Beyond Hogwarts

Search Beyond Hogwarts:

Reference Desk:
Beyond Hogwarts FAQ
Wizard to Muggle Currency Converter
Harry Potter Spelling Reference

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Parts 1 and 2

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is dense with information that is crucial to the overall story. It's definitely too much to stuff into a two hour movie.

There are many challenges in adapting a novel or series of novels into scripts and movies. Plot lines are always reduced and/or eliminated. The work that has been done so far on the Harry Potter series has had reasonable success. The millions of dollars of revenue prove that the Harry Potter Fans will pay for anything HP, but will they pay for two movies made from one book? If the Studio thinks fans will not pay for and sit through one longer than average movie (3 hours plus, a rule broken successfully by the Lord of the Rings movies), will it be possible they'd think fans will happily pay for two films?

So, do you think it's possible that the final Harry Potter adventure, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, will be made into two movies? And if it is, where would you end movie number one and start movie two?

UPDATE! 3/12/08: Producer David Heyman said last night that It will be officially announced soon that book 7 WILL BE TWO FILMS! Click here for more info!

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>

Reader Comments: (Page 4)

I'm hoping for a 3 hour+ film, because I wouldn't know where to end the first and begin the second. I also think that Order of the Phoenix should have been a 3 hour+ film, because if you didn't read the book (yes, there still are people who didn't) it was very difficult to get into the story. Personally, I think that al lot of of things that happened in the book, should have been in the film.

Posted by Anita from Oosterwolde Gld., Netherlands on February 19, 2008 03:51 AM

I think just one film would be better. i love the books and i love the films, but the films are never really that good in comparison. they miss bits out, and i think they miss bits out in the 7th film. Also, the actors be far too old to play their characters if they add on another film.

Posted by Lusy from Scotland on February 19, 2008 05:21 AM

All I know is, Michael Gambon is the WORST thing that has happened to the HP movies. Watch his interview with Empire Online. He says he doesn't even read the HP books and doesn't see the point, he just plays Dumbledore the way HE sees him. COME ON! His portrayal (dare I say betrayal) of Dumbldore's character is a stain on the HP movie series.

Posted by Mike from Seattle, WA on February 19, 2008 10:27 AM

I like Michel Gambon and it doesn't matter to me that he doesn't read the books. Not everyone involved in this has to have the same level of passion as the fans. For many folks, it's just their job. I felt Richard Harris was a bit stuffy, to be honest. Did you know he wasn't even going to take on the role until his granddaughter BEGGED him to do it? The Dumbledore character should be a bizarre balance of playful whimsy with life-or- seriousness, and I believe Gambon pulls that off.

I came into this whole HP frenzy with the release of the Order of the Phoenix film, and I must tell you I came out of the theater feeling like a two year old, with more questions than anyone could possibly answer. So I started reading the rest of the books before seeing the flicks. They all make the best of the movies seem like dog doo.

Posted by hollyanna from new jersey on February 19, 2008 11:14 AM

There can never be agreement among HP fans on whether or not to split the final film. Everyone who's commented has really good, albeit personal reasons for wanting the book split or not and where and why.

Personally, with the exception of the first two films, I've never been able to sit through the other films and a) enjoy them and b) make sense of them with only one viewing because not only have important ideas been left out or condensed but scenes have been inserted that were not in the books. I've always found that a distraction.

I realize that film and book are two different modes of entertainment and require different approaches. But, as an HP fan, I want the film to convey not only the spirit of the book but the richness of the plot. I recall Cuaron saying that he took the plot of book three and whatever "stuck" to it was in the film and that which didn't stick was thrown out. It didn't make for a satisfying experience at the theatre. That approach also waters down the depth and detail of the reading experience so that viewers who have not read the book really have a choppy and disconnected view into the life of Harry Potter which takes away from the overall themes of love, sacrifice and friendship and the ultimate power of a battle between good and evil.

There is tremendous power in the final book and a balance worth noting. Perhaps finding that balance would be a way to determine whether the film should be done in one part or two, although I would rather sit through a three or even four hour film than have it split. Splitting the book into two parts satisfy no one and who of the millions who see the films without reading the books really "get it" or want to come back to see the finish?

So, the balance. The Dursleys good bye is a counterpoint to the epilogue. Consider one the warm up, the other the cool down. The flight from Privet Drive counterbalances the battle of Hogwarts. The trio's wanderings, though seemingly endless, supply the viewer with increasingly accumulated information that lead to Harry's dilemma, Horcruxes or Hallows. Nothing that leads to Harry's doubt about the path to take can be left out if his decision is to have the impact it deserves. And, the poignancy of certain scenes simply cannot be left out, eg. Godric's Hollow, if the film is to touch one's emotional core. In the first film, the Mirror of Erised was poignant and powerful. Another such scene was Mrs. Weasley's hugging Harry at the end of GoF which was cut. And so, some of the emotional connection with Harry's plight was lost.

So how to make this film? Here's a crazy idea. Ask JKRowling herself to either write or edit the script. In my opinion, a director may make the film but the quality of what he does is based on the clarity and vision of the scriptwriter. If you could find a director who's commited to richnes of detail and a writer who can see the forest for all the trees, DH could be a satisfying conclusion to one of the greatest sagas of all time.

Posted by Hannah from Los Angeles on February 19, 2008 10:44 PM

Hannah makes a very good point. Usually, when authors of books write their own screenplays, it works out very well (Holes, for example). It wasn't ever possible, with the prior movies, for J.K. to write the screenplay, because she was busy still writing the books. But, the books are finished and she's available now!

Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on February 20, 2008 10:50 AM

harry potter and the ly hallows is a long book. but everything inside means something and is important to the end. although it would be hard to wait after the first, i'd rather that than the movie cutting out scenes and completely changing the book. i agree with Hannah. im sure JK herself knows what are the most crucial places.

Posted by Meg from NJ on February 20, 2008 3:36 PM

Dave, I had forgotten about Holes but I do remember that Peter Shaffer who wrote Equus also wrote the screenplay for the film version of Equus. He walked away with an Oscar and the film was as powerful as the play. Maybe this site should start a groundswell of public opinion in favor of J.K.Rowling, author AND screenwriter. Jo, if you're reading this, would you be ing?

Posted by Hannah from Los Angeles on February 20, 2008 4:07 PM

I definitely think that they should make the movie like 4+ hours long, with an intermission at the part when Harry and Hermione jump from Bathilda's house after nearly missing Voldemort. Harry was unconcious for like a day after that, so it's a good place for a break. It would also add an element of suspense! I just wouldn't be able to stand it if there were 2 completely separate movies; I would probably just see them back to back if that were the case. But they should definitely make the movie longer because there's not much you can skip over in book 7; all the new info is too important to the plot. In fact, I was pretty upset about movies 3-5. They were awesome movies, but I think that they skipped over too much important stuff. A true Harry Potter fan won't care how long the movies are so I don't know why they're so worried about the 2 hour thing. And I wish that Yates would be as faithful as Columbus was with the character's appearances. I mean, they completely changed Dumbledore! I know Gambon won't be exactly the same as Harris, but they could have done better. JK gives very detailed descriptions of all the main characters in the books; all they have to do is follow them. To this day it still bugs me a bit that Daniel Radcliffe doesn't wear bright green contact lenses. But I love Dan; they're all really awesome actors, I just wish that the movie makers would have been more faithful with wardrobe and stuff like that,

Posted by Tina from TX on February 20, 2008 5:19 PM

I think they should do a 3+hour film in order to include all the crucial information.

Posted by Prongs from Athens,Greece on February 21, 2008 03:12 AM

I really think that they should make it into a 4 - 5Hrs Movie. I would watch it even if i have to pay an arm and a leg and have to watch it for 10Hrs.

If they cut it into two, one would just keep waiting for an year or so and eventually need to watch the first part again to watch the second...

Posted by uHeaven from Beijing, China on February 21, 2008 03:42 AM

Tina, Daniel Radcliffe was very young when they started filming and they didn't want a kid as young as him bothering with contact lenses. It is not recommended for children to wear them. And later on he obviously couldn't all of a sudden have a different eye colour as Harry.

Still, I am very much hoping they'll film the very emotional scene when Snape is and Harry looks him in his black (Alan Rickman wears lenses) eyes - I'm sure Radcliffe be able to nail this scene well - no matter what his eye colour happens to be.

Posted by Siena from Leeds, UK on February 21, 2008 06:19 AM

Pages:  <<  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ...  >  >>

Featured Discussions | The Septology | Harry's World | Harry Potter Movies | Dumbeldore Is Not Dead | FAQ is not affiliated with or approved by
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury, Warner Bros., or J.K. Rowling
Original Content Copyright © 2006-2010 David Haber, All Rights Reserved