Twilight the Movie-Does it Do Justice to the Original Work?

Erika Bailey
We have all heard the old saying, "Don't judge a book by its cover," or as J.W. Eagan said, "Don't judge a book by its movie,"1 but in the case of Twilight I believe it is more appropriate to say, "Don't judge a movie by its book." Some fans were disappointed by the movie adaptation because it did not contain scenes they considered to be critical to the plot, or because the actors and actresses did not resemble the characters they had pictured in their minds when they were reading. However, fans need to understand that it is incredibly difficult to adapt a book into a screenplay and that necessary cuts and changes must occur in order to bring a story to life on the big screen.

Any time a book is converted into a film dramatic license is often implemented to make what was exciting on the page, just as enthralling on the screen-and it is often a painstaking process. The adaptation of Twilight into a film was made all the more difficult by the fact that the book is written entirely in first person viewpoint. But to avoid an action-less rendition of Bella's thoughts as a voiceover while the characters acted out the movie, the filmmakers wisely added only a few short scenes where Bella is "narrating" the story-and it works.

The film begins much like the book with Bella musing about her decision to move to Forks and moves things along at a far faster pace from there, but that is to be expected. Bella and Edward come to terms with their mutual attraction fairly near the beginning and things progress steadily from there. Several scenes are straight from the book's pages and are charged with emotion. For those who have read the series and know what Bella and Edward are thinking, the subtle facial expressions so masterfully delivered by Robert Pattinson (Edward) are the icing on an already scrumptious cake.

Without the long, uncertain emotional quest Bella embarks on through the book's many pages of the book, the romance between her and Edward does seem a tad rushed in the film, but it is also understandable. What works wonderfully on paper would have been extremely uneventful on film. A sort of time lapse method was used to show viewers the progression of Bella and Edward's relationship, which to someone unfamiliar with the story could seem dull. However, the excitement of the forbidden romance and the danger Bella places herself in by her mere willingness to be in Edward's presence overrides these milder scenes in my mind. Not to mention the sizzling tension between the two throughout the film and the fear generated by the arrival of another vampire clan, one of whom has it out for Bella.

The casting, though I have heard it criticized by some, was very good in my opinion. Edward's obvious good looks and quirky, knowing smiles, paired with his low, smooth voice made for an extremely attractive package. Bella's laid back personality countered by her passionate attachment to Edward and her obvious concern for her friends made for a very well-rounded character. Jasper's tortured expression in the presence of humans made it very clear how hard he was working to control himself as a newly "vegetarian" vampire. Alice's perky cheerfulness, Rosalie's venomous hatred toward Bella and Dr. and Mrs. Cullen's compassion were all expressed very well by the actors portraying them. Bella's dad, Charlie played the part of the loving, but awkward father so endearingly. Then there were the evil vampires, James, Laurent and Victoria-simply brilliant. I wanted to jump through the screen and go after James.

There were a few minor things that had obviously been changed from the book, such as the Cullen family wearing baseball uniforms during their thunderstorm game and Edward revealing his sparkling skin to Bella at the top of a mountain rather than in their meadow, but I considered those to be minor changes that did not really effect the whole of the story.

Overall, I felt that the film excellently portrayed the emotion Stephanie Meyer had built into her novel. There was a wealth of tension, fear, uncertainty, action, danger and love for the entirety of the two hour and twenty minute film. As with most books-turned-movies, the film will never replace the book for me, but at least in this case, it stayed true to the theme and feeling of the original work. And that made it worth watching.

Published by Erika Bailey

I am a writer, photographer, chocoholic, movie fanatic, bookworm, pianist, singer, art critic, cat lover, chef, and globe-trotter. I love sunshine, curling up with a book by the fire, rain, roasting marshmel...  View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Cindy Kearns12/2/2008

    I agree with you that adapting a book to the big screen sometimes omits a lot of what readers like. Good review! --Cindy Kearns

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.