After Edward: What Will Be The Next Big Post-Vampire Craze?
Team Edward or Team Jacob. “True Blood” and “The Vampire Diaries.” It’s clear that blood-sucking vampires are having a cultural moment. In fact, since the first “Twilight” movie was released in 2008, vampire-related products have grossed more than $7 billion worldwide. That’s a whole lot of blood at the bloodbank.
But “Twilight” and “True Blood” won’t be around forever (sad but true). So we’ve provided a list of several hot-to-trot contenders ready to replace the vampire craze with all the Burger King merchandising tie-ins your heart desires.
Pro: Werewolves are the obvious choice — they’re vicious (sexy!) and prowl around at night — just like vampires.
Con: They’re really, really hairy and shed a lot.
See also: Michael J. Fox in “Teen Wolf”; Benicio del Toro in “The Wolfman”; Joaquin Phoenix on a bad day.
Pro: Studios can save lots of money by hiring just about anyone to be a robot actor.
Con: Have you ever seen robots have sex? It’s not pretty.
See also: R2D2 in “Star Wars”; your mom’s Roomba.
Pro: Girls love guys — and horses.
Con: You’re fantasizing about having sex with a horse. That’s gross.
See also: The Old Spice guy before Isaiah Mustafa.
|Mermen and Mermaids
Pro: Great tie-ins for swimwear. Finally finding out how mer-people have sex.
Con: Filming underwater is expensive. Fish are slippery.
See also: Darryl Hannah in “Splash.”
Pro: Cool tricks. A glimpse into the seedy magician underworld.
Con: Aren’t magicians just, like, low-grade sorcerers or something?
See also: Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale in “The Prestige”; The Hip Hop Magician.
|Witches and Warlocks
Pro: Dabbling with the dark arts.
Con: Stupid cloaks.
See also: “The Craft,” any local Renaissance Faire.
Pro: Require lots of bandaging, which perfectly hides post-plastic surgery scars.
Con: Mummies move really slowly, so how much action could actually happen?
See also: This hilarious sorta NSFW mummy sketch from comedienne Lizzy Caplan.