Starring Kristen
Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Peter
Facinelli. Directed by Catherine Hardwicke. (2008, 121 min).
Twilight
is a great film.
Really.
Really.
I declare this of my own free will, nearly free of embarrassment. I'll explain myself to those of you who still poke fun at Twilight as though you're the first to notice it's the funniest film since Point Break.
I need to stress that when I say 'great,' I don't
mean Citizen
Kane-great
or Godfather-great.
I'm not Armond White, that nasty excuse for a film critic who revels
in ruffling feathers by verbally crapping on movies everyone loves
while praising Death
Race, Transformers 2 and
(ironically) Twilight.
White
is a troll with the sole agenda of pissing people off to call
attention to himself. Hence, his reviews are marvelously entertaining
because he's the greatest kind of whackjob...a complete moron who
thinks he's the smartest guy in the room (I love folks like this).
No,
I ain't him, though a few cinema purists might initially think so when
I say, not only is Twilight a great film, I can convince almost anyone reading to think so too.
First,
a bit of history for those of you who just arrived on Planet
Duh...Twilight
is based on a young adult novel by Stephanie Meyer, a writer of such
dubious talent that (as a writer myself) I find myself torn between thinking “Thank God
I don't write like that” and “Why the hell can't
I write like that?”
Twilight
sold in the gajillions, so of course Hollywood came a' callin'. The
subsequent movie raked in tons of cash from legions of young female
mall-rats willing to part with their allowance just to bask in
the dangerous affection between Edward and Bella. The
movie itself isn't ambitious at all, a cynically-produced
checklist of key scenes and plot points for its intended
audience...an exclusive club where parents, respected film critics
and similarly-aged boys are not welcome.
But a film like this doesn't
need to be ambitious...it ain't aiming for the Scorsese crowd. I've
read the book and think it's godawful, but I'm a middle-aged man,
decidedly not
Meyers' intended audience, so my opinion is meaningless. Director
Catherine Hardwicke and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg were recruited
for the film, and are actually extremely talented. Hardwicke's
directorial debut was Thirteen,
one of the more heart-wrenching and disturbing depictions of
teenagers in recent memory, while Rosenberg was the head writer of
Dexter,
one of the greatest cable series of all time. One
might understandably think, with that kind of obvious talent behind
the camera, Twilight
should have been a much better film. Again, like my 'old-man'
assessment of the novel, it depends on your perspective. Can you
imagine someone like Kubrick or Spielberg directing this?
Of course not, because they would insist of putting their own
creative stamp on things...which would have alienated legions of
'Twi-Hards' in the process.
"Lemme get that zit on your back." |
Twilight
fans simply want to watch their novel translated verbatim. Striking while the iron is hot, Twilight
was pretty-much rushed into production to capitalize on a huge literary property. With hindsight, Hardwicke &
Rosenberg made the best adaptation possible under the circumstances.
While they likely knew the film would not be a gold star on either
of their resumes, they knew their audience and keenly-delivered
exactly
what they wanted. As
a fan who worships at the alter of Stephen King, I gotta say the
number of shitty movie adaptations of his books far-outweighs the good ones. I know I'm in the minority on this, but I think Kubrick's The
Shining was a jaw-dropping bastardization of the novel. I read the book when I
was 15 and wanted the movie to be the direct onscreen version of the story
which made me keep my bedroom light on at night. What I got instead was a
long, boring descent into madness, punctuated by endless scenes of a
Steadicam travelling through corridors.
I
didn't get what I wanted, nor did lovers of novels like The
Bonfire of the Vanities, The Da Vinci Code
or Midnight
in the Garden of Good and Evil (bestsellers adapted by renowned directors).
But Twi-Hards were sure-as-hell satisfied, because its filmmakers knew damn good and well nobody under 20 cares about a director's personal interpretation.
I'm
not saying all movies should follow their source novels
scene-for-scene. What I am
saying is, even if you're a horror purist who can't stand the idea of
emo teens, sparkly vampires and shirtless werewolves, you gotta admit
Twilight
does a tremendous job meeting fan expectations (who don't
give a shit if vampires & werewolves have historically been
considered monsters). They aren't looking for directorial brilliance,
Oscar-caliber performances or groundbreaking cinematography. They
want what they pictured in their heads when reading the book,
rendered by gorgeous folks who don't exist in the real world.
Regardless
of your opinion of the movie, you have to admit Twilight totally delivers to its audience, something
you can't say with a straight face about the prequels in the Star
Wars
saga. Whether or not anyone outside that circle gets its appeal is
irrelevant. When I say Twilight
is a great film, I mean great in the sense of what it does for its fans.
To all you purists pissing and moaning over how Twilight
shits all over traditional genre conventions...where the hell were you guys when someone decided zombies
were capable of running the 100 meter dash in four seconds? Besides,
Twilight
isn't so much a vampire movie as it is a revisionist telling of Romeo
& Juliet,
only our lovers don't end up dead at the end (okay...maybe
undead).
Besides, I don't recall Stephanie Meyer ever claiming she was rewriting Dracula anyway.
And
to all the Facebook trolls jumping on the
Twilight-sucks
bandwagon to come up with 'clever' ways declaring your contempt for
the entire
franchise...isn't
picking on a current teen phenomenon kinda like shooting fish in a
barrel? Is this the extent of your creativity? Hell, anyone
can come up with clever put-downs of pop culture phenomena. Like it or not,
Twilight will be remembered decades from now, long
after all the other young-adult adaptations wannabes have fallen by
the wayside (except perhaps, for The Hunger Games, which is just-as-much a checklist as Twilight).
For Twilight haters, here's how you can embrace the film you profess to hate...turn the sound down and add your own dialogue, at which time the film takes on multiple meanings, and you can appreciate its brilliance and absurdity at the same time. Ingesting a few beers beforehand will help.
The
beauty of Twilight
is
the simplicity of its story, the amusing facial expressions of its actors and the
assembly-line method in which it is filmed. Watching without sound gives viewers the unique
opportunity to make it the film they thought it should have been, most-likely a comedy, depending
on their familiarity of young-adult film conventions, vampire lore, sexual innuendo, Mystery
Science Theater 3000
or hatred of everything the Twilight-phenomenon
represents. But no matter who you are, your love for Twilight will undoubtedly expand if you are willing to participate, bringing your own prejudices, pop-knowledge and preconceived ideas to the table. This is how Twilight achieves its greatness.
And the whole time I wrote this, I threw up in my mouth only a little..
No comments:
Post a Comment