Review: Ronny Yu's 'Fearless'

'Fearless' is about real-life early twentieth century Chinese folk hero and martial artist Huo Yuanjia (Jet Li). The film begins in Yuanjia's childhood, when he practices martial arts, behind his disapproving father's back. It is during this time that he has two pivotal experiences: seeing his renowned martial artist father Huo Endi (Collin Chou), seemingly defeated in a fighting contest and experiencing his own defeat at the hands of Zhao Jian (Shang Yapeng), an obnoxious neighbourhood child, shortly afterwards. He swears that he will never be defeated again. As a man, blindly fuelled by these two experiences, and having acquired impressive martial arts skills, he defeats numerous opponents, eventually acquiring the title "Champion of Tianjin".

After Yuanjia hastily fights and kills Chin (Chen Zhihui), the head of a rival martial arts school, who had severely beaten one of his students Liu Zhensheng (Yi Shixiong), Yuanjia's family is butchered in retaliation. Yuanjia goes on to kill… the butcher (Jacky Heung). When he finds out that the cause of all the bloodshed is trivial -- Liu Zhensheng's having a secret love affair with Chin's wife -- Yuanjia leaves Tianjin, grief-stricken and ashamed. He ends up in picturesque rural China, a place that looks like something out of a fairytale, and it is while there, that he finds healing and returns to Tianjin, to right his wrongs.

'Fearless' was beautifully shot, the cinematography was absolutely stunning. It was a feast for the eyes! I enjoyed the rich, vibrant colours and evocative lighting. Of note are the scenes set in the aforementioned picturesque locale, that Yuanjia ends up in. And the images at the end of the film, of Yuanjia gracefully practicing his art, while a magical light illuminates his face and shoulders, against a stark, dark blue background, lending a 'heavenly' quality to the images. Absolutely stunning.

There were hints of 'The Last Samurai' -- a warrior who has gone off the rails, finds his way back to the light, with the help of a beautiful female with whom he has no sexual relations, in a picturesque, somewhat secluded country setting. And Masato Harada, who played Japanese diplomat Omura in 'The Last Samurai', was present as Mr. Mita, also a Japanese diplomat.

There are three qualities that I look for in a screen fight -- grace, power and clarity. The fights in 'Fearless' had all three. They were a pleasure to watch. Fight choreographer Yuen Woo-ping is like the postman -- he always delivers. Although, there's one fight that takes place on a wooden platform elevated very high up from the ground, that was somewhat dodgy. Parts of the fight didn't transition smoothly into each other, it was jerky, as though some footage had been unskilfully excised. And the fight wasn't quite 'natural', the wire-assisted moves were rather too apparent.

I enjoyed the restrained but impactful interactions between Yuanjia and Moon (Betty Sun), the lady who helps him heal. In some instances, Li and Sun conveyed much without speaking, but merely with the look in their eyes. It was beautiful.

I watched 'True Legend' (2010) before I watched 'Fearless' (2006), and so the advantage of hindsight or is it foresight, or both?… came into play. It seemed to me that 'TL', which debuted several years after 'F', was somewhat a retread or remake of 'F'. I find it interesting that both films were scored by the same composer, the talented Shigeru Umebayashi; Yuen Woo-ping choreographed the fights in 'F' and on 'TL', he directed everything, the fights and all other aspects; the theme of re-igniting Chinese pride by trouncing invading foreigners in the 'ring', runs strong in both films; and the set design, in both films, of the area where the bouts take place, is similar. And I wonder if Collin Chou, who played Huo Endi, Yuanjia's father in 'Fearless', is related to Jay Chou, who portrayed the 'god of wushu' in 'True Legend'. If 'True Legend' was intended as a remake of 'Fearless', then the former wins, hands down!

'Fearless' isn't the best entry in its genre, but it's definitely worth a look.

Jiéshù

(Images: blu-ray.com)

The Dark Knight Rises: Second Impressions

The first time I watched ‘The Dark Knight Rises’, it blew me away. But on watching it for the second time, it didn’t appeal to me as much. I found it far less enjoyable. Was I in a ‘Hollywood-marketing-machine-induced’ euphoria when I watched it the first time? Was the euphoria of my own making? I’m not certain.

The unintelligibly edited hand-to-hand fights, that had held a sliver of appeal for me before, didn’t appeal to me at all, this time. Perhaps Nolan and crew should have hired master fight choreographer Yuen Woo-ping (The Matrix, Fearless, True Legend; Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon etc.) and asked him to tone down the awe-inspiring, gravity-defying moves that characterise a great deal of his work! I’m certain that master Yuen, even with his wings clipped to suit Nolan’s ‘realistic’ style, would have done a superb job.

The sound effects and score seemed to drown out the dialogue. Was it a result of poor sound-mixing on the part of the filmmakers? Was it the theatre’s sound system that was faulty? Was it my ears? I don’t know. Although, I doubt very much that it was my ears – they are still in fairly good condition you see. The other two are more probable.

I still don’t know how Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) had what seemed to be close ties to Bane (Tom Hardy) or how she knew so much about him. I know that the answers lie in the film’s dialogue – if only so much of it wasn’t so difficult to hear!

The epic scale of ‘The Dark Knight Rises’, demands that one be in awe of this film. Its scale is epic indeed; a marvel. One example is the huge vehicular chase involving Batman as the pursued and almost all of the Gotham Police Department as pursuers.  But I’m currently of the mind that there isn’t that much mass/substance to this colossus of a film. Ah, the epic proportions of this film, the spectacle of it.

In some instances, the film – the moving images – relied too much on the score, to generate excitement, to the point that the score overshadowed the images. The score made grand promises of excitement while the images failed to deliver. An example is when ‘The Bat’ flies the ‘nuclear bomb’ out of Gotham so that the ‘bomb’ detonates out at sea. The music in this sequence is grandiose, but what’s happening on screen isn’t grandiose.

It’s annoying to watch a film that was partly shot on IMAX film and be unable to see, fully, the grandeur of the IMAX shots, because you’re watching the standard-sized print, on a standard-sized screen. Such was the case with ‘The Dark Knight Rises’.

The theatre screen wasn’t large enough to accommodate the whole film image. The film image exceeded the boundaries of the screen, such that part of it could be seen on the area around the screen. That was very annoying. Are movies nowadays being shot in a wider aspect ratio than before? Is it because ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ was shot on a variety of film stock sizes – IMAX, 35mm and I-don’t-quite-remember-what-else. Did the projectionist not know what he was doing? I don’t know.

I don’t think that this film would have been any less enjoyable without Talia al Ghul (Marion Cotillard), Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) and Robin John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). These characters felt a little tacked on. I felt that their presence wasn’t integral to the story. It was as though they had been added at the last minute, when the filmmakers felt that there weren’t enough characters to keep the audience interested. ‘Batman’ films have always been an ensemble piece, after all.

The idea of a prison with a shaft leading up to the surface seemed rather too implausible this time. So were the prisoners chanting the phrase “deshi basara” and a TV installed in prison, especially for Bruce Wayne to witness the destruction of Gotham.

Jodhpur, India, which was chosen to represent the landscape outside the prison, because of its ‘desolate look’, didn’t look foreboding to me at all. Instead, it looked beautiful. The rustic colours were absolutely majestic. 

The Dark Knight Rises: First Impressions

So I watched Christopher Nolan’s cinematic tour de force ‘The Dark Knight Rises’, on the afternoon of 17 August 2012. It was my first visit to the cinema in South Africa. I was expecting the facilities – the actual screening room -- to be far more technologically advanced than what’s available back home, in Zimbabwe, but that wasn’t the case. It was the same, at least in terms of theatre size, screen size and screen structure/mechanics.

A tiny portion of the screen seemed to have been singed off by a naughty patron. During the showing, the picture was slightly out of focus and the sound wasn’t 100% clear. It was slightly ‘muffled’, making it hard to hear the dialogue. The audio output wasn’t ‘multi-channel’ or ‘surround’, it was stereo. Granted not all theatres are equipped with multi-channel audio. And this was one theatre within a multiplex and one branch within the Ster-Kinekor chain. This is hardly reflective of all the cinemas in South Africa, Ster-Kinekor or otherwise. It’s just that I was expecting a gigantic screen; a super-sharp, bright picture and super-clear, multi-channel sound – a top notch experience. This was Ster-kinekor, after all. The seat was the most comfortable cinema seat I’ve sat in thus far, though.

Anyway, the result of the poor sound, was my missing (verbal) narrative points that would have enhanced my understanding of the story and therefore my enjoyment of the film. I could be wrong but, I don’t think that the problem was the particular print or reels, that we were watching, but the playback system – the film projector and related equipment. It’s a little over a month (at time of writing) since ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ had its global theatrical debut, so it’s too soon for the reels to have worn out. Isn’t it, dear reader? Oh! Another thing, the end credits were cut short. I hate that. There are many interesting things that one can discover from watching the end credits roll.

Enough of that.

I am supposed to put forth a synopsis of the film here, but that seems rather redundant, therefore I shall not. Actually, what interests me most about writing film reviews is sharing my thoughts, so I’ll use artistic licence and skip the synopsis.

Hans Zimmer’s score was impressive, as expected. It was dark, epic and immensely beautiful. It added a great deal of impact to the visuals. The dialogue – that which I managed to catch – was good. It was appealingly dense – chockfull of references to past events -- and in some moments insightful, philosophical, thought-provoking, funny and witty. The kind of dialogue I like. I am no film expert, but I didn’t find the cinematography particularly striking. Which isn’t to say that it was bad, it’s just… there isn’t a shot that struck me and made me go “wow, that’s beautiful”. (Writer’s introspection: what’s the point of all this writing about movies again?)

Tom Hardy’s Bane was exceptionally good. Bane stood head and shoulders above everyone else, both literally and figuratively, and stole the show. He was genuinely menacing and there was depth to him. He wasn’t a cardboard villain, he had a back-story that was actually kind of moving. Bane’s speech, which was filtered through his mask, was somewhat hard to decipher, and the poor audio made it harder.

I’m noticing that I usually enjoy more and have more to say about the supporting performances than the lead performance. Anne Hathaway’s Selina Kyle/Catwoman, because I couldn’t make out some of the dialogue, I’m certain I missed things that would have led me to appreciate her more. Because I didn’t understand how she knew so much about Bane, how she could saunter in and out of Bane’s lair/hideout, without being harmed, and yet tell the police (I think it was the police) that they should be as fearful of Bane as much as she. Perhaps I’ve become hard of hearing. Hathaway looked spiffy in a cat-suit but I couldn’t quite make out what was going on in hand-to-hand fight sequences involving her. The hand-to-hand fights in this film, I found generally hard to follow. I think it was Editor Lee Smith’s quick cuts. My current stance is that there really wasn’t much meat to Hathaway’s role, dramatically, but I could be singing a different tune in future. We are such fickle creatures we human beings. But seriously, I’m certain I’ll appreciate her more when I watch a visually and aurally pristine copy of this film.

I felt that Christian Bale’s performance was adequate. Bruce Wayne isn’t an awfully emotive man, he plays his cards close to his chest, and Batman is without emotion, automaton-like, which is as it should be. But that’s what makes it difficult for me to gauge Bale’s performance because it was so restrained – internalized. Taken at face value, one would think that Bale didn’t break much of a sweat in portraying Bruce Wayne/Batman, but nothing could be farther from the truth. I wonder though, how much of Bale’s performance as Batman – underneath the face-concealing cowl – was actually his, considering that it was easy for a stunt-double to play most, if not all, of Batman. I’m just wondering. I felt that Gary Oldman’s, Michael Caine’s, Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s, Marion Cotillard’s, Morgan Freeman’s and Cillian Murphy’s performances, as Commissioner James Gordon, Alfred Pennyworth, Robin John Blake, Miranda Tate, Lucius Fox and Jonathan Crane respectively, were adequate too. The scene towards the end of the film, where Alfred (Caine) weeps at the graves of the Wayne family, feeling that he failed Bruce’s parents, felt contrived and overly sentimental. I wasn’t moved.

The scene where Catwoman leads Batman to Bane’s lair, leading to Batman and Bane having their first meeting and physical confrontation, was disturbing. Because of Bane’s then superior fighting prowess, I genuinely feared for Batman’s life. Bruce’s punches, kicks and fancy gadgets had no effect on Bane. And as Selina Kyle looked on regretfully from above, as Bruce was pummeled almost to death, I was moved. There was a real sense of danger… grave danger, in this scene. That’s testament to the power of cinema. When Bruce valiantly persisted in the face of a then unbeatable force, the futility of it made me deeply sad. But what I liked about the ending of this sequence was that, although Bruce was defeated, his body broke before his spirit -- a good sign, some encouraging subtext from the writers. This film was very well written.

I liked the scene where Gordon, in the presence of Blake, laments the restrictive nature of legal structures in the pursuit of justice and describes the events surrounding Harvey Dent’s death. Gordon’s skillful use of words was impressive – something to do with plunging one’s hands into the filth and so on -- bravo!

The special- and visual-effects in this film were well done. It was thrilling to see Bruce and Selina working together to retrieve the stolen fusion core – the ‘batpod’ racing through the deserted streets, while ‘the bat’ whizzed overhead. The fictional mechanics of both contraptions were impressive – especially the unusual way the wheels of the batpod turned when making a sharp turn. And the ‘rider’s view’ shots when either Batman or Catwoman was riding the batpod, were fun. They gave me a sense of the speed and maneuvering of the bike. There’s a scene where Bruce alighted his vehicle to be met with a barrage of reporters’ camera flashes and questions, and promptly disabled the cameras with an unseen device on his person – nice. I wonder what it was, I’m thinking EMP – electromagnetic pulse burst.

Alfred wanted Bruce to leave Gotham, find himself (another) good woman and live a normal life – this struck a chord with me, because I drew parallels… I was also struck by the simplicity of the sans-serif typeface used for the title of the film. It was just blocky and unadorned – uncharacteristic of big-budget comic book adaptations, which usually have elaborately designed titles; with glows, 3D effects and so on – very ‘Nolan’. The ending was reminiscent of Nolan’s ‘Inception’, with the hint that things aren’t quite what they seem; that there’s more to come.

‘The Dark Knight Rises’ is a solid film. It’s so engaging and well executed, that I didn’t feel the long running time of approximately two hours and forty minutes. I felt that it’d all gone by too quickly instead. It’s moving, thought-provoking, disturbing, funny and spectacular. What appealed more to me were the drama and themes explored, than the action. It was an afternoon well spent. That is, despite the aforementioned technical issues.

I walked out of the theatre feeling as though I was Joseph Gordon Levitt’s character, Blake. I like it when I leave the cinema feeling as though I’m one of the characters in the film I‘ve just watched. It’s one of the ways I know that I’ve enjoyed myself. I’ll be revisiting ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ for a long time to come.

Review: "Sunshine"

Our Sun -- the gigantic star that we revolve around, that makes life on Earth possible -- is dying. If it dies, so does Earth. After the first mission (Icarus) to save the Sun fails mysteriously, a second group of individuals, regarded highly in their respective fields, is sent aboard a ship dubbed "Icarus II". It is a perilous journey to the far reaches of space, to attempt once again, to rescucitate the dying star. To achieve this, they must detonate a gigantic nuclear bomb, deep within one of the Sun's craters.


I have never seen a 'mission-in-outer-space' story told quite like this before. The special- and visual-effects were impressive, but it's how the crew of eight related to one another -- the human relationships -- that made this film palpable for me. Though I must say their interactions with the ship's ultra-intelligent computer, Icarus (voiced by Chipo Chung), were interesting.

Having seen Chris Evans (Mace, the engineer) in the first and second "Fantastic Four" films -- which didn't require much of him as an actor, in terms of emotional range; nuance; and subtlety -- before I watched "Sunshine", I didn't think much of him as an actor. I was convinced he lacked emotional range, that he couldn't embody a 'serious' character and elicit an emotional reaction from the viewer. But I was wrong. Chris Evans can act. His stirling turn as Mace was, for me, the highlight of the film. Wow.

Before "Sunshine", I had never seen delectable action star Michelle Yeoh -- whom I and most other people know from "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", "Police Story 3: Super Cop", as a Bond girl in "Tomorrow Never Dies", and so on -- in a film where instead of kicking, punching, leaping and slicing her way from one scene to the next, she had to rely solely on her dramatic acting skills. In "Sunshine" she plays biologist Corazon, and she does it beautifully, without having delivered a single strike to anyone's body.

Cliff Curtis (Searle, the doctor and psychological officer) is one of the best character actors working today. Curtis' Searle is charismatic, adept at selling an idea and making himself heard. Searle commands one's attention when he speaks. My first brush with Curtis was in 1999's "Three Kings", in which he played one of thousands of Iraqis rising up against Saddam's tyranny. He impressed me then and I have no qualms with his performance here.

My first encounter with Hiroyuki Sanada (Kaneda, the captain) was in the epic "The Last Samurai", where he quite beautifully played a Samurai named Ujio -- silent, dedicated, honourable and a warrior par excellence. Sanada's Kaneda seems to be averse to speaking, yet because he has a certain mystery and strong presence, he is able to command the respect of his crew.

Rose Byrne (Cassie, the pilot), I had seen before in a film/TV series whose name I cannot recall. Byrne has some of the most expressive eyes I have ever seen on screen. This, coupled with her soft, delicate features makes her a pleasure to watch as Cassie. Laying eyes on her... eyes, you can't help but be drawn in. Cassie has an emotional and physical, fragility and vulnerability that play havoc with your nerves as you watch her struggle to evade mortal danger, because she's kind of like an egg that you don't want to see shattered.

Cillian Murphy, Benedict Wong, Troy Garity and Mark Strong do an adequate job as Capa the physicist, Trey the navigator, Harvey the communications officer and Pinbacker the insane stowaway captain of Icarus I, respectively.

"Sunshine" is definitely worth a look.

*Retro Review: Nights in Rodanthe

Paul Flanner (Richard Gere) is a surgeon whose life starts to unravel when his wife divorces him and a patient of his has an unexpected fatal reaction to anesthetics and dies on the operating table, while being operated on by Paul. The deceased's husband, Mr. Torrelson (Scott Glenn), files a lawsuit against Paul -- blaming him for his wife's death -- and later writes a letter to Paul, inviting him to his home, so that he may explain what actually took place during the operation and hopefully assuage his pain and give him closure. Paul flies out to the town where the Torrelsons live and while there he stays at a beachside inn that looks like something out of a fairytale. It is here that he meets the equally troubled Adrienne Willis (Diane Lane), who's temporarily in charge of the inn, while its owner, a very close friend, is out of town on vacation. It's just Paul and Adrienne at the inn, since business has markedly decreased, and it is during their stay together that they come to learn each other's problems.

Paul learns that Adrienne is a recent divorcee, that her former husband would like to give it another try and that her children aren't coping with the separation. Adrienne learns that Paul is divorced, is largely absent from his son's life and is tormented by having a patient die under his charge. So Paul and Adrienne, alone in a picturesque house, in a picturesque locale, gradually warm to each other and (spoilers ahead) eventually fall in love, thereby giving each other a new lease on life. And therein lies the story.

There was nothing new about this take on romance, other than that one of the characters dies -- which isn't new per se, just rare. The acting was fair, but Lane's is the only performance that engaged me. When Adrienne tells her daughter of her extraordinary relationship with the recently deceased Paul, Lane's performance is so moving that I actually shed a tear. Gere was adequate. Glenn's salt-and-pepper mop of hair, angular features and steely gaze, lent some weight to his sombre performance. I omitted noting the young and talented actress's name, whose turn as Adrienne's daughter was fairly impressive.

In one scene, Adrienne mentions how her son is always in his own world and how his solitude will produce great things one day. I liked this line because it sounded somewhat like a description of myself. Paul and Adrienne had beautiful costumes -- I wished I had a wardrobe like Paul's and Adrienne's exquisite blues and rustics suited her and blended well with the surroundings. The beautiful score melded well with the picturesque locale and the widescreen photography effectively captured its natural beauty.

All in all, a very paint-by-number film that is, despite this, somewhat appealing. I suppose it deserves at least one viewing, but if one chooses to pass, they won't have missed much, if anything.


*Written about 2 years ago and left to languish in a dusty drawer, until now.

*Retro Review: Journey to the Center of the Earth

Trevor (Brendan Fraser) is a passionate scientist whose funding has been cut, following his unsuccessful research on volcanic and seismic activity. While in Iceland, doggedly following a new lead in his now jeopardised research, with his gadget-loving nephew Sean (Josh Hutcherson) in tow, Trevor, with the help of a gutsy Icelandic mountain guide, Hanna (Anita Briem), makes his way into the mountains to locate an electronic device that records seismic activity. After locating the device, Trevor, Sean and Hanna find shelter from a storm (no pun intended), in a mountain cave. While there, the ground beneath them caves in and they fall down a seemingly bottomless hole that leads to the center of the earth.

This film, which is supposed to be full of adventure, wonder and excitement, unfortunately, is not. Being a 3-D film meant to be viewed with 3-D goggles, perhaps I found it unexciting because I watched the 2-D version. Or maybe my mind is saturated with computer-generated imagery, because I found nothing revolutionary or appealing about the visual effects and animation. I felt like I'd seen it all too many times before. The side stories of a brother losing a brother, an uncle bonding with his nephew and a son losing a father, did not offer anything to sink one's teeth into, because they were poorly told. Fraser's poor acting was especially disappointing, considering that he was the lead. Despite this, I give him credit for making bearable a film without a story, because if it hadn't been for his efforts, almost ineffective though they were, this would have turned out much, much worse.

I found it unfortunate for Andrew Lockington's fine score to be wasted on such banal material. There were moments when this film seemed to be picking up, moments that were almost exciting -- almost -- but they were few and far between, such that they didn't count for anything. I wouldn't recommend this film, not even moderately.


*Written about 2 years ago and left to languish in a dusty drawer, until now.

Review: The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Victoria (Bryce Dallas Howard) wants to avenge the death of her lover, James, at the hands of Edward (Robert Pattinson), by killing Edward's one and only love, Bella (Kristen Stewart). To achieve this, Victoria raises an army of vampires, a savage pack of voracious new bloods. To defeat said army, the Cullens must form an uneasy alliance with Jacob (Taylor Lautner) and the rest of the werewolves.

Overall, the acting was good, but for me, Pattinson's performance took the cake. Being uninitiated, I didn't expect much from Mr. Pattinson, but the man can actually act. He imbues the character of Edward with a great deal of nuance, appeal and likability. One of the scenes that impressed me, is one where Edward, Jacob and Bella are in a tent very high up in the mountains. Bella is about to freeze from the sub-zero temperatures, Edward, being "cold-blooded", can't hold her to keep her warm, so he grudgingly lets the warm-blooded Jacob get under the flimsy covers with the shivering Bella, to keep her warm. With Bella asleep or seemingly asleep, Jacob and Edward get to talking, it is in this conversation about how if certain things were different, perhaps they'd like each other, that the bucket-loads of appeal and nuance that Pattinson gives Edward, are most apparent. Pattinson's performance in this scene is pure magic. To me, anyway.

Claude Debussy's classic piano solo, "Claire de Lune", was used quite nicely in the scene where Bella enters the Cullens' posh abode to spend the night with Edward. It added appeal to the scene. "Claire de Lune" was also used quite nicely in the brilliant "Man on Fire". It's such a beautifully emotional piece of music. Also in this scene, Sia's immensely beautiful song, "My Love", was used to great effect when Edward and Bella are kissing and Edward being the gentleman that he is, politely refuses to go further. Sia's song enhances the beauty and importance of Edward and Bella's relationship. And then there's the score by accomplished composer Howard Shore. Mr. Shore provided the jingles quite effectively. I couldn't help noticing the strong similarities between the score for "Eclipse" and that for "The Lord of the Rings Trilogy", which was also scored by Shore. Did he merely recycle the themes he created for LOTR? I don't know.

The visual effects and animation were well done. There's a scene where Bella is standing next to Jacob in wolf form and there's contact between her and the wolf's fur -- nice. This image of Bella standing next to the abnormally huge wolf, reminded me of Hayao Miyazaki's "Princess Mononoke". An ecological tale, where there are wolves just as large, on whose backs the titular character rides, albeit, not at the same time. And then there were the fights, the gore was tempered, but there was enough to give the fights impact. The editing, choreography and camerawork were impressive -- you could actually see what was taking place.

The dialogue was fairly interesting, Jacob said something interesting about "imprinting" -- something to do with falling deeply in love. I'd quote him if I could remember what he said.

If this film has a fault, it's that it gets a bit monotonous and repetitive to see Jacob and Edward jostling for first place in Bella's heart -- just a tad drawn-out, nothing major. Watching Edward and Jacob fighting over Bella, I couldn't help asking myself, "Do people agonize this much over love in real life?"

"The Twilight Saga: Eclipse" is definitely worth a look.