5/5 Enjoy The Movie For What It Is..
  by David Foughty
Don't spend your time comparing it to the book. If you just sit there comparing the book and the movie, you'll take the fun out of the movie itself. If you are a book reader, reading Midnight Sun really helps understand Edward's reactions and such. This is the best movie I've seen that has stayed the closest to the book as much as it could. I do understand why they made a few changes to please some of the moviegoers who haven't read the book. It ties things in a different but acceptable way. I loved how they interpreted the book. I understand that it was a teen movie so of course there was a little cheesiness at times. But hey, the book is geared towards a teen audiences regardless of the wide age range that actually reads it. I think Summit did a good job and can't wait for New Moon.

5/5 I'm 42, my husband is 50 and we both love this movie
  by Janice S. Wilcox (Auburn, MI United States)
I read the review the previous "wanna be" professional critic wrote and it's a bunch of BS. This is by far a one of the best movies made. Can't wait for New Moon. I've never read the books and I'm not a teenager. This isn't theater, it's entertainment. If you want theater, go to broadway. As for entertainment, it was great. I think most of the nation will agree with me. I've pretty much learned what the critics love, sucks. I mean really, how many awards did the movie "Sideways" win? My husband and I watched it and ended up turning it off, it was by far one of the worst, most depressing, boring movies I've ever seen! I've learned if the critics hate it, I'll love it and vice versa. You won't regret seeing this movie, it's awesome.

2/5 Sparkly vampires!
  by E. A Solinas (MD USA)
Like Harry Potter and "Eragon" and other such younger-reader literary phenomena, Stephanie Meyers' bestselling vampire romance "Twilight" has gotten the big-screen treatment.

Will its countless fans love it? Undoubtedly. Will the rest of the world love it? Ehhhhhhh... probably not.

Basically liking "Twilight" all depends on whether the idea of teenage vampire/mortal romances with no sex and lots of longing looks appeal to you. It's essentially a teenage fantasy about finding the Perfect Hot Immortal Coverboy Who Longs For You Alone, and as such, it's neither amazingly good nor hilariously bad -- just sort of blah.

On her first day at her new school, klutzy Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) is struck by the ash-pale, vaguely incestuous Cullen family -- an especially by the Hawt and Brooding Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). Edward doesn't seem to like her much -- but when Bella is nearly killed by a runaway car, he somehow manages to zip across the parking lot and knock away the car.

Bella does some speculation about how Edward did this particular trick, throwing off some Superman/Spiderman comparisons. "But what if I'm not the hero? What if I am the bad guy?" he asks. Of course Bella believes he could never be, because he's hot. Er, because she trusts him because he's hot. Umm... never mind. Anyway, Bella eventually figures out that he's a vampire-- a "vegetarian vampire" with the power to read thoughts... except hers.

Despite his fears that he'll hurt her, their smoldering chemistry (and Bella's "heroin" smell) draws them into a relationship... at which point, since the plot has had zero non-teenybopper tension, three two-dimensionally evil vampires enter the scene, intent on hunting Bella. The Cullens whisk her away to keep her safe from this trio -- but they have more than one way to find her.

The book "Twilight" is essentially the eroticized fantasies of a teenage girl, purple of prose and taking itself hilariously seriously. Director Catherine Hardwicke and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg thankfully remove most of the sentimental drippiness and damselly distress, but Hardwicke's "Twilight" focuses more on the stars' pretty faces than on their personalities. Or the plot.

Hardwicke paints the whole movie in dreary shades of misty grey and blue, which has a certain appropiate visual prettiness. Too bad about the choppy, jerky fight scenes and appalling CGI, including a unintentionally silly "vampire baseball" scene. Think supersonic pitching. Add that to some oatmeal-bland dialogue ("This kind of stuff just doesn't exist!" "It does in my world"), and you don't exactly have a winner.

The biggest problem is the plot: it goes nowhere fast. "Twilight" is your basic teenage romance -- angst, whining and OMG-does-he-like-me-does-he-hate-me? -- except that the Hawt Guy is a vampire, and the only real obstacle to their Eternal Luv is that he can't make up his mind about whether to date her or not. This is not terribly riveting as a story, especially since it's glaringly obvious whether they'll get together or not.

To make matters worse, the main source of tension is the cliche sex = bloodsucking formula, where Edward is constantly shying away from Bella's virginal neck (what does that imply about sucking blood from animals?). Hardwicke wrings a few pretty moments from the movie -- such as Edward and Bella in the Northwestern pine treetops -- but her skills seem to be stifled. You can only wring so much interest from "Meet the Vampire Family."

The talented Pattinson is undeniably a beautiful guy, and he has the bad boy thing down to a fine art. Unfortunately Edward doesn't call for much more -- Pattinson broods, smolders and stalks Bella as a sign of how he loves her. Stewart does a flat job as the flat Bella Swan (whose main ambition in life seems to be eternal undeadhood with Eddie-boy), and it's hard to forget that that she's basically playing a self-insert for the masses.

Those who adore the works of Stephanie Meyer and dream of eternal love with an Immortal Hottie may find "Twilight" a delight, but it's no more than a thin, flat guilty pleasure at best.