Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

Potter Producer Talks Deathly Hallows

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> Potter Producer Talks Deathly Hallows Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Potter Producer Talks Deathly Hallows - 14/3/2008 5:48:03 PM   
Empire Admin

 

Posts: 28903
Joined: 29/6/2005
Post your comments on this article
Post #: 1
- 14/3/2008 5:48:03 PM   
holsy


Posts: 191
Joined: 5/12/2005
Well that certainly goes a long way to easing my mind about the whole thing. I dont doubt that the whole creative team want to do whats best, its not just about making twice the money, though surely that will be the icing on the cake.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 2
This is the edited version. - 14/3/2008 5:52:13 PM   
Silvertouch

 

Posts: 127
Joined: 6/11/2005
In the original interview, he involuntarily spluttered the word "ka-ching!!" every few seconds.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 3
- 14/3/2008 5:56:00 PM   
Ben Myers

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/12/2005
Splitting the final book in two? Right choice. Keeping Yates on for 6 AND 7? Hmmm. The versatilty in directors has always been one of the franchises strong-points, but I'll wait until we've seen what he's done with HBP before I judge. However, it's a worry about how he can keep each film feeling fresh.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 4
- 14/3/2008 5:59:04 PM   
Albertine


Posts: 130
Joined: 18/7/2006
I think the waiting period is going to be hard, but worth it! A whole year of shooting, oh my,,,This will be exiting! I hope it wont ruin the actors motivation in the end! A whole year, that's a long time....well, well

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 5
Yay! - 14/3/2008 6:12:57 PM   
ChrisGold


Posts: 20
Joined: 19/12/2007
OMG! I love Rupert soo much. I absolutely cannot wait to see this movie. I'm also really happy with the split because that means there is the potential for a Harry Potter movie to finally be good since it hasn't been done so far. Yay!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 6
- 14/3/2008 6:14:34 PM   
jared isaacs

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: 0
I am really annoyed about this. It just seems to be a way of racking in extra money. It is a con.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 7
feeling nervous :( - 14/3/2008 6:28:29 PM   
BigDaveP

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 3/8/2007
well there used to be a time i was excited about the prospect of a Potter film... Then PoA happened, then GoF.... Phoenix was alright... but each time theres always Nervous tension around when it comes close to seeing the,....

And wheres the love for Ron..... Psssssshhhh some impartial Producer he is.... Ron Pwns All... Shame the films Messed with him so much

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 8
- 14/3/2008 6:49:23 PM   
doctorolorinbats1975


Posts: 6787
Joined: 30/10/2005
From: Harrow
Wow, I wonder how the people who think this is a scam would do it. A few years back people wanted Goblet of Fire to be two films. And now there's moaning. Loser cynics.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 9
Hairy Patter - 14/3/2008 7:42:22 PM   
Horrorguru

 

Posts: 220
Joined: 11/1/2008
YAWN!!!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 10
- 14/3/2008 8:38:01 PM   
sunnygirly2k4


Posts: 36
Joined: 17/12/2006
From: Essex, UK
Gosh, I'll probably be the oldest fan when it finishes in 2011... I can see why they made it two films, though - it's just too much as one unless you want a 3hr+ film, which alot of people with short attention spans can't cope with. Oh well, it certainly didn't ruin LoTR box office takings ...

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 11
- 14/3/2008 9:06:51 PM   
Gina

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 26/10/2007
I think if uv read the book u'll agree that they cnt afford to leave any details out if they want to do it justice so I think they've made the right decision. David Yates did a great job on OOTP and i'm sure he will do a fantastic job on the Hallows. It will be interesting to see where they decide to finish part 1 and start part 2.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 12
money grabbing - 14/3/2008 10:10:28 PM   
BlueDragon21120

 

Posts: 203
Joined: 11/11/2005
what a joke

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 13
- 14/3/2008 11:25:26 PM   
clarkkent

 

Posts: 759
Joined: 20/7/2006
okay, so this ISNT a money making scheme. its like saying LOTR is only in three parts because they wanted to milk it dry. They made it into three films because the story is fucking epic.

Deathly Hallows doesn't have alot of plot that can be cut out without effecting the story.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 14
RE: - 15/3/2008 1:10:08 AM   
LeChuck

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 1/5/2006
Well, colour me hugely sceptical. So they're aiming to do make five hours of film from this?! FFS, there is PLENTY that can be cut and streamlined in this from this meandering, leisurely story, if the scriptwriters had any discipline or courage to do so. Cut the Voldemort prologue, Scrimgeour, Dumbledore's backstory, maybe even one of the Horcrux retrievals; streamline things by swapping Tonks and Lupin into Bill and Fleur's roles, and Kreacher into Dobby's; simplify some of the convoluted lore and background to stuff like Regulus, Snape, the wands and even the Hallows themselves. The film would still be long, probably three hours or more (not that that would be a problem - look at Titanic, Gone With The Wind or LotR), but at least they could claim to have made an effort to actually, y'know, ADAPT the book, and to preserve its integrity as a single story. For them to even be throwing around figures like four hours suggests to me that we're in for a return to the bad old days of slavishly reproducing the source material moment for moment, basically an extended staged book reading with special effects, rather than trying to make genuine film equivalents, like the last three, for all their flaws, tried to do so admirably. If all you're going to do is give me a unaltered imitation of a book I've already read, what's the point?

Again, I'll be delighted to be proven wrong on this, but the way I see it right now, Heyman and WB have sold out the series's chance for a cinematically worthwhile finale with this unnecessary, pandering and mercenary move. Over to you now, Yates, Kloves and co...

(in reply to clarkkent)
Post #: 15
- 15/3/2008 8:48:17 AM   
faith1

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 28/12/2006
If it was just about the money, surely they would have started splitting the films into two from the Goblet of Fire?! This series is so dear to people that to make sure justice is done to the final book they can't start chopping bits out - every bit is important in Deathly Hallows. Good decision - we just have a bit of a wait on our hands!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 16
RE: RE: - 15/3/2008 9:51:53 AM   
kinge247


Posts: 383
Joined: 8/3/2006
From: Somewhere away from you!
quote:

ORIGINAL: LeChuck

Well, colour me hugely sceptical. So they're aiming to do make five hours of film from this?! FFS, there is PLENTY that can be cut and streamlined in this from this meandering, leisurely story, if the scriptwriters had any discipline or courage to do so. Cut the Voldemort prologue, Scrimgeour, Dumbledore's backstory, maybe even one of the Horcrux retrievals; streamline things by swapping Tonks and Lupin into Bill and Fleur's roles, and Kreacher into Dobby's; simplify some of the convoluted lore and background to stuff like Regulus, Snape, the wands and even the Hallows themselves. The film would still be long, probably three hours or more (not that that would be a problem - look at Titanic, Gone With The Wind or LotR), but at least they could claim to have made an effort to actually, y'know, ADAPT the book, and to preserve its integrity as a single story. For them to even be throwing around figures like four hours suggests to me that we're in for a return to the bad old days of slavishly reproducing the source material moment for moment, basically an extended staged book reading with special effects, rather than trying to make genuine film equivalents, like the last three, for all their flaws, tried to do so admirably. If all you're going to do is give me a unaltered imitation of a book I've already read, what's the point?

Again, I'll be delighted to be proven wrong on this, but the way I see it right now, Heyman and WB have sold out the series's chance for a cinematically worthwhile finale with this unnecessary, pandering and mercenary move. Over to you now, Yates, Kloves and co...



You're wrong, this is the one book that should not be cut as its one long story with no easily removable subplots, everthing is integral to the main story.  You cannot just go around swapping characters into others roles and dropping stuff like Dumbledore's back story, it would not work.  The whole point of adapting books is so that you get a visual interpretation of the book not a complete rape like 'I am Legend' that completely went against the original.
I am not really pleased that Yates is getting to finish this series as they should have gone either with Cuaron again or got Del Toro who was well up for doing it, but I will watch it and am glad that at least they are doing the whole book this time.

< Message edited by kinge247 -- 15/3/2008 9:55:51 AM >

(in reply to LeChuck)
Post #: 17
Thanks for not cutting corners, mate. - 15/3/2008 10:09:52 AM   
billkiller

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 16/6/2006
From: bedford UK
I love the Potter films and I have a huge respect for Heyman, and what Heyday films have done for Harry Potter, and I honestly say they have done the best possible adaptations of the books. The people who don't like the films, those book purists, will NEVER like the films, doesn't matter what is done with them. And I'm sure the heads of Production at warner are going to be please that revenue from an additional film is going to be breaking box office records in 2011. But Please, for any one to say that it's just for the cash is a bit stupid. sorry, a fucking retard, because frankly the book cannot really be streamlined successfully in the same way Pheonix was, Pheonix for me always felt like a bridging story, from the child harry, to the young man Harry. So it was easy to trim, as the story for more character driven, but deathly Hallows, is completely different and anyone who has read them will agree, it's driven by so many more elements and this needs to be adapted to film, not just for Hollows to work, but for all the six predecessors to work to, since Philsophers stone, we have be building up to something, and I don't know about you, I hope that Yates can do for The Battle of Hogwarts what Jackson did for The Battle for Middle Earth.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 18
RE: RE: - 15/3/2008 2:38:15 PM   
LeChuck

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 1/5/2006
quote:

The whole point of adapting books is so that you get a visual interpretation of the book not a complete rape like 'I am Legend' that completely went against the original.


See, this is where we disagree; I've always felt that making a film that is simply a play-by-play visual imitation of the book is an exercise in masturbatory pointlessness. Obviously in this case I'd prefer a film that's faithful to the spirit, message, story and characters of the source text, but more than anything, I would like an actual FILM. Deathly Hallows was a fabulous book, but it was just that: a book, and a bloody long book at that. It was paced like a long book, and structured like a long book. Simply filming that scene-for-scene over five hours might be a gratifying exercise for a core of HP fanatics, but my fear is that this process of non-adaptation will land us with a bloated, stylistically confused vomit drop of scenes that conforms to no recognised cinematic storytelling conventions, and that will be essentially worthless as an independent creative entity.

Furthermore, I disagree fundamentally with this concept that Deathly Hallows is a story so complex that it cannot possibly be cut. For God's sake, look at the entire history of cinematic literary adaptations; hundreds upon hundreds of novels, many infinitely more complex than Harry Potter, have been adapted for the silver screen, and not one of them has needed FIVE bloody hours to tell their story. Yes, Deathly Hallows was long and dense on the page, but that's because it was meant as the ultimate culmination of the books' larger and denser universe; every loose end needed to be tied off, every character accounted for, every major and minor arc completed. The universe of the films, however, has thus far been a (necessarily) simpler and less layered vision of the same thing, where background characters are sometimes just that, where precise detail isn't always given, where some things are left unsaid if they're not 100% important to the main thrust of Harry's story; as such, the finale to THIS universe could in turn easily have afforded to be a much simpler story. Would you have to cut things that were important in the book? Of course; everything in the book is important, that's why they're in there, but it doesn't mean that those things are necessarily important if you're making a film. The Marauders' backstory was crucial to the book of PoA; it wasn't to the film, so they cut it. Dobby's roles in GoF and OotP were vital; he wasn't necessary in the film, so they gave his role to Neville instead. They're details, detours and elaborations, all of which are fascinating on the page, but would be time-consuming and pointless on the screen, and Deathly Hallows is chock full of them (Regulus, Bill, Fleur, The Tale of the Three Brothers, Snape and Dumbledore's pasts, Dobby, Scrimgeour, Dean, Griphook). Which is why you change it, lest you get a five hours of formless, pointless reiteration, which is what I fear we're going to get. The Potter filmmakers understood this in the past, but now they seem to have forgotten it, which is why I suspect that they're taking into account considerations beyond the creative...

(in reply to kinge247)
Post #: 19
RE: RE: - 15/3/2008 5:20:19 PM   
mins

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 22/12/2007
From: Aberdeen
Hear hear!

(in reply to LeChuck)
Post #: 20
Show me the money! - 16/3/2008 4:42:43 PM   
Funk

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 20/3/2006
This frashise has already made Warners a mint! Even if i hated it like the flu and hitler id be a 'fan'!

Of course if ur a fan ur going to say 'hurah' but common.... they never would have made a 4.5hr movie! I remember Warners actually could stand toe to toe with Jacksons and New Lines LOTR and got their asses wooped!

However I did warm to OOTP and after learning what goes on in the last two instalments and no longer for kids, should be good!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 21
- 16/3/2008 6:22:40 PM   
imperio_girl

 

Posts: 11
Joined: 10/7/2007
Really glad they did this...i was recoiling in horror at the prospect of the final book being condensed into crappy kiddie-friendly fare and all the character development being thrown aside for the more shallow and visually impressive scenes...also it gives people who like to complain something to groan about, so everyone's happy.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 22
- 16/3/2008 7:27:21 PM   
udjifudgi


Posts: 48
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Sunderland
let me guess, this one is going to be 'darker'

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 23
RE: Potter Producer Talks Deathly Hallows - 16/3/2008 9:28:38 PM   
brokenking

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 8/8/2007
When I read the book I was wondering how the studios were going to manage it all in one film.  I'm very much in favour of this decision.  There's so much for the audience to enjoy, personnally (and this is a propbably a SPOILER) I'm looking forward to Gringotts break in the most, though Hermonie's torture scene could a real highlight, in a manner of speaking.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 24
TEASE ME ALREADY!!!! - 17/3/2008 9:55:34 AM   
datdudecalvin

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 12/3/2008
OMG!!!! November is only 8 months away. So when are we going to see the first HP-6 teaser trailer??!! We first got a glimpse of Cloverfield nearly a year B4 its release and we saw the Enterprise from the new Star Trek movie back in Jan. and i heard it was pushed back to 2009. I think it's time to give the people what they want......HP-6 teaser trailer already! the book was huge and i dont need to say how GIGANTIC the movie will be. So if we could have a teaser B4 summer........that would be awesome!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 25
- 17/3/2008 12:45:23 PM   
jascott

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 13/3/2008
From: Edinburgh
Erm... if there are so many potter fans involved in this that agree that the film should be split into two then they all should know exactly where the split will come. If i was involved in those discussions my first question would be can we make the first film a good film in its own merit and that would mean it would need a good ending and I wouldnt settle for the films being split unless that was guaranteed. It should have been scripted before the decision was made. OOTP was the longest book and it was made into one film and it was actually one of the better films. I must admit that I amnt against the last film being made into two but it all seems pretty vague just now so I am a bit sceptical.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 26
RE: - 17/3/2008 2:09:23 PM   
Halfling

 

Posts: 123
Joined: 31/10/2005
Urm, I don't wish to nitpick, but they made 3 LOTR films because the original book was published as 3 distinctive volumns.  Deathly Hallows is one book, and whilst being the fan of HP and book 7 that I am, I still think they could have done a 3+ hours cut (that has already been mentioned) and done the book justice.  BUT, the decision has been made, and it's all a very long way away.  And I think we ALL know where the split should be....(well, you know, those of us who have read it!)

(in reply to clarkkent)
Post #: 27
RE: RE: - 17/3/2008 2:33:26 PM   
gemmalouise

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 9/11/2006
As a big fan of the books, I really welcome the decision to make the film in two parts.  I enjoyed all the films so far but have always been a little disappointed at what was cut.  At least with 2 films there is every opportunity to include as much as possible from what is a very rich in plot final book.  I just hope they don't feel the need to include Jo's final "Nineteem years later" chapter!

(in reply to Halfling)
Post #: 28
Lets be honest - 18/3/2008 5:41:08 PM   
rsman26

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 11/9/2006
From: California
Lets be honest WB, this decision to spilt the final installment is driven by money, this is the last you'll get from the Potter franchise and you want to milk it for every last dime you can get, as a fan I feel like were being used and not treated with the respect we deserve, the studios greed is apparent and I hope people can see that.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 29
Hallows split - 18/3/2008 10:09:02 PM   
dave1159

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 8/2/2008
This is great news, the book is so action packed it would have been a crime to cut any major scenes, all of them are vital to the plot as well. Warners and esp David Haymen have made this set of films so sucessful by constantly sticking to the books and involving JK Rowling, each one has really captured the heart of the story. Can't wait for the bank scene and Molly Weasleys `moment' and we've got `Half Blood Prince' in the meantime... fab!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> Potter Producer Talks Deathly Hallows Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.093