Far From the Madding Crowd (6/10): Far from The Hunt

"It is difficult for a woman to define her feelings in a language chiefly made by men to express theirs.”

Thomas Vinterberg decided to follow up his critically acclaimed 2012 film, The Hunt, with this adaptation of Thomas Hardy’s classic novel set in Victorian England. It was a sharp change of direction for Vinterberg considering what a great small crafted character study The Hunt was. Far From the Madding Crowd is more focused on the narrative and therefor the characters aren’t explored as well, but the romantic story is still quite engaging. It centers on a strong and independent woman played by Carey Mulligan. Her name is Bathsheba Everdene and despite her humble upbringing she inherits a large amount of farming land from her uncle. She is determined to restore the land’s productivity and in order to do so she hires a sheep farmer named Gabriel (Matthias Schoenaerts) who used to own a small piece of land next to her place. He had borrowed some money to pay for the land and buy some sheep, but after a terrible incident his fortune is reversed and is forced to sell the land back leaving him with nothing. Prior to this reversal of fortune for both Gabriel and Bathsheba, he had proposed to her but she kindly refused claiming she had no intention of marrying. Her strong independent female role isn’t something audiences are used to seeing in films set during this era which made Mulligan’s performance quite special. Once her character settles in her new home, two other suitors show up: William Boldwood (Michael Sheen) a wealthy senior and Francis Troy (Tom Sturridge) a charming Sergeant who she unexpectedly falls for.    

I wasn’t familiar with Hardy’s novel so I can’t say how faithful David Nicholls’ screenplay adaptation is. Unfortunately I found the pacing a bit hurried and the story was jumping from one scene to the next without letting us get to know these characters. From the very opening scene it is clear that Bathsheba and Gabriel belong with each other. Schoenaerts completely steals his scenes and along with Mulligan they are the only two characters who are portrayed as strong and perseverant characters. By the time Sturridge and Sheen show up on screen they have no chance of getting the audience’s sympathy because they are already rooting for Gabriel. Troy takes a villainous turn very early on without much explanation and William is simply a dull and boring character despite his good intentions. Juno Temple has a small supporting role, but her prior relationship with Sturridge was underdeveloped. There is a scene where her character shows up at the wrong church for her wedding day and so Troy is left stranded in the altar, but it wasn’t handled well. There are also several twists and surprises along the way, but they weren’t as shocking as they could’ve been considering these characters weren’t developed well. The film was trying to get from one point to the next in a rather quick pace because the audience is simply expecting the two main characters to get together and nothing else seems to matter. 

Vinterberg’s greatest accomplishment was casting Schoenaerts and Mulligan in the lead roles because they had great chemistry together, but it also turned to be the film’s downfall since it was so strong that we could care less for the other characters. The cinematography was gorgeous and it helped that most of the film was shot outdoors because nature was perfectly captured here by either the sunlight or the heavily charged grey skies. Those were the two main reasons why I ended up enjoying Far From the Madding Crowd despite being disappointed by it. The Hunt was one of my favorite films of 2012, so I had high hopes for the Danish director in this English film, but they weren’t met. Far From the Madding Crowd is powered by its lead performances, but unfortunately the narrative was unnecessarily rushed and that hurt the film.  

Kill the Messenger (7/10): A story worth hearing about.

“Some stories are just too true to tell.”

Ten years after their initial collaboration together in 12 and Holding, director Michael Cuesta and Jeremy Renner team up for this political thriller based on the true events surrounding the life of journalist Gary Webb and the investigation that led him to uncover  a conspiracy between the CIA and some Nicaraguan drug dealers with the specific purpose of arming the Contra rebels fighting the war against drugs in that country. It’s a shame the film didn’t do well at the box office because Jeremy Renner gives his best performance since The Hurt Locker. He does a convincing job portraying this journalist who during the first half of the film is doing some great investigative journalistic work and in the later half is trying to protect his family and convince people that he is telling a true story when he becomes the target of a smear campaign. 

Many people have claimed that the theme of the film is outdated considering the events took place during the early 90’s, but I have to disagree. With everything that has happened in the last couple of years with the Snowden whistleblowing incident I think we can learn a few things about government conspiracies and journalistic unbiased reporting. Having watched the Academy Award winning documentary CitizenFour recently, I have to admit the way he came out in public with the information was rather brilliant. There was no way he could leak this story to a journalist in the USA because what happened to Gary Webb would probably happen to him. It seems that the American government has a history of washing away their guilt by pointing the finger at someone else and smearing their image. That is what happened with Webb when all of a sudden the focus stopped being the story he reported and everything started centering on who he was and his past. That is why in the documentary Snowden is always concerned with getting the story out in the public first before coming out because he knew that as soon as his name was out there, the story would shift its focus on him. It is something that continues to repeat itself in history so forgive me if my faith in good journalistic reporting is a bit shaky. They simply shift the attention of the story and instead of digging into it and uncovering conspiracies they end up smearing the name of the person who is trying to expose the crimes of our country because it is much easier and convenient to do so.

The film works best during the first hour when the actual conspiracy is being investigated by Renner’s character. The journalistic investigation was thrilling and gripping as Webb began following each lead and ultimately unraveling a dangerous conspiracy. During this first hour there are a number of strong performances as we get cameos from Andy Garcia and Michael Sheen. Mary Elizabeth Winstead also delivers a solid performance as Webb’s editor while Oliver Platt convincingly portrays Webb’s boss. In the second hour the film does lose some of its grip when it begins to shift the focus of the journalistic story to the smearing campaign and some family issues that ensue. Rosemarie Witt however delivers a strong performance as Webb’s wife. Despite some issues with the pacing during the second half of the film, the brilliant cast makes up for it and keeps un engaged. Kill the Messenger is a solid entry into the investigative journalism genre. I’m glad the story got told, but it’s unfortunate that not many people went to see it.   

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Admission (4/10)

"You all want to know the secret formula for getting in. Of course everyone thinks we're sadists, that we like saying no. We are in this job for one reason, to say yes."

Paul Weitz became a household name in Hollywood after his successful 1999 comedy, American Pie, but everything he has directed since has been a bit of a let down for me. I haven't seen all of his films, but the ones I got to see were not actually good. I had higher expectations for Admission considering it had two of today's most successful comedy actors: Tina Fey and Paul Rudd. Tina is just so smart and hilarious, while Paul Rudd has great comedic timing and the pair usually choose their roles wisely. I guess this was one of those movies where the comedy worked more on paper, because on screen it really didn't. One may argue this wasn't actually supposed to be a comedy, but I didn't feel it worked well as a drama or a romantic film either. The characters weren't developed very well and I don't know why Tina Fey didn't just butt in and re write the entire script which would've helped this movie a lot. Tina Fey is such a great writer, I would simply let her write the entire dialogues for me. Admission is actually based on a novel written by Jean Hanff Korelitz and it was adapted for the screen by Karen Croner (who hadn't written a screenplay since 1998, One True Thing). It is a shame that the potential of these actors was put to waste here with such an awkward and weak script. Stay away from Admission, this is one film you won't want to be enrolling in.

Portia Nathan (Tina Fey) has spent the last 16 years of her life working at the admissions department for Princeton University. Her boss, Clarence (Wallace Shawn), is getting ready for his retirement so Portia is really looking forward to the promotion. The position could be hers or Corinne's (Gloria Reuben) since they both are the main admissions officers. Princeton has always ranked as the number one University students want to apply for, but this year they are number two. All Clarence wants before retiring is to leave on top so everyone is working overtime. Portia begins visiting several schools around the nation to look for the perfect candidates for Princeton. She receives a call from a former college classmate who is now overseeing an alternative school. John Pressman (Paul Rudd) wants her to come visit his school because there is a special kid named Jeremiah (Nat Wolff) who he wants her to meet. Portia visits the school but doesn't think much of its students. The real reason why John invited her is because he believes that Jeremiah is Portia's son who she gave up in adoption during their college years. He asks Portia to get to know the kid without having to commit to anything because he hasn't mentioned anything to Jeremiah about her. When Jeremiah shows interest in wanting to go to Princeton, Portia will try to do her best to help him. Some complications and funny situations ensue as Portia's life begins to unravel when the man she's been living with for seven years (played by the talented Michael Sheen) bails on her for another woman.

The characters in this film are all pretty much stereotypes we've seen before. I think these stereotypes usually work in comedies, but this film was a little more serious. You have the classic elements were two co-workers begin competing for a same position, a man abandons his companion for another woman, and a romance ensues between two distinct characters with opposite personalities. Rudd and Fey are great actors but I really never believed the chemistry between them here despite their natural likability. The film doesn't work at any level really, not as a comedy and not as a romantic story. There are some funny moments but they are too few and too scattered through. The film is predictable although there are a few surprises here and there that you might not see coming, but they are just smaller details in an otherwise formulaic film. This isn't your typical slapstick college comedy, but it is rather predictable on the romantic side. There are a few witty and cultural jokes thrown in here and there, but it simply wasn't enough. Despite some interesting subjects tackled in the film, Weitz really doesn't take any risks and the film felt bland.

My Review: Midnight in Paris (9/10)

¨That Paris exists and anyone could choose to live anywhere else in the world will always be a mystery to me.¨

Woody Allen has directed more than 40 films in over four decades and I can honestly say that his last film is one of my favorites. If you think otherwise then you are just probably living in nostalgia and trying to remember the past as being much better than the present. Like Micheal Sheen`s character would say: ¨Nostalgia is denial - denial of the painful present…the name for this denial is Golden Age thinking – the erroneous notion that a different time period is better than the one ones living in.¨ Woody Allen has directed numerous great films and this is one of them that will be remembered nostalgically in years to come. It is not a romantic film as we are used to seeing, it is more of a nostalgic film; the true romance isn`t between Wilson and McAdams, but between Wilson and Paris, between Wilson and art. The romance is in the city, in the art, in the past. The central theme of this film is clear: nostalgia. Woody Allen manages to deal with these issues in a very comedic way and the dialogue and story is just great. Midnight in Paris is a very funny and nostalgic film. The city of Paris may have never looked as great as it does in this movie. The characters are memorable and it is interesting how Allen intertwines the present with the past and makes fun of some of the stereotypes these artists have. I had a great time with Midnight in Paris; Woody Allen has done it again!

Gil (Owen Wilson) and Inez (Rachel McAdams) are an American engaged couple who are visiting Paris with Inez`s parents, John (Kurt Fuller) and Helen (Mimi Kennedy). Gil instantly falls in love with the city and the rich story it has to tell, while Inez on the other hand doesn’t like Paris that much. Gil insists they should move to Paris once they get married, but Inez would rather stay in Beverly Hills where Gil has had success writing scripts for Hollywood films. Gil is unhappy with his Hollywood life and has decided to try his luck on writing a novel. Inez insists he should stick to what he does best. In Paris, Inez runs into some friends: Paul (Michael Sheen) and Carol (Nina Arianda). Paul is a very pedantic sort of guy who always has an opinion on everything and is showing off his great knowledge. Gil can`t stand him, but Inez insists on hanging out with him and his wife Carol, and asks Paul to critique Gil`s novel for him. One night the couples decide to go out and dance, but Gil says he`s too tired and decides to head back to the hotel on his own. While wondering the streets of Paris the clock strikes midnight and a group of French partygoers invite Gil to a party. In this party, Gil runs into Zelda (Alison Pill) and Scott Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston), and Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll). Gil realizes that somehow he has travelled to 1920 and is meeting all these artists who he`s admired all his life; he`s in the decade he considers as being the Golden Age. Ernest tells Gil that he can get Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates) to proofread his novel for him; but when Gil goes to get his novel he is back in 2010. Gil realizes that he can only travel back in time when the clock strikes midnight, so the adventure begins every night where he meets interesting people like Picasso (Marcial Di Fonzo) and his mistress Adriana (Marion Cotillard) who he falls for, and other great artists such as Salvador Dali (Adrien Brody) and Luis Buñuel (Adrien de Van), among others.

The true heart of the film relies on Owen Wilson`s performance. He is great in this movie and reminded me a lot of the younger Woody Allen who used to star in his own movies. The funniest moments of the film have to do with these stereotypes that these great artists of the past have been given. Adrien Brody is great as Salvador Dali, and the rhinoceros scene is extremely funny; Corey Stoll is equally great playing the courageous Ernest Hemingway. His dialogue with Wilson`s character about love and death is powerful and funny at the same time. Marion Cotillard and Owen Wilson also had great chemistry together and it was fun to watch them on screen. McAdams is one of my favorite actresses, and this time she plays sort of the villain, instead of the sweet role she is used to playing. This is a much different role from the one Wilson and McAdams played in Wedding Crashers. Midnight in Paris is just a terrific movie, with a lot of heart, and Woody Allen proves once again that he is a great director and writer. I absolutely recommend this movie as one of the best the year has had to offer.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Tron Legacy (5/10)

¨I was paged last night; came from your dad's office at the arcade. That number's been disconnected for twenty years! ¨

The hype for Tron: Legacy has finally come to an end after several months of being bombarded with the cool trailers and all I can say is that I was a bit disappointed with this film. The first 40 minutes were great, the visuals, the light cycle races, and the disc gladiator games were breathtaking, but after the novelty of being introduced into the digital world the movie began to drag due to a weak script and plot. The movie runs a little over two hours and after the first 40 minutes it begins to go downhill until it reaches a pretty anticlimactic ending because we never really got to care too much for the characters or the story because the focus seemed to always be on the visuals which got old after a while. Tron made for a very exciting trailer and perhaps could have been one of the greatest music video videos thanks to some cool soundtracks from Daft Punk, but as a movie the pieces didn`t seem to fit together. The first forty minutes are really worth your time however and many might enjoy this film, but I was just a little disappointed because I had some high expectations for Tron: Legacy which marked the directorial debut for Joseph Kosinski. The weakest link for Tron has to be the screenplay written by Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz (both happened to collaborate together as producers and writers for Lost).

Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner are back playing their duo roles from 1982`s original Tron. Bridges is Kevin Flynn, the CEO of Encom and a virtual world designer who is trying to create a better world. He has found a way into a digital universe and in his intention of creating a perfect world which he calls The Grid he also creates an alter self known as Cleo (played by Bridges as well) that will help him program The Grid while he is back with his son Sam (Garrett Hedlund) in the real world. Boxleitner is back as Alan Bradley, Flynn`s main security chief in both worlds (in The Grid he is Tron). One night Kevin is telling Sam about how he is going to change the world, but after leaving for his office he is never seen again, until about 27 years later when Sam manages to find a way to get in The Grid and discovers that Cleo has betrayed his father and left him trapped inside the digital world. In The Grid Sam will have to search for his father and find a way to get him back to the real world. Here we meet some interesting characters such as Quorra (Olivia Wilde), Gem (Beau Garrett), Jarvis (James Frain), and Castor (Michael Sheen).

Tron: Legacy could have been much better considering that the producers had 28 years to come up with a decent script for the sequel of the original cult movie. The visuals were great, but they got tiresome after the novelty of the digital world wore off. The performances were ok, Jeff Bridges will probably not be remembered for his role in this movie as much as he is being considered for his work in True Grit (he also comes fresh from an Oscar win for his performance in Crazy Heart). Garrett Hedlund gave a good performance as the lead role and proved he can be a star player as well. Olivia Wilde was also good as a supporting character, but who really stole his scenes was Michael Sheen as Castor. His performance was a little out there, but he made it work because he is just such a talented actor. Overall I wouldn’t recommend this movie unless you are a fan of the first film or are really into the visual and special effects. The story falls short for me and the visuals alone weren`t enough to save this movie.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: The Queen (8/10)

¨That's the way we do things in this country, quietly, with dignity. That's what the rest of the world has always admired us for. ¨

The Queen will mostly be remembered for Helen Mirren`s Oscar winning performance as Queen Elizabeth II which was just remarkable. She absolutely nailed the role of this widely known public figure and really captured her essence. Her physical resemblance with the Queen helped, but her mannerism and expressions were also outstanding. The only disappointing thing about her performance is that it overshadowed some other important elements the movie had. First of all Stephen Frears (High Fidelity, Dirty Pretty Things, The Grifters) did a great job with the direction which gave him his second nomination for best director, Michael Sheen was also excellent in his portrayal of Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the most important element of all that has been overshadowed by Mirren`s performance was the screenplay that was beautifully written by Peter Morgan (The Damned United, Frost/Nixon, and The Last King of Scotland). Morgan wrote a very believable story about what happened inside the Queen`s summer residence during the week of Princess Diana`s death. The scenes felt very real and sincere and there were also several funny and clever lines as well. Morgan never takes any sides on the issue and gives a fair portrayal of what might actually have occurred on those days before Diana`s funeral took place. I think he deserved a lot more credit then he actually got because he really did a great job researching for the story and made the film look more like a documentary than an actual fictional one. Helen Mirren`s spectacular performance however makes it easy for us to overlook those elements.

The film begins with Tony Blair (Michael Sheen) winning the elections by a landslide and becoming Britain`s youngest Prime Minister of the century. Queen Elizabeth II (Helen Mirren) is watching the news on TV while she is getting her portrait drawn by an artist and regrets not being able to vote.  The Queen isn`t very excited about the new young Prime Minister, but they meet in Buckingham Palace and she makes the title official. The movie then jumps forward three months later when Diana suffers an accident in Paris. Real news footage is used for the movie covering the incident and we see how the Royal family receives the news in their summer residence in Balmoral Castle, as well as Tony Blair back in London. Blair`s director of communication, Alastair Campbell (Mark Bazeley), writes a speech for him realizing that her death has had a huge impact in the world and that a live speech honoring her would be necessary. Blair`s popularity rises even more after his great speech in which he calls Diana ¨the people`s princess, ¨ a title that has stuck with her ever since.  The Royal family takes a different approach and decides this is a private matter and that no public speech should be necessary. Queen Elizabeth`s mother (Sylvia Syms) and Prince Phillip (James Cromwell) aren`t very fond of Diana and agree with Elizabeth that she is no longer a member of the Royal family.  Prince Charles (Alex Jennings) on the other hand recognizes that the public will see them as the enemy if they don`t empathize with their loss, so he asks Blair to try to convince her mother to make a public statement. The movie focuses on this dark week for the Royal family in which the tabloids tried to force the Queen to make some sort of statement, while she struggled with coping with her death privately and maintaining the Royal tradition.

The Queen is a very well written drama with some powerful performances and it is perhaps a very realistic portrayal of what went on inside the Royal residence during those days in which no public statement was made. Diana`s death was a very memorable event for those of us who were alive during the time and we all remember where we were when we first heard the news. It remains a very memorable event in our heads and that is why it was so important for the movie to feel real, and Morgan`s script contributed to that along with the performances from Helen Mirren and Michael Sheen. The scene where the Queen encounters the impressive stag was very powerful and serves as a great metaphor in this movie. There are several different views of what the stag actually represents, but I believe it represented royalty and how fragile it has become. The Queen identified with such a magnificent creature and realized that she would have to change her approach in order to survive. Blair was perhaps the only one from his office (even his wife, portrayed really well by Helen McCrory, was against monarchy) who identified with the Queen. The movie may only be remembered in history for Mirren`s excellent portrayal of the Queen, but I think there is much more to it than just that. 

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My review: The Damned United (9/10)

¨I wouldn't say I was the best manager in the country. But I'm in the top one. ¨

The Damned United is one of the best sports movies that I have seen recently, and it`s very different from other films in its genre because it focuses more on defeat and humiliation than it does on overcoming obstacles and victories. It`s based on the life of Brian Clough, a very successful football coach in England during the 70`s who really was ahead of his time because he probably was the first celebrity-coach and became famous for his cockiness and big mouth. If I would have to compare him to any coach from the present it would probably be Jose Mourinho. However, The Damned United doesn`t focus on all of Clough`s triumphs and his glory days in Nottingham Forrest; it focuses on the disastrous campaign he had with Leeds United that only lasted for 44 days, and his personal rivalry and obsession with Don Revie, the coach he replaced at Leeds. The film is directed by Emmy Award winner Tom Hooper who is mostly known for his TV miniseries Elizabeth I and John Adams; and it is based on David Peace`s novel The Damned Utd. The screenplay was written by Peter Morgan who has worked with Michael Sheen in the past in The Queen and Frost/Nixon. This is the third historic figure that Sheen has played in a movie and in each one he is truly outstanding and difficult to recognize because he changes so much, but he truly does justice to each character.

The movie opens in 1974, the year when the English national team wasn`t able to qualify for the World Cup, so highly successful Leeds United coach, Don Revie (played by Colm Meaney), seemed to be the right man for the job. Revie turned Leeds United into a powerhouse in the 70`s and dominated the league over the past few years. With Revie in the national team, Brian Clough (Michael Sheen) is offered the position as the Leeds boss, although he was known for being a critic of Leeds style of play which he called dirty and constantly criticized coach Revie for cheating. It makes perfect sense now why Clough wasn`t the right man for the job and that he was doomed to fail from the get go, even more so considering he wasn`t joined by his assistant Peter Taylor (Timothy Spall). The movie takes place in 1974, but we have constant flashbacks informing us how the rivalry between Clough and Revie began. The first flashback takes place during 1968 when Clough and Taylor were training a bottom placed second division team, Derby County. Clough was excited that his team was going to face first placed division one Leeds United for the FA Cup. He admired coach Revie because they grew up in the same neighborhood, but when the team arrived at the stadium, Revie completely ignored Clough (probably because he didn`t even see him) and thus the bitterness and rivalry began. The movie continues in the present (1974) with the tense relationship Clough had with the Leeds players, while returning through flashbacks from 68 to 73 focusing on the rivalry with Revie, the arguments with Derby chairman Sam Longson (Jim Broadbent) and Clough`s relationship with Taylor that help explain the present situation.

The strongest thing about this movie is that it takes a different spin in the sports genre that usually focuses on overcoming adversity and turning a bunch of losers into winners. This time Clough has the difficult task of filling in for a successful team and a group of winners and somehow his ego gets in the way and ends up having one of the worst opening campaigns for the team. The team was destined to fail from the beginning after so much criticism and rivalry built over the years. Clough was a very successful coach and even went on to win back to back European titles with another club, but the film decides to focus on his failures instead. The movie really works outside of the conventions of the sports genre and Michael Sheen is excellent in his portrayal of Brian Clough. There are some very strong performances from the supporting cast as well: Jim Broadbent, Colm Meaney, and Timothy Spall all give strong performances that helped build this movie. I really enjoyed this film and recommend it even though you are not sports fans because Clough had such a unique personality and was loved by some and hated by others. It is said that he was the greatest English manager to have never coached the national team.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: New Moon (9/10

(9/10) The wait is over for Twilight fans as the second film of the franchise is finally out and just like the first one it`s getting mixed reviews. The saga is based on Stephenie Meyer`s novel of the same name. Just like in the novel, there are going to be four parts and New Moon is the second one of the franchise. I really enjoyed the first Twilight, and thought that the action slash romance was well balanced and worked very well. When I heard Twilight was about vampires I was completely expecting it to be the typical vampire blood sucking movie, but I was suprised to see how different the film was. In New Moon I already knew what to expect, but I found it even better than the first one. I thought it had a lot more action and the addition of the werewolves was a plus because their characters were complex, interesting and it presented a whole new world that hadn`t been introduced to us yet the first time around. The romance also got better as Edward and Bella were seperated and a third character was thrown in the mix, Jacob. The friendship between Bella and Jacob and the mixed feelings of love and friendship that they felt was an interesting addition to the saga. It`s always good when in a film you have mixed feelings for which character you want him or her to end up with and in this case many of the fans were routing for a different guy and that is what explains so many status updates about Team Edward or Team Jacob.

I know this film is targeted towards teenage girls, but it has enough action and good vissual effects to be enjoyed by guys as well. I really thought the special effects were much better than in the first one and after watching 2012 I thought these effects felt cool and they just felt more real and not exagerated. The werewolf transformation scenes were pretty nice, as were the chasing scenes between werewolves and vampires. There is plenty of action for guys to enjoy as well although the first 20 minutes do feel a little cheesy. The dialogue is probably one of the weekest parts of the movie, but the story is just engaging and I guess most guys can identify with the Jacob character. We have all fallen for a girl that sees us as a friend who has always been there for her, but not as boyfriend material. Ouch. I don`t know maybe it`s just the teenage adolescent girl inside of me doing the talking. It feels kind of good of letting that repression out. The love triangle between Edward, Bella, and Jacob was a great addition to the franchise. There were several references to Romeo and Juliet and in a way this film has several similarities to the Shakesperean play (although they could have learned a lesson or two on how to write decent dialogues that didnt feel so cheesy) because of the rivalry between two families, in this case the werewolves and the vampires and somehow Bella is caught in the middle of both worlds.

Another improvement from Twilight were the villains. Micheal Sheen was great as Aro the head vampire of the Volturi (a sort of vampire royalty), and Dakota Fanning was also creepy in her role as Jane a pain inducing illusionist. These villains made you feel like the ones in the first Twilight were a joke. Kristen Stewart is also a delight to watch on screen and she makes the love scenes work despite the bad dialogues. The chemistry between her and Pattinson really works and you can feel the sexual tension between both chracters despite the awkward long pauses and stares. Taylor Lautner plays Jacob, Bella`s best friend who is in love with her and actually is a werewolf who haunts down vampires therefore the plot thickens. The rest of the Cullin family doesnt`t have much screen time as the main focus of the film is in introducing the werewolves and building the relationship between Bella and Jacob. I really enjoyed this movie and it will probably end up in my top ten films of 2009.