Get More: Music Videos, Free Music Videos
It worked indeed. I thought it was sensual and romantic. And too short.
Get More: Music Videos, Free Music Videos
Hating Twilight is so 2009, and with the newest installment, Breaking Dawn, ruling the box office, the juggernaut hardly needs defenders. But the virulent seriousness of the haters is surprising. Many of the reviews have heaped disproportionate and moralizing scorn on an Oscar-winning director’s fantasy enactment of a young girl’s dreams and fears. Kristen Stewart and her co-stars have been excoriated for their “sullen” and “wooden” performances despite receiving respectable and sometimes highly favorable reviews in other movies in which they have starred.
The negative reactions fall in two camps: The dismissive camp simply mocks Twilight’s incorporation of silly, “moony” elements like undying love and the surprisingly authentic portrayal of wedding ritual, honeymoon jitters and the shock of unintended pregnancy; the topics are apparently too boring and unrelatable for most reviewers. The deluded camp, conversely, takes Twilight far too seriously, faulting it for leading young girls to mistake fantasy for reality in dangerous, disempowering ways.
It makes you wonder if some people missed the memo that hundreds of millions of females, like their male counterparts, enjoy their fantasy life straight-up weird, sexy, and implausible.
Why is it that female fantasies are such a source of derision and fear? The male species is allowed all manner of violent, creepy, ludicrous and degrading movie tropes, and while we may not embrace them as high art, no one questions them seriously as entertainment, even when sometimes we probably should. (Violent imagery is, after all, associated with violent behavior.) You want to saw someone in half or put their head in a vise? Showcase naked strippers as a fake plot device? Pair a beautiful and successful career woman with a slovenly, unemployed man? Pretend you are Wolverine? Go right ahead. We know you can’t really be serious. But watch a tender wedding night between a virginal, undead superhero and his teenage, human bride, and the scolds come out in force. Are parents worried that their teenage daughter actually wants to be impregnated by a 100-year-old vampire who can crush a headboard with his hands (and perform an emergency C-section with his teeth)?
Maybe part of the reason critics deplore these movies is not only because they are so unfamiliar with kooky heterosexual female fantasies but also because they don’t really like what these fantasies say about men.
The discomfiting reality of the Twilight phenomenon is the way it strips off the veneer of détente between the sexes. For all the progress we promised our daughters, women’s bodily experiences mark them in ways not only unimaginable, but also uninteresting and even repulsive, to men. When was the last time (or only time) you saw a movie that featured menstruation? (The Runaways, directed by … a woman.)
Most mothers know the sense of their body being taken over by aliens, and more than 500,000 women still die in childbirth every year worldwide. Is it really so surprising that we would be drawn to Bella’s gruesome tribulations? For all its tremendous ick factor and craziness, the vampire-hybrid delivery captured with excruciating realism the desperation (on poor Edward’s bloodied face) that attends a birth when things go badly wrong. You could hear a pin drop at the screening my daughter and I attended. The gothic horror felt more palpable because it merely exaggerated, rather than imagined sui generis, what many women go through every day. We sure know blood.
The other thing women know all too well is the lurking danger of men. The idea of a wildly earnest romantic lead who isn’t demanding oral sex in the high school parking lot (and who happens to look like Robert Pattinson) is all very appealing, no? Yet our perfect vampire man, alas, also has the capacity to inflict serious harm — much like in the non-cinematic world, as even 5-year-old girls can intuit.
The 25-year-old English actor, who plays Edward Cullen in the series, had nothing but kind words for Condon, the fourth director to sign on for a "Twilight" film and the man who will conclude the saga next year when "Breaking Dawn -- Part 2" is released. He said he appreciated what the filmmaker was up against: a tonally challenging narrative, a special-effects-intensive production and pressure to meet outsize fan expectations for the first half of the finale of the franchise adapted from author Stephenie Meyer's bestselling vampire romance novels.
"It was a massive undertaking, much bigger budgets and huge expectations, since it was the last one in the series," Pattinson said of the production. "There was much more pressure than the last one."
Pattinson said he felt that Condon had a point of view with the film -- Condon told The Times that he wanted to marry melodrama and horror in telling the story of Edward's marriage to Bella (Kristen Stewart) and the fallout from the unplanned pregnancy that happens soon after. The actor also enjoyed Condon's humor, which showed up both on-screen and off.
"It's very easy to become cynical about stuff, especially where you are doing five movies in the series," Pattinson said. "It's a very sentimental story in a lot of ways, and I'm an incredibly cynical person. Bill would always have a great explanation for why it's not ridiculous and it's not corny. It was great to have someone on set who could convince me of those things."
Pattinson said that from the beginning, the shoot was a challenge. The six-month filming schedule for both parts of "Breaking Dawn" kicked off in Brazil, where Pattinson said "everything went wrong."
"Just the fact that he didn't get overwhelmed within two seconds was a big deal," Pattinson said of Condon. "We were in Rio [de Janeiro] for one day. Two cameras broke down, a crane broke down and everything was crazy. There was no crowd control, and he stayed perfectly calm. Bill was really thrown in the deep end, and we came up with really nice stuff. It was really pretty and nice."
Do you think this will be the project that really sets Robert (Pattinson) apart from his past, so to speak?
David Cronenberg: I have no control over that, obviously. All I know is, as with Keira, I thought that Robert was very underrated. I mean, Keira has done more work than Robert has, but in England, they're always on her for whatever weird English class reasons. I'm not sure what that is. I always thought she was a substantial actress, and I had no doubt that she could really ace this role. I felt the same about Rob. The fate of the movie, though, who knows. I certainly think this. I don't think that any director who's looking to see what Rob can do, will not be able to see how terrific he is by looking at Cosmopolis. Even if the movie isn't a success at the box office, creatively, as far as I'm concerned, it is a success, and for Rob, it totally is. He's brilliant in the movie, he's fabulous. If nothing else, it will be a great demo film for Rob, for any other director who's looking for a great actor.