द ट्वाईलाईट सागा: न्यू मून

The first movie is better / fresher probably because it was directed by a woman... (maybe that's why the books are just SO cool) and as for the music, well Carter Burwell has genius and experience beyond his years, so that too would make Twilight an infinitely exquisite experience over and above the sequel. More budget doesn't always produce a superior movie, sometimes less is more, so I still prefer the first movie to this one. (I went into the hall and tried opening it. then i forgot what happened next and somehow) I actually couldn't think of enough things to say about this movie for the required minimum of ten line criteria by IMDb, so sorry about the random bracketed words in the middle.

Admittedly I have only in the last 2 days watched Twilight and New Moon and I am totally baffled by the popularity of these movies. Especially New Moon this film was TERRIBLE. Taylor Lautner cannot act to save himself, yet next to Kirsten Stewart and Robert Pattinson he looked like he had the talent of Catherine Hepburn.

Now, about the acting.... Kirsten Stewart has one face and that is the "semi-sad" look. For the most part ot simply looked like she couldn't wait for the film to be over. Robert Pattinson has one face and that is also the "semi-sad" look. I think he may be this decades answer to Luke Perry. There was a valid reason that the period between 90210 and Twilight had no "Luke Perry types". They can't act!! I fail to see the appeal. Taylor Lautner constantly does that thing where it looks like he is gazing about 20 metres away trying to read micro-printed reading cards and his lines come out accordingly.

And did it bother anyone else that Bella is just so accepting of the fact that vampires and werewoves exist???

Now I know these are movies made to be aimed at teens and tweens, but for crying out loud at least TRY and make a decent film. There are Werewolves and Vampires present. Shouldn't there be epic battles and much blood lust??

Here are a few points that came to mind: 1) Twilight refers to the beginning of the evening between sunset and dusk and when Vampires and Werewolves get ready to come out to play. They ARE NOT daywalkers. If the characters are daywalkers then "twilight" is a pointless time of the day and had no reference to the story..... 2) Calling a movie New Moon where you introduce werewolves into the story would be OK, if the "moon" had anything to do with their ability to turn. Having them as daywalkers as I stated in point 1 defeats the purpose altogether. You may as well have called the story "Cheesecake", such was the relevance. (Mmmmmm Cheesecake).... 3) Vampires and Werewolves are creatures of legend and not a bunch of sorry ass "Emo" teens. They are vicious and bloodthirsty, not whiny and desperate.

Perhaps Stephanie Meyers has them confused with Waaah-wolves and Vam-criers? Yes?........

I am yet to watch Eclipse but it will need to be a vast improvement on New Moon because it was possibly the worst sequel ever....and yes I am including Police Academies 2 through 7!!!

A very generous 4/10 at best.

I too expected this movie to be better. I read the 4 books. The thing is they cut out the best lines from the books which can add SO much to the movies. I was looking forward to some seens in the movie: Edward proposal for Bella, when they talk while they are waiting to get out the Volturi, very romantic and whilte they are in plane going back home. I think the scenarist must be replaced or the writer should oversee the script. The only reason movies are hit cause of the books only. Most people who did not read the books did not like the movies. Hope they'll do better in the 3rd one. But I really hope they'll do much much better in the 4th movie cause this is the book I'd like most. In general, if you read the books you must watch the movies, its nice to have the characters & seens a life.

First of all, I haven't read the novels/books, so I can't say how close this is to the source material. I've heard that, the first movie (Twilight) didn't bring everything from the book onto the screen (which makes sense, because otherwise the source material would've been really slim/weak). While we had our introductions in the first movie (and I'm assuming you have either seen that or at least read the book), we should be able to have more "fun" with the characters this time around ... well if you thought that, than you are very wrong!!

The things K. Stewarts character (Bella) has to go through, come across. But while some additional stuff has been made up (or so I've been told), that wasn't in the book, to have a "special" character with more screen time, this all adds up to a pretty dreadful experience.

The acting wasn't really top notch from part 1. There is no reason for that. And I think the only one coming out of, mostly unscathed, is Taylor Lautner. And the girl who played in "Up in the Air", forgot her name. But that's more due to the movie "Up in the Air" than to her role in this one.

While nothing much is happening (not only acting wise), the movie still tries to be as dramatic as it can be. The problem being, it isn't at all! And while there are a few nice action pieces, the whole thing feels utterly ridiculous, which makes it quite hard to really enjoy it. Again though, as with the first one, this was aimed at a female audience group and if you saw it in theaters, than you might have heard quite a few of them screaming. There is one "special" scene that really made them happy ... and some guys too (although they might have been cynical)! While the scene as it is, didn't excite me and influenced my vote directly, the impact it has/had, does reflect in my vote, as well as the fact, that the target audience seems to love it ...

Okay here it is, New Moon is not unwatchable (thought some parts come close). Twilight was a bit better mostly cause it had some direction. This one is severely unfocused, with a plot that denies motivation and has lazy acting across the board...well not quite.

New Moon may have one edge over its predecessor which is that Taylor Launter puts more into the game than Rob Pattinson. At times, it feels like Jacob may be the better match for Bella. Their interaction which takes up the majority of the movie in fact, feels less broody than the Bella/Edward connection. Unfotunately, around the beginning of the third act we grow out of Jacob almost as fast as we grow into him. Wheras Edward is quite blatantly shy, Jacob by contrast is angry. The reasons for this however seem largely unjustified by the story. Like all bad stories, this one advances by making up its own rules on the spot, resulting in a movie that makes very little sense.

I'm truly not sure what it is about the Twilight saga that demands such a plastic style of acting. Why is everyone so lazy about this? it actually degrades the quality of the material. If this is the kind of Romantic chemistry that sells on the market (a chemistry where two people act like kissing is more pain than pleasure) then Romance itself could be a dying genre.

But perhaps that is an overstatement. New Moon gave me something to watch on TV when there was nothing else on, I wouldn't recommend it for any other purpose.