THE TWILIGHT SAGA: BREAKING DAWN - PART 1.

There's really only 4 reasons somebody is seeing this movie: 1) You're a fan of the series, 2) You're being dragged by a significant other who is a fan of the series, 3) You realize this series is terrible and love to laugh at it, or 4) plain morbid curiosity. As most of you know by now, I'm a mixture of the last two. In this one, Bella (Kristen Stewart) married vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson), she gets pregnant, and everyone, including werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner), gets in a huff because the baby starts to kill her from the inside.

Of the primary two male leads, I've always been a "Team Jacob" person. He tends to treat her well, generally respect her wishes (even if he hates them), love her unconditionally, and fight for her until the very end. Edward, on the other hand, is mopey, boring, mean, controlling, and has way too many stalker/serial killer tendencies. He really tops it off in this one, where he treats Bella as if her feelings and opinions don't matter (and then accuses her of not including him). Not to mention Bella always seems like it pains her to be with him, while she always laughs, feels good, and even says she feels "complete" with Jacob. The Edward relationship has always felt forced, and it makes Bella seem like an even worse person than she already is by treating Jacob the way she does.

Nothing in these stories makes any sense. Everything contradicts itself, and nothing these characters do is logical. And this movie, yet again, proves that all of the other characters besides the main three are far more interesting. From the rest of the Cullen siblings to Charlie to Seth to the 5 minutes of screen time we see Bella's old high school friends. They were all far more entertaining than the primary story.

The acting, however, has quite improved, especially since the first film. Kristen Stewart still needs to learn how to smile during the most important moments of her life, though. Even Edward gives a grin here and there. Surprisingly, Taylor Lautner doesn't act with his abs in this movie. Literally the first shot in this movie is him taking off his shirt, but after that... he tends to keep it on for pretty much the remainder of the film. Sorry, ladies. The one person I do want to give it up to here is Jackson Rathbone as Jasper. He might have only had about 3 minutes of screen time in this entire film (and that's stretching it), but he showed more charm and personality in those 3 minutes than he has for the past 3 films combined. Oh yeah, and Billy Burke's Charlie is still the best character in this entire thing.

What brings these films down is, of course, the writing. But you can't really blame screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg, though. It all goes back to the source material. In fact, I've always said that the films are better than the books because at least you don't have to read Stephenie Meyer's terrible writing and how godly Edward's breath is every other sentence. And actually, Melissa Rosenberg tends to be in on the joke with the audience, putting in little quips here and there that make fun of the material. In the last film it was about Jacob's shirtlessness. In this one, it was toward how terrible the name Renesmee is. There was actually a surprising amount of humor in this movie, and I don't just mean the unintentional kind. I also must thank our dear screenwriter yet again for adding in an action sequence where the book skipped over it.

As for my opinion on the seemingly much-talked-about "pack mind" sequence? I'll just say it worked much better in the book. The telepathic talking between the wolves was silly, but it would have been silly no matter how they translated it onto the screen. The Jacob section of the book was arguably the best and/or only good thing in the entire 800 (or however many) pages. It didn't translate nearly as well to the screen.

Finally, I want to discuss the visuals. As usual, the CGI is rather questionable, especially Renesmee's face at the very end (what was that?). The practical effects, however, were actually quite exceptional. They finally made the vampires not look obvious, and Edward didn't look disgusting for once. So the makeup job on them was decent. The best work, however, was most likely a mix of practical and digital, making Bella look gaunt and deathly ill. It was done pretty dang well, so I must give credit where credit is due.

Was it a bad movie? It's Twilight, so there's no question. There are logical holes abound. The main characters are unlikable morons. The story goes on for far longer than they need to (Hell, the books alone could have easily been condensed into maybe 2 or 3 max, making this 2-part finale even more ridiculous than it already is). But was it entertaining? Yeah, it was. Like the previous film, it tried to actually be good for once, and at times it might have succeeded. But that also means it makes it a less entertaining Twilight film. As usual with this type of film, the following rating is based on entertainment only, not on overall quality.


I Am McLovin!

(P.S. There was a teen girl next to me who started squirming and going 'eww' when a certain character began drinking blood. This is a freakin' vampire story, girl. What the hell do you expect?)

THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE.

We all know my feelings on Twilight (if not, check out my review of the books, as well as my thoughts on the first two movies). In quick summation, I've seen all the Twilight movies in theater (though not since) and think they are vastly superior to the books... mostly because they cut out most of the stupid and add in everything awesome the books cut out or glossed over. So now that I've seen the next installment, does this trend continue? By leaps and bounds.

Eclipse starts a year prior where a boy named Riley (Xavier Samuel) gets attacked and turned into a vampire. Pick up a year later, and we have Bella (Kristen Stewart) and her shiny vampire boyfriend Edward (Robert Pattinson). Edward continues to ask Bella to marry him, and she continues to (illogically) turn him down, though begs to be turned into a vampire instead. Her father Charlie (Billy Burke) would prefer her to be with her old friend Jacob (Taylor Lautner), who just so happens to be a shapeshifter/werewolf (though not really a werewolf). And Jacob loves Bella and won't take no for an answer. Meanwhile, chaos is going on in nearby Seattle where Riley is building an army of powerful newborn vampires. Oh, and Victoria (Bryce Dallas Howard) is back, hanging around the Forks forestry... (I wonder if these can be connected?). So now the Cullen family (Jackson Rathbone, Ashley Greene, Peter Facinelli, Elizabeth Reaser, Kellan Lutz, and Nikki Reed) must figure out a way to stop what's going on in Seattle while simultaneously protecting Bella before the Volturi show up to investigate (assuming they aren't responsible for it themselves) and find out that Edward hasn't broken his promise by not having turned Bella into a vampire yet.

Eclipse is considered the best of the books, and it is certainly the best of the movies thus far. Unlike the previous two, it wasn't even mostly so bad it was good. On the whole, it was actually a decent movie. Yes, it has its Twilight-y cheese and stupidness. The "I won't marry you, but I want you to turn me in a vampire so I can be with you forever" thing is still insanely idiotic and nonsensical. The dialogue is mostly horrendous (with a few scene exceptions) and delivered painfully. Because, as we all know, the Twilight movies are famous for their cardboard performances that can make Hayden Christensen look like Marlon Brando.

What made it decent was the fact that, similar to the previous movies, it added in a whole section that isn't in the book. Riley becomes a pretty huge part of the film, getting pretty much every other, or maybe every third scene. You see what's going on with him in Seattle, etc., which is only mentioned briefly every now and then in the book. Also, you get to see the creation of Bree (played by Jodelle Ferland), though she's pretty much only shown in two scenes--maybe one and a half--prior to the climax battle (and I would have liked to see more of her, which could have given the ending a bit bigger impact). And that's another thing. You actually get to see the battle! Again, like the other two movies, this one adds in an actual climax fight where the books did not. In this case, the book had the battle happen "off screen" while the fight in front of Bella was happening so fast she couldn't see it. The movie, on the other hand, shows it all. The only downside to all the action? It's almost completely bloodless... and for a very strange reason. I don't remember this description in the books, so correct me if I'm wrong... but the vampires here break off like ice when they're hit. It's very odd... almost comically so. I mean, it kinda explains the "sparkling in the sunlight" bit, assuming they're made of ice and/or diamonds. But it's just... strange.

Again, the acting is painfully dull, with only a few exceptions. Xavier Samuel as Riley, Taylor Lautner as Jacob, and Jodelle Ferland as Bree (despite her only having about half a line). Normally I have Ashley Greene's Alice and Anna Kendrick's Jessica in this list, but they're in the movie so little, it's pretty pointless to even bring them up. But Taylor Lautner continues to be really the only one of the main bunch to show any kind of range, which I know isn't true considering I've seen Kristen Stewart act very well in other things.

One thing that continues to bother me is how well, writing-wise, these books are adapted to the screen (while other adaptations, such as the quite recent Last Airbender, are adapted so poorly). I mean, honestly, these movies are not only faithful to their source material, but they actually improve upon them. The only thing I can actually think of that this movie left out from the book is when Charlie congratulates Jacob on forcing himself on his daughter and then subsequently breaking her hand... which I'm monumentally ecstatic they left out of the movie (it made me want to throw the book across the room for its stupidness). If any Twi-fans hate the movies, it's only because they don't realize how terrible the books are while reading them. Most of the dialogue and mannerisms come straight from the page. And I mentioned earlier how there were a couple scene exceptions that don't have the bad dialogue... I was very happy to learn that the tent scene was left in the movie, as it was probably one of the few things Stephenie Meyer wrote well in the entire series. And it's probably one of the best non-action scenes of the movie.

Overall, the movie has pretty good pacing, with only a few lags here and there near the end. There was a decent balance with the cheesy romance scenes and the added Riley stuff, giving the movie a sense of building suspense and purpose. The acting isn't any better than the last two, except where you'd imagine it would be (Taylor Lautner et al.). The visual effects, particularly the wolves, are much better than in New Moon, and they look really good. Really, it doesn't matter what this review says. If you haven't seen the first two, you're not gonna see this one. If you saw the first two, you'll see this one no matter what. I don't think I've ever heard of any Twilight fan that was on the fence about seeing the next movie. Unless, of course, you're like me and don't care for the series, but have a disturbing fascination... like watching a train wreck. It's not a bad movie. It's not great by any means, but it's not bad. And it's probably the first one I saw where I didn't feel completely embarrassed after having watched it. I can't not give it the following rating, considering I gave the last two this rating and I consider this one better than the last two... but again, know that it's not a score based on the film's quality, but of its entertainment value (whether that means it was actually good or so bad it was good).


A Keanu 'Whoa'

(P.S. The most disappointing factor of this experience? They didn't show the Deathly Hallows trailer before the movie as promised...)

Why Haven't They Made This Yet? #3

[Do you know what I find even more annoying than the constant wave of remakes, reboots, sequels/prequels, and comic book and video game adaptations? People complaining about remakes, reboots, sequels/prequels, and comic book and video game adaptations. Seriously, all I ever hear these days is 'waah, why aren't there any fresh ideas? Everything is (see above) nowadays!' And frankly, I'm getting really tired of it. So instead of joining the ranks, I'm going to embrace all said types of film, and I will be celebrating it in a segment I like to call... "Why haven't they made this yet?"] 

Man, I haven't done this in a while, but I was inspired today while watching the original (especially so close to viewing Where The Wild Things Are) that I had to do it. 

Title: Labyrinth.

Type: Remake. 

About: Almost everybody remembers this trippy classic. It was the film that pretty much launched the career of Jennifer Connelly. As a fantasy (on a magical realism level) full of puppets and a pseudo-musical (with everything written and sung by David Bowie, the film's antagonist), Labyrinth works on many levels. A lot of its visual effects don't hold up today, and with what modern cinema has at its fingertips, this movie could be redone as a modern classic... if done right.

Film Possibilities

Genre: Similar to the original, it would be a trippy, puppet-driven fantasy/pseudo-musical for children and/or young adults.

Why This Movie Could Work: Where The Wild Things Are. If anything was outstanding in that recent film, it was the puppetry and men-in-suits work. Movies have come a long way in the realm of realism and puppets, and if the same people were involved as were with "Wild Things," this film could be outstanding visually. 

Story: Similar to the original, a spoiled girl named Sarah is tired of having to give up her time to babysit her baby brother so her parents can go out. So in a fit of anger, she offers up her brother to the Goblin King, but immediately regrets it. She travels to the Labyrinth and discovers she has 13 hours to get to the middle, through the Goblin City, and to the castle to save her brother before he's turned into a goblin forever. Along the way, she makes friends who help her find her way through the dangerous maze.

In the remake, though, I'm sure there would be the want to detract the magical realism and make Sarah freak out about the whole thing instead of act like everything she sees and experiences is as common as rain. I'd hope that would stay in to keep with the fantastical feel of the story. At the same time, though, maybe the remake could add a bit to the characters of Sarah and possibly the Goblin King to make them more rounded and relatable characters. 

Director: My first instinct, of course, is Spike Jonze (as long as he stays away from Dave Eggers in the script department). For the most part, he did good things with "Wild Things." I could also suggest Tim Burton, who would take this already whacked-out story and, dare I say, make it even crazier and more surreal. Plus he's had the experience with musicals (Sweeny Todd). But he'd probably cast Johnny Depp as the Goblin King, and I have other ideas for him. But I'm gonna go out there and say that I'd like to see another artistic take on it by hiring Guillermo del Toro. He's done his own puppetry work (Hellboy I and II, Pan's Laybrinth). And especially with the aforementioned "Labyrinth" film, I know he could make one heck of a magical realism/fantastical film. 

Cast: I'm gonna stick away from the voice actors for now, though I dare say del Toro should hire Doug Jones for a lot of the men-in-suits bits. Boy that would be a nice paycheck, wouldn't it? My main concerns are the protagonist and antagonist: Sarah and the Goblin King.

First, who would take over for the classic Jennifer Connelly role? There aren't a ton of young actresses who I could see taking the role. Dakota Fanning is too young. I could suggest the hot up-and-comer Emma Stone for the role. I'd say it's what she'd really need to break out, but I think Zombieland just did that. Plus, I'm not sure if she could grab the emotion of the role too well.

That's why I'm going controversial. I'm gonna say the role should go to Kristen Stewart. I know, her Twilight role makes her look like she has the depth of a teaspoon, but I know this girl can act (see: Speak or Adventureland). She can also be the dark, broody girl required of the part. Plus... she actually kinda looks like Jennifer Connelly did at that age.

Then we have our villain, the Goblin King. Famously portrayed by David Bowie, the character needs to be able to sing. The actor should also have an androgynous feel to him, as well as not look ridiculous in eyeliner. I really only had two suggestions. If we were going the "older" route, I'd say Anthony Head. We know the guy can sing (see: Buffy's "Once More With Feeling" or Repo! The Genetic Opera). And he's no stranger to the fantasy realm. But I sincerely doubt they'd go that risky and pick a guy that 1) isn't overly attractive, 2) isn't well known by the mass population, and 3) isn't a draw for the young crowd.

That's why I think the perfect person for this role would be recent American Idol almost-winner Adam Lambert. He can do the falsetto. He can dress up in tights and eyeliner and still look good (he did it every week on Idol). He already has the hair for the role. And he falls into the young, attractive, and popular crowd. He'd certainly draw in the big bucks. Not to mention (in my opinion) he has a great voice.

And that's pretty much all there is to this edition. Thoughts?

ADVENTURELAND.

I’m almost happy this movie didn’t get more advertisement than it did, because the advertising it did have made it seem like a big comedy, the next Superbad. And it couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s the 80s, and James (Jesse Eisenberg) just graduated college with a literature degree and plans to go to Europe as a graduation present before heading off to grad school in New York. But when his dad gets demoted, he not only loses the money to go to Europe, but nearly loses the chance to go to grad school. So he’s forced to get a summer job so that he can pay to live in New York. His old friend Frigo (Matt Bush, AKA the kid from the AT&T rollover minutes commercials) get him a job at a theme park, Adventureland, where he’s hired by owners Bobby (Bill Hader) and Paulette (Kristen Wiig). He gains a new friend, Joel (Martin Starr). But he also starts to fall for fellow co-worker Em (Kristen Stewart). Of course, it’s not that easy. Between maintenance man Connell (Ryan Reynolds) and sexy co-worker Lisa P (Margarita Lavieva), their relationships and friendships will be tested.

Like I said at the start, this movie is much more a drama than a comedy. Sure it has some comedic moments (usually in the form of Matt Bush, Bill Hader, and Kristen Wiig), but the majority of the movie is about how freakin’ miserable everybody is. But unlike movies like Knocked Up, where I thought it got too serious, the drama in this movie didn’t bring it down any, for me. It stayed at a healthy level of both drama and comedy—it wasn’t too serious to make the comedy seem random, and it wasn’t too funny to make the drama seem like too much of a downer.

My only issue with the story was that it did focus a lot on the crappy lives of these characters, but outside maybe Em and James (and more specifically Em), it didn’t go into a whole lot of depth about it. It was as if the entire cast of characters was trying to be fully developed, but fell just short. However, there’s only so much you can do in the time frame of the movie. But I don’t think adding scenes would have worked either, because then it might have come off as repetitive. That’s why I don’t think it was a huge issue, and why I think just hinting at a lot of it instead of blatantly coming out with it worked much better. And by the end of the movie, I honestly didn’t care about it anymore, anyway.

As far as acting went, everybody was brilliant, for the most part. I think maybe the role was written for Michael Cera, because Jesse Eisenberg channeled him quite often. However, I don’t think Cera could have pulled off some of the scenes the way Jesse did, particularly at the end. And Kristen Stewart? She’s completely redeemed herself from Twilight (not that she was particularly terrible there, but just for being associated with it in general). She was great in this, showing all necessary emotions. And she was incredibly sexy, to boot. I also want to see more of Matt Bush and Martin Starr in the future. I’ve seen Martin Starr in tiny roles in the past, but the guy deserves better. And the only thing I’ve ever seen Matt Bush in are the rollover minute commercials, where I think he’s hilarious, too. It was also interesting to see Ryan Reynolds in this type of role. It’s not his usual quipster, sarcastic, funny man. It’s a more serious and subdued role, though he was great in it.

I think what I liked most about the movie was that, although I don’t remember too much about the 80s (I was born in 86, so I was still rather young at the time), I could still associate myself with a lot of the happenings. James reminded me a lot of, well, me… except without the pot… or the parties and drinking… or the select group of women wanting to be with him. But like James, I’m a college grad with an English/Lit degree, who wants to travel the world, and is quite awkward when it comes to the opposite sex (at least in matters of dating). Though I was right there with Joel, too, at times. And other things, too. Anyway, the point is, I was able to identify with the movie and the characters quite a bit.

I’ve seen very few good movies in theater so far this year (that were actually movies for this year, not last year’s just taking their time), but I’d wager that this is one of the first “great” movies of the year so far. Depending on the rest of the year, I might end up putting this on my Top 10. I didn’t know what to expect going in, but I think that made it better.

So to end this review, I want to share two anecdotes about the man sitting next to me during the movie. First, I knew I was in for a rough time when the very first trailer starts, and it’s for the upcoming Spanish film Sin Nombre. The man proceeds to say, once the trailer is over (and keep in mind, this is a foreign movie with a completely Spanish title), “Looks like it might be pretty good… except it looks like it might have a lot of subtitles.” I knew that if I ever got closer to slapping a stranger for idiot statements, it would be too soon. So the movie’s not very far in, and it shows them driving up onto their driveway or whatever, and the guy points out the car and goes “A Panzer? You don’t see those everyday.” That’s because the movie takes place in the freakin’ 80s, you Dumbass. Anyway, the point is… well, there isn’t a point. I had a stupid guy sitting next to me. And he talked (and breathed) quite loudly. But the movie was brilliant, and that’s all that matters.

Royale With Cheese

TWILIGHT.

As some of you might know, I’ve read all the Twilight books. I don’t consider myself an avid fan, but I have read them all, and I believe there are some pretty entertaining bits to be found within them. I also have often said that, as opposed to the norm, the Twilight series would probably work better as a film series than a book series. Tonight, I have taken a step further into believing that very theory.

After Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) moves away from her mom in the big city of Phoenix, Arizona to the small town of Forks, Washington with her dad, Charlie (Billy Burke), she doesn’t think anything will ever get better for her. She’s clumsy, and she hates the cold and the rain, so of course Forks, a town laden with constant rain and chill, would be ideal for her, right? But then she meets Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), a mysterious young man at her high school who seems to loath the very sight of her upon their first meeting. But as they start to know each other, they start to get closer. And when Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) entices her curiosity over the true nature of the Cullens, Bella starts on a journey to discover the truth about the family… that they’re vampires (though they feed off animals instead). But this cannot stop the true love. Oh no! It must prevail… even after a dangerous Tracker vampire by the name of James (Cam Gigandet) shows up and will stop at nothing to get Bella all to himself.

So first let me talk about the movie as an adaptation. I’ve been reading a lot of things about how this movie is so different from the book and how you shouldn’t go in to this film expecting it to be anything like the reading experience. Did we see the same film? Seriously, the movie was pretty dead on with the book. Sure, there were a few new scenes, a couple cut scenes, and other things like that, but every major scene was there, every major character was there, and basically every important element of the book was counted for. There was even dialogue taken straight from the book, and a voice-over narration very much like Bella’s first-person narration in the book (in fact, some of it is directly from her narration in the book).

The casting was pretty much perfect, specifically the Cullen family, even more specifically Alice and Emmett. They were pretty much dead on with my imagination. The others worked really well, too. The only complaints I have in casting were Bella and Jacob, and only moreso the latter. And it’s not because the acting was bad. In fact, I thought Taylor Lautner acted it just fine. But in the book, Jacob was this massive hulk of a guy, nearly twice Bella’s size (something more like Emmett). And even if he were thin in the first book and got huge later, I have no idea how they're going to pull that off with this guy in the next couple films. But besides his looks, he was good. And my Bella complaint was moreso on how she acted the character, which is probably more of a director complaint than an actress complaint. The Bella in the book is much funnier, wittier, and sharp. The Bella in the movie is so freakin serious and overdramatic all the time. She so totally doesn’t become whiny, serious, and overdramatic until book two. Oh, and one more complaint when it came to characters… what the heck was up with Carlisle’s super-thick white makeup upon his introduction? It got better later, but damn… that was some hardcore thickness right there.

To get into a few more of the movie workings, I had a few issues with logistics in things they did in changing/adding stuff. First of all, they made it the middle of March at the beginning of the movie, as opposed to the book when I believe it’s closer to January. This doesn’t seem like that big of a deal… until you get to the parking lot wreck scene when the whole place is icy. Granted, I don’t live in Washington, but will the ground really be covered in ice in March/April? Another thing is that Edward is so overprotective of Bella, mostly because of how clumsy she is. So why on Earth would he take her to the top of an incredibly tall tree and then let her loose to climb it on her own (much less Bella actually be willing to do so)? That just seemed incredibly out of character for the both of them.

On some other positive sides, there was some good chemistry between characters, though the two characters I felt had the most chemistry aren’t the two most would think. I felt that the relationship between Bella and her father Charlie was done very well. When a specific thing happens towards the end of the movie, I actually felt really bad, much like I did when I read it in the book. There was also some good chemistry between Bella and Jacob, and I really did like Jacob in the film despite his size. And they even added more of him in, which was smart. In the first book, he had a really bit role, and then becomes this huge character come the second installment. But they upped his role in the first film, which, again, I really liked. Finally, of course, there was the good chemistry between Bella and Edward. It was pretty tense most of the time, as Edward gets upset a lot in the first book. Though there wasn’t nearly as much humor between the two of them in the film as there was in the book (I mean, it was there… just not as much. They focused more on the serious stuff in the film).

But one of the biggest flaws of the film is also one of the biggest flaws of the books: Edward and Bella's relationship is purely superficial. And what people aren't seeming to grasp, including the uber-fans of the book, is this flaw. In the movie, Edward and Bella argue a lot before suddenly falling head-over-heels for each other for no apparent reason, and then will do anything for each other. Well, sorry to break this to you, but the books are exactly the same. If you take away every superficial quality about Edward (and even Jacob brings this up in one of the books), there'd be absolutely no reason that Bella would love him like she did. The relationship comes from nothing, is based on nothing, and stays hollow for the entirety of the series. And that was emphasized even further within this movie, even to the chagrin of the fans who thought it otherwise. So, yet again, the movie keeps to the heart of the books just fine.

The film is no masterpiece by any means, just like the book isn’t a new classic (no matter how much the fan base of 15-year-old girls thinks it is). Both the books and the films, once they make the others, will simmer down with time. But I figure that if they stick to it like they’re doing now, by staying close to the book, yet altering it just slightly so that it fits good for a movie, and taking out all the bad writing and annoying little descriptions of Edward’s godly breath and godly this and that (though they did almost allude to all of that during one part of the movie), then I really do believe that the movie series will be much better than the book series. I anticipate the next film now, especially since I hated that book the most in the series… I can’t wait to see if they actually make it good. After all, they did a pretty good job with this one (and the following score is more based on entertainment value and adaptation abilities than actual quality of film... plus, when it comes to the Twilight series, you aren't in it for quality to begin with anyway, so it's all good).

A Keanu 'Whoa'

Twilight Teaser Trailer.

I hate teaser trailers... because they're such a tease! I adored the book (and still need to read the next couple in the series), but the Twilight teaser trailer has finally hit the internet! And It. Is. Awesome.

(And is it just me, or does Robert Pattinson remind anybody else of Timothy Olyphant a couple of times in this teaser?).