I apologize if this is a repeat (I didn't get any similar picks as results when I searched it), but I was wondering if you all honestly think it's well written or not.
its a good book but no masterpiece. the forst book is good. the second too but Eclipse is terrible and BD -as much as I lvoe it - is mostly just a disaster
I think it is for the most part. I thought Twilight and New Moon were great, Eclipse was good, Breaking Dawn was . . . um . . . not what I had expected. I really got into the plot, the story, and the characters. Breaking Dawn was a very strange plot and I wished it was different. But I love the series anyway. I did like The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner, too.
I've been writing for the better part of my life, and when I write a story, I at least try to know a little about my subject. Not only did Stephenie Meyer ignore a lot of the staples of the Vampire world, she created a lot of other things that simply made no sense. On top of that, there are real errors in the books that even the simplest editor should've been able to spot. There are biological errors, as well as a blatant disregard for geography in Breaking Dawn. The coast of Rio de Janeiro is not on the WEST side of South America.
So I have to say no, they're not well-written. And I say that from a writer's standpoint, because I did read them, and I'll admit they have their good points, but a book should be good as a whole, not just in certain places.
I know a lot of people don't like the excessive adjectives and constant descriptions, but I've always loved that style. A lot of my favorite authors have adopted this style.
But they're not masterpieces.
So I have to say no, they're not well-written. And I say that from a writer's standpoint, because I did read them, and I'll admit they have their good points, but a book should be good as a whole, not just in certain places.
코멘트를 추가하려면 로그인하거나 팬팝에 가입하세요