Buy Stuff

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Twilight Cometh









This may mean that I'm a bad gay, but I'm not completely on-board with the upcoming film adaptation of Twilight. I know that a lot of people are really looking forward to it, and I'm sure it will make a boatload of money, but I honestly can't get very excited about it. Part of my reticence may have something to do with Robert Pattinson. I don't recall being blown away by his performance in Goblet of Fire, and although he can look very presentable at times, he often looks like something the cat dragged in. Plus, the trailer was so cheesy. It looked like something made for the Sci-Fi channel, and believe me, that's no compliment.

On the other hand, there promises to be quite a bit of male pulchritude on display, including Taylor "Sharkboy" Lautner, Cam Gigandet, Michael Welch and Kellan Lutz. So, there's that.

9 comments:

jaymcfly said...

I do agree with you about Rupert , I cant see why he was cast in the lead really . Given that There are so many guys that could have done a great job - Action Alex for one . ( although i did read that rupert during tests have great 'chemistry' with kirsten .)

A lot of people commented on the quality of the fx in the trailer too . So although I'll watch the film for what i know will be a oscar tipped performance by Taylor ,
I do have a lot of doubts really .

All these vamp films make me think of that camp classic 'the covenant' with steven straight. i liked that one very much .

Mike Ellis, The Jolly Reprobate said...

I'm glad I'm not the only person not attracted to Robert Pattinson. To me, he ranges from boring to homely. When he was cast as Cedric Diggory, I was really disappointed, wanting a handsome actor for a handsome character.

Jimmy said...

Perhaps it's Robert's masculinity that turns you off. Not quite the nubile, only just post-pubescent man/boy, I just got my driver's license , you typically drool over.

Vera said...

Nope, That's not it. In any case, I don't think he seems particularly masculine. I just don't think he's very handsome.

But, that's not what you mean, is it? Your real purpose here is to try and shame me and my readers for liking what we like. No doubt our taste is different from yours and that's not acceptable to you. Well, that's not going to work, my friend, but you have a great future with the Republican party.

Jimmy said...

Methinks she doth protest too much.

I like chicken as much as the next chicken-lover. Certainly, this is the place to find it. Man does not live by chicken alone. I'm just sayin'.

Vera said...

Read it again- I didn't protest at all. I am very happy to say and it is very obvious to see that I go for the twinks. Why would I would never deny it? I do, however, think your tone is judgmental and accusatory. Am I wrong?

Jimmy said...

If my observation of your taste seems judgmental, it is because I am always struck by one-dimensional takes on what is to be appreciated in terms of the male form.

It's neither here nor there. It seems clear that a classically handsome guy capable of growing facial hair is not your cup of tea.

Vera said...

"It seems clear that a classically handsome guy capable of growing facial hair is not your cup of tea."

Really? Did you even look at the post that you are commenting on?

Jimmy said...

Silly me. How could I miss such a manifestation of manliness?

He probably worked months on that.