Deathly Hallows - 2 Films

Gemini Cricket · 03-13-2008, 08:50 AM

The final Harry Potter book will be split into 2 movies.

Quote:

Producers are expected to announce Thursday that J.K. Rowling's last "Potter" installment, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," will be split into two parts on the big screen. The first film is slated for release in November 2010, with part two following in May 2011.

Source

I think this is a good idea. This way, less of the book will be cut from the film.

Nephythys · 03-13-2008, 08:54 AM

Oh my- make sure to wring the cash cow out until the last drop

on the other hand- more Potter goodness for us.

Snowflake · 03-13-2008, 08:56 AM

More Potter goodness, indeedy.

Awaiting Half Blood Prince, more Snape now!

Gemini Cricket · 03-13-2008, 09:24 AM

Yeah, I was thinking 'ching-ching for the studio' when I read it, too.

cirquelover · 03-13-2008, 09:24 AM

I'm torn on this. It's good because they won't cut as much of the book but the downside is Daniel and the rest will look far to old to be believable in their characters anymore.

flippyshark · 03-13-2008, 09:50 AM

Downside - Camping, lots and lots of tedious, argument-filled camping. (This section of the book seemed a prime candidate for trimming to me. Things really picked up in the novel as soon as the endless camping was over. The book never let up after that.)

innerSpaceman · 03-13-2008, 10:18 AM

So odd you'd post this today. I give all my Harry Potter books to my ex, who keeps them on her shelf. So I'm dog-sitting for her this week while she's at the South-by Fest in Austin, and of course this morning I notice all the books and think of the news I heard several months ago that the last book was to be split into 2 films.

So I thought to myself I think it's a nimrod move, and wonder if I should comment on that on the LoT.

I guess I should.

It's a nimrod move.

If any book should be split it's Half Blood Prince. But of course, in re-reading it recently (my absolute least favorite of them), I realized a good writer could cull about half the material for a quite good movie.

The same could be done for the final tome. 2 movies will leave things bloated and overblown. It will likely be closer to a boring Chris Columbus straight from the page, literal filming of the novel ... and as far as possible from the film series' highlight of Alfonso Cuaron's brilliant movie adaptation of Prisoner of Azkaban.

UGH.

Alex · 03-13-2008, 10:22 AM

They're making movies, not unabridged books-on-film.

innerSpaceman · 03-13-2008, 10:25 AM

Don't know if you saw them, Alex ... but the first two films in the series were unabridged books on film.

Precisely.

Never were there two more glaring examples of the lazy trait.

Chernabog · 03-13-2008, 10:29 AM

I think it's a stupid move too, why do a straight adaptation of the book? Hell, if they want to wring the Harry Potter cash cow, why not just remake it ALL over again in Miniseries form on HBO? That way nothing will be left out.

What works on the page usually does not work in film format. Not sure why people don't understand this simple concept.

I don't think we'll have to worry about the "they're too old" thing, as long as they film both parts of book 7 back to back (a la Back to the Future 2&3, or Pirates of the Caribbean 2&3), which they will given its release schedule of 6 months apart.

In any case, this is a wise move to please only the more slavish fans of the novels and to put more money into Warner Bros.' coffers. After the crapfest which was Order of the Phoenix, both parts should be coming Blu-ray direct to my mailbox via Netflix (or on demand to my Ps3-TV) in late 2011, after I head home from a fun day visiting Cars Land at DCA

03-13-2008, 08:54 AM	#2
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	Oh my- make sure to wring the cash cow out until the last drop on the other hand- more Potter goodness for us.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 08:56 AM	#3
Snowflake lost in the fog Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: San Francisco Posts: 7,831	More Potter goodness, indeedy. Awaiting Half Blood Prince, more Snape now!
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 09:24 AM	#4
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Yeah, I was thinking 'ching-ching for the studio' when I read it, too.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 09:24 AM	#5
cirquelover Cruising around in my automobile... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Oregon Posts: 2,617	I'm torn on this. It's good because they won't cut as much of the book but the downside is Daniel and the rest will look far to old to be believable in their characters anymore.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 09:50 AM	#6
flippyshark Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 2,852	Downside - Camping, lots and lots of tedious, argument-filled camping. (This section of the book seemed a prime candidate for trimming to me. Things really picked up in the novel as soon as the endless camping was over. The book never let up after that.)
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 10:18 AM	#7
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	So odd you'd post this today. I give all my Harry Potter books to my ex, who keeps them on her shelf. So I'm dog-sitting for her this week while she's at the South-by Fest in Austin, and of course this morning I notice all the books and think of the news I heard several months ago that the last book was to be split into 2 films. So I thought to myself I think it's a nimrod move, and wonder if I should comment on that on the LoT. I guess I should. It's a nimrod move. If any book should be split it's Half Blood Prince. But of course, in re-reading it recently (my absolute least favorite of them), I realized a good writer could cull about half the material for a quite good movie. The same could be done for the final tome. 2 movies will leave things bloated and overblown. It will likely be closer to a boring Chris Columbus straight from the page, literal filming of the novel ... and as far as possible from the film series' highlight of Alfonso Cuaron's brilliant movie adaptation of Prisoner of Azkaban. UGH.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 10:22 AM	#8
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	They're making movies, not unabridged books-on-film.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 10:25 AM	#9
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Don't know if you saw them, Alex ... but the first two films in the series were unabridged books on film. Precisely. Never were there two more glaring examples of the lazy trait.
	Submit to Quotes

03-13-2008, 10:29 AM	#10
Chernabog Biophage Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The Moon Posts: 2,679	I think it's a stupid move too, why do a straight adaptation of the book? Hell, if they want to wring the Harry Potter cash cow, why not just remake it ALL over again in Miniseries form on HBO? That way nothing will be left out. What works on the page usually does not work in film format. Not sure why people don't understand this simple concept. I don't think we'll have to worry about the "they're too old" thing, as long as they film both parts of book 7 back to back (a la Back to the Future 2&3, or Pirates of the Caribbean 2&3), which they will given its release schedule of 6 months apart. In any case, this is a wise move to please only the more slavish fans of the novels and to put more money into Warner Bros.' coffers. After the crapfest which was Order of the Phoenix, both parts should be coming Blu-ray direct to my mailbox via Netflix (or on demand to my Ps3-TV) in late 2011, after I head home from a fun day visiting Cars Land at DCA __________________ And they say back then our universe Was a coal black egg Until the god inside Burst out and from its shattered shell He made what became the world we know ~ Bjork (Cosmogony)
	Submit to Quotes