New Moon
Movie Review
"New Moon"
Review by Eric D. Snider
Grade: C+
Rating: PG-13
Released: Friday, November 20, 2009
Directed by:
Cast:
Bella Swan's problem, and the thing that makes her so enviable to many of her adolescent female fans, is that there are two strong, handsome young men deeply in love with her, both of them willing to die for her. Is this not the epitome of the classic romantic melodrama? What teenage girl wouldn't want to be her? As far as the target audience is concerned, the only way it could be better is if there were three boyfriends instead of two. Of course, the third one would have to be a zombie or something.
Bella (played by Kristen Stewart) has another problem that pops up a lot in "New Moon," the first sequel to the squeal-inducing "Twilight": these guys love her so much that they keep telling her to stay away from them for her own good. Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), as you already know, is a vampire who can barely resist the urge to gorge himself on a feast of her blood. Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), as you also already know but aren't supposed to until well into this film, becomes a werewolf when he gets angry. Vampires and werewolves hate each other anyway, but especially when they're in love with the same girl. Isn't it romantic? Swoon.
These are not supernatural movies. I cannot stress that enough. They are teen romances that happen to have supernatural elements. Stephenie Meyer's novels -- or at least the first one, which is all I've read -- make no attempt to hide this fact, and the two movies so far are likewise pretty straightforward about their intentions. If you come out of "New Moon" wishing there'd been more vampire mythology or werewolf science-fiction, that's your problem, not the movie's.
This is unlikely, however. If you go into "New Moon" in the first place, willingly and of your own accord, the odds are very good that you are a fan of the book series, and that you are female, and that you are eager to see a somber, gothic love story. It's not for nothing that Bella's English class is studying "Romeo and Juliet." (According to Hollywood law, this means that specific plot elements of "Romeo and Juliet" must subsequently come into play in the lives of the characters.) I think the movie will probably give you what you're looking for -- which isn't to say it's a great movie, only that it's basically successful at achieving the not-very-lofty goals it sets for itself.
The story begins on Bella's 18th birthday, a reminder that she is getting older while her boyfriend remains forever 17. What will happen when she is elderly and haggard and Edward is still pasty-faced and adolescent? Bella's proposed solution to this problem is that Edward vampirize her, which he opposes on the grounds that being a vampire means losing your soul, which evidently is bad. Still, he cannot bear the thought of living without her. If he ever lost her, he says, he would commit suicide by going to the Volturi, an ancient race of hardline vampires, and provoking them into executing him. In the business, we call this sort of casual reference OBVIOUS FORESHADOWING.
After an unfortunate paper-cut incident at Edward's house reminds him and his vampire family how perilous the Bella situation is, the Cullens leave town. Bella is heartbroken, and director Chris Weitz ("About a Boy," "The Golden Compass") does a good job conveying her teenage depression and the passage of several months' time in about a minute. (Would that he had been so efficient elsewhere: At 130 minutes, the movie overstays its welcome.) Eventually Bella finds solace with her friend, Jacob, who unfortunately is starting to go through certain changes that certain lupine members of his Native American tribe experience in adolescence. Jacob is on the brink of werepuberty.
Weitz's visual style is steady and polished -- this is a very good-looking movie. (Props to cinematographer Javier Aguirresarobe, who also shot "The Road" and apparently specializes in bleak, sullen stories.) Where "Twilight" director Catherine Hardwicke emphasized a realistic, gritty look, Weitz makes "New Moon" glossy, in the fashion of traditional Hollywood romances. The special effects have vastly improved, too. But Weitz is stuck with two male leads who can't deliver what their roles require. Pattinson's strategy is to look "brooding" at all times, as if he is constantly on the verge of being sick to his stomach. His Edward seems to have only one emotion: aching. Lautner, his role beefed up for this film (along with his pecs and abs), just doesn't have the gravitas needed to be convincing as a lovesick young man haunted by powerful secrets. His "intense" moments don't ring true, like a high-schooler doing "Death of a Salesman."
Then there is Kristen Stewart. Her performance is fine -- but what is there for her character to do? Bella is defined solely by Edward. Every thought she has, every action she takes, is because of her love for him. That may be romantic, but such a one-dimensional protagonist (especially a somber one like Bella) stops being enjoyable to watch after a while.
The cheesy love dialogue makes me gag a little, but I'll concede that exchanges like this:
BELLA: I don't have anything to give to you.
EDWARD: You give me everything just by breathing.
-- and this --
EDWARD: You just don't belong in my world, Bella.
BELLA: I belong with you.
-- are appropriate to the genre of teen-sanitized Harlequin romances. (The screenplay has again been adapted by Melissa Rosenberg, but I wouldn't be surprised if those specific lines are in the book.)
Regardless of my status as a grown man who does not belong to the "Twilight" demographic, simply as a moviegoer I'm disappointed by the way "New Moon" is constructed. The story has no climax; it just sort of ends, and you think, "Oh, I guess that little fight was supposed to be the climax. Huh." Michael Sheen is introduced as one of the Volturi (and Dakota Fanning, too!), then given very little to do. It's obvious that a lot of threads are being established for later sequels. That sort of seed-planting is acceptable in moderation, but "New Moon" overdoes it, giving us very little payoff here and now. Are they just ASSUMING that everyone will be back for part 3, no matter what? I mean, they're probably right, but still.
Grade: C+
Rated PG-13, moderate violence, graphic teenage lycanthropy
2 hrs., 10 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.
This item has 34 comments
November 19, 2009 at 4:03 pm
"Graphic teenage lycanthropy," "werepuberty." HA! You had a lot of fun with the werewolf thing I see.
November 19, 2009 at 4:30 pm
You had me "fanged yet toothless romance." Beautiful! Even more than Edward. Not as much as Jacob.
November 19, 2009 at 4:35 pm
LOL! Had to look up lycanthropy. Didn't realize that was part of the MPAA rating criteria. Who would 'a thunk it?
My wife loves the books, hated twilight 1. Might like #2 though, sounds like. She can't stand Pattinson as Edward. She watches some vampire drama on the TV that she and her friends say is the Edward they pictured.
November 19, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Ur so wrong!! This movie deserves an A++++ rating. I havent even seen it yet, but me and my friendz all LUVVVVVV Twilight and all the movies alreddy. You are just jealous becuz no girl wuld ever love you like Bella loves Edward (and also as much as she loves Jacob too... you know, after Edward is gone for a couple months).
Whoa, sorry about that. I was possessed for a second. Thanks for the review Eric. Although it didn't get a great rating, you at least gave me hope that it will be somewhat bearable when my wife drags me to it.
November 19, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Eric, your review was pretty fair. I can totally understand why this type of melodrama resonates with the teen crowd--it's the 40-ish fan-Mom crowd that unsettles me. Being both a fan of horror and quality, I'll be passing on this one since it seems like an expensive Goosebumps episode. But other reviewers have seized on it with a vengeance, which seems all too easy.
November 19, 2009 at 8:44 pm
.
Question:
What happened to Chris Weitz? About a Boy was brilliant. And then . . . .
What happened to Chris Weitz?
November 19, 2009 at 10:52 pm
If you think the ending of book/movie two is a let down, wait until you read/see four.
November 19, 2009 at 11:51 pm
This is why I quit reading the books halfway through the second one. I wanted to slap Bella upside of the head. Are we REALLY trying to teach teenage girls that they are nothing without their man? That death is preferable to living without the one we love? (the book spent more time on Bella's suicidal tendency (i.e. learning to ride the motorcycle) than it sounds the movie spent on it, but that's where I quit). I have no patience for stuff (self edited) like that.
November 20, 2009 at 12:26 am
I foresee more Angry Letters.
I approve.
November 20, 2009 at 6:35 am
This seems to be a fair assessment - I was really hoping that you would tear it apart, so I'm a bit disappointed. I think my favorite part about this movie finally coming out is that I will no longer have to endure annoying Facebook updates/chatter about it. I'm 30, and I think it's ridiculous that my friends even care about this crap.
By the way, I also refused to watch the movie "Titantic" back in the day (though I loved Eric's screenplay). I tend to eschew things that are wildly popular but without substance. (turning nose up at Twilight fans)
November 20, 2009 at 7:55 am
@Jon, I have to disagree with you on book 4. The ending is a bit anticlimactic, however it did have some pretty cool action scenes, so it is SOME potential...
It's a pity that this movie didn't turn out better. I was hoping that having Robert Pattinson on screen less would make the movie better. Oh well, I suppose I'll have to see it once. I can't very well be the only female college student in Utah to have not seen it, and once I see it I can make fun of it.
November 20, 2009 at 8:20 am
I think you're too narrow in your assessment of who will see this voluntarily. There will be plenty of men who see this voluntarily, 100% of which will be with a woman, and 100% of which are counting on being in close proximity to said woman with brownie points to spend when this brooding, angsty teen romance puts her in a frisky mood. In the meantime, you can pretty much grab your iPhone, step out to "use the rest room," and check scores as often as you like. She'll be riveted to the screen anyway.
November 20, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Dear Teenage Girls:
All teenage boys are either
a) a vampire;
b) a werewolf; or
c) something else equally deadly.
So, despite your hormonal surges and your incredible sense of romance at something so forbidden, you should AVOID THEM AT ALL COSTS. To do otherwise means TO LOSE YOUR IMMORTAL SOUL.
Let me show you how it will play out if you do get icky with them.
With love,
StephanieXXXXXXXX Stephenie Meyer
November 20, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Uhm, I'm not sure that I can really trust any of your reviews now because I just read this contrasting 'review' from someone on my Facebook feed...
New Moon = Best Movie Ever!
I just don't know what to believe any more.
November 20, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Argh.
90% of teenage girls are obsessed with this crap.
As a teenage girl, this greatly depresses me.
The plotline is awful, the characters are all idiots and the writing is frivolous and repetative. This stuff is horrible.
November 20, 2009 at 6:03 pm
@Kimberly T: for about half a page. Then everything ends with rainbows and flowers.
If you cut out about 75% of the "love" dialogue, all of the bad mormon-esque writing that Meyer forces down your throat, and replace it with more fighting, powers, and killing, Twilight could be a decent work of fiction.
Oh, and make sure the protagonist isn't perfect except for [EXACTLY ONE FLAW] together with the most broken super power ever.
November 20, 2009 at 6:16 pm
of course, removing all that would leave you with about 200 pages with all 4 books put together.
November 20, 2009 at 7:07 pm
My daughter just finished reading Lord of the Rings and pronounced it better than twilight. We are watching fellowship tonight...
I have succeeded as a parent;)
November 20, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Is there a rejected "New Moon" script lying around your place? You nailed what's wrong with "Twilight" so well with the last one...please let there be a sequel...
November 20, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Russ what constitutes as "mormon - esque" if I might ask?
November 20, 2009 at 10:33 pm
I hope they have more quidditch in this film.
November 21, 2009 at 11:22 am
@Robert 21: you made me smile. I forced myself to read all four books since i couldn't very well condemn something i hadn't read. my synopsis is at http://www.mudmark.com/?p=44 and Eric, i swear i didn't plagiarize your Twilight screenplay. :)
November 21, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Come on, guys, let me let you in on a little secret about Twilight -- or something blatantly obvious about the Twilight movies. Have you noticed how in the vast majority of every movie ever made, almost every single woman is beautiful and perfectly proportioned? That is, unless she's playing a "character" part or is someone's mother or the whole plot of the movie revolves around how she's not hot enough, (but, you know, MaryAnne from Gilligan's Island "ugly," not really unattractive.) Every male character in these movies is actually good-looking! It's truly a Hollywood miracle. Also, it is difficult for many women to separate a guy's outward appearance with his personality and character, so all these men are also hot because they all have good qualities. Amazing. So let us have our turn. We know how to earn money and pay for a movie ticket ourselves, which Hollywood is just starting to realize. And, yes, we know there's plot holes. We know some stuff just doesn't make sense. We know it's at times cheesy. We know it would be RIDICULOUS to even compare these mild-interesting, but romantic stories to JRR Tolkien novels. (At least most of us do.) Just relax. I think Eric didn't tear it apart because he's not one of those people who automatically hates something that's popular so that he can feel superior.
November 22, 2009 at 12:58 pm
I too am very disappointed that this review is not a rejected screenplay. Pleeeease, Eric? Please!?!
November 23, 2009 at 9:18 am
I think the final book in the Twilight series will reveal that Bella is actually bat-poop-crazy, and "Edward" is a mannequin she stole from a department store. It explains the good looks, sculpted body, perpetual youth, "marble skin", and lack of personality.
Everybody in Forks, WA plays along with her delusion because they don't want to exacerbate her already unstable mental state.
Like "Lars and the Real Girl", but with no redeeming qualities.
November 23, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Ms Meyer actually briefly thought of bringing in a zombie boyfriend, but she knew that even her fans wouldn't buy a guy who liked Bella for her brains . . .
November 24, 2009 at 7:43 am
@Thoran Orson Scott Card, like Stephenie Meyer, puts a lot of his Mormon beliefs into his writing; but unlike Stephenie Meyer, he is a really good writer, so that even if you disagree with his beliefs, you can still enjoy his books. (At least, I loved all the Ender books, though I didn't think much of Card's other series.) I've also noticed this with C.S. Lewis; lots of non-Christians love the Chronicles of Narnia, just because they are good stories.
November 25, 2009 at 12:39 am
Oh man, the fourth book was an abortive piece of literature. ... Using the title "literature" to describe Stephanie Meyer's work might be giving her too much credit, actually. Anyway, it was horrible. It read like it was written by one of her rabid fangirls, and didn't really have a plot. The story just kind of meandered along aimlessly until I grew to hate the book so much I wanted every character to die.
When the fourth movie comes out... God save our souls.
December 1, 2009 at 4:56 pm
That whole thing about the books being teen romances with supernatural elements, I've been saying that for years. When my friends try to convince me that I should love the books because they are fantasy, I keep telling them they are primarily romance novels, and I hate romance novels, they won't listen to me. I'm beginning to think I am one of the only sane women left in my community, everyone loves Twilight.
December 4, 2009 at 11:18 pm
I will never see this movie. Especially on a Monday. Not because I object to it or find it trite, but I'd get that Duran Duran song stuck in my head. I wouldn't be able to pay attention.
December 12, 2009 at 9:09 am
One of the things I think is hilarious about this series is that Bella can get a papercut that makes the vampires go wild, but they somehow don't notice her monthly periods.
December 14, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I think you underestimate the story and the movie. I'm a history teacher so I know the importance of a good story. So what if they are only prepping for more sequels. Preparing for the future is what history and good storytelling is all about. You have to be ready for what's to come!
December 18, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I honestly don't think that any of ya'll will ever understand the concept of the Twilight Saga. One) Eric you haven't even read the whole saga so who are you to judge stephanie meyers' successful writing. Two) How far would you go to SAVE the one you loved? whether it be a family member or wife or husband. you would die for them wouldn't you? prolly so. three) The sequel was brilliant. not only did it teach you life lessons (you would have to really look into it to understand) it taught you to never let go of something you love or to fight for what you want or to never give up. The Twilight Saga has completely changed my outlook on life. I use to hate it. I hated my family, my boyfriend (who ive been with for 5 and half years now) but now ive learned to not give up on the things that matter the most. To not give up on the things that help keep you alive. Reading that book has made me understand the true concept of love and hate and war. I love deep books but the Twilight Saga was BRILLIANT.
January 11, 2010 at 8:51 pm
I avoided seeing New Moon until the hype died down because I got so sick of hearing and seeing about it, and I appreciate movies more when the advertising has not been burnt into the corneas of my eyes...I just saw it today.
And I have to say, it's not as terrible as I've heard. I still remain undecided on which one I favour more..because I liked the tone of the first one better. There were some good elements in New Moon. I agree with the review that Bella's depression got captured really well. I also agree (and I laughed so hard when I read this)that Lautner's "intense" moments don't ring true, like a high-schooler doing "Death of a Salesman." My favourite bit was the films introduction to the 'Volutri gang'. Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning, once again, reigned supreme. I wish they had more screen time. They were both so convincingly menacing, I loved it.
Can't wait to see Fanning and Stewart in "The Runaways". That'll be interesting.