Sunday, November 23, 2008

I didn't quite see the "Twilight" at the end of the tunnel




***POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT***

 I know that millions of teenage girls are going to kill me for saying this. But I have to tell the truth. "Twilight" just didn't do it for me.  Maybe it was the two hour wait for a seat, or maybe it was the fact that I haven't read the book, but when all was said and done I could not have been more disappointed. 
  They will teach you in any basic screenwriting class (of which I have taken) that the key to any good film rests in characterization.  You have to create some sort of character sympathy in order to engage audiences.  I felt as though unless you read the book, and already had sympathy for the characters, you were left hanging.  Bella's character was cold and unappealing, which I would have excused had a cared for Edward Cullen in the slightest. His characterization was rushed, as was the love affair between the two. And, I'm sorry, but in a movie about vampires, a love story won't carry the entire film. There needed to be more drama. One fight scene is not enough. Tension usually is a thread used to hold a film together, here it was a dangling line to which the movie was barely holding on. 
  I wanted to know more about the family.  Kellen Lutz and Peter Facinelli anchored a well cast Cullen clan, but they were underused. The film tried also to establish relationships between Bella and the Fork's High School clan, but besides some scenes invented to instigate some awkward teenage sympathy, they became more of a nuisance than an aid to the plot. 
  I am glad that the film has found a niche in the teen audience. Not since the late 90's, early 2000's has there been a truly successful love story aimed at that market (think back to the good ole days: "10 Things I Hate About You", "She's All That", "Cruel Intentions".)  
  A guest on "Table Talk" attempted to compare "Twilight" with the "Harry Potter" series. She thought that "Twilight" would find as much, or more, success.  The problem is that with the "Harry Potter" franchise, people who weren't fans of the book, or who didn't read it, can still enjoy the films.  With "Twilight" I fear that non-book fans won't find the film nearly as amusing. The good news is that if the creators decide to make the second and third novels into motion pictures, then they'll have two other chances to get it right. 

4 comments:

Molly Storey said...

....burn (to me).

well, i concur, the movie was not good, but the experience was and edward cullen was still the sexiest thing i have ever seen though.

strangly, a lot of my friends really liked the movie and chalked it up to bad acting...

maybe i should get new friends?

EBUZZED said...

The film was rather low budget. The acting was the same. I think it comes down to the fact that the story is better told on paper than on a big screen.
As for your friends...I have a feeling you're pretty lucky to have them mstorey...I'd hang on...at least until the sequel :)

Anonymous said...

I think that Quantum of Solace was not that good either. a weekend of bad movies for the thanksgiving holiday.

-Half Italian Stallion

Anonymous said...

i thought it was pretty good the first time i saw it that made me want to read the books but then i really thought about it and it wasent as good as i thought it was.