Friday
21Nov2008
Movie Review - 'Twilight'
Friday, November 21, 2008 at 3:27AM | Twilight
Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner  |
What
should be clear by now if you've followed an ounce of the hype surrounding
Twilight in the past month or so is that this entire review simply doesn't
matter to a huge percentage of its audience. They'll go, they'll enjoy it,
they'll say it's not as good as the book, they'll swear their allegiance to Team
Edward or Team Jacob, and they'll line up and do it all over again in a couple
of years.In a way, I envy those audience members, whether it's for Twilight or Batman or Hannah Montana. It's good to have something you love regardless of how good or bad it is. Ultimately, the greatest gift an artist can receive from his or her audience is that they fell in love with it no matter what. So good for them if they've got something that captures their imagination.
But Twilight is not a great film. It's not poorly made and it's not stupid - I'd say far from it - but it's way too languid and lacking a certain energy that it could and probably should have. It's also not much of a vampire movie, but that's not really the agenda.
Twilight is a love story, an old fashioned Romeo & Juliet or The Notebook or Titanic, but with fangs. Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) is the new student at her high school in Forks, Washington, having transplanted from the warmer climes of Phoenix. On her first day, she's mesmerized by the pale and brooding Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). All of his brothers and sisters are pale and brooding, too, which is probably not uncommon in the Pacific Northwest. There's something not quite right with him, however, in his mannerisms and in his speech, but Bella can't pin it down. (Here's a hint: He's a vampire.)
Slowly - too slowly - Bella and Edward begin to trust one another, despite his compulsion to devour her, which he freely admits. There's too much of this strange courtship because of the other elements at work. If there were no villains, then this would all be super. But there are villains, just as powerful as Edward, and they're developed and dispatched way too quickly. So really, Twilight is just a film out of balance more than anything else.
Director Catherine Hardwicke has taken the wildly popular young adult novel by Stephenie Meyer and developed it into the foundation of something really unique. The look of Twilight, ghostly and obscured in a wash of cool grays, is outstanding, and while the film sports a best-selling soundtrack, you don't hear as much of it here as you would expect. The score is a perfect fit for the mood and the cinematography, but there aren't many scenes featuring your fave tunes.
Her counterpart, Robert Pattinson, is tougher to figure. That's partially because we're not terribly familiar with a lot of his work (he does appear in a couple Harry Potter films) and it's partially because Edward Cullen is quite enigmatic. So I can't even say if it's a "good" performance. But it's definitely got something. He reminded me a lot of a young Johnny Depp, definitely left of center, and even though I'm not entirely sure what he was going for, it is impossible not to watch him. It's curious, it's a little foreign, and it's just tortured enough to make you believe he could live off a steady diet of warm blood.
So, if you have been ambivalent about the film, I can say that some of the parts work better than the sum of the parts. I think Twilight shows the beginnings of something special, but I don't think it qualifies on its own.
Reader Comments (21)
Robert Pattinson is glorious. Good review. I agree. I'm going to go spoon with my pillow now and call it Edward...
the vampires in Stephenie Meyer's world dont have fangs. do some freaking research.
im disappointed in the movie. i feel like twilight is the most important in the series. its where you meet all the characters and it sets the whole plot... but i feel that they didnt take the time to make it as good as it should be. twilight is the book that if your team edward you fall for edward and i dont feel that the movie lived up to it. i love the books ill read them over and over but its still disappointing... i waited all this time to be let down. i just feel that the people havent read the books arent going to get the right story because so many important parts were left out and there were parts where if you didnt read the books you would be confused about what was going on... e.i. the field scene where edward leaves w/ bella... bella says "so what now he's after me" but they didnt put anything in before that to lead to that so it was like it jumped from scene to scene instead of smoothly transitioning. all and all i feel they just didnt take the time to make it as good as they could... i feel like who ever wrote the screen play for this didnt take the time to read the books to understand the true feelings and purpose of the things they left out
JW -
The vampires also don't have very good dialogue, so do some freaking lightening up.
I think TWILIGHT would have done well, if given a much larger budget. . .films with great special effects would have had at least 3x the budget Catherine Hardwicke was given.
I think we will definitely see the film side of the Twilight Saga develop, as the budget also goes up.
Also, i think people should really seperate the ideals of the book from the Movie. If we all had the movie made our way, it would have been probably 5 hours long. I hope the rest of the Series which are made into movies are more promising. It is disappointing to see how things do not turn out as much as we hope for, but i have not come across a movie yet, which preceeds its book self.
i totally agree that it would have been way better if it was given a bigger budget. i wasnt expecting the movie to be as good as the book i was just expecting it to get all the important parts... pretty much every scene that twilight the book is known for was not put in the movie the way it should be edward never got out of the car when he saved bella in port angeles, the whole how old are you part was said in the car on the way back from port angeles, the you are my life now was said after edward first spent the night at bellas and she said i love you in her sleep, all that was left out and i felt those were some of the most important parts of the novel. i feel the parts that werent even in the book shoudnt have even been put in.
I'm so happy that you could see something special in the film, because it is definitely there.
Robert Pattinson was limited in his portrayal because of the novel.
I hope the screenwriter gives the characters better dialogue to chew in future sequels.
I met my favorite critic at the midnight showing of Twilight last night. Great review. He is spot on. First I am so glad that someone finally made it clear that Twilight has more than just a "tweener" fan base. Boyd pointed out on the radio this morning that over half of the crowd at our theater was over thirty! I did love the movie but of course it can't compare to the book. Still very entertaining and I will definitely be in line for the next one, ready to do it all again!!! -(Hopefully with a bigger budget so they can capture more of that "something special"). Rob Pattison had an impossible task of even coming close to the Edward character and I really have to give him credit, he came closer than I ever thought possible. I would recommend the movie to fans and the "just curious"! I think I even talked my husband into going! Hopefully I will see you at the next one Colin! BTW-Thanks for helping us keep an eye on the creepy Hitler hair dude! YOU ROCK!
Good review, I absolutely agree with it. I love the books, they are addictive, call it a guilty pleasure, but I can't seem to put them down. The movie is good, if I were reviewing it, I would have given it a C+. The special effects are a bit comical, so a bigger budget would have been nice. If subsequent movies in this series do not get a bigger budget, there is no way Twilight will surpass the Harry Potter hype, which some are saying it will do. I am eager to see how the rest of the movies play out, because there is definitely more adventure and action in New Moon, Eclipse and Breaking Dawn. And remember, no matter what, books to big screen always lose something. I like to think that because I've read the books, I have some inside information, that those who haven't read the book will never understand.
I think it was ok, just felt like a pretty reading of the book. I agree, he does remind me of a young Johnny Depp. But that's because all the Cullen boys had something rather "Edward Scissorhands" about them. Especially Jasper.
Just had to say that I LOVED Colin's comments during the movie. Probably enjoyed them just a touch more than the film itself. Excellent review. Nice meeting you!
I think that the movie "Twilight" was amazing, aside from the lack of special effects. However, Harry Potter is a whole different series and I just don't think you can compare the two properly.I thought Robert Pattinson did a great job, he was the perfect person to play that role. Kristen Stewart did all right, but I really don't think she captivated me as much as other actresses would in that part. Also, Jacob Black is such a critical part to play, as you will see in "New Moon", and this kid playing him just doesn't have the talent to play such a difficult role!
I think 3 stars is way too much for this turd. I can't think of one redeeming thing about this movie. The acting was horrible, the story took way too long to get to the action, the makeup was bad (did Edward leave lipstick on her head at the hospital scene?), etc, etc. Casting, editing, hair, baseball (wtf?) - it was all poorly done. I didn't have high expectations going in, but even my wife couldn't help but laugh at some of the ridiculous acting. Face it, this is porn for girls.
It looks like Dawson's Creek..... With vampires..
It's worse than Dawson's Creek - at least their pop culture references were funny.
I thought it was really good, it sent shivers through my whole body. But i was definately disappointed with a few parts, for example edwards sparkle. It was pathetic-at first you couldn't even tell he was sparkling, it was more like a limp shimmer-like they just sprinkled glitter on his face. But ne way, otherwise i loved it, but obviously not as good as the book--but really, what movie is?
it was the best f***ing movie i have ever seen it was soo good i have seen it like 7 times already :)
<3 i love edward <3
i wonder what will be more successful/popular in the long run, Twilight or Harry Potter
"i wonder what will be more successful/popular in the long run, Twilight or Harry Potter"
Depends on your definition of success, I guess.
Harry Potter 1 worldwide gross: $974M vs. Twilight $306M
Harry Potter 8 movies vs. Twilight 3 movies
Harry Potter appeals to both males and females vs. Twilight predominantly young adult females
Harry Potter has decent actors/scripts/effects/makeup vs. Twilight poor actors/script/effects/makeup
I dunno, tough call..
I love everything about twilight.
Its funny it awesome.
My favourite charcter is roslie and Bella
and Edward and Emmett and charlisle and ......ok
i ll stop there i love all the characters soooo mucg :)
i bought all four books and read them too
(twilight)very good,(new moon) that was excellent,(exclipse)brillant,
and breaking dawn the best of them all, i bought the dvd and watched it 20 something times
i m also counting down to when new moon comes out (i love twilight and edward):)
Anyone who says Twilight can measure up to Harry Potter is insane. Harry Potter series has a HUGE audience compared to what Twilight can get.