Not That We Didn't Know Already, But...

Well, the actual figures are in...

The Twilight Saga: New Moon made $26.27 million from last night's midnight showings, to make it the biggest midnight gross in history. Official report here.

Robert Pattinson's Film Career Outside of Twilight?

Well, I've already done a post about the Twilight phenomenon (here) and even a review of the just released New Moon (here), but all of this Twi-talk has prompted me to think about the three leads in the cast and the chances that each have at a legitimate film career post-Twilight... or at least outside of the wildly popular vampire-romance franchise.

So, depending on how what you consider Twi-talk, I'm going to be doing my fair share of it in this post, where I discuss a possibly hot topic: Robert Pattinson's film career after the Twilight franchise has run its course.

It's a very difficult dilemma to tackle. Of course, let's just look at the facts before we get ahead of ourselves in assuming anything:

Robert Pattinson was not very well known before stepping into the shoes of Edward Cullen, the male protagonist of The Twilight Saga. Now, he's one of the most famous people on the planet. While I'm not going to try and say that the first Twilight was that great of a film, I will still defend Pattinson's performance, although it was stifled by director Catherine Hardwicke. Upon seeing the second film at a special screening yesterday, I can say he was even better this time around, since there was no talent-limiting director to "guide the way."

Now herein lies the probable dilemma: he's is completely attached to this role, this character Edward Cullen. Whenever any Twilight-loving teen girl sees Robert Pattinson, she doesn't think Robert Pattinson. She thinks Edward Cullen, the sensitive vampire.

Yesterday, I saw trailer for a film called Remember Me, which stars Pattinson in a leading role and co-stars Pierce Brosnan and Academy Award-winner Chris Cooper. It's clearly a star vehicle.

Interestingly enough, Summit Entertainment, the company behind the film adaptations of The Twilight Saga, is behind this film. They seem to have already figured out that they owe it to Mister Pattinson to try and boost a career that, as a whole, may be otherwise doomed to failure. Either that or they're trying to spread his appeal over a wider demographic to potentially bring in even more people to watch the Twilight films (because they definitely need more money).

He's also signed to star alongside Academy Award-nominees Kristin Scott Thomas and Uma Thurman in the upcoming film Bel Ami. Luckily for Pattinson, this project doesn't sound at all like a poor and ill-fated star vehicle!

Granted, he doesn't have anything to worry about now: he's getting tons of money for doing the films, and he's getting even more money for appearing on every magazine cover known to creation, but when all of that runs dry...

What happens?

No clue, but let me close out in saying this:

Robert Pattinson is a phenomenally talented actor who has shown nothing but dedication to the role of Edward Cullen. If he exhibits that same devotion in his film roles outside of The Twilight Saga, then I think he can go places. Seriously. If this guy wins an Academy Award within the next ten years, don't tell me I didn't tell you so. Of course, it probably won't be for any of the films in The Twilight Saga.

However, some will refuse to know him as anything other than Edward Cullen.

Now that's a sad thought.


Photo Courtesy: Styletraxx

New Moon Breaks a Record!

This just in everyone. Of course, shouldn't shock anyone, but New Moon is officially the biggest midnight grossing EVER. 

As reported by Nikki Finke (here)...

BREAKING NEWS! FRIDAY AM: Rival studios are telling me this morning that Summit Entertainment's New Moon debuted with $23M-$24M in 12:01AM screenings. That would set a new midnight opening record, smashing The Dark Knight's $18.4M set on July 18, 2008, and Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince's $22.2M set on July 15, 2009. Summit has yet to release an official number for the Twilight sequel's midnight debut in 3,514 theaters. 

Again, no surprises here. Does anyone think that Eclipse could become the highest grossing FILM ever?

FILM REVIEW: The Men Who Stare at Goats

When I saw the trailer for Grant Heslov's somewhat political comedy The Men Who Stare at Goats, I became very excited for the film. With a cast including Jeff Bridges, George Clooney, and Ewan McGregor and some pretty humorous moments in the trailers, I thought this would be fantastic.

Sadly, it wasn't...

Well, let's discuss the plot... I'm drawing a blank here...

It's essentially about your average Joe Schmo (Ewan McGregor) who decides to go over to Iraq. There he meets a guy who used to be part of a secret military branch that specialized in paranormal abilities (George Clooney). Token Joe Schmo character gets dragged into an adventure filled with tons of strange people (Jeff Bridges, Kevin Spacey).

That's me talking the film from memory.

Let me preface my pointing out of the bad with an acknowledgement of the good: the ensemble cast was fantastic. I've never been too impressed with Mister George Clooney's work before (granted, I haven't seen a lot of his more acclaimed work), but this film may be my first step in becoming a fan. Luckily for that possibility, I have Syriana at home and Up in the Air will be out before the end of the year. He was probably the best in the cast, but no one here was in poor form.

Other than that... there aren't too many positive things to say about the film. About 99% of the laughs were spoiled in the trailers, which were, by the way, very misleading. You see the trailer and you think this is going to be like There's Something About Mary minus the romantic aspect.

You thought wrong...

Unfortunately, there are few laughs to be found.

All in all, a great cast stifled by a weak script that contains very little humor.

Not recommended (but it's a better than The Twilight Saga: New Moon)

Rating: 4.5 out of 10 stars (2.5 out of 5 stars)

Photo Courtesy: MV Trailer

More About that Infectious Twilight Fever

This shouldn't surprise anyone who's been paying attention to any sort of visual media for the past week, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

As reported by Larry Richman from PROnetworks (here)...

"The early word this Friday morning from industry sources is that The Twilight Saga: New Moon may be on its way to breaking the all-time midnight screening record set by The Dark Knight. That film grossed $18.4M from 3040 showings. It went on to take in $67.17M that opening day, dropped 29.1% from Friday to Saturday to bring in another $47.65M, and ended with $43.6M on Sunday for an opening weekend total of $158.4M. 

In contrast, New Moon played 3514 midnight screenings last night, 474 more than The Dark Knight. This would certainly indicate that it's headed for a new midnight record as it only needs to break $18.4M to do so. It might also be on its way to an all-time opening day record, although the film plays at 4024 theaters this weekend vs. The Dark Knight's 4366 locations."

I'm pretty confident that this film will break the midnight screening record, and it might even have the biggest opening day record. If I'm being optimistic (something I don't want to do considering that I didn't care for New Moon AT ALL), it could end up having the biggest weekend ever. Still, I'm not so sure that it will end up grossing more than The Dark Knight as a whole. The Dark Knight was a film that appealed to a much wider demographic than any Twilight film ever will. Of course, you have to factor in the factor of repeat viewings. The Twilight fangirls will see New Moon at least ten times at the theater, whereas The Dark Knight probably didn't bring too many people back thanks to its 2.5 hour running time.

Granted, I saw Christopher Nolan's masterpiece five times during its run. Guilty: I saw Twilight four times during its run, but it was mainly due to lack options and friends wanting me to go with them. It's not a really strong meter for judging how much I liked the film.

What do you think? Do you think that Twilight fever could help this film break these all-time records? Or are we getting ahead of ourselves?

Uh-Oh: Avatar Might Be in Trouble...

Avatar is director James Cameron's first film in twelve years. Cameron has many well-known and acclaimed films in his resume, but perhaps his crowning achievement was 1997's Titanic. The film touched lives worldwide and took home eleven Academy Awards, including Best Director and Best Picture.

However, things might not be looking so good for his next venture, Avatar. The film is currently scheduled for a December 18 release... but that might not happen.

As Lauren A.E. Schuke and Ethan Smith of The Wall Street Journal report (here)...

"Less than a month before the scheduled release of James Cameron's new movie, 'Avatar,' some scenes from the costly special-effects extravaganza remain unfinished.

[...]

Since 'Avatar' still isn't finished, the cost is growing daily. However, a 15% tax credit from the government of New Zealand is likely to soften the blow to Twentieth Century Fox and the film's other two financial backers, which took on about 60% of the production's cost. Fox is owned by News Corp., also the parent of The Wall Street Journal."

I don't think that this will hinder the film's release at all, but I am a bit skeptical. I mean, didn't this happen with  The Reader last year? Rushing everything in at the last minute just so it could get released at the end of the year so it could undeservedly get Oscar recognition?

I dunno...

One of Robert Pattinson's Next Roles is...

Well, Robert Pattinson is certainly getting tons of talk today: we got to see the trailer for his upcoming film Remember Me, he has a phenomenal turn in the less-than-phenomenal New Moon, and we hear that he will be starring alongside two Oscar nominees in one of his upcoming film projects...

As reported by Borys Kit from the Hollywood Reporter (here)...

Uma Thurman soon will making time with Rob Pattinson.

The actress has signed to star opposite the "Twilight" star in an adaptation of Guy de Maupassant's short story "Bel Ami." 

Kristin Scott Thomas also has joined the cast.

"Ami" tells of George Duroy (Pattinson), a young journalist who rose from poverty to become one of the most successful men in Paris via the ruthless and calculating bedding of the city's most glamorous and influential women. 

Thurman plays the wife of Duroy's friend, a woman who is extremely involved and connected in the goings-on of Parisian society. She helps Duroy in his ascent, later becoming his wife.

Thomas plays a socialite who falls for Duroy, becoming clingy in the process.

London theater director Declan Donnellan is making his film debut on "Ami," which Uberto Pasolini is producing through his shingle Redwave Films. The movie is scheduled to shoot next year in Paris.

Personally, I think this is awesome. I would really like to see Mister Pattinson outside of the Twilight universe, but don't feel like checking out the Harry Potter film he starred in. I think he's exceptionally talented, having given a dull leading man some sense of personality and being.

Can't wait

Photo Courtesy: Styletraxx

FILM REVIEW: The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Well, since I've already discussed the phenomenon, let's talk the film in question.

I had the opportunity (probably not the best word to use) to see The Twilight Saga: New Moon yesterday...

I should preface this review with my overall opinions concerning the first film: if you didn't read my article about the phenomenon - I already posted the link above, but here it is again - you would know that I didn't care too much for the first film. The story was bland and cliched, the screenplay gives way for no character development, very poor visual effects, and - for the finale - director Catherine Hardwicke didn't have a really strong sense of what she was doing.

Granted, the lead performances given by Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart - as well as their shared chemistry - were admirable, despite being greatly hindered by Hardwicke being clueless in her direction.

If I had reviewed the first film for this blog, I would probably have given it a 4.5 out of 10 stars and a 3 out of 5 stars... and that's me being nice...

Anyway, to the matter at hand...

What is there to say about The Twilight Saga: New Moon? Well, before I delve into the details, here's my brief overview: what was good about the first film was done even better... but the negative aspects were more poorly executed in take two of The Twilight Saga.

The film opens on moody and whiny pessimist Bella's (Kristen Stewart) eighteenth birthday. Sparkly and albino vampire boyfriend Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) and family throw her a party. However, a horrible little thing happens at the party: one of the vampires tries to eat Bella after she starts bleeding!

Well, I mean... vampires... human blood... not to mention the fact that Bella could be coined "vamp-bait," a concept that has been pretty much pounded into readers'/viewers' heads at every chance possible.

Smart protagonist, huh?

Anyway, after that little brouhaha, Edward meets Bella in the forest (don't ask. I didn't get that either really) and tells her he never wants to see her again! In fact, she was never good enough for him in the first place!

Talk about disrespect, Mister Cullen! Sounds like he took breakup lessons from Joe Jonas!

Mister Disrespectful and his family then proceed to leave Middle-of-Nowhere, Washington, leaving our brooding, whiny, and withdrawn protagonist to be, well, even more broody, whiny, and withdrawn than before!

Oh no! What ever shall she do?

Well, she has her childhood friend Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), who has suddenly evolved from no body shape at all to built, buff, and ready to roundhouse kick you in the face at any given moment... for any given reason.

And - spoiler - something that's never happened before: Jacob totally has a crush on Bella!

I know - I wouldn't have guessed it either!

However, for some reason, she doesn't seem to connect the dots here. Of course, we are talking about the same girl who went to a house full of vampires that dream about eating her limb by limb.

Stupid decision number two for our brilliant protagonist. Don't you want your daughters to end up just like Bella?

I didn't think so. But back to this film adaptation of a Harlequin romance novel-lite brilliant and completely sensible story: she sits in the exact same chair facing the window - and even retains the exact same brooding facial expression - for several months... or at least that's what they made it look like in the film.

Anyway, somewhere, somehow, Jacob actually comes into the picture. The two start to develop an even closer relationship. Yes, that's right! They go from friends to... being closer friends!

Well, isn't that just fine and dandy? But wait: Jacob has a startling secret...

Jacob is a werewolf!

Gasps! Shocks! Bewilderment!

It's not like every single commercial hasn't totally spoiled that part of the film, so don't be so quick to throw your New Moon copies at me just yet. I'd have to ask that you wait until you finish reading my review. Then you can hurl as many copies at me as you'd like so I can proceed to burn them.

Where does the plot go from here, you ask? I didn't know there was a plot here! Your guess is as good as mine.

Something about Volturi vampires and cliff-jumping and more senseless broodiness comes to mind, but I could be wrong.

Now back to seriousness (somewhat... I have to apologize. I'm just having so much fun with this)

Here are the horrible aspects of the film:

I could just give a general "everything," but that wouldn't be nice. Not too far from the truth, but it's still not very kind. Granted, it's not kind to treat moviegoers to awful dreck like this.

First, the direction. Again, Catherine Hardwicke did a horrible job with the first film. She may as well have doused the bland screenplay in gasoline and set it on fire, and Twilight would have been just as... good(?). But Chris Weitz, who helmed another horrible fantasy film (2007's His Dark Materials: The Golden Compass), isn't much better. As a matter of fact, I could make the argument that he did worse.

I think Weitz gave the principle actors a much better sense of freedom this time around. I mean, did you watch Twilight? It was like one of those awkward, unasked for, and uncalled for conversations that you have... except that it was two hours and it involved sparkling vampires.

Next up: Taylor Lautner's performance as Jacob. I can admire dedication to a role - including his getting into shape to play this character and his studying of the source material to understand his (completely one-dimensional) character - but I'm sorry: having twelve-pack abs means nothing other than having twelve-pack abs. Well, it'd probably be a good stepping stone to getting any woman you wanted, but I'm getting away from the point. Furthermore, this extremely desirable physique does not in any way, shape, or form mean that you can act or that you can even play a certain role well. All of the things I had heard about how mind-blowing this performance is and the revelation brought upon by it completely lost any and all meaning upon seeing this film. Based on this performance, Lautner couldn't act his way out of a wet paper bag that was already opened at both ends.

Another bad seed in a garden that already wreaks of epic fail is the story and screenplay. Just as bland as ever, and even more disconnected. With the first film, as poorly done as the writing was, I understood the overall point: that Bella and Edward are completely (and without any legitimate reason) in love with each other.

I guess that was the point of this film as well, but I didn't get any real connectivity between events. It felt very rushed; for about an hour or so absolutely nothing happens. Then, within fifteen or twenty minutes, tons of stuff happens and then, "Hey! Look what time it is! The movie's over."

Another thing I didn't like: the visuals. They did better this time around with the action sequences and such, but those wolves were incredibly unrealistic looking. Seriously. Wait until you see those things on the big screen, and you'll definitely see where I'm coming from.

My final - and quite possibly my biggest - complaint about The Twilight Saga: New Moon is the main protagonist Miss Bella Swan. I've already made it a point to express how stupid this girl is. I've many times mentioned her senseless angst and broodiness, and I hope to have conveyed the personal layers and emotional depth that this Lizzie Bennett-wannabe DOESN'T have.

So here's my question: why would any guy want to date this girl? At all. And here, we're not talking just any guy. We're talking two guys who could almost literally get any girl they want!

Edward has mentioned how he wants to make Bella happy. It's good that he's immortal: it'll probably take him all of eternity to get this girl to shut up and be glad that she isn't in poor living conditions.

Seriously! She's all about whining and complaining and boo-hooing herself. Whenever she's with Edward or Jacob, she's whining about something. Whenever she isn't with either of these two, she's whining about how she wants to be with them!

Bella, just get over yourself... and while you're at it, you might wanna get a head start on some college classes. Personality 101 would be great, but only if you're okay with British accents because it's taught by Elizabeth Bennett.

Of course, you probably don't like British accents, as you don't seem to like anything other than GQ-ready men who will put up with your senseless psychobabble and the life-threatening brouhahas you bring upon them.

Way to go, Bella. You're a great role model for the millions of impressionable teenage girls that read about your adventures in the world of negativity.

Now I have to talk about the good parts. I can be pretty short, sweet, and to the point about this!

It might seem out of place to praise Kristen Stewart's performance immediately following my total tearing down of the character she portrays. Well, that's what I'm doing. She was even better than she was in the first film, as the director was better (at least with the actors), and she made me actually (sort of) care about this annoying little whiner!

Secondly, Robert Pattinson as Edward. It's a shame that this guy is never going to be able to live down the fact that he played Edward Cullen, because this guy is incredibly talented. I totally bought his portrayal of Edward: head to toe, start to finish.

Lastly, Dakota Fanning and Michael Sheen were good in their small roles as Volturi vampires.

As you can probably guess, I didn't like The Twilight Saga: New Moon very much. Bad directing, a weak story, a flawed screenplay, fairly poor visuals, a bad leading performance, and an awful protagonist don't really add up to a good film, even with two strong lead performances.

Not recommended

Rating: 3.0 out of 10 stars (1.5 out of 5 stars)

Photo Courtesy: Shopping Blog

The Twilight Phenomenon: What's the Deal?

                                                                                                  1

Before I delve into what's going on here, let's go to the not-so-distant past. June 2008 sounds good. If you had asked me what the Twilight series was, I could have honestly told you that I had absolutely no clue what you were talking about. Flash forward to now, and I would tell you, "Twilight is a full-fledged national phenomenon."

The first book in the Twilight series was released in September 2006 2, which is aptly named Twilight. Here is the plot synopsis:

About three things I was absolutely positive:

First, Edward was a vampire.                

Second, there was a part of him–and I didn't know how dominant that part might be–that thirsted for my blood.

And third, I was unconditionally and irrevocably in love with him.

Isabella Swan's move to Forks, a small, perpetually rainy town in Washington, could have been the most boring move she ever made. But once she meets the mysterious and alluring Edward Cullen, Isabella's life takes a thrilling and terrifying turn. Up until now, Edward has managed to keep his vampire identity a secret in the small community he lives in, but now nobody is safe, especially Isabella, the person Edward holds most dear. The lovers find themselves balanced precariously on the point of a knife -- between desire and danger.

Deeply romantic and extraordinarily suspenseful, Twilight captures the struggle between defying our instincts and satisfying our desires. This is a love story with bite.2

It doesn't sound like anything more than your average teen-romance novel, right? Well, you might want to think again.

As of May 9, 2008, more than 100 sites were based around the book series. In addition, it was chosen as Amazon.com's Best Book of the Decade... So Far and the Editor's Choice for The New York Times.3

That's quite impressive. However, I do not have any recollection of having known about this book series until a little while later...

Let's flash forward about two months. It's August 1, 2008. Until about 11:15pm on this day, this was just an ordinary day in my life. However, those last 45 minutes were intended to be anything but ordinary. This is the day before the fourth and final installment of the Twilight series, Breaking Dawn, is to be released.

Of course, I wasn't too aware of that fact. I'm pretty sure that I had heard some things about the book series here and there, but I don't pay attention to the world of literature but so much (ironically, for someone who enjoys writing - granted that the topic is something of interest to me - I'm not much of a reader, so I'm not inclined to care all that much).

At any rate, one of my friends, Brianna, who was a fan of the series at the time (she hated the series after reading the fourth book) invites me to go with her to a local book party for the release. I'm can't be there for the entire party because I had to work, but luckily, my shift ends at 11pm and the bookstore is literally within walking distance. Yes, I remember all of this. It was that significant of a night. So I meet up with her there, and I have experience something I've never for myself witnessed before...

I'm not just talking about the people dressed in strange costumes. I don't simply mean the contests that included free giveaways of Breaking Dawn. Although this was a big factor, I'm not just including the people sternly divided into the two teams of "Team Edward" and "Team Jacob," which are based around the two male protagonists of the series.

There was this strong sense of unity that I could feel that I had never felt before - ever! An overwhelming feeling of excitement and wonder took over that bookstore in a way that could never be again matched. It is at that moment that I realize something: this series is a phenomenon that has taken this nation by storm.

That being said, it is arguably around this time that I stumbled onto news of a film adaptation of the first book in the series. It's starring somebody named... Kristen Stewart? Who's she? The other lead in the film is being played by... Robert Pattinson? Who's that? Casting no-name actors and actresses in this sort of film isn't necessarily the way to go.

November 21 arrives, consequently bringing the film adptation of Twilight along with it. The film has mixed reviews on Metacritic and a "rotten" score on Rotten Tomatoes. Still, obsessive fans are not in any way going to pay attention to any film critics who don't know anything about the deep and passionate romance between Bella Swan and Edward Cullen: theaters are packed with every age of female and many men (who were more than likely forced into attendance) accompanying them, not to mention that the film made slightly over $69.6 million in its first three days.4

As of this moment, the opening for Twilight is the 37th biggest opening weekend in film history.4 Of course, the New Moon opening this weekend will probably push that 37th placing down a notch.

I went to see the film on the Sunday following its release, giving me reason to scratch my head over how such a cliched and bland story spawned a national phenomenon

I can appreciate some aspects of the film, such as the young talents displayed by Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart as the leads and even the chemistry that the two have between each other. However, this all in all was not a very good film.

First, this interpretation leads me to believe that the book itself is nothing to write home about. That is, of course, given the assumption that this film generally stays true to the book. The "explored" ideas of forbidden love ("explored" isn't the best word; the ideas are merely touched upon) come across as a "been there, done that" scenario, not to mention that the actual story wreaks of multiple plot holes that are never resolved for us as an audience. As is stated in Bob Grimm's analysis of the film...

"Edward is Bella's lab partner, and he doesn't like her at first, because, well, he wants to drink her blood, and he finds this bothersome. His family of vampires only eats animals, but Bella has him thirsting for human blood, which pisses him off. How dare she? Still, Bella is hot, so he falls in love, which poses the dilemma of him loving somebody he literally wants to eat on a cracker."5

Does any of this make any sense? I didn't think so either. Here's my ill-fated attempt at comprehending the story of Twilight:

Bella is a whiny and moody teenage girl who goes to Middle-of-Nowhere, Washington. She sits next to an albino named Edward, who doesn't seem to care for her too much. One day he saves her from getting hit by a car with superhuman speed. Then he prevents her from getting raped and buys her mushroom ravioli... and... she falls in love with him. Oh yeah, and he's a vampire.

Of course, fans neither mind nor notice these blatant and on-the-surface inconsistencies and absurdities. From Grimm's critique and my own personal opinion, I can gather that Twilight is a Harlequin romance novel-lite... except that it gets its own film series.

Another complaint I can make about this film concerns the visual effects. For a film that was made with a $37 million budget 6, I would assume that we would be treated to at least a visual spectacle... because, I mean, we're obviously not being treated to the best film in the world with Twilight... instead, we get visual effects that look like they cost somewhere around $37 to implement.

And since we're discussing the actual making of the film, let's talk about the actors. I've already mentioned the talented Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart, but let's throw Taylor Lautner into the mix as well. I'm going to tackle their performances one by one.

Let's begin with Kristen Stewart. Before Twilight, she had already been in the film industry for quite some time,with over twenty films to her credit already. She had her "big break" in 2002's Panic Room, alongside two-time Academy Award winner Jodie Foster, and has performed in films such as 2004's Catch that Kid and 2007's Into the Wild. The latter of which she received a Screen Actors Guild nomination for being a part of the film's ensemble cast.8

Despite a solid body of work and (arguably) critically acclaimed performances, Miss Stewart had never been an A-list celebrity. This film catapulted her to that level of fame. That would have happened even if her performance was not good, but I believe that her portrayal of Bella Swan was the most redeeming quality of the first film. However, I won't pretend that her performance was perfect. It was filled with some pretty awkward moments that cannot be ignored. I will address this issue in a little while.

Now to Mister Robert Pattinson. His filmography is not quite as full as Stewart's: his first film was an uncredited role in 2004's Vanity Fair 10; perhaps his most famous (and biggest) film role before stepping into the shoes of Edward Cullen came in his portrayal of Cedric Diggory in 2005's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

Similar to Stewart, Pattinson was nowhere near being famous. Also in the vein of Stewart, Twilight thrust him into the limelight, and he has graced the cover of nearly every teen and female-oriented magazine since. Still... despite some shining moments, I am not a fan of the way he portrayed Edward Cullen. I think he had the right idea, and I even believe he may have dabbled in some method acting for the role (flawless American accent, by the way).

Finally, Taylor Lautner. I know that many of the Twilight fans (most probably "Team Jacob") connected to Lautner's interpretation of Bella's childhood friend Jacob Black. I cannot for the life of me figure out why. I mean, his performance was nothing. Not good. Not bad. Nothing. He has a very limited time on screen, and this isn't a "Beatrice Straight in Network" or "Viola Davis in Doubt." This isn't even a "Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love!" Still, his appearance performance was able to get him to A-list status and tons of meaningless nominations such as MTV Movie Award and Teen Choice Award mentions. 11

Now comes my assessment of Stewart, as well as my critique of Pattinson...

Well, to say what I thought of the lead performances is going to be difficult to explain in essay form. Instead, I've elected to put it in the form of a dialogue:

*Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart finish a scene. They do everything the right way. Pitch-perfect*

Catherine Hardwicke: Cut! No, no, no! You're doing it all wrong! Rob, you [did this]. Instead, try [doing this]

Robert Pattinson: Okay.

Catherine Hardwicke: And Kristen. Can I get [certain quality, emotion, etc.] from you?

Kristen Stewart: Yeah. Sure.

Catherine Hardwicke: Great. Let's do that scene again, everyone. And... action!

Do you see what I'm getting at here? I believe that the performances of both Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart were greatly stifled by Hardwicke's lack of focus when directing the film. I think that Stewart's performance was less scathed than Pattinson's, which is a testament to her prior experience within the industry.

Anyway, I'm getting away from what I'm trying to address: the overall problem here

I can complain about the stereotypical and overdone theme of forbidden or the awful visual effects or even the bland screenplay, but there is one culprit here who I do not believe has been properly addressed: director Catherine Hardwicke.

I believe that Miss Hardwicke is the reason that the first film was a failure. In the hands of another director, I believe that this film could have been legitimately good - even a fantastic film! However, she stifled the many things that could have worked in the film.

To quote film critic Brandon Fibbs...

"Director Hardwicke obviously believes that romantic chemistry is composed of nothing more than two hours worth of smoldering glances.Worse, she assumes (rightly, no doubt) that Twilight will be followed by a string of overstuffed sequels and trades the promise of things to come for the flat tedium of the here and now."7

To me, this is an absolutely perfect assessment of the situation. Hardwicke's take on this best-selling novel is, if we're deciding to give her a little grace, mediocre. This film needed its director to give legitimate foundation for the romance that is shared between Bella and Edward. Instead, we are, as Fibbs says, treated to "two hours [...] of smoldering glances."7

With all of that being said, I have to wonder... why is this Twilight Saga so popular? Why did these books move so many units? Why is this weekend's New Moon suspected to gross over $100 million in its first three days?

I honestly have no clue. I caught a screening of New Moon earlier today. I am glad to say that I was some small part of a cultural phenomenon, but I'm still not a huge fan of the phenomenon. In fact... well, I'll leave that for my review tomorrow

Granted, these films aren't made to be accessible to everyone. This series is made to be nothing more than fan service for fans of the series. In other words, if you love the book, then you will more than likely love the films. However, if you don't love the books or haven't bothered to read them, then I wouldn't bother.

Sources:
1. Twilight: Anke Groener; The Twilight Saga: New Moon: Shopping Blog
2. Barnes and Noble Synopsis: Twilight
3. Official 'Twilight' Synopsis Sadly Lacking In 'OME!' Exclamations
4. All Time Box Office Opening Weekends
5. The Moping Undead
6. 'Twilight': Inside the First Stephenie Meyer Movie
7. Twilight
8. IMDB: Kristen Stewart
9. NOMINATIONS ANNOUNCED FOR THE 14th ANNUAL SCREEN ACTORS GUILD AWARDS®
10. IMDB: Robert Pattinson
11. IMDB: Taylor Lautner

Could Melanie Laurent Get a Best Actress Nomination?

I reported earlier this week (here) that Melanie Laurent was to receive a Best Actress campaign for her role in Inglourious Basterds, despite many of us - myself included - having the previous assumption that she would be pushed in the Supporting Actress field.

Upon hearing this news, many believed that this was the end for Miss Laurent. That she would no longer have a shot at receiving the awards glory that she oh so very much deserves.

Well...

As usual, I have to be the odd one out. One might think that I'm the odd one out just for the sake of being the odd one out, but that is not the cast at all. I hate being the only person thinking a certain way on an issue. Really.

But anyway, let's get back to the topic at hand: Melanie Laurent's awards chances for her work in Inglourious Basterds. Could she make the Oscar cut?

I say yes.

But let's take a step back, and look at one of the events leading up to the Oscars: the Golden Globes.

I'll have my predicted five in bold and in blue; as listed in alphabetical order, here are (arguably) the women in contention for a Golden Globe nomination in the Actress - Motion Picture category and the possible problems:

1. Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side) - Mixed reviews. Probably already getting in for The Proposal
2. Abbie Cornish (Bright Star) - Nobody's talking about it anymore
3. Penelope Cruz (Broken Embraces/Los Abrazos Rotos) - Same as Cornish. Already in for Nine
4. Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart) - It's The Jeff Bridges Show. She's just there as a plot device to Bridges
5. Melanie Laurent (Inglourious Basterds) - Not famous. Most people think she's hopeless going Lead
6. Helen Mirren (The Last Station) - She won't win?
7. Carey Mulligan (An Education) - Um... Sidibe?
8. Michelle Pfeiffer (Cheri) - Movie wasn't all that great
9. Saoirse Ronan (The Lovely Bones) - Second nomination before turning 18? Not so sure... ironically, could be argued for an out-of-nowhere win. Honestly, have no clue
10. Gabourey Sidibe (Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire) - She's not your typical award-winning actress
11. Hilary Swank (Amelia) - The movie was bad, and she wasn't all that great in the aforementioned bad movie

Of course, this is pretty much a Mulligan vs. Sidibe race, but Laurent getting a nomination is NOT completely out of the question. I mean, Inglourious Basterds is, in theory, the type of film that the Hollywood Foreign Press eats up like your favorite dessert. But moving on...

Next up in preparation for our Academy Awards ceremony, we have the Screen Actors Guild Awards.

Let's for argument's sake say that Lauren doesn't get nominated at the Globes (I mean, there are quite a few formidable contenders vying for those remaining spots after Mirren, Mulligan, and Sidibe). Inglourious Basterds is VERY likely for an Ensemble nomination, so she'd technically have a nomination for that. Furthermore, the SAG tends to give a few mentions to those who were overlooked by the Hollywood Foreign Press.

Provided that she is the main protagonist (sorry Waltz), she might get nominated here.

Do I think that Miss Laurent will get a Best Actress nomination at this year's Oscars? Not really, but I don't think her chances should be so dismissed.

What do you think? Do you think she's hopeless? Do you think she'll get in?

Open for discussion

Photo Courtesy: Daemon's Movies