Genres

Visitors Review

chucknorrisfacts 2012-05-25 02:56:31

This movie sucks!

Let me just preface this review by saying I knew this movie would bebad. I had no doubt about that but what I didn't anticipate was justhow bad it would be. It really was one of the worst movies I've everseen in my life.The lead actors need some acting lessons, badly. I felt as if I waswatching amateur night at the community theatre and not some highlypaid (and unjustifiably so, in my opinion) Hollywood actors.Robert Pattinson spends the entirety of his scenes looking constipated.As a vampire, he's not convincing in the slightest. I feel his "actingchops" would've been much better suited to a Pepto-Bismol commercial. Kristen Stewart once again manages to make her character totallyinarticulate. It's really difficult to even watch her as she blinks,stutters and stammers her way through each line of dialogue she has.Also, she has a highly annoying habit of arching her eyebrow. I have noclue why she does this but it's very irritating.Taylor Lautner has a big problem with overacting. His performancedoesn't ring true, it seems rather forced and unconvincing. Hiseffeminate voice doesn't help him to sound intimidating while speakinglines when he's supposed to sound as such. Also, while unrelated to hisacting, still a major annoyance is that his character only wears ashirt for about two minutes of the movie and the rest of the time he'sbare-chested. He has no reason to go around without a shirt other thanto try to play the "beefcake", and it's nauseating. One scene or twowithout the shirt would've been enough to "get the idea", not the wholemovie.The supporting cast is largely forgettable, and seemingly unimportantto rest of the film. It's almost as if you're watching a movie thatonly truly has three characters in it. Every one else is just sort ofthere. The CGI was horrible. You would have thought with as much money as thefirst movie made they could've gotten some halfway decent effects forthe sequel but I guess not.Watching this, I didn't even really feel like I was watching a realmovie. It was so horribly boring and uninteresting that I could hardlyfinish it. In truth, I don't even know why I did other than to be ableto give a full review on exactly why it was so terrible.I was hoping that with "Eclipse" being released today that I'd onlyhave to listen to all the undeserved hype about "Twilight" for one moremovie, "Breaking Dawn", but now the greedy movie studio behind thefranchise has decided to split the last book into two movies so theycan keep the kiddies coming back in order to milk them out of as muchmoney as they can before this fad is forgotten like the Macarena. Idread having to hear about this series another minute, let alone forthe next year or two. Why can't people see how crappy these movies areand just stop seeing them? I mean, I saw it for free so I don't feelbad for contributing to its gross. No way in hell would I have paid tosee this. You shouldn't either!

anodien fithralith 2012-05-24 21:35:58

Too much ado...

I had been waiting for this movie for all those months. I got mytickets early enough and now I just feel disappointed and fooled.The only truly good things in the movie was the acting and the effects.Other than that I found the script too pompous for it's own good. Sopompous that even the acting didn't save the situation.Don't get me wrong, I know that it is another think to visualizesomething in your own head and another to actually see it throughsomeone else's perspective but again... It was just too much! I feel soutterly disappointed because I loved the books and for me they didn'teven try to get the book's meanings through the movie. It was all justtoo SUPERFICIAL. Made only to satisfy the eyes and not the brain. Andthat is something I can't stand when I have high expectations fromsomething. I mean, the book made me cry more than once. The moviedidn't do that at any time.All I could think about during the movie was that I would've beenbetter off reading the book for the third time instead of going to themovies tonight.Like I said, too much ado...

Davyd Teather 2012-05-19 22:09:49

What is all the fuss about?

I do not understand why a lot of people are saying negative thingsabout this movie. This is actually a very good movie. It thought NewMoon was a little better than Twilight. In this movie, their arewerewolves and vampires. What more could you ask for. Thecinematography and directing is well done, it is well paced, their ismore action, and it goes more in depth with the characters than thefirst movie did. Everything a sequel is supposed to do. I really hatethe reviews that are putting this movie down. The acting was also verywell done. Especially Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart and TaylorLautner. It is worth a watch.

2012-05-19 01:27:36

Great

This review is from: The Twilight Saga: New Moon (Two-Disc Special Edition) (DVD) It came well before it was suppose to. I saved money by preordering it through Amazon. It was in great shape when I got it. I would totally buy from them again.

kemo10000 2012-05-14 16:34:57

an excellent captivating film

i had herd some talk from all my friends about this film (bad talk) asi did with the first but after that i couldn't miss this if u get achance see this (with out your friends) people say the main charactersseam stiff emotion less but u have to look at the mood of the story putit all together e.g. you are a teenage girl in a relationship with avampire she is a loaner in the first place she cant tell and she isdeeply in love he is hundreds of years old a vampire with a extremeconstant thirst for the one he loves blood every time they are togethertheir is so much tension its unreal if u want to like this movie youhave to have empathy (feel what they do think what they have doneseparately and together) if u have seen this and don't like it watch itagain and think bout what i said my motto is their is no bad moviesjust bad watchers.

2012-05-14 06:04:13

Amazing Movie!

This review is from: The Twilight Saga: New Moon (Two-Disc Special Edition) (DVD) When the first Twilight movie came out I wasn't into it. I never thought it would be good. But then I saw it and I was totally wrong, it is an amazing movie! Everyone that waches it loves it! Then I started reading the series. My favorites and New Moon and Breaking Dawn. The movie version of New Moon is SOOOOO good! I think anyone will love it!

riggsthecat1000 2012-05-13 04:51:51

Liked it better then "Twilight!"

I have read the book and this is very close to it. The graphics areawesome! When Jacob and the others "turn" it's amazing. Some commentshave been made about Rob's acting, well, I think he did an incrediblejob (after all he was a depressed, vampire is he supposed to smile?giggle?) Geesh! They did make him more creepy in this one though, I wasa little disappointed. When they kiss he looked like he was in pain,that was exactly how he was supposed to appear, because remember herblood is very hard for him to resist! As for the very first commentabout the message to teenage girls, Movies are "FANTASY" they aren'tsupposed to be "real"! Who on earth wants to watch a movie that isabout everyday, real life! A movie is to be enjoyed! It'd be a prettydepressing movie to watch if it showed how life, for the most part,really is! and why pay to see something like that, when you will orhave lived it!All in all, I liked it! Everyone was great in it, the filming wasawesome! and it was very close to the book, which is great! For the males who comment on this and give it a bad rating, IT'S NOTSUPPOSED TO BE FOR BOYS! This is geared for females! That's why youdon't like it.

2012-05-12 22:55:38

Why oh why did I decide to watch this?

This movie....was so boring. Even the "exciting" parts were not that great. There was never a moment in the film where I went, "WOW! That was awesome!"*some very minor spoilers*My hubby and I rented it over the weekend. I used to love the books, but now hate them, and only watched out of morbid curiosity. There was nothing exciting about this film, with the exception of maybe Lautner as Jacob. I hated Jacob in the books, but found he was probably the most entertaining bit about this movie. I feel bad for Lautner that he was sucked into this awful franchise. And knowing what's coming for him in the last film, I feel even more horrible for him. Oh! And Charlie! I hated Charlie in the books, but Billy Burke as Charlie is probably the best thing about the movies! Give him more screen time please!!Just like the first film, Stewart and Pattinson were THE WORST parts of this film. Neither of them can act their way out of a paper bag. I wonder if KStew will ever learn to incorporate emotion into her acting, or when she does, see if she can do it without looking like she's hyperventilating or on the peak of an.....nevermind, or if RPattz can ever try to not overact. Awful. Just truly dreadful.The CGI wolves were hilarious! We had a good laugh whenever they were onscreen.I didn't get the 'Matrix' style slow-motion in the Volturi "fight" scene. It didn't look good. I guess because the rest of the movie was slow and boring, they wanted the "fight" to be the same way? IDK.We lasted through this movie for about fifteen minutes before we got truly bored and started providing our own commentary throughout the film. That at least made the film more entertaining.

darkmax 2012-05-12 04:32:56

Where is the taste?

I found the first film hugely overrated, despite going in with an openmind, knowing it is a girl flick. but at least I sat through the firstone.For some reason, 1/2 an hour was the best I could get through thesecond.Explain to me, what's so "hot" about the male leads? Edward has a flatface, and dog boy is just butt ugly. Granted the dog boy has a body,but that does not make him "hot". Whatever happen to the taste in men,girls? If it is not men with a body or a face, it is a gay. Where aregirls with superficial tastes these days? Gosh....Then there's Kirsten Stewart.... Come on! Surely there are betterlooking chicks out there. For that matter the one playing Jessica isalready better.I have been very disappointed in Hollywood's teen flicks these days,and this one just tops it off. I hope they didn't make enough to make athird one, but I would then be underestimating the power of thetastelessness of the target group these days.

sweetaya 2012-05-11 16:20:09

Chant with me "NO MORE KRISTEN, NO MORE KRISTEN"

Before I get to the movie, I would like to address the cancer of oursociety which are all you morons that leave reviews on how much you arenot going to see this movie because you heard so much bad stuff aboutit. Do us all a favor and take the warning labels of the products youuse please! And to those that didn't like the first one: WTF why wouldu go see New Moon one if you thought Twilight sucked???? Beats me!I gave the movie a 7 mainly because I appreciate the fact that its justlike the book. Granted a few lines have been left out a few have beenadded or changed, but for the most part it's like the novel itself. Myonly problem with the twilight movie series is Kristen Steward herself.I don't know what she did, but she must have done someone out there areally great favor(cough cough)She is an even worse actress than MeganFox and she is no where as hot. But anyway I'm OK with the movie, so-soon the makeup, and no-no on the casting of Bella.

2012-05-10 20:40:08

perfect example of a conventionally produced movie

i rented this film. it was decent and pretty much followed the book. jacob was pretty fab too, i found myself liking him a lot even though i didn't care for him in the books. the following issues however were really apparent and totally proves in my mind why one director/music director needs to tackle a series all at once (a la' lord of the rings) rather than having a hodge podge of different directors:1.makeup was terrible, edward looks ten years older. the yellow contacts they wore made their eyes look alien instead of golden, alice was the only one who looked better with yellow eyes. hair was absolutely awful, especially rosalie and jasper although edwards hair looked better. everyone looked noticebly uglier except for bella and jacob and charlie and alice. edward is supposed to look 17 for crying out loud, not have deep powdery lines in his forehead and really obvious circles under his eyes.2.even though there were serious holes and mistakes in twilight, the magical feel and soft texture of the film made it a hit even with those of us who had not read the books, i.e. the eery bluish cast of almost every frame, the rainy foggy beauty of the forests...new moon was much harsher in its look.3.the acting between bella and edward was seriously lacking in emotional depth, however the real life chemistry between them is what kept me watching in spite of that.4.the music was...completely unremarkable. typical 'movie' orchestral soundtrack and the pop songs didn't fit and were not catchy at all. not like the first twilight in any regard. i certainly won't be buying that soundtrack whereas i have bought both soundtrack cds from twilight and still listen to them.if twilight had been made by this director i would not have any reason to see any follow up films. hardwicke, even with all her mistakes, really understood the emotion and intensity of being in love for the first time for a klutzy 17 year old girl and the super coolest danger guy at school. i ran out straightaway and bought the books and loved them for the most part(except BD).i watch twilight over and over again, but i won't be buying new moon, that was a one time watch. but...it didn't stink, was just ok.

2012-05-10 08:44:39

Consider Yourself Mooned!

Few people who lived through the Great Irish Potato Famine will ever forget it; the same holds true for this movie.

nama chakravorty 2012-05-05 04:09:43

A Superb Entertainer...

Chris Weitz directed 'New Moon' is a superb film, that turns out to bea memorable cine-going experience.'New Moon' is like a Batman, Superman flick... where logic needs todamned. A film that has Vampires, Werewolfs & Volturis as it's maincharacters. I didn't enjoy the first flick, but this one has impressedme.To state Robert Pattinson as a Superstar, would be like insulting theguy. I was stunned the way my younger sister, and the entire Cinema{which was filled with chicks} erupted when he entered the screen. Theguy is a Youth Icon, and a fabulous actor. Kristen Stewart isimpressive. Taylor Lautner is quite good. Michael Sheen stands out in abrief role.'New Moon' is a blockbuster entertainer.... watch it for Pattinson &Stewart!

DeltaNu 2012-05-04 15:39:50

If you loved the novels, you'll love the film!

I just read through some "professional" as well as viewer reviews andas I suspected they were mostly negative.Well, I am going to review this film while keeping in mind who it wasintended for: Teenage Girls. Now the novels happened to appeal to amuch larger audience than that, which is why so many people weresuper-excited to see both Twilight and New Moon. That doesn't changethe fact that the whole story is still intended for female teenagers.Is it long? Yes. Is it very slow paced, with many intense emotionalmoments? Absolutely. The film follows the book. If Weitz had changedthe story to match typical film structures or left out the readers'most favorite parts, a gazillion people would have been disappointed. Ithink it's better to have some old haters mock the movie than die-hardfans be disappointed. The movie is not an artistic masterpiece, butit's not supposed to be. It's not trying to win an Academy Award, so Idon't judge it by comparing it to those kinds of movies.As a fan of the series, I loved the film. Weitz did a great job turninga novel that basically describes feelings into a film that entertainsevery second of its two hours. Technically, Weitz far surpassedHardwicke's Twilight as well. There was one awkward cut to Edwards facethat threw me off a little, but that's nothing compared to all thetechnical errors in Twilight. There were several references to thefirst film that gave the two movies a connection. I appreciated that,especially since the director changed. As before, the actors have a great chemistry. And especially the threeVolturi and Dakota Fanning were awesome new additions. Too bad there'snot enough time to properly flash out every character. Rosalie and Esmehad about a line each.One reviewer said that it is almost impossible to follow New Moonwithout having read all the books. That's probably true. And if youhaven't read the novels, Bella's illusions and the wolves might even becomical to you. And you might roll your eyes at Jacob's nakedness eventhough that choice had nothing to do with wanting cause hysterics amongthe teenagers.My opinion is: If you loved the novels, you'll probably love the film.

2012-05-03 17:26:45

Great Movie...

HUGE improvement over the original Twilight. With that said I think that fans need to remember that it is difficult to translate every detail, page, and scene from the book on to the silver screen. I personally think that Kristin Stewart does an ok job portraying Bella's character and that Bella is a complex character to act.

hollandddxo 2012-05-03 13:09:00

learn to dream a little,

It should occur to all the annoyed and disregarded people who can'tstand a movie so much they decide to rant on and on about TwilightMovies. well, obviously girls have imaginations.. as does everybody butsome women have a broadened, colorful, romantic and interesting onesrather than others. And whether books, or movies, or a beautiful mindintrigue and open the doors to feed an imagination for them it starvestheir minds to simply dream about a romance that they don't have orhave had.. such as this beautiful mysterious story.This is a movie that is wonderfully simple but yet unpredictable, andexciting. A quality that most movies now do not have because they'vealready been made and made again, the chic flicks you've already seen,the movies you can guess what happens. This movie has something theothers don't and thats why it is so popular. The story, the actors, thebooks, the scenes, the fan-girls..why wouldn't this movie scoop up asmuch money as it is?

2012-05-03 03:22:18

Boring

First off, let me begin by saying I enjoyed the book of the same name.Next, let me say that this movie was an extremely poor film rendition.That being said, let me get into the true problem of the film - the twomain actors! They were both extremely boring in their attempts atacting. I believe that both of them would do well to take an actinglesson. His acting method is to look brooding and hers is to grimace atall possible moments. It was like watching my son and my daughterfighting. I think that these two people have it hard though as theyhave a lot of hype to live up to. They do not, however, live up to thisimaginary line drawn on the screen. Shark Boy was okay but what was upwith the fake Indian hair? If he is Indian, I am a shark. One wordsummarizes this waste of time - boring, money back, no acting, littleaction, slow plot development, terrible acting, and did I mention itwas also boring? Don't waste your time going to see this second ratefilm that was nowhere near as good as Twilight.

Magan Edinger 2012-05-02 16:48:17

Not Worth the Wait

Throughout this movie I felt like I was at a strip club. Every timeEdward or Jakob appeared on screen all of the girls would scream. Itwas apparent that they were there because the guys are hot, not fortheir acting ability. I have been a fan of vampire films all of mylife. I also love romantic movies. The film shows very little vampirerelated content and the romances are awkward. It is very slow movingand the acting seems awkward and not developed in parts. The best partof the movie for me was the last half hour or so. The wolves were cool.I spent most of this movie hoping it was almost over. From the start itdragged. I was hoping to see more of the Volturi and Dakota Fanning. Iwish I just would of waited for it to come out on DVD.

JODY B 2012-04-29 21:29:21

loved the book, hated the movie

twilight is about love and passion and very few times did i feel the love or passion. the kiss between bella and edward was boring and had no passion. the love jake has for bella you could have missed it if you didnt read the book. what also bothered me with this film, why was forks sunny and happy when bella was so sad. yes the director read the book but come on it was almost word for word. i am very sad, and i went to the midnight showing and waited in line for some movie i was so geeked to see bummer.

joolzah 2012-04-29 10:01:06

Pure Masterpiece

I saw this movie today after reading a large majority of the novel,comparing both I'd say Directer Chris Weitz portrayed his vision theway the book was intended also full respect to Taylor Lautner (JacobBlack) and the visual effects provided. Unlike Twilight Director,Catherine Hardwick, Chris Weitz gave the film a lot more characterpacked with more action and darker themes which will keep your eyesglued to the screen.New Moon is a massive achievement kick starting a turning point to theTwilight Saga, I promise those who weren't fond of the first film willget more than what they bargained for.