Read this review and other young adult book reviews at sarahthebooknerd.home.blog!

So, the first thing I should establish is that I've read through the series twice before. This was my third time reading "Twilight," but the first time as an adult. I first encountered the series in middle school and fell in love with it. I'm pretty sure Stephenie Meyer was the author responsible for turning me into a book nerd.

I was obsessed. I went to midnight book releases and later to the movie releases. Although, the movies are awful.

Reading "Twilight" was much more nostalgic than I thought it would be. I read through it in three days. I'd forgotten so many things about this book. I'd forgotten how annoying Jacob is, how sarcastic and hilarious Edward is, and how derpy Bella is. I'm often compared to Bella and I fiercely denied it because I'm ashamed of Kristen Stewart's portrayal of her. But the Book-Bella is a lot like me. We're both clumsy to the extreme, beyond socially awkward, and stubborn as hell. The Movie-Bella is whiny and expressionless. Okay, so Book-Bella gets whiny (but not so much in this book).

I didn't forget how terrible the grammar and general writing is. That killed me reading through the book. When I was in high school, probably a junior or a senior, I took a red pen to all four of her books. This was the second time I read through the series. I did it on a dare and I don't have the copies anymore (that makes me very sad). I was tempted to re-do it.

One of my biggest pet peeves with Meyer's writing style, which she fixed outside of the Twilight series ("The Host" is better), is how she explains everything. Luckily, we've never had to watch Bella go to the bathroom. But that's pretty much the only thing she left out. She was so detailed without being detailed, if that makes sense. We knew what she ate for breakfast most mornings and which shampoo she uses, but some of the characters didn't have descriptions. They were name dropped. Or, she would describe someone as "nondescript."

That's a cop-out description. My version of "nondescript" is different than my boyfriend's version of "nondescript." That's not a description of a character. I want to know how tall he is or what hairstyle he has. I had a hard time separating movie-characters from the book-characters, which usually is not an issue for me.

I could talk for hours about how terrible her style is... moving on. One of the big-picture problem I saw with this book is the sparkling. She should've used different words to describe what happens. Vampires don't sparkle, even in her world. When you say "sparkle," I picture unicorns, fairy dust, and literal sparklers (fourth of July style).

No. That's not what happens. She says, "His skin, despite the faint flush from yesterdays's hunting trip, literally sparkled,..." BARF. "...like thousands of tiny diamonds were embedded in the surface." Pay attention to the second part. Tiny diamonds were embedded on the surface... like the soft glistening of the pavement when the sun hits it in a certain way. I hate that she used the word "sparkle" because now everyone calls her vampires fairies.

Okay, so rant over. Breathe, Sarah.

One thing i was looking for this time around is the symbolism in the titles. I didn't get this as a kid, perhaps I was too young to fully absorb the meaning. The reason the first book is titled "Twilight" is because it's the best time of day for vamps to walk around (Edward admits it himself) and it foreshadows the next book. No spoilers, but Edward also indicates that twilight is the end of the day, whether you want it to end or not. Everything must come to an end.

Most of this review was complaining (see, maybe I am like Bella!), but the plot was okay (rated three stars based on plot), the world she created was great (aside from the sparkling), and I enjoyed the ease of reading it. For a thick book, it's surprisingly easy to read through.

So, with that... New Moon, here I come!