Posted tagged ‘Taylor Lautner’

« ManicDDaily home page

Super Hot Day Brings Up Edward And Bella Again – Is The Fascination About Sex, Marriage, Feminism (Or Lack Thereof)? Or Just All the Carrying?

July 6, 2010

Modern Harried Female and Embarrassed Robert Pattinson (as Edward Cullen)

I hate to try the patience of my regular followers.  I ask for forgiveness based on the fact that it was 102 degrees in my city today, and  I have used very little AC for several hours in a perhaps misguided attempt to support Con Edison (as well as our troops abroad, and our environment at home.)

So, under guise of a very wilted brain, I am returning to a discussion of Twilight, it having re-entered my consciousness with the new Eclipse movie.  Only this time I’m approaching it from a sociological perspective and not an “isn’t-Robert-Pattinson-so-much-cuter-than-that-Lautner-guy” perspective.

There has been much discussion of the sexual conservativism of Mormon Stephanie Meyer’s books (the lesson of “sure, dear, sneak a vampire up to your bedroom every night, just don’t, you know, have, like, sex with him. “)

But the truly old fashioned aspect of the books relates to sex as in gender roles, rather than to sex (or the lack thereof) as an activity.  Frankly, when viewed through this lens, the appeal of the books to middle-aged women (the mothers or grandmothers of the target teen audience) is really kind of sad.

Much is made in the movies of a love triangle between Bella and her vampire suitor Edward and werewolf suitor Jacob, but, frankly, in the books – spoiler alert- Edward wins hands (ahem) down.

No, the true choice for Bella (as written) is not between Edward and Jacob, but between a) Edward, a life of very ample financial security, sex (finally) and devoted, if controlling, companionship, and b) having a life on her own—that is, going to college, having a career (vampires have to keep too low a profile to pursue work or renown in any meaningful way), having an ongoing relationship with her birth family, having children (although this one doesn’t come up for a while), having her choice of friends, having to wear sunblock, and (though rarely mentioned) eating food.   (Edward sort of sums all these things up in “having a soul”.)

This choice, if you think about it, sounds an awful lot like the choices faced by many women in the past (and currently in much of the world) in marriage.   Going from one set of fairly controlling males (the father and his sphere) to another (the husband and his sphere).   Trading off the possibility of independent personal development for material security and sex with a sole partner.

Even more strange from a feminist perspective is the fictional fact that Bella feels forced to make her choices quickly primarily because of her vanity.  (Okay, and hormones.)  She can’t stand to delay a transformation to vampiredom, even to go to college for a couple of years, because it will cause her to become “older” than her vampire beau.  She feels the tick of a biological clock that is not based on reproductivity but firm thighs and an unlined countenance.

Yes, young love is powerful.  But why do older women (much to their own embarrassment) read the books so avidly?

The only answer I can come up with (and I should know) is that Edward promises to take care of everything.   He is handsome, considerate, unconditionally loving, but, more importantly, extremely attentive to detail.  He loves to buy presents.   He arranges for house cleaners.  He cooks!  He carries Bella around, never ever complaining about how heavy she is.  One big reason he wants to get married is simply to be allowed to pay Bella’s bills.

The modern older woman a) rarely has anyone carry her groceries much less herself, and b) generally has to pay her own bills.

Of course, the success of the books probably also arises from the fact that even as Bella makes some very unliberated choices, she ends up repeatedly saving the day, and generally doing adventurous, independent, types of things.   (All the while being carried at moments, and having important bills, such as medical and travel, paid.)

It’s interesting that the non-Mormon director and screenwriter of Eclipse, presumably sensitive to feminist issues, actually change the dialogue to have Bella say that her motivation for becoming a vampire is to be her truest self (rather than her love of Edward.)   While the change may be intended to promote the idea of strong women, it ends up meaning that Bella’s choice is for wealth, supermodel looks, superhero/bloodthirsty strength.  (And still no college or family!)  Somehow the doing-it-all-for-love part seemed better.   (Especially given the carrying.)  (And the saving the day.)

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Twilight Saga Eclipse – Embarrassing – Something To Learn From

July 1, 2010

Embarrassed Pattinson

I’m putting aside all this discussion of constitutional issues and the Second Amendment today and getting to something really important:  the new cinematic installment of the Twilight Saga – Eclipse.

And I’ll stop right here.  I can’t, with a straight face, call it really important.  With a straight face, all I can call it is really terrible.

The most fun part, in fact. was standing in line in the theater with two twenty-somethings who kept talking about how much they hoped that they would not run into anyone they knew, and which particular person they would least want to run into.

At the end of the movie, we all three walked away very very fast.

The problem, aside from idiotic dialogue, and visuals that, on individual shots, make the actors look incapacitated by angst or glum boredom, and group shots, as if they are on a fashion photo shoot, is that its makers disdain the basic material.  Yes, the books are goofy; yes, the writer is a Mormon; yes, a big feature in the plot is the maintenance of chastity before marriage; and yes, Edward is just too “good” to be true—yes, these factors are all pretty dumb and very uncool (as is a lot of the Twilight crowd),  but they are the givens; a big part of what made the books popular.

One can feel the director, David Slade, the script writer, Melissa Rosenberg, strain against these very uncool, unhip, givens; they seem embarrassed to be connected to a movie promoting them  (just as we, hip New Yorkers, were embarrassed to see it.)  (Although Slade and Rosenberg are, I’m sure, eager enough to make money from it.)

The exceptions here are perhaps Taylor Lautner who seems, sorry, clueless enough, not to mind the story, and still too thrilled by the fact that they kept him in to be disdainful of anything, and Billie Burke, who is just a good professional actor.  Okay, okay—I’m not going to blame Pattinson (who is given truly awful lines, and very little leeway to smile charmingly) or Stewart either.  It’s the Director and Screenwriter, who seem like the true teenagers here, mortified by their parent, i.e. their base storyline.

But a movie that doesn’t like itself is just not likeable.   To make a stupid, uncool, story work, you have to just go with the stupid, uncool flow, not try for a stupid cool flow.  (Otherwise, it just doesn’t make internal sense.)

Bringing this around to something that may be of more interest to followers of this blog:  it really is important, in pursuing any kind of artistic endeavor, to make a kind of peace with it, to let go of that edge of embarrassment that sometimes clouds one’s work and commitment.  If you find your work truly embarrassing (not because of modesty, but because of something deeper—because the work is it is too personal, too openly reflective of your goofy side, or the opposite, too blatantly commercial and not reflective of your goofy side), it will be very difficult for you to really push it to any kind of happy fruition.

Categories: Robert Pattinson, Twilight Saga, Uncategorized, writing
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

New Moon -The Missing Moments

November 23, 2009

Chris Weitz and Summit Entertainment have struck gold with Twilight Saga New Moon. Frankly, any regular ManicDDaily reader could have predicted this:  while Kristen Stewart manages to embody both the ordinary and heroic—a combination of qualities that many young girls envisage in themselves, Robert Pattinson embodies (literally) what many young girls envisage for themselves.   And then there’s the extra set of muscles, bright smile, and uncannily canine shagginess of Taylor Lautner.

Where the movie fails, though, is in targeting the needs of tweens, a core fan group, for quirky scenes, lines and gestures which can be repeatedly replayed  (i) in their heads, and (ii) on their downloaded versions of the movie,  (iii)  preferably, at a slumber party.

The first movie, Twilight, had an abundance of these quirky, (one might  say) goofy, moments.  They were camp, but could somehow bear the weight of repeated viewing:  (i) RPatz’s shaken/frozen face after he stops the careening car; (ii) “I’m a killer, Bella,” (iii) the whole “you shouldn’t have said that,” “spider monkey,” thing (iv)  the first kiss;  (v) the second kiss; (vi) the third kiss.

New Moon has remarkably few of these quirky moments —moments that one can imagine young girls watching again and again in giggles and pajamas.   In my pre-vcr/dvr youth, this need was filled by our actual re-enactment of scenes.  My personal favorite was Olivia Hussey’s death scene in Zeferelli’s Romeo and Juliet, which I performed with great gusto and convincing gasps on numerous all-girl occasions.   “Oh happy dagger, this is thy sheathe.  There rust and let me die.”   (Yes, I was a weird kid.)

But what would a weird kid re-enact in New Moon?  All I can come up with (and these are no match for Hussey) are (i)  Bella’s single-arched-browed “kiss me,”,  and (ii) Dakota Fanning’s smiling “this may hurt a little.”

So, will this lack of re-enactable scenes translate into a lack of repeated viewings?  A drastic downfall in ticket and DVD sales after the initial hot weekend?

I doubt it.  The film still has a lot of Rob Pattinson abs.   (Apparently, even 109 year-old  vampires have adopted modern low-rise fashions.  Who knew?)

And, then of, course, there are kisses 4, 5, 6, 7…. But who’s counting?

Categories: New Moon, Robert Pattinson, Twilight Saga
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

For Wishful Twihards – Is there really a Santa…errr… Robsten?

October 25, 2009

Waiting to get my hair cut yesterday, I happened onto a magazine covered with pictures of Rob and Kirsten.  (To the non-cognoscenti, Robert Pattinson and Kirsten Stewart.)

Yes, I only happened onto the magazine (OK!), although I confess I had noticed it before (on nearly every newsstand I walked by.)

The headline  is something like “Welcome to Our Home” and describes the 34th floor of a hotel in Vancouver as the Robsten “love nest.”   As “proof” of the Kirsten/Pattinson relationship, the article declares that Rob refused to leave Vancover during a recent solo one-week break, because Kirsten was stuck there still filming.

During my shampoo, I tried to reconcile OK’s article with (i) recent reports in other “news” sources of Kirsten firmly disclaiming any love relationship with Pattinson, and (ii)  the sinking feeling in my stomach.   That sinking feeling reminded me of the terrible disappointment I felt in the December of my fourth or fifth year of life when, after I had badgered her  nonstop for several weeks, my mother finally admitted that there was no Santa Claus.

It was odd.  I had been quite sure that there was no Santa Claus.  I had gone through the impossibility of it repeatedly in my head;  my endless questions were framed with the statement, “I already know the truth, so just tell me okay?”  But when my mom actually said the words aloud, tears sprang to my eyes, a huge lump filled my throat and chest, and I could hardly stand to believe her.

“Reliable reports” posit that Summit Entertainment, the maker of the Twilight movies, won’t let Rob and Kirsten admit to their relationship for fear of scuttling the credibility of the Jacob-Bella focus in the upcoming New Moon and Eclipse movies.  (For any non-cognoscenti still reading this post, Jacob, played by brawny Taylor Lautner, is the werewolf rival, of the divine vampire Edward, played by RPatz.)

That doesn’t make sense to me.  First of all, even the most rabid Twilight fans must know that the Twilight movies are just movies.  (Although some are crazed enough to seem to need Midsummer Night’s Dream’s Peter Quince explaining that “Lion” is really played by a man.)  Still, it’s hard to see Jacob as a credible rival to Edward, even in the books.

Even so, Summit may be on to something (besides publicity) in keeping “Robsten” under wraps.   The fact is that the people who like Twilight like fantasy.  And the true fantasy of the books and movies   (other than the werewolf/vampire bit) is not the love affair of two super-glamerous, wealthy, and successful movie stars who are constantly thrown together, but the unbreakable romance of the nearly perfect (though secretly flawed) Edward and the nearly ordinary (though secretly attractive and brave)  Bella, despite all of his efforts to keep his distance.

As a result, I suspect that the true Santa Claus story for most fans is not the real-life probability of “Robsten” but the other-wordly possibility of Rob holding out for a real life Bella, someone who, like them, is loyal, brave, true, klutzy, and, with the right makeover, could look really great.

Sorry, girls, but I don’t think there is a Santa Claus.

If you’re interested in slightly silly…errr… thoughtful posts re RPatz, Robsten, and Twilight, check out my other posts in those categories, especially post discussing why some modern females prefer Robert Pattinson to Marlon Brando, and why I know my feelings for RPatz are strictly maternal.  Find these from ManicDDaily home page:  https://manicddaily.wordpress.com.

Also for subsequent post re Yes, Virginia there is a Santa…errr… Robsten, check out:  https://manicddaily.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/yes-virginia-t……robsten-maybe/

Categories: Robert Pattinson, Robsten, Twilight Saga
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment