Archive Review: Twilight (2008) - 2/5 Stars

I come from the group that has never read the Stephenie Meyer books and knew little about them other than the general idea of love and vampires and such. I had put off watching "Twilight" based on reviews, what I heard and my gender, but finally -- nearly a year later -- gave in to my curiosity over what the craze is all about.

Now, I understand it. I don't like it, but I understand it. "Twilight" and the book it's based on is romance -- melodramatic dialogue-filled romance about dangerous/forbidden love, something that's been a major literary force for centuries. Combine that with human infatuation with vampires and there's perfect reason for "Twilight" to be a success.

That said, the storytelling of "Twilight" is not all that good, speaking about the film at least (still haven't read the book). Bella (Kristen Stewart), moves from Arizona to the Pacific Northwest to live with her dad. At her new school, she develops a quick crush on the mysterious Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), a pasty-faced TD&H beaux from a family that is equally strange and equally as covered in distracting pale make-up. Bella, however, is a little odd herself. For reasons we never totally understand, she's drawn to him and willing to trust him a bit quickly as she discovers he's not exactly human. Edward, however, is much the same. The on-screen chemistry of Stewart and Pattinson gets an A, but the chemistry of their characters in the story gets an F for fake.

Once things get rolling and we get over the fact that we don't fully understand why they're suddenly in love with each other, "Twilight" becomes more interesting. Until then, however, it's all sorts of awful. Never mind the low-budget visual effects and shoddy stunt work that look like something I've seen on the WB -- that's a whole other issue.

The problem is there's no source of antagonism in the story for the first hour and change. Edward keeps telling Bella she should stay away from him and be scared of him and Bella wants to know why. Then she figures it out and he tries to scare her off some more. The conflict is inner tension entirely. People's thoughts only make for good conflict in books -- it doesn't translate onto the screen the same way. Melissa Rosenberg, who wrote a few episodes of hit teen show "The O.C." and the dance flick "Step Up," doesn't seem to have generated any creative ideas to make this story work more visually. I can't speak for her adaption of the source material, but I can rightfully say the movie is not inspiring or captivating until an external force (a few bad vampires) enter the picture.

So "Twilight" has to sell hard on romance, which is what it's all about anyway. This is the specialty of director Catherine Hardwicke, who directed the intriguing teen drama "Thirteen." The intimate scenes between Edward and Bella, which are supposed to have a tentative, awkward feeling to them given the nature of their relationship, is really felt in her work. She's definitely keen on the whole connection between vampires and sensuality. Stewart and Pattinson are both great selections for the film. Both weren't just lucky casting choices -- they have definite careers ahead of them.

What the movie needed to actually be entertaining to a bigger audience is a director with a better sense of action and suspense. Edward climbs a fair amount of trees with Bella on his back and it's more reminiscent of Brendan Frasier in "George of the Jungle" than anything released in today's visual effects era.

"Twilight" ultimately takes too much time establishing itself and the rules of its world, not showing them to us quickly in creative visual ways that give us a sense of the fantasy we think we ought to be enjoying. It's like the "Mad Max" films with Mel Gibson: the first film ends just as it gets interesting and the second film is the one most fondly remembered. You only get a sense by the end of the film what the "Twilight" world is all about. I imagine "New Moon," the second installment, will be somewhat better by this same concept (and also with a fantasy-grounded director in Chris Weitz). Problem is, "Twilight" didn't convince me any future films will be better enough.

2/5 Stars

"Twilight" (2008)

Directed by: Catherine Hardwicke

Written by: Melissa Rosenberg, Stephenie Meyer (book)

Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson

Archive Review: Moulin Rouge! (2001) - 4/5 Stars

If there was an ultimate and absolute antonym for "Moulin Rouge!" it would be the adjective "shy." Hundreds of gorgeous costumes, lavish studio sets, a digitally reproduced city of Paris and an abrupt and cartoonish comedic style make this movie musical a one-of-a-kind spectacle.

From the very first musical mash-up number in the Moulin Rouge club that consists of around five songs, two of which are Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and "Diamonds Are A Girl's Best Friend," you get a sense that "Moulin Rouge!" wants desperately to be different and ultimately unforgettable. The initial gut reaction to the film's camp and genre- butchering is to dismiss it as forced and unnatural, but once the recycled albeit powerful love story takes over, the derring-do of Baz Luhrmann's visually striking show becomes much more easily appreciate.

Despite a mix of songs that defies the historical context, "Moulin Rouge!" takes place in turn-of-the-century Paris in the "underground," inspired by the paintings of Toulouse- Lautrec of the burlesque dancers, courtesans and Absinthe-drinkers. Christian (McGregor) is a hopeless romantic poet whose talent earns him a shot to convince the most famous dancer/performer/courtesan, Satine (Kidman), and her manager/pimp, Harold Zidler (Broadbent) at the city's most famous club, the Moulin Rouge, to let him create the show that will turn Satine into a star. At the same time, a wealthy Duke (Roxburgh) is funding the show and one of his conditions is for Satine to be his.

"Moulin Rouge!" is also not shy about love or letting you know its themes are love and everything to do with love and that it's all that matters in life. If not for Kidman's wonderful performance as a morally conflicted woman dealing with masculine pressures and discovering love is indeed possible, one could make the case that the focal relationship between her and Christian around which the rest of the film blooms might never even begun to ripen.

Christian, after all, is a one-dimensional character seeing as he's motivated only by Satine and true love -- he has no other desires. So as Satine falls for him and his incredible ability to steal the material of famous songwriters decades after his lifetime and perform it with a soaring tenor, something must ground the film, and her very real issues, which are inspired by a combination of famous story lines including "La Boheme" and "La Traviata," do the trick.

Then there's Luhrmann's (1996's "Romeo + Juliet") influences on the film. As it progresses, we begin to love his work here more and more. As the plot thickens and turns for the dramatic (and convincingly so despite so much early antics), his lightning-fast editing choices and lighting become even more effective and the musical numbers being fashioned out of a wide array of songs (like Sting's "Roxanne" mixed with original tango music) become all the more impressive.

Sweeping zoom-ins of a city done all by computer and music numbers that are shot and choreographed in an all too showtune-y manner go from questionable choices to beautiful ones as Luhrmann's twist on a classic love story archetypes matures before our eyes and the true spirit of his film becomes clearer. There are still some goofy elements that don't fit, but the spontaneity of song and its often times non-traditional use is one of the biggest things to make sense and fit Luhrmann's vision with time.

Despite only one original song in "Come What May," (which should have been allowed to contend for an Oscar) it's more the placement of the songs, the way they follow traditional musical theater rules for song placement -- either setting the mood and foreshadowing the story or expounding on the characters' inner feelings at appropriate times -- makes them so effective.

Similar can be said of "Moulin Rouge!" on the whole: though there's an inherent abruptness, randomness and even a faux quality to much of the film, it keeps the traditional love story at its core and everything else is merely growing bountifully from it. There's a reason the same kinds of love stories get recycled in the theater and movies and simply get dressed up a different way and it's because those stories work; they appeal to something human. So as flamboyant and absurd as this movie gets, it never goes wrong because it sticks to its universal storytelling ideas.

4/5 Stars

"Moulin Rouge!" (2001)

Directed by: Baz Luhrmann

Written by: Baz Luhrmann, Craig Pearce

Starring: Nicole Kidman, Ewan McGregor

Archive Review: Romancing the Stone (1984) - 3/5 Stars

Kathleen Turner stars as a romance adventure novelist who ends up on a romantic adventure of her own in "Romancing the Stone." Naturally, fans of romance adventures will most enjoy this one, but to its credit there's a good balance of action to make this film enjoyable for just about everyone.

"Romancing the Stone" is a writer's fantasy about a writers' fantasy that comes true. Screenwriter Diane Thomas must've been something of a hopeless romantic herself to create Joan Wilder and have her live out a story similar to her books. Wilder is a single woman in her 30s living with her cat who finds out her sister has been kidnapped and that the ransom has been sent to her randomly in the form of a treasure map. Joan flies to Columbia where another man interested in the map sends her off into the jungle instead of straight to her destination where Indiana Jones more or less in the form of Michael Douglas as Jack Colton finds her and helps her begrudgingly.

The film certainly capitalizes on the popularity of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" only targeting itself at women. Joan is a naive and hopeless beauty-in-waiting and Douglas the rebellious adventurer who helps her for initially selfish reasons that turn into romantic ones. Their chemistry is a bit forced, but each fits perfectly into his/her role that we easily approve.

From an action sense, director Robert Zemeckis, in his first major film, keeps the film light but suspenseful enough to keep our interest. Considering the writing calls for cat and mouse the entire time as Joan and Jack run from the corrupt the Colombian police officer Zolo and his men as well as Danny DeVito, a lot hinges on Zemeckis' creativity to keep the constantly recycling scenes of fleeing from gunfire feel more pressing each time until the climax. He also brings a healthy sense of humor that makes the movie easier to enjoy, knowing that even its maker wants this to be nothing but light-hearted entertainment.

"Romancing" is predictable adventure with even more predictable romance, but Zemeckis finds a way to make it inherently more likable than even Turner or Douglas as talents do. In a film where there would be plenty to role our eyes at, Zemeckis graciously spares us the trouble.

3/5 Stars

"Romancing the Stone" (1984)

Directed by: Robert Zemeckis

Written by: Diane Thomas

Starring: Kathleen Turner, Michael Douglas