p r e f e r r e d r e v i e w e r s :
 |
 |
|
You haven't selected any preferred reviewers. To learn more about customizing your experience, click here.
|
|
|
 |
 |
o t h e r r e v i e w e r s :
|
|
|
DokBrowne [ 3.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
For God's sakes....
I admit there's a watchable factor to both movies, and "New Moon" at times seems more competent than "Twilight", and accentuates even further the splendor of its majestically brooding Northwestern environment, and uh, Kristen Stewart is hotter than ever (irrelevant side note: I'm more smitten by her than anyone else in Hollywood right now). But come on. Honestly.
This is trash, and not even cunning or entertaining trash. I don't blame teen girls; let them obsess over whatever they want, just like every other demographic. But jeff, I don't see you pardoning, say, "Transformers" because it was merely satisfying teen boys. A movie is still a movie, after all. Your other example, "Titanic", proves the difference: something that seems predominantly likened to a specific target (women) can still be universally praised and enjoyed if it's actually well-made and worth something. "Titanic" is a great movie, "New Moon" is embarrassingly stupid pre-teen-lit. The writing is simply atrocious; it's even less than functional, it's almost sub-Neanderthal in intelligence, wit, coherence, and conviction.
And even if we are to take the whole thing seriously, the internal logic is maddening: why is Jacob continually insulted and punished for being a good, helpful, down-to-earth, friendly person, whereas Edward is exalted and beloved for his pouting, wet-blanket, zero-dimensional personality and impulsively cruel behavior. To say nothing of how ridiculous he looks (like a supermodel with AIDS), especially without his shirt on but especially when it looks like he's sleep-walking during the climax (that half-lidded expression is supposed to be heavy soul fatigue, I suppose? It's barely distinguishable from his normal mien). I didn't care enough to take sides (no Team Anyone for me) but at the very least I'm astonished that anyone in the story or watching it could be seduced by Edward the Pathetic Douche Cipher.
Some scenes, like an early one where Bella gets a paper cut and is nearly mutilated by one of her vampire friends, or the later one where Jacob implies to Edward that Bella is dead and then 2 seconds later Bella's friend rushes into the room to announce that Edward is going to kill himself "Romeo & Juliet"-style as a result, are beyond words. They should be submitted to an all-time hall of shame list of worst movie scenes ever made.
And the action! This one ends much like "Twilight" with a brief throwdown between Ed and some vamp antagonists trying to hurt Bella that's trying to make up for having forced us to sit through non-stop whispered brooding for 2 straight hours. It's a lot of slowed-down/sped-up clashes, like "300" x1000, that like everything about this series (its sexual tension, its mythology of characters and backstory) yields no blood or wounds or anything of consequence, but rather plays like a cheap Mormon approximation of Hollywood cliches.
And then, just to prove that there's no art or standalone value to this particular chapter of "Twilight", it ends on an abrupt cliffhanger, and one that's meant to send our hearts aflutter but alas if you're not a teen girl may simply sound vaguely offensive (or am I a grump for not cheering at the prospect of two high schoolers getting married, and for the sole purpose of one feeling better about murdering the other?).
Gimme a few more pages and I could list out my grievances for every other scene in the movie, but I've already wasted enough space. Let the teen girls have this one, but let's not pretend it's good for them or anyone else. It is pure awful.
Although I was tickled by Michael Sheen. Neverminding the curiousity factor of his casting in relation to "Underworld" (is he a vamp/wolf afficionado, or wtf), he brings his usual precision and mastery of charismatic screen presence to the one (and otherwise profoundly retarded) scene he's in. Him and the scenery and Kristen Stewart, those are the only survivors here, really. Another note about Stewart: she has a talent for understatement, but her performance is identical to the one in "Adventureland", and I've noticed that a lot of her body language and mannerisms are reminiscent of Jennifer Love Hewitt (trust me, I studied her back in the day when I was an googly-eyed dope), which makes me respect her less (over time I realized how annoying JLH's acting tics were) but I still think she's (Kristen's) an effective star, at least so far in these withdrawn/wounded soul parts to which she is recurringly attracted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jeff_v [ 7.0 ]
[ add to preferred ]
[ email this review to a friend ]
The vitriol that has greeted the second installment in the Twilight franchise reminds me of the sneering that was directed at the hugely successful Titanic. Blame it on teen girls! Only they would see a movie over and over again. But of course, that wasn't the case then and it isn't the case now. Yes, these movies are earnest, but I actually appreciate the commitment the cast & crew bring --this isn't an irony-steeped, wink-wink nudge-nudge affair that feels embarrassed by its material.
Anyway, is an entertaining deepening of the subject of Twilight, and the measured introduction of backstory brings into focus the escalating conflicts that never quite come to full boil. The sequel boasts better effects, photography and soundtrack, though is still sadlled with the over-use of slow-motion and some pandering ogling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Weighted Rating | : 6.3 |
| No. Ratings | : 3 | |
| No. Reviews | : 2 | |
|
|
|
|