ROSEMARY MAC CABE

I’m a firm believer in having films reviewed by their target audience – or, at the very least, by someone who understands the target audience. The futility of having a 40-something man whose idea of heaven is a decent Henke movie reviewing Sex and the City: the Movie shouldn’t need to be explained to the most braindead of readers. So perhaps my review of New Moon should come with a disclaimer: I’m 24 years old and, though I shouldn’t have liked the Twilight books quite as much as I did, I was fully aware that Stephanie Meyer is only an author insofar as she writes books. Her literary prowess, if you ask me, leaves a lot to be desired. Perhaps a round-world trip might be in order (to see that attractive men don’t iron their chinos), or a thorough read of a few good authors (let’s start off slow: Stieg Larsson, to show you how suspense and intrigue are created, Lee Child, to show you how to create a decent, manly character, then some Colm Toibin, for a lesson in storytelling, pure and simple).

In short, I’m a bit of a literary snob. I love reading, and I will pretty much read anything, but I’ll be fairly judgmental at the other end. I also accepted fully the fact that Twilight (the movie) was a ridiculously entertaining rubbish movie, but it was rubbish. Like the large-screen equivalent of Lee Child, one could say – compelling and, in parts, gripping, but, ultimately, you wouldn’t recommend it to anyone at work, for fear they may think you’re a simpleton. Yes, a literary snob for sure.

So I wasn’t expecting an extraordinary feat of film-making when I entered the theatre yesterday in Brooklyn, NY, for a screening of New Moon. My sister had booked tickets for me days before, and I had arrived fresh off the plane, been delivered to Brooklyn by a very rude taxi driver who I stupidly tipped, had a shower, and emerged again, into the searing daylight, to the cinema for my dose of R-Patz and Taylor Lautner. But I wasn’t expecting to be this disappointed, either.

There are certain things that don’t translate well from page to screen. Vampires, werewolves, teenage love and heartbreak are not included in those things. So why oh why did New Moon fail so utterly? I can’t be sure, but I can proffer my suggestions.

1. Taylor Lautner. Sure, he’s buff (the audience at our screening whooped and clapped their way through every single topless moment – and there were plenty), he’s got a cute smile (albeit with ridiculously white teeth, so white that I was sure he was going to keel over with bleach poisoning at any moment) and the Bella-Jacob storyline is cute, if a little twee (heartbroken girl enlists help of lovesick boy to make a motorcycle so she can attempt to indulge in risky behaviour so that she will see an image of her protective ex-boyfriend. Ahem). But Lautner lacks the charisma necessary to carry the 75% of the film he’s involved in.

2. Bella, Bella, Bella. Could one person be more self-absorbed? Yes, I know breakups are hard, and heartbreaks are the bitterest of pills to swallow, or something, and Edward aka R-Patz is very handsome, but really? Her constant depression and sulkiness just made me want to scream at the screen: “Snap out of it! Have some pride!” My friend Emma could teach her a few things about getting back on the horse. And I could teach her a few things about putting on a brave face. Sometimes it’s necessary.

3. Bella + Edward = ridiculous state of depression. Could they look happy for even a second?! One single second?! Would that be too much to ask? In the books, despite Meyer’s teenage writing (which has its merits, don’t get me wrong, and it is a great story), they are happy together. Yes, I swear. They love one another! Being together is good! In the film, on the other hand, I don’t think I saw him smile once. Well, maybe a little bit. But really, sooooo depressed. Bella’s relationship with Jacob, on the other hand, makes her LAUGH! And they kiss in the books. At least once, I’m sure. So taking that out of the film was a disappointment, if only to me.

4. Edward, Edward, Edward. Could he look more pale and pasty?! I know he’s a vampire, but in the first film he was pale and beautiful. In this one, he looks as if he’s procured some strange form of jaundice, and is slowly dying from behind his eyes out. Nothing attractive whatsoever. And his pale chest? Ugh. Don’t make me vomit.

Kristen Stewart, despite the mopiness of her character, was a formidable lead – no mean feat, considering she had to survive the whole film on a diet of heartache and Taylor Lautner’s bare chest – and Dakota Fanning is making me very excited for Eclipse and even more so for Breaking Dawn in which, if I remember correctly, she has a much larger role. Rachelle LeFevre is also brilliant as Victoria, although her role in this movie is really played down, which is such a pity. In the next movie she will be replaced by Bryce Dallas Howard. Hopefully that won’t be as epic a mistake as I suspect it will.

Verdict? Disappointing. But again, I have high hopes for Eclipse. Just don’t do what I did and ruin it by reading the books. See? I’m not that literarily snobbish, after all.

Related posts:

1. To the tune of Katy Perry: I saw New Moon, and I [didn't] like it
2. There’s a moon out tonight
3. Kristen Stewart and R-Patz ARE a couple!