

I mean, what's not to like? OK, cold stone white clammy dead-like tissue epidermis is kind of repulsive to me, and the whole cannibalism notion is a bit morbid, but if you can look beyond that you do have beautiful people (again looking past the cold pasty un-living aura...), passion, seduction, immortality, super-powers, growling, fighting, music for the senses, a touch of that James Dean "I'm too cool for my school" rebellious allure. Throw into the mix driving machines such as a red convertible BMW M3 (in the book but not in the movie), a silver Volvo C30, a black Mercedes Benz S55 AMG and a jacked up macho-dude 4x4 wall climber all driven effortlessly at reckless speeds and with dangerous yet instinctively controlled maneuvering and you just may win the hearts a few manly men in this epitome of a chick flick. Admittedly, I tend to be more of a romantic than I am a fighter so this "Twilight" love story with high speeds, fast cars, beautiful people and super strength/powers provided the chick flick factor but still let me keep my man card (I think).


I loved the soundtrack and the leading characters were beautiful, thereby reaching the viewer on the two relative senses that pertain to cinematography. I felt the acting (at least that of the lead characters) was excellent. They were attractive, interesting, somewhat unpredictable and even humorous. Some of those in my party who had read the book beforehand were rather disappointed because the movie deviated somewhat from the story, but for me, even after I had read the book
after seeing the movie (finished this past Friday), I still liked the movie better. I guess my imagination is not quite as good as the ensemble of actors and settings that the movie producers put together. Granted, I was not totally impressed with the main vampire character's family, I didn't think they were as beautiful as the book alluded, but it didn't detract much from the entertainment.


The music and the leading character's performances can make a movie for me, even if the story line isn't all that strong (Phantom of the Opera comes to mind). If I don't like the main characters (i.e. if Anne Hathaway starred as Bella) I become disenchanted with the story. For whatever reason, I'm not a big fan of Anne Hathaway. Sandra Bullock is another that always ruins for me whatever movie she's in. If she never opens her mouth, it wouldn't be a problem, but when she talks and I get a sense of her personality, it's like nails on a chalk board for me. Music and sound in general contribute immensely toward the appeal of a movie for me, I loved the Paramore song "
Decode" and the Carter Burwell "
Bella's Lullaby" was/is beautiful.
Linkin Park and
The Black Ghosts were just frosting on the cake.


Now let me contrast to the cult vampire movie of 1987, The Lost Boys. In that movie I thought they also did a phenomenal job casting the main characters. Even the dorky little brother and his pals were well cast/acted, though I didn't care much for their roles and the storyline of the underground anti-vampire patrol. Kiefer Sutherland was the flawless "bad boy" vampire, he was absolutely perfect in this movie (in retrospect, I wish he had been cast as Dr. Carlisle in "Twilight"). He does a decent enough job as Jack Bauer in "24", but he was awesome as "David" in The Lost Boys, very convincing. In addition, Jason Patric as "Michael" and Jami Gertz as "Star" were the beautiful seductive people providing all of the necessary eye candy for those that need that (for me it helps), and I felt they all acted well too.





The Gerard McMann "
Cry Little Sister" song was perfectly choreographed as was the Saxist Tim Capello in the outdoor concert scene playing "
I Still Believe". I thought the vampire dress/make-up was pretty convincing for that time and the movie provided enough scare to keep you on the edge of your seat (it is a vampire movie after all). Michael's little brother was well acted, he added some needed humor, but his yo-yo anti-vampire pals pushed the corny factor a little too far. The mom/boyfriend and grandpa made the movie drag needlessly and didn't really contribute to the underlying story. They just escalated the corniness factor that much further (a third of the the story really needs to be rewritten). Despite those negatives, it's definitely a classic, especially if you love the 80's. As would be expected, the 20 year more modern advantage gives "Twilight" the definite edge in my opinion.


If you prefer the more comedic vampire tales, you can always go back to the bug eating Nicolas Cage (Vampire's Kiss, 1989) and/or the bug eating Arte Johnson (Love At First Bite, 1979) for a campy chuckle. They did use a "bugs and worms" reference in "The Lost Boys", but you wont see the glamor boy Edward Cullen or any his elitist family members snacking on creepy crawlers... If horror is more your genre of choice, Stephen King's contemporary Dracula story "Salem's Lot" (the book, 1975) will no doubt provide spine tingling entertainment for you.