.*


----------



## Bart (Dec 13, 2009)

ROKUDAIMEHOKAGE said:


> *I dislkike the Twilight saga if I have to be honest, but I generally like vampires a lot, especially the classical ones.*



Have you watched True Blood?


----------



## ROKUDAIMEHOKAGE (Dec 13, 2009)

Bartallen2 said:


> Have you watched True Blood?



*No, I've never watched it. I generally prefer single movies. The only vampires' series I remember having watched is Christopher Lee's series. *


----------



## Muk (Dec 13, 2009)

wtf

dracula never had trouble with sun light

why is everyone on the whole sun light = death thing

they should make another proper dracula movie where you get to see dracula walk around in his wolf/bat/human form in daylight and crush all those whiny shitty characterless vampire movies that are out there 

that includes the angsty twilight shit


----------



## Bart (Dec 13, 2009)

ROKUDAIMEHOKAGE said:


> *No, I've never watched it. I generally prefer single movies. The only vampires' series I remember having watched is Christopher Lee's series. *



Woh?

Seriously, I recommend you watch True Blood, as it's such a brilliant TV show, especially the first season.


----------



## Piekage (Dec 13, 2009)

Muk said:


> wtf
> 
> *dracula never had trouble with sun light*
> 
> ...



Generally depends on the Dracula in question, but even still it's acceptable for Dracula to have some resistance to sunlight because he's usually the first and/or the most powerful vampire in the verse he's in.


----------



## Gabe (Dec 13, 2009)

sorry but twilight made vampires lame for me.


----------



## Muk (Dec 13, 2009)

Piekage said:


> Generally depends on the Dracula in question, but even still it's acceptable for Dracula to have some resistance to sunlight because he's usually the first and/or the most powerful vampire in the verse he's in.


read the novel for crying out loud

he walked in daylight weakened and only with 'human' powers

but still he walked in daylight like it was no problem at all

that's how vampires should be


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 13, 2009)

Bartallen2 said:


> Harris's Sookie Stackhouse books took the Vampiric Universe to a whole other level, especially with the True Blood series on HBO.



True Blood is an awful series. It's what Twilight would be if it had more violence, blood, and sex. Suffice it to say, these elements do not make it a good show.



Slice said:


> Underworld was neither well written nor exceptionally good.
> 
> But it had a good portrayal of how a modern Vampire society and powerscale could look like.



Actually I'm willing to agree with you on this (though I never said it was "exceptionally good").

My point was that Underworld did something right, even if it was not the best depiction out there, where as Twilight just falls flat on its face.


----------



## Piekage (Dec 13, 2009)

Muk said:


> read the novel for crying out loud
> 
> he walked in daylight weakened and only with 'human' powers
> 
> ...



I have. That still doesn't change what I said. There's plenty of incarnations of Dracula and vampires. Of course the best ones are immune to sunlight.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 13, 2009)

wait, do twilight vampires have any new weaknesses since the sunlight isn't lethal to them?  No non-movie spoilers plz.


----------



## Chee (Dec 13, 2009)

narutosimpson said:


> wait, do twilight vampires have any new weaknesses since the sunlight isn't lethal to them?  No non-movie spoilers plz.



No. The only way to kill a fagpire is for the Volturi to do it (I don't even think its explained how the Volturi kill, I dunno, I don't remember) or for a werewolf to kill them.


----------



## Bart (Dec 13, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> True Blood is an awful series. It's what Twilight would be if it had more violence, blood, and sex. Suffice it to say, these elements do not make it a good show.



I beg to differ.

The Sookie Stackhouse books were released even before Twilight. True Blood is an adult, thought-provoking TV show, created by one of the most creative minds around, especially as it tackles very relevant issues.

I cannot wait until they tackle Warewolfs and Fairies.


----------



## Alexandritee (Dec 13, 2009)

Twilight vampires _have_ raped vampires. They're just laughable.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 13, 2009)

Chee said:


> No. The only way to kill a fagpire is for the Volturi to do it (I don't even think its explained how the Volturi kill, I dunno, I don't remember) or for a werewolf to kill them.



ic, so twilight vampires main weakness is being gaylords

btw, tylor lautner was pretty good on SNL last night.


----------



## mystictrunks (Dec 13, 2009)

Bartallen2 said:


> I beg to differ.
> 
> The Sookie Stackhouse books were released even before Twilight. True Blood is an adult, thought-provoking TV show, created by one of the most creative minds around, especially as it tackles very relevant issues.
> 
> I cannot wait until they tackle Warewolfs and Fairies.



Shit's still weak.


----------



## Bender (Dec 13, 2009)

A vampire that's a vegetarian

Nuff said


----------



## Bungee Gum (Dec 13, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Vampires had a long history of fixation by artists.
> 
> They were once just evil demons about as romantic as brain eating zombies
> then they took the demon and made Dracula
> ...



i dont think you got my point at all. i said because twilight was so shitty that people like basically everyone in the real world besides teenage girls will want to change the series into something more along the lines of dracula or underworld. of course there is always the possibility for those people to make twilight shit movies to get $$$$ but i think that a lot of people will make better movies out of this. no reason to neg me when its gonna happen, when better vampire movies will come out in the future because they think twilight sucks so they want to make dracula/underworld movies.

btw, i was tired it was like 3 am when i wrote that so if i didnt put s' or make clear everything that i meant to say, for example, i know there already is an image i just didnt type it like that because i was tired. common sense stuff.


----------



## Banhammer (Dec 13, 2009)

No. Your OP was void of comon sense, and I acted accordingly.

Specially since you made a new thread for twifags in which you didn't proclame your burning hatred for it.

Not that by pronouncing your burning hatred would make it any better, I simply wouldn't have negged if you had. Hell, there would probably be a poz. Srs buisness this rep thing.


----------



## Hyouma (Dec 13, 2009)

I hear Brad Pitt is going to direct a new vampire movie, based on the early years of Dracula. He'll be working with the producer of Twilight for it.


----------



## Graham Aker (Dec 13, 2009)

Twilight is shit.

It didn't ruin the vampire image imo, but it is a very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very VERY shitty film.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 13, 2009)

Bartallen2 said:


> I beg to differ.
> 
> The Sookie Stackhouse books were released even before Twilight. True Blood is an adult, thought-provoking TV show, created by one of the most creative minds around, especially as it tackles very relevant issues.
> 
> I cannot wait until they tackle Warewolfs and Fairies.



I don't know about the books, but as far as the T.V. show goes, it's crap.

For the reasons I already mentioned.



Chee said:


> No. The only way to kill a fagpire is for the Volturi to do it (I don't even think its explained how the Volturi kill, I dunno, I don't remember) or for a werewolf to kill them.



I thought dismemberment + burning was another way.


----------



## Rukia (Dec 13, 2009)

I agree with the thread title.  But I think you held back a little too much.

*TWILIGHT WILL SAVE HOLLYWOOD.  THIS SUCCESSFUL VAMPIRE FRANCHISE IS THE SHOT IN THE ARM THEY NEEDED.*


----------



## Red (Dec 13, 2009)

SuperNovaLogia said:


> Despite what your thinking, it's not a twilight wank thread :/ i do love twilight but thats not the point.
> 
> Clearly, twilight hate is off the scale  and it made me think, it might just inspire all of those twilight dislikers to go out and grow up to make more legitimate vampire movies in order to save the vampire image as a whole. same can be said for all of the people who love twilight, but the drive to save the genre is probably much higher in those people who believe twilight ruined vampires for a whole generation. of course im not sure, and its just an idea, but i think that in the future past twilight, other vampire movies will become better in order to create the vampire image. im not saying vampire movies are bad besides twilight, i am saying they will get much better. i love sparkly vampires, but not if they were added to underworld :/



Twilight haters are too busy being as much tools as Twilight fans to do shit, your optimism is wasted.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 13, 2009)

Red said:


> Twilight haters are too busy being as much tools as Twilight fans to do shit, your optimism is wasted.



I hope you aren't grouping everyone together when you say that, because some people have legitimate reasons for disliking Twilight other than just hopping on the bandwagon.


----------



## Red (Dec 13, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> *I hope you aren't grouping everyone together when you say that*, because some people have legitimate reasons for disliking Twilight other than just hopping on the bandwagon.


Of course I'm not. Twilight is horrid and for very real reasons.


----------



## Corruption (Dec 14, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> I don't know about the books, but as far as the T.V. show goes, it's crap.
> 
> For the reasons I already mentioned.



So True Blood is crap because it has violence and sex?...sure.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 14, 2009)

Darkness_Surrounding said:


> So True Blood is crap because it has violence and sex?...sure.



No, it fails naturally just like your attempt to use sarcasm.

It's not the fact that True Blood has these elements in it, but rather that they stick them in randomly and try to rely on them to draw in an audience.

Then you get to the main characters. Mary Sookie Sue with randomly, unexplained telepathy falls in love with tall, dark and handsome Bill because she can't read his mind (sound familiar?)

Then there is the issue of the "gay rights" parallel. Comparing homosexuals to vampires in order to convey the idea of giving social equality and rights was possibly one of the worst idea ever. The show demonstrates vampires as violent, powerful creatures who live by drinking the blood of humans and you want to compare gays to this image in order to achieve positive results? A-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The point is that True Blood is a shallow show with cliché characters that does a horrible job at trying to make a comparison while relying on sex and violence to gain viewers. 

Is it as bad as Twilight? No, but in no way does that make it good.


----------



## Bart (Dec 14, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> Then you get to the main characters. Mary Sookie Sue with randomly, unexplained telepathy falls in love with tall, dark and handsome Bill because *she can't read his mind (sound familiar?)*



You do know that the first five Sookie Stackhouse books were written before the first Twilight book, right?


----------



## Chee (Dec 14, 2009)

True Blood looks dumb, every time I sat down to give it a chance there was always a sex scene going on. I stopped trying to get into it after I saw the stupid orgy in the middle of a forest.

I agree with Narcissus.


----------



## MartialHorror (Dec 14, 2009)

I doubt it. How many vampire movies have you seen since Twilight?

Cirque du Freak: The Vampire Assistant  was one, and it was okay, easily better than Twilight......but it also flopped.

Translmania isn't doing good either.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 14, 2009)

Bartallen2 said:


> You do know that the first five Sookie Stackhouse books were written before the first Twilight book, right?



So you've said. But you missed the point.

I was not implying that True Blood copied Twilight, but rather drawing a comparison. In both stories the main characters fall in love for a very shallow and idiotic reason. 

Then there are all the other reasons I named for the show being bad.


----------



## beautiful scorpio (Dec 14, 2009)

Don't get me wrong i actually like twilight as a love story, but not as a vampire movie.  I mean when i think of vampire and  this is just me.  But i think of blood thirsty slashers that don't have emotions for humans other than for food.  So twilight is a very good love story but horrible vampire story in my opinion.  You could make edward anything mytholical and the movie would still work for me.


----------



## Chee (Dec 14, 2009)

beautiful scorpio said:


> Don't get me wrong i actually like twilight as a love story, but not as a vampire movie.  I mean when i think of vampire and  this is just me.  But i think of blood thirsty slashers that don't have emotions for humans other than for food.  So twilight is a very good love story but horrible vampire story in my opinion.  You could make edward anything mytholical and the movie would still work for me.



Why do you think its a good love story?

Bella never laughs or smiles around Edward and they don't have very much in common. They disagree and fight most of the time, more than a couple should.

They only "love" each other because Bella smells good to Edward and Edward looks good to Bella.

Seems very shallow.


----------



## Banhammer (Dec 14, 2009)

When you look at a vampire, you're not looking at a shy beautifull marbeled 17 year old virgin.

You're looking at the thing that killed him


----------



## Shock Therapy (Dec 14, 2009)

MartialHorror said:


> I doubt it. How many vampire movies have you seen since Twilight?
> 
> Cirque du Freak: The Vampire Assistant  was one, and it was okay, easily better than Twilight......but it also flopped.
> 
> Translmania isn't doing good either.



lmao cirque du freak officially scared me away when I saw a preview of it when I watched transformers 2.

guy: so you're a vampire
vampire: yes, want to become one?
guy: sure

i mean, what kind of pickup line is that?


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Dec 14, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> What on Earth are you blathering about?
> 
> Twilight "raped" the vampire image because it was a horrendously written pile of shit with absolutely boring and shallow characters. And since when does power automatically make a series good? Oh wait, it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Wow, everyone in this thread is mentioning Underworld(I'm not a big fan of it.)what about the classics? From Dusk Till Dawn, John Carpenter's Vampires, and Blade(favorite vampire movie of all time).Now those were good vampire movies.



Darkness_Surrounding said:


> So True Blood is crap because it has violence and sex?...sure.


It's surprising that Alan Ball.who made True Blood made a show called Six Feet Under. In that show Michael C. Hall was in it as his very first role of TV(he was a side character).It's pretty damn ironic that after Alan Ball let Michael go, he started playing the "America's Favorite Serial Killer" role(if you watch Dexter you'll know what I mean.). And Dexter has much higher ratings.


----------



## MartialHorror (Dec 14, 2009)

rawrawraw said:


> lmao cirque du freak officially scared me away when I saw a preview of it when I watched transformers 2.
> 
> guy: so you're a vampire
> vampire: yes, want to become one?
> ...



lol, it wasn't said like that in the trailer. the problem with Cirque du freak is that it advertised itself as a comedy. As a movie, it went back and forth, unsure if it wanted to be a drama, action, fantasy or comedy. 

Twilight did have a poor love story. Edward talks about how vampires have  a natural allure to humans(his whole 'everything about me lures you in...my looks, smell, etc speech), explaining Bella's love. 

In New Moon, they almost make it look like either that Bella is using him to become immortal, or dating a vampire is just a thrill to her. I mean, she sees him when he's doing dangerous shit, and does anyone find it odd that the only guy she CONSIDERS is a wolf-man? they make her attraction to these guys seem like a fetish for mythical creatures. 

As for Edward, as said, he liked her smell. The movie also made a point at how he was attracted to her because he couldn't read her mind. Maybe if they did something where it was revealed that he could not read the minds of those he loved or something.......But it turns out that it's a natural ability that Bella has.

What kind of bullshit love is that? Twilight is not a good love story, it's a good female fantasy. thats all.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 14, 2009)

Chee said:


> Why do you think its a good love story?
> 
> Bella never laughs or smiles around Edward and they don't have very much in common. They disagree and fight most of the time, more than a couple should.
> 
> ...



But don't forget Chee! Edward also can't read Bella's mind! That makes her SUCH an interesting person!



Goku1003 said:


> Wow, everyone in this thread is mentioning Underworld(I'm not a big fan of it.)what about the classics? From Dusk Till Dawn, John Carpenter's Vampires, and Blade(favorite vampire movie of all time).Now those were good vampire movies.



I only mentioned Underworld because I was responding to someone who had used it before me.

And if From Dusk Till Dawn is the movie I remember, that was not a good vampire film either.


----------



## Chee (Dec 14, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> But don't forget Chee! Edward also can't read Bella's mind! That makes her SUCH an interesting person!





She's painfully dull, you don't have to be a mind reader to tell there's nothing going on up there.


----------



## Rukia (Dec 14, 2009)

I can't wait to see Edward and Bella share more kisses.

And New Moon was so much better than the first movie because of the Edward vs. Jacob dynamic.

Can you guys fucking imagine how good the 3rd movie will be?


----------



## -Dargor- (Dec 14, 2009)

I don't remember ever seing a good vampire movie to this day, the closest thing being cheesy action flicks such as blade or underworld, the later falling short in the end. If a vampire story is based on a love story, it will usually suck. If its only action, it won't be that great. Balancing it out is something very few people have managed to achieve troughout the years.

Interview with a vampire was decent despite being a pale version of the book, but its what, 10 years old now? 

I'm still waiting for anything to come close to , be it books, tv-shows or movies.


----------



## Rukia (Dec 14, 2009)

Interview with the Vampire was far too gay for my liking.

And the only thing worse than an adult Kirsten Dunst is a preteen Kirsten Dunst.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 15, 2009)

pre teen kirsten dunst = grade AAA loli


----------



## Rukia (Dec 15, 2009)

You are thinking of Natalie Portman, dawg.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 15, 2009)

her tooooooooo, thats why they were cast.

forget about wats her name , twilight 2, cat in the hat, war of the worlds...

grossss


----------



## Rukia (Dec 15, 2009)

Dakota Fanning?


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Dec 15, 2009)

Rukia said:


> Dakota Fanning?



lol, u knew her name 

AAAA loli


----------



## Gabe (Dec 15, 2009)

Interview with the Vampire biggest problem was not following the book thoroughly.same problem they had with queen of the damn. they need to follow the books not change the story. john carpanters vampires was a good movie. james wood was goo in the movie.


----------



## Chee (Dec 15, 2009)

I need to read Interview with a Vampire so I can know these big changes everyone mentions.


----------



## -Dargor- (Dec 15, 2009)

Rukia said:


> Interview with the Vampire was far too gay for my liking.


Yeah they didn't make that very clear in the movie, in the books they do explain however that vampires are asexual, meaning they become so out of touch with life in general that genders don't matter to them anymore.

The author seems to like playing with these themes to mess around with the readers tho, I found lestat going out with his own mother for a while quite disturbing at the time


----------



## the_notorious_Z.É. (Dec 15, 2009)

-Dargor- said:


> Yeah they didn't make that very clear in the movie, in the books they do explain however that vampires are asexual, meaning they become so out of touch with life in general that genders don't matter to them anymore.



It's also explained that their interest in other vampires and humans has no sexual connotation since after all they don't really have any sexual desire to begin with.


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Dec 15, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> But don't forget Chee! Edward also can't read Bella's mind! That makes her SUCH an interesting person!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You might be thinking about the sequels.


----------



## Vanity (Dec 16, 2009)

Well, Twilight might have made vampires a lot less cool to a lot of people....

Personally I'm not going to let it take away from the awesomeness of some other vampires though that were badass.

I read the original Dracula book a while back. It's a good book.


----------



## Muk (Dec 16, 2009)

Kyasurin Yakuto said:


> Well, Twilight might have made vampires a lot less cool to a lot of people....
> 
> Personally I'm not going to let it take away from the awesomeness of some other vampires though that were badass.
> 
> I read the original Dracula book a while back. It's a good book.



the only good book about vampires


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Dec 16, 2009)

Kyasurin Yakuto said:


> Well, Twilight might have made vampires a lot less cool to a lot of people....
> 
> Personally I'm not going to let it take away from the awesomeness of some other vampires though that were badass.
> 
> I read the original Dracula book a while back. It's a good book.


You should read Salem's Lot by Stephen King.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 17, 2009)

Stephen King did say "Myer can't write worth a darn" so you know he knows what he is talking about.


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Dec 17, 2009)

Narcissus said:


> Stephen King did say "Myer can't write worth a darn" so you know he knows what he is talking about.


One twitard at my school said that king is full of shit. Lol.


----------



## Jotun (Dec 17, 2009)

The Anne Rice vamps are the old Twilight vamps, much more tolerable, but the same amount of angst. I thought Interview with a Vampire was great for a movie crossover, Brad and Tom before all the stupid hollywood drama 

We need more Lost Boys and less Lost Boys 2 if you know what I mean D:


----------



## Chee (Dec 17, 2009)

Goku1003 said:


> One twitard at my school said that king is full of shit. Lol.



Did you punch her in the face?


----------



## Taleran (Dec 17, 2009)

I find the entire concept of Vampires Boring


----------



## Butcher (Dec 17, 2009)

Goku1003 said:


> One twitard at my school said that king is full of shit. Lol.


Meyer>King

Cannot calculate! 



Taleran said:


> I find the entire concept of Vampires Boring


Me to,seeing a vampire in a movie or Book does not make me read it,the story or characters makes me read it.

Some kids at my school say:
"Holy fuck,there is a vampire in that book?!I have to read it!"


----------



## Jotun (Dec 17, 2009)

Well Vampire stories are generally moody/thriller types. 

I will read almost anything with a zombie however.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 18, 2009)

Goku1003 said:


> One twitard at my school said that king is full of shit. Lol.



One of the world's most accomplished writers is full of shit because he made a negative statement on a poorly written series? Hell, he even goes on to give the real reason why the series is so popular.

As Chee suggests, someone needs to punch this girl in the face.


----------



## Catterix (Dec 18, 2009)

So has anyone actually read this thread yet? I remember leaving in disgust when I read the replies.

Just for those too stupid to read the OP, they said that because Twilight is so shit, other vampire film makers will work harder to protect the vampire name. They won't want vampire films stuck with the Twilight stigma, and will work harder to make better Vampire movies.


----------



## Chee (Dec 18, 2009)

Catterix said:


> So has anyone actually read this thread yet? I remember leaving in disgust when I read the replies.
> 
> Just for those too stupid to read the OP, they said that because Twilight is so shit, other vampire film makers will work harder to protect the vampire name. They won't want vampire films stuck with the Twilight stigma, and will work harder to make better Vampire movies.



Yea, first post:



> It won't save vampire movies, Hollywood has taken a notice of Twilight's box office and they see a market for stupid teenage girls. If anything, it will go downhill. After all, thousands of Twilight ripoffs are being sold as we speak.



There are thousands of teenage girls reading this new age vampire crap and they are going to write thousands of idiotic ripoffs of it. If anything we'll have more crap than gold. Not helping.

All of the good vampire flicks are being pushed aside for waxed abusive dicks.


----------



## Narcissus (Dec 18, 2009)

Catterix said:


> So has anyone actually read this thread yet? I remember leaving in disgust when I read the replies.



Funny, considering that I nearly left in disgust the first time I opened this thread because I actually read the OP. 



> Just for those too stupid to read the OP, they said that because Twilight is so shit, other vampire film makers will work harder to protect the vampire name. They won't want vampire films stuck with the Twilight stigma, and will work harder to make better Vampire movies.



Twilight is insanely successful and making a lot of money. Wanna take a guess as to what that means there, skippy? As my good friend Chee as stated, the chances are exactly the opposite of what the OP suggests. They would want to make more movies that are similar to Twilight in order to ride on its success.

So as my other good friend, Banhammer, stated earlier in the thread, the OP was void of any common sense. And you're claiming that the people who had a negative reaction to the thread are stupid?

The irony.


----------



## Pandorum (Dec 18, 2009)

SuperNovaLogia said:
			
		

> Twilight will save vampire movies


----------



## Talon. (Dec 18, 2009)

the OP has a very rational and plausible theory, but nevertheless (?) Twilight is nothing more than a fad. Thats it. A fad. Daybreakers>Twilight.


----------



## mystictrunks (Dec 18, 2009)

Really Twilight won't have much influence on the vampire genre, but that's simply because it was always filled to the brim with self-insert Mary Sues in poorly written love stories. You might see a few more of them turned into movies for a couple of years but honestly in the world of film vampires are like organized crime or athletes; there's going to be a hundred movies a year based around them so you're always going to get something good.


----------



## Mαri (Mar 9, 2010)

@OP:

Thousands of people read Twilight a day, and many aspire to become authors/directors. If anything Twilight will _ruin_ the vampire genre.


----------



## Chee (Mar 9, 2010)

Oh, thanks for bumping an old thread, Mari.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Mar 9, 2010)

you guys are just haters

Twilight is the best romance drama of the last half century AT LEAST. I can't even think of a better romance saga!


----------



## MartialHorror (Mar 9, 2010)

It will harm them.

For one, in all honesty, vampires have never been all that great during film. They're always becoming cliched. 

Bela made them cool in his Dracula, but then all the imitations came in and made it tired. The hammer films actually did a good job with them, but that didn't catch on well outside of hammer....(and hammer eventually died).

Hammer treated vampirism based on the characters. To some, it was sex. To others, it was immortality. To others, it was none. 

But during the 80's vampires became whiney bitchty emo brats. During the 90's, they became fodder for Buffy and Blade.

And now they've evolved to whiney emo brats again......

Plus, most vampire movies are flopping. Daybreakers underperformed and Cirque du Freak flopped.


----------



## Whip Whirlwind (Mar 9, 2010)

Twilight will save vampire movies....huh, of course! Kinda like how the holocaust saved the Jews, right?


----------



## Yakuza (Mar 9, 2010)

> *Twilight will save vampire movies.*


I stopped reading there and neg you.


----------



## Bungee Gum (Mar 9, 2010)

Yakuza said:


> I stopped reading there and neg you.



Thank you.


----------



## Platinum (Mar 9, 2010)

If it's a choice between the survival of the vampire genre or more twilight esque movies, I rather just have the genre die while it still has some dignity.

But no matter what Twilight won't be a factor in the survival of Vampire movies. It's just a shitty fad.


----------



## C. Hook (Mar 9, 2010)

I've actually read Dracula, and... It's really not as good as some people give it credit for. The first few chapters with Dracula's castle are good, but then it all gets horribly boring and tedious when it moves to the island. Dracula is an awesome as hell character with his nostalgia and arrogance, but no one else really stand out. Plus, you have some really easy to spot misogynist themes.

Dracula himself is pretty cool, what with the shape shifting, hypnosis, controlling wolves, crawling up and down walls like a lizard, and smooth demeanor. Oddly enough, Dracula is described as physically ugly.


----------



## Koi (Mar 9, 2010)

Did I miss the part where vampire movies were doing shitty to begin with?


----------



## Gabe (Mar 9, 2010)

i hope the op is messing around who in their write mind think twilight will save vampire movies. they just ruined them.


----------



## Superrazien (Mar 9, 2010)

Twilight may save Vampires, in the sense of bringing more money. But Twilight sucks; try and debate that it doesn't. Twilight is not saving Vampires as far as quality goes.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Mar 9, 2010)

Whatever dignity the Vampire genre had it was Torn Asunder by a Book Series with 1 Dimensional plot Sparkling Vampires who don't ash by sunlight and Lupins who transform in broad daylight - a "Full Moon". So not only has Twilight killed the Vampire genre but it has terminated the Werewolf genre as
well. Nice Going You know I'd pay good money to watch the actors die in a feiry car crash and watch a mob of Twilight fans be killed when the car explodes.


----------



## MartialHorror (Mar 10, 2010)

C. Hook said:


> I've actually read Dracula, and... It's really not as good as some people give it credit for. The first few chapters with Dracula's castle are good, but then it all gets horribly boring and tedious when it moves to the island. Dracula is an awesome as hell character with his nostalgia and arrogance, but no one else really stand out. Plus, you have some really easy to spot misogynist themes.
> 
> Dracula himself is pretty cool, what with the shape shifting, hypnosis, controlling wolves, crawling up and down walls like a lizard, and smooth demeanor. Oddly enough, Dracula is described as physically ugly.



I dont even think I got through the book, but tbh, I was young. Then again, I do remember reading Frankenstein and liking it.

I think they need to do another Dracula movie. That's the type of movie that needs to be made for every generation, and the 90's Dracula movie didn't do it for me.


----------



## Narcissus (Mar 11, 2010)

This shitty thread really didn't need to be bumped.


----------



## Rukia (Mar 11, 2010)

The trailer for the next film looks really promising.


----------



## Narcissus (Mar 11, 2010)

It is just sickening that the 11 second trailer on Youtube has over 3 million views and it's only been out since yesterday.

And they really need to stop advertising the werewolf's half-naked body so much.


----------



## Chee (Mar 11, 2010)

He's ugly as fuck. I don't get why teen girls like him.


----------



## RAGING BONER (Mar 11, 2010)

i don't understand how you soulless monsters don't feel chills when watching that trailer


----------

