Twilight Productions, Goldcrest Pictures, Imprint Entertainment, Maverick Films, Temple Hill Entertainment and Summit Entertainment.

Written by: Melissa Rosenberg, adapted from the novel “Twilight” by Stephenie Meyer.

The extraordinarily popular “Twilight” series of books seemed custom-made for the jump to the big screen. When news arrived that the series would be brought to the big screen, millions of devoted readers waited with baited breath for the casting news, the directorial news, and every little tidbit of information one could gather about how the film adaptation of the first book would come together.

Unfortunately, and with my head bowed to all of the millions of book lovers and film apologists, “Twilight” is a weak and mediocre film, which succeeds only in laying a foundation for what may come. That the film is not all that intriguing or interesting would be acceptable if there were some thrilling sequences or signs of life within the film. Hiring independent filmmaker Catherine Hardwicke, a savvy and skilled auteur of the teenage experience with her films “Thirteen” and “Lords Of Dogtown”, seemed like a knowledgeable choice. Filmed on a modest budget for upstart studio Summit Entertainment, who leveraged the company to afford the rights to the series adaptations, Hardwicke’s voice is muted amongst the pale colors and indifferent acting on display. In repeated viewings it is difficult to determine whether Hardwicke bit off more than she could chew, there were too many chefs in the “Twilight” kitchen, or some of both.

In a nutshell, Bella leaves her mother and stepfather in Arizona and moves to the small town of Forks, Washington to live with the police chief father she has not seen in years. Although feeling like a misfit, Bella makes friends fairly quickly. Catching her eye, however, is the dark, brooding, and intense Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), the vampire who glitters in the sunlight and instantly takes Bella’s heart. Through the course of the movie, Bella and Edward develop their love, while Edward cautions her about what it means to be with and accept the life of a vampire.

For much of the movie, we are simply watching the building blocks set one on top of the other, with an oddly disengaged tone. Bella and Edward have palpable chemistry but the extraordinary passion between the two, so present and memorable in the books, is absent here. Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson have some nice scenes together and some terrible ones as well. An extended sequence in the woods, where Bella and Edward fly around and Edward reveals his true self to Bella, plays like low-rent dinner theater, with pathetic visual effects to boot.

Eternally watchable, ultimately “Twilight” is nothing more than a 2-hour prologue, which continuously makes you feel that something exciting is right around the corner, but keeps you waiting and waiting – apparently for the sequel.

Should I See It?

YES

Simply should be seen for the pop culture aspects of the “Twilight” phenomenon.

Arguably this film’s success is the reason we have numerous vampire films and television shows.

It made iconic A-listers out of Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart.

It is bulletproof. People acknowledge its flaws but love it nonetheless.

NO

Even for those who live and breathe the books and these characters, there is a general consensus that the film in underwhelming.

When it is good, it is watchable and when it is bad, it is laughable. Hardwicke’s directing is scattershot and misses frequently in capturing the best qualities of the novels.

The film is a tease, making you think big moments are coming, only to fail to deliver any real “wow” moments. The movie feels rather pointless in summation.