It's all good. Although just because these predators have a hunger that constatly trials them. Doesn't mean that they don't necessarily have a soul. Serial Killers and families of their victims say they don't have souls but they still have them.
See what i mean...... u keep repeating the same argument. These are vampires my friend..... not lions..... not serial killers (in the real world sense that is)..... and its not a philosophical discussion. So idk why u keep repeating yourself. This is a novel about vampires, albeit a variation of the Bram Stoker vampire we all know and love. But yet vampires in every magical sense of the word. And according to them they dont have souls. So im sorry but just cuz you tell me a serial killer has a soul even tho he kills people..... doesn't follow the argument at hand.
It's wierd that you call yourself the hater of haters. Your base breakdown of my comments is childish. If they don't have souls in the end then fine. As I said I didn't read the books just watched the films from the port glass (I'm a projectionist). I was one of the first people on this forum who stood up for the TwiVamps in battles. I'm aware of what they can do. But going by the films just because Edward says he has no soul makes sense considering what they are.
I respect your argument but I refuse to believe they are of the Undead type I grew up with. Being Reanimated corpses possessed by demons. Who burn under the Sun and can't stand holy relics.
Does it make you feel like smarter to call people childish? And when you say "base breakdown" it doesnt make you seem smarter, it makes you seem like you like to use big words that dont go next to each other in that context. I made a "base breakdown" of your comments? Neway now it sounds like you're agreeing with me..... so what gives?
U don't get super powers, adamantium-like skin, and speed comperable to an airplane, through a biological mutaion. I mean one of the vamps can see the future.
Vampires are monstrous creatures, not pale, rock-skinned regular joes.
Vampires abhor and/or are destroyed by sunlight, they do not shine like someone rubbed them down with too much sparkle oil.
Vampires may only enter one's home through invitation, not just sneak into some dumb broad's room to watch her in the middle of the night.
These are just a few points.
Y'know what else, chos? I've actually enjoyed the books, they're a guilty pleasure for me. That doesn't change the fact that Twilight vamps shit on traditional vampire lore, more than it might be skewed or interpreted elsewhere. So you can get off your high horse and tell me not to "hate", because I'm not, and I wouldn't be surprised if at any point in time Ms. Meyer comes out and says that TwiVamps have souls, but until then, it's speculation in favor of, in my opinion.
__________________ -"My internet is currently so bad I'm time traveling. Don't worry about it."
-"You have the best problems, Scenario. You really do. haermm"
Actually i should have included the contagion factor. I mean for them to develop these powers and abilities through some freak evolutionary factor. What are the odds that they would evolve past what they are, and that they would pass their mutation along through a bite. And why would this mutation make them immortal?
All u just did was spout "Bram Stoker" and TV vampire lore...... I mean no one really cared about vampires until he wrote this book. They werent even called that specifically. They've had hundreds of names and attributes. Some cultures think vamps can't cross water. Some think they're just bloated corpses that walk around at night and eat ppl. All you did just now was repeat what the show Angel made vapires out to be.
X-men is not 100% mutation and if it were true in twilight they wouldn't have been the only ones to get this. I mean the indians turn into wolves and the vamps bite people. Never in the movie did it say that there was anything else. Seems like if it was a mutation we would see some X-men stuff. Not just contagious vampires and skinwalkers.
Angel? I'm sorry, you mean the show where "monstrous" constituted a ridiculous change in facial features and no other part of their body being affected at all? Please, Van Helsing did a better job with the classic vampire than Angel did, and Bram Stoker did a bang up job with his rendition of it as well, though he certainly romanticized them much more than had ever been done before. Excuse me if I really don't feel like putting much effort when it's three in the damn morning for me. I could have easily mentioned Vlad the Impaler, one of the original sources for the vampire mythology, or even Elizabeth Bathory, who did the whole bathing in blood schtick, but really I just wanted to get my point across, and that is that Twilight changes the traditional view of vampires drastically.
__________________ -"My internet is currently so bad I'm time traveling. Don't worry about it."
-"You have the best problems, Scenario. You really do. haermm"
Not 100% mutation? What? You have got to be joking. The X-men and all other mutants are created from a mutated gene in their DNA called the X-Gene. The majority of the human race is afraid of these mutants because of their mutation and what it does to them and what it means for the future of the human species.
Only...y'know, there's the whole psychic powers things. Seeing the future, that's totally not an X-Men thing...oh wait.
Well, at least there's nothing like controlling emotions in X-Men...Well, hold on...
Mind reading! That's definitely not an X-men thing...erm...
You're right, though, that shapeshifting thing is totally original...
The durable skin that sparkles. Not an X-men thing either...
__________________ -"My internet is currently so bad I'm time traveling. Don't worry about it."
-"You have the best problems, Scenario. You really do. haermm"
U do realize that whole paragraph was a perfect example of what i just said. U think vampirism just showed up some time after vlad. I just want to point out how wrong you are. Vlad was the inspiration for Bram Stoker.... not for vampyres themselves. Demonic beings that feed off of the living or the undead that inhabit bodies to the same end have been around since the frikin mesopotamians. I mean its kinda funny how people think they know about vapires just cuz they know about vlad the impaler. And as for Bathony..... there is almost no evidence to support the fact that she did any of those things. FAIL
Yes, I have to disagree with X-men not being 100% mutants. Its not about how much sense it makes, its up to the author to say whatever and it becomes law.
On the other hand, he did make a few very good points on why Twilight characters are very unlikely to be mutants.
Again, you're missing my point. I could really use my brain meats at three in the morning to give you more than popcorn references, but I'm up at three in the morning and not feeling all that willing to do such a thing. Twilight changes things in kind of a big way when it comes to looking at vampires. That's what I'm saying. I don't care that you want me to not use pop culture to get that point across, I really don't.
__________________ -"My internet is currently so bad I'm time traveling. Don't worry about it."
-"You have the best problems, Scenario. You really do. haermm"
Sigh....... u just totally took the bluntest view of what i just said. So what your saying is that these are genetic mutaions but 5 ppl in the world get them? Gee kind of sounds magical to me. And like i said no one seems to be just turning into vampires. Seems like the need to bite you before you become them.
I was just gonna write that but had to have dinner. They are not traditional vampires. And yes in the realm of fiction a mutation can make a humanoid clinically dead hard as stone and psychic abilities. Their enhanced state evolves them to these potentials.
Some mutants are vampires in appearance and ability.
__________________
Last edited by the ninjak on Jul 30th, 2010 at 10:21 AM