Better than the book


I've never outright hated the franchise, and there are things wrong with the movies, but they're so much better than the books. Which is really rare, for me.

They actually tried to fix the giant disappointment that was the almost-fight with the Volturi, and even though it was a dream sequence, the fight was pretty awesome. It was as 'real' based as it could be in a story like this, and people actually died in it, which was a pleasant surprise.

And as much as I don't like Stewart in these movies, she gives Bella some personality (albeit, not a lot), and by virtue of who she is as a person, she lends the character some strength too. She almost seems too cool, a bit too offbeat, to be the Bella that was in the books. Charlie's character had a lot more going for him in the films, too.

reply

I agree. I think the writers really fixed a lot of Meyer's shortcomings as a writer.

You are sin.

reply

I couldn't DISagree more! The books had a certain charm, and while Meyer isn't the best writer, she is a good storyteller. I did like the books a lot, and Breaking Dawn is my favorite of the series.

I blame the screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg for the horrendous script, especially in the last two movies. There were so many fun, sweet, and humorous moments in the book, that would have translated well to the screen, but Rosenberg completely betrayed the characters, and made them act in ways they never did in the books.

Now I watch the last two films to pretty much make fun of them. They're like a gorgeous cupcake, that's great to look at, but has no substance, and makes you feel kind of queasy after you eat it.

No, let me rephrase that: the movies are like a very long, visually appealing music video. The music is great, the costumes and scenery are great, the actors are good looking, but there's not much else there.

reply

I feel the opposite. The movies have a campy charm, at least for riffing.

The books tend to be filled with bad characterizations, stilted story telling, wooden dialogue, and unfortunate implications.

The movie's strongest points are keeping Leah and Charlie as likable characters, something the novels seemed to go out of their way to torpedo.

Seize the moment, 'cause tomorrow you might be dead.

reply

I'll definitely admit that the actor who plays Charlie is the best thing in the movies, and just like he was portrayed in the books. Leah and Seth were pretty good, too.

reply

Stewart is the only Bella. No other actress could play her. Kristen Stewart IS Bella Swan Cullen.

reply

Um, yeah, that doesn't say much for her future career. She needs to mature as an actor, and get past all the awful tics that she relies on as an actress. Blinking, stuttering, hair touching. So many people say, "hey, that's just how she chose to portray Bella, because that's how Bella is". But every role she played after that relies on these same tics and acting 'techniques'. The only role she was really believable in was Joan Jett in The Runaways. She really nailed that role.

reply

SILENCE!!!!!!! SHE IS A PERFECT ACTRESS!!! WONDERFUL IN ALL HER ROLES!!! BELLA IS HER BEST!!!! FACT!!!!! My word is law. Especially when it comes to this beautiful and amazing actress.

I love you, Kristen Stewart. :) You are so beautiful and talented. I would love to perform with you.

reply