Will the fourth book in 'The Twilight Saga,' 'Breaking Dawn,' hit the big screen in two parts? If Summit Entertainment and author Stephenie Meyer have their way, yes. If the actors don't get a significantly bigger paycheck, then very possibly, no.Variety is reporting that Summit has scheduled screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg, who wrote the first three films, to finish the series -- but whether she's writing one film or two, no one knows.
The question marks? Whether 'New Moon' director Chris Weitz will return to shoot two back-to-back films. And the key cast members -- Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Lautner -- are currently only inked to four films, which would mean re-opening negotiations for a fifth. Variety speculates that the three could command eight-figure paydays for an extra film. That's a whopping $10 million minimum each.
Weitz has already announced plans to direct the much smaller 'The Gardener,' which Summit is it talks to fund, a deal likely predicated on securing Weitz's participation on 'Breaking Dawn.' Weitz is expected to announce his decision soon, and sources tell Variety that the job is his, if he wants it.
"You can't do 'Breaking Dawn' in one movie, you'd have to split it up," Meyer told MTV News when the last book in the series came out in 2008. "I really think they'd have to do five movies." She says that fans will know the exact cliffhanger moment where the split should occur.
The third film in the series, 'Eclipse,' is due out June 20, 2010. David Slade (who previously tackled vamps in '30 Days of Night' and inappropriate/horrific May-December relationships in 'Hard Candy') directed that installment.
Given the insatiable appetite for all things 'Twilight,' we can't imagine that fans will accept anything less than the full epic treatment. After all, if 'Harry Potter' fans get two 'Deathly Hallows' films, surely the 'Twilight' saga can muster the ranks -- and the cash -- for a fifth film. Providing the 'Twilight' craze doesn't fizzle out sometime between now and the date that 'Breaking Dawn' hits theaters, or R-Pattz and Kristen do become a real-life couple and -- the horror! -- call it quits and refuse to work together.
Reader Comments (22)
rowleyporter at 2:43PM on Dec 1st 2009
Breaking Dawn HAS to be split into two movies. There are too many major things that happen in this series finale that need to be significantly focused on and not just browsed over. I have a feeling that the way it needs to be done would cost too much money and too much time for just one film.
Nicole at 4:17PM on Jan 3rd 2010
No it shouldn't! Nothing major even really happens in Breaking Dawn! That would just be copying Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. They are just trying to make Twilight as good as Harry Potter which is not possiable because Harry POtter is a much better series!
daysha at 10:06PM on Jan 5th 2010
i think it should be split because there are to many major events that happen in that book. if they don't split it up then i dont think it will be good, because no one will be able to make sense of it all. i hope they do for the fan's that really enjoy every major detail of the book. The last one has to go out with a dang and i love harry pottor myself but i also love Twilight because its on another level from any other vamp movie. I agree with several other's that have left comments. It just so much the wedding, honeymoon, the affect of the prego bella, the turning of bella into a vamp, the training, and the big last scene with the conclusion. Split it please!!!
filberto at 3:25PM on Dec 14th 2009
nah, doesnt need to be 2 films. not enough content. nothing happened in the books, and so far nothing has happened in the movies. why make 5 movies where nothing happens? waste of money
aimee at 12:17PM on Dec 2nd 2009
if they split it in 2, those 2 films will be sensationally boring as the book as a whole was very dull. this saga will not be as big as it is now. people will lose interest after the first 2 films were very poor.
Elaine at 10:19AM on Dec 16th 2009
Breaking Dawn should NOT be spilt into two movies. But then again I wasn't a big fan of the last book, especially the final third (which according to how Stephenie suggests they break it up would be all that would remain for the final film). Frankly, I think that splitting up the book, especially there, would harm the movies. In the last third of the book there is barely any action. Sure, there is the big "fight" in the clearing, but (and tell the truth) weren't you disappointed when you read that part of the book and there wasn't a showdown?
But from a purely practical stand point - and in response to rowleyporter - it would probably be easier and cheaper to make one slightly longer than average film than to make two films which will require the renegotiation of several contracts for a pay raise of what is sure to be millions of dollars. Let's be honest here. The only reason they're considering it in the first place is because Harry Potter is doing it. (A move that is understandable in their case because JK Rowling introduced the completely new "Deathly Hallows" plot arch to the already complicated Horcrux one.)
If they could make the Lord of the Ring's triology, with its complex plot set in an imagined world with its own rich history, into one film per book, then they should be able to do it with Twilight. And let's face it The Twilight Saga isn't walking away with 11 Oscars any time soon.
Cryd at 1:11PM on Dec 2nd 2009
This book must be split into two movies. there is not enough time in one film session to fit in all the things that need to be in this movie in order to understand it. If they skip any parts people will be lost. They should cliff hanger it when jacob imprints and bella's heart starts to change. it's pretty much perfect. I think it would be a horribly inaccurate and boring movie if they only do one.
laura at 11:24AM on Jan 12th 2010
YES YES YES YES YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT.
Misha at 3:06PM on Jan 27th 2010
omg i totaly agree with u! one movie wudnt do it justice. it has to be two. You know what the movies are never going to be as good as the books, but i guess it will just have to do.
kara at 8:02AM on Dec 4th 2009
Breaking dawn should be two movies i totaly agree that way too much happent to be done well in one movie
Jenn at 2:48PM on Dec 4th 2009
Breaking dawn HAS to be split in two movies. the book is wayy to big to be put into one movie. if it was made into one so many big details would be left out that are vital to the twilight saga! so split the movies and the actors better be the same or else they will lose alot of money and alot of fan will be angry and disappointed!
Ella at 7:37PM on Dec 3rd 2009
I agree with Cryd. Also if Bella was recast the movies would be such better.
thatchic at 9:32PM on Dec 5th 2009
okay okay, i totally get it that Breaking Dawn is super long (ive read it a million times) and probably would need about 6 movies. but seriously, why keep everybody stringing along forever? yes i get that they want to keep making billions of dollars but really, it bugged the crap out of me when they left the cliffhanger on New Moon. sure i knew what it was. i read that book too. but i dont want to see "Breaking Dawn Part One" then wait another year to see "Breaking Dawn Part Two" and so on and so on. i mean, Come On! agh, now im pissed. hmph.
kris at 2:30PM on Dec 18th 2009
I think that it would suck to have to wait for the other film to come out... BUT>>> it would be soo worth the wait because there is too much that is going on in Breaking dawn....
Agnes Cullen at 10:19PM on Dec 21st 2009
Breaking Dawn HAS to be split into two films. It would drive me crazy (as if I wasn't already crazy about The Twilight Saga) if I had to wait another year to see the second part of Breaking Dawn but the book is just too long to fit into one film without cutting out so many important bits. If it wasn't split into two films, and they left out too many things, then people would be confused, and would eventually lose interest.
Daniella at 8:46PM on Jan 2nd 2010
I personally think that Breaking Dawn should be split into two movies. There is just way too much stuff going on to fit into one movie. I mean, the wedding, the volturi scene, bella learning to be a vampire, bella CHANGING into a vampire, bella having her kid....etc. Yeah, so split it into two. It would include more scenes than just one movie and more Twilight mania!!!
brittany at 11:50PM on Jan 2nd 2010
okay so as a fan of the twilight saga not a die hard fan but i did love the books i read them while i was pregnant..so this is to all of those people who think they are dry and boring ..why the hell did you keep reading them if you didnt like them and if you dont like them then stfu noone cares how you feel because those of us who do like the books and the movies really dont wanna hear ur bs about it so kep it to yourself...breaking dawn should def be split into 2 movies there is way to much going on in that book and it is very long to put it into one film would be outrageous.
cristal at 7:21PM on Jan 4th 2010
of course BREAKING DAWN should be split into two films!! If it is not then alot of parts are going to be missing, and i think that people could take the wait rather then having one really lame movie with alot of important missing details.even though i will be going crazy the whole time waiting for the part two to come out! it WILL be worth it!
laura at 3:41PM on Jan 9th 2010
I SCREAM AT THE TOP OF MY LUNGS YYYYEEEESSSS!!!! It has to be two movies
Donna Brown at 12:59PM on Jan 12th 2010
I don't think there is a good place to split the movie. I would rather see the time extended to accomodate the storyline. People are willing to sit through a longer movie and have it completed in one viewing rather than splitting and having to wait to see the outcome.