DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 117 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:04 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4813
Location: The Netherlands
If anyone wonders where all the money is that's currently evaporating on Wall Street... well it's apparently in the pockets of screaming, obsessed teenage girls and young women. Who'll alltogether invest a whopping 70 million dollars in this film this weekend.

They've already invested a billion dollars worldwide in Mamma Mia and Sex and the City. So I guess if you wanna make it through the financial crisis, you better start making films that appeal to teenage girls, because they control the universe or something.

I had seriously never heard of it untill 3 weeks ago. But I couldn't escape the hype any longer when even South Park addressed the insanity that is Twilight.

I guess exponentially, when one girl starts screaming for some new celebrity, in this case Robert Pattinson, it starts a chain of screams that goes around the country. I understand the magic behind Harry Potter. You know, wanting to believe that Hogwarts is real and imagining what it would be like. But there's just something pathetic about all these girls obsessing over a "girl falls in love with vampire" story. Why do all these girls insist on loving something so awful? There's much better entertainment out there for them.

But in the end, if I were a Hollywood executive I'd probaply greenlight this and all the inevitable sequels too. I bet the studio knows it's awful too, but who care! This is making a lot of money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:09 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:30 pm
Posts: 5212
Location: Ohio, United States of America
I saw it last night, and to me it was a completely average movie with bad special effects and cinematography. Some of the acting was decent (Bella was so bland and unemotional, but Edward was good in what he was supposed to be) but overall not to wonderful. And I know it had a small production budget, but I'm sure they could have used the money wiser. The characters I really only liked were Alice, Jasper, Emmett and Edward. Charlie had some funny lines, too, but seemed distant at some points. I have read the book (finished it before I left to go and see it) and it was probably on par with how the movie turned out: not so good.

6.5/10

_________________
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:22 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:56 pm
Posts: 1072
I don't care how you put it, judging a movie by its hype is always a bad idea; I don't even allow myself to be annoyed by hype.


The movie was great. A very strong adaptation for an average book. Cheesy effects,yes; overhyped, maybe; poor film, no. I liked the movie, I don't think it's fair to judge a movie just because people are overrating it. I liked the changes they made--I think that when a book is so recent, the changes come well because the books are so fresh in our minds and we enjoy the film separately. I liked that the movie wasn't stunt casted, fairly known actors were a good choice. The one annoying detail: hair. Did they have to dye people's hair that blond? If they HAD to be blond why not pick blond actors? And Jacob wearing a weave? Why?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 12:55 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:00 am
Posts: 2192
Location: Campbell River, BC
I'm pretty sure this is one of the Twilight actors...if not it's still a good laugh :P

http://roflrazzi.com/2008/11/21/celebri ... fan-girls/

_________________
http://hornedking.deviantart.com/

My DA site :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 1:51 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:45 pm
Posts: 3749
Location: Florida
Chernabog_Rocks wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is one of the Twilight actors...if not it's still a good laugh :P

http://roflrazzi.com/2008/11/21/celebri ... fan-girls/


LMAO I love it!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Twilight: The Movie
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 6:04 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11265
Location: America
My friends, one of them Jasmine1022, read the books and told me to read them, and I didn't really want to, but I did to be able to talk and get excited about it with my friends, and maybe discover something that actually is wonderful.

I only read the first book, and will read the others, but...

While it's possible I didn't like it because I have a hard time feeling the romance from something that isn't my own romance, or I just didn't want to like it...I thought the book was very average, and not well written, and I didn't like it.

My main gripes was Bella being a nobody who has no life or excitement until she meets a boy. Oh wait he's a vampire even more exciting, so what she can't feel happy until she meets some impossible dream creature? And she's ordinary and boring, and weak, but especially compared to this vampire boy. A beautiful, smart, strong, super vampire who's perfect and better than her in every way. Sometimes I thought the relationship was downright disgusting, especially when I thought how easily he could kill her and indeed, had the desire to kill her.

If someone told you, "I want to kill you...but I'll try not to, I think I can not kill you" what would you do? I know the idea of true love is supposed to be so powerful it overcomes everything, and that's very romantic, but I didn't fall under it's spell. He should've looked for an equal vampire and she should have looked for a nice human. But it's "true love" and "fate" and they "have" to be together so whatever.

But if you want to know how creepy it is just read sentences that talk about Edward wanting to take Bella's blood and replace the word "blood" with "virginity" or "life". And it's so funny how Bella falls under his spell when the whole idea is that vampires are designed to overpower their victims.

NOTE: I actually do like the idea of being with a perfectly beautiful, strong guy who could overpower me and I'm so weak he takes care of me. Yet I still didn't like Twilight's book, and you know, maybe I was just trying to come up with reasons not to like it.

However...I thought the movie was good. I thought it was well-done. And I liked it.

And I think I can figure out at least possibly why. Well, for starters the movie made changes from the book, so the movie was different from the book, allowing it more chances to be better than the book.

The movie wasn't gushy or overly romantic. It was...natural, and more realistic, and actually kind of gritty, and you know maybe it was actually good looking at Bella and Edward interact instead of hearing Bella say "Oh he was so perfect" "His smile made me melt" and all that kind of stuff.

But more than that I think it was that Edward wasn't perfect and completely better than Bella. He was less of a superior jerk. He wasn't controlling Bella. He was fallible, he made mistakes, and he was funny with it, too. It made him way more likable.

Also, I wonder if Bella being like every normal girl and Edward being perfect, in the books, was just too nondescript. I mean, you're supposed to use your imagination in books, but it really left a lot of things you had to fill in. The movie, of course, was able to give a lot more, you knew what the characters looked like and acted like, it wasn't just doing something plainly or perfectly. But I'm the least sure about this, I don't think they were that detailess.

Widdi, all the Cullens are at least better than most people, the average looking person, but you must see all the actors playing the Cullens, as they look in the films, can be called good-looking or beautiful. But other than that, it's hard to find really, really, really good-looking people who are also good actors. Maybe the stereotypes about super models being empty headed, and usually failing at acting, has something to do with it.

And MIKE NEWTON was the CUTEST boy in the whole film, possibly even the most beautiful. He was the one I preferred, his looks were my favorite.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Twilight: The Movie
PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:13 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:10 am
Posts: 1498
Location: North Bay, Ontario
Disney Duster wrote:

Widdi, all the Cullens are at least better than most people, the average looking person, but you must see all the actors playing the Cullens, as they look in the films, can be called good-looking or beautiful. But other than that, it's hard to find really, really, really good-looking people who are also good actors. Maybe the stereotypes about super models being empty headed, and usually failing at acting, has something to do with it.


Perhaps, but I can think of a lot of people who'd fit the bill better than who were cast. Alice is the only one I think is spot-on.

The strange thing is the one actor I find mildly attractive was made to look ugly in the movie (the guy who plays James. I can't remember his real name) but that could just be my opinion based on my dislike of long hair on men.

Meh, I'm going to see the movie tomorrow night. I don't expect much. New Moon I will see opening night though, I did really enjoy that book.

Team Jacob FTW! [/delusions]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Twilight
PostPosted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 12:58 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11265
Location: America
The funny thing is James was actually supposed to be plain, or just not particularly attractive, in the book! And he's one of the ones my friends and other girls kept saying was so hot! Yes, in the film, too!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 1:38 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:10 am
Posts: 1498
Location: North Bay, Ontario
Okay, so I just saw the movie and OMG! Most unintentionally hilarious movie I've ever seen! I couldn't stop laughing. The acting... could it be any more horrible? I really don't think so. Charlie, Renee and Jacob where the only ones who didn't have me in stitches every time they were on screen. Well Charlie did, but I think that was on purpose.

I found it hilarious seeing Pattinson blush throughout the movie. He doesn't have blood, he can't blush! Well of course Meyer contradicts the whole blood thing several times in the series (mainly with Edward being able to have sex) but still.

I know the film had a small budget, but the SE were TERRIBLE. You could almost see the wires making them jump and move in that ridiculous fashion.

The leads have NO chemistry at all. Which annoyed me. The funny thing is Bella and Jacob did. Oi, just like in the book I guess. Ah well.

Bella's friends (with the exceptions of Eric and the black guy [Ben?] whom I wanted to punch... A LOT) were the one real bright spot in the movies and I'm pissed that there screen time will go down greatly in subsequent movies. If I had to choose someone based on this movie I'd be on Team Mike. He was ADORABLE!

Anyways, the movie was bad. But so was the book, so what did I expect.

At least it was funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Twilight
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:23 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11265
Location: America
From what I've read so far, the critics don't think this film's very good, but not horrible. But what annoys me is some critics thinking what the book had was better...hm...well the movie improved on the book in many ways for me, but I'm sure some things from the book should have stayed in, too. Namely, things to make the romance, and danger, more believable and better.

I really didn't think the acting was bad. I mean, really when I thought about it only Angela, the chick with the glasses, did I notice her acting seemed poor, but it could have just been the social akwardness her character is supposed to have.

If Robert blushed and they didn't catch it, to have him re-do the scene or digitally whiten it...oh well, I'm sure they never intented for him to blush. I doubt they ever directed him to blush.

Yes, the low budget effects was inexcusable. The only thing I could think of was they weren't sure if it would be a hit or not so they didn't want to pay a lot. OR they were lazy because they thought teenage girls wouldn't care, or they would love the movie even without effort in the effects...that are supposed to make some of things girls' love about these powerful vampires believable... :roll:

And as I called it first, Mike was the cutest guy in the whole film!

And also like I said, it was funny, most importantly Edward was funny, intentionally, and that's made him way more likable.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Twilight
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:36 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:00 am
Posts: 2192
Location: Campbell River, BC
Disney Duster wrote:

I really didn't think the acting was bad. I mean, really when I thought about it only Angela, the chick with the glasses, did I notice her acting seemed poor, but it could have just been the social akwardness her character is supposed to have.


Compared to the acting on Corey in the House the acting in this movie must seem award winning :P

_________________
http://hornedking.deviantart.com/

My DA site :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:00 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:56 pm
Posts: 1072
I personally don't like to hear people criticizing Kristen Stewart, People say she pouted too much, that makes me wonder if they ever read the books. Besides, most people haven't ever been in any play, TV show, or movie and even though it's easy to see when someone is terrible, an actor can't be judged by one performance, it might just be the character.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:35 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:10 am
Posts: 1498
Location: North Bay, Ontario
It wasn't the pouting that bothered me as much as the complete lack of any emotion she portrayed during the movie. Her inflection NEVER changed. Bella was always my second least favourite character in the books too, so perhaps that influenced me as well.

Besides it was Stewart who bothered me most. It was Pattinson, the guys who played James, Jasper and Carlisle and the girl playing Alice who made me think "and the Razzie goes to..."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 8:41 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:56 pm
Posts: 1072
Well, the razzies do only go for overrated people or films; for example, next year the razzie so goes to Miley Cyrus and Hannah Montana The Movie.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:24 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:43 pm
Posts: 4553
Location: USA
While I admit Robert Pattinson is just a strange actor, and Cam Gigandet didn't portray James as evil as he could have been, Ashley Green and Kristen Stewart were the best things about this film.

_________________
Image

http://teendramaforum.proboards.com/
http://twitter.com/clemxens


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:40 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:05 pm
Posts: 5613
Location: Wichita, Kansas
For once I agree with Widdi on something (shock of all shocks!!). I went to this movie with my wife, and my daughter (37 years old) and basically we all found ourselves laughing in places we weren't supposed to be laughing, and groaning at the dialogue. Never will I criticize Hannah Montana for being so lame and terribly acted. This movie has proven to be a one-shot in the pan at the box office, and I am glad. All we need is another 'Chick Flick', and a Vampire one, at that.

Where did they find these actors, and who was the cinematographer? The sets were weird, the makeup and acting was atrocious, and I didn't understand what all the hype was about. There are a bunch of other actors who might have pulled this one out of its doldrums, but I doubt that much could save it from being what it is - not a very good movie!!

:D

_________________
The only way to watch movies - Original Aspect Ratio!!!!
I LOVE my Blu-Ray Disc Player!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 3:59 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:00 am
Posts: 2192
Location: Campbell River, BC
dvdjunkie wrote:

Where did they find these actors, and who was the cinematographer? The sets were weird, the makeup and acting was atrocious, and I didn't understand what all the hype was about.

:D


It's because your not a fangirl ;) They don't use things like logic, common sense etc. They see it, they want it, they destroy everything that gets in the way in order to get it.

:P

_________________
http://hornedking.deviantart.com/

My DA site :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:19 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:43 pm
Posts: 4553
Location: USA
The sets were so dark and gloomy because it's set in Forks, Washington, the rainiest town in America.

_________________
Image

http://teendramaforum.proboards.com/
http://twitter.com/clemxens


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Twilight: The Movie
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 7:14 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11265
Location: America
You know Widdi, I did forget that I thought Alice was bad when she had her vision about the ballet studio, and I guess she wasn't good all around. But she's supposed to be soft-spoken, sweet, and nice, so maybe she wanted to remove any anger or annoyance or any inflection that wasn't nice. Hm...still, yea, she could have been better and it would have been better with more, other emotion.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:25 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:19 am
Posts: 1772
Location: Portugal
I thought it was great!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 117 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group