ROTTEN TOMATOES: New Moon Set Visit, Day Two: Pattinson's Pain, Lautner's Secret Wish

New Moon Set Visit, Day Two: Pattinson's Pain, Lautner's Secret Wish

by Jen Yamato

Page | 1 2 3

The crew immediately moved on to rehearsals for the next shot, in which Bella was to plead for Jane to stop attacking Edward. As she does, Alice runs to Edward's side to check on him. Here, things got interesting.

While she stayed quiet during rehearsals (some might even interpret her readings as sounding bored, a fact that elicited giggles from those offstage), Stewart really turned it on for the cameras. After giving almost sarcastically flat readings beforehand, she unleashed a fiery stream of emotion once they were rolling:

"Stop it! Please, stop hurting him! Try it on me!"

During this particular shot, for an unknown reason, an assistant director approached us. "All guests clear the set," he shouted, directing his command to our press group. We cleared the set. What exactly happened in those ten minutes, only Weitz's cast and crew know, but soon enough we were back inside, and the same scene was still being filmed.

Stewart was mesmerizing in take after take. The repetition of it was fascinating to listen to; the 19-year-old actress seemed to open a vein with every take, then fall silent. Or she'd ask Weitz for direction, or cut herself short with an expletive or burst of laughter. The tension of the scene always brightened once Weitz called "Cut!" -- a Volturi actor would give Pattinson a hand up, or Stewart might wander off, snapping out of the moment. (After one take, Pattinson turned to Greene and playfully asked, "Does it look like I'm in pain?")

Watching the monitors revealed even deeper layers in Stewart's performance. Stewart, who by now has nearly 20 film credits under her belt, is a uniquely emotional performer; anguish is practically written on her face. Maverick or no during rehearsals, Stewart packs an almost unrivaled intensity into her acting. Yet in interviews, she and her Twilight cast mates are hounded by gossipy questions; why not ask her about her actual craft? We would have, given the chance. Sadly, Stewart and Pattinson were unavailable for interviews, and we had to make do with watching them from (not so) afar.

However, we did get to speak directly with one of New Moon's wolfalicious lead actors...

Next: Taylor Lautner talks Jacob Black, pumping iron, and why he would choose to have one of Edward's powers.

Next Page >>

Page | 1 2 3

(1-20 of 45 posts) | Reply

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 20 2009 11:02 PM

i dont understand why they just dont film it in forks. i know a few scenes were shot there but i dont see why the majority of its being shot in canada. it makes no sense to me. i think its been a week or so but i fish on a reservation close to there and while we were fishing, the coast guard came zooming by for some reason. later that day it was on the local news that some idiot stranded his or herself on the edge of the cliff that bella recently had a scene shot on. my uncle joked about where we really were that day. or i thought he was joking.....

(Reply to this)

Lanca R. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 08:56 AM

Probably has to do with taxes and film friendly laws. Plus, what small town wants to deal with the fiasco for an extended period of time.

(Reply to this)

jordan d. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 09:02 AM

In reply to this comment (#2529135)
the reason why it makes no sense to you is because your not a producer from summit entertainment.If you knew about what is involved with shooting a movie you would know that to actually shoot the entire movie in forks it would cost about 200 million dollars!!! Also forks has no studios, no camera or lighting gear, no hotels and it is one of the most remote towns in the entire USA. Even when they shot the first one in portland it cost them way too much cuz even portland isnt set up to do big feature films. Vancouver is the best place to shoot the twilight series because its in the pacific north west and is only second to hollywood when it comes to making movies ie: studios, crews, and also it is cheaper. So now does it make more sense?

(Reply to this)

Jen Yamato writes:
on Jul 21 2009 09:53 AM

Good points, Jordan. Vancouver was uniquely equipped to host the production, especially as they used sound stages extensively...

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 10:42 AM

In reply to this comment (#2529219)
ok so forks doesnt have a sound studio. what ever happened to filming on location? forks is not as remote as you make it sound. they need to make this film a little more authentic than the first one. theres plenty of hotels and port angeles is not too far away. if all these people would stop acting so damn spoiled then they can live with staying in a cheap hotel for once. that town would welcome all the film crews, it definently wouldnt hurt the financial situation of that place. but no im not a producer nor do i claim to be. 200 million dollars to shoot in forks? gimme a break. nothing would cost that much to film there. sighhhhhhhhhhhh..flatlanders anyway.

(Reply to this)

Jen Yamato writes:
on Jul 21 2009 12:24 PM

To your point, I think there is a benefit to shooting on location, but few productions ever film entirely on location - especially films of this size, which require special effects and otherworldly sets, etc. So yes, I would appreciate authentic settings, but didn't Stephenie Meyer write many of her settings without really knowing what they were like? I thought I'd read that somewhere. So perhaps the actual locations didn't exactly match the director's vision, in which case, can you blame them for going for the best possible portrayal?

(Reply to this)

Lanca R. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 12:41 PM

Hmmmm, I really liked the scenery in the first movie. It was one of the high points for me. I used to live on the Olympic peninsula in Sequim and I thought it was pretty authentic. The view of the sound from the tops of the tree's was pretty amazing and just like I remembered it.

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 12:44 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529281)
@ jen yamato, i was merely being sarcastic,(except about it costing 200million dollars to film there.) but your right about Stephanie Meyer setting the story in a place where shes never been too. im sure alot of authors do that, if not all of them. my point is i wish these filmmakers would go to actual locations for filming. put some reality into their work instead of using "sets", sound studios and green screens. well to a point to were they have no choice but to use them. Forks is a very unique little town. and it definently would not hurt the twilight films to be filmed there.

(Reply to this)

jordan d. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 12:51 PM

Seriously, maybe 200 million is a bit of a strech!! but have you ever looked at a map of washington state and seen where forks is? When you do a movie you need to have soooooooo much stuff readily available to your crew. There are hundreds of people that work on a single production and if you were actually gonna shoot in forks you would have to find hotels or accomodations for that many people and pay them perdiem. Thats just to crazy!!! I totally understand where you guys are coming from and im not taking the side of the studios, but you just have to understand that it is a buisness and thats part of it. Remember nothing in movies is real, and everything is fake. but when you watch it does it really matter where it was filmed?

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 01:20 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529295)
uhhh ya i know where Forks is. i drive through there frequently. like i said to jen yamato. i was being sarcastic to a certain degree. but actually shooting their or finding hotels or accomodations is not impossible. port angeles and sequim are not that far off. im just saying it is very possible to film the majority of the film there.

(Reply to this)

jordan d. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 02:02 PM

uuuhhhh well since you live near forks im guessing that you dont know much about film or television production. So maybe you should learn a little more about what your posting comments about. Forks is two hrs from everything, and its not that they only shoot things in sound stages and studios. Its that they do both, locations, studios, city streets. and they need to have all of those things close to each other. I also worked on new moon

(Reply to this)

Lanca R. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 03:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529316)
jordan, they don't need those things. Plenty of movie's have succeeded with far flung and isolated productions. Pirates and Apocalypse Now spring to mind. Even New Moon films some scene's in Italy. It's just as you say though, an economic choice. Some productions choose to sacrifice cost for authenticity like Paints said and most choose the more economically viable option. When I was a kid I got to see both Field of Dreams and Twister filmed in Iowa and let me tell ya we got nothing close to a sound stage around there.

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 04:09 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529316)
uuhhhh so your saying since i live near forks i know nothing about film production? well your guess is WRONG!!!!! i dont live near forks, if you read my previous posts you would know i go up that way for fishing trips and among other things. Forks is not 2hrs from everything. well for someone like you it is cause it sounds like your stuck in a populated area. and you said they need studios, city streets etc. close to each other? what about italy? thats a little ways away from vancouver.and dont try to insult me just to prove whatever point your shooting for.

(Reply to this)

jordan d. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 04:10 PM

yes indeed it is a choice, but my original thing was its just really hard to shoot in forks especially when vancouver is so close. You just named three shows that took place over the last three decades, and your right when they want to make a movie and it takes place somewhere specific and they have no way to fake it, yes they do go to the real place. but any time they get a chance to fake it believe me they do!

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 04:37 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529352)
@lanca, im glad your getting the point im trying to make. i know alot of films have no choice but to film in sound studios and what not. believe me i wish peter jackson could of went to middle earth and filmed all three movies on location. that kind of film has no choice. twilight does. thats all im trying to say. if a film maker has a chance to bring authenticity to a film, why not go for it!?

(Reply to this)

Lanca R. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 05:45 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529381)
Yeah, I think it's like I originally said. They have a suitable standby that will save them profit margin. Which makes perfect sense as Jordan sayes. Though the condescending tone isn't appreciated.

Star Wars,
The Da Vinci Code
Lawrence of Arabia
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves
Rambo series
Rob Roy
Gladiator

All films I thought of in the last two minutes as I typed which chose authenticity or relative isolated shoots over thrift. Certain movie's simply chose to do this because their budget allows it and it usually pays off in results. Though as I'm sure you know when it fails, it really fails i.e. Waterworld which I still think is a decent movie, but has become the quintessential flop since it was released due to it's well publicized problems.

(Reply to this)

jordan d. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 07:42 PM

So what you guys are saying is that they should load up 20 Semi trucks with all the Camera gear, lighting gear, grip gear, locations gear, props, set dec, sound, craft service, special fx, wardrobe, hair makeup, production office, makeup fx, ad stuff, art department, construction, paint, animals, and vfx and load it up in L.A (cuz even seattle doesnt really have all that stuff) load it up and drive it all like 36 hrs with 150 crew members and just do the movie in forks. Huh maybe I should go into the eclipse production office tomorrow and tell them your guys plan

(Reply to this)

krystina p. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 07:44 PM

All in all, money aside, they don't HAVE to do anything. especially film a movie where it is set. I mean, how any movies come out of Hollywood each year pretending to be someplace else of city blocks created to look like New York. Shooting the movie in Forks would truely do nothing to add to or take away from the actual movie. so why spend the extra movie unless it is the most important thing that matters? The actors arent being spoiled. they didn't call the production company and say "we refuse to film in such a remote location". They just show up where they are told to. It just so HAPPENS that the town they live in is a real town in the United States. What would you say if it wasnt? Nothing. The company is being logical and anyone who insists it needs to be filmed on location is just whiny.

(Reply to this)

Paints Hz Shirt Red writes:
on Jul 21 2009 08:23 PM

In reply to this comment (#2529426)
ya jordan, go into the eclipse office first thing in the morning and tell them what we said. dont leave anything out either. or itll suck just as much as the first one did. and while your in there take a look at a map and check your distances. 36hrs really? damn if what you say is true about your ties to the movie business i hope you dont schedule trips or calculate costs cause so far your numbers are way off. @krystina p. nobody here INSISTED for it to be filmed ANYWHERE. sounds like you guys are just looking for an arguement.

(Reply to this)

may x. writes:
on Jul 21 2009 08:43 PM

free shipping 50%-80% off
We are a professional shoes and sneaker Industrial company, and as a famous nike shoes factory & Stores and wholesale company ,offering avarious of shoes like nike,adidas,jordan,and handbags ( LV FENDI CHANEL PRADA POLO GUCCI ED Hardy COACH D&G Juicy Couture Burberry),WELCOME !
http://www.ok-jordan.com

(Reply to this)

Related Links

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links