Rumor Alert: Spielberg and a Two Part “Deathly Hallows” Film

117

Jan 13, 2008

Posted by SueTLC
Uncategorized

Hang on everyone, there is a new rumor tonight regarding famous directors and a possible two part Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows film. The Daily Mail is reporting tonight that crews currently working on “Half-Blood Prince” have been told the final Harry Potter film “will be released in two halves.” The article then points out while the financial benefit would be significant (“it could mean a £500million bonus in ticket sales”) the paper reports this purported move is artistic, citing an unnamed source who says:

“There’s so much to fit that the view is the last movie should be in two halves. There is a huge battle when Harry, played by Daniel Radcliffe, takes on Voldemort that needs to be done really well.”

The article then goes on to cite that Warner Bros, which has still not formally announced a director for the final film, is considering some big name directors for the final movie, including legendary Oscar winning director Steven Spielberg. Quotage: At Warner Bros, who are rumoured to be thinking of Oscars and a big-name director such as Steven Spielberg for the final film, a spokesman said: “People are discussing all possibilities.”

Readers will remember, and as cited by J.K. Rowling on her website, Steven Spielberg had considered directing the first Harry Potter film, but declined. As we have reported previously as well, other names have surfaced in regards to directing “Deathly Hallows” including Alfonso Cuaron, David Yates, Chris Columbus, and most recently Guillermo Del Toro. As exciting as all of this sounds, please keep this one very much in the rumor category for the time being. We are trying to verify this, and will update with more when we can.

Thanks mc and rodeo!





448 Responses to Rumor Alert: Spielberg and a Two Part “Deathly Hallows” Film

Avatar Image says:

TWO PARTS WHAT???? Does that mean we’d have to wait time in between releases?

Avatar Image says:

I KNEW IT! The only way to do justice to this franchise is a two-part Deathly Hallows. They wouldn’t have to cut anything. I just hope Speilberg doesn’t do it. I don’t want Williams back for score either…even though he is brillant…I think the films have turn in a direction that he is not good at composing.

Avatar Image says:

Yes LemonFaerie. I personally feel having the first half end with the death of a certain house elf…that or when they get capture by Greyback.

Avatar Image says:

They said that Goblet of fire was going to be two parts also, but they managed to get that (and Order of the Phoenix) each into one movie. And they’ve been cutting out sub-plots all along, so they’ll be able to get everything into Deathly Hallows that needs to be in there and do it all in one movie.

Avatar Image says:

That would be awesome if Steven Spielberg did the seventh movie. WE don’t want an re-Oder of the Pheonix movie where two minutes and the scene it over. It has to be BIG!!! and exciting and NO ridiculous editing.

Avatar Image says:

hmmm, I wouldn’t be opposed to a two-part Deathly Hallows. I always wondered if they would consider it. Although this is only rumor, it’s still exciting nonetheless!

As for Spieldberg….Please NO! He’s a great director but after finding out what he wanted to do with the first film, I’m not sure he’d be the best choice. Guillermo del Toro or Cuaron would be perfect though!

Avatar Image says:

Two parts? To fit everything in, sure, but I don’t think fans would be too happy to have to wait to see the 2nd half. There would have to be a way to rectify that somehow.

Avatar Image says:

I am all for a nice long movie to get everything in, but no way do I want to wait a year or more or whatever in between releases, just so they can make more money on ticket sales. Release it all at once with an intermission, ala Gone With the Wind, get a great director (NOT Spielberg) and do it justice, but don’t make us wait any longer, 2010 is far enough as it is.

Avatar Image says:

To do justice to DH, I think it should be in two parts, hopefully we don’t have to wait a year before the next release like LOTR. For Warner Brothers, what is there to decide, the Potter series are the highest grossing series of movies, I believe, ever. So DH cost 250 million, OTTP grossed almost a billion and that’s before DVD sales. What Risk?

Avatar Image says:

I’d perfer a 3 hour movie than a 2 part movie. Its a 7 part series not an 8 part series. BUt at least I got some of the big news I’ve been begging for.

Avatar Image says:

I do not think for a second that WB is thinking only of money for this decision. They want to do justice to the book and to the fans. JKR has said how thrilled she has been with how the WB have wanted to keep with the books. We have been anticipating that DH would come out in June or July (if WB keeps with the pattern for the past 7 or so years). So part one can come out in June/July of 2010 and part 2 can come out December of 2010. That’s still keeping it in one year. I would hope that they would release a version (either in movies or on dvd) that you could see the movie in one sitting. Here’s hoping.

Avatar Image says:

WOW! Do NOT like that idea at ALL. If you have to make it 3 hours I don’t care but making it into two parts is probably not a good idea. I also can’t imagine how they would end the first half its just to confusing in some ways. I would love to see Alfonso direct the last one i think it would be really good. As for the Great battle at the end…Please not another 5 min battle scene like in Order of the phoenix and thats it. Make it the best there ever was like 10-15 min.

Avatar Image says:

I aggree with Sam 100%, and I think they could have done that for OOTP or GOF, instead of cutting all of the sub-plots

Avatar Image says:

WoW if its true it would quite the deal

Avatar Image says:

Just make it 4 hours, we won’t mind…

Avatar Image says:

lol wow 4 hours thats really long…..

I would watch it, maybe only once haha

Avatar Image says:

I must admit to mixed feelings.

While a few projects like Lord of the Rings and Gone with the Wind have worked well with very lengthy pieces, others have not. With the right director and scriptwriter, it might work. But they have to be careful with this.

As for Spielberg, I too am very skeptical. I really enjoy a lot of his work, but I’m not sure he is the right man for this particular project.

If they did it, I would hope we get more of the character development for Ron and Hermione (BOTH of them. I LOVE the locket scene with Ron, which I pray isn’t overly simplified or done away with).

Avatar Image says:

I think most intense potter fans (including myself) that the movies will never do the books justice. However as a movie with no relation to the potter books at all Deathly Hallows is gonna be an amazing action packed movie. However if it was split in two not only would it completely alienate it from the books, but it would also mean the movie would end at a weird spot causing confusion for non-readers (not that they don’t deserve it :P). Anyways thats just my two cents on the whole thing.

Avatar Image says:

Well I like the Spielberg aspect….this film needs to be epic.

But when I saw the words two parter, I freaked! There is NO way that they should do that. Elongate the film to three hours, perhpas, but split it…nuh-uh.

Not if you want this to be the film people remember. This series needs to go out with a bang…one big loud impressive leads to acadamy nods bang.

Not two fairly good bangs.

WB would be shooting themsleves in the foot if they did that. I pray to god none of this is true.

Avatar Image says:

Well, if it is true, I’d bet ten galleons the first half will be called “HP and the Deathly Hallows” and the second “HP and the Elder Wand”. It’d mean a huge pay day for everyone(WB, JK etc.) if it was released in two parts, particularly because it could all be filmed at once. Plus,that would put the 2-half of DH coming out around the same time the World of Harry Potter opens it’s gates at Universal.

Avatar Image says:

WHOOHOOO!!!!! FINALLY!!! I have been begging for this for years. I definitely think that this is the way to go. Everybody wins. WB makes more money, and the fans get all the goodies that they want from the book. Who cares if we have to wait for it? We fans are used to waiting long for what we want, and waiting for a while for a 5-hour telling of the last novel is more than worth waiting for! And, I really hope that Guillermo del Toro or Alfonso Cuaron directs them!!!! YAY!!! :D :D

Avatar Image says:

“Not if you want this to be the film people remember. This series needs to go out with a bang…one big loud impressive leads to acadamy nods bang. Not two fairly good bangs. WB would be shooting themsleves in the foot if they did that. I pray to God none of this is true. Posted by ccm&hp on January 13, 2008 @ 12:00 AM”

WELL SAID! Exactly. I hope someone from WB sees your post.

Avatar Image says:

i think a to part release would be great! I just wonder how long inbetween part one and two we would have to wait…..However, and i don”t want to start a fight, I think everyone is entitled to his/her opinion….. Spielberg would kill it! I like him and some of his work but it would bring a fast passed, “Hollywood”, cookie cutter action film feel to Harry Potter which would kill the magic. (which is what HP is, magical, on screen,in the books, and in the minds of viewers and readers everywhere) Aside from the extensive cuts, and short scenes, which were probably forced on Yates by the producers and the studio, who actually probably forced it on the writer before Yates. I liked him the best!..

Avatar Image says:

I think that OotP was the least successful of the films precisely because everything was rushed and there was no time to really develop the plot correctly. Some really important things were left out: the Locket in the drawing room, Lily Potter in Snape’s worst memory and Harry giving the interview to Rita and the Quibbler (not to mention the scene I wanted to see with Harry getting “Career Advice”).

People are mistaken if they think that a two part movie means that there would be a year between the first and second part. It would all be filmed at once so the second half would be released like a month later or something like that. Every time I read DH I cringe at the thought of any of it being cut. A single three hour movie might very easily lose the entire Dobby subplot, since we haven’t seen him in the movies since COS.

As for Spielberg, he’s one of my favorite directors, but given a choice I’dlike to see Cuaron direct DH. If you saw “Children of Men” you know that he could keep the intensity level up to the standard set in the book.

Avatar Image says:

I think you can have it in two parts and still have it end with a bang. The entire battle at Hogwarts is epic and could take up to 30-45 minutes to film (hogsmeade, the DA and everyone meeting in the RoR, snape leaving hogwarts, getting the house’s together, snape’s memory, the diadem, the first fight, going into the forbidden forrest, the fight after the forbidden forrest) on second thought…I would say an hour is right there…if it’s done right! The first film would be good to end at the part when they get caught in the forrest, or the best being when our favorite house elf dies. To me, that is a turning point in the book. Harry changes right then and there and everything starts to click. Plus it would leave the audience wanting more. It would also give plenty of action for the first and second part.

Avatar Image says:

Also keep in mind the people that run studios (WB) are only worried about how much money there gonna make and not much else. Not only that but alot of them dont even know much about movies ! some of them probably dont even read!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Two parts would be great, Speilburg, would be a HORRIBLE choice. I hope that part is a rumour, and the just use a mixture of some of the past directors, like Alfonzo. But if they had two parts for DH, that would be so great. I would watch a three part, if it meant including everything. Although, watching the deaths of favorite characters on scene would be far more depressing.

Avatar Image says:

oh, that would be awesome!!! i would love having 2 parts! then they could fit everything, even all the little subplots, into it. plus if we have to wait, that would just draw out the excitement more and make the harry potter movie’s magic last just a little bit longer. but i hope spielberg doesnt do it, after finding out what he wanted to do with the first movie, im just not sure this is the best series for him.

Avatar Image says:

People are mistaken if they think that a two part movie means that there would be a year between the first and second part. It would all be filmed at once so the second half would be released like a month later or something like that.

WB would never do that, because the casual movie goers will say screw this I’m not going to the first part, I’ll wait a month till I got to watch the big battle movie. Anyways everyone’s entitled to their opinions, but I’m really worried about how many people seem to be supporting a 2 part movie, I’d love a 5 hour movie if that was possible, but its not and the next best thing is a 3 hour movie, not two 2 1/2 hour movies, that could ruin the credibility of the films in years to come.

Avatar Image says:

Personally, and I know I am one of very few who believe this, but I love OotP and what Yates did with the movie. I am so excited about HBP because of how OotP went. And obviously I am not alone because it was the second highest grossing movie of the franchise! I would love for him to do DH as well. Anyone but Columbus and Speilberg.

Avatar Image says:

LMAO Spielberg? They’re kidding, right?

Avatar Image says:

Im on the fence about this one. I was hoping for Del Toro but I guess Spielberg would be ok. I just hope if anything they do like what they did in Titanic and make it to be something like 4 hours long and tie up all the loose ends that WB has been sweeping under the rug. I deffinitely dont want a 2 part movie. It would completely ruin the whole sequence of things. For some reason after GOF and OOTP I think WB is actually afraid of longer films lol.

Avatar Image says:

I agree with you EMUBari83, I think a two-part movie would be the only way they can include everything and do it justice. I mean, there is soo many sets they need to work on and film that its just mind boggling.

Avatar Image says:

Sam, there is no way that it could be released within 1 month of eachother. Technically it would be 2 movies. I can see 6 months inbetween, but not a month. If WB really wants to be considered for Oscars than a June/December release schedule would fit perfectly.

Avatar Image says:

This is exciting news, but it IS just a RUMOR. It sounds a little too good to be true if you ask me. It would definitely make sense for Warner Bros. to release the film in two parts because the book is sooo detailed that everything needs to be in the film and also because they would make like 600 million dollars off the two halfs combined and that’s just in the US alone. So it’s a definite possibility. As for Speilberg directing it, that’s doubtful and I’m not sure I would want him to considering what he initially wanted to do with the first film: He wanted to make it an ANIMATED film and have HALEY JOEL OSMENT do the voice of Harry Potter. I get sick everytime I think about it. I think one of the directors who have worked on the films already would be best because they know how the process works already and they already know the trio.

Avatar Image says:

The first thing my brothers and I said after reading DH was that they need to do 2 movies for it. First of, JKR writes exceleltn first chapters (wholes books too but the first chapters are awesome). So thats what part one would start with…the malfoy manor scene. part 1 would need to have rescusing harry (including the deaths) because that forcasts the things wrong with voldemort’s wand. then the time at the burrow and getting the objects form dumbledore’s will, and the wedding needs to eb there (side note “Scrimgeour is Dead. The ministry has fallen” si one of my favorite lines in HP history. gave me chills). Then theres the whole attack at the ministry (needs to be in for the locket), then the fact that ron leaves and such and getting the locket and then the story of the deathly hallows and escaping that attack. then gettign captured and getting away from the malfoy’s…it all needs to be in. that’s one movie alone.

Avatar Image says:

I see some of your points for a 2 part series, but I think what you are missing is how it disassociates itself from the books. In 5 years I’ll have a stack of 7 books that represent not only Harry’s journey from entering the wizarding world to becoming an influential adult in it year by year, but that also represent 7 the most magically powerful number, and one that is very important in the series. While beside it all have a stack of eight movies, that dissociate from the books as I said before. I think a 3 – 3 1/2 hour movie is the way to go it will give the director time to tell the story properly, while still keeping it as one story which was the way it was written.

Avatar Image says:

You actually just changed my mind on how you think about it EMUBari83 6 months is actually not that bad for me anyway.

And second, key plots in the story are more important than cutting them. That battle at the end is what im looking forward to the MOST and the person i think that can handle it is Alfonso or Guillermo Del Toro. I know they can figure some way where there won’t be a long waiting period in between films and where the first half would end.

Avatar Image says:

Sam, there is no way that it could be released within 1 month of eachother. Technically it would be 2 movies. I can see 6 months inbetween, but not a month. If WB really wants to be considered for Oscars than a June/December release schedule would fit perfectly.

I agree with you if you read the whole post you’ll see I was quoting someone else and saying why it wouldn’t happen.

Avatar Image says:

You guys are both spoiled and stupid. There isn’t a BETTER choice out there than Spielberg. Most of the things you may have heard about his plans for the first movie were lies. In reality, Speilberg didn’t go as far as casting the movie because he wasn’t interested just like wasn’t interested in Spiderman. It’s just too easy for him. At this point, I’d rather see him do “Interstellar” and “Tintin” but if he does decide to do it (very unlikely) he would do a fantastic job. Why wouldn’t he?

It’s just that no matter what producers think, I don’t think he would be interested. Also, expect Indy 4 to outgross Potter 6 in box office.

Avatar Image says:

TWO FREAKING HALVES? Whoot! I knew it! I knew it! I always imagined this, and now a rumor! :) Yay! I’m still happy even thought it’s a rumor! Omg. If it’s 4 hours, I’ll be so happy! Like, I’ve always thought “What if we watch the first half, and then wait a little bit in the theater, and then the second half can come on?” I’d BE SO HAPPY to sit in the theater for four hours! I could care less if it was a whole day just to watch Harry Potter! If it take that long to make it the BEST that it can be, then so be it! Oops, I think I’m talking too much, so I’ll stop here. PS- they better find a GREAT director. Seriously.

Avatar Image says:

Glad to hear it Jamez.:) This is the first time I’ve discussed things here. I really think WB doesn’t want too much time inbetween the rumored 2 movies. It would seperate itself too much. But what is important for me is that they give the option to buy the movie in one long format. I nuderstand why a 4-5 hour movie is improbable…but in my own home I would want to see it that way.

Avatar Image says:

SS- yeah sure whatever. two parts- YES PLEASE!!!

Avatar Image says:

Christine – I agree two halves with an intermission would be great (wouldn’t make as much money for WB, but thats not the point) but what the rumour is saying is that the movie would be cut in half and each half would be shown on a separate date.

Avatar Image says:

History has shown that intermissions just don’t work anymore. Anyone see Gods and Generals? It’s an awesome movie but it didn’t do well. It was 4 hours with an intermission. That’s why. people have a hard time sitting for that long. Plus, in the time that 1 movie with an intermission shows 2 could play if they were shorter. Less people could see it and that isn’t fair as well.

Avatar Image says:

Please Moses, Mary, Joseph, and Paul—LET this rumor come true. Stephen Spielberg and Peter Jackson are the two directors I would trust most with this! :) This is THRILLING news for the fanhood!

Avatar Image says:

I don’t think a two-parter would attract any Oscars, really. As exciting as this is, I doubt it. The Daily Mail…

Avatar Image says:

I understand that an intermission wouldn’t work I’m just saying that it would be a great movie. And EMUBari83 I’m sure you’d agree that a 4 hour 1 part DH would be better than two 2 hour parts, but we both know a 4 hour movie isn’t gonna happen. I see where you’re coming from, but I just think that the integrity of the series as a whole is more important.

Avatar Image says:

Yes exactly! Seeing the movie in two parts is understandable especially for this last one, but then being able to buy it in on one disk is also very cool. Your exactly right!

Avatar Image says:

EMUBari83, I largely agree with you. Very few do well. Recently only LOTR: ROTK did well enough, that I recall anyways (3 hours 12 mins theatrically).

Avatar Image says:

Actually I wouldn’t want a 4 hour DH. It’s too much. You also have to think about the audience. Not everyone who sees these movies are teenagers and adults. There are quite a bit of younger kids. Have you ever sat next to a 10 year old in a movie for more than 2and a half hours? If not I hope you never do.

Avatar Image says:

I meant from a standpoint of the movie itself not the atmosphere in the theatre.

Avatar Image says:

While I always thought the movies were too short, I think whether or not its in two parts will depend on how many more subplots get killed in HPB. How much of the LV flashbacks are shown and will they introduce a relationship between Bill and Fleur.

Avatar Image says:

Even in general I wouldn’t want a 4 hour movie. It’s easier to watch a movie of that length at home. I want the films to be successful and I do not tihnk DH would be as a 4 hour movie.

Avatar Image says:

Two movies would seriously suck. It’s just greediness and money-grubbing from WB.

Just release a single long movie, if Peter Jackson can do it with LOTR franchise (one movie for each book) surely Harry Potter is easy compared to that.

Avatar Image says:

Hmmm, But making a two part movie that includes more of the book into a movie is a little different. If they add certain scenes where you need to know and understand why that is happening from previous movies and books. some areas may not be understandable especially if your not much of a reader and rely on the movies. But i’m sorta confusing myself out here.

Avatar Image says:

EMUBari83 – I think I see were not gonna agree on this well, your entitled to your opinion. jam – I agree 2 movies would not be a good thing, but I don’t know if HP really would be that much easier than LOTR. I’m a LOTR fan so I’m not dissing it in any way but JRR Tolkein adds a lot of subplots that are not directly related to the plot, but explain the world he is creating which is not always necessary, while in HP, especially in DH, everysingle subplot is important to the overall story. That is why the filmmakers have had so much more difficulty pleasing hte HP fans than they did the LOTR’s fans.

Avatar Image says:

Please don’t let this be true! The Potter films have gotten better and better, I think, and they’ve all come from relative obscurity. Dan, Emma, & Rupert were all pretty much unknowns before HP, David Yates was an unknown in the US, etc. For such large-scale movies, they’re actually quite humble in this matter. Bringing in a big-name director like Spielberg would ruin the franchise. Splitting up the movie, while it would ensure that every little tiny bit of plot would be in there, just wouldn’t feel right. Yes, I want it to be epic, the book was incredibly epic, but I think the direction the films are going in now is the right direction for them. SPOILERS! Besides, the final battle between Harry & Voldemort was actually quite simple and extremely ironic (expelliarmus?) and I think the movie should capture that aspect. That final scene with just the two of them circling each other should absolutely not resemble anything like Dumbledore vs. Voldemort at the Ministry in OotP or anything like it. Spielberg would probably make it that way. David Yates has done a stellar job with OotP (best movie of the series by far) and he needs to close it out. Even if some plot is left out, he’ll capture the spirit of the movie, and that’s what really matters. Say no to Hollywood interference, WB, and stay on the path you’re on. You’ve got a good thing going here… why screw it up now?

Avatar Image says:

No Way… DH in two parts, we have waited long enough for the movie release, why make it in 2 parts and how are they going to divide the story Deathly Hallows Part I and Deathly Hallows Part II that’s a lot of nonsense. I agree with most of the fans here for a 3 hour movie like LOTRRotK or even make it 4hours with intermission for moviegoers to go to the washroom and stretch out or buy more popcorn is more sensible. Stven spielberg (he’s a very good director) not on Deathly Hallows. We want the last Harry P:otter movie the most memorable one, one witha loud BANG, that people will be talking in centuries (it deserves it). The team of David Yates (justice to David Yates) and Michael Goldenberg will suit it best IMHO. Besides the poroblem that Michael had in wrting the screenplay of OotP is to compress the movie in 2 hours and OotP is the longest HP book(then). I think, given a longer screen time, Michael can do a better screenplay that will give justice to the book, OotP is close enough. So it’s 4 hour movie with intermission (if 3 hours is not enough) and David Yates and Michael Goldenberg to work on it.

Avatar Image says:

I think that maybe a 3 1/2 or 4 movie would be great and enough to get the most important parts of DH in and to really do the book justice make the wand fight scenes both of Harry Vs Voldemort and the fight for Hogwarts atleast 25-30 mins long and we Harry Potter fans would be so darn happy.as for director’s lets wait and see what happens with Yates and HBP and if not better than OOTP then Cuaron or Del Toro for sure.POA is my favorite HP movie and i love Pan’s Labarinth by Del Toro.So please Warner Bros,give us fans a 3 1/2 to 4 hour movie it wont hurt it a bit i mean look at the LOTR movies they are 3 hours or more and did really well so come on please dont dissapoint. Love You Harry Potter Fans! Oscars 2011 here we come!

Avatar Image says:

Personally I do enjoy the idea of a 2-part movie… Kill Bill was split as such, though it didn’t need to be (IMO) but that it REALLY worked well and I’m so biased at this point about DH that I honestly can’t see how they’d fit that entire book into a 2 hour film.

Avatar Image says:

I’ve gtg hope however stays on keeps up the defense of a good old long one part movie. Don’t split up our DH!

Avatar Image says:

NOOO!!!!!! NO NO NO NO NO UGH I CANT BELIEVE THEY WOULD EVEN SUGGEST SOMETHING SOOOOO HORRIBLE AS THIS!!! I AM SO MAD I AM FURIOUS!! FIRST OF ALL THEY CAN NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SPLIT THE MOVIE IN HALF THAT WOULD RUIN EVERYTHING!!! I MEAN EVERYTHING! I AM A BIg!!! HHARRY POTTER FAN AND I WOULD BE ULTIMATELY DISSAPOINTED!!!!!! I HATE THE THOUGHT OF THIS!!!!! I DONT CARE IF THE FLIPPEN MOVIE WAS FREAKIN 92 HOURS LONG!!! ITS NOT GOING TO BE SPLIT INTO HALF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SECOND OF ALL SPIELBERG ARE U FREAKIN KIDDING ME! OKAY HES REALLY GOOD BUT HES NOT BRITISH HE HASNT BEEEN WORKING WITH THE CAST/ACTORS COMPARED TO ALL THE OTHER ACTORS HE SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!! I NOW PRAY THAT THIS “RUMOR” IS FALSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM PRACTICALLY IN TEARS OVER THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Hmm, I’m not sure about this yet. Spielberg is a great director, but I’m not so sure on how he’d be with DH. If he had been working on it all along then it would be different, but having him just come in for the final installment may be a bad call.

2 parts. That’s got me thinking. The pros are them keeping a lot more in than they have in previous films and more detail, but the con is we’d have to wait to watch the second half! I’m not so sure on how a lot of us would fare waiting at least another 6 months for the next movie. Personally, I think it’s a huge rumor that WB is going to shoot down. I don’t see how they could cut the book in half (although someone did say it would probably be after Dobby died or the whole Greyback thing). Either way, it would leave everyone hanging, and the darn non-readers would be completely confused. I’m kind of on the fence about this. I think it would keep a lot more in, but is it worth that wait? I guess since we waited years for the book, we could wait a year for the end of the movie…

Avatar Image says:

VERY SMART MOVE ON WB’s PART…IF THIS IS TRUE. They couldn’t have possible made DH in a anything less than 4 hours!

Avatar Image says:

That would be really incredible!

Avatar Image says:

Amanda, honey calm down a bit. lol, deep breaths. it’s nothing to get that upset over. We’ll have to deal with it no matter what, but I understand where you’re coming from. However, Christopher Columbus is American and Cuaron is from Mexico so they’re not worried about where the directors come from more of their skill level. WB is going to do what they want, but they’re going to try their best, just like they have with the last 5 movies. I would prefer an extremely long movie 7 (cough and movie 6 cough) but that’s probably not going to happen. Heck, if they do a 2 parter, it may not be too bad.

Avatar Image says:

They wouldn’t rename part 2, it would just be “PART 2”.

Avatar Image says:

I think I’d rather have a two parter than a short film. Heck, if they’re going to work into putting as much detail as possible, I would settle for a two-parter. When I rewatched OotP, it kind of dragggeeeed on. I wouldn’t like a 7 hour movie, to be honest.

Avatar Image says:

i dont like the idea of there being two parts but the speilburg parts a deffinant good idea. as long as the movie captures the amazment as the book did im down

Avatar Image says:

I would be all for the two part Deathly Hallows. I wonder at which part they would end the first half… Probably after Shell Cottage before all the crazy stuff happens, or maybe that’s too into the book already. Then they could make this really long movie out of the last part of the book and leave everything in…

Avatar Image says:

Yay!!!! That means a very londg movienessieness! That’ll mean they’ere not going to cut a lot from the last book! Finally! But I don’t think spielberg’s quite the typr for this film…he’s more of a sci-fi person than a fantasy person. But I don’t know, cuz all of the directors up to this point are either former kids’ movie people, romance movie peoples, comedy peoples, or gritty TV-for-adults people. I’d just rather have Alfonso Cuaron or Guillermo Del Toro, and maybe (not likely) Peter jackson.

Avatar Image says:

I really hope they make it 2 parts, so they can fit everything in it. I know it would be frustrating not getting to see all of it in one bit, but having more would be so worth the wait.

Avatar Image says:

That sounds like a * rumour. I typed the swear word in with stars but it starts with a B if you want to know what it is.

Next it will come out saying New line will be producing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

Come on there is so much you can cut from Deathly hallows it is ridiculous to think that it is going to be a two parter. Most of the book they are in a Tent. come on you are not going to need much to say they are moving around in a tent.

start off with Lord Voldemort accendant 5 mins for that, maybe 10 because they are walking. 5 mins for the departure of the Burrow they can cut Dumbledore’s Memorial and just say Daniel’s already read it.

Where are they going to cut it and make another movie, when Harry gets attacked by Nagini. Please they are just going to cut it up and leave a lot out of the movie. Spielberg going to be the next director you have got to be joking. Some one thinks it is Fred and George’s birthday I reckon.

Avatar Image says:

Nope nope nope. I’m not really buying into this right now. It would seem so… odd… for WB to do this. I don’t really see the great advantage to having a two-parter- just b/c more stuff is packed in doesn’t mean that the movie will be better. But I guess two parts wouldn’t be too bad if done well… But whyohwhy would WB ‘test out’ a new director on the FINAL film, even if it is Spielberg? I’m betting they’ll go with someone they’ve had experience with, probably Yates or Cuaron. Besides, is the Daily Mail the one that isn’t always reliable for news? Well, who knows- I guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens. :/

Avatar Image says:

I wouldn’t mind a two part movie at all. It’d need to be 8 hours long to fit in all the important information they’ve cut out of the other movies. I’d love to see someone like Spielberg at the helm. Just NO MORE CUARON hatchet jobs please!!!

Honestly, I watch these movies and enjoy seeing the kids grow, but after the first two they’ve just gone downhill into “See my great special effects action scenes!” movies.

Where the special effects should be good, they’re awful. The centaurs are supposed to be handsome, highly intelligent beings, but we got Neanderthals with hooves! (wheels off rubbing forehead artery)

Avatar Image says:

Well, put me in the camp of not being too thrilled about this rumor. I’ve always believed that a two part Harry Potter movie would be a bad idea. First, you have seven books, you should have seven movies, not eight. Secondly, for me ticket prices play a part. I’m a 20ish year old single woman with expenses. Already my movie going has had to be drastically cut down in the past year. As much as I love Harry Potter, I’m not going to spend twice the money on what should be one movie (to put my point into perspective, lets also take into account large families, I have neighbors that have 8 kids at home who all love Harry Potter and the Harry Potter movies, normal night at the movies for them is about $50, give or take (so going out is a rarity for them). If it’s split into two they’d be looking at spending $100 for what should be ONE MOVIE). Which also means forget about seeing it more than once in the theater. No, if it’s split into two, my butt will not be in that theater seat.

Like others, I feel that if Lord of the Rings can be successful with 3+ hour installments, than DH should have no problem being one movie while still maintaining what’s critical to the story line.

For now, I’m personally holding onto the hope that this rumor is just that, a rumor (just my personal opinion).

Avatar Image says:

i dont mind having to watch a 8 hour long movie :] i dont think fans would like having to wait year or more just to see the second half.i dont really think spielberg would do a good job (no offense) but i agree with leggers get someone with experience.i just hope the movie turns out great in the end :D

Avatar Image says:

yes! but no…i want this but how long will it take to get released?? and what if i accidently see the 2nd part first?!

Avatar Image says:

I LOVE IT. The producers for the Potter franchise are very careful with the films, especially since so many people are invested in it. They employ so many individuals, so if they’re able to keep them employed longer, that is also amazing. After the Potter films are over, a lot of people will be out of a job, so if you think about this from an economic standpoint it helps a lot. Also, we’ll get more of the loose ends tied up hopefully without having to cut too much. They’ve made so much money off of this franchise, they could drop it right now and all still be rolling in money. I see the possibility of two films allowing them to actually put in the creative process, give the book justice, let them do what they love a bit longer, keep people employed a bit longer, etc.

Avatar Image says:

I love the two halves thing so that the film would be thorough and i can watch it more and more! YAY!

Avatar Image says:

I forgot something.

Thinking back at the book, this movie will probably be easier to film. The cast is smaller since you’re mainly out of Hogwarts so they would have less actors to organize with. Also, when a large part of it is in the tent and various homes, the sets seem like they won’t be as difficult. The special effects don’t really go that far. If you all remember, many of the movies will be in post-productions for a long time. If they’re smart, they’ll film the more effect-intensive shots first so those can be in post- while they are filming the simpler scenes so the film can be released sooner.

Avatar Image says:

I hope this ends up being true!!!!

Avatar Image says:

The idea of a two part movie it something that should have started with GoF, but that obviously hasn’t happened, so they need to make up for it buy making the last one special. If they don’t spit it into two movies, they should at least make it one massive movie – at least 3 hours long – with a break in between.

Getting Steven Spielberg to direct it isn’t a bad idea either. With a reputation like his, you can’t really go wrong. However, as long as Alfonso Cuaron doesn’t do it, I’ll be happy; he totally destroyed PoA, and you can’t have that kind of “creativity” for this movie. You need someone who will actually deliver the plot that’s in the book.

Avatar Image says:

ravenclaw from Glenn:

“I think that OotP was the least successful of the films precisely because everything was rushed and there was no time to really develop the plot correctly. Some really important things were left out: the Locket in the drawing room, Lily Potter in Snape’s worst memory and Harry giving the interview to Rita and the Quibbler (not to mention the scene I wanted to see with Harry getting “Career Advice”).”

OotP wasn’t the least successful of the films, it’s the second most successful. The only one beating is is PS/SS, which is probably because it was the very first and the hype around it was insane.

Avatar Image says:

I am really split about this. Two parts would be GREAT if they can keep from cutting out too much of this amazing book and make the end battle the spectacular thing it needs to be. However, I really would be mad if the wait to see the next one was more than a month (which is veeeeery unlikely). This would also lead to the DVDs being more expensive because they would need to put two DVDs in one case just to get the movie all there, let alone bonus features. I am all for a 3 hour 7th movie. Intermissions need a comeback anyway! Oh and I really don’t want Speilberg to do it. GREAT AMAZING SPLENDIFEROUS director, but this is the last one, so, we need a director who’s more in the tradition of the HP films. Cuaron would be great.

Avatar Image says:

harrypottergeek, you are completely entitled to your opinion of Cuaron and PoA, but I would just like to know in what ways did he completely destroy the film? Newell and Yates have cut just as much if not more plot from the films, but these directors do not get criticized for destroying the films. They cut scenes that are just as meaningful and important. Newell cut the hospital scene at the end of GoF in which Molly comforts Harry and the whole Order is called into action. Yates cut the most important aspect of Snape’s Worst Memory and Harry’s rage after Sirius’s death.

Also, I actually think a “creative” director is perfect for the job of directing DH. A creative director knows how to use the visual medium that film is to convey more plot and emotion in shorter amounts of time. A creative director could make a beautiful, detailed, and yet epic film that could fit into a doable 3+ hour film. This is exactly what Peter Jackson did with the LOTR series. He cut bits of the books from the films and manipulated the plot (Faramir, Arwen, etc.). A good director and writer who use their creativity can make a good adaptation of DH that does not require splitting up the movies.

Avatar Image says:

i think that Speelberg shouldn’t do the movie, i’m afraid of what he might do. and i hope that they find some one who is a dedicated fan to the book who wouldn’t butcher the franchize. i didn’t like the rushed feel to OFTP in the first seen, they should have left it alone and kept to the book. the book is that story, to stray from the book is like telling a fals tail, other than that i have no complaints. JK is a brilliant writer, and i want to see her work along with the creers of Rupert Grint, Daniel Raddcliff, and Emma Watson all thrive to great things. and i hope that they don’t play too much on Dumbldoor’s coming out in the last movie, it was only hinted in the book and should only be hinted in the movie. i’m done, thank you all for alowing me to post this comment with out joining anything :-)

Avatar Image says:

C’mon folks. Look at the bigger picture here. HP makes Warner Bros tonnes of cash and this is just a way to milk the cash cow a little longer. Why settle for one blockbuster when you can have two and make twice the money. I’m a big fan of the films, and this is just exploiting the fans. Do the decent thing and boycott the movie.

Avatar Image says:

Great. Of course the statement “the more money you have, the more you want even more money” rings a bell here. What a dumb idea to capitalize on the last movie.

Avatar Image says:

We can only hope that Cuaron or del Toro would take it, and that it would be in two parts…

Hoping

Avatar Image says:

omg omg omg…this is the best news ive ever had

Avatar Image says:

I don’t like the splitting idea. I would much rather have one super long movie then have to wait for the ending to come out. I have no problem whatsoever with long movies..in my experiance they have proved to be of far greater quality then most of the regular timed movies I have seen.

As for Director…Please for the love of all that is good…please not that guy who did OOTP. Man that movie is so messed up. Did that guy even read THE book let alone the series. Seriously bad mistake with him as director.

Avatar Image says:

This is absolute rubbish. It won’t happen, this unnamed source doesn’t know what he or she is talking about. The side plots in Deathly Hallows are so cuttable, far more than earlier books side plots, in fact. So much of the book involves the trio sitting in a tent somewhere. There is so much that could go. There is absolutely no need for a two part film.

Yes, slight modifications have been made to the films in the past to enable the cutting of side plots. The same thing can be done again in the final film to make these changes fit.

Deathly Hallows is probably the slowest paced book in the entire series. That doesn’t make it bad, it’s just very dialogue/exposition heavy which does not lend itself well to a film at all. Making it into two films will not help matters.

Avatar Image says:

OMG! YES for the two parts! I don’t care if we have to wait month until we see the second part, it would mean that we would get to see a longer, probably more satisfying movie! That’s what we need!!!! :DDDD

Avatar Image says:

Love the intermissions idea, Bring back Colombus, too… And go with the facebook group’s idea of a 7 hr. movie.

Avatar Image says:

That would be terrible. DH is not the “feel-good” type of movie that Spielberg likes to direct. Spielberg, don’t ruin British cinema! Bring back Alfonso Cuaron!

Avatar Image says:

Not saying the split idea is good or bad . . . but where would they split it?

Where, near the middle of the book, is a scene that would work as the end of a movie.

I can’t picture where they’d chop it. What do you all think?

Avatar Image says:

That idea of Speilburg just doesn’t …feel right. The problem is I just can’t explain why. Maybe it’s because the name is just to “big”. I mean, everyone knows Speilburg, it’s like saying Coppola or Scorsese. It just seems….odd.

Avatar Image says:

And anyway, with the writer strike, don’t we need to make sure we can get ONE DH film before we worry about making it two instead.

Avatar Image says:

Not that I would mind to parts but if they could fit GOF and OOTP into one movie. I don’t see why they cant do the same with DH, even if they have to just make it a wee bit longer like nearly 3 hours or like 3 hours and 20 minutes. I’d rather see a longer movie then have to see part one and wait who knows how long probably up to a year to see part 2. I also think that some people will never be pleased that’s just how it is. People will complain about DH the movie wether is a one movie or two movies.

Avatar Image says:

First of all, a big NO to Steven Spielberg. His style is completely anti-HP. I wouldn’t be against Cuaron or Yates. Definitely no to Mike Newell though, some of the spells in the fourth film didn’t even do what they were supposed to…what’s the point of Expelliarmus us it only knocks them down then you have to kick the wand out their hand.

I’m fine with a two-part release, there really is a lot, and not really any sub-plot that can be cut out (if they cut out Ron leaving I will totally freak).

The battle scenes have to be stellar, there are so many, the Seven Harry’s, the Wedding, the Ministry of Magic, Gringotts break-in, the Malfoy mansion, and then the final battle. If they cut any of it, the fans will be angry.

But if they are gonna do two movies, they might as well make them both 3 hours a piece, I’m up for a little LOTR style length. It’s the finale, and they have to make it good.

Avatar Image says:

Hmm I don’t know how I feel about this. Deathly Hallows, IMO, can be made in to a very good film without needing to make it too rushed. Alot from the book can get cut out because of cuts already made in the movies series because alot of the stuff in DH correspnds to things that aren’t in the films and only amtter in the books. They can just compress alot of the first act nicely, cut about 60% of the camping. So if Steve Kloves just steps it up and takes his time, there won’t be a need for two films. Now about Steven Speilberg. Hmm. It would be very interesting if he got the job. He is a very very talented director so I’d really like to see what he does with Deathly Hallows but I really really want to see Alfonso do Deathly Hallows. He was just soo brilliant with Prisoner of Azkaban.

Avatar Image says:

YESSSSSSSS at a two part film!

NOOOOOO at Steven Spielberg!

GUILLERMO DEL TORO FTW!

Avatar Image says:

A 2 part movie sounds great what a way to end it with a bang I really dont mind waiting in between the halves as long as the movie is exactly like the book I also would not mind watching a 4 hr movie that would be great too I hope this is confirmed soon let’s keep our fingers crossed and hope its true

Avatar Image says:

Even if Steven doesnt do it. I HOPE ITS 2 PARTS! It is the only way to do the book justice, and it shows they are committed to a fuller story!

If the movies are 2 hours each that would 4 hours total! Thats and hour and a half more than ussual!

Avatar Image says:

I think this would be fine, on both counts. First, there is no way they could make a single film that’s even three and a half hours long; doing it in two parts would allow for more than 5 hours total which preserves more of the book. If you really like the book and all of the sub-plots (and most fans have been unhappy that those have been cut in previous films), this could be the best solution.

Finding a place to end the first film would not be hard, and there is plenty of precedent for divided stories: remember the end of the Empire Strikes Back? Yes, you would have to wait a while longer for the conclusion. Do you really want it all to be finished so quickly? This would allow for a truly epic, hour-long Battle of Hogwarts sequence, a fitting culmination for the whole series.

Spielberg’s early films were, I think, not very good and not very deep. But have you seen the battle sequences in Saving Private Ryan, or the tense and dramatic emotional tone in Schindler’s List and Munich? I think he could do justice to the epic nature of the final book. It’s not guaranteed; he does have a tendency to fall back on the “Hollywood Spectacular” style. But he’s shown he can also do serious films.

Avatar Image says:

One movie would be better in my humble opinion, but I do think there is too much story in DH to put in one film. And this is different from GOF and OOTP, because allmost everything in DH is important. Oh well, if it happens, it just means more to look forward to for us. I’m just a bit concernd about spielberg as director. He’s a great director, but he might be a bit too american for such a british story. Considering he wanted Haley Joel Osmond as Harry Potter (barf!). He should have very contricted freedom.

Avatar Image says:

Cuaron/del Toro – YES!!!! Although I would also not mind Yates, I’m one of the ones who loved what he did with the characters in OotP, especially after Goblet . . . as for the length of the movie: whatever it takes to make it what it deserves to be! 4 hours or 2 parts, I’d go for either!

Avatar Image says:

This is exciting! I can’t believe some people see this as bad news! A two-part DH film (2 or so hours long each) is a much better idea that one three-hour film, and I’m sure Warner Bros wuld cut it to a two-hour film, as they have done with OotP. So, yeah, the two-part thing is a good move, IMO (of course, if the rumours are true). As for Spielberg….YES! Of course yes! I do not doubt that man for one second, although his films have mostly been un-HP, I’m trust him enough to turn his style around. I mean, come on, at least he’ll do it in a way that makes us cry over ALL the deaths, just like in the book. He’s a brilliant director. And, of course, having him means the return of John Williams, the man who gave us the unforgettable PoA music. So yeah, if this rumour is true, then I’m all for it!

Avatar Image says:

Oh, and the thing about the first film, well, no wonder he was kicked out, BUT after six movies, I’m sure he’s got a fairly good idea about the tone of the films, and, with the producers supervising, he won’t get carried away. I’m sure. Hey, if it isn’t Peter Jackson, might as well be Spielberg.

Avatar Image says:

Crosby, thank u for responding to my opinion i gave myself a good hard slap and got out of my own perspective. lol thanxs 4 everything and MAYBE JUST MAYBE it wont be a horrible trainwreck that will cause me to go crazy =) but thanxs hopefully u will read this….

Avatar Image says:

OMG I hope it’s true. Can I just say I am REALLY surprised that people on here don’t want two parts. It’s like ARE YOU SERIOUS. It’s the right thing to do. WB owes it to us fans to do the final movie right.

People on the IMDB want this to happen so bad they talk about it ALL THE TIME and are going to press WB to make it happen. 2010 will be so good. They will probably release Part 1 in June/July and Part 2 towards the end of the year. Remember filming and editing will be complete as they shoot it all at the same time. There are no problems for this to happen.

All this “It needs to go out with a bang” talk, WTF are you talking about IT TOTALLY WILL. If they end part one of high then it will leave the audience begging for more. I’m thinking maybe when they get caught and go to Malfoy manner or after Harry buries Dobby. I’m just guessing.

Quite frankly I don’t care what all the “movie” potter fans think or the under 12 years old, these movies are made for the HARRY POTTER fans like us. The ones who read the books over & over and who log on to HP site’s because they can’t get enough. Little kids shouldn’t even be going to these movies anymore as they aren’t suitable for them. If your kid can’t sit through a 3-4hr movie then that’s your problem. Don’t ruin our fun.

And just think what’s even better is that we will get a 4 hr plus DVD with it all together plus hopefully amazing special features. HOW FREAKING AWESOME WILL THAT BE.

I’m going to pray that this happens and I hope others do too.

PS I agree – NO to Spielberg. I love him but this movie is just not for him. At present my money is on Yates but Del Toro would be cool.

Avatar Image says:

That would be awesome. I really hope Speliberg DOES NOT direct Deathly Hallows. He may be a great director, but he’s plans for Philosophers stone were not great at all.

I dont know about the rest of you but im prepared to sit in the cinemas for even 5hours. But only because it is Harry Potter.

But i really hope that we wont have to wait a whole year for the second half. It would be good if they filmed the whole thing (even though it would take way longer) and then release them a few moths apart.

And it would be great if they made the movie exactly like the book. Then nothing would get missed out, not like Order of the Pheonix, they missed a tone out on that. And i think it would be good if they split it when harry jumped in the water to recieve the sword, and finish it just before ron came to save him :P Thats practically half way through the book.

Avatar Image says:

I am confused, actually. Even if I’d love to see a 2-part film with the first film running at 120 minutes and the second one at about 130-140 minutes, I don’t know if it’ll be worked out…Spielberg is OK. I mean, Deathly Hallows NEED the BEST EPIC DIRECTOR EVER. But at the same time, it needs DARKNESS and MYSTERY and TENSION. Don’t know if Spielberg is good at ALL of these. Two directors, perhaps? What about Yates,Cuaron and Spielberg directing it?LOL. Yates would be terrific for the mystery and the politics, Cuaron for the darkness and the landscapes and Spielberg for the epic battles and the tension. I’d love that…Now, about the two parts….I don’t think I’ll have a problem, I’d love this actually! Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 released in June/July 2010 and Part 2 in November/December 2010. BUT, Part 1 needs to be EXTRA awesome in order to let lots to watch it and take GOOD reviews. The second one will be ALL about ANSWERS to our QUESTIONS and massive battle sequences. Now, there is a strange thing going on…The first part won’t be particularly impressive…

If we divide the book in the middle, the first part would be “The Dark Lord Ascending-The Silver Doe” and the second part “Xenophilius Lovegood-Nineteen Years Later” There’s a bad ending for the first film and a bad beginning for the second one. I don’t know how they’ll work this out. Even if the first film ends at Malfoy Mansion (it would be great), the rest of the film would be 90-100 minutes…BUT they could be begin the second part with Voldemort punishing the DEs of the Manor. That would be great…I still don’t know how they’ll work on this… Now, about the battles…we have: 1.The Seven Potters battle sequence in the air (I guess it will be 5 min. tops if it’s only ONE film but 15 minutes if it’s a two-part film totally…I also think they will not only use landscapes but also the city of London for a bombastic flight battle sequence.) 2.After the Wedding (Here, in the book we have a brief attack of DEs and then the attack of the two DEs in the cafeteria. They could actually make the wedding battle a lot longer with OotP members fighting DEs…it’s not a big battle but it’s intense) 3.The Ministry of Magic Battle (that’s awesome. Not only we have all these haunting Dementors but also the Death Eaters hunting the trio-I’d love to see the trio not having the Polyjuice Potion influence from the Umbridge/Dementors scene to make it better. And the Atrium in OotP film was AWESOME so it would be nice) 4.The Silver Doe sequence (it’s not a battle but it is adventurous. The silver doe in the middle of the snowy forest and the pond and the whole sequence with the sword would be a really beautiful scene and a dark one) 5.Bathilda/Nagini attack in Godric’s Hollow (it’s a scary/intense scene with Voldemort appearing later and Harry and Hermione escaping from death…) 6.DEs attack in Lovegood’s house (a brief action scene with the trio exploding the whole house…it will be intense, for sure) 7.Malfoy Manor (that’s awesome. Not a battle but INTENSE. The capture, the torturing of Hermione, the fast paced battle, Wormtail’s Death, Dobby’s death…wow.) 8.Gringotts break-in battle (that will be awesome too. The tunnels, the waterfall, the intense scene in the vault, the flight with the blind dragon…nice) 9.Hogsmeade scene (a nice touch ,too. The dark village, the attack of DEs, the Dementors…it will be breathtaking) 10.Severus Snape VS McGonagall and Flitwick (cool too! It’s brief but it can be longer and even more impressive) 11.The Fiendfyre Sequence (ooh…I cannot wait for this one! The fire creatures, the destruction of the lost objects maze…Crabbe’s death…awesome) 12.The First Battle of Hogwarts (ooh, this HAS to be LOOOONG. 15-20 minutes…the whole battle…in the castle, in the grounds, next to the forest, next to the lake, next to the whomping willow…Death Eaters, Dementors, Spiders, Greyback…MASSIVE) 13.Elder Wand/Shrieking Shack/Prince’s Tale- more story-driven part even if it’s intense and sad…It’ll give emotion in the middle of the battle… 14.The Forest Again/King’s Cross—-it nees everything…Harry seeing the survivors of the battle, meeting Neville, going to the forest, crying, the spirits of the dead, the dementors, the camp of Voldemort in the heart of the forest…Harry’s death…the scene with Dumbledore in the whilte-lit misty place…oh, the best part of the film for sure 15.The Second Battle of Hogwarts—that will be AWESOOOOOOME. Centaurs, Thestrals, Buckbeak,House Elves, Students,Professors, the Order, Parents, Aurors…all against Death Eaters,Spiders,Giants and Dementors…the great finale with Bellatrix VS Molly,Hermione,Ginny,Luna and Voldemort VS Harry…omg…)

So, these are the action parts. I really NEED help…I mean how could they split them in two parts without cutting too much and making abrupt endings?

Avatar Image says:

Well, I’d rather take two 2½ hour movies than one 7 hour-blast. It would give DH the respect and the value that it deserves. You saw OotP and how badly it was edited. You want the same thing for DH? I certainly don’t.

Avatar Image says:

There will be awesome if Spielberg direct hp7 and it be in 2 parts!!!

Avatar Image says:

Although I wouldn’t have minded them doing this for any other film, deathly hallows wouldn’t work because the 1st half of it was rubbish compared to the amazingness of the 2nd half, so it would be a bit weird.

Avatar Image says:

Thats a good idea, it would allow them to wrap everything up nicely… PLUS MORE HARRY POTTER MOVIE HOURS FOR ME!

Avatar Image says:

It could work both, IMO. A two part movie or one longer movie. I personally would sit throught 3 1/2 hours even without intermission. :-). I guess I did it for LOTR.

The big pro of a two part movie would be that there is a chance they let Ron have his shining moments. With Kloves as scriptwriter (if he does DH) these are likely the first to be cut.

IF they decide for a two part movie (and yes, of course that’s mainly a means to milk the audience for more money, WB is no charity enterprise but set on profit LoL), then I hope they will film it back to back, so that there is no visible difference in the age of the actors, AND they’ll release it within one or two months, if that’s techinically possible. I would not want to wait a year or two for the second half of DH.

About Spielberg, he is a great director, so why not. If he does the story and the characters justice.

Avatar Image says:

yes. Spielberg is great for the last film. but i prefer peter jackson. he’s better. much better….

Avatar Image says:

Hang on! Did I miss that Spielberg is now a Brit. I always placed him in the US.

Is this correct? So how can he direct a movie that is supposed be created by british crew? Or is this long forgotten that Jo originally wanted brits for her movies?

Avatar Image says:

Well, they’d have to do it in two parts to put everything right that they messed up before. That’d be awesome….more premieres to go to :D I dont think, I’d mind waiting between the two parts.

Avatar Image says:

If they make it a two-part movie, make it a double-feature like in the old days. Rocky Horror Picture Show anyone? ;)

Avatar Image says:

When will they learn that time is not time matter anymore. I mean look at Return of the King. It worked great. If they just stop thinking about the money and making little children happy we would have a good 2hr + film. Its the last film, of course its going to be long! Look at OotP, if they could make that big of book on to the great short film that it became, Hallows wont be that hard. And what do they mean by the battle between Harry and Voldemort? All they did was talk, are they going to completely change that? I’m sure that the film is going to be in one whole piece and it going to be great.

Avatar Image says:

Hey! Can I just say that I am from the UK where the Daily Mail is from, and it is regarded as a load of bull** over here! Its a bit like the Prophet when Rita Skeeter was writing all the stuff about Hermione and Harry etc. I think its a good idea to release the movie in two parts, but I bet what they have said is all lies! xx x

Avatar Image says:

Guys!!The only way DH would be made into a great film is to split it!There is no other way to do it.You want a 20 minute ending battle?That’s ok but keep in mind that in a 3-hour long film all the other battle sequences will be cut out or reduced to 5-minute scenes…regardless of the battles,the only way to make this film tragic enough and emotional enough is CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT,something impossible in a 3-hour long,action-packed blockbuster.Take LOTR3 for example,nobody took it seriously when Sam and Frodo started talking about the fields and the strawberries…Dh must have its own time to breathe,the audience ought to have time to comprehend the emotional depth and the ultimate closure that this last film will bring.I am definetely for a two-part Deathly Hallows film. As for the closing scene for the first part..it should be the return to Shell Cottage,the burial of (spoilers!)this house elf and the ultimate choice of Harry not to act,to choose Horcruxes over Hallows,to trust DD and look past his own survival! As for the director,I think that Spielberg is capable of ending Harry Potter with a bang and making the last film an excellent movie.My personal choice would be Tim Burton or Del Tro.However I would hate to see DH be handed over to a director with no experience(like -i am sorry to say-David Yates)...That is all.These news(rumors)are definetely good!!!

Avatar Image says:

LOL – it probably hit them that soon their money-making movies will be over – I wonder whether they will start regretting that they haven’t made two movies out of GoF etc.. rolleyes – lol – Oscars – let me laugh – the movies are ok at best, well maybe one of the non-actor oscars… well, we’ll see… in any case it would feel strange if all of a sudden, with more movie-time, they started paying attention to important plotlines. :)

Avatar Image says:

No and no.

It’s perfectly doable to have DH in one (long) movie. RotK was one gigantic movie and didn’t it win like 11 Oscars? I just can’t see the movie being in two parts, it would be kinda lame. And DH is one movie that could benefit of cutting chunks out of it, since there are number of scenes that aren’t vital to the plot. (DH was NOT that well-written, if you ask me.) I think it would break the flow, and people would feel annoyed if they’d have to wait like sixth months to see what happens. LAME.

Spielberg? I hope not. I’m hoping for either Cuaron or del Toro to take the job. I just can’t see this as a Spielberg movie, while Cuaron or del Toro would be excellent choices considering that they both have experience of the fantasy world etc.

Avatar Image says:

Oh and I forgot. If RotK was 3h 11min, I think DH should be something like 3h as well. People will watch it, since it’s the last movie and all. And they can make a super-long director’s cut for the DVD.

I hope DH will rock the house so that Harry Potter will leave with a BANG!

Avatar Image says:

Secunda Jo only wanted the actors to be British.

Spielberg is American as is Chris Columbus. Alfonso Cuarón is Mexican and Mike Newell & David Yates are from England.

Also the HP crew has people from all over the world working on them. They might not be born in England but they work and some probably live there as well.

Avatar Image says:

Oh wow! Here’s hoping all of that is true!

Avatar Image says:

Hmmmm, I don’t know what to think. When I first read it, I was thrilled, but a lot of you make a good point. There are 7 books, so there should be 7 movies.

I could live with either way. I just want to see DH done right because everything in it is important. I cannot think of anything they can cut that isn’t directly connected to the main plot.

Making it into two films wouldn’t be too hard. Part one could easily end with Harry deciding to search for Horcruxes over Hallows easily. You would be ending briefly after a major climatic experience like all the films have done and still leaving a cliffhanger. It works.

Those who are saying you would have to split the book right in half should reconsider. the first half of the book is easier to condense, so you can go further into the book and still have plenty to put into the second film. The Battle at Hogwarts, from Hogsmeade to LV’s death, would easily be at least an hour.

I am ok with two parts as long as it doesn’t take too long for the second part to come out. WB could easily choose the same months they always have for HP and make it work. Part one would come out in July 2010 and part two in November 2010. Four months is not too long.

I agree that there should be a DVD of the entire film as a 4 or 5 hour movie available becuase I want to see this movie as one, epic story! And then there should be a box set released of the director’s cut of all the films!

No to Speilberg, btw. I don’t trust him or any new director. My choice is David Yates and if not him, Chris Columbus.

Avatar Image says:

I REALLY hope they do it in two parts ! That way we get to see most of what is in the book ! There are so many interesting parts in the movie i really want to see. I think the best time to split is when they get captured as it will hold the suspense. What sort of time will be between the two releases though?

Avatar Image says:

well, re-reading the book at the moment, I can’t see how it can be anything but VERY long to do it justice. Maybe they can film it all at the same time but release two halves shortly after one another.

Not sure about Spielberg though. Some critic once said that he’d have ruined HP made it all cutesy.

Avatar Image says:

Hmmmm. A two part movie: naaaaah Steven Spielberg: I wonder if I´m the only one with a vision of Dobby´s deathscene; The last thing the little elf will manage to say is : “Dobby phone home”

Avatar Image says:

Nah. A three hour and half movie is okay, to be honest. This is their way of saying, “Sorry, we messed up so bad with the previous movies because we included random comic relief rather than the plot that we need to extend the last one to squeeze in all the facts.”

WB you really should have made all the movies longer, but two parts is ridiculous, and ugly. Don’t give us this “the last battle must be long” crap. It wasn’t that long, and whatever “battle” you want to acheive wasn’t really achieved because Harry isn’t that great at dueling, he just threw himself in front of a spell, then shot another spell, letting the Elder Wand do most of the work. Unlike Dumbledore’s spells, that were CGI-tastic and made sense, Harry can’t do that, and it’s not on par with the story.

I don’t want to be a cynic, but is this the movie where only Harry Potter fans will enjoy, and where “Harry Potter movie” fans will be disappointed? As in, make them go for the fake-funny stuff from before, like Ron acting unlike his own character, Trelawny being a retard, Hermione being a sexy “heroine”, Harry being the brave Hero, and Dumbledore being annoying in general, then throwing them all these facts from the book in the last installment?

As we all know, Book 7 is a “romantic comedy”... so uh, yay?

Avatar Image says:

Spielberg NO PLEASE!!! he’ll make a slushy childish movie for childrens of it, please don’t let him ruin it!

About a 2 parts of movie I think they should’ve considerated it before with the 5th movie too, it could be fine at least with the last one, I still think they have missed some important points from the plot already in the movies.

thanx for the info

Avatar Image says:

I so hope this is true -

Yes- a two part Hallows;

and Steven Spielberg !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

NO WAY for Steven Spielberg – he’s movies are too flashy with no real heart – way too commercial – and this book is so special I couldn’t bear it to be ruined in this way. Guillermo del Toro would do a great job I think – or Alfonso, though I think we need new blood for the last one.

And as for a two-parter… I reckon they could fit it into one film, but they wouldn’t be able to do it as much justice. I think this is the only book that really could be split into 2; think how much happening there is: (Spoiler Warning) ........................escape from Privet Drive, wedding, on the run, the ministry infiltration, Kreacher’s story, the 3 brothers, godrics hollow, the doe, ron running away, Dumbledore’s life story, being captured at Malfoy manor, gringotts, the attack on hogwarts, getting last horcrux, all of Snape’s memories, Harry’s sacrifice, regeneration and death of Voldemort, + epilogue.

LOADS of little sub-stories to this one – it could all be fit into one, but imagine them rushing harry’s death scene? C’MON!! And people might start getting restless if it’s 4 hours long.

Gosh, I’m so torn on this one – on one hand, they’d be cramming if it was one film, but stretching things out a bit in 2 films!!!

Avatar Image says:

I’d rather have 2 halves of a movie separatively and have it done right than to go throught what happen in OOTP. The editing was cut so sharply in that film it was ridiculous. The editing was done much better in Goblet of Fire. I would love it if Spilberg could do it but I am afraid that he will not do it. Plus David Heyman in the past has been adamant about doing his movies in one film and in 2 hours. That will hurt him severely if he does Deathly Hallows that way. What ever happen to movies with intermission like Gone with the Wind, Oklahoma, My Fairlady, etc. People will pay and stay for a good movie and Deathly Hallow will definitely be the movie of the decade to see potential breaking Titanic record for box office returns. Lets do the last movie right please.

Avatar Image says:

waw! nice I will kil myself! 4 hours! now I don’t know what to do! it will be very good movie Dan and Ralf Finnes at the end of the secend half! Dan an Bonnie kissing! and Rupert and Emma! it will be very very good movies(2 halfs)!

Avatar Image says:

I think that most true Harry Potter fans wouldnt mind if the movie is 3.5 to 4 hours if the movie is done “right”. Personally, I don’t want a film that is lacking some of the subplots or any battle scenes (OOTP). The final battle at Hogwarts needs to be given plenty of time and so does the Horcrux search. There is too much in the book that I feel is essential to the final film in order to make it work properly

Avatar Image says:

Well,I think it is better to make the movie 3 hours than a two movies lasting for 1 and a half hour. And at least 30 minutes for the battle at the end. As for the dirctor,well I don`t know who I would prefer, NOT Spielberg, after what he tried to do with the first movie.

Avatar Image says:

Personally I have nothing against sitting through a long 3hr+ film at the cinema, just as long as there is an intermission… but if they thought it would be better made into two 2hr films say, then I would go and watch them both.

I imagine they would do what the did with PotC2 & 3, in that they would film both parts at the same time, and start post-production on the first film immediately, then start on the SFX for the second film after the release of the first.

People seem to be forgetting that SFX heavy films such as LotR, PotC and Harry Potter, can take almost as long in post-production as they do in filming, and I have to ask… which would you prefer? Something that left you feeling disappointed after watching it? Or something that blew your mind?!

I know what my answer is!!

If they do release it as two films, we will have to resign ourselves to a wait between, it’s just a fact of life. PotC managed it in about 8 months, and maybe the Harry Potter team can do it in 6 months, since they have the advantage in that everything is based in the UK, we shall have to wait and see!!

Avatar Image says:

YAY!! Let´s hope it´s really true that it´ll be in two parts!! I don´t care much about the director as long as it´s good, but I guess Spielberg would do a great job.

Avatar Image says:

Frankly, I’m not all that worried who directs it as I’m sure they’ll want to correct the OotP mistakes (as in cutting out half of the most important parts) so they’ll pick the one they think will do the best job, whether it’s a big name like Speilberg or an unknown. I do hope they have Williams back for score though. Despite him having a very different style from what was needed for the last couple of movies, I think he has the capacity to produce beautiful and melancholy music, which is what will definitely be needed for DH (the scene with the stone couldn’t possibly be scored by a better person, assuming they don’t cut it :P )

As for length, I couldn’t care less as long as they release it all at once. 7 hours? No problem, just give me an intermission and I’m happy. Heck, they could even justify charging more for the dvd then, if they’re worried about money. Besides, think of the marketing potential, it’d make for an awesome event, a full day of DH. They could turn it into a massive convention-like vibe. Even if it’s only 4 hours, they could easily add an intermission and make the whole event a big deal. My point? Don’t release it as two parts at two different times, it’ll only make for losses in the end when people decide not to watch the first because they want to see it all at once (like I would).

Avatar Image says:

Please don’t let it be true, please please please!

Avatar Image says:

I was thinking about two parts film of DH when I read the book for the first time.I hope it’s gonna be in two parts because there is so much informations in DH…..WOW…. I hope each part will last 2 hours…..that’s gonna be like two HP films…awesome….I would like Alfonso Cauron for director of DH….because for POA I can say- this is totally Harry Potter——do you agree with me?

Avatar Image says:

It’d be so great! Unless we’d have t wait between the two halves, then it’d be the worst thing ever. Then just make a 4-5 hour film! It’d be torture to see the first half, and then have to wait six-twelve months for the next!!

Avatar Image says:

They should get Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens for the screenplay of DH..

but that’s just my opinion..

Avatar Image says:

Ok. Cool, maybe 2 parts! But i am one of few people, i think, who thinks Spielbergs films are too big /glamour. I really hope Cauron or Del Toro direct the last film(s)

Avatar Image says:

I like Steven Spielberg he would do an amazing work with the final movie. As far as the two halves is concerned, well, if it’s the only way to fit everything in then ok. Whatever happens, and whoever directs the 7th movie, it has to be the best. The final battle at Hogwarts and the confrontation between Harry and Voldemort has to be epic.

Avatar Image says:

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think they should have like all the previous director work somehow on it!!! I know it probably can’t be done but that book is going to take all of their skill put together!

Avatar Image says:

I dont believe this rumour. The daily mail for a start is unreliable with such reports. The rumour is off the back of the recent decision for the Hobbit to be made into 2 films with Peter Jackson. So someone must have commented ” oh how about Deathly Hallows be done the same way and may be get spielberg to direct?” which the Daily Mail converted into a super rumour fact without any ground. I hope the rumour isnt true about the 2 film split. Spread out into 2 films, we will have 2 boring films. Make into 1 film, then we will have a rip-roaring adventure/thriller end to the series. I dont mind spielberg directing actually. This series has been fantastic for its tone variation so far. But ultimately Warner deserves our trust as they have earned it with 6 brilliant Potter films which have got better and better.

Avatar Image says:

Guys, if they split the movie into two parts, then you would probably have to wait until the next year to see the second part. They wouldn’t release part one, and then a month or two later release part two. That would eat into each movie’s profits and not make any business sense. That is one of the many reasons why we got a new LOTR movie every year.

Splitting up the book is a great idea however!

Avatar Image says:

i’m not sure if anyone’s said this yet but, if they half to do it in two parts, they should just have an “intermission” inbetween like this did in gone with the wind or west side story. that way the movie can be longer but the audience can have a little break without feeling guilty about missing anything in the movie

Avatar Image says:

I have not read ALL the comments, on this article, but I do have an opinion and statement: This is the first BIG RUMOR of 2008. Hang on to your collective hats, ladies and gentlemen. Between now and the release of ‘Harry Potter and The Half Blood Prince’, they will abound! Remeber: Rumor, Hear-say, SPECULATION! Thanks, Leaky, I know you’ll keep us posted!

Avatar Image says:

gah… i have mixed feelings…

i do not want to have to wait another year or really, even just a few months, for the second part of DH… but if the end of it isn’t as excellent as it was in the book… i would be SO disappointed. So, if the only way they can make this work well is to do it in 2 parts, so be it… because in my mind i would rather have to wait and have it be excellent than for them to rush it and be disappointed.

but they could always just make it three hours. :-) there have been three hour movies before. I’m for sitting in the cinema that long!

M-B-W

Avatar Image says:

I quite frankly wouldn’t mind a two part DH. I think it would be the best way to end the series as a movie. Plus, if they got Steven that would be even better. However, it would honestly depend on if they did a good job. If DH just plain sucks then there is no way the second part of it would be any good. WB needs to get over the 1hr and 30minutes deal first before I’m going to seriously think of them making HBP and DH amazing. The last two books/movies need that much time.

Avatar Image says:

I think it is a great plan. There would be so many meaningful scenes left out in a two and a half hour film version! I have lately been wishing that Order of the Phoenix had been done in two parts, and also HBP, filming right now…. We fans can eat all of what those obedient elves can cook up!!!!

Avatar Image says:

PLEASE let it be two films!!! If both were 2 1/2 hours, then the whole story would be 5 hours!!! That would be sooooo awesome!!! I don’t really care when they come out. It can be a month, 6 months, or a year to release both, I WILL WAIT that long for the nice, long, decent, emotional, action-packed story that Deathly Hallows is! And I hope WB picks Guillermo del Toro or Alfonso Cuaron to direct! So excited!!!

Avatar Image says:

Of all the books Deathly Hallows is the last one I feel needs two films.

If they didn’t do Phoenix and HBP in two films why stat now? The only way this makes sense if they are going to somehow try and fit in all of the subplots they never set up into previous movies into this one (Lupin and Tonks, SPEW, Neville’s backstory….etc)

Not even sure how they cut the movie into 2 parts considering we spent 7 months in a tent in this book

Avatar Image says:

Speilberg seems like an odd choice, I’m still praying for Peter Jackson, but I doubt that will happen.

I don’t want it in two parts. I would like a 4 hour long movie.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t know if WB looks at these comments at all, but if they do, I want to add my two cents and say, YES, MAKE IT 2 MOVIES!

Making these books into one movie each really hasn’t made anybody happy.

Those who don’t read the books (shame on those old enough to be able to and haven’t) are left confused.

Those who do read the books are always having to apologize to their friends, explaining “the books are better, really!” and explaining crucial plot points left out or why they are upset because “that’s was just wrong!”

The books just have too much detail that are important for character development and flow. How can you show how hard life on the road was for the trio if in film it lasts 30 seconds? The breakout of Gringotts could take up 1/2 the movie all by itself. Are they just going to skip the heartbreaking burial of Dobby? Will they even show Fred? How short are they going to make Snape’s memory?

And as far as Oscars or other awards, they can’t give them to movies that have had such choppy scenes and are confusing. The movies have to being able to flow!

YES, YES and YES, make it two movies! Part I comes out in June, Part II on October 31st. DO IT!!!!

Avatar Image says:

I hate to say this but i predicted this before Christmas. The amount of money would be wow to big to think about. I see it this way, one released in November and the other in the summer. WOW it could happen, i sure hope so:)

Avatar Image says:

One more thing they could open it in conjuction with WB opening the theme park.

Avatar Image says:

Smart move. Warner will be able to have a field day with the Harry/Hermione kiss in the first movie, then the Hermione/Ron kiss in the second half. With the Dan and Emma chemistry, Warner would be stupid not to promote it like crazy.

Avatar Image says:

They can make it into as many parts as they like … in my perfect world there would be a complete movie that starts when Hermione conjures a flask out of thin air for Harry to capture Snape’s memories and ends when Harry finishes seeing them in the pensieve.

Two full hours of Snape! (That might set my friends at Snapecast all abuzz) ...

Avatar Image says:

they’ve already left out the locket, the mirror, the fidelius charm, regulus, mundungus, lily/snape, S.P.E.W., and they WILL leave out Bill and Fluer and most likely Remus/Tonks so WHAT do they have to PUT in two parts??

on speilberg…. no comment.

Avatar Image says:

I see nothing wrong with doing a two part DH. I want them to get everything in that they can. I do say this though…if they do decide on a two-part DH, do it right. Put in everything you can…the whole entire sink, but do it whole series justice. I mean flashbacks and everything if you have to. Also NO SPIELBERG. Also if they decide on a two-parter, they have to make sure that releases are very close…within a month or two. PLEASE DO NOT go the route of the Matrix. That was the greatest downfall of that series in my opinion, because they released Matrix Reloaded with that to be continued craziness in May, then had fans waiting until November to find out what finally happened in Revolutions. That was seven months for fans to sit and talk about what happened—the good and the bad…seems fans focused more on the bad. So much so that by the time November came, there were some who didn’t want to even see the movie. I don’t want that to happen to DH. So if they decide on a two-parter, they should have releases tops within a few months difference of each other.

Avatar Image says:

I like that idea. Although I’d rather wait a long time and have them both within 6 months of each other, than wait a year for the first then another year for the second.

But – Spielberg? I know everyone’s always going on about how good he is at directing.. But I don’t think that should be the only factor. I don’t know a great deal about him, but I’d rather have a film that was true to the books, and heartfelt, than a film which honestly looks like the director was trying hard to appeal to the non-fans.

People who aren’t already big fans don’t matter by this stage. They were important up to the fifth one, but I think from then on it should be for us. I just think we deserve it, to be fair. Who’s going to be more disappointed if they don’t like it? Right. Us. The fans.

Avatar Image says:

Oh, please don’t…the thing I’ve enjoyed most about the post-PoA movies is the feeling that the filmmakers have actually been trying to turn the books into actual MOVIES, redesigned for the language of film with appropriate changes in focus, framing and pacing, as opposed to the turgid, lumbering book-film mutants that Columbus gave us. For me, GoF was the most perfect HP adaptation to date, a fantastic translation of literary ideas into cinematic ones, giving the audience the same feeling as reading the book but in a totally different way, and I’d like the same from DH.

There’s no reason in the world that Deathly Hallows can’t be turned into a perfectly satisfying single film; it might end up running quite long to fit in all of the essential plotlines,even once you’ve trimmed some stuff out, but I can’t see why it would need to be any more than three hours. Making a two-parter would just say to me that they’re more committed to pandering to the demands of greedy executives and pedantic fans than they are to the actual filmmaking process, and I can’t support that: after all, if I want the full, unadulterated story, I always have the book. Just be brave, WB, and make a good FILM of DH; whatever it takes.

Avatar Image says:

Absolutely no sodding way! It’ll cost me £10 to see both of them then!

Avatar Image says:

YES to two films, NO TO SPEILBERG!!!!

Avatar Image says:

yeah yeah yupi !!!! two parts!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Muddtallica: GoF the best adaption so far? A definite no in my opinion and it was the film that was most slated by critics. It was clunky, badly scripted and horribly acted.

I’d quite like a two part Deathly Hallows film as it was one of my favourite books in the series and I’d really like to see them do it justice. However, this does seem rather like a money-making scheme than an artistic move. They haven’t made a huge effort to make these films canon in the past, why start now?

Avatar Image says:

As much as I would love a 2 movie option , I see 2 main problems: 1. The “Trio” have signed on for only ONE movie 7. By making it 2 parts, its kind of like telling them they have to go to school another year. I believe they truly enjoy doing the films, but there is a sense that they are looking forward to life after Harry Potter.

2. The “trio” adore David Yates. I believe they would all want to continue with him, more than any other director.

Avatar Image says:

I think DH could be made into one film. It would be closer to 3 hours, but it can be done.

If they were to find the real locket in HBP then that would allow them to easily streamline the plot in DH. We don’t need Kreacher’s tale, Regulus, or the trip to the Ministry. I found these side plots to be kind of meandering to read and it would be even worse if they translated it to film. I thought that the whole R.A.B. mystery at the end of HBP was sooo cool, and it was pretty anti-climatic for Harry to just walk by his door and be like: “Regulus Black, R.A.B.. Eureka! Good thing we happened to escape to Grimmauld Place so that we could catch this lucky lead.” Regulus has it, then Kreacher has it, then Mundungus has it, and then we go for a trip to the Ministry where it’s not even going to be Dan, Rupert, and Emma but three random people we don’t know and there’s no real exciting escape scene. It was ok for the book, but I don’t see how they could translate that to screen without movie audiences wondering what the whole point is, and why they aren’t getting on with the main plot.

So, the whole reason for my rambling is that if they cut out Kreacher’s Tale, the Ministry, and other middle men (such as Xenophilius Lovegood), this could most certainly be one film.

However, it could also be two films if they want to stick to the book. The first film would HAVE to be “Harry Potter and Slytherin’s Locket” (I’m not suggesting a title change, just stating the general idea of the movie). Each film will have to have it’s own story arc, and the only logical split would be for one to deal with finding/dealing with/destroying the locket, with the subplots being Voldemort’s continuing gain of power, Dumbledore’s past starting to be revealed (the cliff-hanger being when Harry reads Rita’s book in the forest), and the Muggeleborn persecution, with minor subplots of Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny, and the mysterious symbol. Of course the subplots will be continued in part two, but the locket part would be resolved in part one. This part would have to end with the tent scene after Ron destroys the locket. There’s no huge battle at the end, but there would be battles within the movie, and there is enough plot to tell one story I think. These books are NOT action books; they’re character adventure books. But I still don’t know if destroying the locket would be enough of a climax.

The second movie would then have it’s focus on the Deathly Hallows, starting with their trip to Xenophilius Lovegood. The subplots would be the same as the first movie in addition to finding and destroying the rest of the Horcruxes.

Now that I wrote out the plots for the two films, the first film would definitely be weaker, but if done right, it could still be a very good movie. There’ll be some action, some romance, some mystery, and a lot of drama and emotion.

Now I’m torn. It could be done in one, but two parts wouldn’t be too bad. This is probably pointless speculation anyways since the rumor is most likely false.

As for Spielberg, he has made some fantastic films, and he can do dark (Saving Private Ryan and Shindler’s List come to mind) but I haven’t been impressed with him lately and I do worry that his version of Deathly Hallows would be too commercial and superficial. I could see it either being Oscar-worthy or terribly cheesy in his hands. I don’t know who I want to direct. Some parts of Pan’s Labyrinth were very impressive, but I didn’t feel as though Del Toro properly explained things and I didn’t feel like he successfully incorporated the fantasy plot into the real life plot. So I have mixed feelings about him. I also have mix feelings about Cuaron: I loved Children of Men and I actually kept thinking of that film while reading DH for the first time, but this movie is going to HAVE to have exposition and he doesn’t like that.

Avatar Image says:

Join my facebook group Don’t Split our DH! http://hs.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7567169261

Avatar Image says:

As great as this sounds, I’m calling the Daily Mail’s bluff here. Even if both parts of the series were shot at the same time, but released at two different times, many of the actors’ contracts would need to be reworked. DH would essential be two-films, and actors like Dan, Emma, and Rupert, should be paid accordingly.

I think this is bologna.

Avatar Image says:

Wow! If that turns out to be true I wonder when they’ll cut off the first movie! Perhaps after Xeno tells the trio about the Deathly Hallows? Hahaha that would be funny if it was just like “That? That’s the sign of the Deathly Hallows.” BLACKOUT bahahaha I would die.

Avatar Image says:

At least this way the won’t skip alot of parts, like the order of the phoenix movie. I really hope they do this for the Deathly Hallows. I don’t want them to skip anything out, even tho some parts arn’t important. Its the last one, so do it good.

Avatar Image says:

I WOULD LOVE TWO PARTs as long as they include EVERYTHING!! What the hell why don’t they amke a 5 hour movie with a break i nthe middle, i’m all for it!

Avatar Image says:

I would rather it be a 4 hour movie like titanic and come out as 2 disks on DVD than having two separate movies.

Avatar Image says:

OMG the scene with “Bathilda” in godric’s hollow (if they do it) is going to be INSANE!!! if they don’t have that i’m going to cry… wonder what the rating’s going to be if there’s all this violence…

Avatar Image says:

Personally, I don’t see why we can’t have an extremely long movie with an intermission in the middle. It would solve a lot of problems and nobody would have to wait for the second half of the movie to come out. I would absolutely abhor having to wait. There really isn’t any proper place in the book to end it for an excessive time period without causing emotional problems to the viewers (not that we won’t all be experiencing emotional problems anyway when the time comes but do you see what I mean?). An intermission would make many issues moot.

As for the possibility of Spielberg. I do love his work but for DH? No…just….no.

Avatar Image says:

I can understand people being 50/50 on the 2 part thing but what is it with people not wanting Spielberg are you people crazy.

Avatar Image says:

That sounds like a good idea. Fans wanted and got it so… it seems good. Split it into 2 films. Not shoving the book into one very long film. It seems like a pretty good idea. As long as they execute well. The directors… i don’t know. Who knows how it’ll go. I just hope it IS NOT David Yates. I like Chris Columbus though. Spielberg… not sure how it’ll go. Del Toro… well he directs a genre of scary and supernatual. That is Harry Potter, but I don’t think I want his style of directing in Harry Potter. So… for directors I would want Columbus, then Cuaron, then Spielberg. I don’t want Yates or Del Toro.

Avatar Image says:

The problem with Speilberg is, being a bigshot director, he may not be as willing to give up his creativity and stick to the Harry Potter feeling if you know what I mean.

Avatar Image says:

I DO NOT think that DH should be split although I think it should be made into a very long movie.

Avatar Image says:

Comments (190) WOW this is excite well i know that waiting to see the second half would get me a bit upset, but if they try to put the whole book in one movie and mess it up up it would be worse, so i think we need to be patient so we can have a better FILM you got my vote WB

Avatar Image says:

NOOOO, not Spielberg. I like the idea of the 2 part movie but please concider another director. But, it is a rumor…

Avatar Image says:

i’d be cool with a 2 part movie – that gives us much more chance of getting EVERYTHING in the book, without anything being cut

it would be exceedingly better than having them chop it down to 2 hours or some crap like that

Avatar Image says:

NOT happy about the possibilty of Spielberg or anyone in his league directing.

I’d prefer Cuaron or Del Toro.

I don’t mind it being split into 2 parts, hopefully ths will mean the won’t have to cut a lot of stuff out

Avatar Image says:

Two parts is good - but not good. I agree fans won’t want to wait between parts, however it can be done in the style of “Gone with the Wind” and have an intermission in between. Diehard fans would love it!!! If they are worried about ticket sales, just set a higher price - again diehard fans would love it.

In addition Steven Spielberg has proven he can direct gritty, dark scenes - Private Ryan. Actually I think John Williams was one of the best composers for Harry Potter - composing the signature theme song. Don’t sell Williams short he is a motivated, creative person.

Avatar Image says:

Don’t forget what they did with The Lord Of The Rings. A trilogy? No Speilberg for Director. The man walked away at the outset of this franchise. I’m for a two-part film. It will save me having to check the books against the films contents, to keep myself on track. Better editing has to be a must.

Val. Canada.

Avatar Image says:

Two parts? Yes, there are downsides, but to have so much more of the book make it to the screen overrides any objection in my reckoning. Even better, though, is the idea of a very long film with an intermission.

Speilberg? Worst. Idea. Ever.

Avatar Image says:

The truth is that Spielberg had a different view of harry potter. He also wanted some americans to play parts including Harry. When Rowling heard that, well that was it. She wanted a Brits and did not like the screen play ideas.

Another thing is that Spielberg is not what he was. Some have thier great moments and others are headed down the food chain, he is one of those.

Chris Columbus. has my vote.

Forget two movies WB would not do it but they might give them more time than 2:25 no matter what the content. But the holy dollar would not go and would cut into the showing times. WB would never go for that!

These goof directors I would even take Spielberg over them.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t think it will be that bad it two halves, then they can’t have the excuss for leaving something out that it didn’t fit. BUT I hope they do it in two halves like with the Titanic or Gangs of New York where the movie was released all the same time just the movie was so long its on two different discs. It would really suck if it was released on two different dates. They wouldn’t do that. (i hope not anyways).

Avatar Image says:

There is no way the WB will even consider a 4 hour movie with or without an interval- it eats into the profits. It would mean there would only be 1 showing per theater room a night say from 7 to 11, and another theater 6 to 10. How many younger schoolage kids would be allowed to go and how many adults with various workschedules and lives etc? No, they’ll split it into two movies where the theatres can put on 2-3 shows a night and that many more entry fees. I do feel sorry for Dan, and yeah, i think they would have to rework his fees and the rest as well, especially the “name” actors unless they took this possibility in mind (likely). That would also mean double promo jobs etc. I would have liked to have seen his face, he has the hardest job of all.

Avatar Image says:

The large portion of the movie going public, who also help to make these films the money makers they are.Would be very irritated at the end of the fist film ,as it would seem very disjointed .It could well put most of them OFF seeing the last one at all, which would end up backfiring for WB. The one good thin Peter Jackson did when he made the LOTR films was encompass enough of each book into each film to complete the section of the story in that film. Having DH chopped up into two films would desolve the empact of the story, as well as each film as a great film unto itself. I still think one longer film would serve DH for more ,for the HP fans,for the movie going public in general and even WB ,in the long run.

I think a lot of ideas are being tossed around on the studio level[WB] and they are still not really sure what they really want to do.On e of their thoughts about the films has only leaked to the public thru thoose who work for the company.I am sure their are more ideas flying aobut the room that have not come to public light.

Avatar Image says:

The only way a two part film of the DH book might work is if they diiffinetly realeased the first one in June and the second one in November of the same year.2010 Which would , as i have read some have said,woud also serve the amusment park.

Avatar Image says:

If they bring back Chris Columbus I will go on a hunger strike.

Avatar Image says:

TeacherKym said ” If they are worried about ticket sales, just set a higher price – again diehard fans would love it”

lol Higher Price? Higher PRICE? There are areas in the US where ticket prices are towards $12/adult and you want them to set a higher price (and again, then pay twice that to see what should be one movie)? I can guarantee that the general movie going audience (which should also be catered to, whether you like it or not) will not go with that and WB will loose money (or at least, will not make as much money as they hope). “Diehard fans” (I personally hate terms like that) can want every word in the book on screen as much as they like, but that does not mean it will a good movie make. And as I said, Diehards cannot be the only demographic catered to. You want to be able to draw in the average movie goer, the one that may not have been interested in HP before this (yes, even with this being the 7th movie). You interest an average movie goer, they’re going to be more likely to purchase the previous films. Turn the average movie goer off, they will not see the second half, they will not purchase the film, which means money not going into WB’s pockets. Catering to the diehards will only take you so far.

(Note: Sorry, if I came across as angry or witchy, I don’t mean to, it’s just been one of those nights where I got barely any sleep and so I’m more irritable than usual. No offense is meant to anyone)

Avatar Image says:

Wow. If it’s two parts, that’s going to be one long movie! I can’t wait!

Avatar Image says:

GUILLERMO DEL TORO! Sweet.

Avatar Image says:

Note: Slight edit on my previous comment, I noticed that TeacherKym was mentioning a Gone With the Wind intermission style in which case my “pay twice the money on top of higher ticket price” comment does not make sense, so that part I retract, but the rest of my opinion remains.

Avatar Image says:

Wow!i’d love it to be in 2 parts,i mean than they would put every little details.or they make a 6 hours long movie,i dont care,just don’t cut anything out!!XD

Avatar Image says:

Spielberg would most likely do a good job on DH, and the situation now is different to ten years ago. Whoever directs this knows they have to stick to the story and use the existing cast. It is nice to see that all options for directors are still being considered.

There is still a lot that can be cut though. I don’t want to see half an hour of Harry, Ron and Hermione apparating around the countryside of the UK and I bet most of the filmgoing public doesn’t either. It can definitely be done in under three hours, if the director knows what they are doing.

But when the movie industry wants to split a film and says it’s not about the money, you can be sure of one thing: it’s about the money. Harry Potter is as close as anyone can get to a sure thing in the film business, and hundreds of millions in pure profit is to be had from releasing two films. Kill Bill and Grindhouse were much worse off as two films and everyone involved knew it, but by splitting they almost double their money.

One possible problem is that everyone is contracted for only one more film. So if two films are released, the producers might have to pay out double salaries. And JK Rowling might possibly have to approve.

Chris Columbus has never made a successful action blockbuster, so it will be astounding if he is being seriously considered. However Cuaron (with Children of Men) and Newell both recently have, and they both know the series well enough by now.

Avatar Image says:

EEEeeewww, NOT SPIELBERG!

Avatar Image says:

I’ve been hoping for a two part movie, so I really hope this is true.

I wouldn’t even mind the fact that we’d have to wait for the second half because I just want to see as much of this book as possible. And I actually don’t feel like cutting it would be awkward. They could end it with Malfoy Manor. Or even Gringotts. I mean, from there to the end of the book…so much goes on.

I think by cutting the movie into two parts, we’re going to get more of what we want to see. No cutting of important scenes with Dumbledore, no lame flashbacks. They could do Dumbledore/Grindelwald and Snape/Lily with justice. I don’t know how they’d be able to fit all of the storylines in a 2.5 movie, you know?

Avatar Image says:

when we diehard fans want to see every precious momenet and memory of the reading visualized on the white screen, it will not be Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, but Harry Potter and the Deathly Movie…. boring!!!!

Luckely all directors till now knew how to use the cutting knife wisely, lets hope the last director will cut it down to size of a magnificent standard lenght movie.

I prefer quality over quantity, why seeing every detail on the screen again, I already read those three or four times?.I did my visualisation, now I want to see what a good HP-fan director can do with this sack of words.

But this rumor is just what it is: a rumor, nothing more

Avatar Image says:

Deathly Hallows is much more than just epic battle scenes and dark moments. It also has a sensitivity and an existential significance which very few directors can really capture. Someone like Spielberg or Cuaron would definitely be up to it. No doubt. Del Toro has some of what’s needed, but not enough. Yates just makes big-budget TV—the terrible Grawp in OoTP shows he is not up to the challenge of major special effects scenes.

Peter Jackson is a hack director who is most at home making schlock horror films (which are definitely fun stuff, but hardly at the higher levels of filmmaking). Like Sam Raimi, he’s someone who got lucky and managed to perform. But the last time a studio gave Jackson a hot property and a mega-budget he turned out an unwatchable turkey. Nobody in Hollywood will be forgetting that.

Avatar Image says:

At first glance, it sounds great! Then you realize it could mean we’d have to wait a while between each. Then, if you can make the longest book into a movie shorter than the shortest book’s movie, they could still easily fit Deathly Hallows into the one movie. Overall, I think it would be stupid. As for Spielberg, JKR vetoed him! I’m joking of course. He’d be great I’m sure, maybe he’d bring back John Williams…

Avatar Image says:

I don’t mind if the movie’s five hours long, but I don’t want to watch it in two sittings! I want to see it all at once!

Avatar Image says:

For those who like the idea of sitting in a theatre for 3 + hours- You’re insane and must have bladders the size of buicks and not have any nerve endings in your behinds what so ever. It didn’t work for PotC 3 it wouldn’t work here either.

Tell the story in 2 1/2 or in 2 parts. Nothing in between please.

Avatar Image says:

I seriously like the idea. But I also agree, why not just make it a four hour long movie? That`s not even that long. (= I’d sit in a theater for four hours for Harry Potter ! But splitting it into two would be GREAT! I mean, we would get more out of the story anyway ! Amelia, I guess some people do have the bladder sizes of buicks – I know I do. (: Or else the people who don`t can just not eat anything, that way they won`t have to make pit stops in between the movies & stuff. =) Back onto the subject, it’d be really nice if they split it, but it would be better if they just made the movie four hours long! Come on! It’s sooooo easy to understand. :) & I imagined the second part NOT coming out a while after the first part. I just imagined that the first part would play, then we’d wait like 15 minutes or so, and they would play the SECOND part. (in the theater) Hm. That’s just my view.

Avatar Image says:

I can understand why some people would like to see a 2-part movie, but seriously the idea really annoys me. No matter what they do with the movie, no matter how long it is, they will still never be able to come anywhere near to the quality of the book. I think the movie is meant to be just that, a movie, not pages of the book meticulously translated onto the screen. When I see any movie I want to be entertained, so slicing DH down the middle would really suck, especially if the two halves came out separately. It would be a massive anticlimax in my opinion, because a) it wouldn’t really be a movie anymore as there would be no real resolution to it (say, finishing the first half in the Malfoys’ Manor, or when Dobby dies, neither of which in my opinion would be a good way to end a film) and b) some of the stuff in the book works well but probably wouldn’t be very good on-screen. Sorry but this is just my opinion and you don’t have to listen to me but this is exactly how I felt when I heard GOF might have been a 2-parter, and I just had to get this out somewhere.

Avatar Image says:

OMG!!!! I knew it!! I was just talking to my aunt about the 7th movie and how it would be cool to do it in 2 halfs. We could watch one half and then there could be an intermission or something. I am going to the midnight premiere!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Some people say intermission movies do not work any more but that is usually with stand alone movies. The reason I think an intermission 4 hour film would work is because it is the end of a beloved series. People will sit there for 3 ½-4 hours if that is the format. I saw Titanic 7 times in the theater but I love epic films my favorite being Gone With the Wind, which sometimes get played at a small local theater when they do a classic movie run, and even though I have the DVD I will go sit for 4 hours in the theater because it is great on a large movie screen. This movie no matter how they do it is going to have as much hype of even more hype than SS/PS and it may even break the first movies record. I am ok with a two set movie if I have to but it would stop me from going to the movies more than once. I would just see each film once in the movie and than wait for the DVD. If the first part is done poorly I may even wait to see the 2nd half until it is released on DVD. Ok who am I kidding I would go see it but the regular HP movie fan-non book fan may not. It is going to be a risk for WB to take either way.

Avatar Image says:

Why not Peter Jackson. Look at the great job he did on Lord Of The Rings. I am sure if he is not doing the “Hobbit” at the time then he would do “Deathly Hallows” justice. My other Director’s vote would be a Cuoron/Guillermo collaboration. Please do not keep the same editor or much of the staff from Order of the Phoenix. (We fans almost deserve a do-over for that movie or at minimum a director’s cut or something). Imelda Staunton’s character development of “Umbridge” was great, but the screenplay and editing and a many other aspects were grossly shortchanged in OOTP. Please do not repeat the same mistakes in OOTP again in either HBP or DH.

Avatar Image says:

It would be great! The first half could be Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in 3D and the 2nd could be the epilogue! Just kidding, they could probably split it at Ron’s departure or at Shell Cottage.

Avatar Image says:

Brenda said “Why not Peter Jackson. Look at the great job he did on Lord Of The Rings.”

LOTR turned out so well because PJ put so much dedication and devotion as he’s a big fan of the material. From what I’ve heard, he’s not that big of a fan of Harry Potter, so I doubt he would give it the same kind of care.

Avatar Image says:

Hearing That makes my day I didn’t want them to cut anything out!

Avatar Image says:

Great news, only please please please do NOT allow David Yates to go near any more Potter material with his midguided hatchet!

Avatar Image says:

For some reason, people always underestimate Spielberg. This is the same guy who did Saving Private Ryan and A.I. (a very underrated movie, in my opinion). Not to mention Schindler’s List. The man can do drama. In particular, the man also does characterization, which has gotten shamefully short-shrifted in the movies. So far, I’ve been disappointed in all the movies, and hold little hope for #6. But Spielberg might just be able to pull off a true Harry Potter movie that doesn’t suck.

Avatar Image says:

While I love the idea of them bringing in quality directors such as Spielberg, Cuaron or Del Toro, I do not understand how they could get two parts out of Deathly Hallows.

The whole book was virtually part two of the last great adventure, Half-Blood Prince being part one. Jo herself even said that’s what it felt like, and reading it to me that’s what it felt like. At what point in the narrative would you stop only to pick up with part 2?

Of course, considering the Potter series is the only cash cow Warner Brothers has, I can see how they’d want to split it in two, but would the actors’ contracts cover that?

Avatar Image says:

Don’t mean to brag or anything but…the day after I finished reading DH I wrote into beyondhogwarts.com that this movie has to, has to, has to be split into two parts! Looks like someone agrees. Also, I recommend the first part ends when Harry retrieves the Sword of Gryiffindor in the Forest of Dean and Ron opens the locket. Release part one in the summer and part two at Christmas. Just a little free advice Mr. Speilberg or whoever ends up directing!

Avatar Image says:

The rumour may or may not become true, but whoever had the idea of splitting the film in two are so centered in their own greed that they haven’t had time to read the book. They have been milking the cow for years and cannot come to terms with the idea that, unfortunately, this is the end (at least, for now…) and they want one more. There are only seven books, Warner people, get over it! Don’t be fooled into thinking that they do it out of respect for the story, or for Jo, or for us. If they make two films it is only for money. How sad.

They ought to know that each film must have its own plot (introduction, action and climax). You can’t break up Deathly Hallows right down the middle, because if you do, the first part on its own will make little sense. Jo wrote one Deathly Hallows, not two. What is wrong with one long film? I would happily sit through seven hours if I had to!

As for SS “directing” it, the mere notion is so ridiculous and so revolting that I don’t know whether to laugh or vomit. Please, let’s be serious! In my opinion, Peter Jackson would be great, seeing what a good job he did with LotR. In fact, I wish he could have done the whole Potter series. Or how about Tim Burton?

I have faith in Jo and hope she won’t let any of this two-part/SS nonsense happen.

Avatar Image says:

I’ve been saying this since I read it- there is no possible way to make DH ONE film. It HAS to be a 2-part movie- a 4 hr with an intermission. Think of Gone With the Wind!

WB has got to understand that most of the fans will be willing to see it through even if it requires a longer film. So long as it is a great film and true as they can be to the books, then people will LOVE it. It would be epic!!! I really hope they don’t separate it over months though.

But this explains the 2010 release and why it would take so long to make a great book into a great film… OMG dorkchills

Avatar Image says:

Hmmmm. I would vastly prefer a three-and-a-half or four-hour movie with an intermission to a two-parter.

Either way, it needs to be huge and action-packed, with time and attention given to all the many details, subplots, and “minor” characters…AND still manage to get the emotional notes right. What? Sounds easy enough. ;)

HP needs to go out with a glorious bang, WB! I am a 43-year-old (professional and otherwise completely sane) mother of two who saw OotP seven times in the theater, including once at the IMAX. Here, let me toss some more money at you right now as a promise: my family and I will be there warming those theater seats repeatedly. Do right by us fans—I have faith in you!

Avatar Image says:

Libby said “But this explains the 2010 release”

No, the 2010 (projected) release follows the same pattern as all the other movies have. 1st two movies were released about a year apart, then there was a year and half between release of 2 & 3, followed by a year between movies 3 & 4, year and a half between release of 4 & 5, about a year between 5 & 6 and so between 6 & 7 should be about a year and a half (which puts in into 2010) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_movies#Films

Avatar Image says:

I think its a great idea to release it in two parts!! Because you know they won’t do justice to it in just one film…they won’t make it 3 hours because they never do that…it always has to 2 and half..and i;’d rather see two two and a half hour parts of it and than just maybe 2 hour and 45 min film of book 7 because they’d cut it up. unless they made a 3 1/2 or 4 hour film of book 7..then i think it’d be great for it to be split up into two films!

Avatar Image says:

I rethought it – the first half should be released at Christmas (covers Christmas at Godric’s Hollow & winter in Forest of Dean) and the second in the summer. Then WB can release the DVD boxed set just in time for the following Christmas Sales. Hello!

Avatar Image says:

I do hope That John Williams becomes the composer for DH, he did a great Job in star wars 3 which was a Dark Movie indeed, He also did a Great job for Chamber of Secrets and the Sorceres Stone.

Avatar Image says:

that is SO cool! That will be good, we’ll get more information, and it’s the second largest book, and the last.

Avatar Image says:

Ideally they should make the movie the same length as the others for the general theater audience and then sell a two disk extended edition for the enthusiastic fans. 4 hours would be a long time to spend at the theater and it is hard to tell if splitting it would turn out alright. I hope they make it available in 3D. Can you imagine the kings cross station scene with mist floating out of the screen? It would be awesome.

Avatar Image says:

THIS WOULD BE SO AWESOME!!!

Avatar Image says:

Who ever doesn’t want this join my facebook group – Don’t Split our DH!

http://hs.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7567169261

Avatar Image says:

I just have this strange feeling that this is going to be one of those huge rumors that is going to be completely squashed by WB, or whoever, within the next few days. The whole thing just seems a bit fishy to me. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

Avatar Image says:

I’ve been saying this to anyone who would listen since they made movie three. And not just about the last one, about all of the ones that followed the third. And I still think they should’ve done the same with GOF, OOTP and HBP.

Avatar Image says:

is it just me or does this sound scarily familiar??

Didn’t this same rumor come out about GoF? Or am I crazy?

Avatar Image says:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When Spielberg was involved before SS he was making a pig’s ear out of the project. I would rather see it not done than done by him! And two parts BAH!

Avatar Image says:

Lily – Whether you liked GoF or not is a matter of your own personal opinion, but to say that it was “the most slated by critics” is absolute rot, I’m afraid. Rotten Tomatoes puts it at an 89% critical approval rating, tied with PoA as the best-reviewed film to date…check for yourself if you don’t believe me. http://64.14.20.205/m/harry_potter_and_the_goblet_of_fire/

Also, there’s been so much drivel spouted in this topic about Spielberg, it’s untrue. No heart? Kiddy? This is Steven Spielberg we’re on about, one of the most acclaimed and respected directors alive today, author of one of the most diverse and consistently interesting bodies of work I can think of, from action adventure (Indiana Jones) to thriller (Jaws, Duel) to kids adventure (ET) to drama (Schindler’s, Private Ryan, Munich) to sci-fi (AI, Minority Report) to light comedy (The Terminal, Catch Me If You Can)...need I go on? He’s a versatile, consummate showman, with a superb visual sense, brilliant grasp of pacing and plotting, excellent handle on effects, wonderful control over actors…to me, the idea that he wouldn’t be up to directing DH is laughable. I don’t think he’d be interested, personally, but he’d be a suerb choice if he was.

Avatar Image says:

I love Steven Spielberg, he’s fantastic, but I don’t think he’d be the right one to direct Deathly Hallows. And I also hate the idea of having two movies. Fans will certainly not be happy about it…I’d rather have one long movie…splitting it in two would make fans very unhappy, which I would’ve thought is something Jo certainly does not want…even if it does mean a slightly smaller pay check.

Avatar Image says:

Yes to the two-part film (provided we have to wait less than a year and no more than six months in between each one) but a huge-massively gargantuan NO to Speilberg (or Peter Jackson for that matter). Hardcore yes to Yates, Del Toro, or Terry Gilliam-even though we know that’s probably never, ever going to happen.

Avatar Image says:

Sorry for the double post, but that crosing out above was not intentional.

Avatar Image says:

“Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows -The Three Brothers” (To the death of Dobby;)

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows -The Battle of Hogwarts”

2 films -each of 140 minutes -directed by one of the greatest directors in the history of cinema….

Wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All of prayers would be answered =Finally a movie that does the books justice.

Avatar Image says:

No way should they have Fran Walsh on screenplay. Her liberties with the LOTR raw material would make Harry Potter fans twinge with agony (compared to Goldenberg and Kloves)

Avatar Image says:

If they did do two parts they should wait to release both together like maybe like a month apart. kinda of like when they re-released the Star Wars Movies

Avatar Image says:

ok first …. 2 PARTS?!!!! are u kidding … well if they follow the story line better than in the other films its ok with me if not well that sucks ….. second …. STEVEN SPILBERG??!!! r u kidding this is not a film of how global warming is about to cause the world to end so i dont think he is right for this movie…..

Avatar Image says:

yeahhhhhhhh plz pzl plz make a 2 part movie it will be the best and steven speillberg is a greattttttttttt choice

Avatar Image says:

i hope they make the movie in two parts so that they don’t have to make any STUPID cuts that RUIN The movie. . and i hope they don’t use any directions they’ve used in the past, the movies have been good but they just don’t live up to my standards (like they ever could, I’m a HUGGGEEEE fan-like most of you…haha)

the 7th movie better be good or i’m gonna hurt someone

=]

Avatar Image says:

One thing is interesting at least. With the exception of the release of book 7 and the Dumbledore business, this one topic has already generated more posts than anything else over the past 12 months in a comparable time frame.

To my mind -this illustrates how mind blowing this proposition is.

Avatar Image says:

No. No Steven Spielberg. No two parts. I want one big huge 5-hour Harry Potter movie directed by Guillermo Del Toro!!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Given the source, I expect this rumor is false… but I’d be pretty happy if it were true! I think it would be ideal for the movie to be 3.5 hours long, but splitting it makes sense to me if it could allow them to do the plot justice (unlike in all five films to date). Lord of the Rings is all one continuous story, and I don’t see anybody freaking out because it was published and the movie was made in three volumes. And HBP and DH are pretty much the same story as it stands, but the break in the plot at the end of the sixth book felt right. I’m sure there are plenty of logical parts where DH could be split. And I hope we get Spielberg, that would be great!

Avatar Image says:

There’s no reason why DH would need to be a 2 part movie. WB is totally capable of making it a satisfying film, regardless of what they may need to cut or rearrange. And I doubt Spielberg was even considered…he was supposed to direct the first film, then had a tantrum because JK Rowling didn’t want him to butcher her story like he was planning to. He’s a hack director anyway. If Spielberg gets his hands on the Harry Potter franchise, it will go to sh* for sure. He’ll change the whole story to make it an alien movie.

Avatar Image says:

Coughdrop, they actually WERE planning on splitting GOF but Newell said that after talking with Alfonso Cuaron who was strongly against it, they changed their mind. So no, you’re not crazy ;)

Avatar Image says:

Reasons Spielberg should not direct DH: 1. He wanted Haley Joel Osment to play Harry in the first movie. Imagine Osment!Harry when he sees a ghost and he says “I see dead people,” lol. 2. He would suck at directing Harry Potter because he is not worthy, and Mexican directors do better with sequels than Spielberg, seeing how Del Toro is making a Hellboy 2 and Spielberg has made NO SEQUELS. 3. Because JKR doesn’t like him at all. 4. Because I want Del Toro or Cuaron to do it.

Avatar Image says:

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that is my freakin dream….... I want DH to be the biggest and baddest one ever!!!! It needs to be made really well with the heartbreaking emotion of the book on point and really really really really great music that build’s on the emotion and really put’s emphasis on the impact of the scenes… It needs to be like the Music in LOTR…..... where even hearing it makes you want to cry! It would be freakin GRRRRRREAAATT if the movie was in 2 parts…. I wouldn’t have a problem with having to wait a couple of months to see the 2nd part…We’ve waited for just about everything that has to do with HP,why couldnt we wait a little longer! I thought i was going to freakin die of anticipation with the months leading up to the release of DH, I mean my freakin life was suuronded around DH coming out for like 4 months before it came out. Wouldn’t everyone want a really GREATmovie that consisted of everything that would satisfy all HP fans than some barely put together,craply edited, and just overall sucky movie that is a depressingly lousy 2 to ( even by a miracle) 3 hour movie? DH truly needs to go out with a bang …something to justifyingly wrap up the HP saga since after the DH movie comes out there won’t be anymore HP stuff, it’ll all be done no more books or movies… We need something that will truly hit us hard and have such an emotional impact that everyone will be crying throughout the movie…. That’s what I need and I know you all do to and if you don’t then your obviously not a TRUE HP fan at all!! The next possibility is making it 4 hours or possibly 41/2 hours to make it just as good. I mean think about it “Titanic” the best movie of all time and the highest groosing movie of all time was 4 hours long and look what it became it literally went down in history…..But here’s the thing, obviously Titanic wasn’t a 4 hour movie that was just average because obviously it wouldn’t be the most successful movie of all time it was a 4 hour long way above average and better than expectations sky-high movie…...... It was just briiliant film-making at it’s best… It truly is the most emotional and heartwrenching movie of all time with some dammmmmmmmn good music that just makes you want to ball!!! If Hp could be made and put together with some ridiculously good music( music can really make or break a movie as shown in LOTR and Titanic) it might just (just?) surpass Titanic . The director choices for me would be Peter Jackson or James Cameron ( seeing as to the fact that they made my all time favorite movies especially Titanic). But i actually think it would be better if Jackson made it since a series like HP (fantasy) is in his area of expertise…. But the downside is that it’s likely impossible for him to do it anyways since he’s gonna be making “The Hobbit” and it’s sequel sometime between later in 2008 and 2010 and it’s going to be released in late 2010. which really really really really sucks….........uh!!!! Gosh I’ve talked so much I’ve worn myself out!!!!!!! I’ll talk later people who read this really take in what I said and see that it really is the only way for this movie to be made (atleast if you want it to be something to remember) Bye-bye Sincerely, a TRUE HP fan!!!!

Avatar Image says:

HOPEFULLY they will pick a excellent director and that person will direct both movies.

Two parts is fine with me. That should help them follow the book closer.

Avatar Image says:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! NOT SPIELBERG!!!

Big name American actors and Quidditch cheerleaders? And he’ll make the ending even more sappy than it was in the book.

No thanks Steven, I doubt many could stomach a saccharine version of ‘the Deathly Hallows.’

Avatar Image says:

I think Del Torro has a good shot at directing this film. Spielberg needs to just continue making his stupid alien movies and cry about not ever getting a piece of the HP pie.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t want Spielberg to direct, I like the idea of the bloke who directed the third film. I don’t want the movie to be divided either, elongate the movie, and show as much of the canon as possible, but don’t hash things together, like in the fifth film. I also like Williams as the composer.

Avatar Image says:

Agreed with Covered In Bees. :D Agreed 100%.

Avatar Image says:

Also agreed with John, except I loved OOTP. If they don’t keep Mrs. Weasley’s line I will be angry to the point of suing David Heyman or Steve Kloves. Can’t JKR write the script for once?!

Avatar Image says:

I’ve read all the comments and nothing is going to change my mind that two parts is the right way to go. I know that it would exciting but sitting on your ass for 4-5 hrs is gonna hurt. Your ass falls asleep and it is one of the weirdest feelings ever.

I am hoping for two parts because you just know that WB will not make a 4 hr movie. Also I thought that movie theatres were owned by individual companies not studios. From what I’ve heard/read theatre owner do not want intermissions anymore so they can turn around and say no to the studios.

As for filming people should have no doubts that DH wouldn’t be filmed all at once. They won’t say do Part 1 in 2009 and then film Part 2 in 2010. It’s not a sequel it’s one story that would be split into two at the theatres.

With regards to the comments about the actors contracts. The actors have signed on for the DH film. Whether it is split in two doesn’t come into it. Uma Thurman signed on and got paid for Kill Bill. The studio decided to split the film rather than make major cuts that would ruin the storyline. She wouldn’t have been paid twice.

There is a possibility that they could do reshoots which then WB would have to of course pay the actors for there time.

Also, Peter Jackson won’t do it as he would have to move to England. He makes his films in NZ so he can be with his family. So cross him off your lists cause it won’t happen.

Avatar Image says:

I’ve heard this 2-part rumour before… I believe they contemplate it every once in a while, but I heard about this one a couple of months ago. They’re genuinely contemplating it this time.

Avatar Image says:

I would like to have Deathly Hallows in two parts because it would just drag out the whole Potter experience and we’d have more detail but I don’t think it’s necessary. If they were able to fit Goblet and Phoenix in one movie each, I don’t see why they can’t do it with Hallows. This seems like it’s just a strategy for Warner Bros. to make more money.

I love Speilberg and I wouldn’t mind if he directed DH. All that the Potter movies need is a really energetic, talented person with a respect for the books to direct.

Avatar Image says:

Spielberg doesn’t have respect for the books. That’s why Rowling wanted him booted off the first film. He wanted American actors and he wanted to put three books in one film…..it’s all about him and no one else.

Avatar Image says:

I would prefer one movie with an intermission…NO Spielberg…also, if WB isn’t trying to cash in then let the theatres issue two tickets (st the single feature price) at the initial purchase.

Think of all the great movies realeased in the 50’s and 60’s with intermissions; King of Kings; Ben Hur; Spartacus; Ten Commandments!!!

One movie!! One price!! Intermission!!

Avatar Image says:

If you cut out most of the “camping trip” you can fit it all in one film. LOTR was able to do it and I don’t mind if the film is over 3 hours either.

Avatar Image says:

It would be a better idea to just make the last film longer with an interval at the halfway point. I can’t see a really good point in the novel where people would want to see the next part after 6 months or so…. it runs the risk of being too long and padded out. Just make a longer film with a break for the kids (maybe a 2 and 3/4 hour film or something. But not two films.

And Guillermo to direct, please God!!

Avatar Image says:

You are not going to get a 4 hour film people. It shouldn’t be longer than three hours, and even then they will have to make it engaging enough for me stay with it.

Avatar Image says:

it would be deathly hallows part 1 and part 2, they won’t make up a new name just because they split the movie in 2… but i agree with what many others are saying… just make one really long film. i’d rather sit 3 or 4 hours through than see the first half of the film once and go back and see the second half another time… plus when it was released, if it was on two dvds, that would interrupt the flow of the movie… i think 1 film is better. of course, a 2 part movie would rack in a hell of a lot more money.. which sucks for us. there’s 7 books, let’s have 7 films, not 8.

Avatar Image says:

I’m glad they are not trying to fit DH into two and a half hours. I’m not sure if it would be better to have two separate movies or a long one with an intermission. On the one hand, having a huge gap between part one and part two might kill the buildup to the final battle. I think it’s important that the mood of the book is preserved, and that might be hard if it is split in that way. Then again, a lot of people might not be willing to sit through a really long movie with an intermission, though many would. I’ll see it either way; I’m just glad it will be longer, and who knows, maybe they can make it work…

I really hope they choose a good director. David Yates and Alfonso Cuaron both did well before, so maybe one of them will be chosen. The final movie just needs to be spectacular.

Avatar Image says:

Yeah!!!My wish will come true :)))))) Harry Potter in two parts.I can’t believe this , I actually have no comment for this one , because I am very happy at the moment.

Avatar Image says:

what a shame that this rush of sense hasn’t occurred for some of the earlier films. Let’s face it so much of the intrinsic story line has been left out that the movies resemble a visual shorthand. They may in my opinion almost be viewed as “stand alones”.

It points up how fortunate we are to have seen the sympathetic treatment given to “Lord of the Rings” by Peter Jackson and team. It, together with a film version of “Dune” (can’t remember the director) and “Bladerunner” stand out as honest attempts to capture in good cinematographic style the underlying essence.

Avatar Image says:

but that wouldn’t be one movie but on two cds? aND WITH THAT LONGER??? OR IT WILL BE TWO SEPARATE MOVIES????OH MY GOD I WAS SO HAPPY :( I WILL SEE THE MOVIE/S WHATEVER THEY WILL BE I DON’T CARE BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF THERE IS ONE MOVIE THAT LAST 5/6 HOURS- THAT WOULD BE GREAT :)

Avatar Image says:

having a 2 part movie would be great I think! I loved OOTP but they left out alot of good things too if it would have been longer it would have been better! As long as they don’t cut out any important things from DH I’m all for it a 2 part movie would be even better!

Avatar Image says:

One word: INTERMISSION.

I don’t think they should make it into TWO different movies….... That would totally break the continuity and fluidity of the film(s) and I don’t think it’d do any justice to the book.

Someone mentioned earlier (sorry, forgot who) but they said that they’d rather have one longer film that is REALLY GOOD, rather than two that could potentially be choppy and be just simply good. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows needs to go out with a BANG. Not two bangs. That just wouldn’t be right.

If WB is looking for Oscar nods, they should be looking to making a singular BRILLIANT film; not two good films. It would just ruin it! :(

Although, I will admit that I’d rather have two films than have one short film that doesn’t do the book justice. DO THE BOOK JUSTICE; and I’d like to see it done justice in one long film, with intermission. It’d be a great idea for the theaters because they’d be able to get better snack/drink purchases during intermission ha ha.

Avatar Image says:

RE my last post. And if you want to see a shining example of how bad Speilberg would be to take HP over at this point, all one has to do is watch AI, which he finished when Stanley Kubrick died. It goes from being an intense surreal thriller to a happily ever after with Aliens story. No thanks.

Avatar Image says:

Everyone out there complaining because they dont want to wait in between releases needs to think about it better. If they made it into two movies, they could include twice as much, and it would mean the Harry Potter fandom would continue another year later. Who cares if they only did it to make more money. The movie wouldnt be rushed like the others have been and it wouldbe so much more in deepth.

Avatar Image says:

im not for it, but in not against it. it would be good to have it in two movies…but then again, It is a seven part series, and I also dont wanna wait a year and a half for it…..and i dont want them to have it like…..”TO BE CONTINUED…” because it would make it so less, HP-ish. ahh It would be so weird to have an HP movie that wasnt one year long. I just think they should have just one movie.

Avatar Image says:

Yay! I’m all for this for two reasons:

1. To do it justice in one part the film would have to be 3.5 hours long thereabouts. People won’t see it. I want it to do well in general, not just be great for Potter fans.

2. This means the Potter films won’t be over until at least six months later. Two premieres? Two midnight screenings? Two sets of build-up and excitement in the fandom. Why would you want it to end? I know I don’t.

As for directors, I love every choice mentioned except for Chris Columbus. I’d trust Columbus with the canon side of things, but I would predict a poor film with him. Cuaron I trust least with the canon, but most with the style. Del Toro I also trust with the style, but I’ve no idea what might be unleashed in terms of canon. Yates… perfectly fine, but personally I think the thing that made OotP amazing most of all was the new scriptwriter rather than Yates. Spielberg is amazing, but I always worry big names will make it about them and make questionable decisions. Potentially Spielberg would be the best bet for a largest-ticket-sales award-winning Potter film, but he can be hit and miss sometimes. Still, all of the above would be on my shortlist.

And Peter Jackson xD

Avatar Image says:

I wonder what Jo thinks about all this. I don’t think she’d want an 8-part series of movies… I think they have taken out so many subplots from previous movies that the story to cover will be a little less and DH could definitely be done as a 3 to 3 and 1/2 hour movie. The series, and we, the fans, deserve a great, long movie and a near-exact adaptation from the book as the grand finale for this awesome series.

Avatar Image says:

This is exactly what they did with Pirates of the Caribbean. They could have condensed the second and third and made one movie, but they wanted more money. I honestly don’t have an opinion, because regardless of what they choose, the movie is going to be bloody brilliant. UNLESS They pick Cuaron. He ruined the third movie because he was so keen on trying to be artistic.

Avatar Image says:

Four words…DON’T SPLIT IT UP!!!!!!! Absoloutely not!!! I don’t care if the it ends up being a four hour movie, just don’t split it up. WB owes it to the fans to make a long, detailed HP movie, subplots and all. I do agree with David though, Peter Jackson would probably do very well directing DH.

Avatar Image says:

I agree with you Carolina, the third movie was the worst.

Avatar Image says:

I personally think that the only way the film can somehow bring justice to the other films is by being two parts. If you examine the difference between the seventh book and the other books, you’ll notice that the seventh has much more plot; the seventh doesn’t stray away from Harry’s journey very often. Its very easy to condense the 4th, 5th, and 6th movies because they turn out to be mostly unimportant subplots. Ideallly the film should be about 4 hours with an intermission, although the idea of higher ticket sales might deter some audiences. The best way that WB can recoup their larger investment without higher ticket prices is to release it in two arts.

Avatar Image says:

I personally think that the only way the film can somehow bring justice to the other films is by being two parts. If you examine the difference between the seventh book and the other books, you’ll notice that the seventh has much more plot; the seventh doesn’t stray away from Harry’s journey very often. Its very easy to condense the 4th, 5th, and 6th movies because they turn out to be mostly unimportant subplots. Ideallly the film should be about 4 hours with an intermission, although the idea of higher ticket sales might deter some audiences. The best way that WB can recoup their larger investment without higher ticket prices is to release it in two parts.

Avatar Image says:

Noooo. Not Steven Spielburg!!!! He will add Muppets to the movie! No offence to the man, but he tends to add a saccharine gloss to most movies he makes and this is not in the spirit of the essential “Britishness” of these movies.

Avatar Image says:

please 2 parts please 2 parts plllllleaaaase 2 parts

Avatar Image says:

I have to say I am so dubious about this. I just think it’s overkill to try and squeak another movie out of this. I think it would totally ruin the continuity and make the ending much less meaningful if it’s split in two. I cannot think of a place right off the top of my head where they could stop it where it would feel right, as the end of the school year does for the other movies. Just when people really get into the story, the movie will end, and they’ll have to wait (months I imagine) to see the rest of it. BAD, BAD IDEA. Harry Potter has always been a 7-parter, and that shouldn’t be messed with.

As for Spielberg, again, that just doesn’t sound “right” to me. I don’t know that JKR would “OK” that. I’d be fine if Yates stayed on or if Columbus came back, because they showed the utmost respect for sticking to the books. But please no Cuaron or del Toro. I haven’t had time to read very many comments yet, but I’ve already noted several posters who say that they want two movies so EVERYTHING can be included, and yet want Cuaron or del Toro direct it. Ummm, I think Cuaron and del Toro (Mr. “on my terms”) have made it clear that they don’t think the books translate well to the screen and want major changes. People claim all the time that PoA is their favorite because it deviates from the book, and when they want the book, they’ll go read it. You will get a very changed story with one of those directors, not a two-parter that includes everything from the book. I’m just crossing my fingers this is all rumor, as it was when there were whispers of splitting GoF.

Avatar Image says:

and for all that is oly in this world make it david yates again

Avatar Image says:

Woah! I’m all for it! More Harry potter than we expected!!! Yahoo!

Avatar Image says:

Ideally we would have Cuaron and Del Toro working together to create a 4hr+ movie split into two halves. Or just Cuaron alone. It would be great if this happened because finally they could go ALL OUT with both the story and the big effects sequences.

Reading DH, especially the last few chapters, I thought there’s absolutely no way they can do this justice in the movie because there’s not enough time. That whole last section from smashing out of Gringotts to the death of Voldemort would easily take a whole hour and more of movie time. So that leaves around 90min to deal with everything else. Not enough time at all. 2 movies would rule.

Avatar Image says:

People are being delusional. There will NOT be a 4 hour movie, or a movie with an intermission. It just wont happen. Sorry. Your choice is either 2 movies or a 3 hour movie. Thats realistically the only think I see WB willing to do. Take your pick.

Avatar Image says:

this would be a good idea, however I hope i wouldn’t have to wait another 18 months for the second part to come out. This would be a very good financial move for the movies allowing it to be extended even further. All that I know is this last movie has got to be the best allowing everything to be wrapped up. I have faith that WB will allow this to happen.

Avatar Image says:

I pick two films!!! I’d see them both multiple times! I don’t care how long I have to wait for the second half, as long as both films do justice to the tale, which is the point of them spliting the book in the first place. YAYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Isn’t anyone else thinking “Peter Jackson”? He is a brilliant director! Look at the fantastic job he did with LOTR.

Avatar Image says:

PLEASE, NOT Peter Jackson. I was entrenched in LOTR when the films were coming out, and frankly, PJ could have done a lot better. The Two Towers was a total train wreck. No, I want Guillermo del Toro or Alfonso Cuaron.

Avatar Image says:

I’m so shocked at this news! I really hope Spielberg has nothing to do with this film! how can they make a two part film! Isit going to becalled DH part2 that doesn’t sound to great… Surely they could make the film at least 3hours like others such as lord of the rings and many others..glad this is a rumour!

Avatar Image says:

It won’t be called DH Part 2, it will have a good subtitle, I’m sure. Same with the first part. Maybe JKR will come up with a subtitle for each half that makes sense for each respective film. Like the second one could be called Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: The Elder Wand, or something like that. I think two films is definitely the way to go! But I say NO to Steven Spielberg.

Avatar Image says:

I say NO to both!! I would love a LONG movie, but not split in two please!!! Oh and please don’t even think of Spielberg, he’s a great director, but not for HP.

Avatar Image says:

Two Towers was hardly a train wreck. Pacing-wise it was better than Fellowship, and PJ did an amazing job getting a good beginning and end on a book that doesn’t have much of either. (Because LotR was supposed to be one long book in Tolkien’s eyes.) The ending of Two Towers is one of my favourite moments; I found it very moving and powerful.

Avatar Image says:

TWO PARTS WOULD BE BRILLIANT!

Avatar Image says:

Sorry, I’d go for anyone BUT Cuaron. If it is released in two parts, hopefully there won’t be a long wait inbetween releases.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t want it to be in two parts!! I don’t care if I have to be in the cinema for 5 hours, but I want it to be all in one!! As for the directors, Cuaron did a good job in the third film and i really liked Chris Columbus in the first and second… at least he followed more the books than the others. Please!! Not Spielberg!!!

Avatar Image says:

Oh gosh, no! Please don’t ask me to sit through HARRY POTTER AND THE CAMPING TRIP and then HARRY POTTER AND THE CRAMMED RESOLUTION.

Avatar Image says:

I would be happy with the two parts. Being the last movie of the series, I(and I think all of us here) really want it to be done real well. As someone said earlier, I want the movie version of the series to “go out with a bang”.

I hope it is not Cuaron. It wasn’t too bad but I was not too happy the way he did Prisoner of Azkaban. I would love to see Spielberg do the movie though!

Avatar Image says:

No No No two parts!!!!!

I’m not trying to sound mean or anything, but the people who are all “yay more HP if there’s two movies!” are being a bit selfish…. I mean it in the sense that it is ONE book so it should be ONE movie, you know?!

“HARRY POTTER AND THE CAMPING TRIP and then HARRY POTTER AND THE CRAMMED RESOLUTION.”

LOL!

But I agree! It’ll compromise the integrity of the ending and it’ll TOTALLY kill the mood if it’s cut off at the halfway mark! An hour and a half movie spends an hour and fifteen minutes building up to the last fifteen… what’ll happen if the second movie is just that last fifteen? There’s no build-up because it’s already been shown in the first movie! You can’t replicate that build-up in a shoddy catch-up slide show, either.

One book. One movie.

WB, start a trend and be the first modern film with an intermission.

Avatar Image says:

I think two parts would be great. The interesting question is where to break it. While it is a little close to the end, I think the rescue from the Malfoy’s would be the best spot. End the first movie with the fight and the disapparation and start the last one at the same spot. A good cliff hanger for those who haven’t read the books.

I think they could get the second movie out 4-6 months after the first one.

Avatar Image says:

I do not like the idea of a 2 part Deathly Hallows movie. it’s ONE book. it should be ONE movie…Order of the Phoenix was the longest book and deathly hallows is about the same lenght as Half-blood Prince. If they make it a 2 part movie it’s only for financial reasons regardless of what they say. I like the idea of Steven Speilberg directing. I’m not sure what ppl mean when they say “what he was going to do to the first movie” can someone enlighten me?

Avatar Image says:

i’m all for a two-part film! nothing should be left out! and i would love for DAVID YATES to direct it. he did a fantastic job with OotP and really understands how important the movies are in relation to the books!

Avatar Image says:

come on, people! They did this exact same rumor for Goblet of Fire, and that turned out to be crap. Now, with DH approaching, they thought, “hey, let’s through this old rumor out there again and see if it catches.” Honestly, guys.

And a two part DH—please. What a way to kill the franchize. And they’re not considering Steven Spielberg because Jo met with him on movie one and didn’t like him. This is just a crap article, guys. The media don’t know what they are talking about.

Avatar Image says:

It wasn’t a crap rumor Heidi. They actually WERE going to make GOF into two movies but changed their mind later on, due in part to Alfonso Cuaron saying he thought it would be a horrible mistake.

Avatar Image says:

alfonso cuaron would be fantastic as far as the movies go number three was the best i love it he did an awesome job!!!! hope it’ll be him again!

Avatar Image says:

Hmm.. A 2 part movie could work, if done properly.

I’d still want Chris Columbus back more than anyone though.

Avatar Image says:

After reading DH, I actually thought (wished) that they could make two movies out of the book it because I just couldn’t imagine how they could fit the book into one 2+ hour (or even 3 hour) movie, without sacrificing the beauty of the book and how well everything tied back to stuff throughout the series in the resolution of DH. At the time, I was thinking that there was no way TPTB could in fact do two movies, so I have to say that I am absolutely thrilled about this rumor.

On the Spielberg rumor, I’m not so sure. Although he is undoutedly a great director and could really rock the epic aspect of DH, I really enjoyed Yates’ take on OotP and especially the way he got to the emotional core of the characters. I have the same view with regard to rumors of Cuaron or Del Toro coming in to helm HP. I loved, loved POA as a stand-alone movie but abhor it as an adaptation of the book, because the characterizations of the main trio got all messed up. As for Del Toro, he can really pull out some great ones (visually and actionwise) out of his hat but he’s also slipped badly in some movies. At the end of the day though, I really admired how Yates was able to pull better performances out of the kids in the OotP and I think I’d rather have the emotional core of DH ring true in the movie than have all the super awesome visuals, action, epic tone, etc. you would get from a Cuaron/Del Toro/Spielberg film. Hopefully, Yates improves his epic-making skills after having director HBP. He’s not the perfect director for the series by any stretch but I really have to admire what he’s done with the quality of the kids’ acting.

I guess this is my way of saying “bring on the two-parter” but please stick with a director who loves the books as much as the fans do.

Avatar Image says:

Woop 2 parts!!! I knew it, if they put it in one long 4 hour movie how do people know that they r gunna do it right. They may leave important stuff out, but if they do it in 2 films then its a bonus cause they’ll put in everything (hopefully). It’s not like us harry potter fans havnt waited. I think its better if u wait then u wont get disapointed 2 quickly : )

Avatar Image says:

Not Spielberg,his last movies are all around special effects and little plot. WB should have done 2 movies since book 4,now its just ridiculous to do that just for DH. What WB should do is not to cut so much and make the movies a bit longer,30 minutes.And put some decent extras on the dvds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

It wasn’t a crap rumor Heidi. They actually WERE going to make GOF into two movies but changed their mind later on, due in part to Alfonso Cuaron saying he thought it would be a horrible mistake.

It wasnt Alfonso Cuaron doing,it was Mike Leigh who said he could include all in 1 movie ( and destroyed the movie for fans,thanks so much!).

Avatar Image says:

I really don’t think this is going to happen. There were similar rumours for previous Potter films, and they weren’t made into 2-parters. They’ll just cut out alot of stuff, as they have done before, and make it into one movie. I’m not a Speilberg fan, so I hope he does NOT direct it.

Avatar Image says:

first. no to Spielberg. For God’s sake, he tried to make an ANIMATED harry potter. He said the plots are too silly to become live action and he wanted Haley Joel Osment to voice harry potter. That’s just plain dumb.

He’s a good director but I would rather have Guillermo Del Toro or Alfonso Cuaron.

I agree to have the film in two parts coz when i read the book, the have all this journey running from the death eater, i was thinking how did they going to show this? in a montage again like in Order of Phoenix.

I’m an aspiring filmmaker so i know they will cut all the journey, the radio, maybe even cut pool thing with ron if they only makes one movie. Coz i think the entire third act (battle with voldemort) would need at least one hour of the time. So that leaves 1and a half hour for the rest of the story?

And they won’t make 4 hours movie either coz they learn a lesson from a screening of Grindhouse. Grindhouse didn’t make a lot of money because people can’t stand sitting for 4 hours straight.

So count me in for two parts of harry potter

Avatar Image says:

they didn’t make GOF two parts because alfonso feels that there’s not enough material to support two films and I agree with him. I didn’t see where they would cut off the film.

But with deathly hallow, it’s different. There’s parts of the books that feels like that’s the end of a movie. Like the burial of Dobby. The escape from the prison would be interesting enough to be the third act of the movie and would be satisfying.

And they can start the next movie with Harry on the journey with Hermione and ron because they don’t want anybody to be hurt anymore.

Avatar Image says:

I would love to have two 3 hr. movies. And Spielberg or Peter jackson would be great. It would take less than half the time to get the footage for the second part because the cast, crew and sets are in place to just keep on with it. And Dan wouldn’t have to where some cheesy wig like he did in GOF because the project would be continuous. A person’s hairline shouldn’t change two inches from scene to scene. Ever. The profit margin would skyrocket as well. The problem is that they are so far off from the books already that they could be more adherent to DH text but have retain continuity with the deviations already made in prior fraudulent movie productions. And yes it is about the money for WB. They could have made just as much money with 3 hr. movies before since the footage was shot but edited out. They just want to extract a bit more gold from the mine.

Avatar Image says:

I think the two-parter is a good idea. There’s simply too much Dumbledore backstory to explore. It could be shot as one film but released a year apart to accommodate the special effects work. And the second part could be called “HP and the Elder Wand” which is a much more relevant title, and by that point in the plot it wouldn’t be a spoiler.

Avatar Image says:

Everyone’s so keen to say who should direct. I say let David Yates do it (if he still wants to). The Harry Potter films have more in common with TV series than a single film. Film directors get far too caught up in their one movie and forget it’s just one part of a longer story. And no to John Williams. Please no. He is an excellent composer, but he did not put his best efforts into the first two films. Keep it as Nicholas Hooper, just so the last films have continuing themes in them other than “Hedwig’s Theme”.

Avatar Image says:

John Williams must come back for the final film, he’s the only one who can do this film justice, especially after the abomination that Patrick Doyle left on the series, at least Nick Hooper was a vast improvement. A Spielberg directed finale would be something, the best action director would make the best action of the series thrilling and unforgetable.

Avatar Image says:

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out the “every single thing in this book is important…How can they possibly cut out anything?!” comments. I think that’s just the fandom-craze talking. There is no need for two separate films simply because there is not enough material to fill two 2 1/2 hour films. Sure, maybe if the filmmakers translate every scene.

But how important is the camping, “A Place to Hide”, the wedding, “The Ghoul in Pajamas”, Shell Cottage, Ravenclaw Tower, “The Goblin’s Revenge”? Not terribly crucial. A great deal of the fragmented Dumbledore history could be melded together. Much of the first 2/3 of the book is just discussing what should be done. If the filmmakers cut the some of the planning and cut straight to the actual “doing” of the plans, a great deal of unnecessary time could be saved.

Avatar Image says:

This sounds like the logical way to go. It would be awesome if Guillermo Del Toro did the final films, can you imagine 4plus hours of beautiful Del Toro shot Potter. It would be awesome and so easy to do You end the first half right after the whole snake head affair at Godrics Hollow. That would be a killer movie ending. If they did it like Pirates or the Matrix with only a month or two between movies it would be awesome. I’m excited now I just hope Guillermo Del Toro gets hired as director forget Spielberg, sure JAWS was great but we won’t wonder and beauty and surreal realism you get that with Del Toro not Spielberg.

Avatar Image says:

Well, I’ll believe it when I see it, but they should have done that for the OOTP movie too, I hope they do do it, it will be so much better. I don’t see how they can give it justice if they don’t, there is too much that will have to be left out to fit 3 hours.

Avatar Image says:

Personally I think the two penultimate horcruxes need heavy revision. The locket was hidden in such a cool place in book 6, it was like travelling into Voldemort’s mind. But hiding it in Gringotts? (The logic being that as a child he envied not having an account… The irony is his horcrux is hidden in someone else’s account. That’s just sad) These two could be re-written to make a much stronger plot, and two horcruxes that delve further into Voldemort’s psyche, Harry’s link to him and the people that were killed to make them. It really needs some detective work to be there! (As a side note, why didn’t Harry go to Durmstrang to investigate the Deathly Hallows symbol? I mean, it gets him away from the Ministry and it is the logical next step. Instead he sits around in a tent for months).

Avatar Image says:

There was less deviation from the book in the first movie than any other. Check it out on the Wikipedia. I think the first movie felt more like the book also. Harry’s anger in OOTP was a bit out there in the movie for the first half. In the book as in all the books( and with all teengers going through a pschotic break) Harry snaps out of it occasionally with Ron and Hermione. Even people in straight jackets have moments of clarity. That’s supposed to be the point of The Trio. A support system that works. They have their outs but they bring each other back from the brink. If we have to have a previous director, let’s have Columbus. He would adapt to the character development shown in the books. Other directors think dark for the sake of dark means critical acclaim. Look what’s happened with Dumbledore. He is not the Dumbledore of the books and it is just sad.

Avatar Image says:

I for one am all for a two part deathly hallows and speileberg I think would be reigned in if he tried to deviate to far from the book, look the last two could’ve been a ton better had they not cut as much, I mean in half-blood prince we are having quidditch come back. and for as great as return of the king was it was 30 minutes to long, and if u tried to cram deathly hallows into maybe a 3 or 4 hr movie it might seem to long, but spread out the right way it could work

Avatar Image says:

You know, fandom has really changed. I remember in 2003 and 2004 everyone was upset because GoF wasn’t split into 2 movies.

Oh fandom. You always keep me on my toes.

Avatar Image says:

That would be amazing if it was in two parts, and I think Spielberg would do great. Outr of all the rumoured directors I think him, David Yates, Chris Columbus, and Guillermo Del Toro would be the best, especially Chris Columbus. Cause while Alfonso Cuaron made a good movie it wasn’t too great in staying faithful to the book.

Avatar Image says:

JoJo. Harry thought he had already learned anything he could have learned about the Durmstrang connection until he had the vision of Voldemort questioning Grindelwald. Then it was too dangerous and he had found out what he needed to soon enough and had to persue the search of the horcri.

Avatar Image says:

THis would be great they could go into so much depth about everything. It would be nice to have the first movie stop after the wedding.

Avatar Image says:

TIM BURTON! His sets are amazing! Just Imagine what he could do with the film. The only downside to him would be that the action may be a little weak. But then again, That’s not what Harry Potter is really about.

Avatar Image says:

hmm.

as long as theyre release d around the same time

coz otherwise therell be this HUGE cliffhanger and we’llk have to wait more. maybe,. :S

Avatar Image says:

BTW. The time in the woods is not throw away material. Several major plot points take place there. Not the least is the change dynamics within the trio. Each character’s development and the need for it is heralded there. If not for the change in mindset each one undergoes they don’t get the job done. There each one finds the committment to the role they have to play and the resolve to help the others in their roles. By that time they know each other so well that they recognize the changes and the realization of the other’s place within the quest is known without a word being said.

Avatar Image says:

Many have commented that Columbus would be a good choice to direct DH. I realize that this is because he directed the first two films to be verbatim visual representations of the books. Keep in mind these two books are the shortest of the series yet are just as long as the most recent installments. The plots are also more simplistic and less action-packed. If you examine the previous work of Columbus you will certainly notice that he has never directed anything close to what DH should be and frankly has very little critical credibility. Mrs. Doubtfire and Stepmom are nice movies, but they are not even in the same league as Harry Potter. I guess what I’m trying to say is that the first two films were successful adaptations because they did not take any risks and were creatively flat. A successful adaptation of DH demands creativity, beauty, and darkness that I believe Columbus is not capable of capturing on film. Columbus, in other words, should not direct the final film or two films.

Avatar Image says:

If creatively flat means not adding superfluous details ( shrunken heads) and leaving out canon,I’ll take that. Sign me up. I don’t think the books are creatively flat. I can’t wait until the BBC gets around to making the 21 part mini-series in a true to the books fashion. Roots and Winds of War ratings records would seem like late night broadcast rerun numbers by comparison. The producers would be able to print their own currency after the DVDs came out.

Avatar Image says:

I think the movie would be great in two halves! They wouldnt miss out all the little bits like they usually do (why didn’t they make Ron & Hermione Prefect in number 5?)—The wait between the two halves would kill me, but it would be way worth it when we got there!

Avatar Image says:

Sometimes superfluous details can be nice. Rowling herself said she liked the shrunken head and eventually even included them in the later books. Besides, it is on screen for less than three minutes and does not interfere with the storytelling whatsoever. If anything, it just is a slightly annoying magnification of the whackiness that is the Knight Bus. It is not a personal insult to all HP fans delivered directly from Cuaron himself.

I know it may be hard to believe, but Columbus also left out canon and manipulated canon. I believe James Potter was a Chaser not a Seeker, there was a whole potions task left out of the final sequence of SS, nearly the whole first chapter of SS was cut, we never saw Norbert released to Charlie, and there are many other omissions. All of the filmakers have to make cuts. The directors who are creative, however, have the ability to make up for those cuts by choosing a certain style, theme, or mood to emphasize.

By the way, I loved the first two films and I think was the perfect man to direct them. He was a worthy steward. He also knew when his time was up.

Avatar Image says:

I’m not saying that I was not aware of the omissions that Columbus made but they were minimal by comparison.The one’s Christine mention are the most glaring examples. And she may be right about Columbus never having tackled this type of effort before. I just think he would rise to the occasion and deliver a product, given this hypothetical additional time, that the book fandom would appreciate more. Also JKR would like the shrunken heads because she is has the Brit appreciation for irreverent humor and doesn’t take herself as seriously as some of us Potterphiles. Even we understand that a literal representation of the text would be impossible,hence the need to create the subtext thematic imagery. As far as that reality has been demonstrated I think they all have compensated as well as WB mandated time constraints would allow. That doesn’t mean I’m placated by Jo’s support of the films. She’s a team player, has a stake,and would not dis the films. But then again I am a self -admitted Potter extremist.

Avatar Image says:

WHATTTTTTTTT!!! OMG Does this mean that they will NOT miss alot out of the book??? Kkooll, but the bad thing is we will have to wait!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

I think that IF the film were put into two different movies, there wouldn’t be an OUTSTANDING amount of time between the two, if the studios choose so because, if the studios were smart about it, they would film the two films simultaneously so that principle photography would be done in about a year or so, instead of drawing it out and having to call people back again for the last installment. So, from there, it all depends on how they’d wish to stage the releases and how much longer it may or may not take to do the VE on the Final Battle and everything else.

Avatar Image says:

To add to my point, I think it would actually be really interesting if they were to do that: film it all at once and then release the films within three or four weeks of each other. They’d make a killing at the box office. And the two Harry Potters would be tops at the box offices for WEEKS.

And then, for people who are willing to do it; offer it up as a marathon of sorts in IMAX theatres or something: show both of them at once with an intermission between the two films.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t care if they do it in two parts as long as we don’t have to wait a year or longer till the second half comes out. If lets them put most of the details that are in the book then i’m all for it. I just hope they don’t get Spielberg to be the director. He wanted to direct the first movie but J.K. Rowling wouldn’t let him because he was going to make it an animated and use Haley Joel Osmen as the voice of Harry. So let hope they don’t choose Spielberg.

Avatar Image says:

Ugh. Please, no. The book doesn’t break organically into two halves. And unless Spielberg has read all the books since he made his infamous proposal however many years ago, he would be entirely unsuitable for this project.

Avatar Image says:

I would rather the final film be released as a three-to-four hour single film, but I choose to be optimistic with whatever the-powers-that-be decide. If it is released as two films, my vote for the titles would be HP and the Deathly Hallows and HP and the Battle of Hogwarts. I think an ideal place to end the first half is at Shell Cottage following Dobby’s death; this is when Harry chooses Horcruxes over Hallows and is a turning point and a calm before the storm, so to type. There were supposed to be seven Horcruxes and there turned out to be eight…look how well that turned out for Harry. Surely turning a seven-part into an eight-part film franchise can’t be that bad either!

Avatar Image says:

Best bets are that they aren’t going to do it, but they are seriously considering it I think.

Avatar Image says:

I wouldn’t mind an extra long movie with an intermission.

Avatar Image says:

They had no qualms in cutting whole storylines from the other films, and unless both halves of the seventh were released to coincide with each other, then I don’t see the point. But why would you bother, unless it’s for the money? P.S. Del Toro all the way!!! The man can rock dark fantasy, Pan’s Labyrinth is all the proof you need of that. And while we’re at it, give him The Hobbit if New Line still hates Peter Jackson. gulp Hope this all gets sorted out for the best.

Avatar Image says:

actually, Peter Jackson and New Line have settled their differences. Peter Jackson will produce 2 movies. One based on the Hobbit, and the other perhaps a bridge movie between the Hobbit and The lord of the Rings.

As for him directing these 2 movies, he’s not sure yet.

Avatar Image says:

sorry guys but what did speilberg say he wanted to do with the first movie? all i heard is that he didnt want to ruin such a perfect and loved world with his vision and he declined for the first… and as for a two part movie… i think they should do like they did for the return of the king at the movies, and make an extended version on DVD… only one part

Avatar Image says:

I’m not too keen on Spielberg either. I think he was great back in his day, but I’m not too thrilled with his creative vision these days. I’ll be in the minority and root for Chris Columbus’ return.

I doubt it’ll be two movies, but just for fun, where would they end the first part? I’d think in Xenophilius’ tower, with the line “Are you referring to the sign of the Deathly Hallows?” It’s not as powerful an ending as they could do, though. Maybe after Ron runs out on Harry and Hermione, though that might be a bit too early in the story. How about after Ron comes back, and the locket is on the stone, Ron has the Sword of Gryffindor…he raises the sword, brings it down on the locket, BOOM flash of light KA-CHOW and credits roll! Total cliff-hanger.

Just a few thoughts.

Avatar Image says:

dont make it a 2 part film…its ok for us if theyll just make it a 5hrs film or so….

Avatar Image says:

I think a good place to split it would be when Ron comes back- the end of chapter 19 “The Silver Doe”. Seeing as this is just over half way.

Avatar Image says:

OMG!! They can’t make it 2 part… I’VE WAITED THIS LONG JUST FOR THE 5TH I’M NOT WAITING ANY LONGER FOR THE 7TH! Plus where would they end it? If it was the part where a certain elf died, everyone would be crying in he end (Well I would) It just wouldn’t work. There are heaps of places they could end it but a lot of people would be confused. MAKE IT 3, 4, 5, 6 HOURS I DON’T CARE! BUT NO 2 PARTS! I’ll protest for it if i have to… BTW, If they do plan on making it 2 parts, LETS PROTEST!

Avatar Image says:

KEEP SPIELBERG AWAY FROM HARRY POTTER! I’m really unhappy about this and I hope this is only a rumor.

Avatar Image says:

WHAT? NO! NO! NO, NO, NO! ABSOLUTELY NOT! I WILL NOT ACCEPT THIS! I DON’T CARE IF THEY CUT OFF HALF THE PLOT, BUT I’M NOT WAITING FOR 2 RELEASES! UP 2 NOW THEY’VE DONE 1 RELEASE SO THEY ABSOLUTELY CAN’T DO 2 IT FOR DH!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

I sure hope they make it a “two-parter”. I’ve been saying since the 3rd movie that WB needed to do this because there is not enough time in the movies to do the books justice. The first two movies were very good at reflecting the nuances in the books. Then the books became too long to allow the movies to do them right. I sent Scholastic and WB a letter saying this but to no avail. Maybe now it will happen!!

Avatar Image says:

Can I put in a request now to bring back screenwriter Michael Goldenberg for the final installment/installments. I think he did the best job yet on transposing book story to film story

Avatar Image says:

How about 4 hours with an Intermission

Avatar Image says:

hmm not sure I agree with spielberg either. I’m not sure that he can fall in line with the increasingly darker tone of the movies…and I think he will really miss the boat as far as the tone that the past directors have conveyed so well. I think yates really has a good feel for the various emotional battles the characters are experiencing…I wouldn’t mind him again.

I don’t know about a 2 part movie…we have all waited so long. I would prefer a longer movie. hmm. not sure…jury is out on that one…

Avatar Image says:

While I have always been a huge Spielberg fan, I also don’t think he should do this. Nor do I think he will do this. He already has a very full schedule for the next few years anyway. If he was going to do HP, he would have jumped on it in the beginning.

However, I’m surprised that a lot of the fans writing in this thread don’t want to see a 2 part finale to the series. It would give the whole series the proper ending that it deserves. All the details that people complained were left out of EVERY HP film since the beginning could be left in. With a 5hr total running time, it will be epic.

Remember – when it’s over – ITS OVER! There will be no more HP to go through. It will be 20 years or so before the next incarnation of Harry Potter incarnation is brought to our screens, so if they want to give us more, I’m totally for that.

The chances are good that this would be a Summer release for a first half, and a Christmas release for the second half. Yeah, it might mean more money for WB and everone involved, but it also means we get what we’ve been asking for all along – a truly faithful adaptation of a Harry Potter book.

I say bring back Cauron and let him go crazy.

Avatar Image says:

I was just looking at the tv this morning.. .they are making quite a big deal out of this. anyone else noticing a lot of talk about this? say what you want about rumors….there is always a grain of truth about each one. Very interesting…..

Avatar Image says:

Im all for the long ending to a wonderful series. Really this whole thing must go out with a BANG

I think the great thing is that WB is finally realizing that they must treat this last book and movie with the utmost respect and time they so desperately deserve. The fans must be heard :)

Avatar Image says:

I feel that DH needs either two movies or one really long one to do the story justice. Even with sub plots having been cut from previous movies this book has a massive amount of action and ties up so many story lines it could be butchered if handled wrongly. I too feel that Spielberg would be the wrong choice – he generally makes the story his rather that stick to the true writing, much like Disney studios has changed fairy tales. There are millions of people that only know the Disney version of classic books. Far too many people have read and reread Harry Potter to be satisfied with that kind of movie.

Avatar Image says:

Well! If they’re going for the “Oskar Gold” (anyone watch American Dad last night) the movie will have to be in black&white, Harry will have to have some sort of disability, and be hiding from nazis.

Well they have two elements down pretty well.

Seriously? Two movies? Has that worked well in the past? No! They should do what they really should’ve started doing with movie 4. Give it the LOTR treatment. Release a meaty 2&1/2 to 3hr theatrical release with a super extended dvd release.

I just don’t think Deathly Hallows has the pacing for two movies.

Avatar Image says:

I really thought this rumour would be shot down by WB by now, but maybe they are really considering it? It is 3:30 in the afternoon in the UK, and no word yet. No official announcement here in the US either. I can’t believe this could really be true.

Avatar Image says:

How about Steven Baldwin and Gene Simmons for directing DH – did you see that dog commercial they did on Apprentice last week? It was really good.

Avatar Image says:

Well, personally, I don’t want a two part movie. I mean, yeah there is a lot going on in the Deathly Hallows book and maybe if they put it into a one part movie it might be 3 hours +, but waiting a year or more for the release of the 2nd part of Deathly Hallows??? I think I’ll go MAD!!!! Like lemonfaerie said 2010 is a long enough wait as it is, and anyways, true Potter fans should be able to sit through a four hour movie :D!

Oh and I think they left out waaaaaayyy to many small, but never the less, important deatails in the Order Of The Phoenix movie. Like how much the gangs friendship was strained in this book, and how angry Harry really did get during this year (I mean comparing movie Harry to book Harry would be like comparing a bunny to a tiger lol), also they failed to mention how Ron became more independent from Harry (trying out for the Quidditch team !!go Ron!!) and especially Kreacher, he was way more important to the book thatn they showed in the movie, OH!!! and I’m not sure if I didn’t hear it or what, but I think they didn’t add the part where Snape calls Harry’s mom a Mudblood when the Mauraders are tormenting him and she tries to help him.

Sorry guys for this long post…but I had to get my thoughts out, I’ve been meaning to discuss this with someone…Where I live not many people are into Harry Potter as much as I am…lol

Avatar Image says:

Very recently, the Hobbit was officially declared to be filmed as two movies. However, the twist to that news is that the first film will be the complete hobbit story as we know it and then the second film will be a bridge story between the events in the Hobbit and Lord of the The Rings. If this rumour (and personally, it think this rumour is ultimately false) they could do the same thing! But then again, JK will never allow additional story to be written beyond her existing books..

Avatar Image says:

Rather than two films, I’d prefer a longer one with reserved seating and an intermission, in the tradition of “Lawrence of Arabia,” “Ben Hur,” “The Sound of Music” or “Funny Girl.” I think it would give the final film a certain old-style Hollywood grandeur, making it a true event.

Avatar Image says:

Ths is crap. The trio are only signed for two movies, Hbp and DH. Not three movies so this is impossible. Emma’s taking a gap yr then going to uni. She’s already stated her plans. I imagine Dan has other plans also, they are ready to move on since even Emma will be twenty when DH is released.

Avatar Image says:

Quite honestly, if anyone but Yates is given the job, I’ll be scared. Maybe not so much for Spielburg, but seriously, Yates is the ONLY director so far who had proved to understand the books, and more important, has proved he understands how to translate the book onto screen.

Of course, all of this will go to waste b/c I’m sure WB will keep Kloves on as head writer, so what can ya do?

And the two parts thing? I seriously doubt it. They’ll fit it all into one, like they always do.

Avatar Image says:

I’m not opposed to a 2-parter but the two parts would have to be released within a short time of each other. Their best bet is pt 1 in July (Summer Blockbuster) and pt 2 in Nov/Dec (Christmas blockbuster). Just please no Speilberg. He’ll ruin it.

Avatar Image says:

WOW is right. But I really don’t want a 2-parter. I’d rather see a 3 hour (or more!) movie, with an intermission, the way they did Titanic. I also think David Yates would probably be a good director for it, as long as he didn’t use Hooper for the composer—that was the worst movie score I’ve ever heard. Patrick Doyle would do a good job.

Avatar Image says:

i have to agree with lemonfaerie! two parts are fine as long as they are shown together. it would completely suck to have to wait for the second half. but i would prefer to see it be three hours and everyone leave the theater happy, so long as spielberg doesn’t direct it.

Avatar Image says:

I’m sure either way, they’ll do all the filming at once then spilt the film later on if they choose. But izziewitch is right – one long film with an intermission (a la Gone With the Wind) would be the best bet. With Yates directing.

Avatar Image says:

I would prefer one film rather than two. we should wait to see if this is confirmed or not..

Avatar Image says:

Come on guys! Do we really want it to end? I wouln’t mind it being a two parter, imagine the details that they could keep! And the excitement of another release is great with me!

Avatar Image says:

two parts? uncool. it would interrupt the storyline. also, as much as i dig harry potter, and obviously care enough to write about it on this site, i think a 4-5 hour film would be terrible. could it ever pack enough punch to really feel like it’s moving anywhere? i’d say keep it 3ish hours, give it a feel of movement, make the story go somewhere and just rock it out in one reasonable installment.

but, then, i’m not a filmmaker, so i oughtn’t to even comment!...

Avatar Image says:

they are actually going to stay honest to the book for a movie?

dies of shock

I’m rooting for Guillermo Del Toro. I’ve loved the style of his films to day and I know I’m gonna disowned by a few friends for saying this, but Spielburg has lost the touch. His last few fils have all been let downs.

Avatar Image says:

I myself would prefer a 2 part movie to the OotP fiasco. Don’t get me wrong, It was a GREAT movie, if you had not read the book. When I finished the 5th book, I told my wife, This is going to be a fantastic movie with a horrendous battle at the end. When I left the theater, I felt short changed. She’s not read the book but she loved the movie. Deathly Hallows needs to get so much of the book into the movie to make it true to the book. JKR did a “Genius” on this book and it needs justice in the theater. Two part, 4hrs with an intermission, doesn’t matter, just make the movie as awesome, dark, funny,sad and exciting as the book. 43 yr old Potter Fan

Avatar Image says:

Make it 3 hours….Not Two Parts.

That’s just ridiculous!!!! If they do a good enough job, people will sit thru a 3 hour movie. That’s been my complaint with the other movies. I’ve been wishing they’d extend the movies, and put more in. I have not be ecstatic about any of them. I was especially disappointed in the hatchet job Cuaron did with POA. Of course I’ve bought them all, because I’m a Nut.

As for Spielberg… He’s a fantastic director, but I don’t want him for DH. I’d be happy with the director for OOTP David Yates. I think another problem with the movies is lack of continuity, and each individual bringing their own vision. That’s why I think LOTR was so wonderful (to me anyway). Each movie had the same director.

Now, if they were talking Peter Jackson for DH, I might change my mind.

Avatar Image says:

No, no, no, no, no…..don’t split the movie! HP and LOTR has proven: make it longer (and better), not doubled. They can easily shave the camping trips into character moments and turn JKR’s 9-mo trip into a few weeks.

Besides, who wants to pay WB for TWO sets of double-disked DVDs, which have less extra content than the movie before it? I can see what the WB would get out of that, but I’d turn to piracy. AAARGH!

Avatar Image says:

First off, lets all wait until we get a slightly more reputable source than the Daily Mail.

I don’t see Speilberg directing at all. If he was ever going to have any involvement in HP, it would have been right from the start when he could have taken charge of the whole operation and brought in his own team. He’s not going to pick up a series that is almost over, working without his own people around him and direct a picture which he can’t be in total control of.

Secondly, I have to say I hope the two-part rumour is not true. It would be very strange to have an eight part series. There would be no conclusion to Part 1 – it wouldn’t work on its own. Artistically, they are better off actually making a 4 hour movie than two movies that don’t work on their own. The only reason to make it in two parts would be WB milking every last cent out of the franchise. Two pictures – twice the profit!

Avatar Image says:

Did Titanic have an intermission? I dont remember – I only saw it once, when it first came out. I would love that though, for Deathly Hallows. I think it should be one nice big movie, but that the filmmakers are no longer under obligation to keep it short and sweet for the children. The 7th book was mature and action packed, and it deserves a “mature” 4 hours. At least, that’s how I feel, lol!

Avatar Image says:

Hey, totally forget about Spielberg. I say we should get Jerry Bruckheimer on this!

Avatar Image says:

Pleeze not Speilberg. We need kick-butt battle scenes. Remember he took the guns out of ET. I don’t want some politically correct Hogwarts, where LV and Harry put down their wands and settle their difference with a peace summit.

Avatar Image says:

@Lunar Tides: Jerry Bruckheimer is not good for a movie like Harry Potter. He’s into big explosions and alot of noise, but his films never really have that much emotion behind them. King Arthur was pretty good, but still there was alot more fighting and alot less romance and whatever else. And anyways, why would you want another producer??? David Heyman and David Barron have been working on these films since before they even cast Dan, Rupert, and Emma or even got Steve Kloves. So I would definitely prefer it if David Heyman stuck around, screw Jerry Buckheimer or whatever his name is.

Avatar Image says:

@Optimus Prime: I completely agree. He’s way too ”...and everyone lived happily ever after” for the Harry Potter films. Even in his more serious movies everything always ends up perfect in the end. And plus he wanted to make the movies into cartoons and have Haley Joel Osment do the voice of Harry Potter, even if his vision has changed, I would still not want him to direct the movie, because he clearly doesn’t understand the books at ALL.

Avatar Image says:

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jumps for joy

Avatar Image says:

Oh please, oh please, oh please let there be two parts!! There is no way to do 7 justice without it being more than 2 1/2 hours! I’ve wanted them all in two parts… those tiny little things like pigwidgeon have been left out and those were some of my favorite things from the books!! Potter is too powerful to be limited to 2 hours on the screen.. i say make it three parts!! You can’t have too much Harry! or Ron for that matter!

Avatar Image says:

4 hours with an intermission..sounds good to me….hehe

Avatar Image says:

I agree with what some are saying. Instead of a two-part Deathly Hallows, they should a three to four hour movie with an intermission.

As far as directors go….

Going back and watching the first five movies, Chris Columbus would be my choice. He really brought Hogwart’s to life. Every other director followed the groundwork that he laid down.

Avatar Image says:

All I ask is no Nicholas Hooper or Chris Columbus. The first 2 HP films are highly enjoyable and I like the Goonies, but they also lack the complexity of the later films and seemed to be made for children. As for Hooper, the Ministry of Music was the only composition I liked. Have John Williams come in and compose something like he did in The Prisoner of Azkaban. Even Patrick Doyle would be fine.

Avatar Image says:

Children,Please! Get a grip! WB makes its decisions based solely on money. The additional footage if they stay on set is going to cost only thirty to forty percent more. The extra money for the cast at their rates is alot but it’s not as much of the cost as you might think. Mobilization and demobilization of people and equipment and the like is huge and that would be zero extra for the second movie. The first could be a summer release with the DVD to be released to coincide with the Christmas release of the second part. They could also re-release the first part so people could see them back to back or with the same time frame. Then when the next DVD comes out they can sell single AND two part sets. With all the short timing and the multiple events Marketing costs would be down as well. And relax. These are business men. They are not going to make you wait longer to see the second part when it means less money at a higher cost to them.

Avatar Image says:

I LOVE the idea of having STEVEN SPIELBERG.I think the movie is a good idea to put it in two parts but does that mean they will come out at different times or will it be all together, it would be almost a full 5 to 6 hour movie but still is a good idea.

Avatar Image says:

WHOOHOOO!!!!! FINALLY that would be awesome!!! Guillermo del Toro or Alfonso Cuaron directs them!!!! YAY!!! :D :D make it a 5 hr movie it two parts 21/2 hr on each for home useer and cost 40.oo for the dvd most of us can buy it then

Avatar Image says:

This is the way Back to the future parts 2 and 3 were released back in the late 80’s. Approx. 6 months apart.

Avatar Image says:

if Guillermo Del Toro directs the 7th movie, i think i’m going to freak! i really don’t think they’ll have to do two movies, considering a big part of the book is thought and scene description, and just describing harry, ron, and hermione’s isolation from the rest of the world. i’m thinkin they can fit it into one.

but perhaps they’re thinking two considering the release date for “Deathly Hallows” isn’t until 2010 supposedly. RIDICULOUS!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Wait…..CELIA, the 7th book kinda ends “and they lived happily ever after…” so you saying that Speilberg wouldn’t be good because his movies are like that make no sense at all, considering this book has no cliff hanger and definitely ends on the happiest note of all the 7 books. you’re dumb.

Avatar Image says:

also…..

do you guys realize how RIDICULOUSLY slow 2 movies would be of this book???????? the book is amazing, don’t get me wrong, but i don’t really wanna watch a 10 minute scene of Harry, Ron, and Hermoine sitting around wondering what to do next.

too slow for two parts. definitely is going to be one, cause that would be the dumbest move ever for WB. and they know that already.

Avatar Image says:

I think it’s a great idea to have two movies for the final. I don’t think Spielberg is a good chioice for director. I always thought Chris Colubus should be allowed to finish what he started. He has been a part of all of the movies. My second choice would have to be ALFONSO CURRAN or DAVID YATES.

Avatar Image says:

I think they should just make it a 3-4 hour movie and forget the 2nd half, fans won’t like to wait!

Avatar Image says:

NO SPIELBERG! Chris Columbus was ok but I liked the films better when they had the British touch. It made the films more like the Harry Potter books and less like summer blockbusters.

Avatar Image says:

I agree, Williams for the score is ALL Wrong. The music has just gotten Better and Better each movie. Williams did a Great job with the first films, but lets move on. Hedwig’s Theme is Brilliant.

I am all for 2 seperate movies. There are just so many fights and the final battle is just so huge!! It could take up most of one movie by itself. The HUNT is also so important and Huge…..and Doby’s death is so very important.

Avatar Image says:

Yet another cynical money making exercise. DH does not have more plot going on than the 3 previous books (well maybe more than HBP but not GOF and OOTP) and yet they decide there’s too much to fit into one film that they have to split it into two. This is just them stringing it out to make more money cos they know after this there’s no more Harry Potter and no more money to make filmwise. GOF deserved more time, preferably to be split into two parts, as did OOTP but they didn’t get it and were butchered to pieces. This makes me livid, it’s ridiculous. I love the Potter book series but I can’t stand WB and the way they’ve treated the film franchise, it’s not a patch on the books and they’ve made it all about money and profit.

Avatar Image says:

Forgot to add they could make DH or any of the other previous films loyal to the spirit and soul of the books (without needing to add every minute detail but still leaving die-hard fans satisified) if they’d just have them longer than 2.5 hours. They won’t/didn’t do this cos they rely on kiddy audiences and won’t admit that by now a lot of the little kiddies who were interested in the first few books are now old enough that they can sit through longer films and those who can’t would probably be bored even if the films were shorter because there’s more teen based stuff going on that won’t appeal to all of them. If they wanted to appeal to the fans they’d give them what they want, and I’ve not heard any fans saying we want them short, most who don’t seem bothered are either happy to get what they can get or are resigned to the fact that it’s all they’re getting so make the most of it. More fans need to expect more, they know the books are better so they should expect better of the films. Just cos it’s a different media doesn’t mean it has to be shoddier or we shouldn’t expect as much. There have been films made of books that make the books look stupid or inferior, I doubt HP could have done this but it was always possible to make the films at least equal to the books in quality. JK shouldn’t have rushed with selling the books to a film company. I’ll always maintain we’d have got better films if a) she’d waited til she’d finished the series b) taken her time and seen who’d be most loyal to her work. I think she was way to swift with her precious work. It would have been better in other hands.

Avatar Image says:

I wouldn’t believe this…it is a rumor. SO many of you are getting your hopes up. I’m trying not to, cause I know it’s gotta be a rumor, again.

DH will wind up being probably 2 1/2 hours or less…sucks I know, but it’s true. I wish they could make it one movie of around 3 hours. But they won’t.

Avatar Image says:

At least they won’t have to cut anything out if they do that. I heard they cut out Marvolo and Morphin Gaunt from The Half Blood Prince film

Avatar Image says:

At least they won’t have to cut anything out from the book if they make it a two part film. I read that they cut out all the stuff with Marvolo, Morphin and Merope Gaunt from the Half Blood Prince film. Why/How could they do that?

Avatar Image says:

putting the deathly hallows into two films is a good idea. there is a lot going on in this book and i think the only way to include all that story is to make two films or maybe a three hour movie. As for Spielberg, no. He is a great director, but i think he won’t do. Guillermo del Toro is great choice for director. but as long as John Williams comes back to the deathly hallows, i’ll be happy.

Avatar Image says:

If they can make a 2hr. 40 minute movie of the Kate Winslet drama “Little Children” then why the heck can’t they make these Harry Potter movies 2:45-3:00 long?? I mean, do you honestly think the legions of fans would NOT go because the movie was too long? anyone remember how long Titanic was and yet people kept going back over and over and over. I think cutting these movies like they have, particularly in GOF and OOTP, is completely absurd. You’re left with a fast-paced movie that never has time to truly showcase the acting. Major characters are reduced to mere cameos. I mean, Maggie Smith must have to show up for what, one day of filming to complete all her scenes anymore? It is rediculous. Why couldn’t they have hired Peter Jackson? We need 4 hour versions of Harry Potter!!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Great! I was hoping they would do this! They should use Chris Columbus as director

Avatar Image says:

2 parts would be good. I like the HPDH and HP and the Elder Wand that was suggested. Spielberg would be great, but with him would come John Williams as the score writer, which would be even better! HPPoA had the best score of all the films and I am sure Williams could do it again!

Avatar Image says:

@Todd: The ending was not ”...and they lived happily EVER after. ” Which means they were always happy. It ends with, “ALL WAS WELL.” Definitely not the same thing. There is almost a tone of ; for now. And all this dumb you are putting in your comments sounds dumb. Calling someone a name because you don’t agree with their opinion is pretty low. Open a thesaurus, Please!

Avatar Image says:

Do not let Spielberg touch this. He will ruin it. He ruined Jurassic Park. He is a horrible director. This should stay in the hands of a european director, preferably british. I liked the last guy.

Avatar Image says:

I love the idea of a two part DH although i think it would have worked alot better with GOF. One could be relesed in the summer then the secnd part in the winter. they could end the first part at the escape on the dragon scene. as for directors i think they should bring back columbus, he started the series he should finish it! although i bet David Yates finishs it. Personally i dont like Yates i thought Oootp was to rushed and it seemed like a clipshow! He also screwed up the dvd and didnt give us enough specal features! And cut up snapes worst memory! anyway my choices for diector would be…. 1. Chris Columbus 2.Guillermo del Toro 3. Steven Speilberg 4. Alfonso Cuaron 5. David Yates

Avatar Image says:

I’m leaning more towards a 4 hour movie, rather than a two part.

Avatar Image says:

I think 2 movies is a great idea, then they dont have to leave anything out! Like the last movie (Harry Potter 5) they left way to much out, it was just pathetic!

Avatar Image says:

dude, don’t you realize that Harry Potter film market are CHILDREN AND TEENAGER.

sure the fans would watch 4 hour long movie.

But CHILDREN wouldn’t

and consider this. if it four hour long, if it start at 8, it would end at 12. their parents would forbid them to watch the movie, coz then they will be home late.

Geez, I know you people supposed to be the fans (i’m a huge fan too) and all but seriously.

After GRiNDHOUSE (which has intermission) failed in the market, I doubt any studio would take a chance to release a freakin 4 hour long movie again. EVEN WITH INTERMISSION.

Even fans of Lord of the Rings complains the third movie are too long. because it was freakin 4 hours long.

Beside if Harry Potter movie gets more money, wouldn’t you happy too. I don’t you will be mad if Harry Potter reaches #1 box office twice in a year.

SO guys, efore you write anything. just sit down and THINK.

It’s not what you want but it all what Harry Potter franchise needs

Avatar Image says:

I do believe Deathly Hallows should be done justice and trying to fit it into a 2 hour movie will leave so much out. The years that was put into the book should be honored properly. A longer version movie with an intermission would work. If you have ever picked up a Harry Potter book , or sat through a movie you are hooked. So no matter if it came out as a 4 hour movie or a 2 part series type movie everyone that is anyone would watch. We may not be happy about the 2 part series type but it would be well anticipated. Warner Brothers should just suck it up and give an intermission to a longer movie all at once, and we will all be happy, and to make all the fans even happier they could release it before 2010. The last movie should be out for viewing well before Universal opens it gates to the World of Harry Potter, in my opinion.

Avatar Image says:

How else would they be able to do the big battle scene if they did it in one movie??? that alone could be 1 movie in itself!

Avatar Image says:

Splitting Deathly Hallows into 2 films would be a profoundly stupid idea, as splitting any of the other films would have been. Sure, hard-core Potter fans will be satisfied by getting to see every subplot of the book included, but 2 slow-paced, bloated, convoluted films of Deathly hallows would completely alienate the general public and casual fas.

Why do so many Harry Potter fans not recognize the value of conciseness when it comes to good filmmaking?

Avatar Image says:

For Grindelwald. If you include every subplot the movie would take 9-12 hours and that’s cutting by the fact that some of the text is visual description and would not be dialog. Even two three hr movies would be faster paced than you may realize. And young children do not go to the late showings anyway. Teens and adults do. The few that do seem to be up to the task and they have to be with their parents. I was at the midnight premiere of OOTP and I can attest to these realities. I have been to all the Star Wars, LOTR, and HP movies with my children and they have had no problem with the length of any of them. Their attention was held and they voiced the same aggravation at the omission of book material.

Avatar Image says:

I think it would be FABULOUS to have John Williams and Steven Spielberg working on this film together!!!!!!!

Please, please, please, not that awful Alfonso fellow; POA was horribly dark (visually hard to see clearly) and probably the worst of all the films.

Patrick Doyle’s music was so bland and uninspired; the only decent part was the theme he took from Williams, and even that he messed up.

A great book deserves great film creators – let’s go with the BEST!!!!!!!

As for a two-part film: if it takes that long to do justice to the book, then so be it.

Avatar Image says:

Omfg 2 parts

Avatar Image says:

@ Joe. you’re talking about midnite screening. of course they would be up for the job. they’re FANS of HP!!. I’m talking about non fans or someone who just relatively like HP. Do you honestly can provide evidence that they can stand watching 4 hour long movie? babies will start crying and children will start playing on their own.

Believe 4 hour movie is a bad idea.

plus 4 hours movie would give the theatre less screening per day, that would automtically decrease the money HP would make.

Either do 2 & 1/2 hours to 3 hours movie and shave all the dudley part, camping trip, wedding, birthday, the black house, the godric’s hollow, the gringotts, the shell cottage and Xenophilius part can be explain by Luna coz she’s as crazy. They might even shave the end sequence to directly harry vs Voldemort. So no more Bellatrix vs mrs. Weasley coz I can see that would not be important.

or do a two parters.

Avatar Image says:

@Joe,

Actually, adults (and film critics, judging by reviews of the first 2 Potter films) are more often the ones complain about length than kids, as adults don’t always have a lot of free time and want movies to be focused and to the point.

Star Wars originals was only 2 hours long, and the prequels were awful anyway. LOTR’s long length was justified as everything in the movie developed the plot or the main story. All of the Harry Potter books, particularly the last 4, are stuffed with subplots that, while it works fine in a novel, don’t advance the plot and should be excised from a good film adaption.

Avatar Image says:

This rumour really did my head in this morning. somehow all of the 440 med students in my year seemed to know that I was an HP-addict and that I do stuff for Leaky/PotterCast. No-one ever really noticed.

Today, however, I had to tell 50 people that the two-part movie was a rumour and that Jo would most probably NOT write a succession to the HP series. When more people actually started to come up to me for explanation and discussion, I had to ask the professor for permission to make a short announcement, so that everyone was clear. Seriously, i never thought people actually cared at my uni, and now, they won’t leave me alone! i’m an instant celebrity

Avatar Image says:

@LV: Hogwarts is dark. There are ghosts, particularly the Bloody Baron who scares everyone. There is a poltergeist who is seemingly trying to do bodily harm to students. Professor Snape is prowling the halls at night, like a bat. And would you want to run into Filch on a deserted corridor. It definitely not Disney World. That is why I don’t understand complaints that Alphonso’s film was too dark. And as I recall POA ended on a upbeat note.

Avatar Image says:

Let me clarify. I’ve taken the kids to all those movies and more at many different show times. The point is the they keep their focus as long as necessary. They are all teenagers now. The good movies keep them quiet,The babies and the very little ones don’t even read,shouldn’t be at the theatre unless it’s animated. The older HPers have never complained about a long HP movie. There’s never been one. But I don’t think the four hr. one movie deal is the way to go. Enough. I laid out in an earlier post (17ish?) how a two part movie makes them a mint with relatively little more outlay and keeps Potterphiles happy for once.

Avatar Image says:

I would sit through four hours and an intermission as well as installments just to see “Weasley is our King,” Peeves, Bill and Charlie, Mr. Dursley asking about “Dementoids,” Keacher and Dobby’s smackdown, and Mrs. Blacks yelling out “filth, scum…etc.”

Avatar Image says:

Sorry I haven’t waded through all the comments, but here’s my two cents: 1) NO TWO-PARTER. Condensing a long book into the time span of a movie is challenging, but can be done well. I agree with those who have stated “7 books, 7 movies”. And I too would be sorely tempted to boycott a 2-part movie (until both parts hit DVD, anyway). 2) NO SPIELBERG. I have lots of his movies in my collection, but Spielberg and HP are not a good fit. It would be a return to a Chris Columbus-type HP world. While those movies are well done, I think the movies have evolved and now require a darker, less saccharine tone than Spielberg would provide.

Avatar Image says:

They should let Cuaron and John Williams finish it. Azkaban was the best film by far. And Please, no more of this “Columbus should finish it” talk. He didn’t portray the Harry Potter wold realstically, but more as a hyper stylized disneyland world.

Avatar Image says:

Joe,

You’re only talking about older HP readers. I’m talking about older people in the general public, who have NOT read the books, plenty whom have complained the movies are too long (read any HP film review and you’ll see). Non-book-readers make up the majority of the audience.

Avatar Image says:

why don’t they just make a regular 2 and a half hour movie for Deathly Hallows and then release a super-extended director’s cut that would include everything that they would have done, had the movie been released in two parts.

does anyone understand what i’m talking about? haha.

i just hope michael goldenberg screenwrites the last film because i absolutely loved the script for order of the phoenix.

peace out. xx

Avatar Image says:

It isn`t too bad …....I think. It deserves for waiting .I can`t wait it and i think it is gonna be absolutely amazing film , no matter how long time it takes . And in my opinion the two part film thing is better idea !

Avatar Image says:

I think it is a very dumb idea it would ruin the whole movie

I also heard that they nothing is final but it’s just stupid bbecause i dont want to have the movie in 2 parts

Write a Reply or Comment

Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.