Nov. 23, 2008
About three things I am absolutely positive: first, I just saw Twilight. Second, there is a part of me – and I don’t know how minuscule that part might be – that thinks it was almost okay. Third, it was unconditionally and irrevocably hilarious.
Written by: Melissa Rosenberg, based on the novel by Stephenie Meyer
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson
Seen at: National Amusements Enfield Cinemas 12, Enfield, Conn.
Running time: 122 minutes
Rated: PG-13
So, all you little spider-monkeys, I did in fact just return from a late-night showing of Twilight (the one that all the embarrassed middle-aged moms went to) and immediately sat down to pen my thoughts on the matter.
In a word? It was hysterical. To borrow a trick from Ms. Meyer’s book (or rather her thesaurus), not only was it funny but it was a riotously jocular humdinger of a film.
First, let’s talk tech specs. The film’s cinematography viewed like a bad spoof of 300, only with more vampires, 98% less blood, and 99.9% more extreme close-ups. And when there aren’t a billion poorly-edited cuts between Edward’s face and Bella’s face, there was slow-mo. And a lot of it. At any moment during the baseball scene, for example, I expected some half-naked guy with a lobster claw arm to glide down from the treetops and ask to join the game. I mean, I have a hard time swallowing slow-mo in an action flick, much less in a film in which half of the scenes consist of the characters stretching out on a field to gaze into each other’s soul.
And that brings me to the moment we were all waiting for, fans and anti-fans alike. I’m not going to lie, folks, I was bouncing on my seat in anticipation of the sparklies. Color me curious, but I was excited to see how they would accomplish that effect. Would they use lens flares? Glitter? Bits of cubic zirconia glued to the makeup caked on Robert Pattinson’s face? There seemed to be a lot of options, so the fact that they decided to use Pattinson’s natural (and profuse) perspiration is something of a letdown.
But to be fair, the effects aren’t all bad. After an hour and a half of “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”-style soaring through treetops, the big throw-down at the end between James and Edward is actually pretty exciting. In fact, it almost made me appreciate Meyer’s choice of the ballet studio as the battleground in the first place, and on screen I actually winced at Bella’s injuries whereas in the book my reaction consisted of a dash of meh and decent dose of yawn.
And speaking of yawn, that’s a good description of the acting. Kristen Stewart definitely had her moments, but Robert Pattinson not so much. At times his performance is painfully stale and at others, particularly during his and Bella’s first meeting, it is overworked and over-acted. For most of the film, he comes off as either constipated or as a creepy prima donna, or perhaps as a constipated creepy prima donna. It seems to me though that it’s through no fault of his own; the writing is simply that bad. Lines that are passable in a book (”…and so the lion fell in love with the lamb,” for instance) cannot possibly be delivered in any way that makes them sound anything other than horrifically cheesy.
Which brings me to my absolute favorite line of the film, from the sparkle scene:
[CUE "DRAMATIC" MUSIC]
“…This is the skin of a killer.”
Take a minute to laugh, it’s okay. That’s the line that made me wonder if director Catherine Hardwicke had decided to spoof Twilight rather than adapt it; it was a line that I could imagine in a Cleolinda Jones recap and a line that I’m a little jealous for not having written myself. I mean, Edward, come on – you sparkle. “This is the skin of a killer?” It’s like saying “These are the eyebrows of a vampire!” or “Beware my shins, for they are murderous!” I have to wonder how many takes Pattinson needed for the line just because I would never be able to deliver it with a straight face. And frankly, that line sums up the film perfectly: it’s unintentionally ridiculous and takes itself way too seriously, as if it doesn’t realize that it’s actually a film about glitter.
Pages: 1 2
Kellen Rice is Blast's Assistant Entertainment Editor. You may love her or hate her. Follow Kellen on Twitter!
You know what i admire about your review of the book and of the movie? that you actually read the books and watched the movie and then judged it rather then just judging it right of the back like others who think it to be drivel about emo vampires actually saving the helpless damsel in distress instead of feasting on her blood. I’ve read the first two books and saw the movie and i can actually understand where your coming from, but as you said in your article, i want to read the other two books just out of morbid curiosity even though i now know what happens because i read your article, which was good too. The movie was pretty stupid, i actually don’t think it should even be considered a movie because it rightfully belongs in the ranks of the deteriorating Disney channel crap like hannah montanna and the jonas brothers. The special effects were terrible and the one closeup i remember specifically is the one of edward, i guess in the movie when he introduces himself to bella, where you can see the robert pattinson is wearing contact lenses! The only parts i enjoyed were the baseball scene, even though it was in slow-mo, and the ending where edward and james fight. One thing i do disagree with you on is the acting. You may have thought that robert pattinson’s acting was bad and stewart’s was okay, but really, it was bad all around. Although i love rob, the two main characters were terrible but i blamed rob’s acting on the fact that edward was emo, constipated and tortured in the books too, and stewart just can’t act except in the ending when she was wriggling, i think that experience came from Panic Room when she played a diabetic. God! Jasper was so in pain, Edward seemed like he was being tortured! But i suppose i was ok, It’s sad though that everything you say are my own thoughts yet still i’m curious as to what will happen in the other two books i have yet to read and the new moon movie.
muderous shins, hilarious! Sorry for the long reply
Thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou for this review! What a perfect summation of everything I thought and felt (though you were a lot more generous with Kristen Stewart’s acting than I was). I went to see Twilight knowing it would be horrible, but little did I know what comedy gold it would be! Your review was spot on, and it was even funnier than the movie unintentionally was. Thank you for the comment about Jackson Rathborne’s acting. I wasn’t quite sure what to say his face looked like, but “Did I just fart?” was perfect.
Being a fan of the books, I will have to admit that i thought this review was actually quite hilarious. I was actually disappointed in the movie more than what i thought i would be. well, on certain parts anyway. I like that you stayed unbiased in this review more than your other reviews. This was a breath of fresh air.
Oh, and if anyone wants to critize me, I am not an adolescent girl. I am a full grown woman with four kids that likes to read. I do like the books and that is my opinion. just as you are entitled to yours on why you don’t read them.
Despite the fact that the books and movies are awful (my sis forced me to read & watch them… The horror! D:) you put yourself through that pain in order to write an accurate reveiw. Thanks so much! I need to make my sister read this!
Btw I read your book reveiw as well. Awesome.
I have been studying film making and art. The way Hardwicke uses the camera is something that was ‘developed’ by female film makers. In Finland we have Pirjo Honkasalo, a female documentarist, whose films in India or Russia, are so good, because she uses unsteady camera. That enables the viewer become as a part of the scene, makes it life like. That’s something I have seen done by few female directores only. It is the key to create the emotional closeness and atmosphere we have been soaked in.
Also the slow motion and the music are they key factors to draw us in. We don’t need too much action. It must be some difference in the brain of people who are sensitive, drawn by poetic music and the people who need constant stimulus of action. And it’s not a gender thing.
If you see the film Piano, it has similar componenets: the beautiful landscape, great music and the difficult love traingle. It’s also made by a female director.
You know, I remember thinking at the time of watching it (on my laptop at noon with the curtains closed) that despite all the terrible acting, terrible screenplay, constipation, hair and sparkling, the camera work and blue-wash lighting effects were pretty good.
It was the one concession I made at the time to an otherwise awful, if hilarious, film. It’s nice to know there is some underlying reasoning to my knee-jerk reaction. I loved The Piano.
Film is something I hope to be studying in the near future. Thanks for your insight.
I love this review. It certainly had me laughing. I love how you say the ’sparkling’ was just his own perspiration and then in the DVD commentary himself, Pattinson makes the comment over himself talking at that point ‘I’m sorry Bella, I’m just a sweaty man.’ Don’t think he thought much of those special effects either. Your comments on the jasper ‘did I just fart?’ expression are priceless. Another comparison I have seen and also agree with is the similarity of his expression to that of edward scissorhands. There is a video on youtube somewhere that shows it perfectly. Love your reviews, they make me lol.
Hey,
I love this review. I couldn’t stop laughing at ‘expression that doesn’t quite say “I’m in pain because of the humans” so much as it does “Maybe if I just stand here, no one will notice.”’
Oh haven’t laughed that hard for a long time. But, seriously I like the books and movie and found your blog while trying to break the Twilight addiction, seriously trying. It’s helped and I enjoyed reading all of them; the book review, follow-up review and this hilarious number.
to take a line out of Green Eggs and ham(a much better book)
Thank you, thank you Sam-I-Am (I mean you but not in a mean way)
I just wanted to say that you are a genius! Everything you said about the movie is true. I’ll take your word about the books. I didn’t read them, the movie discouraged me too much. I’m amazed that you were able to read all of the books, and still remain somewhat sane. I know I shouldn’t judge the books yet, but the movie….
bahahahahahahhaa.. kellen, you are the MAN (said with utter conviction)!! hahahahahaahahaha, this is the skin of the killer?! awwwwwwwwwww, how cute really, bahahahahahah. . man I took more than an hour to stop laughing. . hahahaha. . I do agree with you about the director deciding to make a spoof rather than adapt it . . hey is the director related to Manysyllable Meyer?! she sure sounds like one . . Am gonna ask all my friends to read your articles . . you ROCKKKKKKKKKK
Excellent reviews, well written and intelligent. I have to confess to being a fan of the series while at the same time being quite uncomfortable about the female ‘heroine’ issue you wrote about in your first review of the books.
As for the movie, I can’t help but enjoy it even if it makes me laugh out loud in several places – but I can’t believe you didn’t mention the hilarious reaction Edward has to Bella when she walks into the classroom (queue slow mo hair blowing and dark ominous music) which still makes me laugh.
I think you may find the following equally hilarious picture gallery of the top ten examples of why the Twilight films are laughable… from Australia, this one is entitled ‘Picture Gallery: Acting so bad, its good! Twilight’s top ten ridiculous facials’ http://yourmovies.com.au/news/?i=175586&action=news
Enjoy!