Do you support warner bros for cutting harry potter 7 to 2 films ?

I'll probably watch both since the final book was my most favorite in the series.

Oh, and Harry Potter is one million times better than Twilight. I never thought I'd live to see the day where vampires were made to be like... THAT! UGH!

At first I thought it was a good idea. But I didn't think about all the implications. Whether or not it does the last book well, I can see them milking the hell out of this.

You'd have to buy two different tickets, probably have to buy both on DVD and it would be twice as much.

No, harry potter needs to die nao.Chiddaling

They had no problem taking liberties with trimming the stories to fit onto celluloid before, so why should this be any different. They want a bonus cash-in is why. I don't agree with it but it's good capitalism. I only watch Potter on DVD anyway so no big deal. Second_Rook

I actually think it's a better decision than trying to do it all in one.

I don't like the thought of it, then again I probably won't watch it in the theater. I'll probably wait for both DVD releases and watch them back-to-back, assuming I even can be bothered to watch it. It IS the only way for them to fit the contents of the book, so I guess I support it. Although, I can't help but ignore this niggling feeling that it's just an attempt to milk the series for cash. They'll be getting roughly DOUBLE the money for one movie.

Never been a Potter fan so dont care and that is what I voted.:D

roulettethedog

same here

I don't like the thought of it, then again I probably won't watch it in the theater. I'll probably wait for both DVD releases and watch them back-to-back, assuming I even can be bothered to watch it. It IS the only way for them to fit the contents of the book, so I guess I support it. Although, I can't help but ignore this niggling feeling that it's just an attempt to milk the series for cash. They'll be getting roughly DOUBLE the money for one movie.

DrSponge

Then again, LOTR did fit 2 books into each movie... (6 books in total)majoras_wrath

Each of the three named books technically have 2 books inside, its how it was originally released.

EDIT: Rather, as Tolkien intended it to be, at least according to my edition of LOTR

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]No, I do not. If Lord of the Rings can be done with one movie per one book, then Harry Potter should be able to. .DrSponge

Even when they are "just walking," the material is substantive. Besides, they cut out a good amount of "non-walking" as well.

In any case, imo, this is just Warner Bros. trying to milk people for more money.

Well I can see them ending the movies in mid-sentence.

Ron: "Harry he is dead"

Harry: "Who's dead?"

Ron: "Voldemort killed him Harry he killed...

TO BE CONTINUED.

The book had so many important details that you cant make a short movie about it, i dont want to be in a theater for four hours.

I hate that they did because now I will pay more (not a huge deal) but I'll have to wait longer to see the end.

No, I find it offensive.

if you want to stay true to the book... READ THE BOOK! movies almost never stay true to the source material, i dont get why everyone complains when they dont, most people who watch these movies dont read the books, i dont read the books and only watch the movies with friends or family i wouldnt ever watch them by myself, no real compulsion to rott my brains out unless there is company.

considering that there is so much in that book yes, this, is the best way to do it

Yes, it will allow them to put in more detail and backstory.

They ought to just have some balls and make one super-long movie.

People complained about the LOTR movies being too long, but people still went out and watched them.

And hell, they can even do like 2001 and throw a 15 minute intermission in the middle of the movie, if they think that audiences need a chance to stretch their legs and go to the restroom.

I'm all for keeping as faithful to the novel as possible in any movie based on a novel, so yes, I'm for this.

Is there a reason besides my immediate thought (milking it for the cash)tbone29

Probably not...i'm torn on my opinion...on one hand they can include more of the important parts of the story. On the other hand they get to suck more cash out of people for seperate box office and dvd releases

hell yes!!! after seeing how much they had to cut out of HBP i'm glad they're splitting DH up. it would have been a disaster trying to fit it into one movie.

[QUOTE="majoras_wrath"] Then again, LOTR did fit 2 books into each movie... (6 books in total)Second_Rook

[QUOTE="Second_Rook"][QUOTE="majoras_wrath"] Then again, LOTR did fit 2 books into each movie... (6 books in total)ChiliDragon

And if Rowling's editor had done his/her job then we wouldn't have this problem.... cut out all unnecessary stuff! That's what editors are supposed to be doing! :x

joke right?

Harry Potter films have been subpar since after the second one, so I don't really care. Maybe it had something to do with the original Dumbledore dying and being replace by a joke?

thats cool :D now i can watch two movies yay!

Harry Potter films have been subpar since after the second one, so I don't really care. Maybe it had something to do with the original Dumbledore dying and being replace by a joke?

Asim90

I think the new Dumbledore catches the witty, entertaining side of Dumbledore far better than the last guy.

"I'm afraid I'm not going to. . .what's the phrase? 'Come quietly.'"

Yes, it's a great idea. All of the books are long, since about the 4th one.. if you ask me thats when they should have started doing 2 part films.

[QUOTE="Asim90"]

Harry Potter films have been subpar since after the second one, so I don't really care. Maybe it had something to do with the original Dumbledore dying and being replace by a joke?

I think the new Dumbledore catches the witty, entertaining side of Dumbledore far better than the last guy.

"I'm afraid I'm not going to. . .what's the phrase? 'Come quietly.'"

Dumbledore only really featured in a Potter movie properly in the Half Blood Prince, and that was only because of what happened to him at the end. The movies have done an appalling job of making him an interesting character. His lines in the latest movie are hilarious though, but I feel the old Dumbledore suited the role better; his beautiful eyes were beautiful, not cold and dark like this new guy's. :xsuper_mario_128

[QUOTE="super_mario_128"]Dumbledore only really featured in a Potter movie properly in the Half Blood Prince, and that was only because of what happened to him at the end. The movies have done an appalling job of making him an interesting character. His lines in the latest movie are hilarious though, but I feel the old Dumbledore suited the role better; his beautiful eyes were beautiful, not cold and dark like this new guy's. :xLJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="super_mario_128"]Dumbledore only really featured in a Potter movie properly in the Half Blood Prince, and that was only because of what happened to him at the end. The movies have done an appalling job of making him an interesting character. His lines in the latest movie are hilarious though, but I feel the old Dumbledore suited the role better; his beautiful eyes were beautiful, not cold and dark like this new guy's. :xsuper_mario_128