Cherwell.org - Student news and reviews at Oxford University
Tuesday 9th February, 2010
Cherwell Cass Business School
Review: New Moon and a new man

by Lucinda Knight | 19:44 GMT, Wed 25 November 2009

Photo: Cherwell

Three Stars

I haven’t read the books, the sight of Robert Pattinson does not make me orgasm, and I spent most of Twilight wondering why I had paid to see two hours of painfully bad abstinence porn aimed at hormonal teens. So why, you may ask, did I go to see New Moon? In short, I went to laugh. In the first film, moments designed to pluck at the heartstrings of young girls, such as one classroom scene where Edward’s desire for Bella (Kristin Stewart) hits him so hard that he nearly vomits, had me in hysterics, and I couldn’t resist going back for more. I wasn’t disappointed. For those who don’t buy into the story, New Moon provides plenty of poorly written, badly acted moments to laugh at; my personal favourite is Bella’s repeated claim that when Edward leaves town after an upsetting paper-cut related incident, he leaves a ‘hole in her soul’.

While Edward’s departure is initially devastating for both Bella and Cullen devotees alike, it saves New Moon from the same terrible fate of Twilight, and is fantastic news for people who actually want to watch a film rather than just commit freeze-frames of Cullen looking angsty to memory for post-film fantasising. Though director Chris Weitz still caters to Cullen fans by having him appear to Bella when she is in danger (a frequent occurrence considering her crazy new hobby, ‘thrill seeking’), the emergence of a buffer, older Jacob (Taylor Lautner), will have many young girls questioning their loyalties. More than adequately filling the eye-candy hole that Edward has left, his over-developed torso plays a starring role, and one particular moment when he whips off his t-shirt had the audience screaming with delight. Hot-blooded and full of desire for Bella, his warm energy counters her cold brooding perfectly, and brings the film to life.

The sexual chemistry between Stewart and Lautner is intense, and beats Cullen’s stilted speech and agonizing glowering hands down. There are still some dubious moments – namely Bella’s musing ‘you’re so warm; you’re like your own sun’ – but overall the relationship between the new duo is fun, fully developed, and had me questioning what Bella was ever doing with Edward. 
The whole film is far richer than the first instalment. The vampires look more natural, CGI wolves are introduced, characters in supporting roles are given personalities, Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning cameo as deliciously disturbing members of the Italian Volturi clan, the scenery is much more dramatic, and the indie soundtrack (arguably the only redeeming feature of the first film) is still there.  While some earnest moments still made me laugh, I was gripped, and though I still don’t think it is worth the devotion that so many fans give it, I’m starting to understand what all the fuss is about.

Release: Now Showing

Director: Chris Weitz

Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner

Page last updated: 2010-01-17 10:11:57
Comments and Opinions:
"non-fan" by Lucinda
Posted: 12:07 GMT, Thu 26th November 2009
Kelly- Surely the chemistry between Stewart & Pattinson is lacking if you need to read the books to understand the intensity between them? Carly- I had read Weitz's comments. He later said too much emphasis was put on that quote, and he actually worked to make New Moon more appealing to the average movie goer. I was trying to say that the film can be enjoyable, even if you're a "non-fan" like me.
"Not just a 'film'." by Carly
Posted: 21:47 GMT, Wed 25th November 2009
Not that I'd of expected you to, but if you had read Chris Wietz' comments about the film he said it was made for the fans and "if you don't get it, you don't get it". As you say you haven't read the books and didnt enjoy the first film I think its safe to put u in the non fan catagory. I think the term lack of understanding applies here.
"Not just a 'film'." by Carly
Posted: 21:43 GMT, Wed 25th November 2009
Not that I would think you had but if you had read Chris Weitz' comments about the film he says its for the fans, the fans of the book and the films, and if "you don't get it you don't get it". As you have not read the books as you admit, and you didn't like the first film, i would safely put you in the non-fan catagory. I think the term lack of understanding applies here.
"FILMS MISJUDGED" by kelly thompson
Posted: 21:06 GMT, Wed 25th November 2009
im 26 and a mother far from the screaming teens ive seen both films and really enjoyed them ill admit the books r better than the film however theres more detail that can be put into a book. rob plays edward true to the character same with kristen there is great chemisty between them on screen and if u read the books u would understand the intensity between them both.
 
Your email address:
Name:
Comment subject:
Your comment: (max length: 400 chars.)

characters left
Security verification: (Enter the code in the box below)



For the Love of FilmSaturday 12:45No Minister
MOST DISCUSSED THIS WEEK
C2 HIGHLIGHTS
COMMENT AND WORLD

Cass Business School
© 2008 Oxford Student Publications Ltd.
Design by Henry Clarke Price, Chris Baraniuk and Adam Hadley
About Us | Get in touch | Send us news | Advertise | RSS Feeds