Sunday, November 30, 2008

Twilight... We are definitely in an age of decline.



I never read the “Twilight” books by Stephanie Meyers. For all I know, they might be good enough to appease the burgeoning sexual desires of a pubescent girl, but the film version by Catherine Hardwicke (of “Thirteen” and “Lords of Dogtown” fame) is anything but. Instead of an “erotic delight” as promised by a “Twilight” movie poster outside the cinema, I spent most of my time stifling my “delight” (laughter) with my coat, sniggering as painfully awkward lines were thrown around and the film effects attempting to showcase a vampire’s speed looked like the cursor trail I had on my Windows 95 computer. Teen cult sensation film? Yeah, right.

The synopsis of the movie is so dreadfully simple it should deter any individual with a real-brain on their shoulders from watching it (my excuse was that I wanted to see how horrendous this production can be). A seventeen year old Bella Swan (Kristin Stewart) moves to Forks, a town in the middle of nowhere, where the sun don’t shine and the rain don’t stop, to live with her father (Billy Burke). She encounters Edward (prep yourselves for the clichéd character construction), who is problematic and something of a mysterious James Dean, and also (wait for it… wait for it…) a vampire! Against all odds, they fall in love (or lust?), him because of the irresistibility of her blood and her because she is just plain-old daft. They come together only to be faced with a milieu of problems brought upon by their differences. Oh, the drama!

Obviously, “Twilight” is no episode of “Gossip Girl” when it comes to the theme of teenage sexual attraction. Yet, in comparison to the suave Chuck Bass, who is a mere 17 year old mortal with the innate power to make women bend in his favor, the indestructible Edward the Vampire (Robert Pattinson) is as bland and repulsive as the weird kid who sat behind you in 10th grade Biology and mouth-breathed salaciously whenever the word “reproduction” was mentioned. You would think that a 100 year-old, “teenage” vampire endowed with the powers of strength and hypnosis and glistened like diamonds in the sunlight would be interesting enough as a character. In this movie, not really.

Was it the script? All the lines in the film were corny regurgitations attempting to capture real passion as found in “Romeo and Juliet” or “Gone with the Wind”. But when lines like “and so the lion falls in love with a lamb” and “you are like my own personal brand of heroin” are being served, the saccharine nature of this, oh-so-romantic! film has the ability of turning even Takeru Kobayashi bulimic. Its cloyingly romantic ingredients surprisingly enough does nothing to inspire anything physical, and by the end of the movie, its extremely PG-nature (Bella and the Vampire kissed a grand total of three times), had a few members of the audience in the cinema I was in shouting “JUST GET IT ON ALREADY”.

The acting too, is a disappointing, below par performance for such a big production, and I think the casting should have raised more eyebrows than it did. I remember seeing Kristin Stewart alongside Jodie Foster in “Panic Room” and was under the impression that she was a boy until Foster started screaming that she needed to medicate her daughter. Though Stewart did grow into a decent-looking individual, I am surprised that the production company allowed the weight of this movie to be carried on this girl’s shoulders. She has no physically enamoring quality or charisma about her to warrant such devotion from such a powerful figure.

In spite of that, Stewart did an adequate (but not great) job of portraying a girl yearning for sexual gratification. However, the same thing cannot be said of Robert Pattinson as Edward the Vampire, who was a miscast in every reason possible. Firstly, this guy is not hot. Him as Cedric Diggory before never did convince me. He has a concaved face that looked like he was involved in a childhood freak accident where a horse trampled on his face. Twice. And instead of leaping with excitement every time he came onscreen (an onscreen presence Orlando Bloom has in Lord of the Rings), my heart felt like it was on heavy horse tranquilizers. Secondly, his acting was utterly despicable and unconvincing, as he delivered his lines with no enthusiasm and a wide-eyed look that made him seem like he was constantly on crack. If you were Cory Kennedy you would totally dig him, but I think he is a complete weirdo.

The effects too were appalling. Dream sequences where Bella imagines the Vampire sucking her blood and the passage of time depicting the very, VERY innocent escapades of Bella and the Vampire, where all they did was sit around and talk (how erotic), were very amateur. Throughout the entire production, I felt like I was watching a B-grade film I could easily have seen while surfing TV stations.

I am overwhelmingly disappointed that the director, who chilled me to the bone with her award-winning “Thirteen”, could produce such an awful movie that lacked soul and creativity. This film, in one single stroke, has managed to make the perennially seductive vampire unsexy.

Wait, and what is this I heard that they are making a sequel? A WHOLE SERIES???

Goddamnit.

19 comments:

Tiffany TienNhan said...

This is completely true and hilarious. Nice job.

S. said...

fantastic writing
I laughed out loud at "turning even Takeru Kobayashi bulimic."

Anonymous said...

"He has a concaved face that looked like he was involved in a childhood freak accident where a horse trampled on his face.... he delivered his lines with no enthusiasm and a wide-eyed look that made him seem like he was constantly on crack."

Damn that's vicious (and accurate). I've always thought his face shape was strange (though he looks fine at moments).

yang said...

twilight = high school musical

Anonymous said...

"i don't understand why my girlfriend loves this.
apparently being bleach white to the point it hurts and having a horse trampled face is hot, because every chick in my school is all like "OMG EDWARD AND BELLA IS SO CUTES!!!" (cue screaming fangirls)

i want the time i spent watching that movie back so i can do something more productive, like pick my nose..."

VAMPIRE BASEBALL?!?! WHO WRITES THIS STUFF?!?
somebody get mrs.Meyer a paper bag please

Anonymous said...

This is comletely ridiculous! If you haven't read the book, you dont really know enough to be exact, do you. And abt the "grand total of three times (kissing)" well if your point is if thats bad, dont go see the Notebook! For all I care you can go read your no name books in your sheltered life. And another thing, if Twilight made enough money to bring in from it, there must be a pretty good audience! And oh please, "good enough to appease the burgeoning sexual desires of a pubescent girl"??!! If thats correct then why are so many middle-aged moms reading this series as well? So have fun seeing Bolt, i heard that was a FABULOUS movie for some homeschooler who has no life...
and kristen acting well for "yearning sexual gratification" haha, yea again, go watch the notebook!!
So yes sit there and talk trash abt this series all you want, but at the end of the day, i think stephenie meyer is doing a HECK OF ALOT BETTER THAN YOU ARE! youre pathetic

Anonymous said...

Your completly pathetic.
Robert Pattinson is gorgeous.
Your obviously an ugly lowlife to go round dissing the movie, the books, and the actors.
The movie wasnt some huge production.
It was a low budget film. They did the best they could with the money they had. Just because so many people love it, dosn't mean it was some massive hollywood film.
They can't afford to have big name actors. But they didnt need big named actors. Kristen and Robert were perfect for the parts.
Perhaps if you read the books you'd understand that.
Who cares if the effects wernt the best. If you dont like it.
Dont watch it.
Stop being a low life didding other peoples work.
I'm sure you couldnt do better.
And I'd also be willing to bet that your probly nothing to look at. So quit making personal attacks about peoples looks.
Kristen and Robers are gorgeous.
And they are PERFECT for the roles of bella and edward.
So keep your opinions to yourself.

Anonymous said...

**dissng

Elly said...

HAHA i laugh at the person above "keep your opinons to yourself" they say as they write a whole paragraph of their own...


anywho, this made me laugh. i completely agree with you! =D yay! there are some sane people left in the world!!

Mike said...

I haven't seen the movie. But pointing out that you went to see the film to see just how horrible it was only deters me from taking your review seriously. I'm definitely much more inclined to see "Twilight" now. Of course, I'll have to take a date (testosterone factor) and keep in mind that books based on movies probably have a great degree of subtext that will be lost upon audience members such as you.

I.e., I'll stick to rottentomatoes.com for my movie reviews. Maybe you should have plagiarized something from that corner of the worldwide web.

Katie said...

100% true. I loved "Thirteen", and although thought the Twilight books weren't entirely terrible, the film was awful. Catherine Hardwick, shame on you.

Also, why are all the people 'dissing' your (extremely accurate) review remaining anonymous?

Even if I disagreed with your views, I wouldn't comment calling you an "ugly lowlife" and then telling you to keep your opinions to yourself?

Made me giggle :)

rathy said...

hmmmm
i like twilight movie....
an verry fantastic writing

Anonymous said...

ummm... it's kind of rude to tell someone they look like a horse trampled them. the movie was kind of poor but the books are amazing. goes to show you that you should always read the book before you see the movie. and there are too many movies with sex scenes now days anyway and bella, and edward are not married so they shouldn't have sex in the first place. i am glad that there is going to be a new director for new moon. maybe they can capture the descriptions of the book in a better perspective.

Twilight Saga LOVA said...

dis is just a opinion and in mine, i think dat the movie is FANTASTIC! The books are even better! You should have read the books before watching da movie and den leaving rude insults on da movie your pathetic!!!

Anonymous said...

its really, really a good film.
robbert pattinson was the perfect actor for this movie.kristen stwart too.i sow twilight,new moon and i am waiting for eclips.

Anonymous said...

ou plese this movies are really goods.and he who write that was fntstic.please see your bisnes if you don't like it do not see it if you like see but pleeeeease do not do coment like that right.

wherever robbert kristen i love you.buy

Anonymous said...

can anybody just close your mouth.
go away

Anonymous said...

i agree with you to a point. the acting, especially KStew and RPattz, was terrible and boring. There seemed to be NO chemistry between the two and i never really believed the relationship at all. The script was really bad and the filming worse.

But however, there were aspects of it that i liked. The other casting, such as Peter Facinelli as Carlisle, Ashley Greene as Alice and Rachelle Lefevre as Victoria was spot on. They delivered really well.

I never actually liked the book and it is my least favorite of the series, but im sure with a new director and better script the next three movies will be much better.

Anonymous said...

hmm... so there was not enough sex between the teenagers for you, Kristen Stewart is too ordinary looking and Robert P's face looks like it was trampled by a horse not once but twice?

As evidenced by your comments and standards for which is valued, I would have to add that we live in an age of mean spirited superficiality.