Spring Break
'Twilight' movie doesn't meet fan's expectations
Marian Gaviola
Issue date: 11/25/08 Section: Entertainment
11/25/08 - "Oh. My. God. I can't believe I'm watching Twilight right now and this is the most awesome movie ever made and Edward is the hottest thing ever and Bella's so perfect for him and I can't wait to tell my friends how I went to the midnight showing and it was the best thing that's ever happened to me and oh, look, and the Cullens are so perfect and I love this movie!"
That's what I wanted going on in my head when I saw "Twilight". Instead, I thought, "This sucks. Is the book really this corny?"
Subtlety is obviously not director Catherine Hardwicke's middle name. Hardwicke created a movie version of a soap opera based on Stephenie Meyer's book series "Twilight." The movie was full of cheesy scenes that made me cringe because somehow, the storyline seemed so much more reasonable in the books.
The book series is certainly not something I'd call intellectual. It's about an awkward girl named Bella who moves from sunny Arizona to Forks, Wash. and somehow attracts the attention of the only single vampire in the area and there the adventure, angst and drama begin.
Bella is shown as the smart, socially awkward newcomer and yet everyone in the school loves her. One of them even tries to write a feature article about her! The "Twilight" world, it seems, is just a darker version of "High School Musical 3." Everyone's happy, or at least as happy as they can be, and no one's mean - other than that vampire trying to eat Bella.
So, what was so bad about it? I mean, for such a popular series and with all the hype that went with the movie announcement, what could possibly have gone wrong? So many little things that could go wrong did.
First of all, casting. For everyone who's read the book, the movie cast was not quite the perfect fit. Author Stephenie Meyer originally wanted Henry Cavill to play the part of Edward, but due to his age, (can't have him getting too old for the sequels) he was nixed. Bella's OK, but the rest of them leave a lot to be desired.
That's what I wanted going on in my head when I saw "Twilight". Instead, I thought, "This sucks. Is the book really this corny?"
Subtlety is obviously not director Catherine Hardwicke's middle name. Hardwicke created a movie version of a soap opera based on Stephenie Meyer's book series "Twilight." The movie was full of cheesy scenes that made me cringe because somehow, the storyline seemed so much more reasonable in the books.
The book series is certainly not something I'd call intellectual. It's about an awkward girl named Bella who moves from sunny Arizona to Forks, Wash. and somehow attracts the attention of the only single vampire in the area and there the adventure, angst and drama begin.
Bella is shown as the smart, socially awkward newcomer and yet everyone in the school loves her. One of them even tries to write a feature article about her! The "Twilight" world, it seems, is just a darker version of "High School Musical 3." Everyone's happy, or at least as happy as they can be, and no one's mean - other than that vampire trying to eat Bella.
So, what was so bad about it? I mean, for such a popular series and with all the hype that went with the movie announcement, what could possibly have gone wrong? So many little things that could go wrong did.
First of all, casting. For everyone who's read the book, the movie cast was not quite the perfect fit. Author Stephenie Meyer originally wanted Henry Cavill to play the part of Edward, but due to his age, (can't have him getting too old for the sequels) he was nixed. Bella's OK, but the rest of them leave a lot to be desired.
