Comments on: New Moon & Eclipse to Shoot Back to Back?

By: Jennii

Jennii — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:45:13 +0000

I WUD LUV THT 4 2 HAPPEN but wnt the cast need a rest ?? i mean after theyve dne new moon im sure thyd wnt a rest then go on2 eclipse ill jst feel harsh lol

I WNA PLAY THE PART OF RENESMEE IN BREAKING DAWN LOL well wen shez 12 neway

LUV U ROB xx x3 <3

By: {R}andi

{R}andi — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:02:40 +0000

OMFG IFTHEY MADE THEM BACK TO BACK I WOULD BE SOOOOOO HAPPY

By: Lee Orlando

Lee Orlando — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:25:55 +0000

Shooting the films back to back give Summit and the production costs what they call *economy of scale*, meaning they control cost of making the films as well as being better able to schedule pre production and post production of both films.

The films release (when we get to see them) would still be separated and each film is treated as a distinct and individual film.

So, we the fans, win. Summit and the investors in the company win. My only hope is that whomever is chosen as the director of the two films — should the Summit managing group decide to go this way — has a feel for the material and treats the material and us with respect and provides the access we are used to having with the production.

By: Michelle Miller

Michelle Miller — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:08:47 +0000

director suggestions…Guillermo DelToro (Pan’s Labryrinth, Hellboy 2) or Alfonso Curon (HP Prisoner of Azkaban)…they can do the scary stuff pretty well. Remember the Dementors in Prisoner..and NOTHING can touch the Angel of Death in Hellboy 2…

By: Michelle Miller

Michelle Miller — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:06:49 +0000

I don’t think its a bad thing. They did it with the LOTR, Pirates and they’re gonna do it with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. They kind of have to…the cast isn’t getting any younger, esp since Vamps aren’t supposed to age.

By: Jasmine

Jasmine — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:55:58 +0000

That is soooo good!!! Hopefully they’ll make them two movies tho!!!!! But the good thing is we definitely won’t wait as long!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: Ashley

Ashley — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:43:20 +0000

I’M FINE WITH THEM SHOOTING IT BACK 2 BACK. I’M A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THE ACTORS AND ESPECIALLY ROB’S SLEEPING HABITS! I HOPE THEY GET ENOUGH SLEEP(TEHEE!) THEY DID THAT WITH LORD OF THE RINGS AND IT TURNED OUT GOOD(I DIDN’T SEE THE MOVIES BUT, I HEARD THEY WERE GOOD) IT REALLY DOESN’T SEEM BAD AND IT REALLY WOULDN’T HURT ANYBODY.

By: Shteff!

Shteff! — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:26:15 +0000

doesn’t seem to bad

By: Bagels

Bagels — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:24:15 +0000

i think this can only be good. the sooner they’re shot, the sooner we get to see them

By: Tara K.

Tara K. — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:59:09 +0000

OMG!!!!!!!!!! PEOPLE!!! IT JUST MEANS THAT WHEN THEY FINISH “NEW MOON”, THEY WILL FILM “ECLIPSE” A.S.A.P!!! HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND?! THE ACTORS WILL GET TOO OLD AND LOOK TOO DIFFERENT IF THEY WAITED ANOTHER YEAR TO FILM “ECLIPSE”!!!!! GOSH! THEY AREN’T MAKING A “NEW MOON MIXED WITH ECLIPSE MOVIE”!!! THAT MOVIE WOULD SUCK, ALL (well the ones I have seen) OF THOSE TYPES OF MOVIES SUCK!!!!

P.S. I am grateful and thankful to those people who know what “filming back to back” means. A+ for those of you that knew that!
P.P.S. I agree that they should make “Breaking Dawn” 2 movies. There is WAY too much information in that book already, so if they cut it back even more, then that movie wouldn’t get any good reviews.

By: Carrie

Carrie — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:30:13 +0000

I hope they do shoot them back to back. It means hopefully they will both come out faster!

By: Johanna

Johanna — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:52:18 +0000

I hope that doesn’t mean that they will combine them?That would be horrible.

By: Tara P.

Tara P. — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:48:14 +0000

I think shooting the movies back to back is a great idea. it will keep the consistency. They have to stay young in order for it to work. This will be a good idea. they can’t condense the movies together. there is too much info to cram. I do think they need to let go of this 2 hour time limit. If Twilight had been at least 2 1/2 hours I think we cold of seen a more put together movie with some of our favorite scenes. i think Catherine did a great job. she as just forced to do a lot of editing due to the time restraint. i did feel that Twilight was rushed and that if you never read the book you might get lost quickly! However I have seen it three times and love it and can not wait for the rest of the movies. As to who the next director should be????? Clueless!!
Love the podcasts!!

P.S. Breaking Dawn NEEDS to be 2 movies…we don’t want that to have any time restraint!!

By: Kirsty

Kirsty — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:47:55 +0000

YAY!!! LOOOOVE that idea! it will solve the aging vampires scenario and also we will get more Rob! and Eclipse will probably be released earlier

By: Samie

Samie — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:47:10 +0000

oh ok, now i know what they mwean by back to back.. thanks everyone… but im still ok with that… we get them all sooner! sweeet!

By: Emmetts Rosalie

Emmetts Rosalie — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:51:20 +0000

they better not shoot the movies in the same movie. Alot of people will raise hell. that would be WAAAYYY too much informatin into two hours. if they do it back to back that would be okay, but not in the same movie. and it is actually kind of smart, because when and if they do make breaking dawn, it is going to cost soooo much. Shooting it back to back leaves more money for Breaking Dawn.

By: Karina

Karina — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 02:41:00 +0000

NO THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE MOVIES ARE GOING TO BE COMBINED!!!!!!!!!!!!! this only means that they are going to shot each one right after the other. NO COMBINING! if they did combine the movies then i will cry. yes i will cry! i will cry because then they will cut so much from each book and only leave scraps and we wont be getting the whole story for it would be so fast pace that we would know what is happening by the first ten minutes.
not really looking forward for breaking dawn for i really dont see who they are going to make it into a movie for it is so complicated and, excuse my language, who the hell are they going to get a baby to turn into a five year old in just mear weeks. i dont think they have thought this through very much……

By: Jenn

Jenn — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:59:22 +0000

I don’t think it is such a bad idea. Combining both movies is going to be easier on the actors because then they won’t age. Anything to get to Breaking Dawn is fine with me!

By: Peri

Peri — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:52:31 +0000

Does that mean that they are going to combine them?? I’m ok with that… Or does it mean that they will shoot them right after another cuz that’s gr8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!it’s kinda like lord of the rings!!!! ummmm…. Yeah!!! but this way the vampires won’t look like they have aged! and that’s really smart thinking on their count, because what if in the next three films Taylor grows an inch or two, this way they will minize that from happening!!!!! Also thtat means if they do shoot Breaking Dawn(and by the way things look, I think that thet will!) that it will come much much sooner then we imagined.. like in 3 years or so!!!

By: Michy

Michy — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:35:48 +0000

I think that it means that the two films will be shot back to back like the lord of the rings trilogy. but there will still be two movies. this will suck only because you will know that the films are done but still have to wait a year before u see the next one. However, it is easier to keep continuity and the actors won’t look like they have aged much!