RE: UGH

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: UGH

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: UGH

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: UGH - 5/6/2009 9:27:53 AM

Wilbert

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Dublin: Ireland

Saw this last night. What a staggering load of bollocks it was! Vampire baseball? Give me a break!

Also, what a dreadful message it gives out for girls....

EDWARD
I'm a killer! A monster! I've killed many people!

BELLA
I don't care! I really fancy you so I'm willing to overlook the murdering
even though I've only just met you. Also, I'd like to be a vampire too, please!

_____________________________

You're killing Independent George!!!!

(in reply to bethie777)

Post #: 151

RE: UGH - 5/6/2009 1:25:44 PM

broonie

Posts: 866
Joined: 30/9/2005

Seen this film last night and all I can say is ...UTTER, UTTER SHITE!!!

I like vampire films, but this was just so f***ing boring. I think people who like this film will be mostly young teenage girls who know f***all about films and only care about Robert Pattinson who seems to walk about the film as if he is constipated.

Anyway, each to thier own, as a girlie chick flick I suppose it will please some, IMO, it's one of THE worst films ever, and I've watched an Uwe Boll film!

_____________________________

Do you want to run this ship?
Yes!
Well,...you cant!

(in reply to Wilbert)

Post #: 152

Terrible - 6/6/2009 5:57:06 PM

MovieAddict247

Posts: 3359
Joined: 5/6/2009

but better than the book, which is saying something. I sat through both book and fiction, and despite being a teenage girl, I can not like such tripe. Honestly, the entire franchise is an overhyped, shallow piece of badly written fiction, with no character development, no chemistry and it should be avoided at all costs.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 153

spiffing - 12/6/2009 8:41:05 PM

smelly cheese

Posts: 2
Joined: 20/5/2009
From: suffolk, england

basically i gave it 5 stars because it deserves more than the average of 2, but its quite a good film. One of my favourite books and definitely one of the most anticipated films of the year (by me at least.) Some scenes are laughable but others are really well acted. Overall- good

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 154

- 18/6/2009 9:08:11 PM

Be.86

Posts: 2
Joined: 18/6/2009

this film is a pretty loyal adaptation, some of the action scenes are a bit dodgy/laughable and some scenes in the film needed to be as expanded as they are in the book, but it definitely does not warrant two stars. if you're a fan of the books i don't think there's a whole lot to complain about. there are a million worse adaptations out there...harry potter.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 155

- 21/6/2009 6:28:10 PM

Sinister_One

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/10/2005

wasted time watching this last night, nothing happens and it looks like it was edited with a chainsaw, utter teenage turd and there are more to come :-(

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 156

It's bad..... so bad - 23/6/2009 12:32:56 PM

elmwood2309

Posts: 21
Joined: 30/4/2007

It has to be the worst thing my eyes have ever encountered not only is it ......but the fact it just reeks of Emo styling makes it even worse. Sparkling Vampires? Vampire Baseball? Seriously who even gives a shit apart from those brain dead drooling girls who wants Pattison as there own its just pointless buy Nosferatu or Let the right one in then ye'll see how its done.

< Message edited by elab49 -- 3/7/2009 10:34:49 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 157

Twilight - 2/7/2009 8:49:35 PM

kido

Posts: 1
Joined: 24/6/2007

brutal acting,crap directing,.....storyline,shit effects,terrible editing.just watch the lost boys if u want to watch a half decent teenage vampire movie cause is the biggest load of shit i`ve ever seen it hurts me to even give one star i want my money back now

< Message edited by elab49 -- 3/7/2009 10:35:45 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 158

Con of the year!!! - 3/7/2009 9:28:04 PM

mrlips

Posts: 5
Joined: 3/7/2009

Twilight has got to be the CON of the year. The chemistry between the lead is only evident through the films lazy, juvenile dialogue.
Catherine Hardwicke has stepped down from her impressive directorial abilities in Thirteen and Lords of Dogtown and gone for the money, only she needs to use some of that cash to find a better casting agent. Vampires are NOT cute and cuddly and they are not supposed to look like the make up artist slapped some effing talc powder on Robert Pattinson(or whatever his name is). I didn't give a damn about anyone in this movie and was kind of hoping they would move it into ultra-cheese and have BLADE come and hunt them, and then kill them.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 159

RE: Con of the year!!! - 5/7/2009 8:44:04 PM

BishopQuaker

Posts: 4667
Joined: 29/6/2007
From: Manchester

The audience were rather spoonfed the plot.

Right down to the blatent "Evil eyes" Patinson and the blatent Werewolf kid.
Overall it wasn't a great film, I can see why lasses might like it more than lads though.

However, I did enjoy the use of MUSE when they were playing baseball

_____________________________

(in reply to mrlips)

Post #: 160

Utter Rubbish - 9/7/2009 1:53:58 PM

Taylor1707

Posts: 1
Joined: 9/7/2009

Am a 15 years and there is possibly nothing i have witnessed in my live that compares with this movie. A complete waste of time and i cant be bothered to mention all its flaws. A complete ripoff of the classical vampire movies, however 95% of its popularity comes from the so called 'eye candy' from Pattinson. Those who are able to see through the dreamy vampire bloke with pasty coloured skin and wearing cherry chapstick can appreciate contemporary cinema with taste.
i can't say im in a hurry to watch New Moon.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 161

Not Bad - 12/7/2009 7:53:36 PM

Scarlett OHara

Posts: 3
Joined: 28/8/2008
From: Southend Essex

Pretty true to the book, some of the effects are a bit wobbly, but Robert Pattinson, pouts his way throught he film nicely and is pretty close to how I imagined Edward in my head. Kristen Stewart is better as Bella, both stong and vulnerable. The other vamps are impossibly beautiful, but then they were written that way by Meyer.
Overall pretty good effort (I am a 36 year old mother) but not as cool vampy as Buffy or Angel.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 162

RE: Not Bad - 15/8/2009 8:23:26 PM

Kapa

Posts: 25
Joined: 3/2/2009

hi ..
well i have to agree with some of the comments.. the acting wasn't that impressive.

but the film wasn't that bad.. and it's very close to the book!

i d give it 3 out of 5

< Message edited by Kapa -- 15/8/2009 9:27:04 PM >

(in reply to Scarlett OHara)

Post #: 163

RE: Not Bad - 20/8/2009 1:12:48 PM

blackduck

Posts: 1559
Joined: 1/10/2005

Ok, as a 33 year old guy this clearly wasn't aimed at me, but sat down to watch it last night (payback for bringing herself to GI Joe). Wasn't expecting to enjoy it, but didn't expect to hate it as much as I did. I can live with the sparkly Vampires, ropy effects and sub Dawson Creek script. But the movie made no sense. Edward is a 70 year old killer, who routinely stalks his Bella (in case she getsa in trouble) and sneaks into her bedroom to watch her sleep. His big romantic gesture is not killing Bella even though he really , really wants to. Ending made no sense, how did the mother forget being kidnapped? How did they explain the trashed ballet hall?

Like Edward saving Bella from turning into a vampire, this movie sucks hard.

< Message edited by blackduck -- 20/8/2009 1:13:07 PM >

_____________________________

I am but an egg.

(in reply to Kapa)

Post #: 164

RE: Twilight - 21/8/2009 3:01:48 PM

Gwilthyunman

Posts: 9
Joined: 21/8/2009
From: Carlingford

Twilight showcases some of the most beautiful cinematography, adroitly complementing the cold passion at the heart of the story, it fits the color scheme of our protagonists: the main characters stand out for their pallor, their icy facades which strangely highlight the red of the lips and the gold of their irises. Their surroundings are always cloudy, giving the green of the foliage an intensity that keeps you remembering the forces at the heart of the story. In addition there is an amazing soundtrack highlighting the various emotions of the characters, from haunting to passionate, from delicate to erotic, from loneliness to full satisfaction. Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson fit the creations of the novel perfectly, and their performances are intense and flawless. These two people show us how easy is to be seduced by the powers in nature, and how terrifying the consequences might be. There is a fine line between humanity and our ties to the lower animals. Twilight is very entertaining considering its leisured pace, and this is another one of its qualities, what makes it special.

5/5

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 165

- 15/9/2009 5:27:28 PM

FanaticalAboutFilm

Posts: 106
Joined: 8/9/2009
From: somewhere else

At the beginning of the twilight hysteria I also thought that the whole thing is just rubbish and totally crap. But then I watched the film out of curiosity and I loved it! Of course it's not going to win an oscar for best film and acting but that's not the purpose of this movie.Personally, I can't wait to see New Moon!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 166

RE: Twilight - 15/9/2009 8:55:13 PM

_twilight_obsessed_

Posts: 2
Joined: 13/9/2009

4 stars!?! I have to say, I disagree with that.. The 'Twilight Saga' of books is amazing by Stephenie Meyer.. but the film was a very poor adaptation of the first book to say the least. I enjoyed it to a certain point, but was still hugely disappointed. Lets hope the 2nd film, New Moon, will be better.. which is released at the end of the year.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 167

RE: Twilight - 15/9/2009 11:21:37 PM

Ezzieblue

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/9/2009

This movie was a complete embarrassment to film-making. I recall when Pattinson and Stewart were in the middle of the forest, the camera angles were just everywhere. It went one way than another and then some other direction. Stewart's acting is atrocious. She displayed the same facial features with every situation. And was it just me or did she look cross-eyed when "Edward" was sucking the "venom" out of her bloodstream. It was too funny to take serious. None of the actors suit the description in the book - in my personal opinion - except for a select few. All in all, this movie ruined the image of the story so unless they invest in better special effects and decent actors, this movie (series) is headed towards ineluctable failure in my book.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 168

RE: Not Bad - 17/9/2009 1:32:22 PM

Fidget

Posts: 80
Joined: 5/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: blackduck

Ok, as a 33 year old guy this clearly wasn't aimed at me, but sat down to watch it last night (payback for bringing herself to GI Joe). Wasn't expecting to enjoy it, but didn't expect to hate it as much as I did. I can live with the sparkly Vampires, ropy effects and sub Dawson Creek script. But the movie made no sense. Edward is a 70 year old killer, who routinely stalks his Bella (in case she getsa in trouble) and sneaks into her bedroom to watch her sleep. His big romantic gesture is not killing Bella even though he really , really wants to. Ending made no sense, how did the mother forget being kidnapped? How did they explain the trashed ballet hall?

Like Edward saving Bella from turning into a vampire, this movie sucks hard.

The plot makes no sense in the film, agreed. Perfect example of director skipping out on the 'build' to make the plot shorter for the film.

Also, the mother was never kidnapped. It was a trick. I thought that bit was pretty clear.

Anyway, I refuse to get involved in this whole starrage thing. As a fan of the books, it's not worth arguing over the undeniable ridiculousness of the film - how did 'like crystal' become 'like someone knocked a tub of kid's craft glitter over him'?

_____________________________

Earning my stars. Again.

(in reply to blackduck)

Post #: 169

RE: Not Bad - 21/9/2009 11:31:11 AM

CORLEONE

Posts: 4594
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Green and Pleasant Land

Finally watched this at the weekend. It was crap. Vampires walking around during the day, look like crystal in the sun, shite. No fangs! Shit story.

Having said that, New Moon could be more intersting with the wolves. With the Cullens being such unlikeable arseholes I hope the lycans blitz 'em.

_____________________________

Al Swearengen: "Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back".

(in reply to Fidget)

Post #: 170

Twilight : A must see - 4/10/2009 5:46:52 PM

deppfanatic

Posts: 103
Joined: 18/9/2009
From: Bicester

I've watched Twilight and i was impressed by the whole film of a young innocent girl falling for a vampire there was plenty of chemistry between the characters: Bella and Edward i must say. But i still don't see the fascination of Robert Pattinson he's okay but not like one of the greatest actors out there.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 171

Incredible - 8/10/2009 11:40:23 AM

mark09laugh@gmx.com

Posts: 12
Joined: 8/10/2009

This was incredible. One of the best vampire films ever made, and a masterclass in the art of filmmaking. Roll on November for New Moon. And the gal that played Bella, Kristen Stewart woz awesome

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 172

Twilight.. - 10/10/2009 2:55:54 AM

LittleKathh

Posts: 3
Joined: 13/10/2008
From: Darlington

As a whole, I feel 'Twilight' as a Film doesn't quite do justice to the novel. Personally, I loved the books (baring in mind I'm speaking from the prospective of a geeky teenage girl here) and there where moments within the Film where I thought, 'Wow, this is exactly what I imagined'. The casting I feel was also pretty decent. I think the majority of the female population would agree with me when I say Robert Pattinson is more then perfect for the role of the sexy bloodsucker Edward Cullen. In fairness, who else could play such a role? Pitt? Cruise? (Though I guess they where fantastic in 'Interview with the Vampire', but moving on..) Arguably, you could say that they're too big for such a small film. Plus, the 'Twi-Hards' would hardly be impressed. Which brings me to my next point.. This teen obsession with the Vampire 'Saga'.. Surely this isn't healthy? Yes, I was excited to see the Film after I'd read the book.. But there's being excited and being a little bit too enthusiastic..

Anyways, back to the Film. Word on the Grapvine is that a lot of people where dissapointed by the casting of the characters for 'Twilight'. To this I say, BULL SH*T :) You can't tell me that after watching the Film, you didn't go home and read the other books and imagine those actors in those roles. What is there to be dissapointed by? Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Kellan Lutz and Jackson Rathbone deffinately tantalize the tastebuds! ;) And Kristen Stewart, in my opinion, gave an outstanding performance as 'Bella', bringing her character to life.. 'Twilight' gives the audience a great mix of Teen Romance, Comedy and a little bit of Action thrown in for good measure. The Soundtrack aswel I thought really complimented the flow of the Film, giving it an Indie like quality that is deffinately desirable.

All in all, I really enjoyed 'Twilight'.. But Catherine Hardwicke did an absoloutely rubbish job, therefore releaving the Film of it's full potential. 5 Gold Stars to whoever edited the Film and saved it from being a complete box office flop! - Trailer for 'New Moon' directed by Chris Weitz.. absoloutely stunning. I really recon this film will bring a whole new edge to the 'Saga' and hopefully appeal to the male audience more. Really excited for this Film, fantastic choice of Director. November 09 is going to be one heck of an exciting month for Film!..

_____________________________

LittleKathhx.

"Everything is backwards now, like out there is the true world and in here is the dream.." ♥x.

Post #: 173

RE: Incredible - 12/10/2009 9:34:07 AM

captainrentboy

Posts: 678
Joined: 16/3/2008
From: South Wales

quote:

ORIGINAL: mark09laugh@gmx.com

This was incredible. One of the best vampire films ever made, and a masterclass in the art of filmmaking. Roll on November for New Moon. And the gal that played Bella, Kristen Stewart woz awesome

Yoooouuuu haven't watched many films have you?

(in reply to mark09laugh@gmx.com)

Post #: 174

Vomit - 19/10/2009 11:06:19 AM

sephiroth7

Posts: 150
Joined: 14/10/2009

The review that made me stop buying the Empire mag. I'd been teetering, some of the reviews had been really kind to some awful movies (thank God the news section is still top notch ;)) but I went to see this after a four star empire review and I can't remember a movie making me feel so angry. Absolute shite from start to finish and not a single likeable character. POISON!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 175

Talk about a shitfest - 11/11/2009 10:23:58 PM

elmwood2309

Posts: 21
Joined: 30/4/2007

you know a movie sucks when count von count from sesame street is scarier than the vamp in that movie

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 176

RE: Talk about a shitfest - 11/11/2009 11:40:47 PM

Twisted Kitty

Posts: 464
Joined: 3/9/2009
From: Belfast

I have just sat down and watched Twilight on dvd tonight. No fangs, sparkling (what the fuck was that all about?!), vampire baseball, tree-scaling and Edward's 'coming out' scene, not to mention the extremely bad make-up. The acting was just soooooo bad it was cringeworthy. What a fantastic pile of shit!

Just reading the front cover of the dvd now "The must-see movie of the year" - Radio 1, "Truly Breathtaking" - Empire, "Mind-blowing" - Sugar, "Fabulously shit" - Twisted Kitty

Will I be watching the next film? Too fucking right.....it was so bad I just gotta see the next one.

_____________________________

"I have a terrible headache, and a sudden craving for chicken wings"

(in reply to elmwood2309)

Post #: 177

- 12/11/2009 9:55:50 AM

ryanboulton

Posts: 2
Joined: 12/11/2009

After reading the Twilight Saga I decided to watch the film, for the second time. After reading the book the film is truely rubbish. They've missed so much out of the film, the good parts! Also... the order has been adjusted in parts. It's an OK film, the acting is good and the general filming is good, but I find it so annoying when they miss so much out the film.

They do say, the books are better than the film - correct in this case.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 178

RE: - 12/11/2009 9:46:47 PM

Sphinx

Posts: 1805
Joined: 11/9/2006
From: East London

I wrote a whole mocking review about this a few weeks back but it failed - good sign really - Basically I wrote that Kiefer Sutherland's cult Status his creation of David being the coolest vampire ever has absolutely fuck all to worry about!!

_____________________________

Meet The New Boss...Same As The Old Boss

(in reply to ryanboulton)

Post #: 179

This is a joke - 15/11/2009 5:51:54 PM

lipton village

Posts: 39
Joined: 25/3/2007

4 Stars my hairy ass. If Empire think this is a 4 star movie then there smoking too much grass in the office. It's a complete load of rubbish. It's aimed at 13-14 yrs old girls who are just entering Puberty and have Smash hits posters up on their wall of the latest good looking kid of X-Factor. Its for teens girls and how many teen girls are going out buying Empire Review. I don't bother reading the official empire reviews anymore or pay heed to the rating. I look at the readers review ratings and throw dart in the middle. Four stars, for the love of Jesus. I walked out after an hour. Silly patronising diatribe of a movie.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 180