New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Why can't we choose Michael Sheen?

Kim Hollis: Whose movie career do you think is most likely to exist beyond the Twilight universe - Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart or Taylor Lautner?

Josh Spiegel: Kristen Stewart, no question. I got subjected to a preview for Pattinson's next film, which looked pretty mediocre, even to my Twilight-loving wife; Stewart has been working for longer, and is more visible as a good actress, this series aside. Pattinson is...not a good actor. Granted, Stewart's pretty awful in this movie, but in films such as Adventureland, she's proved her worth. Lautner is not an actor I see going too far, buff body aside. Stewart could be as solid an actress as Jodie Foster was at this age.

Sean Collier: I'd be shocked if any of them lasted. Stewart if any of them.

Reagen Sulewski: I'll concur on Stewart. She's the only one that had a significant career beforehand (no, I don't count Sharkboy) although the Foster comparison is wildly optimistic. Pattison seems hopelessly trapped in this role even though he's probably the least impressed by the series out of all the leads. Irony is pretty ironic sometimes.

Tim Briody: Kristen Stewart, if she could stop looking bored and/or stoned every time I read about her in the press.





Jason Lee: They're all pretty cardboard to me. I doubt any one of them goes on to have significant BO success. To stay on the topic of Potter for just a while longer, I could easily see Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe having long, celebrated careers. The difference for me is that the Potter actors demonstrate more sheer acting skill in their blockbuster franchise than the Twilight kids have.

Max Braden: I sense from Stewart that she wants the career more than any of them, and I'd bet on her before I bet on Megan Fox. Pattinson suffers from the Radcliffe and Tobey Maguire situation of being wildly popular in their signature roles but not exactly a true draw. On the other hand Pattinson could turn weird into an asset along the lines of Johnny Depp. In envision Lautner's career tracking that of Mario Lopez.

Tom Macy: Thinking rationally, I say Kristen Stewart. She's had memorable roles in high profile releases such as the critically acclaimed (for reasons I don't understand) Into the Wild and the comedy Adventureland. She's got the benign cute girl next door thing going, which luckily for her is the most common female archetype movies. Plus, the Twilight stigma seems likely to attach itself more to smoking hot dudes than Stewart, making it easier for her for to distance herself from the franchise.

However, my gut just says Robert Pattinson. But people are freaking nuts about this guy! If someone that odd looking (I'm not alone right? He's not an attractive man) can make girls that crazy, it's something more than a momentary Freddie Prince Jr. teen idol thing (I used to go bananas whenever I saw a picture of him). People are going to keep shelling out cash for Pattinson's movies regardless of quality. Oh wait, that's already happened.

Continued:       1       2       3       4