2008 Woodie Awards
In the twilight zone? - maybe
Anna Wiegenstein - The Daily Iowan
Issue date: 8/28/08 Section: 80 Hours
Now, to get this out of the way: My track record with the Twilight phenomenon is not ideal. This spring, I wrote a less than complimentary "Medium" piece discussing the series - both Stephenie Meyer's first book and some of the more devoted branches of its fandom.
The results were numerous unfriendly comments from the latter. Some of which may have been deserved ("A lame facsimile of Rita Skeeter," depends on who you ask). Some I'm fairly certain were not ("So congratulation[s] for single-handedly bringing the women's movement back 80 years, Anna." Now, that's giving me too much credit - I'd at least need two hands).
For the readers who seemed skeptical on the matter - I have read three of the four Twilight tomes. I'm not a fan of Meyer's overwrought writing, though the vampire yarn was a good one until, pardon the ridiculous metaphor, getting too tangled.
As the infamous "Medium" mentioned, "This coming winter, the in-production film adaptation of Twilight is gearing up to be a legitimate competitor to the next Harry Potter flick." Or, at least, it was.
That was until Warner Brothers made the decision to move Half-Blood Prince back to July 2009. Scant days later, Twilight's production company announced the coincidence that it would move its release date from December to Nov. 21, the date just vacated by the J.K. Rowling adaptation. Comments online are rife with speculation about why, ranging from plain ol' crass commercialism to, yes, pointing the wand at the undead brigade of Meyer's work.
Whatever the true motivation, moving the Meyer adaptation up is a move that looks a whole lot like inheritance, at least on the part of studio Summit Entertainment. So, though they're now not coming out in the same season, the question presents itself: Is Twilight the new Potter?
The short answer: no. Were the epic romance of Twilight characters Edward and Bella unlucky enough to première onscreen the same weekend as Harry Potter 6, things could only end badly for one of them. Hint: not the one known for having its final installment, Breaking Dawn, largely trashed throughout the mainstream media (not to mention receiving harsh write-ups from many of its own fandom).
The results were numerous unfriendly comments from the latter. Some of which may have been deserved ("A lame facsimile of Rita Skeeter," depends on who you ask). Some I'm fairly certain were not ("So congratulation[s] for single-handedly bringing the women's movement back 80 years, Anna." Now, that's giving me too much credit - I'd at least need two hands).
For the readers who seemed skeptical on the matter - I have read three of the four Twilight tomes. I'm not a fan of Meyer's overwrought writing, though the vampire yarn was a good one until, pardon the ridiculous metaphor, getting too tangled.
As the infamous "Medium" mentioned, "This coming winter, the in-production film adaptation of Twilight is gearing up to be a legitimate competitor to the next Harry Potter flick." Or, at least, it was.
That was until Warner Brothers made the decision to move Half-Blood Prince back to July 2009. Scant days later, Twilight's production company announced the coincidence that it would move its release date from December to Nov. 21, the date just vacated by the J.K. Rowling adaptation. Comments online are rife with speculation about why, ranging from plain ol' crass commercialism to, yes, pointing the wand at the undead brigade of Meyer's work.
Whatever the true motivation, moving the Meyer adaptation up is a move that looks a whole lot like inheritance, at least on the part of studio Summit Entertainment. So, though they're now not coming out in the same season, the question presents itself: Is Twilight the new Potter?
The short answer: no. Were the epic romance of Twilight characters Edward and Bella unlucky enough to première onscreen the same weekend as Harry Potter 6, things could only end badly for one of them. Hint: not the one known for having its final installment, Breaking Dawn, largely trashed throughout the mainstream media (not to mention receiving harsh write-ups from many of its own fandom).
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 6
Wendy
posted 8/28/08 @ 9:09 AM CST
I was hoping this was going to an article that actually had some up-to-date information concerning the movie. Unfortunately it is just another article to waste my time. (Continued…)
TWILIGHT
posted 8/28/08 @ 10:42 AM CST
Honestly the fans should of just went into this book without any notions or ideas REALLY ! If this book is good enough for Stephenie IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE FANS ! Alot of these crying teenagers couldn't identify with it so when they grow up they will ! OBVIOUSLY I LOVED BREAKING DAWN AND THE SERIES AND IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE AND LIKE HARRY POTTER IT WASN'T MY FAVE. (Continued…)
Pholla
posted 8/28/08 @ 12:25 PM CST
I don't understand what people are whining about. I'm sure 99.8% of the fandom wanted Bella and Edward to get married and for Bella to become a vampire. (Continued…)
Twilight is my life
posted 8/28/08 @ 4:47 PM CST
YOU KNOW WHAT DON'T BE DISSING STEPHANIE AND HER BOOKS WE WILL MOST CERTAINLY BE A COMMON NAME(EVEN THOUGH WE ARE ONE NOW!!!!!) ANNNNND WE WILL BEAT STINKN harry potter BECAUSE HE SUCKS AND WE DON'T LIKE WIZARDS!!!!!!!!!! NOTICE THE ONLY WORDS ON HERE IN LOWER-CASE ARE HIS!!!!! BECAUSE HE IS LOWER THAN US AMAZING VAMPS!!!!!!!
Anastacia
posted 8/28/08 @ 7:22 PM CST
Well this sucks, I thought I was going to get more info on the movie twilight, not some article discussing how mediocre the book is. And why is the book being compared to HP anyways? They are two different worlds for goodness sakes. (Continued…)
Post a Comment