Movie Box Office Results

Twilight series
My daughter loved and read the entire series. It is increasing her reading level and enjoyment of reading.

Not as bad as I thought, but not great. Chock full of problems
*** This review may contain spoilers ***


OK, count me in the number that could stand to never see the whole Twilight franchise again. It's everywhere: web ads, bookstores, fricken Nordstrom. It's been very hard to avoid everything Twilight. So it was on Showtime On Demand, it was snowing (Blizzard 2010), and I decided to finally watch.

First off, Kristen Stewart's Bella was incredibly deficient in the personality department. Did she have a lobotomy? I mean, granted, it's been 8 yrs since my teen stage (I'm 26), but good grief, her perpetually depressed and moody face bugged me. We had Emo kids in my high school, but even they could crack a joke every now and then. She literally had no presence. In my high school, she would have been the new kid for a day, but nobody would have talked to her bc she looked so depressing. It was hard to believe that there were guys already crushing on her. Why? She wasn't all that nice to anyone, she barely talked, the friends she had, the relationships seemed more one-sided than anything.

Next Edward. I will say that RP is a nice looking guy, but all the fangirl (not just teen girls, either) swooning is a real turnoff. Anyway, when Edward first came on screen, I had high hopes, but when he actually spoke, I was like "um, is he slow?" It was as if he had a speech impediment. I had to rewind it to hear it again, and then proceed to laugh. Edward was also a bit of a stalker. I guess if I were 14, I would be turned on by his behavior, but being an adult, I'd be concerned about why he was following me places. And don't get me started on how he admitted he likes watching her sleep.

Which brings me to another point. I get that the author wrote the novel based on a (obviously Fabio-esquire)dream she had, but she played way fast and loose with the vampire details. Perhaps the fact that the guy in her dream was a vampire was secondary. I literally asked my friend "OK, are they vampires or some type of animals?" The pale faces weren't enough. I could not believe that it wasn't clear that they were vamps. Then when I saw they didn't have fangs...WTF!! And they must be the only set of "vamps" that don't combust when out in the daylight. The sparkle was SO CHEESY. I know I'm giving spoilers, but 1.I marked the review w/the spoiler tag and 2.if you like vampire-based stories, you will be sorely disappointed. Back to my point, when Bella discovers what Edward is, he gets all serious and they focus on his face, but he reveals no fangs!! WTF! Fangs are so basic to vampires. Then I read a reviewer that says they don't have them? Is this for real? The baseball game...come on. What fun is it if you can just fly and catch the ball. Cheesy. BTW, the whole family structure was a tad creepy. The conflict lasted probably 15 minutes and was over so fast. It's less of a vampire story and more of a teen angst/Degrassi-style movie.

And don't get me started on Bella wanting to be turned after her association with Edward nearly gets her killed and she's only known him a couple weeks!!

Someone else had it right: they seemed less like vamps and more like supernatural creatures. If they could walk into anywhere uninvited, didn't burst into flames, can't be staked, etc etc, then what makes them scary? Since when are vampires nice? Even back on Buffy, Angel became Angelus and Spike w/his chip still had his bad boy tendencies. More recently, Damon on Vampire Diaries is straight up evil and doesn't make excuses for himself. Stefan, his brother, is also part of this neutered dog trend (like Edward) which is quite ridiculous if they are supposed to be vamps.

So watch the film (for free on TV) but keep your expectations low. Just think of it as a teen flick NOT a vampire flick, and you should survive.

Before I forget, that bluish-tinted filter that Twilight was filmed in was awful. Just awful. It almost hurt my eyes. Sometimes that adds effect to the film/show, but not when it's that noticeable. It was almost as if it was done to make all the characters seem even more pale and emo. Horrible.

Bonus material isn't something I want to watch twice
Bonus Material: I don't think the bonus material DVD is something people should hold out for. About 75 percent of the time, it's the director and the author talking, which is okay the first time around. But I wanted to see far more Jacob and Edward, and Jacob is barely shown. Edward (Robert Pattinson) has small snippets, but he mainly runs his finger through his hair and talks about how he can't hear because of all the screaming. It was cool to see the vampires from out of town and watch the baseball scene though. But this isn't something I'd want to watch twice. I wasn't really interested in watching the chummy relationship between the director and the author. More Jacob. More Edward. More of the cast from the movie.

The Movie: Initially I couldn't get into "Twilight" because I watched "Eclipse" first. I'd never heard of "Twilight" books or movies until the third one came out, and after I saw the third movie because nothing else was playing, I became a fan. However, watching the movies out of order may have worked against me. Because the special effects in "Eclipse" were so much better, the ones in "Twilight" looked too fake. Even with the wiring, it looked like someone was just pressing the fast forward button, not natural quick movements. The main issue was Edward going around the car. Nothing about that looked realistic.

I don't remember Tyler kissing Bella in the book so that part caught my attention, but the movie wasn't a complete copycat of the book so I let it slide. If I missed that part in the book, let me know. The guy who played Tyler was entertaining to say the least. I kept laughing whenever he was around because he seemed to be having the most fun at all times. Kristen did a great job of playing Bella, but in interviews she looks this uncomfortable so I'm wondering is it acting or is this just her. Either way, she played her part. Although I am Team Jacob and didn't see too much of Jacob in this film, I enjoyed watching Taylor run down the backstory of how werewolves and vampires reached a treaty. Robert Pattinson clearly was the best person to play the role of Edward, and he played that to a tea. He's fascinating during interviews though because he doesn't seem to have anything in common with Edward, so it was nice to see him go into a role unfamiliar to him.

The first time I saw the movie, I didn't like it much. But I gave it another shot and enjoyed it much more. I like the "Twilight" book better than the movie, but the movie was pretty good, too. I think "New Moon" and "Eclipse" were better though. We got to see more dynamics from the characters. However, this was still a very good introduction.

Keep Wooden Stakes Handy When Approaching This Movie
Only barely post-pubescent girls can be excused for declaring this movie "good." Adults and the "Twilight Moms" that callously dare to sing this movies' praises are clearly just interested in Hollywood's latest male cheesecake and aren't objectively reviewing the film itself. The two main characters have the chemistry equivalent of rust, and the film itself the charisma of Ben Stein's character in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off." Between the choice of watching this writing-deficient offal again and committing suicide, I'd really have to think long and hard which I'd choose. Final review: 122 minutes of pure unadulterated suck punctuated by numerous periods of mind-numbing boredom. I've seen the previews to "New Moon" by the way, and, though I haven't seen it (and never will), judging from the previews, I'm pretty sure the filmmakers have outdone themselves with an even worse film. One wonders how that was even possible.

Twilight Review
Really liked the movie, the books are so much more detailed. Looking forward to the rest of the saga!