8 seconds ago 2010-02-09T21:49:08-08:00
New Moon pales in comparison to Twilight, according to the critics.
Chicago Sun-Times' Roger Ebert says "the characters in this movie should be arrested for loitering with intent to moan. Never have teenagers been in greater need of a jump-start. Granted some of them are more than 100 years old, but still: their charisma is by Madame Tussaud."
See what the New Moon stars looked like before they were famous
Ty Burr of The Boston Globe remarks: "Sorry, girls: The thrill is gone." He says that "where the first film’s director, Catherine Hardwicke, plugged into [author Stephenie] Meyer’s vision of supernatural teenage lust with abandon, Chris Weitz is stuck with a sequel that’s a morning-after mope-fest."
See Robert Pattinson's sexy pose at the New Moon premiere!
Burr also says that the film favors werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner) than vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson).
"When he's onscreen, Pattinson’s Edward is all emo posturing under a trembling bouffant - the actor suddenly seems to be embarrassed to be here," says Burr. "Lautner's performance, by contrast, has the warmth of an actual human."
Check out Kristen Stewart's biggest red carpet mishaps!
But Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times says Lautner and Kristen Stewart (who plays Bella) have no heat: "The connection between these two is so self-evidently non-romantic that it turns out not to be much of a diversion."
USA Today's Claudia Puig agrees, saying the the Bella-Edward romance is a bore and that "the pace picks up" once Jacob and his pals turn into werewolves. She gave the film 2.5 out of 4 stars.
Variety writes that ladies hoping to gaze at Pattinson the big screen " may be disappointed by Pattinson's reduced presence" in the sequel, "as his Edward appears predominantly in mumbling visions until a cliffhanger that brazenly sets up the next episode."
See the love lives of the New Moon stars!
Despite some harsh reviews, the film is still expected to earn more than $85 million during its first weekend (it has run up the biggest advance sales of any film in history). It opens in 4,024 locations, beginning with 3,500 performances at 12:01 a.m. Friday.
Get more Us! Follow us on Twitter, Friend us on Facebook, Subscribe to Us Weekly
comments
-
Mimi RocksAre these critics IDIOTS?????!!!!!! If they read the books they'd know that the book is about Edward leaving her. READ THE DAMN BOOK BEFORE YOU CRITIQUE IT!!!!!!!!report abuseposted November 23, 2009 3:33 PM PST
-
FG137Critics get paid to spit out an opinion. It's the biggest movie going right now, so of course they're going to weigh in on it. I doubt any of them cares about the actors or the story or how true it is to the books. If you're a fan and you enjoyed the movie, it was money well spent. Who cares what the critics think?report abuseposted November 20, 2009 8:33 PM PST
-
JGenisisDuh R Patz isn't going to be in the film that much.... Edward is basically gone from the entire book...Duh. duh, duh... obviously these critics haven't read the books before they decided to open their huge mouths about the movie... I haven't seen it yet, but I'm going today...I bet its fine, these critics are just hates..report abuseposted November 20, 2009 7:47 PM PST
-
misses razoethis is ridiculous new moon is even better than twilight and im pretty sure it sucked n thats why tickets are sold out everywhere n its done better than any movie ever??? yea keep talking smack twilight n new moon rock!!!!!report abuseposted November 20, 2009 5:55 PM PST
-
mel23wiUmm have these "critics" ever read the book? Duh Edward is MIA, he left. Any girl thinking she was going to have Rob for eye candy obviously didn't read the books so sucks to be her. And DUH Bella and Jake don't have a clear romantic connection. The movie is awesome I've already seen it!report abuseposted November 20, 2009 5:04 PM PST
-
Of course Pattinson has less screen time than Lautner. New Moon (the book) centers more around Jacob and his transition and relationship with Bella than any of the others. Did the critics read the book prior to writing their reviews?report abuseposted November 20, 2009 4:57 PM PST
-
heathercritics usually don't know a good movie even if it slapped them in the face. they usually always enjoy the movies that put me into a coma...so i never care what they say because they get paid to be ignorant. so i am going to see this movie with an open mind and knowing how much i loved twilight i'll love this one as well!report abuseposted November 20, 2009 4:43 PM PST
-
sugarListen, I go to enjoy a movie just to 'enjoy' it. I have NEVER listened to critics. If I had listened to them, I would have missed a whole lot of movies that I absolutely loved!! Everything is subjective, so no one should pay any attention to them!! By the way, love is universal and it has NO age limit....I'm 56 and I have read ALL these books at the very least 5 times.report abuseposted November 20, 2009 4:06 PM PST
-
Iceman77Tiig3rlilyy, sweetheart he is not gay. Pattinson is too careless about hsi appearance to be gay, gays would never leave the house with such a unshaven and unbrushed look.report abuseposted November 20, 2009 3:59 PM PST
-
Strangeri've got news for you: twilight. is. stupid. there is no action in any of the books - only a sappy soap-opera, a poor excuse for a romance novel. and the movies are no better. i was duct-taped to a chair and forced to watch twilight, and i decided that if edward and bella are completely eliminated from the plot, then twilight would have been excellent. EDWARD AND BELLA BURN ETERNAL!!report abuseposted November 20, 2009 3:19 PM PST
Post A Comment
RELATED ARTICLES
- Pierce Brosnan reveals the character actor within
February 9, 2010 4:57 PM PST - Taylor Lautner Talks Birthday Plans On Edge Of 18
February 9, 2010 2:40 PM PST - Alba not flattered by attempt to look like her
February 7, 2010 12:59 PM PST - Taylor Lautner To 'Stretch' Into Latest Role
February 6, 2010 5:14 PM PST - Stretch Armstrong Casts Taylor Lautner in Title Role
February 6, 2010 4:47 PM PST
RELATED PHOTOS
RELATED VIDEOS
Updates
Today
-
-
1 minute ago 2010-02-09T21:47:48-08:00
-
2 minutes ago 2010-02-09T21:46:54-08:00
-
2 minutes ago 2010-02-09T21:46:25-08:00
-
3 minutes ago 2010-02-09T21:45:41-08:00
-
4 minutes ago 2010-02-09T21:44:30-08:00
comments