Eclipse

It's been billed as the biggest film of the year and perhaps it will be, but it has some stiff competition from the likes of Harry Potter coming this winter, so let's see if Eclipse really deserves that prestigious title.

The vampire and werewolf love saga has been bitterly disappointing so far with a dull first instalment and a hideously depressing second. Add to this some excruciatingly painful running times of over two hours and you have death by celluloid.

But perhaps I'm being a little unfair; this third instalment has been based on perhaps the most exciting book of the four in the series so it already has a good starting point and some convincing performances from the actors really do make this film a huge leap ahead of what preceded it.

The storyline to this film is pretty much non-existent but director David Slade does a good job of turning zilch into another depressing, but well made two hour love fest. Robert Pattinson (Edward Cullen), Kristen Stewart (Bella Swan) and Taylor Lautner (Jacob) return as the three main leads and their love triangle becomes even more confusing this time around, with frowning faces and awkward kisses galore. Add to this an army of newborn vampires ready to rip the very flesh of Bella Swan's bones and it's getting pretty tense down in Forks.

Sadly, even with a whole army of vampires and werewolves fighting in the finale, this small increase in action doesn't take away from the fact that the film drags in more than one place with blocks of dialogue that feel as if they're going to last a lifetime. It's unfortunate as the action pieces look excellent and the CGI, especially in the werewolves has improved leaps and bounds between New Moon and Eclipse. This shamefully vain dialogue with unnecessary close-ups of Robert Pattinson's face, Kristen Stewart's eyelashes and Taylor Lautner's chest are surely there just to appeal to the female fans and do nothing to progress the story.

It is these main three characters that hinder the film; their stilted dialogue and mediocre acting overshadow the rest of the cast who are all superb. Newcomer Bryce Dallas Howard playing red head vampire Victoria is seriously underused along with the whole Cullen flock who are not given enough room to breathe between the heavy central dialogue. Their acting is fantastic, why not use them more? Thankfully, it isn't all tears before bedtime with some well-timed comic humour from Bella's dad, Charlie. Played by Billy Burke, he is the only character of the used variety that leaps off the screen and he does so well, playing to his strengths as an actor.

Overall, Eclipse moves the game on but only very slowly. David Slade has crafted a beautifully shot movie with some excellent action pieces; but it still remains dull as ditch water because of bland performances from the lead cast and chunky dialogue. It's bound to please fans but biggest film of the year? I think we'll be seeing a certain boy wizard holding that honour for 2010.

Eclipse is the beset Twilight movie so far and now I'm starting to give this series a little mercy. Yes, the writing is still bad, the CGI is awful, there's no chemistry between the leads, there's a lot of laughable dialogue, and terrible characters, but I enjoyed the movie and that's what movies are supposed to do. I'm actually going to watch the next movie with an open mind even if this movie wasn't that good.

So much ado in the world mass media about "Eclipse"! And - much ado about nothing.

"Summit Entertainment", please call back either Catherine Hardwicke or at least Chris Weitz! The franchise is getting from bad to worse. You're in danger of losing millions of viewers for "Breaking Dawn" if the trend begun by David Slade continues! If you don't care about quality movies, care at least about your profits. "Eclipse" is a cheap hack-work whose only aim is to make some easy money. It won't work twice.

David Slade has done the impossible - he managed to butcher the "Eclipse" novel altogether! Instead of the most dynamic book of the saga, which – though possessing no literary qualities of big literature - is at least a page-turner, he produced an incredibly cheesy hash-dish of disconnected episodes, none of which is charged and coherent enough for the viewer to evaluate its meaning for the plot and character development. The film has no magic of Catherine Hardwicke's "Twilight" which concentrated on the phenomenon of first love with all shades of emotion, its tenderness and blunders. The colour gamut of "Twilight", the dialogues, the motivation of the characters, the pacing varying from slow to lightning speed – everything was there to contribute to the magic. Chris Weitz, on the other hand, concentrated on the character of Jacob and on the film gathering momentum in the very end, when Bella goes to Italy. This break from the slow pacing of the time tedious for Bella to break-neck speed of the Italian part does the film credit. Though in comparison with "Twilight", Chris Weitz almost botches up Edward's character to save it at the last moment in the episode with the Volturi, both films have an atmosphere of their own. Not so the "Eclipse".

Slade and Rosenberg seem to have been intensely hating the book while filming it. How otherwise could they have created this … this… product (euphemism)? No coherent and consistent dialogue, no dialogue meaningful enough to give the actors at least SOME room for displaying their acting skills, no character motivation, no chemistry between the characters. The flashbacks with Rosalie and Jasper held some promise, but no, David Slade was very consistent in destroying their appeal, too. Both the stories lack some essential parts absolutely necessary for understanding the characters. On the whole, all the actors have to mumble through some nonsense lines which have to pass for dialogue. ALL of them seem to be there just because the franchise must plod on. Edward's repeated bleating about Bella marrying him obviously gets even on his own nerves. Action? Don't make my cat laugh. If this tiny part of vampires' training and a tiny fragment of real fighting lacking any gusto can be called action, then I'll eat my hat. I bet people expected much more than that bit of morning exercise, waving hands and raising legs. The only credits in this field go to Jasper and Emmett.

Acting? Godawful. It seems the main characters are suffering from various diseases and need medication real quick.

Edward is hanging about with the facial expression of one having chronic dyspepsia. It seems that each and every Bella's appearance on the set is nauseating for him and he's manly fighting this emotion to conceal it. Motilium and sickness medications, quick! It's not a progress in acting, but a step back. Edward was best in "Twilight", in "New Moon" it was slow deterioration, now it's a catastrophe. Edward must be changing, but - so? Edward seems to be turning into a willing slave of Bella and effacing himself completely. It's obvious that, on the one hand, the actor was left with no choices of his own and with not much of a role to play, on the other hand, he's tired of the franchise whatever he may be saying in public (and anyone would be tired of this film 'very DIFFERENT from the previous two'). By the way, we should do Mr. Pattinson credit, for he's honest – he said that he feared nobody would come to see the film. He has definitely seen the pre-release copy. Next time I'll be more attentive to the messages he sends.

Bella. She's lost all the appeal of a young inexperienced girl caring for everybody, eager not to hurt, to bring together, a heart bleeding for everyone. Now we see an egoistic scheming wench not caring a fig about anybody, her only aim, as we learn in the end, was to sift through her motives and to make the RIGHT choice, and that's becoming a vampire, love is secondary here. Is she doing it for her shrink? Next time fetch your pocket calculator to draw up the balance, Bella. Bella's attempt to seduce Edward looks nauseating, so pre-planned it is. Where's love, where's sincerity, where's youthful impetuousness? Gone to the dogs. On the whole, judging by Bella's facial expression it's evident that the girl was dropped head down more than once in her infancy and now has difficulty comprehending what is being said around her. Acetazolamide may have helped, had it been taken earlier. Bella's also obviously a mouth-breather. Remove your adenoids, Bells. Before it's too late and you're too far gone.

Jacob. No progress in comparison with "New Moon", too few and too bad lines given, too little screen time.

Victoria. Rachelle Lefevre was voluptuous, lascivious, dangerous. Bryce Dallas Howard is emaciated, pitiful, heavily painted and timid. She can't touch Rachelle Lefevre. A very bad choice. The wig alone doesn't make the character. A bad mistake of "Summit".

Was there ANYTHING good? My thumbs up to Jasper, Alice, Emmett, Carlisle, Charlie, Riley (though Riley's part could have been made more dramatic and consistent, but not with the current wonder script, alas). Oh, yes, the landscapes were impressive.

Oh god, Edward Cullen, you're so damn hot. Take my virginity, take it, take it now! But wait, no, I'm so conflicted. Jacob Black is also hot. In fact, he might be hotter than you. What should I do, Edward? Should I give in to you, with your milky white skin, your smouldering eyes and chiselled chin, or should I....should I give in to Black, with his ripped six-pack and Hawaiian glow?

Oh Edward, you know I don't want to hurt you, it's just that a girl's virginity is a big deal. I want to lose it with someone special, with someone I love. It's not like I can lose my virginity twice, Edward. It's not like my virginity can grow back. Unless....no. No, you can't be serious Edward. Regrow my virginity? Is that possible, Eddie? Surely it's not. What? I can remain in a state of perpetual virginity by reading Stephenie Meyer's Twilight Series? Oh Edward, sweet, precious Edward, what a genius you are! Call Jacob, call Riley, and come hither yourself Edward, for tonight all beasts dine on the blood of Bella Swann, the most chaste harlot a mortal did ever spawn.

10/10 – Masterpiece.

I've really tried to understand why these movies and books are so popular. I read the first book, and though it was a somewhat fun read, I didn't' see what all the hoopla was about and didn't bother reading all the others.

The first Twilight I found to be entertaining, New Moon was a snoozefest, and now Eclipse found me straining to keep my eyes open. In all honesty, it just seems like nothing ever really happens. Yes, there are some short action sequences, and it was interesting to get some background information on some of the Cullens, but that's about it.

I've really tried to understand why Edward and Jake are so into Bella, and I really don't get it. She's not that interesting of a person and she's always walking around in what seems to me to be a gloomy state. Really, guys, just move on! Also, (just as a sidebar), if the werewolves shorts can magically reappear after they turn back into a human, why do they run around without shirts? Shouldn't they reappear too? Just a thought.

It also seems to me as if the actors are bored in this film too. Especially Kristen Stewart. She seems as though she would rather be anywhere than making another Twilight movie.

But I think the overall problem is that there are really no surprises, no twist and turns in any of the movies. It's all pretty straightforward and predictable. Quite honestly, I find the TV show "The Vampire Diaries" to be far superior to Twilight in almost every way. It has the same premise, more or less (mortal girl torn between her love for two supernatural beings), except that you need a score card to keep up with what's going on. Every week is a roller-coaster ride, which is really enjoyable, and you completely understand why everyone is into the lead girl. And that's what I thought Twilight should have been like.

I guess at the end of the day, you can never underestimate the power of marketing, both for the books and the movies, or the buying power of the average teenage girl.