BY DEBORAH WILLIAMS
U-HALL FACULTY FELLOW
Last Friday, I went with fellow FFIR Patsy Cooper and a group of U-Hall students to see Twilight, after meeting for dinner and a discussion about the book. Let me say upfront that I started the first book out of idle curiosity – and then couldn’t put it down. I read through the entire series in the span of about four days and then immediately re-read them. I was amazed by my obsession, however, because even as I read faster and faster to find out what would happen, I couldn’t help but notice the flat dialogue, the two-dimensional characterization, and passivity of the heroine.
Given the flaws in the book, it was possible that the movie could be an improvement – perhaps giving the dialogue more flair, or deepening the characterization. The real challenge for the movie would be in finding a way to dramatize both the intimate, highly emotional conversations between Edward the vampire and Bella, the human who loves him and Bella’s interior monologue about those emotional conversations.
I’m not sure the movie is much of an improvement over the novel and in fact in some ways it may be worse – but I think, upon reflection, that I didn’t hate the movie as much as some of the other U-Hall residents who saw it.
Now, true, frequently Edward looks more nauseous than hateful, particularly when he first meets Bella (a moment in the novel that is fraught with fear and tension); and, true, the Cullen family of vampires don’t look spectral and pale but instead like they’ve dusted their faces with flour (Kurt Loder, on the MTV website says the vamps look like very fey mimes, and he’s not far off); and, true, Jacob Black’s hair is an example of how not do hair extensions; yes, I know, Jasper looks like Harpo Marx’s cousin; and yes, it’s hard to believe that Catherine Hardwicke really wanted to create an almost camp version of Meyer’s novel – but it’s also hard to believe that Hardwicke was oblivious to the movie’s camp effects. I could go on, but I will let others add to this list of faux pas.
As with the book, however, I can’t quite let go of the movie. I remember too clearly the awkward angst of high school, especially where a crush was concerned; and Edward’s clenched fist shuffle, while not quite the sinuous grace that’s described in the novel, does a nice job of showing us how appalling it can be to be seventeen and not entirely in control of oneself. And as someone said during our dinner conversation, Bella demonstrates the allure of not having any responsibilities: she doesn’t really have to answer to anyone about anything – and who among us hasn’t wanted to live like that?
It’s Edward, the undead “monster,” who is the most responsible character in the novel (way more responsible than either of Bella’s parents); he is clearly the bad-boy-with-a-heart-of-gold (despite not having a heart), a direct descendant of James Dean (thus, perhaps, the odd pompadour that Edward sports during the entire movie, ditto the fast cars), and as such his love for Bella is oddly familiar: we all know the bad-boy loves good-girl story. But I think the real fairy tale that underpins this story isn’t Disney’s Beauty and the Beast (remember the title of the heroine?) but Sleeping Beauty. Bella is asleep, numb to the world around her, and she needs something to wake her up – and we all know that danger can be far more rousing than love.
I wish I could put my finger on what it is, precisely, that keeps me thinking about these books and about this movie, which on many occasions was almost laughably bad. So what do you think about the book, or about the movie? What do you think keeps people so invested in the story of a girl and the vampire who loves her? Are we all just pining away for a chastely romantic love story?
Comments (6)
Priceless: This movie was the bomb…that exploded upon the twilight series
1.Eric was ASIAN!
2.Jasper’s Expression
3.The stereotypical Native American (They all had long hair!)
4.Incorporation of Mace into the movie
5.Carlisle faulty foundation job-Did they forget his neck?
6.Rosalie’s bleach job? Not going to that salon.
7.Reindeer beer.
8.Scorching looks every 6 minutes (can you feel the heat?)
9.“Say it. SAY IT… OUT LOAD.”
10.Bella’s inability to articulate during the hospital scene…or during any scene.
11.Lets get everyone a tanning bed
12.The flashbacks in the past…what?!?!?! (ridiculous outfits)
13.Bella’s epiphany after seeing the dead man’s feet.
14.The baseball scene, or should call it the almost battle dance sequence
15.Too many monkey references: “Hold on spider-monkey”, “He’s my little monkey”
16.The relationship developed in two ‘come hither’ looks
17.Bella: “How long have you been watching me?” Edward: “For the last couple months.” (SO CREEPY!)
18.Melanie: I have the same silver and turquoise bracelet from Arizona!
Posted by Melanie, Thuy, Lily, Yawei | November 25, 2008 1:02 AM
Posted on November 25, 2008 01:02
Great list! Did you two like the book(s), from which much of the dialogue comes? I agree with you about Carlisle's make-up. I hope when they get around to filming book #2 (which is way better than book #1, in my opinion), they do a better job with that whole "marble skin" thing.
Posted by Deborah Williams | November 25, 2008 11:44 AM
Posted on November 25, 2008 11:44
hi Deborah!
my bf and i were just arguing about 'high' vs. 'low' literature yesterday (specifically about whether or not 'low' literature should be studied academically -- i say yes, depending on the circumstances; he says no, go figure), so this post is very fitting. i haven't read/seen 'Twilight', but i think your suggestion works -- one of the many functions of literature (for the everyday human) is to communicate some sort of yearning/feeling, i assume? or to offer some sort of escape from the reader's mundane life (i.e. the many "i wish i could transfer to Hogwarts" Harry Potter fan groups on Facebook)? when there's something in the text that tugs at our inward desires, that speaks to us, that we think 'understands' and relates with us, we can't help but go back, no matter how terrible the prose is. (this works in the opposite way as well -- for instance, i think James is brilliant, but i wouldn't read him for pleasure.)
i hope you're feeling better! have a wonderful holiday. ( :
Shendi
Posted by Shendi | November 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Posted on November 25, 2008 11:45
Hey o!
So for the record, I helped with the 4th floor girls' list. The whole "missing Carlisle's neck" was my contribution... lol. But I totally agree. It was a bit of a hack-job of a movie, but it was entertaining. HIlarious at the very least. I also agree with their #16. Some of the plot developments were big leaps to make while reading the book. These were even bigger leaps to make in the movie. They didn't waste anytime making it through Bella and Edward's courtship... which in my opinion was one of the best parts of the book. Definitely one of Meyer's stronger points as an author.
I also was watching Ellen today, and Stephanie Meyer was on. Apparently the whole series is based on a dream that she had and didn't want to forget. She started writing it down, and before she knew it she had been writing over the course of 3 months. Then she realized she had a book. Very interesting. And she has no prior experience as an author. Not even unpublished works. Could explain the less than stellar writing.
All that said: I'm addicted.
Posted by Mateo de Piso Quatro | November 27, 2008 10:00 PM
Posted on November 27, 2008 22:00
The Twilight craze that ensued before the release of the movie motivated me to pick up the book and read it. I too was taken by the first book, which I was reluctant to read at first because Meyer's writing is not exactly exceptional. However, I continued to read it because it reminded me of my past crushes, and the excitement that you get when you sit near that crush and you're constantly in wonder. It was nice to relive that (to some extent) through the books, to get those daydreams fulfilled through Edward and Bella's courtship. That said, I completely agree with Mateo- that aspect of the book was severely lacking from the movie. The friend that went with me to see Twilight could not understand how it went from Edward giving Bella the cold shoulder, to him telling her they couldn't be friends, to her thinking in her voiceover, "I was unconditionally and irrevocably in love with Edward." Truth be told, if I had not read the book prior to watching the movie, I would've had the exact same reaction. For that, the screenwriters (and Hardwicke) are at fault for 'jumping the gun'.
Rewatching the movie, one of the few things I can say I'm completely satisfied with are the scenes between Robert Pattinson (Edward) and Kristen Stewart (Bella). Stewart got Bella's awkwardness down pat, while Pattinson could have been a better Edward but, nonetheless, it's hard to imagine anyone else for the role now. There were several instances where I cringed at his acting (his stares??), but when he was with Stewart on screen, their interaction was smooth and persuasive. One can only hope that the actors will realize their faults from the first movie and prevent the transgressions from occurring again in the sequel.
The real gems of the movie: Charlie and Bella scenes. They were flawless, exactly how I envisioned them to act. Every other part of the movie needs work. Hopefully the cast and crew get it right for the next installment, because the books only get better as the series goes on.
Posted by Dayana Sanchez | December 8, 2008 6:26 PM
Posted on December 8, 2008 18:26
Do any of you think that the fact that the romance between Bella and Edward stays almost completely non-physical is one reason why the book (and movie) are such big hits? Compared to Gossip Girl, The OC, etc etc., what happens w/Bella and E. is really, really tame and could in fact even be seen as a warning about the perils of "heavy petting" - the guy might lose control and kill you! Is the really strict morality of the novels part of their allure?
On an unrelated note - I totally agree with Dayana that the Bella/Charlie relationship, while slightly different in the movie (they eat out vs. Bella cooking) is right on target - the awkwardness between daughter and father; the hesitancy about touching one another; the father's inability to articulate his worries...all seemed very "real."
Posted by Deb | December 12, 2008 3:26 PM
Posted on December 12, 2008 15:26