A retired Detective is given a simple job, but his seemingly easy task soon turns into a complex mystery. It's just wonderful to find a film called Twilight that I actually liked. It's a bit of a pot boiler, and by modern standards, it is somewhat old fashioned, but it works, I've read a few savage reviews, but I quite liked it. It's quite a mature cast, but I enjoy that for a change, it's nice to see a group of Detectives that aren't fast tracked children for a change. Newman, Hackman and Sarandon are all great, the acting is faultless. Overall, I would say, a decent story is elevated by a particularly capable cast, 7/10.

With so many seasoned and excellent cast members in "Twilight" directed by Robert Benton, you'd think you're in for a good watch, but you'd be mistaken. This movie is a clunker, thanks to a hacked up story and poor direction. Newman and company can only do so well, but when direction and content get in the way, it doesn't matter how good the cast is. Dialog is fairly stilted but what's worse is the noir atmosphere fails. You have voice-over, but lighting and production doesn't lend to it. A final dual with Newman and Garner in their 70s is preposterous, and a stinkbug to end on. 4.5/10 I had higher expectations for this but was disappointed. An epilogue scene was distasteful as well.

It's refreshing to see consummate actors plying their trade, especially one with the skill of Paul Newman. It's especially wonderful to see this skill applied to a film like "Nobody's Fool." In "Twilight," Newman is reunited with "Nobody's Fool" director-screenwriter Robert Benton and is essentially playing the same character. Only this time the character is placed in a manipulative plot that seems like retreads from better crime films. It's simply a window for Newman to show is talents. Other screen veterans--Gene Hackman, Susan Sarandon and James Garner (who is just as natural in front of a camera as Newman)--are also on display, but are not given the screen time to display their skills. It's really Newman's picture and the rest of the actors are simply "guests". Stockard Channing is underused in the role of a police investigator and one of my favorite character actors, M. Emmet Walsh is completely wasted in the role of a...well...a corpse, I guess. The message--about people in the "twilight" of their years--is heavy-handed and the story makes absolutely no sense logically. But it's good seeing Newman at the top of his form--now, if he will only pick out better projects in which to display his talents.

The late actor Paul Newman portrays a fly in the ointment, the anti-hero version of Dick Tracy, herein Twilight. I've read some reviews of people wondering why widely acclaimed filmmaker Robert Benton has made this movie. A short answer: To provide screen experience to new starlets with veteran actors. There are 3 of those starlets in this film. First one is Reese Witherspoon. 1998 was an important milestone for her. She's been busy whole year long with Pleasantville and Overnight Delivery. Through 1998 summer she played in Twilight, thus she has bold scenes with Liev Schreiber. Even though she has a cameo role as Mel Ames in the film, her role includes the only nudity content of her box-office movies career. Yet, Twilight features its queen Susan Sarandon. For me, this is Sarandon's third best after Atlantic City and White Palace. She comes out of pool, starts walking in Eve outlook, looking for her Adam, then Newman comes by. The second starlet is Liev Schreiber. He plays Mel's date at Mexico. While Mel lies naked on a couch, she asks him "Do you love me?". He keeps his silence a bit while staring at her tits, and hinders himself from replying "No, I just love your tits". Thankfully Mel speaks before him: "I mean it doesn't really matter you love me or not". If all the movie critics thought the same way that Robert Benton has written the worst script of his life, they might be right. The third starlet is Patrick Malone. If you read this review right now, and don't know who Patrick Malone is, it's because herein Twilight he wasted his chance of a lifetime due to his imitation of Will Smith. A young actor in Hollywood must not copy other actors of same career level. I actually liked Malone's harmony with Newman playing his partner, if only he could have played his own style. He was one of the supporting actors in Lawrence Kasdan's Grand Canyon(1991). Even though the cast is rich on paper, the whole plot is turning around Paul Newman. No one is able to come closer to him, and he acts only with his self-belief. From my point of view, the main issue is not the script nor the cheapness of the story telling methods. Nobody but Benton and Newman, is in the mood of making a movie. Gene Hackman, James Garner, Stockard Channing spoil the story. So many stars make it darker. Only Newman and Sarandon could have been enough to fill the cast, since the storyline is so simple.

This may be one of the most underrated movies ever. Robert Benton's sharp, smart, moving and funny tribute to the "film noire" genre was undeservingly scolded by most of the critics and it is a real shame. "Twilight" is one of a few movies I saw this year, that reminds us the taste of a really good cinema. It stars a team of Hollywood's greatest stars, it has a truly great script, it's relatively short (and you will be sorry it ended that fast) and it is a total enjoyment for any movie lover. And if it's not enough, there is an incredibly hot sex scene with an amazingly sexy Rhis Witherspoon. You shouldn't miss that, I guarantee you.

It was both inspiring and painful to see such great lead and supporting talent demonstrating their craft with nothing to work with. It could have just as well have been several one-person demonstrations of how to act. I'm glad I got this video for free from the library.

I really liked this film, even though I never heard of it until it was on cable. I was afraid at the start that Newman was going to recycle his curmudgeon character from "Nobody's Fool" but instead he played a very different richly complex character. Kudos also to the rest of the nearly all-star cast. One important plot element absolutely jumped out at me, even though none of the characters seemed to notice, but aside from that I have no complaints. Reese Witherspoon was particularly beautiful here. Grade: A

What a shame! Great cast - poor movie. Newman is, has been and always will be one of the greats, with support from Sarandon, Hackman and Garner this movie had great potential. Unfortunately it's just dull, dull, dull. A disadvantage of following such a well-worn genre as private-eye movie, is it's a fair bet that predictability is going to be a problem. Unfortunately that is amply demonstrated in Twilight. This can only be recommended as an opportunity to see some top-notch veterans go through their paces in a harmless, non-challenging couple of hours.

This movie proved that Geritol should work--as long as you take it when you are supposed to. Prime material to watch old Hollywood veterans act...old. And don't be fooled by Paul Newman's limp; he was hobbling about on screen long before he received a bullet in the leg from Reese Witherspoon's gun-wielding scene. Gene Hackman proved he was old by playing gin; James Garner proved he could stand in the same spot long enough to down his gin; Susan Sarandon proved she'll never-again be sought after for a musical by her singing talent (or lack thereof - unless someone is doing a sequel to The Rocky Horror Picture Show); and Paul Newman proved that if he needed a bathroom in a hurry during scenes, the best place to keep him was in one. (There were more bathroom scenes in this movie than in all the Porky's flicks -- combined.) And as it took Newman the entire movie to prove Garner was on the take, is reason enough to suspect Alzheimer's permeated through the script. In the final shoot-out between Newman and Garner, the goal was not to see who would be the quickest, but the slowest. To call it a detective movie would be something of a misnomer. More like a defective movie. Stockard Channing should be commended, though, for helping an old man down the sidewalk at the movie's closing scene. Yes, that was Newman she was holding up. (And I'll bet some viewers thought they were in a romantic embrace.) Look closely - she was helping him back to the motion picture retirement home.

Most critics wrote off the film because of the poor script and the lackluster direction. Yes, it is true that an average viewer should be able to spot the villain, well before the ex-cop and ex-private investigator does so in the film by comparing life-styles. But that is what young audiences will look for in the movie. What I liked about the script were the subtle dialogues ranging from Samuel Johnson misquotes to acerbic one-liners that developed each of the characters slowly. Take the misty-eyed Lt. Verna (Stockard Channing) greeting Ross as an old acquaintance and then closing the dialogue with the icy "Cuff him!" to the arresting officers. You have an extra-ordinary script here and everywhere in the film. This film is not action-packed; it is heavy on dialogue requiring a mature mind to take in the clever character buildup. Sarandon's character, in particular, was well developed leading to a charming finale. Benton never appealed to me as a great director; nonetheless this film's strength lies in his script (co-scripted by Russo), a thoroughly delightful cast ensemble, and a notable camerawork by Sobocinsky. Finally, I thought the film's name was a wonderful and appropriate selection.