Review: A Royal Night Out

body_5_3

DIR: Julian Jarrold • WRI: Trevor De Silva, Kevin Hood • PRO: Robert Bernstein, Douglas Rae • DOP: Christophe Beaucarne • ED: Luke Dunkley • DES: Laurence Dorman • MUS: Sarah Gadon, Emily Watson, Rupert Everett

A Royal Night Out is the latest film from Julian Jarrold, and continues his tradition of making some of the most quintessentially British films to hit a cinema. His first huge success was Kinky Boots, a film about British drag queens and shoemakers which dealt with the issue of Britain’s long-standing textile industry losing out to foreign competition, then there was Brideshead revisited, another story about a commoner and a member of the elite upper-classes falling in love, because apparently we can’t get enough of those. Then there was Becoming Jane, another cliché love story, this one about a posh English girl and an Irishman, another cliché among British love stories. And now we have his latest entry, this being the true story of V.E. night, when the young princesses, Elizabeth and Margaret, went for a night out, ditched their chaperones, got lost, and had a series of misadventures involving whorehouses, alcohol, a quest that amounts to running around London looking for princess Margaret, and an ensemble of unique, and often clichéd characters.

This cliché is a problem that pervades a lot of this film. Firstly, there’s the princesses themselves – Elizabeth being the smart, prim, proper one, the “straight man” if you will, whereas Margaret is here to get drunk, have a good time, and is mostly clueless about everything that’s going on around her, i.e. she’s the comic sidekick, the Jack Sparrow to Elizabeth’s Will Turner. Then of course there’s Rupert Everett and Emily Watson as the disapproving parent-figures, and  there’s up-and-coming Irish actor Jack Reynor as Jack, the grumpy, brooding soldier with a secret heart of gold. Finally, there’s Captain Pryce and Lieutenant Burridge, the two drunken, inept chaperones who, to their credit, do manage to provide a few laughs. It quickly becomes apparent that this is a fish-out-of water movie, one of the oldest genres in Hollywood.

On top of that, this film also keeps banging you over the head with the message that the royal family are just like you and I, despite the extravagant wealth, fame etc., and to that end the screenplay, easily the film’s biggest weakness, keeps contriving things for Jack and Elizabeth to have in common in an attempt to have a “star-crossed lovers” element to the story – which brings me to my biggest criticism of this film, the script. The dialogue is mediocre, and despite having watched it a few days ago, I can’t remember a single line, always a sign of poor scripting. As well as this, the characters feel more like archetypes than actual 3-dimensional human beings, and the over-arching plot sinks to one of the laziest forms of story-telling, one I like to refer to as fashionably late syndrome, wherein the characters are given a single objective that never changes or alters, and every time they get to where that objective is, its moved on to a different area. You remember those old Super Mario games wherein you’d storm a palace, beat king Koopa, and then be told “sorry, but our princess is in another castle”? Same deal here.

However, despite some big failings by the script, there are some plus points. Julian Jarrold excels at giving this film a brisk, frantic pace, in fact he does it well enough that you don’t even notice the scripts numerous problems until you reflect upon it later on. Leads Jack Reynor and Sarah Gadon, both up-and coming actors, prove their skill yet again and have quite an appealing chemistry, which also helps to make up for the script’s deficiencies. As well as that, the sound design courtesy of Andy Kennedy is also top-notch, adding extremely well to crowd scenes that rely too much on shaky cam.

If you like your adventure romps, and can keep things like poor scripting and character development from detracting from your enjoyment, you’ll enjoy this. However, if you like better scripts with more cohesive storylines, and if no amount of good direction or acting can make up for a lack of the aforementioned, you should probably avoid this film.

Darren Beattie

12A (See IFCO for details)

96 minutes
A Royal Night Out is released 15th May 2015

 

Share

Review: Clouds of Sils Maria

clouds-of-sils-maria-cannes-2014-2

 

DIR/WRI: Olivier Assayas • PRO: Karl Baumgartner, Charles Gillibert, Thanassis Karathanos, Jean-Louis Porchet, Gérard Ruey • DOP: Yorick Le Saux • ED: Marion Monnier • CAST: Juliette Binoche, Kristen Stewart, Chloë Grace Moretz

 

In Olivier Assayas’s latest interrogation of the nature of performance and identity, Juliette Binoche fearlessly tackles the role of Maria Enders, a celebrated actress who comes face-to-face with several uncomfortable mirrors of her own personality. When Enders makes the fateful decision to accept the role of the older woman in a re-staging of the play that made her famous, with her own original part now taken by a Hollywood starlet, Jo-Ann Ellis (Chloë Grace Moretz), it would seem that the stage is set for a backstage showdown between maturity and youth. However, as the film unfolds, it becomes apparent that the greatest challenge to Enders’ sense of self may come, not from Jo-Ann, but from her own personal assistant, Valentine (Kristen Stewart).

 

Although the set-up is complex, Clouds of Sils Maria is Assayas at his most formally accessible. The running time is manageable, the narrative is linear, and the ragged jump-cuts that brought electricity to Irma Vep (1996) have been replaced with perfectly-judged fades to and from black. With the exception of one hallucinatory sequence on a foggy mountain road, the film has a calm surface, calibrated to showcase the uniformly strong performances.

 

As the veteran star facing an uncertain future, Binoche is completely arresting, minutely charting each ripple of doubt that disturbs Enders’ apparent self-confidence. The degree to which Binoche is (or is not) playing a version of herself is presumably intended to tantalise the audience, although it’s notable that Enders, who is splendidly dismissive of populist science-fiction, takes a harder line than Binoche, whose previous English-speaking role was in Godzilla (2014).

 

The film’s true revelation is Kristen Stewart, whose mumbled interiority proves remarkably complementary to Binoche’s regal bearing. More than earning her status as the first American to scoop a French Cesar award for Best Actress, Stewart makes something very real, and often quite poignant, of Valentine’s struggle with Enders, the friend/employer/idol, who both awes and stifles her. While Julianne Moore and Mia Wasikowska made a delightfully grotesque pantomime of the star/assistant relationship in David Cronenberg’s Maps to the Stars (2014), Assayas, Binoche and Stewart approach the same topic with greater analytical perception as well as greater sympathy.

 

Moretz has what is necessarily the smallest and most cartoonish of the lead roles, but she attacks it with gusto. Brief “found footage” glimpses of Jo-Ann’s near feral volatility are totally convincing, as is her honeyed poise at other moments. She and Binoche have a great scene late in the film when the gulf between Jo-Ann’s personae threatens, briefly, to close – although Assayas is, of course, too cool-headed to permit a full showbiz tantrum to appear in unmediated.

 

As much as Clouds of Sils Maria is about its central characters’ negotiation of “roles”, it’s also about the way in which Assayas tackles generic convention, inhabiting it while observing it from without. Clouds of Sils Maria is as much a backstage melodrama as Demonlover (2002) and Boarding Gate (2007) were “erotic thrillers” – that is to say, theoretically only. The result is that Clouds of Sils Maria can occasionally feel rather dry, with what would remain subtext in a film like All About Eve (1950) or The Star (1952) openly discussed between Assayas’s characters.

 

Although Clouds of Sils Maria is an unapologetically talky film, the good news is that the talk is consistently stimulating, especially when delivered by the unexpected but terrific pairing of Binoche and Stewart. Beyond that, by creating characters with self-awareness enough to elevate subtext to text, Assayas opens up the possibility for deeper, perhaps mythic, dimensions to exist in the unspoken realms of the film. Grander, intangible themes are persistently evoked by Assayas’s landscape shots of the Swiss Alps, a location as crisply bracing and coolly mysterious as the film itself.

 

David Turpin

15A (See IFCO for details)

123 minutes
Clouds of Sils Maria is released 15th May 2015

Share

Still Alice

still-alice

DIR/WRI:  Richard Glatzer, Wash Westmoreland •  PRO: James Brown, Emilie Georges, Pamela Koffler, Lex Lutzus • DOP: Denis Lenoir ED: Nicolas Chaudeurge • MUS: Ilan Eshkeri • DES: Tommaso Ortino • CAST: Julianne Moore, Kristen Stewart, Kate Bosworth, Alec Baldwin, Julianne Moore, Kristen Stewart, Kate Bosworth

During the introduction of one of her lectures, linguistics professor Alice Howland (Julianne Moore) is suddenly unable to remember, of all things, the term lexicon. Soon she starts to show further problems, she gets lost while she is jogging, she introduces herself to her son’s girlfriend despite the fact that he had already introduced them moments earlier. She becomes worried about these lapses in memory and is soon diagnosed as suffering from an early onset of Alzheimer’s, despite only having recently turned fifty. While she makes attempts to manage her symptoms, her condition soon worsens, leaving her family to try and adjust to her care.

Naturally, all attention for this film will be centred on Julianne Moore’s subtle and studied performance, which leads to the question of whether or not this performance overshadows the film as whole. While it is certainly true that Moore’s performance is in itself a lot better than the film that surrounds it, I believe it would be unfair to dismiss the film along those lines. What the writers/directors Richard Glazer and Wash Westmoreland, adapting the story from a bestselling novel by Lisa Genova, are aiming to do is to depict Alice’s condition from her own point of view and to have more of a focus on how much of an impact the disease has on her life rather than the effect it has on the people around her.

There is a very personal reason why the directors would want to depict Alice’s condition in this way as in 2011 Glazer was diagnosed with motor neurone disease, an incurable disease that weakens the body by wasting the muscles. This fact is the most felt in a scene where Alice delivers a speech at the Alzheimer’s Association where she describes just how awful it feels to lose your memories and to lose control over yourself. The film’s sensitive handling of its subject matter shows this personal reticence. While it does lapse into overt sentimentality at times, it never feels emotively exploitative, as perhaps it could have been, mainly thanks to the director’s understanding of her condition and of Moore’s fantastic lead performance.

While there is much to admire about Glazer and Westmoreland’s approach to the subject matter, there still is the problem that the film is not as good as its main actress. Part of this stems from it visual style, which is quite unremarkable and where the only technique used to signify Alice’s experiences, the use of shallow or out of focus, is gradually dispensed with as the film goes on. This lack of visual imagination offers us no insight on what Alice is going through, making us more reliant on Julianne Moore’s skills to fill in those gaps. The film’s use of language symbolism is a bit on the nose as well, from Alice’s profession to the scrabble like game she plays on her phone.

For all these problems, what makes the film work as well as it does is largely in part down to the stunning central performance by Julianne Moore. While the timeframe that the film explores shows us Alice from when the earliest signs of her disease through her rapid decline, Moore shows us glimpses of the kind of person Alice used to be, which allows us to recognise just how much her mind is deteriorating. It is not a show-off performance full of large gestures and dramatic outbursts, but rather more reliant on subtle movements, both physically and emotionally. The scene that showcases just how convincing Moore is in her character comes when Alice, whose condition at this point has worsened significantly, discovers a video message that she had made while her condition was somewhat manageable on her laptop. The difference between these two versions of Alice, one with some sense of control while the other is meek and confused, is extraordinary, showing Moore’s talent, building the character but then slowly dismantling it, leaving someone who is recognisable while at the same time completely different from what they where before.

While Moore’s performance makes the film,  she does have some great support, most notably from Kristen Stewart as her youngest daughter, a wannabe actress and the only member of the family who attempts to try and understand Alice’s condition rather than cope with it, the respectful approach taken by Glazer and Westmoreland, though understandable, seems only to highlight the film’s flaws rather than its strengths. Still, its intention is undoubtedly sincere, and what it lacks in inventiveness it makes up for in heart.

Patrick Townsend

12A (See IFCO for details)
100 minutes

Still Alice is released 6th March 2015

Still Alice  – Official Website

Share

Cinema Review: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2

DIR: Bill Condon • WRI: Katherine Fugate • PRO: Wyck Godfrey, Stephenie Meyer, Karen Rosenfelt • DOP: Guillermo Navarro • ED: Virginia Katz • DES: Richard Sherman • CAST: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner

The international success of the Twilight saga can be traced back to a single demographic – teenagers. And their mothers. From its inception, it’s abundantly clear that Twilight is catering to a specific niche market that enjoys poorly constructed stories involving teenage angst, one-dimensional characters and weak plots. It had vaguely promising beginnings with Catherine Hardwicke – she of Lords of Dogtown / Thirteen fame. But now, in its fifth and final film, the magic has well and truly worn off. The story follows on from Breaking Dawn, Part 1 and let us be clear from the start – you need to have seen it in order to know what’s going on. No true explanation is given to goings on or events throughout the film. It’s simply understood that the viewer has seen the previous films, is aware of the canon and can follow the story. Unfortunately, this serves as one of many stumbling blocks to watching the film as key scenes and subplots hinge on specific knowledge of the previous films. As such, there’s a good two-fifths of the film that is baffling to the uninitiated.

Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart have clearly moved on from Twilight and the poor script. Those who’ve seen Cosmopolis and On The Road will know that, when given decent material, both actors manage to amp up their efforts and abilities. Here, both of them look listless and bored – very clearly phoning in the performances as part of a contractual obligation. Taylor Lautner, who is very clearly this generation’s Keanu Reeves, gives a ‘spirited’ performance but ultimately ends up falling flat. Michael Sheen, playing Volturi leader Aro, looks like an idiot. Hamming it up in every scene under two and a half inches of make-up, it’s a little depressing to see an actor of his calibre slumming it in this affair. Likewise, Lee Pace, Dakota Fanning, Maggie Grace and Rami Malek all work their roles with sufficient effort but come off looking the worse for it. Bill Condon’s direction is tame and boring, failing to put any kind of individual stamp on the film and makes it feel more like a TV movie instead of a tentpole franchise. The CGI throughout the film is laughable at best, particularly the scenes involving the love-child between Pattinson and Stewart. The ‘immortal child’, Renesme, is straight out of the Uncanny Valley and is genuinely unsettling to watch. Overall, Breaking Dawn, Part 2 is a laughable excuse of a film. Regardless of critical reaction, the film will do huge business and close off the franchise for the next ten years.
Brian Lloyd

Rated 12A (see IFCO website for details)
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 is released on 16th November 2012

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 – Official Website

Share

Cinema Review: On the Road

DIR: Walter Salles • WRI: Jose Rivera • PRO: Charles Gillibert, Nathanaël Karmitz • DOP: Eric Gautier • ED: François Gédigier • DES: Carlos Conti • Cast: Garrett Hedlund, Sam Riley, Kristen Stewart, Viggo Mortensen

Based on the novel by Jack Kerouac of the same name, On the Road is the story of young writer Sal Paradise (Sam Riley) and his tumultuous relationship with Dean Moriarty (Garrett Hedlund).

Sal is first introduced to Dean by a friend in New York in 1947, Dean having moved there with his new bride Mary Lou (Kristen Stewart). He is taken by Dean’s free-spirited craving for all that life has to offer and the two form an immediate bond. Soon after Dean tells of his plans to move back to Denver with his wife and a mutual friend Carlo Marx (Tom Sturridge). Sal remains in New York, trying and failing to write a novel, until he receives a drunken letter telling him to ‘bring Paradise to Denver’. Carrying his worldly possessions on his back Sal heads to Denver and from there starts a voyage that will bring him to California, New Mexico, back to New York and a host of places in between.

For a film with ‘Road’ in the title the road features as a comparatively small element. Granted, the main characters are based in a number of cities throughout and there is some travel but it merely serves as a tool for some aesthetically pleasing, but otherwise pointless, tracking shots. The characters themselves, with the exception of Sal, rarely develop during the time they spend travelling together. The same can be said for their relationships. Even in the case of the protagonist, it is only when they are stationary that they get the chance to indulge their hedonism and converse. Hedonism, it should be noted, is the name of the game.

At the beginning of the story Sal has just recovered from a mysterious illness that he advises us was related to the death of his father. He sees in Dean the vibrancy he is lacking and seeks to feed off it just as Dean, the felon and con-man, wants to feed off Sal. It is here that we find one of the central flaws. Dean is portrayed as a rogue and a charmer but we as the audience are never convinced of him being anything more than a selfish user. A few cheap laughs are to be had when Dean goes to bed with a girl that he had apparently found for one of his cohorts but his actions in these instances are display his personality in microcosm.

Sal protests at one point that Dean ‘gives people a good time just by being himself’ but he is more accurately summed up by a mentor of Sal’s. Old Bull Lee (Viggo Mortensen) describes him as ‘feeling no responsibility towards others’ while ‘feeling others have a responsibility to support him’. Even in moments of vulnerability he quickly reverts to talking about sexual conquest. We are left wondering why people would choose to ally themselves to such as Dean for anything beyond the hedonistic, but ultimately self-destructive, lifestyle that he can offer.

The on-screen chemistry between Riley, Hedlund and Sturridge is palpable, although a number of other characters appear secondary at best. It is perhaps telling of the relationships in the film that the most enjoyable sections are when Riley’s Sal is travelling alone and in the encounters he has during those parts of his journey.

While On the Road may have benefited from a shortening of its 124-minute run-time, the episodic narrative and an excellent performance from Riley show us the America that was. Something that is worth seeing for yourself.

Paddy Delaney

Rated 16 (see IFCO website for details)
124 mins

On the Road is released on 12th October 2012

On the Road   –  Official Website

Share

Cinema Review: Snow White and the Huntsman

DIR: Rupert Sanders • WRI: Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock, Hossein Amini • PRO: Sarah Bradshaw, Helen Hayden, Sam Mercer, Palak Patel, Joe Roth • DOP: Greig Fraser • ED: Conrad Buff IV, Neil Smith • DES: Dominic Watkins • Cast: Kristen Stewart, Chris Hemsworth, Charlize Theron

Kristen Stewart and Charlize Theron act up a storm in this alternate take on a classic Grimm Fairy tale. Thankfully Snow White and the Huntsman is not the 1950s-style housfrau romance we all remember but is delightfully darker, more violent and a smidgeon more feminist than its Disney predecessor.

A young Snow White’s free-spirited existence is altered forever when her mother passes away. Not long after, her grieving father and his troops manage to defeat a mystical army only to free their beautiful captor, Queen Ravenna. Enamored, the lonely/randy King Magnus plans some shotgun nuptials and ends up receiving a nasty wedding present from his new bride in the form of a dagger through the heart.

Under the rule of this powerful witch the state of the Kingdom rapidly deteriorates and Snow White is locked away for years (amazingly without even a hint of psychological trauma). On one of her long chats to her evil, melty mirror, Ravenna discovers that Snow White’s beauty and innocence is a threat to her tyrannical reign, so she sends her brother, Finn to the dungeon to kill the Princess. However, Snow White escapes in true Shawshank style and goes on the run with that handsome Huntsman and Finn on her heels.

The film’s selling point is definitely the stunning visuals; there isn’t a single shot that isn’t striking, stylish or downright beautiful. From majestic fight scenes, sweeping shots of snow-covered scenery, an avatar-esqe magical forest and some really spectacular effects; the only thing that really lets the side down is some Lucas-grade CG fairies.

But alas, Snow White and the Huntsman is all style and only a spoonful of substance. There’s a disappointing lack of tangible character development, with the majority of the backstory consisting of tired clichés. In fact, if it weren’t for the sheer talent of the cast, notably Theron and (I‘m surprised to add) Stewart, the film would have been as flat and unengaging as the dwarves attempt at comic relief.

Gemma Creagh

Rated 12A (see IFCO website for details)

Snow White and the Huntsman is released on 1st June 2012

Snow White and the Huntsman – Official Website

Share

The Runaways

The Runaways

DIR/WRI: Floria Sigismondi • PRO: Art Linson, John Linson , Bill Pohlad • DOP: Benoît Debie • ED: Richard Chew • DES: Eugenio Caballero • CAST: Dakota Fanning, Kristen Stewart, Stella Maeve, Scout Taylor-Compton, Michael Shannon

The film is billed as the story of The Runaways – a manufactured chicks and guitar licks rock ‘n’ roll band whose short career from 1975–1979 was marked by leather trousers, loud pop riffs, manipulative Svengali managers and substance excess. Formed by Sandy West and Joan Jett (who would go on to achieve mass MOR acceptance with her love song to rock n roll), the film quickly sets out its stall as really being about Jett and the band’s singer Cherie Curry. The film is adapted from Curry’s book, so no prizes for guessing who takes centre stage. Into the mix is thrown the snake-like producer Kim Fowley to add some venom to the proceedings.

If truth be told this saves the film from spending too much time focusing on the people involved and losing the interest of its target audience, and instead laces up its leather boots and attempts to kick life into a predictable story of a rock band’s rise and fall. There’s nothing new here but it’s fairly well paced and holds its trashy head up high.

The director Floria Sigismondi brings all her history of directing pop videos to bear on her handling of the film and all too often uses unnecessary and forced flashy techniques in an attempt to portray the ‘wild’ on-screen shenanigans. She directs with a certain amount of control early on in the film and allows the early years to tell their own story without resorting to the flashy techniques that she uses later on. These are quite tiresome – nowhere as much as the druggy scenes that meander in and out of the narrative. The film descends into a bit of a mess after its first half and the audience is served up a rather clumsily handled series of scenes that forego storytelling and take refuge in building up towards its uninspiring conclusion charting the band’s demise and putting Jett on some sort of pedestal. Perhaps her being on set influenced the director’s perception of her.

The limitations of the film are there for all to see as the film takes no risks and gets on with blasting out the music and fitting in enough episodes to create the illusion of following a narrative. While it’s entertaining enough, you can’t help but feel that there was a much better story trying desperately to be told here but was constantly being bullied into submission. But hey that’s rock ‘n’ roll.

The film never really gets down and dirty and it all seems rather clean. There are only really hints of the abuse that the band members suffered at the hands of Kim Fowley. And the film fails to convey the problems the band faced elbowing their way into a depraved, all-male territory. The two central performances from Fanning and Stewart are a bit too contrived and there’s never a real sense of angst beyond the angry pouting and tantrums. It is Shannon as Fowley who truly leads this rock entourage as he chews up his scenes and spits them out in true 70’s hamtastic fashion and in the process steals the film from everyone around him.

Never as bad as it could have been but nowhere near as good as it should be, The Runaways will probably secure the producers a few more dimes in the jukebox baby…

Steven Galvin

Rated 16 (see IFCO website for details)
The Runaways
is released on 10th September 2010

The Runaways Official Website

Share

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

DIR: David Slade • WRI: Melissa Rosenberg • PRO: Wyck Godfrey, Greg Mooradian, Karen Rosenfelt • DOP: Javier Aguirresarobe • ED: Art Jones, Nancy Richardson • DES: Paul D. Austerberry • CAST: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Xavier Samuel

Eclipse is the third instalment of The Twilight Saga, a series of four fantasy/horror/romance novels by Stephenie Meyer. Melissa Rosenberg, who has written some episodes of Dexter, writes all the screenplays. You must see the first two films before watching Eclipse. I sat down recently to watch Twilight and New Moon for the first time to prepare myself. The fundamental flaw of the Twilight films is the pacing, which often meanders. They all need alot of editing. Sometimes when you think back it is hard to work out which film is which. Twilight (2008) was made for $37 million, New Moon (2009) for $50 million and Eclipse (2010) for $65 million. The bigger the budget, the louder the film and the more special effects are substituted for storyline, which never works. The flashbacks to the origins of the some of the Cullen family are bit distracting to say the least, not to mention the soppy and overused music score throughout. There are some one-liners, which were not there in the first two films.

We return to Bella (Kristen Stewart) an 18-year-old high school student and Edward (Robert Pattinson) a 109-year-old vampire in the body of a 17-year-old. The majority, if not the entire cast are still with us. Bella’s father Chief Charlie Swan (Billy Burke) Alice Cullen (Ashley Greene) Dr. Carlisle Cullen (Peter Facinelli) and of course the human werewolf Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) to name but a few. Bella is graduating from high school and so is Edward (for the 83rd time!). Edward’s group of vampires and Jacob’s group of werewolves join forces to protect Bella from the evil forces of Victoria, a vampire out for revenge since the first film. Bryce Dallas Howard, who replaces Rachelle Lefevre from the first two films, plays Victoria. Bella must decide who she loves more, Edward or Jacob.

A miscast Dakota Fanning returns as Jane, a guard of the Italian vampire coven known as ‘Volturi’. Stewart, Pattinson and Lautner get by with their roles. Stewart’s lack of facial expressions can look a bit off. But, she gets away with it. Pattinson’s American accent isn’t bad at all. Lautner has fun having his shirt off most of the time! I wonder where these stars will be in ten years – like Harry Potter there is only one film left with two parts. Who knows how seriously they will all be taken after the signature roles are over.

Although Eclipse is slow and dull at times like all of the Twilight films, it is an acceptable fantasy/horror/romance blockbuster, which will continue to wow its target audience. However, if you look back at Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse you’ll realise that not a lot happens and it happens very slowly.

Peter Larkin

Rated 12A (see IFCO website for details)
The Twilight Saga: Eclipse
is released on 9th July 2010

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse Official Website

Share