And now a very special announcement from the Shattered Lens…


Hi everyone!

Today, I have very exciting news about something that has been going on behind-the-scenes for a while here at the Shattered Lens.  Today, one of my humans — I call her the flame-haired one but you probably call her Lisa Marie — finally convinced Arleigh that it’s time to turn the Shattered Lens into the internet’s number one Twilight fan site!

The flame-haired one has been trying to convince Arleigh to do this since she first joined the site in 2009.  Even though no one has really cared or thought about Twilight since 2012, the flame-haired one is convinced that she will be able to once again get everyone in America wondering if they’re “Team Edward” or “Team Jacob.”  So, say goodbye to the all of our old reviews and features and get ready for endless polls, memes, and out-of-date gossip about whether Rob and KStew are still as close as Edward and Bella!

Congratulations, Flame-Haired One!

April Fools!

From the humans and the cat here at the Shattered Lens, happy April Fools Day!  Please be kind with your jokes and remember that April Fools Day ends at midnight!  Any pranks pulled after midnight will no longer funny and will instead just be annoying.  Meh.

Teaser Trailer: The Host


With The Hunger Games currently dominating the box office and the Twilight saga coming to an end later this year, The Host (scheduled to be released in 2013) appears to be Hollywood’s next great attempt to capture the money of tweens and people who wish they were tweens.  Much like Twilight, The Host is based on a book written by Stephanie Meyer and it’ll probably make a lot of money while getting slammed by critics.  One positive note is that the film stars Saoirse Ronan, who deserved an Oscar nomination for Hanna.  On the negative side, The Host is directed by Andrew Niccol, who is just a bad enough director to have a whole lot of rabid fans online.

Film Review (plus a Twilight Primer): The Twilight Saga – Breaking Dawn, Part I (dir. by Bill Condon)


“Harry Potter is about confronting fears, finding inner strength and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is about how important it is to have a boyfriend.” – Stephen King

I have a problem with the notion that says you have to have someone in your life in order for your life to be considered perfect or grand. I’m of the mind that you step into the world alone and leave it the same same way. Even if you are surrounded by your nearest and dearest friends when you pass, you’re still the only one making that trip. And while I love the notion of Romance, I don’t believe it needs to translate to “Omigod, if you’re not near me, I’m going to jump off this building, I swear it because I can’t talk about you without stammering.” or the other obsessive notions that Twilight seems to bring up. This doesn’t mean I outright hate everything that Twilight is, but I’m not totally fond of the overall message it conveys. Perhaps I’m just emotionally cold that way.

And yet, I may know more about Twilight than any other guy in the known universe. It’s an enigma, I know.

A little background on why I, a guy, am writing a review for The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, which is pretty much geared for girls. Note that I’ll refer to the film just as Breaking Dawn, because I really don’t see Twilight as a Saga by any means.

In the early 90’s, I hit a “Vampire Phase”. Between playing games of Vampire: The Masquerade and reading every Vampire Chronicle novel that Anne Rice wrote up until Tale of the Body Thief, I was pretty involved. I grew up with Vampires that were monsters to be feared (and sometimes admired), and dodged the sun more or less. I even owned two vampire encyclopedias. Somewhere between Mark Danielewski’s “House of Leaves” (a book I still haven’t finished) and Andrew Davidson’s “The Gargoyle”, I picked up a hardcover copy of Stephenie Meyer’s “Twilight” from Barnes & Noble. I didn’t think much of the books, save that they were quick reads. Meyer and her vampires were far from Rice and her universe lacked the erotic flair of Laurell K. Hamilton’s earlier books in the Anita Blake series. They were more or less books for teens, but they had vampires in them, so I pretty much inhaled all four books (Twilight, New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn) twice in Hardcover. I even went so far to read Meyer’s “The Host” and have seen all of the other Twilight films in the theatre. While they all seem to be really close to the source material, there’s something strange in the translation. What made sense on paper really didn’t on screen (Sparkling Vampires jump to mind), but I guess that’s for an Editorial.

So, when it came to reviewing Breaking Dawn, we at the Shattered Lens drew straws. While we hold to the tenet that any movie can be reviewed by anyone even if the movie was previously reviewed by anyone else (for alternate viewpoints), this was a film that was pretty much off our collective radars. I think we all secretly wanted Lisa or Erin to take it, but both Lisa and my cousin gave the argument that I could probably give a different perspective on the film than all of the girls who planned to see it, most of whom would sprout something like the following:

“I love Edward so much, and that he took his time with Bella was just so heartfelt that I wanted to cry. I felt so bad for Jacob that he could haven’t have her. He deserves better than that!! If anyone doesn’t like what I’m saying, then I will come to their houses and stab them with rusty blades in their beds because no one – I mean no one – gets in the way of my Twilight Love!! You haters could suck it! Team Edward/Jacob Forever!!!!”

So, here I am, writing this. Let’s see what becomes of it, shall we?

For those of you who managed to avoid the Twilight books and movies like they were Sutter Cane novels, here’s everything you’ll ever need to know.

Twilight is the story of Isabella Swan (Kristen Stewart) who moves from Arizona (where Meyer lives) to Forks, Washington to live with her Sheriff father, Charlie (Billy Burke). While in school, she meets an interesting but strange fellow in Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). After being saved from a near fatal car crash in an impossible fashion by Edward, Bella becomes intrigued with who and what he may be. A little big of Googling and book buying leads her to discover that Edward is in fact, a Vampire. He explains he’s dangerous. She doesn’t care. He states he’s a killing machine. She loves the danger. He steps into the sunlight to show he doesn’t burn, he just sparkles. She’s just mesmerized.

The original Twilight was Bella’s introduction to The Cullens (who are more or less Vegetarians in that they don’t go after humans, but animals instead):

Carlyle (Peter Facinelli) – Father figure and Doctor. He recruited the rest of the family.

Esmee (Elizabeth Reaser) – Carlyle’s Wife and Mother Figure.

Emmett (Kellan Lutz) – The Muscle of the Family and companion to Rosalie.

Rosalie (Nikki Reed) – Emmett’s Companion and is pretty much opposed to Bella up until Breaking Dawn, for reasons she explains in Eclipse.

Alice (Ashley Greene) – Companion to Jasper and has the ability to see the decisions that others make before they make them.

Jasper (Jackson Rathbone) -The newest vampire of the group and companion to Alice. Has the ability to manipulate the emotional tides of others.

In Twilight, Bella and the Family run into a trio of vampires, one of which decides he has to hunt down and kill Bella (because she’s food). The family is able to kill the vampire and get on with their undead lives, not before a final parting shot showing the vampire’s girlfriend and her desire to kill Bella in return. Bella decides it’s in her best interests to become a vampire and tries to persuade Edward to change her, but he refuses, citing she has many years ahead of her worth living.

In New Moon, Edward decides to celebrate Bella’s birthday at his place. After an accident occurs that leaves her bleeding, Jasper loses it and attacks her. The family is able to save her, but this convinces Edward that it just won’t work out and the entire family leaves town. Left on her own, Bella spends the next four months crying and screaming in her sleep over Edward until her father convinces her to hang out with her friends. She ends up spending more time with Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), a friend who lives on a nearby reservation that clued her into what the Cullens really were. They get closer as friends and eventually, she discovers that Jacob and his family are actually Werewolves. While cool, she also learns that the Werewolves don’t get along with Vampires and despise the Cullens. They haven’t killed the vampires because of a Treaty that was enacted long ago. Werewolves stay on their side, Cullens on the other and no humans get hurt. Victoria (the girlfriend of that dead vampire in Twilight) returns to town to kill Bella, but she’s protected by the Wolves. She ends up doing a little cliff diving, which catches Alice’s attention and she manages to reunite with the family, though learns that Edward plans to kill himself. Edward believes she died when she jumped off the cliff, volunteering himself to death by the Vampire Congress known as the Volturri.

Alice and Bella fly to Italy and intercede, rescuing Edward from his fate and meeting the Volturri. As Bella knows too much, the Volturri leader demands that within a year she has to becomes a vampire. This of course, excites Bella and annoys Edward, who throws in a “Let’s get Married First” clause into the works. The idea of this is to help give closure to all the humans in Bella’s life. She reluctantly agrees to it. Jacob catches wind of this and spends the next book & film, Eclipse, trying to convince Bella that she should live and that he’s the better choice of a love interest.

Okay, Eclipse. Victoria knows that she can’t get to Bella on her own without dealing with both the Werewolves and the Vampires. She finds a resident of Forks in Seattle named Riley Biers and changes him to a Vampire, convincing him that the Cullens are bad and killed her friend. He builds an army and they attack the Cullens en masse, but somewhere along the line, Victoria forgot to mention there may be giant dogs in the area. The Cullens and Werewolves join forces and defeat the newborns with ease. In the process, Bella learns more about the Wolves and their ability to “Imprint”, meaning they basically obsess over one person for the rest of their lives (much like whales, I suppose). Luckily, Jacob hasn’t Imprinted on Bella yet. Edward eventually dispatches Riley and Victoria, leaving the romance to continue. In Eclipse, the Cullens explain to Bella how they came to be, partially to help her what she has to look forward to, positive or negative.

And all that brings us to Breaking Dawn, Part I.

Of the Twilight movies, I still feel Eclipse was the strongest one. Breaking Dawn covers everything the 1st half of the book does and manages to do it without stepping past the PG-13 bounds it created. The film starts off with Edward and Bella’s Wedding, with different reactions from everyone. Jacob hates it, wolfs out and runs to Canada. The Cullens are ecstatic. Charlie manages to deal with it. The wedding ceremony is done well, and gives some screen time to all of the high school friends (who we won’t be seeing after the wedding). Stephenie Meyer herself even has a cameo here (and eerily looks like my mother). Even the honeymoon is done better than I thought it would. Anyone expecting Bella and Edward’s honeymoon to look like something out of a late night Cinemax series may be disappointed, but the romance is nice to see and there were some laughs in the audience. Again, it’s Twilight. I’m not expecting Jane Eyre or Sense & Sensibility romance levels. At least, that’s what the snoring mother sitting next to me who brought her kids felt, I think.

After the married couple’s wild honeymoon, Bella discovers she’s miraculously pregnant and even worse, the unborn child is sucking the very life from her. The wolves find out about this and feel that she needs to be eliminated, along with the rest of the Cullens, as it breaks the Treaty. Bella is rushed home while the Cullens try to find a way to save both the baby and the mother. Will Bella make it? Will the Wolves pounce on the vampires? Those are some of the questions brought to the table.

Jacob finds himself taking sides with the Cullens, which causes him to recall his Alpha Status in his wolf pack and stand alone (or nearly alone) against his family. In the book, this was done pretty well, but translated to the screen the scene with wolves telepathically yelling at one another seemed a little cartoonish. Just change back to people and talk it over. I guess it was done that way to show how animals have the whole Alpha / Omega relationship, and remains one embarrassing moment in a sea of scenes that were okay.

Visually, Eclipse was a serious step up from both Twilight and New Moon. Breaking Dawn seemingly returns to the look and feel of the original Twilight, right down to Carter Burwell’s score. With the exception of the Bella’s Lullaby theme (which worked incredibly well, especially at the last two minutes of the film), the music felt a little weak to me.  I actually preferred Howard Shore’s score to Eclipse. Don’t get me wrong, the movie goes where it’s supposed to, but you’d expect things to look a little better as it goes along. It would be nice if they improved on that.

One other thing I’ll give this (and that’s all of the Twilight mess) is the audience. I live for seeing audiences react to what they’re seeing on the screen, and I can’t remember a more reactive audience set since Captain America. Some of the girls who go to see this really go wild over it, and some of the guys grumble loudly. My theatre was packed, right down to the front seats where you have to crane your neck up to see everything. It’s the closest to a Midnight Movie experience you could have at a Matinee.

The big problem Breaking Dawn Part II will have will be trying to be exciting, because there isn’t a lot that occurs in the second half of the story that’s worthy of stretching it out to nearly two hours. It’ll be interesting to see what they do with that.

Overall, Breaking Dawn doesn’t really break any new ground in Vampire myths or anything like that. For anyone unfamiliar with the Twilight movies or books, it may feel slow and even a little boring at times. For it’s target audience (readers of the book), it gives them just about everything they wanted.

Poll: Which Films Are You Most Looking Forward To Seeing in December?


Last month, at this time, we asked you which four films you were most looking forward to seeing in the month of November.  The results are in and it appears that October is going to be all about A Dangerous Method, Twilight, Pirahna 3DD, Hugo, Melancholia, and J. Edgar.  Thank you to everyone who voted.

Here’s December’s poll.  As always, you can vote for up to four films and write-ins are accepted.  So, let us know — which films are you looking forward to seeing in December?

Film Review: Red Riding Hood (dir. by Catherine Hardwicke)


My problems with Red Riding Hood are more of a personal nature than anything else. I’m from a family that clashed old world values of women being blindly subserviant to the Man of the House vs. women being fiercely independent and only having a male in their lives to complement things. These elements were my luggage already brought to the table on seeing the film, but it shouldn’t damper one’s opinion on the film. If this review does this, it’s on me personally and not a reflection of the entire Shattered Lens.

Like Alice in Wonderland before it, Red Riding Hood takes the classic fairy tale and expands on it. While it does so, it doesn’t do it by much. What it has going for it is a nice visual style. Colors are vibrant and director Catherine Hardwicke really has an eye when it comes to forest landscapes (just as she did with Twilight). Mists cover the trees and capes billow in the wind, when it’s not concentrating on the town itself (which does look like a soundstage at times). In the end, however, it suffers from the same quasi teenage issues that Twilight had. I yawned a number of times. Granted, I understand that the movie may be targeted to a younger audience (and for them it may very well work), but even my audience groaned a little and they were target individuals.

Red Riding Hood is the story of Valerie (Amanda Seyfried), who lives in a small village that lives in fear of The Wolf, who has been known to sneak in and attack or kill citizens. To appease the wolf, the townspeople keep animals tied outside. As a child, she forms a bond with a young boy named Peter. Time passes, and we find young Valerie bethrothed to Henry (Max Irons) by way of her mother’s plans (played by Virginia Madsen). Peter (Shiloh Fernandez) still has feelings for Valerie, and this all quickly becomes another Bella / Jacob / Edward triangle. It’s not at the start a story of Valerie choosing her own road, but having to hear from everyone around her that this guy should be the one she marries or that one is the right guy for her. To me, personally, the film in the beginning pushes as much of a pro-“I need a man to survive” stance as Battle:LA does a Pro-Marine one. Is this a terrible thing? Not if that’s where your mindset is, no. Every time I saw them mention anything along the lines of hand and feet worship some guy just because “that’s how it is”, I had to remind myself that it’s just the time period the story takes place in (though I’m sure the audience heard me groan at least once). Again, that’s just me.

In the midst of all this, on being asked to run away with Peter, Valerie is alerted to her sister’s death from the wolf. The townfolk make a point of going after the wolf, and decide to head out the cave where they believe the beast lives. They return with proof of a victory and plan to host a party for the deed. The town priest (Lukas Haas, who somehow seems to less here than he did in Inception) reaches out for help in form of Solomon (Gary Oldman). Solomon, arriving with armed guards warns the townsfolk of the evil of werewolves and that he will hunt it down. The next few nights will be Blood Moon nights, meaning that if the wolf bites anyone during that time, they’ll become werewolves as well. The townsfolk, not buying into this, decide to have a wild party with sexy dancing. This results in a visit from the Wolf, who confronts Valerie and telepathically asks her to come away with it, or the town will be razed. It all kind of escalates from there.

Oldman, for his credit, was fun here and slightly over to the top.  Oldman delivers his lines with flair, being far less subdued here than he was in The Book of Eli. For who better to hunt a wolf than Sirius Black himself, right?

And that’s part of the problem I found with Red Riding Hood. With the exception of Seyfried, the supporting cast is actually stronger than the main group of actors the story focuses on. Julie Christie plays Valerie’s grandmother, in a great turn, and as always Billy Burke (Drive Angry, Twilight) is supportive as Valerie’s father. He’s really one of the highlights of the film. As for Henry and Peter’s characters,  the most I could think of with them were the Winchester brothers in Supernatural. They’re eye candy for the girls, though I should note that none of the girls in my audience were excited as they were when I saw The Twilight Saga: New Moon. There were lots of screaming for that one.

What does work is that the movie is reminiscient of The Beast Must Die. It is a mystery of who the wolf actually is, and both Valerie and the audience are given clues. That I actually enjoyed, and the third act of the film wasn’t too bad. The action is quick and to the point, but again, it all kind of feels like I could have seen this as a series on the CW. There wasn’t as much of a worry about who would fall at the hands of the wolf or what dangers would face Valerie so much as they actually looked cool when it occurred. Easily a Netflix pick.

Vampires vs. Zombies…who would win?


So, we finally have hit the goal of 500th post for the site’s first year.

I had thought to commemorate this achievement by writing up a film review or maybe one of the other writers post something appropriate, but I thought what better way to do this than post something about zombies.

Zombies have been big again of late. The recent premiere season of the TV adaptation of The Walking Dead and the continuation of the original comic book series it’s based on. The TV series’ success has brought the topic of zombies back to the forefront with fans and non-fans sharing a common appreciation for this horror sub-genre which has remained the dirty, stepchild cousin to the more glamorous and fantasy-fulfilling monsters calling themselves vampires.

Vampires have been in the general public’s consciousness due to the popularity of the Twilight book and film series not to mention the TV shows True Blood and The Vampire Diaries. These three franchises have made the vampires sexy and popular once again. While they’re not the silk and lace types popularized by author Anne Rice during the 80’s they still portray the vampires as dangerous, but also conflicted and over-emotional creatures who curse their lot as much as embrace it.

Zombies on the other hand have began their inevitable decline after the market was flooded by legion of sub-par books and films. For every Dawn of the Dead (remake) and Shaun of the Dead we got stuff like Day of the Dead (remake) and direct-to-DVD titles such as Zombie Wars and Last Rites. But thanks to the Robert Kirkman’s critically-acclaimed and very popular zombie comic book series and it’s subsequent TV adaptation by showrunner Frank Darabont the zombies have had a major resurgence that brought the question of which was better: zombies or vampires.

These two monsters have their histories both in entertainment and in folklore. The vampire legend and myth could trace itself back to the beginning of human history as early human civilizations always had in their stories and own legends creatures risen from the grave to drink the lifeblood of those still living. There’s Lilith of the Judeo-Christian faiths who some attribute to being the mother of all vampires. There’s also Cain himself who many thought was the progenitor of the original vampire myth. Every major religion both past and present have had their version of the vampire, but while they’ve remained as stories told to warn children of the dangers of the night they were never truly told as part of entertainment. Only in the past hundred or so years have vampires begun to make their mark on the realm of entertainment.

Zombies on the other hand have always been the younger sibling. It’s history has it’s basis on local religious folklore from African slaves brought over to work the plantations of Imperial colonies in the West. The zombies of these West Indies folklore were not the flesh-eating creatures we now know, but just another form of slavery. The flesh-eating aspect of the zombies would not make it’s appearance until a filmmaker from Pittsburgh decided to make his recently risen dead to become flesh-eaters. Night of the Living Dead gave birth to the zombies that’s turned legions of readers and monster aficionados into fans of the monster. A monster who wasn’t as strong or as sexy as the vampire, but much scarier and quite more apocalyptic in its nature. It’s this apocalyptic aspect of the zombie monster which keeps this younger monster from becoming fully eclipsed by it’s more older sibling the vampire.

Now, a question was brought up by the websites Zombie Ammo and Vampybit.Me about the topic on vampires and zombies. With the current popularity of these two monsters there was bound to be a debate on who would win in a match-up between the two monsters for domination of the world.

In one corner we have vampires who retain their intellect and have increased all their senses and even given supernatural abilities. They also remain living dead who need the blood of the living to survive with their faculties intact. No blood means having to waste away into a sort of limbo where death doesn’t truly come but also living death becomes a paralyzing curse only to be lifted with infusion of this life giving blood.

In the other corner we have zombies who are literally mindless with only the primal instinct to feed the only motivation for their existence. But feed on living flesh they must and their hunger has no limit. Their literally a locust on a global scale which would scour the planet of all living things. It doesn’t matter whether the flesh is human or animal but it has to be the warm, living flesh that feeds them. In the end, zombies would become the extinction-level event for humanity.

So, who would win in such a battle for domination.

Vampires need humans. While their appetites ultimately kills their human victims they do try to keep their feeding in moderation. While there are stories and films that paints a world where vampires rule the planet openly they still maintain slave-colonies and/or human farms where they allow their human cattle to breed and multiply thus  their food source remains constant. Human extinction is not what vampires want, but control of humanity instead. Controlling their food and harvesting them in an efficient manner. Only a select few would be turned into vampires. Humans who are willing to serve their undead lords would protect them during the daytime and become Renfield overseers over those humans who do not feel the same.

Zombies on the other hand do not care whether their appetites have been sated by a recent feeding. They will continue to feed as long as a living human and/or animal is in their reach. They would gorge themselves to the infinite for that’s what their instinct drives them to do. Human won’t be able to reason or subjugate themselves upon these monsters. These monsters do not have the wherewithal to ration their food source. The fact that death itself (any death whether through zombie, accident or natural) would just add to their geometrically increasing numbers.

How can humanity find a way to stave off extinction in the face of such a surge of death?

The answer to that is the answer to who would win between vampires and zombies. An answer that some may not agree with (being a zombie fan I’m actually surprised I came to this conclusion), but is the correct one when the question was logically looked at.

Vampires would win over zombies.

I say this because despite the vampires having lesser numbers they would have the intellect and know-how to defeat the legions of walking dead. They do this not out of the goodness of their unbeating hearts, but out of necessity. A necessity that ties their existence with the continued existence of humanity. A humanity that becomes extinct due to a zombie apocalypse would inexorably lead to the very downfall of the vampires themselves.

Vampires on skill alone would be able to destroy any zombies they come across. The fact that their flesh are cold and they’re not living makes them invisible to the zombies. They don’t want to feed on dead flesh because if they did then they would turn on each other instead. This aspect of the vampire keeps them upright and ready to fight.

With their food source endangered by this upstart monster the vampire would have no choice but to protect this valuable resource. As we’ve seen with the more popular types of vampire stories and film it is that vampires are small in numbers, global and ruled over by a council of elders who governed clans of vampires. They impose rule of vampiric law to make sure that their kind remain secret from the world at-large and/or keep their numbers down to better keep the vampiric plague from becoming a wildfire that would scour the planet of life.

It would be up to these governing bodies of vampires to make sure humanity doesn’t succumb to any form of zombie apocalypse. The level of survival for humanity from such an apocalypse will depend on how quickly vampires marshall their meager, but powerfu forces to stave off the inevitable tide of walking dead. They could respond right away and stop the tide before it becomes a global pandemic or their response would be slow and bring humanity to the brink.

In the end, vampires would do whatever it takes to keep humanity from joining the likes of the dinosaurs and mammoth. Whether it’s using their own supernatural-given abilities to destroy zombies by the score and hundreds. Or they could reveal themselves to humanity as vampiric saviors and giving them a choice: become extinct by way of an unchecked zombie apocalypse or allowed to be ruled by a vampiric elite who would protect them from this tide.

It’s a lousy choice for humanity, but one that I think they would choose for the latter (until they find a way to defeat both and keep themselves whole). The prospect extinction is a powerful motivator for a species and choosing to continue one’s species even under the rule of a parasitic race is a better choice than dying out under the teeth and clawed nails of the walking dead.

As you can tell I’m a huge fan of both (though I lean more towards zombies) and have thought about this topic on more than one occasion. This site has seen many posts about zombies though not enough about vampires which would need to be remedied. There’s the ongoing reviews of The Walking Dead in both it’s comic book and TV series form. There was also the reviews of this past summer’s anime series hit which also dealt with the zombie apocalypse but with a level of T&A involved to spice things up a bit. I speak of Highschool of the Dead.

Feel free to leave comments about what you think the conclusion I arrived at. Who do you think will win out between vampires and zombies? Which of the two do you like to read and watch more of? If there was a zombie apocalypse would you try to survive on your own or submit yourself to a vampiric protector and hope they don’t run out of their own supply of blood?

Red Riding Hood Trailer


I went to see Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part One earlier today and, before the film started, I saw the trailer for the upcoming Red Riding Hood.  The trailer itself gives off a definite Twilight vibe, which isn’t surprising since both films were directed by Catherine Hardwicke and, regardless of what we may think of them, the Twilight films have made a lot of money.  So, it makes sense that the trailer would be designed to bring in as many Twilight fans as possible…

Still, I’m looking forward (though admittedly, with a certain amount of caution) to Red Riding Hood.  Why?  Well, first off, Gary Oldman’s in it and Gary Oldman would have made Twilight a lot better as well.  Plus, both of the leads are pretty to look at.  (And, it should be noted, if Amanda Seyfried could give a good performance in a terrible film like Chloe than she can probably give a good performance in anything.)  And finally — Catherine Hardwicke made her debut with Thirteen back in 2003 and I love that film so much that I can even forgive her for a hundred Twilights.

Anyway, here’s the trailer.