New Moon sequel to Twilight.

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I saw it tonight and I thought it was pretty good, I also thought it was better than the first movie.
The action scenes were good (When you finally get to them), the CGI was passable, and the most important thing, my wife loved it.
In fact my wife liked it so much she want's to go again with her friend.

She's happy, so I'm happy
 
Contrast Meyers vamps with Whedon's - he created something new and different, but didn't throw out the essentials of the vampire lore and the reason that we still love to be scared by them.

Whedons vampires weren't scary in the least. And they could be killed far too easily. I remember one episode where a vampire died by slowly and unknowingly lowering himself over Dawn who was lying down and happened to be holding a stake upwards at his chest level. Somehow the stake managed to plunge through his flesh, ribcage and into his heart despite no stabbing force on the part of Dawn nor anything approaching the requisite amount of his own momentum for it to do so. And Willow killed a vampire with a pencil in one episode! Anyone in the Buffyverse could kill a vampire, its a wonder they needed slayers at all. In this respect the Twilight vampires clearly have the edge since, as my g/f tells me, only other vampires or werewolves have the strength to kill them.

But yeah the sparkly thing and being able to walk around in daylight is a bit crap. Also the whole vampire-in-love story and tortured soul vampires had been done by Buffy and Interview with the Vampire so Twilight coming out now seems a bit late in the game. Apart from all the girls fancying Pattinson I don't get why its so popular or how it warrants all the repeat viewings my g/f gives it. I suppose she feels the same about Star Wars and Terminator.
 
But vampires have endured as monsters for so long because they ARE monsters - they jump out at you in the dark. Meyers has taken a scary monster and turned it into a sick puppy.

Contrast Meyers vamps with Whedon's - he created something new and different, but didn't throw out the essentials of the vampire lore and the reason that we still love to be scared by them.

I understand what your saying but Buffy IMO is no better than the Twilight saga. Vampires are monsters. There is no disagreeing on that. However, my favorite version is the type that you could be sitting next to one and not even know it. That is how Dracula was was and he was the main OV. Hahaha! Seriously, he was charming and witty. It is much more scarier and albeit a bit sexier to know you could be sitting beside a hot woman or man if thats your thing and be in conversation only to be lured away and killed in a heartbeat. That mind ???? if you will is much more dastardly than a mutant looking person or so called vampire that is just out to rip people apart. They are more like fast moving zombies. I don't consider that a vamp in any way. I like 30 days of night. Are they vamps? Not in my definition. They are more infected than anything else. But I like all versions and I just can't jump onto the Myers sucks bandwagon. I think she created something unique. I don't hold her work up to the standard or Stokers or Rices. But I give her props for coming close.
 
Last edited:
I went with my Wife last weekend to see this... well... I was dragged.. but I have to say it was better than the first.

I may not be a fan of the series or of the mythology of the vamps, but I can admit that the narrative was decent. The story was pretty well done and enjoyable enough that I wasn't bored and I actually felt emotion from the story.

There were a few cringe moments with clothes blowing in the wind, Jacob pulling his shirt off to clean a little blood, etc... that I knew were in there for the women. But they weren't too bad.

It's still a bit too lovey dovey and everything is a bit fluffy as far as threats... but it was a good movie. I can give it that.

My Wife has filled me in on the entire saga, even though I didn't ask.. :lol

So I know what happens. But one of the main things that bugs is me a later development in the series..

The baby. First of all.. Vamps are dead, and cold. Therefore cannot have sperm. PLUS they don't have circulation and therefore cannot get erections. Not to mention the large number of questions for a mixed baby and how it could even be created at the genetic level. BIG hole in logic to me, I can't say I agree with that idea.
 
Brad Pitt is the most attractive man to ever play a Vampire.

b174583468.jpg
 
Valfar we all know that you like dudes. However, don't go Full Eli on us! What is it with you Canadians and dudes? :dunno

BadMoon, we know you're more gay than Agen, you ain't fooling us. :)

The way you dress, the movies you see, and the way you post. Oh, and your fandom of the Hershey Bears.
 
Brad Pitt is the most attractive man to ever play a Vampire.

b174583468.jpg


Nope....the only time Brad Pitt was good lookin' to me was when he was in Legend of the Fall.

David Boreanaz (Angel), Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000), and Chris Sarandon (Fright Night) were sexy vampires as well. :monkey5
 
The estrogen in this thread is overpowering....:rolleyes:

(yes, I'm talking about Badmoon, Eli and Valfar....)
 
Nope....the only time Brad Pitt was good lookin' to me was when he was in Legend of the Fall.

David Boreanaz (Angel), Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000), and Chris Sarandon (Fright Night) were sexy vampires as well. :monkey5

I have no idea who that guy was you posted a pic of back a few posts, he looks like the pretty boy version of Andrew Dice Clay=oogly, same with David Boreanaz with his oddly shaped head and poor haircut, Gerard Butler...i agree there.

And wtf? this guy??
4011332.jpg
 
I still recall vividly watching movies like Lost boys, and then Interview with a Vampire, and then Bram Stoker's dracula, and falling in love with what a vampire is. This of course was preceeded with such classics as Dracula during Saturday afternoon black and white movies.

To think some of today's youth is going to grow up thinking a vampire is the dude from Greenday or whatever lead signer of the goth group of the month is just sad.


Metrosexual vampires, patoowhi (that's me spitting on the very thought).
 
I have no idea who that guy was you posted a pic of back a few posts, he looks like the pretty boy version of Andrew Dice Clay=oogly, same with David Boreanaz with his oddly shaped head and poor haircut, Gerard Butler...i agree there.

And wtf? this guy??
4011332.jpg

Oh come on....yeah post that pic of him! :lol

Alex O'Loughlin played in Moonlight and now is on Three Rivers. He looks NOTHING like Dice Clay. :sick

I guess I don't have your same taste in men! :D

 
I still recall vividly watching movies like Lost boys, and then Interview with a Vampire, and then Bram Stoker's dracula, and falling in love with what a vampire is. This of course was preceeded with such classics as Dracula during Saturday afternoon black and white movies.

To think some of today's youth is going to grow up thinking a vampire is the dude from Greenday or whatever lead signer of the goth group of the month is just sad.


Metrosexual vampires, patoowhi (that's me spitting on the very thought).
:lol:lol

I forgot Frank Langella! :rock
 
I think some are missing the point about the Vampires being scary.
The Cullens are meant to be the good guys who forgo human blood.
Now the bad Vampires like Victoria and the Volturi are more interesting to me, And they seem pretty evil when it comes to killing humans.
It's a shame the stories do not concentrate on these characters more, because the movie shifted up a gear when the Volturi arrived on the scene
 
Back
Top