On that matter of vampires and other bloody (british usage) things.

Anne Rice may not have been the creator of the “vampire” but defiantly inspired novelists many generations later. It is my belief that Stephanie Meyer should have gotten the hint. Vampires are monsters, not self-proclaimed romanticists. A true vampire would gladly drink blood and never, never ever ever, go willingly into sunlight.
The great thing about Interview is the layout. The story telling style used in the novel makes you really think like a vampire and how he must have felt. Was he a pedophile? Did he really feel okay with himself? Why in the world would he tell this story to a human? It makes me think of all the possibilities. 

If we view vampires as squirrel eating baby-makers, what makes them different from you and I? Eternal life? Write a soft-core teen novel, be an actor in daytime TV, sing your lungs out even though you know you suck, and you can have it. The true gift of the vampires was an alluring mystery.

With Nosferatu we were given a blood thirsty monster. Blade gave us gore and techno-life. Underworld showed us a sexier side of killing. Vampire: The Masquerade gave me a way to communicate with other nerds! But Stephanie Meyer gave me nightmares... of sparkling vampires with rat tails hanging out of their mouth.

In a world where magic is so vital, the genre has opened up endless possibilities. Can we die, can we love forever, what do we live for? That is what vampires must face.

1. Dying, yes... in extreme situations.
2. Love... eternal and debaucheries.
3. Life?... well, undeath, hold the promise of knowledge, sex, and blood. What more could you ask for?

I do not hold any one writer accountable for mixing up these questions with silly notions of day-walkers, teen-aged pregnancy, and dancing werewolves. In my eye they can never ruin the appeal of a random sexy Lestat. And might I add, Selene can bite me any day.

Brains or no Brains

I started off reading this text bored. I have just finished reading "World War Z" and to my knowledge any other zombie text would not compare. Nonetheless David brought me in by chapter two. By taking the view points of many different characters and times he shows digression in a new light. Gary's character brings the most interest to me, his point of view, through being an undead is wonderful. Gary is what changes the idea of zombies being things with no emotion, hungry for more, into a new dimension.
Since my introduction to zombies with Dawn of the Dead, I have always assumed that zombies were a metaphor for societies lack of humanity. Though this holds true, especially with that state of New York, Gary is able to create this anomaly. What if zombies were friends?
Zombies for me though are a way to plan for worst-case-sanario events. Unlike any other monster, zombies don't just appear scattered... outnumbered masses would attack like any given disaster. Now, I have to say with that in mind, zombie clowns freak me out. I mean! Come on! They only thing worse would be a zombie Barney... and don't get me started on that.