I was just curious as i never heard what happened to Catherine Hardwicke? Did she get fired? Was it her choice? Why did Stephenie Meyer get a new director? I feel really bad for her i think she done a fantastic job on twilight,shes the one that made me fall in love with it( i never read the books before twilight but i have now read them all LOL) Chris Weitz better not stuff new moon up or change it too much or i'll be very upset.. How do you feel about twilight having a new director? Is this really his thing or do you think he will totally miss the point of the story? Will he be doing eclipse and breaking dawn too?

Views: 11

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

To me its unclear if Summit Entertainment decided to let go of Hardewicke or if, due to time and money Hardewicke decided to leave herself. Considering that Eclipse will have a different director from New Moon, I am thinking Summit decided to let her go.

Stephenie Meyer has NO say on final decision making concerning the movie, she has signed the rights over to Summit, and all final decisions including, the script, director and cast is up to them, unless cast members and script writers are under contract.

I am actually really excited to see what Chris Weitz does with my favorite book in the series. He seems to be much more professional and grounded then Hardewicke was. Even though I truly appreciate Hardewicke's attempt to make Twilight an amazing movie, in all honesty, even though I adored it, it could have been MUCH better. I feel like Hardewicke's decisions on some parts of the movie, regarding directing her actors, certain camera angles, and other changes, made the movie come off as some what melodramatic and cheesy.

Keep in mind I really do LOVE the movie, but in the sense that it brought these amazing and well written characters to life and we were able to see a visual of Stephenie Meyer's creation.
Hello thanx for the reply it actually made me feel abit better after reading your post, .hopefully there is no need to worry about new moon.
michelle.
Mrs. Hardwicke claims in the commentary on the twilight video that she had other engagements that prevented her from working on new moon.

I got the distinct impression when listening to her though that she was not interested in the project.

Stina in a way I agree with you. There was much Mrs. Hardwicke left out of the movie that really should have been in the movie. Things which are in the books, which make the storyline make more sense.

I felt that in a way Mrs. Hardwicke dumbed the movie down some. Of course I'm not a huge fan of her other work either anyways.
My concerns for Weitz are the following:

1. He's not a woman. Sorry, it's a woman's story about a young woman, and the emotions and relationships are key to the story. I've seen some of Weitz work. It's not his style.

2. I am concerned Weitz will resort to vampire cliche, which is not the Twilight series at all. The fact that Michael Sheen is playing Aro makes me nervous.

3. I am concerned Weitz was chosen to make a movie that would attract a broader range of theater goers, and that Summit and Weitz don't understand that Twilight's core audience, the ones who made Twilight a hit, may see it once or twice no matter how unlike the book it is, but it will not inspire the abject devotion TwiLoids feel towards the Twilight movie.

In short, I'm hoping for the best, but have grave concerns we're going to get campy "Underground" cliche.

I don't know if Weitz can deliver the heart of NM like Hardwicke delivered the heart of Twilight. IMO, it was a miracle that Hardwicke could do that, and Summit may have made mistake in believing that what Hardwicke did was easy, and any director could do it. Without the heart of NM, it s nothing.
Daidalos Falvius Nosphoros said:
Mrs. Hardwicke claims in the commentary on the twilight video that she had other engagements that prevented her from working on new moon.

I got the distinct impression when listening to her though that she was not interested in the project.

Stina in a way I agree with you. There was much Mrs. Hardwicke left out of the movie that really should have been in the movie. Things which are in the books, which make the storyline make more sense.

I felt that in a way Mrs. Hardwicke dumbed the movie down some. Of course I'm not a huge fan of her other work either anyways.

It's impossible to get all of a book into a movie. The best directors realize what is the heart of the movie and incorporate that, and as much of the other as the can in the 2-hour time constraints. The book "Babylon Babies" was so complex, and I think the director did a great job in turning it into Babylon AD.,but stone fans of the book were upset because he didn't include a lot of the book. Hello? The movie would have had to be 12 hours long to do that.

I remember reading an interview where Hardwicke, RP and KS were having dinner when Hardwicke got a call from Summit, and they were giving her an ultimatum regarding how much time she had and the budget--which was very low. She knew she couldn't do it for that amount of money and time, and didn't want to ruin NM by trying to do it on the cheap.

Ironically, by the time they started shooting NM, Weitz had already gone seriously over budget.

So it looks like Hardwicke was right on this, like she was right on so many other thing, and Smmit was wrong.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Advertising

FANGIRL WITH US HERE

© 2014    

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger... Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger... Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...