I do think that Stephenie went too far, from everything I can tell.

It's true that a lot of the vampire weaknesses are post-Stoker additions, but I think that making them just powered-up humans who get sad if they don't drink blood is pandering straight to the romantics and not to the monster fans.

The way I see it, vampires are mythological creatures. If you decide to write about them you get to decide what is and isn't true about the myths. To D, the daylight thing is non-negotiable.

I can't agree. Certainly, you don't have to buy the entire sleight of tropes when you're buying into one of the BIG mythologies, but really, some details are more important than others. Otherwise, it's just a name. And for my money, the sunlight issue is a bigger deal than, say, obsessive counting of spilled rice. (True folkloric detail!)

Let me put it this way: If you have a character named Superman, but he's not from Krypton, then he's not Superman. If you have a character named Superman and he's not from Krypton and he's just a guy in a suit that gives him super-strength, then you're Nicolas Cage and THANK DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN SOME FILM PRODUCER SOBERED UP BEFORE THEY ALLOWED THAT TO HAPPEN!!!

Consequently, "Being Human" is skirting along the vampire mythos. Still close enough on the whole, but really, playing a tad too fast and loose for my taste. The whole "trapped in eternal darkness" is part of what makes them what they are.

"Twilight," on the other hand, has abandoned the whole vampire precept entirely, and is really something else. It's the Nicolas Cage capeless Superman of vampires.

obsessive counting of spilled rice. (True folkloric detail!)

"Aw, what'd you have to go and do that for?

You're in trouble."

I'm glad I'm not the only one who immediately went to Bad Blood, hee!

Superman is different, I think, because he belongs to Siegel and Shuster. I just did a little searching and found that, prior to Stoker, most vampires were described as bloated and ruddy. I think if your creature goes back before written history, you've got free rein.

Wheee! My Chuck 2.0 discs arrived today and I finally got to see the whole of the season finale. Love Jefster so much. Not to mention "Guys, I know Kung Fu."

Please don't let the network screw season 3 up with "helpful" suggestions.

but I think that making them just powered-up humans who get sad if they don't drink blood

eh? i'm assuming you're referring to Twilight. while i don't agree with a lot of SMeyer's storytelling, that's not something she portrayed.

if your creature goes back before written history, you've got free rein.

Free reign? Surely you have some point at which they don't deserve the name anymore.

I agree, tiggy. I thought the plot of New Moon rose from the point of vampires not being able to control their bloodlust.

Surely you have some point at which they don't deserve the name anymore.

yes, I think there needs to be bloodlust. Energy vampires are just silly.

i'm assuming you're referring to Twilight. while i don't agree with a lot of SMeyer's storytelling, that's not something she portrayed

It's not specific. I consider her vampires heinously romantic because she bothered to have them sparkle. I don't know Edward's other details.

And I dislike the idea of removing too many weaknesses and savagery. But that happens a lot. At least Joss gave his abstainers a soul or a chip. At least Mitchell turned someone. Moonlight and Forever Knight (IIRC) made it too easy. Angsting isn't enough. Even Stefan Salvatore only gets picturesque bloodlust.