Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 poster & wallpaper
Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites

Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli ... see more see more... , Elizabeth Reaser , Kellan Lutz , Nikki Reed , Jackson Rathbone , Ashley Greene , Michael Sheen , Sarah Clarke , Christian Camargo , Gil Birmingham , Julia Jones , Boo Boo Stewart , Mia Maestro , Ty Olsson , MyAnna Buring , Maggie Grace , Casey LaBow , Kiowa Gordon , Tyson Houseman , Alex Rice , Christian Serratos , Justin Chon , Michael Welch , Christopher Heyerdahl , Jamie Campbell Bower , Chaske Spencer , Bronson Pelletier , Alex Meraz , Tinsel Korey , Tanaya Beatty , Angelo Renai , Sienna Joseph , Carolina Virguez , Sebastiao Lemos , Kimani Ray Smith , Tora Hylands , Mackenzie Foy , Daniel Cudmore , Charlie Bewley , Ali Faulkner , James Pizzinato , Christian Sloan , Ian Harmon , Gabriel Carter , Paul Becker , Stephanie Moseley , Olga Fonda , Janelle Froehlich , Masami Kosaka , Amadou Ly , Wendell Pierce , Xavier Samuel , Tracey N. Heggins , Judi Shekoni , Omar Metwally , Andrea Gabriel , Rami Malek , Angela Sarafyan , Marlane Barnes , Lisa Howard , Patrick Brennan , Noel Fisher , Guri Weinberg , Lee Pace , Toni Trucks , Bill Tangradi , Erik Odom , Valorie Curry , Joe Anderson

In The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1, Bella (Kristen Stewart) and Edward (Robert Pattinson), plus those they love, must deal with the chain of consequences brought on by a marriage, honeymoon,... read more read more... and the tumultuous birth of a child...which brings an unforeseen and shocking development for Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner). -- (C) Summit Entertainment

Flixster Users

63% liked it

132,864 ratings

Critics

24% liked it

193 critics

PG-13, 1 hr. 57 min.

Directed by: Bill Condon

Release Date: November 18, 2011

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: February 11, 2012

Get It:

Stats: 13,278 reviews

report incorrect info

Photos

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 New picture Robert Pattinson Kristen Stewart Movie still Picture from the movie Taylor Lautner Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson Picture <3 Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson Still from the movie Wedding guests Taylor Lautner Bella & Renesmee Taylor Lautner as Jacob Back Movie Shot Taylor Lautner
Upload a Photo | View All Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 Photos

Your Rating


clear rating

Flixster Reviews (13,278)

  • fb1442511448
    May 13, 2013
    fb1442511448
    The first-half of the last chapter of the Stephanie Meyer adaptation disappoints as the rest of the films did. As what Deathly Hallows Part 1 did in the past, Breaking Dawn Part 1 does as well. It's lengthy and a slow pace that only builds up its climatic points in the second par... read moret. Only difference is Deathly Hallows Part 1 is actually pretty good. Breaking Dawn Part 1 is brought down by its once-again uninspiring performances and dull chemistry. 3/5
  • Raajay
    January 10, 2013
    Raajay
    Eh... I kinda liked it. Just because the teasing from the first three movies was over and they actually got on with it!
  • fb733768972
    November 17, 2012
    fb733768972
    "The Twilight Saga" has never been particularly great, and after the dreadfully poor "New Moon," I had lost all hope for the young franchise. Once "Eclipse" came into the picture I had a new aspect on the series, actually being interested how it is all going to end, not having re... read moread the books of course. This time around, Bella and Edward are getting married, having sex, and getting pregnant. Only problem, Bella is not able to hold a half-demon/half-human baby. It is killing her from the inside out. This film is not great in any way whatsoever, but the fact that I was able to take this ride with ease, and have my heart racing by the final moments of the film, tells that I still have a desire to finish. This film is filled with beautiful camera shots (as always), a riveting premise (even though there really is no story), and the conclusion will have you begging for more as you clench every bone in your body, watching the filmmakers fire-on-all-cylinders, not holding back any of the graphicness of the novel. This, like "Harry Potter" has the Part 1/Part 2 film scenario, and having to wait a year is absolutely ridiculous, but who am I kidding? I'm on board! "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn- Part 1" is not a good film at all, but I enjoyed watching it. There are so many problems that cannot be ignored. The acting is surprisingly improved, but once this saga comes to an end, so will Taylor Lautner's career. I spent most of his screen-time laughing as I could not stop to take him seriously. This film is a mixed bag overall, but I found myself intrigued! It's pretty intense, but the story is pretty lamely executed until the end!
  • mrbungle7821
    October 11, 2012
    mrbungle7821
    Taking a cue from the blockbuster film franchise of our age, the Harry Potter series, the producers and studio heads decided to split the final Twilight film into two separate movies. Yes, for you cheerless, unfortunate males dragged along to author Stefenie Meyer's estrogen-dren... read moreched soap opera, hoping to be done with Bella Swan and her sparkly vampire boyfriend, well your pain soldiers onward another year. If Breaking Dawn: Part One is any indication, we're all in for a world of pain come November 2012.

    Wedding bells are ringing for Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and her undead boyfriend, noble vampire/undead heartthrob, Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). Bella's persistent demand to be turned into a vampire is finely about to come true. She wants to stay human a bit longer, to savor her last days on Earth before sipping blood through a bendy straw. Her always-in-second best bud, Jacob (Taylor Lautner), is worried for Bella's well being. The wedding is like a fairy tale and Edward sweeps his new bride away to a tiny island off of Rio de Janeiro, where the housekeepers illogically speak Spanish. The couple makes the most of their time alone, and by this I mean they have sex (I refuse to believe this couple would play chess in the newlywed downtime). Edward withholds any second rounds of sex, fearing he'll seriously harm his bride (he destroyed the bed in mid-copulation). No matter because Bella gets pregnant right out of the gate. We're told this is impossible, yet her half-human/half-vampire fetus is rapidly growing inside momma's belly. The baby is also destroying its host, eating away Bella's body. Edward demands to kill the baby but Bella will have none of it. She?s going to deliver this baby even if it kills her. If it does kill her, then the truce between the werewolves and vampires will be broken, and Jacob's feistier tribe mates will be knocking down the Cullen doors looking for some tasty vampires to chomp.

    Director Bill Condon, he of Dreamgirls fame and an Oscar-winner for 1998's Gods and Monsters, goes hog-wild with the emotions, fittingly reminiscent of the life-and-death swings of emotional polarity that orient a teenager's life. Condon plays all of the ridiculous melodrama straight. It successfully channels the feelings of teenage angst and obsession, much like the first Twilight film. This Teutonic exhibit of buzzy hormones is like catnip to the Twilight faithful. Finally, they get what they've been waiting for, and Condon and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg delay that gratification even longer. This is the longest wedding I've seen on screen since The Godfather. It takes up about 45 minutes of the movie. The protracted walk down the aisle literally takes longer than the rest of the ceremony combined. I can already envision thousands of young girls asking for the "Bella dress" when their time down the aisle comes. At no point does the movie address the fact that the groom's side probably are all absent a heartbeat ("Hmm, extreme paleness? Are you with the bride or the groom? I'm at a loss."). That's a missed comedic opportunity. What's with the wedding guests played by name actors like Maggie Grace (TV?s Lost, Taken)? Did they hire recognizable actors for one-line bit parts? They better have larger roles in the second feature. Under Condon's direction, the film looks marvelous, and even the long-awaited love scene has some discernible heat to it that will give teen girls "funny" dreams for the next few months. Condon's also helming the next and final film, so I can at least say it'll look swell.

    This last film was broken into two parts due to the mountains of money the studio would make. It surely wasn't for some sort of artistic necessity. The plot of BD: Part One is stretched mighty thin. It's no joke that the wedding and honeymoon takes up half the running time. The baby drama is handled so amateurishly, and the plot ramps up the incubation time so that everything too fast for the audience to adjust to how stupid everything truly is. The first half of the movie is free of meaningful conflict. It's just concerned with payoffs. From everything I've read online, and from female friends who have partaken of the series, BD: Part One pretty much covers most of the plot of the 400-page book. What's left? I would totally give the series a pass if the second movie, started with Bella, hair a knotted mess, holding a shrieking baby. Edward sits at the table, drinking. "When are you gonna get a job?" she yells. "When are you gonna stop being a bitch?" he retorts, then gulps down a swig of booze. This domestic downer of an ending would almost make the whole series worth sitting through. Truthfully, as the teaser during the end credits advertises, if Michael Sheen (Frost/Nixon) has a larger part in BD: Part Two, it automatically becomes, sight unseen, the best movie of the series. Thus is the awe-inspiring power of Michael Sheen.

    This has long been a silly franchise filled with poorly veiled messages that seem less empowering to teenage girls than reassuring to their parents. Long a heavy-handed message about abstinence, the characters finally get to have sex, after they're properly married of course (does God really object more to vampire-human relations or when it occurs?). And you better believe the moment Edward and Bella eventually do the deed is a moment that teen girls, and their mothers, around the nation have been anticipating for three long, hard years. The buildup to the carnal climax is a rapturous release for the audience of Twi-hards; my theater felt like it exploded in pubescent hormones and giggling as soon as the proverbial train entered the station. Speaking of euphemisms, I find it telling that not a single character ever refers to sex as, well, "sex." They keep dancing around the term, referring to it as indistinct pronouns like "this" or "that" or the slightly more specific "honeymoon activities." It's like the characters can?t talk about a mature topic without a case of the giggles. There's even a scene where Jacob talks about Bella's forthcoming tangle between the sheets, openly, and with alarm: "You'll kill her," he tells Edward. He doesn't kill her but he does leave bruises all over her body. Bell assures her new husband that he?s not to blame, arguing, "You just couldn't control yourself." What kind of irresponsible message is that sending to teenage girls? But after enduring three movies of "save it until marriage," the message is made even clearer when Bella, after one bout of sex, gets pregnant. Boom. Bella breaks the news by saying, "The wedding was 14 days ago, and my period's late." Edward stares dumbfounded and replies, "What does that mean?" Apparently, after graduating from high school 200 times just for kicks, Edward must have been absent every damn time for sexual education ("Condoms go OVER? Oh! This whole time I thought they went UNDER, you know, to hold everything in.").

    It's here where the movie awkwardly shifts into a relentlessly pro-life message on legs. I?m not against movies presenting messages, but when a movie is as narratively empty and transparently padded as BD: Part 1, then the movie just gets swallowed up by the clumsy message. It doesn't matter that Bella's unborn hell spawn is literally killing her, sucking her dry from the inside out, she's going to have this baby no matter what, even if she dies in the process. Okay, Meyer, we get it. Here's a question for the world: can anyone really tell that much difference between emaciated Kristen Stewart and her normal self? She always appears a little sickly and hollow-eyed, but maybe that's just me. The baby is basically the only conflict the movie presents and it happens so late in the film. Thanks to a fast gestation period, the demon fetus is determined not to wait until Part Two to make its grand entrance. Now that Bella is preggers, she?s become instant buddies with Rosalie (Nikki Reed, a long way from Thirteen), and the two of them begin a war against non-gender pronouns (its vs. he/her). The baby conflict would be more interesting if it was a tad more ambiguous, but the fact that it literally is killing Bella, not to mention its monstrous possibilities, and yet she persists to give birth is less characterization and more stubbornness. If Bella's worried she'll never have another chance to have a flesh-and-blood daughter, then explore this. Otherwise it makes Bella look blithely cavalier with her own life.

    It's here where Meyer and the Twilight franchise, already deliriously high on teen angst, goes off the charts into weirdo territory (some spoilers will follow). Never mind where the werewolf boys (and a girl) manage to find new clothes after they destroy them after each beastly transformation, we've got far weirder moments to process. There's a vampire C-section via biting. There are giant wolves communicating via growling telepathy and bad CGI. There are Bella's completely insane names for her child; if it's a boy she wants to combine Edward and Jacob's names because that's not awkward ("See, son, you're named after the other guy I could have slept with but decided to just string along instead."). And if it's a girl she wants to combine her mother's name and Edward's mother's name forming the atrocious "Reneesmee." Excuse me? That makes Apple seem as traditional as apple pie. No one tells Bella these names are horrific because she's pregnant, naturally. I imagine all the characters broke out into laughter as soon as Bella left the room to go puke into a bucket. Easily the weirdest and dumbest thing in the history of the Twilight franchise occurs as a contrived deus ex machina and a tidy solution to Jacob's eternal, annoying pining. Jacob is determined to slay the monster he believes responsible for killing his unrequited love, Bella, but then he looks into those cute little baby eyes and swears devotion to this newborn babe. He "imprints" on her, which means that they are meant to be together, and thus the werewolf/vampire truce holds. "Of course," Edward intones, "Imprinting is their number one law. They cannot break it." Of course! This reminded me of the scene at the end of the second Harry Potter movie where a phoenix comes from nowhere and cries into a wound ("Of course, phoenix tears can heal anything," Harry informs while I was physically smacking myself in the head). Doesn't anyone else find this whole plot development creepy? Jacob can?t have the mother, so he?s going to have the baby? And he's got to wait 18 years if he wants their coupling to be legal on top of that. I think a messed up name is the least of this kid's worries.

    It all comes down to the heroine of the franchise, Miss Bella Swan (sorry, Bella Cullen now). I just don't get what all the fuss is about. To me, Bella isn't worth the effort. She?s never really been anything close to a fully formed character. Bella Swan has always defined herself by having a boyfriend, and when he was gone it was about pushing her friends away and moping until she finally found a new guy. She has zero self-identity, no center, she is an empty shell, there is no there there. She's a cipher, meant for the teenage readership to plug themselves into her place. I won't restate my theory that the Twilight series is glossed-up pre-teen wish fulfillment, but there you have it. Yet there are sneaking moments where Bella seems almost shockingly human. Her anxious montage of preparation before her first night of sex is relatable and sympathetic (what outfit to wear? Shave the legs? What kinds of makeup?). Too bad this relatable side of her character vanishes all too quickly. Before Bella defined herself by her boyfriend, and now she defines herself by her baby. She's still the same whiny, selfish, morose, and cruelly manipulative Bella, though. She can't let Jacob alone; she has to continue stringing him along, bringing him into inappropriate personal matters. Jacob's always been a bit of a control freak who seems to spout quasi-rapist dialogue (the classic "You love me, you just don't know I yet."), but the guy's always gotten a raw deal as far as I'm concerned. Betrothed to a baby is not a worthwhile parting gift. I worry that young, impressionable girls are going to look at Bella as an influential figure. If these same gals want a literary heroine they could truly look up to, they should feast their eyes on Katniss Everdeen, proactive and laudable star of the Hunger Games and forthcoming movie of the same name.

    The three actors have been playing the same character notes for so long that they could all just go on autopilot and collect their paychecks. Stewart (Adventureland) is less annoying than she has been in previous films. I'm trying not to take out my antagonism of her character on the actress, who I've genuinely liked in pre-Twilight projects (even her Joan Jett performance was pretty decent). Pattinson (Water for Elephants) seems to shrink into the background for this movie. There are a lot of long, ponderous, somehow meaningful stares between the two, with the soundtrack trying to communicate emotions that the screenplay has failed to do (a little more variety on the soundtrack next time, fellas? I think I tuned out after the twelfth melancholy piano ballad). Luckily, Pattinson does have something of a screen presence to go with those abs. Unfortunately, the same could not be said for Lauthner (Abduction). The young buck, formerly of Shardkboy fame, just cannot act. He has a nostril-heavy manner of expressing emotion that makes you wonder if he?s about to blow your house down. It's telling that within mere seconds of the film beginning, the guy rips off his shirt, the peak of his acting abilities. I suspect it will not be long before Lautner and his six-pack and sitting at home, unemployed, and indulging in a different six-pack.

    Breaking Dawn: Part One is certainly not intended for critics of the book and film series, or really any audience member lacking ovaries. But I think that even the most ardent Twi-hards will walk away giggling at the silliness of the melodrama. I try not to be out rightly dismissive of the whole series, but the bad characters, bad plotting, and questionable messages make it hard to continue bending over backwards to find slivers of quality to support. I get the appeal of the series, the fact that Bella Swan is a cipher to exercise frothing teenage wish fulfillment, but that doesn't excuse the movies from being so bad. This isn't the painful abomination that was 2009?s New Moon, but it's come the closest. Only the promise of more Michael Sheen makes me hopeful that BD: Part Two will be better than its predecessors. But when you're talking about an obscenely popular moneymaker, quality becomes secondary to delivering a product that is recognizable to the demands of the screaming fans. BD: Part One is less a payoff than a warning. There is more to come, and if you thought Bella was intolerable before just wait until her vampire growing pains.

    Nate's Grade: C-
  • ajaymuthecooldevils
    August 16, 2012
    ajaymuthecooldevils
    Sorry team Bella, team Edward, or team Jacob (or should I just say em : Twilights fans), I just can't rate this movie any higher than this.. I'm not a Twilight haters but this movie definitely made just because the studio didn't want to lose all the possible money they can get by... read more splitting the last movie into 2 different movies or should I say it ending this franchise immediately.. A very slow but powerless drama combined with not-so-great acting from the actors made this movie made really in the purpose that I mentioned before.. Even some other scenes seems ridiculous when it meets my eyes like when wolf Jacob talk with their pack and I feel like watching an animation movie or when Bella's condition getting worser and worser day by day the effects were just weird cause the body get the effects but the face just didn't.. But I still have some hope for the second movie since all the action will put in there so I hope there's an improvement in the last movie..
  • Deano78
    July 23, 2012
    Deano78
    A very slow, rather dull installment in the franchise....seems to go down hill more which each new film.
  • fb100000257973100
    June 3, 2012
    fb100000257973100
    I will be honest and say that, while I have despised the previous installments in this series, the Twilight Saga is known for being some of the most comedic films ever. In that view point, Breaking Dawn part One is the most hilarious film I have seen in a very long while. If you ... read moreare someone, that enjoys comedy, then this is one film you will be busting a gut over. Sad thing is: this film was made as a serious drama. The comedy here is like that of The Room: the byproduct of poor film making. With this being the most humorous, it is just quite sad. Then again, I do have some sympathy for this series. You see, the problem with Twilight is not really the acting or directing (granted they are part of the problem). The problem is due to the cheap material that Stephenie Meyer wrote and the poor script writing. With this film, the script is just a mess. To begin with, there are so many unneeded scenes, so much that could have been removed without ruining the film. Then the complete screw up of the logic of the series (um⦠they are suppose to sparkle, right?). Finally you have the different directors for each film. Okay, direction. I understand that each director for this series tried their best with the material (the best is David Slade, but then again he is a talented director). But given the novels that this series is based on, I pity them and their dignity at making one of the worst film series I have ever seen. And it probably did not help at all that they tried to copy Harry Potter with breaking the film into two segments. To be honest, they did not need to with this film. They just did not. Moving on to acting. What am I kidding? There is no acting in this film. The reason why is simple: all the actors know is that they are in a soft pornographic film for teenage girls and as such, they will automatically get a huge paycheck for doing nothing. At all. For those like me that have the burden of reviewing every hit film that comes out, we are asking for something real, for something to keep us, the critics, entertained. Yeah, this film is just a slap in the face. The people donâ(TM)t make an effort, donâ(TM)t add anything to the characters, and just gives us cardboard. So, where did all the money go to? The cinematographer and the make-up artist. I will give the film props on being beautiful to look at in terms of scenery and the make-up when Bella is pregnant is, shockingly, well done. But other then that, there is nothing good about this film. But that brings me to my biggest problem: this film is insulting. One thing I have noticed about the Twilight books is that it is nothing short of a metaphor for teenage romance and teenage sex. One thing that this film also had going for it is the topic of abortion. Right now, this topic is rather hotly debated and this film had the chance to have a serious, adult look at the topic, weigh both sides, and give the audience and characters a chance to actually decide on this issue. Here, they just make it out that all guys want to do is be a coward and go for abortion while the women want to have the child. As a guy, I am beyond insulted with this. Why, is my question? The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part One is stupid, unintentionally funny, and a complete mess of a film while insulting any man that watches it. Never in my life of reviewing films have I found a film that is this un-enjoyable, dreadful, and completely unnecessary. With this, I am grateful that there is only one film left and after that, we can bury Twilight and start recreating the myths of Vampires.
  • scottgreen96
    April 2, 2012
    scottgreen96
    Going for the Harry Potter ending effect, and failing badly, the film consists of some strange scenes and absurdly awful script, the director is better off finishing now while he still has an ounce of dignity, while the actors have no idea what they are doing and clearly haven't ... read morespent time on this kiddie project very much.
  • spielberg00
    March 24, 2012
    spielberg00
    Forget the fact that THE TWILIGHT SAGA: BREAKING DAWN - PART 1 (wow, that's a long title) finally makes the whole "vampire romance" genre look as dumb as it sounds. The thing that truly makes this a bad film is that it starts off as a sappy romantic drama, and it takes over half... read more the film to evolve back into a supernatural/romantic thriller like the rest of the saga.

    That is certainly not to say that "Twi-hards" will not enjoy this fourth and thankfully penultimate entry into the Twilight Saga. Even the novel Breaking Dawn by Stephenie Meyer was a huge drop from the previous three, but how could someone who would give anything and everything for this series care? (Not to mention, the drop from the novels Eclipse to Breaking Dawn was not nearly as large as the one we see from the films.)

    Ranked #3 worst of 2011.

    Full Review: http://wp.me/p1Urcx-uR
  • sergioogarcia
    March 4, 2012
    sergioogarcia
    I usually take my time to make a brief but sustancial opinion of movies, but honestly I was expecting a litle bit more for "The Final "SAGA" (yes " " again)"...c'mon! But not this time...so I'll just say: A wedding long enough to become pregnant.

View All Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 Reviews

Critic Reviews

Bruce Diones
December 5, 2011
Bruce Diones, New Yorker

This penultimate "Twilight" film is the best in the series so far. It's languorous, romantic, moody, and, in the end, horrifying. Full Review

Joshua Rothkopf
November 20, 2011
Joshua Rothkopf, Time Out New York

Color us stoked that a Twilight movie even strays into evil-fetus territory. Full Review

David Edelstein
November 20, 2011
David Edelstein, New York Magazine

The last twenty minutes of Breaking Dawn are so harrowing that it's possible to forget that most of the acting is soap-operatic (the guy who plays Carlisle is aging to look like Liberace) and the dial... Full Review

Sara Stewart
November 18, 2011
Sara Stewart, New York Post

It all goes wrong just when it should go right. Full Review

Peter Howell
November 18, 2011
Peter Howell, Toronto Star

Melodrama reigns in this supernatural soap opera, even though author Stephanie Meyer's tale takes a decided turn toward the weird and violent. Full Review

Richard Roeper
November 18, 2011
Richard Roeper, Richard Roeper.com

This is a well-made film, though sometimes unintentionally funny. Full Review

Tom Long
November 18, 2011
Tom Long, Detroit News

There are a few reasons The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn -- Part 1 is probably the best of the Twilight films. Full Review

Peter Rainer
November 18, 2011
Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor

For those of us who are not Twilight fanatics, or even fans, or could not care somewhat less than less, the arrival of Part 1 is not cause for trumpets blaring. But I would imagine that even those who... Full Review

Dana Stevens
November 18, 2011
Dana Stevens, Slate

By any normal standard, this is a terrible movie, with stilted dialogue and leaden pacing -- every 15 minutes or so, the action stops for a musical montage involving slow-motion handsomeness. But the ... Full Review

James Berardinelli
November 18, 2011
James Berardinelli, ReelViews

Here's hoping Breaking Dawn Part Two gives us more of what Part One provided in the final 30 minutes than what it forced viewers to endure to get there. Full Review

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Cast

More Like This

Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Twilight
    Twilight (92%)
  • The Twilight Saga: Eclipse
    The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (93%)
  • The Twilight Saga: New Moon
    The Twilight Saga: New Moon (92%)
  • Dracula A.D. 1972
    Dracula A.D. 1972 (25%)

More Movies like Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1

Facts

Submit a Fact | View All
    • Bella Swan: Childhood is not from birth to a certain age and at a certain age The child is grown, and puts away childish things. Childhood is the kingdom where nobody dies.
    • Leah: Being any kind of happy is better than being miserable about someone you can't have.
    • Bella Swan: You have to accept what is
    • Edward Cullen: Because you've given me no choice! Bella, were suppose to be partners remember? But you've decided this on your own, you've decided to leave me.
    • Bella Swan: Don't see it that way
    • Edward Cullen: Well I have no other way to see it,'cause it's me who'll lose you. And I don't choose that, I don't choose that.
    • Rosalie Hale: Say the word, Alice. Baby. It's just a little baby.
    • Alice Cullen: The fetus isn't good for Bella!
    • Jacob Black: I'm not the one carrying a demon.
Submit a Fact | View All

Twilight Saga: Br... : Watch Free on TV

Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 Trivia

Movie Quizzes

Create a Quiz |

All Quizzes

Video Clips

Upload a Video |

All Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 Videos

Meet Other Fans

Add Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 to favorites

Recent News

Submit a Story |

View Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 News

Recent Lists

Make a List |

View All Lists

Most Popular Skin

No skins yet. Interested in creating one?