After the birth of Renesmee, the Cullens gather other vampire clans in order to protect the child from a false allegation that puts the family in front of the Volturi.
Director: Bill Condon Writers: Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer(novel) Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner
Storyline
The final Twilight Saga begins with Bella now a vampire learning to use her abilities. And happy to see her daughter, Renesmee is flourishing. But when someone sees Renesmee do something that makes them think that she was turned. This persccon goes to the Volturi, because it is a violation to turn a child. And the penalty is death for both who turned the child into a vampire and the child, cause they deem a turned child too dangerous. Alice gets a vision of the Volturi coming after them. So the Cullens try to convince them that Renesmee is not a threat. So they ask friends and family to come stand with them. But when someone who has it in for the Volturi shows up and tells them they should be ready for a fight. And they get ready.
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2 Review
An inferior end to a mediocre series
I was almost literally dragged by my ankles to this movie by some friends of mine. In the end I decided to eventually give in and pay a ticket price of £5.70. £5.70? for a twilight ticket. OK I'm not gonna get into that but I was expecting good things.
So the good points first: Taylor Lautner puts in a decent effort. Michael Sheen makes for a good villain.
Taylor Lautner is not what I would call one of the current rising stars. He just doesn't have the talent but...having said that he was the only good guy in the movie who was believable. Michael Sheen is very worthy as a good villain. He has an air of insanity yet I can't put any fault on his performance. For example I can't say that it was Over the top or just a screaming role (In which case Shia LaBeouf should have been cast for that).
Now the negative points: Kristen Stewart can't act for her life, Dakota Fanning was so unconvincing. Rest of the cast was mediocre, CGI and special effects are underwhelming and an absolutely insulting ending.
Kristen Stewart spends the vast majority of the film pulling a stupid childish pout and frown which is not what you want to see from a hit film's protagonist. All of her lines are cringe worthy and poorly written. Her career is failing and her film selection (Snow White and the Huntsman? what the hell was that?) isn't helping her. Dakota Fanning has always annoyed me as an actress. I have nothing against her personally but her Shia La Beouf type role in War of the Worlds just killed it. However Coraline was a revelation on her part and renewed my faith. However she has no stage presence so to speak. Her one line in the film was like something from a family guy cut scene. The rest of the crew were poor and why the hell was baby Renesmee (horrible name) a CGI baby? It just made this film look evenmore ridiculous.
The whole vampire thing just got ridiculous and the ending? Oh my god, the ending....I will not spoil anything but it was so poor. To finish I will never watch this again. Ever. Fans will probably love it because it's the end and they naturally will defend from criticism with their lives. Anyone else will stop watching after about 10 minutes and I don't blame them. Twilight...the hit series...was an absolute bloody waste of time and money.
The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
Edward leaves Bella after an attack that nearly claimed her life, and in her depression she falls into yet another paranormal relationship- this time with werewolf Jacob Black.
Director: Chris Weitz Writers: Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer(novel) Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner
Storyline
After Bella recovers from the vampire attack that almost claimed her life, she looks to celebrate her birthday with Edward and his family. However, a minor accident during the festivities results in Bella's blood being shed, a sight that proves too intense for the Cullens, who decide to leave the town of Forks, Washington for Bella and Edward's sake. Initially heartbroken, Bella finds a form of comfort in reckless living, as well as an even-closer friendship with Jacob Black. Danger in different forms awaits.
The Twilight Saga: New Moon Movie Review
Sure didn't see that coming.
well to start off, I've read all four books, and saw the first movie which i loathed.It had horrible acting, and cringe-worthy dialogue. so i was extremely disappointed with that one.I saw the trailer for new moon and became very anxious to see it. i was hoping it would be better since they got a new director......well i was wrong.i got my tickets in advance. pulled up to the theater with my mom-she has read the series to and thought twilight sucked-and we couldn't sit together because there was so many screaming teen girls.we got there half an hour earlier thinking there'd be no one there..... anyways,so the movie starts, i'm feeling pretty good.....sure as hell did not see this piece of crap coming.WORST.ACTING. but not from everyone.just Kristen and Robert.there was no chemistry at all between them as some claim. half the time he wasn't even looking at her!he mumbles his lines and its just BAD. then Kristen cant show emotion to save her life. she does this rapid blinking thing i don't understand.if they were replaced it would make a huge difference. Taylor was pretty good for the most part. he over acted at times and it came off as fake to me. like something you would see in a soap opera. but the rest of the Cullen clan,the wolf pack,and her school mates were excellent. the cgi was good,had really good stunt work. some lines seemed out of place to me. the leading roles need to FEEL the words and not just say them nonchalantly. the ending was bad to. they cut too many scenes from the book that would make a big difference to. so overall I'm disappointed. why this is such a big franchise i have no idea. fans are too obsessed, boggles my mind.i was left dissatisfied, but of course the rabid fan base will approve.
Twilight (I) (2008)
A teenage girl risks everything when she falls in love with a vampire.
Director: Catherine Hardwicke Writers: Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer(novel) Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Billy Burke
Storyline
Bella Swan has always been a little bit different. Never one to run with the crowd, Bella never cared about fitting in with the trendy, plastic girls at her Phoenix, Arizona high school. When her mother remarried and Bella chooses to live with her father in the rainy little town of Forks, Washington, she didn't expect much of anything to change. But things do change when she meets the mysterious and dazzlingly beautiful Edward Cullen. For Edward is nothing like any boy she's ever met. He's nothing like anyone she's ever met, period. He's intelligent and witty, and he seems to see straight into her soul. In no time at all, they are swept up in a passionate and decidedly unorthodox romance - unorthodox because Edward really isn't like the other boys. He can run faster than a mountain lion. He can stop a moving car with his bare hands. Oh, and he hasn't aged since 1918. Like all vampires, he's immortal. That's right - vampire. But he doesn't have fangs - that's just in the movies.
Twilight Movie Review
Pretty Good for What They Had to Work With
I have read the books, and the first thing I noticed was that the story wasn't about a plot line at all. It's about the characters and what's going on with them. Stephenie Meyer focuses on interaction, not on dialog, plot, or setting, which is fine. But it makes for a bad movie.
Surprisingly, Twilight wasn't that bad of a film. I expected it to be much worse. As I said, there's very little plot or dialog in the book, so it's hard to make a convincing film. They had to over act looks to try and communicate without many words. I could probably count on one hand the lines in the movie.
Other than the over acting, it wasn't bad. There were some very good moments and some very "eh" moments. But overall I would recommend it to Twilight fans. I probably won't ever want to see it again, but it's okay at midnight with some school friends who like it or something.
Titanic (1997)
A seventeen-year-old aristocrat falls in love with a kind, but poor artist aboard the luxurious, ill-fated R.M.S. Titanic.
Director: James Cameron Writer: James Cameron Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane
Storyline
84 years later, a 101-year-old woman named Rose DeWitt Bukater tells the story to her granddaughter Lizzy Calvert, Brock Lovett, Lewis Bodine, Bobby Buell and Anatoly Mikailavich on the Keldysh about her life set in April 10th 1912, on a ship called Titanic when young Rose boards the departing ship with the upper-class passengers and her mother, Ruth DeWitt Bukater, and her fiancé, Caledon Hockley. Meanwhile, a drifter and artist named Jack Dawson and his best friend Fabrizio De Rossi win third-class tickets to the ship in a game. And she explains the whole story from departure until the death of Titanic on its first and last voyage April 15th, 1912 at 2:20 in the morning.
Titanic Movie Reviews
Despite some glaring faults,Cameron's mixing of romance with real life disaster is still impressive and occasionally brilliant
It's really quite odd. When Titanic first came out,the reviews were mixed but the public generally loved it,those who disliked the film were definitely in the minority. Over the years,it has became somewhat fashionable to slag Titanic off,even if a great many of those people who did so were probably amongst those who made it such an enormous hit in the cinemas. Titanic is flawed,definitely,sometimes greatly so. However,it's also a tremendous achievement for it's director James Cameron. Mixing a real disaster with romance is harder to do than some might think. Maybe he did have a right to say "I'm king of the world" when the film won Best Picture at the Oscars. Just once.
The modern day opening is excellent,making effective use of some of Cameron's real footage he took of the sunken Titanic. There is a real sense of mystery. Than we flash back to the Titanic being boarded,and the film stalls just a little for around two hours. The attention to detail is amazing {even all the cutlery matched,you know} and there is nothing wrong with an extremely slow build up to action-think of The Seven Samourai. However,the central romance between Leo and Kate is often badly written and unconvincing. For a start Kate's Rose would certainly not have done two things she does in the film as quickly as she did {Obviously thousands of teenage girls seeing the film in 1997 would disagree with my views}. We also have to suffer Cameron constantly labouring the point that the poor people on the ship are better than the rich people.
However,the final 80 or so minutes,detailing the sinking,is simply brilliant film making. The suspense is built expertly,even though we know what will happen,and climaxes with some technical shots which are still impressive. Perhaps there is a little two much emphasis on the central couple,but there are some truly moving moments,and it really feels true,although of course Cameron did play with the facts a little here and there,as at least one descendant of one of the survivors has pointed out. The following sequence involving the boats is extremely haunting,with some especially good use of sound. As for the final scene,it does manage to be pretty moving,it's schmaltzy but it works {though hardly original,think of Somewhere In Time and various 40s romantic fantasies}.
Titanic has some excellent use of CGI {watch out for the transitions from present to the past on the sunken ship} and one glaringly bad special effect-the iceberg which looks like polystyrene. James Horner's best selling score is really quite poor and only occasionally brings the emotion it should do. Performances are generally excellent and sometimes succeed in overcoming some thin characterisation {such as Billy Zane as Rose's fiancée,who even has to suffer with far too much eye make up!}
Overall Titanic is still worth seeing,and sometimes it really does hit the heights that it should. It succeeds more than it fails,which is impressive in a film as ambitious as this.
No Strings Attached (2011)
A guy and girl try to keep their relationship strictly physical, but it's not long before they learn that they want something more.
Director: Ivan Reitman
Writers: Elizabeth Meriwether (screenplay), Michael Samonek (story) (as Mike Samonek)
Stars: Natalie Portman, Ashton Kutcher, Kevin Kline
Storyline
Occasionally in the 15 years since summer camp, Adam and Emma cross paths. When he discovers that an ex-girlfriend is living with his dad, he gets drunk, calls every woman in his cell phone contact list, and ends up passed out naked in her living room. By this time, she's a medical resident in L.A. and he's a gopher on a "Glee"-like TV series, hoping to be a writer. She guards her emotions (calling her father's funeral "a thing"), so after a quick shag in the moments she has before leaving for the hospital, she asks if he wants a no-strings-attached, sex-only relationship, without romance or complications. A prescription for fun or for disaster?
No Strings Attached Movie Review
I had very low expectations for No Strings Attached. The couple would make the decision to use each, one would fall for the other, and in the end they would live happily ever after. I was correct about the overall story line, but, impressively, the writers found a way the mix in enough comedy to keep you entertained for the full 110 minutes. On top of that, there is enough cutsie romance to make for the perfect date night movie. Comedy to make you laugh and romance to cheer up any romantic girl.... sounds like a romantic comedy to me!
Natalie Portman shows her range of acting abilities by having two extremely different films in theaters at the same time. I was thoroughly impressed with her ability to drop the comedic one liners and portray a unaffectionate woman who's fallen in love realistically. Comparing this to her award-winning role in Black Swan made her abilities even more impressive. I cannot say the same for Ashton Kutcher. He has a great face and is great at comedic acting. However, each serious, romantic scene he was in became unrealistic and uncomfortable.
Overall, this is the perfect date night or girls night movie. It has some great comedic moments and brings in the romance that most ladies love to see. If you are looking for a light-hearted romantic comedy, this is a great choice.
Friends with Benefits (2011)
While trying to avoid the clichés of Hollywood romantic comedies, Dylan Harper and Jamie Rellis soon discover however that adding the act of sex to their friendship does lead to complications.
Director: Will Gluck Writers: Keith Merryman (screenplay), David A. Newman(screenplay), Stars: Mila Kunis, Justin Timberlake, Patricia Clarkson
Storyline
Jamie Rellis (Mila Kunis) is a New York City head-hunter trying to sign Los Angeles-based art director Dylan Harper (Justin Timberlake) for her client. When he takes the job and makes the move, they quickly become friends. Their friendship turns into a friendship with benefits, but with Jamie's emotionally damaged past and Dylan's history of being emotionally unavailable, they have to try to not fall for each other the way Hollywood romantic comedies dictate.
User Reviews
What I can say for Friends with Benefits is that it's a cute movie that doesn't reach it's full potential. The main problem to me is that when it starts, the film is being played as satire and when it ends, it's being played straight. As a result, Friends with Benefits does not quite rise above the romantic material it mocks, but on occasion it's funny and adorable.
Actually for a while, the movie is on fire. The opening is cleverly handled, and is a good way to grab the audience’s attention. Then for the next several scenes, Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake demonstrate charm, comfort and overall competence and end up delivering a couple of the funniest sexual encounters I've seen in years. What I like about them both is that they bring enthusiasm to whatever they do, and this film is no exception.
Around the halfway point, the film starts to feel a little boring. with a running time of just over a hundred minutes, Friends with Benefits is not a long movie, and while it's not exactly short either, it feels shorter than it should be. There are a few hints to suggest that a longer movie was intended but the Studio may have forced a cut down. In addition to an ending that feels rushed, all the supporting characters in the story seem futile, and underwritten. Woody Harrelsson, for example, can be a really funny guy, but he's not given the material or the screen time, to make his appearance worthwhile.
The film has it's ups, it has it's downs. It doesn't end up being a bad Rom-com, but I've seen better.
