Breaking Dawn - Bis(s) zum Ende der Nacht: Teil 1

There is not much happening altogether in this film. They put way too much focus on the wedding and the honeymoon, thus wasting precious time. But I guess all those teenage girl fans wanted a full portrayal of the big romantic wedding.

In all of the previous films, I liked the acting of most of the cast a lot. But in this film, everyone except Bella, Edward & Jacob is marginalised to such an extent that there cannot be much said about them. As an audience you just don't get to see enough of any of them to really develop a connection with or care about them.

Altogether this is an OK addition to the franchise, by no means worse than the disappointing/confusing 2nd or 3rd films. I assume I will give this film either a 5 or a 6 (out of 10), but I think I will withhold my final vote until I have seen part 2. I know some might say that they are released as separate films and therefore should be treated as such, but as the original book is ripped into two halves here, I think it is fair to reserve the final judgement until I have seen the two films in conjunction (seeing that, as I haven't read the books, I will need to have seen both films in order to make sense of it all).

I'd say, stay for the first 15 minutes then come back for the last 20 minutes, just so that you can skip all of the nonsense in between. Surprisingly, the werewolves have taken a dire turn in this franchise which is a crying shame because their presence in the two other films were refreshing and light handed. In one of the worst scenes ever, they all confront each other through telepathy which is hard to watch because the voice acting is so out of place. The wedding scene was gratuitous and the birth scene was ripped out from the pages of hell. Bizzare.

I like twilight. i wouldn't say i LOVE it, but i found the books to be amusing, warm and a good time waster. The movies seem to be more about capitalising on funds rather than delivering a decent plot.

i've never been a fan of Kristin Stewart (insipid droning teenager that she is in all of the movieS) but she actually appears to present somewhat of a decent acting skill in this movie, whereas cold, boring edward (who in the books was a heart-throb) is just as terribly pathetic as he was in the previous movies. The man that has stolen the show, taylor lautner, since he took his shirt off in the second movie was pushed into the background a little bit in this movie, which i think was the worst thing they could have done. but, in the same token, they had to do as its a love story between edward and bella, not bella and jacob. I'm just a little disappointed by the way they've dragged this on. but i was disappointed by the books towards the end too.

We took our whole office at the penrith professionals and there were mixed reviews. The oldies hated it, the middle agers (who knew the basic plot line of the movie) found it a nice romance but fairly boring and the young girls loved it for the sheer fact it was twilight.

I wouldn't see it again, thats for sure.

The movie is not to the level of expectation. Although, the book is better, it is hard to represent everything in visual. The worst part of the movie is releasing it as two parts. Anyway let bygones be bygones. The performance of Kristen is fantastic. But the rest of the team don't support her performance. The nocturnal fight can be made better with little increase in brightness. Twilight series is in the high level of expectation to the people who don't read book. Let us expect some good plot in conclusion.

One famous critic says the following. " Based on a portion of the popular teen romance book "Breaking Dawn" this slow-moving film has long periods of inaction and generates little suspense, making it the worst film in the "Twilight Saga" films so far. This movie seems to be a mere multimillion dollar bookmark, marking time until the overarching story is finally concluded in the last film. Short on plot developments and long on inaction, the characters spend much of the film waiting for something, anything to happen.

This third film in the Twilight Saga opens with the marriage of the human Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) to the vampire Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). This is followed by the honeymoon in South America. A good deal of time is spent in transit to and from South America. Although a private jet is involved in this trip, most of the traveling scenes are in cars or limousines. These are awkward sequences where nothing really happens. When the newlyweds finally have sex, the act is underplayed, and not repeated during the honeymoon. Once again, the chastity theme comes to the fore as the husband broods over the safety of his wife and his wife's bruises resulting from his partial loss of self-control during sex.

So the bride and groom are on their honeymoon on a fancy island resort, but they are still waiting for something else to happen, namely the act of turning Bella into an vampire. Why they don't just go ahead and get it over with isn't explained very well. When Bella's other boyfriend, Jacob the werewolf (Taylor Lautner) finds out about this human-vampire honeymoon idea, he thinks it is crazy. While everyone is waiting for Bella to become a vampire, something else happens. Bella becomes pregnant. This, of course, requires more waiting to see what happens with the pregnancy.

After more limo scenes, the bride and groom head back to the family compound in Washington where they spend the rest of the film waiting to find out what happens with the baby. More waiting, more interminable chastity. Just like any marriage. There is a brief flurry of action at the end of the film when another battle between the vampires and werewolves starts to flare up, for no good reason, by the way. During all this, amazingly, nobody bothers to tell Bella's father that she might be dying, or that she has decided to join the undead vampires anyway, even if she survives the birth. Instead, Bella lies to her father, telling him she is at a spa in Switzerland. I guess everyone decides that Bella's father has no right to be at his daughter's side as she fights for her life. This is just heartless and wrong, but it is just one of many wrong things in this twisted story.

I'm not going to go into the film's ending, but almost all of the plot and what little action there is in the film is back loaded into the last few minutes of the film. The film's running time of nearly two hours is overlong. It is more like one hour of plot padded out to two hours. Surprisingly, the one character who undergoes much of a change in the film (until the last second of the film) is Jacob. While most of the characters in the film are passive and childlike, Jacob actually grows up and becomes an adult in the film. He takes a stand against the leader of his wolf pack and starts his own pack. Unfortunately, this doesn't last long. He reverts back to passivity because of something called "imprinting" and once again loses his will. Completing the image of loss of will, he even falls to his knees as if he were worshiping the baby Jesus in Bethlehem.

I get the feeling this film is similar to "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part One." It seems to be an artificial creation, manufactured to make an additional $700 million that the studio would not have gotten if they had just made one "Breaking Dawn" film instead of two. If you are going to make movies of a series of books and you plan to make the movies true to the books, then do that. Don't try to manufacture additional movies by splitting a book in two. It doesn't work. At least it hasn't worked with the Harry Potter and Twilight franchises. This film rates a D."

I am neither a Twilight fan or a Twilight detractor. This said, I am indifferent to the franchise. As far as the movies, I still think, coming from someone whose knowledge of the books only comes from my sister being a fan and me reading a chapter of one and putting it down, that the best is Eclipse(not saying much) and New Moon the worst. But that is not a consolation really. Breaking Dawn: Part 1 is not quite among the worst of the year and nowhere near among the worst ever, however it suffers from some major problems that I will get to later in the review.

So what was it that got me seeing Breaking Dawn: Part 1 in the first place? The answer was its director, Bill Condon. I am familiar with his previous films and find him a promising director and writer, finding his films well written, observed and acted. Gods and Monsters is amazing and one of my favourites, Kinsey was interesting and Dreamgirls elevated by the soundtrack and cast was quite decent. Did Condon do a good job directing? For me, I am not sure. I'd say of the four Twilight movies so far Breaking Dawn: Part 1 has the most cinematic feel to it, on the other hand there is not much here that made Condon's previous films so good and I'd go as far to say it is the film of his that engaged me the least.

Are there any redeeming qualities to this instalment? I think so actually. Although there are moments of sloppy editing, I did like the look of the film. At some points it was quite Gothic, and at others it had either an evergreen or autumnal feel to it. The scenery often does look stunning, the effects are okay I guess and the cinematography especially with the close-ups of the back of the wedding dress and the final shot is some of the best of the franchise in my opinion.I also liked Carter Burwell's score. I like Burwell a lot, his music has a hypnotic and quite hauntingly beautiful quality to it. For my tastes though some of the pop tunes are on the insipid side, however the score itself was pleasant with a lot of what I like about Burwell evident.

Much has been said about the sex scene. In all honesty I was expecting it to be of hilariously cheesy quality, but somehow Condon brought a little more subtlety than I was expecting. The last thirty minutes was perhaps the most exciting Breaking Dawn: Part 1 got, as some of does have purpose and intensity, which was something that the first half of the film did not have.There are also two good performances, Billy Burke and Michael Sheen, the latter being another point of interest. Burke as always is amusing with some of the better lines of the film(though is that saying much do you think?), while Sheen, ever the great actor, adopts a menace and magnetism as Aro without overdoing it too much. Ashley Greene is also quite good, if not great.

I have to say I still don't think much of the acting of the central trio. Kristen Stewart is much better than she is in New Moon, with much less of the moping and dead pauses, but some of her line delivery is still awkward and her facial expressions for my tastes are lifeless. It doesn't help though that Bella is a rather dull character.Robert Pattinson has more to do than he did in New Moon and is less hammy than in the first film(the looking into the camera moments brought moments of unintentional laughter when I first went to see Twilight when it came out). As a matter of fact this is perhaps his best performance of the series and he is certainly the best of the central trio, but like Stewart some of the line delivery could've been more inspired.

Taylor Lautner on the other hand is getting worse and worse. He is hunky to be sure, but does that alone make you a good actor? Not to me. I will give credit and say he is better than he was in this year's Abduction, where both the film and performance were awful, but the more dramatic moments from him felt forced and overplayed, and throughout there was a very stilted nature about him. A lot of the problem is to do with the writing. The dialogue in the Twilight franchise never was particularly good, saying this though in terms of written quality this is Twilight at its most banal, its most clunky and its most cheesy. The characters are clichéd and underdeveloped too, and at the end of the day you don't care for anybody. Oh, and the talking wolves were poorly done and unintentionally funny.

The story is very bland and unengaging, not to mention thin structurally and in content. The whole of the first half reads little more than ponderous melodrama. Was the wedding lavish? Yes it was. But it was also plodding and over-extended. The second half fares better, still with the clunky dialogue, uneven acting and cheesy, underdeveloped plot points and characterisations, but as I said the last thirty minutes or so serves as the highlight of the film. But for me what killed the film was the pace. Mind you, I have seen movies with slow pacing, but they are often paced deliberately and with strong meanings, great acting and dialogue and identifiable characters. With little of that here, Breaking Dawn: Part 1 not only is dull and plodding but also uninteresting and without bite.

Overall, despite my admiration for Condon and Sheen, this didn't work. The ending is highly suggestive of a continuation, which I understand is happening. If so, I do hope it will be better than this. 4/10 Bethany Cox