Twilight (2008)
Grade:B
Twilight is gunning to be the next Harry Potter series, and while the books have been immensely popular, I can safely say, having read the first book and now having seen the film adaptation, that J.K. Rowling shouldn’t be too worried about her empire being usurped. Not that the Harry Potter books are great, but they’re certainly better, and the films, to be sure, have had more ambition than the film version of Twilight has.
To be fair to the filmmakers of Twilight, they had a difficult task. First, they had merely O.K.-at-best source material to work with in crafting a film around author Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight. Out of morbid curiosity, I read the book before seeing the movie, and the book is geared firmly at middle school girls (maybe some high school girls in that mix, too), from the simplistic and idealistic love story between Bella Swan and vampire Edward Cullen to the rudimentary writing, to the almost painful dialogue. As narrated by Bella, the books are plodding accounts of one girl’s obsession with and devotion to her supposed soul mate, and the books are a chore to read a lot of the time. Entertaining to a point, yes, and the central characters of Edward and Bella are on the whole well-drawn, but the books are more flawed than success-ridden.
This uneven quality of the source material extends to the film, due in large part, I think, to the desire of the filmmakers to be faithful to the book so as to satisfy fans (and largely reflected in Meyer’s heavy involvement in the making of the film). In short, the film is probably the best film that could’ve come from the books that would still satisfy fans, and that is fully meant as a backhanded compliment. Having read the book, there was admittedly some semblance of comfort in seeing that it had translated directly to screen, but from a completely film critic perspective, the resulting film was just… alright.
Both book and film tell the story of Arizona transplant Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) as she moves to drizzly Forks, Washington to live with her father after her new stepfather and mother decide to travel the country for a while. Bella quickly assimilates into her new environment, a group of kids absorbing her into their group with little fanfare (what a lovely high school Forks High School must be where the biggest drama seems to be how friendly everyone will be to each other on a given day) and things seem to be going well with her semi-estranged father Charlie (Billy Burke).
Then brooding Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) enters the picture. Edward’s a member of the mysterious Cullen family, consisting of father Carlisle (Peter Facinelli), mother Esme (Elizabeth Reaser), and a handful of adopted children who are also… paired off into romantic couples? If the names seem antiquated and the dating thing seems weird, it’s because the Cullens are hiding a simple fact: they’re all vampires. The adoption thing is a cover, and they all have been living together for decades, moving from city to city while trying to live some semblance of a normal life while hunting animals in the wilderness, the vampire equivalent of “vegetarianism” so that they don’t have to hunt humans.
Edward and Bella immediately fall in love, he with her because she is the most enticing human he’s ever smelled (unh-hunh) and she with him because as a vampire he is predisposed to being inhumanly gorgeous so as to attract the best prey (riiiiiiight). Oh, and he sparkles or some crazy shit when he’s in direct sunlight. She finds it like, so totally hawt OMGZ.
The whole movie is goofy. There’s no better way of putting it. The flaws of the books translate to the film in some truly painful dialogue and wooing exchanges between the two lovers. And the vampire stuff is all mildly interesting in terms of functioning as a revisionist take on vampire lore, though as handled in the film, comes across as… goofy. All the blood lusting and what not. And the superpowers that these vampires have: mind-reading, future-seeing, and the like. Totally goofy.
But if you just run with it and try not to take it all too seriously, the film isn’t terrible. It’s goofy goofy fun and certainly entertaining. Director Catherine Hardwicke (she of the infinitely better Thirteen) tries valiantly, sometimes too valiantly, to bring some cinematic flair to the proceedings. She sometimes picks swooping circling shots too much and goes overboard with the stylistic whooshes and what not, but at least she’s trying. Thank God Brett Ratner didn’t get this project or something. Then we’d be in serious trouble.
The film’s also universally well-cast, right down to the smaller high school roles. I always thought Bella’s interactions with her high school friends were much more interesting than all this vampire business in the book, and the same is strangely true about the film. Anna Kendrick, in particular, as best friend Jessica, is fantastic with only a few minutes of screen time, and the rest of the group of friends have an ease about them that comes across as instantly credible.
The whole endeavor is just a bit moot when all is said and done. If you try to iron out the flaws of the book in the name of making a better movie, you lose the fan base, and if you are too faithful to the book, then you’re left with horrible reviews – not that it would have much of an effect on the final box office tallies. So while it’s not like Hardwicke was given lemons and made lemonade, it’s like she was given a jug of powdered lemonade mix and decided to make the best damned lemonade possible while following the directions on the label.
Bottom Line:
It’s the best possible movie that could have been crafted from the source material while still being faithful and satisfying fans. For better and for worse.
© 2004-2009 Ben Waldorf. Posted November 22, 2008. IMDB
I love your lemonade analogy at the end lol. I haven’t seen it yet, but the middle school girl inside of me can’t wait! :)
— Stephanie Nov 22, 05:02 PM #