Not signed in (Sign In)


Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.

    The marketing is just so damn scattershot. MNF spots aren’t cheap, especially during a meaningful game like Pittsburgh vs. Denver. They also ran the trailer before Zombieland.

    Just who the hell are they aiming at?


    Just who the hell are they aiming at?

    Everyone. I mean, who doesn’t like sparkly vampires who stalk teenage girls to see if they have the will power not to eat them? They really do think that everyone likes Twilight. Just look how many times it’s compared to Harry Potter, not that everyone likes Harry Potter, but it’s a billion times better than Twilight.


    who doesn’t like sparkly vampires who stalk teenage girls to see if they have the will power not to eat them?




    Hey! Don’t insult me. I don’t like them either. I don’t find creepy stalker demons of the night at all attractive, not to mention the sparkling.


    Oh, of course I don’t mean men are the only ones who dislike it. I just mean that, if one uses any bit of sense, the following two statements are pretty self-evident.

    A) Twilight’s audience skews very heavily female
    B) Steelers vs. post-Cutler Broncos audience skews very heavily male

    If both are true, it makes no sense to drop a significant chunk of change on an MNF spot, or even on ESPN at all. It just makes no sense whatsoever.


    Hooray for DVR and fastforwarding. :D


    who doesn’t like sparkly vampires who stalk teenage girls to see if they have the will power not to eat them?

    Sane people.


    However, you must admit that that specific group is becoming a minority.


    Silly SWQ, it’s always been a minority.

    • CommentAuthorWiseWillow
    • CommentTimeNov 11th 2009

    Yep. Or are we the crazy ones?

    Cue Twilight Zone music


    Cue Twilight Zone music

    Seems almost redundant to use that word in that phrase…

    • CommentTimeNov 12th 2009

    I’m so tired of New Moon commercials.

    I seem to be forever watching Volvo ads.

    “Look! with enough money you can buy but probably not drive because you’re not old enough a car JUST LIKE EDWARD’S.”


    Am I the only one who was really ticked off by S.Meyers constant description of the cars? WE DON’T FRIGGIN CARE. (at least, I don’t ;P)

    • CommentAuthorWiseWillow
    • CommentTimeNov 12th 2009

    My car is a Volvo…. volvos seem to run in my family. My sis’ first car was a volvo, so was my brother’s, and he was going to hand his down to me, only it sucked a lot so we swapped it for parts to fix up a better volvo. Only it’s a volvo from the nineties, and I got it before I knew Volvo was besmirched by all the Twilight crap. In my defense, they are pretty well built- I got t-boned over the summer but didn’t even get bruised.


    bq.Am I the only one who was really ticked off by S.Meyers constant description of the cars? WE DON’T FRIGGIN CARE. (at least, I don’t ;P)

    Excessive description on clothes, physical features and accessories (like cars) smacks of amateur fiction to me. I used to obsess over what my character was wearing, what her room looked like, what her vehicular device looked like, what she looked like while in transit…...on and on and on…

    (Not saying I’m like so totally accomplished now. Smeyer is published. I’m not.)


    I tend to overlook everything; I use minmal detail, and only mention something if it’s crucial. I think a happy medium is what I’m looking for. ;)


    Yeah, I do that too. It’s kind of just like ‘he did this, and she said this.’


    I don’t mean men are the only ones who dislike it.

    I was being sarcastic mostly. I know what you meant, sansafro.

    I tend to use a lot of detail, probably too much. I think it’s because I always want a lot of details when I read a book, so I can have better picture of the character and their surroundings. I should probably use less detail though because most people are not as nosey about the fictional characters’ appearances and lives as I am.


    I have a vague rule: Describe as much as you can without said description interfering with your larger purposes. Of course that doesn’t tell very much, but basically adding noncritical detail isn’t worth tripping yourself up over.

    That reminds me of this one short story a girl in my CW class wrote in the spring, which had to be at least 50% description of the environment, and every single object described had at least two adjectives attached. Rather than making the picture clearer, it made the whole thing utterly impenetrable. Even after workshopping it and hearing the girl herself try to explain it, I still had no clue what was going on.


    ^^I don’t think I’m quite that bad. I do more of the whole hair color, eye color, age, height thing. There’s less with the environment, but there is still some.


    Yeah, I honestly don’t know how she did it. It was just so over the top that there was no way she couldn’t have noticed.

    I will also say that there’s next to no environmental description in my first draft, since I didn’t want to get bogged down in it. Absolutely understand on the character thing though, since you want your reader to have the proper images of your guys.

    Gah that woman in the article still creeps the piss out of me.


    Do you mean the RPattz-obessed cougar article in the other thread. She is a very creepy person.


    Yeah, I did. I was so creeped I forgot what thread I was in.


    Well, don’t feel too bad. I keep getting “The General Twilight Thread” and “What Famous People Think of Twilight” confused too.


    Lol. I think doing too much German history is messing with my brain. For a second there I thought you meant Friedrich Ebert…


    And we’ve got Ebert’s take on New Moon.

    “The characters in this movie should be arrested for loitering with intent to moan.”

    That is the single greatest thing I’ve heard all week.

    BraVO Mr Ebert. Would that I have an opening line someday that’s even half that awesome.

    EDIT: I wanted to see what his review of Twilight was and… got the wrong one.


    So did I. I think that was on purpose, too…


    He’s no Ebert, but the guy on ReelViews absolutely shelled it for great justice.


    Hey, I’m not Catholic, but even I stop to see what the Vatican has to say when it makes headlines. And guess what?


    Yes, they also hated Harry…but part of the article runs thus: Last year Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano… published an article approving of the latest big screen installment, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. The film managed to ‘distinguish between good and evil’, it said.)


    The film managed to ‘distinguish between good and evil.’

    No, really?

    Putting aside the religion issue, when it comes to HP, it’s fairly obvious who’s the bad guy anyway. (HINT: He’s the guy that goes around murdering people, okay?)