Saturday 3 April 2010

The Twilight Saga: New Moon



The best thing that can be said about The Twilight Saga: New Moon is that the incessantly mumbled, incomprehensible, muttering that passes for dialogue makes for an excellent approximation of the numb affect noted in teenage interaction. Characters haunt each other, stumbling about gracelessly and vocalising their emotions - spelling their ideas out in clipped, reverential, bulletins. Awkward, thought-collecting beats are mercilessly held as childish mindscapes pore over their next would-be-profound statement. Befuddled suitors wander around shirtless in the rain and, above all, nobody really communicates. The Twilight series is notionally about human dealings with Vampires, although the monsters here are neutered, abstinent, and exempt from any usual supernatural rulings. Instead, they have superhuman athleticism, require no sexualised sustenance, and sparkle in the sunlight. 

Robert Pattinson and pals are Vampires in name only. They aren't low nightmarish vermin seeking to establish a one-up on humanity, they're special best friends that fawn over the dull and dreary. The undead family that Kristen Stewart's Bella Swan chums around with are a cabal of mood maintenance parasites able to scan thoughts and indicate futures. Their abilities are so finely attuned they require practically no input from Bella. They revere her for hysterically unsubstantiated virtues, endlessly endangering their cobbled together collective for a girl that reads onscreen as a long, vapid, scowl. There's a vague insinuation that these ancient things are feasting on her raw emotional energy, that Bella's teenage moodiness is a delectable treat for a destitute life-sucker. The idea is never even remotely pursued; these Draculas are much too wholesome. Buckle up for a two hour treatise on frenzied repression!

4 comments:

Aliwazere said...

What I find remarkable about the whole saga is that in all the people I've met who have seen the film say: 'They were taken to see the movie by someone else.' Not one person has ever claimed to have seen the movie on their own volition.

Who are these people taking them?

p.S. I miss sinister, goth vampires who'd sooner tear you a goary new throat hole than trade dialogue with a melancholy teenager.

anna said...

I cannot stress the following point enough so I'm going to use a heady cocktail of capitalisation and punctuation:

THIS. FILM. IS. BOSS.

Master Disaster you loved it. I could tell by all the swearing and hate-filled looks. DON'T MAKE ME READ THIS ALOUD TO YOU. AGAIN.

Chris Ready said...

That was the big stumbling block for me Aliwazere, what does a one hundred plus year old see in a child? I've since had it explained to me very carefully that these Vampires are frozen maturity wise at their turn point.

I suppose some of the disconnect I felt can be attributed to the film taking a highlights reel approach to adapting - the thinks being if you're not knee-deep in lore why would you want to see the film? The rest, my own fault for expecting sinister emotional depth in a book written explicitly for people much younger and much more female than me. I've been spoiled by Harry Potter!

Chris Ready said...

Ha! Me fears another read-out! The 20XX party line is now that this film is COMPLETELY EXCELLENT.