The Twilight Saga

every thing breaking dawn new's, pic's ect....................

I know eclipse have not even came out yet but As far as I am concerned I am pretty stoked about BD getting made I noticed someone put something like this for eclipse and I though well why not BD here I will put articles I get from bd here and You all may do so to or pic's that you have everything related to BD. for starter's here is a article about summit thinking about putting BD in 3-D.

 



Twilight Breaking Dawn

Views: 89421

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

1 month to gooooooooooooooo!!!!!

Now Available – The Twilight Saga: The Complete Film Archive

by Leandra on October 16, 2012 
in Books

The Twilight Saga: The Complete Film Archive: Memories, Mementos, and Other Treasures from the Creative Team Behind the Beloved Motion Pictures is now available at Amazon. This hardcover edition has new photos and artwork from the sets of the films and exclusive stories from the cast and filmmakers. A must-have for die-hard Twilight fans and a great gift for anyone who loves the movies. Check it out here.

Source: Twilight Guide

twilightis definetly not a movie that should be in 3-D its not the kind u put in 3D YEA I STILL WILL SEE IT BUT IT WILL REALLY MESS UP THE MOVIE IF ITS IN 3D

 

Marathon video!

Jess...

I'm itchy all over with anticipation and excitement...I CAN'T WAIT....I'm like  child in a candy store....Now! I want NOW!!!

Is it just me...or is Pattinson just complete hotness in Twilight...what the heck did Bill Condon do to Edward?

I mean Pattinson is  a drool factor in any given situation,....but, He was uber-drool in Twilight....he was Edward....

Catherine nailed it....from the hair, the clothes and the appropriate amount of vampire makeup...

I don't see "Edward" in BD part 1 and 2...

It really, really irks me....the hair is ALL Wrong...and the  CGI makeup is washed out and dimensionless...

I know I've ranted about these inconsistencies within the  twilight saga Movies/directors before...but, Condon's physical changes to Edward were most obvious/inconsistent....

Why? Just why? did they change Hardwicke's version of Edward? In my mind... it was spot on...perfect..a great mix of sexy, modern and elegance....and that HAIR was the signature masterpiece....

Why..did they mess with it?

I have to say, Stewart's Vampire character...is well done. the makeup/hair.....and wardrobe...is how I picture in my mind for vampire Bella to look like and BEHAVE....

I've never had a problem with Stewart's look through out the saga....pretty consistent with every director. Same with Lautner...his look was consistent...

Now...Edward had the biggest inconsistencies with hair/makeup/wardrobe...and Carlisle? What happened to that beautiful man? he's dreadful looking in BD part 1...and I assume in part 2 as well...

Rosalie...? What is up with her as well... Esme's hair is so dark and austere....she looked great in Twilight...

I just don't get Condon's vision with the makeup/hair/wardrobe....

It's easy...keep your same makeup/hair/wardrobe team for each movie...to keep the aesthetics consistent....

Fans notice these details....and when they're so different from each movie/director...it's very distracting....

Edward looks like an entirely different character from the original Twilight...

Vampires Don't age...their hair doesn't grow..so why does Edward look like a 30 year old man...instead of 17 years old?

 It's irritating....is all I can say...Jess!

love...

Danette

I know that wasn't meant for me, but I just thought you should know that I totally agree with you on so many levels. The way Catherine Hardwick made Twilight, is the way that the book went. The way that Bill Condon is making the Breaking Dawn movies, is an entirely different way to the saga that does not quite stay in character with the book. I wish Catherine had directed all of the movies, I would actually be able to watch them without it irritating me.

I look at how Pattinson looked in Twilight, exactly as the book described, dark, mysterious, and secretive and I feel as f I've jumped into the book itself. But in Breaking Dawn, Condon makes him more bright, silly, and so human-like that it;s not even funny. That awkwardness the movie Twilight had to it... it was it's charm. What made it so realistic to the book. Condon seems more concerned with the effects and newness and money, rather than sticking to the book.

And I agree with you when you say that vampires hair doesn't grow. Every character it seems has had major appearance changes through-out every movie when Jacob and Bella were the only characters supposed to undergo changes in physical traits (Jacob in New Moon, and Bella in Breaking Dawn)

I hate most that I don't feel like I'm in the book with the other movies. Twilight is the only one that feels real, that feels... like Twilight. I can honestly say that I'm disappointed in Stephenie Meyer for allowing these fancy-money-making directors to tear apart such a beautiful saga the way they have for the last three years. 

Hi, Jesse Desplat...

well...I am so glad you contributed your thoughts...the more the merrier....as far as I'm concerned. OPEN FORUM EQUATES FOR ALL TO PARTICIPATE! I appreciate you reading my commentary and taking the time to validate my perspective...THANKS!!!

You know...Jesse...

I think all the directors had their Artistic vision and created it according to their own interpretations and Hardwicke's subsequent material/ Myer's literary works...

However...Consistency is important when telling a story....little modifications/changes are expected when they logically support the directors overall vision/aesthetic....I get that! But, to radically change a character's image/behavior so much....it detracts from the story or the cohesiveness.. UGG!!!!

Jesse...many would disagree about our favoritism for Hardwicke's artistic vision and adaptation/interpretation of Meyer's literary works.

I think Hardwicke is a true artist...and a twilight fan. She hand picked an amazing cast...and had the intuition/insight to create this "surreal" prototype of Edward cullen...and Pattinson fit that image perfectly....

He's a fabulous actor...deep and introspective...not just eye candy...he's the whole package...

Much like Edward Cullen... a beautiful person...inside/out.

I think, Jesse...it's a gift to innately acknowledge beauty or greatness in people/things...that the average individual would over-look or not recognize.

Hardwicke saw the potential in Pattinson...that many fans didn't see or support until he was all in character as Edward Cullen. In my opinion....I think meyer even lacked the vision of "Edward" in pattinson in the "raw"...until Catherine crafted her artistic/innovative vision upon Pattinson. (thank god...Rob protested the original long hair/dreds)....

Hardwicke utilized and collaborated with Pattinson's great bone structure, planes of his face and unusual body language/mannerisms...to create Edward Cullen. Her blue hued atmosphere and camera work....capitalized on the unique chemistry between Pattinson ans Stewart. Her camera angles on their faces...captured the right amount of emotion....and told the story in a very engaging/ethereal way.

I liked "elements" of the other movies and I think each director contributed something great to the saga. I just hated...I mean hated...how drastic the aesthetics were modified...almost to the point of stupidity.

Some fans may disagree with the modifications to Catherines's "Edward" were unfavorable...some actually liked how he appeared/behaved in Condon's Breaking Dawn...

And...I may be wrong about this...but I think the overall consensus amongst fans is...Edward looked most like ""EDWARD""" in Twilight. And in each subsequent film/director that followed...Edward became less and less...and this "new" character submerged in breaking dawn that barely resembled Hardwicke's original vision.

Now....It could be that Condon intentionally/radically modified Edward's appearance to metaphorically symbolize his emotional growth...which has basically been fossilized for 100+ years being a vampire. Bella's love liberated him...made him emotionally evolve/mature and  feel his humanity again...

I get that angle of it...but Edward's appearance got worse instead of better...and that didn't make sense to me at all...

If his life is so much more fulfilling now...why make his appearance/pallor more dessicated/sallow? Right? In my opinion...Edward looked sexier, happier on Prom night in twilight than he did on his Wedding? Regression is not a favorable thing...especially when vampires don't age...

I think Condon missed that pertinent detail...

I think he did great with the special effects...but, missed the mark on maintaining the "indy", surreal feel of the Hardwicke's twilight. I think Condon appreciated/respected Hardwicke's vision...but, didn't quite capture the emotional chemistry between Edward and bella. Some parts he did...amazingly.....but he didn't bring the best qualities out of Pattinson's acting and potential. Maybe a healthy glimpse of it in the birthing scene...but, I wish he challenged/pushed pattinson more in the right direction. yes, he brought out pattinson's playful/witty side....which was a good change...but it made him too human...and it over-shadowed his vampire character...

yes....Edward was evolving, changing due to Bella's love....but, EDWARD is not HUMAN...and he didn't retain his vampire mystique/appeal like he had in Twilight. Condon made Edward the ''humanpire"...which on some level was revolutionary...maybe because of his chosen lifestyle of abstaining from human blood and maintaining control while having sexual relations with a human. I guess Edward was evolving into some unusual, vampire hybrid....and that was Condon's intention to radically alter his appearance...but, it just wasn't a "upgrade" or  a favorable "make-over" from Hardwicke's visionary, beautiful Edward....in my opinion. And what perplexes me the most....is Meyer has the most artistic control/input with BD PART 1 and 2....is this her vision, as well? Are these her collaborating contributions with Condon?

feel free to elaborate on my commentary, Jesse...

I would love to hear more of your thoughts...

Love,

Danette

Dear Jesse and Jess....

This still of BD Part 2...I love....It has a reminisce presence of Edward "Twilight"...it's truly a beautiful picture of them together...

I deplore this one...I hate Edward's hair/makeup....it's flat and unremarkable....

That looks like a completely different actor in the second picture. It's so not Edward. He doesn't even look comfortable in that photo...

I don't see why more people do not like Hardwicke's Twilight. I think a big part of it was the budget. Breaking Dawn's budget is obviously far bigger than Catherine had, therefore I believe she worked that much harder on making a great movie. Condon Has more than enough money to play with for Breaking Dawn, so I think he used a lot of that to make even more money by using fancy graphics and such.

To show what I mean, watch the Twilight trailer, then the Breaking Dawn trailer. To a person that has never seen Twilight, watching the Twilight trailer will provide what the characters are like, and the basic plot of the movie. But when watching the Breaking Dawn trailer, they see fancy CGI and graphics. They see 'Look what we did with a computer!' I mean seriously, at least 60% of the trailer is devoted to showing wolves and gifts that lift water and people jumping and running amazingly. That doesn't tell you what the movie is about, it tells you that the director is a four year old with thousands of dollars in a candy isle...

I agree with you that Edward became less and less himself through-out every movie. I don't think the proposal in New Moon was played very well. It just didn't seem 'Edward.' If Slade had went with the book, I think that would have helped, but still wouldn't have done as much as needed.

And about the wardrobe, I get that once Edward fell in love with Bella, he became brighter and all, but each director has horribly attempted to show this through his clothes! We can see that he is happy with her, you don't have to put him in tacky clothes that his character wouldn't wear. By putting him in out of character clothes, you are creating a new character altogether, because if Edward wouldn't wear that, then it's not him.

I have much more to say on these topics, but I leave to now. I'll be back later to put in more input. ;)

Danette-

i also like Edward in the first movie more,he looks more as it is described in the book,but i have to say that i also like his in breaking dawn,you can see a more mature Edward. He also looks older which we should't be able to see but i mean thats impossible.Rob can't stay seventeen forever like edward!lol

Jacob in the other hand is really different that in the first movie,but thats how he is suppossed to be,i guess that wasnt a proble for them because through these years Jacob became grew and so did Taylor!

I also agree that each director brings chages,but in my opinion it makes the movies more interesting because we can see how different people see them.I really loved how Catherine introduce us to this world,but i am also liking how Bill is ending it,so far!

Rosalie did look more natural in Twilight, and i didnt like much how Kristen was in eclipse,i guess because of the wig.

Love,

Jess

Kristen & Robert thank Denmark fans ahead of BD2 release



Via / Via Via: Thank-You!

RSS

© 2014   Created by Hachette Book Group.

Report an Issue | Guidelines  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service