NEW MOON REVIEW: Twilight Kicked Up a Notch
We were both impressed with what this sequel was able accomplish over the first film in the Twilight franchise. With better action, better acting, and better direction all around, New Moon gave both Nat as a Twilight veteran, and Matt as a noob, much more than we were expecting.
PLUS – Click here to take a look at our review of Twilight from last year!
December 15th, 2009 at 12:59 am
I’m a 44-year old male. I have BAs in English and Psychology and am a professional writer. I’ve read all four of the “Twilight” books and seen both movies twice. I did these things because I have a 15-year old niece whom I adore and with whom I love to share experiences. I take her to go see midnight showings of these movies (and also ones like “The Dark Knight” and “Watchmen”) during school nights and let her stay home the next day because I’m cool. She is literally ga-ga over the “Twilight” phenomenon. However, she has an excuse: she’s a teenager with raging hormones and no grasp of reality. So OK, Matt & Nat… what’s YOUR excuse?
I’m literally shocked that you two veteran critics liked “New Moon” so much, and even enough to proclaim it considerably better than “Twilight”. To be fair, it’s understandable that Nat, at least, would have a primal, visceral attraction to the series, as she’s a woman and these books/movies are even more estrogen-centric than Anne Rice’s vampire manure. But Matt? C’mon man, you have to be riding the wave of Nat’s hype and energy to think that this was even a passable attempt at a decent movie. I agree with Matt that most of the pathos and angst were bled out of “New Moon”, but that’s because neither Kristen Stewart nor Robert Pattinson have the talent or gravitas to emote realistically in front of a camera. The scenes of Stewart and Pattinson together were literally painful to watch, and many people at my screenings were actually laughing during the scenes where the two leads struggled to display any acting ability. Stewart’s “craft” displays it’s singularity in every role she plays – and as for Pattinson, well…squinting one’s eyes and furrowing one’s brow does not a shattered heart make, Rob.
Chris Weitz is an intelligent man and a decent director, so he did the smart thing and focused on what he had at his disposal – which is why the sequel became much more focused on silly humor while the Native American version of N’Sync continually doffed their shirts. Weitz knew, of course, that this would cause all the tweeny-bopper girls in the audience to squeal with delight and spend the next 15 minutes texting their friends three rows down. Weitz was also able to distance himself from the story and look at the hand he was dealt in a realistic way, which something Catherine Hardwicke couldn’t do and led to her failure with “Twilight.” I usually enjoy Hardwicke as a director, but she fell prey to one of the classic blunders: “Love your story, but don’t Fall In Love with it.” She became wrapped up in the shiny hoopla surrounding the production, and lost her perspective. Blinded by the sparklies, as it were. She’s not a glam moviemaker, with one foot steeped in indie grunge and the other in edgy snark – but her girliness ultimately doomed her.
Again, I respect Chris Weitz’ ability behind the camera, but there were some incredibly poor decisions made in this film. However, I believe he was forced to make some of those choices because of the limitations with which he was forced to work. Here are a couple of examples: 1) Instead of a simmering, smouldering Jacob Black who’s internal struggle is as dangerous as the monster that he’s become, we instead get a petulant, squeaky-voiced man-child with great abs. A horrible choice, but one that Weitz was forced into because Taylor Lautner is an even more woeful actor than the two leads. 2) The “ghost images” of Edward appearing to Bella were beyond cheesy – they looked like something ripped out of “Somewhere In Time” or some other 1970s Harlequin romance movie. I don’t know who decided to use that particular CGI motif, but it was laughably bad. 3) Toning down the action/adventure aspect and ramping up the melodrama was yet another mood swing for the progesterone crowd, and while it will undoubtedly cause the sequel to rake in more of Daddy’s money, it also made the movie BORING. At times I felt as if I were watching a student film by a goth chick who’s inner artist desperately wanted to make a Merchant & Ivory movie, but then decided at the last minute to throw in some hot guys and a cool yellow Porsche to “pizazz it up”.
So now it’s a 7-month wait until “Eclipse” opens. Once again, I’ll be there at the midnight showing with my niece and her bff, hoping against hope that new director David Slade was able to distill something vibrant, thrilling and depthful from the book. “Eclipse” is actually my favorite of the four books, as it often shifted the focus away from Edward and Bella and explored more of the Cullen family and The Volturi. I’m not looking forward to “Breaking Dawn”, however, as by the end of the last book, I was praying that our two lovers would fall into a random vat of hydrochloric acid.
December 15th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Well said BrashHulk. Even thought I hate this franchise, I’ll still go to the midnight premiere for Eclipse, in the IMAX nonetheless. I’m not through with this franchise yet.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Hi, I agree Kristen can’t act – she never has any emotion on her face. She could have been a lot more torn over Jake and attached to him; that tension would have been effective. I thought Taylor Lautner did a good job. Pattinson was ok. The Bella in the water thing was silly – Victoria was right there, and suddenly she decides not to attack? Silly plot hole. It was ok – it is what it is – a teeny bopper chick flick.
Brashhulk, thanks for all your credentials and pointing out why you read and watched Twilight and New Moon – TWICE. It makes your review ohhhh SSSOOOOOOO much more gripping (NOT). I mean, come on, it’s a movie for 13 year-olds and it was pretty good on that level. End of story for those of us with a brain. Matt and Nat don’t need any excuses. They always make great observations and they are right that it’s a much better movie than the first – because the story was that much more complex, above any other reason. They said they liked it more than they thought they would, and that’s all. Nowhere do they put it on anything near equal footing with ‘liking’ or not liking Dark Knight, LOTR or other adult scifi-fantasy films. You sir, can skip your comments on the next film, because we already know what they’ll be. I mean, why on Earth would you write a novel on New Moon? Unless you’re a 13 year-old girl in disguise!
The fact that you take your ‘niece’ to midnight screenings and then let her skip school (is she your daughter or your niece?) also puts your review in a certain light, shall we say. (You put it out there, not me.) You ain’t helping with the fact that she has ‘no grasp on reality’ sir. Do you? Just in case you need me to spell it out to you (and you do), here goes: take her to a normal time showing of the film and put an emphasis on her education. But if you don’t already realize that….good luck to you both!
Anyway, from a sociological point of view, the only deep thing worth saying about New Moon is that it’s a feminist breakthrough IMO. Sure there have been films before where there’s been male eye candy added to the film (James Bond in a bathing suit, etc. etc.), but this film seems to be to have broken through barriers in that the eye candy is pronounced – Jake is extremely beautiful as Bella says, both leading males have their shirts off repeatedly, as do the wolf pack, all to attract and please a young female teen audience. I think that’s very interesting. It’s a first, I believe. When I think about all the naked or scantily clad girls added to Porky’s and a million teen boy movies since, I am glad Hollywood has finally taken this step. And tastefully done too, in this respect.
December 19th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
that’s idiotic – lowering standards to the level of porky’s is never a good thing – and it’s certainly not ‘feminist’. i think we can all agree that pubescent ogling and the encouragement of such things is something to be proud of. Not in the form of porky’s anyway (and to that extent this film too). There are better examples of teen-flicks with tantalizing content which ARE well acted in, well directed, well scripted, etc. (i’d name a few but then this’d become a comparison or films, and thats not the point, but i just thought it was worth pointing out)
BrashHulk, i agree with nearly everything you said; well put and well thought out. Tootie, you essentially attacked BrashHulk, not his review of the film.
p.s. when someone mentions Matthew McConaughey, just like when someone googles Megan Fox, all i think of and all you will find is nearly nakedness – so this film is not a revelation, hollywood has always been a money-making machine, it gives people what they want, and/or tells them what they want. This film is no different. This, and the prequel film, is simply a sub-par teen flick. There are many, way better teen flicks AND teen novels.
December 21st, 2009 at 1:21 pm
First of all, I am not lowering any standards, mine or anyone elses’, to Porky’s. I don’t know where you got that. And the definition, as you don’t seem to know, of feminist, is equality for male and female.
This film helps put us on a equal footing in the way I explained. To reiterate, there aren’t any other teen flicks with tantalizing content such as this JUST for teen girls – this is a first that I know of . As I said, sure there have been films with half-dressed guys like James Bond and Matthew McConaughey, but those films also featured naked or half-naked women in the film (that is, lots of eye candy for both genders).
‘New Moon’ is a first in that ALL THE EYE CANDY IS FOR FEMALES. That is my point. If you know of others, please do list them. I’d be interested, but I am doubtful you will be able to list any.
BrashHulk misunderstood and kinda attacked Matt and Nat, insinuating that they were making the film out to be more than what it is, a teeny bopper vampire romance. I stick up for them whenever I feel some has maligned them unfairly. I will never stop doing that.
And you have to admit, just a guy, that Brashhulk comes across…..anyway….whatever!
December 21st, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Just to put it into perspective… Porky’s was a $4-Million dollar movie that grossed over $100-Million worldwide. In the 80′s. That’s pretty amazing return on investment at the box office.
Afterall, it’s called showBUSINESS, not showFUN. Finding an audience isn’t easy for films, and when a production company finds a way to make some insane money at the box office to fund all the other films in their business, you can see why they capitalize. Summit hit the formula perfectly with Twilight, and will hopefully be in business risking it on cool films like Once… they put some FUN back into it for the film snob in all of us.
Especially the film snob in filmmakers
There’s an audience for just about anything… and Vampire/Werewolf crushing highschool students make great business sense when you’re after the spending money of 13-year old nieces and their kind uncles.
~Matt
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:40 am
Wow. You guys have WAY too much time on your hands…. Arguing over a teen movie review that excessivly? Really????
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:30 am
The film is a milestone. A reference point.
A long time from now, people will say “New Moon was the first Hollywood movie with eye candy ONLY for teen girls.” That’s interesting, to me anyway. One of the only interesting things about the film for sure!
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Yikes. Okay, backing off….
December 24th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
My contention with Matt & Nat is that “New Moon” is not a step up in quality from “Twilight” as a film. They both stated that opinion in their review, and I disagreed. I decided to spend a little time giving them some perspective of who I am and the detailed reasons why I disagreed for a specific purpose: Because posts containing valid, supportable points coming from a slightly-less anonymous source are usually more well-received and appreciated than wastes of time and bandwidth from brilliant submitters like “SukkMyBawlzYo” screaming “THIS MOVIE WUZ TEH LAMEST SUCKFEST EVAR!”
In my personal view, it’s very simple: The actual QUALITY of a movie has nothing to do with target audiences, zeitgeist, money spent-to-money made ratio, notoriety, or anything that takes the art & science of film-making outside the realm of itself. Using that criteria, “New Moon” is a poor film with little redeeming value – and people who defend ANY low-grade movie with an embarrassed shrug, trite excuses or employ the “It Is What It Is” mentality either have an agenda, they don’t debate well, or they’re just being lazy. Also, my stance is supported by the fact that “New Moon” carries a 28% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes after 198 reviews, whereas “Twilight” carries a 50% Fresh rating after 195 reviews.
So, in all actuality, the only entity being attacked in my initial comment was the film. No reviewers were harmed in the making of my post. I have considerable respect for Matt & Nat, and also enjoy their style. Not only is their passion and commitment to the Geek genre commendable in itself, they also strive to make their reviews enjoyable, fun and accessible to the non-Geek who may stumble across the site. Even when Matt & Nat dislike a film, they at least try to be fair and point out the positive aspects. This is a wondrous and refreshing phenomenon, as most Geek sites drip with such fanboy/fangirl snark and negativity that the moderators may as well place a “Mundanes Will Be Skinned & Eaten Alive” tag on the (You’re Not) Welcome page.
Tootie, my advice to you is: If you want people to take your words to heart, then don’t allow wayward assumptions to color those words. There’s nothing wrong with allowing emotion to drive your point home, as long as you actually stay ON the point. I honestly don’t grok the venom directed at my person, but we all have our demons to deal with and I wouldn’t presume to make any misguided attempts at dissecting yours. However, I thank you for your concern for my niece’s well-being, but rest assured that allowing her to skip a school day once or twice a semester hasn’t caused too much irreparable harm. I’m sorry that you disagree with my approach to Avatar Parenting, but as the Dude says: “Well, that’s just your opinion, man.”