User Score
4.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 566 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. Aug 16, 2010
    3
    What does it matter if a film stays close to the book if some people haven't even read the book. Anyone could make an exact rendering of the book, but it's the originality and creativity that is put into adaptations (though not this one) that make it exciting and worthwhile. This films was incredibly boring and almost corny at times. Lautner can't act to save his life sadly, and most ofWhat does it matter if a film stays close to the book if some people haven't even read the book. Anyone could make an exact rendering of the book, but it's the originality and creativity that is put into adaptations (though not this one) that make it exciting and worthwhile. This films was incredibly boring and almost corny at times. Lautner can't act to save his life sadly, and most of the time when he's trying to be dramatic, he is actually funny. What a poorly made film. Expand
  2. Dec 10, 2011
    4
    "New Moon", the tweenage vampire romance sequel to "Twilight", is crappy as **** As usual, the movie is filled with unnecessary steel faced characters that just sucks at acting. The character development isn't even a development. Director Chris Weitz just throws everyone's personality into the movie without even trying to fix it. Guess what the result is; no good or bad morale, only a"New Moon", the tweenage vampire romance sequel to "Twilight", is crappy as **** As usual, the movie is filled with unnecessary steel faced characters that just sucks at acting. The character development isn't even a development. Director Chris Weitz just throws everyone's personality into the movie without even trying to fix it. Guess what the result is; no good or bad morale, only a cheesy love between a spoiled **** with her ghastly boyfriend is left. Not only that; what's with the random, slow-mo so called "action"? I guess if you glue in several dudes with abs fighting vampires make a good action scene, right? IF you are a movie critic like me or people who are just starting out to learn more about movie criticism, have this as your 'worst movie' in the romance genre. Trust me; it'll come in handy. Expand
  3. Aug 27, 2010
    0
    I felt that by watching this movie I had opened the door of judgment on tween-girl fandom, and my exclusion hit as I felt the cold abyss stared back at me, daring me to defy it. Yes, I had entered the Twilight zone, and I had no place being there (nor would anyone with any critical sense)
  4. DavidG
    Nov 26, 2009
    0
    This movie was awful. I went in to see it with my girlfriend as she's somehow interested in these fake vampire movies. This movie is nothing more than softcore porn for women. If you've seen this, you'll know what I mean by that. About the characters, the two main characters are just plain dumb, Bella's just a self-absorbed bitch who teases other guys, but in the end This movie was awful. I went in to see it with my girlfriend as she's somehow interested in these fake vampire movies. This movie is nothing more than softcore porn for women. If you've seen this, you'll know what I mean by that. About the characters, the two main characters are just plain dumb, Bella's just a self-absorbed bitch who teases other guys, but in the end just mopes about the seemingly autistic "vampire." Since when could vampires be in sunlight? And when did they start to sparkle? Jesus, I think I'll need a bottle of whiskey to down this god-awful movie with. A fun after-movie fact was, that when I asked my GF about the movie's plot, she actually was like: "What plot?" Anyway, I've got a bottle of whiskey to drink. Cheers! Expand
  5. Oct 4, 2010
    0
    While the first one gave us the ridiculous idea that vampires sparkle, this one implies that werewolves are really creatures that shapeshift whenever they want. Is Stephanie Meyer trying to ridicule the horror genre?
  6. Nov 20, 2010
    3
    A seriously dumb movie. Even the special effects are wimpy. I had hoped to find some thrill in all the beefcake noted in the trailers. But even that is wasted.
  7. DaveH
    Jan 10, 2010
    0
    This movie rocks if you're a 14 year old girl who just had her first period. Seriously.
  8. BenjiP.
    Apr 19, 2010
    0
    Garbage!
  9. TSNMislame
    Jan 31, 2010
    0
    One of the worst movies I've seen on my life of my life with Gigli, Saw VI, one missed call and the first one too! pure vampire and werewolf incoherence!
  10. Aug 18, 2010
    2
    This has to be the worst sequel that I've ever seen. It's dull,I mean it is SO BORING! Very disappointment! You know why this film so bad? Because of those lovey dovey cast and some lovey dovey dopey story,nothing else. It's almost bas as the first one,just the same logic of the sequel. WHAT A RIP-OFF! No other Box-Office Hit couldn't be good like this. I guess that the Twilight franchiseThis has to be the worst sequel that I've ever seen. It's dull,I mean it is SO BORING! Very disappointment! You know why this film so bad? Because of those lovey dovey cast and some lovey dovey dopey story,nothing else. It's almost bas as the first one,just the same logic of the sequel. WHAT A RIP-OFF! No other Box-Office Hit couldn't be good like this. I guess that the Twilight franchise wasn't too memorable and not even too good for the series. It's just downhill from there. Even of course it's a viewers flop and of course there's nothing creativity about this movie,it's just the romantic movie with too many cliches and putting into a vampire of crap,that's all I have. But it's bad,it's really,really bad! Expand
  11. Dalek
    Jan 6, 2010
    0
    The movie sucked. I almost fell asleep in some parts because it's so boring. It's always cheap lines to make the audience laugh, and stupid 16 year old girls distracting in the row behind you. Worst film of all time.
  12. EnzoP.
    Nov 22, 2009
    4
    Twilight New Moon has a plot that really makes me think. In both films the two main characters (Edward and Bella) are in love with each other. But oh know one of them is a vampire and his family and enemies want to eat Bella so their love is forbidden and ruined by many people. That is not the part which makes by angle my head. It's how they even love each other. I never see them Twilight New Moon has a plot that really makes me think. In both films the two main characters (Edward and Bella) are in love with each other. But oh know one of them is a vampire and his family and enemies want to eat Bella so their love is forbidden and ruined by many people. That is not the part which makes by angle my head. It's how they even love each other. I never see them laughing together or anything and when they are walking together they are serious and talking about their relationship problems. In both movies I didn't see one connection they had with each other or any sparks. They might've showed it in the book but Chris Weltz forgot it in this twilight series. But still New Moon did many things that they did succesfully. That's why I gave it a 4 many good things and bad things. I can't believe I am saying this because I did not think New Moon could pull this off but it's better then the first. I am mainly surprised because I thought the film crew was going to try to get Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner shirtless for several scenes. Well, they did but they also wanted to film the movie in a gorgeous and elegant way and I am not talking about shooting Robert and Taylor like that. I am talking about capturing the beatifulness of why everybody enjoys movie. They sort of captured it and I give credit to them for trying. They especially tried in all of the montages with the sad music or good feeling music. Overall Twilight New Moon is better the first Twilight and if you are on Team Edward or Team Jacob you will probably enjoy this film. Expand
  13. Oct 8, 2010
    0
    There's nothing good about this movie. And you're only gonna embarrass yourself by trying to explain why it's so good. Actually, I'm mistaken- That awkward elevator scene was hilarious! If you were going to watch this movie just for the laughs, don't even bother. Just youtube that elevator scene. It's amazing.
  14. Dec 17, 2011
    2
    Bad performances, and some terribly written dialogue, not to mention its long running time, which makes it unentertaining, this film does have some great romance and an impressive budget though, but it fails to impress. I give this film a 25% of a good movie.
  15. Mr.G
    Jan 10, 2010
    0
    I thought this movie was pure garbage. it was 2 hours of a confused.
  16. Jan 11, 2011
    5
    NEW MOON is the second constellation of Twilight Saga. Which written by Stephenie Meyer. Meyer is typically feminine-romance novelist. The movie casts by the regular Actors from the prequel, such as: Robert Pattison and Kristen Stewart. Plus brand New-Casts, like: Taylor Lautner and Michael Sheen. Pattison played a role of a vampire that falling in love with a girl named Bella (Stewart).NEW MOON is the second constellation of Twilight Saga. Which written by Stephenie Meyer. Meyer is typically feminine-romance novelist. The movie casts by the regular Actors from the prequel, such as: Robert Pattison and Kristen Stewart. Plus brand New-Casts, like: Taylor Lautner and Michael Sheen. Pattison played a role of a vampire that falling in love with a girl named Bella (Stewart). We saw Pattison few years ago for the character as Harry competitor in HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE (2005). The former Director of TWILIGHT (2008), Catherine Hardwicke was replaced by Paul Weitz. Hardwicke version of TWILIGHT was more gentle and success to build a romance between characters and backgrounds. The contrary, Weitz did not get into the right track to create such emotions. In the beginning, I think whoever the Director of this second movie should had more chance to create attractive plots, considering the conflict will be more intense based on original contents. The other lack of thiz movie is on the action sequences. Maybe the actions supported by more special effects, but the actions is too short and dd not create memorable thrills. We remembered the first TWILIGHT, the scene that Edward came to saved Bella from a bunch of bad guys, or the fight-scene on a baseball field. The only scene that I like on thiz movie is when Bella had a dream about her grandmother on a beautiful forest. In that scene, suddenly Edward appeared and Bella realized later, that is not her grandmother, but it is herself getting older in Edwards Arms. Visit My Blog on JONNY'S MOVEE : http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com Expand
  17. Nov 12, 2012
    3
    When you have a new True Blood airing every Sunday on HBO, this sexless, bloodless Twilight follow-up stings sour and is only worsened by some really terrible acting.
  18. ThallytaK.
    Jan 10, 2010
    10
    The film New Moon is a film that calls us, we can not release the film before the end. Is perfect.
  19. LeoM
    Nov 21, 2009
    10
    I am 37 year male fan of Twilight Books. I have also been with my wife in Montepulciano, Italy when New Moon was filming. That, by the way, was really interesting experience. We visited Voltera, too. And compared it to filming location. We have seen New Moon 1st time yesterday and was bit confused - it seemed rushed and chunky - good but not satisfying. But after 2nd viewing today - I I am 37 year male fan of Twilight Books. I have also been with my wife in Montepulciano, Italy when New Moon was filming. That, by the way, was really interesting experience. We visited Voltera, too. And compared it to filming location. We have seen New Moon 1st time yesterday and was bit confused - it seemed rushed and chunky - good but not satisfying. But after 2nd viewing today - I must say that rhythm is very good and anything clicked. So, if you are really interested in Saga - I strongly recommend to watch it at least two times. Enjoy Collapse
  20. RaquelM.
    Jan 10, 2010
    10
    The film New Moon is a film that calls us, we can not release the film before the end.
  21. Nataliem...a
    Feb 2, 2010
    10
    The film remained true to the book, and it's the most important thing. Amazing soundtrack. Big plus to the director for pulling out some of those funny moments - it's refreshing and gives more space to breathe (sort of).
  22. Jan 1, 2011
    10
    This movie is a disgrace to Twilight fans. I was surprisingly impresssed with the first one, but I was extremely disappointed with this one. I was not at all impressed with the over all feel of the movie. I blame that on the director switch. I felt that in the first one all of the actors did an outstanding job of bringing their characters to life, but that dropped with NewMoon. If itThis movie is a disgrace to Twilight fans. I was surprisingly impresssed with the first one, but I was extremely disappointed with this one. I was not at all impressed with the over all feel of the movie. I blame that on the director switch. I felt that in the first one all of the actors did an outstanding job of bringing their characters to life, but that dropped with NewMoon. If it wasn't for the fact that every girl/woman in the country can't keep their eyes off him, I'm pretty sure Lautner would be fired - his acting is almost amusing. Overall the whole movie is pretty cheesy, I felt like I was watching one of those online spoofs, rather than the real thing. Don't waste your time with this film. Expand
  23. TaraD
    Nov 20, 2009
    10
    This movie was fabulous. I went in with really high expectations, which usually lets me down... but not today. It was just as good as I thought it was going to be.
  24. JohnB.
    Jan 10, 2010
    10
    The film New Moon is a film that calls us, we can not release the film before the end of history than others, but especially, every action, every scene that is passing the film gets better, begins and ends perfect perfect.
  25. JohnB.
    Jan 10, 2010
    10
    The film New Moon is a film that calls us, we can not release the film before the end of history than others, but especially, every action, every scene that is passing the film gets better, begins and ends perfect perfect.
  26. BeaR
    Nov 22, 2009
    10
    No words needed!! Loved it all the way, looking forward to Eclipse.
  27. BigMomma
    Nov 23, 2009
    10
    Love it...great movie, want to see it again.
  28. princetongirl
    Nov 25, 2009
    10
    New Moon is better than Twilight as it is more faithful to the book and also has used CGI and action scenes nicely.It captures the gist of the book very effectively and is entertaining with a slight touch of humor.It also interprets the characters in a more detailed way than Tilight did.
  29. IsaacV
    Jan 28, 2010
    5
    Certainly better than the first one but still needs work.
  30. MarlaS
    Nov 20, 2009
    10
    100% perfection. True to book. Strong acting. Great CGI. Great Soundtrack and song placement. Amazing visually. Brought on the tears and giggles with effortless ease. Flowed well. Was everything I waited a year for hoping it would be. Thank you Mr. Weitz, you made my visions come true and bettered them with much style and grace. This is the real thing next to Twilight. Makes Twilight look 100% perfection. True to book. Strong acting. Great CGI. Great Soundtrack and song placement. Amazing visually. Brought on the tears and giggles with effortless ease. Flowed well. Was everything I waited a year for hoping it would be. Thank you Mr. Weitz, you made my visions come true and bettered them with much style and grace. This is the real thing next to Twilight. Makes Twilight look like a joke. New Moon is first class directing, acting, and a movie lovers kinda movie. I say see it in the theaters people! Expand
  31. katya
    Nov 23, 2009
    10
    I loved this movie! my friend found most of it at www.watchfreelinks.com check it out!
  32. cassandras
    Nov 29, 2009
    10
    new moon is too much,. the actors are beautiful,. I liked a lot, how is it that a movie that has the tickets out and about to have that note?! this can only be Marxist thing these men do not admit that the movie is good, because it is your nature to be so stubborn, stupid and unbearable. I do not emporte with these criticisms, because I know there are many people out there who also liked new moon is too much,. the actors are beautiful,. I liked a lot, how is it that a movie that has the tickets out and about to have that note?! this can only be Marxist thing these men do not admit that the movie is good, because it is your nature to be so stubborn, stupid and unbearable. I do not emporte with these criticisms, because I know there are many people out there who also liked the film, and he thinks too much, ah who did not like FUCK. Expand
  33. Dylan
    Nov 30, 2009
    10
    Not as bad as they want you to believe. Sure, some cheesy dialogue and over acting, but overall, a really good movie. Don't listen to the whiners, see it for yourself.
  34. CarlosF.
    Nov 21, 2009
    10
    this movie was GREAT.. Chris really does know how to coordinate everything... the wolfs were just amaaaazing, and the score, by Alexandre Desplat, is so emotional and touching... a brilliant movie, 1000000 times better that TWI-shit.
  35. CourtneyA
    Dec 19, 2009
    10
    I fell in love with this movie from the moment it began to the end; of course no movie is as good as the books. But there was action, fantasy, drama, and adventure!! If you haven
  36. Oct 31, 2010
    7
    not an excellent movie, but its perfect and it beats the first movie in just one shot.
  37. Nov 17, 2010
    4
    I really wish i wasn't one of the many that end up disliking the Twilight series, but sadly i am. this movie was technically fine if you're into the love of vampires. The fight scene was pretty cool, but what got me, was the HORRIBLE acting. It was just terrible throughout the whole freaking movie. The actress who plays as "Bella" has a lot to learn given that I think her performance wasI really wish i wasn't one of the many that end up disliking the Twilight series, but sadly i am. this movie was technically fine if you're into the love of vampires. The fight scene was pretty cool, but what got me, was the HORRIBLE acting. It was just terrible throughout the whole freaking movie. The actress who plays as "Bella" has a lot to learn given that I think her performance was the worst out of everyone in the movie. "Edward" 's acting was not that grand as well. and Taylor (werewolf guy) did ok, I really wouldn't recommend this to anyone unless they were already involved in the series, which means they probably already saw it. So, yeah......not a good 8 bucks spent at the movies. Expand
  38. Dec 6, 2010
    5
    This movie is really bored. I love twilight but i cant watch this one over again. It is really bored to watch. The story to this movie is as good as the first one. This movie is more on the kids side then teen. I love the first twilight. This movie is really slow it take too long to get to it point. Hardly any action in this movie. This movie was so mediocre. I would suggest you to see itThis movie is really bored. I love twilight but i cant watch this one over again. It is really bored to watch. The story to this movie is as good as the first one. This movie is more on the kids side then teen. I love the first twilight. This movie is really slow it take too long to get to it point. Hardly any action in this movie. This movie was so mediocre. I would suggest you to see it if you love romance and vampire movies. I don't know how people like this one more than the first one. Some people say the book is way better . I hope they right. This is the worst of the twilight movies. Expand
  39. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    I have to say...way better than the first movie! I was just obset when I found out that Bella was going to go save Edward after he hurt her like that. What the hell is wrong with her? This movie had more action,the script was not as slow,and the actors were great! They really did improve from the last movie! I was so excited when Jacob (Taylor Lautner) did not have his wig onI have to say...way better than the first movie! I was just obset when I found out that Bella was going to go save Edward after he hurt her like that. What the hell is wrong with her? This movie had more action,the script was not as slow,and the actors were great! They really did improve from the last movie! I was so excited when Jacob (Taylor Lautner) did not have his wig on anymore!!! He looks so much better without his wig!!! That Tattoo just makes him look so f***ing sexy and his abs...his abs are just wow! I am the future Ms.Lautner! Expand
  40. JD
    Nov 20, 2009
    2
    What do you call a vampire movie with no action/horror and what do you call a romance with no chemistry/sex? Apparently you call it NEW MOON, but to anyone who actually can tell the difference between a good story from a bad one, you'll just call it BORING. The werewolves (if you can even call them that) have really bland FX, and they may look good compared to Twilight's FX, but What do you call a vampire movie with no action/horror and what do you call a romance with no chemistry/sex? Apparently you call it NEW MOON, but to anyone who actually can tell the difference between a good story from a bad one, you'll just call it BORING. The werewolves (if you can even call them that) have really bland FX, and they may look good compared to Twilight's FX, but that's because the FX found in Twilight were the quality of a Syfy Original. I won't get into the whole vampire glitter thing, either, nor will I bother trying to debate the logic of a 100 year old male going to high school over and over (I guess home schooling doesn't exist in Forks?) to score with 16 year old tail - in particular, the 16 year old tail of a brooding, angsty, emo girl who really needs to be put on medication. Wow, what a match made in Heaven. The 2 in my score is entirely for Taylor Lautner's abs. The dude hit the gym HARD for this movie, I respect that. Expand
  41. killdarren
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    Indisputable proof that our culture is intellectually bankrupt!
  42. ToniL.
    Nov 20, 2009
    7
    Hated the first movie, but tried to go into this one with an open mind. Some parts were corny, and sappy, and made me want to vomit up my plastic special edition tub of twilight popcorn, but there were some scenes that were quite intense and very well done. It followed the book almost perfectly...except I thought the movie was better than the book... sorry Meyer.
  43. NicoleB.
    Nov 20, 2009
    10
    I loved this movie. So not a disappointment!
  44. WillC
    Nov 22, 2009
    1
    Awful film. Bad books made into worse movies. Awful acting, god-awful script, hideous CGI. Jacob is the only character who actually has character but thats like saying he is as charming as a brick. The plot is freakin stupid. Edward leaves because Bella gets a papercut? It just proves he doesn't even care about her dispite the fact that this is a love movie. I can see why he Awful film. Bad books made into worse movies. Awful acting, god-awful script, hideous CGI. Jacob is the only character who actually has character but thats like saying he is as charming as a brick. The plot is freakin stupid. Edward leaves because Bella gets a papercut? It just proves he doesn't even care about her dispite the fact that this is a love movie. I can see why he doesn't care about her because Bella is one of the worse teenager in recent memory. Expand
  45. RK
    Nov 20, 2009
    8
    This movie was much better than Twilight. I solid addition to the saga. Had some funny cheesy parts that could not be avoided. Be sure to read the book, some parts of the plot were overlooked due to the assumption that the audience knows how they got there. It isn't a masterpiece, but for what it is, they did a great job, however, I was excited to see it. I knew I would like it, but This movie was much better than Twilight. I solid addition to the saga. Had some funny cheesy parts that could not be avoided. Be sure to read the book, some parts of the plot were overlooked due to the assumption that the audience knows how they got there. It isn't a masterpiece, but for what it is, they did a great job, however, I was excited to see it. I knew I would like it, but from as close to an objective standpoint as I can be, if you liked the books, go see the movie. If you didn't read/like the books, don't see it. Expand
  46. BillyT
    Nov 22, 2009
    1
    Maybe would have been better with different actors but with these emotionless stalefaces I just wanted to walk out.
  47. bradk
    Nov 20, 2009
    1
    New Moon handily wins WMOTY wost movie of the year!
  48. RD
    Nov 20, 2009
    6
    Better then the first and possibly better then the book.
  49. TerryA.
    Dec 25, 2009
    4
    This love story movie has some of the worst acting I've seen to-date. Whats up with Kristen Stewart screaming and morning for months. That was a little too much!
  50. fredr
    Dec 8, 2009
    1
    Being a middle-aged man who writes screenplays i like to stay abreast of what is successful. I was pleasantly surprised by the first twilight movie. It had tension as Bella puzzled about Edward, then after realizing what he is, the tension became over the consummation question. Becoming a vampire is the metaphorical equivalent of sex and the tension and chemistry between the actors held Being a middle-aged man who writes screenplays i like to stay abreast of what is successful. I was pleasantly surprised by the first twilight movie. It had tension as Bella puzzled about Edward, then after realizing what he is, the tension became over the consummation question. Becoming a vampire is the metaphorical equivalent of sex and the tension and chemistry between the actors held my interest. Not the case with the new one. I found it interminably boring. I've seen Kristen Stewart in 4 films and the only one she has believable romantic chemistry is Twilight. Perhaps she has authentic off-screen feelings for Pattinson so she showed that in the first film. But there's no chemistry between her and Lautner, her and Eisenberg in Adventureland or her and Sanford in some crappy indie. She has much appeal in many ways and is not nearly as bad as Scarlett Johansen, but she has to grow. The film as a whole was overlong, boring and weak. It repeated the same plot devices as the first film, this time it's lautner with a secret. And how many solemn promises can these guys break? If you aren't a die-hard twilight fan - skip it. Expand
  51. KatieY
    Jan 2, 2010
    3
    I've would likely give this a 0, but the cinematography (which is grand) makes up for that. Also New Moon is a slow-moving movie unlike Twilight (which was straightforward and easy to understand). And I slightly think Robert Pattinson had bad acting throughout the Twilight Saga. Lastly, I highly recommend to read the book first, then see the movie.
  52. KarinR.
    Jan 28, 2010
    8
    The film was good, not extremely good. It pleased me. It was cool to see. I have fun.
  53. MikeN.
    Jan 30, 2010
    0
    The movie overall was very dull, the so called "thrilling action" parts put me to sleep. Plus for the most part you see Bella weeping and screaming for her Edward, give me a break and cry me a river. The story was good but the really bad acting by Stewart ruined the whole movie, her face looked a rock, pale and emotionless. Overall this movie was a complete waste of my time and my The movie overall was very dull, the so called "thrilling action" parts put me to sleep. Plus for the most part you see Bella weeping and screaming for her Edward, give me a break and cry me a river. The story was good but the really bad acting by Stewart ruined the whole movie, her face looked a rock, pale and emotionless. Overall this movie was a complete waste of my time and my money,and doesn't even deserve to be called a movie anymore. Expand
  54. joeh
    Jan 7, 2010
    0
    I did not see this movie for fear of adding to the already appalling figures it has managed to garner, but after seeing the original I can safely say that no film bearing the twilight name could possibly be meritorious of anything higher.
  55. JonM
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    This movie was offensive to me as someone who likes good movies and literature.
  56. JT
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    A bunch of mopey teens standing around (literally, they DO just stand around for the entire film) as some soon-to-be-dated pop songs play in the background. People actually like this??
  57. AlanaG.
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    The first vampire film I've ever seen that is boring... maybe boring is too kind of a word.
  58. JohnnyW.
    Nov 21, 2009
    3
    Not worth the price of admission to me, but if your a teenage girl it presses all the right buttons. I liked it better than the first one, better special effects.
  59. TonyC
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    I thought nothing was worse than the original "Twilight" movie. I was wrong.
  60. SookieStackhouse
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    UGGHHH...they're not even real vampires! If you are love this movie and your not in high school you have issues.
  61. KaylaO
    Nov 20, 2009
    8
    If you're a fan of the Twilight books then you will more then likely enjoy New Moon. It follows the book VERY closely and it is definitely better then Twilight. Some scenes are corny, but it is a romance after all. My boyfriend, who is by no means a fan, enjoyed it as well. He was a fan of the wolves as compared to the vampires. New Moon the movie = Extreme fast forward of New Moon book.
  62. ChadS
    Nov 22, 2009
    4
    The opening scenes of "New Moon" plays more like episodic television than it does a feature film. It works as comfort food, that is, if you were comforted by the Catherine Hardwicke original. There's the high school parking we all know and love, the place where Edward(Robert Pattison) saved Bella(Kristin Stewart) from a swerving vehicle with just a single hand, and there's the The opening scenes of "New Moon" plays more like episodic television than it does a feature film. It works as comfort food, that is, if you were comforted by the Catherine Hardwicke original. There's the high school parking we all know and love, the place where Edward(Robert Pattison) saved Bella(Kristin Stewart) from a swerving vehicle with just a single hand, and there's the high school itself, still composed of a student body that's not all entirely human. (The Cullen vampires remind me more of the preppies in the Donna Tartt novel "The Secret History" than they do bloodsuckers.) In this week's(year's) episode: Bella turns seventeen! Jacob(Taylor Launter) gives her a dreamcatcher. Of course. He's "Indian". Jacob's rival, Edward, who is too lazy to make, and too cheap to buy, a proper gift for Bella, gives the mopey(and dopey) girl a kiss. It's what she asked for. If you swoon at this, and you're not a fourteen-year-old-girl, you need to watch Lloyd Dobler in action, or heck, even f***in' Angel(from Joss Whedon's brilliant serial reworking of the original "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer" movie), who is not quite as pasty-faced, or bloody boring, as Edward. "New Moon", incidentally named after singer-songwriter Elliott Smith's posthumous 2007 album of rare tracks, could possibly inform this vampire, who's certainly depressing enough, and dead, like the Portland, Oregon-based musician. What can you say about a film which improves significantly when its key supporting character is off the screen? Some of us like Edward better as a vapor. Expand
  63. MichaelZ
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    Just another excuse for girls to keep making fun of anyone who they think is beneath their status (I'll include parents, because they have to put up with this 24/7), and prefer image over what's beneath. But in a vampire movie? Well, fear no more, vampire fans who are still out there. Daybreakers.
  64. SteveM
    Nov 22, 2009
    0
    Bashing my head against a wall would be less painful then this.
  65. TrevinS.
    Nov 20, 2009
    2
    A lot of style. No substance.
  66. MandyC
    Nov 22, 2009
    0
    Poor acting and poor story. Absolute garbage! Yeah, a bunch of ugly guys with abs, TOP WRITING THERE! This is the dumbest series.
  67. MelissaD
    Nov 23, 2009
    7
    The love triangle is really compelling and this movie is much better than Twilight.
  68. MatthewT.
    Nov 20, 2009
    10
    An absolutely fantastic film, i enjoyed every second of it. it is an amazing novel to film adaptation and captured the feelings that bella felt for edward when he left and her new feelings for jacob. the depression was done well but the action scenes were top notch with an excellent cliff hanger that left people literally begging for the sequal
  69. joem
    Nov 23, 2009
    0
    This movie is the worst movie i have ever watched, i can not believe i wasted my money on a movie that has horrible actors and a extremely bad story line. In my opinion the Twilight saga itself should not exist.
  70. aramisg
    Nov 24, 2009
    8
    I'm a long time horror movie fan (I even know the people who did the FX for Sleep Away Camp & C.H.U.D.) so don't try to feed me crap about most positive reviewers being women. For me there can never be enough female nudity in "men oriented" movies, so if women want to see topless guys then more power to them. I expected to hate both of these movies when my wife forced me to see I'm a long time horror movie fan (I even know the people who did the FX for Sleep Away Camp & C.H.U.D.) so don't try to feed me crap about most positive reviewers being women. For me there can never be enough female nudity in "men oriented" movies, so if women want to see topless guys then more power to them. I expected to hate both of these movies when my wife forced me to see them and ended up thinking they were both ok for what they are. More along the lines of Lost Boys for this generation than a true vampire or werewolf movie. Expand
  71. JudyM.
    Nov 20, 2009
    10
    If you liked Twilight, New Moon was even better! I highly recommend it!! The movie was over 2 hours but it seemed like 20 min. Loved it....
  72. AdrianR
    Nov 24, 2009
    0
    Another drone of a movie that is going to be wildly popular with the masses of sheep despite shoddy plot loaded with holes and weak acting. Not to mention further killing the traditional vampire in this mtv society.
  73. Waits
    Nov 20, 2009
    1
    Poorly acted, poorly written, dreadfully slow and horribly shot.
  74. J.C.
    Nov 24, 2009
    0
    Please, stop that shit! We´re destroying our kids, our books, our movies, we are hitting culture in the fucking balls! New Moon sucks, like Twilight. It´a product, not a movie. The books are teen´s minds-controllers, not books. Please, see M-O-V-I-E-S (Agora, Diary of Noa) and read B-O-O-K-S (Harry Potter, Pilars of Earth, A World Without End, Fatima´s Hand) but Please, stop that shit! We´re destroying our kids, our books, our movies, we are hitting culture in the fucking balls! New Moon sucks, like Twilight. It´a product, not a movie. The books are teen´s minds-controllers, not books. Please, see M-O-V-I-E-S (Agora, Diary of Noa) and read B-O-O-K-S (Harry Potter, Pilars of Earth, A World Without End, Fatima´s Hand) but not this, please. NOT THIS. Expand
  75. AmyK
    Nov 27, 2009
    5
    I really wanted to like this movie. Parts of the movie are painfully slow. Some of the acting was painful as well. I did enjoy the scenes with the werewolves. New Moon has been my least favorite book of the series and the movie follows right along with the book. Eclipse is my favorite so I look forward to that movie!
  76. BeccaS
    Nov 27, 2009
    7
    This was a movie made for the fans, not to please everybody else. The movie was extremely close to how the book played out and if you haven't read the books then honestly you will NOT get it.
  77. NicholasB
    Nov 28, 2009
    1
    Only those interested in the books and previous film will be happy with this. Everyone else will regard it as a junk film. The bad acting, overuse of male topless nudity and terrible lines are only just watchable if you turn your brain off, but anyone who has no interest in this will be unable to watch for more than a few seconds. I give it a 1, and that's being extremely generous.
  78. Jim
    Nov 20, 2009
    1
    Acting is terrible, dialog is straight from mtv. I dont get how people can enjoy this junk.
  79. KellyB
    Nov 30, 2009
    0
    If only actors could be better than them. The worst of all is beautiful Kirsten Steward. I'm sad for her because the succes of Twilight movies will keep her far from learning acting skills, she will be like Jennifer Lopez. She don't even know how to speak to be listen. I had never read the books but I feel that New Moon is more in feelings than in images, and that's why the If only actors could be better than them. The worst of all is beautiful Kirsten Steward. I'm sad for her because the succes of Twilight movies will keep her far from learning acting skills, she will be like Jennifer Lopez. She don't even know how to speak to be listen. I had never read the books but I feel that New Moon is more in feelings than in images, and that's why the film is so boring. I don't think this film is better than the first, at least the other one was cheap and unpretencious, but I still remember the music and the baseball play. It was more rock and roll, which means more romantic. This one is a "mexican telenovela" with more investment in special effects but no invest in best make up. I really believe the film had to start with Bella's jumping the cliff and then explain whatever they want to explain about the risk of being a human sorrounded by vampires, and wolfs, which is not bad concept at all. Expand
  80. kgm
    Dec 1, 2009
    3
    Bella, Edward a love story for the ages. Yeah, right. Teenage girls believe this sorry excuse of a movie which doesn
  81. Ols
    Dec 18, 2009
    3
    I'm not a fan of Twilight Saga, although I did enjoy the books. The movie, hoverer, is a disaster. The worst is of course Stewart. Her acting is horrible, she looks emotionless, is unable to potray any deeper emotions, has one facial expression during the whole movie (and open mouth, as a bonus). The crucial scene when Edward was leaving Bella in the forest was not only dull and I'm not a fan of Twilight Saga, although I did enjoy the books. The movie, hoverer, is a disaster. The worst is of course Stewart. Her acting is horrible, she looks emotionless, is unable to potray any deeper emotions, has one facial expression during the whole movie (and open mouth, as a bonus). The crucial scene when Edward was leaving Bella in the forest was not only dull and boring but I would even say hiliarious in it's trying-so-hard-to-be-hearbreaking form that reminds us all of low quality romances and old cheap movies. The dialogues can be good for a trailer but while watching the whole movie they seem unfinished, what makes them sometimes hard to understand for people who hadn't read the book. The ending also is sort of confusing and I got the impression of missing scenes that should be there. I also don't appreciate the look of Edward who is supposed to be an 18 year old and still is dressed in suits, not casual clothes teenagers wear. Not loving the books, I still felt someting while reading them, the plot was gripping, I read them all in few days. The movie I found annoying and because I didn't want to wast the money for a ticked I forced myslelf to think it's funny. Expand
  82. Pau
    Dec 2, 2009
    0
    utterly boring, soppy, drags like a cat with no back legs, just another flick for the ugly 14 year old goth girls out there that nothing ever goes right for. completely boring, it doesn't even make you think you just sit and wait for the next cheesy line to come along and believe me there are plenty, i wouldn't even call it a love story as they've gone past that, utterly boring, soppy, drags like a cat with no back legs, just another flick for the ugly 14 year old goth girls out there that nothing ever goes right for. completely boring, it doesn't even make you think you just sit and wait for the next cheesy line to come along and believe me there are plenty, i wouldn't even call it a love story as they've gone past that, they've taken it to the extreme of a massively long soap opera x10! disgraceful. Expand
  83. NicoG
    Dec 2, 2009
    5
    the best in this movies is ... MUSIC, fantastic rocking' soundtrack and very solid SCORE by A.Desplat.
  84. ChrisW.
    Dec 5, 2009
    0
    It
  85. KimK
    Dec 7, 2009
    3
    The books were okay...I would give the BOOK at 5, but this movies just turned into a JOKE! Sorry Twilight fans out there.
  86. FillDaCleana
    Dec 9, 2009
    7
    Great sound track. Director is really good but its let down by crappy acting. Though I don't really have a problem with all these reviews, I think, if you're a teen or a pre-teen, don't take the words of the majority of these reviewers. It's not reviewed by you or for you, but rather for an adult audience. You'll probably love the movie if your in the 13-17 age range.
  87. QuinnN.
    Nov 21, 2009
    1
    Soon to be one of the most overrated movies of the decade.The acting was less than average, the comedy was deadpan, and the dialogue, dear god, the dialogue was like some overlong text message. I went and saw this with a bunch of girls and they all loved it cause Taylor whatshisface takes off his shirt for no reason. Let me put it this way, This is a straight guy's worst nightmare!
  88. MikeB
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    I have never read any of the books, nor seen either movie. But just looking at the movie characters, then the fans makes me want to rip my eyes and ears completely off. Anyone who enjoys this crap needs to read...lets see...ANYTHING EVER WRITTEN to see how real people enjoy real literature and cinema And hes, ii am saying your not real people. LET THE CRYING BEGIN!!!
  89. PiliR
    Nov 21, 2009
    9
    Yes, okay, it is a bit sloppy and very 'teen'...the plot isn't the one that critics most like but...people...the book was a HUGE best seller and trust me...this one does SOOO much justice to the book...in fact it's better. For the ones who missed edward in the book...well, you don't get to miss him...and, for the ones who go on team jacob...you defenately will be Yes, okay, it is a bit sloppy and very 'teen'...the plot isn't the one that critics most like but...people...the book was a HUGE best seller and trust me...this one does SOOO much justice to the book...in fact it's better. For the ones who missed edward in the book...well, you don't get to miss him...and, for the ones who go on team jacob...you defenately will be satisfied. It's NOT a bad movie, or a bad script...the thing is that critics are really critisising the book because, this movie is better than twilight and, man, is it good. I don't think that many people could really dislike it if they sat down and decided to have some fun for a while. Great soundtrack, btw. Expand
  90. LynnW.
    Nov 20, 2009
    9
    I like Catherine Hardwicke better as a director, but there was still a lot that was good in New Moon. It's true that the two hours flew by like twenty minutes. I almost wish it were longer so that some of the emotion could have been built up more.
  91. LouiseH
    Nov 20, 2009
    9
    I didn't have the greatest expectations for this film but I was pleasantly surprised. It was a really beautifully crafted film and very true to the book. They captured the highs and lows of teenage love very accurately and it was great to see Jacob's character developed. I'm sorry to see all the very low scores by people, clearly a tepid attempt at lowering the over all I didn't have the greatest expectations for this film but I was pleasantly surprised. It was a really beautifully crafted film and very true to the book. They captured the highs and lows of teenage love very accurately and it was great to see Jacob's character developed. I'm sorry to see all the very low scores by people, clearly a tepid attempt at lowering the over all user rating. I think most people who have read the book will be happy with the result. Expand
  92. Fedaykin
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    Abysmal acting, writing, editing, screenplay. Just abysmal, this film hasn't a sliver of quality in it. And having to listen the fans going "Oh my God I'm gonna cry!" when the film begins is more than enough to make you leave the theater.
  93. MitchM
    Nov 21, 2009
    0
    This could be the worst movie I've ever seen. Like an atmospheric episode of 90210 expanded to a mind-numbing 2+ hours. Mind you, this is a vampire movie with no blood. No fangs. No sex. No plot ... utter trash. The theater was packed. There were police outside. Giant lines around the block. The crowd was SO PUMPED they screamed at the opening titles in frenzied anticipation. I This could be the worst movie I've ever seen. Like an atmospheric episode of 90210 expanded to a mind-numbing 2+ hours. Mind you, this is a vampire movie with no blood. No fangs. No sex. No plot ... utter trash. The theater was packed. There were police outside. Giant lines around the block. The crowd was SO PUMPED they screamed at the opening titles in frenzied anticipation. I thought, "This movie is going to be nuts with audience reaction/participation." I've been to those action flix in downtown Bklyn where the crowd is SHOUTING at the actors ("DON'T GO IN THAT ROOM, MONTEL!!"). This was going to be a similar phenomenon. ... then for 2+ hours the audience sat there almost completely silent (stunned? stupefied? bored?), save for a few twitters and giggles when the male actors took their shirts off (?!) that joint should have been ROCKING!! Expand
  94. AdamA
    Nov 21, 2009
    1
    When you're trying to make a long movie, you need to keep the audience gripped. New Moon fails to even keep you gripped for the first 5 minutes. It also seems like anti feminist propaganda with girls effectively being told to be doting to your boyfriends, even if they are jerks.
  95. LM
    Nov 21, 2009
    9
    Loved it, followed the book very well. Could not expect more from a ficton, fantasy aspect. To all the critis giving this movie a F, what were you thinking your were going to see in a film with a Vampire and a Warewolf as its' main leads? This could never be a Titanic or Apollo 13. I think we all could use two hours of enjoying a world of anything is possible. We just might smile more.
  96. BailorE
    Nov 21, 2009
    0
    Only someone incapable of mature thought could enjoy this movie.
  97. anac
    Nov 20, 2009
    0
    The worst vampire movie ever, totally boring. Fell asleep more than once.
  98. AdrianF
    Nov 21, 2009
    7
    It's OK, little boring but there are some scenes very spectacular. I love Jane, so evil.
  99. BobB
    Nov 21, 2009
    0
    A horrible movie the stars in it including that robert person and that one guy taylor should die.
  100. KatS
    Nov 22, 2009
    0
    A tedious movie that manages to wring the life out of every second of its 130 minute running time. ..130 minutes of life I'd like back.
Metascore
44

Mixed or average reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 32
  2. Negative: 7 out of 32
  1. Reviewed by: Anna Smith
    60
    Is this sequel defending its fan base and preempting criticism about its transparent agenda? This IS a soap opera, folks--and acceptable escapism for those old enough to see it yet still young enough to shriek at undead dreamboats.
  2. Reviewed by: Jordan Mintzer
    70
    Carried by Kristen Stewart's compellingly dark performance, but also by helmer Chris Weitz's robust visuals.
  3. Constrained by the plot of the novel, the film keeps the two lovers apart for quite a spell, robbing the project of the crazy-in-love energy that made "Twilight," the first entry in the series, such a guilty pleasure.