'Twilight': What does Catherine Hardwicke's exit bode for 'New Moon'?

By now, Sunday's sudden and stunning news that "Twilight" director Catherine Hardwicke would not return to helm "New Moon" has had time to sink in.

Consider what her departure means for the franchise.

Hardwicke was key in casting Kristen Stewart and breakthrough star Robert Pattinson as the young lovers in Stephenie Meyer's romantic vampire saga, and she's got a proven track record in dealing with themes and issues concerning young people ("Thirteen" and "Lords of Dogtown.")

Perhaps more important, Hardwicke, who in fact is still on the promotional tour for the film, which has grossed almost $140 million in the U.S. alone, is something of a "Twilight" fangirl herself. The night before the Los Angeles premiere, she visited fans in line -- many of whom had been there for a couple of days -- posing for pictures and signing autographs. She was also at least partially responsible for getting the film's initial script, which she compared to "Charlie's Angels," nixed in favor of a more faithful telling.

Now she's gone and fans what to know what happens next. There are few schools of thought:

Not to fret, different directors can keep a series fresh. Just look at the "Harry Potter" movies, which began with the straight-forward adaptations of Christopher Columbus, went through a darker if more emotionally powerful period with Alfonso Cuaron ("Prisoner of Azkaban"), got an adrenaline boost from Mike Newell ("Goblet of Fire"), and have matured under David Yates ("Order of the Phoenix" and the upcoming "Half-Blood Prince.") Ditto other successful franchises such as "James Bond," the "Bourne" movies.

Movie watchers have already begun discussing who should take over. RopeOfSilicon.com has five female suggestions, among them Kimberly Pierce, who directed "Boys Don't Cry," and Mira Nair from "The Namesake." Earlier this month, Film.com weighed in with its top choices, including young upstart Sarah Polley and long-shot Sofia Coppola.

It doesn't matter who's behind the lens, as long as screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg sticks around. Rosenberg is credited with condensing 500+ pages of story into a two-hour film, helping to eliminate some of Meyer's clunkier passages of prose and injecting more humor into Meyer's story (i.e. the exchanges between Charlie and Billy, the dialog among Bella's human pals, details such as the wall of graduation caps.) Critics who had positive things to say about the film were grateful.

On the flip side, taking such liberties infuriated some Meyer devotees, and could do so to an even larger extent in "New Moon." Rosenberg reportedly achieved a way to squeeze in more screen time for Edward, even when he's supposed to go MIA for the majority of the second book.

The cast will be back -- what could go wrong? Pattinson and Stewart aren't going anywhere. Does anything else matter?

We have a problem, Forks. Whether or not you fell in love with Hardwicke's vision, the director's finger was on the pulse of "Twilight" fans. She relentlessly scoured Oregon for Bella's and Edward's perfect meadow, the pivotal scene for most readers. She made sure Stewart and Pattinson would steam up the screen -- on her own bed, no less. She made sure the book's many characters were all accounted for, even arguably expendable folk such as Eric.) She even went so far as to film a scene from "Midnight Sun," Meyer's as-yet-unfinished retelling of "Twilight" from Edward's perspective, which will be included as a bonus for fans on the film's forthcoming DVD. Will Summit Entertainment be able to find another director so in touch with teens and just as passionate about the source material?

What do you all think? Is Hardwicke's exit a good or bad thing for "New Moon"? Does it make a difference? Who do you want to see take over? 

-- Denise Martin

Related:
"Twilight" sequel "New Moon" gets the green light from Summit
Complete "Twilight" Countdown coverage

Photo: Catherine Hardwicke. Credit: Getty Images

Comments

[Joshua]

Excellent news! "Twilight" is a commercial success DESPITE Hardwicke's direction, not because of it.

[Becca]

Stop with the sob story. Hardwicke did a terrible job. Its one of the worst directed films I've ever seen and the editing was atrocious. I'm thrilled she's gone.

I hope Summit stop being so reverential to Meyer's work. New Moon's mid section is incredibly repetitive and boring.

The need to revisit Bella and Edward's relationship at the start of the film as so few initimate emotional scenes were included in Twilight. I still feel I dont know them at all. Also develop Edward's relationship with his father and the other Cullen's. Most of Bella and Jacob's scenes are repetitive in the middle of the book. Use some time to follow Edward's story ie tracking Victoria or a temptation to hunt humans again. Get Carlisle having to work hard to keep Edward on the straight and narrow. I also want to see Edward's visit to the Volturi fleshed out. Thats such a dramatic moment that if we only see it as a vision I'll feel cheated.

I'd love them to bring in a director like Paul Morrison who worked with Pattinson on ittle Ashes. Thats a stunning film and made for just £1.4 million. He could create something remarkable for $40 million.

[anne a.]

Frankly, I'm concerned. I really liked what Catherine did in Twilight and that's because she was very passionate about the book and the story. I'm definitely afraid that whoever Summit picks to direct New Moon will not have that same passion. The important thing about these books is the romance. Fans will also hate it if they deviate too much from the source material. Having Edward more of a presence in New Moon is okay with me personally because we would want to see what he was up to while he was away from Bella (and we fans who have read Stephenie Meyer's "outtakes and extras" online know all about this). Just don't kill the romance. This is what makes the Twilight saga extra special. This would be the challenge the next director has to face. And for the record, I don't really care about the gender of the director...why does everybody have to make that an issue?

[dawn0606]

I thought Hardwicke did a great job with raw jagged closeups and that guitar strumming music score used in the meadow scene was really cool and fit the mood. Plus lets not forget about the soundtrack opening up at #1 on Billboard and is still in the top ten coming now in #6. I believe Ms. Hardwick had a lot to do with the soundtrack and putting Pattinson's two songs along with his sister in a song from what i hear.

Well, she's gone now so we must move on. The best director that comes to mind is Joe Wright who did Pride & Prejudice & Atonement. He has a great reputation for working well with young actors and has great cinematogrophers and Music Scores and he is a major Character driven director. He is still rather new to this and probably won't be as expensive as huge blockbuster directors. Wright is my #1 choice.

[sandy]

I think that the studio will have a hard time finding anyone as Catherine was about this project. They need to get someone who is a fan of the novels, and understands the depth of the storyline, so they can set the right tone. Also, I hope the screne writer doesn't cut out some of the better lines/scenes fromt he book like she did in twilight that set up the Edward/Bella relationship, because it made the romance too rushed. I still loved the movie. They should do a director's cut.

[Megan]

I am delighted that Twilight is getting a new director, The movie did not do justice for the book what so ever.

[tara]

As bored as i am im replying. I seem to like catherine. just her spunk seemed to be good enough to direct this movie. But if money is what they want they will have to get someone else. Someone not so close to this movie that will make it good but not really give much care if the fans want steamy love verses action. Opinion out there. I dont much care. I love the books and as long as Roberts in there i wont care much.
ps...kristen sucks as bella...too bad they didnt know that ahead of time. haha

[Twilighter]

I say good riddance! Personally I think CH ruined Twilight, with all the choppy scenes. She took too many liberties and made it unitentionally funny. I hope they get someone who really knows how to do fantasy.

[G]

Maybe now we can get a REAL Rosalie, as opposed to the director's ex-step-daughter/bff/etc.

[SG]

I love Hardwicke's version of Twilight. I've seen the movie 22 times (no, I don't usually do this) since it opened and it just keeps getting better. I plan to buy the DVD because I know it is a result of her work. I am very upset that she is leaving the franchise. I've heard all the negative stuff floating around cyberspace and it just doesn't matter to me. I love her work and I want her back as director. I'm so disappointed that I don't plan to see ANYTHING that Summit is releasing to the theaters. I hope the backlash is huge and terrifying.

[Dolmance]

She made a very successful film that made a lot of money - and her audience loved it. Which means, the series is afflicted with one or more bad and arrogant producers who want more control, not only over the film but over the creative people too. The people responsible for this will find a director who makes the right noises of deference and kowtowing, but the product will suffer. And unfortunately, the producers responsible for firing the director are probably too foolish and narcissistic to ever admit it, even to themselves.

[alexandria l.]

i think a new director makes a huge difference... the fact that Catherine HArdwicke followed the book almost to a tee is simple proof that she should be the only director. In this article it is stated to look at the harry potter series of movies and that they had different directors and survived... and yes, they did have different directors and SURVIVED. but not all of the movies were as captivating. Catherine gets this series. she gets how to film it, how to direct it, how to connect her viewers personally and most importantly how to make the book lovers feel proud that the movie does the book justice. i really truly wich she had stayed on.. im a little anxious abt the next movie.. i hope whoever they pick can fill the huge shoes put in front of them.

[Jen]

I have been wondering what the staffing change will mean. Will the movie lose some of its authentic, indie feel? Or will the new director want/be able to keep that intact?

[twilightgirl33]

This is wonderful news! Every serious problem of this movie, from the misuse of music, the under/overacting of the leads, the use of close-up shots (a cheap way of making things feel intense and dramatic... rather than having the actors do that...) even the use of the blue-filter (for the same cheap effect) ALL Hardwicke's doing! I am thrilled we don't have to watch another film that looks like a bad documentary with kids who are trying to act! Maybe another director will use music to convey emotion, acting to convey emotion and lay off the bad camera work!

Thrilled!

[Donna]

I am very disappointed. Producers have a terrible track record of screwing up fantastic stories for the sake of making it pop. Imagine if this director wasn't on board and another director saw the original screen play for the first film with Bella as a cheerleader!

Like Peter Jackson it really shows when the director is passionate about the spirt of the books. Hollywood is just too good at screwing up a story for me not to be worried about a director coming on board who isn't a fan.

[katie aka twilight mom]

I, ALTHOUGH AMONG THE FEW, WILL BE DISAPPOINTED...AS HARDWICK DID CAPTURE WHAT WAS NEEDED UNDER A LTD. BUDGET.

[Rebekah Irene]

While I have not yet seen the Twilight film, who the director is should not matter. So long as the actors and screen writer remain, New Moon will be an excellent film. People tend to forget that the screen writer is way more important than the director because no matter how good the actors are, if the script is bad, then the film itself is doomed. A bad director can be overcome far more easily once the cast is chosen. Besides which finding good directors is easy. Even if the director is not great, a mediocore one cannot harm a film too badly. Peter Jackson was a terrible director, unnable to cut any film out and dedicating too much energy to epic battle scenes yet his films were still essentially good. Why? The actors and screen writers were talented. Moreover changing directors inserts fresh energy and ideas, often benefiting the series as a whole. The Harry Potter films went from horrendous, bad and good in the space of three short films because the directors built on what the previous ones had done. The studios will not be dumb enough to harm a film that is a guranteed blockbuster by hiring a bad director. So, calm down everyone. Losing a director never hurt anyone.

[kaaat]

this is not good.
i think catherine hardwicke was a wonderful director for the movie and honestly i dont think new moon will be as good without her
and the excuse that the time frame was the reason is totally untrue
it was about the budget. catherine wanted a higher budget to do special effects for werewolves and shoot in rome.
but summit was too cheap to give her a higher budget when they only spent $37 million on twilight and as of today it has grossed more than $138 million dollars
:(

[Anonymous]

Doesn't bode well for the sequels. As a devoted fan, I would hate to see a new person stray even farther away from the plot with NEW MOON than Hardwicke did with Twilight. I appreciate that she was a fan, and know that she did fight to stay true to the core of the novels. Would the next person strive for the same goal? I'm not convinced. I'm just hoping they get someone who is passionate about the project and has actually read the novels the way they were meant to be read.

[Kelly Burns]

She was good for 'twilight' (I really liked her adaption), but 'new moon' is not really hardwick's cup of tea. Although I think she would be able to show bella's pain and sorrow and her friendship with jacob, I think that she would be out of her element with all the ware-wolf scenes, and it would show in the movie. A new director just makes sense.

[Charlie]

I'm glad to see her go. The movie needed so much more. If you are a teen it might have been fine, but lacks so much.

C

[Tom]

Are you sleeping with Hardwicke's publicist? What a bizarre article. Hardwicke is Scorsese all of a sudden? As if!

[Rebecca Jupiter]

I'm so disappointed to hear this. CH has such spunk, so much talent. I'm sure the next film will end up ok, since the actors are still attached, and Rosenberg, but it's such a shame to lose Catherine. She has such a vision for everything she does, and she is an intensely hard worker... I agree that it's unlikely Summit can find anyone who cares as much.

[Virginia]

I'm not sad to see Catherine go - the movie was so bad - but frankly Rosenberg should go too b/c it was definately a lot more than the director that made this movie suck (no pun intended). The dialogue was so cheesy and there was no good transition - a lot of which happens in the actual writing of the screen play. So in my opinion in order to make New Moon successful they need to ditch Rosenberg too!

[dandelion]

it could be a good news ~ i am a fan of the twilight saga and though already prepared that the movie won't put up well with the book, however, the quality just came out even lower than what i expected ~ anyone who hasn't read the book would never understand how bella and edward's love had gone so deep. the movie is so shallow, superficial. the acting is not so good either. pattinson failed to display the confidence and determination that edward possessed. if it wasn't the problem of the director, what else?

[Deb]

While the script was okay, the cinematography was awful! How many extreme closeup shots of Edward and Bella staring into each other's eyes did we really need? The incidental music was laughably awful too. I will give her credit for being true to the books, but visually the whole thing sucked.

Waiting for #2.

[ew]

Wow, you mean Twilite was supposed to be a vampire film? Ohhh, i thought they said Camp-fire film...or a tween movie, or to be shown at Jesus Camp (no offense J, love your work)

but a feature release?? --- puh-leasssse...

i saw it as one of the most over-hyped and under-delivered films in a long time, this month...

as for the "legions" of multiple viewers, wow, just wow, fascinating, captain, yet illogical

but then again, people actually are buying tickets and then staying in their seats for Four Xmases -- if ever there were a litmus test for ____________ (fill in the blank-headedness)

[Krista]

Why does everyone keep blaming the director for the crap movie that Twilight was? If they should let go of anyone, it should be the script writer. Did the woman even READ Twilight?!?! The director couldn't help the cheesy special effects or the "glitter" that adorned Edward's face, because of the very limited budget. I'm sure with a bigger budget they could have used George Lucas's company and made those parts better, but as far as the dialogue, there is just no excuse. I would have paid THEM to write a better script just so they couldn't have ruined the masterpiece that is Stephanie Meyer's book.

[Spare Me]

Ok, can I ask what you do for a living, Rebekah Irene? IF you are part of the Entertainment Industry, you must be a writer. If you aren't part of the industry, you must be a struggling writer or dreaming of being a writer because your ignorance towards directors typically comes from writers who are unhappy they don't get as much credit as directors do. If you are a writer or want to get into writing, you'd better accept one solid fact...the directors are the captains of the ship...always. It's been that way for years and will continue. Are you serious when you think the writers, who are immensely creative, can be responsible for direction of the cast, crew, etc? Unless the writer also truly understands business and is a true business person, there's no way. Writers are too emotional. Now, don't get me wrong...that's not a bad thing...as long as they aren't in charge of a production. The writers that are business are also directors, if you do your research. By the way, have you ever paid attention to how the studio negotiations go? The Directors Guild ALWAYS negotiates on their own and the other studios follow. So, what do you think that means about the directors? Duh...captains of the ship. And while everyone is entitled to their opinions, you really do sounds like an idiot when you say that, "...losing a director never hurt anyone." Obviously, you really don't know your film history.

[anna]

NO NO NO!

That is exactly what I am afraid of, after Chris Columbus left for HP the movies were terrible! NOOO

[cbk16]

Harry Potter has kept fresh with new directors. For Twilight, after all the criticism from the critics, (also may fans also don't like the film style), it is best to have a new director.

[Stephhead]

Why are we fussing over CH?! It's the screenwriter who needs to go!!!! MR and CH together ruined the movie and that can never be redone. Bad script, lame dramatic effects rather than sticking to the movie and allowing it to be a smooth beautiful story that it is. Kristen will be fine in New Moon, she does unhappy better than she does happy (notice in Twilight you never felt like she was happy? always weird) But regardless of the director, it's the script that makes or breaks the movie adaptation of a beloved book

[andi]

im delighted new moon will have a new director. i thought that twilight was good, but only because of the book. my friend's who haven't read the book were having a hard time following along. she never even explained why edwards eyes change color, i mean come on. and what was the point of the field trip except that it took out too much time for the blood type scene? she did a good job with some things, such as casting and music, but i think thats about it. im excited to have a new director in new moon, but hope that the screen writer keeps true to the story. i think edwards absence is crucial to the story line, unfortunate as that is for rob's fans. im hoping that the newer movies start to get better with each movie, like the harry potter movies. they have done well even with different directors.

<3

[azun]

It is sad that catherine is not going to do the sequel, she understand the books and did keep the essence of it.

I am afraid that Summit wants to have a cheap-rush sequel, but if they do that, without exaggeration or inaccuracy "literally" They will end up paying for it

[potch]

Hardwick did an amazing job. Anyone who doesn't think so obviously isn't intelligent to understand it. She has a passion and love for the series that you're not going to find in another director. Plus I HATE when movies switch directors. It screws with the continuity of the setting and details. Changing directors did NOT help HP.

[Cece]

Catherine Hardwicke is an artistand a talented film maker. Its a shame she is not going to do the next instalment. Susanne Bier (Things We Lost in the Fire)... Miss Bier is super talnted and is able to do sexual tension and loss... New Moon has plenty of that not to mention her incredible camera work. Hopefuly the music is something that they are looking to change as well ;> For me personaly unless they are geting Peter Jackson/ Del Torro to do the next few instalment it had better be a woman. Few get to do work of this scale and since they are the female director friendly prod company this shouldn't be a prob.

[I LOVE THE BOOKS, ambivalent about the movie]

I am glad she's going. The Twilight series needs to have a new director for each film (remember the mechanical wings of the owl in the first HP movie? And now look at the films---very worthy of JK Rowling)

I am sad, however, that the studio is keeping the screen writer. I thought she did a horrible job of adapting the book. The entire courtship of Bella and Edward got lost in translation and the meadow scene was barely recognizable. The tone of that scene in the book and the scene in the movie completely clash. Ugh.

And how dare she alter the story to put more Edward in the story of New Moon? Team Jacob fans will NOT be happy. And neither should Team Edward. Afterall, it takes pain to appreciate the joy in life. The Twilight movie was bad enough, I think it will go downhill from here. I don't plan on seeing any more films. I like the characters and dialogue the way I imagine it inflected as I read the book---seeing Hardwick and Rosenberg's vision was torture. I'm skipping the rest of these films.

[A Twilight Fan]

I think CH did an incredible job of keeping loyal to the book, of casting, and of really bringing Stephenie Meyer's creation to life. I think she gave a lot of young people a real chance, and unlike others, I like the injection of humor in the script.

I'm sorry she's leaving. She wanted more time and budget for New Moon - that's realistic, people. Turn 'em and burn 'em is just going to make this another low-budget sequel, which is really sad.

I hope I'm wrong.

[Heather]

Oh I'm SO glad. Catherine Hardwicke ruined Twilight and now I'm so happy there is some hope left for New Moon. This news MADE MY DAY.

[Jessica M]

I am worried that the direction of the sequel will not follow the book at all. I think the script will be as lackluster as the first. A bad script =bad movie no matter who directs it.

[nita]

Without Catherines vision I fear that New Moon will bomb out at the box office.

Look at this womans's creativity!! She did wonders with this film. She is an amazingy talented person who brought the characters of Twilight alive. No director in Hollywood or anywhere else could possible replace her. The talent she has can't be replaced.

Catherine, is what made this film. Her directing of these wonderfully talented people made the movie. Your movie is only as good as your director.

She should not be expendable. The fans should fight this decision. Start a petition for her to continue directing the sequel. The fans of Twilight have a lot of power. They need to use it to save Catherine.

~Nita~

[Kathleen]

Catherine in an awesome director. She will be missed and Summit will go down...obviously they do not know how to deal with a true artist who delivers! Man, they're scum.

[carla galeano]

I really loved the movie, but to be honest, i thought bella's character was dull and empty lacking everything that made her interesting in the books...the books are written from her perspective and judging her by this movie, we would have been bored after the first chapter...i think it would be great for Joss Whedon to direct the next movie! He's had much experience in turning average girls into interesting characters (Willow, Tara, Cordelia, River etc) and would give Bella the necessary push to hold the second movie. Edward is hardly in the next movie and if Movie-Bella doesn't wake up from the trance she seems to be in, there's no way she can keep us entertained!
Joss would be perfect for this and he would also give the movie the sarcastic aspect it lacked in the first one...yes, the books were romantic and sweet, but they were also funny and sexy and i missed that a lot in the movie.

[andrea]

i'm glad there's going to be a new director, the movie was ok, but it could be so much better. the tone in twilight was weird and awkward, and let's face it, the movie was a little bit cheesy. I think that this change is a good thing

[Hilda]

I think that everything will work out just fine.

Catherine did a good job with what she had budget wise. I will give her HUGE props for her main casting choices. If Summit were wise they will keep all the major players,I.E. The Cullens. Jacob,Billy,ect. The fans will react badly to shake-ups in casting!

IMO,they need to hire another female director. Someone that is going to do right by this franchise!

[Jalyn]

I liked Hardwicke did a okay job with Twilight. Her visions were a lot of mine, but I did not like the closeups, transitions, & the way she put music over every single conversation that they had. One of the things I enjoyed about the book is the conversations between Edward & Bella. I think she did a good job with the casting, but after I seen the movie I was disappointed in Stewart. She looked bored & she just did not give her all as Bella. I know they always change things from the book into the movie, but this book was so simple that they really didn't have to change anything. I am still angry over the part where Edward keeps asking Bella to say it & she says, vampire. Whatever. Lame? It was like they wanted to focus on that more than the love between them. I also felt like the first kiss was too intimate. You have to remember who the audience is & how Bella didn't get so worked up until the third book really. I think she went for a too sexy of a scene with what Bella was wearing. I know a few mothers that were upset due to them bringing their 12 year old daughters. Yes, it was PG-13, but that isn't the point. Hardwicke did okay, but it will be great to see another woman/man view of the book(s).

I hope in New Moon they will show all sides of the story. I agree with someone that stated it would be great to see Edward's point of view since Bella & Jacob continue to do the same thing day in & day out. I think that will give everyone a little inside into his head. Also, I would love to see the Cullens more & how they view things.

One of the things I loved about Twilight (the book) was that Edward was so careful around Bella & careful of being close. But in the movie, he was not afraid to be so close to hear, touch her, & show her his true self. Even though he wants to keep that away from her. I was upset with that.

Movies are never like the books, but.. thats life.

I am happy that Pattinson is back. I think he did a good job as Edward. I was worried at first, but he pulled it off nicely. Also, everyone they cast for the Cullens did great too. Very nice. Now Jacob.. eh. I hope they pick a new Jacob. But all in all, my opinion.

[JohnDemetry]

I loved the movie! It was amazing, if not, alas, great. Catherine Hardwicke is the perfect director for this: nothing in the book compares to the moment Bella enters Bio class in the film... Edward -- repulsed -- winged like an angel (flanked by a stuffed owl), Bella -- self-conscious -- her hair billows against the fan. The danger of sexuality, the grace of Desire. Beautiful. The film is full of that stuff (I don't know why people call this exposition!?!? What more conflict do you need? It's the later "conflict" that seemed not quite to work for me, but all was made right by that heartbreaking prom scene. Killed me.) I was hoping Hardwicke would continue so that she could work through the ideas she introduces. It was like My So-Called Life with Godfather ambitions. In that tradition, I had hopes Part II would be better.

So this is BAD news from my perspective.

Yes, the great d.p. Elliot Davis deserves A LOT of credit. I have no doubt the editor might as well. But only one person could have gotten those performances from those actors. This is a real shame. Oh well, here's hoping Kathryn Bigelow or Sturla Gunnarsson or Neil Jordan or Patrice Chereau (!!!omg!1) will be hired to take over "New Moon". But something tells me they're not looking for artists. Anyone who directs "New Moon" should do screenings of "The Story of Adele H.", "Godfather Part II", and "The Company of Wolves" for inspiration and instruction.

[Jamie]

As long as they get someone who is as passionate about the project as Catherine is and was then we'll be ok, but if they are not having her back so they can rush things out and we get a crappy second movie, they're gonna be shooting themselves in the foot. I hope Summit knows what its doing.

Yes, having the same actors, and the same screenwriter and most of the same crew (ie: costuming, makeup, producer, ect.) will help the continuity of the film even with a different director, so I hope they've kept all of those ducks in a row.

It just seemed as if not just Kristen and Rob have great chemistry, but them along with Catherine together.

[stacie]

i'm not sure why everyone is so thrilled with CH not being in on the sequels. understandably, twilight the movie could have been MUCH better, but i agree.. it has much to do with the screen writing. the two main characters HARDLY talked to each other throughout the entire movie, MR basically wrote in scene after scene of them staring at each other as if they were drugged out. that's my only complaint about MR though, i do think she did a fantastic job at condensing that huge book.

my only hope is that whoever the new director is, they have equal the passion towards the project as CH did... bc i have a feeling the real reason she's not coming back is bc she's being handed a limited budget again. and we all saw those "special" effects in twilight. god help us if they don't get the money they need to do the werewolves correctly... if they fall flat in new moon, we can expect the worse for eclipse (and don't even get started on breaking dawn... people need to stop focusing on that book getting its turn as a movie, bc if new moon is worse then twilight, you can kiss any chance of that goodbye... can you say direct-to-dvd starring a completely different cast)

as the article mentions above, we have MUCH to be thankful for from CH.. she did cast the best actors in my opinion (who had to struggle with making a lacking script rise). i'm keeping my fingers crossed that new moon either keeps on pace with twilight, or is better. summit... please take the time and resources to do it correctly!

[Tracey]

Does it really matter? How is it that suddenly Twilight is the tour de force in the movie world? Who cares? It's just another tween movie -- albeit with a rather hot lead actor, IMO -- but that's it, it's a film.

It's not Harry Potter, and it won't ever be near the league of HP fandom because Rowling hit a niche at the right time (and I can say this without prejudice as I can't stand HP anymore, despite once being a large fan). Twilight is good -- and I've got all the books, and even reread them a few times.

But that's it, it's just GOOD. It won't be fantastic, and it won't be crap. It's medicore, so really, complaining about the screenwriter or who the director is won't change anything when the material you have to work with is only ho-hum. It takes a lot of talent to bring something like that to extraordinary and let's face it, unless it's Nolan or Spielberg, what's the likelihood of this film series being anything more than just a passing fad?