Who Should Direct the 'Twilight' Sequel - 'New Moon'?

Director Catherine Hardwicke, star Kristen Stewart and author Stephenie Meyer
Photo: Summit Entertainment

Whether you love or hate Twilight it is impossible to ignore the fact it is a phenomenon, and a female phenomenon at that. For so long genre films have satisfied fanboys and their lust to see men dressed as spiders, bats, flaming skulls and giant green men, but we now have our first bonafide fangirl film. Sure, there have been the Hannah Montana's and High School Musical king of films, but those always skewed younger. Twilight captured an audience Sex and the City couldn't even fulfill. Back at the end of May Sex and the City opened to $57 million and the headlines ran rampant insisting women could spur a film on to box-office success; the film ended up making $152 million.

Less than two months later came Mamma Mia! and its opening weekend of $27 million. It was a smaller number than Sex and the City by almost half, but it has since earned $143 million domestically and another $422 million in the foreign markets making it the 48th highest grossing worldwide feature ever. Yet again women prove to bring a film to box-office glory. Oh, and it just became the fastest selling UK DVD ever, beating Titanic's previous record.

On November 21 Summit released Twilight to the tune of $69.6 million in its opening weekend giving it the fourth best opening weekend of 2008 behind the likes of Batman, Iron Man and Indiana Jones (not bad company) and ahead of Will Smith, Pixar, Hulk and Narnia (can someone say "pwned"?).

However, even with nearly $70 million to its name you can't overlook the 44% Rating the film received from critics as compiled by Rotten Tomatoes. I am of the opinion that even the majority of Twilight fans realize it was not a very good movie, but they love it regardless. I can understand this, but just imagine if it was actually a good movie. Imagine if it wasn't only tweens and their mothers chomping at the bit to watch Edward and Bella fall in love. $70 million would be embarrassing compared to what the film could earn.

With news breaking that both Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson will be bringing in $12 million each for the sequel, New Moon, Summit has already committed 68.5% of Twilight's reported $35 million budget to its two stars, one can only assume they will give the same kind of monetary bump to the production. However, money isn't all that matters. Actually, it doesn't matter at all if you don't have the right people in place to make it.

With Stewart and Pattinson in place as well as screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg there are several more slots to fill, but one in particular intrigues me. And as much as we may learn in the next few days that Catherine Hardwicke will be brought on to direct once again I can't help but think (hope) a new director will be brought on to helm the second installment. In my opinion the primary problem with the first film was the script and the direction. I can't really blame Rosenberg too harshly for the script considering she only had five weeks to write it as she was working on a deadline as the writer's strike loomed. On top of that Rosenberg has proven she isn't a hack with her recent work writing eight episodes of Showtime's "Dexter". I am also confident she will do a much better job on the script for New Moon as she will have more time to write it and a good idea of what worked and what didn't in Twilight. This leaves Hardwicke.

In my opinion there should be one major prerequisite when it comes to the Twilight franchise - the director must always be female. It's a female fueled franchise and 2008 is proving to show females can make movies too, and movies that make money, but wouldn't it be nice if they were better?

Hardwicke certainly fills the female requirement, but I don't know why everyone is so high on her as a director. Outside of Thirteen what has she done? And Thirteen, while a good movie, wasn't great. Several people lavish praise on Hardwicke as if she has accomplished some high status in the world of film, but looking at her RottenTomatoes score and seeing a 55% on Lords of Dogtown, 38% on The Nativity Story and the previously mentioned 44% on Twilight I am wondering what people are praising.

Therefore, I tried to figure out who may be best to fill the gap. There are several ways to go about this depending on what kind of film you want to deliver. Do you want a film that will have an intense edge to it as well as the lustful tension between your two leads? If so, then lets recruit either Kimberly Peirce or Kathryn Bigelow.

Peirce directed Hilary Swank to her first Oscar in Boys Don't Cry in 1999 and since then has only helmed 2008's Stop-Loss, a film with a trailer that features Drowning Pool's "Bodies". Yeah, I think she is a director that could take things up a notch. As for Bigelow, well her next film is already set up at Summit for a summer 2009 release and word out of the festival circuit says The Hurt Locker is one hell of an intense and amazing film. Jeff Wells at Hollywood-Elsewhere said watching it is "like having your heart operated on by a construction worker wielding a power pneumatic nail-driver." Bigelow also directed Point Break for you action fans out there. Hmmm, action, now there is something Twilight lacked even when it tried.

Personally I think those two are terrific helmers but aren't quite right for the project.

I started thinking about Sofia Coppola, but for starters I don't think there is any way she would come within 100 yards of the project and on top of that she just doesn't fit.

My top four ultimately end up being Niki Caro, Patty Jenkins, Julie Taymor and Mira Nair. Of the bunch I think Mira Nair would be the most likely choice. Nair was offered the job of directing Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and also directed the coming of age story The Namesake. Julie Taymor directed the Oscar-winning film Frida, the visual and musical adventure Across the Universe and the Oscar-nominated Titus. Taymor would definitely bring a different approach to the story that I would probably compare to the shift the Harry Potter franchise took when Alfonso Cuaron turned it into bonafide filmmaking with Prisoner of Azkaban. However, I am not sure such a shift would sit well with fans just as a lot of Potter fans look down on what Cuaron did with Azkaban even though a lot of critics consider it to be the best film in the series.

Patty Jenkins would be an interesting pick, primarily because I would assume her involvement would ramp up the attention to the dialogue as she has directed episodes of both "Arrested Development" and "Entourage". She also has a bit of Academy cred after directing Charlize Theron in Monster earning Theron a Best Actress Oscar. With Jenkins' filmography including both high profile television work and film work she may be a perfect choice for a film that felt far too much like a made-for-TV movie, but still needs to remain in that middle ground making sure it doesn't abandon its core audience.

Personally, I would love to see Niki Caro at the helm. I love Caro's work on both Whale Rider and North Country and think she has just the right mix of serious as well as a fun-loving approach to her films. Whale Rider was a gem and with Caro also serving as writer on Whale Rider as well as her upcoming feature The Vintner's Luck, an adaptation of the Elizabeth Knox novel, I think she has a better ear for what works and what doesn't. Watching Twilight I felt the film stuck too closely to the book, a book that primarily focuses on the inner thoughts of a love struck girl, a hard task to put on the big screen, but Hardwicke took it to task with long swooning shots which were supposed to be grand but came off flat.

Of course, these are just my thoughts and who knows, with a little more time to work on the script and perhaps getting Hardwicke intimately involved with the script (she co-wrote Thirteen with Nikki Reed) New Moon could be a completely different story. A lot of emphasis has been placed on the money spent for Twilight, but you have to remember not a single vampire fang was seen and outside of a lot of fast forward and wire work all the effects went into Edward's shiny skin, an effect pulled off by ILM, so of course it's the best effect in the feature.

So who should direct New Moon? My suggestions are above, but what do you think? Cast your vote in the poll and add your comments below.

Who Should Direct the 'Twilight' Sequel - 'New Moon'?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

ONE NOTE: Let's tone down the negativity in the comments please. Yes, this is a Twilight related article but I think we can all act mature enough to have a discussion about it without negativity. There is a way to argue without calling people names and also remember, Twilight is the fangirl's Dark Knight, everyone deserves to have their geek out movies.

  • Em

    I say Niki Caro.

    Anyone but catherine hardwicke, and i'll be happy.

  • Chris C.

    I saw Twilight and agree that the weakest parts were the screenplay and the direction and would like to see both of those change hands...Kimberly Pierce would be my ideal choice, but thats just because I love her as a director and her name would spark interest in the project...Julie Taymor would be an abysmal choice in my opinion. She butchered 'Titus' and butchered the Beatles. I don't have faith in her being reliant to source material, which in the case of the Twilight series, is immensly popular and beloved. All that said, I think the studio will return to Hardwicke, for the sake of keeping everything that made Twilight a success intact.

  • SG

    Sorry Brad. I understand your reasoning, but don't agree with you. I've seen Twilight 16 times now and I'll be very disappointed if Catherine Hardwick is not at the helm. Very disappointed. Obviously, I don't give a tinkers damn what the critics say, but I know what I enjoy. Thanks, Catherine!

  • Felicia

    I don't believe that the director is the issue. I've read all of the books and greatly enjoyed them, however the movie did not follow the books enough to allow for character or plot developement. Granted the budget was much less than the HP franchise has enjoyed but again, the screen writing is I believe the biggest hurdle. If an HP books can be pared down enough for a movie and still follow the authors premiss than why couldn't Twilight? For instance in the book Edward more fully explains vampirism to Bella while they are having dinner in Port Angeles however he barely glosses over it in the film. Then we hear Bella making un-intelligent comments about how it doesn't matter because she loves him. This makes her sound like some love struck teenager because it didn't give enough information as the book did. Jasper was another weak link.........he spends the film looking catatonic not frightened of losing control. In the book he and Bella actually have a conversation while in Phoenix, but not in the film. I think the poor actor actually utters maybe two lines the whole time. We spend time watching Edward and Bella climb a tree and have unheard conversations, that was a true waste of precious film time. The scenes in Phoenix with James mention nothing about Alices past. Again time is wasted showing scenes of Bella and Charlie eating out at a diner, not only did that not happen what was the point? Bella comes to spend all of her time with Edward and that is a huge bone of discontent with Charlie and her friends, very little of which is seen in the movie.

    The real issue will be with trying to fill in the blanks for furture films because the first was not truer to form. I truly believe with better writting this could have been done even on its lower budget to become so much more. One of the saving graces was that most of Meyers more humerous lines were incorporated into the film.........such as Edward marveling at Bella's worry over if his family will like her rather than the fact that she will be in a house full of vampires.

  • Felicia

    @SG: You've seen the movie 16 times? Its been playing for what, six days so you've seen it every day, twice a day? You may very well single handedly bank roll the next project.

  • Felicia

    @Chris C.: I would like to point out that what made Twilight a success was the work of Stephanie Meyers who made people want to see the film, rather than the film standing on its own merit.

    Go into a book store and try to find all four books. Its difficult at best as they are flying off the shelves. That is why Twilight is such a success.

  • Chels

    I agree that some/most of the problems with the film came from the direction, as well as a lack of budget. But I still absolutely loved the movie. I realize production wise it was absolutely terrible, and can see why the critics bashed it, but personally i loved it, despite its many, many flaws. But for those who say it didn't follow the book, I think that's completely absurd. It followed the book amazingly well. Yes, there were several underdeveloped plots, but I think that came from trying to follow the book so closely, and yet still trying to fit it into a two hour film. They should have gone for three hours, because lets face it, those who drove this movie to its box office success were its fans, and they would have been more than willing to sit through a three hour movie if it meant more development between the lead characters, with scenes like, "Your hair looks like a haystack...but I like it." "Edward! You Stayed!", as well as all the other sarcastic, but loving banter between Edward and Bella, which is partly what we fell in love with. Not to mention beefing up the other characters roles like, from Alice, "It sounded like you were having Bella for lunch and we came to see if you would share." I missed all the witty remarks that made the characters of the book seem so normal. I think the key is relatability (is that a word?) As for the director, I'm kind of torn. Yes I believe the movie could have been a much better MOVIE if a different director had done the job. But I also know that Catherine was a HUGE fan of the books going into the project, and I can't help but think that if a different director is handed the task of New Moon, female or not, that we may get a better MOVIE, but a worse adaptation of the book, which will upset fans even more than the odd direction, and underdeveloped plots of Twilight. If it could be guaranteed that a director was chosen who had read the books, and loved them, even before being offered the job, than I would be totally fine with a new director. But then again, SM worked closely with Catherine, so even if a non-fan director was chosen, maybe she could help keep her in check. I really don't know which way I prefer.I would really love a new director, who was previously a fan of the books, who could make an awesome MOVIE based closely on the book, that would be amazingly good. good enough that it would draw in other audiences and make beaucoup bucks at the box office, and set some kind of record, so that we could set all the twilight-haters straight, and get more people to read the books. I don't know of anyone though, and it seems unlikely that there is someone out there to fit that description. So do we stay with Catherine Hardwicke, who will do her best to stick to the book, and make a so-so movie, or do we go with someone who may stray a little bit from the book(or may not, but do we want to take that chance) but who will make an extremely good movie to watch, twilight fan or not? I guess it doesn't really matter either way, because the choice isn't up to me. All I can say is, whoever is given the task of New Moon, you better do a darn good job of showing how much bella and edward love each other at the beginning of the movie. Take extra time if you have to, otherwise the separation won't be nearly as dramatic, and despite the chemistry that was clearly present between kristen and rob, i just didn't really feel the love between bella and edward in twilight, partly because of a lack of focus once actually together, and because of the tone of the movie.

  • GregM

    I don't fully understand the need for the director to be female, but I'll play along.
    I voted for none of the above and here are my two suggestions:

    Adrienne Mitchell: IMDB's a little misleading with her credits, check out her work on Durham County.

    Sarah Polley: Away From Her. Plus she's got some genre ties with Cronenberg and Snyder.

  • davidfrank


    One thing you forgot with Kathryn Bigelow: She directed Near Dark, a film that some (many?) believe is the best vampire film of the last 20 years.

    I doubt she'd want to get back on board the vampire wagon--especially one as silly and wimpy as Twilight--but if she did, then I'd be positively curious about the next film.

  • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/blog/brad_brevet/ Brad Brevet

    @davidfrank: I actually haven't seen that, but will check it out.

  • MARY

    Okay, i LOVED the movie... but some parts did fall short. as a teen-girl and crazed fan I cant say i hated the movie but i wish it stuck closer to the book. i mean, Stephanie Meyers book is known by all...she must have done something right. so why didn't summit stay with it? I don't think it was Cathrine Hardwickes fault the movie had some...shall we say, intersting...parts. it was just that in the two hours they had they couldn't show the depth and complecty of Edwards and Bellas love.(plus the kiss scene was over done) It made their relationship seem shallow and kinda random. but hey i enjoyed staring at Rob Pattenson for two hours... he's great for the eyes.

  • Twilight Mom

    "Are you insane?? Did you even read the book??"

    Fact it is a Phenomenon, due to Stephanie Meyer..
    Opening day was huge ticket sales we all know because the book was so great but, Cathrine Hardwick missed it dead on!

    If you haven’t read the book how could you understand the passion and longing they have for each other. How they feel one could not live without each other and the physical pain each of them feels when apart? I can only hope the studio hires a new team of writers, directors and hair and makeup crew for 'New Moon'. They should also consider a soundtrack that actually works with the scenes.

    Stephanie Meyer created her books in a way that would allow each one to be easily transformed into a movie with having to chop out major scenes.

    Good Luck!

  • Jill

    O.K, everybody STOP!! Don't be so hard on Catherine. I have seen the movie 3 times (including the midnight showing) and every time I see it, I love it even more! I read all 4 books, working on the 2nd round. I agree that the build up of Bella and Edward's relationship came too quickly but I did really love the first kiss scene. I wasn't sold on Rob as Edward in the beginning but after seeing the movie, he is fitting the bill of Edward more and more. I'm one of the "women" fans so I wasn't screaming and yelling throughout the movie but I did have a blast watching it and of course, thinking about all the changes and additions I would have made had I been the director! I'm glad Katherine was a fan before directing it. I also thought it could have been better in some ways but don't we always say that about something so loved and anticipated? All in all, it was fun to watch (but not enough kissing/romantic scenes)!! I thought the music was great! I wish the Baseball game scene was longer! Let's all go see it 16 times so there is not doubt all the sequels will be have the funds to be made!!! I hope all the same actors are cast . . . Jasper rocks!!

  • Asyikin Z

    Yeah...I av to agree.I'm a huge fan of da books.Reading da book,it's absorbing,it just pull u into the world of mysteriousness and I think watching Twilight,that is what it's lacking in.I think the problem comes from the writing.No disrespect 2 Roosenberg.I think she needs to immerse herself in2 da book and write the best version 4 da movie.I'm satisfied with the actors.I think Hardwicke did a decent job.Nothing's perfect in life,and I like this movie actually.I'll watch it again..I'm too much of a fan to care...: )

  • Holly

    @Felicia: i totally agree with you. There was no character or plot development at all. It was as if they chose which scenes from the book to do & pasted them together, with out any real transition. I was really disappointed how the whole blood typing scene was completely left out. Not only does it show the irony that Bella can smell blood, but that it also makes her faint. It also shows us how protective Edward is of Bella before the Port Angeles scene & how jealous Mike is of Edward. Honestly, it seemed to me that the whole thing depended on the fact that every single person in the audience had read the book. What was really sad was the scenes we were supposed to be awwing over we were laughing because it was so corny. For example, the meadow scene. I found it odd that they suddenly lay down (it wasn't even a meadow really), staring at each other, in complete silence w/ music playing...that's not quite how it happened in the book. I had forgotten until I read your comment that Bella does talk to Jasper in the book. Was his ability to calm people even mentioned in the movie? It's interesting that they chose to leave out Alice's past in the movie, I wonder how that'll come in to play in the sequel, because it is mentioned in the book. The fact that Bella willingly went to prom w/ Edward is unbelievable. Over & over in the book she mentions how she can't dance & has no desire to go to either dance for that reason. I would like to see a new director, but as long as they spend more time on the characters & the plot in the sequel, I will be happy. To me, everything felt rushed until the fight scene; and then it speed up again. Regardless, I know I will go see the sequel just because I'm to big of a fan to ignore it. My biggest question is however, if the transition from book to movie worked so well with HP, why can't it work with Twilight?

  • Laura

    I am a big fan of the books and loved the movie as well. I thought the main thing that was missing was the development of the relationship between Edward and Bella, you really don't get a sense that they HAVE to be together. I think the problem with this is essentially the writing, I didn't really think the directing was bad at all. The scenes that were in the movie did their absolute best to portray the love between Edward and Bella, but when it comes down to it there just weren't enough of these scenes.
    Another reason I think the writing is the real issue is that the added scenes never seemed to advance the plot at all. They simply took precious time that they could have been using to show us more of the book. I think also the focus was placed to heavily on the action aspects. Yes, they are exciting to see, but isn't Twilight essentially a love story? Where was the love?

    Given that I think the writing was the main issue, I really like Rosenburg. Dexter is one of my favourite shows ever and I think she does great with it. Maybe with more time she will be able to show us what she can really do. Also New Moon is a different type of book altogether, yes there is lots more character development, but there is also more action. Hopefully, this different type of story will aid in the making of an even more fabulous movie.

    I hope that haters of the movie will eventually come around and realize that movie does the best it can and really is not so bad. I think there is some inital shock because the movie is not the book, but really, what movie ever does the book justice? Even the best Harry Potter movies are nearly as good as the books are to read. Isn't it worth it to have SOME of our favourite scenes and moments on the big screen rather than NONE of them.

    I definitely think so...

  • Justin Casey

    I want catherine hardwicke if she goes not return she is either not being paid enough or fuckin retarted

  • niters

    If there are things lacking in a film it is almost always the director. they, aside from the producers of course, have the last artistic say in things and if they dont speak up and say that they dont like how a scene is done then they have no one else to blame. everyone else mostly just follows orders and keeps their mouth shut.

  • Annie

    I agree with your points on the script and the direction - I wasn't impressed with Hardwicke. I say get someone new. I loved it when Alfonso Cuaron was brought on to the HP films! The first two were so so soooo bad. I'm hoping that New Moon will be Twilight's Prisoner of Azkaban!

  • Gina

    I don't think that they should ask either the director or the writer back. I enjoyed the book so much but was disappointed in how rushed every scene was and that they added scenes and left ones out that we important. I would really like them to take there time with the next movies because they become more intense and get rid of the corny things because that is really not part of the book.

  • Mary Ann

    I am torn on the issue because the first time I saw the movie I was really disappointed. I went to see it again the next day with an open mind to just watch it as a movie, not comparing it to the book, so it was better. I do think it could have been much better because it just felt too rushed to me and I could not understand why some of the key scenes could not have been in the same places they were in the book. I am hoping and praying that when they do New Moon that they pay attention to what did not work with Twilight and make this one much better. I would like to address one issue that I have read from several reviews and that is the fact that there are no fangs. There are no fangs because Stephenie's vampires do not have fangs, just sharp teeth.

  • angel

    @Felicia: I agree with you on most points, Felicia. I think that the actors (even the kid who played Jasper-I think the girl who played Alice was worse.) had poor material to work with. I also think the director didn't really do a great job either. The story telling in this movie just doesn't seem to work. On top of that, Hardwicke resorts to annoying camera tricks (the scene where Bella is telling Edward that she knows he's a vampire-the one in the woods where Hardwicke kept spinning the camera around instead of focusing on the actors' faces. That shows lack of storytelling ability to me.). I don't like the idea of Kimberly Pierce. Hate the idea of Julie Taymor. But Niki Caro? Brilliantly thought out, Brad. Niki Caro has the ability to tell a story from a girl's point of view--what's more, an outsider's point of view, which is what Bella is and what a director needs to bring to the table. Whale Rider is a prime example.

  • Twilight**Mom

    It was a very low budget film and I wouldn't be surprised that the film was partially ruined during the editing process since everyone was on such a tight schedule, however, I do think the script writer was weak, she didn't delve into Bella's or Edwards 'true love...ie...Romeo & Juliet like passion' and the panning of the camera in the woods as well as the sparkling effect of Edward left a sour taste in my mouth, as well as Kristin's monotone voice, but on a good note I did like the baseball scene, I just wish it were longer. But I think Julie Taymor would excellent choice if Harwicke doesn't come back...with a higher budget there a better film would be inevitable...so I guess Summit better dish out the bucks for better special effects...and really please fix Edwards Sparkling body before the dvd is released...please.

  • sherry

    I don't know if this was already mentioned, but I am sick of people saying they didn't see any fangs. Of course you didn't because in Stephenie Meyers vampire world, they do not need fangs. They're teeth are powerful enough. It's a new twist and if you read the books you would know this. I personally like the new twist, it fits with having these "vegetarian" vampires.

  • Carrie

    I say let Len Wiseman of Underworld I & II (HUGE successes!!) do this. It DOESN'T have to be "helmed by a woman"--give it a rest already! I'm a woman, and no disgrace to my gender, but get someone who has had success with VAMPIRE/ACTION/ROMANCE movies... If Hardwicke does New Moon, someone needs to light the fuse on her muse!

  • Clara

    I think Hardwicke should direct New moon! she did a great job whing twilight!!!

  • twilight

    I agree with most of the posts and read the books and generally felt the movie was kinda "meh" I really had a problem with the blue tint given to the movie it just made it look cheap to me as well there was no need for so many close-ups all i could do was stare at Kristens teeth lol. With all books you have to let go and just enjoy the general story told, each actor had some terrible scenes (I laughed during the first bio scene, and some of jaspers moments) but overall i dont regret seeing it but i watched it on watch-movies.net rather than spending the money to go again. Something i was really upset that they lost in the book was the sleep talking that bella does and the fact that edward tells her what she says and more importantly edward being able to read minds was poorly developed. I was pleasantly surprised with charlie in the movie though.

  • Samantha

    First off, I began my journey with Twilight when it was published in 2005. So, I have been around the phenomenon for quite some time.

    Now, I have only a few complaints about the "adaptation" of Twilight. I found that though the movie stayed true in a gist, it lacked the "fluff" and details within the plot. So many characters were undeveloped, namely Jasper and Alice. In the first book, you really don't get that much out of Emmett and Rosealie; however, I feel as though I got more out of those two in the movie than the others. Poor Jackson Rathbone hardly said a word. And as pleased as I was with the casting of Ashley Greene as Alice, there was so much missing the character and I can hardly think this is Ashley's fault. Also, the relationship of Bella and Edward happened much too fast. All we see is this head-over-heels, typical high school girl falling in love with a gorgeous guy. We don't see or feel the real struggle to their impossible relationship. And there was no "morning after" to the first night Edward stays with Bella. That scene adds a lot to their new found love.

    Maybe I'm going out on a limb by saying this, but I don't really blame Hardwicke. Sure, Rosenburg was pressed for time but we know she has the talent since she's written for "Dexter". Perhaps since then, she has taken to reading New Moon repeatedly to ensure she adds more "fluff". Also, I'm praying for a bigger budget. New Moon is my favorite book in the saga, and I would hate to see it fail.

  • Samantha

    Oh! And by the way, Meyer's vampires DO NOT have fangs.
    Sorry you didn't get the memo, Brad! Maybe you should read the book?

  • http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/blog/brad_brevet/ Brad Brevet

    @Samantha: Thanks for the comments Samantha, but I did read the book and they do have fangs, they just aren't seen. Hard to be a vampire without fangs.

  • anonymous

    You know who might actually do an awesome job at directing the next film? Joss Whedon. I think he has proven himself to be rather awesome at tortured vampire love.

  • Sarah


    Amen! I totally agree with this post! Catherine is crazy about the Twilight books and I think that is incorporated into the finished product. I think if it hadn't been for her, a lot of the script would have fallen flat. The script is definately the weakest link in the movie. I understand about the incredibly tight budget, but I really think Twilight needed to be *atleast* 30 minutes longer. I really really hope New Moon is atleast 2 1/2 hours long. 3 would be better. Especially since a lot of gaps will have to be filled in. I don't think Twilight was written in the expectation of New Moon being made, and they'll have to back track some to make it make sense to those who haven't read the books.

  • twilightlover

    i agree
    maybe joss and catherine should work together cuz i loved the work that catherine did in twilight but for the next movie if they also got joss it would be great since he did do 7 seasons of great buffy episodes.

  • twilightlover

    everyone should know that movies arent suppose to be made exactly like the books
    everyone should just be happy that they even made a movie, sure there might have been things missing but it doesnt matter, for such a low budget movie catherine did a good job, plus it was the first movie of many to come the next ones will be better take harry potter for example their first movie wasnt all that great but over the years it has gotten better

  • -Boy from phil..

    Well i agree that the problem was that it was boring in some part of the movie... i actually can hear the stomach of the person behind me rumbling.... that was in some LAME parts of the movie..... i also hope that bella would be a little more LESS- vampire yet.... it's weird really... she's more of a vampire than Alice.... even if she's a new face it's not an excuse to be .... uhm... boring i guess?? get a life Kristen... i mean just even look at her pictures... no offense but she is so serious, i can mistake her for a statue.... beautiful statue to be honest... i still want her on new moon cause i think it'll spoil the movie if she'd be replaced.. just hope she'd act more BELLA next time... and i hope Edward can lead her next time... about the director... well it's like harry potter 3.... no colors..... get it?? compare HP1&2 by Cris C, in direction... It was beyond better that Jay Leno's.... IT'S TRUE JAY, GET OVER IT>>>>.....>>>>

  • Greta

    Please no Hardwicke! Hardwicke wants to make an action movie, Twilight is a love story first, action film second! I disagree with the notion that next Twilight film needs to be directed by a woman. It just needs a great director period.

  • karla rodriguez

    i think STEVE SPIELBERG would make the movie EVEN better for the sequel....if thats even possible!

  • sher

    @Brad Brevet:

    They do not have fangs.

    Page 218 Eclipse: The conversation is between Bella and Jacob.

    "Well...I was wondering...do you...y'know, kiss him?"

    I laughed. "Yes."

    He shuddered. "Ugh."

    "To each her own," I murmured.

    "You don't worry about the fangs?"

    I smacked his arm, splashing him with dishwater. "Shut up, Jacob! You know he doesn't have fangs!"

  • cindy

    first let me say, i am reading the series for the 2nd time. i only discovered the book series 2 weeks before the movie Twilight was on the big screen.. i know, where the hell have i been, right? lucky me though! i didnt have to fret for long!!
    i have been obsessed from book one.
    i am so excited it was even made into a movie... im a movie/ tv addict.
    reading hasnt ever been my fav. past time. ruined by forced novels during my high school years.
    after picking up twilight, recommended, no.. demanded, by a friend, i couldnt put it down! i think i love reading again! if it werent for stephenie meyers, i wouldnt know what i have been missing! i have the sudden urge to find a copy of wuthering heights, having no clue to the story being referenced in her books.
    anyway, we all love stephenie & i got carried away:) lol
    i wanna talk about the movie now.
    i agree completely with most of the complaints! not enough love/ tooo much action for this romeo & juliet story! waisting time adding new scenes of nomad killings, rather than focusing on Edward & Bella, there love/ death relationship, and the many lost scenes of struggle and passion! so much was left untouched. There truely isnt enough justice in the film. i believe it speaks to the talented & gifted stephenie, who graced us with her imagination! we should ease up on the cast & crew! spend the money, the films will only get better!

    i hope that there will be flashback scenes in new moon to make up for the loss of character/ relationship development. or an extended version twilight dvd!! who knows..

  • LiNe

    I loved twilight, but it just seemed to short for me. I mean Catherine did a good job, but i wish that they stuck more to the book. I'm down for her to direct New Moon. She probably has a better understanding of what the fans expect so she's prepared.

  • r

    I agree that Hardwicke should be replaced. It's like she didn't understand the book at all and was trying to do a bigger budget Buffy episode. But I don't think any of the above women are right--my choice is Mary Harron. She has right edge (American Psycho) and delves deep into character, something Twilight was completely lacking.

  • me

    MIRA NAIR! if she was asked to do harry potter and actually did across the universe then PLEASE make her do new moon and make this movie better! the cant possibly allow this series to follow thru like this. its an AMAZING series. i read them each about 4 times. please stick to the passion, romance and commitment.
    if catherine keeps going then she must change a lot of things and deffinately improve color (no more grey, black blood, and dull colors). the only color i saw was the green from the trees. not even her "purple" bed.

    and no they dont have fangs.

  • Tw

    NO NOT hardwicke!!
    All i saw was the color GREEN.....
    She has a creative mind but it just doesn't work in the twilight saga,,,she rushed everything..the scriptwriter should not be blamed though,,but i guess she has a part of it...but it's hardwicke's work to clear all that..

    men,,, i hope New Moon will be WAAAAAY better than twilight,,
    Stephenie's books are so touching but I can't feel it in Hardwicke's interpretation..
    so if you're wise you'll replace her..

  • Pauline

    I could not agree more with this article. I am 31 years old, but am a huge fan of the Twilight book series. When I got out of seeing this movie I was utterly disappointed. I understand that they didn't have a big budget on this first film...but it was just horrible. I thought the acting was poor but I think it had more to do with bad directing then rather with actors who couldn't act. I also thought the special effects were bad and the story was just butchered. If you didn't read the book and just went to see the movie I don't think you would know what the heck was going on. I think that Catherine is the wrong choice. These books are huge and should of had a big movie like Harry Potter. Instead it had the feel of a cheap 80's horror movie.

  • Janet

    Sarah Polley should be on your list. I think she could do a great a job.

  • esther

    To be honest, I think she could have have done a better job but if they want to fire someone, they should fire Melissa Rosenberg.

  • deb

    i chose none, why does it always come down to female directors for us to choose from. Some of the most epic love stories were made from Male directors, Baz Luhrmann (Moulin Rouge + Romeo and Juliet), Joe Wright (Atonement) and maybe even Alfonso Cuarón who i love for including the natural elements as a secondary character. To me i don't care who they choose, the only thing that really concerns me is the final product of New Moon. Would it be worth watching or would it be something like Twilight with bad camera angles, horrible script and bad editing. i loved Catherine's work for the movie Thirteen but she definitely disappointed me with Twilight.

  • Orla

    Any body who can direct an epic love story such as New moon.

    It doesnt have to be women.
    Some of the most moving love stories were by men.

    Ie.. Nick Casvettes - the Notebook.

  • chicgeek

    Alfonso Cuaron - who directed Prisoner of Azkaban

  • Melissa

    JOSS WHEDON! All the way! I don't agree that a female should have to do this movie... Joss Whedon made incredible stories of love and longing on his tv shows and has experience with action scenes and creating wonderful characters... these characters already ARE wonderful but the movie didn't show that off very well. I think Joss would be GREAT for New Moon. Plus, Stephenie Meyer is a fan of his ;-)

  • ponyluver

    @Justin Casey:
    i totally agree
    i, for one, am not going to see the twilight sequels if she doesn't direct them. even if it kills me! i agree with "Clara" as well. Catherine should NOT be replaced, she needs to come back
    she knows what the fans want. she has family that loves this book too, i'm sure, so she has an insider's scoop on the fandom as well! i went to see Twilight and i thought it rocked!

  • Wendilynn

    I'm not too worried about changing directors. What worries me is that this means they are going to give New Moon a low budget which means another cheesy movie. Twilight fans sunk alot of money into the first one to make sure New Moon would be made right with a real budget and it looks like they plan on biting the hands that fed them.

  • Wendilynn

    I disagree with Joss Whedon and Alphoso Cuaron even touching New Mooncompletely. I still can't watch Prisoner of Azkaban because it was so badly done, Alphonso killed major plot points of the story and added a bunch of crap that didn't need to be in there. I shudder to think how his heavy hand and silly editing transitions would ruin New Moon. And apparently I'm the only one who thinks that Buffy was predictable and boring. I only read Twilight in the first place because my daughter convinced me that it wasn't your typical vampire story. And she was so right. Buffy was terrible. Anything "alternative" or "sub culture" was added to Buffy and the additions came predictably. Twilight has a life of its own that separates it from the typical vampire genre and I wouldn't trust either of those two with it.

  • Pauline

    Last night I watched Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. I had seen it before but it is the first time I watched it since Rob Pattinson appeared in Twilight. Rob was so good and natural in that movie as Cedric Diggory. But in Twilight he seemed awkward and forced. That just goes to show me that it isn't because Rob can't act...it is obviously because of a bad script (replace the screen writer) and bad direction (replace the director). I have also been to the Summit Entertainment website trying desperately to find an e-mail address or phone number so that I could call and try to voice my opinion that I think New Moon needs a bigger budget and a new director but I can't find any contact information for the company. If anyone knows of suck information could they post it here?

  • Daveigh

    I think catherine was a good director, and she did a good job, but it COULD have been better. I'm really glad they're going to have a new writer as well. The only thing now, is that they're going to be trying to "make-up for" in NEW MOON what they didn't have in TWILIGHT. And I feel that the main thing they didn't have in TWILIGHT was the bond between edward and bella; them falling in love, it was too silent, quick, not strong enough. Cause that was really the most crucial part. And it's going to be extremely difficult to make-up for that in NEW MOON, when Edward isn't even in the majority of it. I hope they can think of something! Can't wait!
    And hey? Does it have to be a female director?

  • saelynne

    I think Alejandro Agresti would be a good choice. He directed "The Lake House". so he has some experience with working on a surreal love story and at the same time making it look romantic at the same time.

  • Pauline

    It was just announced that the director of New Moon will be Chris Weitz who directed the Golden Compass and I heard he co-directed American Pie.

  • J. Edwards

    Hardwicke has done some good stuff but I'm not sure she's right for this genre. I really like the idea of Taymore directing the next one bc I love the two films mentioned in the article. Niki Caro's upcoming "The Vintner's Luck" looks extremely promising so I may change my opinion once I see that.
    And I will admit my comments are made on hearsay of Twilight, as it did not actually appeal to me. However I have heard mediocre response from the all the half dozen people I've talked to.

  • i love Rob

    i loved twilight the book but to me the sucked

  • Sadman

    Chris Weitz, of "About a Boy" fame is directing the movie.

  • Terri

    I am disappointed that a woman is not directing the New Moon. I agree that Hardwicke may have not been the best director, particularly since she talked too much through the special features and she overlooked a few things: 1) the camera lights that were seen on the side of the truck in the dark (there were no street lights to provide lights to the side of the truck); 2) the fact that Bella's dad was home and didn't wake up from the noise that Edward made from restraining himself from Bella in her bedroom (her father should have been working late or had some sort of excuse that would explain why he didn't investigate the noise Edward made when he slammed himself against Bella's wall/door); 3) the fact that Emmit was eathing when he shouldn't have been in the lunch room; and 4) Edward said he had been visiting/watching Bella sleep for the past couple of months, yet she started school March. It would seem a more realistic timeframe would be "a little over a month."

    My biggest worry is that this new director will overlook the little things like the wolf picture watching over Bella in her bedroom or the fact that the Cullens wear what appears to be their family crest as either a wrist band on the right hand for the guys and necklaces for the girls. I also hope Edward's hairstyle doesn't drastically change. Even though Rob Pattinson doesn't care for the particular hairstyle, he looks really good in it. I understand the new director will want to make changes, but I hope he doesn't make drastic changes like Edward no longer wears his wrist band without explaining why. Hopefully, he'll have the Cullens use the same wrist band and necklace props as well.

  • Terri

    I hope the people at Summit know what they are doing by making Chris Weitz the director. He may not do as good of a job keeping the female fans happy. If he and Summit are smart, they will have some women helping him with directing, etc.