Excellent adaption, So-so movie

Rating: 6/10 (22 December 2009)

Before I start actually talking about the film, I would just like to say that even though I have read the first book and did enjoy it (despite it's flaws), I am NOT a crazy Twilight fan. I read the book primarily because I was going to go see the film with my English class (of all things) and wanted to have my background info; and let me say, this is probably one of the best book-to-movie adaptions I have ever seen. Not because it's a good *movie*, but because it follows the book to the letter and brings almost everything from the novel onto the screen and into the script.
That being said, I found the book to be, while no doubt enjoyable and sweet, written with a mediocre hand and riddled with unfortunate clichés, and original ideas that come across as nothing more than simplistic sketchy plot devices. For a debut, it's undoubtedly passable, but it's really the story and the romance that made it so popular, not the quality. The same goes for the movie.
The story, as most people on this Earth now know, is about an awkward teenager, Isabella "Bella" Swan, who moves from sunny Phoenix, Arizona to the wet, depressing North-West town of Forks, in an effort to give her mom and her boyfriend some space. Although she quickly captures the attention (and hearts) of what seems to be half the male adolescent population of Forks, Bella only has eyes for Edward, the handsome, pale-skinned, and mysterious boy who seems to despise her very presence. However, eventually they begin a friendship that turns into something much, much more squeal-worthy. And therein lies the conflict; Edward cannot allow himself to get too close to the introverted Miss Swan. Why? Bella's pasty Adonis is not only super-strong and super-fast, but super-immortal; he's a vampire, and he "vants to sauck her bluud".
The movie's dialogue is poor and clichéd, even more so than in the novel - the cast, which I honestly love, did the best they could (for the most part) with a barely acceptable screenplay, but that in itself was enough to bring the film down in my eyes. The same can be said for the awful special effects, which were laughable at best. As several people have already said, in the scene where Edward reveals the reason that he cannot go out in the sunlight (he gets sparkly *rolls eyes*), if I had not already known what was supposed to be happening to him, I wouldn't have noticed the sparkles - and even being prepared, I almost missed the poor effects entirely.
However, as I said before, I do love the cast - though not entirely for their performances in this movie, which, while enough to *just* carry the bad dialogue, aren't as good as they could be. Robert Pattinson isn't, to be honest, as attractive as I'd imagined Edward to be (he isn't bad looking, just not good looking ENOUGH), but he has personality, and that, while not revealed through his words or even his actions, comes across nonetheless. He makes Edward way more likable than he is in the book, I think. Kirsten Stewart is wonderful too - I love her and think she is an incredible actress. She manages to create a Bella that you can sympathize with; monotone and introverted, yet still vulnerable, sweet, and in possession of an inner fire that doesn't show itself often, but is obviously there. She and Pattinson have an incredible chemistry - and while the script has nothing but long, lingering looks between them to show that they are falling in love, the romantic/sexual tension they create so naturally manages to take that crappy "You don't have to say anything for me to know you're perfect" ideology and make it believable.
So, all in all, Twilight was an incredible adaption of a mediocre book, sacrificing quality dialogue for lusty glances, turning what could've been a thousand times better into an only passable film that was carried solely by the actors and their chemistry.