wooden acting, weak story line, nothing happens, why the hype ?

Rating: 2/10 (5 April 2010)

Having read other reviews of this movie, all I can say it is a shame that people have given this 10/10 whilst openly admitting they think it is only worth 4 or 5 by their standards but they want to "even it up a little from the people who have given it 1/10". The 4.odd/10 it has received is a little flattering (well... very) by any standards, this is a dreadful dreadful movie, a straight to DVD production at best, if it should have been realised at all. The marketing team who have managed to make this such a box office and DVD success are geniuses !! I had a Twilight and New Moon marathon inflicted on me earlier this week, having watched Twilight (and being very disappointed) I was promised the second was better so optimistically donated another 2 hours of my life to watching it; I CAN say this is better than the first one of the "saga" (strictly this is a saga because it is a long story comprising a sequence of events, don't let the attachment of the word to these movies make you think it can be considered in the same breath as Starwars, Lord of the Rings, etc etc though) but only in the same way breaking your arms is better than breaking your legs, you wouldn't really choose for either of them to happen...
I can honestly say this is the worst movie I have ever seen (well, second worst to its predecessor), the quality of acting is comparative with 5 year olds in a nativity, the plot follows some kind of love story between a vampire (which the author has made an ill attempt at updating the genre of, he (they) sparkle beautifully in the sunshine instead of dying with no attempt (unlike the far superior Blade) to explain why) and a weird brunette who becomes somewhat of a bunny boiler, has a bit of a flirt with a werewolf, then goes back to the sparkly vampire. I have labelled this section as a potential plot spoiler but don't be mislead into thinking there is a plot to be spoilt. Imagine (English readers of this review will understand this) Hollyoaks with poorer acting, no sex, no plot lines, no beautiful women, and rubbish mythical creatures and you pretty much have the Twilight series.
Given the hype around this movie and the others in the "saga" it must seem that I'm in some way taking the micky out of this movie etc, but you have me on scouts honour that words really CAN NOT describe how bad this movie is ! I have rated this as 2/10, it would have gotten 1 if zero/10 was an option, as it is not; it has received the lowest score possible from me plus a bonus point for the CGI in turning man -> werewolf -> man.
The 130 minutes spent watching this could be much better used painting a wall, alphabetising your CD collection or passing a kidney stone !!