User Score
5.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 904 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. Dec 8, 2011
    4
    The tweenage vampire romance movie "Twilight" is one of the worst horror romance films I've seen in years. The actors are all wooden and incoherent in their role, presenting themselves like noobs who memorize the verses word by word with no meaning or emphasis to it. The story contains the cheesiest dialogue made up of "I love you. (Stare) (kiss) Let's be together" and other kinds ofThe tweenage vampire romance movie "Twilight" is one of the worst horror romance films I've seen in years. The actors are all wooden and incoherent in their role, presenting themselves like noobs who memorize the verses word by word with no meaning or emphasis to it. The story contains the cheesiest dialogue made up of "I love you. (Stare) (kiss) Let's be together" and other kinds of disgusting crap (Vampires....sparkle?). Most importantly, the movie has no in-depth; the character development is incomplete and baffling as well, resulting to a general "whatever" pace of the movie. Oh, and Kristen Stewart? She is one **** spoiled brat we've got there. Overall, like Justin Bieber, "Twilight"'s a fad movie that will attract many teenage romance geeks but repel professional movie critics.

    PS: What the **** is wrong with Robert Pattinson? Why is he so white? Somebody give him some blood or something!
    Expand
  2. GeorgeC.
    Nov 21, 2008
    0
    I'm not kidding, its like the worstest movie of the year by far. It is so pale, dull and boring. Nothing exciting ever happens. It is emotionless, and you just can't wait for it to end. And the visual effects, they were awful! But most of all, why would you make a movie adapted from the lamest hit chick flick novel out there. And the story: Booooo.
  3. RuthJ
    Jan 12, 2009
    2
    I am a big fan of the book (and hot vampires) but OMG this movie was awful!! The negative reviews I read beforehand weren't nearly harsh enought to prepare me! The opening scene of one of the Vamps hunting a deer showed promise, but the first 20 minutes of "dialogue" (was there actually a script or were they just winging it?) forced me out of the theater somewhere around the I am a big fan of the book (and hot vampires) but OMG this movie was awful!! The negative reviews I read beforehand weren't nearly harsh enought to prepare me! The opening scene of one of the Vamps hunting a deer showed promise, but the first 20 minutes of "dialogue" (was there actually a script or were they just winging it?) forced me out of the theater somewhere around the "I'll have a garden burger" moment. I'm not sure if it was really the acting (hello B-list) or the director trying to jam in insignificant book details rather than taking time to build suspence and character depth. Edward's tempted and tortured moment in biology class just looked like a five-year-old that had to pee?! I had to re-watch Harry Potter to remind myself that he really is a decent actor. I vote 2 - in the event that it got better sometime after I gave up. Expand
  4. Jun 21, 2013
    1
    This whole movie is a a 14 year old girls wet dream with terrible acting! I really don't now what else to say other than this movie destroyed Vampires for me as now if I hear the word Vampire I will think of this terrible piece of crap.
  5. RayS.
    Apr 8, 2009
    1
    This movie was almost painful to watch. I passion, what passion, and the characters were DULL DULL DULL. There was no chemistry only angst or depression. The only thing decent was the soundtrack that is why I gave it at 1 at least. So disappointing.
  6. LawrenceT
    May 5, 2009
    1
    This movie was so boring. I hated it and the acting and the directing was lame. Bella asked the same damn question every three seconds. How did you save me? I will give this film a negative review.
  7. AdrianaS.
    Nov 27, 2008
    2
    the movie quite frankly sucked! i wa expecting more... i mean the books r fantastic and then this movie flopped. But some how it is still making millions (which i do not understand) Too many scenes were changed and added. it went to slow and all they did was stare at each other.. no flirting or "i love you" moments like in the books. It sucked.
  8. bootsaplenty
    Nov 28, 2008
    0
    Worse adaptation i have ever seen. i have read all the cheesy books and i love them but i really really almost cried when i saw this movie. this is by far the biggest literary heartbreak I've had.
  9. RyxE
    Dec 2, 2008
    0
    Absolutely terrible. I do not know why this is so popular. I had to leave the theater in the middle of viewing because I couldn't take it anymore.
  10. tb
    Jan 10, 2009
    3
    Most of you guys are retarded. the first half was decent. her school chums were funny. but as soon as they get into the vampires this movie becomes shockingly cheesy and unintentionally funny. the pacing is way, way off. Too slow at first than way, way 2 fast. the bad guy is introduced way 2 late and the climax is way 2 short. this is one of the worst directed movies ive ever seen and one Most of you guys are retarded. the first half was decent. her school chums were funny. but as soon as they get into the vampires this movie becomes shockingly cheesy and unintentionally funny. the pacing is way, way off. Too slow at first than way, way 2 fast. the bad guy is introduced way 2 late and the climax is way 2 short. this is one of the worst directed movies ive ever seen and one of the cheesiest. Expand
  11. JimS
    Feb 17, 2009
    0
    I saw this movie and thought it was horrible. Not only was it super gay, the vampires were all glittery and stuff. What the hell?
  12. AntônioE
    Apr 13, 2009
    1
    Absolutely crap, I don't know why I'm still wasting my time on this kind of american movies, it's so pathetic, it is boring from the beggining until the end, I have wait to see what could be happen but nothing happens. The only thing that worth is in the radiohead song in the final credits. It's defenely the worse movie that I ever seen in a few years, it's worse Absolutely crap, I don't know why I'm still wasting my time on this kind of american movies, it's so pathetic, it is boring from the beggining until the end, I have wait to see what could be happen but nothing happens. The only thing that worth is in the radiohead song in the final credits. It's defenely the worse movie that I ever seen in a few years, it's worse than "The Spirit" also a great piece of sh*t. Expand
  13. DavidJ
    Apr 28, 2009
    1
    Undoubtedly one of the single worst films ever made. With a thoroughly uninteresting plot and poorly developed characters, this is an insult to what was actually not a bad book. At least that had some good points. You could go and see this, or you could......well there are too many better thing to list.
  14. wesleym
    Apr 4, 2009
    0
    My I.Q. dropped from watching this pointless movie. Horrible story line and effects. This movie was no doubt the worst creation ever to curse this planet.
  15. DanR
    May 1, 2009
    2
    I like to think of myself asa movie buf so I decided to give this movie a fair go, I read the book and decided it got a 5 out of 10 because it is not written that well and the same thing goes for this movie. They tried to change a classic horror element, Vampires, like what the remake of dawn of the dead did to zombies but while dawn of the ead was good this failed. Poorly made, little to I like to think of myself asa movie buf so I decided to give this movie a fair go, I read the book and decided it got a 5 out of 10 because it is not written that well and the same thing goes for this movie. They tried to change a classic horror element, Vampires, like what the remake of dawn of the dead did to zombies but while dawn of the ead was good this failed. Poorly made, little to no prodution values and just a ciomplet lack of what makes a movie good. Expand
  16. Naomi
    May 23, 2009
    3
    The film is crap rob pattinson is a weirdo. I love the books but the movie was sad and boring .
  17. ClifC
    Jun 8, 2009
    1
    Hey people, get yourself a movie education! This is not even a movie, it's teenagers' fantasies for a guy who has a sex appeal equalling... 0. I gave it a 1 only because I had a good time laughing at it with my friends during the movie. I've rarely seen a movie so bad; oh wait: I already know one... "Twilight 2". There's nothing else to add, my comment is as profound Hey people, get yourself a movie education! This is not even a movie, it's teenagers' fantasies for a guy who has a sex appeal equalling... 0. I gave it a 1 only because I had a good time laughing at it with my friends during the movie. I've rarely seen a movie so bad; oh wait: I already know one... "Twilight 2". There's nothing else to add, my comment is as profound as this movie. Expand
  18. CarlyN.
    Nov 21, 2008
    3
    I went with 9 of my friends to see the movie and none of us liked it. We came knowing it would be different from the book but didn't think it'd be that bad. The acting skills of the actors weren't that good, the music didn't fit the scenes, they mixed scenes from the book together....overall it was a big disappointment.
  19. FilipeM
    Nov 15, 2009
    4
    If you are a girl, teenager, in love or just like to watch bad movies. WATCH IT!
  20. Aug 27, 2010
    0
    The acting is terrible, the movie's stupid and for me the movie is just targeted for tweens. I'm also tired of this vampire sh**. Kristin Stewart barely has any emotions and she was way better in Adventureland. Every vampire aren't really vampire's! What I mean is that the vampires aren't sucking any blood, they sparkle in the sun and I'm glad there's a movie parodying this crap.
  21. Nov 27, 2010
    1
    Should be called "The Stalker's Guide to Getting Chicks." I only gave it a 1 and not a 0 because i laughed during a couple of scenes. The characters were really stupid and I couldn't believe anything that the actors said. My friends and I watched, wondering what all the popularity was about. All 9 of us are still wondering.
  22. Feb 24, 2011
    0
    Worst dramatic/romantic movie I ever seen in my life. Kristen Stewart can't act for **** and everyone who tries to act is stupid and the concept of vampires being in daylight is dumb. Vampires are supposed to kill people not fall in love with them.
  23. Apr 12, 2011
    2
    This film just makes you realise that the world is full of camp people,men and women.In the older days when men were men and wanted to do manly things with their pals Vampire Horror was quite enjoyable but these days men just follow their partner anywhere and everywhere!Even going as far as copying the lady habit of dropping their own friends for the partner relationship.Only to try andThis film just makes you realise that the world is full of camp people,men and women.In the older days when men were men and wanted to do manly things with their pals Vampire Horror was quite enjoyable but these days men just follow their partner anywhere and everywhere!Even going as far as copying the lady habit of dropping their own friends for the partner relationship.Only to try and win their mates back after the relationship goes south and crumbles and shatters to pieces!
    This film is drowned in camp vampires.....omg if the vamps have gone camp then there really is no hope left for mankind!
    Vampire films used to be classed as horror but with drivel like this its no wonder there's no scares left in the genre.......except for 30 days of Night,if you want an up-to date vampire horror go for that as you wont be dissappointed,oh and it has romance but its so thin you know its there but forget it as the horror is so intense.
    Expand
  24. Dec 19, 2011
    3
    This is a very horrendous move. A pretty predicatble plot, and bad acting and a stupid story (do we need more vampire romances in the world?) I just want to punch the direct in the face.
  25. Jun 12, 2011
    2
    Nothing more than a confused womans wet dream, with legions of idiotic, pubescant 16 year old fan girls streaming in her wake. The poor story is further degraded by immensely wooden acting and dull script writing. A real fangs-bared yawn accompanied by repulsion at the overall story.
  26. Jul 27, 2011
    0
    The fact that this film was even thought of by Paramount is a mystery to me. The film for me is so offtrack and boring that I can't understand why they accepted another 3 movies. A film about vampires will never be successful, but when they throw romance along side this rubbish and a hint of comedy, it's just a disaster and a waste of money. I feel sorry for the actors whose careers haveThe fact that this film was even thought of by Paramount is a mystery to me. The film for me is so offtrack and boring that I can't understand why they accepted another 3 movies. A film about vampires will never be successful, but when they throw romance along side this rubbish and a hint of comedy, it's just a disaster and a waste of money. I feel sorry for the actors whose careers have been ruined by this utter drivel. Dreadful 0/10 Expand
  27. Mar 4, 2012
    0
    My wife has made me sit through all of these films. I feel cheated that i will never get those hours of my life back. Don't worry though, I made her sit through the alien films followed by Die Hard 1&2&3&4. that'll teach her!!!
  28. Dec 7, 2011
    2
    One of the dullest movies I've ever seen in my life. If only I could take those 122 minutes back. Here are reasons why this movie sucked. 1. First off, the characters are lifeless. 2. The characters sound like they are reading off paper
    3. Practically remain blank faced throughout most of the movie
    4. No chemistry between the two main characters 5. Is everybody wearing makeup? If you are a
    One of the dullest movies I've ever seen in my life. If only I could take those 122 minutes back. Here are reasons why this movie sucked. 1. First off, the characters are lifeless. 2. The characters sound like they are reading off paper
    3. Practically remain blank faced throughout most of the movie
    4. No chemistry between the two main characters
    5. Is everybody wearing makeup?
    If you are a Twilight fan, then I feel sorry for you. Please get some help.
    Expand
  29. Jan 11, 2012
    2
    One of the more foolish movies I've ever seen. It has a poor plot, poor music, poor screenplay and the worst, it ruined the vampire's stories. This movie is really awful. Enjoyable just for teenagers in love. In a way is stupid.
  30. Dec 16, 2011
    0
    This film doesn't even deserve a 1. If you want to see a vampire film, look out for Underworld or Bram Stokers Dracula. Not these teen romances which have stolen everything from every other vampire film or book and made it 'teen friendly' by removing blood. Hello, that's why teens live!
  31. Jan 7, 2012
    3
    It had a few decent moments in it, but overall this movie just bored the hell out of me. The romance wasn't moving at all, that best fight scene mtv awarded battle with edward and that one wolf was 2 minutes of basically epic shoving. why the hell do so many people like this movie? Its like over 2 hours long and it just drags on.......blah blah oh hes a vampire.....blah blah blah of i'mIt had a few decent moments in it, but overall this movie just bored the hell out of me. The romance wasn't moving at all, that best fight scene mtv awarded battle with edward and that one wolf was 2 minutes of basically epic shoving. why the hell do so many people like this movie? Its like over 2 hours long and it just drags on.......blah blah oh hes a vampire.....blah blah blah of i'm suddenly magically in love with you edward..... i gave it an honest chance, and it made a chuckle here and there, thought it was kinda creative at times but overall im just watching this like, wait a minute? why the **** is this vampire glowing in the sun? Plus Bella should've been hotter. seriously they get a mega pretty boy i guess for the vampire because girls wont shut up about him, but for bella we got an actress whose a 8 of 10 at best. lol. Expand
  32. Mar 30, 2012
    1
    This movie was a total borefest. I had no preconceptions about it since back then I not only hadn't read the books, but hadn't even heard about Twilight. All I knew was that it was "a movie about vampires". I watched it with my brother and we both agreed that it sucked. Uninspired acting, terrible dialogues, boring story. It failed to evoke any emotions from me.
  33. Nov 24, 2012
    1
    I gave this movie a chance. I really did. But it just takes my intelligence, crushes it and stuff a cartload of dung into my brain. It felt like a mixture of cinematic rape, utter boredom and cringeworthy acting/sequences that make this the worst movie I've seen in a very long time. Twilight feels like a B-grade, made for TV movie, only that they managed to get a decent camera for the job.I gave this movie a chance. I really did. But it just takes my intelligence, crushes it and stuff a cartload of dung into my brain. It felt like a mixture of cinematic rape, utter boredom and cringeworthy acting/sequences that make this the worst movie I've seen in a very long time. Twilight feels like a B-grade, made for TV movie, only that they managed to get a decent camera for the job. About the only half-decent component is the cinematography. Its definitely well shot. As for the main juice of the movie...you'd be wondering why on earth anyone would make this movie apart from milking the cash out of Tweens and their poor boyfriends. Apart from some supporting characters who have passable acting, the main characters lack the skill and aptitude to produce even an a line of dialogue that wont leave you cringing or in some cases, wishing you were dead so the torture would end. Tweens would defend this pile of excrement to their deaths and I say, feel free. The world can judge. And thankfully, most people who have a conscience would stray clear of this horror. Yes, tweens, there are a lot of females out there who hate/aren't give a fck about Twilight than there are those who would. Get that fact right. I am not even going do a review for the other sequels as I WRITE THIS AS A WARNING TO ALL: This is almost as bad as Batman & Robin and is universally claimed by critics who were not bribed by the producers as the worst movie franchise of the 21st century, if not in all of movie history. I literally felt my IQ drop by spades during the movie. Please, save yourself and avoid this. I saw this out of pure curiosity. Dont even try to do what I did. Its not worth it. Expand
  34. Jan 21, 2013
    2
    Twilight is an extremely pathetic movie. A movie so riped of phoniest it is almost laughable. Not only is it dull, pretentious and boring, it has some very wooden acting and poor dialogue.
  35. May 22, 2012
    3
    Bad acting, cheesy moments (super cheesy), lack of chemistry in love scenes and not having the true spirit of a true vampire is all I can say. You would not even classify this as a vampire movie because vampires in this movie are rarely drinking blood and rarely bites people. Overall, the film is boring and bad. They did redeem just a little bit in New Moon and Eclipse (from a score of 3 to 4).
  36. GabrielleG.
    Feb 10, 2009
    0
    Well this whole thing sucks pretty hard. I mean how can this be a Vampire book. i mean seriously what kind of vampires glitter in the sun. everyone that reads this thinks they know vampires but they don't. most of them never even heard of interview with the vampire or even underworld. real vampires don;t fall in love they suduce people to get what they want.
  37. Jul 20, 2011
    0
    One of the worst films ever made. Without a shadow of a doubt. Not only is it dull, pretentious and boring, it has some very wooden acting and poor dialogue. It makes you cringe at the fact that four more installments are on their way...
  38. Jun 26, 2012
    0
    terrible movie, terrible book, this series has officially killed the vampire genre, before this if you said vampire romance, you'd sound crazy, and in my opinion, it still sounds crazy. there 2 different things, vampire, a horror idea, and romance, some lovey dovie move. they don't fit together. another reason i don't like this movie is because it killed the idea of a vampire horror. everterrible movie, terrible book, this series has officially killed the vampire genre, before this if you said vampire romance, you'd sound crazy, and in my opinion, it still sounds crazy. there 2 different things, vampire, a horror idea, and romance, some lovey dovie move. they don't fit together. another reason i don't like this movie is because it killed the idea of a vampire horror. ever since the original book was made, there has been nothing in the vampire genre besides vampire romances. and any movie that doesn't have them as a part of some relation ship puts them as a small, weak sub enemy. there is no Dracula-like vampires any more. so, in short what im saying is, thanks a lot twilight, i hate you Expand
  39. May 31, 2012
    1
    I've seen a lot of poorly written garbage get mainstream attention before but this convoluted wet dream posing as a love story is too popular for me to let be. Okay, to be fair it IS technically a love story, it's just a bad one. The characters not only have close to zero personality to speak of, but the person you're intended to side with is all around, pretty damn sleasy. If I played aI've seen a lot of poorly written garbage get mainstream attention before but this convoluted wet dream posing as a love story is too popular for me to let be. Okay, to be fair it IS technically a love story, it's just a bad one. The characters not only have close to zero personality to speak of, but the person you're intended to side with is all around, pretty damn sleasy. If I played a drinking game for how many people she manipulates or screws over, I'd be in a coma. Not only that but to my knowledge there are close to no consequences for her actions. A war between freaking vampires and werewolves could be going on, and still all the movies really care about is 'when the hell are they gonna do it'. -_- I will say this though, it's actually not many notches lower than most other romance movies, a lot of them have really odd priorities. Expand
  40. Ryan
    Nov 23, 2008
    1
    I've read the entire Twilight series, and I have to say that the movie is terrible. That isn't to say the books are any better, but this is just atrocious. All I can say is: you know something is wrong when your audience is laughing in a gothic vampire romance movie.
  41. Aug 23, 2010
    3
    It would be a great mistake to call this picture "vampire movie". Vampires here are quite phony since they don't drink blood. I don't know if it is bad acting or whether romance is supposed to be so slow and passionless between vegetarian vampire and gloomy girl, but I can't see a single spark between them even when they're kissing. Characters' actions are full of incoherence. How doesIt would be a great mistake to call this picture "vampire movie". Vampires here are quite phony since they don't drink blood. I don't know if it is bad acting or whether romance is supposed to be so slow and passionless between vegetarian vampire and gloomy girl, but I can't see a single spark between them even when they're kissing. Characters' actions are full of incoherence. How does Edward, according to some girl's evidence quite desired by most of schoolgirls, fall in love with some girl who seems to have dyslexia? I don't believe that his feelings are based on her smell solely. Why on earth evil blood-drinking vampires are so hostile? Smell again? And let alone poorly made supernatural jumps and combat scene. I practically can see strings attached to their bodies. Expand
  42. Oct 4, 2010
    0
    I hated the book, and the movie was no better than the book. I wish this series never existed at all. A vampire that shines? Seriously? What has the world come to?
  43. Jan 24, 2011
    0
    God, this movie is awful The acting is horrendous, the dialouge is terrible, the characters are underdeveloped, the directing is lazy, and anything I forgot to mention sucks too.
  44. Sep 27, 2010
    0
    this movie sucks!!! there's nothing good about this movie. i don't know what the **** people like this dumb movie. Only little girls watch stupid movies like twilight
  45. LilyX
    Jul 30, 2009
    3
    Nothing actually happens in this travesty of a film. Gothic romance? You wish! Only 15 yr old girls can find some interest in this boring, banal, undercooked crap with bad acting and laughable dialogues. Oh, at least I laughed out loud in certain points.
  46. JamieD
    Jan 24, 2010
    0
    I was looking forward to the Twilight movie.The movie is one of the worse movie I ever seen.I am a 16 year girl.I did think Robert Patterson is hot.
  47. Feb 5, 2011
    1
    Never before have I seen a more terrible movie than this. Vampires? Maybe. 2 "hot" guys that 10 year olds like. Check! A good movie? Yeah right. I like the first minute or two. Before anyone arrives on screen.
  48. Oct 2, 2011
    2
    the glamorous vampires are not badass at all. it was quite sad, never knew they were books until after i saw the movie, just terrible fairy vampires AND **** ACTING!
  49. Dec 15, 2011
    1
    There is essentially nothing good about this film. It is created for a female audience who have read the book, of which similarities between the two can be found. Beyond the characters is the way they both flows, which is quite terribly. In addition, the film alone stands as a crime against cinema. The directing is lackluster at best (the 1 point given is because the cinematography wasThere is essentially nothing good about this film. It is created for a female audience who have read the book, of which similarities between the two can be found. Beyond the characters is the way they both flows, which is quite terribly. In addition, the film alone stands as a crime against cinema. The directing is lackluster at best (the 1 point given is because the cinematography was slightly better than terrible and rarely well done at points), and the acting was atrocious. Kristen Stewart comes off as either high on some substance or simply mentally handicapped throughout the film. She seems to have trouble speaking and for some reason, seems to keep her mouth open constantly. Robert Patinson does slightly better, which is saying essentially nothing. He is still one of the worst actors in Hollywood. He is put on screen because of his physique and nothing else. His acting ability is exactly as his character: dead. But unlike his character, there is no sparkling about his talent, or lack there of. Tweens and teenage girls will flock to this film and enjoy the muscles and romance, though that too is badly created, but for those who understand what makes a film good should place a gun in their mouth and pull the trigger before seeing this pile of garbage. Expand
  50. Dec 17, 2011
    4
    Good romance because of the chemistry, but due to its bad performances and dumb premise this should just be a comedy more than a drama/romance. This is the beginning of one of the most embarrassing franchises ever. I give this film a 42% of a good movie.
  51. HakeemB
    Aug 9, 2009
    0
    This movie is wrong. This is the most ecruciatingly painful and boring vampire or 'romantic' movie ever... I've never seen a vampire fly like superman...they ceased to be vampires when they started 'glowing like diamonds' in the sun and seeing their reflections? That's just BLAH!. Plus the dude doesn't sleep, even in the daytime (though i'm not sure This movie is wrong. This is the most ecruciatingly painful and boring vampire or 'romantic' movie ever... I've never seen a vampire fly like superman...they ceased to be vampires when they started 'glowing like diamonds' in the sun and seeing their reflections? That's just BLAH!. Plus the dude doesn't sleep, even in the daytime (though i'm not sure if that's not part of their nature)... would have been a good movie if the vampire characters were written to be some special creatures other than vampires. This is an insult to all vampire movies of all time, even vampire comedies get more props than this crap. Both lovers could have as well just stared at each other for the whole 2 hours of the movie. This movie made me cry. One of those movies that takes away 2 hours of your time.. I wish I could get back the 1 hour 11 mins and 57 secs I wasted, at least I didn't finish it. PLEASE DON'T MAKE A SEQUEL!!! Expand
  52. Morgan
    Sep 9, 2009
    0
    If you haven't seen this movie already, I would suggest you avoid it at all costs. Honestly, don't even bother downloading it illegally -- it will only waste the precious space on your computer. Acting? I've seen better acting in high school plays, maybe even elementary plays: each and every line was flat, emotionless and the delivery -- let alone the awful, awful dialogue If you haven't seen this movie already, I would suggest you avoid it at all costs. Honestly, don't even bother downloading it illegally -- it will only waste the precious space on your computer. Acting? I've seen better acting in high school plays, maybe even elementary plays: each and every line was flat, emotionless and the delivery -- let alone the awful, awful dialogue -- left me literally laughing aloud. And special effects? It was like I was watching a satire of the movie rather than the actual movie. Plot? Full of holes and loose ends before it even made the silver screen, one would think that the screen writer would have patched a few of them up. In conclusion: I left the theatre with bruises on my arms and the words, "Shh, all the pre-teen girls will beat you up if you don't stop laughing" still ringing in my ears. Expand
  53. AngelaH
    Aug 10, 2009
    0
    This is without a doubt one of the worst films I have ever seen.
  54. Oct 13, 2010
    0
    Do you enjoy deeply terrible movies with gaping plot holes, a horribly bland cast, an uninterresting premise and excruciatingly horrible writing? Then look no further than Twilight. Vampires shining has just earned Stephanie Meyer a place in hell. And the romance? Pah! Bella and Edward have as much chemistry as a rapist and his victim.
  55. Sep 9, 2011
    0
    This was the most boring film ever i sat through. I wonder why they took "actors" for this "vampire-movie". A non bloodsucking vampire is as much a vampire as a potato. In a film with non bloodsucking potatoes they could have saved on the budget though.
  56. SebastianC
    Sep 30, 2009
    1
    Bar none, one of the worst films ever made. I understand this is a teen flick, but the script is appalling, the acting is dreadful, the directing is terrible and the whole thing is just physically painful.
  57. Nov 13, 2010
    4
    If you loved the novels then you WON'T love this. Why because there are hardly any moments when the air isn't filled with an awkward feeling. In the novels the characters are very confident and likeable. In the film they are compromising and, well . . . stoned.
  58. RyanC.
    Jan 9, 2009
    1
    This movie was HORRID. The layabout acting mixed in with a droll, played-out storyline makes for a completely wasted hour and a half. The only redeeming quality was the fight sequence, which didn't last more than 3 minutes.
  59. Nov 12, 2012
    4
    It's puke-worthy performances and timid script get rid of all the potential this baby had. The producers knew an 'R' rating would make the box office numbers tumble. Good move financially. Bad move for the movie.
  60. JoshL
    Nov 20, 2009
    4
    It was bearable. I think people go into this movie exoecting to hate it and just want to piss of the crazy little girls who love it. Kristen Stewart tries to hard and is to melodramatic, but Patinson suprisingly good and charming. Hardwicke is a terrible director. Its obvious that she can't control herself with random, orgasmic camera movements that are detrimental to their cause: It was bearable. I think people go into this movie exoecting to hate it and just want to piss of the crazy little girls who love it. Kristen Stewart tries to hard and is to melodramatic, but Patinson suprisingly good and charming. Hardwicke is a terrible director. Its obvious that she can't control herself with random, orgasmic camera movements that are detrimental to their cause: building tension. On top of this she brings out nothin in her ensemble and can't direct action. It's not only budget, there are movie with dirt cheap budgets that pull it off ebcause the director can HIDE the budget if they are good at all. Hardwicke is not good. At all. And I don't care what the slappy's say, when there's a mythology around a being (i.e. Vampires have fangs, and only come out at night) it's a writers duty to simultaneously meet the requirments for the type, and defy boundaries without rewriting whats been previously laid down. This is like a werewolf that doesn't transform on full moons... oh wait, that ends up happening in the next movie doesn't it? Expand
  61. Barone
    Jan 9, 2009
    4
    Go watch "let the right one in" far far superior Vampire love story.
  62. SandiH.
    Nov 21, 2008
    3
    I love the books. The movie was close to it. THE DIRECTOR AND MUSIC STUNK! she made it seem like a complete acid trip, the cinematography was all over the place and crude....and there was never a point in which the music ever STOPPED. or matched the actual scene. and there was an actual montage. and a quote form the Lion King. (yes, really) his sparkling was weak. over all, the director I love the books. The movie was close to it. THE DIRECTOR AND MUSIC STUNK! she made it seem like a complete acid trip, the cinematography was all over the place and crude....and there was never a point in which the music ever STOPPED. or matched the actual scene. and there was an actual montage. and a quote form the Lion King. (yes, really) his sparkling was weak. over all, the director had no idea what the hell she was doing. Expand
  63. DrakeR.
    Nov 21, 2008
    3
    Crapy book. Crappy movie. Plot is cliched and boring. Save your money and see something decent.
  64. claap567toyou
    Nov 21, 2008
    1
    It has way too many little Vampire flaws, but at least it hist its target audience, but to me, I thought that there were so many flaws that I just think I should steady out the reviews because here I go. Twilight is the worst movie Ive ever seen! Sometimes chick-flicks are fun (like Juno), or there just sappy or unrealistically cheesy, This turns out not to be a chick-flick, but everyone It has way too many little Vampire flaws, but at least it hist its target audience, but to me, I thought that there were so many flaws that I just think I should steady out the reviews because here I go. Twilight is the worst movie Ive ever seen! Sometimes chick-flicks are fun (like Juno), or there just sappy or unrealistically cheesy, This turns out not to be a chick-flick, but everyone seems serious, the romance, the characters. Lame. Expand
  65. RoseW.
    Nov 22, 2008
    2
    The movie did exactly what Vampires do, suck. The only reason it made as much money as it did is because of their millions of loyal fans who have read the book plus the girls who have swooned over Pattinson since his appearance in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Overall, the film is funny, though unintentional, and has ruined the idea and fear people have had for vampires for many The movie did exactly what Vampires do, suck. The only reason it made as much money as it did is because of their millions of loyal fans who have read the book plus the girls who have swooned over Pattinson since his appearance in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Overall, the film is funny, though unintentional, and has ruined the idea and fear people have had for vampires for many generations of young tween girls. Expand
  66. Joe
    Nov 22, 2008
    2
    Terrible acting... people in the theatre were laughing at the acting.
  67. PaulaD.
    Nov 22, 2008
    3
    The movie will probably satisfy fans, but will not do much to attract those who have not yet read the book.
  68. adrianav
    Nov 24, 2008
    2
    this movie was verry porly made, the acting was not the best, the makeup looked obviously way overdone. it looked like a low budget film. the setting was not belevable. I beleve that the director does not demand more of the actors, because when you have a demanding director you can get the worst actors to look like the best. the story draged on too long, and felt boring, the vampires actedthis movie was verry porly made, the acting was not the best, the makeup looked obviously way overdone. it looked like a low budget film. the setting was not belevable. I beleve that the director does not demand more of the actors, because when you have a demanding director you can get the worst actors to look like the best. the story draged on too long, and felt boring, the vampires acted way too depressing, and sure a little depresing is okay but they way over did it. in one ocassin I saw the main character who is not suposed to be in derect sunlight ouside in a cloud free sunny day,their is no way that this group of teenagers could have gone to a normal school without raising some crazy suspicions. alot of girls went to see the movie, but it was the book that made them go. Expand
  69. HeatherJackson
    Nov 24, 2008
    2
    A lot of build up and a BIG let down!!! I have read all four books and I was really disappointed!!! The acting was terrible, there was no real connection between the two main characters(Edward and Bella). The almost love scene was cheesy and the makeup and special effects were awful. Don't waste the money for a ticket.
  70. ShelleyWallace
    Nov 25, 2008
    4
    I am a huge fan of all 4 books, I have read them over and over again. I went to see the movie at the midnight showing knowing that it would be different from the books and I can except that, but the movie was cheesy the acting was lame and the special effects really sucked. I also hated the fact that they had Bella meet Jacob before she met Edward. The time line was all wrong.
  71. EC
    Dec 11, 2008
    2
    The only things that I felt was good in the movie, was the music and the laughs. Edward, Jasper, Alice, Bella and Jacob all looked.. wrong. The acting was okay at best and the scenes where the vampire used their 'superpowers' were horrible.
  72. DavidH.
    Dec 20, 2008
    3
    Twilight, the film that keeps on giving. But the question is whether the audience wants what this film has to offer. The dialogue is poor at best and utterly atrocious if not. The script feels as if it was written by an 8 year old with a vocabulary of around 25 words: Edward: do you like the rain? Bella: no i don't like the rain, i don't like anything cold and wet (worth noting Twilight, the film that keeps on giving. But the question is whether the audience wants what this film has to offer. The dialogue is poor at best and utterly atrocious if not. The script feels as if it was written by an 8 year old with a vocabulary of around 25 words: Edward: do you like the rain? Bella: no i don't like the rain, i don't like anything cold and wet (worth noting these abysmal actors stutter their way through the lines, straining at an attempt to portray high school love, but frequently missing the mark and just showing themselves to be poor actors) The plot is nonsensical and horrendous, the support cast don't help at all. And did i mention, the dialogue is awful. Gets a three for the scenes which weren't utterly appalling, and for the unintentionally witty lines (see above) and my personal favourite: Edward: hold on spider monkey (aimed at Bella) not spider girl, or spider woman, or even spider lady, no..... spider monkey! Collapse
  73. mf
    Dec 2, 2008
    4
    Given a 4 for funny dialogue. Rancid, badly-written movie for a rancid, badly-written book. Looking up the actors, especially the male lead, talking about their feelings on the film is a worthwhile time investment for bonus laughs.
  74. JakeJ.
    Dec 25, 2008
    1
    Well, it sucked. The only thing good about the movie was that it managed to be better than the book. Except, even this triumph was unintentional: the script is so awkward at points I ended up laughing out loud at the most random, inopportune times. If you are a teenaged girl, however, you will love the movie. Shame on you.
  75. J.C
    Nov 13, 2009
    1
    Twilight really really sucks. I saw a monkey acting better than this...this...well...THIS. The only thing i liked is Clair De Lune song, but only that.
  76. Dan
    Oct 12, 2009
    0
    Possibly the most laughable attempt at either a romance or a vampire film. Aside from the obviously laughable effects(high speed piggy back?) and the combination of awkward acting and a stale script leaves nothing else but some stock footage for the north american tourist board. The actors shuffle and mope their way though this overly long film. I am sure the frothing Twilight fans will Possibly the most laughable attempt at either a romance or a vampire film. Aside from the obviously laughable effects(high speed piggy back?) and the combination of awkward acting and a stale script leaves nothing else but some stock footage for the north american tourist board. The actors shuffle and mope their way though this overly long film. I am sure the frothing Twilight fans will just keep bumping this rating, but nothing can excuse this dire epic. Comparing it to Lost Boys is also faintly ridiculous as the humour in Lost Boys was intended, any humour derived from Twilight is sadly unintentional. Expand
  77. AlanD.
    Jan 12, 2009
    0
    Utter rubbish from start to finish. I guess if you are a 12 year old girl (and wrote this) then you might like it. It sucked (whilst having no teeth, no plot, no worthy dialogue or redeeming values at all) The worst hour and a half of 2008.
  78. MaureenD.
    Jan 18, 2009
    3
    Book much better. Not enough graphics, her acting not very good and he should of kept his accent. They skipped so much that if you didn't read the book you would be lost. Hope movie 2 has better graphics like Harry Potter did.
  79. AmyC
    Dec 30, 2009
    1
    The writer obviously didn't think about the affect her writing, let alone her movie, would cause her reader/watchers. Her vampires were so obvious. They didn't try to mix, they stayed as a group. Everyone loves Bella the moment they see her. She has a vampire watching her sleep, which is considered romantic. Her vampires sparkle. The only reason I'm giving it a 1 is because The writer obviously didn't think about the affect her writing, let alone her movie, would cause her reader/watchers. Her vampires were so obvious. They didn't try to mix, they stayed as a group. Everyone loves Bella the moment they see her. She has a vampire watching her sleep, which is considered romantic. Her vampires sparkle. The only reason I'm giving it a 1 is because James was a decent vampire. Expand
  80. Amyf
    Oct 25, 2009
    0
    This movie was so bad. I laugh all the time. I just don't get what people like about it. the bad acting, the horrible makeup, the emberresing dialog or the monky like moves?
  81. DaveH
    Dec 7, 2009
    2
    There's nothing extraordinary about this movie, the fangirls who are in love with E.C. have never experienced romance in their lives.
  82. PeterKay
    Oct 30, 2009
    3
    This film was really poor, for a vampire film to not use a correct definition of a vampire is a deadly sin; this made the movie as uncompelling to me as possible, there is a difference between innovating and redefining, and twilight crossed the redefining line. A vampire is not a vampire just because it sucks blood; leeches and mosquitos suck blood too. It could of been a lot more This film was really poor, for a vampire film to not use a correct definition of a vampire is a deadly sin; this made the movie as uncompelling to me as possible, there is a difference between innovating and redefining, and twilight crossed the redefining line. A vampire is not a vampire just because it sucks blood; leeches and mosquitos suck blood too. It could of been a lot more appealing with a better cast, Rob said himself in an interview that he wished it had more violence, he's not the right man for the job; someone more sensitive and with a better hold on romance would have been better. I'm finding it hard to find good things to say, but its just too cheesy to comment on, one thing I did like was the small role played by Bella's father(Billy Burke) and Alice(Ashley Greene) but I feel hard to give these value as they are both established actors. Expand
  83. HalG.
    Jan 7, 2009
    0
    Absolute urination on all that is vampires, a horrible love story about sparkly emotionless vampires. AVOID.
  84. JimR
    Feb 14, 2009
    2
    The only real value I can see in this movie is if the series is popular enough to spawn a few sequels, so viewers can look back and realize how far the later ones have come. The special effects are barely hidden, as is the value of our female lead. I am tempted to call her a heroine, but aside from rushing into a an obvious trap to trade her life for her family, she never does anything The only real value I can see in this movie is if the series is popular enough to spawn a few sequels, so viewers can look back and realize how far the later ones have come. The special effects are barely hidden, as is the value of our female lead. I am tempted to call her a heroine, but aside from rushing into a an obvious trap to trade her life for her family, she never does anything especially heroic. She praises her friend as a strong independent woman while showing little sign of being such herself. Perhaps I just don't see it as a man, but Edward does not seem to be as "beautiful" as he is described. The re-imagination of the vampire legends does allow the story to avoid certain classic pitfalls of vampire media, but Meyer seems to be intent on keeping the general convention of women intact. That is to say, if they do not have some supernatural powers, they are pathetic. At least Bella shows some desire to become a vampire toward the end. Expand
  85. TylerS.
    Feb 21, 2009
    0
    I hate this movie. It's just terrible. I hate when Twilight fangirls/boys think it's so great. They obviously will never be able to unbiasly judge a film.
  86. AnnaF
    Mar 11, 2009
    1
    I absolutely LOVED the book. and the movie sucked real bad in comparison. Hopefully the next one will be better.
  87. roberts.
    Mar 22, 2009
    0
    Just an awful, awful movie. It's clear that if you don't fall within the 12-16 teen girl range that this movie targets you won't find it at all entertaining or bearable. I had to stop watching half way through.
  88. KevinC
    Mar 20, 2009
    0
    This movie is badly directed and has some of the worst acting i have seen in years. There are worst movies yes... Glitter for example but that was in theaters for less than a week before most theaters pulled it. Twilight is a small nudge above that but it's cult like following boosted it's popularity and box office numbers. Any movie that actually has a budget bigger than This movie is badly directed and has some of the worst acting i have seen in years. There are worst movies yes... Glitter for example but that was in theaters for less than a week before most theaters pulled it. Twilight is a small nudge above that but it's cult like following boosted it's popularity and box office numbers. Any movie that actually has a budget bigger than what's in your bank account is better than this movie. The lack of character development, bad acting, bad special effects and horrible directing and shooting simply makes this one of the worst "wide-release" movies ever. Simply put... If the books never existed and this was just another vampire movie... it would have lost money and you wouldn't be reading this right now. Expand
  89. MarkR
    Mar 20, 2009
    1
    The books were Great! The Movie was to poorly directed. It should have never made it to a screen to be viewed. In my opinion
  90. VanH
    Mar 22, 2009
    4
    The Movie and the books are total crap. It makes no sense that a vampire wouldn't kill other humans not suck human blood and go out in the open light. This movie is a poor exucise for a vampire film.-G.A.T.E.T.V. Van Helsing & Blade.
  91. LeighW
    Mar 25, 2009
    2
    Ridiculously bad. I mean, sure, people are bound to like this movie, especially the insane Twilight fanatics who are blinded with their own obsession with the books. I think my favorite part of the movie was probably all the special effects. I literally couldn't stop myself from laughing. Not only were the effects disappointing, but the acting as well. You with think with such a cult Ridiculously bad. I mean, sure, people are bound to like this movie, especially the insane Twilight fanatics who are blinded with their own obsession with the books. I think my favorite part of the movie was probably all the special effects. I literally couldn't stop myself from laughing. Not only were the effects disappointing, but the acting as well. You with think with such a cult following, they would attempt to find some decent actors. The girl who plays Bella couldn't be more mediocre, and Edward...well at least he has his looks and white makeup to support him through life. Let's just say I'm not a fan. Expand
  92. Brian
    Mar 25, 2009
    4
    I understand the "gothic romance" thing, but this is "emo." This woman has completely killed vampire mythos in her books and now, unfortunately, by letting a film adaptation be made. This true love thing ONLY exists while you're 14 - 17. Hopefully by 18 you'll understand that you're not supposed to drop your entire life and family cause of some young male, especially one I understand the "gothic romance" thing, but this is "emo." This woman has completely killed vampire mythos in her books and now, unfortunately, by letting a film adaptation be made. This true love thing ONLY exists while you're 14 - 17. Hopefully by 18 you'll understand that you're not supposed to drop your entire life and family cause of some young male, especially one that wants to kill you. I literally felt colorblind for most of the movie since, even though colors were present, they were so washed out with post-production that it felt like a high-quality re-envisioning of Blue Moon (which was MUCH more entertaining.) The lead actors (whose names I do not care to remember) were terrible. Stuttering beyond the point where stuttering is still socially acceptable, acting nervous and sketchy, and trying too hard. The vampire "family" was a hilarious and sad joke, and the diamond-skin... thats a serious WTF. The bottom line is this: If you want vampires, read Anne Rice prior to 1998. If you want a sappy teen romance filled with abstinence and drug avoidance and vampires that are socially conscience, don't feed on humans, and can walk in the sunlight, rent this crap. Expand
  93. IvanG.
    Mar 29, 2009
    1
    Mainstream crap churned out to please people of ages... well, it wasn't really made for anyone- just people stupid enough to be convinced by a mormon that "vampires are perfectly normal people" or that a vampire doesn't drink blood or kill, it just has glitter skin in the sun... If you went to see this film, consider yourself on a warning.
  94. Moebius
    Apr 3, 2009
    3
    Holy... Well, let's stop on this. I haven't seen a Movie! It was just a set of separate (and often ridiculous) scenes, not linked together at all! It's a complete waste of time, money and nerves! Even visuals more like chinese action-movies with all those "rope-jumping"! What's this?! I hate it. Really. P.S. Girls, who watched "this" with me, wasn't excited too. Holy... Well, let's stop on this. I haven't seen a Movie! It was just a set of separate (and often ridiculous) scenes, not linked together at all! It's a complete waste of time, money and nerves! Even visuals more like chinese action-movies with all those "rope-jumping"! What's this?! I hate it. Really. P.S. Girls, who watched "this" with me, wasn't excited too. Who needs movies like this, then? Expand
  95. dereks
    Apr 4, 2009
    0
    By far the worst movie ever made in the history of mankind. Biggest waste of 2 hours ever created.
  96. MarkK
    Apr 5, 2009
    4
    A good book turned into on of the most over-rated (emo clad garbage) films ever made.
  97. surs
    Jun 1, 2009
    1
    The book was great. It may not be a literary jewel but it was an excellent romantic story. I was very disappointed with the movie. Kirsten Stewart can't act to save her life. The movie was not true to the book at all. I for one cannot see the cullens riding in public transportation of any kind, even a school bus. The book had so much potential as a movie that I hope someone does a The book was great. It may not be a literary jewel but it was an excellent romantic story. I was very disappointed with the movie. Kirsten Stewart can't act to save her life. The movie was not true to the book at all. I for one cannot see the cullens riding in public transportation of any kind, even a school bus. The book had so much potential as a movie that I hope someone does a good remake. Expand
  98. FranciscoM.
    Jun 14, 2009
    4
    It's definitely entertaining but it's popcorn entertainment. You sit in your couch, you see this movie and 30 minutes later you won't remember watching this.
  99. KeenanS.
    Jun 15, 2009
    3
    The moment I saw a preview of this film, I knew it was going to suck, but I was still willing to give it a chance, so I went and saw it. Wow, it sure did suck. The film is atrocious and fails to deliver anything that a romance or vampire film should have. It has boring, 1-dimensional, cardboard characters who have some of the worst acting abilities (Especially the guy who plays Edward) The moment I saw a preview of this film, I knew it was going to suck, but I was still willing to give it a chance, so I went and saw it. Wow, it sure did suck. The film is atrocious and fails to deliver anything that a romance or vampire film should have. It has boring, 1-dimensional, cardboard characters who have some of the worst acting abilities (Especially the guy who plays Edward) I've ever seen in a film. The dialogue was really bad, thanks to the cliched, hackneyed script. The music soundtrack is horrible, and stands as one of the worst film soundtracks I have ever heard. The CGI effects were utterly appalling, and I've seen better CGI in the 90's. The film also does not meet certain requirements vampire films are supposed to have, such as the fact the vampires sparkle like diamonds in the sunlight. I don't mind if a few things get changed up a bit in a vampire film, but vampires die in sunlight. It's been a requirement for the last few centuries. By the way, whoever says this is the best romance since Romeo and Juliet is an idiot. Expand
Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 37
  2. Negative: 2 out of 37
  1. 63
    Twilight will mesmerize its target audience, 16-year-old girls and their grandmothers. Their mothers know all too much about boys like this.
  2. Reviewed by: Justin Chang
    50
    A disappointingly anemic tale of forbidden love that should satiate the pre-converted but will bewilder and underwhelm viewers who haven't devoured Stephenie Meyer's bestselling juvie chick-lit franchise.
  3. Reviewed by: Chuck Wilson
    50
    In the 17-million-copy land of "Twilight," the calling card isn't blood and fangs, but the exquisite, shimmering quiver of unconsummated first love. By that measure, the movie version gives really good swoon.