Comments on: Can Twilight Succeed Without the Praise of Critics?

By: rejectnation

rejectnation — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:25:05 +0000

Indeed, I added the $150 million to the end. That number, coincidentally, is not exactly Iron Man money… Iron Man money is $300 million plus. Either way, the question stands.

By: rejectnation

rejectnation — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:25:00 +0000

Indeed, I added the $150 million to the end. That number, coincidentally, is not exactly Iron Man money… Iron Man money is $300 million plus. Either way, the question stands.

By: Bethany

Bethany — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 04:30:13 +0000

I completely agree!!!! Twilight the movie was a hack job of the original novel.
Catherine Hardwicke did a horrible job. She missed so much of the essence that was Twilight, chopping, pasting and gluing scenes together and leaving out vital details while making her characters completely wooden. If you hadn't read the book you wouldn't know what the hell you were watching.
Where was all the adorable, yet smart and dark banter between Bella and Edward?
It seemed like this movie was all about atmosphere and very little substance, of which Hardwicked still missed the mark. I mean, what was up with all the spiraling camera angles and cheesy music???
I agree, the trailer and previews were soooo much better. I loved this book and I was so excited for the movie interpretation. How UNBELIEVABLY DISAPPOINTING. It makes me want to read the book over again just to feel the passion that should have been infused in this movie.
And, okay, what was up with the casting??? I don't mind that they took liberties here and there, but the fact that Nikki Reed was cast just because she's worked with Hardwicke before is absurd. She wasn't pixie like or thin or lanky. In fact, she seemed clunky in comparison to the fluid model like character described in the book.
What was up with the other vampires showing up and killing folks in town? That had no part in the book. It was enough that they changed the school, made Bella & Charlie go to a diner and that they jacked up the entire story line. Why make additions like this when it could have been done with a few simple lines.
OH, and what was up with the special effects? How utterly lame. I laughed out loud at the spider monkey scene. So did my husband. It make me feel like a total loser for bringing him.
I am still so angry, I can't make sense of my thoughts. I was agitated the whole time I watched the movie. I cringed and I laughed through out entirely too much of the movie.
Whoever is listening, please, please PLEASE PLEASE do not let Hardwicke direct New Moon.
UGH!!!!!!!

By: Bethany

Bethany — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 04:30:00 +0000

By: Leah

Leah — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:11:34 +0000

I thought it was stupid. You wouldn't have understood the movie if you hadn't read the books, and all the scenes seemed really choppy and didn't flow together at all.

By: Leah

Leah — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:11:00 +0000

I thought it was stupid. You wouldn't have understood the movie if you hadn't read the books, and all the scenes seemed really choppy and didn't flow together at all.

By: IIISixus

IIISixus — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 01:01:05 +0000

Twilight was the worst movie I have ever seen. It was so bad I wanted to shoot my self in the face the first 10 minutes of the movie. The only good thing about this movie is that I got to see it for free. If I would have had to pay I would have wanted my money back. From one to ten I give it a zero. I have to grow two more arms for I can give Twilight four thumbs down…!!!

By: IIISixus

IIISixus — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 01:01:00 +0000

By: ana

ana — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:56:08 +0000

twilight sucked!!!
kristen stewart's(bella) acting was horrible she had the same blank expression throughout the whole movie!!!!
as for robert(edward), ashley(alice), jackson(jasper), nikki(rosalie), kellan(emmett),elizabeth(esme), and peter(carlisle) did perfect as for acting , but they weren't in it hardly ever!!!
i think catherine hardwicke was a horrible choice to direct twilight!!!
they missed soooooooo many important details from the book!!!
i'm sooo totally dissapointed in how twilight came out!!!!
solomon(sam) and krys(embry) were in there only once!!!
i know that sam and embry are mostly in new moon but why would you cast somone to be in the movie only once?!?!?!
when in the book they were mentioned more than that?!!!!
catherine hardwicke said she'd put her heart into this movie cause she didn't want to dissapoint fans but she hardly ever put any thought to the movie!!!
i could've done a wayyyy better job in making that movie myself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the trailers were totally better than the whole movie itself!!!!
i am pissed!!!!!
i want to write catherine hardwicke and tell her what bad of a job she did and how many fans she dissapointed!!!!!
the movie flew by so fast it was like i just got there and it was over!!!!
jeez, i'm so mad!!!!!!!!!!!!
PLEASE!!! do me a favor and don't see it!!! trust me you'll be just as dissapointed and angry as i am!!!
i loved that book with a passion and they messed the movie up!!!!
decode by paramore wasn't even in there!!!!
I'M SOOOOOOOOOOOOO ANGRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: ana

ana — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 08:56:00 +0000

By: BrianCGibson

BrianCGibson — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:53:48 +0000

I predict you will see $10 million, for every slo-mo brooding shot in the film

By: BrianCGibson

BrianCGibson — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:53:00 +0000

I predict you will see $10 million, for every slo-mo brooding shot in the film

By: Josh_Radde

Josh_Radde — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:50:28 +0000

The editor added $150 million. My only comment was that it won't make Iron Man money because it doesn't have the buzz of having a previous installment or the backup of critical praise, like Iron Man had. The real test will be what Twilight fans think of it after today.

By: Josh_Radde

Josh_Radde — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:50:00 +0000

By: BillBrasky

BillBrasky — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:13:44 +0000

I agree with Robert, this is a tweenie movie … not a fanboy movie. As a fanboy, I have been let down many times with movie adaptations of some of my most praised childhood memories. Since I have all those cinematic scars … I find myself prone to avoid some much anticipated (yet subpar reviewed) movies and opt for the DVD release. I have no actual data, but I doubt tweenies visit FSR, AICN, and RT websites as much as I do. I believe they visit teen people, (enter teen publication here), etc … which don't dive into cinematic critiques … only hype. Twilight's fan base will knock this one out of the park, and based on what I have read in reviews … I hope they invest that $$ in a solid sequel.

By: BillBrasky

BillBrasky — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:13:00 +0000

By: RobertFure

RobertFure — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:55:38 +0000

Yeah, there is no way this film does badly. It may under perform based on some predictions, but it's the kind of film that doesn't have to be good to get teenage girls to see the movie 3 times.

By: RobertFure

RobertFure — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:55:00 +0000

Yeah, there is no way this film does badly. It may under perform based on some predictions, but it's the kind of film that doesn't have to be good to get teenage girls to see the movie 3 times.

By: Rob_Hunter

Rob_Hunter — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:46:01 +0000

Critical reception means very little when it comes to box-office on any film, but it's even more irrelevant when it comes to a movie with a built-in fanbase/demographic. The movie will do well, especially in relation to its budget. Much like how New Line Cinema used to be called "the house that Freddy built" (as in Nightmare on Elm St), I predict Summit Entertainment will soon be known as the house that sappy Mormon vampires built.

By: Rob_Hunter

Rob_Hunter — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:46:00 +0000