The term twilight is usually used to describe the time of day when the sun has gone done, it's becoming more dim, and you begin to feel drowsy and perhaps even sleepy. It's also occasionally used to describe the latter years of one's life or career after a period of glory or success. Both descriptions are appropriate for "Twilight." One of the most eagerly anticipated movies of the year -- simply due to the high powered, Oscar worthy pedigree of those involved with the production -- this is a dull, less than involving feature that may lull, or better yet, bore you to sleep.
In fact, if not for the cast, this would nearly be a really bad movie. A throwback to the gumshoe noir films of yesteryear, the movie feels old despite the modern day injection of profanity and nudity -- neither of which was allowed decades ago, and neither of which does anything for the story. The inclusion of such material seems at odds with the movie and its target audience. Although it's obviously aimed to satiate the younger crowd, it's doubtful that many under the age of twenty-five will want to see this film. Conversely, it's use will likely offend or irritate the older audience to which the film will almost certainly appeal.
The performers won't offend anyone, however, unless you consider the weak script from which they desperately try to extract the semblance of decent performances. The main attraction is obviously Newman, a long time favorite of critics and moviegoers alike. An eight-time Oscar nominee (with a win for "The Color of Money"), Newman does his best with what he's been given to work with, but this definitely isn't one of his stronger roles. Despite the stereotypical characterizations, he certainly fits the bill as is quite believable. Playing a former detective who describes himself as "a little rusty," he's quite enjoyable and always engaging to watch.
That also perfectly describes Susan Sarandon, who's still beautifully alluring despite being at an age when most studio executives think she'd be better off doing Geritol commercials than headlining a feature film. Yet this four-time Academy Award nominee (with a win for "Dead Man Walking") definitely proves that notion wrong in her variation of the standard, noir femme fatale. Although she doesn't seduce Newman's character in the traditional sense, her character's a strong woman filled with mystery and Sarandon expertly plays it with both hot and icy cold moments.
Five-time Oscar nominee Gene Hackman (with two wins: "Unforgiven" and "The French Connection"), has always been one of my more favorite actors to watch on screen. Unfortunately, here he's given a less substantial and decidedly weaker role than his fellow performers. Playing a cancer-weakened character prevents him from fully playing his usually strong and commanding persona, but he still does a fine job in portraying this character.
The previously nominated cast doesn't stop there. James Garner (nominated for "Murphy's Romance" and from the popular TV show, "The Rockford Files") is good in his role, but unfortunately now falls into the growing category of former leading men who are now cast as villains (joining Jon Voight, James Caan, and others). Stockard Channing (nominated for "Six Degrees of Separation") plays the investigating cop and former lover to Harry, but not much ever develops from either their previous or current relationship.
That pretty much sums up "Twilight's" problems. Written and directed by Robert Benton (a dual Oscar winner for "Kramer vs. Kramer," and a best screenwriting Oscar for "Places in the Heart"), and co-written by Richard Russo (who wrote the novel for "Nobody's Fool," another Newman movie), the story is dull, listless and decidedly less than involving. While it's a throwback to older detective films in pacing and structure, it probably even would have come off as boring decades ago.
While the "mystery" element -- revolving around who's killing people, whether Jack or Catherine is involved, and how it all ties together with a decades old murder/disappearance -- seems intriguing, it's anything but. Developing and unfolding at a glacial pace and featuring flat and relatively harmless villains, there are absolutely no surprises to be found here.
One continuously hopes that the plot will gel and then finally take off as the events unfold, or even that a few twists or partial turns will surface along the way. Unfortunately they never do. Despite Benton's partially successful attempts at creating the noir atmosphere -- especially using eight- time Oscar nominee Elmer Bernstein's melodramatically moody score -- he cannot overcome his boring, and often unbelievable script.
For instance, Harry and Catherine sleep together -- which isn't presented convincingly enough to make us believe that it's their first time, or that they haven't been doing this for years. The moment seems forced, and then to top it off, it only generates some brief, mild repercussions instead of a long volley of fireworks one would expect. Likewise, Harry's moments with a chauffeur who dreams of being his partner never work and seem extremely out of place. Then there are the villains and their motivations that similarly are weakly constructed.
All of that's too bad because not only is a great cast wasted, but it's not often that such a collective ensemble can be brought together for one film. Much like a rare astronomical event that was to feature an impressive alignment of stars, but ultimately was obscured by an overcast sky, this alignment of a different group of stars is clouded by a dull script. We know they're capable of shining, but we just can't seem them doing so. For that reason, we give "Twilight" just a 3.5 out of 10.