Showing posts with label versus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label versus. Show all posts

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Team Cullen vs. The Original Gangstas vs. The Hopes of Single Men

Today's guest blogger comes from my friend Brian - you semi-typical, middle 20-year-old American male. Thanks Brian for being a guest!

Note: The views and opinions of Brian do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of this blog.


When I was in high school, the latest craze regarding vampire literature was the newest Anne Rice novel, an author who, unfortunately, doesn’t seem to be getting enough respect for a genre that she more or less dominated for a span of many years. I read Interview With The Vampire, The Vampire Lestat, and The Queen of the Damned. These three books served as the core of vampire mythology for a good long while. Sure, there were others, but Anne Rice had a veritably unmatched saga of vampire fiction rolling off her fingertips. Any vampire movies watched with friends always fell back to being compared to the novels’ sense of history, the beauty of these creatures was one borne out of time, the romance inherent in vampire affections, the laundry list of behaviors and various mythological truths embedded in the pages of Rice’s central three novels.

Rice’s vampires were beautiful, terrible beings. Incredibly powerful, ancient, terrifyingly gorgeous products of their original time mixed with the present (whichever time period that present happened to be). Now, is the rest of this diatribe going to be about how nothing found today really seems to measure up to the (what in my mind) is the original testament of vampiric lore? Most likely. And don’t get me wrong, I understand the fact that things change, evolve, progress. If human history has shown us anything, it’s that we move forward. But are the new models really an improvement on the original, or are they more of an impediment to the single male?

I thought this stuff burnt out when the sun started shining on all those freak-wannabe-vampire-punk-goth-rocker-stoner-make-up-wearing-juggalo kids from high school, the day after graduation. The day that whole, “Oh, shit, we can’t all work at Hot Topic,” mentality settled in and took root in the cerebellum of these daywalker posers who wished more than anything that they actually needed to feed off of blood. Welcome to Reality. These people disappeared for a while, leaving behind the romanticism of the bite, the penetrating stare that reads souls and minds alike; the vampire faded from beatific glory and into the shadows from whence it came, becoming again a creature to be feared, not adored. And then, recently, they got pretty again.

Enter Team Edward. A seventeen-year-old kid who was made into a vampire two hundred years ago is supposed to be the new heartthrob of women the world over. Forty-something-year-olds getting caught up in the craze of teen-girl-fiction, falling in love with a fictional diamond-skinned vampire, whose character flaws spawned a whole line of t-shirts? These new vampires are too pretty to be seen in sunlight (because they get all shiny), they convulse and fight massive erectile temptation whenever their soul mate walks into the room, and this Mr. Cullen happens to be the only gentleman left on the planet, it seems—minus, of course, the creepy stalking bit.

Here’s the thing I witnessed with the new vampire craze: they took the evil out of them. Over-romanticized the hell out of these once evil creatures. Good luck to any normal guy trying to measure up, now. We’ve all been irrevocably screwed by the vampire system. And the vampires know it. They’re in their coffins right now laughing at us. The newer, bolder, modernity-ridden bloodsucker leaves no room for human error, no room for improvement, either. They don’t exist, so one would think that mankind has an edge. But we don’t. Team Cullen blew us out of the water.



Vampires in the olden days had to be sexy without sex, if you catch my drift. Theirs was a beauty held in mannerisms, appearance counted, yes, but not for everything. The capacity to love was outside of the vampire’s realm of existence, or knowledge, beyond their reality. Love was a human thing. Granted, Louie did care deeply for Claudia, but when Lestat made him a vampire, he made sure to make him weak, that’s why the other vampires ‘loved’ him: he was the most human. The Anne Rice suck-heads had a measure of evil that maintained a balance in the world, as far as vampires were concerned. It wasn’t just anybody who could be made into a vampire. The majority of people weren’t even close to being candidates for vampirification, only those that had that special something. What a twenties-era gangster might call ‘moxie.’

[Side note, I hear that this show “True Blood” takes place in the South… Any self-respecting vampire would move him/herself to larger, more popular epicenter of sophisticated human culture, not the sour-mash capital or Bible-belt central. But anyway…]

We can have moxie. Hell, some of us have it in spades, but will we it be enough to take the girl’s mind off of Edward? Doubt it. Talk a good game, walk a straight line, open a door or three, pay for dinner, movie, drive, be a gentleman and kiss her on the cheek instead of moving in for a full on mouth-bath, and you still won’t measure up, not to the new vampire standard, which says this to the modern male:

When you step into the sunlight, we see your flaws, your wrinkles, your missed-a-spot-shaving patchwork jaw line, your pimples, uneven eyebrows, your receding hairline. We see your wardrobe’s mismatched color scheme, dirty shoes, untrimmed fingernails, mustard stains, and your sweat.

There are no diamonds embedded in the small cracks of your skin. You can’t promise immortality. You don’t come from money this old, you aren’t this strong, this fast, this controlled. You aren’t this mysterious, this enchanting. You aren’t us.

And never will be.


Friday, December 5, 2008

Twilight and True Blood or Twilight and Sookie Books

I thought I would take a little more time to blog about Twilight and Sookie because probably close to 80% of people who visit my blog through a search engine type a version of what I posted as the title of the entry, as you can see: (and this was just the top keywords, not each search. There are even hundres of more keyword searches that ask the same thing)

I had previously written a post about Twilight vs True Blood back in September, prompted by a letter written to TV guide. You can view the entry and the comments Here.

First, let me start by saying that True Blood the TV series can no way compare to the Charlaine Harris Sookie books. The books are way better and the show has quite a bit of differences. So when we do compare, lets stick with books not visual representations.

Second, everyone is free to their opinion, but you can't really make an informed descision either way about which one is better or claim that one copied the other, etc. if you haven't read both book series.

The first thing I want to compare, to clear things up, is that Harris did not copy Meyer:
Twilight, by Stephanie Meyer was published in 2005
Dead Until Dark by Charlaine Harris was published in 2001.

Harris' books are about a mid-20 year old who has the intersting ability to read minds. She lives in a small town in Luisianna where nothing much happens, until she meets her first vampire. Vampires came out into the public several years ago with the invention of a synthetic blood called "Trublood" (hint the show name). Vampires are fighting for human rights, there are churches who are against them, Sookie can read minds, and she finds some other interesting beings along the way as well. She becomes romantically linked with Bill the vamp, bad things happen, and she ends up agreeing to work for a higher up vampire (Eric, who I love) to help solve different mysteries.

Not sure if it is even worth writing about Twilight, since the people searching for the similarities and differences are probably Twilight fans. I know there are a lot of Twilight fans who have been vampire fiction fans, but there are also a lot of Twilight (or Sookie) fans who are not familiar with vampire fiction or folklore and think that the similarities between the two means one has copied the other.

Here are some common vampire characteristics:
Reading minds
Mind control
"Tricking" people into believing things
Super-human (or inhuman) strength
Super speed
Rich
Immortal
Hyper senses
Sexy and dangerous
and so on.

I have never read a modern-day vampire book that didn't have some similarity to another, which is okay because they are writing about the same subject. Each author adds in their own version of a vampire, but it's still a vampire. Many vamp books have werewolves in them too, that does not mean one copied the other. They say that there are no original stories anymore, this is one of those cases that illustrates the point. Vampire authors may change how blood is taken, vampire abilities, reactions to humans, and other characteristics but it can never be wholly unique or else it wouldn't be a vampire, it would be some other creature.

There are some similarities between Trueblood and Twilight, or Twilight and Vampire Kisses (lots of similarites between those two) but that does not mean they copied each other. They all write about a main female character who falls for a vampire. Of course there are going to be similiarities.

For those of you who are curious about something more specific, feel free to email me or comment me. Since it seems like some many people are curious, I will be starting to reread the Harris books so I can do more in depth reviews of them on my blog.

And I will say it again, Harris did not copy Meyer - look at the facts.

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Twilight vs. True Blood

I had to take some time tonight to write an entry about Twilight versus True Blood.

Today I noticed I had some people click on my blog from searching about the two different shows. What pushed me to action, however, was the following letter to TV Guide magazine, titled "Blood Related?" -

I was reading about HBO'S True Blood and though: This show sounds an awful lot like the Twilight books. Then when I read the Roush Review [9/1], my thoughts were confirmed. Vamps? Mind reading? Small towns? Are you kidding me? How could no one else have caught this?! - Anais Villa, Maspeth, N.Y.

Well Anais, if you would have left some contact information, I would definitely be writing you some hate mail at this moment. When I read this I became quite enraged. I thought it was absolutely ridiculous. First, let us examine the books these shows were based off of:

Twilight, by Stephanie Meyer was published in 2005
Dead Until Dark by Charlaine Harris was published in 2001.

In no way did Charlaine Harris (or HBO for that matter) copy the Twilight people. If, dear Anais Villa, you did at least one simple Google search, you would have realized this. I might have excepted the argument that HBO was trying to get some of the vampire show profit, but not that True Blood is a copy of Twilight. If you have been following this blog, you know that I am a huge fan of the Sookie Stackhouse books... and I am not too fond of the Twilight series.

I will try and play devil's advocate though, and list some differences and similarities.

Similarities:
Human girl, hunky vampires
I guess we can put Anais' "observations" of small towns and mind reading
There are some werewolves (but only later on in the Harris series, not in the show)

Differences:
Twilight is aimed at a teenage audience
Characters are "high schoolers" in Twilight
Female character is very dependent on male vampire in Twilight
In Twilight, the mind reading is done by vampires, in True Blood, Sookie is the one that does the mind reading
Sookie doesn't want to become a vampire
There is also more sex and action in True Blood because it's audience is meant for the more mature
In True Blood, vampires are out of the closet and drink synthetic blood

These are just a few I feel like listing. If you are interested, you can write TV Guide at Radnor, PA 19088 or email at letters@tvguide.com. Include your name, address, and phone number. I think I will be writing them an email, I would suggest you do the same.

Any one out there have an opinion either way?

EDIT: Just wanted to let you guys know that I have a recent update to this post. YOu can view it here.