Finish this sentence: Twilight is...

To me, it's really horrible. Please inform me if you can prove me wrong otherwise but I really can't find any meaningful theme or message to the story. Also, I can't stand Edward. He's bland and unrealistic, (yes, I know it's a vampire book, but even so Meyer could find a way to make Edward a little believable, as Rowling did with the characters in Harry Potter) not to mention a wuss. I think the only well-structured characters are Jacob and Alice, but otherwise the characters aren't well spoken for. Possibly Meyer did this purposely for the fangirls to picture themselves in Bella's place, being loved by this so called "perfect" boyfriend (as well they have) but it really doesn't seem a good message to send to a young woman to act selfish and shallow and expect a knight in shining armor to romance and protect them, while the girl lusts after him. Twilight reminds me of an old princess movie, teaching the girls to just worry about their own needs and desires and expect a man to treat them with respect when they have none for themselves. It's meaningless and shallow, and it deeply surprises me that its popularity has lasted so long. I must admit, I have read all the books, and at first i did enjoy them, but as one would enjoy a children's puzzle, mildly interested at first but while looking back realizing it was a complete waste of time. And by the way, it was a bad movie too, the actors giving a performance even less believable than the actual characters were. All in all, and this is just my opinion, but speaking from my perspective, Twilight is the epitome of bad taste.
P.S. Harry Potter is WAY better!

No my dear it was overrated LONG before the movie. Before the movie was when people were obsessive almost to a state of violence. Robert Pattinson had nothing to do with it, especially since he downed the book. But there were more people talking about Twilight before than after the movie. If you don't believe me, you should've been on the internet.

Also, I don't think you understand what unoriginal means. ORIGINAL means it's fresh, it's something that hasn't been done before. UNORIGINAL is what you just described, something similar to the book you just read.

Books are meant to be provoking. The point of books is they make you think, even when you don't think you're thinking. They give you characters going through dilemmas and make you predict and apply what you're reading. And there is nothing surprising about Twilight. In fact, as if to add INSULT that there's no surprise, she throws in something completely uninhibited and something with absolutely no foreshadowing. And even THAT wasn't a surprise so much as it was stupid (I'm talking about the Jacob and Edward/Bella hell child thing. And about the Edward/Bella hell child thing in general.)

And you just said it wasn't provoking? See, if it were just for a younger crowd (which I'd say it was if it weren't for Breaking Dawn) then I wouldn't expect much. But if you say it's also for an older crowd, then yes it's supposed to be provoking. And just because you graduate from college, doesn't mean you know good fiction.

Stephen King, a fantastic writer who's published and sold many many books, has said that Stephanie Meyer isn't a good writer and that Twilight isn't a good series. Stephen King knows something about books. He has elements of originality, surprise, and always provokes his reader. That's why his books sell.

Twilight is a book for people who don't actually like to read, is my opinion.