As you may know, Rachelle Lefevre won't be returning as Victoria in Eclipse. If you haven't heard, there have been a total of 3 press releases:

-Summit's Announcement of Her Replacement
-Rachelle's Response
-Summit's Response to Rachelle's Response

On the day of Summit's announcement, there was many emotions in the Twilight Fandom. Hate, anger, astonishment, etc. During the first hour of the announcement, there were 4 trending topics (out of ten) that pertained to this particular matter on Twitter. Fans were furious. Many petitions were made and signed, emails were sent to Summit, and even phone calls were made. I even emailed to Summit's board and gave them a few calls, but that's besides the point.

Summit fired Rachelle because she broke contract. Her contract said that she could not take any major roles that interfered with Eclipse filming. "Barney's Vision" takes place the same time as Eclipse filming, August 17th. She plays a man's wife. From the statements given by Summit and Rachelle, we can't tell if she purposely signed on to "Barney's Vision" knowing that it would run into Eclipse filming. Filming for "Barney's Vision" takes place in Rome and a total of 10 days. She insisted that missing 10 days of Eclipse filming wouldn't have affected her character, and she was stunned that Summit would settle this with her dismissal from the Twilight franchise. Personally, that's what I got from the statements.

Was this a communication failure? Or was it an alternate motive to Summit?

If there was a communication failure, the EASIEST thing to do is sort it out, NOT fire the person. It's ridiculous. The conclusion to that reasoning? Summit didn't think she was worth keeping and so, they "happened" to hire another actress with a "bigger name". If Summit was planning on keeping her, then why would they hire Bryce Dallas Howard? The auditioning process takes time, and from the statements, firing Rachelle was a spontaneous decision. Summit must have been planning to replace her because they already had another actress lined up. An alternate motive? For more money? That seems likewise. Summit has been known for being greedy. And I think that's what they were trying to do in this particular situation.

If you don't believe the "alternate motive", that's fine. But do you seriously believe Summit's "scheduling conflict" when they have rearranged filming for Cam Gigandet (James in Twilight) and Jackson Rathbone for Eclipse? Why would Rachelle's case be any different? Unless Summit's initial plan was to keep Rachelle, they would have come to a compromise, just like Cam and Jackson's schedule. In other words, Summit didn't want to keep Rachelle and wanted a "more known" actress, therefore raking in more money.

Yesterday, it was officially announced that Rachelle is sueing Summit. And my honest opinion? I'm glad she isn't going to let Summit walk all over her. What do you guys think?

Comments are welcome! :)