Welcome to Gaia's forums, where millions of members gather to discuss random stuff, make new friends,
complain about life, argue about nothing, laugh at dumb pictures, discuss serious issues and/or curse like sailors.
Lurking is creepy. Quit skulking in the shadows and join the conversation!
Register to reply
 |
More Discussion required. Bump!
|
|
|
MarlboroMurder Quote: The Final and biggest one of all is this: • The entire story line of New Moon is almost direct knock off of Romeo and Juliet, by Shakespeare. As good as Shakespearean dramas are there is no need for them to be copied almost to the letter, using elements yes as Shakespeare is pretty much the father of the English language. The key difference is that New Moon doesn't have a tragic outcome, but this one is more obvious as she does state in the books Romeo and Juliet themes as Bella has to study it for English, by reading you can see the similarities, they are as plain as day to those who aren't blinded by fandom. This Is For The CO3O3 My People We Got The Music That You Can't Stand Still To Do Explain Your Plot Comparison. I Too, Read All Four Books, And I Don't See How New Moon And Romeo And Juliet Are Even Vaguely Similar. Romeo Never Left Juliet. Bella Is Not Opposing Either Edward Or Jacob. She Is Split Between The Two Of Them, With Them Being Of Opposing "Clans." And Romeo And Juliet With No Tragic Ending Is Just A Knockoff Love Story. Even Just Based On the Ending, New Moon Cannot Mirror Romeo And Juliet, Because The Ending Of Romeo And Juliet Is What Defines It. And Even If You Don't Dance, Don't Dance I Gotta Get You Out And Take This Chance Enie Menie Minie Mo So Much Bitches At Our Shows Different State A Different Ho Which Of Them Should I Take Home? I have already posted this in its exactness on page 2 but here it is again as a refresher: The Figure 13 Have you read Romeo and Juliet or at least seen a film adaptation, you will understand when I say that, in Romeo and Juliet it is the fate the befalls both Romeo and Juliet that is the key similarity. In Twilight the same fate almost befalls Bella and Edward. In Romeo and Juliet, Juliet pretends to kill herself to draw Romeo out of hiding, or exile or something. Romeo finds out, and thinks, Juliet has killed herself and goes to her tomb to kill himself over her body, with poison. Juliet wakes up from her death like state and sees what Romeo has done. She takes up a dagger and stabs herself as neither wants to live without the other. This is the case in Twilight, Edward thinks Bella has killed herself and in turn wants to die, he goes to the Volturi and asks them to end his life but because they won't he has to find another way. Bella stops him, but if she hadn't stopped him and he had stepped into the sunlight to get himself killed for exposing the Vampire world, Bella probably would have asked if the Volturi could kill her to. But as it is neither end up dead, so that is where the similarity ends. Page 2. That is the page it is on. @Tutela de Xaoc I am sorry I hurt your feelings, for the record I did say most. |
 |
|
|
Freebird4077 Marokia Edward = proves that original doesn't always mean good with sparkly skin. And also... 107 year old stalker ***** vamp. Moving on. Bella's Dad would be the one getting locked up in all honesty. |
|
|
Marokia Edward = proves that original doesn't always mean good with sparkly skin. And also... 107 year old stalker ***** vamp. Moving on. |
|
|
 |
Quote: The Final and biggest one of all is this: • The entire story line of New Moon is almost direct knock off of Romeo and Juliet, by Shakespeare. As good as Shakespearean dramas are there is no need for them to be copied almost to the letter, using elements yes as Shakespeare is pretty much the father of the English language. The key difference is that New Moon doesn't have a tragic outcome, but this one is more obvious as she does state in the books Romeo and Juliet themes as Bella has to study it for English, by reading you can see the similarities, they are as plain as day to those who aren't blinded by fandom. This Is For The CO3O3 My People We Got The Music That You Can't Stand Still To Do Explain Your Plot Comparison. I Too, Read All Four Books, And I Don't See How New Moon And Romeo And Juliet Are Even Vaguely Similar. Romeo Never Left Juliet. Bella Is Not Opposing Either Edward Or Jacob. She Is Split Between The Two Of Them, With Them Being Of Opposing "Clans." And Romeo And Juliet With No Tragic Ending Is Just A Knockoff Love Story. Even Just Based On the Ending, New Moon Cannot Mirror Romeo And Juliet, Because The Ending Of Romeo And Juliet Is What Defines It. And Even If You Don't Dance, Don't Dance I Gotta Get You Out And Take This Chance Enie Menie Minie Mo So Much Bitches At Our Shows Different State A Different Ho Which Of Them Should I Take Home? |
|
|
No work of literature is completely original, and the fact that a text borrows elements of others is not a sign of its literary worth.
|
|
|
|
The Figure 13 RaggedyViolet I will respond to each of these points. Let me first clarify. I am neither defending or attacking the quality of the book, only the originality. 1. The whole skin of granite thing. Whether that was taken from Catwoman or not it's pretty well established that vampires are hard to destroy. Skin of granite seems to support that and describe it well. 2. The Werewolves being shape shifters in actuality. I'm pretty sure she was just looking for a way to explain why the werewolves could shift at anytime, not just a full moon. After all, if Jacob could only transform during full moon a lot of the book couldn't have happened. (like him saving Bella a few times during the day) 3. If you take an idea from mythology it isn't plagiarism. It is a re imagining of a previous idea. Even if she did it intentionally maybe she was trying to imply that Aro is that old that he was the "god" who had this shield. The more likely explanation is that she didn't know and it's a coincidence. Which brings me to ... 4. Okay I'm not going to try to cry coincidence here, she's stated that it was inspired by Romeo and Juliet. But as long as she acknowledges that it isn't anything wrong. After all the Lion King is a total rip off of Hamlet but no one throws a hissy fit about that. If you copy from Shakespeare it doesn't really count because he chose to write about universal themes. His ideas were good. It's pretty well established that if you copy Shakespeare you are still being creative. Well done, but it is a discussion about originality. Flawing my points is not exactly making points for or against the discussion. But pointing these obvious things out is good, it means someone has actually taken the time to formulate an argument. You pretty much put everyone in this forum to shame as you actually took the time to make an argument. It just happens that it is off topic, I believe I posted an argument on where werewolves came from, responding to a direct post from you...thanks v.v talk2hand |
|
|
Whelps most failures of this degree aren't that original. At best Twilight is a failed spoof of a genre. Nothing more and nothing less. Just one lady's bad, bad, wet dream.
|
|
|
|
RaggedyViolet I will respond to each of these points. Let me first clarify. I am neither defending or attacking the quality of the book, only the originality. 1. The whole skin of granite thing. Whether that was taken from Catwoman or not it's pretty well established that vampires are hard to destroy. Skin of granite seems to support that and describe it well. 2. The Werewolves being shape shifters in actuality. I'm pretty sure she was just looking for a way to explain why the werewolves could shift at anytime, not just a full moon. After all, if Jacob could only transform during full moon a lot of the book couldn't have happened. (like him saving Bella a few times during the day) 3. If you take an idea from mythology it isn't plagiarism. It is a re imagining of a previous idea. Even if she did it intentionally maybe she was trying to imply that Aro is that old that he was the "god" who had this shield. The more likely explanation is that she didn't know and it's a coincidence. Which brings me to ... 4. Okay I'm not going to try to cry coincidence here, she's stated that it was inspired by Romeo and Juliet. But as long as she acknowledges that it isn't anything wrong. After all the Lion King is a total rip off of Hamlet but no one throws a hissy fit about that. If you copy from Shakespeare it doesn't really count because he chose to write about universal themes. His ideas were good. It's pretty well established that if you copy Shakespeare you are still being creative. Well done, but it is a discussion about originality. Flawing my points is not exactly making points for or against the discussion. But pointing these obvious things out is good, it means someone has actually taken the time to formulate an argument. You pretty much put everyone in this forum to shame as you actually took the time to make an argument. It just happens that it is off topic, |
|
|
I will respond to each of these points. Let me first clarify. I am neither defending or attacking the quality of the book, only the originality.
1. The whole skin of granite thing. Whether that was taken from Catwoman or not it's pretty well established that vampires are hard to destroy. Skin of granite seems to support that and describe it well. 2. The Werewolves being shape shifters in actuality. I'm pretty sure she was just looking for a way to explain why the werewolves could shift at anytime, not just a full moon. After all, if Jacob could only transform during full moon a lot of the book couldn't have happened. (like him saving Bella a few times during the day) 3. If you take an idea from mythology it isn't plagiarism. It is a re imagining of a previous idea. Even if she did it intentionally maybe she was trying to imply that Aro is that old that he was the "god" who had this shield. The more likely explanation is that she didn't know and it's a coincidence. Which brings me to ... 4. Okay I'm not going to try to cry coincidence here, she's stated that it was inspired by Romeo and Juliet. But as long as she acknowledges that it isn't anything wrong. After all the Lion King is a total rip off of Hamlet but no one throws a hissy fit about that. If you copy from Shakespeare it doesn't really count because he chose to write about universal themes. His ideas were good. It's pretty well established that if you copy Shakespeare you are still being creative. |
|
|
|
Brenivin Veolin Brenivin Both main characters had sex on a beach. Both main male characters called their wives "love" Both female main characters got pregnant with a dark or tainted child. Hell, I was even working on a story several years back where as a woman was descended from a partially vampiric family born to a turning vampire held between transition when the child was born. And not a month ago I found a strikingly similar idea presented in Larissa Ione's Demonica Novels. Eerie, but just a coincidence none the less. Which I'm not saying that Mayer didn't rip her off, but rather that hasn't been the best case Ive seen regarding such claims thus far. What got me was that it wasn't the ideas being copied, but entire sentances/paragraphs, word for word, with names changed. But with that consideration, I would be up in arms too. >.> |
|
|
No idea is original anymore. Every idea has basically been thought of.
If things were always looked at in terms of originality, everything would suck. Also, it's pretty lame when people relate her to people like Bram Stoker and Anne Rice- who also have their own way of sucking royally. People who do relate her to them, complaining that her vampires aren't like theirs are ruining the argument of her unoriginality, since you're basically asking her to be like them. |
|
|
|
Skittish Nature-Boy Found it.  lol heart |
|
|
VeXeD ZERO Okeedookey guys and girls Lets bring Bram Stroker into this If we take the legend of Dracula into this. Twilights Vampires ability to be in the sun MAY be plausible, But the Shinyskin? Thats just plain old ******** stupid. Dracula, being the first vampire, was able to withstand the sun, His powers WERE stronger during the dark of course. Hollywood has blurred what vampires are now for years, slowly changing the Laws of the Vampire. Vampires, Since Dracula, Were always smooth, Seductive, beings. Not pasty faced little wankers who think that they are all that. I mean ********, Edward Culeen is a ******** p***y. LOOK AT HIM! I reckon most the chicks I know could beat the living piss out of him, Even you Figs! I could rant on and on about this drabble, but Im really not in the mood right now...I'll be Back twifags. ^_^ Just so you know, we're not all twifags, but yeah, that is kinda the point of the argument. If you want to make a Vampire Story original you have warp the reality of the Vampire in order to so. |
|
|
|
Okeedookey guys and girls
Lets bring Bram Stroker into this If we take the legend of Dracula into this. Twilights Vampires ability to be in the sun MAY be plausible, But the Shinyskin? Thats just plain old ******** stupid. Dracula, being the first vampire, was able to withstand the sun, His powers WERE stronger during the dark of course. Hollywood has blurred what vampires are now for years, slowly changing the Laws of the Vampire. Vampires, Since Dracula, Were always smooth, Seductive, beings. Not pasty faced little wankers who think that they are all that. I mean ********, Edward Culeen is a ******** p***y. LOOK AT HIM! I reckon most the chicks I know could beat the living piss out of him, Even you Figs! I could rant on and on about this drabble, but Im really not in the mood right now...I'll be Back twifags. ^_^ |
|
