Thursday, August 13

Stupid girls and their stupid vampires....

I finally caved and read Twilight. (No, I haven't seen the movie!) Honestly I must live under a rock because I had never heard of this bestselling novel until the movie came out. It looked to be something that a lot of teenage girls would be into. But two weeks ago, something weird started happening. One of my nephews friends (who doesn't normally read for fun) told me it was one of the best books EVER!!! I shrugged that off, but was intrigued when one of the "soon to be 6th grader" boys in my Sunday school class told me it was his favorite book. (The kid has three older sisters though.) Then my oncologist told me that "If you like Harry Potter, you will love Twilight." Was it true? Had my oncologist read Twilight? "It was really good" he assured me.

I was baffled by all of this. So I decided it was finally time for me to read it. Because of the "buy nothing challenge" and the over 100 people waiting list at the library, I had to track down a copy from a friend. Which, given the amount of worthless Sci-fi novels several of my friends read, (sorry guys) was a lot harder than I originally imagined it would be. (Apparently you can read a whole series about an intergalactic time traveling vampire(ish) girl, but Twilight is too over the top?)

Back story aside, I just finished reading it and I can officially say that I don't get what the fuss is all about it. It wasn't bad, it just... ended before it got good. I get it, Edward is dangerous and Bella shouldn't hang out with him. I didn't need the first 2/3 of the book to beat that point into my skull. I have no doubt that it made a good movie. So much should have been dropped from this story. The problem is... since the book ended just as the story seemed to finally be going somewhere, I have been sucked into reading the second.

But to Levenback... no... Twilight is not Harry Potter. Potter was a mixture of timeless, epic themes presented in a new and enlightening way. Twilight is a glorified romance novel.

No comments: