Filed under: Movie Reviews

Movie Review: 'Twilight' (2008)

This one's strictly for the fans

Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson in Twilight
Photo: Summit Entertainment

Twilight is a film fueled by online fan fervor as fans of Stephenie Meyer's best-selling teen-vampire franchise took to the Internet to talk about the upcoming film adaptation. The media was late to catch on to the obsession, but once they did Twilight was all anyone could talk about due to the short-term attention boost it brought to any outlet willing to dedicate space to the story. Shopping mall riots, online insanity and crying 14-year-olds denied access to my screening of the film all come with the territory. The only question is: Is it worth it?

Regardless of quality Twi-hards, as the obsessed fan base has come to be known, will enjoy this film no matter what. It's their favorite characters brought to life on the big screen and that alone is enough for them. Where the film goes wrong they can just fill in the blanks. Will that stop them from recognizing the film really isn't all that good? I don't think so, it just won't matter. Because, the fact is, Twilight is not a good movie. It assumes too many in the audience have read the book of which the film is based, and as a result will leave the uninitiated scratching their heads with boredom. To that effect, it will have the same impact on the people that have read the book but don't have a crush on the film's male lead, Robert Pattinson playing Edward Cullen, the embodiment of the perfect man. Edward's only flaw is that he is a vampire, but if I am reading the metaphor correctly this is actually a good thing because every girl wants an overprotective boyfriend that only wants to suck the life out of you. As long as he is "beautiful" and shimmers in the sun like white diamonds the rest doesn't matter.

The adjective laden descriptions of Edward are not as heavy handed and sappy as they are in Meyer's novel, but his early inability to cope with being in the presence of Isabella "Bella" Swan (Kristen Stewart) is downright laughable, just ask the audience I saw the film with as they were laughing nearly 50% of the time as Edward's face twists and contorts into looks of extreme constipation and clenched fists as Bella enters the room. Long staring matches between villains and friends become old hat and the film dissolves into something of an inside joke that only the truly obsessed seem in on.

Ultimately the story of Bella Swan as she moves from Phoenix, Arizona to the small town of Forks, Washington mirrors the book almost too well as much of Meyer's writing is dedicated to lust filled longing glances as Bella, the human prey, is drawn to Edward as much as he is drawn to her. Her motives, instead of being filled with lust as they were on the page, now seem to be choices made out of pure stupidity and naiveté. This is where the film relies on the source material far too much as those that have read the story of Edward and Bella already know the relationship's motivations and will see through the onscreen melodrama, but those unaware folk will be left in the dark.

Pattinson and Stewart aren't a horrible match in this picture, but both had very hard roles to pull off due to the film's dedication to the amateurish dialogue lifted from the novel. No one could have pulled off such sappy and mundane discussions, but it does improve as the film moves forward and each become more comfortable as their characters, but only to the point the dialogue becomes a bit more – "real?"

The best performances come from the supporting cast, primarily Bella's father, Charlie, played by Billy Burke. Charlie, along with a few of Bella's human friends at school are the only actors with believable roles. None of the actors playing the vampires seem comfortable in their character's skin, except perhaps, Rachelle Lefevre (one of the baddie vamps) whose role is so limited giving her any kind of credit is really a stretch.

The special effects are extremely weak and have the feeling of a made-for-TV movie and the direction of Catherine Hardwicke (Thirteen) feels as if it is done by a fangirl just as in love with the characters as the target audience. Long tracking shots and 360-degree camera pans focusing on ineffectual scenes of nothingness do zero for an audience just waiting for something to happen. It's impossible to project the emotional status offered up in Meyer's novels on film without something to keep the audience watching. Fans of the book may enjoy nearly two hours of Edward gazing, but those unfamiliar with the original story will just be left yawning.

Twilight leaves itself open for the subsequent sequels and should the first film live up to early box-office expectations there is no doubt the sequels will be made and considering the lead-in story is now out of the way and Summit Entertainment realizes the value in the franchise I expect the further adventures of Edward and Bella will be geared toward a much wider audience and more than five weeks will be spent on the script, as was the case this time. For what it's worth, fans of the books will love this movie, but may not go back for as many repeat viewings as they originally intended. For the rest of us we will have to grin and bear it, hoping future chapters will be more compelling.

GRADE: C-
Twilight was released by Summit Entertainment on November 21, 2008 and was directed by Catherine Hardwicke. The MPAA has rated it PG-13 for some violence and a scene of sensuality. The cast includes Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart, Elizabeth Reaser, Nikki Reed, Anna Kendrick, Michael Welch, Rachelle Lefevre , Peter Facinelli, Taylor Lautner, Cam Gigandet, Jackson Rathbone, Kellan Lutz, Ashley Greene and Billy Burke.

For more information on this film including pictures, trailers and a detailed synopsis click here.

Related post categories: Movie News, Movie Reviews, Reviews :

Click Here to add an
Avatar to Your Account
Post #1
Gravatar

Oh God.

The Twi-hards are not going to be able to handle this.

Honestly, I could tell from the Trailers that the special effects looked horrible. I just don't understand why Director's have such a hard time with Vampire movies. Maybe I haven't seen a good one yet.

Is it bad that I still want to see this though? I need to be sure that it is as awkward and cheesy as it sounds!

- Phobia
( November 20th, 2008 | 6:45 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #2
Gravatar

Does anyone realize that Twilight only had a $35 million budget? They could only do so much, and if this move does as well as everyone hopes the sequels will obviously be given a much larger budget. Also, I think all the guys need to understand that this story line is very epic and romatic for girls, that is where the meat of the movie is at. So guys, seriously, lay off the special effects and your dissappintment of a moral vampire. You should all take some pointers from the way Edward treats Bella.

- Amanda
( November 20th, 2008 | 8:57 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #3
Gravatar

@Amanda:
I have not read the books, I admit. But please cease and desist with making blanket generalizations and accusations which no sane being would ever make. Happy Thanksgiving! :)

- Grumpy
( November 20th, 2008 | 9:59 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #4
Gravatar

@Amanda: I totally agree with Amanda. The budget is very low for a film that has gotten this much hype and promotion. Limited funds equals limited resources.
And, it is a forbidden love with a twist…twist being that the boy could kill the girl. Imagine Romeo and Juliet and replace the fueding families with she's alive and smells good and he's would love to have her for dinner but chooses not to. And I must admit that when I first saw the trailer I was like, "whatever…another vampire movie" but then I read the books realized that it is not the same concept of crypts and burning up in the sunlight. It's unique.

- Christina
( November 20th, 2008 | 10:05 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #5
Gravatar

@Grumpy: And to you…I have seen such qualities in real life that the character Edward possess. It's a rare breed these days, but gentlemen do still exist. And Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

- Christina
( November 20th, 2008 | 10:08 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #6
Gravatar

@Grumpy:

I wasn't trying to place every guy under that generalization but 95% of the guys I have come across are having a very hard time understanding the hype of this series and why it has captured so many girls. I am simply pointing out that just because it doesn't have the effects and action expected from a vampire move is no reason to bash it. Romance is a big deal to girls, it's how we're wired, so it would help the guys out a lot to try and understand this and not give us all such a hard time. Happy Thanksgiving to you also :)

- Amanda
( November 20th, 2008 | 10:13 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #7
Gravatar

On a separate note: Brad, I think you did a good job of being as unbiased as a male possibly can be when approaching this film. Anyone who is offended by this review is likely reading between the lines and missing the legitimacy of your arguments against it, as well as the slight praise you do give it. Both my sisters are very into the books and my girlfriend at least somewhat likes them, so I'm sure my viewing of it will be inevitable. Good to have proper prepping :)

- Grumpy
( November 20th, 2008 | 10:28 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #8
Gravatar

One thing you all have to realize is some people will judge the film based on its CGI and acting because that's what most people do esp if they are not diehard fans of the books and just curious about the film. So I think what brad was getting at is this is JUST for the diehard fans and maybe some casual fans as well. It seems to me that this movie was kinda thrown together and that's a shame sure it will make a lot of money but if the film isn't that good not many people will be coming back for the second

- Josh
( November 20th, 2008 | 10:42 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #9
Gravatar

I think the fans should let non-fans give their opinions…reading the book has nothing to do with watching the film…the film should have the same effect the book would, if we see horrible acting and bad special effects we're judging it on that fact….we can't invest in a 2 hour movie if looks boring and dull, no matter how good the "books" are….I'm in my 20's and a guy, this movie isn't marketed for me and I understand that….the one thing the studio forgot is that young males is another demographic of movie goers and they are ignored….

for a vampire film this "looks" really weak… we have many vampire films in the past such as Lost Boys or Interview with a Vampire…which were made so well, to make a film about PG vampires who can walk around in the daylight is hard enough to swallow…now add the poor special effects and acting…then you have more reasons non-fans will avoid the film…

someone used the defense of the budget, I think it's more the director had no experience with a genre type movie…along with a small studio trying to take on a big project…that being said they should have noticed the bad quality of special effects and either get more money or try to re-shoot without certain effects shots….it will make a lot of money from fans alone but there will most likely be a small group of them who are going to be turned off to the "movies"…

- Christopher Marc
( November 20th, 2008 | 11:29 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #10
Gravatar

I think there's certainly a double standard here. My girlfriend endured weeks of hype leading up to The Dark Knight, without uttering a single negative word about my enthusiasm for the movie. She has not read Twilight, and has no interest in seeing the movie, but if she happened to be as excited about it as I was to see TDK, then I would support her interest in it.

However, I think the big issue guys have about the Twilight craze is the matter of the quality of the material involved. Although the megafans won't ever admit it, the books are pretty poorly written, and if the critics are to be believed, the movie is subpar as well. At the very least, male geeks can take comfort in the fact that their love is directed at genuinely good material.

- BrokenHelix79
( November 20th, 2008 | 12:28 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #11
Gravatar

@Christopher Marc:

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I havn't seen it yet but am slightly dissappointed that it's not on the level of Harry Potter. I am hoping that it will get there though. The effects in the first HP movies are no where near as good as the ones in the most recent films. Though technology has improved since the first one was made. I still think the budget had a lot to do with how everyting panned out. All in All I am a fan so as long as it sticks to the main parts of the plot I can handle the rest.

- Amanda
( November 20th, 2008 | 12:29 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #12
Gravatar

I am female, but that doesn't mean I'm instantly dazzled by some "epic" Romeo and Juliet story. All in all, the effects still suck. I'd have to agree, it looks like a tv special.

I read the first three books, I liked them to some extent.

Not all girls think that Twilight is the answer to their romantic prayers.

- Phobia
( November 20th, 2008 | 12:40 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #13
Gravatar

See, the one thing I thought Twilight might have going for it over Serenity that might lead to its redemption was the fact that, while Serenity relied too heavily on backstory from the TV show to be accessible to newbies, Twilight was starting from the beginning of the story and wouldn't have that problem. Kind of sad that it does anyway. It's amusing to watch history repeat itself…

I may have to watch this movie just to see what all the fuss is about, but there's no way in hell I'd pay to do so. I'm thinking I'll wait until there's a Rifftrax available for it. That's how I got through Daredevil and didn't feel like I'd just wasted two hours of my life. Watching it at home also spares me the pain of trying to get through it sober. It seems like great drinking game material.

- aerinpegadrak
( November 20th, 2008 | 1:24 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #14
Gravatar

I already see the movie and i totally agree! though i think the fans will see this movie once and again no matter what they think the first time they watch it, me for example i'm seeing it again tonight at 10 pm (here in México the movie was released earlier)

- Ana Twilighter
( November 20th, 2008 | 1:27 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #15
Gravatar

uh oh. what if this movie outgrosses TDK for opening day? the world will end before we all get a chance to see watchmen.

- RIPsquishy
( November 20th, 2008 | 2:45 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #16
Gravatar

I really and deeply hope that the movie bombs, so there would be no sequels and as a result this fangirls would shut the hell up, since the books are over know. Jeeeez, I cant go anywhere without seeing that meaningless book covers in people's hands…

- Siamak Frey
( November 20th, 2008 | 2:56 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #17
Gravatar

@Siamak Frey:

Well considering 389 showings are already sold out and it is #20 on movietickets.com's most pre-sales of all time I don't think you are going to get your wish….sorry, you're just going to have to deal.

- Bob
( November 20th, 2008 | 3:20 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #18
Gravatar

@Bob: The latest book sold 1.3 million copies on opening day in early August. It has sold 2.7 million copies in total of its initial 3.7 million print run. I think that tomorrow's ticket sales–not sales for the whole weekend, but just for Friday–are going to account for at least 30-40% of final grosses, quite possibly much more. Considering that next week we have an epic romance, a romantic comedy, and an action film opening, all of which appeal to Twilight's target demographic (not to mention a film with gigantic Oscar buzz), it's going to plummet dramatically in its second week and won't really recover as competition gets stiff through the holidays.

Twilight is also longer than its two main contenders, two hours versus an hour and a half from Bolt and Quantum of Solace. So for every five showings of Twilight, there are six each of the other two movies, both of which are much better marketed, have much broader appeal, and are much better reviewed.

Now, I don't think that Twilight is going to be a box office failure. I think that, for a movie from a small and relatively new studio that relied mostly on word-of-mouth marketing, it's actually going to do quite well. But to expect it to do the same kind of money as something like Harry Potter is just silly.

- aerinpegadrak
( November 20th, 2008 | 3:56 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #19
Gravatar

I can't hold it in any longer. I don't wanna see the film and can't help but say F**K YOU TWILIGHT!! (that felt good)

- adu
( November 20th, 2008 | 4:23 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #20
Gravatar

@aerinpegadrak:

Your theory with the trend of book sales paralelled with ticket sales may be correct except one thing. With book sales you are obviously only going to buy one book, that is not the case with movie sales. Twilighters are most likely going to see the movie probably on an average of three times. Also take into account that there are going to be a lot of curious people who are not readers but want to see what all the hype has been about, even if the movie doesn't live up to it.

Oh and for the record I never compared it to Harry Potter, that is on a completely different level. The demograpgic is much broader thanTwilight.

- Bob
( November 20th, 2008 | 4:55 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #21
Gravatar

@Bob: You didn't make the Harry Potter comparison, but it's been made in several other places. As far as repeat viewings, I can't help but think of all the Star Wars fans who bought tickets to multiple different showings of The Phantom Menace in presale, then threw them away in disgust after seeing the first show… I think there will be a repeat market, but it's going to get severely cut into as the holidays continue and more and more movies targeted at teens are released. But the eventual repeat viewings are likely to have more of a long term effect than to help it on opening weekend.

My point with the book sales is to illustrate that the movie caters pretty exclusively to its existing fan base, and that the fan base has proven to be early adopters. The vast majority of people interested in seeing this movie will do so in the next three days.

I still contend that the hype isn't nearly as loud as we think it is. As I've said before, until I started poking around looking for news about Watchmen, I'd heard very, very little about this movie. And while the movie business and other industries peddling escapism boom in economic recessions (the Golden Age of Hollywood was during the Great Depression, after all), I'm not so sure that in this economy, people are going to be spending money just to satisfy their curiosity. Personally, I may eventually end up watching the movie out of morbid curiosity, but I'm sure as hell not going to waste $10 on it.

- aerinpegadrak
( November 20th, 2008 | 5:46 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #22
Gravatar

i read all the books and saw the movie tonight. i was extremely disappointed. it was coated with cheese. and it was funny. the book written by stephanie meyers was not meant for comedy. it was written as a teen romance. i was expecting something much better. it was a hige let down.

- Brandi
( November 21st, 2008 | 3:28 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #23
Gravatar

So, I'm literally writing this after coming back from midnight showing in Cali…I have never been so disapppointed in a book turn movie since Ella Enchanted which is one of my all time favorite children's book. I love the Twilight book series yet this movie was a disaster!!! The movie was filled of bad acting–seriously, it was worse than a REALLY bad Lifetime movie…

I'm sorry but no amount of someone telling me the small budget is the going to change the fact that the movie sucked big time! The plot was sooo different from the book that there was HUGE holes which meant if you hadn't read the book you wouldnt have known what the heck was happening! The director should have taken the time to get the small details right like Bella's prom dress or the color of their kitchen or how the Cullen family was driving a Volvo sedan instead of the multiple of expensive cars that weren't mentioned until way later into the book….these small details should have been addressed because they would have made a world of difference for the sincere fanpeople of Meyers. How could Meyers have felt this movie satisfied her artistic intentions for her book????

I think ulitmately the biggest mistake made by the director and/or person who adapted the book to a movie is the complete disregard of the sense of time in the book….in the movie the seasons don't change…its remains fall the entire movie….so it makes is seem Bella fell head over heels and in life comsuming love with Edward in a blink of an eye….there's so many more dissappointing and frustrating comments that should be made but I'm tired after being up since 9am and going all day till now….one world to sum it all up: CRAP!!!

- Caitlin
( November 21st, 2008 | 5:27 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #24
Gravatar

I saw twilight last night and I honestly fell asleep. The acting was HORRIBLE, the time setting was off and unrealistic, they left out a lot of details, where events took place in the book they were way off in the movie (example: where the boys asked bella to the prom.) Maybe I was expecting too much….the book was amazing, I couldnt put it down, but the movie was a train wreck!!! I will not be buying the movie when it comes out to DVD. What a disappointment!!!!

Grade: F

- Rush
( November 21st, 2008 | 9:42 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #25
Gravatar

I thought the movie was so cheesy and cheaply done, honestly they had a great book to work with and didn't put the time and effort into the movie. I think the movie should be redone like the way the Hulk was. Lets have a drama not as much comedy next time. Where was the love story… she goes on one date and bam loves him the movie didn't show enuf leading up to the romance and the action could have been done a lot better.

- ninney
( November 21st, 2008 | 2:11 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #26
Gravatar

@Amanda:
yea i understand that they ONLY had 35mil but either
for a little more they couldve made it amazing and there would have been no doubts or second guesses. Or waited to have a better budget I would have gladly waited if it meant it was gonna be good, or stuck to the book whats so hard with sticking to the book, instead they flew scenes around.
and money doesnt explain the lack of info. ok i read the book, and am trying really hard to pretend i didnt see the movie,
what did they save money by switching the scenes around? and did they save money by only having 20 lines spoken throughout the entire movie?
Mostly its just that this movie was made a HUGE deal of and i partook in that, excited to see my imagination brought to life, and dissapointment was all i felt yea Rob was hot and yea they had really good actors but i felt like instead of them going all the way they kinda settled for half ass.
This was supposed to be the ultimate fight for love she was supposed to be madly in love with and he was supposed want her more than anything but they didnt express that at all in the movie. because they left out the little things like his touching her cheek and her telling him i love you….did they save money leaving those out?
I love the books and i continue to love them, but if they do make New Moon a movie, i really hope they make it amazing because theres no such thing as it being too good.

- Kirsitn
( November 21st, 2008 | 2:38 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #27
Gravatar

honestly i have to say i liked the trailers better than the movie, the trailer had every aspect of the movie crammed together in two minutes, yet the actual movie had no more detail than the trailers….

- Kirsitn
( November 21st, 2008 | 2:48 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #28
Gravatar

Alright, I am a huge Twilight fan. Yet I will admit there are things that were in this movie that I felt lacked the feelings in the book. Don't get me wrong – I still did like this movie a ton. The shots were great and I could feel the chemistry between the two which was a huge thing.
Many have stated about the whole CGI effect…yeah it wasn't the greatest, but this wasn't suppose to be an action movie. And yes I will play the whole not enough money on budget card since I actually did read the whole making of the movie to see what they could and couldn't do. Summit is new compared to others and more independent, but now with this movie and with all the hype, and all of the fans they will become big. That equals more money for the sequels which means better CGI effects and action. The next three movies are going to need more special effects, so it's a good thing the first one was just based on romance and suspense.
The one thing that I felt was left out that shouldn't have been was some of the developing of the characters, but the Cullens for instance, don't really become developed until later books. I did love how the movie brought out Bella's father more – he carried a great personality that wasn't as exposed in the first book.
Now the whole experiencing the movie was crap because all the little girls who are in love with the character would scream each time Robert entered the screen. That distracted me a ton, so I do hope to see it again when there isn't so much hype of someone showing up on screen.
I'm glad that the movie did have more comedy than the book – if they couldn't suffice for the budget on CGI, the humor made me content. Yes some of it was cheesy, but funny either way.
I do agree with outsiders being lost in the dark in some parts…which I feel isn't that fair to them. I don't know what they could have done to develop more because it was already two hours long. And I also agree with wishing that the time frame was the same as the book, but with the fact of making the movie in just a few months and probably not having the money to go to Alaska or Canada for the winter scenes I feel held that up.
The actors did very well portraying their characters…I'm huge on acting – no it wasn't the greatest, but if they can portray their characters in the book then great. Other than the story, book to movie needs that.
Oh and many keep talking about Edward being in so many shots and throughout most of the movie and yadda…this movie is through Bella's eyes. Bella pretty much tells the story – it doesn't go back and forth through the characters. I think the director and script writer did well on making sure the audience understood that because, well Bella was narrating in some spots in the movie – especially the beginning.
The whole comparing this movie with other vampire movies…yeah not good because this isn't a vampire movie. Yes it has vampires in it, but it's a romance and the thrill of being in love with someone that you shouldn't be. It is like Romeo and Juliet – forbidden love.
Since I have read the book, I unfortunately compare the movie to book instantly, when in fact they both have different responsibilities. With a book, it could take a few pages to describe a setting, while in a movie you get it in a frame.
So with that said, I feel that the other three movies will actually be better as a movie itself. They will have more visuals and CGI effects so should keep the outsiders who haven't read the book enjoying it. Plus, most of the characters will become more developed that were in the first, since Bella begins to spend some more time with them.
When I saw Lord of the Rings (I didn't read the books) I didn't like it…the scenery was phenomenal (as it is in Twilight) and the shots of it too. However, I was bored. But when the other movies came out I gave them a shot and they were better. I especially enjoy the third – my guess is because there was more to see. In movies, people expect to see a ton of visuals to keep them content, which is why I feel many didn't really care so much for Twilight, but will for the upcoming sequels.
By the way, everyone knows and always says the books are better than the movies, so if you really want to fill in the blanks go get the books. And I don't really remember who said that they were poorly written, but you have got to be kidding me! If I can see descriptive details in my mind on characters and scenary – can actually picture them, how can it be poorly written? The more descriptive the better readers can picture what is in the authors mind. Also if the story is good (which it is fantastic) who really cares as long as you understand it?
Either way, Twilight was a little disappointing with all of the hype it had, but I'm not worried about the sequels, they will be better.

- Nicole
( November 21st, 2008 | 10:33 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #29
Gravatar

The movie sucked…I actually saw this movie twice today…and both times it was awful. The second time was to take my niece who begged me to take her…Everything from the horrible background music, to the cheesy acting of the characters, Kristen was the worst….the most disappointing part of the movie was that it all felt so rushed.

Catherine Hardwicke focused too much on the other characters in the book that the movie took away the most important element from the books and that was the extremely passionate relationship that Bella had developed with Edward. The chemistry was definitely not there between the two main characters. And WHAT WAS UP WITH THE WAITRESS IN THE RESTAURANT, THE BEEHIVE WAS A LITTLE TOO MUCH…was that supposed to be a joke?

If the director had only read the books she could have directed the cast in a way that would have shown the intensity of the love between the characters, which is what mainly drew all this hype. The books are so filled with details that it's almost impossible to put them down. I can't believe that Stephenie Meyer would have given her approval and then to have made a cameo in the film. YIKES!

If there should happen to be another movie or movies, They should redo some things. Keep Robert Pattinson and the rest of the vampires, Esme was so pretty, fire the background music score guy and the makeup people, get a different director and definitely cast a different Bella, she was so uttterly common and not a very good actress. That hospital scene was the worst, I thought she was gonna combust.

The only good part of this movie was the baseball scene and it was short, that is until Kristen overdid her part by buckeling herself into the seat.

The soundtrack however is really good, considering…

- matymeg02
( November 22nd, 2008 | 2:44 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #30
Gravatar

I think this movie was pretty fantastic, but then again I've read the books a couple of times. I'm sure with all the rough critic this movie is getting, and hopefully great sales in th box office the next movie will do soo much better and put in as much detail as possible.
And yeah, this movie did leave out some details, but if they honestly put in every single detail like the color of the dress or kitchen color ect, the movie would have been too long.

- jessy
( November 22nd, 2008 | 10:59 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #31
Gravatar

I enjoyed the movie. I already knew that it wasn't going to exactly follow the book, and that the special effects were not going to be state of the art. I had no problem with the casting, but I thought they could have developed the other Cullens more. Bella is supposed to be ordinary, not beautiful, and I thought Kristen Stewart portrayed her well. She showed her klutziness without going overboard. I'm glad they included her mother more, as that made her decision to go to the ballet studio more understandable. The biggest problem I had with it was the timing was rushed. The events in the book happened over a period of months, and in the movie it seemed like days. I also missed not having Alice's backstory included. Hopefully, future movies will have more depth. I actually liked the touches of humor.

- dsolo
( November 22nd, 2008 | 1:10 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #32
Gravatar

@Nicole:

I agree with you on pretty much everthing, thank you for posting something that isn't one extreme or the other. You seemed to have done your reseach. I enjoyed the movie but am definately looking for to the sequel with a bigger budget and having catherine learn from her mistakes.

For everyone who hated Twilight I encourage you to atleast give the next one a chance, the story will also be more appealing to the male audience.

- Breea
( November 22nd, 2008 | 2:38 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #33
Gravatar

@Breea:
Thank you all i think is that they literally shoulve had the book in front of them at ALL times directing straight from it.
i just dont understand why they couldnt have followed the book?!
hmm well i agree i will definately most definately look forward to a sequel…..because i hope they learn from their mistakes and instead of adding new (??) stuff to put in things that are influencial and are actually in the book
afterall this was based on the book right??
haha well yea
Im done with it what's done is done and cant be taken back. so lets hope for the future shall we?

- Kirsitn
( November 22nd, 2008 | 7:26 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #34
Gravatar

The movie was terrible. I was EXTREMELY disappointed. Acting and side effects were horrible. I wish they would have taken their time and looked for the goos actors to play these rolls.

- Allyson
( November 22nd, 2008 | 10:13 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #35
Gravatar

I enjoyed The movie. No it wasnt better than the book, but what movie is ever better than the book? I plan on watching Twilight again.I loved how Robert Pattison played the role of Edward Cullen. The characters Alice and Jasper Were good too. they did their homework. I feel like the the director nailed forbidden love.

- rikitiki
( November 23rd, 2008 | 1:57 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #36
Gravatar

Don't view all the twi-hards as bubbling fifteen and sixteen year old girls who have fallen in love with Edward Cullen. I am sixteen, and read all the books, but I saw the movie and was highly disappointed. Stewart and Pattinson's sad attempts at a romance were pathetic to watch, the plot wasn't brought forward, and two hours is not enough time to capture the love between the two.

Point blank,
It was terrible.

- Diana H.
( November 23rd, 2008 | 10:31 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #37
Gravatar

You know what I find hilarious? That all these reviews I see are by men. This movie is not meant for men; the series is not meant for men. Yet, men seem to be the ones writing all the reviews.

Where are the girls?? Certainly, Brad, you must know one or two. Just approach one, be slow, though, and keep your hands out of your pockets, and ask her what SHE thought of the movie. Chances are she's not as uptight as you. I know there were no explosions in Twilight, but sometimes, that's ok, Brad. Really.

What did everybody expect with a $37M budget? It's essentially an independent film being judged alongside the big boys, the blockbusters. It's the little engine that could. GIVE IT A BREAK!

- Michelle
( November 23rd, 2008 | 2:11 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #38
Gravatar

For those who mentioned their qualms about the $37 million budget (and I'm sure the budget for Twilight used a lot of money for shooting on location & getting book rights instead of special effects & that stuff), "Cloverfield" (sans the awesome viral marketing stuff) cost $25 million. Seriously, it looks leagues better than that ass-y "10,000 B.C." from this year & with a quarter of the budget. Again, "Cloverfield" is a bit hard to compare to, since most of the stuff was done on a soundstage and there wasn't really an epic script to write or anything, but still. It's about creative use of your money,not just about how much money yo u have. So basically, "Twilight" could've done better than it's "Bad Charmed Episode" esque- graphics.

I didn't read the books, & I'm a 19 year old male, but I did find the movie entertaining. There were some corny parts and it was definitely something for the fans only, but sometimes that stuff is ok by me, as long as there's some entertainment value to the film itself. And, for me, there was.

- Vince
( November 23rd, 2008 | 2:45 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #39
Gravatar

CA Twilight Movie Review
We dressed up, did our makeup and got in line with electrical excitement in waiting sighs to be Bella. Geeky girls, jock girls, pretty girls, middle school and middle aged, all waiting in silent, tortured exhales waiting to see Edward, to see Jacob. In our forced diffused excitement waiting to allow the onslaught of overcharged emotions to flow out, to smile and see our dreams become reality. There were girls talismaned in Rosaline pendants and Edward shirts and some in both. But there was no shame and no embarrassment as the Border’s party was discussed, the soundtrack, the free remix of Bella’s lullaby on the Harkins Theater Website. The frustrations with the series end. Some had gone as far scouring the internet for pieces of the series and informed others of the online chapter from Edward’s point of view. We all understood, we all had read the books in a week; we had jealously guarded our Forks, which belonged to us alone. The theater devoid of testosterone lent itself to a sense of community as girls packed in close to one another, excited for the moments with Edward. The theater was silent, silent of wrappers as we all held our breath waiting. When Jacob came on the screen, I blushed and actually felt shy to look at him. When Edward came on the screen there were audible gasps and giggles and everyone repositioned themselves in enthusiasm. When Edward went to kiss Bella for the first time, the electricity in the air was palatable and the moment of buildup was excruciating as our hearts pounded in our chests, there was a guttural “har har” giggle from a junior high girl, and other giggles, and I smiled to myself, acknowledging that I felt the same way, and I wished I had an Edward shirt or a Rosaline pendent to hold on to, to satisfy my craving for more adventures, now that the thundering pulse of pages had finally run out and I was left with reading Host or rereading the series. I felt silly for allowing myself this intoxicating indulgence in the beginning of my graduate school career, but I was not the only one numbed from reality with the pallid, frozen desire that fixated on these characters. There was talk in the theater of how Edward was also in Harry Potter, but it was not Edward the actor we wanted, it was Edward the character and many would watch that film again in hopes of glimpses of Edward; in hopes of reliving those moments of being Bella. We all now wait in twilight, intoxicated by the sweet cool breath that escapes those pages that we read quickly with thirst, but carefully to avoid paper cuts, for our next fix from Stephanie Meyers as she creates her next world.

- megan
( November 24th, 2008 | 11:10 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #40
Gravatar

OMG TWILIGHT is the best movie I've ever seen, I loved it. I mean some parts could have been closer to the book like Eric is most def not japanesse and you know… wheres lauren? There was also 2 dances in the book but it still turned out to be a rlly great and awesome movie. One of the best Ive ever seen. The book Twilight is the best book ive ever read..lol. The Edward was cute but not like it described in the book but jasper, emmint, and jacob were SEXY, and Jacob or Taylor Lautner was rlly HOTT even with the wig. Once again I loved the movie… U guys who didnt like it are RETARDED, because it was amaizing.

- felicia
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:32 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #41
Gravatar

TWILIGTH WAS ALSOME BUT THE BOOK WAS BETTER I KNOW THE NEXT ONE WILL BE EVEN BETTER.

- Tom
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:47 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #42
Gravatar

Well i thought it was pretty great. it could have been a lil closer to the book tho. but it was still a really good movie. definally would go see it again.

- Brayden
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:49 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #43
Gravatar

Taylor lautner did an excellent job as Jacob. Only thing i did not like was the wig but he was still HOTT.

- felicia
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:50 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #44
Gravatar

I enjoyed the movie and i would go see it again. keep up the great work actors and actresses who appeared in the movie Twilight. AND i think Bella did a really great job in the movie. I mean I dont see you in the movie do I?

- Matt
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:53 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #45
Gravatar

ONE word: GREAT..

I would definally go see it again.

- Joanna
( November 24th, 2008 | 2:55 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #46
Gravatar

I haven't read these books but I think when this movie comes out on DVD I may get my roller derby team together and make a drinking game out of it. That sounds pretty awesome.

- Julie
( November 24th, 2008 | 4:10 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #47
Gravatar

@Kirsitn:

oh my god, i totally know what you mean….

did they forget that bella was constantly blushing? what the hell was with the whole adding scenes like the green house and when they went off of school grounds into the forest? what the hell happened to the meadow scene? there was so much that was left out and so much that was added for no reason. they should have stuck with the book..whats so hard about that. the one thing i did like that they added was the fight scene.
i knew i was in for disappointment when i saw the trailers and did hours of research because i am i huge fan of the books i just didn't expect it to be that bad. i found myself literally shaking my head trying to get it out and telling myself that i just wanted to see the movie to see it, not because it was supposed to be part of this epic series. my boyfriend even said that he felt bad for me because i was excited about the movie…he made the same reference as someone said in another comment about the dark knight.
i hope that for the new moon and eclipse they make them 3 hours long because they tried to stuff some much info in just two hours and it really only made sense to me because i read the books.
the actors…wow. seriously, i thought kristen stewart was having a spaz attack or something..she just couldn't get anything out. rob pattinson was so angry the whole friggen time and the other vampires had like 2 lines each…i couldn't even take it. the guy that played charlie was great. he saved the movie…with the few scenes he had…with his sarcastic tone and dry humor.i was a little upset and agree with most of the reviews on here. i just hope the next movies are not as bad, are longer, and have a much more realistic budget to make a great movie. the book deserve at least that. i also hope that they cut the cheesy cornyness of it and stick with the book…and get kristen acting lessons or speech lessons.

im going to see it again i think and i am going to go into it knowing that its not the best thing ever, but i am hoping that i will like it better when i see it knowing how much it is not like the book….ah. that feels better.

- ange.
( November 25th, 2008 | 9:02 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #48
Gravatar

I liked the movie and the books. I liked the book, Vrakluna:Origin of the Vampire better. It was more adult romance and definitely had blood in it. Shouldn't vampires actually feed on blood? I have an extra copy, hit me up or you can go to Amazon. The author's name is Benjamin G. King.

- Lisa Lowry
( November 26th, 2008 | 9:49 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #49
Gravatar

are you mad?? seriously?? If you think Twilight is bad you are mad. >or very stuck up!!I am one of the 17 millionpoint blank.

- leah
( November 28th, 2008 | 11:08 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #50
Gravatar

I have not read the books, but this movie was engaging and different from other movies of the same theme; it is this aspect that holds its appeal. The reticence of Bella throughout the movie created a tension on its own, so I disagree with another critique who thought she lacked emotion on screen. I thought it added a frustration level that got slightly released in Bella when Edward kissed her, and then the tension transferred to Edward knowing he must resist his blood-thirsty tendencies with his beloved. I think other reviewers missed this complexity. Additionally, Bella made a statement during the movie that she was somewhat like her father, who was emotionally unavailable, so it makes sense for Bella to be less dramatic as a character. She was incredibly reserved, which had to match Edwards need to hold back for the couple to work well together.

The other things I liked about “Twilight” was the special effects of Bella riding on Edward’s back running up trees at terrific speeds, and the shimmering translucent skin when Edward showed Bella his skin in the sunlight. That was a marvelous effect! I was left wondering why Edward could not read Bella’s mind. All-in-all I liked this film very much and I was engaged in it. I give “Twilight” a A-.

- Joy Fox
( November 30th, 2008 | 3:15 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #51
Gravatar

Before going to the movie I had not read the books. I was pretty apprehensive about seeing the movie, because I had heard mixed opinions and because of all the girly overhype. However, overall, I was pleasantly surprised with the movie. Parts were poorly done, comical when they weren't meant to be and the effects were pretty bad… I laughed out loud when they were climbing the tree. I was surprised at the somewhat blandness of the culllens… they weren't nearly as attractive as I had anticipated with all of the Cullen love I had heard, however after watching the characters they certainly grew on me. I thought the acting was good and could see the chemistry between Bella and Edward come to life. Even though I had not read the book, I thought the story was easy enough to follow. After watching the movie I was so drawn into the story alone that I purchased and read the book in two days (yes it is poorly written, but the story is captivating and addictive… that's all that really matters). After reading the book I standby the movie, I don't think very many keypoints were left out. Overall I wouldn't say that Twilight was the best movie or book of all time but both are certainly worth seeing and reading. It is a great love/adventure story that will suck you right in.
I'd give it a B+

- Amy
( December 1st, 2008 | 8:05 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #52
Gravatar

@ange.:
Thanks i just think that no matter what we're gonna like it.
It was what we waited so long for and anticipated and It's TWILIGHT so of course theres that little part of us that wants to like it and will, so just hope for the next ones right?

- Kirsitn
( December 2nd, 2008 | 5:58 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #53
Gravatar

@Kirsitn:

yeah, i guess thats all you can do..i heard a rumor that cathrine isn't going to be directing the next movie? anyone have news?

- ange.
( December 2nd, 2008 | 7:31 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #54
Gravatar

@ange.:
Yea she is going to be the director….i just hope they take the fans criticism well cuz we're the ones that matter.
goto IMDB.com
u can see Twilight and New moon information….not much on New Moon but yea.

- kirstin
( December 2nd, 2008 | 11:19 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #55
Gravatar

=!ok i am the president of the twilight fanclub at my school and we thought it was going to be the best movie ever since we were such great fans of the book. we went to the midnight showing in our town in 11/21/08 and we got out of the theature very dissapointed. First of all they left way to much stuff out and changed to much too. Secondly the acting wasnt that great. and thirdly the graphics were kind of lame. the part where edward goes in the sunlight and starts to "shimmer" put me apart from the whole movie and made me laugh. And i dont recall james having a video camera in the ballet studio telling bella to tell edward to avenge her. THAT WASN'T IN THE BOOK! The only reason they're makin a lot of money at the box office is because people already bought their tickets and thought it was going to be just like the visions in their head.and thats what it should be like. If they read the book then they should make the movie how they saw it and how the readers saw it. I am still looking foward to seeing new moon, eclips, and breaking dawn, but the director needs to make it seem more real. The depression could really help Kristen Brake from her shell in being an actress. ( not that she's not good now anyways.) and jacob and mike need to be sweeter in the next movie because they are both trying to get with Bella. Sorry but twilight just didnt do it for me.

- Amber
( December 3rd, 2008 | 4:29 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #56
Gravatar

@Kirsitn: I hope that the next one will be good. Hi Im Amber. In the last movie i wanted so badly to like it like u said because it was twilight but i couldnt, they should have put a little more effort into it. The graphics werent that good. But i still kinda liked it. plz right back.

- Amber
( December 3rd, 2008 | 4:32 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #57
Gravatar

@Amanda: I have not read the books, and i totally followed it! and i LOVED it!! i saw it twice in one weekend. I think that people can follow it just like you can follow Harry Potter without reading the books!! and i also think that the $35 million was a little low to have amazing special effects, and they will improve with teh new movies. But i thought it was Amazing!

- Kyndra
( December 3rd, 2008 | 5:10 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #58
Gravatar

@Amber:
hahaha yea it was twilight after all, but i think my problem was that i liked the most little things in the book and like specific things i was looking for like him humming the lullaby and her blushing and holding hands and like little things like that, but what i realized is that just because they didnt add those specific things, me myself, was looking for…didn't make it a bad movie, it just made it not what I expected…ya know…..hahaha but they made big bucks off of it, and they already started New Moon and so I think that i will be waaaaaay better….hopefully they'll take our criticism…and use it.
and umm I LOVED the actors all of them i thought – no matter what others say – That they were AMAZING!!! hahaha
but yea I'm kirstin….hahaha

- Kirsitn
( December 8th, 2008 | 6:23 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #59
Gravatar

@Amber: the video camera part waS in the book thats how Alice discovered who she was she watched it

- Kirsitn
( December 18th, 2008 | 12:10 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #60
Gravatar

I disagree

I found that many people that did not read the book loved the movie and the people who did read the book didn't like the movie at all. It didn't live up to the book.

- Natasha
( February 4th, 2009 | 10:37 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #61
Gravatar

@Christina: This movie is not unique, I could tell u several movies just like this, and DONT compare Meyers to Shakespeare

LIST OF MEDIA CONTAINING SAME PLOT
1.angel
2. Buffy the Vampire slayer( which later stars Angel)
i cud go on but u fans will think im an a**hole when u read this in my opinion Meyers watched too many Angel movies

- walterkovacs
( May 29th, 2009 | 1:06 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #62
Gravatar

@felicia: said the retarded girl

- walterkovacs
( May 29th, 2009 | 1:09 am )
Reply to this comment
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Leave Your Feedback
(required)
(will not be shown) (required)
DON'T WANT YOUR COMMENT DELETED?
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
Follow Us On Twitter!
RSS Email
Latest Posts
Latest Video
The Last Airbender ~ Super Bowl TV Spot
New Pictures
Friend RopeofSilicon on Netflix!