Do you think that the Twilight saga: Breaking Dawn movie should be 1 or 2 movies?
There are rumors going around about the Breaking Dawn the movie will be 1 movie. But some say it'll 2 two movies. What do you think it'll or should be? 1 movie or 2 movie.
Public Comments
- It should be in zero movies.
- 2 movies, no doubt. there is just too much to fit into one, just like the final harry potter. they both need 2 parts, no doubt. or it will just feel rushed in under 3 hours for the whole book.
and for the person who said zero, what a loser you are for clicking on a question just to knock the subject matter. seriously, get a hobby and answer questions, don't just be a jerk.
edit: thanks for the thumbs down jerk. i see another jerk came here to make the same point as you. you both need to get a life.
- 2
because its a really long book
- id love it to be two movies and just a few minutes ago this was confirmed:
"I have this from several sources, and it's definitive. Filming on the back-to-back movies would begin in mid-October, and Summit Entertainment is looking at "high-end" directors. Breaking Dawn is the longest in Stephenie Meyer's 4-book series lengthwise and it's the most graphic -- presenting birth, attempted murder, death, and of course vampire bites. Published on August 2, 2008, it has a happy ending for most of the characters. Divided into 3 parts, the 1st and 3rd sections are told from the point of view of Bella (Kristen Stewart), and the second section from the perspective of Jacob (Taylor Lautner). It prominently features all 3 favorite characters including Edward (Robert Pattinson). Summit Entertainment no doubt will save money by making these Twilight Saga movies #4 and #5 back to back. Screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg (who's written all the Twilight Saga films) is currently adapting Breaking Dawn. Eclipse, the 3rd movie, will be released on June 30th."
- I don't think it should even be made into a movie.
The really sad thing is that the Twilight movies are worse than the books (I didn't know it was possible for something to be worse than the Twilight books).
- 2. there is entirely too much to cover to make it into one. and, you see how they butchered the first one....
- i think it should be two movies. squeezing the entire plot into just one would be way too hard; they've already had to cut a lot out. It's do-able, but not easily.
- I agree with the others, 2 movies is necessary because there is no much going on in Breaking Dawn. If they tried to squeeze it into one, it would really leave a lot out.
- 2 movies. there is just so much....
more then twilight lmao and that was the first book...
if they dont split it into 2 films then they better prepare for bunch of angry chicks!! =]
- Well 1 movie is 100% out of the question. It would be horrible all squished and mashed together. Personally I love the series alot, but the movies where not as good (not to say they were horrible just not as good). Twilight and New Moon movies seemed squished and they were missing chapters but that is a sacrifice of turning a 500 page novel into a movie, so there is nooo way breaking dawn could be one movie too, many important events and over 700 pages. They will probably do 2 movies, but i have no clue how they will work out that whole 3 part thing in 2 movies. Personally i believe they should do 3 movies, 1 movie per section, either way these should be long movies. 3 movies would not only be more satifying for the fans, summit would make more money too. The money they made off the previous 2 movie was incredible and once the flash of breaking dawn is over so is the franchise (well unless Stephenie finishes Midnight Sun and they decide to make it a movie, which i highly doubt). another thing is the actors would need to sign for the movie(s)(since they only signed for 4). Hopefully it will not be rated r either, that would hurt the franchise concidering the audience mostly consists of preteens and teenagers under 18.
oh and for the guy that said no movie yeah your reall smart answering on a question to which you have no clue go get a life because nobody asked your opinion on whether or not you enjoy the series and go ahead and give me a thumbs down because your going to end up having more than me >=)
Enjoy!!!! =D
- Nonononono. SMeyer is so wannabe Rowling.
I have not read Breaking Dawn myself, but I have read several summaries and a few excerpts and I know for a fact that there is not enough plot for it to be split into two movies. If they want to keep it a PG-13, (which they probably will that's where they have their main fanbase) they will have to find a way to work around the messy birth and all of Bella and Edward's sexy time.
It's just ridiculous. Just because it's a long book doesn't mean it will work. Half of it is adjectives anyway, and they don't transfer well to screen.
- Summit has already greenlit the idea to make Breaking Dawn into 2 movies.
Filming of the 1st half of the story is planned to start by October.
Most of the actors are only on contract for 4 movies, so they're negotiating their intake for the 5th.
The NEW question is if they should make it into 3D (that's seriously what they're considering, not me).
- none. the 1st 2 are terrible they should end it there. the only reason it gets sales is because there is topless twats in it
- I personally think it should be two movies.
Melissa Rosenberg, who has written the god awful scripts for the movies, would have
to be a major screw up to mess up the scripts that way.
There's a lot of detail that needs to go into Breaking Dawn
- I think it should be one, its to much excitement to be left hanging its like splitting avatar into two movies
- It would be better to make two movies (which they said they're probably doing), because there's just so much! Honestly, I think they all should have been made into 2 movies...ohwell...
- Two movies because breaking dawn is a pretty long book and i would rather watch two, 2 hour movies than a one four hour movie.
I believe its official that their going 2 make part one and two.
Their even thinking about 3D
