Twilight’s Rachelle Lefevre Sinks Her Teeth In, Summit Bites Back

Posted by Neil Miller (neil@filmschoolrejects.com) on July 30, 2009

rachelle-lefevre-header

In what could be the biggest public re-casting controversy since Terrence Howard v. Marvel Studios, the folks at Summit Entertainment have engaged in an all-out publicity war with Rachelle Lefevre, the actress who was recently dropped from the cast of their upcoming film The Twilight Saga: Eclipse and replaced by Bryce Dallas Howard. It is a story that we reported earlier today, and at the time it seemed relatively harmless. That is, until the sparks began to fly.

This evening, Lefevre issued the following statement to Access Hollywood saying she was as stunned as the fans are:

“I was stunned by Summit’s decision to recast the role of Victoria for ‘Eclipse.’ I was fully committed to the ‘Twilight’ saga, and to the portrayal of Victoria. I turned down several other film opportunities and, in accordance with my contractual rights, accepted only roles that would involve very short shooting schedules. My commitment to ‘Barney’s Version’ is only ten days. Summit picked up my option for ‘Eclipse.’ Although the production schedule for ‘Eclipse’ is over three months long, Summit said they had a conflict during those ten days and would not accommodate me. Given the length of filming for ‘Eclipse,’ never did I fathom I would lose the role over a 10 day overlap. I was happy with my contract with Summit and was fully prepared to continue to honor it. Summit chose simply to recast the part. I am greatly saddened that I will not get to complete my portrayal of Victoria for the ‘Twilight’ audience. This is a story, a theatrical journey and a character that I truly love and about which I am very passionate. I will be forever grateful to the fan support and loyalty I’ve received since being cast for this role, and I am hurt deeply by Summit’s surprising decision to move on without me. I wish the cast and crew of ‘Eclipse’ only the very best.”

Summit Entertainment responded hours later with the following public statement:

We at Summit Entertainment are disappointed by Rachelle Lefevre’s recent comments which attempt to make her career choices the fault of the Studio. Her decision to discuss her version of the scheduling challenges publicly has forced the Studio to set the record straight and correct the facts.

- Ms. Lefevre’s representatives were advised as early as April that THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE was expected to start shooting in early August.

- If Ms. Lefevre was, as she describes “passionate,” about being part of THE TWILIGHT SAGA, we feel that she and her representatives would have included us in her decision to work on another film that would conflict with the shooting schedule of THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE.

- It was not until July 20th that Summit was first informed of Ms. Lefevre’s commitment to BARNEY’S VERSION, a commitment we have since been advised she accepted in early June. Summit had acted in good faith that she would be available to fulfill her obligations both in terms of rehearsals and shooting availability for THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE. We feel that her choice to withhold her scheduling conflict information from us can be viewed as a lack of cooperative spirit which affected the entire production.

- Furthermore Ms. Lefevre took a role in the other film that places her in Europe during the required rehearsal time, and at least ten days of THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE’s principal photography. This period is essential for both rehearsal time with the cast, and for filming at key locations that are only available during the initial part of production.

- Contrary to Ms. Lefevre’s statement, it is simply untrue that the Studio dismissed her over a ten day overlap. It is not about a ten day overlap, but instead about the fact that THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE is an ensemble production that has to accommodate the schedules of numerous actors while respecting the established creative vision of the filmmaker and most importantly the story.

The fact remains that Ms. Lefevre’s commitment to the other project – which she chose to withhold from Summit until the last possible moment – makes her unfortunately unavailable to perform the role of Victoria in THE TWILIGHT SAGA: ECLIPSE.

As you might expect, it is incredibly rare to see a studio engage in such an open publicity war with a star. Usually, as was the case with the aforementioned Terrence Howard situation, the studio remains silent and moves on with the production of the film. But in this case Summit, which is a fairly young studio whose future is based on the success of the Twilight franchise, has decided to air all of the dirty laundry. If I had to guess why this is the chosen route, it might have something to do with the rabid fanbase around the Twilight franchise, a fanbase that demands answers.

However, if you ask me, this sort of response isn’t one that is necessary — the fans would have eventually gotten over the recasting. They still have their core cast that will make or break their films. But now, we’ve got ourselves a story — an actress scorned, a studio in panic mode. Lets not forget though, that it is still a franchise that will be bankrolling Summit projects for years to come — the fanbase will not wither over a little scandal. So while it’s fun in an inside baseball sort of way, by the time Eclipse hits theaters, fans won’t even remember this little controversy.

What do you think of how both Rachelle Lefevre and Summit Entertainment are handling this situation?


Read more articles by Neil Miller

« Previous Article | Next Article »

Related Topics:

Movie News, , , ,

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • I could not care less... But I'll write it in my blog because of the audience.
  • ThatGuy0
    I'm sorry but at the end of the day its still Twilight and it's still crap. Who cares about her or her war with the studio. Jumping ship was probably the right thing for her anyway. Now she wont be typecast as "That Vampire Chick".
  • I agree, who cares? I personally watched 'Twilight' and I find that Victoria is not the real quinessential to the story (correct me if I'm wrong I didn't read the books but I find Victoria just a groupie to the story). Ed, Bella, and Jason are the main character to care about (well I didn't care about the movie, why should I now?). I love Bryce Dallas Howard and she is quite a talent and came from the line of family acting but going forth w/ 'Twilight' Saga? I think she could get a better film to expand her resume.
  • teknokracy
    Psssst.... Earth to Rachelle... here's your chance to save your career... don't fight a good thing.
  • While her role in the first movie was minimal, her character is very important in the third film, for which she was recast. It just seems silly that it could not be worked out, regardless of who is at fault. She believed she was still involved at comic-con from what the interviews sounded like. I'll be honest, I'm a 22 year old guy who loved the books, and actually enjoyed the movie. It wasn't perfect, but I appreciated it because I had read the books, among other reasons. Everyone who doesn't like the movies, hasn't read the series, or both, you can still empathize the concept of continuity. I don't really remember the old Dumbledore but Richard Harris died 7 years ago. These movies are coming out within a year or less of each other, and it's a shorter series. I don't have anything against Howard, I just disagree with the decision to recast based purely on principle. To contest Mr. Miller's point, I think you doubt how much some of the fans care about the series, most will not forget. I'm not saying it will impact the box office performance at all, I'm just saying, anyone who has seen the first two will still have a weird feeling when someone else is playing the villian.

    Sorry this was such a long comment, but in all the dialogues i've seen on the internet about this, most consist of "I don't care!", "It's good for her!" and "OMG I'LL NEVER FORGIVE SUMMIT IT WAS TOTALLY A FAVOR TO RON TO GET HIM TO DIRECT A PROJECT FOR SUMMIT", without much discussion about the topic. (to the first point, I've never understood why people comment on shit they don't care about.)

    In that spirit, how do other people feel about continuity? I would think being a community of film lovers, it would matter to this audience than most, but who knows. Discuss :)
  • machig
    Summit = Real Life VOLTURI

    meaning: untrustworthy, game playing, tyrannic, hard, cold, inhuman, insane, power-obsessed, imbesille
  • Sarah E.
    I don't think there was any malicious intent on her part or her reps part and just a misunderstanding. When I read Rachelle's statement about it I never felt she was attacking Summit for replacing her but was confused on why they were reacting the way they did (whether or not she really didn't know is up for debate). I remember Rachelle Lefevre from the series Big Wolf on Campus and I think she would have been great in Eclipse especially with her more prominent story line. I highly doubt she would have been typecasted as a vampire after her role though. I don't know how I feel about casting Bryce Dallas Howard because they definitely didn't need name recognition (if you think she has any) and I don't know how I feel about her acting.
blog comments powered by Disqus