Tantalizing Twilight

I've always listened to MuggleCast, the Harry Potter podcast, and I found out the main host of MuggleCast had another podcast, Imprint, which is Twilight-themed, so I listened to one of its episodes.

I found the topics discussed a lot weaker and shallower compared to the immensely deep analyses they give to the Harry Potter kingdom, which further supports my belief that Harry Potter has, is and will forever be bigger and better than the Twilight saga.

Yet strangely enough, I continued listening to other episodes and soon enough, I got pretty much influenced to buy the New Moon DVD. I remember it was Thursday last week and I just had an unpleasant Wednesday after-school, so I wanted to enjoy my Thursday after-school. I went to buy the New Moon DVD at the nearest shopping mall and a whole take-home pack of peach yoghurt.

I had a bad experience watching the New Moon movie in theatres last year. Me and the two friends I was with all agreed that the movie was crap. However, the second time I watched in on DVD, I thought it was slightly better (although it remains equally slow-in-progression).

I remember sometime this time last year when I bought the Twilight book, because practically everyone was reading it, and I was wondering what was so nice about a typical romance novel between a human and a vampire.

I had watched the Twilight movie online. So-so. I watched it again on VCD when my brother rented it. A little more than so-so, but not captivating at all.

I spent quite a bit of today reading 57% of the book (hahaa, I stopped at the end of Chapter 13, then counted the pages read).

The book is 10 000 times better than the movie la! I think the book itself deserves the credit and accolades it received, because it truly managed to capture the romance and the tension and the atmosphere that it intended to.

The movie, on the other hand, did a filthy job on it. These are the differences that i found:

In the book, Bella is a girl. Like, literally, she is a girl. Not the girlish girl, but you get to see that she does have her girly side and she's more outspoken and she has a more-lively relationship with her father, Charlie.

However, in the movie, Bella seems to be a non-girl and seems barely interested to talk to her father, and she seems really boring and sleepy and colourless and seems to keep everything to herself. She speaks in monotone and it irritates viewers like me. The only time she ever goes up the solfege is when James' venom is acting on her.

Who's to blame? Kristen Stewart for her crappy portrayal, or someone in the production of the film.

In the book, Edward has a fun side. He laughs, he makes fun of Bella. In the movie, however, he's the dreamy romantic that will ensnare you.

In the book, you get to see the development of the relationship between Edward and Bella. You get to see them start off as Biology partners, and then they evolve from frequent disagreeing conversations to Question games and then the hidden flirting inside all of them blossoms into a romance that you can believe in.

In the shitty movie, it's merely a chronology of scenes snipped out from the book, and then you suddenly find yourself seeing Edward and Bella embracing with each other, leaving yourself the question inside your head: "Huh, when they did ever fall in love?"

You don't get to see a realistic development in the movie because it's like, it starts off with Edward avoiding Bella, and then the Prophase-Anaphane, and then the carpark incident, and then the part where Bella gets ambushed in the alley, and then it later progresses into the meadow.

Now I can understand how and why Bella and Edward fell in love. The movie failed to portray that, so now I think sometimes the movie is the epic phail inside of the book, although I enjoy movies a lot.

And speaking of why they fell in love. I don't want to get stoned by any Twihard fan, but technically, I say, technically, Bella fell in love with Edward because she found him goodlooking. It was a love-at-first-sight thing. And that's because Edward's a vampire with enhanced good looks. So technically, if Edward was not a vampire, Bella wouldn't have fallen in love with him.

Then again, Edward would have been dead if he was not transformed into a vampire.

Also, Edward was enticed by a scent Bella gave off which Edward loved. Okay, it's probably a half-metaphor in the book, but if I took it literally, Edward likes the way Bella smells. HAHAHAHAHAHA. And he wouldn't be able to pick up Bella's scent if he was not a vampire with enhanced senses. So technically, Edward wouldn't have fallen in love with her if he was not a vampire.

So in overall, Bella and Edward would not have been together if Edward was not a vampire.

I'm gonna read the remaining 43% of the book when I have the time, because there's a lot of additional mathematics practices that I need to go through first.

I do struggle with the first-person technique of writing the books, because sometimes I pause and think, who am "I", and I remind myself, "ohh, Bella" before I can continue. And there's a lot of dialogue in this style:

"Hello."
"Hi."
"I want to buy some chicken."
"What type of chicken?"

There's no ' said Edward ' or ' said Bella ' in these paragraphs of ongoing conversations, so I get quite mixed up on who said what, probably because I don't pay 100.00% attention when I'm reading the book, and that's probably because I'm listening to music (listened to the whole Mariah Carey debut album while I read. Its love songs are appropriate for the book).

And after finishing Twilight, it's very highly likely that I'll buy New Moon. But one concensus to end: the books are 10 000 times better than the movies. (number not to scale)

P.S. I think I differ from my fellow readers of my age in the sense that, I do analyse what I read instead of just bothering to find out what happens next and then closing the book once I've found out.