I want the money (I didn't pay) back

Rating: 2/10 (11 June 2010)

I disliked the movie "Twilight", so I saw this one against my better judgment, and with quite a bit of skepticism. Ten minutes in, it was clear that "New Moon" would be better than it's prequel. Sadly, this doesn't say a lot. Throughout the movie, I found myself being either annoyed, bored or utterly amused, and all for the wrong reasons.
The story does indeed stay somewhat true to the book this time, but I think I would have had trouble following what goes on, if I hadn't read the book. Most key moments from the novel have been given focus here, but there's not much to fill out the in-betweens, so this movie impressively succeeds in being both boringly slow AND fast-paced. The fast pace is because of the same thing that made "Twilight" fast-paced; the would-be romance between two people who go from just meeting, to not being able to live without each other in all of 5 days, more or less. It wasn't believable then, and it isn't now. So why boringly slow? Because of these:
1. THE DIALOG. When you write a book, it's okay to use fancier words, and to give your characters long speeches, to let them get descriptive; it's sometimes necessary, because since we can't see either their body-language or facial expressions, their words will to some extent have to make up for them. However, you should never forget that real life people don't talk like that! This movie sadly utilizes lines directly from the book, and as in most such cases, it ends up sounding wooden and insecure, not to mention ridiculous.
2. THE ACTORS. Robert Pattinson looks like he's in immense pain, from beginning to end. He sounds like he tries to put some seriousness into his lines, but without backing them up with any kind of conviction or real feeling. Kristen Stewart once again gasps her way through too many lines, and still hasn't learned to master any facial expressions beyond bored and vacant. Never once did I see "Bella" during the 2 hours this movie progressed - I saw an actress trying hard. She appears to be struggling with every scene, and failing. Her interaction with Pattinson looks they were forced into it, and his attempt at seriousness clashes almost spectacularly with her monotone indifference. After a while, it became amusing to watch her incompetently stumble and stutter through scenes. Towards the ending, I found myself wondering if the director and the screenwriter intentionally left out the more emotional moments, because they realized she wouldn't be able to act them out anyway.
Finally, we have: 3. THE CHARACTERS. Can't say much about them, because there's really nothing to say. If you would ask me to describe any of them without using looks, profession or race, I wouldn't be able to give you an answer. I'm not demanding someone to relate to, but I at least want someone to care about, and here, there's just nothing. The actors could have been replaced with mannequins in some places, and I wouldn't have noticed the difference. I can't call any of the characters particularly memorable, but if any of them were, they would all be found among he minor ones.