IMDb > The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Twilight Saga: New Moon More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 91: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 908 reviews in total 

13 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

Why do people eat this garbage up?

1/10
Author: zeroand09 from United States
3 December 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'll admit, when I saw the first Twilight film, I wasn't going to give it a fair shake. I was surprised that it wasn't awful, it at least at decent cinematography. I sat through mediocrity, much as I do with a majority of movies. It wasn't anything special. I went into New Moon the same way, I wasn't disappointed.

This was a horrible movie. The plot was inane drivel with souless acting all around. The only character I felt for was Jacob, as he was being friend zoned from the start. Bella is a selfish c*** who will do anything and use anyone to get back with her equally selfish "vampire" boyfriend. Jacob bends over backwards for this incredibly bland girl with nothing to offer and time after time is reminded that he won't be getting anything from her. When he leaves, she is distraught, but not because she truly loves him. No, it's because she doesn't have a b**** to take her mind off of Eddy. I would have given anything to have seen her die a horrific death. Even when Eddy and Bella get back together, Ed keeps conspiring to get rid of the person he "loves" the most, because he doesn't want the hassle. The funny thing is, he hasn't gotten anything from her either. The only reason he is attracted to her is because of her pungent smell. That alone should tell you this relationship is super f***ed up from the get go. I fail to understand why two guys are fighting over such a person.

So when I see the fan reaction and the records it is breaking...I just don't get. Do all girls eat up garbage like this? I can only assume the books are better, as is usually the case. Still, you have to call a bad movie when you see it. The only positive is that there's only two movies left. In two years, the craze will die and we can move onto the next irritating thing. It'll probably be the Creature from the Black Lagoon. Or Snorks.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 44 people found the following review useful:

?!! What happened?

3/10
Author: sariforever from Germany
21 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First of all I read all four books (not a teenage girl!) and I have to say that movies will never be as good as the books! But apparently that's not the bad news about the movie. New Moon is actually just plain boring. The Story is told without depth and I don't know who hired the actors but they are simply bad! Neither Robert nor Kristen delivered any emotions. Which is exactly the problem because the whole book is just about emotions and heartbroken teenagers! It's about love, desire, friendship and Bella is supposed to be bursting because of her loss. Her heart is broken but what the hell happened? Kristen Stewart looked as she would have been bored out of her mind or just wanted to be somewhere else but not in this movie oO No heartbroken teenager on screen! Girl start acting or quit the job! Same goes for Robert Pattinson. I've never seen him as the next De Niro anyway but that it would get worse.. outch! There is no connection between him and Kristen at all(which was at least one reason I liked Twilight). If those two are actually dating well then good luck for that relationship. Next to that I wouldn't hire the make up artists of the movie again! The faces of all Cullens looked like cheap Halloween costumes. The contact lenses are exorbitant and I still don't get why all Cullens are suddenly forced to wear smeared red lipstick?!

The only really good thing in this movie is actually Taylor Lautner and I'm not just saying that because that 17 year old boy is way better in shape than his fellow Robert Pattinson (who BTW. is supposed to be the most handsome guy in this movie.. ahm NO!). No I'm saying that because he did a great acting job and made it possible that I was totally Team Jacob for once! <-- which is basically a miracle because when it comes to the books I'm totally an "Edward girl" (hey and wasn't Taylor the one they wanted to replace with another guy so badly? Wow! Way to go if you want to make a bad movie even worse)

I guess one problem with Edward here is that Robert Pattinson is not the greatest actor and the second reason is that they picture Edward in a different way in the movies. It's always just the desperate and "wise" Edward but they tend to forget that Edward can be cheeky and fun as well. How many times did I spend laughing because of him and Bellas stupid reactions?! New Moon ruined it!(well yeah it's not the book with most of the fun parts of Bella and Edward but what happened to the proposal scene? Unbelievable!)

Next to all that it seems hard to follow for everyone who hasn't been reading the books by now . There are so many plot holes and seemingly unfinished scenes! Hard sudden cuts. I just wasn't impressed. The movie has some cute jokes (some of them unintentional) but hey.. please please don't go this way with Eclipse!

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

These are not real vampires. Also, no plot.

1/10
Author: dieharddeus (dieharddeus@gmail.com) from Staunton Illinois
21 November 2009

Real vampires don't sparkle, they don't love teenage girls, they're not pedophiles who like girls that are centuries younger than they are.

They aren't vegetarians. Ever.

They are dead husks that lurk in the dark. They feel nothing, they have no soul.

This movie is just a plot less mindless romance movie made for fat tweens who no one will ever love. And they know it.

Vampires are meant to be the embodiment of evil, not some moronic sparkly dream boy who does not and never will exist.

Keep liking and watching movies like this and no one will ever love you.

They won't anyway, but at least you wouldn't be rotting your brain with this filth.

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 56 people found the following review useful:

Unfair Comments

10/10
Author: ashvanauken from United States
26 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Possible Spoilers: Book and Movie I think most of these reviews are being unfair, though I can understand a lot of the points that have been made. I was on the fence about going to see this movie because of these reviews here. I'm glad I choose to watch it! The directors compacted a book to a movie, which could have easily been well over four hours, into two. This movie could have been one of those slaughtering of book to movie scenarios like Blood and Chocolate, the directors could have not followed the book at all, again like BandC, but they didn't. It was a decent job and New Moon, in my opinion, was better than Twilight. Honestly, it was really closer to the book than Twilight was; this is probably why people felt it was rushed though. It was too much for two hours and had the movie been made longer it would have been a terrific adaptation.

The actors and actresses were better, it was even funny at points when it was meant to be intentionally funny; they were familiar with the material they had to work with. Special effects kind of wavy, but they aren't everything. The fact that the story was so close to the book made up for the sometimes cheesy computer-generated images. More screen time for the Volturi and a bit more of Jacob/Bella interaction as well and it would have moved 'great' to 'amazing,' but that can be corrected in Eclipse. Also the addition of more interior monologue from Bella was a good idea. The music I didn't really pay much attention to, but then again it wasn't a Mickey Mousing like Twilight had been. The music just seemed to be not as important in New Moon.

I also read something about Kristen Stewart not being able to act…Bella was dull in New Moon; she was depressed because Edward left, she was supposed to be that way. I read all the books as well and though I'm not the biggest fan of Stewarts she did a good job acting depressed. And Rob Pattinson playing Edward did decent as well. In the beginning he was all happy-go-lucky, but as the movie progressed, he looked that way because he was in pain at having to leave Bella! I haven't read the New Moon book for awhile, but I do read the books often enough to remember this.

Overall I was pleased with New Moon.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

This is one movie where a spoof would be far better than the original

1/10
Author: donco6 from United States
4 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Hard to believe I wasted 3 hours (hey, it was on FX and they jam everything with mega-commercials) of my life watching this tripe.

If I had to watch one more 360-spinning view of Bella sitting somewhere, mourning the loss of Edward, all to the strains of some overwrought teen pop music, I'm quite certain I would have had to run to the bathroom to barf.

NOTHING happens in this movie. You don't need to worry about spoilers because there can't be any.

What I *am* anxious to see is the spoof of this movie, because it will be deadly funny.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Bella needs to go potty

4/10
Author: poj-man from United States
28 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I've not read the Twilight books...and I am a 49 year old male...so...I know the demographics are not targeted at me. However, I have no begrudging anyone their success and harbor no ill will towards the Twilight gang. My opinion is that I am "calling as I see 'em."

Technically the film is structured OK. The cinematography is nice and the CGI is fine. To me, though, the film is like the Vampires of true Vampire myth...soul-less.

I see many reviews state that Twilight is "teen porn." I find that I disagree with this assertion. Twilight is more like people who need some porn in their life for there really isn't anyone in Twilight.

For the movie Bella acts like she needs to pee. Like...pee really bad. Bella is in blue jeans and she is so tormented that she is almost constantly bending in her blue jeans like she needs to find a potty quickly.

Bella pines for Edward...and acts like she must pee. She tells Jacob "Don't do this" in such a tortured manner...and acts like she must pee. She exits the car to run to the clock tower not knowing what to do...and she acts like she must pee. That is most definitely not "teen porn."

If mopey, whiny characters who bear no semblance to reality are your fantasy bag then have at it. In this kind of fantasy the characters are all tortured and the nerdy girl who looks like she needs to pee is loved by both vampire and werewolf. In real porn she is enjoying doing both of them at the same time...and she probably has more substance than Bella. Considering how little substance that porn girl is demonstrates how little substance Twilight is.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Frustrating

3/10
Author: Sjhm from United Kingdom
13 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Truthfully, the CGI is good. Then we come to the real problem; Kirsten Stewart is not the actress to carry Bella off with conviction. It's a shame. Because this film is all about Bella. She is the core of the story, with Edward absent for a significant portion of the film. Without a good core, the cheesy dialogue and long sorrowful glances are just that, cheesy and long, it's impossible to see past them. It takes FOREVER for anything to happen. Happy or sad, suicidal or in a bad mood, it really is impossible to tell. Kirsten's broody look never changes. Scenes which should have some poignancy are simply flat and dull. I know that the character is somewhat thinly written, but really, come on. And then Robert Pattinson comes back in, and he also delivers his lines as though he's reading from a telephone directory. Very disappointing.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

the absolute worst film I have ever seen

1/10
Author: BelmaresJodene from United States
20 April 2012

I was forced to watch this terrible pitiful excuse for a film. This film had absolutely no redeeming qualities at all. I have never seen such a worthless piece of crap film in my entire life. The storyline was just terrible the acting sucked and the effects were just terrible. I want those two hours of my life back.Furthermore it had an actor from one of my favorite movie series and I was not Happy This film is so bad that it belongs in a landfill. This is also the worst book to movie adaptation I have ever seen in my life. Do yourself a favor and don't waste your time with this abomination. I cannot tell you how much I despise this film . lastly this makes gnomeo and juliet look like the silence of the lambs and that's saying something. Avoid at all costs. One more thing vampires sparkling what the f*ck is that If you want a real movie go see hunger games

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Slightly better than the first, but a far cry from being any good

4/10
Author: Bobby747 from Canada
28 July 2010

The reason it took me so long to review this film is because I wanted to wait for it to show on the movie network, as my interest in it was next to none. I got bored today and watched this movie and they basically took all of the redeeming qualities of the first film and removed it.

The most interesting part of the story was the relationship between Jacob and Bella, however it began to get tiresome after Jacobs third attempt to reach out to Bella, and then it just wouldn't stop. Edward and Bella's relationship is totally annoying to me, as there is no apparent passion between the two when they're interacting with each other. Close talking with convenient lighting does not convey passion.

I tried watching this with the notion that this is a children's movie, and I guess its good enough for kids if they decide to like it. However the subject matter leads to a rhetoric that is heavily politicized. I do not wish to discuss that here.

I understand that fans of the Twilight novels wanted this film to do what the previous one could not. Which is to do the novel justice. The script writing was not thoughtful enough to even come close to representing even a poorly written novel. The dialogue was that of an after school teen TV series. You can tell that Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson tried a bit harder to convey emotion. However Pattinson is too caught up in the image he wishes to portray as a vampire instead of becoming his character for the film, and Stewart is likely in a quandary. The acting was so bad in the first one, but there is a huge fan base for Twilight. How does she make the character better without straying too far from what was done in the first film? That being said, Bella's character was ruined before they even started filming New Moon. Unless they rebooted the series, there was no saving this film.

What bothers me is that I know these actors can do much better. I've seen Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart do some good work in the past, and it seems they've both let the Twilight attention get to their heads. Their acting is pretentious and dull in New Moon. I hate seeing scenes with them together because I'm numb with boredom every time they are.

This movie was slightly better than the first as a MOVIE, not as a representation of the novel. I have no comment about the novels because I have never read them, nor do I intend to. Vegetarian vampires, and the struggle of two people who want desperately to be together is not really my thing and quite frankly it's the oldest story ever, are not really my thing. How about every religious person and their desire to be with a God who may or may not exist? That's how old this story is.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Thumbs down for New Moon

3/10
Author: jonathanruano from Canada
28 July 2010

Kristen Stewart once called herself as a "professional liar" when referring to her performances in movies, like Twilight. The problem with "New Moon" is that the performances of Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattison, Taylor Lautner, Anna Kendrick and others are so obviously a lie that it is nearly impossible to believe in any of them. In this respect, New Moon is a very inferior film to the first Twilight which, for all its flaws, at least had believable characters and a believable love story. The main reason for this major flaw in New Moon is that the script lacks compelling dialogue. Most of the dialogue, especially in the beginning, is absurd; and the actors know that their dialogue is absurd because they give the consistent impression that they do not believe in what they are saying. So the result is a superficial vampire movie.

But the problem with "New Moon" goes even deeper than that. The plot is not really interesting. For most of the film, Bella is meant to be depressed after her break up with Edward Cullen that is never properly explained. But Bella never succeeds in establishing a connection with the audience - not least because the Kristen Stewart voice-over sounds so fake - and therefore watching her depressed is a boring experience, instead of a touching one. There is a somewhat interesting part of the film with the wolves, which in my view really do upstage the actors. But the part with the volturi, who are meant to enforce a rather rigid set of vampire laws, was done completely wrong. If the film-makers were smart, they would have done something unique and original with the set, like create a whole new vampire world hidden from human civilization with its own unique look (why do vampire buildings have to look like human buildings, for instance?), culture and way of life. Instead human beings can see the volturi simply by walking into an elevator, clicking the basement floor - how unoriginal (what happened to secret passages) - and then walking into a throne room that looks like a baroque cathedral from a tourist guide. The volturi themselves, moreover, are not that scary, even when they do come close to killing Edward Cullen (I really stopped caring by that point, because I wanted an early end to this film). Martin Sheen is miscast as the head volturi, because he lacks the stature and command to make that role work. Sheen was much better in "Frost/Nixon" because in that film he was supposed to be a mousy interviewer who seemed way over his head financing and carrying out the interview of President Nixon. Perhaps Frank Langhella would have made a better volturi or Eva Green. But Sheen is all wrong for the part. The same is true for the other actors attempting to look scary as volturis. The female volturi, for instance, looks like one of those part geeky, artsy theatre chicks one meets while attending the fringe festival. Of course, the script does not give the volturis much to do or anything interesting to say. So these actors are also hamstrung from the start.

Overall a disappointing film. Thumbs down. The other sad thing about this film is that Graham Greene, who was so brilliant in "Thunderheart" and "Dances with Wolves," is in this film, but the film-makers only gave him a bit part instead of utilizing his considerable talents in full. What a sad day when a great actor's potential is not exploited to make a bad film, like this one, somewhat better.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 91: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history