All the Director of ‘Twilight' Got After the Film's Success Was...a Cupcake
In a new interview with The Guardian, the movie's director, Catherine Hardwicke, revealed that she received a...sliiiightly underwhelming gift from the film studio after its huge opening weekend in November 2008. After all, Twilight opened with $69 million and launched an entire franchise based on the romantasy novel series.
'I walked into a room with all these gifts, and everybody was congratulating the studio, and they gave me a box,' Catherine told the publication. 'I opened it up, and it was a mini cupcake.'
She added that successful male directors are typically gifted 'a car, or a three-picture deal, or [the chance] to do basically whatever you want.'
This isn't the first time Catherine opened up about her journey directing the movie that started the worldwide phenomenon. During a 2023 appearance on the Watchalong podcast with Josh Horowitz, she said that the studio always underestimated Twilight's potential, as it catered to young women.
'Every studio in town turned this down,' she said on the pod. 'MTV and Paramount, they put it in turnaround. Everyone said we weren't making this. Even when I started on the job, they said, 'You know, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants was a popular book for girls. It made $29 million. That's probably all this movie can ever make.' Of course, our opening weekend was $69 million, and we made $400 million overall. Nobody could predict it!'
She added, 'Up to the day before opening weekend, like that Wednesday or Thursday before, they said, 'If we make $30 [million] or something, we'll be ecstatic.'
Little did they know, it would go on to become the first franchise ever to have three movies earn more than $130 million in their first three days. Not too shabby.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Twilight' Heartthrob Is Unrecognizable After Major Style Switch-Up: 'Be Still My Millennial Heart'
'Twilight' Heartthrob Is Unrecognizable After Major Style Switch-Up: 'Be Still My Millennial Heart' originally appeared on Parade. As the countless devoted fans of the Twilight film series know, Cullen family member Jasper Hale — played by Jackson Rathbone — was known for his wavy, chin-length blonde hair (and startling amber eyes). But as a recent video proved, Rathbone has definitely moved on from his iconic character's fans can't get enough. In a clip shared to TikTok this week, Rathbone, 40, sat in a chair at a hair salon, where his brown locks had recently been cut into a more close-cropped 'do. As the hairdresser cleaned up the edges with his clippers, he seemed to nick Rathbone, saying, "Oh, geez, did I get you?" Rathbone's answer — delivered while looking directly into the camera — came courtesy of a soundbite featuring Jasper's iconic line from The Twilight Saga: Eclipse: "Those are my battle scars." Commenters made it clear they approved of his new style, with one gushing, "He's still so fiiiiiine." "Damn, he's finer than ever," a second person agreed, with another adding, "Aged like fine wine." "Be still my lil millennial heart omg," declared someone else. In a 2008 interview with Seventeen, Rathbone opened up about dying his naturally dark hair blonde for the Twilight movies, saying, "I really enjoyed it." "I was always a character actor when I was in theatre," he continued. "I kind of find that it helps the audience, especially with Jasper. I mean I'm not actually blonde so I had to bleach my hair blonde. I'm fairly pale. I'm more of an indoor sports kind of guy. I'm a musician so I spent most of my time awake at night and in the recording studio tucked away from the sun." "But I really do love to change appearances for a lot of the characters I play," Rathbone added.'Twilight' Heartthrob Is Unrecognizable After Major Style Switch-Up: 'Be Still My Millennial Heart' first appeared on Parade on Aug 15, 2025 This story was originally reported by Parade on Aug 15, 2025, where it first appeared.
Atlantic
3 hours ago
- Atlantic
Don't Believe What AI Told You I Said
John Scalzi is a voluble man. He is the author of several New York Times best sellers and has been nominated for nearly every major award that the science-fiction industry has to offer—some of which he's won multiple times. Over the course of his career, he has written millions of words, filling dozens of books and 27 years' worth of posts on his personal blog. All of this is to say that if one wants to cite Scalzi, there is no shortage of material. But this month, the author noticed something odd: He was being quoted as saying things he'd never said. 'The universe is a joke,' reads a meme featuring his face. 'A bad one.' The lines are credited to Scalzi and were posted, atop different pictures of him, to two Facebook communities boasting almost 1 million collective members. But Scalzi never wrote or said those words. He also never posed for the pictures that appeared with them online. The quote and the images that accompanied them were all 'pretty clearly' AI generated, Scalzi wrote on his blog. 'The whole vibe was off,' Scalzi told me. Although the material bore a superficial similarity to something he might have said—'it's talking about the universe, it's vaguely philosophical, I'm a science-fiction writer'—it was not something he agreed with. 'I know what I sound like; I live with me all the time,' he noted. Bogus quotations on the internet are not new, but AI chatbots and their hallucinations have multiplied the problem at scale, misleading many more people, and misrepresenting the beliefs not just of big names such as Albert Einstein but also of lesser known individuals. In fact, Scalzi's experience caught my eye because a similar thing had happened to me. In June, a blog post appeared on the Times of Israel website, written by a self-described 'tech bro' working in the online public-relations industry. Just about anyone can start a blog at the Times of Israel —the publication generally does not edit or commission the contents—which is probably why no one noticed that this post featured a fake quote, sourced to me and The Atlantic. 'There's nothing inherently nefarious about advocating for your people's survival,' it read. 'The problem isn't that Israel makes its case. It's that so many don't want it made.' As with Scalzi, the words attributed to me were ostensibly adjacent to my area of expertise. I've covered the Middle East for more than a decade, including countless controversies involving Israel, most recently the corrupt political bargain driving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's actions in Gaza. But like Scalzi, I'd never said, and never would say, something so mawkish about the subject. I wrote to the Times of Israel, and an editor promptly apologized and took the article down. (Miriam Herschlag, the opinion and blogs editor at the paper, later told me that its blogging platform 'does not have an explicit policy on AI-generated content.') Getting the post removed solved my immediate problem. But I realized that if this sort of thing was happening to me—a little-known literary figure in the grand scheme of things—it was undoubtedly happening to many more people. And though professional writers such as Scalzi and myself have platforms and connections to correct falsehoods attributed to us, most people are not so lucky. Last May, my colleagues Damon Beres and Charlie Warzel reported on 'Heat Index,' a magazine-style summer guide that was distributed by the Chicago Sun-Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer. The insert included a reading list with fake books attributed to real authors, and quoted one Mark Ellison, a nature guide, not a professional writer, who never said the words credited to him. When contacted, the author of 'Heat Index' admitted to using ChatGPT to generate the material. Had The Atlantic never investigated, there likely would have been no one to speak up for Ellison. The negative consequences of this content go well beyond the individuals misquoted. Today, chatbots have replaced Google and other search engines as many people's primary source of online information. Everyday users are employing these tools to inform important life decisions and to make sense of politics, history, and the world around them. And they are being deceived by fabricated content that can leave them worse off than when they started. This phenomenon is obviously bad for readers, but it's also bad for writers, Gabriel Yoran told me. A German entrepreneur and author, Yoran recently published a book about the degradation of modern consumer technology called The Junkification of the World. Ironically, he soon became an object lesson in a different technological failure. Yoran's book made the Der Spiegel best-seller list, and many people began reviewing and quoting it—and also, Yoran soon noticed, misquoting it. An influencer's review on XING, the German equivalent of LinkedIn, included a passage that Yoran never wrote. 'There's quotes from the book that are mine, and then there is at least one quote that is not in the book,' he recalled. 'It could have been. It's kind of on brand. The tone of voice is fitting. But it's not in the book.' After this and other instances in which he received error-ridden AI-generated feedback on his work, Yoran told me that he 'felt betrayed in a way.' He worries that in the long run, the use of AI in this manner will degrade the quality of writing by demotivating those who produce it. If material is just going to be fed into a machine that will then regurgitate a sloppy summary, 'why weigh every word and think about every comma?' Like other online innovations such as social media, large language models do not so much create problems as supercharge preexisting ones. The internet has long been awash with fake quotations attributed to prominent personalities. As Abraham Lincoln once said, 'You can't trust every witticism superimposed over the image of a famous person on the internet.' But the advent of AI interfaces churning out millions of replies to hundreds of millions of people—ChatGPT and Google's Gemini have more than 1 billion active users combined—has turned what was once a manageable chronic condition into an acute infection that is metastasizing beyond all containment. The process by which this happens is simple. Many people do not know when LLMs are lying to them, which is unsurprising given that the chatbots are very convincing fabulists, serving up slop with unflappable confidence to their unsuspecting audience. That compromised content is then pumped at scale by real people into their own online interactions. The result: Meretricious material from chatbots is polluting our public discourse with Potemkin pontification, derailing debates with made-up appeals to authority and precedent, and in some cases, defaming living people by attributing things to them that they never said and do not agree with. More and more people are having the eerie experience of knowing that they have been manipulated or misled, but not being sure by whom. As with many aspects of our digital lives, responsibility is too diffuse for accountability. AI companies can chide users for trusting the outputs they receive; users can blame the companies for providing a service—and charging for it—that regularly lies. And because LLMs are rarely credited for the writing that they help produce, victims of chatbot calumny struggle to pinpoint which model did the deed after the fact. You don't have to be a science-fiction writer to game out the ill effects of this progression, but it doesn't hurt. 'It is going to become harder and harder for us to understand what things are genuine and what things are not,' Scalzi told me. 'All that AI does is make this machinery of artifice so much more automated,' especially because the temptation for many people is 'to find something online that you agree with and immediately share it with your entire Facebook crowd' without checking to see if it's authentic. In this way, Scalzi said, everyday people uncritically using chatbots risk becoming a 'willing route of misinformation.' The good news is that some AI executives are beginning to take the problems with their products seriously. 'I think that if a company is claiming that their model can do something,' OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told Congress in May 2023, 'and it can't, or if they're claiming it's safe and it's not, I think they should be liable for that.' The bad news is that Altman never actually said this. Google's Gemini just told me that he did.
New York Post
5 hours ago
- New York Post
‘And Just Like That' showrunner defends bizarre finale toilet scene that left fans enraged: ‘Relationships are a lot of s–t'
He stands by it. 'And Just Like That' showrunner Michael Patrick King is defending his choice to feature a disgusting toilet scene in the series finale of the 'Sex and the City' spinoff. In an interview published Thursday night, King told Variety, 'We cannot take ourselves too seriously. For the gorgeousness of Carrie's pink, sparkly top and tulle skirt — that's the high — the low is a toilet filled up with s–t.' He added, 'Because guess what? Being single, there's a lot of s–t, and relationships are a lot of s–t. It's the comedy, with the drama, with the romance, with the fairy tale. I guess it's a response to the fairy tale.' 12 Sarah Jessica Parker as Carrie in the 'And Just Like That' finale. Craig Blankenhorn/HBO Max 12 Michael Patrick King in Paris, on May 28, 2025. AFP via Getty Images 'And Just Like That' had its series finale on Thursday night after 3 Seasons – ending Carrie Bradshaw's (Sarah Jessica Parker) reign on TV that began when 'Sex and the City' premiered in 1998. During the episode, Carrie attends an awkward dinner party where there's an incident with a toilet overflowing. The camera shows crap in the toilet onscreen. Enraged fans slammed the scene on social media, saying it made them feel 'insulted' and made them 'vomit.' The episode ends with Carrie alone, in no relationship after Big (Chris Noth) died, and after she split with Aidan (John Corbett) for the umpteenth time. 12 The toilet scene in the 'And Just Like That' series finale. HBO 12 Cynthia Nixon and Sarah Jessica Parker in the 'And Just Like That' finale. HBO King said Carrie ending up alone is a 'call and response' to the criticism 'Sex and the City' got when that show's 2004 series finale ended with Carrie, Miranda (Cynthia Nixon), Charlotte (Kristin Davis) and Samantha (Kim Cattrall) all in relationships. 'It is something that I've always thought about. Because, as much as I made sure in the 'Sex and the City' finale that they weren't all married — because the anarchy of 'Sex and the City' was that, at that time, that being 34, with someone, but unmarried, was unacceptable…So Samantha was not married. That was my loophole,' he said. The showrunner added about the end of 'SATC' that Carrie 'did say that beautiful last speech about the most significant relationship of all being the one you have with yourself — while holding a phone, with Big calling.' 12 Sarah Jessica Parker, Cynthia Nixon, Kristin Davis and Kim Cattrall in 'Sex and the City.' HBO 12 Cynthia Nixon, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Kristin Davis in 'And Just Like That.' HBO 12 Sarah Jessica Parker, Cynthia Nixon, Kim Cattrall and Kristin Davis in 2002. Getty Images The end of 'And Just Like That' finds Carrie dancing around her apartment, seemingly at peace with being single. 'It's 'the real, real, this-is-now Carrie. Many, many years later, having gone through deaths, heartbreaks, new romances, saying, 'I'm grown-up enough to face this, because I've created a life that's so magnificent for myself,'' King told the outlet. He added, 'She's on her own. And that sentence is… mostly for someone who feels bad because they don't have someone. That's really what it is. It's to say: Look at her, how fabulous she is, and she's exactly where you are. That's what it's for.' 12 Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) dancing in her apartment at the end of 'And Just Like That.' HBO 12 Carrie writing the epilogue to her book at the end of 'And Just Like That.' HBO Before Season 3 premiered, HBO didn't announce that it would be the final season. King and Parker both made the announcement on social media on Aug. 1, just two weeks before the series finale aired. He explained, 'We didn't tell the press — people do tell, to get a bump. And I didn't need the bump, and I didn't want people looking at the Carrie-Aidan relationship with the word 'final' over it. I don't think they would have invested. They would have said, 'All right, just end it.'' 12 Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) in 'And Just Like That.' HBO The showrunner said, 'If the word 'final' had been in the mix, you would have seen everything differently. You would have seen Harry's prostate cancer as final. And we never wanted that to be final.' He continued, 'If we had told the press at the premiere 'final,' they would have said 'How does it end?' Guess what? We didn't know. None of the actors knew. We were just following the feelings of the writing and story and where we could bring Carrie that would be enough of a finish that people could continue with their fan fiction writing on their own.' At the end of Season 3, Carrie – who is writing a novel about a woman in the 1800s – ends the book by writing, 'The woman realized she was not alone — she was on her own.' 12 Kristin Davis, Sarah Jessica Parker and Cynthia Nixon in 'And Just Like That.' GC Images King wrote that scene in the middle of the Season 3 production, he said. 'The resonance of that felt so profound that I knew it was a very significant end to the season as we wrote it.' He continued, 'And then… wait, more is coming? Can we do more? I talked to Sarah Jessica and said, 'I think this is it. This feels like where we should leave Carrie Bradshaw.' She said, 'Then we stop.'' 12 Sarah Jessica Parker in 'And Just Like That.' Photograph by Craig Blankenhorn / HBO Max When asked if Carrie's story could ever return to TV, he said, 'It is closed. Because I care so much about what we've done. …she's this hero in her late 50s, wearing a Hindenburg hat and eating sherbet in Washington Square Park,' he said, referring to the giant cloud-like accessory that Carrie wore on her head in Season 3 of 'And Just Like That.' He explained that Carrie has 'made her mark,' and 'as a writer, I feel we've made our mark. I never thought once about continuing…Anyone else could keep going. I can't.'
