the many flaws on the twilight movie (DO NOT READ IF HAVE NOT SEEN MOVIE)

I love the movie as much as I love the book. Im just so thankful that the character in the book comes to life by doing this movie. Ofcourse reading the book is such an amazing experience, but you see, its easier to imagine them and the situation when you have specific picture and person in mind. I think every movie has its flaws so I dont mind if its has some.

I haven't seen it. it's not out in the UK yet, but could I resist looking. no. so I can't answer 1 or 2. you don't remember correctly. Alice has black hair. although the pictures I've seen, I imagined it shorter, but she looks a good interpretation of Alice in my book. 4. I think Bella is probably prettier than she seems in the books, because I've been a teenage girl. you're always better looking than you see yourself. if she wasn't good looking, why would everyone (Edward, Jacob, Mike, Tyler etc) all be falling over themselves for her. so I think she probably is quite pretty. even if she doesn't think so herself, and as the books are from her POV, and she has quite low self esteem, like most teen girls, you're never going to see that opinion of her in the books. 5. again, not having seen it, I couldn't tell how well it fits in that timeframe

well just like any other thing that exists, flaws are inevitable, but since everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I respect yours if you think that there are many of it. 1. movie is a representation of images (not specifically ALL from the book, maybe by the scriptwriters perspective as well) 2. As you can see, the book is so wordy and that if you'll put all the details in the book to the movie, that would be so long.. not enough for the movie time allowed. 3. I think Alice's hair in the movie is red, like that of Ron in Harry Potter. 4. If you think Kristen is hot, then that is your own perspective. For me, yes at some point she is, but while watching the movie, I see her as an average girl, a newbie who make heads turn simply because she is something new to look at. 5. Well, at some point yes I AGREE. I wish the movie was made even longer because for people who did not read the books, they would be on a "why is it like that?" dilemma to tell you frankly, I haven't read the books yet, but based on friends and what the internet says, I molded my opinion there. Just my two cents.

what random scenes? yeah, they had the whole revelation part in a different scene.that should've happened in the car. they deleted the scene in the airport. but i do like the movie.its good but the book is better.always is.

Yeah, I think they tried to "squish" in everything into that 2 hour movie so it felt like everything was going too fast and too short. I mean, hello? It's just a 2 hour movie, kinda hard to get everything in the book. I think I don't like that. Maybe they should make the movie into two parts or something. Summit is probably going to earn so much with that. Haha!

There's always disappointment among moviegoers when the film is based on a book, it is normal. But there's a world difference between a screenplay and a paperback plot and theme. In world movie industry, this pattern is natural. The book is written to present the story to the readers what should the characters are supposed to be, because in a book, there's only one element is using which is visual. Normally, a writer is screwing up a story to stimulate senses and interests among readers, but it is a total different when it comes to adopting a story to a film. In a movie, we are using two elements-the visual and audio,because this is now called a screenplay, the story is quite different from the book itself because the director is molding a story for cinematic purposes and we cannot expect a paragraph for paragraph translation in the film. A lot of film adoptation has this same kind of pattern because screenwriters and film directors have always make it a point to set distance to the word-for-word translation of the story. What they are doing is their own version of the story apart from the book writer but making the whole theme and plot intact.

for me twilight is a good movie but not as good as it is in the book..i watched the premier movie of twilight, and as far as i could remember, alice has a red hair..and the movie was short..i thought that it would end for 3 hours but the movie end for just 2 hours..for me bella was just okay for me. I notice that there are many scenes were not shown in the movie that i have red in the book. The story was very fast and if you really dont read twilight you will not understand some part of it.

You wanted more torture? Two hours wasn't enough? :P Just kidding, based on this guy's review (a guy who actually read all 4 books and watched the movie), it sounded like a joke: http://mrmsmultiplywtflol.multiply.com/journal/item/90/An_open_letter_to_Twilight_fans Hope you have fun reading it! And I think he encourages comments, be it harsh or not haha

I have to disagree completely. The movie was one of the worst movie that I have seen in a long time. Could they not hire any good actors/actresses for this movie. It reminded me of a documentary made by a couple of teens. However: 1. I don't remember anyone in the movie that was not in the book 2. Completely agree that they should NOT have made up new scenes 3. Alice had black hair in the book and I think that they nailed her look perfectly 4. Bella looked just about right to me 5. If they had better actors/actresses and better plot and character development they could have added a good 30 minutes to the movie, but with the screenplay they had and the actors/actresses . . . thank god it was only 2 hours!

:O I didnt see the movie yet =/