Comments on: Bryce Dallas Howard replaces Rachelle Lafevre in Twilight Eclipse

By: Kristina

Kristina — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:10:38 +0000

The one on the left has better hair.

By: John

John — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:38:55 +0000

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.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:38:06 +0000

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.

By: Meli

Meli — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:58:45 +0000

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.

By: BeautifulMess

BeautifulMess — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:00:13 +0000

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.

By: Sherile

Sherile — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:12:23 +0000

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.

By: mojomann

mojomann — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:40:20 +0000

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.

By: Ifaz

Ifaz — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:22:02 +0000

I just learned that Michael Sheen is going to be Aro. Good news just keeps on coming.

By: Ifaz

Ifaz — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:10:13 +0000

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.

By: The Dude (original)

The Dude (original) — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:42:20 +0000

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?