Either you're a huge fan of the 'Twilight' series or you're not: Based on critics' reviews, the new film, 'The Twilight Saga: New Moon,' is unlikely to convert any non-believers. Not when critics like Roger Ebert groan, "Sitting through this experience is like driving a pickup in low gear though a sullen sea of Brylcreem." Ouch!Director Chris Weitz takes the reins from 'Twilight' director Catherine Hardwicke; Without the passion for her characters and her more indie approach, many critics feel that the sequel simply falls flat. Some, however, prefer Weitz's more-polished style ... and then there are those who simply hated both films and probably can't tell the difference.
Non-fans cite the slow-pace ("The uninitiated might find that the film's deliberately unhurried 130-minute running time feels like a Cullen clan eternity," says the Hollywood Reporter). But most agree that the addition of werewolves to the saga livens up the proceedings. Whether you think endless shots of Taylor Lautner's bare torso are sigh-worthy or just silly probably depends on whether you count yourself a member of Team Jacob.
But hey, who needs critics, right? If what those grumpy Guses say matters to you, check out their reviews below.
Roger Ebert: "Takes the tepid achievement of 'Twilight,' guts it, and leaves it for undead. You know you're in trouble with a sequel when the word of mouth advises you to see the first movie twice instead. Long opening stretches of this film make utterly no sense unless you walk in knowing the first film, and hopefully both Stephanie Meyer novels, by heart ... Sitting through this experience is like driving a pickup in low gear though a sullen sea of Brylcreem."
LA Times: "'New Moon,' which has been grandly titled 'The Twilight Saga: New Moon' in honor of that first episode's huge success, marks the franchise's entrance into the self-protective, don't rock the boat phase of its existence, which is inevitable but a bit of a shame ... A smooth professional whose credits include such adaptations as 'The Golden Compass' and 'About a Boy,' [director Chris] Weitz makes the vampire trains of Melissa Rosenberg's capable script run on time, but he almost seems too rational a director for this kind of project. This lack of animating madness combined with the novel's demands give much of 'New Moon' a marking time quality."
Variety: "This second chapter of Summit Entertainment's four-part franchise is as good as 'Twilight' and arguably a shade better... [Kristen] Stewart is the heart and soul of the film, and not only because her Bella is surrounded by characters who literally have neither one nor the other. She gives both weight and depth to dialogue ('You're just warm. You're like your own sun') that would sound like typical chick-lit blather in the mouth of a less engaging actress, and she makes Bella's psychological wounds seem like the real deal."
'Twilight' personality quiz
'Twilight: New Moon' character guide
Best movie vampires ever
'The Twilight Saga: New Moon' trailers and clips
'The Twilight Saga: New Moon' showtimes and tickets
NY Daily News: "[Director Chris] Weitz takes a looser approach than the series' last director, Catherine Hardwicke, did. He has a better sense of humor, too. But he does get tripped up in the long-winded plot... His job is to sell as many tickets as possible, which means hitting all the right notes. Then again, if you've come to this movie looking for fancy filmmaking or an original voice (other than Meyer's), well, Weitz frankly doesn't care. You're not his audience. He's got a franchise to keep running, and he does that with workmanlike precision and minimal intrusion. Which, most likely, is just how fans will want it."
New York Post: "'New Moon' is supposed to be an exciting love story plus monster action. So where's the excitement? Where's the action?... This movie moves like the line at the post office. ... Director Chris Weitz proves that 'The Golden Compass' was no fluke: He really is a non-master of action. His CGI werewolves, who look like they were designed by the animatronics crew at Disney's Country Bear Jamboree, go at it in about three semi-OK bouts. These are by far the best scenes in the movie, but they cut off suddenly after a minute or two (you can almost hear the producer yelling, 'That's it for our budget, sorry')."
USA Today: "Though an improvement over the first 'Twilight' film, this sequel ... drags and sputters, even in scenes meant to be infused with passion... Unless it's a Ingmar Bergman film, watching an expressionless person stare out a window or trudge around alone in the woods is simply a drag... the scenes with Bella and Jacob are actually playful, a welcome relief from the lugubrious "love hurts" connection Bella shares with Edward. 'New Moon' does nothing to add depth to a shallow tale."
The Hollywood Reporter: "This slightly improved sequel is ... for better or worse, exceptionally faithful to its 2008 beginnings. The uninitiated might find that the film's deliberately unhurried 130-minute running time feels like a Cullen clan eternity. Given that he's directed both the more intimate character-driven 'About a Boy' and the fantastical 'The Golden Compass,' incoming director [Chris] Weitz is a smart choice for the material."
Reader Comments (77)
Wendilynn at 1:05PM on Nov 19th 2009
I'm expecting a more drawn out, depressing, hopelessness feel to most of the movie because Bella is going through those emotions for most of the book. Did any of these reviewers read New Moon? Didn't they know that this IS the story? It is all about Bella and her pain and hopelessness and how Jacob slowly brings her back. Its not an action movie, its not a fast zippy romantic comedy. Its Bella and a devestation pain/loss that she is coping with in the absense of Edward. New Moon was never going to be a happy, go lucky, fast, upbeat type of movie. And its unrealistic to go into this movie with that expectation.
Suesan at 7:15PM on Nov 19th 2009
You have succintly and accurately described WHAT the movie and book are about. Thank you for reminding us, this is NOT an action,movie event. You are right on. The critics have not done their homework.
Sharon at 6:13PM on Nov 19th 2009
I completely agree with you. When reviewing a movie based on books they really need to read the book or get clif notes before they say something.
connie at 1:52AM on Nov 23rd 2009
i agree with you.....everyone should read the books than give judgements
Annie at 11:50AM on Nov 20th 2009
Oh my goodness... THANK YOU! These people (& by people I mean critics, if that's what they are) clearly have never seen a sequel to a movie based on a book before... If you really want to know every single thing that's going to happen then by all means go search for a synopsis of the story... Don't complain about it in some insipid, trend-following movie review that sounds as dismal as what you're pretending to describe.
I admit, there are some key-points that I think the film should've highlighted moreso than others but who am I to sit here & be unhappy about it? I thought the director Chris Weitz did an incredible job & was so glad to here that Hardwicke was being kicked to the curb. Kristen Stewart really is a refreshingly good actress & many people who underestimate her will see that she can truly *be* a character in this movie.. not just act it out. I am very much looking forward to Eclipse in 2010, & I hope New Moon does well despite all the nay-sayers!
Josh at 6:42PM on Nov 21st 2009
i hate to burst your bubble but its their jobs to give their opinions on the movie, not the book. so if the movie is long, drawn out, and boring, then thats what they say. whether the book is good or not has no effect on that.
Dana at 12:52AM on Nov 23rd 2009
THANK YOU! And I thought I was the only one getting sick and tired of explaining the movie to people who haven't read the book. Kinda tired of hearing "I don't understand...it's so depressing....why would Bella do that...?" People wanting to watch the movie and wait to read the books are missing out. I say finally, there is a movie/book sequence that should be reversed - read the books first, then you'll understand the movie more (and what the characters are going through.).
JellyBean at 8:51PM on Nov 25th 2009
I completely agree. I didn't much care for this book actually, it was my least favorite of the four books, and that is why. Its depressing and emotional, and I think it was the most difficult to get all the way through.
Wendilynn at 6:52PM on Nov 30th 2009
So, I've finally seen the movie. 4 times I've seen the movie, and I really enjoy it. There is a lot more action, courtesy of the wolves, then I was expecting and I thought Chris did a pretty good job telling the story. A minor thing that disappointed me is that the "Truth" Chapter is chopped up into bits and only parts are strung into different sections of the movie. It explains a great deal and gives women all the romantic conversation we could hope for. And the conversation between Charlie and Alice really helps you understand what is going on with Bella. The only other issue I had is that Kristin and Rob mumble. I didn't care for it in Twilight and they let them get away with it in New Moon. Other than that, I thought it was well paced, interesting. Taylor was great as Jacob and stole every scene he was in. I loved his delivery, his lines were clean and sincere. I never felt he was "remembering his lines"... Chris did a good job with what was difficult material. I have enjoyed the movie enough to have seen it four times now.
Paige at 1:05AM on Dec 23rd 2009
A lot of the comments seem to be similar to this first one, but it seems to me that you Twilight fans are justifying the movie being long, drawn out, and ultimately boring because the book is the same way. Granted I haven't seen the new movie but I did read the book and I agree with that description. So maybe the problem isn't the director at all but the franchise these movies are based on.
karen at 2:45PM on Dec 26th 2009
Well said. All those negative reviews, it seems to me that not only their expectations were unrealistic but they are also sort of clueless about what the book fans wanted. Chris Weitz did exactly what Stephanie Meyer wanted and what he said he'd do, he follow the book line. I really would love if he's take the lead on Breaking Dawn! Thanks for your great comment!
Mea at 11:37AM on Dec 27th 2009
Ok, I loved all four books, I read the series 10 times but the movie was a let down. It is a timeless romance and they took a very intimate scene from the beginning of the book and placed in the classroom in the movie changing the feel of it completely. When that scene ended I said to my self "oh no", I already knew how the rest of the movie was going to go. I am not sure I can blame the director for this miss step or the may other things I foudn disappointing my guess is the screenwriter goofed up but without a look at the script it is hard to say. The werevolf scenes were good but come on this is LOVE STORY not and ACTION FILM. I thought Twilight was well done and I never agreed with all the comments that it needed more special effects, for what exactly? I still love the series but New Moon did not peak my excitement to see Eclipse. I only pray that Melissa wasn't working on Dexter too much during the writing for Eclipse and gave David more to work with.
Mary Adolay at 2:23PM on Dec 29th 2009
Amen sister! I couldn't have said it better. They obviously did not read all four books and have no concept of Bella and Edward's entire journey.
gina thompson at 1:33PM on Nov 19th 2009
what these critics say is irrelivent and why do i say that? maybe coz new moon has the fastest selling tickets in history that pretty much says it all! a majority of these critics say the movie drags but for fans it will most definately be a plus coz they dont want to see the movie end they want to get as much as they can out of if. i know after reading twilight i couldn't wait to read new moon and so on to breaking dawn and the same goes for the movies i myself and millions of fans can't wait for new moon, eclipse and then breaking dawn. these critics are not doing themselves any justice slating the movie they are just gonna piss millions of twihard fans off.....
Elizabeth at 3:23PM on Nov 19th 2009
Reading these reviews were really disappointing, but if the movie stays true to the book and boasts the same actors, then how could any Twilight fan be let down?? It's going to be amazing!!!
Boo at 5:59PM on Nov 19th 2009
Catherine Hardwicke should have been the director on all three.
JellyBean at 8:48PM on Nov 25th 2009
There are 4....
s at 7:40PM on Nov 19th 2009
well not surprised that the critics didnt like the movie, look at roger ebert for instance, is this man capable of knowing what is relevant to anyone under 80?
its always been one of the greatest sham's of all time, that elderly, unpopular, geeks, are actually reviewing movies about lives which these, obsiquious old men know nothing about.
but thats ok cause the movie goers and fans, we live, spend and go to movies, based on our own opinions....
Cherie at 11:05AM on Nov 20th 2009
I agree, the critics are movie critics and they are working on information from the first movie. New Moon was depressing and sad and the heroine is very close to an emotional death and as readers you felt Bella go through the stages of grief.... I don't know why they thought it should have been light hearted and fun full of action, the girl had her soul ripped out. its a romance series. I am probably one of the few people was happy when we got a new director. I got the feeling that Catherine Hardwick was going change too much, look at what happens in the Harry Potter books, those movies should say loosely based on the book. This director stayed very close to the book. I loved that.
Hans Lander at 12:01PM on Nov 20th 2009
No, what these critics are saying is relevent. They basing their opinions stirctly on the movies. Why should they have to read the book? If the movies are good, they should stand alone.