What do you want to watch? Be careful...

Rating: 6/10 (6 February 2009)

Here's the deal. You have a beautiful girl, properly named Bella (the gorgeous Kristen Stewart) who moves to a small town to live with her father, a chief of police (Billy Burke). She goes to school, she's the new girl, the new toy. Suddenly, a good looking guy by the name of Edward (Robert Pattinson) comes along and saves her life in a way that doesn't seem human. Bella doesn't understand, and becomes fascinated with Edward, who keeps a secret we all know.
A story like this one could happen to any of you today, leaving aside everything that's not human, because Edward is a vampire, and that changes everything. "Twilight" is based on a famous novel Stephenie Meyer, a lot of people went to see it because of that and for the same reason they'll go to see the second part, shooting right now. Considering the fact that the novel has to be 'condensed' for the screen, screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg did a pretty ambiguous job; considering that in developing an adolescent love story she included lines like "you are my life now, Bella" and also had the nerve to put thing like "you are like my personal brand of heroine". Who would say such a thing? A vampire, you could answer, if you intend to defend the film's writing.
While it may all be fault of the novel itself (which I didn't read but heard was lame enough), it's true that the movie develops its plot in a hurry, and we always feel we're missing an important number of conversations between the very interesting main characters. Pattinson (now a heartthrob who got the role of his life) and Stewart (one of the finest actresses of her generation) work well together and their chemistry is palpable, either when they transmit they want to be together or the exact opposite. In this particular aspect, director Catherine Hardwicke gets the best out of the movie.
Hardwicke directed the fantastic "Thirteen", so she knows about teen angst. However, this time everything is more focused: the camera showing only the characters' eyes, emphasizing their looks. The fact that Edward is a vampire and Bella can't have him so close seems to be the center of Hardwicke's attention and, as if she wanted to show teenage sexual desire-and eventually abstinence- as an important topic of the film (she mixes it up with love sacrifice, but it becomes unnecessary and tired because the images leave it clear), she shoots the film's hottest scene with deep breaths and dim lights, ending it in nothing.
If you watch the action scenes-fights between vampires and other creatures-you will also understand that part of the film wasn't Hardwicke's biggest concern. The shaky camera that cinematographer Elliot Davis developed and worked so well for her in her first film, now seems out of place. The action scenes are badly shot, incomprehensible and sometimes even badly edited (or not edited with enough enthusiasm); the music by Carter Burwell sounds like out of a B-movie or a cheap TV series about murders and-maybe-vampires.
At least Hardwicke will not be directing the sequel (maybe she'll get back to what she does best, with all her usual actors included-they are all in this movie-) and at least "Twilight" is better than "Jumper". You can watch it for some good performances, or for some fun. That's a lot to say.