Finally, after months of eager anticipation (*cough, cough* Bull-s#!t *cough, cough*), I finally watched the Twilight movie.
And yes, it was everything I thought it would be - and worse.
But this is not going to be yet another "Why Twilight is so ridiculously stupid" post. You can easily find a million of those with a simple "Twilight reviews" google.
Rather, I'm going to tell you why I "liked" Twilight. It'll be a bit of a stretch, so bear with me . . .
First of all, let me just say right off the bat that the movie really is lousy. The acting is forced, the make-up looks like something my kids would do to themselves on Halloween, and I seriously doubt that the producers even hired an editor to review the screenplay. The whole thing is just plain rubbish.
Before watching the actual movie, I saw the trailer. (Who hasn't seen the trailer?? It seems to play on practically every film that I've rented in the past 6 months, not to mention being embedded on an insane number of blogs written by vampire-obsessed middle-aged women.) I've also watched a number of "spoof" videos on YouTube - most very funny and better produced than the actual film.
To tell the truth, I probably should have just left it at that. All you expect from both the trailers and the spoofs are choppy "highlights" of the movie, right? Unfortunately, the feature length version was no different. It was just one long Cliffs Notes version of the book. It's as if they took the book and a big set of scissors, chopped it up, and pasted random scenes for the audience to watch. No cohesion, no plot or character development . . . If you hadn't already read the book, I can't imagine how you could even understand what was going on.
So how can I possibly write a post entitled "Why I Liked Twilight" when, obviously, the movie was about as entertaining as watching someone else's kid in a piano recital?
Why did I ultimately decide that I'm glad to have watched it??
Because it taught me a lesson.
I am fairly anti-Hollywood. I think that most movies these days are offensive, stupid and a waste of money. I would much rather read a book. (And, in fact, my kids are not allowed to watch a movie that has been adapted from a book unless they've read the book first.)
On the rare occassion that I actually suck it up and pay the money to watch a book-turned-movie, I am nearly always disappointed. I sit in the theater fuming over the travesty of taking a perfectly good book and massacring it, changing plot lines, casting horrible actors, and dumbing down scripts, all in the name of "poetic license."
I have often demanded: WHY can't they simply re-tell the story the way it is written?
Well now, thanks to the torturous 1 1/2 hours that I spent watching Twilight, I understand. It just doesn't work to condense a book into random sound bites and disconnected scenes. It may be true that a picture is worth a thousand words. But it is not true that a few dozen random scenes are worth to a book. Even if (or, maybe, especially if) that book was not very well written to begin with.
So that's why I "liked" Twilight. I'm hoping that it will force me to allow directors to take a bit of poetic license, make some necessary changes, tweek a line here or there . . . so that the movie is bearable to watch.
(Or maybe I just liked Twilight for the fun of mocking it. I'm already planning to watch the sequel with my friend (a Twilight lover) in the theater. Come join me!)
7 comments:
The thing is, just when you decide that no book can be translated well to the screen, along comes Peter Jackson and does a brilliant job with "Lord of the Rings". Of course, the 'brilliance' takes something like 13 hours to achieve. But it's still faster than reading the books, which, frankly, I found tedious.
I never read the Twilight books. And I thought the movie was beyond ridiculous. But my REAL beef is with any woman over the age of 40 who even cracked the cover, let alone slobbered all over the movie. If the whole situation were reversed, and it was middle-aged MEN drooling over a 17 year-old female protagonist, we'd be screaming 'pedophile' and calling for their heads on a stake.
DeNae - I totally agree about the weirdness of middle-age women going gaga over a teeny-bopper book and movie. Creepy. But the thing that REALLY boggles my mind is that they are drooling over THIS particular movie. I mean - honestly - the main guy character is not good looking. In fact, he kind of reminds me of a cross between Data (from Star Trek) and Edward Scissorshands. How is that sexy?
Robert Pattinson is not a good-looking guy. There, I said it. And I am not afraid to admire an attractive younger man, either. Then again, I am unable to think of one that I find attractive. Paul Rudd is adorable, but he is my age....
Great, I just deleted my comments. Trying again:
I was annoyed by recent "Masterpiece Theatre" productions/adaptations of "Sense and Sensibility" and "Oliver Twist" (the latter bearing only a passing resemblance to the book!). On the other hand, I thought that Emma Thompson's adaptation of "Sense and Sensibility" was outstanding, and that remains one of my favorite movies (and books). I highly recommend it. :-)
As for "Twilight," well, you would not catch me dead (or undead, ha ha) watching it or with one of those books in my hand -- 'nuff said.
I was happy to read your post. I feel the same way about how weird it is that women are gaga about these books. I read the first and was not impressed. The film wasn't good either. Thanks for putting to words my feelings exactly. I am not the slightest bit interested in reading/watching the second book/film. If you want to read a good vampire book, you read Anne Rice.
In my ward the empty-nester women (I don't know what they call themselves, modified snowbirds?) had the Twilight movie as their movie for April! Yes, even I a Twilight book liker, thought that was too strange!
In the movie Jasper so needed to go to the bathroom...didn't you just read that on his face? I just saw the movie and couldn't stop laughing. And Edward... not handsome! The picture in my head was much better.
I thought the whole thing was just creepy. Didn't Carlisle look like he'd been doused with yellow paint? And at the end, when Edward was sucking the venom out of Bella's arm, I couldn't decided if she was dying or having an orgasm. The only character I "liked" was the annoying high school friend (can't remember her name). At least she was believable in her role - cheesy obnoxious high schooler.
All in all, it doesn't rank as the worst movie I've ever seen (Howard the Duck still holds that distinction), but it's darn near close.
Howard the Duck? I laughed out loud reading that. So loud in fact, that I was worried about waking up Izaac. The #1 reason I liked Twilight was being able to watch your face explain the torture going on in your brain. Seriously Brooke, I wake up excited to be a part of your next adventure.
Post a Comment