I know there is a huge anti-fan vs fan war going on surrounding this series- so I think instead of doing a “Twilight” and a “New Moon” review, I’ll lump it all in together in here. Since they were a series and the cast didn’t change, I think the quality remains the same.
Let me just state my place before you read on. I am not with the Twilight anti-fans, nor am I with the fans. I’m comfortably standing on the “vs” in that battle. I think the book was a little overwritten, but a good read if you want something simple. I think the movie would have been good if they had a better quality of work from their actors, but I think my issues with the film lie squarely with the director and visual effects supervisor.
That being said- Twilight (meaning the series, not just the first movie) was a disappointment. The acting was severely lacking from the leads, and it isn’t good when the extras do better than everyone else there. I don’t mind the script. I fully understand that it had to be changed to fit into the film, so I’m not going to listen to complaints about how it didn’t match the book. Get over it.
Here is where they get burned: Robert Pattinson is, at best, the quirky friend who comes in and leaves with less than 10 minutes of face time the whole movie. That is where his talent level lies, that is where he should be kept. In Harry Potter he was perfect- he appeared when needed and died without fuss. Twilight was not a good move. Robert Pattinson doesn’t have the ability to make the audience care about his character at all long term, and he can’t give any depth to the performance.
Kristen Stewart really disappoints me in the Twilight movies. She was such a great actress, I’ve seen her in movies and I always liked her. She brought depth to the characters and worked hard for them. But in Twilight she has no personality. She is a flat character with no quality and that kind of performance puts her beneath Pattinson on the list of actors. Look, I can imitate her character with text: -_- frighteningly similar, huh?
This deserves it’s own paragraph. Taylor Lautner. I had absolutely NO hope for this kid, coming from such gripping epics as “Shark Boy and Lava Girl”, but he surprised me. Other than the extras he’s the only actor who shows up for filming mentally as well as physically (and kudos to him for the abs!). I don’t like his character, much too whiny and needy, but his acting earns full points in my book. Hopefully he’ll manage to have a career after this series is finally over.
There is more to directing than point and shoot, right? Wrong, at least if you are Catherine Hardwicke. I really hope the series picks up now that she’s gone. I blame this director for the terrible acting from Stewart. The overall quality of this movie is equal to that of a student production or a cheap indy film. Hardwicke had no imagination and her movie reflects that.
Visual Directing: -5/5
I have to pick on this guy. It was his job to keep something like the meadow scene with the GLITTER from happening. I was totally willing to forgive the crappy acting until that scene. As my friend said: It looked like they painted Pattinson with gay stripper glitter (Not sure how he knows what they would look like…). It was a HORRIBLE shot that killed the movie for me.
So overall I think this movie is never going to break away from being popular with 12-13 year olds. But it seems to have such an annoyingly strong hold over them that I’m sure they’ll get through the last two movies (or three, there is apparently talk of splitting one) without much strain. I just hope this new director keeps a lot of the crap down.
Just look at the bright side: When they remake this movie in 10 years the movie might actually be GOOD (I know, shocking right?).