The Twilight Saga: New Moon — a Response and Review.
Author: Admin
Well, since our last “Meaning” post here at Twilight News Site, we have moved to a new home, got injured doing so, recovered somewhat, (mostly) moved into a delightful new home, and even had enough energy to enjoy a lovely Christmas. By the way, if you missed Stephenie Meyer’s Christmas essay for Ensign magazine, “Hero at the Grocery Store,” you may read it here. We haven’t posted a review of the New Moon film, but as a Christmas present to ourselves, we are setting aside some time this evening to write — which makes this Christmas even more lovely.
In general, the Chris Weitz film, “The Twilight Saga: New Moon,” has received what journalists kindly refer to as “mixed reviews.” Of course, we here at Twilight News Site have read a good many of them — which you’re not supposed to do before writing your review. Otherwise, if you liked it and others didn’t, your review becomes something more of a response to the movie and its criticism — in other words, a defense. Since, as it turns out, that’s exactly what I’d like to write, here goes.
How to Write a Film Review
Oftentimes, film reviewers run out of things to say about the bazillionth movie they’ve watched in their career. Apparently, the phrase, “I was bored, like I usually am watching yet another movie. The end, thank God.” isn’t enough to keep a job as a film reviewer. Yet it seems as though an extended version of that sentiment is, in fact, good enough to maintain a film critic position.
So to extend that thought, when a reviewer is bored, and has little to say about a film, he generally falls into simple plot description. First, they will write a brief sentence or two, telling what (little) they think of the film. Then they fill in their required word count with more and more of the plot until they run out of space. While doing this, they often turn to snark — the poor man’s version of wit — which also helps to fill things out, while temporarily salving one’s poor self-esteem.
Further, if you’re an angry critic, who is frequently annoyed by how much marketing there is, or the fact that a film isn’t specifically targeting elderly gentlemen, or perhaps bothered by indigestion or some other physical ailment, you go ahead and tell the entire plot and throw in the denouement for good measure. If you’re still short on word count, and especially put-out, you might want to add a statement to the effect of “how dare they make a film like this,” which makes you seem correct without having to justify any of your assessments.
Finally, you add a brief paragraph about how — despite all you’ve said above — the actual cinematic qualities of the film were professionally done, and this or that actor did a wonderful job with what they were given. Note: discussing the cinematic qualities is what they teach budding young critics reviews are supposed to contain, and they often try, but it can be difficult when you’ve never actually made a film before. Or television show. Or any other creative endeavor, outside of criticism. If you can call that “creative.”
Trust me on this: the vast majority of reviews of “New Moon” follow the above pattern.
A smaller percentage of reviewers, generally written by female baby boomers, challenge the film as detrimental to the women’s movement. Background for our readers: the women’s movement was a 1960-80s effort by many women to be “liberated.” I don’t know either, but I’m quite sure we’re all enjoying the benefits of their sacrifices today. So, thank you. Sincerely.
However, I’d just like to add a side note to a number of those reviewers that I’m very, very sorry that early promiscuity was not the path to happiness that you were hoping it would be, and that I can understand that the theme of “New Moon,” and the Twilight saga in general, might bring up a great deal of unpleasantness for you. So sorry. Really.
Lastly, I must add that broad attacks against the LDS church in the guise of a movie review would likely be regarded by most people nowadays as “politically incorrect,” a term you should be familiar with. I mean, that joke worked in that X-Men movie — more or less equating mutants with GLTs — so why not here?
Most of the remaining reviews of “New Moon” can be summed as saying, essentially: “Huh?” I applaud these reviewers for their authorial honesty in presenting their actual thoughts while viewing the film. Psychologists have identified three types of marriages: (1) Bad ones, where nothing between the two is ever really figured out (other than mutual agreement to harm one another); (2) Good ones, where they divide up their lives between themselves quite effectively; and surprisingly, a third category, (3) Great ones, where they save one another, and where the two become one. I can understand why some people simply wouldn’t get the Twilight series, which is all about #3. If you have not, will not, and never will truly love someone until you two become one, then no, I don’t think Twilight will make much sense to you.
Lastly, some reviewers said, simply, that they liked it. And then they explained why, referring to the cinematic qualities of the film itself, which as I recall from my college courses on film, was generally what film reviews were supposed to be. This — for those of you keeping score — is one of those reviews.
But then again, I’m not actually a professional film reviewer, so what do I know? Well, I do know a good deal about video production and I do recognized a few obvious truths about making a movie like “New Moon.”
New Moon: A Review
It is hard work to adapt a novel (i.e., hundreds of pages of dialogue, action and character development) into a screenplay (i.e., 90 – 120 pages, i.e., one page of script per minute of screen time). The screenwriter has to pare everything down while adding something(s) exciting enough to make the film a value-add for those who already read the book, without going too far outside of the world-within-the-book — it’s milieu. It is even more difficult to then take that script, hire and manage a few hundred people, short-term, and thereby create a compelling vision of that book and script.
The task is made even more difficult with a book/movie series, where you need to reach people who didn’t see the first film, while not boring those who did. The many fans of the book present a true challenge — to fulfill their sincere passion for each characters’ journey — while needing to produce a film at a marketable length, on-time, and under-budget. Further, you need to add your own vision and cinematic flair to the on-going story, while recognizing that the story can/must be able to be picked up by another director.
And, no doubt, that is made even more difficult when there are millions of rabid fans hounding your every move, you have an extremely limited amount of time to change thousands of man-hours into 2 hours or less of entertainment, and when the previous director has broken all manner of records in their own attempt.
Yet, despite those difficulties, Chris Weitz’s film is a resounding success. Let me be clear here: Not since “Gone with the Wind” has a popular novel been so carefully, lovingly, and brilliantly been brought to the screen.
Like the Twilight series, “Gone with the Wind” was an incredibly popular book in its day, with the film version facing fan such unbridled excitement and expectation rarely seen before or since. Like GWTW, “New Moon” presents a rich and fully-realized world for the beloved characters to inhabit and explore, with a remarkably rich visual palette, sound, and tempo as it briskly gallops from one beloved plot-point to the next.
“New Moon” treats its challenging subject matter with enormous care and affection. Where “Gone with the Wind” occasionally falls into weepy melodrama, in “New Moon,” the director strengthens and reinforces the bittersweet emotions of the characters, each one lost amid feelings so powerful they barely understand them. Viewers themselves are taken along for their own emotional journeys; undoubtedly, many couples will spend hours afterwards remembering their own courtship’s mistakes, success, and the deep (but sometimes forgotten) feelings that have led them to the life they now lead.
The love that the author, screenwriter, actors, and director have for each character — even each line of dialogue — is perfectly clear on the screen as the story unfolds from one breathtaking setting after another, again. Rarely are films so carefully produced. Yet that care never prevents the spontaneous performances of its talented cast members from revealing the raw emotions that drive their characters’ action.
For example, after viewing the film many times — and “New Moon” rewards repeat viewings as few films have — there is a moment which never fails to make my skin crawl and, simultaneously, my tears start. It is a powerful emotional combination I’ve experienced in life many times (e.g., whenever one of my children, or my wife, is hurt), but to be honest, never in the cinema.
Without divulging plot, it is when Kristen Stewart screams — in a captivating performance — “please,” repeatedly, in a climactic scene.
That moment is simply one of the finest in the history of film, an instant classic, a moment to be treasured forever — as performance, vision, sound, and story combine in synergy, with an emotional impact far beyond the sum of their parts or what one would expect from film. It is a masterful and supernal moment, a cinematic moment which transcends the medium, and one which I will always be grateful for.
“New Moon” is an amazing film of breathtaking emotional scope and visual impact, an artistic — and commercial — triumph, and a wonderful gift to Twilight fans, and to the cinema itself.
To Chris Weitz and company: Thank you. You did it.
