Well, I read the second one. I love the idea, but this one irritated the hell out of me. My chief complaint: The comparison of the two character to Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. First off, that is SO not original. So many people use that comparison, and what's worse, Shakespeare ripped those characters off of two other writers. Lets see some originality! How about Psyche and Cupid? Orpheus and Eurydice? You think 60 years down the line you'll hear someone say, "They're a regular Bella and Edward?" HELL no. And that is because the author was content to stop there are not push the archetypal envelope.

Additionally, the tragedy Romeo and Juliet took place in the 1500's. Times have changed. Yes, I do understand the basic plot; Edward is a vampire, therefore stealthier, deadlier, faster, stronger, etc. than Bella. It's the 21st century. Relationships are SUPPOSED to be equal. At least here. When did it become ok for one to dictate what was best for both? <(Edward.)

You want to be a heroine in life, not a victim. Your love leaves, you go after him. Family be damned. Even Juliet did not let her life be totally dictated by Romeo's whims. Although, for what orders she did have to follow, she did have a better excuse; it was the 1500s!

When you love someone as much as Bella's character claimed to have, you don't sit there numb for months on end. You get your ass up and you go after them. What people don't seem to realize nowadays is that there are several circles of hell you gotta walk through to be with your soul mate. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are; Vampire/Human Werewolf/Human Swampthing/lawn gnome. Whatever!!!

Despite all of my bitching, it was obviously a good story. Sometimes, even a negative reaction is proof enough of that.

On to the third.