Monday, January 3, 2011

Six (Or So) Thoughts About A Six (Or So) Part Documentary About Eclipse

I. A making-of documentary should theoretically accomplish two seemingly opposite objectives at once: it should show you how a few minor cinematic feats were accomplished, to make you feel like you could do it (“Oh, that's how they did that!”) but should also give you an idea of what an immense project a feature film really is, to make you feel like you couldn't do it (“Wow, can you believe they did all that?”). One thing it should not do is make you feel like the actual director and producers and everyone involved BARELY pulled it off (“Wow, can you believe THEY did all that?”). Yet in just four minutes or so (while a knock-off version of Arcade Fire's “Rebellion” plays underneath), the first featurette on Disc 2 of Eclipse totally undermined my confidence in the team behind this movie. David Slade talks and gestures like a patient in an insane asylum; it almost looks like he's trying to break up and distort his own words as they leave his mouth to keep you from hearing him.
At one point he mentions directing videos for a band, a job that got him noticed for this gig. “Ten years later they're huge,” he says, “and I'm directing a Twilight movie.” I'm not sure how he intended for that to come out. But no matter how often he uses phrases like “visual alchemy” he doesn't convince me that he knows what he's doing; in my notebook I wrote: “Not movie-making FOR retards, but movie-making BY retards." I'm a little less refined in my notes.
II. The story of the making of Eclipse is a story of missed opportunities. At one point in this section, we get a tour of the Cullen house. We see way more if it than we ever see in the films, and (surprise!) it looks much better than it does in the films. Eclipse uses a lot of close-up shots of actors, which is either because they were going for a certain mood or (more likely) because it's easier to avoid continuity errors that way. So why spend so much money on a set you're never going to see when you should be buying Ashley Greene a better wig? It's deeply ironic that the purpose of these documentaries is to show you how much effort went into building a set for a movie you've already seen and therefore know was squandered. The visual representation of this should be a funnel: a gigantic staff of visual artists doing all kinds of creative work at the top, David Slade using only fractions of it at the bottom. Similarly, a ton of time is spent showing us the fight training all of the actors went through. For what? I can't think of a single image in the film that looks like it required fight training except for maybe this:
and I'm pretty sure Ashley Greene didn't do that herself. The rest of it is running and punching, and you don't need to hire an expensive fight trainer for that! These movies need a stricter accountant.
III. I'm starting to think the only reason this documentary is six parts is because the other DVDs had six-part documentaries too. The “six part” framework is pretty badly imposed on this thing: the runtime of the segments varies wildly, some are four minutes and others are close to twenty. Some stick to a single topic, others have five or six subdivisions. Part three is entitled "The Heart of Eclipse," and focuses first on Bella's "choice." And then on Jasper's backstory. Eclipse has multiple hearts, like an earthworm. We cut between cast members and S. Meyer herself, who offer an oversimplified plot summary of the plot of the book which is still more complex than the film adaptation. Ashley Greene is weirdly burned by the editors of this feature: when discussing Jasper's military career she gets his rank wrong; her clip is sandwiched between two other actors getting in right. What did AG do to piss off the DVD crew?
IV. Quote of the Day: "The Victoria of Eclipse is... a different Victoria." We know. Victoria's plan is called "brilliant," which is kind of stretch. A distinction is drawn between "carnal love" and "true love"; Victoria and Riley have carnal love and not true love, Edward and Bella has true love (and not carnal love, which is a problem no one addresses).
V. That the cast has "established dynamics" after three films together sounds like code for "we've all fucked many times in many combinations," but maybe I'm reading too much into that. In this mixed-bag segment, we see Taylor Lautner's Blue Man Group-like ability to catch grapes in his mouth. He seems like a cool guy. I like throwing grapes! We could totally hang out!
Am I the only one who noticed that there is no pronunciation standard for "Aro"? We get "Arrow" and "AR-oh" in rapid succession. Also: it turns out that during the filming of the fight between Edward and Victoria, Robert Pattinson was making a bunch of weird animal noises. That David Slate cut those sounds out makes me feel like I should have more confidence in him than I do.
VI. Everyone praises the "ravine chase" sequence, which apparently took enough work to warrant half of this segment. And yet the end result is so fucking artificially darkened it might as well be claymation. Once again: the funnel. Meanwhile Taylor Lautner, who had to wear basically Charlie's Green Man suit from It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia, is disappointed by the fact that he didn't get to do any of the stunts. Just like his character: not getting any action. Of course, much like how sleeping will Bella is probably no fun, the action work Peter Facinelli (who is wearing a hat with a blurred out logo like this is MTV Cribs in 1999) and the gang got to do looks like a drag anyway. Running on treadmills and doing cartwheels is basically all I see.
Okay, so I have too much time on my hands.

Did you guys watch this fucking thing? Are you as hardcore as me? Any thoughts?

5 comments:

Kim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kim said...

Is it online? My mother-in-law bought me the single disc version of the movie, so I haven't seen the super extra special features.

Maybe they built up the Cullen's house for use in Breaking Dawn.

Did Riley and Victoria really have any kind of love? I thought she was just faking it to get his help.

ZL said...

Well, they imply that the entire set was taken apart at the end-- they rebuild it every time-- so it can't be for BD. Which is yet another example of wasted resources. You're telling me there isn't a lot they can keep that set on?

Kira said...

Speaking of The Funnel, Rosanne, Lauren and I have discussed a book we all checked out that was kind of a scrapbook and diary that Catherine Hardewick made during preproduction for Twilight. It blew my mind how much work went into making what was a really, really not-so-good movie. It was fun to see, but also I kept thinking that if they had saved money on custom making RobPattz's famous peacoat and just bought it at Gap like everyone else does, and didn't make custom Cullen Family Crest jewelry and shit, maybe everyone's hair and makeup and wardrobe would've looked like they were managed by professionals and not theater production students at the Forks Junior College. (YA BURNT, HAIR, MAKEUP AND COSTUME DEPARTMENT!)

Anonymous said...

I was watching or I should say listening to the special feature on the Twilight DVD and I heard S. Meyers saying something about the deer in the beginning of the movie, and that they went through 3 of them a couple died?? Have to listen to it again to get the exact wording. Did Edward chase them to death and give them heart attacks? I hope not. A little hard to make out what they were saying here and there, I'll come back after I listen to it again with more info unless someone can add anything to this that have watched it. Thanks