Shjade:

...because dying, then re-animating while dead purely by ingesting the blood of living creatures and, in the process, gaining strength, speed, and possibly the ability to shapeshift into, say, a bat doesn't break any laws of physics, biology, etc., amirite?

Many, but it supports those changes within the mythology.

I don't recall reading any convincing explanation for how any of that happens, why it works, or why some vampires can basically say, "Screw the rules, I have plot armor!" and be godlike without the usual explanation ("I'm a million years old" or "I drank the blood of a god") to support the power they're throwing around.

I'd take a look at the Bible, where Caine - the first murderer - is cursed to wander the Earth forever - and then Lilith.
Or you can say, like the Bumblebee, that it's a creation of the Devil's, in mockery of the Lord's work - so that it has to feed on the Lord's creatures.
(It doesn't have to be a GOOD explanation, it just has to have one that doesn't contradict it's own rules)

Your kung fu is weak.

But my aikido is really strong.

-I find myself compelled to write a story in which vampires not only sparkle in the sun but sustain themselves not on blood but on a strict diet of Zima and Tic Tacs and somehow make it good.

And if you can manage the last one (I believe there's a Malkavian that exists only on words), then you'll have done better than Meyer.

Shjade:

I'm familiar with Cain. I don't recall him wandering the Earth forever after having died and come back to life. He's immortal, not undead.

But it "makes sense", doesn't it? There's nothing inherently contradictory there.

Also, "God says so" doesn't have anything to do with physics or the other sciences you listed.

Depending on your viewpoint, yes it does. It could easily be "Because a wizard/genegineer/ripperdoc says so, as long as the "rules" are set out.

Not as familiar with Lilith. One of the pre-Eves, yes?

Yep, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith, whole strain of mythology that you can draw from there.

What is "the Bumblebee?"

One of the Just So Stories, I believe, had that the bumblebee was created by the Devil from all of the precious minerals. But it didn't have any life as life can only come from God, so the Devil stole a tear. This brought the bee to life, but made it so sad that it can only feel better by collecting pollen for it's whole life.

It's better told by Kipling.

Thing is, it's an explanation that allows the reader to instantly understand what a creature is capable of and incapable of. If Vlad Teppes can go out in sunlight, Stoker's Dracula avoids it and Buffy's lot turn into dust - they can all still be Vampires - there's reasoning why each one has their own weaknesses and strengths, based from the original stories.

Edward et. al. break the fundamental rules, and never conform to any new ones. If Meyer's Vampires are diamond-hard, sunlight/holywater/faith/wood/rice (Yep, that's where Count von Count sticks to the myths - if you drop rice in front of a Jiangshi (Hopping Vampire) it has to count them), bloodthirsty, antisocial SoB's; why isn't Edward long dead and those Vampires running the Earth Matrix-style, with humans as feed-tanks.

I'm not even touching on imprinting (Rape/Paedophilia is good, apparently), canine cesarean, spine-breaking, author insertion or any other such horrors.

But, even the plumber in a porno whose come to "fix the pipes" still has a wrench in his hand to start with.

I think what root of all evil is saying is that twilight is internally inconsistent, That it breaks it's own rules (correct me if I'm wrong).

I've never liked vampires anyway.

EDIT: I guess root sort of ninja'd me there.

Excellent article, and it raises a valid point. Though I feel there are certain rules one must satisfying to qualify as a certain type of critter. You can't very well have vampires that are normal cacti, after all. Those are cacti, not vampires no matter how much you call them that.

Now! If your cacti drank blood with their needles rather than water....

blindthrall:
I always just assumed it was Masquerade rules, with different kinds being different clans. Dracula was Ventrue, Nosferatu was...Nosferatu, and Cullen was Tremere. In the second Masquerade game, it's hinted that sunlight doesn't kill the vamps, that it's just a tool to keep the vampires out of sight and control them. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the working over zombies have gotten, they weren't even originally dead.

OT: I'm taking option B, that Worgen is furrybait.

Dracula is so Gangrel (the man turns into a bat! a Wolf! MIST!). Cullen is also so stereotypical Toreador it's not funny, what is funny that you'd think him Tremere, which is a clan of total neeeeerds. :P

Akiada:

Dracula is so Gangrel (the man turns into a bat! a Wolf! MIST!). Cullen is also so stereotypical Toreador it's not funny, what is funny that you'd think him Tremere, which is a clan of total neeeeerds. :P

Sparkling = Presence 5?

bismarck55:

EDIT: I guess root sort of ninja'd me there.

That's what I do :) But yes, even Trolls 2 is internally consistent, and that has some hookey-science like you would not believe. Attack of the Fifty Foot Woman - natch.

Otherwise you have no way of relating to it - and as such - you're purely following what the author/writer/designer tells you. There's no "reason" why Edward can't remake himself a virgin, thus deflowering the whole "I've waited for you forever" angle.

My sister's reaction to the Twilight series was a prime example. I was saying something about vampires, and she was basically claiming that Twilight held the true vampires, and that it should be a gospel to what they really are. Drinking blood and having to stay out of the sun? No no, it turns out those are all lies!
The arguments that literally hundreds of years of folklore cannot be washed away by a single book written in the 21st century by some woman didn't get far.

Lots of truth in that article. Unfortunately, truth isn't powerful enough to undo the wrongs done by Twilight and it's horrible acting+writing.

I think the problem about vampires and werewolves is that they're not just fantasy creatures but rather part of the folk of various cultures. Also, you must remember that most of the fantasy creatures you described early appear within fantasy. All tolkien fantasy species appear in a fantasy world. Same goes for orcs in warcraft and so on. But vampires and werewolves appear most of the time in a real world, in cities or villages that you know exist or existed throughout history.
Vampires and werewolves are part of our culture, and this bound exceeds fantasy.

The_root_of_all_evil:

bismarck55:

EDIT: I guess root sort of ninja'd me there.

That's what I do :) But yes, even Trolls 2 is internally consistent, and that has some hookey-science like you would not believe. Attack of the Fifty Foot Woman - natch.

Otherwise you have no way of relating to it - and as such - you're purely following what the author/writer/designer tells you. There's no "reason" why Edward can't remake himself a virgin, thus deflowering the whole "I've waited for you forever" angle.

While I don't actually know anything about Twilight's plot beyond what I can divine from the movie trailers, I agree that it is incredibly annoying when authors/directors simply "force" things into their story with no regard for the rules and logic that they themselves already established.

Funk wins again. Thank you.

As for your Worgen, the only logical choice is hunter. A Werewolf with a pet wolf riding a wolf wearing armour made out of wolves? It doesn't get much wolfier than that!

I agree with you on the werewolves, but a big thing about all the interpretations you named is that they enhanced the idea of the character and work within certain bounds and ideas. Elves have long lives, and people have modified that so that they can deal with the obsession with death that comes with age, or to give the character more dynamic. We have the "good" dark elves because the subversion contrasts perfectly with the normal outset and delves into the ideas of grey morality and redemption which are popular. Vampire weaknesses come and go as is required to make an interesting believable character.All the flaws were added because they brought something interesting to the table (like Vampires with OCD) or removed because they were a nusiance.

But glittering? No I'll never accept a vampire that glitters.

lolz at getting stumped by dwarves XD

"Real" werewolves man that cracked me up when ppl say that.

Same argument can be had about the zombie debate. Slow vs Fast Zombies and which is more "real" however, from George Romero himself "I forgive them if they're not dead." SLOW is the real zombie!

Not to nitpic but the whole Worgen race idea isn't that an original reimagining of the beast man concept. DND did it way back when, everquest did it with cat men in both games and the elderscrolls series did it to name just a few.
Anyone commenting along the lines of "wtf WoW is screwing with werewolves" simply doesn't know their gamer rpg history.

Vampires also have been highly changeable even in modern and accepted fiction from dracula, to interview with a vampire, to the whitewolf clans, to buffy, to legacy of kain to the true blood and Annetta Blake vampires.

The only things these vampire archetypes have in common is the fact they are undead, live on blood, must avoid sunlight and live forever. Other than that they have very little in common.

As a result I do not think the geek rejection of twilight style of vampire is just about it breaking the rules of the vampire archetype. It has more to the feeling of disrespect of the existing mythos the books and the fans of the books seem to have.
These books dont seem to re imagine the vampire mythos, they steal the established labels and apply them to monsters that normally would not have the label. After all there a legions of monsters, demons and fae who live forever and live on blood.

This would be forgivable if the books themselves weren't so badly written and the fans of the books weren't so rabid.

The flamewars are more about geek and goth culture clashing with tweens than anything else.

I am Spy:
Funk wins again. Thank you.

As for your Worgen, the only logical choice is hunter. A Werewolf with a pet wolf riding a wolf wearing armour made out of wolves? It doesn't get much wolfier than that!

Damn you! You've just condemned me to playing hundreds of hours of WoW when Cataclysm comes out.

Oh Shit, Did I just see a Drizzt reference in there!?!?!

Hell yeah John, Hell Yeah.

Also, reminds me of a fan dissing the wolf mans werewolf because it wasn't like the ones in twilight :0

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

(Temp Sig!)

"Drinks blood, check. Vaporizes in the sunlight, check. Sleeps in a coffin, check. Turns into a bat, check. Obsessed with counting? Ooh, we missed that one - let's go watch Sesame Street reruns for inspiration." HAH!

and John Funk, try out Hunter or Warrior, Worgen don't look like the cloth type.

Exalted had sparkling vampires years before Twilight. They drink blood to survive in the land of the living and sparkle when they use their powers (like all Exalted).

Also, Tolkien changed elves and dwarves as much as vampires are different in Twilight, but I don't see much people complaining about that.

That's a really good point, people need to be allowed to have different takes on ideas, that's the only way we will not get tired of the same old stuff, and make something new.

That said I'll have to stop calling Twilight complete trash because they are not "real" vampires or werewolves (I still love the classics) but call it trash because that's what it really is.

Anything, no matter how outlandish or just plain silly can be brilliant depending on how well it's executed.
Even the best ideas can be crippled by poor execution and a seemingly bad concept can be turn around if presented well.

I've never seen Twilight, and hopefully won't as I'm pretty sure I wouldn't enjoy it anyway (I'm not the target audience for a start), though I'm not going to judge anything that I haven't just seen for myself. Despite the fact I think the concept sounds a bit weird at first glance.
I like the concept of Blizzard's Worgen, from the bits of backstory and lore I've read, though Blizzard have a history of taking some fantasy staples and putting their own twists on them, and with success (at least all the ones I know of).

Also, never played WoW (why I don't judge that either) but Worgen Hunter makes for a fitting concept. A tamer of beasts is technically part beast themselves. That could just be the role-player in me however.

Susan Arendt:

The Great JT:

Susan Arendt:
...sparkly vampires don't make your vampires any less cool.

Yeah they do. They totally do.

Ok, how? How does Twilight's existence in any way impact the vampires that you like? If anything, I would think their innate lameness would make the coolness of other vampires even more obvious.

Well...Uh...

Okay, they don't, but the fact remains that Twilight sucks toast.

Roos1993:

Oh and I hate twilight because they're not real vampires AND the piss poor acting.

Same. Vampires might not be real, but you don't mess with the mythology in such a piss poor fashion.

Very good points all throughout. I blame the rise of PC gamer elitism.

Twilight is a gateway drug. Be patient with the twits who are obsessed with it. I've had more than one friend go from "OMG ITS TEH BIBLE" to "...what.. what is this 'Nosferatu' you speak of?"

So much hate. Do I find the sparkly aspect incredibly lame? Yes. Are Meyer's books elementary tripe laced with what are probably repressed sexual abuse? ....incest, bestiality and necrophilia much? ...check. But we've all had our turns with terrible literature. You don't like it don't read it. Don't want your kid to read it, don't get it for them. Or you know, you could cosplay a fucking Nazi and go book burning.

I'll stick with no censorship, thanks.

And enough with the WoW hate already. It's annoying. I don't take a fat piss on Aion or whathaveyou. So stop thinking you're so goddamn superior just because you aren't playing the crack-cocaine of the MMO universe. Big damn deal.

OP: Great article, Mister Funk. Shared it with my friends. I wish more could think like you, but alas... haters will always be haters :*(. And we all have our own special little petty hatreds we fuel and tend.

Great article, I loved it.
I just can't accept sparkly vampires, and drinking animals blood? Most of the vampire movies I've seen, yeah I know they are movies. Haven't done much reading on them. But don't most of them detest having to drink animals blood?

I have no trouble with the Worgen.

I have... some trouble with the vampires in Twilight, but not much. The sparkling thing, while not my favourite "no sunlight" rationale, is hardly a dealbreaker. I can't chime on the books yet, I do plan to have a bit of a look, but for the first movie my main problem with it all is that it's not a vampire movie, it's a movie with vampires in it. There is nothing about the plot that requires vampires to work.

John Funk:
Obsessed with counting?

Perhaps the problem lies in the concept that werewolves are bloodthirsty maniacs whereas the Worgen retain sanity whilst in wolf form. To reflect this trait, they aren't disheveled, which I think some folk can't wrap their heads around. When viewing the archetyple werewolf, the Worgen just don't fit into it.

Which is awesome, because I wouldn't want a "Brutal insanity" debuff that caused me to flag PvP and attack anything with a pulse when I play at night(Which is the time I play).

You know... this is first time since revealing of (wow here player and active forum visitor) worgen that someone actually gets something extremely intelligent about werewolfs, vampires, twilight and other stereotypes (since inside my normal forums these are now classic inbeforeban topics) ...

I thank you for giving me material to link if anyone is still stupid enough to bring this topic up

Akiada:
Excellent article, and it raises a valid point. Though I feel there are certain rules one must satisfying to qualify as a certain type of critter. You can't very well have vampires that are normal cacti, after all. Those are cacti, not vampires no matter how much you call them that.

Now! If your cacti drank blood with their needles rather than water....

blindthrall:
I always just assumed it was Masquerade rules, with different kinds being different clans. Dracula was Ventrue, Nosferatu was...Nosferatu, and Cullen was Tremere. In the second Masquerade game, it's hinted that sunlight doesn't kill the vamps, that it's just a tool to keep the vampires out of sight and control them. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the working over zombies have gotten, they weren't even originally dead.

OT: I'm taking option B, that Worgen is furrybait.

Dracula is so Gangrel (the man turns into a bat! a Wolf! MIST!). Cullen is also so stereotypical Toreador it's not funny, what is funny that you'd think him Tremere, which is a clan of total neeeeerds. :P

I meant to say Toreador, it's been a while since I fucked around with Masquerade. Dracula may have Gangrel abilities, but his actions are very Ventrue, with the whole mind control thing. I can't exactly see Dracula living in the woods off of rats. I guess Victor would be a better example of Ventrue, though. Which clan does Salma Hayeck fit into?