-
-
- drunkenhopfrog
- added this
From the folks at PopBunker.net
http://www.popbunker.net/2009/12/2009-year-in-movies-57-61/
An excerpt:
#61 New Moon
Yes I saw it. I’ve not properly read any of the books, rather I’ve skimmed them as I often do popular books to see if the style jives with my taste. None of the “Twilight” books managed to make it on my reading list, but often books I can’t stand to read make good movies (for me Jane Austen novels are much better as BBC tv events). “New Moon,” however, can be defined by one word: Insipid. To wit:
–adjective
1. without distinctive, interesting, or stimulating qualities; vapid: an insipid personality.
2. without sufficient taste to be pleasing, as food or drink; bland: a rather insipid soup. – Dictionary.com
One could try to string together words to describe the movie. Like mopey and moody and bromidic. It’s not a good movie, it’s not a particularly well shot movie, and each character is only identifiable as a cliché of different shades of dreary or intense. Boring and muddled. My guess is that this franchise is only made for the fans it already has or there would otherwise be a greater attempt at making the story livelier (haha!) for greater appeal.
Read the rest of this entry with media and links at:
http://www.popbunker.net/2009/12/2009-year-in-movies-57-61/
http://www.popbunker.net/2009/12/2009-year-in-movies-57-61/
An excerpt:
#61 New Moon
Yes I saw it. I’ve not properly read any of the books, rather I’ve skimmed them as I often do popular books to see if the style jives with my taste. None of the “Twilight” books managed to make it on my reading list, but often books I can’t stand to read make good movies (for me Jane Austen novels are much better as BBC tv events). “New Moon,” however, can be defined by one word: Insipid. To wit:
–adjective
1. without distinctive, interesting, or stimulating qualities; vapid: an insipid personality.
2. without sufficient taste to be pleasing, as food or drink; bland: a rather insipid soup. – Dictionary.com
One could try to string together words to describe the movie. Like mopey and moody and bromidic. It’s not a good movie, it’s not a particularly well shot movie, and each character is only identifiable as a cliché of different shades of dreary or intense. Boring and muddled. My guess is that this franchise is only made for the fans it already has or there would otherwise be a greater attempt at making the story livelier (haha!) for greater appeal.
Read the rest of this entry with media and links at:
http://www.popbunker.net/2009/12/2009-year-in-movies-57-61/
-
- groups:
- Movies
