Drumroll Please: the Twilight Movie Review

Thousands of books are published every year and every so often one of them becomes a best-seller. Every now and then one of those books is put to celluloid. It is a lucky - nay, skilled - author, indeed, who crafts a manuscript so compelling that it becomes a pop-culture phenomenon. It's even rarer still to carry the true aesthetic of a book to film while honoring both the Hollywood marketing machine without betraying the soul of the novel. As both a huge literary and film junkie, I am often disappointed.

Not since Harry Potter has a story series captivated people; we're lucky in that we've had two such destined-to-be-classics in our Gen-X lifetimes, now with Stephanie Meyer's "Twilight." As Harry Potter's journey slows to a stop; the cinematic telling of Edward and Bella begins.

I sat in a theater with a predominately female audience who chirped and giggled and restrained girl-shrieking when Robert Pattinson first appeared on screen. It's almost difficult to review the film because most fans of the series have seen all the trailers, television spots, interviews, photo galleries (stills, set shots, scans) online. They know the story by heart. The surprise comes in the changes in scenes, dialogue (which don't alter the story arc), and the visual reenactment of literature's favorite couple.

The film opens with Bella taking a cactus with her as she leaves Phoenix. She arrives in Forks and is fawned over, excessively, sometimes annoyingly so. She locks eyes with Edward across the cafeteria; he grimaces his eyebrows; later when meeting her in biology his reaction is a physically violent shudder. He holds his mouth and nose as one does when they're about to vomit. When Bella meets him again in the school's office, he's angry that he can't change his class and brushes past her marking one of the film's first departures from the book's dialogue: "I guess I'll just have to endure it." (Other differences, which speed up the plot and keep with the film's timespan, include Bella overhearing Rosalie arguing with Carlisle and Edward and how Edward tells her that he's a vampire.) When Edward returns, he is friendly, awkward, even. After their lab he begins firing off questions and it's apparent by his expressions (the ladies in the audience vocally swooned) that he's fascinated by her. They volley the silent treatment back and forth before Edward stops Bella from being crushed by a van; blahblahblah Edward in the sun, the two of them gazing longingly at each other in the meadow, Charlie comically cleaning his gun before Edward takes Bella to meet his folks. Then the drama kicks in even more.

One of the deal-breakers for this film was Robert Pattinson's performance. Meyer stated earlier that she was initially afraid that Pattinson would brood too much; she was afraid that he would be "emo Edward." Edward is a melodramatic character anyway; to take it to Level Emo would kill the film. I was worried as to whether or not Pattinson could pull it off and was beyond satisfied when he did. I've seen Pattinson in interviews; the man I watched on screen wasn't Robert Pattinson; it was Edward Cullen. Pattinson's Cullen was a perfect combination of angst, humor, and while the character is a 108-year-old vampire, Pattinson retained that teenage awkwardness which defines, along with his physiology, the age at which he was turned. He was brooding without being too brooding. After watching his performance I truly understood the depths to which he painfully loves Bella. He was also funny and showed that he comes by comedic timing honestly. I think Meyer crafted a wonderful plot and characters, but this was something which exceeded my expectations. Kudos to Pattinson for an impeccable American accent, achieved without the aid of a dialect coach.

The second deal-breaker was whether or not Kristen Stewart could play a discerning, yet vulnerable teen without coming off as precocious and whiny, as some critics of the series flippantly skewer. Stewart's Bella was either wimp nor precocious teen; she was just as Meyer wrote her and was desperately in love without coming off as desperate. She was alluring, beautiful but not a textbook hottie, and I appreciate Summit casting for complexity rather than for a Maxim cover. The onscreen chemistry between the two was ridiculously convincing, which is a restrained way of saying thechemistryomgsquee.

Nikki Reed's Rosalie Hale was a spot on battle of resentment for Bella and loyalty to her family; to see it on film shows how truly combative she is towards Bella. (Total witch.) Meyer felt that Ashley Greene was the perfect Alice and, upon seeing her photo when cast, exclaimed "You found Alice!" Greene is quirky, upbeat, and does a perfect ballet extension replete with pointed toes as she winds up to pitch in the family's baseball game. Elizabeth Reaser as Esme - I wish she were my aunt. Or something. I love her. Jasper, Emmet, Carlisle, Charlie were perfectly cast. Anna Kendrick as talkity gossip hound Jessica is HYSTERICAL. And Jacob; such a secondary role in this first film but he and Edward manage to exchange hostilities before the proverbial curtain falls. 

The scenes don't follow exactly as they do in the book, some are altered, some are new, and there is a B-story not in the book which serves the climax well. This is a must; in a 500+ page novel you can afford to introduce the antagonist later in the series, not so in film. It would have been a trainwreck to follow the same blueprint for the film. Also, you can't have Bella narrate the entire 121 minutes so director Catherine Hardwicke was successful in creatively using setting, props, and dialogue to complete the story. Some of the book's scenes, which don't change the direction, outcome, or feel of the film, were omitted, and the editing choices were well done. There is more humor in the film than in the book, a necessity, otherwise the film would be too dramatic and seem to take itself too seriously, which would be campy and, well, suck.

The special effects were modest and tasteful, which was my third deal-breaker: if effects were over-the-top (think Ang Lee's "Hulk") then the movie would be campy. Edward's skin in the light was cinematically subtle; most of the vampire effects were organic which made it seem real and encouraged my suspension of belief.

Also there's kissing! And killing! And the waitress at the restaurant where they first dine looks haggy! The soundtrack is even greater in theatrical Dolby Digital Surround and Robert Pattinson's original music is perfectly paired with an integral and romantic scene. As far as the big twist at the end? All I will say is that it's an allusion to "Eclipse." That's it! So don't ask!

Granted, there are some things that won't be perfect; some of the dialogue seems slightly contrived and you can tell, without having read the book which lines were lifted from Meyer's pages and which were written by screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg (no easy feat, her task. She should be applauded). I also wish that the vampire's growls and hisses were as audible and threatening as described in the book. However. These are but minor complaints. What your imagination creates for visuals and audio based upon the author's description will never match up to what's on screen. I think Rosenberg and Hardwicke's effort is quite an accomplishment, especially when you consider the expectations.

There will be the critics out there who pan it, the critics who suck the joy out of storytelling by insisting that every film follow their completely arbitrary rules. These critics will enter the theater with prejudices simply because it's a "YA" story - which is misleading as the series has crossed demographic boundaries. These critics will say that it's simply a Romeo and Juliet vampire remake; they'll say that some of the lines are cheesy and that the characters are too dramatic - which tells me that these critics JUST DON'T GET IT. It's a book about teenagers. Um, durr? Teenagers are dramatic, teenagers are prone to desperate acts of love and it's a sad thing for a critic to be so far removed from their youth as to forget what a wonderful rollercoaster it was. They can stick to reviewing movies like "Things Old People Watch" while answering their Publisher's Clearinghouse Ed MacMahon mail. I'm harsh, but only because it annoys me so. Who wasn't dramatic as a teen? Oh, you weren't? LIAR!! (I'm still prone to dramatics.)

I give "Twilight" 3.5 out of 4 stars. Go forth and watch. Be transported to your youth. And if you have such a love in your life, rejoice.

"Twilight" fansite, galleries, official.