Vampire Chronicles au Twilight Series?

The Vampire Chronicles.

The narrating in The Vampire Chronicles is exceptionally beautiful and colourful, while in Twilight, it's rather fanfiction typish and avarage.

The Vampire Chronicles have (an) original and interesting main storyline(s) plus many, many interesting and colourful storylines on the side. Such the story of Louis and Claudia, then Lestat becoming a rock nyota for the fun of breaking the rules as extremely as possible and happens to wake the vampire queen. And as for the "side storylines", zaidi au less side those of as in fact these are the very bases to the other ones; Lestat's entire mortal life, his and Nicolas's story, the story of the Twins, Marius's story... There's so MUCH and indepth in the Chronicles and it all viungo together in one way au another.

While in Twilight, there's pretty much only one storyline au at least the rest of them revolve around the one; that in itself is all about a high school romance. That doesn't even develope nor work realistically. So, yeah. Nah. Not my thing.

The characters in the Chronicles are also much zaidi original and colourful and deeper than in Twilight, which, again, is zaidi like a fanfiction with the so-called Mary-Sue characters and they don't seem to get that much depth when it comes to the mwandishi uandishi about them. But then, I haven't read the entire serie. But then again, characters should be zaidi indepthly developed and explained already in the first part than I think they are, in "Twilight".

Twilight completely alters everything but the blood-drinking part. It even turns this demon-like nightly creature, which can not socialize with mortal beings as much as it might want to, into a sparkling diamond in the sun, who can also work and go to school like any human being could. The Twilight "vampires" are practically superhumans, whose bodies are dead and drink blood and are turned into this kwa a bite. So, some very basic vampire stuff is there but they're still made into superhumans and not vampires, as majority of the myth elements have been stripped away au drastically changed.

I find it funny Anne mchele called them "tamer version of the vampire". In my view when someone alters and changes something as much as Meyer has done with this creature - it's no zaidi a tamer version but something completely different that only remotely reminds of it's origin.

In the Chronicles the vampire myth is taken into incredible depths. She gave the vampire a human moyo but still kept the demon, the monster in them, and didn't enable them to come out of the shadows so literally and extremely as Twilight does. She visioned an indepth sociaty for the vampire that included rules, crimes and punishments. Her Wanyonya damu are about good and evil in a perfectly fascinating balance and way, and their exsistance is pondered good and well. Twilight never took the vampire into such an observation whereas it also dismissed everything that made it mythic and interesting.

I have read both. I must say that The Vampire Chronicles kwa Anne mchele is a lot better then Twilight. For many reasons the uandishi is better the story line is better, and the characters have far much zaidi depth then Twilight vampires. This is coming from a 16 mwaka old female, if wewe were to ask most females my age they would probably be all for Twilight, however i'm not. Does anybody else feel that a lot of twilight mashabiki are just conformists?
Lestat will always win>

First I'd like to say that twilight is zaidi about Bella than it is about the vampires. As far as upendo stories go I think its one of the best. I loved both the twilight series and the vampire chronicles and think they are equally great. Also when it comes to the sinema I have to say Twilight is way better. I can't stand the Queen of the damned. They didnt do anything right with that one.

Being I've read both Series and i find myself enjoying both but when it comes down to it, I enjoy the Vampire Chronicles much more. Anne Rice's novels are far zaidi complex with zaidi thought out characters..for example we know much of Louis, Lestat and Armand's past through the novels. However with Twilight, we never even get to know what Bella's life was like before Forks...her interests...we only get to know about The Cullens and even then its very little. The thing I do enjoy though with Stephanie's novel is I find her characters easy to relate to as they are quite human.

Now with Stephanie take away the Vampire aspects, the Story could generally could be told...even if they were sparkly angels....or mermaids. See my point? Its not like Stephanie did the research as Anne mchele did. One thing I did enjoy was how Stephanie envolved Jacob who happens to be my main reason for enjoying the novels, being I am not a shabiki of her Wanyonya damu as I upendo Anne Rice's Wanyonya damu too much.

I feel Stephanie has a basic idea for her characters but she didn't develop...the characters much, same with the stories.

Anne mchele did so wonderfully with the Vampire Chronicles...now I don't know if its fair comparing due to the fact that she is a zaidi experienced writer than Stephanie Meyer.

I prefer the Vampire Chronicles. I watched the first two Twilight movies, but I got tired of them after a while. Bella is too fickle and she has no real strength. Edward is no Lestat. Lestat has zaidi depth to him. Lestat knows that he is a monster, but he still wants to be good. He knows that he is a "human" and it shows in the novel "Tale of the Body Thief" and also in "Memnoch the Devil". Anne mchele gives her characters zaidi depth kwa exploring their histories and what led up to them being a vampire. She explores their human side au what's left of it. She delves back into the Bible, ancient history and the present to give wewe a full
picture of the world that her Wanyonya damu live in.

I have read each book in the Twilight Saga as well as watched the sinema multiple times, as I have done with the Vampire Chronicles. Although I originally fell for Twilight, the Vampire Chronicle now hold my heart.

The sinema for each both had ups and downs. For example the script writers for Twilight could've added zaidi depth for the vitabu and the casting could have been much, much better. However, the film score for Twilight was very admirable, managing to get Muse, Paramore and Radiohead.
Both sinema from the Vampire Chronicles are completely different, from acting, director, and downright quality. Interview with the Vampire is considered a cult classic among movie buffs and 'vampire fanatics' whereas its succeeding film, Queen of the Damned, was dubbed a complete failure kwa critics and the mwandishi of the chronicles herself, Anne Rice, claiming that it was a 'bastardisation of two vitabu (Queen of the Damnned and The Vampire Lestat).'

Comparing the vitabu together is a completely different matter. The Twilight saga was aimed at the young adult genre whereas the Vampire Chronicles was aimed at zaidi college age. The kusoma level for the Vampire Chronicles is also much higher than that of Twilight and could take some time to get used coming directly from Twilight.
The Twilight Saga vitabu have zaidi depth than shown in the sinema but have no adventure, no real loss au any chance for mourning and can be very predictable. They are an easy read for those who don't care for a detailed plot nor want a heavy read. The Vampire Chronicles on the other hand are completely different. They are complex, ave incredible depth and can be a difficult read.

Overall, it is incredibly hard to find common ground between the two as both follow completely different plot lines and are aimed at contrasting kusoma groups. The only running theme between the two is the matter of vampires, and even so both myths have been changed drastically to fit the narrative (for example, the Vampire Chronicles don’t have diamond encrusted vampires).
I would have to say that my preference to the Vampire Chronicles is pretty clear but even so I do appreciate and occasionally enjoy Meyer’s work with the Twilight Sage and have respect for both.