Necrophiliac

November 22, 2008 Leave a comment Go to comments

Oh it’s another post about Twilight. So shoot me.

Man, I haven’t felt this… whatever this feeling is, for any book. I don’t know how to describe it.

I definitely don’t love the book; however, saying I hate the book is a bit too much as well.

Maybe it’s because I read the book so near to when the movie came out. And the big hoo haa about it.

I find the book shallow and the only reason I want to watch it is to annoy the hell out of my friends in the UK who would only get to watch it (baring them streaming it online, that is) on December the 19th. And I’m not so worried if the movie sucks because I’m in Malaysia; there’s always sucky but ridiculously amusing subtitles to fall back to.

Which is why I do enjoy going to the movies when I’m in Malaysia. Added to the fact that I have a student ID and will forever and ever use the damn ID till I start getting wrinkles. Heck, even then I might still use. Hahahaha.

I’m such a cheapskate.

Anyway, so, the movie opens today in the US.

People have watched the screenings.

So happily, I went on reading about the reviews.

I read it yesterday, by the way. And only saved this link because I love the bitchiness. It’s Roger Ebert’s view on the movie. A must read for the review of the movie, I think.

Most of the reviews that I read said that Catherine Hardwicke (the director) did quite a bad job sketching the book into the movie. Not in those words, but they’re hitting those notes. Ah well. Not my field there… I’m just utterly disappointed that Rosalie Hale (supposedly the most beautiful person) was played by Nikki Reed. Fine, Reed is pretty, but not in a pale and blond way, you know? She looks much better tanned and as a brunette. And a lot of them say that if you haven’t read the book, you’ll be pretty much clueless as to why things happen the way it did. So Bella’s obsessive writing do come handy in understanding the movie then.

I think I made it clear that I found the book shallow; with Bella having no character and her love for Edward is more due to his looks than anything else. I mean, she was positively sure that she was in love with him before they did much of their communications. The quote behind the book was on page 195 and the book is just 2 pages short of being 500 pages. (The pages are more for the benefit of people who are too stupid to check on amazon.com and googled it instead and stumbled upon my blog.) Fine, by then he has saved her life twice, talked to her and somewhat confirmed that he was a vampire.

Still, that is not enough to constitute much communication that would warrant you to fall in love with a person, right? Barring love at first sight (which I always found a bit weird since they usually only involve good looking people), which I suspect didn’t really happen… How did she fall in love with him? Because he is so “perfect”? Even reading till page 498, I thought (and still think) that was the only reason she fell in love with him. Yeah, he is quite protective of her. I suppose the combination of the danger and the protectiveness she felt for Edward is what draws her to him.

And for goodness sake, she’s seventeen!!!

Yes, I am very skeptical about teenagers falling in love. I don’t know; I find they’re just too immature for that still. Edward falling in love is fine; but Bella… She’s really seventeen!!

Anyway, yes, the title. Getting to it!!

During the stint of my hoo haa with the Republicans after Obama’s glorious election and seeing how Roe v Wade will be the law for quite some time still, and how so many of them said how cruel I am to be a pro-choice person ladida… I deleted most of the comments because I considered them spam and only left 2 behind because the first one was important to explain why I continued explaining and the second one is for the sake of marketplace of ideas.

It was also about that time that I read the review for Breaking Dawn. It disgusts me, the synopsis of it. Refusing to have an abortion even when her life is at risk. But I suppose, since she was going to be a vampire after that anyway… She didn’t really bother about her life, because she was going to be an immortal!!

However… I saw this very brief interview with Kristen Stewart, who plays Bella Swan, describing Bella and Edward’s relationship like Romeo and Juliet’s. I found the comment funny, because when you think about it… Edward is dead. Undead, yes, but still dead.

That’s one thing I realize was “special” about vampires. As far as I recall… Only when describing a vampire do people use the term “undead”. Look at Frankenstein; the doctor goes “it’s alive!!” instead of “it’s undead!!” Phoenixes… rise from the ashes, or reborn (or re-egged; being a bird). And I usually hear that ghosts are dead…

Taking that view… I wonder why nobody find the book exceptionally unsuitable for impressionable teenagers to read. Think about it; Bella wants to be a vampire/undead/dead… See what I mean?

In a way, she does want to commit suicide.

It’s as if Meyer’s saying that love is something that is worth committing suicide for.

I have not read the second book, though I will make damn sure now that I would read it. I do wanna know how bad the book goes, and I don’t want to really rely on wikipedia and interviews and reviews fot it. Nonetheless… I’m going to pick a scene from the second book anyway; Edward’s big come back, as was called by Robert Pattinson (who plays Edward in the movie). Where he went to Italy to commit suicide after he was told by one of his sisters that Bella committed suicide when she actually went bungee jumping.

Oh, how worthless my life is now that I have found love and that the love of my life has committed suicide. I don’t wanna live!!

Too bad that Meyer’s vampire can’t commit suicide like how Amni and my idea of drawing a vampire suicides book. Something like Bunny Suicides by Andy Riley. Can’t just open the window and dies… Or go to a church and immerse himself in holy water or pierce his heart with a silver dagger ladida.

So Edward has to go through the complicated way of getting someone to murder him and burn him and whatever exactly that they did with James (OMG you soooo have to watch the Twilight Parody made by Evil Iguana!! The snack in question is a Hershey bar!! Hahaha). Had to go all the way to Italy to do that. And I am pretty sure it wouldn’t be as funny or as cute and adorable as the bunnies committing suicide. Hehehe.

Whatever, yeah… So really, is this what we’re trying to promote to the kids nowadays? Murder is wrong!! Suicide is murder too, you know. Murdering oneself. After all, it was illegal once to commit suicide. Heck, the UK considers euthanasia as murder!! It is still suicide, euthanasia, regardless the beautiful words put to it. Also, I think dying to give birth for a baby when you know that it will cost you your life is also “murder.” Like, your baby, an innocent (or a sinner, since people don’t baptize fetuses, right? How would they do it, even. Hmmmm…), being guilty of “killing” his/her mother. Put it that way, quite sickening, eh?

It is quite an obsessive love; forbidden and obsessively so.

And to the title. Bring back my comments on vampire and being undead/dead.

I honestly honestly didn’t see it in this angle till I read the aforementioned Roger Ebert’s review.

“‘She is the embodiment of the sentiment, “I’d die for you.” She is, like many adolescents, a thanatophile.”

Got that at the end of the second paragraph of the review.

When I wikied the term “thanatophile”, it was put as synonyms for the words necrolagnia and necrophilia, with the latter being the main article.

True… Edward is not a corpse… Still… He’s dead!!

A little bit sick, somehow. And I never thought of vampire-human sex like this till today.

Urgh.

Damn it!!

Still, the spirit of Ebert’s sentence, reading it in the probable meaning, without wiki-ing it but flipping through the dictionary instead… Okay it is not there. However, I manage to dig through the internet and found out that “thanato” in Greek means death. A fascination of death, perhaps? A bit weird to have sexual attraction to “death”, unless it does means corpse…

I don’t trust wikipedia much even though I do my research starting with it. It just gives me the general idea.

So, probably he meant fascination of death.

Even with this is so not right thing to encourage to teenagers (I keep repeating teenagers because they are the age group the book and movie is aiming for). One should not be so fascinated by death that they’re willing to die for someone they just knew. You know, maybe if Bella knew Edward for over 2 years… Actually even then it will be unacceptable.

Yes, I wouldn’t deny that I have admitted that I have suicidal thoughts.

However, I don’t go around “recruiting” people, telling them how fascinating death would be. Heck, I don’t think I am qualified to go around talking about how great death is since I actually don’t know how great it is.

And I don’t tell that because I want people to join me; I want people who do have the same feelings to not feel alone.

And I think Bella Swan should be on her own with willing to die for Edward.  Please please please don’t be stupid enough to want to die for someone else.

Nonetheless, being a pro-choice person, if you think that is what you think is best, I say fine, go on. I would not superimpose my morality on you. Assisted suicide, suicide, drive like a maniac, being homosexual or bisexual… Whatever. Especially when you’re an adult. At the end of the day, you pay it yourself; not others. And God gave you brains to decide on your own what is best; use it.

Oh, maybe that’s why I can’t stand Edward. He absolutely refuse to turn Bella into a vampire because he thinks it’s horrid or whatever it is. I mean, if Alice is willing to turn Bella into one… Why not? Why you busybody and try to impose your morality on Bella, even if you’re dating her?

Okay hold it; to clear another point; I’m not saying Stephenie Meyer is going all out to promote suicides and whatever that I have elaborate above. I am going into the intrinsic meaning of the story; what moral values does it have and what it seem to promote. I mean, when you say something or publish something or make it known… you are trying to put your views out; isn’t it always the case?

Nonetheless, being a work of fiction… It’s alright for me. Anything for entertainment sake and don’t get worked up on it. I find this a fascinating piece to write. Somewhat a practice, shall we say, for me? After all, this whole blog and its existence is for me to practice.

PS: I might sound contradicting, but if you read the whole thing properly, I’m not. I may try to influence your decision mildly, but I wouldn’t get in the way of it if you think it is best. And the influencing part; I would never use coercian or any mental or physical torture.

PPS: I like this quote too from the review.  “You may recall Robert Pattinson (Edward) as Cedric Diggory, who on Voldemort’s orders was murdered in a graveyard in “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.” Maybe he was already a vampire.”
Makes you wonder… If Harry Potter series hasn’t ended… Maybe Rowling might even make Diggory turn into a vampire and fight against Voldemort or something.
And yes Amni, I am being lame.
Like you don’t know me. 😛

PPPS: I have not watched the movie or read the whole series, as I might have mentioned above.

PPPPS: I love Gerry!!!! From PS, I Love You. And Gerard Butler, who played him in the movie version. Hahaha. Couldn’t resist adding this, after I typed out my latest entry, even though it is likely no one would actually see this. 😛

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: