Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. NEWS!

[GeorgeMichael]

Ok, I'm placing this in the literature Discussion section because it is one of the most important pieces of literature of this decade, and because there is some big news surrounding it that was just released. According to the distributor of the movies, I don't know who it is but it's the distributor, Fans are going to sit through eight Potter films instead of seven. The final book has been officially approved to be split into two movies, one to be released on November2010, and the other part on May 2011.

What are your thoughts on this, what do you think will be left out from the book this time? Is there anything really that can be cut from the seventh book without ruining the plot?



Here's the whole story.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-potter13mar13,1,5626063.story

[Ichigo]

...Oh wow. I have mixed opinions on this, on one hand, they'll probably include lots of action and most of the plot but having longer time to shoot the movie. On the other, we'll have to wait a whole new year to see the last bit. Which angers me very much. Rawr.

But also the guy was right...where would they split it?

[Imelda]

They should have split OotP, so I don't know why they're doing this. The first half is just going to be camping out, with a couple of deaths right at the beginning. It's stupid.

[Shaun]

This is a perfect way to kill a film franchise. Splitting the book in two? Good lord. Okay, so like Imelda said the first part would be...umm...camping...and apparating all over the place, but not doing a whole lot...and the second half will be action...so...umm...wow, so I can skip the first of the two films and just see the second, which will be far more entertaining.
Why don't they just make the damned thing 2 hours and 50 minutes long or something...good lord.

[Imelda]

Oh because then kids will need to pee in the middle. They can't have that.

[GeorgeMichael]

I wouldn't mind the two movie thing so much if they weren't released so far apart from each other :( I don't want the first movie to end like... I don't know... whenever, and then have to wait half a year for the next part.

[Lykaios]

2011? But that's so far away, the kids will be in their 20's . . .
The first half of the book is boring, just camping, like Imelda said, couldn't they cut some of that out?

[jordanisonfire]

This is what pisses me off. I don't care if the kids pee in the middle, I would rather have the movie based on my book three hours long rather than cut a load out. This is IF it gets made into a movie, which I very much doubt will happen. ^^ Like LotR, the books are two seperate books. I think they should have split those movies in half and added some of the other stuff like Tom Bombadil and all that stuff.

[Shaun]

Here's what I don't get. They said the reason for two films is because they don't want to cut from the book, but they didn't have a problem cutting the living crap out of the other books, so why suddenly a problem with the last book? If anything the last book could use a LOT of cutting. It wasn't the best in the series by a long shot and could have used an editor. You could make the film easily in 2 and a half hours, or three hours and give an intermission of 15 minutes or something so the stupid kids can pee. You could cut the book up a lot.

[Carraka]

It's all nothing to me. I'm not going to watch the seventh movie, first or second part.

I am not! It would ruin the seventh book! It ruined all the other books too!

-sigh-

-kicks a wall- Ow.

I'll watch the sixth movie, but that's it. No more than that.