Your Garage Luxury Beauty Killers of the Flower moon STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Samsung S8 Launch Limited time offer Wickedly Prime Handmade Mother's Day Gifts hgg17 Shop Popular Services animespring animespring animespring  Introducing Echo Look Starting at $49.99 Kindle Oasis Nintendo Switch Shop Now disgotg_gno_17
Customer Discussions > Twilight forum

King VS Meyer


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 32 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jun 24, 2010, 2:31:49 PM PDT
Stephen King (brilliant man) said that Sephenie Meyer can't write. And he is 100% correct. Not only is her writing completely horrible, she can't even come up with an original idea. Except for the sparkling vampire crap, and I'm still waiting for Edward to come out of the closet for that.

And Meyers fans reply to Kings review with:

"Steven [sic] King doesn't know what a real book was if it hit him in the face. He's just a bloody guy who is jealous of Edward's good looks," wrote poster Kiki Alice Cullen. "King is no Gabriel Garcia Marquez so I don't understand why he gets to say who is a good writer and who is not," agreed another, while a third, who wished she could "just hit this guy", suggested that "we twilighters should send him tons of hate mail ... just to show him how many twilight fans he just pissed off."

First of all, I highly doubt King is jealous of Edwards good looks. Edward is a fictional character! Sorry to burst your bubble, but he's not real.

Second: Of course King is a good writer. Have these people read his books? Or even just read the back of them? King has written over fifty books and every one was a New York Times Bestseller (and an original story). The only reason Meyer has bestsellers is because teenage girls now-a-days are morons. And most of his books are movies. The Stand, The Shining, Misery, Carrie....

Third: "Just hit this guy"? Yup. That'll show him.

And Finally: Go ahead. Send him as much hate mail as you want just to let him know who he pissed off. I'm sure he cares. Once he's finished reading all your letters I'm sure he'll apoligize.

I'm starting to lose faith in the human race if they prefer Meyer over King.

Posted on Jul 3, 2010, 4:09:02 AM PDT
M. Cook says:
I just thank God that King agreed to write the flashback tales in "American Vampire" (Vertigo Comics). Vampires with real teeth, pun intended! Not these faux vampires. Heck, even Tom Cruises's portrayal in INTERVIEW wiped the floor with the whole of Twilight Saga. And just how does one immediately self-declare a story as a "saga" especially when it plays like little more than some cheap daytime soapie. And is it just me, or is a 100-yr old vampire falling in love with a 17 yr old schoolgirl just a bit "creepy". I mean, fair enough if that aspect of it was explored and not merely glossed over.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2010, 7:22:10 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
Wow. Fantastic. Have you actually READ Meyers, are do you just let other people tell you what to think?

As someone who's actually READ both authors, I *VASTLY* prefer Stephanie Meyers. Far from being unoriginal, I think she's one of the most gifted storytellers I've ever run across, and pulls of things in her books that I have NEVER experienced in fiction anywhere else (The Host in particular).

I can NOT say the same about Stephen King. He's not bad, but everything I've read of his feels similar to other, better things I've read.

It's one thing to honestly prefer him, but there's something wrong with you that you'd post something as disturbed as this.

Posted on Jul 7, 2010, 10:16:44 AM PDT
Katt978 says:
Wolfpup- I'd have to agree. 99% of the people who bash Stephanie Meyers, have never read ANYTHING by her. It's fine to leave an opinion or start a debate, but to bash something you haven't even tried.... sort of pointless.

I think that Stephanie Meyers has re-defined the "rules" of vampires for a whole new generation. Much like Anne Rice did with her novels. And how many million copies of SM's books have sold... there must be something to that :)

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 8, 2010, 2:07:16 PM PDT
Before you guys start going off on people who bash her books but haven't read them, just know that I actually have. I've read all of them. And they are not original. The Host? Go watch Body Snatchers sometime. You'll find an amazing resemblance between the two. And guess which one came first. Yup. Body Snatchers.

And Twilight? A vampire falling in love with a girl? Cause that's so original?

Meyers has sold lots of books. 40 million, actually. But you know how many King has sold? 350 million.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 8, 2010, 2:14:39 PM PDT
Wolfpup, no I do NOT let other people tell me what to think. I was actually the first person of all my friends and family to come out and say I hate Twilight after I read the first two books ( the third wasn't out yet). I read them before the movies and the huge hype started. I read Twilight before probably half the fans now read them because I'm actually intersted in books. Not just one story or author.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 8, 2010, 4:46:27 PM PDT
WolfPup says:
<<<Wicked_Grimmerie says:
Before you guys start going off on people who bash her books but haven't read them, just know that I actually have. I've read all of them. And they are not original. The Host? Go watch Body Snatchers sometime. You'll find an amazing resemblance between the two.>>>

No, you won't, which you'd know if you'd read it. Obviously they have a related basic premise. So does virtually everything else that's ever been written. That doesn't mean it's not original.

<<<And Twilight? A vampire falling in love with a girl? Cause that's so original?>>>

Again, you're pointing to a basic premise. Virtually NOTHING is original if you just point at a one line premise. The WAY it's actually executed is what makes it unique. To paraphrase Ebert, it's not what a book is about, it's how it's about it that makes it good.

<<<Meyers has sold lots of books. 40 million, actually. But you know how many King has sold? 350 million. >>>

So? Sales figures don't indicate how good something is or isn't. Even if they did, King has been writing for decades longer than Meyers.

Regarding your second post-fine, you don't like them. I have no problem with that. What I DO have a problem with is your claiming they're not good in some absolute sense.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 9, 2010, 12:19:05 AM PDT
"""Again, you're pointing to a basic premise. Virtually NOTHING is original if you just point at a one line premise. The WAY it's actually executed is what makes it unique. To paraphrase Ebert, it's not what a book is about, it's how it's about it that makes it good."""

Well then the same goes for Kings books. His are very original. And The Host isn't just the basic premise. She practically took Body Snatchers and just added a very small twist to it. I'm not trying to say she stole is and she's a terrible person or anything, I'm just saying it's not as original as you're making it out to be.

And Twilight is just so predictable. There was never any question whether she was going to end up with Edward or Jacob, or if Edward was going to fall for her or anything. The whole story was basically laid out within the first chapter.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 9, 2010, 8:32:55 AM PDT
WolfPup says:
I seriously question you having read any of these, and you appear to be a troll. You like them better? Fine. I really have no problem with that, just don't pretend they're better in some absolute sense.

Posted on Jul 10, 2010, 1:46:49 PM PDT
T. Fox says:
Of course wicked is gonna try to play on everyones literary ignorance, but not me I have read all of Kings stories. ALL of them and your gonna tell all of these people that the twilight series is predictable?. What about Kings "Cell", you dont mention the oh-so predictable stories...and Wicked? don't start a discussion if you are just going to bash others...thats not why this is here and if you keep it up you'll have to leave.

Posted on Jul 23, 2010, 6:08:32 AM PDT
N. Chauvet says:
This discussion is so heated! I personnally don't like Meyer books and don't think her writing style is good because she repeats too many times the same information or the same adverbs or adjectives. However her book was a page turner, even though I thought Bella lousy. In my opinion, she should have developped more the Cullen and the Volturi families and make a bit less people in love with Bella.
So, in my opinion: weak heroine + repetitions + slow development of plot + adverbs and adjectives on one hand, and on the other hand a page turner = still not a very good book.
Besides, the page turner thing might be because I am very curious and like to know the end of a story I begin.
Stephen King is therefore right when he says she is not a good writer (that doesn't mean she is not a good story teller). However, I do not like Stephen King either, for other reasons, the main being that I like fantasy and sci-fi but don't really like horror. However, a good strong writer and story teller, he is.

Posted on Jul 26, 2010, 10:49:42 PM PDT
Cheri S says:
I've read all four books in the Twilight Series and I'm not sure how anyone can intelligently argue that they're well written. She does write with a certain redundancy. The English language consists of over 150,000 words, a quarter of those being adjectives. I'm not saying the better writer is the one who uses the most words, but would it have killed her to describe Edward's eyes as something besides "smoldering?" We get it. The characters are flat, especially Edward. Bella seems like a teenage reincarnate of Stephanie Meyer, from her looks to her personality. The plot is mind boggling. It seems that Meyer got so caught up in the success of her books, that she lost focus because the books get consecutively worse. Breaking Dawn is choppy and anti-climatic.

The books are page turners though because you want to connect on an emotional level. Yet, you don't. I find that on the whole they leave me unsatisfied. I think that is why Meyer has a reputation as being a bad writer because her books are empty. There is no substance. If you take out the vampire element they wouldn't even publish her books.

Posted on Jan 18, 2012, 2:42:19 PM PST
Everyone will ask each other ten years later: Sephenie Meyer? Who the hell is she? whereas Stephen King will continue his glorious kingdom in his fifth decade.

So all these arguments are redundant...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 18, 2012, 3:43:35 PM PST
WolfPup says:
The more I think about it, the more silly that claim sounds. You don't know that. The same argument would have been equally valid against King.

Not that it's relevant, while I like King okay, I'm far more impressed with Meyer's writing.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012, 4:52:27 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012, 4:58:25 AM PST
Then you have not read enough that you like very easy reading because Meyer writes for fifth grade children.

I claim it because even in his third book King has been hailed as a master of modern horror, not like Meyer, who is now a laughing stock in general. After five years of his first book, King was a gigantic name in fiction.

But No one really takes Meyer seriously, even her fans. Bella or that damned bronze chested vampir is more famous than her. Remove these dreamlike Barbie characters and you have nothing that Meyer has stamped herself on. If she wrote about an alcoholic man trapped in a hotel with his ugly wife (as in King's Shining) instead of sparkling romantic vampires, I am sure people would leer against her.

Mark my words. ten years is really generous. Say it five years.

Just look at Dan Brown- after all the fashion about the codes, Vatican or Christianity has passed, the interest in him deflated like a balloon because he is already a very terrible writer who managed to write a book of times at the nick of time with huge chance. Sometimes certain things are very clear.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012, 9:48:53 AM PST
WolfPup says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012, 6:34:07 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012, 6:37:23 PM PST
It is not a random insult; again it is experience. I may sound very pompous, sorry, but I have to say that I have undergone a similar path, too and I think many of us are the same. I am sure I read and fell deeply in love with some stinker (I cannot remember them now because they are so unnoteworthy- probably Dean Koontz is my biggest flop name) in my time. But the more you read in your life the more you see how much they stink. It is not a weakness or some ignorance; it is just a human nature. Read more, my friend, and you will see what I want to say.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012, 7:26:01 AM PST
WolfPup says:
It is indeed a random, baseless insult, that in no way backs up your claim, nor will convince anyone of it.

Posted on Jan 21, 2012, 12:03:08 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 21, 2012, 12:04:59 PM PST
I am not here to convince anyone; you read whatever you read; it is up to you...But just mark this day and five years later. You will see that Meier is not even a teardrop in literature history. Once this generation of teenage girls grow up, she will be forgotten like dust in the wind as a new kind of fad will replace her for the next generation of teenage girls. Of course you will probably remember and smile to yourself: "I understand what you feel"

Longevity requires talent, which Meier unfortunately lacks in barrels. The tastelesness of this generation's girls is another point. Just watch youtube fan videos broadcast by Meier fan-girls; all seem so pathetic, so pitiful...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2012, 6:32:54 AM PST
WolfPup says:
<<<H. Baki says:
I am not here to convince anyone>>>

Obviously you are, or you wouldn't keep bringing it up.

<<<But just mark this day and five years later. You will see that Meier is not even a teardrop in literature history.>>>

Just like King isn't, right?

<<<Longevity requires talent, which Meier unfortunately lacks in barrels.>>>

Ahhh. Okay. By asserting it, you've proved your point!

<<<The tastelesness of this generation's girls is another point.>>>

Yes of course, since only girls read her books, since you've asserted it.

Posted on Jan 24, 2012, 4:26:13 PM PST
You may think that I am here a crusade on behalf of King? That would be alright if I had opened such a forum entry; no I just came here and expressed my humble opinion. You TRIED to convince me otherwise with your ridiculuously sentimental feelings towards Meiers.

Secondly your sentiments about King is laughable. King, at the very least, will go down as one of the modern masters of horror, at his worst, or one of the greatest fiction writers of the USA in the 20th/21st century at his best. We are talking about here "forgetfullness" Meiers will be forgotten and her name will be never ever mentioned again.

Besides unless those pimpy girls did buy the book, Meiers books would not sell even a bucketful. And even someone as tasteless as you should be aware that Meier lacks talent?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 24, 2012, 4:32:58 PM PST
WolfPup says:
<<<H. Baki says:
That would be alright if I had opened such a forum entry; no I just came here and expressed my humble opinion. You TRIED to convince me otherwise>>>

No I did not. Good grief, all one need do is look at the rest of your post to see how backwards your claim is.

<<<with your ridiculuously sentimental feelings towards Meiers.>>>

What "ridiculuously sentimental feelings towards Meiers."?

<<<Secondly your sentiments about King is laughable.>>>

Do you even understand what I said? What is "laughable" about it?

<<<We are talking about here "forgetfullness" Meiers will be forgotten and her name will be never ever mentioned again.>>>

Just like King was, right?

<<<Besides unless those pimpy girls did buy the book>>>

Ah yes, this random assertion again.

<<<And even someone as tasteless as you should be aware that Meier lacks talent?>>>

Ah, yet another random insult.

Why are you posting here? How do you think you can convince anyone with your random assertions and insults?

Don't you think your case rather poor, when that's all you have so far?

Posted on Jan 24, 2012, 10:47:32 PM PST
<<<We are talking about here "forgetfullness" Meiers will be forgotten and her name will be never ever mentioned again.>>>

Just like King was, right?"

Are you that stupid? Look, you can do math. Try to calculate the number of years between 2012 and 1974. What is the result? King has been going strong in his fifth decade, I say, and you still blindly insist on his "forgetfullness" I say no one will remember Meier in 2017, let alone, in 2042. Are you on drugs that you cannot understand simple statements?

<<<And even someone as tasteless as you should be aware that Meier lacks talent?>>>

Not an insult, a fact. A fact supported by King and many people who see her true nature as a writer: A plump mother who saw a dream, put it on paper and millions of love-hungry romantic pimpy girls bought it, not to mention, the support by the awful movie.

My case may be poor or not but the fact that Meier is a fad and will be gone like the wind when the next big thing comes is true. Sorry for your shattered dreams but you have to grow a little bit and expand your horizons. There will be more than those bronze chested vampires in your life...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 25, 2012, 8:57:35 AM PST
WolfPup says:
<<<H. Baki says:
Are you that stupid?>>>

Are you?

<<<King has been going strong in his fifth decade, I say, and you still blindly insist on his "forgetfullness">>>

No I haven't.

<<<I say no one will remember Meier in 2017, let alone, in 2042. Are you on drugs that you cannot understand simple statements?>>>

Of course I understand them. You're apparently incapable of understanding that you're making random, baseless assertions.

<<<Not an insult, a fact.>>>

Not a fact, an insult. That's all you've "added" to this thread so far.

Do you seriously think anyone will come around to your way of thinking by insulting them and simply asserting the same thing over and over? Frankly, if you have no reason you can express to others for why you hold your beliefs, it may be time to reassess them.

<<<A fact supported by King and many people who see her true nature as a writer>>>

Ah, so it's true because Stephen King and "many people" say it's true.

<<<My case may be poor or not but the fact that Meier is a fad>>>

Another random assertion. What is your evidence?

<<<Sorry for your shattered dreams>>>

What "shattered dreams"?

<<<but you have to grow a little bit and expand your horizons.>>>

Ah, another random insult.

Posted on Feb 6, 2012, 9:33:05 AM PST
Katie Wesch says:
*headdesk to the 1000th power*

Really, debating the merits of Meyer's writing compared to King's....really? Those two are so far apart it doesn't even make sense to compare them.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Twilight forum
Participants:  15
Total posts:  32
Initial post:  Jun 24, 2010
Latest post:  Feb 11, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers

This discussion is about
Twilight (The Twilight Saga, Book 1)
Twilight (The Twilight Saga, Book 1) by Stephenie Meyer (Audio CD - September 27, 2005)
4.5 out of 5 stars (7,756)