RiffTrax Forum
 

Twilight 3:Eclipse

Started by Henry88, August 04, 2009, 04:44:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Henry88

QuoteIn "The Twilight Saga: Eclipse," Bella once again finds herself surrounded by danger as Seattle is ravaged by a string of mysterious killings and a malicious vampire continues her quest for revenge. In the midst of it all, she is forced to choose between her love for Edward and her friendship with Jacob — knowing that her decision has the potential to ignite the ageless struggle between vampire and werewolf. With her graduation quickly approaching, Bella is confronted with the most important decision of her life.


Release Date: June 30, 2010

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=53125
ROBOT CO-OP IS GAMING COMEDY
https://robotco-op.com/

iv3rdawG

Controlled Obsession (My website - Movie, TV, Video Games)

Dim of the Yard

Quote from: iv3rdawG on October 25, 2009, 03:20:42 PM


What the hell is an Ectipse?

... Oh, Eclipse.  My bad.  The sparkles are really throwing me off here.

Relaxing Dragon

I remember when Eclipse used to be a cool word.

Come to think of it, I remember when Twilight used to be a cool word.

RobtheBarbarian

What's Stephanie Meyer going to do when she starts running out of mystical-sounding moon related shit to name her books after?

Twilight: Solar Transit

Twilight: Synchronous Rotation




carlobee

i haven't even read New Moon. ;D but this seems interesting.


Toby Danger

She has to choose between Edward and Jacob?

Umm, didn't she  already do that when she ran off to Italy to stop him killing himself before the Vampire Mafia? That's kind of the big indication she likes him best.

Scrivener

Good grief, can't we even pass the spiky, sulfuric acid-coated kidney-stone that is New Moon before we feel the next sequel jabbing at our innards?

I will say two sorta complimentary things about the producers, much as it pains me.

1.  They can actually produce sequels on an annual, or even more frequent, basis.  I thought that art was lost in Hollywood around the time Sean Connery left the Bond series. (The first five Bond films came out once a year, 1962-1966.)  Harry Potter tried it, but couldn't keep up the pace; The Lord of the Rings fudged it by filming all three movies at once.  For the moment, the Twilight samovies are pulling it off. (Yeah, I refuse to call this thing a 'saga'.  Sue me.)

2.  They know their tweener audience is probably not going to stick with this thing for a very long time, so they're exploiting it as fast as they can.  Kudos for recognizing their own evanescence.
Buy P.S.Productions' iRiffs.  NOW AVAILABLE:

goflyblind

Quote from: RobtheBarbärian on October 25, 2009, 09:02:58 PM
What's Stephanie Meyer going to do when she starts running out of mystical-sounding moon related shit to name her books after?
Twilight: Solar Transit
Twilight: Synchronous Rotation

she'll start going after stellar stuff:
twilight: radiative transfer
twilight: triple-alpha process
twilight: coronal mass ejection
dF = 0
d*F = J

Tyrant

Quote from: Scrivener on October 26, 2009, 05:44:53 AM
2.  They know their tweener audience is probably not going to stick with this thing for a very long time, so they're exploiting it as fast as they can.  Kudos for recognizing their own evanescence.

  Yeah, that's actually the first thing I thought when I heard about this. They need to get it all out there before these kids mature a little and realize how inferior Twilight is to all the other vampire-centric media that Meyer supposedly didn't rip off.

Kete


Relaxing Dragon

Quote from: Scrivener on October 26, 2009, 05:44:53 AM
Good grief, can't we even pass the spiky, sulfuric acid-coated kidney-stone that is New Moon before we feel the next sequel jabbing at our innards?

I will say two sorta complimentary things about the producers, much as it pains me.

1.  They can actually produce sequels on an annual, or even more frequent, basis.  I thought that art was lost in Hollywood around the time Sean Connery left the Bond series. (The first five Bond films came out once a year, 1962-1966.)  Harry Potter tried it, but couldn't keep up the pace; The Lord of the Rings fudged it by filming all three movies at once.  For the moment, the Twilight samovies are pulling it off. (Yeah, I refuse to call this thing a 'saga'.  Sue me.)

Hey, Saw's managed it for about 5 years now.

Dim of the Yard

Quote from: goflyblind on October 26, 2009, 06:50:52 AM
twilight: coronal mass ejection

More like cranial mass ejection, amirite?!

Scrivener

Quote from: Relaxing Dragon on October 26, 2009, 01:13:24 PM
Quote from: Scrivener on October 26, 2009, 05:44:53 AM
Good grief, can't we even pass the spiky, sulfuric acid-coated kidney-stone that is New Moon before we feel the next sequel jabbing at our innards?

I will say two sorta complimentary things about the producers, much as it pains me.

1.  They can actually produce sequels on an annual, or even more frequent, basis.  I thought that art was lost in Hollywood around the time Sean Connery left the Bond series. (The first five Bond films came out once a year, 1962-1966.)  Harry Potter tried it, but couldn't keep up the pace; The Lord of the Rings fudged it by filming all three movies at once.  For the moment, the Twilight samovies are pulling it off. (Yeah, I refuse to call this thing a 'saga'.  Sue me.)

Hey, Saw's managed it for about 5 years now.

Okay, you got me.  The Saw series is way, way out of my sphere of attention.  I know it exists, I know they keep making the movies, but it didn't register with me exactly how frequently there were doing it.

So we've now equated the Twilight movies with the Saw franchise.  Not sure that was a step up for them.
Buy P.S.Productions' iRiffs.  NOW AVAILABLE:

Relaxing Dragon

Quote from: Scrivener on October 26, 2009, 02:21:18 PM
Quote from: Relaxing Dragon on October 26, 2009, 01:13:24 PM
Quote from: Scrivener on October 26, 2009, 05:44:53 AM
Good grief, can't we even pass the spiky, sulfuric acid-coated kidney-stone that is New Moon before we feel the next sequel jabbing at our innards?

I will say two sorta complimentary things about the producers, much as it pains me.

1.  They can actually produce sequels on an annual, or even more frequent, basis.  I thought that art was lost in Hollywood around the time Sean Connery left the Bond series. (The first five Bond films came out once a year, 1962-1966.)  Harry Potter tried it, but couldn't keep up the pace; The Lord of the Rings fudged it by filming all three movies at once.  For the moment, the Twilight samovies are pulling it off. (Yeah, I refuse to call this thing a 'saga'.  Sue me.)

Hey, Saw's managed it for about 5 years now.

Okay, you got me.  The Saw series is way, way out of my sphere of attention.  I know it exists, I know they keep making the movies, but it didn't register with me exactly how frequently there were doing it.

So we've now equated the Twilight movies with the Saw franchise.  Not sure that was a step up for them.

I just know it makes this Saw fan feel a little dirtier inside.