The press release was sent out yesterday afternoon. Catherine Hardwicke, will not be directing the sequel to Twilight which Summit wants to have in the theatres by the end of next year or at the latest in early 2010. The release said that Hardwicke passed on the project due to "timing issues" because she wanted more prep time to work on the script which scribe Melissa Rosenberg turned in on opening weekend. Summit wants to film sooner rather than later.
Nikki Finke is reporting that Hardwicke was actually fired because she was "difficult" and "irrational." Geez, they just should have called her a bitch and been done with it.
Who knows what the real story is, probably somewhere in the middle, but this rubs me the wrong way. First, the film is opening all over the world and Hardwicke is currently in Europe promoting the film. Awkward.
Second, I can't help but think that a guy director who has brought in over $140 million on a budget of under $40 million would be treated differently. Hardwicke did everything she was supposed to do, that every director dreams of doing, directing a big box office success. (The film will probably turn out to be in the top 10 domestic grossers of the year.)
Everyone keeps saying the power job is the director and that having more women directors show box office prowess will open up the directing ranks. Guess not. Just goes to show that the gender issues are just much deeper than anyone is willing to discuss.
No Hardwicke for 'Twilight' sequel (Variety)
Originally posted on Women & Hollywood
Long before $150,000-gate, Sarah Palin seemed to...
The Obamas dropped by the Vatican on Friday, with daughters...
Yesterday evening, Greg Sargent reported on The Plum Line that one of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's key reasons...
I was sorry to watch, live on CNN, Edward R. Murrow and Emmy Award-winning broadcaster and...
I never actually heard the words made famous by a certain man on a certain TV show. Instead I got a lot...
Jim Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for...
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The former fiance of Gov. Sarah Palin's...
Hermione herself, Emma Watson, charmed David Letterman and...
Think Progress flags David Brooks telling...
While we of course do not claim to know anyone's thoughts, we nominate these...
The Daily Show's John Oliver is unhappy with mainstream journalism, and even drearier...
It's summer, the time for weddings! A few of my friends are getting married this summer and fall, so lately...
SYDNEY — Residents of a rural Australian town hoping to protect the earth and their wallets...
For this week's installment of their "Lunch with the FT" feature the...
"What's for dinner?" A lot of us ask that question right...
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I haven't seen the film so I cannot comment on the directing. However, if a male director who was "difficult" managed to rake in this much money, he would have been brought right back into the fold.
independentwoman is correct in her assessment. The directing, screenplay, and editing was purely BAD in this movie. The movie did not flow well, but the actors were well picked. A person would have had to read the books to understand everything going on, though. In that sense, the directing was just bad, bad, bad. Good move on Summit's part, as long as they pick someone who will understand the greatness of New Moon, and seamlessly move it to the big screen where it truly belongs. It will be a blockbuster if done right. If not, the fans may very well walk this time, instead of paying to see it multiple times like they did Twilight. It wasn't because Twilight was so good that they did this. It was to make sure Summit made enough on the first movie to make the sequels. They have it now. Spend it wisely.
There are only two reasons this movie did well: first, the excellent Twilight books are devoured by teenage girls who are in love with the main character, the gorgeous vampire Edward Cullen, for his burning desire but honorable behavior toward his human love interest AND the attractiveness of the actors playing the parts. That is what sold tickets. Otherwise this was a poorly made and horribly directed movie. In fact, the movie was awful. Full of cheesy longing looks between characters set to dark and moody music to clue us in to the forbidden attraction between them. The adults in the audience were actually laughing at times. Even my 13 year old daughter who loved the books thought the movie was "just ok." I didn't know at the time that the director was a woman, only that the movie was horrible. The director, regardless of gender, deserves to be replaced. On the bright side, maybe the next movie will be better.
Thank you. The film was pretty damn bad.
No matter who directed it, Twilight was going to be a hit because of the massive following the book had. Ed Wood, Jr. could have directed it, and it would have been a hit.
We shouldn't let women direct just because they're women. We should let them direct because they're damn fine filmmakers. You know, male directors get fired for being bastards too.
Now, if Catherine Breillat got to direct one of the Twilight movies!
Director is the power job? Not unless you're a big name...Otherwise, it's the producers and the studio who call all of the shots. And the stars.
And you are just now figuring this out? While I am not a vampire movie fan, having a good film that is wildly popular and directed by a woman is definitely progress. Shame on Summitt for their short-sighted attitude. But, I guess, good, well-done and fast don't always go together.
Congratulations to Ms. Hardwiche for her well-done film; I look forward to seeing her future project in the theatres.
You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in or