Right then, Twilight

[annathepiper]

Y’all may remember that a few weeks back we at the Murkworks had us a Sparkly Evening of Vampire Sparklyness: a group viewing of Twilight. I got asked by marzipan_pig if I would review the movie. So this is me, doing that!

Short form, honestly: not as godawful as I was expecting. It is not a good movie by any stretch of the imagination, but it did have occasional okay moments in it.

Going in, even though I haven’t actually read the book, I nonetheless had an overview idea of what would happen. So nothing was really a surprise, which I grant may have lost me something in the movie viewing experience. My attention was caught therefore not by the events playing out, but rather how those events were depicted.

For example, the Big Reveal where Edward makes with showing Bella the sparkling: not nearly as visually striking as it should have been. Edward looked like he had a flashlight on in his shirt pocket, and the beam was reflecting off his chest. Not at all what I was expecting–though I’ll also grant that if they’d gone more obviously Sparkly it would have looked even cheesier, so hey.

Not much better implementation of Edward’s speed, either. Watching him scramble up a tree with Bella clinging to his back was making us all go “wait, vampires are howler monkeys?”

But of course the main point of the story is the relationship between Bella and Edward. Which is in turn of course the whole issue I have with the story to begin with: I just don’t buy it. I will freely admit I am biased from my Joss Whedon fandom here, but with Buffy and Angel, I’ve already had a much more intense and dangerous relationship between a teenage girl and a vampire a lot older than she is. With Angel, especially in Season 2 of Buffy, you believe that this guy can and will at the slightest provocation rip Buffy’s throat out. Not so with Edward. Young Mr. Pattinson is very pretty, I’ll give him that, but I never believed that his character was actually dangerous to Bella at any point. It didn’t help either that half the time the boy looked more constipated than dazzling, too.

I did say that the movie had a couple of halfway okay bits, and I’ll stand by that. Cheesy though it might have been, I kind of liked Vampire Baseball after solarbird pointed out that it was one of the more unusual things we’ve seen vampires do in, well, anything. There’s also a good bit where Edward casually leaps off of something and Bella says testily to him, “Can you at least try to act human? I’ve got neighbors!” It’s one of the few places in the movie where Bella shows a bit of spark, not to mention the world beyond just her and Edward.

All in all it’s a fun movie to watch in a group that isn’t taking it seriously, especially if there’s MSTing to be done. It does fall into that range of badness that makes it excellent for the Mystery Science treatment.

But I still ain’t reading the book.

Mirrored from annathepiper.org.

Comments

[marzipan-pig.livejournal.com]

Ooooh thank you! I have an inivtation to watch a pirated version of the movie, so I will hopefully see it soon myself. Your description of The Sparkle sounds kind of like what happens at the end of a colonoscopy, where the docotor watches for the light to shine out through the person's belly (really; I've seen it and it's weird, kind of red and lit-from-within).

I think Angel's hunkiness makes him seem more sexual and dangerous than the wispy-brooding look I've seen in stills/ads of Edward. Even though I'm more attracted to guys-like-Edward, they don't have the INTENSITY of the Angels of the world!

I will review it myself if/when I get around to seeing it!

[annathepiper]

You're very welcome! And har about the colonoscopy thing; you're not far off, aside from the reddishness part.

David Borenaz had a lot more going on with the broody, dangerous hunkiness, yeah. Edward beats him for prettiness, but yeah, Robert Pattinson just can't match Borenaz for intensity yet. It may be a function of his youth, dunno.

I expect we'll probably giggle at New Moon at some point after it comes out, just to ogle Shirtless Werewolf Boy, who for my money is way cuter than Edward. ;)

[kieri.livejournal.com]

Ha. :)

Have you ever seen the YouTube mashup of Buffy versus Edward? It's pretty cool. I like the commentary on the relative feminism of Buffy and Bella, and the way it illustrates how freaking creepy Edward is. (Entirely aside from the sparkles)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZwM3GvaTRM

[annathepiper]

Oh yes, I saw that when it was going around the net before, and it is indeed made entirely of Win. :)

[mari-mac1109.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I seriously don't get why people think Twilight is the most romantic love story ever. It's mostly: confusion and hatred, followed by more confusion and hatred and then some plain confusion and then some answers and then infatuation FOREVER. And some stalking. And then some "OUR LOVE. IT IS SO TRUE."

And I just don't get it.

I feel like if you asked Edward or Bella what they saw in each other, neither would know.

[annathepiper]

I'm sure that some would try to draw a parallel to Romeo and Juliet, since Romeo and Juliet also had the teenage love thing going on (modulo Romeo not being, y'know, a hundred-plus-year-old vampire and all). But then, Romeo and Juliet went straight to WUV TWU WUV right out of the gate, and also, Romeo never hung out in Juliet's bedroom watching her sleep.

Also, that was Shakespeare, and, well, 'nuff said. ;)

But yeah, I cannot imagine what the hell Edward sees in Bella and I have a hard time parsing that more than I do the opposite. Bella you can kind of handwave off as being young enough that she's operating on pure infatuation here, but Edward, being 100+, is at least in theory old enough to want a little bit more out of a life companion, no? Unless he just likes pretty young things who go "you're so BYOOTEEFUL make me a vampire plz", in which case, shallow much there, Sparkle Boy?

(I think I'm trying to apply way too much Earth Logic to this entire scenario.)

[agrimony.livejournal.com]

I saw the movie before I'd read the book. Now, I enjoyed the movie enough to be willing to pay $7 for it at Walmart, but I do remember leaving the theatre thinking 'gosh, that's the most boring vampire movie I've ever seen.' Of course, any time anything even remotely close to interesting (a new character reveal, a book scene, whatnot) was about to happen, the tweens next to me would give a bated breath gasp, so I always knew something was coming.

I enjoyed the movie enough to have watched it a couple of times on DVD, but by no means to I spend any of the movie going 'Oh yes, Edward. You could definitely kill her in an instant.'

Then I read the book.

And suddenly, understood why the movie was so freaking /slow/ and why /nothing happened/. Because /nothing happens/ in the book! The odd pacing of the movie - ie. an hour and a half of lazy lead up followed by 15 minutes of action - is /exactly/ the same pacing as the book. Oy. Only, they added some more stuff to the movie to at least foreshadow the trio of bad vamps.

And yet, I didn't /hate/ the book. And I read the remainder of the series. The last book completely and totally jumps the shark. I can't even imagine how they'll make it into a movie that is anything other than horrifying - and not in the Rosemary's Baby way.

I spent a lot of New Moon kinda sorta hoping that Bella would, in fact, manage to kill herself. Even though I knew she wouldn't, because hey, there were still two more books to go through. :) I'm interested to see how the movie version manages to handle Bella's completely over the top reaction to Edward breaking her heart and if they'll be able to make it less, well, slow and maudlin.

[annathepiper]

I've read summaries of all four books, so yeah, I know what comes in Book Four. I too am wondering how exactly they'll pull that off.

As for Book Two, man, I'm almost more leery about that just because of how maudlin I'm given to understand Bella gets. To wit, AIGH. :)

Two comments in one!

[lickingtoad.livejournal.com]

I forget where I found/was led to it, but somebody who used to be Mormon did a neat deconstruction of the story along those principles and with some of the elements, picked up on a lot of stuff that made me go: "Hnh. Mormons are weird. Plus now, I don't have to read the book."

I have a great many friends who virtually pollute their britches with delight when 'Harry Potter' is mentioned in any context, and my staple answer as to why it fails to inspire me is that the 'childlike wonder' space in my heart was filled by Roald Dahl. I don't need to validate myself through love of Pottermania. (My brother once suggested we call them always 'Harry Potheads.')

Re: Two comments in one!

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

I think my biggest pull for Harry over Bella, is that there has always been a big big spot in my heart for fairy tales and mythology. Harry has lots of it. I also appreciate well written books, and the little I could stomach, Twilight has it not. I can see the character play in the HP books, which Twilight, again, has not.

However, if we're going to talk obsession and childlike wonder, I have forever had the spot claimed by Garth Nix and his Abhorsen series.

So I feel ya. Speaking as an adult who'll still read a book of fairy tales cover to cover.

Re: Two comments in one!

[annathepiper]

The Potter books certainly do have some lovely worldbuilding, that's for sure. And while I've got my issues with some aspects of Rowling's writing, worldbuilding is not one of them.

I was just saying in my other comment that my childlike wonder spot gets claimed by Tolkien--but then, you also reminded me of the (fill in the color) Fairy Books. I ate those up when I was a kid, along with Bulfinch's Mythology. :)

Re: Two comments in one!

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

I once worked in a library on the UA campus, the McLure Education Library. In the basement were a bunch of books from kids' to young adults'. It was wonderful. I could pull out a stack of fairy tales, millions of retellings of Cinderella, Snow White, Baba Yaga (I smuggled out a copy of East of the Sun, West of the Moon) and gorged myself on them.

I was telling my husband last night that fairy tales and folklore are important to us. To know what our ancestor's feared, what they believed in, what they saw around them. The Bible is a big collection of folktales and fairy tales just as much as the Grimm Brother's collection is.

I met a guy from India who had either a phD or a Masters, and studied Indian folklore. He worked in a gas station, I think his brother owned it? But we talked about it, and he also understood how learning those things grounds us.

I think that's why I've always loved it, and loved mythology too. It's our long, unbroken tie to who we were as a people, before our wonder and awe was stolen away.

Re: Two comments in one!

[lickingtoad.livejournal.com]

I think I shall friend you, now. (PS, and I once asked this is a bar: Why are Indian gods and goddesses so often blue? Is there a rationale beyond 'Blue is pretty?' I mean, even the Byzantines didn't do gold-leaf backgrounds purely for 'pretty.' Gold = Heaven, natch.)

Re: Two comments in one!

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

XD I'm pretty boring, but feel free!

Shiva's throat is blue, though there are two different stories that say why.

Vishnu is completely blue because that is how he is described in the Puranas (as the divine color of the clouds) which I think is attributed to the fact that he is the most divine of the gods. It represents the infinite in Hindu beliefs, and Vishnu is the infinite force with no form, no name, and he "incommensurable".

I was a religious studies major, after I was an English major. :P I was always fascinated by those sorts of questions too.

Re: Two comments in one!

[annathepiper]

Oh, I read the Twilight summaries done by cleolinda, myself. Which were HY-LARIOUS, and gave me more than enough of an idea of what was going on.

Re: Potter, *snerk*. I've liked the Potter books okay as I've read them (and I still need to read Book 7). But I'm with you; it's not nearly the Great Revelation to me that it's been to so many others, just because I've seen so many of the things in it before reading SF/F in general since I was a wee tyke. For my childhood Sense of Wonder, I think I need to go clear back to Tolkien; I never did much in the way of reading children's authors when I was an actual child. :)

I do kind of envy the kids who are getting that initial Sense of Wonder off the Potter books, though. That is a great feeling to have, and I can see enough in the books to intellectually see how they're getting it, even if it doesn't trigger the reaction in me.

Re: Two comments in one!

[lickingtoad.livejournal.com]

If they turn children who think of reading as a chore into children who look forward to reading, *then* I shall give them 'props.' (I'm sure they have.)

Re: Two comments in one!

[denelian.livejournal.com]

i am pretty sure you are meaning LJ user "stoney321"

at least, she has WONDERFUL write-ups of all the books with the "mormon mythology" beautifully deconstructed. she is TehAwesome :)

[astraether.livejournal.com]

The "vampires playing baseball" bit totally reminded me of the old Claremont days in "X-Men." I don't know what it is about baseball, but every few issues, there'd be an intro where the team's playing baseball, and using their powers, and just having a grand ol' time. I don't know if Stephanie Meyer is a comic fan or not, but that's what it reminded me of.

That and the fact that it's more fantasy-fulfillment. What teenage girl wouldn't want to have a family of vampires as friends? But not scary vampires -- they play baseball, see! They're good ol' wholesome American vampires! Nothing wrong with that!

The "howler monkey" bit where he's carrying her around on his back made me laugh, too. Suddenly Edward reminded me of Falkor from the "Neverending Story."

[annathepiper]

Yeah, the "good wholesome pastime of baseball" thing certainly seems in character for what Meyer was trying to do. I don't know enough about her to know whether she has any love for comics. I'd more expect it comes out of her overall Mormon-flavored ethos for the books.

And to tie this over to my Harry Potter post, har, we caught a bit of the fourth Harry Potter movie on TV yesterday--the one where Robert Pattinson appears as Cedric Diggory. I had a simultaneous reaction of "AIGH EDWARD IS AT HOGWARTS" and "wow, that boy looked way cuter in this movie than he did in Twilight". Also, quite rosy-cheeked by comparison!

[caligogreywings.livejournal.com]

He seems so very wooden in Twilight from the stills I've seen. I thought the boy could act, but it's like they lobotomized him for Twilight.

[lickingtoad.livejournal.com]

"AAATREEEYYYUUUUU!"

(Sorry, I hearted that movie as a kid. A case could well be made that Noah Hathaway was my earliest celebrity crush.)

[denelian.livejournal.com]

my best friend (we became friends over Buffy - we started watching them together in Season 4, up until then i had only caught ocassionals - we also watched Angel, and we would forever fight over which of us *got* David Boreanus...) wanted to go see Twilight. and i, stuck with Best Friend's Job, had to.
i had had to read all the books, because i am the 1st Reader for anything my 13-year-old niece might want to read (in case you are wondering - my verdict was "not until she's at least 15. maybe. maybe even older. these books are *actively* anti-feminist and pro-women subsuming themselves in their boyfriend/husband/whatever. *rage*)
so the movie was just *BORING*. the ONLY good scenes were Alice scenes, and the baseball game.

i should try watching with different people to MST3K it - i bet that would a *lot* more fun!

i agree 100000000% with the "Angel - how it's done" statements.
sigh.
i also agree with the lack o' sparkle - he was supposed to look like *diamonds*, for Pete's sake! (Pete drank a *lot* of Sake last night at his birthday party... sorry, my mind wanders); i thought that they way they depected the *sparkle* was just - i mean, he looked more like a Raver than a Diamond!
sigh. and i will be forced to see the rest of them, too.
i am terrified of Movie 4.

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

I guess my only comment is you're not *quite* the teenage girl that is the intended audience! Emotional depth seems to be less important than roiling emotions.

[annathepiper]

I am indeed not the target audience for this thing, but that certainly hasn't seemed to stop all the other women my age who have been slurping up these books. ;)

And hey, I have been known to read some YA--rachelcaine has some good ones, and The Forest of Hands and Teeth which I read a while back is YA and awesome. But this particular one? Not so much.