Reflective of Our Times?
I watched the first three Twilight movies in the theater last night. Totally awesome! What I found most interesting about the experience was how different the audience’s reaction to the first two movies was last night, in comparison to their reaction when those movies first came out.
They laughed at the first two movies in a few places, even while breaking into applause for some of their favorite moments.
Edward watching Bella sleep in Twilight was met with snorts. When Twilight first came out, sure, there were plenty who were weirded out by that, but especially in the theater, this was accepted with solemn intensity instead of laughter.
Twilight was first published in 2005, thus written and read when Bush was in his big-brother mode. In fact, the end of 2005 was when we first started discussing his phone-tapping policy. In 2005, the United States was still willing to trade freedom for protection. Even in 2008, when the movie Twilight was released, there was no laughter in the audience for this plot point.
I took the laughter as hope that this terrifying trend is coming to a close.
Then there’s the sex thing. The movie Eclipse was self-aware of how archaic Edward’s feelings on sex, virginity and marriage. It gave the audience several moments to laugh at this situation. The first two movies regarded the sex thing with solemnity, although the audience did snort or laugh at these moments last night.
In the past few years, there has been a sweeping, judgmental, and intolerant movement when it comes to sex. The audience’s reaction to the sex thing was heartening. I’m taking both the self-awareness of the movie and the audience’s laughter as hope that this judgmental and intolerant trend is phasing out.
And finally, in the first three books, Bella is courageous and she wants desperately to fight for herself, but she is human and not a match for vampires. (Though she does fight, in her own way, but I don’t want to go into that debate.) For the most part, Edward and Jacob protect her.
When the Twilight trilogy was written, we were still reeling from 9/11. Even when it was first published, the average U.S. citizen was passively living their lives while others protected them from terrorism, which they were powerless to actively fight. While this is still going on today, I see less fear. The 2004 election was mostly won because Bush promised to protect us and played on our fear of terrorism. I don’t see that same tactic working as well today. Eclipse does a great job of making Bella more proactive and showing how she does fight, even when she doesn’t.
I enjoyed the trilogy immensely, and still love the storylines. As I sat there, though, I wondered if Twilight would have had the same popular resonance it did if the first book had been released in 2010 instead of 2005.
Although sitting in a packed movie theater isn’t my favorite way to watch a movie, it was fascinating to observe the audience. Eclipse did a great job of spanning both times and cultures, and the audience always laughed with the movie and never at the movie. The first two movies showed signs of… aging.
What do you think? Have you watched the first two lately? Are you going to the third? Do you think that if Twilight were released today, that it would have the same resonance it did in 2005?
34 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Natasha Fondren is a writer traveling the U.S. in a camper with her four cats. She is currently enjoying the lizards and desert heat in Arizona.
Ack! I never watched the movies. They don’t interest me at all. I’m one of the people who couldn’t get into the book.
It’s all subjective, and Stephanie Meyers is doing well without me.
I understand, Edie. I couldn’t get into the first book, for sure.
So true!
Twilight is anathema.
btw, this has nothing to do with this post, but have you read Rhonda’s latest blog post? She mentions “being single again”. I’m like, WTF??
ROFL, Elizabeth! Now tell me how you really feel about Twilight.
She is? Awww! No manpanion anymore?
My SIL won’t go to those movies with me anymore because I laughed during those parts the first time around. The lovey parts were just so cheesy.
Jill, this time, the whole audience laughed during those bits.
Rob Pattinson creeps me out and Kristen Stewart is so un-Bella…IMO. But I did like Breaking Dawn.
I think another interesting question is would the True Blood series have been made without Twilight and if it had been, would Twilight be as popular if it were released post-True Blood.
LOL, Aerin! Did you see the latest episode of True BLood? I think that was the most disgusting sex scene I’ve ever seen! *shudders*
I had every intention of seeing the movies, but I wanted to read the books, first. Then, the whole mess blew up and I had to listen to my tween niece blather endlessly about how WONDERFUL Edward was and how lame I was for not: a) reading the books, b) seeing the movie, and c) giving in to her desires that I pick a “team,” regardless of the first two points. Somewhere near the two-hour mark–when her voice had become a mosquito’s buzz in my ear and the only emotion I could successfully produce was indignation that vampires could go out in daylight AND sparkled whey they did so–I stopped caring. I have the books on my shelf, but I think they’re going to sit unopened for a bit longer.
I started reading “The Host” and did not immediately mesh with Meyer’s writing style. That, too, helped me decide to put off reading the series.
ROFL! That’s hilarious. If my niece had told me to watch or read Twilight, I would have done it immediately. Evidently, I’m trained to be obedient to nieces.
Yeah, the sparkles make me giggle.
I like your points, though. Very well thought-out. I think all writing is either a reflection of, or a commentary on both the time in which we live and society’s sentiment thereof.
I agree, Avery. Usually subconscious rather than purposeful, but it is interesting.
I saw the first movie. Haven’t read the books. You make an interesting point, although I thought the themes for the books were probably more universal, especially to women. I’m not exactly sure what those themes are. Perhaps great and powerful love?
Charles, yes, true. The whole Romeo and Juliet thing is definitely timeless!
Like Charles I only watched the first movie. I chalked it up as not my thing and have given no thought to any of the questions you ask, but I find it very astute that you would glean such things.
Travis, it was just startling to see how audience reaction had changed to the first two movies.
Wow! I never thought of the books in terms of their relevance to society, and Bush, and freedom, and… I love the way you think. It’s so creative and interesting. My mind would never go there without a big fat push.
I think these books would resonate with adolescents no matter when they were released. It’s basically the Romeo and Juliet theme. Kids love that. (So do adults!) The doomed love theme is pretty darn popular in movies, also. I had adolescent patients who saw “Titanic” 20 times. Really.
Oh Robin! LOL! I love your new avatar! It was hard not to think of it, since the audience reaction was so different.
The Romeo and Juliet thing is HUGE!
This was my reaction to this post too! I never would have come to theses conclusions but they are a very interesting way to look at it.
LOL, Melanie! Well, I could be overthinking it! Me? No!
I can’t see those movies. One page of the book and five minutes of the first film caught on TV told me they are not for me.
The books disturb me on a lot of levels, not the least because of the hero and heroine’s age difference. Sorry, ick. Gag reflex all the way. Young girls being attracted to and by older, wiser men, even if they’re willing to “wait,” is a deal-breaker for me.
That said, I’m glad you had fun!
LOL, Betsy! Awww. Well, being with an older man, (not wiser, though) that doesn’t bother me. Despite his “age,” I still see Edward as 17, so that didn’t bother me at all.
I did enjoy the books a great deal and got my daughter hooked on them, but just couldn’t get into the movies. I don’t feel they did the books justice. Even my daughter, who was a big Rob Pattinson fan BEFORE Twilight, finds the movies a little cheesy, even though she loved Edward from the books and was happy Rob was going to play him.
I think True Blood would have been made without Twilight, but do believe that “The Vampire Diaries” (which came before Twilight, and where I think Steph Meyers borrowed a lot of material – some of it word for word) probably would not have become a tv series without the Twi phenom.
Kate, I definitely think of the movies as illustrations of the books. Without the book, the first movie, and even the second one, makes Bella look like a wimp.
Supposedly, Meyers never watched or read a single vampire thing before coming up with her story. I don’t know if that’s true, though. Her lack of… foundation in the vampire mythology does seem to pervade the books, LOL.
I LOVE the Vampire Diaries series! (TV) I haven’t been able to get into the books yet, but I haven’t tried overly hard.
I think it’s hard for me to form an opinion on audience reaction in conjuction with societal fears and worries as the books were being released. I didn’t read Twilight until Eclipse had been relesed. I didn’t read New Moon until right before the movie came out last year and I am just now reading Eclipse. I’m attracted to the books because of their homage to Wuthering Heights, Romeo & Juliet, Pride & Prejudice, etc. Dramatic angst isn’t new, obviously. And the romance genre today pushes strong, feminist heoines (nothing wrong with that) and Bella doesn’t really start out that way. She needs saving. I think many women crave that on some level. Maybe not all the time, but at least in relative spurts. Especially so in times when they feel helpless. (Hello economy? Anyone? And the current economy is a result of 9/11, so one has to wonder. Everything has shifted…)
I do love how she did that, Heather! I agree with the saving thing. I don’t think it’s un-empowering, not any more than dreaming of winning the lottery, LOL. Women are still doing the majority of the housework, the raising of kids, and working outside the home. I’d argue that we tend to do more work than men, so why shouldn’t we get a break in our fantasies?
releAsed
heRoines
ROFL! I know the feeling!
Natasha, you watch movies the way I do. Even in comedies, I’ll invite my mind to allow itself to blend art with society. In a sense I feel that a director’s job is to put his interpretation of the story on film. I’ve always felt that hidden within is a personal commentary. Perhaps that is why people are at times turned off by the movie version of a best selling book. They’ll say that “It didn’t do the book any justice,” but really, the film version is merely the filmmaker’s viewpoint – his adaptation. (Can you tell I studied Fiction to Film in college? lol)
That’s interesting, Kath! I often find, in the last decade, that I enjoy the movie more than the book. I’m not sure why that is, but maybe since I try to stay up with pop culture, the movie is more reflective of its time. Or maybe not. I don’t know.
I think movie-goers don’t realize that authors/publishers sell the rights all the time to whomever, be it the producer, director, an actor, whatever. Once someone else owns the rights, they can do whatever they want with the story, including changing it to suit their interpretation. I think that’s why some are disappointed with the movie version, or vice-versa.
Yeah. That must be hard on authors, though! Laurell K. Hamilton put a stop to a TV series based on Anita Blake because of that.
P.S. I’m looking forward to reading the trilogy.
Cool, Kath! I gotta warn you about the first one… it’s a difficult, awkward read. In fact, I still haven’t read it. I skimmed it. It took me a year to start the next one, and then I couldn’t put the last three books down!