'Twilight' Screenwriter Trashes Her Own Work

'Twilight' Screenwriter Trashes Her Own Work-photo

As Celebuzz is well aware, there are millions of you Twi-hards out there who think the Twilight movies are, like, the greatest thing ever. Oddly enough, Melissa Rosenberg doesn't seem to be one of them.

Rosenberg, the screenwriter responsible for penning the scripts for The Twilight Saga, delivered an odd moment of candor in a recent interview, admitting that the movies she penned aren't anything particularly special:

"Is it high art? No. But it's not trying to be."

So why does Rosenberg spend so much time and effort on something she considers to be dreck? Apparently, an unceasing hopefulness that, somehow, the Twilight series will develop into something beyond the utter mediocrity that he currently believes it to be:

"The key to success is delusional optimism. Some people call it resilience. You're lying there bleeding on the ground and you basically have to say, 'Maybe tomorrow will be better.'"

Rosenberg, many will recall, is currently weighing whether to include the infamous birth scene in the upcoming Twilight sequel Breaking Dawn. Maybe if she'd go for it and put a little edge in her scripts, she might not feel so ho-hum about the results. 

For all things Twilight-related, make sure to check out The Forks Report.



Default avatar
  • Guest with Sense
    Guest with Sense

    I hate to say it but I will; Stephenie Meyer is a terrible writer, but she knew her story would sell because it pulled at the heart strings of every hot blooded female/gay male wishing and praying they had a man that even closely resembled the charm and charisma described in the character of Edward. That's all it's about. If you actually write a book that describes realistic issues like child abuse or drug abuse, Hollywood shuns it because they don't want to A. Offend anyone & B. They want to make money and who can really make money on producing/supporting a story that has some validity without that warm, fuzzy feeling?

  • freebitch

    the same argument can be made for Avatar and look what a hit it was. Avatar is completely based on pocahontas. There is no originality in holywood anymore.

  • Pjl

    Can't anyone just read for fun. The shrewd marketing work came after the movies and the production companies have a huge hand in it. If you seperate the two vehicles, the books are a plain fun story. It doesn't have to be great lierary work to be enjoyed. Reading, for me, should be fun and enjoyable or something educational, it doesn't have to be all these things at the same time. I don't know why people have to disect everything for some hidden meaning. Can't it just be what it is, a good story no matter what your age. My 76 year old mother even liked the books, the movies, not so much.

  • leyla11

    I don't blame kids for liking that stuff, but grown ups should understand what lies beneath: a successful, and very old literary archetype, plus some shrewd marketing work, a scheme to make money. No more, no less.

  • brittany

    I totally agree with you leyla11 finally someone smart on here!!!

  • Blah

    comment* not comic of course, I'm sorry. But anyway, go you^^

  • Blah

    Wow leyla11, first time I've read something as intelligent as your comic on this website, it made me happy:) You're absolutely right!

  • leyla11

    I did read Twilight to understand what the fuss whas all about, I had absolutely no prejudice against them. I didn't like it because I could see all the little cogs and wheels working, I understood exactly what the author was trying to achieve. Ages ago at university I read a book for my English lit class and it explained exactly why works like Twilight are a roaring success. It's all about the archetype of the "Beauty & the Beast" (the name Bella rings a bell, anyone?), which is the same formula behind all the Harlequin romance novels. It's no surprise that those "book" are such a success, though I don't think I would have been hooked even if I was 12. So the screenwriter is basically right, even though she missed the main point. People can do whatever they want, they can read those books and rave about them, but I don't think they'll remain in literature history.