I would say yes I am sort of prove of it, because I did walk away from New Moon movie not thinking very highly of Edward. But honestly I didn't think that highly of Jacob or Bella either. In general I really didn't like the movie. It wasn't until after I read the books that I liked the movie.
I think the movie gave a good visual of Edward's voice inside Bella's head and it represented Bella's connection to Edward that despite his absence that she still longed to be with him. I think that was conveyed throughout the movie.
I honestly don't know how much screen time Edward got in the movie compared to Jacob, it isn't as easy to get as book pages.
Yes they added a birthday present from Jacob to Bella, however they completely missed Valentine's Day that Jacob and Bella spent together. So I think that would be an even trade.
Oh, they should cut out Valentine Day. Because, according to book, this is the first time when Jacob gives a gift to Bella. He is awkward, he is confused, and he gives her... what? a box of candies from villages shop! After birthdays gift it does not work. And what does Bella? She is completely forgetting about Valentine Day! You do understand, it does not show any "special bond" between them at all.
Actually, it shows perfectly that Jacobs and Bellas feelings are not the same.
Oh, they should cut out Valentine Day.
-- Based on accuracy alone, if it was in the book it should be in the movie.
I think they showed that the feelings between Jacob and Bella were not the same in the movie. It is clear that Jacob liked Bella much more than she liked him and I believe that is accurate from the book.
Yes. but but in that case Jacobs birthdays gift does not make sense. Obviously moviemakers wanted to show friendship between Bella and Jacob more stronger than it was in the book.
I think that they showed a friendship between Jacob and Bella to be quicker than it was in the books. They really are not friends until Bella brings over the motorcycles and they start working on them together and then continue to hang out together.
So I partially agree with you and partially disagree, but I do think that they showed that Jacob and Bella had a strong friendship and that is supported by the books. The timing of 'when' that friendship developed is not accurate in the movie, but the friendship itself is accurate.
Eclipse Movie critics
Reviews for the film were mixed, but slightly more favorable than New Moon. Review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a score of 49% based on 229 reviews, and a 68% "fresh" rating from Top Critics. The site's general consensus is that, "Stuffed with characters and overly reliant on uninspired dialogue, Eclipse won't win The Twilight Saga many new converts, despite an improved blend of romance and action fantasy." Review aggregation website Metacritic, which assigns a weighted mean rating out of 100 reviews from film critics, the film holds a rating score of 58/100 based on 38 reviews, indicating "mixed or average reviews".
The Hollywood Reporter posted a positive review of Eclipse, saying the film "nails it". Peter Debruge of Variety reports that the film "finally feels more like the blockbuster this top-earning franchise deserves".
Rick Bentley of McClatchy Newspapers stated the film was the best in The Twilight Saga so far, suggesting that, "The person who should be worried is Bill Condon, the director tapped for the two-part finale, Breaking Dawn. He's got a real challenge to make movies as good as Eclipse." The New York Times praised David Slade's ability to make an entertaining film, calling it funny and better than its predecessors, but wrote that the acting has not improved much. Giving the film 4.5 out of 5 stars, Betsey Sharkey fromThe Los Angeles Times praised David Slade's method of blending his previous works to form a funny movie. She stated, "Eclipse eclipse[s] its predecessors." The film was also listed in 49th place by Moviefone on its list of the 50 best movies of 2010.
Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel gave the film 2.5 out of 4 stars, stating, "The dullness of the performances really stands out when somebody like Bryce Dallas Howard, or Anna Kendrick turn up and liven up their scenes." While calling the film "too chatty and too long", he did compliment David Slade's directing and noted that the movie will please the fans. Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune gave the film 2 out of 5 stars, stating that David Slade's pacing is "everything like molasses running uphill". He also criticized the characters, the actors portraying them, the big close-ups of hand-held devices, and called Howard Shore's score "gunk". Wesley Morris from the Boston Globestated, "If the first two movies were "get a room," part three is "get a therapist". He said the second and third film "repeat that discovery [in Twilight] without truly deepening it...the movies are interesting without ever being good."
A mixed review said that while "Eclipse restores some of the energy New Moon zapped out of the franchise and has enough quality performances to keep it involving", the film "isn't quite the adrenaline-charged game-changer for love story haters that its marketing might lead you to believe. The majority of the 'action' remains protracted and not especially scintillating should-we-or-shouldn't-we conversations between the central triangle." Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun Times gave the film a more positive review than for the first two films in the saga, but still felt the movie was a constant, unclever conversation between the three main characters. He criticized the "gazes" both Edward and Jacob give Bella throughout the movie, and noted that the mountain range that appears in the film looks "like landscapes painted by that guy on TV who shows you how to paint stuff like that." He also predicted that a lack of understanding for the film series in general would not bode well with the audience, stating, "I doubt anyone not intimately familiar with the earlier installments could make head or tails of the opening scenes." He gave the film 2 stars out of 4. Steve Persall of the St. Peterburg Times called the movie "just monstrously bad", and said, "Eclipse leaves the sputtering story arc in idle, with only an uneasy truce between the vampire and werewolf clans amounting to anything new" and rating it grade C-. The Guardian's columnist Peter Bradshaw gave the film a one-star rating in a review that lampooned Bella's continued abstinence, among other plot elements. Bradshaw, dubbing the series "The epic of the unbroken duck", wrote that "Bella Swan is starting to make Doris Day look like the nympho from hell", and concluded that "it could be time to sharpen the wooden stake."
the film was the best in The Twilight Saga so far
I agree with your disagreement. I was disappointed with Eclipse.
Breaking Dawn part 1 Movie critics
Breaking Dawn – Part 1 received mostly negative reviews from critics. Review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reports that 24% of critics (of the 188 counted reviews) gave the film a positive review, and the site's consensus reads, "Slow, joyless, and loaded with unintentionally humorous moments, Breaking Dawn Part 1 may satisfy the Twilightfaithful, but it's strictly for fans of the franchise." The review site Metacritic gave the film a 45 out of 100. (Based on 36 critic scores.) It is the lowest-rated installment in the franchise, which was formerly New Moon. Justin Chang of Variety gave the film a negative review, calling the film "disappointing". Todd McCarthy of The Hollywood Reporteralso gave the film a negative review, calling Part 1 "bloated". Brent Simon of Screen International called the film "soapy and melodramatic". Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian gave the film one star out of a possible five, and referred to it as the next stage of an "emo-operetta" that "sweeps us away on a new riptide of mawkish euphoria".Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film two and a half stars, saying that it is filled with a lot of unanswered questions, but calling Stewart's portrayal of Bella "pretty good". The television show Film 2011's Claudia Winkleman gave the film a negative review, calling it "hilarious". Writing for Rolling Stone, Peter Travers said Breaking Dawn – Part 1 is "the worst Twilight movie yet" and thought Taylor Lautner looked like a "petulant five-year-old". Mary Pols of Time magazine named it one of the Top 10 Worst Movies of 2011, saying "this entry, which held within it the teasing promise of explosive consummation, instead delivered soap-opera-level dry humping in high-thread-count sheets", and concluded, "This was the bloodiest of the Twilight movies but somehow the most bloodless."
Conversely, Gabriel Chong of "Movie Exclusive" gave the film four stars out of a possible five, praising the dialogue, wedding and action scenes, and particularly Condon's direction, stating, "In the hands of a lesser director, the turn of events could very well descend into farce- thankfully then, this movie has found a masterful helmsman in Condon." He went on to praise Stewart's performance, calling it "mesmerising" and saying that she "makes [Bella's] every emotion keenly felt that runs the gamut from joy, trepidation, anxiety, distress and above all quiet and resolute determination." Mark Adams of Daily Mirror also gave the film four stars out of five and said, "The Twilight films manage to cleverly blend melodrama with supernatural thrills, and while the film is not without its silly moments and cringeworthy dialogue it does deliver the drama and emotional highs we have come to expect". He also praised the wedding, describing it as "beautifully staged", and Stewart's performance. Other positive reviewers from The New York Times and Philadelphia Inquirer said the dialogue was improving and the whole movie played out with style, while being faithful to the book and servicing hardcore fans. MSN Entertainment critic Alaina O'Connor gave Condon some praise for bringing "a certain visual elegance that helps with some of the more-absurd elements of the story." O'Connor also felt that the film did a good job of "examining the relationship between Edward and Bella", but felt that the narrative was weak otherwise. The film was also ranked the tenth best film of 2011 by E!. Will Brooker, writing for Times Higher Education, makes the case that Breaking Dawn has a feminist element, stating that it "reverse(s) the embedded cinematic conventions of male voyeur and female-as-spectacle", and that "the lack of attention to (Bella) as sex object is remarkable."
The film also drew both criticism and praise for having what was seen as a pro-life theme. Natalie Wilson, writing for the Ms. magazine blog, described what she saw as the book's "latent anti-abortion message" as "problematic from a feminist perspective" and found this element "heightened, not diminished, in the film", citing scenes in which Rosalie scolds Alice for using the word "fetus". Richard Lawson of The Atlantic said that Bella's pregnancy "serves as the narrative dais from which Meyer, and in complicity Condon and the screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg, delivers a startlingly direct and uncovered anti-abortion sermon", adding "it seems there was no escaping the firmly anti-choice themes of this leg of the story, and so we must sit and grumble while sickly Bella is scored by plaintive strings as she chooses the one true moral path". Neil Morris ofIndependent Weekly said that the film "takes up a radically pro-life mantle when Bella refuses to abort her baby, even though her life may depend on it". Sandie Angulo Chen of Moviefone described the "bulk" of the film as "one long pro-life debate", in which "Bella says it's her body, her choice (terms usually used in the pro-choice movement), but her decision is pro-life to the extreme, because the baby can and will kill her". In contrast, John Mulderig of the Catholic News Service praised the "strongly pro-life message being conveyed via Bella's unusual plight", saying it "presents a welcome counterpoint to the all-too-frequent motif in popular entertainment whereby pregnancy is presented as a form of disease or an almost unbearable curse".
In an interview with Screen Rant, screenwriter Rosenberg addressed the perception of a pro-life message in the film, stating, "If I could not find my way into it that didn't violate my beliefs (because I am extremely pro-choice very outspoken about it, very much a feminist) I would not have written this move [sic]. They could have offered me the bank and I still wouldn't have. In order to embrace it I had to find a way to deal with it. I also had no interest in violating Stephenie's belief system or anyone on the other side".
On February 25, Breaking Dawn – Part 1 was nominated for eight Razzie Awards, including: Worst Picture; Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-Off or Sequel; Worst Screen Ensemble; Worst Director (for Bill Condon); Worst Screenplay; Worst Actor (for Taylor Lautner), and Worst Actress (for Kristen Stewart). The Worst Screen Couple award for Kristen Stewart with either Taylor Lautner or Robert Pattinson was also included. The film lost all categories to Jack and Jill.
Much better than New moon or Eclipse.
I thought the filming was much better than NM or Eclipse, but I thought the movie was boring. There wasn't enough plot to substantiate having its own movie. I believe that the producers, etc, got greedy and wanted a way to make more money which is why they divided the book into two movies.
Agree with you. This idea about two movies was just for money.
But another thing why BD seemed boring: Eclipse movie was all about triangle, but this triangle suddenly disappeared in Breaking Dawn. Bella and Edward were couple again without any problems which should be arise after Bellas statement that she was in love with Jacob, too. It is not a thing which someone could easily forget. Moviemakers went a bit too much with changing characters, and, when movie was back to book, it did not work.