Distracted wrote:Yep. As I've said before, Twilight the book appeals to teenage girls who rarely read anything because the author's target audience is teenage girls who rarely read anything. Ditto the movie, although my 17 year old seldom-reader griped bitterly about the movie because it didn't follow the book.
It followed the book it just rearranged some things to make up for the fact that a book-to-movie copy would be 14 hours long. They introduced Jacob RIGHT AWAY even though it was like halfway through the book before. They invented some friend of Charlie's that gets mauled by "an animal" (really the bad vampires) I think the purpose of that was to number one, insert another parallel plot line to keep the viewer more busy, since a viewer is more visually demanding than a reader, and secondly I think it was to create more doubt in the viewer's mind initially about whether or not the Cullens could be trusted, so it shows you some vampires killing some guy to make you think it's the Cullens... even though there was hardly a mention of there being "other vampires around" until they actually showed up in the book. Other things were sped up or simplified the way any book-to-movie is. I saw the movie first, so maybe that colored things... you don't tend to be a book purist if you see the movie, then read the book, then see the movie again. IMO, that's the best order to go, otherwise you'll just be disappointed (about any book) since they always leave things out.
Most of the complaints/critiques I see about Twilight tend to be along the lines of it being simplistic, teeny bopper-oriented writing, which I agree with to an extent. Here's the problem: If you started Twilight and you came to that conclusion, even in the unusual event that you gave it the benefit of the doubt and finished the book, you almost certainly didn't read New Moon and I guarantee you didn't read on any further. The series gets a lot - I won't say "better" - but it gets more mature and more contemplative than the first book. In this humble reader's opinion

I'll say one more thing about their "romance" - 'what do they have in common?' Well it's not really a practical romance, it's like a harlequin romance. It's not tryin to be a practical romance, it's trying to be a fantasy romance.