Breaking Dawn -- how movies & books are different

Discussion of the Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn 1

Moderators: December, cullengirl

Forum rules
Click for Forum Rules
Post Reply
Muse of Philosophical Discussion
Posts: 2721
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:09 am
Location: Putting the "Longa" into Ars Longa....

Breaking Dawn -- how movies & books are different

Post by December »

Books and movies have different ways of telling a story, with different strengths and weaknesses. Do you think the movie format particularly lends itself to BD? How and why? Or did BD work better for you as a book?

Note: this is not a general thread comparing the movie to the book, but specifically about differences related to the way books and movies work (eg books make it easier to get inside the narrator's' head; movies are more visually exciting, etc.).
“When did you ever promise to kill yourself falling out of Charlie’s tree?”

Settled in Forks
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:36 pm

Re: Breaking Dawn -- how movies & books are different

Post by 4mejasper »

I'm new to this website/forum, so far I can't see any other replies/posts.

As far as how well the book/movie worked, they were different.

The screenwriter Melissa Rosenburg was asked why she had the wolves actually attack in the movie, and she said it brought more drama than just the discussion. I was in the audience at this interview, and although I had seen previews, I didn't believe the scense were showing the laPush shifters attacking the Cullens. I had thought it was some recollection of the Volturi about their fights against the Children of the Moon. This was one of the biggest differences, obviously.

Another comment (perhaps the screenwriter didn't make this one) was that the wedding was not heavily written in the book, so there was a lot of room for the toasts. And the toasts were great. They allowed more drama, and more character interaction. I think they were fun for both the Twilight fans and the more casual viewers. I did see a review in which someone commented that the movie overall would have been improved if Jessica had been allowed to just pop her head into various scenes and make a comment.

I missed having Seth inside the Cullen house. I thought those were some of the warmest scenes from the book. And of course, I missed the Jacob-Rosalie blonde joke wars. But enough about my thoughts on what I missed.

And of course, one of the biggest differences was the fact that Rosalie and Esme left Bella alone in that exam room with Carlisle and Edward. This was the dramatic scene where Bella is left alone on the exam table, after Edward stalks out of the room. It portrays her isolation beatifully. But in the book, Rosalie and Esme would NEVER have let her go into an exam alone with Carlisle and Edward, one of the two were always at Bella's side. So she wasn't alone.

Another scene that was nicely played on screen, and I don't recall from the book, was the bathroom scene when Rosalie is drawing Bella a bath, and Bella begins to drop her robe, showing her emaciated figure.

So, enough from me.

Settled in Forks
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:28 pm

Re: Breaking Dawn -- how movies & books are different

Post by Blossomforth »

I'm not sure if this belongs here, but here goes...

I noticed a small change between the book and the movie, but I thought it was an interesting one. When Bella was discussing baby names with Rosalie and Edward, Rosalie was okay with "Edward Jacob" but she didn't like "Renesmee", which was completely different to how she acted in the book. It was Edward who said Rosalie's line that the name was "unique". If I remember correctly, Edward was pretty indifferent about it in the book.

I thought that was fairly interesting... It almost seemed like Rosalie was unhappy with Bella's choice because she wanted to choose the baby's name, going with the idea that she was only interested in the baby. Giving the line to Edward was also interesting because it made him seem more fatherly, which was very sweet to see.

Another change that I remember was when Carlisle was telling Bella that she was going to die of starvation. In the movie, Bella looked to Edward and told him that he had to stay alive if she died, because their baby would need him. I thought that seemed a little out-of-character, because, in the book, she was very insistent that she was going to live, though, as a vampire. I don't remember her ever giving up hope... Or maybe I just need to reread it. : P

Post Reply