Only people expecting a perfect adaptation will be disappointed...

Rating: 10/10 (11 December 2008)

It had always bugged me (hearing people constantly complain about stuff left out/things that were changed in movie adaptations of books). I'd never read any books that films had been based on, and therefore was able to enjoy the films for what they were, rather than comparing them to the books they were adapted from. With the Twilight series, however, I finally decided that I wanted to see things from a different angle. I wanted to read these novels and then watch the film so that I could get a different perspective on things. I started reading the Twilight novels after hearing that a movie was being made based on the first one. Although I'd heard it was a series targeted at girls, I thought the books were worth giving a shot and went into it with an open mind. I actually really enjoyed them and couldn't put them down, they were that good. As for the movie...
Bella & Edward - I can happily, and with all certainty, assure people that Kristen Stewart has been perfectly cast as Bella. They could not have found a better fit. She embodies the character completely and absolutely does her justice. Robert Pattison's Edward is suitably cold in the beginning, but soon warms up and you can tell these two actors have the chemistry needed to make the Bella and Edward relationship believable. Although they are given questionable dialogue at times, they both pull out all the stops - and thank heavens, as this film rests almost completely on their shoulders. That isn't to say the other characters in the film aren't important. Far from it. Every other person in the movie is crucial, and I'm glad to see the casting was spot-on with almost every single one of them.
The Cullens - They are given limited screen time (some more than others), but manage to make the most of their time on screen. They're ALL good in their roles. Peter Facinelli and Nikki Reed (as Carlisle and Rosalie) are probably given the best chance to develop their characters, whilst Emmett, Jasper and Esme are sadly underused. I was annoyed with how briefly Alice was on screen (she was my favourite character from the books and Ashley Greene was another superbly cast actress. What little we saw of her, however, was spot-on. She *is* Alice).
Mike Newton, Jessica Stanley, Eric Yorkie, Angela Weber - The actors playing Bella's "friends" (I use the term loosely, because she doesn't exactly treat them as such) are given a surprisingly solid amount of screen time to develop their characters. They all manage to define themselves within mere moments of Bella meeting them (Anna Kendrick as Jessica probably being the stand-out of the lot). They provide some of the film's funnier moments.
Charlie and Renee - Billy Burke and Sarah Clarke (as Bella's parents) are both memorable, given their limited screen time. The awkwardness between father and daughter is something that's stayed faithful to the book. So has the mother/daughter relationship. Billy Burke is especially good as Charlie (he provides some amusing moments).
Jacob Black - Sadly, like quite a few other important characters in the movie, Jacob's underused and we don't really get to know him as well as we should. Taylor Lauter does the best he can, though. He shows promise. Jacob's father (Billy) has even less time, but still gets a couple of laughs.
James, Victoria and Laurent - Although Cam Gigandet is somewhat over-the-top as James, Rachelle Lefevre's Victoria has the quiet menacing thing down.
Directing - Catherine Hardwicke makes the movie visually interesting. She has a very distinct style, which I think the film benefits from. Hardwicke's directing keeps the film grounded, and it has a 'realism' about it (which is quite the feat, considering). The scenery/atmosphere is amazing and the *look* of things is very faithful to the book. There's an incredible amount of thought and detail that's gone into the movie. The film's soundtrack is used exceptionally well. It never feels intrusive, but is just there in the background to enhance things (in a subtle way). The visually-stunning baseball scene is a perfect example of this. It's one of the best parts of the film. I also liked the wide sweeping shots of Bella and Edward high up in the trees (where 'Bella's Lullaby' was used to great effect).
If I had to pick one negative, it would be that the film feels a tad rushed. It felt as though there was SO much to get through, and certain things/characters weren't lingered on long enough. But this is a minor quibble. What's most important is that the heart of the books is maintained, and I believe the film has achieved this. Twilight isn't full of CGI, which makes it a better film. It's much more subtle/serious (though there's still plenty of humour, as well as some action. The film's humour was actually something I really enjoyed). Twilight may not be totally perfect/flawless, but I think it comes pretty close and remains very true to the books. Overall, I think this movie is successful at translating the first of Stephenie Meyer's books to screen. It's very enjoyable (I saw it twice at the cinema) and I cannot wait for New Moon. Make sure to stay for the end credits, they're well worth watching.