Review of Twilight

Twilight (I) (2008)
2/10
soap opera remake - beautiful actors and ugly script
26 November 2008
Be Warned: This is coming from a girl in her 20s who has never read the Twilight saga. But I do enjoy a good vampire film/series.

After all the media surrounding Twilight I expected a decent film but I found Twilight to lack the luster and buzz of recent media. I love the concept behind the novel but the execution was horrendous. Emulating an episode of Passions, the film is filled with above-average looking actors and a poorly written script. Apparently the script was written in 6 weeks and it shows. As a vampire film, it was hard to concentrate on the fantasy aspect because the special effects were laughable. And when I say "laughable" I mean I actually laughed out loud a few times.

The film is over 2 hours long and 30 minutes in I was already checking my clock. The only thing keeping the audience (girls) in their seats was Edward, played by Robert Pattinson. I admit he is eye candy but I'd rather watch him as Cedric Diggory in Harry Potter because at least that film is watchable. The actor's performances carry the film especially the actors playing the 2 leads. They do their best with the horrible script they're given. Also, I found the actress playing Alice to do a very nice job as well.

The story revolves around Bella and Edward's love story but one second their eyes meet and two seconds later she claims she loves him. The film doesn't develop their story so it's difficult to believe their love for one another. I'm sure the novel explains it in a more believable manner which is why this film may be geared more towards those loyal readers.

If you plan on watching the film, I recommend reading the novel first. That way you can visualize the story and ignore the poor script development and odd film choices. There's going to be a sequel so I hope they hire a new scriptwriter and director.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed