Monday, July 19, 2010

Twilight Saga: Eclipse with a grip-load of spoilers and disturbing images

Directed by David Slade. Released 2010. Rated PG-13.

If you wanted to see this movie you probably have already. If you haven’t, you didn’t want to anyway. That established, I am going to spoil this movie as much as possible.

First, let me assure you that I am as disturbed by the frequency of children’s movies in my reviews as you are. This next one straddles the line between the grown-up and children’s genres, and should probably have its own category. I’ll call it the Woman-Child’s genre. This genre reflects the dreams of women while retaining unrealistic views that can only be called childish.

In case you’re worried I’m being sexist, there is a Man-Child genre. These films are mostly action, though. Like Die Hard 4, or The Losers. The unrealistic points of view in Man-Child movies are mainly awesome to watch,

and don’t make you uncomfortable like Woman-Child movies do.

(Like walking in on your mom....)

So, here we have an interesting specimen of Woman-Child cinema: Twilight Eclipse. It’s a new sort of woman’s movie that is dark without being lesbian-feminist, yet still so estrogenially driven that only women can stare into directly…like the title hints at.

And that’s why I had to watch it at a drive-in. Watching a movie like this is like being locked in a car while an incontinent Pepe LePew has his way with a futily-resisting cat. Watching it at a drive-in is nearly the same, but with your head refreshingly out of the window.

(Just another reason why Smell-o-Vision would be a terrible idea)

But let’s get to the gritty. Eclipse has a story! Or something very close to it. I have suspicions that Eclipse is two stories, but the interesting one is not only told by secondary characters, but has almost no impact on the main characters.

We all know that Bella and Edward are simply made for each other, right? And we all know that it’s Jacob who really deserves her, but she’s, like, too conflicted over her relationship with Edward, right? Good, because this movie is nothing like hearing about it for two hours.

Except that Bella is really only leading Jacob on for her own selfish means. And not only Jacob, but his entire tribe of Indians. On top of that, she never lets Edward into the know. Does this make her a bad person? What part of it doesn’t? Whatever. There’s cooler stuff going on, while this is unfolding.

There is a vampire that is pissed at Bella from the first movie. This vampire is raising an army of vampires to kill Bella. Bella’s house-trained vampires hear about it, via equal parts obvious news reports and clairvoyance. They immediately and unquestioningly step up to the table, putting all their lives down. They are naturally worried that this army of super vampires could be dangerous to their six-man team.

(I don't see why people so fashionably dressed would worry about anything)

Selflessly, Bella enlists the services of the were-wolf tribe Jacob is from. She has some few concerns that are all silenced when she reasons: “But this is for my protection.” It’s never talked about it again, and she never talks to any of the fighters ever again.

This is probably shy of the half way point. After here we just see poorly delivered line after poorly delivered line from both good and bad guys, along with different training sequences. Bella exemplifies Triflin’ brand Ho behavior, and Edward proposes. She accepts and then lets Jacob rub up on her in front of Edward for an entire night without ever acknowledging that it might be awkward. Then she makes out with Jacob the next morning. Honestly, if Jacob could just shut up about trying to be alpha male he could bank on a piece of that triflin’ booty being available every time Edward left the house. Or, apparently, whenever Bella was in the mood.

(Edward is just overreacting. This is part of the uniform for milkmen now a days)

We get some more back story on some other vampires. It's kinda fun, but like I said, Bella couldn’t care less. Then the war happens. You may hear some bad things about the war, but it was ok. Arms were being torn off, heads were snapped, and giant wolves were eating people. Of course, the main characters were pretty safe and far away. Only the two most important bad guys break free and make their way to Bella so we can tie the two stories together.

Everything turns out ok. Bella even cuts herself to distract the bad vampires so she doesn’t have to see Edward’s head broken. I say “even” because Bella actually did something for someone else, not because I think it made the movie better. I think we can all agree killing Edward would only simplify things and lead to a happier ending for everyone.

But she never apologizes for risking everyone’s lives, never apologizes for cheating on Edward in front of him, and actually insists that she becomes a vampire for the lifestyle, not because she loves Edward. In fact, she makes it sound like he is simply convenient.

For some reason, Jacob gets mangled by a stray enemy in one of the last sequences. I think it was an excuse for the doctor vampire to do good deeds to werewolves, but, like everything else poignant in this movie, it has no moral effect on Bella.

So there you have it. I couldn’t say anything more. If you aren’t getting turned on by Jacob’s abs, there is no reason to watch this. Don’t let anyone tell you that they like it for the story. They like it because they want to be immaculate whores.

(She may have the name, but she don't look like Mother Mary)


  1. That last comment goes way too far. I can understand being annoyed with girls and their unreasonable obsession of Twilight, and Edward. However, there is absolutely nothing that would justify a man beating a woman. Nothing. Your saying that is disgusting, and shows a lack of maturity.

  2. There you have a picture of a dude in really good shape and skimpy underwear pouring milk on himself. Women will look at that, quickly admire his abs, then move on. Now, if that was a girl in really good shape and skimpy underwear pouring milk on herself, men would slow down and admire the art a bit more. Why? Because women prefer emotional porn. Men focus on the physical, women on the emotional--this shouldn't be news to anyone, unless you're retarded, in which case you're retarded. Take a look at the Man-Child's genre and the Woman-Child's genre. The ideal character these movies create are essentially the same one, only they're customized to the sex whose ideal they are meant to portray. The man's man goes about beating people up, killing stuff with his hands, and destroying things with explosives, all while still having time to hook up with hot babes. The woman's woman goes about beating and killing people emotionally, and destroying relationships and homes [not physically], all while still having time to fall in love with multiple guys and not being sure which to pick. It's the same damn character. But while women see Mr. T and say "that's dumb," men see Bella and say "She's a horrible person...and she's ugly and uninteresting." Why the masculine backlash? Are men overreacting? Nope. Mr. T never beats a woman. Mr. T never kills a woman. When Mr. T blows up a building, a woman is never inside; only bad men are in there. Bella, on the other hand, inflicts emotional beatings and killings on Team Edward and Team Jacob. Bella accomplishes Mr. T's feats but in an emotional realm, but always against the opposite sex. Simple media such as this reveals that the female projection of its ideal involves the destruction of the opposite sex, while the male projection involves the destruction of everything BUT the opposite sex. The male projection can arguably be said to PRESERVE the opposite sex. That's the big difference. I mean, if a movie came out where the main character was a male and throughout the movie he was beating the women attempting to woo him, women would be outraged. But The Twilight Saga is essentially a series of movies/books where the female lead regularly administers severe emotional beatings to the male characters attempting to woo her. It's the female version of the same offense! And I defy you to convince any sobbing teenage girl whose boyfriend just dumped her that a broken arm (physical) is more painful than a broken heart--not even they will admit that. When it comes down to it, even though women like to pretend all men are pigs and are horrible, we all know whose moral compasses REALLY point north--or at least, we know who has enough of a conscious to stay on the right side of a certain line of selfishness. Women shouldn't complain about men being so obsessed with the physical; in fact, women should encourage it (sorry, fat chicks). If men focused on "inner beauty" as much as ugly girls wanted them to, all men would be gay, and ugly girls would still be ugly. So too bad, fat, ugly chicks, but until your gender can fix it's decency gauge, you will remain single against your will. Unless you can find a vampire or werewolf, which I guess makes you either a necrophiliac or cynophiliac. Sickos.

  3. Well said, Ben. I watched the first one out of curiosity, the second one to spend time with family, and now have no reason to see the third.

    I admit I enjoyed reading the books, but after my old roommate commented that I laughed a whole lot more than she did reading the books, I imagine I read more for the humor of the story (plus I like a nice, happy, easy read now and again)

    I still find it sad, if not a little amusing, that adult women fantasize about Edward. Who would give up their marriage for a fictional character (who in my opinion isn't even desirable...)?

  4. Ben, we just saw this movie, and now I've just re-read your review - and it's frightening how much we saw it through the same eyes.

    Except that my rose-colored glasses allowed for more projection on my part. I thought that Bella was actually distressed at being Helen of Troy - and I thought she was a teeny bit more mature about dealing with the reality that we can care about more than one person at a time - but that it's possible to make a permanent decision to choose one over all others.

    And I bought it that she kissed Jacob only because that was the only way she could get him from going off to die for her, because there were several times when they agreed that he would only try to kiss her again when she asked for it (another spoiler).

    And I was surprised when Bella finally came out and said that she's been listening to everyone around her who've been giving very convincing warnings about how it's going to feel a few centuries from now after she gives up a real life - but that she's been down on life since birth, and all those warnings give her a perverse sense of hope. So it's more than just adolescent stupidity after all. (But I'd still try Cymbalta first if I were her)

    It's always been an implausible plot, but I think she was acting out the script as well as could be expected.