The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

By Sean Burns
Add Comment Add Comment | Comments: 7 | Posted Jul. 6, 2010

Share this Story:

C-

Wide release

Probably as good as any movie can be while still being based on a novel by Stephenie Meyer, Eclipse continues the mopey bestselling saga of sparkly vampires, shirtless werewolves and a cloyingly vapid heroine who makes Carrie Bradshaw seem generous and self-aware. The new addition here is directorial competence, something the first two features sorely lacked. Also, some shit actually happens in this one.

Director David Slade previously helmed Hard Candy and the very different vampire picture 30 Days of Night , two extremely well-made movies that I still didn’t like very much. He’s got visual chops to burn, shooting Robert Pattinson’s fey dreamboat Edward and Kristen Stewart’s petulant twit Bella in romanticized widescreen closeups. There’s Twilight ’s usual Mormon-y abstinence: Bella wants it bad, but Edward insists on waiting until marriage, because consummating their love will cause her to lose her soul and become a monster. Wicked subtle, Steph.

She also keeps teasing Taylor Lautner’s sad-sack wolf-boy Jacob, who repeatedly insists that Bella secretly loves him, showing the same steadfastness in his resolve to never wear a fucking shirt.

Luckily for us, there’s a rogue pack of flesh-eaters tearing up the Pacific Northwest. Eclipse picks up some steam when it strays from the Hot Topic angst and charts an uneasy alliance between vampires and werewolves against a common enemy, digressing for some nifty flashback histories of side characters that expand the series’ scope considerably beyond the usual teeny- bopper belly-button lint. There’s a knowing, tiny turn by Stewart’s Runaways ’ bandmate Dakota Fanning as Darth Vader by way of Bette Davis, and the climactic battle sequence is gratifyingly nasty.

But in the end it’s still a Twilight movie, which means queasy sexual politics, rancid dialogue and terrible lead performances. At this point, Stewart looks so bored by this entire endeavor that I couldn’t help bursting into giggles whenever she’s nuzzled by a gigantic CGI wolf and half-assedly mutters, “What’s up, Jake?”

Add to favoritesAdd to Favorites PrintPrint Send to friendSend to Friend

COMMENTS

Comments 1 - 7 of 7
Report Violation

1. Jiddles said... on Jul 17, 2010 at 07:36PM

“I love this review. It is actually very well spot on and lets face it, Twilight was a massive hit, for a book. However sadly, I do not see why, WHY ON EARTH they chose such terrible actors and made the whole movie lame. ):”

Report Violation

2. little Mo said... on Aug 8, 2010 at 03:35PM

“I have never seen such BAD TEETH on the leading actors. It was distracting to watch. Bella seriously needs to have her front teeth ground down by a good dentist. Those front teeth make her look like a rabbit. It mars her wholesome looks. Are they going for "poor kids in a poor town" look? If the director was, then he got his wish.

What happened to movie stars with white, straight teeth?”

Report Violation

3. ashley said... on Aug 13, 2010 at 05:46PM

“i dont have anything bad to say about this movie. i have watched all the movies to this saga and also have read all the books. yes i agree they could do something with bellas character, but when you actually think about it do you think that anyone would want to watch the next movie if it was a different person playing the charcter. no. this is how they started it and this is how they will end it. anyone who has something to say about this movie really does not know what they are talking about because obviously if it made over two hundred million before leaving the theaters then it is an awesome movie.”

Report Violation

4. Noah Brighten said... on Sep 6, 2010 at 05:17PM

“Ashley... many MANY movies make over two hundred mill these days. Just because a movie makes money, that doesn't always mean that it is quality. Transforms: Revenge of the Fallen won a Rasberry Award and it still took in over 700 mil. The ONLY reason the Twilight Saga is making money at all, is because of the fans. When Summit and Co. thank the Twi-hards for making it possible, they are being serious, because the Twilight franchise offers nothing for anyone who is not utterly enthralled and or blinded by the series. In short, without the loyal fan following, the Saga would have sank faster than M. Night's career. That is the reality.”

Report Violation

5. king bee said... on Sep 26, 2010 at 01:44PM

“A relidious fundamentalis should never write about vampires”

Report Violation

6. Anonymous said... on Dec 29, 2010 at 09:23PM

“I can understand your side of the opinion but since you said, "its a twilight movie which means..." Don't watch it! or those who hate it because they hear a bunch of girls screaming about which teams they are on (which is annoying sometimes)...Sometimes I don't get this world, "I hate it because others love it" I think Kristen Stewart is pretty and maybe she got all that dull attitude because she plays movies that are depressing even way before twilight.
I like the movie and the book, I can see people disliking it but going to the extremes like "OMG I wish twilight was never written or We should've killed Stephenie Meyer for introducing this shit!" Its Pathetic! Same goes for you twi-freaks, "OMG Team Edward, Team Jacob" Just shut up already!
Peace.”

Report Violation

7. LizD said... on Jan 28, 2011 at 06:44PM

“Great review. In fairness I have read the Twighlight books and Bella is even more unlikable on paper than she is on the screen. At least in the movies we don't have to listen to her angsty and frequently idiotic inner dialogue. It's a mystery in both mediums as to why she's so ardently desired by human, vampire and werewolf alike...”

ADD COMMENT

Rate:
(HTML and URLs prohibited)