Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.
no, its a way to be able to get twice as much money from the movie, probably more, and then of course there all of the movie merchandise that there will be from both, i know its supposed to be about business but come on....cutting the book in half would have been like cutting the watchmen movie in half and have it end where they delve in to rorschach's past
Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.JustPlainLucas
yea if they made it into 1 film it would of been as long as titanic, and that movie was loooooooooooong
Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.JustPlainLucas
Yes. I can watch a movie in the theater for about 2 and a half, maybe three hours...but a four hour film? I did that once with one of the Lord of the Rings movies, never again.
[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.anihimrox222
yea if they made it into 1 film it would of been as long as titanic, and that movie was loooooooooooong titanic???!!! what about the director's cut of return of the king im a LOTR fan but i can barely sit down to watch it....
[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.Hallenbeck77
Yes. I can watch a movie in the theater for about 2 and a half, maybe three hours...but a four hour film? I did that once with one of the Lord of the Rings movies, never again.The two movies are gonna be 5 hours , 2 and half hour each one , i don't think that anyone will se a 5 hour movie in the cinema .
They're not doing it for the story, because the last book wasn't the longest one, so seems like a money-grab. Therefore, no I don't.blackngold29
the 7th isn't the longest book , but it has a lot of important things happening in it that are really necessairy to understand the story , the fith one (1000 page ) had a lot of subplots and unecessairy details in it , it had the shortest MAIN story line , so the movie ended up begin the shortest one ,deathly hallows is gonna at least 5 hours to be comprehensible .
Yes, Im not a big fan of the books, but I do enjoy the movies, and im honestly tired of hearing everyone tell me that the Half Blood Prince was rushed (since i dont know what really happens in the book) I wouldn't mind a real book to film adaptation.
[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.GC4ever
yea if they made it into 1 film it would of been as long as titanic, and that movie was loooooooooooong titanic???!!! what about the director's cut of return of the king im a LOTR fan but i can barely sit down to watch it....*checks wiki* i stand corrected
Yes. This way they're not going to water it down and cut any good bits out, trying to fit the small 3 hour time slot. They have 6 hours now, so they shouldn't stuff it up.
When I first heard I didn't even care. I just wondered if they would give the moviues subtitles. "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1" or something... or if they'd have uniqe subtitles.
HP 1 and 2 in movie form were wonderful. Why? Because they stayed close to the source material. Everything after has been pretty lame, why? because there's too much source material to contain in the movie (plus bad directing etc choices). If cutting book 7 into 2 movies allows them to stay close to the source material I'm all for it. If the movies aren't I'll be severely disappointed and continue to hate on them.
Hell no! Why does it have to be split up into two?! Why weren't the other movies split up as well? I wouldn't mind if the time gap between part 1 and 2 wasn't ONE YEAR! I have to wait one whole year to see the other part? Dang it all :x
When I first heard I didn't even care. I just wondered if they would give the moviues subtitles. "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1" or something... or if they'd have uniqe subtitles.
DigitalExile
Naw, I don't think so. It'll be like Kill Bill 1 and Kill Bill 2. By the way, I've always wondered where your sig is from.
Splitting 'Deathly Hallows is a very obvious ploy to sucker people into paying for the one movie twice. It's unforgivable when you consider that 'Deathly Hallows has the least amount of content of any of the Harry Potter books.
When I first heard I didn't even care. I just wondered if they would give the moviues subtitles. "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1" or something... or if they'd have uniqe subtitles.
JustPlainLucas
Naw, I don't think so. It'll be like Kill Bill 1 and Kill Bill 2. By the way, I've always wondered where your sig is from.Click it, and you shall find. (Source mod Neotokyo if you're too lazy).
I agree with it: without MAJOR cutting, there is no way the book would fit into one movie. It's not like the others where 50% is just extra sidestories, this book is mostly plot. Not to mention they have to put in things they left out from the 6th movie.
What for? The final movie is basically just Harry, Ron and Hermione camping out in the middle of nowhere and doing nothing for half the book. I don't really care anyway, final book was crap and ruined the series, plus the movies are so disjointed because of all the different directors and because they didn't wait until after the series had finished to start making them.
Splitting 'Deathly Hallows is a very obvious ploy to sucker people into paying for the one movie twice. It's unforgivable when you consider that 'Deathly Hallows has the least amount of content of any of the Harry Potter books.NBSRDan
Agreed, unless they are going to put some missing plot pieces (like some of Snapes and Marauders backstory) in from the previous books, Deathly Hallows probably has the largest amount of useless crap in it except maybe for OotP.
There is a huge chunk right in the middle of the book that they could do to cut out, and there are many other non-essential scenes they could cut. They're only doing this for the money, nothing else. At least we know Deathly Hallows, Part 1 will be as boring as all hell :|.
I don't mind at all unless they make the movies like the book. Seeing that the sixth movie was bad and didn't seem like the book I hope they do it right this time.
[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.Hallenbeck77
Yes. I can watch a movie in the theater for about 2 and a half, maybe three hours...but a four hour film? I did that once with one of the Lord of the Rings movies, never again. AAAAhhh..... LOTR: The Return Of The King.... 3 Hours and 20 minutes of longness xD
[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]Isn't it supposed to be more than four hours all together? For the love of god, yes. Split it up. I don't want to be stuck in the theatre that long, and considering this is the final movie of the final book in the series, it only makes sense to try to do the book as much justice as they can.Hallenbeck77
Yes. I can watch a movie in the theater for about 2 and a half, maybe three hours...but a four hour film? I did that once with one of the Lord of the Rings movies, never again.
I once watched all 3 Lord of the rings movies in the theater, for more than 12 hours! (with the breaks)
I voted yes, although it's obviously a money making scheme. If I could know that the 2 films would be on one blu-ray disc, then I wouldn't mind. But anyway, I think that this is the best way to really stay true to the book. The newest HP film pretty much changed the story completely (It's still quite a good film).
Log in to comment