Thread: Twilight - should I keep reading??

Hey guys I just started the first Twilight book, 100 pages in, and I'm having a hard time seeing the appeal. It just seems like poorly written drivel to me. Am I missing something??? I've had several well educated professional friends (in their mid to late 20s) coerce me into starting the series but I don't think I can go on. I'm surprised they like it - it seems very immature and poorly constructed. If I hate the first 100 pages is it likely that I will hate the next 100? Or does it somehow get better?? I don't know it just seems like such crap that I am having a hard time understanding how it ever got published... My options are continue reading this or start on Jane Eyre. Thanks for the help

Just because lots of people liked it (like myself) doesn't mean like you should like it too. It's a matter of taste. I guess, if you don't like it now then you won't like the rest. Because me, I started reading it and was hooked since the beginning.
I've seen other people dislike the way the book is written, but personally I like the way it's written, also because while I read it I was more aware of the actual story rather than format, or the way it was written, I don't have any problems with it.
I think you should continue reading it if you are a sucker for love stories, happily ever after... blah blah. ;p

I read all four to see what the appeal was. It gets better in a sense--some sort of plot begins to develop. However, Edward and Bella's dynamic never gets realistic or interesting. The books are very poorly written, though there is slight improvement with each book as if she's learning to write as she goes along. It probably isn't worth the time. It was mildly entertaining and worth it if you want your brain to take a thinking break.

You could watch the movie and see if you like that? And there's a movie of Jane Eyre too. I kinda liked it.

Yeah, the movie is better.

No, the movie sucks. It's about equally as bad as the book, though a lot could have been done in the movie to salvage the good parts. Unfortunately, that "lot" wasn't done.

EDIT: Although, Robert Pattinson makes every movie a little better. I heard, however, that even he had some negative things to say about the books!

Actually, I haven't read the book or seen the movie. If I wanted vampires, I'll go read about Lestat again. Which reminds me. I love those books, so how come I have only read the first and seen the two movies? I have practically the whole series and the Mayfair Chronicles...

Vamps are supposed to be scary, not sparkly, shiny, romantic or any of that crap. You don't see any books about how to house train your pet werewolf, do you?

He also thinks that Stephanie Meyer is "mad" and he thinks that she probably wrote the part of Bella as if it were herself. I totally believe that theory.

Hahaha, you've got "criticize" right. =P I've also heard that The Host is better, but I'm skeptical. I really don't like Meyer's writing style at all (or really, lackthereof). Maybe I'll give it a shot when I need to give my brain another break. But Harry Potter generally fills that void in a much more successful and entertaining way.