Twilight Vamps vs. Traditional Vamps
the issue of these different types of vampires have come up many times and i have to voice my opinion after some posts from my friends on twitter and in my life (boyfriend and friend):
HIM: "I miss the days when vampires would burst into flames and ash in the sun, instead of glittering like a sequin jumpsuit. :-("
another response to the books:
HER: "no i refuse to read a "vampire" book where all the basic concepts of a vampire are destroyed"
OKAY...who ever said those types of vamps disappeared? you are capable of reading about them as much as i love to read about the twilight vampires. i understand that Stephanie Meyer has created a very very different type of vampire, so different from Dracula, Lestat, Nosferatu, and on, but who is to say that the ones past down in mythology has disappeared, or even REPLACED AND DESTROYED??? I don't really believe Meyer's intentions were to even drastically change AND DESTROY what a vampire really is, she was merely sharing a dream. A DREAM. and using that dream to create the story that so many Twilighters have become obsessed with. everyone has crazy dreams where anything can happen.
It seems that those who are 'disgustingly obsessed'(<--quote from my friend, a vamp fan...) with traditional vampires think that its popularity has diminished. NO it hasn't, only if you make it seem that way. Many of my Anti-Twilight friends think that since Meyer has a different view on a vampire that she is 'violating' the original myths, that her view on vampires "don't count" because it's not like most traditional vamps. I'm not saying Meyer is right, but she has the right to share her opinion and view on it. But it's not like she's going to try and change the encyclopedic definition of a vampire. NO. she had a dream and she wrote it down and it so happened the love story and boundaries Bella and Edward were crossing is something that interests many, many people. It's dramatic. It's different. People are into that sort of thing. I do feel that Robert Pattinson has A LOT to do with the popularity of the movie because...well DUH. he's hot and he plays pale, emo glittering vampire pretty well. But I still love Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise and Gary Oldman for their vampire roles.
Basically what i'm saying is have an open mind. I REALLY REALLY DOUBT THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION THINKS THAT THE IDEA OF A VAMPIRE IS FROM THE TWILIGHT BOOKS. we're not dumb. people have grown up with the stories of vampires for hundreds of years, if not more. I don't think it is SO BAD that someone has challenged the tales of vampires. i mean give the story a chance? i dislike that there is this 'WAR' against new and old vampires. maybe i'm just trying to be an optimist and i want everyone to get along and be open about different views. Not have "reject and refuse" attitude just because it's 'different.' does this all make sense? i tend to ramble.
phew! ok i'm gonna watch the new moon trailer again for the 1,387 time :P btw, is anyone else squeeing and damn near crying when they see the trailer??? i'll admit...i feel just that :P
from a movie critic perspective rather than a fan-girl view, i feel that the movie is going to do very well. the way its filmed looks really really good and it seems they used much less filters this time. I was made aware by a friend that filters were used in Twilight to make it mostly blue which i wasn't sure if i liked it and i thought Catherine was trying too hard (still like the movie tho haha) the vampires look less pasty white too. it seemed like a 'warmer' tone throughout the scenes of the trailer, probably to match the, how should i say, body heat of Jacob? Like the movie is reflecting what Jacob is. OMG and the transition from guy to wolf was how i pictured it! with torn bits of clothes trailing behind in the wind :P anyways just some thoughts!
Click to viewEDIT:
i guess i don't want to believe that they are fading because i want to believe there can be a level of equality and a love for both. maybe my friends think they are fading...idk i'll talk to them. idk why i care so much!!! idk why i should care at all! like i said, ppl are entitled to their opinion on both sides...i do understand where people are coming from when they say it 'violates the basic concepts of a vampire' but are they really? i mean the only major obvious difference is they sparkle! which, to me, i'm just whatever about and i'm sure many others feel the same way because...ITS A SPARKLING VAMPIRE!!! i laugh like crazy and shrug it off after i watch or read that scene because we all know or are used to the basic idea of a vamp. but why do we love the twilight series so much? because its was a great story to read, a love story that, on some level, i related to Bella, emotional. ppl love drama. and now that the movie industry has made the movie and put attractive faces to the book characters (Rpattz, Taylor L, Cam and all them) its popularity was instant...because of those faces. i don't even know if the whole Traditional Vamp vs. Twilight vamp thing even matters in the eyes and heads of so many fans...
ANYWAYS, twilight vamps still drink blood, they still are pale and mysteriously attractive... they still can...die/dismember... or live for many years. but maybe...JUST MAYBE...if Stephanie Meyer never wrote about them going into sunlight because they sparkle, and we assumed that they are pale and don't go into the sun because mythological history taught us they burst into flames, would we even have this tiny war of Traditional vs. Twilight? if she left out the sparkle part, would the other aspects of her version of a vampire 'count?'
i can't believe i've gone on thinking about this for so long....whoa! i can't believe i'm taking this to a serious level. because should it be? IT'S FICTION. i still love love love everything Twilight and Vampires...such a fandom girl :P