I have not done a Book vs. Movie post in awhile! I wasn't originally going to see Breaking Dawn in theaters because I didn't want to spend my money on it. But when my friend invited me, I decided to go since I was really curious about how they were going to adapt the book.
Breaking Dawn was my least favorite Twilight book, which is saying something because I don't really like the other books in the series. That being said, I think for the material they were given, the producers, director, etc did an okay job with it. Obviously it wasn't Oscar caliber but I still had a good time watching it. I've decided to list some thoughts in bullet points, since it's easier. No outright spoilers but maybe allusions to some, so beware.
- The acting is still pretty bad. Namely, Kristen Stewart. Everyone else is okay, but Kristen still needs some work.
- Even with not much going on in the movie, I still feel like they rushed things. There were certain storylines that they threw in there because they were never mentioned before. These include: the Denali coven, imprinting (not sure when this was introduced in the books) and the Volturi.
- Even though the movie rushed things, it was still pretty drawn out. Most of the movie is Bella pregnant and then some wolf-pack drama. Harry Potter made sense to be cut in two parts, but Breaking Dawn, not so much. The movie was only an hour and a half, so they definitely could have done 1 two and a half hour movie.
- Supposedly people have been getting seizures from the red and white flashes in the movie. Ididn't think it was too bad but I don't get motion sickness at all, so what do I know?
- The birth scene was pretty freaky. It wasn't super graphic (Breaking Dawn is only rated PG-13) but the weirdness (giving birth to a vampire baby) of it all made it worse.
So those are my thoughts on Breaking Dawn. The only positive I can think of is that it didn't completely suck but wasn't that great either.