?

Log in

 
 
24 November 2009 @ 09:15 pm
Catching up, sorta  
I really suck at life balance. I lurch from prioritising one thing totally over all else to prioritising something else completely... for six months or so it was work, and then a month ago I realised that the rest of my life had fallen into ruin, so now I'm on a 'get fit/healthy, get organised, get a life back' kick. Who knows if I can strike a balance at any stage?

Anyway, I'm struggling to fit fandom in, in either case, and am falling ever more hopelessly 'behind'. There are so many things I could or should be doing and I am not doing... sigh. I have lots to post about at the moment (had I the time!) so this is going to be one of those terrible, catch-all, catch-up posts... that won't really catch me up very far at all! :p

First up... Smallville. I now watch a week behind everyone else so I haven't seen 'Pandora'. But this delay means I'm spoiled considerably by icons, etc. So I knew that 'Idol' was a big Clois episode and had The Dread going in because the Clois has slowly been sucking my soul dry all season. I don't think anything constructive will come of me talking about my sadness that now, at the time I should be MOST into Smallville (when Lois finally is getting considerable screentime and show presence, and the show is focused on Clark/Lois), I have never felt more empty or distant from my show. A lot of it is self-protective to stop me feeling rageful at the way they're writing things (which I know I would if I didn't distance myself a lot). It's not just the Clois... Callum Blue is so atrocious as Zod I don't know what to do when I watch him. I can't even laugh, it just makes me feel hollow! And it's all taken a toll...

Only, actually, I was pleasantly surprised with 'Idol'. :) It didn't make me want to gouge my eyeballs out or block up my ears! And there were a couple of genuinely cute scenes (the glasses ZOMG!) and I even liked the kiss at the end. I liked it MUCH MUCH better than the one where Clark swooped in on Lois randomly for no reason. I also liked the cute little siblings and I think they need to go hang with Ollie (but they won't). So maybe, just maybe, I may rally to write an actual review of an episode... Maybe. Or maybe 'Pandora' will be soul-sucking again.

I went to see the new Twilight movie for the LOLZ. I was prepared for it to be worse than the first movie, but I found it more enjoyable. There was a lot more to laugh at and it was far less dreary. Jacob's pecs brightened things up CONSIDERABLY. (Wow, Edward, you are such a dreary dweeb... and is it just me, or was Pattinson not really feelin' it in a couple of those scenes? ;) )

Thank god for Jacob and his clan of implausibly clad werewolves (werewolves are apparently all about the PANTS and not much at all about the SHIRTS. Become a werewolf and you will never wear a shirt again). I was a bit sad when the CGI on his chestal area slipped up briefly though... or did they have to recut a scene and he'd lost a bit of tone maybe? Er, yes, I was paying CLOSE attention to the plot.

Oh, come on! What plot? Seriously I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND how this stupid story is considered so compelling. But it was great fun to laugh at:
- The camera panning round and round emo!Bella's head to represent time passing without Edward.
- The LITERAL moon in the credits (though it was very pretty). But wow, these movies are so unsubtle.
- Bella screaming from her nightmares (LOL, I never expected that to be portrayed on screen! Too funny!).
- The desperate attempts of the screenwriters to downplay the soul/Christianity/marriage aspect. I can't wait to see how they try to stranglehold the increasingly overt Mormonism of books 3 and 4...
- Bella falling over and falling off a bike. So much fail! Yet, movie!Bella is surprisingly likeable despite that, so I laughed in principle but admired the actress for overcoming the ridiculous character premise.
- WAVE out of nowhere!
- Bella's 'oh, my life is so hard, I just have TOO MANY GUYS TO CHOOSE FROM' emo.
- Dakota Fanning (Twihard, yes?) shooting 'Pain' from her eyes.
- And finally the marriage LULZ. Always good to enter the credits with tears of laughter...

Meyer's minimalist approach to world building is laughable, but I do admire the film creators' for overcoming that with all their beautiful cinematography. Also, it makes me LOL when they pull crazy dramatic SFX on a scene that was a couple of lines long in the book.

Watched Friday Night Lights 4.4, and while I don't have time for a full review I do need to say... MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!! OMG! That final scene really took me by surprise, I did not see it coming, and it had the intended shock value for me. I'd been delighting in having Tim and Matt in scenes together (they always delight me), and it never occurred to me we were heading for a fall of this sort! :( Ouch! And oh, GRANDMA!

There were many other moments I loved in the episode, and overall it's once again the show I'm enjoying most on television (though it has little competition).

I did watch the Doctor Who special but found it too OTT.

I'm up to speed with Dexter but it's been patchy all season for me.

Community continues to please me. Abed and Troy's duet FTW this week.

Have read a few good books and have several more I want to get to! Wish I had time to natter about them. Hmm. Wishlists are going round, yes? Wave a magic wand for more time for me? :D
 
 
Current Location: sofa of comfiness
Current Mood: thoughtfulthoughtful
 
 
 
Sophie: torchwood spoilersalias_sqbr on November 24th, 2009 11:40 am (UTC)
Your spoiler cut for Twilight turned into a linky thing. Luckily I don't care about being spoiled :)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:17 pm (UTC)
Ugh. Epic fail! *facepalm* Fixed now but SORRRRRRY WORLD!
Alexandra Leaving: We'd like to give it a good talkingalexandral on November 24th, 2009 12:55 pm (UTC)
Jacob's pecs brightened things up CONSIDERABLY.

yes, this was the best part of the movie:D
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Blair yelloqbop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:19 pm (UTC)
Indeed!
squirrelhavensquirrelhaven on November 24th, 2009 02:06 pm (UTC)
What I love is that, even while you clearly have some (justifiable) contempt for the entire Twilight series, you've still read and given some thought to all the books.

(Not that I have any stones to throw. I found the first movie hilarious. The RiffTrax version of the first movie is one of my favorite entertainments when I want a good laugh. And I fully intend to read the books as soon as I find used copies for $1 or less, which I surely will one of these days.)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Ameliebop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:21 pm (UTC)
Oh, I have OCEANS of contempt! Oceans! But it pays to know your enemy. ;)

I was a little disappointed with the first movie--it wasn't quite hilarious enough (not as hilarious as the book) for me. But Movie 2 hit the spot nicely. :)

The books are seriously great fun to mock. My favourite line from the first one was: 'He stood in the doorway looking like a male model from a raincoat catalogue'. Meyer ... workin' that simile! :p
Kass: Taylors redkassrachel on November 24th, 2009 02:26 pm (UTC)
The end of the most recent FNL ep made me weep. I didn't see it coming. I loved seeing Matt and Tim together -- they've never been friends exactly but I think now that they're both still in Dillon, both struggling with the question of who they want to be, there's more common ground than there used to be -- and I thought that whole scene with them talking and drinking beer by the fire was wonderful. And then oh, my heart, the way the music swelled so we couldn't hear what the Army men were saying but we knew the news was bad... Oh, show. &hearts.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: FNL Matt Saracenbop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:23 pm (UTC)
I knoooow! I was so distraught and then I had to go to a party and I did not feel party-ful!

But yes, I did like Tim and Matt by the fire... it's lovely how they're so different but they have this shared past now. But oh, man, this is going to be hard for Matty!
patron saint of neglected female characters: twilight--sex now?rose_griffes on November 24th, 2009 02:31 pm (UTC)
I can't wait to see how they try to stranglehold the increasingly overt Mormonism of books 3 and 4...
I'd like to see more on that at some point, even if it's just in a PM to me. Maybe it's because I have the same religious background as the author, but honestly, most of what has been attributed to Meyer's religion, I view as a reflection of the genre (romance novels) rather than her religious beliefs. So I'm curious about your perceptions on it.

Thank god for Jacob and his clan of implausibly clad werewolves (werewolves are apparently all about the PANTS and not much at all about the SHIRTS. Become a werewolf and you will never wear a shirt again).

It was hilarious! That part made me laugh and laugh.

Oh, come on! What plot? Seriously I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND how this stupid story is considered so compelling.
My theory: the same appeal that any dominant male romance novel has on women. Which is to say, there are many people who will care nothing at all for this type of storyline, but for those who do, it's not as embarrassing to be caught reading a Twilight novel as it is to be reading something from the Harlequin Presents line of stories. And since the company chose to market this for teens, it feels 'safer' somehow, and more legitimate.

The cinematography was indeed lovely. Though I miss vampire baseball. *grins*
patron saint of neglected female charactersrose_griffes on November 24th, 2009 02:40 pm (UTC)
Oh, and this: and is it just me, or was Pattinson not really feelin' it in a couple of those scenes?

It was laughable! Especially the scene in Brazil--his reaction to the news of Bella's 'death.' And just... yeah, he was much more comical in this, and not in a good way.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Napebop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:29 pm (UTC)
I'd like to see more on that at some point,
Sure! I read an interesting thesis on it which I found convincing--I'll try and dig that out... I do feel that Christianity (more generally) imbues the whole series (not that unusual for vampire books though!), but it's really in the later novels that I felt her specific personal background was showing. I agree the first ones are dominated more by the classic romance plot. But I have an atheist's aversion to Christian themes in any guise so bear that in mind in my crit. ;) I'm really not her market! not even vaguely.

Thanks for the serious answer to the non-serious question. ;) I think the books were very smartly marketed.
patron saint of neglected female charactersrose_griffes on November 25th, 2009 07:05 pm (UTC)
If you're interested in seeing other Mormons' POV on the series, I have some bookmarks here: http://delicious.com/rose_griffes/LDS-twilight-meta

The word 'meta' in the link is unintentionally misleading, though. There are parodies and goofy posts mixed in with more serious thoughts.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Lois reporterbop_radar on November 26th, 2009 03:35 am (UTC)
Here's the thesis: ils.unc.edu/MSpapers/3348.pdf

I've read a lot of the more amusing links on your bookmarks already, I confess. ;)
patron saint of neglected female characters: bear hugrose_griffes on November 26th, 2009 02:28 pm (UTC)
I confess, I saw that paper a year ago, downloaded it to read, and found it silly enough that I stopped reading early on.

This is not to say that none of its points are valid. In fact, I'll take a look at it later (next week, probably) and give you some more specific feedback. But getting back to the point you mentioned in this post, that Twilight has increasingly overt Mormonism as the series progresses: some of the author's points in that paper have to do with what isn't in the books, rather than what is*. A lack of anything isn't necessarily going to resonate with most viewers as being typically Mormon. There's not much to repress to avoid overt Mormonism in the film series if what's making the book a reflection of Mormonism is what isn't in it.

Well, other than sex. That's the one I see mentioned a lot. And while I've said in one of my posts about the series that the lack of sex could be viewed as a Mormon aspect of the books**, it's also part of the style in some romance novels--lots of lead-up but no sex until near the end, close to the 'happily ever after' stuff. (Plus Mormons didn't exactly copyright abstinence before marriage, either.)

*Some of the other aspects mentioned in the paper are viewpoints that are common in lots of religions, and for lots of non-religious people as well, such as the importance of marriage and family in life, the idea that we have the ability to choose.

**When I've asked other Mormons if they view anything in the books as being obviously influenced by our religion, the no-sex-before-marriage is the one (and usually only) thing they mention.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on November 26th, 2009 09:08 pm (UTC)
give you some more specific feedback
You really don't have to! I'm not that invested in this discussion--I just provided the thesis link because you wanted it. I know this a topic that is obviously close to your heart, and I appreciate that, but honestly, I don't really see this discussion going anywhere. I'm a hardcore atheist. I take issue with religious views, whatever their origin, wherever I find them.

Some of the other aspects mentioned in the paper are viewpoints that are common in lots of religions
Oh, totally! It happens to be Mormonism in Meyer's case, but it the conservative morality speaks to lots of different people and backgrounds (except me, LOL!). By the 'increasing' aspects, I was thinking specifically of the way the Cullens function as a closed community and the treatment of the pregnancy (and the way it so swiftly follows marriage). As well as the no sex before marriage thing, but that's common to a great many religions, as you say. I thought the paper made a good case about the community dynamic and pregnancy. (The pregnancy stuff made no sense to me until I read it.)

Look, I can understand you being defensive about Meyer. Frankly, I wouldn't want her as a representative of my religion, if I had one, either. But I totally do not think she represents all Mormonism, so you should chillax about that. I just think her personal background influenced some of her preoccupations. *shrug* As it would for most people! And I don't like heavy-handed religious or conservative morality ... so I baulk at it when I read it.

If it reassures you at all, I'd be equally offended/annoyed/disliking it if she was a Catholic, piling the novel up with guilt. All religions are annoying to me.
patron saint of neglected female characters: bookgirlrose_griffes on November 27th, 2009 02:26 pm (UTC)
You really don't have to! I'm not that invested in this discussion--I just provided the thesis link because you wanted it.
Oh good. I didn't want to be totally dismissive of something you found useful, but I'm really not interested in reading all of it.

I'm guessing we take a different approach to reading fiction. I usually don't care about authorial background or possible motivations in writing. Even in reading something written with a more purposeful agenda, I'm generally more concerned about being entertained. I even liked Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy in spite of the not very hidden anti-religion message. They were interesting stories. (Okay, the ending of the third book made me want to throw it against the wall, but until then I was enjoying it.)

The exception to this would be if I'm unsure about something. Like with Wuthering Heights--was it meant as a romantic tragedy or a cautionary tale? Either way, I think Cathy and Heathcliff deserved each other, but only to avoid torturing everyone else who ended up falling in love with one of them. *laughs*
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: books are lovebop_radar on November 27th, 2009 11:30 pm (UTC)
Ah, yes, that is true! I did a lit major and I do often consider cultural and social context in my enjoyment of books--especially gender politics, but definitely wider than that as well. It's a genuine interest in that I think it's partly how I intellectually engage with things I both like and dislike--I like knowing about an author's background. (And I've been known to be so angry with an author's asshole-ish behaviour in person that I've returned his book to him indignantly!) So yes, I think that might be different.

If I am truly entertained, then I don't tend to engage as much with that stuff. But that's quite rare these days and definitely didn't happen with Twilight--just not my 'thing'.

the ending of the third book made me want to throw it against the wall, but until then I was enjoying it.
Hahaha, SO TRUE. I remember you writing about that a while back. And I think I was in a recluse-y time, but I so agree. I had blocked out that ridiculous ending from my memory, it was so bad!

Cathy and Heathcliff deserved each other, but only to avoid torturing everyone else who ended up falling in love with one of them
Haha, too true!
Cosettecosetteferaud on November 24th, 2009 02:37 pm (UTC)
Seriously I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND how this stupid story is considered so compelling.

THIS. I know I shouldn't care but... I find the Twilight phenomenon a little bit frustrating. The first two books are almost tolerable. But the third and --especially-- the forth... Ugh. **shudders** I am going to watch New Moon though (morbid curiosity? ;P).

Jacob's pecs brightened things up CONSIDERABLY.

Glad to know. Jacob always was my favorite.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Blair yelloqbop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:31 pm (UTC)
Totally! Actually my tolerance is much lower than yours. I was throwing the first book across the room in horror at the terrible writing (and gender politics). But they did get worse...

I think you'll be good with New Moon! I dreaded it but actually it was more amusing! And a bit faster paced than the first movie. Also Edward is blessedly off screen for a lot of it.
Cosettecosetteferaud on November 24th, 2009 10:23 pm (UTC)
and gender politics

Ugh. Dude, that is the worst part... I find the whole Edwatd/Bella dynamic upsetting. And it *really* bothers me that so many women respond so strongly to that sort of old-fashioned gender stereotypes (but well, I am pretty touchy with gender issues, I must admit :)).
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Feminismbop_radar on November 26th, 2009 03:36 am (UTC)
Totally! It bothers me too. I deal with it only by ranting a great deal about them to friends in real life, and via humour. ;) I'm very sensitive to gender dynamics as well--that can throw me out of a book or movie I would otherwise like, and the Twilight novels are irredeemable for me.
chatchien: the Queenchatchien on November 24th, 2009 07:05 pm (UTC)
Thank God for Jacob and his clan of implausibly clad werewolves (werewolves are apparently all about the PANTS...

Werewolf: ::snarl, snarl, growl, growl, pant, pant pant, pant, pant...::

Well Yeah! Werewolves ARE ALL ABOUT THE PANTS! Duh!!!!

You just don't get it!!! :-D Hahaha! I just couldn't resist.

As for Smallville, I've been happy with the Season so far. Pandora was a little incoherent. And I am a Zod Lover, there! there! I like a raw, unpolished Zod. He doesn't have the ease and security of all that power of money behind him as the Luthors did. This Zod is an Horatio Alger kind of villain. He has to work for his badness.

But strangely, I forget some of the episodes as soon as I see them. There's nothing memorably bad or really good for me. And there are holes in the Happy Romance of Clark and Lois for me. I don't think that Clark would go crawling back to Lana if she ever showed up again. But I don't see the great love between Clark and Lois. For me, it's just physical attraction (and they are two beautiful people) and flirting and a good friendship. And Clark does appreciate the acceptance from Lois of his "specialness". She's like Alicia in that regard.

Edited at 2009-11-24 07:17 pm (UTC)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Clois OTPbop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:35 pm (UTC)
HAHA. OK, puns always get me!

I don't think that Clark would go crawling back to Lana if she ever showed up again.
Oh, I do! I just don't see that much from his side at all. Also he has a history of turning to whoever is there when he doesn't have a girlfriend. They haven't really shown me that Lois is special to him. If they played up the side where she gets the Blur better than anyone more, I'd get it. I think that Alicia thing is really important to Clark... but I don't feel he has as real and uninhibited a relationship as he had with Alicia. Even though that was crazy young love, Clark is holding back soooooooo much more with Lois. He's in control all the time and that doesn't imply any great affection to me.
Enderenderwiggin24 on November 24th, 2009 09:11 pm (UTC)
waiiiiiiiiiiiiitttwut!!?
And finally the marriage LULZ. Always good to enter the credits with tears of laughter...

what marriage!??!?!?
this is the second movie, they already are married?!?!?!?!?
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:36 pm (UTC)
Re: waiiiiiiiiiiiiitttwut!!?
Oh, man. *facepalm* Sorry about my cut tag, dude! Er, rumours of marriage may have been grossly exaggerated...
Enderenderwiggin24 on November 24th, 2009 09:39 pm (UTC)
that isEVEN WORSE!
they don't elope, they don't have sex, and they don't even marry!??!??!?

That is the worst kind of fanfic, hahahahah!

omg, now I need jacob/edward fic!

*waves magic wand, so that boppy gets fannish balance*
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on November 24th, 2009 09:42 pm (UTC)
Re: that isEVEN WORSE!
they don't elope, they don't have sex, and they don't even marry!??!??!?
LOL! Correct! They don't even turn Bella into a vampire.. at least not yet! So boring!

Thank you. :)
Allisonfrolicndetour on November 24th, 2009 10:50 pm (UTC)
More serious note: Re. your convo with rose_griffes above, I admit the general tenor of fandom discussion about Meyer's religion makes me uncomfortable. I'm not LDS and I haven't read the books, but I've never encountered anyone who both identifies with that cultural group and views the books as specifically Mormon; more the opposite. Of course, to a large extent we're all influenced by our cultural surroundings, but I feel like if Meyer were a member of a majority group (say mainline Protestant in the US), her specific background wouldn't be made an issue of. So I'd be interested in reading your thesis too!

Non-serious note!: (Wow, Edward, you are such a dreary dweeb... and is it just me, or was Pattinson not really feelin' it in a couple of those scenes? ;) )

Ahaha. That poor boy cannot act at ALL. Which is good, because it adds to the wonderful cheesiness of the whole endeavor and ensures that I won't succumb to the id-candy appeal. A couple of my friends swear he's hot enough to make up for it, but I just don't see it. Not underneath that bad hair and make-up job.

I do like Kristen Stewart's performance though! I can tell even from the movies why she drives people crazy as a protagonist, but Stewart has a whole Girl, Interrupted thing going for her which totally works for the character. And almost makes me care. Almost. Though I hope she improves now that she and Sparkles are finally tying the knot!

Edited at 2009-11-24 10:50 pm (UTC)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Stephanie Meyer sucksbop_radar on November 26th, 2009 03:59 am (UTC)
I've never encountered anyone who both identifies with that cultural group and views the books as specifically Mormon
Really?! I'm trying to dig out a link to a series of posts from someone who was LDS and who wrote up really funny picspams about them drawing the parallels. So annoying, I can't find them right now.

But I can see why you might feel uncomfortable by people mentioning her Mormonism a lot. For me, it's irrelevant whether she's Morman, Catholic, Protestant, whatever... for me it's religion at all that bothers me (I'm stridently atheist). So I'd be as strident against it regardless but maybe that's different for other people... especially in the States maybe. I'm not surprised though, given the popularity of the books and their overt morality, that people are commenting on her religion.

it adds to the wonderful cheesiness of the whole endeavor
Indeed! And I totally agree about Kristen Stewart's performance! I can't believe how bearable she makes Bella. It's quite uncanny. And I don't even like her looks or the actress herself! And yet I find her so watcheable! Despite hating Bella. Kind of fascinating.
patron saint of neglected female characters: twilight--sex now?rose_griffes on November 26th, 2009 02:36 pm (UTC)
Really?! I'm trying to dig out a link to a series of posts from someone who was LDS and who wrote up really funny picspams about them drawing the parallels.

You're probably thinking of the posts by... stoney123? 321? She's a former Mormon, and strongly anti-Mormon in tone. I wouldn't claim to be unbiased in my own posts about the books, but she certainly isn't either. I found her posts to be offensive; clearly I'm not her target audience. (Try the keyword sparkledammerung. I think she coined it.)

eta: it's stoney321, and googling the word works--first link on the page

Edited at 2009-11-26 02:38 pm (UTC)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Aishwarya lanternbop_radar on November 26th, 2009 09:09 pm (UTC)
Yes, that's the one! They were hilarious! (I so AM her target audience. *g*) And no one is unbiased. I'm a highly biased atheist.
Allisonfrolicndetour on November 26th, 2009 10:38 pm (UTC)
For me, it's irrelevant whether she's Morman, Catholic, Protestant, whatever

Hmm, and if she were, say, Muslim? To me, it's problematic when people use the popularity of the books (or the ridiculousness of sparkly vampires) as an excuse to bash a minority group that's faced a history of discrimination.*

* Not that that's what you were doing, but that that's the context in which a lot of the discussion is occurring.

I'm stridently atheist

I'm tepidly agnostic. *g* I think that as such, you and I are in a position of relative privilege in our respective societies. (Especially me, perhaps.) In that, if Dan Brown or whoever comes out with some wildly popular, horribly written series, we never have to worry about whether everyone's going to decide to attribute whatever horrible writing to their secular humanism, and whether we should brace ourselves for the bashing every time we click on a book or movie review. Because we can count on being seen as individuals first, members of a group second. LDS people aren't in that position yet, as can be seen by all the horribly ignorant, 'lolz, sparkly vampires are totally a Mormon thing, right?' comments.

Which is not to say the religion issue should be discussed, but just that it should be done in an informed way - which IMO necessarily includes hearing what actual LDS have to say. I think that was the point of rose_griffes earlier (amusing??) post linked above.

Edited at 2009-11-26 10:42 pm (UTC)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Aishwarya Raibop_radar on November 27th, 2009 12:36 am (UTC)
if she were, say, Muslim?
Totally the same! Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an atheist Muslim, is one of my heroes.

I don't think people should be bashed or discriminated against on any basis. And I definitely don't think I was doing that, nor do I condone it if it's happening elsewhere. But I will be totally honest and say that I do not respect religion as an institution (or institutions).

Because we can count on being seen as individuals first, members of a group second. LDS people aren't in that position yet
Really? Honestly I don't see how they're any different from any other religion. Perhaps this is a US thing.

going to decide to attribute whatever horrible writing to their secular humanism
LOL. I don't know if that's such a great example? There was a LOT of religious backlash against Brown... at least there was here.

all the horribly ignorant, 'lolz, sparkly vampires are totally a Mormon thing, right?' comments
Honestly? I haven't seen any such comments. Probably because my interest in Twilight is miniscule (and my investment in it is hating it!). Those comments are crazy exaggerations, and I can see how it could slide into implying all Mormons are batshit, and that sucks, and I support what you're saying.
Allisonfrolicndetour on November 28th, 2009 02:20 am (UTC)
Those comments are crazy exaggerations, and I can see how it could slide into implying all Mormons are batshit, and that sucks, and I support what you're saying.

Aw, thanks. And reading it over I see I totally misread your comment above; sorry about that! I probably should not try to post amidst holiday madness.

And yeah, maybe Dan Brown isn't the best example. *g* It's just the absolute worst book I've ever managed to finish and it scarred me! The religious reaction I remember was mostly amusement since the history was just SO bad, but then, I'm not from an intensely religious area.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: books are lovebop_radar on November 28th, 2009 08:09 am (UTC)
Oh, that's cool! I didn't mean to give any offence. Dan Brown is definitely VERY scarring! Ugh! (And yeah, weirdly a few VERY upset priests here in Melbourne--and I assume other places too.)
patron saint of neglected female charactersrose_griffes on December 7th, 2009 06:56 am (UTC)
Can't sleep, so I'm randomly commenting on old posts.

For me, it's irrelevant whether she's Morman, Catholic, Protestant, whatever... for me it's religion at all that bothers me (I'm stridently atheist). So I'd be as strident against it regardless but maybe that's different for other people... especially in the States maybe.

One-quarter of the US population would not vote for a Mormon for president, even if that person were "generally well-qualified." Depending on the poll, that number went up as high as thirty-seven percent. In other words, there are some very real prejudices in the US about Mormons. The Gallup poll suggests that the numbers (1/4) are the same now as they were forty years ago, when George Romney was running for office. (Atheists fared far worse, by the way. As for religions, the LA Times poll shows that Islam is the only one that pulls ahead of Mormonism for losing votes.)

Meyer's religion being constantly mentioned makes me uncomfortable, but that's mostly connected to the tone with which it's done. (Not objecting to yours, by the way, though I'd still argue about how much of the Twilight series reflects Meyer's religious beliefs. I have another post I need to write about that for my own LJ, however.)
(Deleted comment)
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on November 26th, 2009 04:04 am (UTC)
It IS! I'm trying... there have been some small steps... but man, it's hard work! (Hopefully early days and it will get better.)