What is Digg?35 Comments
- Jader2toesbumpy, on 03/12/2008, -1/+13Maybe now they be able to make a movie that is true to the book.
- revslowmo, on 03/13/2008, -0/+5As long as its rated R and their is some nudity I am in!
- jmpeagle, on 03/13/2008, -0/+4radcliffe is going to be like 30 when the final one comes out
- herro, on 03/13/2008, -0/+4i will be fine with this decision so long as it's done well.
- mnetlucas, on 03/12/2008, -1/+4Unfortunately some people might see this as only a way to gain money...
- Morganzola13789, on 03/13/2008, -0/+3This is the best news I've heard in a while. Although I really did love what Alfonso Cuarón brought to Prisoner of Azkaban, I think David Yates is really great. I'm very excited! Hopefully they can fit everything into the movie now!
- BoyScout010, on 03/12/2008, -1/+3I don't think that it deals with money (well, at least not all of it).
If WB made a crappy movie they would recieve bad reviews. In result, DVD sales would plummet. Imagine how angry book-fans and movie-fans would be if the movie was crappy. The storyline of Death Hallows simply too vast and difficult to cramp into one movie. But, when they thought spliting the movie they probably realized, "oh, well make even MORE money." That also probably encouraged them a bit.
Besides Jo is ok with it since she signed off on it. I don't about other fans but when Jo says, "OK" on something, I usually feel assured. - indisguise, on 03/13/2008, -1/+3it doesn't matter to me that i have to pay for 2 movie tickets as long as its as true to the book as possible
- B0N3S, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1Hesitant about this one. By splitting the movie they better guarantee fans EXCELLENT movies, that are JUST like the book. No skipping major parts like the 4th and 5th movies.
But then again, Jo knows best. I'm going to keep my fingers crossed anyways. - misshannahmarin, on 03/12/2008, -1/+2it's true, but i'm sure it was also a factor in making the decision.
- WWWoody, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1Everything is about money.
- elizabethb221, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1"I swear to you it was born out of purely creative reasons," Heyman said during an interview in a converted airplane factory outside London that has been home base to all of the "Potter" productions. "Unlike every other book, you cannot remove elements of this book. You can remove scenes of Ron playing quidditch from the fifth book, and you can remove Hermione and S.P.E.W. [Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare] and those subplots . . . but with the seventh, that can't be done."
- Agger, on 03/13/2008, -1/+2Agreed, This is just to get more money... The won't be releasing the movie on 1 DVD (or 1 Bluray), they'll release it over 4 DVDs.
- Zendour, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1That's okay, maybe then he can play himself at the end of the movie when he has children haha!
- WWWoody, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1This better be the book and then some, no more of this "it wasn't important, we cut it" *****.
- Zendour, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1I have to agree. OOtP was the longest book, and the shortest movie... That aside, I have to say he didn't do a spectacular job with #5 anyway.
- B0N3S, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0Exactly. I just want a movie like the book. I don't care how long it is. :)
- oboy, on 03/13/2008, -1/+1I definitely don't think it's a decision based upon the money. The book is loaded with too much that cannot be cut. It isn't like the other movies where you could cut out subplots -- this one was almost entirely focused on the issues. Still, you know there are people who are happy to make an extra $400 million in net profit (plus other income streams). The choice wasn't a hard one.
- ajmrowland, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0There will always be deleted scenes. But they're still going to focus more on the bigger parts than just that. They could use montages, and there are some important parts in the tent, Like Ron leaving and coming back. I agree about the wait. However, I'm more worried about the length of the split between the two parts.
Yates isn't *****. He's just inexperienced. Number 5 was his first film after all. Before that, all he did was television. Honestly, what director doesn't make a few mistakes. I can't believe they cut out all those little plot enhancers, like Umbridge admitting she sent the Dementors after Harry. Goblet has better editing. - mnetlucas, on 03/12/2008, -1/+1why did someone digg you down? It was a factor, just not the only one.
- LRebaglia, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0WOO HOO!!! I honestly wouldn't care if it was an 8 hr movie... just make time for pee breaks, I'd stay the whole time and pay a mighty price, just to see the movie finally do the book justice! 2 movies just lets the magic last a little longer for those of us who are in depression about the end of the book series. Kudos to you WB and Yates! YAY
HP for life! - demodawid, on 03/12/2008, -3/+3Why not just one long movie? These people are desperate because they ran out of movies and this is the result.
- nightwolf182003, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0I personally believe that the seven movie should be 2 movies but they should be released at the same time as happened with titanic, Because with the amount of stuff that happens in the book there are going to be huge cliff hangers cuz once you get into the middle of the movie there is no way in hell that you are gonna wanna tear away from it for about 7 months before you see the rest of it. I just hope that the end of the first movie isnt in a good part cuz i will be saying my mind to WB and to yates
- LRebaglia, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0You are making a very typical generalization of the American audience. Let's not forget that this is Harry Potter we are talking about. Do a poll to see how many die hard HP fans wouldn't want to watch a 4 hour epic movie. I think you will find many of them. Also, while JK Rowling has to give her thumbs up on them cutting her books to pieces... she may not be happy about it. They throw out scenes that could have been easily done... and throw in ones that NEVER occurred in the book at all... see GoF the instructive dance scene.... although funny in its own right... it was a 10 minute add on that was not in the book. BTW, who cares about critics and their opinions. I make my own
- nightwolf182003, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0and i also heard that they are cutting fleur and bill out of the 6th book. How can that be done with how important they are in the Seventh book
- angeldragon023, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0
i really dont think its the money. if they made it all just one movie it would either be like eregon where they barely put 1/4 of the book in or it would have to be about 5 hours long to get the important parts in. who all has complained about them not putting certain parts into the previous movies? now how upset would you be if only 1/4 of the story was in DH? - Soragon, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0Good. The more HP the better for me. lol
I didn't really like OOPT but I think HPB will be better and hopefully DH. - Thumper13, on 03/13/2008, -1/+1They've already screwed the series up so much that 4 extra movies couldn't sort it all out.
Yeah, I'll see them. But I'm not happy with how they've handled the story so far.
I see this as a little bit story telling, large chance to make massive money. - ajmrowland, on 03/13/2008, -1/+0They don't skip MAJOR parts, just stuff that doesn't have anything to do with the MAIN PLOT. They do consult J.K. about these things and only her approval makes the changes. Did House Elves have anything to do with the Tournament(Except potion ingredients and certain owners)? DVD has taught me an awful lot about this sort of thing.
American and British audiences don't accept long movies. Otherwise the Deathly Hollows split wouldn't have happened and Pirates 3 would be well reviewed. And our movies would be as long as those in India(which make about as much B.O. money anyways. They call it the Intermission). - Agger, on 03/13/2008, -2/+1Oh how I hate the movies... And to split the last movie over 6 months... ***** money whores!
- 007kz, on 03/12/2008, -2/+1+1 for two-part movie
-1 for David Yates
>_> - angeldragon023, on 03/13/2008, -1/+0i really dont think its the money. if they made it all just one movie it would either be like eregon where they barely put 1/4 of the book in or it would have to be about 5 hours long to get the important parts in. who all has complained about them not putting certain parts into the previous movies? now how upset would you be if only 1/4 of the story was in DH?
- julianwan, on 03/13/2008, -3/+1Oh yea! I remember that Harry Potter kid!
- nhurst09, on 03/13/2008, -3/+1This is terrible. All the producers are trying to do is get a larger payoff. Yes more of the story will be included but its not like there werent cuttable parts. The 300 pages harry and hermione spend in the tent could defiantely be cut. Yates is a ***** director and i cant believe they havn't found anyone better for the job. This is the worst news i have heard yet. Plus it adds another 6 months to the wait for DH.
- inactive, on 03/13/2008, -5/+2What??? Half of the last book was filler anyways. Ron literally says "we're not doing anything, I'm bored , I'm leaving" How are they going to stretch the least content filled book into two?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is