Ghost Rider vs Twilight

Originally posted by Placidity
Actually he doesn't want to turn her because he doesn't believe vampires have souls. He and Carlisle discussed this in the book and its very clear they were talking about souls in the literal/spiritual/religious sense.

Originally posted by the ninjak
And I've never read the books I just call it as I see it.

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.

Originally posted by the ninjak
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.

Originally posted by omgchos
Changed any what? And you keep dancing around this soulless is just an opinion thing. U went from "it's only the wolf pack and their victims" to "Edward only thinks so cuz shes gonna eat ppl now". Which means you either didn't wanna mention it the first time, or you formed some type of bias opinion cuz you think ghost rider should beat the twi vamps. Lets put it this way, ghost rider has alot more powers than the penance stare, which would require him to stare into their eyes for a second or two.... close up. We know these twivamps can move at super-fast speeds. So i dont see how the penance stare even enters your mind in this argument.
Not only are they soulless but its obsolete in this fight.

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.

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

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.

They seem to be more a biological mutation.

Originally posted by the ninjak
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.

Originally posted by the ninjak
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.

They seem to be more a biological mutation.

Originally posted by the ninjak
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.

Thats is not the only criterion of a vampire. If it were so, most well known vampires would not be one according to you.

Originally posted by the ninjak

They seem to be more a biological mutation.

They are medically dead.

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

Well, you could... but its not likely to be the case here.

Its pretty much up to the author to decide...

Originally posted by omgchos
The fact that you hate something this much is a failure. I mean this kinda sounds like back when all the harry potter vs. forums were going around. All those guys would argue against HP simply because they hated. And got all snippy when someone seems to back the side your up against. All i was pointing out is that he keeps saying because they killed somebody that means his penance stare is just gonna own em all. And btw do you know how much vampire lore their is? Cuz most vampire lore shits on itself. There are more different types of Vamps in the world than there are religions. But as i was saying........ pretty much all of them say no soul.

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.

Originally posted by Placidity
Well, you could... but its not likely to be the case here.

Its pretty much up to the author to decide...

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

Umm...Marvel and the X-Men would like to have a word with you. 😐

Originally posted by XanatosForever
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 say 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.

Originally posted by XanatosForever
Umm...Marvel and the X-Men would like to have a word with you. 😐

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.

Originally posted by XanatosForever
Vampires are monstrous creatures, not pale, rock-skinned regular joes.

No not always.

The Vampire Diaries and Anne Rice Vamps are examples of Vampires having attractiveness and charm as traits.

Many others are not monstrous...

Originally posted by XanatosForever

Vampires abhor and/or are destroyed by sunlight, they do not shine like someone rubbed them down with too much sparkle oil.

Alucard.

Originally posted by XanatosForever

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.

Blade, Underworld, Anne Rice.

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

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...😐

dur-rage

Originally posted by XanatosForever
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.

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

Originally posted by XanatosForever
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...😐

dur-rage

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.

Originally posted by omgchos
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

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.

Originally posted by XanatosForever
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...😐

dur-rage

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

Xmen?

Originally posted by XanatosForever
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.

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.

Originally posted by omgchos
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.

Some mutants are vampires in appearance and ability.