A Handy Shanville Monthly Roundup

[atraphoenix]

If you aren't already subscribed, I highly recommend subscribing to the Shanville Monthly, a handy newsletter that Darren sends out once a month, more or less. It's always full of interesting and amusing bits and pieces.

I thought I'd pick out the best bits for your perusal here.

Comments

[stitchfrequency]

I totally agree with your point about Twilight...even John C. Reilly said in an interview that the Twilight wave "wasn't quite cresting" when CDF was made, and I wish more people would be aware of that.
But I guess that's just one of the obvious consequences of the movie being marketed the way it was, and released when it was (i.e. right when the hype for the next Twilight movie is starting to ramp up). :(

The only thing I didn't like about the obvious lead-in to a sequel at the end of the movie was that I'm still kind of unsure about there even being the possibility of a sequel, so for them to leave it so open like that is...I don't know, giving me false hope or something? I just didn't know how to react to that ending - should I take it as assurance that there will be a sequel? Or should I still take it with a grain of salt?
I've been trying to find interviews where the actors say anything about a sequel, and they're all just kind of coy about it, haha

[atraphoenix]

That's a very nice way for him to put it. And even if people don't realise that, I'm not sure why they automatically think of Twilight when they hear the word 'vampire'. The characters and the plot are very, very different.

I'm torn there. On one hand, I will be very disappointed if there isn't a sequel and that's how it ends up being left. But, on the other, I'd rather a sequel feel like a natural progression than something tacked on for the sake of it. I'm taking it as a good sign for a sequel. Having the room there is a start.

[stitchfrequency]

I'm not sure why they automatically think of Twilight when they hear the word 'vampire'. The characters and the plot are very, very different.

:( That's my main beef with the Twilight series. I hate how Twilight has become representative of ALL vampire literature when it's really the newest addition to the genre, and in fact does away with so many of the things that make vampires vampires. Bleh.

[sleepall_day]

You're so right about that. You know what I love about Cirque du Freak, though? Last night I was flipping through the first book as I was searching for quotes for making my wallpaper (eventually I just settled on the first line of the book) but I LOVE when Darren is confronting Mr. Crepsley. And he says that he is evil. Mr. Crepsley just goes cryptically, "Am I?" Darren says, "Yes. You're a vampire. Vampires are evil."

Twilight, I think, tries too hard. Meyer tries to paint this picture of a self-hating brooder who drinks animal blood instead of human blood and it almost makes it seem like they're doing it to make themselves feel better rather than out of any moral issue. (But, that is a complaint that has its own time and place.)

But when I first read Cirque du Freak, and I got to that part, it's kind of making you do a double take and wonder, "Wait, so IS he evil? Or, what is going on exactly?" But then you realize he really is a good person. Especially in #3 I think, that one really shows Mr. Crepsley's character so well.

[stitchfrequency]

I love that quote! I even used it in my current Livejournal layout, heh.

Yes, exactly - Twilight's characters annoy me so much because they're so mopey and self-hating, but for what? There's no real struggle for existence there; all the "flaws" that usually make up an essential part of a vampire's existence (such as needing to drink human blood and not being able to go out in sunlight) are basically done away with. How can you relate to someone who's already superpowered and perfect in every way?
In CDF you get genuinely interested in the characters because their lives are far from perfect. There's a real life-or-death struggle at many points throughout the series, but those inner issues of morality and even spirituality are still there. And you can really see how characters change throughout the series as they interact with each other and are forced to deal with all of the terrible stuff that goes down in the course of the war.

But in Twilight, they're all already perfect so there's no real development. It's just so static. :/

[sleepall_day]

Ahhhhh, that is so cool! I totally did not realize! But I checked out your layout just now and saw it :) I love your layout, and that quote is so definitive of Mr. Crepsley.

I won't bore (and risk offending) anybody with my rants about Twilight, but dude, you really hit the nail on the hammer. The characters all seem so static. And even without making any comparisons or anything, I have always said that one of the things I love about CDF is that it's about growing up. Darren really changes, a lot, and there's so many little things here and there that you could point out that show his growing up. And the whole series is kind of about that.

[atraphoenix]

For most of the first three books, it was hard to be 100% certain that Mr Crepsley was actually a good guy. That's why Darren's mistake in Tunnels of Blood makes so much sense. I made the same one when I was reading it. I love moral ambiguity and shades of grey and moments of doubt. Twilight is ... yes, static is a perfect description.

And don't worry about your rants. I'm so used to finding people who think Edward is the best thing since Dracula that it's actually quite nice to realise that I'm not alone.

[sleepall_day]

I really want to see this cast together again, and I feel I won't have closure if I don't see a sequel haha.
BLAAAAAARHGHGH ME TOO.

Also, your icon is gorgeous :)

[stitchfrequency]

:) thank you!