Zombies...and why Twilight sucks.

     We all love zombies...they're becoming the new big thing since Stephanie Meyers allegedly ruined the vampyre name with her band of sparkling, adolescent, fang-less vamps. So while may of us may have read the books (and possibly enjoyed them as well), but detest the unnecessary and annoying hype, we seem to have placed our allegiances with a long-forgotten friend - the zombie.
     You can't ruin the gore, horror, and fear that a zombie evokes in us, right?

Well, that may be wrong. Books and comics are beginning to pop up across all countries. The harm in this? They have the same type of central theme as Twilight, but replace the romanticized vampyre with the charming rot of misunderstood zombies.

Okay, before I go any further, I must say that I am a huge fan of Generation Dead, by Daniel Waters. It is the perfect teen-zombie romance novel. And most importantly, it doesn't leave me thinking that the most important thing in life is to have two super-hot mythological, supernatural men fighting over me while I sit in a chair and sob about how terrible my life is when one of them decides to leave.
     Don't get me wrong. I LIKED the Twilight books. They weren't exactly the best pieces of literature I've read (that spot can only be held by Harry Potter, who I am an eternal fan of), but they weren't terrible either. Okay, so the sparkling kind of annoyed me and I liked to pretend that they weren't really vampires at all, but just supernatural (because calling them vampires is a disgrace to Dracula and Bram Stoker), but overall, the supporting characters were intriguing and I found myself wanting to know more. I was a Twi-lover.

     But then the first movie came out. It reminded me of a comedy-laced documentary, but it was a refreshing change to some of the other movies that were out at that time.
...Then little girls, no bigger than the age of eight were running around wearing Twilight apparel. Twilight's not exactly what you would call an adult movie - no nudity, not too much violence. But what it does have are underlying messages that:

1. Support the idea that the most important thing that young girls should be worried about is having a 'hot' boyfriend. 
2. That said girl should give up EVERYTHING for said boy (because instincts are never wrong and people never break up, right???)
3. That after boy leaves, girl should play with other boy's hearts.
4. That sex validates a relationship.

And these little children that are watching an calling Edward Cullen 'sexy' (when they don't even know what sexy means) are sickening. It is one thing to let a child watch these things, but when the child does not understand that this is not the way love and life works, then there is a problem. To the vampyre world, the following things are wrong with Twilight:

1. They have no fangs. This is a problem because vampires are naturally supposed to have sharp fangs to rip and break through the flesh. I'm pretty sure that science would back up the idea that an animal that rips flesh in order to feed would have naturally sharp teeth. Not dull teeth that would be more suitable to a diet of vegetation. 
2. Another fang problem: Fangs PIERCE the skin. How do the people (victims) in the movie have fang bites on them, if the vamps don't have fangs? These vamps have regular teeth with industrial strength which would surely crush and break the wrist or neck of the person, not leave a nice crescent-shaped scar that would let them walk away from the attack. 
3. There is nothing intimidating about a sparkling vampire. What are you going to do? Blind me to death? I understand that for the sake of Twilight, they use it as a lure, but what exactly would cause them to sparkle? Legendary vampire lore states that the sun (fire) is natural enemy to the vampyre because it is the most natural pure source that fights against the 'disease' and rots the body of the unnatural walking dead. (ya, know, exploding vamps are pretty cool too).
4. We understand that vampirism is a lonely existence, but to watch the girl while she sleeps and then ADMIT IT, and coddle her like some type of pet or trophy is just creepy. If you wanted to spend all eternity with her, you'd change her...you are not a love-sick school boy. You are a hundred year old vampire.
5. Bram Stoker's Dracula was an amazing feat in terms of literary and even cinematic achievements (Nosferatu, anyone?), but today, much thanks to Stephanie Meyers, children - and teens as well - are running around calling Edward Cullen a vampire and talking about how vampires sparkle, etc. etc. etc. But ask those same teens and children who Bram Stoker is, they'll have no idea. Ask them who Dracula is, they'll either say "some vampire", a "monster", or (if you're talking to someone whose extremely out there) they may even say "that guy on the cereal box" (count Chocula). Ask who Nosferatu is and you just bought yourself a one-way ticket to the loony bin ("Who the hell is that!?).

I hope you are happy Stephanie Meyers, you've turned the feared Dracula into a dewy-eyed, sparkling, fairy who can't seem to live without a idiotic teen girl who is willing to unquestionably give her everything to a boy (vampire or not). You're  doing a swell job at sending a good message to your readers and an even better job at keeping our society interested in reading by replacing those "boring", "traditional", "old-school" texts with your lovey-dovey, fairy-princess piece of intelligence-killing idiocy.

     Please, people, do not let there be another Twilight. Let's save the fearsome name of Zombies before Edward gets more undead competition for that undeserving brat, Bella.