Monday, November 23, 2009

Mooning Over "New Moon"

Has your teenager seen "New Moon" yet? If not, I suggest the two of you go together. My teenager saw it twice this past weekend. She went to the midnight premiere Thursday night (I mean, Friday morning!) I wasn't real happy about that, as she kind of blindsided me.

A month ago, she asked me if she could go to the midnight showing on Friday. I thought, "Sounds stupid to stay up that late for a movie she'll be able to see at an afternoon matinee anytime for the next two months. But sure, why not? Might be a fun outing with her friends on a Friday night."

Welllllllll . . . . . little did I know that when she said "midnight pemiere on Friday," she really meant midnight on THURSDAY night, going into Friday morning. I almost didn't let her go since that was a school night and she had a chemistry test the next morning. I mean, how ill-conceived is that, for movie marketers to plan a midnight premiere of the hottest teen saga EVER on a school night when most kids with rational parents probably wouldn't be able to go, anyway?!

Apparently, there are quite a few irrational parents out there -- including me -- because the theaters were PACKED by 10:30 p.m. with eager teenagers -- mostly girls -- waiting in line outside in 40-degree temps to snag a decent seat.

She got home by 2:30, and of course I laid awake until I heard her come in. She practically fell asleep in her oatmeal four hours later, but she claimed it was worth it. (BTW, I'm still awaiting the results from her chemistry test. I'm scared.)

On Sunday, I took my 12-year-old to see "New Moon" with her friend, and surprisingly, my teenager said she wanted to see it again. We sat next to each other, and the first time Taylor Lautner appeared on screen without his shirt, I understood COMPLETELY why she wanted to see it again. WOWZA!! Why didn't they make teenaged boys like that when I was a teenager? Back then, a six-pack was nothing more than a few cans of your favorite soda.

After taking in as much of Taylor's half-nudity that I could legally handle as an adult woman, I glanced sideways at my teenager at the same time that she looked sidways at me, and both our jaws dropped simultaneously.

For a split second, we forgot our respective roles, and this mother and daughter were simply two women in full appreciation and awe of one of God's most beautiful creatures.


Jouda Mann said...

Vampires don't sparkle, and they never have. They can't go into the daylight. And let's be honest: he's how old? and he's STILL cruising the high schools for chicks? How stupid is he to still be in High school? Or if he really IS smart, how farking CREEPY is it that he's still picking up high school chicks?
Isn't the whole thing a high school testosterone fueled "I don't like him because he likes you" pissing contest? I mean, very figuratively, aren't they just metaphorically whipping it out, pissing on her, and telling the other "she belongs to me"?
But have no fear, Lynn. I know that you don't really watch for the character development. It's a meat market film for you. With Taylor anyway. I think you'll agree with me that Robert Pattinson needs a shower.

Lynn said...


You sure know a lot about a film for which you are so disdainful! Come on, admit it . . . you've seen it too, haven't you? No, I'm not an adoring fan of the whole "Twilight" saga. But as a writer, I do appreciate the creativity and imagination behind the storyline. Vampires aren't real, but the magic of these books and films is that they make you believe that vampires are real. I can appreciate that.

Quite frankly, Belle drives me nuts. I don't think I've ever seen her smile. She always looks so scared and frail. How can so many guys be in love with her when she is such a downer to be around all the time?

And while I thought Robert Pattinson was sexy in the last movie, he wasn't this time. Yes, he needed a shower. But I think the super-hotness of Taylor Lautner completely eclipsed (I just made a moon pun, get it?) whatever sex appeal Pattinson had to bring to the party.

Jouda Mann said...

Of course I know about a film that two teenage girls would go to. Have I seen it? Absolutely not, nor would I, without a flask of scotch with which to spike my concession stand drink. Either that, or I would break my decade long dry streak, and smoke a hefty bowl before I went.
And honestly, I would only go so that I could see Dakota Fanning's drama chops. I feel that as long as she doesn't go the way of Drew Barrymore in her teens, we can expect to have some REAL acting for a long time. Also, she and my older daughter are very similar looking, so there's a vicarious thrill there, as though it were my own daughter playing a dramatic part in an incredibly stupid movie.
I agree with you that poor Kristen Stewart is very wooden, and she has been that way in all her films, from the most recent "Adventureland" to her breakout role in "The Panic Room". She only has two expressions; scared/frail, and bored. Definitely not crush worthy, in my mind, because I fear that if in the World of Make Believe I ever WERE to get that, it would be just embarrassing, and I don't think I would have the strength to pull all her puppet strings just to get her to move her ass.
I'm perfectly comfortable in my heterosexuality saying that I can see how Taylor Lautner is crush worthy. But I think he got so crush worthy by way of Photoshop. Not like Matthew McConaughey in "Reign of Fire". He actually worked to get those abs, and the transformation from displaced surfer boy to rogue sergeant is remarkable.
And yes, I understand that the creep factor of centuries-old vampires dating high school girls didn't start with the "Twilight" Saga. There was Buffy/Angel before that, and plenty of other worldly man/ innocent girl-woman iterations even farther back in the history of film and television.
But the SPARKLING!? Ugh, call me when a good zombie movie comes out.

Lynn said...


Thanks for the nice, long, very entertaining response! I have a few moments before I'm off to a BBQ. Yeah, two days after Thanksgiving and I'm STILL eating!

I just wanted to let you know that you're not missing anything in terms of Dakota Fanning's "acting chops." She was in the movie all of four minutes, max. Weird casting for her. She's such a great little actress, she deserved a lot more than that itty-bitty part. Your daughter really looks like her? Maybe you could farm her out as a body double or something.

Your comment about making Kristen Stewart's ass move with puppet strings made me laugh out loud. Dude, you need to start a blog of your own. You'd have a million followers in a week -- besides the Farkers, and including me.

Your creative hilarity is unmatched! And as much as I hate to admit it, this blog is not giving you the exposure you deserve.

But don't go away. It's nice to know that at least SOMEONE is reading my crap!

Anonymous said...

Lynn & Jouda, I've enjoyed reading this discussion's full of awesome.

My issue with the hype over the movie Twilight (and the series, for that matter) is best expressed in one picture.

Jouda Mann said...

@ sheasmith:
Agreed and well said!
Just how appropriate would it be if there were a gaggle of 40 year old men hanging around the set of Hannah Montana screaming and carrying on?
I know, there already is such a crowd, but what if they were all straight?

Lynn said...


I just noticed your comment. That's one of my biggest problems with my blogs is that I don't often go back and check for responses. A belated "Welcome!" to you. Feel free to drop in anytime. And thanks for sharing that picture. If any of those Twilight-crazed women are married, their husbands need to get off the golf course and pay them some attention!