Sunday, April 12, 2009
Twilight (PG-13/122 Min.)
This is the bone of contention between Popcorn Toes (PT) and Armat. I wish I could tell PT that the movie isn't very good at all and convince her that she's not really missing anything but I can't. I liked this movie. I've seen it three times already. Two of those times in one weekend. For the few people, including my immediate and most of my extended family, who have not seen the movie - or read the book - following is the summary as given on Amazon.com:
"The big-screen adaptation of Twilight, Stephenie Meyer's bestselling vampire romance, is aimed squarely at its key demographic: teen girls whose idea of Prince Charming is a brooding, pale, undead teen who could kill you instantly at any moment. Such a prince is more fascinating than frightening to new girl Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), who moves to the rainy-gray town of Forks, Wash., to live with her dad (Billy Burke), the local sheriff who's puzzled by a series of "animal attacks." On her first day at school, Bella appears to (visibly) nauseate her lab partner, Edward (Robert Pattinson). Turns out the scent of her blood is this vampire's "brand of heroin," and his struggle not to kill her causes an irresistible pull toward her. Whether he's attracted for the normal reasons or because she smells especially sweet to him is vague in the book and even less clear on-screen; nonetheless, Bella falls hopelessly in love with Edward, which sets her on a dangerous path when a few nomad vampires show up in town, one particularly keen on tracking the human."
I've read the entire series and, as most often happens, I preferred the book over the movie. I liked Robert Pattinson (Edward) more as Cedric Diggory in the Harry Potter movies although he did a pretty good job here. He's just not who I pictured as being an Edward. A few weeks ago PT would have been outraged to hear that. She's seen movie pics of Twilight and thought he was way "hotter" (her words not mine) in Twilight. She recently saw an interview with him and changed her mind. Something about bad hygiene. Tweens are so fickle.
I also thought Kristen Stewart (Bella) did well. She did seem to mumble quite a bit though. I bet she drives lip readers crazy. She is very close, though, to what I pictured a Bella would be. I've been a fan of Elizabeth Reaser - who plays the part of Edward's foster mom, Esme - since I saw her in "The Family Stone". She doesn't have many lines in either movie and that's a shame. Jackson Rathbone (Jasper) didn't get enough screen time for my tastes either. An important part of the hotel scene involving Jasper didn't make the transition from the book to the big screen. Peter Facinelli - Carlisle, Edward's foster father - is just a pretty, pretty man. Oh sorry. Men aren't pretty...they're "hot!" We definitely need more of him in the second movie. And finally, Cam Gigandet (pronounced Ji-GON-day according to imdb.com) who plays the part of the villain, James...all I can say is, "Oh my!"
Sex - None. But it does show major kissing in Bella's bed
Violence - Well, duh. It's a vampire movie. Not much blood though and no gore.
Language - I'm ashamed to admit that I didn't pay as much attention as I knew PT wasn't going to be allowed to see this movie. I don't remember there being much if any.
Drugs - No. Heroine is mentioned but only as a metaphor (or is it a simile? I need to take an English class again).
Alcohol - Not much. Bella's dad drinks Rainier Beer in several scenes. As I watched the Special Features on the DVD I found out that this is referred to as Vitamin R. Who knew?
If you haven't read the books or seen the movie I would recommend the movie first, but either choice is entertaining. I still agree with Armat, though. PT should be a little older before she sees it.