About Those Harry Potter Rumours Will book seven become two movies?
You may have seen yesterday that The Mail On Sunday reported that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will be split into two movies (we'll not discuss why you were reading The Mail). This would make potential sense, since the final book in the Potter series is by far the most plot-dense and fans would want to see proper time given to the fates of all characters. But forgive us if we don't believe them. When we spoke to Warner Bros they told us that "no decision has been made about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows".
One reason that makes perfect sense is that there isn't a script in existence, Empire has had confirmed. Steve Kloves, who will write the last in the series, hasn't starting writing the script yet, since the WGA strike prevents him from doing so. Without a working script, The Mail On Sunday's assertion that the decision to make two films was for "artistic, rather than financial, reason" doesn't hold water. How can you assess what is best, artistically speaking, for a script that doesn't exist yet? And the crew would certainly not be told that they'd be shooting two films back-to-back at this stage (the last movie's not set to shoot until February 2009). None of our sources back up the Mail's rumour and all say that the decision is a way off.
We're in two minds about whether Deathly Hallows should be one or two movies. On the one hand, you'd have to cut a lot to fit the whole tale properly in to 150 minutes – although you could chop swathes of the section where Harry, Ron and Hermione head into the woods. On the other hand, two movies could stretch the material a little thinly. With the right director we can see it working. But, whatever finally happens, please know that the question of how many movies Deathly Hallows becomes is not one anybody, including the film's makers, currently knows the answer to.
Everybody on this site keeps saying that it should be one really long movie.
But what none of them can seem to get through their thick skulls is that the producers are NEVER going to make the movie three-or-more hours long. And it needs to be that long.
Look at the first one. Very little was cut for the film adaption, and it was 152 minutes long! Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows NEEDS to be 2 films!
broonie said:
"Bollocks! If they can trim down HP:The Order ... to a decent run... Read More
I think that the most logical solution is to make one film with an intermission. The film, which will be too long to watch in one sitting will have time to stretch your legs. Also, it will allow the writers to keep all of the details from the novel intact, while avoiding having to stretch out the material too thinly. Just my thoughts. ... Read More
I feel this is a slap in the face to all true HP fans who have wait many years for this story to come to an end in books as well as on film, and now theres talk of spilting the final film in two, meaning we would have to wait even longer to see the conclusion of this saga on film, it doesn't matter if the last film is the longest, fans would love that much more then having to wait a year to see the films end. ... Read More
What's the problem with an extended finale on screen not just DVD? Return of the King ran for 3 hours or thereabouts and there were plenty of under 12's at the screenings I went to (including my own) who, on the majority, managed to sit through it quietly enough. The film needs to hold their attention. ... Read More
I think filming as much as possible, editing it for normal release and then having an extended edition (think lord of the rings) available on dvd would give the best of both worlds. I think that this is something that the whole harry potter franchise could have benefitted from. ... Read More
Who cares how long it is, they have to be faithful to this one. We all want to see as much as possible. I think they can end it after they escape from Malfoy Manor and come to Shell Cottage. Then start the second one when they start plotting hte Gringots break-in. ... Read More
I think Empire should secure an interview with Kloves once the first draft is written. Then ask him. Though I'd agree with LeChuck. God I hate the Daily Mail, what a pile of shit. ... Read More
I think Hallows can easily be pared down to one film. Goblet of Fire was easily the most complex of all the books and they did fine there. ... Read More
I totally agree that an over-faithful adaptation, as per the first two movies, would be a mistake. However, the difference between DH and, in particular, OotP, is that DH is pretty packed with a dense narrative, most of which is essential to the story and in providing closure to story arcs and overall themes of the series. OotP was ripe for trimming. DH somewhat less so methinks. Maybe two shortish movies... or a Lord of the Rings Stylee 3 hour epic. ... Read More
that 4th Harry Potter could've/should've been about 30 minutes shorter. i mean, that whole dance thing had NOTHING to do with the overall story. ... Read More
