User Score
5.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 432 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. JamesS
    Jun 30, 2010
    0
    This movie was the epitome of terribleness. I wanted to die as I was watching it. It has a bearable story line but theres no good moments or anything cool or enjoyable in this movie. Worse actors cannot be found and the director was likely off snorting cocaine when the movie was being filmed because it was obvious that he didn't even have a presence during filming. Just please stay This movie was the epitome of terribleness. I wanted to die as I was watching it. It has a bearable story line but theres no good moments or anything cool or enjoyable in this movie. Worse actors cannot be found and the director was likely off snorting cocaine when the movie was being filmed because it was obvious that he didn't even have a presence during filming. Just please stay away from this movie if you want to keep your eyes because mine have been burned off by the pure shit that this movie is. Expand
  2. ThomasR.
    Jun 30, 2010
    0
    A silly film based on silly books that are badly written and in correlation badly acted. For books that have so much confusion in what they want to be and what love is, it's no surprise that this movie is campy and silly.
  3. Aug 13, 2010
    0
    The majority of teenage girls and I, do not see eye-to-eye on entertainment. They enjoy things like One Tree Hill, pop music, and whatever is on MTV while they're sitting in-front of the television. Things that promote superficiality, melodrama and self-absorption. Twilight is yet another of these things. It's badly written, terribly acted, superficial, and worst-of-all, boring as hell. IThe majority of teenage girls and I, do not see eye-to-eye on entertainment. They enjoy things like One Tree Hill, pop music, and whatever is on MTV while they're sitting in-front of the television. Things that promote superficiality, melodrama and self-absorption. Twilight is yet another of these things. It's badly written, terribly acted, superficial, and worst-of-all, boring as hell. I cannot say enough bad things about this, and the fact that this has become as popular a fad as it has, makes me want to die a slow agonizing death from cancer just to get my mind off of it. This isn't receiving a 0 because "I'm a guy and guys just hate Twilight because girls enjoy it". This is getting a 0 because it is truly earned, by a movie (and book) that have no thought put into beyond the characters appearances. There is nothing redeemable to list here. Expand
  4. Aug 22, 2010
    0
    I've just started to write a script which will make me millionaire. Here's the recipe; dig out a few Mills & Boon romantic trash novels (3 in all), re-write the romantic hero as a cutesy-wootsey werewolf, who upon the sight of a full moon enjoys to nothing more than to roll-over and have his belly tickled. Enter the romantic anti-hero who doesn't admire having his belly tickled so much,I've just started to write a script which will make me millionaire. Here's the recipe; dig out a few Mills & Boon romantic trash novels (3 in all), re-write the romantic hero as a cutesy-wootsey werewolf, who upon the sight of a full moon enjoys to nothing more than to roll-over and have his belly tickled. Enter the romantic anti-hero who doesn't admire having his belly tickled so much, but rather prefers gnawing at a butcher's bone and terrifying stray kittens of an evening. Let one cute human, kitten-owning teen to be a the centre of a love triangle between said doe-eyed-beasties. Put together a cast of good-looking young people to populate the families, friends and townsfolk of this fictional village. Don't let any of the protagonists kiss until the very last 10 minutes of the final movie in order to maintain a high level of suspense among the female, pre-teen audience. Expand
  5. Aug 23, 2010
    1
    i have to admit i haven't read the books, and i watched the movies just to know what's everyone so crazy about. but this movie was super-boring. it wasn't as horrible as new moon, but the acting almost made me cry with frustration. i mean, they get paid soooo much money for this??? i just don't understand why the movies are such a big hit. it has nothing we haven't seen before!!! littlei have to admit i haven't read the books, and i watched the movies just to know what's everyone so crazy about. but this movie was super-boring. it wasn't as horrible as new moon, but the acting almost made me cry with frustration. i mean, they get paid soooo much money for this??? i just don't understand why the movies are such a big hit. it has nothing we haven't seen before!!! little advice, read anne rice, watch true blood, coz that's about real vampires. this is just a pile of crap. thank gods i'm not stupid enough to pay to see this garbage Expand
  6. Feb 8, 2011
    0
    While the other two Twilight movies were bad, this one sets a new low by having the least interesting plot, meaning it was so bad, I would've given this movie a -5 if metacritic let us do it.
  7. Dec 29, 2010
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Okay, seriously? This is what some people consider to be a good film? This is what people were up at midnight to see? You gotta pray for humanity, even if you don't believe in God. Okay, opening rant aside, lets move onto the actual film review. This films plot is less stupid than New Moon. Here, it's basically Newborn Vampires VS The Cullens and Jacobs Pack. The problem with that is that the Newborns are hugely anticipated and so built up, but, the fight lasts barely a minute, and they don't even do damage against the good guys. Bella's a **** There she is stringing Jacob along, when we all know she'll choose Edward over him. Heck, they're discussing him turning her at the beginning of the film. Poor Jacob, his heart being played like some toy. The dialogue was crap. This is an actual piece of dialogue. Charlie Swan: What's going on? Jacob Black: [pause] I kissed Bella. [pause] Jacob Black: And she broke her hand. [pause] Jacob Black: Punching my face. [pause] Jacob Black: It was a complete misunderstanding. Whoever wrote dialogue like that probably wrote for Andromeda. The troubling thing is that in the theater I was in, people actually laughed at that dialogue. They'd probably have laughed if someone just got up their and jingled a bunch of keys. And we're supposed to believe that Bella and Edward are in love? They have as much chemistry as a rapist and his victim. And Edward still looks like a **** with his pale ass face, his disco ball impressions in the sunlight and hair being 95% gel I will add one positive thing: Bryce Dallas Howard and Ashley Greene are beautiful! Thats the only good thing I can say about this piece of crapola. To close this review, If you see a twilight fan who calls this the best film of the year, do the right thing. Slap them over the head, give them a copy of Nosferatu, Dracula, Near Dark or 30 days of night and hope they get immerssed into a REAL vampire movie Expand
  8. Mar 10, 2011
    2
    More generic sparkly vampire nonsense that doesn't deserve your attention. Despite being a flavour of the month thing, where vampires are periodically "cool" again for a month or two, this movie caters for screaming fangirls and nothing else, please avoid if you are over the age of 13
  9. Jun 10, 2011
    1
    One of the most boring movies I've ever seen... one of the worst actresses I've ever seen seriously the girl really needs some acting classes. They sell the Lautner boy like a piece of meat is always half naked =___=. Pattinson acting is about 30/100. The "great final fight" is lame, MORE THAN LAME, for me this movie sucks. The only point I'm giving is for the character of "Alice" wich IOne of the most boring movies I've ever seen... one of the worst actresses I've ever seen seriously the girl really needs some acting classes. They sell the Lautner boy like a piece of meat is always half naked =___=. Pattinson acting is about 30/100. The "great final fight" is lame, MORE THAN LAME, for me this movie sucks. The only point I'm giving is for the character of "Alice" wich I found interesting. Expand
  10. Jul 20, 2011
    1
    How many more Twilight films must they make before they finally realize that they are creating an abomination of a franchise? Although Eclipse is better than its two predecessors, which is hardly saying anything, it continues its dull and lifeless story with very poor acting, dull imagery and a totally boring characters. Three films, three flops. This is getting ridiculous.
  11. Mar 8, 2014
    3
    Just because of a slight improvement, the "Twilight" series won't win over much more fans. Once again, we have a bland script and terrible acting.
  12. Nov 12, 2012
    3
    This new dose of vampire mush for puss:es is the worst load yet. It offers no payoff at the end, and not even any highlights throughout its duration. The plot literally flatlines after the first frame.
  13. LaurenF.
    Jul 2, 2010
    3
    The plot in this movie went nowhere. It seemed to start and end in the same place with no movement or further character development from the previous movies. The acting was uninspiring, but on a positive note the backgrounds and filming locations were gorgeous.
  14. SpencerW.
    Jul 6, 2010
    2
    The Twilight Saga previously consisted of 2 mediocre films.Well now it has a bad one too.My first concern with the movie is its budget.It seems that when the director was given the over 90 million budget his first tought was,ok we gotta have an epic action.Well at the cost of some good action scenes the plot goes nowhere and the characters,especially Edward are as dimensional as a piece The Twilight Saga previously consisted of 2 mediocre films.Well now it has a bad one too.My first concern with the movie is its budget.It seems that when the director was given the over 90 million budget his first tought was,ok we gotta have an epic action.Well at the cost of some good action scenes the plot goes nowhere and the characters,especially Edward are as dimensional as a piece of paper and as intersting as a rock.This Vampire romance almost hits bottom.Do yourself a favor and don't watch it. Expand
  15. Mar 14, 2011
    3
    This movie was bad. This was the first twilight movie I saw. A lot of wooden, sometimes hammy, acting, dumb love scenes, terrible script, average special effects, and a bad story with bad characters. I do not recommend that you see this movie.
  16. JazzH
    Jul 4, 2010
    1
    After while It seems as if myers wrote these books only trying to strech the same plot out over four books, it gets old. It's not much if a mystery this francise is very predict able. Bella chooses vampire, vampire happy but werewolf sad what more do you need to know!
  17. DonnieG
    Jul 4, 2010
    0
    The best eleven dollar nap I ever had.
  18. RodericR
    Jul 4, 2010
    2
    The love story between Edward and Bella is so unbelievable and contrite. The plot seemed choppy and not a lot happened in the whole movie. The outlines of the plot itself - Werewolves and Vampires united/fighting could be great, but Underworld and Blade are only a bit better. This topic needs done by Sam Raimi or Peter Jackson.
  19. Mat
    Jul 4, 2010
    1
    What the he!! was this... some of the worst effects ever, completely unbelievable. The character development is obviously aimed at the 12 year old female audience. Don't waste your money, see twilight again.
  20. DylanJ.
    Jul 1, 2010
    3
    The last movie i say with acting this bad was New Moon lets face it these actors will never Evolve.
  21. killdarren
    Jul 4, 2010
    0
    This isn't literature, it's toilet paper. This isn't a film it's the mental decay of a generation. Original ideas, intelligence and sincerity are officially extinct.
  22. Oct 27, 2010
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I saw it with my girlfriend and she's really into this stuff (vampires etc.). Maybe that's why I found this film a little bit frivolous. I don't mind if someone like it - it's his stuff. But please, I don't wanna hear about it all time. When will the new Twilight movie hit the cinemas? Really, I don't care Expand
  23. MarkM.
    Jul 6, 2010
    0
    Bring a vuvuzela to a screening of this movie.
  24. MatthewE
    Jul 3, 2010
    0
    Much hate for this trivial crap.
  25. LuisG.
    Jul 2, 2010
    3
    The Twilight Saga - adds another snore to the list- not only is ECLIPSE bad its also awful - Visually the series is engaging but it lacks a coherent script and dialogue that would embarrass the Brady kids - Witless- Stale and self loathing.
  26. AlisonF.
    Jun 30, 2010
    3
    Disappointing. never liked any of the twilight saga movies.. especially the first one but this one was better than the first do kudos for that.
  27. JoseM
    Jun 30, 2010
    0
    Boring, really boring, nonsense dialog, and the worst part is the acting, is just slow and really not interesting. If the first two didn't catch your attention, believe me skip this one, or see it in DVD if you're curious.
  28. JimM.
    Jun 30, 2010
    0
    I love Vampires and Vamp movies and this is neither. Vegetarian Vampires is laughable as are these androgynous ladyboy wannabees. READ the books, the author does not know the genre and is cashing in on the Vamp craze...this is a crap fest for Emo Goth pretenders.
  29. JonathanK
    Jul 1, 2010
    0
    How this movie/book series maintains its popularity is beyond me, even more surprising is how I keep getting tricked into seeing it with promises of "the best one yet." Don't be fooled, this installment might have a bit more action than previous titles, but the dialog is still awful and the whole plot plays out like the tame erotic fantasies of a lonely 30 year old woman who wishes How this movie/book series maintains its popularity is beyond me, even more surprising is how I keep getting tricked into seeing it with promises of "the best one yet." Don't be fooled, this installment might have a bit more action than previous titles, but the dialog is still awful and the whole plot plays out like the tame erotic fantasies of a lonely 30 year old woman who wishes she had a special vampire friend to satisfy her own sexual needs. Expand
  30. laurens
    Jul 3, 2010
    2
    Ah... we step into the theater to find ourselves with R.Patz and K.Stew kissing on the giant screen. It is a piecture that is better than New Moon and the starter of the Twilight Saga: Twilight. However, the acting has been getting the tired Stewarrt a bit dry. In all fairness, this movie is better than the first. But i see no reason why Non-Twilight fans should see it. The teenage grils, Ah... we step into the theater to find ourselves with R.Patz and K.Stew kissing on the giant screen. It is a piecture that is better than New Moon and the starter of the Twilight Saga: Twilight. However, the acting has been getting the tired Stewarrt a bit dry. In all fairness, this movie is better than the first. But i see no reason why Non-Twilight fans should see it. The teenage grils, *i'm not one of them) are going "HE'S SO CUTE!" when they're "in love" with the stars. Go see the only movie worth seeing again and again: TS3. Expand
  31. AllieZ.
    Jul 4, 2010
    2
    The action scenes were okay, even pretty cool at some points. The acting? Not so much. I went to see this at midnight, and my friends and I laughed through the whole thing it was so bad. Every single line was cliche, and the whole movie was basically a mix of close-up shots of Bella biting her lip, Edward looking jealous, sickly, and in pain, and Jacob posing up against random things The action scenes were okay, even pretty cool at some points. The acting? Not so much. I went to see this at midnight, and my friends and I laughed through the whole thing it was so bad. Every single line was cliche, and the whole movie was basically a mix of close-up shots of Bella biting her lip, Edward looking jealous, sickly, and in pain, and Jacob posing up against random things (cars, motorcycles, tents, etc) without a shirt on and saying things like, "Oh, come on, you KNOW I 'm hotter than you are, Edward". It's beyond me how ANYONE can consider Taylor Lautner (and his abs) a good actor. But to each his (or should I say HER, since only females seem to be very interested in Lautner, I wonder why) own, I suppose. Definitely won't be seeing this again, hopefully EVER. Oh, and I actually really like most of the actors in real life, but the script...ohhhh, boy. Not good. At all. Expand
  32. Sep 26, 2010
    3
    "Is it better than New Moon?" After viewing The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, this was the first question asked by most people, and the answer is "Yes.", but that doesn't mean that Eclipse is good.
    The third outing into Forks, Washington retreads much of the same ground as the first two films, Edward (Robert Pattinson) and Jacob (Taylor Lautner) are both still fighting for Bella's (Kristen
    "Is it better than New Moon?" After viewing The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, this was the first question asked by most people, and the answer is "Yes.", but that doesn't mean that Eclipse is good.
    The third outing into Forks, Washington retreads much of the same ground as the first two films, Edward (Robert Pattinson) and Jacob (Taylor Lautner) are both still fighting for Bella's (Kristen Stewart) love, which leads to discussions like, "I want to be a vampire. But you shouldn't become a vampire. I want to have sex. We shouldn't have sex until we're married. I like the cold vampire and the warm wolf, why can't they just get along?" Of course we know there's also going to be a battle, either between vampires and wolves, vampires and vampires, or a mix of vampires, wolves, and more vampires. There's more shirtless abs too, Edward even asks Bella at one point, "Doesn't he own a shirt?"
    If you can sit through all this, there is about 45 minutes of worthwhile footage, mostly consisting of Jasper Hale (Jackson Rathbone) or Charlie Swan (Billy Burke). Bella's loving father, Charlie, is his usual comic-relief self, and he maintains and like-able presence while remaining concerned for Bella's well-being. Every scene with Charlie is enjoyable. Jasper is a different animal altogether, as the most mysterious, and unpredictable, of the Cullen coven, Jasper finally comes out of his shell to show that, (surprise, surprise) Jackson Rathbone can act. Rathbone never comes across cheesy or lame, and he delivers his sub-par lines in such a way that we focus not on what he's saying, but how he says it.
    Another bonus in this installment of The Twilight Saga, are the featured back-stories of select members of the Cullen coven. Up til now, Edward's the only one graced with a "How I became a teenage vampire" story, and it's not just the low temperature bloodsuckers who have a history lesson to share, we also learn a little history of the Quil wolf tribe.
    The actors are slightly better this time around and deliver less cringe-worthy moments. The dialogue is still uninspired, but I can't blame the director, David Slade (check out his film Hard Candy (2005), to see what he's capable of when he has a good script and actors). In Eclipse, Dakota Fanning is still shaping up to become the next Meryl Streep, I hope to see more than a few stares and harsh words from her in the next two films. Ashley Greene, my other favorite actress in the film, who plays the future seeing vampire, Alice, isn't in many scenes, but she's great, as always, in her few moments on-screen. Although I wasn't thrilled with Rachelle Lefevre in the first two films as Victoria, the red-head vamp who's set on ridding the Earth of Bella, she was a better fit than Bryce Dallas Howard, who, although a good actress, doesn't have the qualities needed to pull off the heartless soulless creature bent on destruction and revenge.
    David Slade uses more static and wide shots, giving the viewer more to chew on and allowing them to take in the scene as well as the moment. On the down side several hand-held scenes were too shaky, not The Blair Witch Project (1999) or Cloverfield (2008) shaky, but it gets annoying. The CGI wolves had been vastly improved, yet still possessed an air of cartoonish quality, making them less believable in some scene.
    There will never be a better score for any Twilight film than that of Carter Burwell, the masterful composer behind the score of the first film (you may recognize his talent from the Coen Brothers films, Fargo (1996), No Country For Old Men (2007), and Burn After Reading (2008)). Despite this, Howard Shore brings the score back from the depths it sank to in New Moon to a more acceptable level in Eclipse. Even the songs this time around work better in their scenes.
    Eclipse isn't the Twilight film I'd hoped for, but the moments that weren't filled with Bella, Edward, and Jacob drama were decent. Plus, I now have a new actor to keep an eye on.
    Expand
  33. Aug 29, 2011
    0
    It sucks. I hate it. Anyways, me and my friend made a bet. We are going to see Breaking Dawn Part 1 and see how fast it takes me to puke. Who ever loses has to buy the winner a burger from a restaurant. WISH ME LUCK!
  34. Jan 22, 2012
    2
    Woof! This movie is so bad, so poorly written, directed, and acted, that it's actually....good? No, never. It's horrible. This whole universe of lore is so ludicrous it borders on blasphemy. Vampires sparkle & they can reproduce thru intercourse? Werewolves imprint on their soulmate? And at the center of this world is a mysteriously special "woe is me" dullard female who takes 3Woof! This movie is so bad, so poorly written, directed, and acted, that it's actually....good? No, never. It's horrible. This whole universe of lore is so ludicrous it borders on blasphemy. Vampires sparkle & they can reproduce thru intercourse? Werewolves imprint on their soulmate? And at the center of this world is a mysteriously special "woe is me" dullard female who takes 3 movies to choose between the jock werewolf and the sparkly emo vampire.

    I give it a 2 for comedic value.
    Expand
  35. Oct 24, 2013
    3
    'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse' basically consists of some people laying in a tent and communicating through poor acting and a lackluster screenplay that they are cold and at the climax a big tree falls. That's all that happens. Nonetheless, its better than its predecessor.
  36. Aug 1, 2014
    2
    "Eclipse" is nothing more than a b-movie supporting the vampire trend "Twilight" has started. Not the worst film of the year, though, but pretty silly and unnecessary. It is visually impressive, at least.
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. It took three films, but The Twilight Saga finally nails just the right tone in Eclipse, a film that neatly balances the teenage operatic passions from Stephenie Meyer's novels with the movies' supernatural trappings.
  2. Reviewed by: Peter Debruge
    80
    Employing a bigger budget, better effects and an edgier director ("Hard Candy's" David Slade), Eclipse focuses on what works -- the stars.
  3. 50
    The movie contains violence and death, but not really very much. For most of its languorous running time, it listens to conversations between Bella and Edward, Bella and David, Edward and David, and Edward and Bella and David. This would play better if any of them were clever conversationalists, but their ideas are limited to simplistic renderings of their desires.