Seems that the vengeful redheaded vampire Victoria played by Rachelle Lefevre will now be played by Bryce Dallas Howard.
We Are Movie Geeks says:
Bryce Dallas Howard has replaced Rachelle Lefevre as the character of Victoria for the third installment of the franchise. No one is really saying why they are replacing Rachelle Lefevre as Victoria but honestly, I think that Bryce Dallas Howard is sexier and can play more of a seductress in the role.
Now I haven’t read the third Twilight book yet, so I don’t know how predominate Victoria’s role is in Eclipse. In new Moon, they could do most of Victoria’s involvement with suggestion as she spends most of the book skirting the town and trying to find a way to get to Bella. We don’t really see her, just her victims and reports of Wolves chasing her.
But I was itching to see more of Rachelle Lefevre in the role. She is seductively sexy and when reading the books, it is her face I see (thanks to the film of course) so replacing her with Bryce Dallas Howard (also a beautiful woman) just seems awkward. Maybe I just have to see her done up like Victoria. Any cast replacement is subject to a state of transition.
I am sure Bryce will do a fine job, and the fans will adjust (after throwing some fits) but they could have done worse.
No reasons are given why she was replaced.
The one on the left has better hair.
I agree that some replacements may allow you to suspend your disbelief. Look at Maggie Gyllenhal replacing Katies Holmes in the Dark Knight. It took me maybe 30 seconds and after that time I said, “Maggie is such a better Rachel Dawes”. I think it is possible for the same thing to happen with BDH.
It’s a shame Rachel has been recast, but it appears Summit was not happy that she took a movie role that had a 10 day overlap with the Eclipse production schedule.
Rachel claims (via Access Hollywood) she didn’t think it would be a big deal; however, according to press release from Summit, released after she spoke out in public, they claim she would be missing rehearsal time as well as important principle photography days. Whether or not that is fully true, Rachel should not have accepted that other role without first clearing it with Summit. To me that seems like common sense. Summit did jump the gun though by up and recasting her so quickly, but hey, those are the breaks.
There is a tight film schedule with these movies and with a part such as hers why should the schedule be changed if the other actors are all commited to the schedule?
Sounds to me as if there was some lack of communication and it ended up costing her the role.
As for the recast? I think Bryce Dallas Howard is a fine choice and the role is a good branch out from her typical sweet character role.
I completely disagree with anyone who thinks BDH would be a good Victoria. Summit decided to replace Rachelle because she signed on to a movie that would cause her to miss ten days out of her 3 months of shooting for Eclipse. I doubt any twilight fans will “adjust”. We are very upset with this choice. Rachelle was a fangirl of the series before even signing on. And now Summit wants to take her out because of ten days. Personally, I love the fact that the cast are not well known actors. The cast is way more humble and happy to please their fans. I do not think Dakota Fanning should even be in this movie. Back to topic, Rachelle can be the only Victoria. I thought it was rude to allow her to be in the first two movies then when she is about to her shining moment as a villain they replace her. That doesn’t sit well with me or most other Twilight fans. I love BDH but just as Pepper and in Lady In the Water, besides that I think she sucks. I do not think she will live up to fan’s high expectations that have already been set and MET by Rachelle.
You make it sound like Rachelle was carrying Twilight. The girl had maybe 10 minutes of screen time as Laurent’s posse. Yeah she was sexy and looked just as I imagined the character after reading, but she will be nearly invisible in New Moon.
It will take about 3 seconds to adjust and you will get over it. I agree that Rachelle had the presence to be Victoria, but I am not going to be ignorant and say she is the only one who could.
Any actor can be replaced.
I just learned that Michael Sheen is going to be Aro. Good news just keeps on coming.
Looks like the discussion went just a little bit off the topic.Whatever.
Bryce Dallas Howard is extremely sexy as well as a good actress. I never liked the first ‘Victoria’. Too bad we have to see BDH only a little in New Moon and have to wait for her until Eclipse comes out. And a great news that Dakota Fanning got the role of Jane. Love her very much.
i really hated the first film i really thought it was an awful film in all respects.
I think comparing Twilight with Potter makes as much sense as comparing Star Wars with Star Trek. No, it really doesn’t make sense but for some reason people are constantly doing it.
I think it’s only natural to compare Star Wars with Star Trek. It makes sense because they have been the two largest franchises taking place in space for a long time. While the tone of the two are completely different, there is enough similarities to warrant a comparison.
Granted, Twilight and Potter are remarkably different. I’m not saying that the stories are similar. I’m talking about the fact that they are both fantasy books turned into movies that appeal to a younger audience. What interests me the most about these two series is how hugely popular they have become.
I wonder what will be the next Harry Potter or Twilight? Is there any series out there right now with the potential to be huge?
As much as I LOVE BDH and think she would have been a fantastic Victoria if it had been from the start…this really upsets me. Unless there is a death (ex: HP’s Dumbledore replacement) I feel there is no justification for changing actors. It’s jarring. You break our ability to commit to the “suspension of disbelief” by reducing the stability of the characters.
This is just like Don Cheadle replacing Terrence Howard in Iron Man 2– Love Don Cheadle, hate the change.
Cast changes. Citing DEATH as the only acceptable reason to replace a cast member is a little narrow minded. No justification?
For whatever reason they replace someone, its not the end of the world. And I suppose if ONE person says they would prefer to do a different film instead of a sequel to one they are in, are they to throw out the entire production or just change the cast member for someone of equal or greater value.
I havent been exposed to very much of Lefevres work outside of Twilight, but shes delicious in the role. Its not like they replaced her with Lindsay Lohan or some other fluff actor. Howard is just as good if not better.
Cheadle is as good an actor if not better. And a better fit for the straight laced military minded Rhodey.
There is no issue here outside of your extreme preference.
Its only briefly “jarring”, and its your own inability to commit to it.
Are you also upset when you see an actor in a different role in a different movie? Because that must mess your mind up hardcore if this upsets you so much.
You totally got me there Rodney, and excellent point about actors in different movies. I may have been a bit over-dramatic. Sorry for that. I should specify that this extreme aversion to actor-changes is for movies that I am really invested in. Twilight is a big deal to me so seeing the actor replaced is upsetting to me. I want this wonderful world that has existed only in mind up to this point to be portrayed just as brilliantly on the big screen, and congruency will help that. (Plus after the first film they need a lot of help to make the others better…)
But I WILL get over it.
I would prefer studios and actors committing to roles. If the actor says goodbye, I wouldn’t blame the studio for moving on without them, especially if they avoid Lindsay Lohan at all costs. I’m interested to know what job is enough to lure Lefevres away from this hugely spotlighted movie.
And I’ll admit it is actually a bit jarring to see actors in other movies– IF they were in that role for a long time or have been typecasted into a certain genre of character. Seeing Daniel Radcliffe in anything else will be hard to see. I hate seeing Robin Williams play bad guys. Is this a narrow-minded judgement–sure, I can accept that. But I still love Williams as an actor, just not in those roles.
Sorry Rodney, you are right. My bad.
But, I have to say that the comparison to Star Wars or to POTC does not fly. They did not start as a series of novels aimed at tweens.
I compare Twilight to Harry Potter because of the target demographic and the way that the fans have become so rabid over these two franchises. It also seems to me that a lot of the Harry Potter fans have moved on to Twilight, and it seems like Twilight is the “new” Harry Potter.
You know, I’ve read a lot of books, but I’m not literary critic and I don’t pretend to be. I’m a hugh sci-fi and fantasy junkie, and I’ve always loved vampire stories. But I couldn’t even get through the first Twilight book. I found it to be so unoriginal and so contrived. But, it has found an audience and I do respect that. I just think it’s lame. It’s the worst vampire story I’ve read, and I love taking shots at it when I can. But that’s just my opinion.
Popular series based on books is about as far as your comparison can go. The fanbase is completely different and the demographic is different.
Yes the age group is similar, but Potter was aimed at 10 year old boys originally, and the series grew with its readership (and JK’s own personal maturity as a writer) while Twilight was aimed at teenage girls, and found a fanatical fanbase with the tweens.
Perhaps the target demographic is slightly different but not as different as you say. I think that most Twilight fans love Harry Potter, but a lot of Harry Potter fans dislike Twilight. But who really knows, I have no data to back up my claims.
I think Stephanie Meyer is not necessarily a terrible writer, I just don’t think that she’s very good. I think that what did happen is that Harry Potter really got a lot of kids interested in reading who were not before. This opened up a new market for fantasy stories targeted to teenagers and this is what allowed Twilight to become so successful. The teens needed something to ready in-between Potter books. Again, just my opinion.
BDH is gorgeous, unfortunatetly, Twilight is like Harry Potter, except that it’s really stupid.
Twilight like Harry Potter? How? Explain it to me.
Easy. A fantasy series aimed at young adults, which adults enjoy as well. Sold millions of copies and generated millions of crazy, obsessed fans. About a young person living an ordinary life suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances. The difference, though, between Twilight and Harry Potter is that Twilight is gay. Sorry, had to be said.
So by your description Star Wars is just like Twilight too?
And Pirates of the Carribean.
All franchises that were aimed at young adults/adults, all financially successful, all containing an adventure that has a normal person suddenly thrust into extraordinary circumstances. There is no direct comparisons outside these vague qualifiers.
Twilight isn’t “gay” and it didn’t have to be said. Aside from completely inaccurate, it is insensitive and shallow.
Bryce Dallas Howard’s amazing looking…but not enough for me to see a Twilight movie.
After the first movie they said there was a guy that wouldn’t be coming back for the second movie. Did he end up being replaced?
At one point there were rumors that Taylor Lautner would be replaced as Jacob, one of the three main characters. Part of the rumor was because Jacob grows up (beefs up) a lot in the second book. Also his side of the love triangle is the prominent story in New Moon and Taylor does not have a very big acting resume. There was worry that Taylor was not physicaly big enough, to which he promptly went on a work out regime and bulked up quite a bit. As far as the acting side, look at the 3 leads in Harry Potter and how green they were in the early films and how much they have progressed, Taylor will do fine.
Finally some star names in this project, David Slade,Dakota Fanning and Bryce Dallas Howard. Now we only need to kick Pattinson out for Nicolas Cage xD.
How does that make any sense.
Pattinson is currently a far bigger draw than Cage EVER was. Let alone the stupidity that a 45 year old man replacing a guy half his age.
Sigh.
^ mere mention of Nicolas Cage should have alerted you that the poster was joking. ;)
Wow, it amazes me how people on this site can’t pick up on sarcasm or understand jokes.
IDk what I think about this. It’s ok i guess
i dont think it will matter much. even though victoria is big in eclipse she isnt super big. she still dosent come in till the last minute. i know for the movie they will change this but still half the time we see her she is fighting so i still dont think many people will notice
The BBC said that she is leaving because she wants to do a film with Dustin Hoffman that’s filming in Canada at the same time.
Summit cites the reason as to why she left as “scheduling conflicts”. But… come on! What (up and coming) actor in their right mind would not fit a Twilight movie into their schedule, it’s HUGE exposure. The Eclipse book has a BIG part for Victoria.
I’m guessing there is an ulterior motive as to why she left.
So like….what about New Moon?