Before I start off this review I have to get some things off my unshaved chest.
I have read the entire Twilight series. Yes, I can admit this. I probably would have gotten around to it eventually, but I had at least one very influential person that insisted I read them. I won't get into a huge book review, but overall I enjoyed them as a bit of guilty pleasure. The main problem I have with them is that the series is too long with too much filler and that the if the story wasn't so spread out it would've made an excellent two book series or just one really long, but actually pretty great book. Whole plot points and characters are just completely unnecessary (I'm looking at you Jacob). But I digress.
Yet, you have to give it to Stephanie Meyers for creating the most LETHAL Vampire in literature history. The only thing that comes close is Vampires, Inc. from John Steakley.
Also, I've been very conflicted over the entire film set. They are sort of jarring because they have been made by four different director's who all have very different styles and clashing methods. So while I hated New Moon as a book, I actually thought it was the most enjoyable movie thus far. How does that happen? Meanwhile, the original is a terrible movie while the book ain't that bad. This is just a broad sweeping example.
Breaking Dawn was my favorite of the book series. It's probably the only one in the series I'll re-read and it's clearly the meat of the story with everything else being the potatoes. So I've actually been looking forward to the movie(s).
With all of this being said, I can't say that I'm the best person to judge this latest movie. Because at best, I have a faulty, passing interest in the series. It's a flawed book series as well as a flawed film series to say the least.
Okay, now that we're done with that, on to the review!
Breaking Dawn Part 1 is probably the best of the movies. However, it's not without it's fatal flaws. The first of which is glaring to me. Bill Condon is an Oscar-winning director. Here he is clearly phoning it in. There is no evidence on the screen that a capable director was behind the camera. I think it's obvious this was a paycheck deal which we all sort of expected, but still. If you want to take a paycheck, cool...but do your job. I feel like this wasn't done in Condon's case, maybe things will be better in Part 2...I doubt it.
At this point it seems redundant and mundane to go into a plot synopsis. But briefly, Bella marries Edward, they have a sexy honeymoon and Bella discovers she's pregnant. The conflict of the story lies in not knowing what's growing in her womb and with the Cullens having varying notions of what to do (because this is pretty much a historic unknown in the Vampire world) and having to confront the Wolf pack that resides in the area who are also conflicted with what to do with a possible Vampire child.
 |
| Something to look forward to. |
Most of the flaws in this movie are nit-picky.
Stephanie Meyers cameo...nuff said.
Too much sex. I know plenty of women who actually wanted MORE sex in both the novel and film version. But with a series that has been so intertwined with teenage girls, I would have a problem with more sex let alone the amount of time that is focused on the sex that Edward and Bella are and ARE NOT having. It just seems so superficial. Heh, but then this is Twilight we're talking about...superficiality is a specialty.
The scene where the Wolves debate is absolutely ridiculous. I remember reading that scene and thinking about how much of a bitch it would be to shoot it. So to everyone's credit, they tried. They fucked it up, but they tried. I think the problem lies with the Wolves thinking (talking) like humans and therefore acting like humans even though they are wolves and that doesn't really jive in my brain. A wolf shouldn't be looking and acting like a human even if it IS CGI. I don't know, maybe I'll get used to it. Probably would've been smarter to have the whole scene done with the Wolf pack in their human forms.
The climatic battle at the end is shot in darkness in the woods. This was not a brilliant decision, it's hard to see. But again, I'm nitpicking.
Bella's look by the end of the movie is too severe...and I heard about this beforehand, but as I was watching I realized why they took it so far. She has to look amazingly GORGEOUS within ten minutes and all the while during Part 2, so they took her far down the ugly path in order to make it very easy to maker her look phenomenal as a Vampire. So while I still think they went a tad too far, I get why they did it. Why they almost HAD to do it. And don't get me wrong, she should look bad...just no that bad. She's got a possible monster baby in her belly that's KILLING her. So there's that.
Ultimately the one scene I can't shrug off with any kind of valid explanation is the birthing scene. When I read this part in the book I was mesmerized and gave Stephanie Meyer's SO much credit because it is the bloodiest and goriest scene I have ever read in any book genre ever. And I've read a lot of books. I remember thinking that if they didn't get this right in the movie I would be pissed.
Guess what?
They failed.
Say what you want, the scene is blurry, disjointed, unimaginative, and uninformative. This to me is another prime example of how Condon was just going by the numbers. It could have been done so much better.
But I guess that's the overall swan song of these movies. Sure, they'll do, but you can't argue that they're good when they take the few great moments of the books and completely butcher them.
Another very talked about problem that I'd rather call a plot point is the scene where Jacob "imprints" on the new baby Cullen, Renesmee. You know what I have to say about this?
Grow up. That's all, folks.
Meanwhile, credit where credit is due. I've been a vocal hater of Robert Pattinson's portrayal of Edward since day one. Mostly this is because I LOVE book Edward. He's the only character I could relate to and the main reason I finished the series, wanting to know what happened to him and his family. Pattinson's version of Edward is all brooding and dark smoldering looks.
This is not Edward. Here's his description off of Wikipedia:
Edward is described in the book as being charming, polite, determined, and very stubborn. He is very protective over Bella and puts her safety, humanity and welfare before anything else. He often over-analyzes situations and has a tendency to overreact, especially in situations where Bella's safety is at risk. He retains some outdated speech from his human life in the early 20th century.
YEAH, that's not Edward in the movies. Sure, some of it is. But in the books, Edward is CHARMING and has a sense of humor. Not in the movies.
However, in Breaking Dawn Part 1, Pattinson finally does something more with Edward beyond talking softly and looking through his eyebrows. So I have to applaud this.
Review wise, we're in a tough spot. The movie is NOT whole. Twilight seems to love to be spread out. One movie would've been enough for this book. It would've had to been a solid 2.5 hours, but it could've been done. So instead we're left with half the story, much of which is filler. It's hard to review a movie that's been split up without seeing the final piece.
Since I have to I will ultimately say that this movie will only appeal to you if you've seen the previous flicks and maybe even have read the books. If you've done some of that you'll dig it. If not, you'll be lost and this is clearly not a movie for you. There's no secret as to why these movies appeal so much to women everywhere. It's sort of a modern day fairy tale. Sure it has horror elements, but even then these classic horror mainstay's have been tweaked so much (partially in order to do something new with the genre, so again, Meyers must be acknowledged) that they're more of a fantasy take on something that used to be terrifying. But this is the story of a clumsy, almost self-loathing, very self-aware girl who meets the man of her dreams who is beautiful, rich, powerful, and can give her immortality. Through her entering his world she transforms into a stronger, more capable woman. Peek behind the curtain and you can see similarities between Twilight and Beauty and the Beast, or even Cinderella and many others. Meyers tapped into something that's been around for a while, she just dressed it up. Much like many others have, George Lucas springs immediately to mind. So while Twilight can be called fluff and vain, there's definitely something there. You gotta respect that. As a geek, I have to.
Girls, continue geeking out please!
7 / 10
No comments:
Post a Comment