The Guest Spot: Suffer The Twilight

A guest post? Here? Say it ain’t so! Well, it is. Finally, someone has stepped up to the plate to give us, and you, an opinion of a film that we’re either too embarassed to admit we watched, or a film that has a beautiful lady in it that makes our lips jibber jabber as we lose control over our bodily functions.  Some Baird woman, most of the time. Anyway, fair Blammo readers, welcome our dear friend Kat and his opinion of something that appeals to a lot of screaming girls.

The Osmonds?! YAY!

Oh. THAT.

I gave myself a 24 hour cool-off period before attempting any kind of review. Although subdued, my opinion remain the same.

As we all know, vampires have always made good movie subjects. However, the media they feature in is no more fresh or imaginative than the hordes of zombie movies, tv shows and games that have flooded my retina to breaking point over the last 10 years or so. Enter Twilight.

Twilight does something new, and it’s refreshing that it does so. It’s just unfortunate that what it does is utterly brutalises the vampire almost as much as big Willy’s “I Am Legend” brutalised Richard Matheson’s work. It is a sad day when I see a non-comedic (or at least unintentionally so) vampire film with vegetarian vampires that don’t go out in the sunlight. Not because they burn in a traditional way most would expect, nor because it is their unnatural time and are in a weakened state like Dracula, but because they sparkle. A more accurate title for the film would be “Sparkling Vegetarian Love Vampires That Run Like Twats ”. I think that covers it.

Twilight’s God-awful treatment of the subject is nothing more than a piss in the eye of all those who have attempted to better or sustain the mythology. I point to Bram Stoker’s superb love story that transcends time, Matheson’s astonishingly insightful and thoughtful attempt at explaining the legend, and Anne Rice’s simply well-structured stories and characterisation.

Perhaps I’m being unfair to make this comparison, as the film adaptation of Matheson’s work was realistically incomparable other than in name. Still, there is no denying that Twilight, as a film, is a lowlight in both vampiric and cinematic history. The film itself is poorly acted throughout. The leading cast are mediocre and quite dislikeable (Robert Pattinson’s Edward is a complete wanker at times), while the supporting cast can’t seriously put ‘actor’ on their CV after being a part of this vomit-inducing drivel. The special effects are sub-70’s for the most part, and the direction is just about on par with a straight to Sci-fi Channel movie of the week.
People may argue that I’m not a girl, a child or a complete cock, and therefore not the intended target of such bilge. In response I will argue that perhaps as an adult my taste and understanding is better than theirs. I don’t enjoy Twilight in the same way I don’t use a potty or run out in front of a bus without looking. Nor do I piss myself or need someone to wipe my nose. If I did, then Twilight would be an ideal choice of entertainment.

Kat scores Twilight 2 Emovamps Sucking out of 5. This is a generous score, and has only been obtained by Kristen Stewart being hot.

16 Responses to “The Guest Spot: Suffer The Twilight”

  1. Now this may shock you dear readers but I actually didn’t mind Twilight. In fact, after all I’d read, it wasn’t half as bad as I thought it would be! Yeah I was disgusted by the whole glittery vamps and why a creature over a hundred years old would hang out in a high school (paedo perhaps?). However it became quite obvious very quickly that I wasn’t the target market for this movie – it’s clearly designed for young teenage girls where a love affair with no sexual elements is what they believe they want more than anything and, in contrast with our guest writer, I actually thought the casting was rather good (clumsy yet likable female lead, frowning attractive vamp).

    So yeah I’d give Twilight a 3 ‘not for me but I think the target market would love it’ out of 5 and hold my tongue on my theories about why I think women like vampire stories…

  2. It shouldn’t matter if you’re not the target market for the movie, you should judge objectively on its merits. If its poorly acted it’s poorly acted. The ability to frown and look mopey is not what I would class as acting. That said I haven’t seen it and have no plans to see it, so it gets 5 Mehs out of 5 from me.

    • As bemusing as it is to actually defend a movie that I didn’t like (and found ridiculous in concept) I need to stop you right there young Bod as you seem to have got the soap box out here.

      1: “It shouldn’t matter if you’re not the target market for the movie, you should judge objectively on its merits”
      – I did.

      2: “If its poorly acted it’s poorly acted”
      – I never said it was badly acted, I think you’ve confused my comments with Kat’s review (to which I disagreed with him)

      3: “The ability to frown and look mopey is not what I would class as acting.”
      – I never said anything about looking mopey and certainly never mentioned “class acting”

      4: “That said I haven’t seen it and have no plans to see it”
      – Then your comments are rather redundant really aren’t they?

      Regardless to clarify my feelings on Twilight for those that haven’t read my earlier posts where i am rather heavy handed with my criticisms, I found the concept hilariously poor. It takes the ‘good girl saves the bad boy with love’ to a ridiculous extreme and, where the sublime ‘Let the Right One In’ dealt with vampire/ human relationship in a wonderfully refreshing and emotional way, Twilight shows us what it would be like if we fell in love with our dinner. That bacon sandwich sure smells awesome but i don’t want to stick my penis in it.

      However as, and excuse the vulgarity, a chick flick it works fine. Really it’s just Beverly Hills 90210 with a vampire twist and some really bad special effects. It’s not good but it’s not terrible either and I know this because i’ve seen it. Kat hates it because he’s seen it. Bod, however hates it because… well I’m not sure why as he pointed out that the target market element doesn’t bother him.

      If BLAMMO demonstrates anything it’s that we’re willing to watch anything (even Day of the Dead 2) and suffer the Bleeding Eyes ™ no matter how poor it may or not turn out to be.

  3. It’s shit. Nuff said, it reaches its target audience, including my wife’s blind passion for Stephanie Meyer. But i will never relenquish the fact that this is the most perverted f*ck up of a vampire movie since the history of time 🙂 Bring on the sequels so i can slate them too.

  4. But the target audience could have been made aware of a current topic that affects everyone like…hmmm…I don’t know…SYPHILLIS. Write that in to the “love story”, then you’ve actually opened up the minds to a morality message. No no no, let’s climb a tree with super agility so we can prepare to shit on the purist vampire image.

    And for the record, had it been a sausage sandwich, then the Count would still be fucking it as we speak.

  5. Mmm sausage.

    This has actually turned into quite an interesting point though. Are the unhappy comments more to do with the variation on the vampire myth (the admittedly ridiculous shiny vampires) than the movie’s plot? As Kat pointed out, Bram Stoker’s vampires didn’t burst into flames (this was created to give Nosferatu a dramatic visual ending and became part of the lore there after), the original book had no love affair sub plot (this was invented for the Francis Ford Coppola 1992 movie) and the garlic element was thought to come from the phrase ‘garlic hath a smelle so stronge that it caneth keep away evileth’ (I may possibly have made that up).

    Can Twilight have created the ‘do zombies run’ equivalent that the purists of the undead find so offensive? It’s quite refreshing to hear people care so much about stories (don’t get me started with anything by George Lucas or *anger growing* Robin Hood) so, if Twilight has done anything right, it has created this passion.

    Only a last note – surely Underworld is the most perverted f*ck up of a vampire movie since the history of time? 🙂

  6. Some very valid points indeed from some (Bod excluded, as judgement is made without having anything to base that judgement on). Running zombies and sparkling vampires… I need to dwell on this a little more.

  7. Despite not creating the legend of the vampire, Stoker’s novel is pretty much considered a rulebook, as much as possibly Romero’s Night Of The Living Dead is to zombies. Blacula, Once Bitten and Dracula: Dead & Loving It have far more in common than Twilight.

    I had a discussion last week actually, as to why the modern vampires don’t actually shapeshift anymore. That’s a missed opportunity right there!

    Hi. Purist.

  8. Underworld is going to be re-judged and re-evaluated as I’m going to watch it on blu ray. FOR ALL OF YOU.

  9. GW Paperstacks Says:

    George Berkeley talked about objects ceasing to exist if there is nobody around to perceive them. With that said I chose not to acknowledge this posts existence or this “twilight” you speak of.

  10. I’m a bit late… but New Moon is amazing ♥ lol

  11. I actually enjoyed Underworld and have both on blu ray ( i dont acknowledge the third one ) It was nice to see a battle between Lyncanthropes and Vampires. Obviously the sexual element of Kate Beckinsale helps as well, but at least they invested in at least some half decent special effects which Twilight failed to do. I think the reason why most people dont like Twilight is because it focuses on the relationship between two people, albeit one being a ‘vampire’, and because of the lack of any exciting scenes. In this day in age, it is now ‘cool’ to be a vampire and what better than to have heart throb ‘hot’ actors attracting a new teenage audience. This i heartily disagree with, and will always continue to believe that the vampire is a creature to be feared and respected, not to be ‘made out’ with. 🙂

  12. I need to post this more for future reference, than anything. Here’s an angry fan who kicked off with a Youtube blog at the thought of Stephen King trashing the author of Twilight saying “she can’t write for shit”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: