I didn't want to see this film because the previous one was lacking in... well... everything. But girlfriend wanted to see it. I went in and was instantly surprised to see the demographic had widened past 12-16 year old girls who instantly swoon at any even remotely hot guy so that was interesting. It's not relevant to how good the film was- it just reaffirmed to me (and should to all of you) that hating a series on principle or having preconceived notions of how bad something will be is unfair on it.

Not in this case. It was still bad. BUT worth the money I payed to see it because though it most definitely not intended to be entertaining in the way I found it. It was full of melodramatic dialogue and bad acting which, if you take ANY Drama classes at school- Which Robert DIDN'T- you'll notice certain things about how people deliver lines. You notice how they're SAYING lines they have memorised with unnatural and stylised emphasis on the key words in the sentences without giving the (cheesy) dialogue depth or realism. Quite simply, it was so terrible I found myself resisting the urge to burst out laughing in a room full of fans who were probably misinterpreting the melodrama as "Good, emotional drama." No. This film is ridiculous.

As it goes further on it gets less tightly stitched together and I had to become reliant on my knowledge of the books to fill in and pick up the slight gaps in dialogue and plot. They would say things that are based on something that didn't happen on screen (probably deleted scene for time) or their dialogue would just be terrible unrealistic lines that are work as standalone ones for a trailer but in conversation it seems like they're jumping slightly just to get to say something that is dramatic without it actually making too much sense.

BUT! It does have SOME redeeming qualities! The melodrama wasn't nonstop hilarity so thankfully something else held my attention. There was actual effort put into this film. The fight scenes actually used REAL special effects (something the first film was a bit cheap on) which actually looked kinda impressive. Any action was short lived unfortunately but what little there was, they did a reasonable job with.

I was impressed at the presence of transition. The previous film jumped and skipped and the next plot point just WAS without having been caused. This film (until near the end, of course) actually had a pace and a coherency to it that allows you to understand it without reading the books. This is a bonus. Certain things you'd think would drag on as the director tries to give you time to let the "emotion" "sink in" thankfully didn't take forever and the entire movie fit almost snuggly into its 2 hour length. Too bad it fell apart more and more it went along.

The film also shares the semi-awkward character interactions that create the same humour as the first one. Not as deliberately funny as the first one (though, as I said, it was pretty hilarious when it wasn't meant to be) though.

Though it was many failings with only a few things to back it up as being a reasonable film it will definitely make all you little teenage girls out there desperate to see Jacob's hell tanked up body very happy. You can HEAR the audience's reaction the first time Jacob takes his shirt off. He's got all you need: Pecs, biceps, ABS OF STEEL and minimal clothing. Too bad he lacks depth and real character. (Girls love obsessively devoted Zombies, they don't think enough to complain) It is NO WAY even NEAR one of the best films of 2009. NO ONE should say this ridiculous claim.

Really tossing up between 3 and 4 stars. Mmm. I guess a movie's highlight shouldn't be how low it sinks. 3.

Okay first off if you are looking for gore,blood,violence etc.Twilight New Moon is not the movie for you.From reading comments from 100's of people they think it made vampires look lame.But if you are into romance then this is the movie for you.

Hey I'm a guy and I thought this movie was great,I read all the books so I love how the movie goes right with the book.It may satisfy hardcore fans of the series, but outsiders are likely to be turned off by its slow pace,relentlessly downcast tone, and excessive length..It's kind of like a fairy tale sad at first then a happy ending overall romance is not my thing but it was a really good movie I was satisfied taking my time to watch it.

Ok first of all i've reed all the books. Don't know if that is good or bad. I know what is going to happen the whole film so, i like watching it but it was also boring me.I'm glad they changed directors for this film cause you can tell.It does still leave you wanting more!

There's way too much tortured acting going on in The Twilight Saga: New Moon, even for those like me who enjoyed the earlier film.

Picking up where Twilight left off, this film follows moody teenager Bella Swan as she's dumped by her vampire boyfriend Edward Cullen for fear of hurting her. She spends months on end moping in her bedroom, before another boy falls in love with her. But Bella isn't destined to have a normal relationship. Turns out her new guy, the hunky Jacob Black is a werewolf.

What bogs down this second film that's been adapted from Stephenie Meyer's bestselling novels, is the morose nature of Bella and Edward's romance. Robert Pattinson, who became an overnight heartthrob since appearing in Twilight, plays Edward Cullen as a brooding, humorless fellow with almost no personality at all. Doesn't help that Kristen Stewart's Bella is a bland and passive character who remains sullen and self-absorbed throughout the film, pleading Edward to "change her" and then going into some sort of blue funk each time he turns her down.

While the first film and its director Catherine Hardwicke successfully managed to capture the virginal yearning in Bella, New Moon directed by Chris Weitz, only gets the action portions right. The scene in which Jacob (played by Taylor Lautner) first morphs into a CGI werewolf and leaps onto another of his species is nothing short of stunning, and the same can be said for a musical sequence in which a pack of werewolves chase a female vampire through a thick forest.

But these are small consolations in what is otherwise a painfully long, uniformly boring melodrama with affected performances from each of its three leads.

It's an ordeal to endure mostly for its maudlin, morose tone. I'm going with one-and-a-half out of five for The Twilight Saga: New Moon; it made a ton of money when it was released internationally, but that doesn't make it any good. Watch it entirely at your own risk.

Rating: 1.5 / 5

great movie...loved how they made the warewolfs big wolfs...vice vsa o.d. nasty looking & scary...n with the vampires how the could b in the sun just there skin shines...vice vs they can't go out in the sun because there skin a fry...like all the other vampire movie...loved it over all different ... n really hope the 3rd one dnt let me down...

There's way too much tortured acting going on in The Twilight Saga: New Moon, even for those like me who enjoyed the earlier film.

Picking up where Twilight left off, this film follows moody teenager Bella Swan as she's dumped by her vampire boyfriend Edward Cullen for fear of hurting her. She spends months on end moping in her bedroom, before another boy falls in love with her. But Bella isn't destined to have a normal relationship. Turns out her new guy, the hunky Jacob Black is a werewolf.

What bogs down this second film that's been adapted from Stephenie Meyer's bestselling novels, is the morose nature of Bella and Edward's romance. Robert Pattinson, who became an overnight heartthrob since appearing in Twilight, plays Edward Cullen as a brooding, humorless fellow with almost no personality at all. Doesn't help that Kristen Stewart's Bella is a bland and passive character who remains sullen and self-absorbed throughout the film, pleading Edward to "change her" and then going into some sort of blue funk each time he turns her down.

While the first film and its director Catherine Hardwicke successfully managed to capture the virginal yearning in Bella, New Moon directed by Chris Weitz, only gets the action portions right. The scene in which Jacob (played by Taylor Lautner) first morphs into a CGI werewolf and leaps onto another of his species is nothing short of stunning, and the same can be said for a musical sequence in which a pack of werewolves chase a female vampire through a thick forest.

But these are small consolations in what is otherwise a painfully long, uniformly boring melodrama with affected performances from each of its three leads.

It's an ordeal to endure mostly for its maudlin, morose tone. I'm going with one-and-a-half out of five for The Twilight Saga: New Moon; it made a ton of money when it was released internationally, but that doesn't make it any good. Watch it entirely at your own risk.

Rating: 1.5 / 5

well i love both movies and if you didnt "I" HOPEFULLY
everyone we dont want to read how much they hated it. cant wait for the rest..hope i did not upset anyone...im sure they will get better and better reading the last book now..dont be a haterr

Chris Weitz’s film caters as well as the previous movie did to pale, fantasy-loving teenage girls, while adding a bit more humour for the rest of us.

Depending on your gender, age and Twihard-ness, this good-looking angst party is either a solid Meyer adaptation with quiver-worthy moments of hotness; or a wet, ludicrous, unintentionally-funny pile of steaming bathos.

I really liked this, I dont think it was better than the first however.
Unlike a lot of people who like these movies I have never read the books, so I am just a fan of the movies themselves. I am not so closed minded that I can't stand a different take on vampires, there is nothing wrong with being a bit more creative instead of just following the same old story over and over again.
I dont understand why people get so hung up over them being able to go out in the day to. This is not the first movie to do this; many TV shows have and some Movies too.
About the whole which team your on thing that everyone talks about, well I would pick Edward over Jacob, reason being, because Jacob acts like a animal, he is way too possessive of Bella for my taste, and he is too quick to become violent, like all his Werewolf friends, even the Vamps have more control, and I don't like how he lies to Edward like he did.
I am not impressed by the the angry tough guy thing, Edward only fights to defend Jacob fights mostly for himself and what he wants, which is Bella no doubt. One thing I can't wait til Bella gets turned, that will be cool, I hope they don't end it after that!!
I am sure they could come up with other things to do afterwords.
I found version 10 to be a good one if your willing to wait a long long time for it to buffer.I gave the movie 5 stars. and the version too

Over all very good. Wished it had a little more details from the book but kept to story line. great graphics of the morphing. Can't wait for the next installment. Dakota Fanning made an interesting Vampire....very child like yet evil as the character was written. Hope the next two are just as good over all.

I LOVE THIS MOVIE IT IS AWESOME. AND ROBERT IS SO DAMN HOT. THEY R THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE... LOVE THE VAMPIRES NOT MUCH INTO THE WEREWOLFS BUT JACOB IS PRETTY HOT 2 BUT IT IS TEAM EDWARD 4 LIFE...... I AM A BIG TWILIGHT FAN. 2 BAD 4 ALL U HATERZZ, HATERZZ SUCK.

i would actual like to watch the twlight new moon with good quality and u can see the whole face of the characters and its actual the whole movie as well. Cause really i dont wanna just watch the movie with just there lower body showing and not there upper body.

New Moon, bigger, better in the effects and more vibrant visually and with a better direction, makes it no doubt better than Twilight. Which I feel to say that it was just a low budget film that appealed to a specific part of film fans and cinematography, never the less a blockbuster. Chris Weitz (director) delivers a bigger scale, thriller in part, with decent visuals, something that Catherine Hardwicke failed to do so, in a rather lame from that aspect, Twilight. Melissa Rosenberg, as screenwriter appears to have a better way with English than the book's writer Stephenie Meyer, so her return from Twilight is a plus.

Main characters, Kristen Stewart/Robert Pattinson perform quite well here, although at times there is a lack of emotion, so in my opinion there was nothing compelling in their performance.
Plot and story line were good in the sense that managed to get the attention of the part of the viewers that the film appeals to. I would consider that this film, is one of the few blockbusters (if it will be eventually), that have a romantic and sentimental characteristics and they lack of true intimacy shots.

I wouldn't call it lame or cheesy, but I must say that I expected "something" more, a film that would appeal to all audiences and not just a transfer of the fantasies of an 18 yo teenager.

Twilight isn't really true definition of vampire. But good looks I guess can fool everyone. Yes, I watched Twilight even though I don't like it, but I love vampire movies...but Twilight isn't the true meaning of it. Nor is it for werewolf.
I recall werewolf stands on two and vampires don't glisten in the sun, they BURN!
Besides that, Taylor Lautner, Ashley Greene, and Alex Meraz are sooo hot!
I rate this movie something to watch, but if you're looking for vampire, try Van Helsing, but don't pay attention to the pass the fake accents.