If I had to briefly sum up the (chuckle) plot it might go something like this. Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) are having trouble with their relationship. She is getting older, and he is remaining the same age. I thought that could make for an interesting story line, but alas that gets dropped after a couple minutes as soon as Edward dumps Bella because their worlds are too different. She is a human and he is a vampire. It just isn't right for a butcher to date a cow. She is a wreck, but takes solace in Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) as their friendship grows he moves in and she pushes away because she still is not over Edward, then she moves in and he pushes away because he has genetically transformed into a werewolf. In the end Bella must choose between a pasty pansy-ass vampire that always looks like he just rolled out of his coffin, or a werewolf that when human resembles Native-American Matt Damon. Decisions, decisions.
OK it can't be the vampire/werewolf supernatural angle that people find so riveting. The story does absolutely nothing with both forces. You never see either of them actually kill and devour a single human, and they have some sort of bullshit truce that prevents them from fighting with each other. What the hell is the point of creating all of these monstrous characters if you are just going to castrate their powers?
What is the least bit sensual or romantic about this? There is zero chemistry or tension between any of these characters. There is always a brief embrace or light kiss before something storms in to interrupt the moment. And there is not the slightest possibility of eroticism to be found, just the mere illusion of it. (i.e. lots of skin, no sex) I guess girls are perfectly satisfied to just see these guys walk around throughout the second half of the film shirtless in freezing temperatures no less for no apparent reason. What if the shoe was on the other foot? How would women feel if guys flocked to a movie where a semi-nude, attractive, female man eater went on a--- oh yeah, why was Jennifer's Body such a flop? It at least had a actual bloody body count and some form of amusing wit to it. Two things that make no appearance here.
Then to add insult to injury I have got to mention this. I found it real 'cute' that a movie that brings nothing to the table itself thinks it has the right to bash films of a different genre. There are a few times in this film where characters go to the movies. When they walk out they mock zombie films as being pointless (Are you fucking kidding me? What does that make this Twilight series?) and criticize that they have a veiled message about consumerism. The character's response: "Maybe some people just like to go shopping." I wanted to punch someone in the face when I heard that. Later other characters see an action film ironically titled "Punch Face." I liked what I heard (corny dialogue, gunshots, explosions), so much I wish Director Chris Weitz would have tuned the camera around so I could have seen something of interest.
I have seen other terrible films this year. Their awfulness stems from a overbearing bombardment of ugly sounds, images, and ideas. New Moon is a different kind of terrible. It is lifeless, soulless, drawn-out, and just unbearably dull. If I had to chose between this and the first installment I would have to go with the original. It is eight minutes shorter and contains one the most laughably bad scenes in movie history. You all know what's coming... Oh shit! Vampire Baseball.
I guess in the end it is rather futile to try and criticize a film that is truly critic proof. This junk is going to make millions, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I guess people love to be assaulted with unbearable melodrama and stupidity. That's fine. Just don't try pawning it off as something that claims to be entertaining. In the immortally wise words of Creedence: "Don't go around tonight. Well it's bound to take your life, there's a bad moon on the rise. D-
Then to add insult to injury I have got to mention this. I found it real 'cute' that a movie that brings nothing to the table itself thinks it has the right to bash films of a different genre. There are a few times in this film where characters go to the movies. When they walk out they mock zombie films as being pointless (Are you fucking kidding me? What does that make this Twilight series?) and criticize that they have a veiled message about consumerism. The character's response: "Maybe some people just like to go shopping." I wanted to punch someone in the face when I heard that. Later other characters see an action film ironically titled "Punch Face." I liked what I heard (corny dialogue, gunshots, explosions), so much I wish Director Chris Weitz would have tuned the camera around so I could have seen something of interest.
I have seen other terrible films this year. Their awfulness stems from a overbearing bombardment of ugly sounds, images, and ideas. New Moon is a different kind of terrible. It is lifeless, soulless, drawn-out, and just unbearably dull. If I had to chose between this and the first installment I would have to go with the original. It is eight minutes shorter and contains one the most laughably bad scenes in movie history. You all know what's coming... Oh shit! Vampire Baseball.
I guess in the end it is rather futile to try and criticize a film that is truly critic proof. This junk is going to make millions, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I guess people love to be assaulted with unbearable melodrama and stupidity. That's fine. Just don't try pawning it off as something that claims to be entertaining. In the immortally wise words of Creedence: "Don't go around tonight. Well it's bound to take your life, there's a bad moon on the rise. D-
0 comments:
Post a Comment