Twilight (I) (2008) User Reviews

Twilight! Twilight! Oh, my... Twiiiiiiiiliaaaaaaaaaaght!

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 5/10 · 26 November 2008]

That was my interpretation of this weekend that I had to endure working at my movie theater, all these little hormone crazed brace wearing under developed young girls who I think would've just about died with the anticipation of seeing Twilight, I'm not kidding, I personally witnessed a twelve year old say that she wanted to have Robert Pattinson's baby. OK, so how I saw the movie, my sister, ironically my older sister has been just raving about the Twilight series with her friends and told me that I have to read these books, after weeks of bugging me with it, I finally broke down and read them. Actually it's kind of a fun series, it reminded me of the same love that I had for the TV series Buffy the vampire Slayer when I was a young teen. But of course she has to take me to the midnight premiere with 100,000 crazed fans who were knocking each other down and crawling all over each other just to see a movie.

Bella Swan has always been a little bit different, never caring about fitting in with the trendy girls at her Phoenix high school. When her mother remarries and sends Bella to live with her father in the rainy little town of Forks, Washington, she doesn't expect much of anything to change. Then she meets the mysterious and beautiful Edward Cullen. Intelligent and witty, he sees straight into her soul. Soon, Bella and Edward are swept up in a passionate and decidedly unorthodox romance. Edward can run faster than a mountain lion, he can stop a moving car with his bare hands - and he hasn't aged since 1918. Like all vampires, he's immortal. But he doesn't have fangs, and he doesn't drink human blood.

So, my opinion about Twilight the movie... honestly, it's average, it's my junior high romance with a vampire. I hate, beyond hate to say this, I'm a hypocrite for saying this, but because I read the book before I saw the movie, I had this completely different interpretation of what the characters look like and how they say certain lines. Twilight the movie made me laugh more than anything simply because of the actors, Robert and Kristen are not bad actors, but the way they talked, I just couldn't take their "love" seriously. Peter Facinelli who played Carlisle Cullen, Edward's father, was exactly how I pictured and pulled in the best performance of the film. Is it worth the watch, absolutely if you're a fan of the books, otherwise, I would say if you just wanna see this movie, I recommend the matinée price because honestly, I think I may have lost my hearing after this weekend of the none stop screams from crazed teens.

5/10

So bad it's ALMOST good.

[The_Amazing_Spy_Rises · 4/10 · 21 November 2008]

NOTE: This review is the fair and unbiased opinion of someone with extremely little knowledge of the Twilight series. I watched the movie with a few die hard fans who I talked to after the movie, and I will work some of their thoughts into the review.

Another much loved book series has been brought to life in the form of Twilight, which despite having nothing in common with the Harry Potter series, will undoubtedly draw comparisons because of the furor and craze surrounding it. The main difference between the two, however, is that the Harry Potter films are generally good and solid films. Twilight, despite having done a couple things right, is not.

As a story, I will admit, Twilight is very catchy and interesting. Now I see what all the hype is about. If I was a young girl, I would go nuts over this stuff too. It's not just a vampire and a human falling in love with each other, but because of the two leads, it's one of the best on screen romances of the decade. This, however, is severely hurt by the fact that Twilight boasts easily some of the worst writing and editing I've ever seen. Let's not forget about the horrid VFX and pasty makeup, either. It's one of the cheesiest films of the year, and can definitely be put in the category of "so bad it's ALMOST good". Yes, I just invented that category.

The 'allure' of the film appears to be the character played by Robert Pattinson, who ironically was previously known for his role in the Harry Potter series. Pattinson succeeded there and he more than succeeds again, as he more than fit the bill for what he needed to do with the character. Most actors would believe the only requirement of the character is to be good looking, but Pattinson takes it a step further and makes Edward Cullen very likable, trustworthy, and in the end, a good hero for the audience. Kristen Stewart is sort of the queen of not showing facial expressions, so she's perfect for the role of the awkward teen Bella Swann. However, there were sometimes where her lack of emotion bothered me.

Our supporting players...Well, none of them are noteworthy like Pattinson is. The villain of the film is lame, cheesy, and played by an actor I can't take seriously. Nikki Reed is probably the best as Rosalie, Edward's 'sister', and the antagonistic vibe felt from her adds a different side to the movie.

Okay, I don't really know what possessed the writer of this screenplay to make it so horrible (was it the source material?), because the dialog is just so bad that I laughed at serious moments. There's a lot of intentional humor, mostly in the beginning when Bella and Edward feel like awkward teens in love. I guess the movie moved along okay, because I wasn't bored at all. I was either laughing at how stupid the dialog was, laughing at some of the mildly funny jokes, or getting pulled in by the electric chemistry between Stewart and Pattinson.

That, folks, is the reason most people will be able to sit through this movie. The chemistry between the two leads, romantically and sexually, is amazing. In this respect, Pattinson and Stewart are perfectly cast and it makes me wonder if they could end up together in real life some day. I was very surprised by how much I liked seeing their one on one scenes, as cheesy and bad as the VFX and editing are.

As far as these visual effects go, I've seen a few vampire movies in my day. I'm going to assume director Catherine Hardwicke has seen a few. Well, she needs to watch a few more. Her fight scenes are horribly choreographed, terribly shot, and lack the intensity required to successfully rouse her audience. I could almost notice the wires the actors flew across on. I noticed a ton of errors with the editing as well, such as basic stuff like mouths moving and no words coming out, and words coming out when no mouths were moving. The fight scene at the end has wicked bad editing too, as the sound mixing also suffers as well.

All in all, with Twilight, as bad a movie as it may be, I couldn't help but stay interested in it because of the electric chemistry between the leads. That alone kept me in the seat the whole time. It is technically one of the worst films of the year, but the entertainment factor in the above respect keeps it out of the company of movies like Disaster Movie and College. I was actually lucky to see it with some of the fans of the book, and all of them (5) described the movie as a 'disappointment' and that the film went 'half way' with some subplots, either starting and dropping them, or randomly starting them halfway through an individual subplot. They were not happy at all with this movie, but agreed on one thing: Robert Pattinson was the perfect Edward Cullen. I'll agree with them on all those points and say that Twilight is exactly what I thought it would be: so bad it's ALMOST good.

Movie is Missing the Magic - An Opinion

[CaniCanz · 5/10 · 19 November 2008]

This is just one person's opinion. No need to get angry, in fact I'd like you to convince me I'm wrong.

The movie is missing the magic. Edward appeared on screen and I swooned. He opened his mouth and I cringed. Edward is strong and confident. He wasn't a whiney, smitten child. In love yes, but brooding and in pain. Bella was delicate, not just dry and indifferent. This Bella lacked emotion maybe even a soul-who is she? She didn't feel like the yearning, thoughtful Bella I had imagined. I wished she needed to be protected. This version can take care of her own business--and I'm not sure how bad she wants to be with Edward, or why for that matter. Maybe if she narrated her emotions would have been more pronounced. Don't get me wrong, the actors' chemistry is very evident, they should get married and have melodramatic children. But was the film from Bella's perspective or not? The changing pov was off-putting. This film proves that Meyer's pages and pages are what bring this story and Edward and Bella's love to life.

The TONE was completely lost in the book to script to screen translation. The story is supposed to be a song that takes you to another world, one where vampires and werewolves exist. The story is an intoxicating melody. Here we're presented with a boy-band pop song sung by kids who think of themselves as classically trained Opera singers. PICK ONE. Be a chart-topping, America's Top 40 or be the haunting, dangerous lullaby I think a lot of fans were looking for.

Speaking of boy band...the screen version of Jacob Black is one "Bye Bye Bye" from being the lead singer in Over-Produced-Axe-Wearing-Guy-Group 2008. Jacob, in my mind, is earthy. He's a guy's guy and gets his hands dirty fixing cars and building stuff. Jacob always left me feeling like he was wise beyond his years, a smitten kitten of course, but I always felt that he was more dynamic than this cute little wig-wearing version. I always felt this sense of history and quiet power. This version wears Abercrombie (and randomly appears from behind trees apparently...you'll see).

The cast was quite OK for me. I did feel bad watching them try to deliver the lines they were given. I get that this is a vampire-romance movie, but honestly. The script is dripping in gooey, sticky, melted, mixed cheeses. OK, so it's fantastical, but to slap me in the face with Gouda and Brie every other frame is just insulting.

Cheese aside, Charlie was great. His timing was spot on. Carlisle played the part, but the caked-on white makeup so completely distracting. Esme-- I wanted to crawl up onto her lap and have her tell me bedtime stories. Love it. Alice... that's her on that screen. A little bouncier and she's perfect. Jasper-- freakishly creepy and pained, loved it. When he comes out of his shell and plays more than the wide-eyed silent sidekick, I'm all over it. Those who doubted Reed need to reconsider. Rosalie is freaking hot and one sassy vamp. Emmett...holy crap, on the money (call me). Jessica is the best casting job in life...Mike, however...really?

I know that this is just a movie. Film is a different medium than books. We get to create the world from a book but people get to interpret for us on screen, I know. I just wish it wasn't so far off base for me. I wanted nothing more than to enjoy it. I think I'm going to remember the series the way I imagined it and set this version aside. My oil canvas painting to their Polaroid.

Who's melodramatic now? This girl.

Here's hopping they make a choice for the next one: teen scene or dark love story so audiences know what they're getting into. Teenie Boppers are quite loyal, perhaps bubblegum will beef up their box office.

Oh my GOD !! .. why people like that movie ?!!

[fluffyousra · 2/10 · 9 August 2010]

I only saw twilight 1 but i wasn't able to see new moon and eclipse . What i saw in twilight was awful , bad story , normal visual and special effects , awful directing .. that's why i wasn't able to see new moon and eclipse.

A movie like this deserves 2 out 10 , i dunno why its 5.6 out of 10 .. maybe the teens liked it because of the romantic scenes , Yes , its a very romantic movie but come on , there's a bunch of gr8 romantic movies . I am not a huge fan of those kinda romantic movies !!

twilight was one of the weirdest movies , worst actually !! it had so many mistakes , it has a traditional directing and story as well . What did i like about the movie ? Nothing !! .. or maybe i only liked the color correction

Robert pattinson wasn't acting at all , that was the worst performance for an actor ever .. the way he talked was so bad i even felt like he caught a cold , the way he was looking' at the girl was really stupid ...maybe people like him because he's a bit handsome with that big hair of his !! but i MYSELF don't like him because i'm not the kind of girl who like actors because they look good !! i think Bella was way better than him !!

if u're willing to pay money for this film and see it .. then my advice to you , don't cry because u paid to see that kind of movie and that u've got to read reviews before u pay for any movie

Twilight Shines Brightest Once the Credits Roll

[DemonicAnthony · 1/10 · 1 December 2008]

This review may contain spoilers. You've been warned. Twilight was a terrible film adaption of a, let's face it, mediocre novel. I went into the theater with an open mind, not expecting brilliance, but expecting to be entertained. Well, I guess I was technically entertained since I laughed throughout most of the movie. Sadly, I wasn't laughing at purposely funny moments. I was laughing at the awkward "acting" of the actors and the terrible dialogue.

Now this is where it gets tricky: Do we blame the screenwriter or the author? The movie made me realize just how corny the book's dialogue was. I found myself rolling my eyes, when I wasn't laughing, at every word out of the actor's mouth. Especially the dialogue between Edward and Bella. Now, the dialogue could have been over looked if the actors were able to deliver them. Alas, whoever decided to do casting for this film decided to cast every "actor" with the acting ability of a toaster. Now, a toaster is a inanimate object and therefore cannot act. Get the hint? What made me laugh the hardest was at the end of the movie when Bella's mother decides to inform Phil VIA TEXT MESSAGE that Bella is alright. I was so shocked that she was really texting him that I turned to my friend and whispered "Bella's okay, L-O-L". Really, though. Text messages? I would think that informing your potential spouse of your child's well being would warrant a phone call at least.

Now, I have to point out the scene where Edward decides to flash Bella the goods. He want's to educate her in the ways of the vampire. He cannot go out into sunlight NOT because he'll burn or turn to dust, but because he turns into a failed children's art project. Reading the scene in the book I already knew whoever turned the book into a film was going to have issues with the scene. However, I really thought they'd aim for something above spraying Robert Pattinson with water then dumping craft store glitter on him. I didn't even notice the "sparkles" at first. My friend turned to me and commented "The sun hits him and he gets gross and sweaty?" because, let's face it, that's what he looked like. Damp and dirty. Oh baby, I can hardly contain myself! I could go on and nit pick at everything, but I'm just going to wrap it up and say this movie was awful and I'm disappointed in the screenwriter as well as the director. I feel like Hardwicke was too focused on making the mise-en-scene beautiful and aesthetically pleasing, which is all well and good, but in doing so she over looked her cast of actors who would probably get over looked at a high school play audition with the way they displayed their acting abilities in this movie. Though, maybe I take back the part of being disappointed in the screenwriter since you can only do so much with the source material you're handed.

BRING ON THE TWILIGHT FANS! I CAN TAKE THEM! *Shields at maximum power!*

Undeniably Atmospheric

[taj-james-holmes · 7/10 · 9 May 2020]

There's an atmosphere to Twilight and that much you simply cannot deny. I can't help but be engrossed by the way that this movie captures the beauty, dreariness and nature of the Pacific Northwest. A memorable score and soundtrack heighten Catherine Hardwicke's broody, yet still enchanting tone. Elliot Davis' cinematography under her direction replicates the indie flair prominent in her other features, this is what separates it apart from the commercially realised sequels that followed. It's a hot and cold, gothic romance with just enough high stakes to enchant you until the very end. If it's raining, you can best believe that I'm slipping into something comfortable and putting Twilight on.

Twilight

[0U · 20 February 2020]

I think this movie suffered from lack of a good script and bad acting.

So Bad it was Funny

[wot_106 · 2/10 · 1 September 2010]

As an avid fantasy reader, I have not delved the vampire depths, and I find the current fad of vampires as sex objects disgusting.

I had planed to never watch this movie, but when I found that some of the former MST3K crowd (Mike, Bill, and Kevin) made their own "commentary" for it (rifftrax.com), I just couldn't resist.

To sum up the plot in one word: Angst

To sum up the event that is the movie(in sotto voce): Line!

So if I were to rate this as an MST3K film it would be about a 8 or 9. The acting on the part of the main characters was poor throughout, and the pacing was terrible. The only clue that time had gone by was in the dialog (I swear the clothes rarely changed!), and only in passing. Also, Bella's high school seems to only consist of parking lot, cafeteria and Biology. Ha!

Guilty pleasure

[hazeleng · 10/10 · 7 August 2018]

If I saw the movie now for the first time I know I probably will hate it, but the 11 year old me was so love struck with it. Honestly no movie these days makes me this happy anymore. Also I think this one (the first movie) is so much cinematically pleasing. I enjoy the dark blue rainy vibe & the shaky camera a lot. This movie is my guilty pleasure. 10 for the nostalgia feelings.

Really Grew on Me...

[socact-1 · 7/10 · 21 November 2008]

To preface this review, I read all four Twilight books in one weekend (last weekend, actually) when I picked the first one up at the airport, and could not put it down. I zipped through the other three and went to the midnight screening on opening day. To say the least, I was captivated by Twilight (and I'm in my 20s...).

I was anxious to see the movie because, like so many other people, I felt really invested in Bella and Edward's story. Not only that, but I love the vampire premise - it just never gets old, especially when you put a new spin on it, as Meyer did in her books. The events of each book really ran together for me, so in a way, I felt like a non-Twilighter coming into this film. I really didn't care if the movie deviated from the book - in fact, I was kind of hoping it would, since you can't expect a book to translate directly to the screen. I heard a lot of serious Twilight teens complaining about "major things" missing when I left the theater, but I honestly didn't notice any major omissions.

Overall, the film was better than I expected (based on previews, I expected it to be extremely cheesy, low-budget, and awkwardly filmed). It definitely grew on me as it went on, especially Pattinson's performance. His introduction was extremely awkward - not sure if that was Hardwicke's fault or Pattinson's acting. In any case, as soon as he settled into his character, he was absolutely captivating. Stewart plays a great brooder, and she certainly did that here. I loved the scenes with her father; in my opinion, these were some of the gems of the movie.

The romance between Edward and Bella, which was obviously the crux of the film, was fueled by their chemistry, but not much else. Where was the development?! I really wish Hardwicke or the screenwriter or somebody had taken more time to delve into the roots of their relationship. It all just happened way too fast. I feel like this happened because of the James story, which to me was almost completely unnecessary (yeah, I know, it's a big part of the book and obviously needs to be here). But even so, the film would have been a more moving romance, and probably a more poignant, emotional film, if that cheesy, goofy subplot hadn't existed.

Hardwicke dealt exceptionally well with teen angst, which was evident in the high school shots. Unfortunately, she really struggled with the vampire side of things. I have to put most of the blame on the director because the characters were all spot-on, very well-acted and well-cast. I also think a higher budget would have done wonders for this movie, and I'm hoping that becomes a reality for the sequel. The special effects were embarrassingly bad, and nearly ruined the movie.

Overall, I enjoyed "Twilight" for what it was - a romance that probed the timeless dilemma of wanting what you can't have (and despite Meyer's Mormon beliefs, this whole series is basically a metaphor for sex). It makes for an interesting, compelling story, and I expect more from the sequels, because the potential is certainly there.

Boring!

[mooitoy · 2/10 · 10 June 2010]

I am afraid to say I almost fell asleep watching this.It was more of scenery and music then a real music. The thing is, what happened to the real deal? Vmapires are definitely not supposed to be "pretty" or "kind". This so called vampire movie was totally off track and the whole idea was dumb. I mean who wouldn't have one little bit of reaction if they found out their boyfriend was a vampire? Bella was a poor excuse for a character. She was so dull and detailed. Bella was definitely not what I would call a realistic and interesting character. The whole idea of making vampires romantic and talented, "just like you and I" was absolutely stupid! Vampires are supposed to be blood sucking, vicious, merciless, revolting, repulsive, frightening, creepy, and unsightly! This movie ruined the idea of real vampires! Yes, I read the book and that pretty much sucked as well. Vampires sparkling in the sunlight? Give me a break! This was an absolutely ridiculous excuse for a movie!

the SOUNDTRACK is amazing

[tiggyjokneale · 8/10 · 17 May 2020]

This movie deserves an 8 purely for the soundtrack - one of the best movie sound tracks EVER (in my opinion) and beautiful scenery and cinematography. sure, the acting isn't great, nor is the script writing, however this movie is an enjoyable watch and a romance classic

I can appreciate what this wanted and tried to be.

[I_Ailurophile · 7/10 · 12 April 2022]

To say that 'Twilight' carries baggage is a dire understatement. The books' reputation precedes them, carrying questionable writing and strong themes of abusive relationships, and it's impossible to watch the movies in 2022 without being aware of much derided special effects, acting, and more. At the same time, one tries to approach movies with an open mind, and it's important to recognize in the first place that these titles were written for a "young adult" audience, and all the horrid awkwardness that immediately greets us with scenes of high school age characters is actually very fitting, for good or ill. And secondly - there are a lot of recognizable performers here that have more than proven their capabilities elsewhere, before or and or since; I think most viewers should be well-rounded enough to recognize that even the best actors, given poor material to work with, will look bad in a lackluster feature.

I don't think 2008 film 'Twilight' is especially great. However, I'm frankly astonished to find myself thinking it's not nearly as bad as everyone has made it out to be in the past 14 years. Here's the thing: all the ham-handedness, the overt and kitschy flourishes, the bluntness - and above all the stilted and gawky writing, acting, and otherwise execution - doesn't feel accidental. It's bewildering as a movie-goer, absolutely, and hard to swallow, and to whatever extent the approach here was intentional, I don't think it was pulled off with all due success. Yet this is a movie about teens, for teens, with supernatural elements forced in, and at the same time that the picture comes across as unnatural and inorganic, nothing actually seems out of place. It's a flummoxing, indelicate balance, distinctly imperfect, and I can't for one moment begrudge anyone who honestly engages with 'Twilight' and dislikes it. For my part, though, speaking as someone who has watched films of all possible styles, genres, quality, value, from silent classics to Asylum mockbusters - I see what this wanted to be, and what it could have been. I can understand and appreciate the ways in which this does work, and those in which it doesn't. If the series were produced not as feature films but as a program on The CW alongside 'Riverdale' or the like, no one would bat an eye. I don't know if it's totally correct to say I like 'Twilight,' but... I get it.

Hair and makeup, costume design, Elliot Davis' cinematography, Nancy Richardson's editing, the visual effects, Catherine Hardwicke's direction, filming locations, set design and decoration, the soundtrack - almost every possible aspect of the production design and art direction, more often than not, is painfully gauche, overdone, and a bit of a burden to bear. That's not to say that it's outright bad; sometimes a particular shot or scene is actually rather fetching, and were more care taken at large I can see where they would have fit in a title of greater repute. Artless as it may sometimes be, it's not sloppy.

Of course, again, much has been made of the acting. To be frank: especially knowing what the cast are capable of, what I see in watching this are actors who worked with what they were given. At risk of repeating myself, the overwhelming awkwardness that pervades the picture from the very start is built into the characters and their interactions, the setting, the scenario, and every little detail, for better or for worse. In a story about young love, new friends, uncertainty, and personal and interpersonal conflict, all the somewhat halting, forced, or artificial expressions, movement, or delivery don't seem entirely wrong - but instead, kind of appropriate. Director Hardwicke has some noteworthy credits to her name, and if occasionally her contribution here is lacking, when it comes to guiding her cast, I think she was rather on point. Once more, it's a very fine line the production walks, an uneasy balancing act of "just right" that ever risks slipping into oafish gracelessness. Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Billy Burke, Nikki Reed, Anna Kendrick, and everyone else on hand did their best with what they had. None of the performances here are great - but by no means do I think they're altogether rotten.

And that leaves the writing. Though I have certainly heard much about Stephanie Meyer's books, I freely admit I haven't read the source material, and I can only make assume that Melissa Rosenberg's screenplay is reasonably faithful. It's worth noting as well that Rosenberg has a considerable number of credits and indeed accolades to her name. The same facets I've described with 'Twilight' broadly certainly apply here, too, as the dialogue and characters vary between tawdrily brusque and direct, inelegantly clumsy and unrefined, and or what feels like is simply suitable. The scene writing, informed by Meyer's own, similarly has some bright spots, while at times struggles with contrivance. However, I also get a sense that this is just one of the difficulties of telling a YA-supernatural romance story; I find it hard to imagine there are many ways of showing scenes of Bella and Edward's blossoming love, or the demonstrations of his powers, that wouldn't come off as strained and cringe-worthy. And the overall narrative has problems in the small details, and above all treads murky territory with the questionably handled overtones of domestic violence and abuse. Yet the bare essence of the tale - a human mingling with "creatures of the night" - is classic, with familiar themes, and is no less worthy just because of the high school setting. In the wide strokes, I think the screenplay is just fine.

What I think it all comes down to is that this is a movie that, beyond the presumed target audience of teen girls, is best left for those viewers who are wholly receptive to all the wonderful, weird, wild, or woeful possibilities that cinema has to offer. I genuinely believe that 2008's 'Twilight' is quite far from a bad movie - but I also readily recognize that I say this from a place of having done my best to find the value herein. Apart from the thematic material in regards to relationships, the biggest issue I see are the special effects - done well such as they are, but not considered at the storyboard stage with particular mindfulness. Everything else, from writing, acting, and directing, down to the slightest rounding elements, are "okay" or "apt" but constantly border on tactless or unsophisticated. For what it tried to do, and be, I think 'Twilight' was more of a success than not, but it tripped over its own two left feet a little bit too much for it not to be noticeable. Color me surprised, though - I can't say I wasn't entertained.

I wanted to throw my eye balls at it!

[jury28 · 1/10 · 22 November 2008]

I would give this movie no stars.. This movie is pathetic. I mean so pathetic. The acting was awful!

The movie starts well, but once they introduce the Cullens its pretty much downhill. Ashley Greene looks good as Alice, Jackson Rathbone looks constipated as Jasper, a wooden plank would have been a more convincing Edward. Robert Pattinson deserves the Razzie, second thought, his acting is so horrible that a razzie is like honoring him.

Vampires are supposed to be scary, when Edward scales trees he acts like a monkey, move over Kong! The baseball match looks like Super Mario Sluggers on steroids! Horrible..

The scene where Edward glitters is pathetic. It looks someone dumped some glitter on him..

On the other hand Charlie Swan and Jacob were spot on.

Over all the director tried too hard and lost it all. I strongly believe someone with more experience should direct a high profile film like this. This movie doesn't appeal as a Vampire movie or as a Romantic movie. Its pathetic..

Jury

Do expect entertainment, but not a good movie

[SteveBC · 2/10 · 13 August 2010]

NOTE: When I sat down to watch this movie I did it because I wanted to see what all the hype was about. I did not watch the movie to mock it, for I had no clue what it was about (except: "something about vampires and werewolves"). I watched the movie in a very objective way, so don't take this as the word of a hater:

Twilight could very well be one of the worst movies of the decade. (I will not say of all time, because there are a whole load of worse movies out there.) The writing was bad, the editing was a joke, the acting was mediocre at best and the visual effects were the most terrible thing I have ever seen.

The writing - I won't go in deep here, because I haven't read the actual book, so I cannot say for sure if it's the original author's fault or if the screenplay-writer(s) screwed up. But this I can say: The story takes place - as I understood from somebody who had actually read the book - over several months. In the movie it seems like a week tops. The dialog is horrible and so corny it made me laugh at serious parts (something I really try to avoid doing). Also the story seems very rushed through and is hardly fully understandable for somebody who has not read the book.

The editing - Not very much to say here: Out of sync talking, terribly shot action- and fighting-scenes. In a word: a catastrophe.

The acting - Although I didn't expect it, Robert Pattinson did quite well here. Him and a few other (secondary) actors portrayed their characters in a believable way. Kristen Stewart however plays Bella in such an unauthentic way, she doesn't even seem like she's really acting. Taylor Lautner's portrayal of Jacob was just as enthusiastic as was the one of Cam Gigandet as James. Namely: not at all.

The visual effects - I will not say anything here, due to a complete lack of words in the English language to describe the terribleness of these effects. You'll just have to watch the movie yourself to see.

Overall - Being one of the worst movies of the decade, Twilight still does two things right: Good marketing and Robert Pattinson. Which (because of all the teeny-girls) kind of go hand in hand I guess (though I personally don't get why). Twilight is a bad to mediocre film - said blandished - and, though I don't recommend watching it for the movie itself, I definitely say it was worth while giving it a glimpse just to see what all the fuzz is about.

the book was better and thats not saying much

[black_heart_night · 3/10 · 26 February 2009]

Now do not be offended by any of this, this is just my opinion.

No I am not a rabid Twilight hater. I read the books, yes all of them. I thought they were interesting. Not very original, well thought out, or well written, but decent enough to read. I had several problems with this movie. It's not just the cast. Though I think Cam Gigandet did an excellent job as James. Okay my main problem with the cast was not really who they picked. I guess it boils down to the fact that Bella and Edward really are not that interesting. Is it so much to ask for a heroine who isn't so whiney and can take care of herself. Or maybe a vampire who isn't broody and boring and doesn't SPRAKLE! ((sorry that just bugs the **** out of me)) I think if they had stuck more to the actually book it would have been better. Granted, not by much, but it would have at least gotten 5 stars from me.

I do like the cinematography. The movie is gorgeous visually, and as i stated before the acting was not terrible. I would have picked different people for most of the cast, but thats me. I do have one more thing to say before i end this.

RABID TWIlIGHT FANS NEED TO CALM DOWN!!! ITS JUST A BOOK AND MOVIE SERIES!! don't take the fact that people don't like it to heart. if you like it, thats great.

Pretty Good for What They Had to Work With

[AnnaShade · 21 November 2008]

I have read the books, and the first thing I noticed was that the story wasn't about a plot line at all. It's about the characters and what's going on with them. Stephenie Meyer focuses on interaction, not on dialog, plot, or setting, which is fine. But it makes for a bad movie.

Surprisingly, Twilight wasn't that bad of a film. I expected it to be much worse. As I said, there's very little plot or dialog in the book, so it's hard to make a convincing film. They had to over act looks to try and communicate without many words. I could probably count on one hand the lines in the movie.

Other than the over acting, it wasn't bad. There were some very good moments and some very "eh" moments. But overall I would recommend it to Twilight fans. I probably won't ever want to see it again, but it's okay at midnight with some school friends who like it or something.

It was a great start of a film saga and i do like how it blends in horror and romance together.

[a-07779-75123 · 7/10 · 15 August 2020]

This is awesome part of franchise "Twilight" because gteat atmosphere, cool soundtrack.

I watch this movie when I'm sad

[corneliaklumpp · 10/10 · 7 March 2020]

Perhaps I Have to tell something so that people who hate this film do understand why I review like this. My Dad died in 2008 when Twilight aired. I watched the movie again and again. And today, I still watch it again and again. I always have problems when I read a book and they made a movie of it. Because most of the time the movie just sucks. But not with the Twilight movies. They are like the books, and this without a big budget. So if you have a hard time and you need a simple but nice movie to watch to leave into another world. Please watch this.

A Great Film, Extremely Well Adapted!

[dreamflower530 · 6/10 · 21 November 2008]

I just got back from a midnight premiere, and the movie blew me away. I'm an avid book lover and college lit major and VERY hard to impress as far as book to screen adaptations go. I have NO complaints! (Take that mom and best friend!) Kristen and Rob are the perfect Edward and Bella. They were captivating from start to finish. I sat back in my seat and listened to my whole theater erupt in laughs, gasps, sighs and jumps at all the right places. Granted most of us in there were young women, but the movie just plain rocked that way. It sucks you in and tells the story just right. Even my friend who hadn't read the books was just as enthralled as the majority of us fan girls.

The humor was Twilight's greatest asset. The baseball game was amazing and the mirror fight scene was tense. I enjoyed the music, the non-overdone visual effects, the adherence to all major plot points and characters and the ending. The ending was pretty much the best. I walked out really salivating to see the next 3 on screen, just like that.

If you give Twilight a shot, you shouldn't be disappointed. It's that good.

Somewhere, Edward is Rolling Over in His Hypothetical Coffin

[evil_suger_plum_faerie · 1/10 · 22 November 2008]

Let's face it, the movie was a total let down. I had low expectations. Extremely low but the movie disappointed me even then. The amazing love story we all read in the books was transformed into a whiny preteen nightmare. There was chemistry between Robert and Kristen, there is no denying that, but I didn't feel the need that is in the books. They are supposed to be I-can't-live-without-you, take-me-forever, I'm-devoted-to-you-always in love (Unless you want to count that one incident in Eclipse, but let's face it, most of us don't) but all I saw was a bored vampire and an indifferent girl.

The one thing that made me most angry was the complete disregard for the meadow scene. It is a VERY important part in the book where they pretty much declare themselves to each other. This meadow scene lasted all of 10 seconds and consisted of them staring at each other. They changed around the timing of the movie so much that it almost made no sense. Lets face it, the book was a good story but the writing wasn't up to par. It was pretty much written to be turned into a movie and the screenwriter obviously didn't realize that.

Sure, Robert was smoking hot (don't lie, you saw the ray bands) but his performance of Edward was terrible. The first time Bella walked into the Biology class, I laughed at his expression as did most people in the theater (some of them were too busy squealing). His badly-covered up English accent was also laughable.

Jasper was perfect, the person that made me laugh during the movie because if you looked, not at where the camera was focused, in most scenes you could see him lurking in the background and I think it fit his character well. Carlisle was cast to a T as were Esme, Jessica, Rosalie, Emmett and Alice. They all fit their parts well even if I imagined Alice a little bouncier, Emmett a little bigger and Rosalie a bit more bitchy.

Oh, the camera work. I'm not denying it, I liked the flickers between scenes at times but after a while, it can give you a headache. The insane closeups did NOT do what they were supposed to (show the intensity) instead they made me where they were half the time and realize how much makeup the actors where wearing. Every time there was a close up on Robert, it was totally obvious he was wearing contacts. Seriously, look for the line.

The one thing that was actually done really well was the climax with the ballet studio and James. The fight scene was pretty cool and I totally believed that James wanted to kill Bella right there. But, with every up there is a down. After James is killed and They are taking care of Bella, why couldn't Edward have been more upset? It's written right in the book that he all but cries when he sees her.

The movie was hyped up to an extreme so it was obvious it would be a let down, I just didn't know how bad it actually was. I don't get why they couldn't do little things that would have made it a bit better; The biology class incident? Bella wearing blue? Why the hell did James have to bite her arm instead of her hand? Would that have been SO hard to change? All in all, go see it if you are a Twilight fan but be weary. If you aren't, stay away because you will not understand a thing that is going on. As I said in my title, somewhere, Edwards is rolling over in his hypothetical coffin (yes I know they don't sleep in coffins, or sleep period for that matter, but that's why it's hypothetical)

The Best Movie Ever

[dsh-86364 · 10/10 · 11 November 2022]

I have watched this movie upwards of 75 times in my life and I don't plan on stopping any time soon. This movie carries memories of friendship, sleepovers, and midnight viewings in home made t-shirts. There is merit to a story when it captures so many people's hearts- and I see Twilight as that story. The books that inspired this film brought the love of reading into the lives of many young girls and the movies only furthered the excitement. Edward and Bellas romance may be flawed, but the thorough enjoyment I get watching this movie has never worn off even all these years later. If you are a lover of vampires and have never seen this movie I reccomend it. And to those who have seen it and love it, may we continue blissfully into this small but perfect piece of our forever <3.

The Lost Boys & Girls...

[Xstal · 6/10 · 24 August 2022]

What would you do, if a vampire captures you, sends your heart into a spin, vessels bursting out your skin, only drawback is he's keen, to suck the life out of your spleen, though he'll hold back at his leisure, to ensure you get your pleasure, competition soon arrives, puts your man in overdrive, all the passion and the gory, to lay claim to all your glory.

I wanted to leave the movie theater

[indigochildren · 1/10 · 23 November 2008]

I've never wanted to walk out of a movie so badly. I think you should give the film a chance to develop fully before forming an opinion. This was certainly not a "film" with any substance. The acting was horrible, the script was horrible, the whole thing was rushed and insubstantial. For being such a predicted box office hit, given the already large fan base, the budget must have been dismal. I think you would need to be no older than 10 to enjoy this film, but the kissing scene in Bella's bedroom was too passionate for a kid's movie (Bella's in her panties!?). In the books it takes them a long time to move forward with their physical relationship. The story was clearly written with teens in mind but still enjoyable for adults. The movie was a cringer.

Awful film with no bite at all.

[bazzamate · 27 April 2010]

I only saw this film recently and haven't read any of the books in the series. Maybe if I had read the books I may have been able to appreciate this awful film.

Firstly the acting was b grade and cheesy but tolerable to a certain extent. What really ruined this movie is the plot.

The plot or lack there of does not seem to progress away from love me, don't love me, you cant love me, okay you can love me and meet the fanged family - okay im a 30 y.o. guy and i know this is aimed at a different market but seriously three quarters of the movie is this back and forth love me, don't love me stuff, and then from nowhere there's a different plot involving some random vampires with basically zero character construction up to this point who come onto the scene and change the direction of the movie. It makes for a very disjointed film.

I sat there afterward angry that a movie this bad could make so many people wealthy. It's not the worst movie I have ever seen but would easily be the highest grossing worst film I have unfortunately wasted a couple hours watching.