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 Re