????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ???????? ???????? ??????? ????? ??? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ??????? ???????????
???? ???????? ????? ????

You’re right, a trailer doesn’t do justice to its movie all the time. But sorry to say, Remember Me just didn’t appeal to me. Perhaps I’ll find the movie better. Perhaps.

All I am trying to say is, the source material of Twilight has its inherent limitation. You have to get him credit for make the first movie so popular and loved by so many people. His future projects sound more promising as “learning project” so maybe it is still too early to write him off just based on Twilight.

And I do think that it takes talent to look cool – that's why not every good-looking, muscular guy can be picked up by studios to be an action star.

From this perspective, I think Pattinson far exceeds Lautner, who seems very short-sighted in his future movie project choices. Pattinson at least show a genuine interest in growing as a serious actor. Whether he can be a good one? Of course we don't know yet.

But do you agree that the author's assertion on Lautner's bankability is purely baseless?

I was intrigued by it way back when it was listed for Sundance (mainly for the interesting title and the premise, a story about love and not a love story). The trailer did the trick in making me put it on my must-watch list. If I was such a Pattinson hater, I wouldn’t even have bothered to check out the trailer for Remember Me. But I did, and I simply wasn’t moved by it.

Boy I sure do hate those generalization thingy things. But how do you avoid it when the overwhelming majority of the people who enjoyed Twilight are teenage girls and people who behave like them (moms getting their underwear signed? Excuse me??). There won’t be smoke without fire. It doesn’t help too that many Twilight fans go about bashing other people for not enjoying it as much as they do. We understand that not many Twifans are like that, but whenever we try to give an opinion the Twifans come out (especially on the Internet) with baseless attacks on why they’re right and we’re all wrong. I’m not saying that Twifans are stupid (heck there are plenty Twihaters who are stupid too) but we’re sorry, Harry Potter fans (a fandom driven mostly by teens, many of whom are female and heads over heels in love with Malfoy, Harry, Lupin, Snape, etc) didn’t have to go about throwing insults and names. Don’t get why Twifans have to do so.

You may yawn at Remember Me trailer, but don’t you think you judge a bit too quickly that it is similar movie to The Last Song? Were you very intrigued by the 500 days of Summer trailer? A lot of hindsight bias here…

And pardon me, it really annoys me whenever people try to generalize all people who enjoyed Twilight as “teenager girls” or even meaner, “people who have intelligence of teenager girls.” Your generalization shows that you are not better than the clueless author of this idiotic article.

I thought I made myself clear earlier. I'm not praising Lautner as the more talented star. Neither am I saying that Pattinson is so bad he's not worth watching. He can be an interesting actor 'sometimes'. But that sometimes isn't enough. So at time of press, Pattinson (who we shall justify as haven't learnt his craft properly yet [wonder where Dakota Fanning goes to train...]) is as yet not a great actor.

If Lautner wants to go the action movie star route, let him be. If Pattinson wants to go Johnny Depp-esque (here's to hoping he actually turns out to be a star at least half of Depp's calibre) then all the best. But as I will continuously repeat: at time of press, neither of them are particularly talented or great in any way as actors (not stars, mind you).

As for talent, no one's saying Robert is the best actor ever; the guy is still learning the craft. In fact, he'd be the first to tell you he has a lot to learn. But his next projects which are all diverse show he at least has the balls to try and learn. And not be stereotyped. Unlike Lautner.

I think our dear well-informed Robert Pattinson fans misunderstood Neil's words. Like he has 'tried' to reiterate several times, bankability doesn't equal talent. Doesn't mean Lautner is anymore talented than Pattinson. However, he does have that action star thing going on (well mostly thanks to this one shirtless stint) and as long the general moviegoing people identify him with bare chests the studio is going to want to capitalize on that.

Pattinson? Bankable? Only to the Twilight fans, he is. His non Twilight movies aren't exactly box office and critical hits, don't you think? Outside of the Twifan-sphere, nobody is going to want to go to the movies to watch a pale-skinned guy doing a rehash of Edward Cullen (which coincidentally fits neatly into his acting range. Picking diverse projects speaks nothing about an actor's talent. And what isn't clear about the word 'aggressively bad indie projects'? His performances in them have been lacklustre. Those entire movies, in fact, got bad reviews and were flops, critically and box office-wise (even the Twifans decided to skip these, apparently).

As for the fact that he's starring in all those upcoming movies (Unbound Captives, etc), well that remains to be seen. As of now, Pattinson isn't any more talented than he has shown himself to be. That he is getting reported pick of scripts is probability due to studios looking to take advantage of his popularity from Twilight (note: not bankability); or that he has shown to possess a suitable emotive range for the role he was given. Neither is Lautner. Perhaps Pattinson could be bankable in the near or distant future, but as of now, the context of this article pertaining to 'Stretch Armstrong' and other such action flicks, obviously Lautner is more bankable.

Bottom line: Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner are nothing more than pretty faces; acting talent only constituting about 10% of body composition.

P.S. And in case anyone was wondering, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a female-based fanbase penned by female writers directed by female directors. There's no discrimination against female-powered works. Unless they're too bad for words, that is…

Oh he did score a festival prize now, didn’t he? Too bad he didn’t get any more recognition anywhere else other than Strasbourg. Also, I recall that Hayden Christensen, who’s been quite the face-set-in-stone in his more recent projects (Awake, Attack of the Clones, Jumper, anyone?), had also won several awards for Life as a House, Shattered Glass, and still manage to emote naught. So really, prizes are, sometimes, not the best measure of an actor’s worth.

New Moon was released because of Twilight’s box-office success and that it struck some weird chord with teenage girls, not because of him. And did you forget that it’s the Twilight Saga now, and not just Twilight? Not making and releasing New Moon would make the entire Twifandom (including those that love Twilight but dislike Pattinson) yell bloody murder.

Haunted Airman was released in DVD because of Pattinson, yes, but because of his involvement with Twilight and his popularity with girls. Pretty sure it has nothing to do with its quality.

As for no one wanting to watch the pale skinned guy act – the Remember Me trailer has been getting good reactions from NON Twifans.

due to studios looking to take advantage of his popularity from Twilight<—- Not bankability? how is that different from Lautner being offered these roles then? Aren't they taking advantage of his Twilight connection too?