Reviews

...if you do you'll be selling yourself short. But it might help if you read the book first. So you can appreciate both more.

First of all, get the whole Twilight comparison out of your head. This story is much better and so was the writing. I didn't even remember about Twilight as I was watching this movie.

Yes, it was slow at times. What a relief to get away from the non-stop over-the-top violence of today's films. The Host gives us very different storyline, an interesting concept, and because of its very calmness, I literally jumped in my seat when sudden things happened.

The acting was, for the most part, very good, especially the concept of having two people in one body, and even though the story was rushed time wise, and more character development would have been nice, you really do begin to understand what is going on inside everyone's heads.

Yes, there were things that could have been done better. If you haven't seen the movie yet, don't read the rest of this paragraph!!!!! I was certainly confused by the (spoiler alert!!!!!!) sudden change in Ian towards Wanderer. And there was one critical scene that I was looking forward to that never happened (and I haven't been able to check in the book to see if it was there because I believe that my daughter stole my copy and brought it to college with her) and that is (Another Spoiler Alert!!!!!): would have love to have seen the moment when Melanie woke up, not just skipping to Wanderer's reawakening.

No, the Host isn't high art. It is just a low-key interesting movie shot in a breath-taking setting that also looks at things from a very different point of view. A very entertaining, thought-provoking and worth-while outing.

And Max Irons is hot. I'm probably too old to say that. I should probably be looking at William Hurt instead, but no. Max Irons is really hot.

Jeezum, folks, lighten up! The books aren't all that great, yet they are captivating, and the same goes for the movies. The Twilight series is just supposed to be fun entertainment....

If you haven't read the books, you have no right judging the movies. And if you have read the books, you cannot deny that they did a great job trying to stick to the book for the second film, and that blew me away. So if you hate the movie, then you must hate the book, which makes me wonder why you bothered to see the movie.

I've seen New Moon twice. Never expected that. I originally went just because a bunch of friends were going. I am not a huge fan of the Twilight books....don't love the writing, found them very slow and repetitive,and at times plain annoying. But going to see the films with friends and my kids and their friends has been a blast....we don't expect to see great art. We expect to see an interesting romp that includes hot guys running around in jeans shorts and no shirts. Call us shallow, but man we are having fun.

Who cares if there are parts that are stupid, if sometimes the acting is not all that great. Overall, New Moon is worth the experience, if you are open to just relaxing and enjoying.

*Spoilers Ahead, not that it really matters*

Stupid, unoriginal,boring.

My husband and I used to have this silly ongoing argument about whether cows had horns.....now we have to argue whether bulls have udders.....

Anybody who vouches that it's just animation, and it doesn't matter that the lead males had udders is just in a case of denial. Yes, they are walking, talking and humanized, and we accept that, but the gender thing is just plain wrong. There is absolutely NO reason why the males could not have been bulls, and it disturbs me to think that out of the hundreds of people who worked on this film, not one of them spoke up to say that there was something wrong. Even the tests audiences should have gotten it across to the producers.

The fact that the leads repeatedly refer to "being a man" and all that crap just emphasized how stupid it was that they had udders. And when the baby calf was born (and how corny was that....the cow was lying on her back to give birth) with the udders, I found myself praying that they would announce it was a girl, and I just groaned when it turned out out to be a boy.......I had to re-educate my six-year-old about cow gender when we left the theater.

And on top of this blatant ignorance, the story was totally ripping off the Lion King (as soon as the dad and son talked under the stars, I knew that the dad was dead....and the son would blame himself). Miles the violent donkey (not a horse!) was an absolute visual rip-off of Shrek's wonderful "Donkey", and it horrified me when he kept on kicking in the farmer's head just because the animals were stupid enough to let him stumble in on them while they were out of character....

One or two scenes made us laugh, especially our six-year-old son.....the surfing, the motorcycles, the chase in the car. The stereotyping of the neighbor farmer and his wife, and the disgusting, horrible red-headed boy really bothered me (and the way he treated his parents....oh, what a wonderful thing for kids to see....), and the racial stereotyping also was annoying....as well as the partying references. The farmer's wife even refers to a rave, and the pizza guys are obviously spaced out....and, I'm sorry, but cows drinking cow's milk as if they were getting drunk on it was bizarre....and they were DRIVING for gosh sakes....THERE'S a message for the kiddies!!!!

Oh, and to top it off, the animation of the animals and people is flat and boring, although I have to admit that the landscapes themselves were absolutely gorgeous.

But really...don't bother. How so much money can be spent on such crap, I'll never understand. I've already told my kids that we will never buy it, and there was absolutely no argument about that!

Slow, boring, stupid plot, unrealistic, terrible acting, lifeless characters, awful editing. I was begging it to end by the time it reached what I thought were the final scenes.

Its great to have what some think are "wholesome" films to watch, but this isn't wholesome, its cheesy and fake, and there are a few very non-wholesome moments that made me want to absolutely cringe. I had to worry about my 12 year old dying of boredom, and my 8 year old being exposed to some moments that were most definitely not aimed at her age group.

Did somebody in another review actually say that Kevin Costner was the president? That level of observance is about what this movie deserves.

So, it wasn't too bad. The kids, 4, 7 and 11, loved it. It was a bit jumpy and confusing, but we got some laughs out of it and the kids left smiling. That's pretty much the goal of going to a Disney film anyhow, even though it reminded me more of Warner Bros. and Looney Toons. And its not so terrible for Disney to try something different. It just takes some getting used to. Frankly, I just forgot that it was Disney and watched the show.

But nobody has mentioned the violence. Just like Looney Toons cartoons that we grew up on, this movie was so full of violent acts that I lost count early on. It disturbs me to see cartoon characters suffer such debilitating injuries and the next thing you see they have completely recovered and carry on. What kind of message does this send the kids? "Go ahead and jump off that cliff, you'll walk away"....."Isn't it funny how that man's teeth are falling out of his mouth....."

But if you don't mind Looney Toon violence, the rest of the movie is OK. Hokey, but it's supposed to be. We, the adults, did wish there had been a bit more character development, especially around Pearl, the owner of Little Patch of Heaven, and Buck, the ridiculously macho horse. Loved the voice of the Buffalo and agree that the horse that Buck encouraged to run away was also a great voice. Liked the music too, although it was a bit overwhelming at times.

So enjoy, and remember: its for the kids, not you.