I take it back.
Earlier today Kurt posted a link to a story about a rumour that has been kicking around the web for a few days that Juan Antonio Bayona, the director of the great The Orphanage (our review), was in talks to direct the third instalment of the Twilight Saga Eclipse. I’ve been tacking so many rumours about the direction of the third film that I never considered the possibility that Bayona would agree to take on the job but go figure, the Spaniard has gone and surprised me.
According to Variety, Bayona has signed on to helm the third film in what is bound to be a media sensation for the next few years. I have to admit, I’m very impressed by the talent that Summit has brought to this production. I had problems with Twilight (our review) but thoroughly enjoyed the film and loved Catherine Hardwicke’s direction and the emphasis that she and scrip writer Melissa Rosenberg placed on the certain aspects of the story; most of my problems with the film were in relation to the effects, but these recent revelations go beyond what I expected from the franchise.
Summit decided to go against most of the fans (a studio with balls – but I guess 15 year old girls are less threatening than 30 year old men; maybe not…) and brought on Chris Weitz to take on New Moon. Not necessarily an improvement but definitely a director better suited to the story which unfolds in this entry into the series. Now with Bayona on board for the third, it’s clear Summit isn’t letting this franchise coast through. And can you blame them? This is a cash cow, and would continue to be even if the quality of the entries didn’t improve, but I’m thankful to see that they’re making the effort.
It’s early in the going, the cast didn’t land in Vancouver until early this week, but I’m very curious to see what comes of the rest of this franchise. As long as they do something about the sparkling effect (like maybe just leave it out? Just pretend it was never written alright?), improve on the “vampire effects” (again, just leave out the lame effect and improve on the wire work) and infuse some great Underworld-styled werewolf transformations and we should be good to go. All of a sudden, this franchise has gone from having my fangirl love to something I’m expecting quality from. Hope it doesn’t disappoint.
I’m officially opening the door on “Breaking Dawn” speculation.
I haven’t read the books or seen the first film, but this choice of director intrigues me. Could it end up being something like Cuaron’s Harry Potter film? Maybe I should start paying attention…
To be honest, it may be a little early to start taking any notice of the third film but I’m delighted to see the franchise moving in this direction. I just hope the end result meets my growing expectation.
Mind you, with a 2010 release, they’d better get cracking!
Well, Alfonso Cuaron did not manage anything special when they handed him Harry Potter 3. Other than job opportunities in the United States (opportunities he may have gotten from Mr. Del Toro), I’d personally rather see Juan Antonio Bayona turn out fine original works along the very classy ORPHANAGE, rather than do sappy romantic plot movies. I hope that this doesn’t stall his career in Franchise B.S.
/disinterested
@Kurt – You’re the glass half empty. I’m the glass half full.
I disagree with ya Kurt on Alfonso Cuaron re: Harry Potter 3 – I think it ended up taking a needed darker step (but not to dark) in the progression of the series.
I have to say I think it’s bizarre they are talking about a third, and different, direction for Eclipse when New Moon is just starting filming. Are they not going to give Chris Weitz a chance to do the third – or perhaps he’s not available.
I hope they avoid sunny days therefore don’t require the twinkling skin for New Moon, but I’m really looking forward to seeing the film.
If the recent weather around these parts is any indication, they’re not going to be able to avoid the sun but perhaps the cold will discourage shirtless vamps.
I’m with Shannon on this, Kurt. Cuaron took Harry Potter from the bland kids’ movies that Columbus did for the first two (which were good bland kids’ movies, but still) and shifted the tone and style to be much more interesting – and necessary for the later films. He broke away from the book more, which a lot of HP fans hated, but I loved it. I’m a bit biased by Azkaban being my favorite of the books, but I still pretty much like Cuaron’s film more than any of the others. Though HP4 and HP5 were really good, as well.
I hate saying it given how much the Twilight books have made for my employer, but even this news isn’t enough to get me to see the movies. I love vampires, but to me Twilight and its sequels are simply too derivative and even far fetched…
Oh, I agree that #3 was a step up from Chris Columbus (that is a no-brainer, Columbus is as bland as saw-dust). I just think of (foolishly perhaps) comparing HP3 to Y Tu Mama Tambian or Children of Men. How does your mildly engaging and dark only compared to the other two, this ain’t even Coraline, middle of the road Harry Potter flick look now? Nope, I generally think these franchise/tentpole flicks are too much “made by committee” and just have too many cooks to bother with a good directors time. And, they are a big commitment of time. Rarely does a James Cameron (Aliens) or Ang Lee (Hulk) manage to take all that money and turn out something really great with a big Studio summer flick.
Ah Well. (Yes I’m a snob. I don’t get the Harry Potter thing….There is no joy in those films….they are merely expensive looking and cumbersome.)
I find oodles of joy in the Harry Potter films. Oodles. I love seeing the magic come alive and the gradual changes in the relationships and how things get more real/dangerous each year.
But, to each their own.
Variety story got debunked:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/03/that-story-you.html
The goblet of fire was one of the biggest let downs I’ve experienced in a theater and I’ve never gone back to any of the HP films.
The sad thing is, that movie could’ve been so great and grand and they managed to turn it into a clunky, boring mess that gives hints at fun and then never delivered:
http://www.moviepatron.com/moviereviews/h/harrypottergoblet.html
@ The goblet of fire was one of the biggest let downs I’ve experienced in a theater
hmm. Personal biggest let down in a theater; A History of Violence.
LOVED A History of Violence. I understand it’s a real divisive movie though.
*sigh* Too good to be true I guess though it sounds like there’s still a glimmer of possibility.
Thanks Shannon.
@ . I understand it’s a real divisive movie though.
It’s not a divisive movie. everyone loves it but me. they’re all wrong.
Worst let-down in a theater: A.I. While an interesting failure, the Kubrick/Spielberg posthumous collaboration left me pretty pissed at the experience and how fucking facile the opening act was. Bad Parenting 101 and I didn’t even have kids at the time.
Part of me wants to revisit A.I. to see if the hate is still there, or whether I missed something in the noise.
Biggest disappointments:
A.I.
Minority Report
Revolutionary Road
I don’t like History of Violence either Rusty. Thought it was boring as shit, and inane. Hated the drawnout sex scenes, the ones on the stairs made no sense to me whatsoever, I could not wrap my head around two people having sex ON STAIRS. Who would do that, if not to make a point about their relationship and juxtapose it with the sex scenes they had earlier in life?
“While an interesting failure, the Kubrick/Spielberg posthumous collaboration left me pretty pissed”
Who talks like this? And it’s not a collaboration, nobody co-directed it, it’s a Steven Spielberg movie.
I talk like this. Seriously. Ask Andrew/John/Mike who converse with me outside of the usual internets text. Listen to the Cinecasts ferchrissakes. Down off your high-horse please, Henrik. Down Boy.
But anyway, sure, it is a Spielberg project (and a very disappointing one, like all the worst aspects of Spielberg’s storytelling styles came out on this one….and buried the movie) but Kubrick had started it originally, and got far enough along with it for there to be some elements within the film.
There is no more Kubrick in A.I. than in Saving Private Ryan.
You talk like a bad writer then Kurt. I’m not preaching, don’t get so defensive.
Henrik, was there an asshole conference you were attending, haven’t heard from you in a while
Actually have been making a film for 2 weeks, less time to point out other peoples defeciencies online.
But Henrik. I am a bad writer. Trying to improve that actually.