Twilight Series

[rmontro]

I'm not even a fan of the Twilight series, but I noticed there wasn't a thread for it, which surprised me.  I've casually watched most of the movies, but not all.  I only started this thread to say that even though I'm not really a fan of the series, or of recent pop music:

I think the use of Christina Perri's "A Thousand Years Part 2" to close the last movie, along with the pictures of all the actors in all the movies, was absolutely perfect for the story.  I find it surprisingly moving every time I see it.

[ShadowHunter]

I am not a fan either though I did see all the movies and tried to read the books.

One of the many problems I had with this series was I enjoyed the supporting characters more then the leads. I like Alice and Jasper and thought their relationship was better. Even Kate and Garret were nice.  I wish we could have seen more of that.

Edited June 11, 2017 by ShadowHunter

[BitterApple]

I never read the books but watched all the movies.

I was always bummed that Jasper didn't get a lot of screen time outside of Eclipse. I've been a huge Jackson Rathbone fan ever since he had that creepy role on Criminal Minds. 

I think Bella is one of the worst characters ever written and a horrible role model for girls. Sure, throw your life, hopes and dreams away, not to mention your parents, for some guy you've barely known a year. That's healthy. I thought it was awful how easily she was willing to toss Charlie and Renee aside for Edward. Like she didn't even care that she'd never see them again once she became a vampire. Even though Charlie knew in BD2 that something was different about the Cullens, how did they handle that with Renee? Did they just ex her out after so many years once it was obvious that Bella wasn't aging? 

I also hated the pedo Jacob/Renesmee relationship. That's so gross to be spending time with a child who's going to become your wife in a few years. Blech.

[GaT]

I read all the books & watched all the movies multiple times, & I still can't get over some of the casting/look choices in the movies. So, in no particular order, here's my (partial) rant.

1. Rosalee-In the books she's described as a statuesque 5'9", model-like, with wavy blonde hair to the middle of her back, so who do they cast? a 5'5" Latina who looks horrible as a blonde. I didn't even know Nikki Reed was pretty until I saw a picture of her without the blonde hair. In all of Hollywood, they couldn't find a beautiful, tall blonde to play this part? I have nothing against Nikki's acting, but she was all wrong for this part.
2. Alice-Alice is described as 4'10", pixie-like, very thin, small features, spiky hair in the books, so of course they cast Ashley Greene who is also 5'5" (the same height as the "statuesque" Rosalee) & has an athletic build, Nothing "pixie-like" about her. Also, she kind of sucks acting wise.
3. Jasper-Described as being 6'3" so they cast 5'10" Jackson Rathbone, who is shorter than the other male actors (most of which he is supposed to be taller than) so that he just looks silly. Also, only has one expression, looking constipated. I later saw him guest star on some TV show, & that was still the only expression he used.
4. The Hair-There were 5 movies in this series, FIVE, & there wasn't a single one where the main character's hair was correct. The biggest problem was Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) whose hair is repeatedly described as "bronze". Over, & over, & over in every book it's called "bronze". Instead, in every movie his hair color was different & none of them could be described as "bronze", in fact, in the last movie his hair was almost black. Other hair problems: Alice's hair wasn't "spiky", Emmet's hair wasn't curly, Jasper looked like he had a growing out Barbie bubble cut, Esme's hair color was supposed to be "caramel" but apparently she used the same colorist as Edward & her hair ended up almost black. Finally, I don't know who Peter Facinelli (Carlisle Cullen) pissed off, but they gave him Lego hair in the last movie & it looked seriously bad. Nobody had the same look from movie to movie, they had the same makeup (I won't even go into the white makeup) & hair stylists for each movie, & they were apparently incapable of doing anything twice.
5. I think Kristen Stewart is a terrible actress, she twitched, stuttered, & lip-bit her way through all 5 movies. 

[methodwriter85]

Nikki Reed was Catherine Hardwicke's muse from the movie 13, so that explains that casting.

I didn't read the books (I couldn't get past the opening of the first one because Bella seemed like such a stuck-up bitch), but interesting to learn that about Alice. Anna Kendrick in a wig would have made much more sense if you needed a pixie-like girl.

[slf]

These movies, like the the books, are Terrible but could've been enjoyable cheese for teen girls had different artistic choices been made. The casting is completely wrong and I don't just mean physically. I'm actually okay with actors not looking like the characters so long as they can act but so many of the actresses and actors were just awful. There was no chemistry between Stewart and Pattinson or Stewart and Lautner. A lot of crummy material was left in that should've been taken out (Meyer's books are like 40% things teen girls actually think and feel and want and the other 60% is weird Mormon shit). In the end the best part of the films was the soundtracks.

I still can't believe Michael Sheen was in this series.

[memememe76]

I loved those end credits in the final film. I am surprised more franchises don't do this thing, ie. Harry Potter. 

[GaT]

Just because we finally have a Twilight thread, here's something to amuse you. Twilight. Acted out by cats.

Twilight

New Moon

Eclipse

[Dejana]

I saw a comment once that Nikki Reed as Rosalie looked like a Wayans in White Chicks and could never unsee it-just a horrible look for her. Overall, the budgets for these movies were way too high for the wigs to look so cheap, and the makeup, horrendous.

Whenever I watch the honeymoon sequence of Breaking Dawn, I always wonder why Bella waits until the wedding night to rush off to the bathroom for a bit of grooming. Presumably, if a bride is saving it for marriage and also into body hair removal, such a task would have been scheduled well before go time? Or maybe she was just nervous and stalling...

Edited June 14, 2017 by Dejana

[Spartan Girl]

My mom always watches these movies on TV, to my intense chagrin.

The only halfway cool thing in the entire series was the big battle sequence in the final movie. And yet THAT turned out to be one giant middle finger to the audience because it didn't even happen!

[rmontro]

On 6/11/2017 at 1:03 AM, GaT said:

Alice is described as 4'10", pixie-like, very thin, small features, spiky hair in the books, so of course they cast Ashley Greene who is also 5'5" (the same height as the "statuesque" Rosalee) & has an athletic build, Nothing "pixie-like" about her.

I get your point, but I thought Ashley/Alice did look pretty pixie-like.

 

18 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

The only halfway cool thing in the entire series was the big battle sequence in the final movie. And yet THAT turned out to be one giant middle finger to the audience because it didn't even happen!

I enjoyed the ending battle, and the "middle finger" didn't bother me, because I thought it made sense under the circumstances.  Also, the battle scene was cool enough to forgive the excuse.

[LeafontheWind]

On 6/12/2017 at 5:38 AM, Spartan Girl said:

My mom always watches these movies on TV, to my intense chagrin.

The only halfway cool thing in the entire series was the big battle sequence in the final movie. And yet THAT turned out to be one giant middle finger to the audience because it didn't even happen!

I went to the midnight premiere of the final movie with my friend who loved Twilight and this was my favorite part of the whole series. Watching the entire theater react to that battle was even more entertaining than the movie itself (I guess spoilers weren't as big of a thing when his movie was released?)! My poor friend was practically hyperventilating by the time one of the wolves fell into the giant pit of doom and then there was a collective sigh of relief when it turned out to be a vision. It seemed like almost everyone enjoyed the twist, especially since it gave everyone a taste of what Alice was capable of as mentioned by @doram.

[Athena]

I was not a big fan of the sequence since I found it anticlimactic, but on review, I do agree that they did well to show alternative events. They improved on the books in that moment.

I disliked the books and basically watched the movies to snark. However, I do think that the last movie was the best one. Bill Condon seemed to walk this line of making a fantasy romance movie without the movie taking itself too seriously. He did it without making fun of the more serious moments. There was a good balance there.

[BitterApple]

One of the things that never made sense was the Cullen kids repeating high school over and over. I know Edward said it enabled them to stay longer wherever they lived, but why not just say everyone's 18 and call it a day? At most, keeping up the ruse would only buy them an extra year or two, so it hardly seemed worth it. 

[GaT]

3 hours ago, BitterApple said:

One of the things that never made sense was the Cullen kids repeating high school over and over. I know Edward said it enabled them to stay longer wherever they lived, but why not just say everyone's 18 and call it a day? At most, keeping up the ruse would only buy them an extra year or two, so it hardly seemed worth it. 

Totally agree. If you were immortal, would you really choose to repeat high school over & over & over again? If you were insane, maybe. 

[methodwriter85]

They could have just sent them to a community college.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

On 6/13/2017 at 6:24 AM, doram said:

Anyway, I feel that Twilight gets most of its flak because "ewww... teenage girls like this!" than for any legitimate reason. 

Yes, that is absolutely the reason. Doesn't have anything to do with having inspired Fifty Shades of Grey in the slightest, although that is the worst of its 'crimes'.

[GaT]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Yes, that is absolutely the reason. Doesn't have anything to do with having inspired Fifty Shades of Grey in the slightest, although that is the worst of its 'crimes'.

No, the worst of it's "crimes" is having the main female character be a 17 years old girl with no other ambition in life than to die so that she can spend eternity with her sparkling boyfriend.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

6 hours ago, doram said:

The hate for Twilight existed long before 50 Shades of Grey was written/made into a film. 

By the way, Titanic (the Original Twilight) got the same treatment - "Here's the thing about Titanic, and the reason 15-year-old girls love it so much: James Cameron is a 15-year-old girl." - and (to the best of my knowledge anyway!) it didn't inspire 50 Shades of Grey. 

 

The girl getting to live* happily ever after with her sparkling boyfriend is the "ambition" of every love story & fairy-tale ever. Twilight wasn't breaking new ground. Except for the fact that it was written by a woman, specifically for teenage girls (which is why Edward was a 200-year-old virgin and not a retired Lothario) and had the audacity to be successful. 

ymmv, of course. 

*Not to go all existential, but is Bella really dying if she's trading a life where she's guaranteed to die in 60 years or less for a life where she will probably live forever? Sounds like the opposite of dying. It's always pointless trying to put real-life analogies to fantasy situations.

Even putting aside A) that I got started in fandom with Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and that B) nowhere in my immediate experience with fictional vampires do they fucking sparkle, is your argument that the books/movies are actually good? It's a bit convenient to blame any dislike on sexism unless you're under the impression that you're dealing with Ursula LeGuin.

[Spartan Girl]

On June 13, 2017 at 8:24 AM, doram said:

Anyway, I feel that Twilight gets most of its flak because "ewww... teenage girls like this!" than for any legitimate reason. 

I don't think it has anything to do with it. Teenage girls happen to like plenty of good movies, books, and shows. 

Twilight gets flak because it's poorly written, one-dimensional, and makes a mockery of vampires by turning them into sparkly twits that have nothing better to do than obsess about Bella Swan.

[memememe76]

I think it has everything to do with it. Young boys like crap too, but that crap doesn't get anywhere near the same level of hate or concern trolling.

[Dejana]

18 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I don't think it has anything to do with it. Teenage girls happen to like plenty of good movies, books, and shows. 

Twilight gets flak because it's poorly written, one-dimensional, and makes a mockery of vampires by turning them into sparkly twits that have nothing better to do than obsess about Bella Swan.

 

17 hours ago, memememe76 said:

I think it has everything to do with it. Young boys like crap too, but that crap doesn't get anywhere near the same level of hate or concern trolling.

I think it's both to some degree. I follow box office, which is a male-dominated hobby, and the open disdain toward properties that appeal primarily to girls/women is a very real and routine thing (though fortunately other men do call out this tendency for the myopic immaturity that it is). From the other side, there is a lot of IMO overbaked concern about the hoards of tween/teen girls who will thwarted from the path of STEM greatness and healthy relationships by mere act of reading Twilight or Fifty Shades, so their impressionable young minds must be protected from such dangerous ideas at all costs! A great deal of this talk seems to come from women who find these stories regressive and problematic, which is their right and (IMO) not actually unreasonable, but some carry on like their generation didn't have its share of pop culture junk, too, that was ultimately harmless (Sweet Valley High and VC Andrews comes to mind).

OTOH I tried the books, felt like Meyer's writing came off like the fan fiction of a more interesting story (that sadly doesn't exist), and finally gave up during the nth chapter of Bella's pining for Edward during New Moon. Fortunately the movie cut this episode down to a short montage. Plus, Meyer literally putting Edward above Romeo, Heathcliff and Rhett (among others) as a romantic lead is really...something. The movies were easier to accept on their own level, such as it was, and lacked pretensions of anything grander. Being geared to teen girls doesn't mean a book or film can't be a Great Work, the Twilight series is not that story.

Edited June 19, 2017 by Dejana

[rmontro]

12 hours ago, doram said:

The girl getting to live* happily ever after with her sparkling boyfriend is the "ambition" of every love story & fairy-tale ever. Twilight wasn't breaking new ground. Except for the fact that it was written by a woman, specifically for teenage girls (which is why Edward was a 200-year-old virgin and not a retired Lothario) and had the audacity to be successful. 

You nailed it right there.  No surer way to get hated than to be successful.

[HunterHunted]

8 hours ago, doram said:

Everyone needs to watch this. 

Basically I agree with everything here. (Not the sorry part - I've never had anything to be sorry about since the misogynistic hatred targeted towards Twilight was clear to me from the start). 

 

And considering the recent backlash towards Joss Whedon, it's interesting to re-read this thread and see the previous discussion hailing him as a feminist icon. 

Watched it and I still hate Twilight. I'm a woman in her 30s. I've always thought Twilight was a mess. This is not changing. Do I think some of the criticism was heightened because it focused on teenage girls? Yeah. But that doesn't make Twilight any less of a mess. Bella's complete lack of ambition or drive external to romantic pursuits is a problem. Edward's singular creepy focus on Bella is a problem. I've had problems with romances across many YA properties for similar issues--Avatar: The Last Airbender (Aang's fixation on Katara borders on obsession), Harry Potter (very messed up Oedipus Complex), and Divergent (Tris' and Four's romance is obsessive and quasi-abusive). The romances are literally the worst parts of those properties. Unfortunately, there isn't much to Twilight beyond the romance. Criticism of this isn't misogyny; it's reality.

I own all of Buffy and Angel and I've always found them to be problematic. Xander's "nice guy" bullshit is terrible. Spike's attempted rape of Buffy is deplorable. And the Angel and Buffy romance is always subverted because it's explicit that it cannot and does not work. Fans criticized all of this in real time. No one was silent about  the weakenesses in the storytelling.

For all of Whedon's faults, he's pretty clear about making Buffy an actual character with a defined personality. Whereas, Bella seems particularly shallow apart from her love of Edward. I never get the sense that Bella misses a single human in her pre-vampire life except her father. In hindsight, I wonder why they bothered to even cast her "friends" when she clearly doesn't give two shits about them. 

Edited January 24, 2018 by HunterHunted

[HunterHunted]

31 minutes ago, doram said:

And the difference between Twilight and all these other films/media is that their romantic stories don't get the same kind of vitriolic criticism that Twilight does. That has always been the point: it's not that Twilight is above criticism, it's that it apparently provokes a level of hatred/disgust in people that is disproportionate to its flaws. 

Or in other words: the day the Transformers movies and Michael Bay get the same level of popular vitriol that Twilight and Meyer has received from mainstream and social media, is the day I'll believe Twilight-hate is reality, not misogyny. 

I'm going to disagree. The Harry Potter franchise gets a ton of criticism on the romance issue as well as other storylines. However, it has more story to tell than just who Harry, Ron, and Hermione end up with. Twilight, literally, has nothing going for it besides romance. Even the larger battles with the Volturi, Victoria, James, and Victoria's newborn army are all in service of the central romance.

Additionally, I think the Transformers movies are treated with the same level of disdain that the Twilight films are. There have been multiple pieces about the many many issues with Michael Bay and the Transformers' films.

It's clear that you and I will not agree on this matter. I don't think Twilight has any unearned criticism.

[VCRTracking]

7 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Additionally, I think the Transformers movies are treated with the same level of disdain that the Twilight films are. There have been multiple pieces about the many many issues with Michael Bay and the Transformers' films.

Yes, but I don't know if there are anybody who loves those movies the same way. Even Michael Bay fans prefer his other movies. There are Transformers fans of course but they love the original G1 cartoon and toys and the various other animated series since. I don't think they've ever gotten as much shit for liking a franchise about robots who turn into vehicles as Twilight fans did. People who genuinely love Twilight  books and movies(teenage girls and middle aged housewives) were generally treated with derision and considered to have bad taste.

8 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Harry Potter (very messed up Oedipus Complex)

I just wonder if that's because the actresses they cast as Lily Potter and Ginny Weasley inadvertently looked similar!

Edited January 24, 2018 by VCRTracking

[HunterHunted]

2 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Yes, but I don't know if there are anybody who loves those movies the same way. Even Michael Bay fans prefer his other movies. There are Transformers fans of course but they love the original G1 cartoon and toys and the various other animated series since. I don't think they've ever gotten as much shit for liking a franchise about robots who turn into vehicles as Twilight fans did. People who genuinely love Twilight  books and movies(teenage girls and middle aged housewives) were generally treated with derision and considered to have bad taste.

I think the Transformers movies are regarded as so universally terrible that very few people will go on record as liking them. The Good Place just had a joke about inventing a new Axe body spray that smelled like a Transformers movie--loud, dumb, and confusing. The latest movie had a plot point about the Transformers helping Harriet Tubman out with the Underground Railroad. I think the consensus is that saying you like the Transformers movies is only acceptable if you preface the statement about the movies with being "fun if you turn your brain off" otherwise you'll out yourself as a douchebag moron. Another example might be the Star Wars prequels.

I can agree that some of hyperbolic criticism of the Twilight films being "teh worst thing evah" came because it was aimed at teen girls, but that doesn't make the films not problematic. Because they really really are. I'm much more in line with the response from The Mary Sue to Ellis' video. 

https://www.themarysue.com/why-did-i-hate-twilight-so-much/

Quote

I just wonder if that's because the actresses they cast as Lily Potter and Ginny Weasley inadvertently looked similar!

Nope. It's implied in the books that they look alike. Both Lily and Ginny are described as very pretty redheads with freckles. They are both in the Slug Club and it's remarked that it's impressive how talented each of them must be to pull off a fully formed Patronus at a young age.

[Frost]

10 hours ago, doram said:

There aren't many mainstream takes on the "Problematic Nature of Harry's Oedipal Complex"

What the Hell?  I've read the book series multiple times and watched the movies in the theatre, on DVD, and via Harry Potter Weekend marathons on TV.  I have NEVER got the impression that Harry wants to have sex with his MOTHER.  That's balderdash.  Somehow it's problematic that a child who lost his parents as a baby - and actually witnessed the murder of his mom - yearns to have a mother's love?  That's the basest syllogism I've ever read.

I've never understood the tendency to tarnish something else just because someone doesn't like how their own favorite is treated.

[HunterHunted]

33 minutes ago, doram said:

you'd have noticed where I said the only complaints that are directed at HP romance are shipping-biased.

I've seen plenty of critiques that there is just no reason to pair all of the kids up, not just that fans preferred one ship over another. Furthermore, there is a lot of criticism of the movies taking many of Ron's instances of kindness and cleverness and giving them to Hermione. It makes the relationship between the two even more lopsided.

33 minutes ago, doram said:

@HunterHunted brought her personal opinion up to play fandom oppression Olympics, and I in turn was pointing out how unheard of the idea was.

I don't think that's a particularly fair characterization of my opinion. A simple reference to my original post would have sufficed. Furthermore, what else is everyone doing here, but bringing their "personal opinion" into their posts. It's not like what you've posted is objective facts and unassailable truths. You've posted your personal opinions. I've disagreed with them with my personal opinions. 

And for the record @Frost, I don't think that Rowling ever realized how similarly she described Lily and Ginny. I think it's completely accidental. But considering the importance that Lily plays in Snape's redemption, it's a bit weird to see Snape's memories of Lily and then watch Harry reunite with a girl who looks a bit like his mother.

[Frost]

2 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

 But considering the importance that Lily plays in Snape's redemption, it's a bit weird to see Snape's memories of Lily and then watch Harry reunite with a girl who looks a bit like his mother.

I reacted very strongly to a couple of posts that seemed to state outright that Harry has an Oedipal Complex, which has a very specific definition:

the unresolved desire of a child for sexual gratification through the parent of the opposite sex, especially the desire of a son for his mother. This involves, first, identification with and, later, hatred for the parent of the same sex, who is considered by the child as a rival

Ginny and Lily having a similar look and some common characteristics does not say Oedipal Complex to me.  That seems to be an enormous leap.  Especially since Harry was very clearly attracted to Cho for several years before he noticed Ginny romantically.   And Hermione is the one who was always described as the 'brightest witch of her age' which mirrored what others thought of Lily.  Not to mention that red heads seem to be very well represented in the wizarding world so Ginny and Lily both having red hair doesn't seem very significant.  This doesn't belong in the Twilight discussion, but the whole idea of Harry having sexual thoughts about his mother really jumped out at me so I felt the need to respond.

I didn't mean to throw fire on flame war. :-)  

For the record, I never read the Twilight books and found the movies kind of lame but I don't have any kind of visceral hatred for them.

[hoosier80]

So MTV is running a marathon again of this series.  Never read the books, but I came looking for a forum after seeing bits and pieces of each film on tv.  I know one ex co-worker who was obsessed with the books and movies (in her 40's).  From what I've seen, just nothing seems so special to me, actually just the opposite. 

The movies do not hold my interest that well.  Kristin Stewart is awful - is that how the character is written?  I mean she didn't even really smile or seem happy at her wedding (Edward did).  Why would anyone be attracted to her or even want to hang out with her?  Such a sad sack.  (She was a tad more interesting when she was on her thrill seeking jag - so she could get visions of Edward.  I guess she didn't have a picture of him for obvious reasons?)

As far as the Cullen kids repeating high school - why not just say they have a tutor, are home schooled, graduated early or fudge (even more) on their age?

I've seen a couple of the Hunger Games and Harry Potter movies, which are both so much better than this series (not perfect but more entertaining to me).  

And yet, I still have this movie on right now (Breaking Dawn part 1), because I'm working from home, sick, and am really bored.

[festivus]

2 minutes ago, hoosier80 said:

Kristin Stewart is awful - is that how the character is written? 

Bella is a morose lump but I've only seen the 1st movie. 

[GaT]

1 hour ago, hoosier80 said:

Kristin Stewart is awful - is that how the character is written? 

1 hour ago, festivus said:

Bella is a morose lump but I've only seen the 1st movie. 

Bella in the books is pretty depressing, she's a 17 year old girl whose only ambition is to die to be with her boyfriend, but Kristen Stewart just made her as morose as possible. I think Kristen is a terrible actress,& I don't understand all the praise she gets. She's exactly the same in every part she plays,all nervous twitching & lip biting. I guess that's why people think she's good, she's done the same thing so many times she's an expert at it.

1 hour ago, hoosier80 said:

As far as the Cullen kids repeating high school - why not just say they have a tutor, are home schooled, graduated early or fudge (even more) on their age?

This is my major problem with the whole series (and that's saying a lot with all the problems it has), if you were immortal, why would you choose to go to high school over, & over, & over again? That's insane.

[Anela]

In the books, she had no interest in the other kids at school, except for Edward and his "siblings" -  she was only interested in dying, so that she could be a beautiful vampire, and be a part of their family. 

[festivus]

Maybe someone else could have done better as Bella, I don't know, I've only seen KS in a couple of other things, but there's not much there to work with IMO.

The reason I never bothered watching the rest was the casting of Jacob. I've got nothing against that Taylor kid, but Jacob was Native American and 6 ft something. I couldn't get past it.

[GaT]

1 hour ago, festivus said:

The reason I never bothered watching the rest was the casting of Jacob. I've got nothing against that Taylor kid, but Jacob was Native American and 6 ft something. I couldn't get past it.

Alice, Rosalie, & Jasper were all seriously miscast too, & everybody's hair was wrong. 

[Anela]

What I watched of the series, had a really awkward feel to it. The acting, the lack of chemistry between some of the actors, and so on. But I hated the books, so I wasn't excited for the films. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

9 hours ago, festivus said:

Maybe someone else could have done better as Bella, I don't know, I've only seen KS in a couple of other things, but there's not much there to work with IMO.

As long as you set your expectations reasonably (read: low) you'll be less disappointed. Stewart needs strong actors to work with to make her seem more awake and present, and while Pattinson isn't as terrible as she is, he's not Daniel Day-Lewis either.

[Spartan Girl]

I still hate these movies, but after Kristen Stewart came and and started doing better movies, I realize that I misjudged her and I'm sorry for that.

[Shannon L.]

Kristen does look like she's having fun in the Charlie's Angels trailer. Granted, I haven't seen too many of her movies outside of the Twilight series, so I don't know if she's appeared to be having fun in any other ones.

[supposebly]

I had seen Kristen Stewart in other movies and always thought her a very capable and gorgeous actor.  Eventually, I tried watching those movies and seriously, no one could make gold out of that dreck.

Michael Sheen at least had the option to go big and chew. She didn't. I think almost everyone was bad in them. They are just really bad movies, stories, dialogue, you name it. I could not finish any of them. It was almost comical but nowhere near so bad it's good level. I mean the father seemed to conveniently go fishing every time something important happened to his daughter. 

Oh, you died and became a vampire? Oh well. You gave birth to a rapidly growing something? Sure! 

Edited September 26, 2019 by supposebly
I always mix up Michael and Martin Sheen

[blueray]

I agree, honestly it probably wasn't the actors that were bad it was the story. I've read all the books (was into them when I was a teenager) and seen the movies. And honestly, now that I'm older I realize how bad the story was. Especially the last book. She gets pregnant never made any sense what so ever. Then Jacob falls for the baby 🤢.

I did however, have fun watching the last movie with my friend. We were in college and went to a mid-afternoon showing and had the whole theater to ourselves. We spent the whole time making fun of how bad it was.

[GaT]

5 hours ago, blueray said:

Then Jacob falls for the baby 🤢.

Ugh, I forgot all about this, why did you remind me? 🤣

[Anela]

6 hours ago, blueray said:

I agree, honestly it probably wasn't the actors that were bad it was the story. I've read all the books (was into them when I was a teenager) and seen the movies. And honestly, now that I'm older I realize how bad the story was. Especially the last book. She gets pregnant never made any sense what so ever. Then Jacob falls for the baby 🤢.

I did however, have fun watching the last movie with my friend. We were in college and went to a mid-afternoon showing and had the whole theater to ourselves. We spent the whole time making fun of how bad it was.

I'd forgotten all about that!! Ew. I want to know how these babies magically grow up fast, and then stop at the perfect age to fall in love. It happens every time. Not once have I seen them magically grow to be 100 in the course of a month. 

The books were bad, I know. I gritted my teeth through them, waiting for the story to get better (since it had so many fans). Which makes me a dumbass. 

[Featherhat]

I really wanted to love the books. I was a teen girl at the time, I loved vampire and supernatural books and love stories, my sister who's taste I generally shared loved them, I thought I'd really enjoy reading it. I ended up throwing the first book across the room I was so frustrated with the story. Bella was a sad sack who only thinks about her boyfriend but everyone she met loved her and she was often really bitchy in her head to them unless they were Edward or Jacob, there was lots of stalking but no heat between the characters to make up for it. And the sparkle alone is snark worthy. The writing style wasn't my cup of tea either. Written by a woman for the female demo (me) had nothing to do with it.

From what I saw of the movies they didn't really improve anything and IMHO the leads had less chemistry then the characters do in the books and that's saying something.

[HunterHunted]

On 10/6/2019 at 8:29 AM, blueray said:

Then Jacob falls for the baby 🤢.

On 10/6/2019 at 1:45 PM, GaT said:

Ugh, I forgot all about this, why did you remind me? 🤣

On 10/6/2019 at 2:59 PM, Anela said:

I'd forgotten all about that!! Ew.

Is it any worse than grown up George Clooney bickering with his 12 year old robot girlfriend in Tomorrowland? Nevermind. It is worse actually, but Tomorrowland is no great shakes either and George's romcom bickering with a 12 year old robot girl is just so fucking weird.

[paulvdb]

‘Twilight’ Series In Early Development At Lionsgate TV

Quote

A TV series based on the best-selling books by Stephanie Meyer is in early development at Lionsgate Television, Deadline confirms. Meyer is expected to be involved. There is no writer attached to the project yet, nor has Lionsgate sought out a potential buyer.

 

[ShadowHunter]

45 minutes ago, paulvdb said:

‘Twilight’ Series In Early Development At Lionsgate TV

 

The only answer I can come up for this being made is they just can't come up with anything new.  I don't think this is needed and with the exception of maybe spending and giving the supporting characters more to do it will just be like the movies. The material is what it is. 

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, paulvdb said:

‘Twilight’ Series In Early Development At Lionsgate TV

 

[supposebly]

I wonder who the audience for that would be. I mean I would guess that a lot of the book Twilight fans would be, I don't know, grown out of it?

And the following generation has seen all the memes and jokes about this franchise so wouldn't be caught dead watching this stuff?