Critics Slam New Moon
US magazine, November 19, 2009
New Moon pales in comparison to Twilight, according to the critics.
Chicago Sun-Times' Roger Ebert says "the characters in this movie should be arrested for loitering with intent to moan. Never have teenagers been in greater need of a jump-start. Granted some of them are more than 100 years old, but still: their charisma is by Madame Tussaud."
Ty Burr of The Boston Globe remarks: "Sorry, girls: The thrill is gone." He says that "where the first film’s director, Catherine Hardwicke, plugged into [author Stephenie] Meyer’s vision of supernatural teenage lust with abandon, Chris Weitz is stuck with a sequel that’s a morning-after mope-fest."
Burr also says that the film favors werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner) than vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson).
"When he's onscreen, Pattinson’s Edward is all emo posturing under a trembling bouffant - the actor suddenly seems to be embarrassed to be here," says Burr. "Lautner's performance, by contrast, has the warmth of an actual human."
But Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times says Lautner and Kristen Stewart (who plays Bella) have no heat: "The connection between these two is so self-evidently non-romantic that it turns out not to be much of a diversion."
USA Today's Claudia Puig agrees, saying the the Bella-Edward romance is a bore and that "the pace picks up" once Jacob and his pals turn into werewolves. She gave the film 2.5 out of 4 stars.
Variety writes that ladies hoping to gaze at Pattinson the big screen " may be disappointed by Pattinson's reduced presence" in the sequel, "as his Edward appears predominantly in mumbling visions until a cliffhanger that brazenly sets up the next episode."
Despite some harsh reviews, the film is still expected to earn more than $85 million during its first weekend (it has run up the biggest advance sales of any film in history). It opens in 4,024 locations, beginning with 3,500 performances at 12:01 a.m. Friday.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Boo hiss.....I swear some critics just like to be contrary. I don't pay much attention to the critics if I really want to seen something. I will see New Moon. Just not on the first weekend.
ReplyDeleteAt 8pm last night, my pals and I began what I termed The Twilight Extravaganza. We caught a 9pm viewing of Twilight on the big screen where its lush greens and head-spinning romance captivates you through to “the most beautiful prom scene ever.” Given that the lines for the 12:01am viewing of New Moon became 50 deep by 10:30, I cut out early to join the legions of teenagers in home-made “La Push Cliff Diving” jerseys and tweens flanked by their mommas. I secured prime real estate in the middle of the rows amid the buzzing of my fellow Twilight family. Surrounding me was talk of this plot point and that character development and oh, yes, the love story.
ReplyDeleteAnd then Edward walked onto the screen, brooding and protective and pained. Universal sigh as every female's hand reached to her heart.
New Moon is not Twilight. It could never be. Twilight was a completely unexpected success, a film budget of 37 million that grossed 118 million and catapulted unknowns to meteoric super-stardom. Naturally, this films more blockbuster than indie-low budget art.
Part of the magic of Twilight resides in the Robsten dynamic. These two characters—and actors—have sparkling chemistry that pours out of them into the audience. Your own heart quickens. Whereas Hardwicke’s production deviated from the book’s manuscript Seitz vowed to direct-by-the-book with accuracy overwhelming intimacy. Seitz direction seemed more formulaic, the film more masculine with amazing CGI and stunt sequences. It does mesmerize. But in an audience predominantly consisting of women and young girls, we’re more mesmerized by an undying love, by romance of star-cross’d lovers, even by passion with our best friend. Here, we’re left hungry just as much as our vampires. Aside from Edward’s absence being the cornerstone of the novel, New Moon, some of that lost romance might be attributed to director’s vision. Hardwicke, Twilight’s director, known for her dizzying intensity and magnificently artistic directing, conceptualized Bella and Edward’s unique relationship in a tangible fashion by focusing on the nuances of love. Those stolen glances, the hesitant kiss, the flirtation. We were lost in the trees above Oregon as these two fell head over heels. With Edward’s absence in New Moon, Jacob is no match for such heat even though his rippling abs sent a tide of gasps through the female populace. As it should be. Lautener’s Jacob wonderfully epitomizes the novel’s were-man: he is angry and strong and protective and unrequited in his fierce love for Bella.
Where critics find issues with the film most Twi-hards, or anyone who actually read the series analytically, would probably emerge 85% pleased with this film adaptation. The actors portray the characters we envision and play them rather well. Pattison’s Edward smolders and broods as he should—he is tortured by this love. Kristen’s Bella lost her rapid eye blinking and stuttering lines for a more natural delivery and even comedic timing. She convincingly depicts the torment of lost love; of trying to remake your life when he’s gone. Sure, there is less Edward, there are some “rushed” scenes, some corny CGI wolves, but it does match the novel’s focus and intent. And even if only to long for Bella and Edward's tenderness is good enough reason to join the crowds. Go ahead. Everyone’s doing it. Just be sure to wear your T-shirt. Team Edward or Team Jacob. Right now, I can’t decide.
Nadya and I saw "New Moon" on Wednesday night. I finished reading Kindle e-book versions of "Twilight" and "New Moon" only days before. I enjoyed the movie and book versions of both stories. I'm rather taken aback by the level of negativity I've heard from reviews, including those quoted in the original post. I wonder at the criteria reviewers use for their conclusions. Are they comparing "New Moon" to "Casablanca"? Is "New Moon" considered bad when compared to other vampire/werewolf movies? Or did it automatically lose points on that account?
ReplyDeleteTo my thinking, a movie like "New Moon" needs to be judged in its own context. For example, viewers unfamiliar with the "Twilight" story are not as likely to appreciate "New Moon". More to the point, viewers (including critics) who would not like the two novels should not bother with this movie. It was not intended for them.
Leen, you graced us with an excellent review of this movie. You described well its strengths and weaknesses and who is likely to enjoy the movie and why. While I agree with your assessments, I still believe you approached this objectively. I think you have a natural talent for movie reviews. Perhaps you should consider doing this as a sideline.
Surprisingly, I thought "New Moon" was a better movie than "Twilight" for the reasons Leen noted about the former. This is not to say I enjoyed the one more than the other. "Twilight" has special appeal in that it introduced us to the world of benevolent vampires and the unique love between Bella and Edward. The first movie of such series usually has more impact on that account. While these themes are more than enough to carry the first movie, I felt that the second had more depth and breadth. The themes of great personal loss, self-doubt, loyalty and redemption play out along with the continued themes of true love and self-sacrifice. The ending includes a gripping introduction to the third story. I've already started reading the third book.
I finally saw New Moon and can officially report that Remmi is on Team Edward :)
ReplyDelete