It was a good movie. I don't get what everybody is gripping about.

Rating: 10/10 (21 November 2009)

Okay, I don't usually spend time ever writing reviews like this, but I feel like I have to since this film is getting hammered.
First let me start off by saying, I've read the books, seen the first movie and am in my 20's so no, i'm not some overly obsessed tween fan girl. I went into this movie not having the highest expectations for this film after seeing the massively awkward text we call Twilight: The Movie last year. Don't get me wrong, I appreciated the first but it had A lot of shortcomings.
The first thing I noticed in New Moon was the color and the lighting. Everything as really rich with warmth and the colors chosen really popped. The lighting that was used in New Moon, I feel, made the actors look a lot better, which was the problem I had with the first. It was too cold and blue, and the lighting reminded me of florescence which makes everybody look bad.
Second: Having a Cinema director made all the difference! Cathriene Hardwicke was passionate about the series, but she just wasn't a movie director. And believe me, it showed. I'm happy they gave the project to Chris Weitz. Personally, I think he did fantastic work with his choices of camera movement and angles. His cinematography really invited me in as a viewer which is what it is suppose to do. Hardwicke's camera work really always kept me at arms length and was never really intimate feeling.
Third: The acting was a good bit better in this movie. We all know how much of a brick Kristen Stewart was in Twilight, and I was dearly hoping it would not be that way for New Moon. She's improved quite drastically, to my surprise. She actually was able to convey emotion when it was appropriate. They other characters held their own as well and improved their characters from the last film.
Finally, the time line and adaptation. I've heard a lot of people on here gripping about the scenes being too short or prematurely cut or jagged feeling. I'm really not sure what they're basing this argument on. I felt the movie ran along at a smooth place. Scenes are going to be shorter if not slightly altered from the book. It's an adaptation people! It can't be dead on 100% of the time. The movie would be 4hrs. I thought they did a brilliant job of capturing this book on film. Some things were altered, some changed but thats okay with me. I realize that it can't ever be perfect, and other people should too. Movies are complicated beings on their own, practically unruly when a book's involved.
Overall this film was a good movie. I honestly don't know why it has such a low review. The only way I can figure is that there are people out there that are dead set on hating this film no matter what. I give it a 8 out of 10 but i felt the need to score it a 10 to offset the unjust hate. If you've read the books and can appreciate the film as an ADAPTATION and appreciate the stylistic effort that was put into it, then you'll enjoy this film. It's a MASSIVE improvement from the first, but if you're dead set on hating it, then don't bother. You wont ever be happy with any of them.