The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 9 of 45: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [Next]
Index 443 reviews in total 

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:


Author: jazzjazzjj from United States
28 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched about 5 minutes of this film before leaving the theater. There are a few things that immediately turned me off- 1) It seems like they try to use Jacob's body as a filler for a lack of plot substance. I mean in all of the movies the viewer sees Jacob half naked running around in the rain. :/ ...... so when he took his shirt of in the opening beat it was a big WTF moment.... :/ 2)What were Bella and Eddie talking about??????????? He started saying how Bella doesn't know the real him and how he killed child molesters and murderers at one point in his life. :/ really? this was a real concern for him? He is a vampire and he is having a conversation about him only killing murderers but he feels bad about it...... this movie is for the brain dead......

The End

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

What the hell?...just...just what the hell?

Author: LordDico from United States
5 January 2012

I guess before hand, i should talk about the other films just to get it out of the way. The first film, directed by Catherine Hardwick, was a boring schlock-fest, based on the book series that, for some UNEXPLAINED reason, has a cult following. But the first film was just boring, lousy, had no story, bland acting you'd find in an exploitation film, and effects that make Michael Bay fall into a coma with boredom. The Second film, New Moon, had gone lower, with it's effects even cheesier, the acting just as bland, and hundreds of unintentionally funny moments that make the film just as bad. And lastly, Eclipse, which has been considered the best by many, but considered the worst by others. I considered it the worst, due to it repeating the same conversations over and over again, and having a backstory from one of the villains be much more interesting to learn than the bullshit love-story that we have to listen to.

Now...Breaking honestly is the worst of them. I'm not kidding. I'm still trying to figure out how this is possible.

Breaking Dawn part 1 is nothing but a padded out mess of a film, that adapts from the book into 2 films, but in this case, THERE'S NO REASON FOR THERE TO BE 2 FILMS! Hell, there's literally no reason for this to be a film series at all! With what little story, character development, and acting, you could easily make the Twilight movies into 3 films at the least! They pad this movie constantly with montages, and yet it's rushed when by the end of this movie she has the baby and becomes a vampire. If you've rushed your movie to where it goes down to the final battle that's coming in part 2, what the hell's the point of even HAVING 2 films?! And plus, for them to mention such grizzly stuff that happens in the book, yet they don't have even decide to go all out on it, then why the hell didn't you just do THAT?! It still would've sucked, since this whole series is crap, but it would've been the least bad of them! Twilight doesn't even deserve to be called a saga, if it has nothing to offer! Story? It padded. Characters? What characters? Heart? It has none. Cinematography? Painful on all levels! If anything, the Harry Potter films are worthy of the name 'saga' because it has all. Story, characters, heart, and great cinematography. I will at least admit, that Stephanie Meyer had an interesting idea. It sounded interesting, but after watching these films, it makes me sick now. These films are butchering the vampire genre! Vampires don't sparkle! Werewolves do not change on their own! Why is Bella Swan considered the icon of teenage girls of this generation? If that's the case, then this is offending every teenage girl AND guy to a high level! For this series to be one of the highest grossing franchises around and MTV giving it the reward for Best Drama and Best Film is shameful. If this series wants to get some...SOME appreciation from everyone as what it's stated by people, then it should be rebooted and redone in a way that people would enjoy! The only characters that are sympathetic are Jake and Charles (Bella's dad). They're reasonable. They have character. They actually know how to do well!

Overall, Breaking Dawn part 1 is POINTLESS! The only reason these films are made are for money. That's all they are! They're cash-grabbers. If anything, these films should be put on trial for assault on the vampire and werewolf genre, and thievery on everyone's wallet and purse!

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:


Author: liaolteanu from Romania
15 December 2011

I had such high expectations before and such a disappointment after watching it. The actors played well their parts. I think Kristin played her best part ever, since the beginning of the Saga. Robert on the other hand, was quite plain. As if the attention was all focused on the Bella character and Edward was in the back. I did not like this. I expected them to be at their best moment, together. I expected the pair to equally share the spotlight or at least feel something when Edward was in the spotlight...

There are huge gaps in the storyline. I found that the moments are not glued well together. It's like, the movie is a brief description of the main moments from the last book and that is all. I cannot see or feel the movie as a whole but only as a collage of video clips.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

over hyped

Author: ged_2k3 from United Kingdom
14 December 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I should begin by qualifying my position in the Twilight 'spectrum' as being firmly in the centre of what is a hostile battle between the book loving uber-fans and the self righteous saga-snobs.

I haven't read any of Stephenie Meyer's novels but her success suggests that she's doing something right and, up until now, I have enjoyed the blockbuster adaptations. Sadly, I always suspected that the fourth instalment would struggle to live up to the emotionally charged hype of its legion of fans, and I was right.

Many have drawn comparisons between the Harry Potter series, which also split the last book into two films. Being in the book loving uber-fan category of Harry Potter fans, and given the rich complexity of the story in the final book, I understood this decision, however even I felt some cynicism towards the motivation behind it. In the case of Twilight, without actually knowing what is to come in the conclusion of the series, I can see no other reason for splitting the book than financial reward.

In my opinion, the entire content of Breaking Dawn – Part 1 can be condensed into about 40 minutes, less if you're really stuck: Wedding; Honeymoon; Pregnancy; Birth; Death; Red eyes. That's about the size of it; everything else is largely irrelevant filler. Most films like this start with a 'scene setting' phase before getting into the meat and bones of the story and then end with the climax, yet I found myself about 45 minutes in wondering when we were going to leave the 'scene setting' phase. That said, even the most content bursting follow up would have the space to accommodate the Part 1 preamble.

It had too much angst, not enough content, a worse than usual soundtrack, and cheesier than usual dialogue and was redeemed only by its exciting 30 minute climax (although the overly gory birth scene could have been toned down).

I can only hope that the saga will be saved by the final instalment, and who knows, I may even decide to read the books after all.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

More of the same trash that's populated the rest of the series

Author: Hellmant from United States
14 December 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


The first of a two part adaptation of the fourth (and final) book in the immensely popular vampire teen romance saga (by Stephenie Meyer). Kristin Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner and the rest of the cast all return to this excruciatingly drawn-out chapter. Melissa Rosenberg wrote the screenplay once again (she's written every film adaptation in the series) and Bill Condon (of 'DREAMGIRLS' fame) directed this time around. If you've hated the other chapters in the series you'll undoubtedly hate this one as well but oddly even a lot of fans are severely disappointed with this film (which surprises me because most of the things that are awful in it have been awful the entire franchise, so I didn't really notice anything that different.) It is undeniably the worst of the series though, for me it wasn't that much more painful to watch than any of the others.

This time around Bella (Stewart) marries Edward (Pattinson), much to Jacob's (Lautner) disappointment. Jacob is even more upset when he finds out, at the reception, that Bella plans to consummate her marriage to Edward while she's still human (which could hurt or even kill her). A great deal of the film is then spent with Bella and Edward on their honeymoon and the dangers of vampire/human sex become more and more apparent. Things especially become gloomy when Bella realizes she's pregnant with a nonhuman baby. This puts her in grave danger when the wolf pack learn of the pregnancy and decide they must stop it.

This film is pretty much just more of the same trash that's populated the rest of the series but things just drag on more. The dialogue and acting are atrocious and Stewart (the strongest actor of the series) is severely underused and her part is underwritten. There's a strong pro-life message, even at the risk of the mother's life and bringing a possible deadly demon in to the world, that a lot of people have a problem with and there's a lot of life threatening sex. The movie is a joke like all the others and like all the others it is extremely humorous in unintentional ways and entertaining just due to it's overwhelming cheese factor. Some fans of the series will enjoy it but most will hate it and no one should see it, unless you're just looking for a good laugh I guess.

Watch our review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Absolute Junk

Author: sanloz11 from Australia
11 February 2012

I loved the first movie, the second was OK... they just get worse and worse. This was PATHETIC! It was like a cheap soap opera you see on TV during the day. the acting was horrible, it sounded like they were reading from scripts in a practice run and the movie dragged. Not to mention the sound track!

The first one was great with a lot of Muse used, it added real excitement! But this was pathetic. What a waste of my time.

There were parts where I though "oh it's going to get good now" ... and then it just went back to where it was... junk.

watch this movie just so that you can understand how crap it really was.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Forever is only the beginning..ain't that the truth?

Author: Jackpollins from United States
6 December 2011

Roger Ebert, one of the most widely beloved film critics once had a quote about the infamous Larry Bishop gangster spoof Mad Dog Time. That quote went "''Mad Dog Time'' is the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time." That's how I ultimately feel about The Twilight Saga Breaking Dawn Part 1. It is a terrible film that, despite its best efforts, turns into a big pile of nothingness. What did the filmmakers want to accomplish here? Well, there are a couple thing such as money, cabbage, and oh yeah, dough. This film was made on the assumption that millions of teenage girls are going to throw down their allowance to go see it. As I went to a public theater to see this and not an advanced screening, their assumptions was right. I was the only male in the theater. No boyfriends, husbands, males by themselves, ETC. May I also mention that there was a very limited range of females under 16 in the theater. Seriously, who thinks of this crap? This film can be summed up in a simple, short explanation-it's a soap opera made for young women instead of middle aged women. I'm not trying to sound sexist or derogatory but this is the way the world works..movies are made specifically for teenage girls to throw their allowance down. Unfortunately, this one, like most of them is petrifying to watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Oh my God, not this s**t again!!!!

Author: Plamena Berberova from Bulgaria
5 December 2011

Is that incredibly , boring and stupid movie is still on?! Who the hell likes it?! It is a mess. They are still selling this stupid story with no line... absolutely waste of money and time. The actors- CAN'T ACT ,for God , give me 5 dollars and I will play better that anyone of them. Of course I am not Kristen no emotions Stewart.I can't believe that in every freaking scene she has got ONE face emotion-BORED AS HELL. And this stupid movie with actors who has no sense of acting , have little idiot fans who make them stars. Sorry but I can't accept that not gifted actors will have millions while there are so many poor but talented people.Such a waste for the cinema ... my opinion - DON'T WATCH THIS NONSENSE!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Drawn-out prequel to the final chapter

Author: Greg Smith from Richmond, VA
24 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


MINI-REVIEW : Drawn-out prequel to the final chapter

RATING : Wait for the instant download – if you must (Rating System: "Watch it in theaters", "Wait for the instant download", "Don't waste your time")

Bella (Kristen Stewart) and Edward (Robert Pattinson) are back and they are going to get married. The marriage goes off without a hitch. While Jacob (Taylor Laughtner) is a bit put out, he makes his peace with it. That is until he learns that Bella plans to let Edward make a woman of her before getting turned into a vampire. "He'll kill you," he warns as he knows vampires go into a frenzy during "maritals" (we guess).

But Edward is able to restrain himself and only manages to wreck the bedroom. Strangely, Bella becomes pregnant in the short time they are on honeymoon – and the fetus (baby) is growing rapidly. And we're off...

I recently watch the first three incarnations of the "Twilight" series at home before going to the theater to see "Breaking Dawn". I thought they were pretty unimpressive stories, but easy to sit through. Breaking Dawn, however, suffers from the fact that it is a mere set-up for the final chapter. There just wasn't enough material to make a full movie. To its credit, the movie pretty much stands on its own with a good beginning, middle, and conclusion. But the scenes that get us to that conclusion are excruciatingly protracted. This movie lasted two hours and could easily have fit in half that time.

There are a number of huge plot holes in this film. Like, why doesn't anyone in the Cullen coven realize that vampire/human sex could create a fast-growing embryo? I mean, the head of the clan is a doctor. The other problems I have would spoil things for you – but at some point I would suggest you ask yourself how digestion works in the "Twilight" world.

The real standout in this film, however, was Taylor Laughtner as werewolf Jacob Black. His character is a truly epic hero. He undergoes a transformation from loner to protector and without giving too much away, I expect we'll see him become a leader in the next film. And Laughtner delivers some really solid performances. He is intense, funny, angry, sensitive… just a fine array of emotions for an arguably secondary character. I saw him in "Abduction" and was not overly impressed. In the previous two "Twilight" films, and "Abduction" his job was to be buff and more buff – and to run a lot - shirtless. While he manages to keep his shirt on in most of "Breaking Dawn", he is the conscience of this film and his performances really support the hum-drum of his partners. And while we're on the subject of werewolves, they are the most interesting characters in the Twilight series. The boys in the tribe, whether in human or wolf form, are always huddling, hanging out, and rough-housing together. And the CGI wolves (while surprisingly huge) are beautiful animals. The actors are interesting to look at and have some substantial secondary plots. Compared, in contrast, to the Cullen clan who seem to just walk around ghost-like with no real relationships.

I have to admit, I'm only watching "Twilight" because it is a phenomenon and I want to be able to talk about it around the water cooler. If I were to give my honest opinion of this film, I'd recommend that you don't waste your time. It is a simplistic tale and you won't walk away from the theater with anything more than you walked in with. But if you've seen the previous movies or are a fan of the books then I recommend you "wait for the instant download," because this is just a protracted episode.

A final note: I have also been watching the "Underworld" series in anticipation of the upcoming release of "Underworld: Awakening," (which also is a vampire/werewolf movie). Once I've reviewed the final chapter of the "Twilight" series and "Awakening" I plan a comparison of the two franchises. I think there will be some interesting parallels.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

This film was laughably terrible

Author: Debbie lol
26 November 2011

If IMDb allowed me to give zero stars I would. This movie was so insurmountably awful, it was comedic. My friends and I were talking through the whole film because it was so boring. Here are just few of the innumerable problems: -half of the movie was nothing. it was clearly a mistake splitting the last movie in two because the first half of the movie was just bella and edward having sex and the last half was just bella being tortured by her pregnancy. -barely anything happened in the film (see above) -the script was laammeee. the movie didn't convey half of the angst or pain rendered in the novel. I know it's difficult to make a movie out of a book, but come on that was just obscene (and the book wasn't that great to begin with) -the ending (i can't say anymore but you'll see) -while I'm at it the beginning and middle were also terrible all of the good things: -kristen stewart's acting was noticeable improved. now that she's dating rob the two share some on screen chemistry -the graphics -the girl they chose for the new character (can't say who bc it may be a spoiler) DON'T MAKE MY MISTAKE AND PAY TO SEE THIS FILM IN THEATERS!

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 9 of 45: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history