'Twilight' reviews roundup: And the verdict is...

Twilightkiss_dl
Let the Twilight blood-letting begin. Though reviewers were asked to hold their critiques until the vampire flick’s Nov. 21 release date, several reviews are now available online, and for the most part, critics aren’t impressed. They unanimously concede that the movie’s target audience — teens with closets full of Team Edward hoodies, who have breathlessly read (and reread) Stephenie Meyer’s four-part series — will thoroughly enjoy the film. But for the uninitiated, consensus so far seems to be that it’s an ineffectual love story combined with cheesy special effects that will leave moviegoers craving more.

A quick summary of the reviews, after the jump.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY
Verdict: Positive

“[Director Catherine Hardwicke] has reconjured Meyer’s novel as a cloudburst mood piece filled with stormy skies, rippling hormones, and understated visual effects. What Hardwicke can’t quite triumph over is the book’s lackluster plot. On screen, Twilight is repetitive and a tad sodden, too prosaic to really soar. But Hardwicke stirs this teen pulp to a pleasing simmer.” —Owen Gleiberman

ASSOCIATED PRESS
Verdict: Negative
"But
much of what made the relationship between Edward and the smitten Bella
Swan work in Meyer’s breezy book has been stripped away on screen. The
funny, lively banter — the way in which Edward and Bella teased and
toyed with one another about their respective immortality and humanity
— is pretty much completely gone, and all that’s left is a slog of
adolescent angst." —Christy Lemire

CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Verdict: Neutral
"Twilight
is a film of intelligent strengths and easily avoidable weaknesses, a
modest film adaptation of Stephenie Meyer’s publishing phenomenon. It
is faithful to its source material, which will likely please the fan
base….So where does the movie fall down? On a simple but crucial
matter of visual magic. Whenever something fantastic requires
straightforward on-screen depiction, Twilight looks like a weaker episode from Season 6 of Charmed." —Michael Phillips

EMANUEL LEVY
Verdict: Negative
"Like other movies that are more significant as sociological and demographic than artistic phenomenon, Twilight
will be embraced by very young female viewers, say ages 10-17, and less
so by the female college crowd. If young femmes manage to take their
boyfriends to see it as a date movie (and on one level it is a date
movie), Twilight should score big, really big at the box office."

ORLANDO SENTINEL
Verdict: Neutral
"The
situations, in high school and among the vampires, are over-familiar.
But the dialogue is mostly flip and hip. Some of the laughs are
intentional, some not. A vampire using the word ‘vegetarian?’ Funny." —Roger Moore

ROGER EBERT
Verdict: Neutral
"If there were no vampires in Twilight,
it would be a thin-blooded teenage romance, about two good-looking kids
who want each other so much because they want each other so much.
Sometimes that’s all it’s about, isn’t it?"

VARIETY
Verdict: Negative
"A
disappointingly anemic tale of forbidden love that should satiate the
pre-converted but will bewilder and underwhelm viewers who haven’t
devoured Stephenie Meyer’s bestselling juvie chick-lit franchise." —Justin Chang

TIME
Verdict: Positive
“So Twilight isn’t a masterpiece — no matter.
It rekindles the warmth of great Hollywood romances, where foreplay was the
climax and a kiss was never just a kiss.” —Richard Corliss

USA TODAY 
Verdict: Negative

And despite
questionable casting, wooden acting, laughable dialogue and truly awful makeup,
nothing is likely to stop young girls from swarming to this kitschy adaptation
of Stephenie Meyer’s popular novel.” —Claudia Puig

WASHINGTON POST
Verdict: Positive

“On the whole, Twilight works as both love story and
vampire story, thanks mainly to the performances of its principals. Pattinson
and Stewart want to convince you that their characters are an undead freak and
the girl who, against all logic, loves him. Yet they do it not by selling you on
what makes Edward and Bella so different, but by finding their flesh-and-blood
humanity.” —Michael O’Sullivan

More ‘Twilight':

Box Office Preview: ‘Twilight’ to suck up buckets of blood…and big bucks

Shrieking masses descend on L.A. for the ‘Twilight’ premiere
‘Twilight': Meet Robert Pattinson
‘Twilight': Inside Bella-Jacob’s Stormy Scene

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY
Verdict: Positive
“[Director Catherine Hardwicke] has reconjured Meyer’s novel as a cloudburst mood piece filled with stormy skies, rippling hormones, and understated visual effects. What Hardwicke can’t quite triumph over is the book’s lackluster plot. On screen, Twilight is repetitive and a tad sodden, too prosaic to really soar. But Hardwicke stirs this teen pulp to a pleasing simmer.” —Owen Gleiberman

ASSOCIATED PRESS
Verdict: Negative
"Butmuch of what made the relationship between Edward and the smitten BellaSwan work in Meyer’s breezy book has been stripped away on screen. Thefunny, lively banter — the way in which Edward and Bella teased andtoyed with one another about their respective immortality and humanity– is pretty much completely gone, and all that’s left is a slog ofadolescent angst." —Christy Lemire

CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Verdict: Neutral
"Twilightis a film of intelligent strengths and easily avoidable weaknesses, amodest film adaptation of Stephenie Meyer’s publishing phenomenon. Itis faithful to its source material, which will likely please the fanbase….So where does the movie fall down? On a simple but crucialmatter of visual magic. Whenever something fantastic requiresstraightforward on-screen depiction, Twilight looks like a weaker episode from Season 6 of Charmed." —Michael Phillips

EMANUEL LEVY
Verdict: Negative
"Like other movies that are more significant as sociological and demographic than artistic phenomenon, Twilightwill be embraced by very young female viewers, say ages 10-17, and lessso by the female college crowd. If young femmes manage to take theirboyfriends to see it as a date movie (and on one level it is a datemovie), Twilight should score big, really big at the box office."

ORLANDO SENTINEL
Verdict: Neutral
"Thesituations, in high school and among the vampires, are over-familiar.But the dialogue is mostly flip and hip. Some of the laughs areintentional, some not. A vampire using the word ‘vegetarian?’ Funny." —Roger Moore

ROGER EBERT
Verdict: Neutral
"If there were no vampires in Twilight,it would be a thin-blooded teenage romance, about two good-looking kidswho want each other so much because they want each other so much.Sometimes that’s all it’s about, isn’t it?"

VARIETY
Verdict: Negative
"Adisappointingly anemic tale of forbidden love that should satiate thepre-converted but will bewilder and underwhelm viewers who haven’tdevoured Stephenie Meyer’s bestselling juvie chick-lit franchise." —Justin Chang

TIME
Verdict: Positive
“So Twilight isn’t a masterpiece — no matter.It rekindles the warmth of great Hollywood romances, where foreplay was theclimax and a kiss was never just a kiss.” —Richard Corliss

USA TODAY 
Verdict: Negative
And despitequestionable casting, wooden acting, laughable dialogue and truly awful makeup,nothing is likely to stop young girls from swarming to this kitschy adaptationof Stephenie Meyer’s popular novel.” —Claudia Puig

WASHINGTON POST
Verdict: Positive
“On the whole, Twilight works as both love story andvampire story, thanks mainly to the performances of its principals. Pattinsonand Stewart want to convince you that their characters are an undead freak andthe girl who, against all logic, loves him. Yet they do it not by selling you onwhat makes Edward and Bella so different, but by finding their flesh-and-bloodhumanity.” —Michael O’Sullivan

More ‘Twilight':
Box Office Preview: ‘Twilight’ to suck up buckets of blood…and big bucks
Shrieking masses descend on L.A. for the ‘Twilight’ premiere
‘Twilight': Meet Robert Pattinson
‘Twilight': Inside Bella-Jacob’s Stormy Scene


Tags:

Comments (788 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 53
  • BklynGirl

    Honestly, I haven’t read the books and had never heard about the books until about 6 months ago. All the hype hasn’t interested me enough to buy the books or stand on line to see the movie this weekend (my sister is planning to see the midnight showing tomorrow night). These reviews don’t help my disinterest.

  • john t.

    no surprise here. it was pretty obvious based on the trailer that it looked underwhelming.
    EW…enough with the twilight coverage please!!!

  • Fatima

    This pleases me greatly

  • Snarf

    Season 6 ep of Charmed? Ouch!

  • sindy

    I TINK THAT TWILIGHT IS GOING TO BE GREAT AND i’M 32!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Annie

    I just finished the books, and I enjoyed them. I will not be standing in line to see the movie this weekend, but do plan on seeing it at sometime. As far as the special effects…from my understanding they had a very low budget to work with. So, I was not expecting too much there. I in an interview, the girl who plays Bella, said they couldn’t even afford the green screens. I’m not expecting this to be Oscar worthy by any means, but like I said I still plan on seeing it.

  • London

    I’m not surprised at all. Let me just say that I love the books (well the first 3 anyway) but….the books are ALL in Bella’s head. How do you make a movie out of…thoughts? plus they picked a mostly untalented cast. Kristen Stewart has been terrible in everything I have ever seen her in! Speak, ITLOW, and the like 5 minutes she was in Into the Wild I contemplated walking out of it. I really did.

  • Allison

    I read the Twilight series only after I saw the movie review in EW over the summer. The series made for a quick read, but I found very underwhelming in juvenile, so I can only imagine the movie will be very undermining and juvenile. I also feel the need to put the Death Curse on anyone that puts Harry Potter and Twilight in the same sentence. Stephanie Myers has nowhere near the prowess of JK Rowling. Stop making the comparison.

    • Brandon

      Damn righ, Allison, who posted on 11/9/2008 at 8:52 P.M. Stephanie Meyes has nowhere near the literary skill of Rowling. Twilight is designed to get prepubescent and awkward teeenage girls to go squeal over a Gary Stu and a Betty Sue. The idea didn’t require much creativity. Harry Potter was completely new. Plus, it’s harder to write for a protagonist who differs from yourself, especially across gender lines. I tried to read the book. I shot it with my AK-47 partway through chapter 4. I read it so that my girlfriend would shut up about it. She asked me to cosplay as Edcward Cullen. I pointed the gun at her, and that ended her notion. Twilight is no different from the thousands of Gary Stu – Mary Sue romance fanfics that fill up fanfiction.net. Occasionally, a good fic will get through without receiving any fanfare, like Necaberint’s Phalanx (Gears of War), then you get crap like Drive My Heart which the population loves despite the lack of real quality. To cut a long story short, Twilight is a cheesy, pathetic story that exists to make girly-girls go squee, and that it does not qualify in any way as a good book or a good movie.

  • kingofcities

    So if I understand correctly this article/op/ed says “well they faithfully adapted the book, the millions of fans of the books will be happy, they really nailed their target demographic…and because of all of that the movie sucks”. That’s hilarious. People want to hate because of all the hype. Since when did satisfying the fans become a bad thing? And for the record I’m 35, male and enjoyed the book.

  • Holly

    I would like to say that I have never in my life watched a movie because the critics loved it, hated it, etc. I am 25 and I have thoroughly enjoyed the books, rereading them again and again. I am sure that the fans of the books will speak volumes about their love for the movie and will silence the critics. Critics are paid for their opinion, but those of us watching the movie couldn’t give damn about some boring critic’s opinion.

  • Lindsey

    I’m not surprised by this: an underwhelming cast of nobodies and mediocre books in no way lead to a good movie. I will be very surprised if the greenlight making “new moon” which was inferior compared to “Twilight”. and Alison I agree: Stephenie Myers has like an 1/8 of the talent that JK Rowling has!

  • Lindsey

    I forgot to add: I can see this movie topping the charts for 2-3 weeks while the fan girls go out in droves to see it and then it will just fizzle out.

  • Stacey

    I read all the books and I enjoyed them very much, and I’m not a teen. I have to agree with Holly, I never pay any attention to what the critics have to say. I’m very looking forward to seeing the moving, and taking it at for what it is, a movie.

  • Angie

    Great! I should love the movie then. Can’t wait to see it.

  • Meg

    Where I am from, the critics the local papers chose to use for their movie reviews have been notoriously wrong–is this true elsewhere? A movie the critics rave about is always a bomb by these “rules” and a movie the critics bomb is always a chart-topper. Do critics in general just hate movies that have no significant plot/theme/lesson/Academy nominated actors?

Page: 1 2 3 53
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos in Movies

Advertisement

From Our Partners

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP