Since when do women read porn. In the first book of Twilight, the two protagonists only kiss at the end.

How do you know I thought you hated it :P

It's just ridiculously absurd.

Girl-porn consists of strong, dangerous older men being overprotective and mysterious in a variety of situations and outfits.
This can be in the form of images or a narrative.

It is helpful if the men have "dark" and/or "tortured" pasts to explain and excuse any otherwise unacceptable behavior.

It is also helpful if some of the outfits do not include shirts.

Stereotypically, that is. :p:

I'm not gonnae lie. (not pointing finger at you btw) This whole place is starting to piss me off with the snobbery against twilight. Seriously, I've you have seen it go ahead and say what you want, you can do because you have seen it to judge it. But I can't stand how most of you don't even know what else it's about except "Sparkling vampires" and werewolfs. I sometimes think this place is much more close minded than you all make out.

Or time traveling vikings who become Navy SEAL's

Like I said, I'll have to figure out what it's about someday ... though I have a few friends of varying ages who love the series, the movies, etc., so I get bits and pieces whether I want to or not.
I never saw anyone mention sparkly vampires and werewolves here, a few seemed pretty knowledgeable about the book, but then I haven't read all the posts.

I'm currently reading The Lightning Keeper by Starling Lawrence. It's good so far.

Of course I've seen it, or why would I be talking?
I assure you, if I'm going to talk about something, I'm going to watch it/read it/hear it first. There was no other reason for me to watch Twilight actually, I just wanted to know what I was talking about, and not just repeat what posers say about it.

*That is why I also watched the High School Musical saga. It's just not easy to be fair, but we got to do it.

That's fair enough. I get pissed off about people who haven't seen the film and act like ****ing sheep and say what everyone else does. I wasn't pointing the finger at you, I know you know your ****.

I know :p: I just didn't want to sound like one of the sheep.

Got the Life
 

http://images.contentreserve.com/Ima...E%7DImg100.jpg

Saw and bought Fieldy's autobiography on a whim at Barnes and Noble on Monday. Haven't gotten a chance to read it yet. Has anyone read it, and is it really worth the $15?

Didn't like it as much as the first one, but a good quick read. :yeah: (all these three-fingered smilies look like they're flipping the bird)

This, I did read the first book/ watch the two movies, they really were horrible.

I'd still bang the **** out of Carlisle Cullen though, hot damn

tell me about it.

Kurt Vonnegut - Slapstick or Lonesome no more

It's been a while since I spent any time with Vonnegut. Apparently he didn't think much of this one but I feel it's my duty to read all of them...

مقام عطية by سلوى بكر

I managed to get the original :D

Walter Schurian - Fantastic Art
http://www.thedesignstore.lk/images/...228-2954-7.jpg

^ As in dreamlike, visionary, non-natural art. Reading this one for dissertation-related reasons.

Reread Fight Club, I'm doing a book report on it.

^ooooooh. Im intrigued. How good is it?

^ Very good, much better than the movie.

I MUST read it then. Speaking of the movie I'm going to watch it for my second time ever, right now.

It's one of my favourite books, even though it's probably my least favourite that I've read by the author, it's absolutely amazing.

I actually prefer the movie(but just by a bit, but that might be because I saw it before I read the book). Even though I like Palahniuk's style most of the time, I found it a little tough to read in this case, it wasn't as "refined" as most of his books. I also like the ending in the movie more, even though I can't really see the movie ending working in the book. Still an awesome book though.

I thought the opposite on this point too.

I agree that the movie is better than the book, Palahniuk even said it was an improvement. The book wasn't much, imo. I mean, it was still good, but it's down in the ****s with Rant as far as his books go

Usually theres no competition on the book/movie debate. Books are always usually way better. :(

Fight Club and American Psycho are the only two exceptions I can think of to that.

American Psycho are both good as book and movie

Trainspotting the movie is kind of ****, compared to the book. It'd be awesome if they'd have filmed it like the book, gone from different characters and ****.

Heh, that's funny. I bought Fight Club on Monday! I'm almost done with it!

If anyone wants to know where I'm at:

Chapter 23, in case anyone hasn't read it yet ^_____^

I made the mistake of reading trainspotting first then watching the film. the film was good. just not really like the book at all. :(

I've definitely run across some movies as good as or better than the books, at least in my opinion. To be fair they're usually based on bad books, but still. Sometimes an idea is just better "live."

In a slightly different vein, some movies (the more popular movies based on Stephen King novels or short stories come to mind) diverge quite a bit from the original storylines, and while I find them as or more enjoyable than the written material, I'm not sure I should really be comparing them as the same story.

http://ebooks-imgs.connect.com/produ...0041543_s4.jpg

Gonna get my Cyberpunk on with a good stand alone Gibson novel.

:yikes:

Rant is probably my favourite by him. Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

I, Alex Cross - James Patterson

Lullaby - Chuck P.
So far really unusual, but I'm enjoying this book.

Anyone else read it? What did you think?