Interview with a vampire

Interview with a vampire is set in New Orleans, a perfect place for vampires.  New Orleans is known for its corrupt politicians, social structure and Gothic themes.
Ann refers to thirst throughout the book.  Even though it is a vampire book, blood is not the only thing they thirst for, love, knowledge, acceptance and lust.  Each character searches for something their missing.
It is clear that the characters have a hierarchy, Claudia is top dog, the purest of both humans and vampires.  Turned into a vampire at the age of five, she never had the chance to learn how humans love, live and experience. She has no human ties to shape her views of life, making her the perfect vampire, ruthless.  On the other hand, the vast amount of knowledge she has can never reach its full potential.  Since her body is that of a five year old her deepest desires can not be met, which makes her sexually frustrated.
Louis seems to be the most human out of the vampires, for a large part of the book he refuses to feed on humans and takes the blood of rodents.  He is easily manipulated by others, particularly by lestat.  Lastat is the "bad boy" the only plays by his rules.  Very charismatic and sly.  He continuously seeks knowledge and never lets people learn all that he knows.  I think he believes he is something he is not.  For example he claims to be a lone wolf but always has a companion around, he continuously seduces people to believe whatever he wants to but cant trust.
I personally am not a fan of vampires in general , the book isn't my kind of story.  Ann can get really long winded with unnecessary details.  A story full of lust, love and feeding isn't what I like to see.  I prefer action oriented vampires like Blade and Underworld.  Ann is an excellent literary writer but the details bore me and take away from the overall story.

Monster Island

I'll be the first to admit that I don't like zombies unless there is an interesting twist or if the zombies die in a humorous fashion.  Fortunately there is a little of both in Monster Island in my opinion.  The solider who left his daughter and dumped his wife in an room wasn't very interesting to me.  He reminded me of the normal solider that is up against impossible odds, just like in every zombie movie.  Despite that, he is a relateble character, its completely understandable why he did what he did.  The teens traveling with him provide me with comedy of some sort.  I think it's humorous that the ones that survive are teenagers with assault rifles and shotguns.  Early in the book, it says that all the major countries, particularly ones with allot of industry.  This includes North America, Europe, Australia, and the majority of Asia.  Only the third world countries survive.  Its an interesting idea, all the advancements in technology and it is all brushed aside by the walking dead.  Since the underdeveloped countries are mostly at war, surviving the zombie horde would be more likely.
Gary's decision to turn himself into a zombie was bold and in my opinion was the smartest thing to do.  The only other option was to hide and eventually get eaten.  The idea of becoming a zombie but with the your original intelligence is interesting.  Gary is both but neither at the same time, he is in between the world of the living and the dead.  Although his still has his conscience, the craving of flesh calls to him;the only difference is the he has a higher level of control than the other zombies.  It's hard fight to resist animal instinct, especially since he has his own mind. 
The zombie itself has always been frightening to allot of people.  A person you may know or a relative coming after you, trying to kill you and has no idea what they are doing.  The zombie is also the closest monster that we can really identify.  They are the slow, decaying version of people and in my opinion makes them the scariest monster. 

Conventions of Horror

• Suspense
• Old creaking door
• dark, stormy night
• myth
• Gothic themes
• heroine
• Past decisions haunt the future
• Secret passage way
• Body horror
• Invincibility of the monster
• Usually take place in European countries or Transylvania
• Dramatic scenes
• A need for survival
• Satire
• Metaphorical material
• Outside noise like howling wolves or lighting
• Monster
• Tension

Frankenstein

Even though Frankenstein is categorized as horror, the book didn't give me that feel.  Its clear that the Gothic era of horror is very different from how the present views horror.  The book is very subtle, more of a literary style than the slashing and screaming we are used to seeing.  The movie that the class saw today was very different from the book.  The movie was more of a clique horror with comedy sprinkled on top.  Its very interesting how we see Frankenstein and how it was supposed to be portrayed.  The monster is described as a lonely, hurtful creature which leads to anger.  Speaking of anger, the violence is...strange.  The deaths are very quick and seem almost harmless.  The monster would strangle someone but its wouldn't go into any detail about how he would kill.  The monster would kill and will abruptly go to the next scene, almost like it was a dream.  I have to admit that my perception of horror has changed and is deeper than I gave it credit for.