Loading
The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
Tags: (14 votes)
Rating #:
4/10
Director:
Chris Weitz
Runtime:
130 minutes
Cast:
Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Kristen Stewart, Ashley Greene, Peter Facinelli, Elizabeth Reaser, Kellan Lutz, Nikki Reed, Jackson Rathbone, Edi Gathegi, Rachelle Lafevre, Billy Burke, Charlie Bewley, Jamie Campbell Bower, Daniel Cudmore, Christopher Heyerdahl, Dakota Fanning, Cameron Bright, Noot Seer, Michael Sheen, Graham Greene, Tinsel Korey That’s right, I braved the hordes of squealing, horny teenage girls and bored, sexually repressed housewives in order to write a review that most of you will be pissed is even on a site like this. Last I checked, both vampires and werewolves are still staples of the horror genre so fuck it, here we go. Looking back to a year ago, I was pretty generous in my review of the first Twilight manly due to its strong directing style from director Catherine Hardwicke. But in this rushed sequel, she’s gone and so are almost any redeeming qualities this movie could have had. I expected something similar to the first movie.
After a disastrous birthday party where Edward’s brother tries to eat Bella, and totally not in the fun way that my fellow pervs are imagining, the Cullen family leaves Forks, Washington. Bella goes into one helluva pathetic depression until her
old BFF, Jacob Black (who’s apparently been juicing for the past year), becomes a possible new love interest for her. And here’s where the movie completely dies. Edward’s naïve charm from the first film has been replaced with nothing more than moody looks, and Jacob is about as fun as waxing your ass hair. I just don’t get this whole battle of Team Edward vs. Team Jacob. Why is Bella so attached to either of these lame ass boys who have more issues than a newspaper. I’d say it’s because she’s getting some good dick, but there is no sex in Twilight world…only awkward pauses of will they or wont they kiss. Which is made even more awkward by the fact that there is absolutely zero chemistry between Krsiten Stewart’s Bella and Taylor Lautner’s Jacob. As the audience, this is beyond agonizing to us since most of the run time is devoted to these two characters developing their relationship.
I didn’t mind any of the leads’ performances in the first film, so I can only assume that Chris Weitz is just not as effective in drawing out strong performances from the young cast as Hardwicke was. And can we talk for a second about how unapologetically gratuitous this movie is? 80s slasher films used more tact when it came to topless females than this movie does with a shirtless (underage) Taylor Lautner. That’s right, feminazis, men can be sexually objectified too so stop your bitching!
I like a lot of the movies the director Chris Weitz has worked on so it’s sad to see just how unimpressively mediocre New Moon’s style is. There’s just nothing innovative or creative going on here. The supposed epic finale fight is nothing more than vampires being tossed around in 300 style slow motion. The strongest part of the film was the fight between the vampire Victoria and the wolf pack, intercut with Bella racing towards the cliffs.
The use of editing and music made this one of the few bright spots of the movie, which was almost ruined by the bizarre look of the giant CGI wolves. Man, did they look effing bad for such a high budget film. If Let the Right One In taught us anything, it’s that it’s possible to create an expertly crafted, slow burning love story of sorts between a human and a vampire without relying on over the top blood and guts. New Moon just doesn’t get it.
The compiled pre-existing tracks worked extremely well, but the composed score itself was distractingly out of place. It was epic and sweeping, yet there was nothing epic nor sweeping about this movie. Good music can’t save a boring scene. And boy are there a lot of them. Clocking in at a whopping two hours and ten minutes, the pacing is begging to be fixed and could have benefited from about twenty five minutes cut out.
In between all this Bella and Jacob bull dookie, we’re subjected to horrible forced humor among Bella’s human friends. As with the first movie, I don’t know who gets the blame for shit like this, the screenwriter or the original author since I
haven‘t read the books and have no plans to. Maybe one of you Twihards out there can let me know. And if it is the screenwriter, why the hell does she keep getting hired back?Once again, every supporting character shines and is given almost negative screen time. As in the last film, the Cullen siblings stand out in their few scenes (with even less screen time in this movie), especially Ashley Green as Alice since she’s the only one given the time of day. Rachelle Lefevre’s Victoria, Dakota Fanning’s Jane, and Michael Sheen’s Aro were far more entertaining in their near nonexistent parts than any of the three leads. It’s a shame that Lefevre’s been recast with the boring Bryce Dallas Howard since she has a very charismatic screen presence. Can we just get rid of this Romeo and Juliet love shit and have a spin off film with all of the actually interesting characters?
I tried to be as unbiased as possible, but when it comes down to it, New Moon is just not a good movie…I don’t care how old or what sex you are. With a story that lends itself to, if nothing else, great visuals, it’s a shame to see such a typical and uninspired filmmaking style. The supporting cast is great, but definitely not in the movie long enough to save it from its many shortcomings. I went it expecting something along the lines of the first film; Decently made, but just not for me. But the end result is a big step down for the series.
| Posted on November 25, 2009 - 6:29pm | Johnny D |
Dates are tentative and subject to change.
- Tue, February 14, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, February 14, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, February 14, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, February 17, 2012
- Tue, February 21, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, February 28, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, February 28, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, March 2, 2012 (VOD)
- Tue, March 6, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, March 9, 2012
- Sat, March 17, 2012 (SyFy)
- Tue, March 20, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, March 30, 2012
- Tue, April 3, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, April 6, 2012 (Limited)
- Tue, April 10, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, April 13, 2012 (Chiller)
- Fri, April 13, 2012
- Tue, April 17, 2012
- Tue, April 17, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, April 17, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, April 20, 2012 (Limited)
- Fri, April 20, 2012
- Tue, April 24, 2012 (DVD)
- Tue, April 24, 2012
- Fri, April 27, 2012
- Fri, April 27, 2012
- Fri, May 4, 2012 (VOD)
- Fri, May 11, 2012
- Fri, June 8, 2012
- Tue, June 12, 2012 (DVD)
- Fri, June 22, 2012
- Fri, August 17, 2012
- Fri, August 24, 2012
- Fri, August 24, 2012
- Fri, August 31, 2012
- Fri, August 31, 2012
- Fri, September 14, 2012
- Fri, September 21, 2012
- Fri, October 5, 2012
- Fri, October 19, 2012
- Fri, October 26, 2012
- Fri, December 21, 2012
- Fri, January 11, 2013
- Fri, February 1, 2013
- Fri, February 15, 2013
- Fri, February 22, 2013
- Fri, April 12, 2013
- Fri, May 10, 2013
- Fri, June 28, 2013
Kristen is a slut,Rober mumbles every word that comes out of mouth,Victoria didnt last longer than a minute in this movie,Britney Spears's boobs looked more real than the CGI so called Werewolfs. Not only that, The director thought that everyone read the books so they all assumed what was going to happen, so he Rushed threw the script. The theature was full of 200 Pound,ugly betty fan fiction writing,horny school girls with there night gowns, as if they just walked out of bed & got in there car.
I read the books, & I thought it couldnt hurt to make this into a screenplay,just like they said,Becareful what you wish for.
I actually didn't bother with seeing this one, because I thought the first movie was boring as hell. Just too much romance.
To me everyone has an opinion, I honestly love the Twilight saga. I think if you read the books you get a better understanding of the movies. But of course if your a guy you most likely wont like the movie because it is based around a romance between two people. My hubby wont even watch it and I guess I dont blame him. I love the books so of course I love the movies. I know people dont see it as a horror film but it does have vampires in it thats why it is in the horror genre
It is rather frustrating when the so-called hardcore fans pigeonhole horror as a genre of entertainment exclusively dedicated to the propagation of gore and nudity. There seems a genuine animosity toward any story that attempts to elevate the genre beyond the threshold of the superficial attitudes of T&A chasers! If a naked woman isn’t eviscerated in graphic detail then the entire movie is considered a “chick flick.” This is the lowest common denominator most horror films aspire to and sadly enough the very bottom of the barrel sludge the fanboys scream for. When a film aspires to me more than mere exploitation the fanboys jump o n their bandwagons and flood the net with their bullshit. If all you want out of horror is a boner or a gross out moment rent a Ron Jeremy video and stop pretending to be horror fans.
Hey Mr. Skye, this movie sucked bigtime--get over it. I love all kinds of horror, slasher, cerebral, artsy--but shirtless glittering male vampires and werewolves fighting over a confused teenage girl is gay. I also can appreciate a myriad of other genres, including a well made chick-flick from time to time. But this Twilight crap is unacceptable! You need to purchase a pair of testicles and never watch this travesty of a feature film ever again--ever!
nah, when a movie that happens to be horror turns out to be drivel impersonating horror, twi-hard fans like you are too ridiculous to lie in the bed that you made.
and your first and last line of defense is that twilight is above horror? instead you compare it to a chick flick and liken horror to old-school porn.
you're ranting on a horror movie site about how lame horror fans are..........?????????? and you rent porn? what are you 80?
In defence of New Moon
It doesn't matter what genre you call it, New Moon was a hell of a good movie. I respectfully but completely disagree with the idea that the characters aren't interesting or have no chemistry. The story is great, it's visually fantastic and emotionally powerful.
I personally put the Twilight movies under the Horror classification (as well as under the Romance heading and the Fantasy heading) largely because I have a pretty broad defination of horror (including movies like The Village, Identity, Dark City and Brotherhood Of The Wolf - all of which also fit under multiple genre headings) and also because, while they're certainly not the scariest movies ever made, they at least have a higher fright factor than, say, Drag Me To Hell or Diary Of The Dead. I'm not tyring to piss anyone off with that, I deliberately chose movies that a lot of people liked (and that's fine) just to illustrate the adage that what one person finds scary another is totally unmoved by, and vice versa. At its very Least, Twilight and New Moon would be horror-NEUTRAL, not ANTI-Horror like all the parodies and spoofs out there that exist only to ridicule and sneer at horror, or at whatever other field of movies they're mocking at the time.
It amazes me that Twilight takes so much flak on certain sites but the parodies ('parody' is almost too kind a word, but I'm trying to be diplomatic) get off relatively unscathed. It's kind of the same with the Saw movies and the 'remake' trend. Even I agree that Saw IV and V have been steps down from the earlier ones (haven't seen # 6 yet but I will), and that there are too many remakes right now (even if a lot of them are excellent, they still should pull back on the sheer number for a while), but I mean, seriously...people go on and on about how this one sucks, about that one sucks, about how you're an idiot if you like this one, how the filmmakers who made that one personally suck.... Some people just say they don't like them and that's it, but others (not all) seem to devote huge chunks of their time ranting and raving about how much they hate them. If people put half of that time and energy into seeking out other, largely unheralded movies, that they might enjoy better (great movies like Isolation, Fear Runs Silent, Voice {aka Yeogo Goedam 4: Moksori}, Tourist Trap, Red Rover, 4 Inyong Shiktak {aka The Uninvited, from 2003}, Unspeakable and Evil Remains), they might be less cranky than just spending all day going on and on about the ones they can't stand.
But then again, if everybody did that, movies like Isolation and Fear Runs Silent might become tremendously popular, and five seconds later it would be as cool (even expected) to bash them as it currently is Twilight or Saw or the Halloween remakes.
it sucks this isnt a horror movie gosh this is a stupid romance shit 4 girls who dnt hav a life it has no real story line wtf is it doing on this site for HORROR movies
Noobz
And I've always believed the scream saga was crap yet....they continue making them Shocker. Deal with it. =]
i always said this saga was crap since i saw the first movie's poster. just looking at the actors moody faces and "lights" (i mean, it looked like a friggin soap opera to me) was enough to understand the crappyness. i didnt see a trailer nor a short clip. i was just sure it was a waste of time.
then a couple of days ago i tried to watch twilight...
i had to stop watching after 20 minutes or so: it was painful.
the only good thing about this saga is making fun of girls who like it.
Just because a movie does well does not make it a great movie. Many people go to see this movie, but how many will like it after they watch it?
“The Twilight Saga: New Moon" achieved $140.7 million in its first three days and pulled in a total of $258.8 million worldwide, according to studio estimates. New Moon opening weekend shot it straight to third all time.
Making money does not equal great movie. This flick is just directed at teenage girls. What's worse of how appearance of how people look in these films should be a concern. Oh yeah, teach teenage girls or whatever that looks are everything and personality means nothing. Twlight promotes a very superfacial and poor message to its audience. Yeah, hollywood movies have done this in the past and in the present but twlight really focuses on the actor's appearances. Normally I do not comment on films I hate, but because someone says the film makes money does not mean its necessarily a great or even a good film.
I'm tired of twilight being catagorized as a horror movie...it's freakn chick flick!!!
Who is categorizing it as a horror movie?
hahaha...I have a subcription to every horror magazine out there and it's on the front page of every freakn one.
Lots of nonhorror get onto horror sites and mags due to some aspect of it. If it has werewolves and vamps it'll be there. If it has some nasty special fx, it'll be there. Exapmples would be Ghost of Mars and that Arnold Flick where he goes to mars which was on every horror based mag when it came out as well.
No one thinks of twilight as a horror. It is not advertised as a horror. It is not horror and everyone knows it. But because it has 2 major horror iconic races (weres and vamps) every horror entity will have something on it.
It's just the way it is...
Agreed, plus if a film is popular enough it will be publicized pretty much everywhere to begin with, because the medium knows that with the huge following will come many readers.
HAHAHA! Ahh, I found this review very entertaining.
I saw we blame the screenwriter