Robert Pattinson finds himself in a situation familiar to many other leading young actors who found fame in a blockbusting franchise. There's a vast amount of pressure in choosing the first project after your newfound success and getting it right can invariably make a career. Get it wrong and you could well find yourself expounding that TV really is the new cinema and that everybody loves a good soap opera.

The young British heartthrob has put his Twilight years behind him now, with the fact that both parts of the final episode Breaking Dawn were filmed back to back some time ago. His first film post Twilight was this period drama that finds Pattinson unsurprisingly the eye candy once again.

It's 1890 and Georges Duroy (Pattinson) finds himself in Paris after fighting a hard fought war in Algiers. The city is in the middle of an economic boom, with many Parisians benefiting from this upturn. Not Georges though; he has arrived with little money and fewer prospects.

That all changes however when he supposedly by chance, runs into an old comrade of his, Charles Forestier (Philip Glenister), in a bar. This army pal takes pity on him and decides to invite him around for dinner. For George, this is the first foot in many doors that he manages to take.

After meeting with Forestier's wife Madeleine (Uma Thurman)at the dinner party, she informs him that Georges has all it takes to ascend the social ladder, but he won't do it impressing the men; instead, he should focus on their wives, as they are the true power holders of France.

And true enough George finds himself quickly rising through the social ranks in Paris, much to the pleasure of the women around him, and to the chagrin of their partners. But George struggles with not being considered an equal in any way by his male peers and finds his anger and frustration pushing him into dangerous grounds.

You know Tina, the very fact that I'm wearing this waistcoat so casually will make 98.6% of the female population swoon. Word.

Despite appearing in a different period of history, it's clear that Pattinson isn't ready to distance himself from romantic material any time soon. But then if you had the opportunity to seduce Thurman, Kristin Scott-Thomas and Christina Ricci, it would be understandable that it would prove difficult to turn down.

The price paid however is that Pattinson continues to reinforce his romantic male lead stereotype and therefore his typecasting as such. Can he play anything else? At this rate, we'll never know. His role in Bel Ami certainly doesn't stretch him as an actor. Unfortunately for Pattinson, his character is neither lovable nor loathable enough either way to care much about. At times he even makes it difficult to read what his character is thinking, as he often pulls a face as if suffering from constipation.

Debut directors Declan Donnellan and Nick Ormerod have captured the period rather nicely, but labour with conveying any real passion on screen. But that could just be the constipated Pattinson once again.

When compared to, say, Scorsese's 1993 Age of Innocence, Bel Ami struggles to conjure up any emotional depth within its story or main character; which is disappointing when you consider that Scorsese managed it with his film, and that was rated U. The same can be said for Stephen Frears' 1988 Dangerous Liaison too, which despite its age, is still superior in every way.

It's not that Pattinson should necessarily pick up a gun and grow a pair for his next project, but if he wants to be taken seriously and be known for being more than just a pale romantic figure, he definitely needs to stick his teeth into something more substantial than the likes of this and be quick about it.