Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Am I Missing Something?
Here's a funny question for someone who is more well versed on the subject than I. I was reading Roger Ebert's review for Twilight:Eclipse and he made a comment about the tent scene between Edward and Jacob. It was in jest, but Ebert made reference to Brokeback Mountain. Then I was looking at IMDB to see who would be directing the fourth film and saw that it was Bill Condon, an openly gay man. I then saw in the trivia section that at one point Gus Van Sant, another openly gay man, had been in talks to also direct the fourth film. Considering that both of these men's films, if not dealing with gay characters, have homosexual undercurrents running through them, is there something inherently homosexual about Breaking Dawn or Twilight as a whole? Is it in the books? I think there could be an interesting reading here, but I don't think I'm expert enough on the Twilight universe to give it. Any thoughts?
Posted by The Taxi Driver at 6:01 PM
Labels: Bill Condon, Breaking Dawn, Gus Van Sant, Twilight, Twilight:Eclipse
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
My only thought is, "Why are we still talking about Twilight??" Ha... in jest.ReplyDelete
Ugh. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a fan of this series of crappily written books and equally crappily directed films. I'm sorry, but everyone is sparkly; everyone talks in a whisper; and Bella has GOT to be the worst "heroine" in years!ReplyDelete
Amen, but you're preaching to the converted.ReplyDelete
To interject, the scariest thing about the whole twilight shlock is that the actors actually think the movies are going well. I happened to glance across an interview where the interviewer asked Kristin Stewart whether she though Bella was a good role model. She said she was because she had to be strong to allow someone else to make decisions for her...ReplyDelete
am I the only on who thinks that is utter bull and that Bella represents nothing more than a blank slate that the writer, producers and director of the movie want every single young girl out there to project onto?
Gentleman, thanks for the comment. If anything, Bella is a promiscuious girl, wanting "sex" (let's face it, that's the depth of the allegory here), outside of wedlock while Edward must subdue her, so what does she do, falls in love with the oversexed, shirtless, werewolve who believes he can better give her "what she wants." Doesn't sound like much of a role model to me.ReplyDelete
Let's remember though, although Stweart seems like a smart actress, most of the times, especially when it concerns big films like these, most of these press interviews are written by publicists before the fact, so we probably can't hold Stewart fully accountable for spewing nonsense.
I love that photo! Hadn't really thought about Twilight in those terms, and Meyer definitely wasn't brave enough to go anywhere near that kind of story line, but the movies might have been better for it.ReplyDelete
I don't think there is, but that's just me - they are so conservative (no sex before marriage!) that if there is an undertone, it's probably a repressed subconscious one.ReplyDelete
I'm worried about the blatant misogyny. Edward is perfectly okay to stalk Bella, sneak into her room, treat her like crap, try to talk his friend into knocking her up and emotionally manipulate her into doing what he wants (marry me and I'll make you a vampire). And this is "twu luv".
Jess- I think it's less a matter a bravery and more one of literary incompitence.ReplyDelete
Darren- Not to mention how the wolves decide their women by scent-posting them or some such thing. I hope in Breaking Dawn Jacob tries to pee on Bella to claim her as his own.