Giving Thanks for Twilight

As an official start to the Thanksgiving weekend, I finally saw Twilight. It's not like I didn't try to see it the day it opened.How could I not? I live in a city of 40,000 people, in a county of about 150,000 and, since the theater was showing Twilight on two screens, I just didn't think that there were THAT many teenage girls who would be flocking to see the movie on opening day that I needed to do anything like pre-buy my ticket through Fandango. I should have recognized my mistake as I walked toward the theater, overhearing snippets of frantic conversations like "We're going to the 7:30 show!" and "Darla saw it at 5:00!" So I was only a little surprised and majorly disappointed to find out that both screens were sold out until the 11 PM show. Strangely, I underestimated the cultural phenomenon that the Twilight series has become.

By yesterday the crowds had thinned out a bit, but the audience was still primarily female, still mostly under 18.

Of course I liked the movie. There are no vampire movies I don't like, given my fascination - okay, my obsession - with the genre. Fans of the book - and I number among them - certainly wouldn't find fault with how accurately Stephanie Meyer's world has been brought to the screen. I've thought a lot about what I wanted to say about Twilight over the past few hours, and none of it is negative, except that I, as have many of the reviews I've read in the past week, really don't understand why, with all the special effects available to the filmmakers, they choose make up, especially for Peter Facinelli's Carlisle, that looked so obviously like a bad Halloween vampire costume (take it from someone who tried - and failed - to get that same pallor for my own vampire costume this Halloween. I probably looked less obviously made up than Facinelli did. And what was with that blonde hair?)

Niggling critiques aside, Twilight was, well, exactly what it needed to be. It wasn't a great film because vampire movies don't have to be great films. It was rife with undertones ( I'm still trying to find a review that mentions that scene in the chem lab with the wings behind Edward's head implying Bella's perception of his angelic beauty) because throughout their 75+ year history, vampire films have always had some social subtext. It was distinctive, because of the unique mythology that Stephanie Meyer created in her books to enhance existing vampire lore. That being said, it was the number one box office movie of its opening weekend, the fourth top November weekend opener of all time, and is, after just its opening weekend, the fifth largest grossing vampire movie (according to www.boxofficemojo.com) in 30 years.

Reviews of Twilight have been mixed. Nothing unusual there. Reviews of horror film in general, and vampire movies specifically, have always ranged from raves to pans. But box office numbers don't lie when it comes to determining the commercial success of any movie. All of which raises the question, which I'll address in my next post: When it comes to vampire movies, does what the critics say really matter?

Waiting for Twilight

With the impending release of "Twilight," and "True Blood" getting renewed for a second season, it seems like it's the right time to launch a blog on which I can share my passion for all things vampire on film and TV. I was never terribly into vampire fiction (aside from the original Dracula and a few others, like Whitney Strieiber's The Hunger) but I thought I'd read Twilight just to see what all the hubbub was about. I'm pretty long past Young Adulthood, and so assumed that I wasn't really the target audience for the book; I thought I'd read it as research for the book I'm working on about vampire films. I was immediately sucked in. I couldn't stop thinking about the characters, I couldn't wait until I could get back to it whenever I put it down. I read it on the treadmill, I read it while eating dinner, I read it before falling asleep. I didn't want it to end. I remembered what it felt like to be seventeen and unpopular, to be attracted to someone and so terrified of that attraction at the same time. And, oh yeah, it was about vampires. Stephanie Meyer has managed to create an entirely new vampire mythology while maintaining those all too familiar characteristics of the vampires who came before hers.

So, needless to say, I'm eagerly awaiting the movie's release. Will it live up to the book's promise? From everything that I've been reading, it seems that it will.

I'm also bemoaning the fact that I live two hours away from a theater where I can see "Let the Right One In," the Swedish vampire movie that's been getting excellent reviews. Newsweek's David Ansen called it "mesmerizing," and dozens of other reviewers have followed suit. Check out this one, from CineMoose. While nothing at all like "Twilight," the two films share a few things in common. They're both about young love, first love, between social outcasts and the undead (which is, I guess, more common than one would think. This makes me very happy that I am not the parent of a teenager.)

From a filmmaking perspective, both "Twilight" and "Let the Right One In" share another commonality, in that the writers of the books that inspired both films contributed to their transition from page to screen. John Ajvide Lindqvist, whose bestseller inspired the film, wrote its screenplay. Melisssa Rosenberg is the screenwriter responsible for keeping the displeasure of the hundreds of thousands of fans of Twilight at bay by not betraying the essence of the world that Meyer has created. In a recent interview in Fangoria, she says the book "was my bible. If I didn't lift it directly from Stephanie's writing, it was inspired by it."

Well, I certainly didn't intend to take off in that direction when I started this post, but that's what you can expect from this site. Vampire movies, regardless of how different they might be, do seem to be linked by common threads, from the best to the worst (and sometimes the worse ARE the best, but more on that later.)