Last Harry Potter movie to be split in 2

[Guest Nemesis Enforcer]

Big news for Harry Potter fans - the last film of the series will be split into two parts and will be directed by David Yates.

 

Filming of the seventh book Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will be made into two blockbuster films - with the first part released in November 2010 and the last instalment in May 2011.

 

While some might accuse the film's bosses of milking the extremely lucrative cash cow - producer David Heyman insists the split is to service the book properly. However, he did admit that he was nervous telling J.K Rowling about his decision.

 

"I went to Jo and she was cool with it and that was quite a relief.

 

"The question will be, where do you break it? And how do you make them one but two separate and distinct stories? Do you break it with a moment of suspense or one of resolution? These are the interesting challenges. But each book has presented its challenges."

 

And despite rumours that Steven Spielberg or Guillermo Del Toro would be directing the last part - helming duties have once again gone to British director Yates, who filmed 2007s The Order Of Phoenix and the forthcoming The Half-Blood Prince.

Credit: Yahoo

[Guest ScottyB]

I'd rather one film if I'm being honest.

[Guest Jung]

People would complain though at a plethora of things being left out if they did that. Thus it was either 2 films or make a 4 hour marathon. Plus they'll end up making more money anyway.

[Guest Rog]

mo' money to be made

[Guest Fiona]

After sitting through the Lord of the Rings movies I'm just getting the feeling back in my butt now. Two movies are okay for me provided they split the book properly.

[Guest John Hancock]

Optomism - Good, long films KILL me. I get bored, I fidget and I kinda phase out and stop paying attention.

 

Pessimism - They know it's going to be a hit either way, so, seeing as the books are over, they might as well make as many Harry Potter films as possible, to get every last penny they can.

 

 

 

I don't care for Harry Potter anyway, so I'm not sure why I'm here.

[Guest Rog]

You got your op's and pes' the wrong way round.

[Guest John Hancock]

You got your op's and pes' the wrong way round.

 

Have I?

 

Optimism; that the film industry cares about us, or pessimism; that it just cares about profit.

[Fidel Cashflow 130]

It should be split with Ron's return. You'd have an extremely climactic, all-important moment to end on, and a happy ending still loaded with promise and forboding for the next movie.

[Evil Gringo 279]

It should just be one movie as it was one book.

 

I am a bit pedantic about things like this, I mean the Lord of the Rings Trilogy was fine as three as it was a trilogy of stories but this is ONE story not two so splitting it does not sit fine with me.

 

Not just that the only point of the first part will be to set the stage for the climatic events of the final film, it will just be a cash cow, money raking stop gap put in place as this is the last to make HUGE money and keep the series in the public eye.

 

The comment about being nervous regarding JK's feelings about the split was funny though...

 

Imagine the convo...

 

DY: Errr... JK... We where thinking... due to the rather expansive size of the final book and with it being, well the ending of the series and all... well we where wondering if you mind it being split into two movies released six months apart?

 

JK: Will it make more money?

 

DY: Well I imagine it would... I mean there would be two sets box office takings, one for each so...

 

JK: Well stop standing there man! Get on with the sixth film so you can make my cash cows you lazy git!

 

Seriously, the fact that THIS gets so much attention and money thrown at it when the Discworld Series (which could give us SO many diverse and entertaining films is ignored bar the odd little project) is not subject to the same treatment is beyond me.

 

Imagine the Watch trilogy (well its pretty much up to six parts now but I digress) done in gritty Gangs of New York style and with its black and twisted humour.

 

No that would kick ass not Tweeny Bopper Trendite Potter Slop

[DC 536]

I posted this a good while ago. The reason they're making it two movies is because of so much happening in the book. They don't want to prune it to the extent it would need to in order to be condensed into one movie.

 

It'll work so long as they aren't released too far apart.

[Guest Nemesis Enforcer]

I posted this a good while ago.

I should have known if it was news about a movie you'd have posted it already in the Entertainment forum :lol

[Evil Gringo 279]

It's six months apart though - thats a bloody long time and in fact the first part will be out on DVD pretty much as the second part hits.

 

I still feel that the audience would sit through a longer then usual adaptation and if JK is involved with the screen writing as its claimed and they have a good enough team along with the director (who seems to grasp the source material well) then there should be no problem with doing one film.

 

In fact it would be nice if they did one to cut down on the over blown fluff and bloated book which I felt could have been a lot trimmer and leaner.

 

As much as I dislike Potter I have at least given it a chance.

[Guest Kanenite]

To be honest it's a good idea and is for the best. The last book I found to be brilliant, so leaving out any events would kill the movie, it was action packed throughout and needs to be kept that way.

[Guest ScottyB]

And what would they call these films?

[Guest Nemesis Enforcer]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Volume 1 & 2 like with Kill Bill would be a possibility on the name front

[Evil Gringo 279]

Sounds like tat... no sorry thats a bit harsh... a cop out is more like it.

 

If the studio believed that much in the artistic element of the book and the work and the team and actual creator cared that much then they would do one film to match the one book.

 

No matter what anyone says its not going to convince me that this is anything by a cash cow milking exercise that people are draping with the 'ensuring the artistic tone and retaining as much content as possible' hokum they always drum up.

 

Same with Kill Bill, Tarantino should have just made one film not two volumes but he bottled it and coped out.

 

Then again his features have gotten worse since Pulp Fiction so what was I expecting.

[Guest Jung]

Sounds like tat... no sorry thats a bit harsh... a cop out is more like it.

 

If the studio believed that much in the artistic element of the book and the work and the team and actual creator cared that much then they would do one film to match the one book.

 

No matter what anyone says its not going to convince me that this is anything by a cash cow milking exercise that people are draping with the 'ensuring the artistic tone and retaining as much content as possible' hokum they always drum up.

 

Same with Kill Bill, Tarantino should have just made one film not two volumes but he bottled it and coped out.

 

Then again his features have gotten worse since Pulp Fiction so what was I expecting.

 

So he should have made one 4 hour film?

[Evil Gringo 279]

I would have paid to see it and watched it and enjoyed.

 

But thats just my view, everyone is a critic after all.

 

But my feelings are regarding films, music, books or whatever creative medium, well they are that if you have a vision or a dream and want to capture then do not allow yourself to be restricted.

 

That view no doubt has hampered my feelings on the splitting of Potter and previously Kill Bill but that is honestly how I feel.

[Nimf 324]

A 4 hour film would be FAR too long for kids to sit through. Who are, after all, who these films are really aimed at. As long as they don't leave too lnog between both films, i'm all for it!