Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson share an intimate moment in “Twilight.” (Photo credit: Summit Entertainment)
‘Twilight’ mostly lackluster, but should satisfy book fans
Remember 2008? How could you forget? Kosovo declared independence from Serbia. The HD DVD format finally died. The Beijing Olympics happened. Oh, and “Twilight” made its way to the big screen to the adulation of millions of fan girls everywhere.
In case you’ve lived under a rock for the last several years, “Twilight” is the brainchild of novelist Stephenie Meyer, who decide vampires should be high schoolers who sparkle when in the sunlight. And then there’s the love story.
Oh, god, the love story.
This particular fantasy involves a human protagonist, Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), who moved to Forks, Wash., to live with her father. The archetypal new girl, she attracts attention from every cultural clique at her new school, including the ever-pale, ever-brooding Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). However, instead of being the mysterious guy who answers questions with more questions, he’s the resident 100-year-old vampire with an intense desire for Bella. Whether that need is love or something more physical (aka he wants to drink her blood) is the question that must be answered.
The story on which the film was based was lacking in actual plot structure and had the tendency to insist upon itself. What plot there was revolved around an imposed forbidden love between a mortal who has self-image issues and an immortal vampire who loathes himself more than the mortal girl who affects him so.
In the film version, most of the detail found in the book was stripped out, and it shows. Not to say either was particularly verbose, but the film’s script was even more shallow, failing to establish character depth or to adequately set up for the film’s numerous sequels.
Then there’s the not-so-subtly implied metaphor regarding the dangers of premarital sex and the value of abstinence. Some say there’s an underlying satisfaction in the wait, that the reward is worth the trials and tribulations. (We won’t even begin to talk about the drama.) But here it’s just forced and ill-explained.
On the plus side, though: “Twilight” is gorgeous. From its pretty cast to its sweeping cinematic landscapes capturing the essence of the Pacific Northwest, cinematographer Elliot Davis never fails at securing the perfect background for the scene.
And there are a couple of well-done scenes involving Bella and Edward. They’re tense and awkward, reminiscent of being a teenager. Some ore actually kind of funny.
But that’s not enough to make up for a deader-than-dead cast and a plot that makes little sense to those not intimately familiar with the book.
“Twilight” was never meant for greatness. It was just one woman’s take on forbidden love. But given its popularity, one would think some more effort was due. In the end, “Twilight” is just bloodless.
Two sparkly stars out of five.
Silver Screening Reviews 