Harry Potter hangs up wand in 2011 Warner Bros has announced that its Harry Potter franchise will wind up with a 15 July 2011 release for Deathly Hallows: Part II, the BBC reports. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is due to hit the big screen in July this year - an eight-month knock-back designed to "guarantee the studio a major summer blockbuster in 2009 …
Hmm. My copies of Half-Blood and Hallows are exactly the same length. I guess that means that the Half-Blood movie will be the same crap that Order of the Phoenix was. If you hadn't read the book, you couldn't follow the mish-mash of disconnected events. If you had read the book, you hated the way it was all chopped up.
"Warner Bros has announced that its Harry Potter franchise will wind up with a 15 July 2011 release for Deathly Hallows: Part II, the BBC reports."
Until they make "Harry Potter and the Quest For More Money" and "Harry Potter and the Onset Of Puberty", that is.
"Order of the Phoenix" was one of those rare occasions where the film was far better than its source material, although that was never going to be hard given that the book itself was a steaming mound of crap. I managed half of the sixth book before boredom set in, and never bothered with the 7th.
Paris, 'cos she could have made a better job of writing the last three HP books.
If you're reading this in the first place you'll certainly be aware that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was split into two cinematic outings "as it was impossible to cram its 608 pages into a single film", as the BBC puts it.
Yeah... its impossible to squeeze that much crap into a single dvd box.
I'm an unashamed Harry Potter fan and I am saving up watching the movies until they all come out so that I can watch them all in one long film fest weekend (sad for a 47 year old I know). I'm obviously going to be waiting some time but there again JK Rowling kept us waiting with the books.
A pal of mine does the cooking for the film crew and apparently they have another 18 months filming left. If anyone wants any autographs I can get them :-) .
Well hopefully, Warner Bros. decided to cut all the Riddle/Gaunt familly history filler that was both a waste of time in the Half Blood Prince book, and yet took up over half the book. If so, that would explain why they are able to fit Half Blood Prince into one movie instead of two.
IIRC, Half-Blood Prince was shorter than book 7. Of course, if "608 pages" is to be the reasoning to split book 7, well, they should've split book 5 as well!
Agreed with some commenters though, J.K. Rowling did seem a little ... tired in the last books; book 6 was kind of a sleep-through in a lot of parts, and well a good chunk of book 7 was kind of dull as well.
Lots of negativity on here towards the books and films. I enjoyed ng them to my children - aand as they got older they all re-read them themselves. Yes some were a little bit long and complicated but I loved the twists etc.
Ms Rowling is a great author - a complex web of stories that appeals to adult and child alike.
They were aimed at children - so most people who read the register are not the target audience
Looking forward to the next films. The only problem will be whether the stars will look way too old!?.
It took a long time for her to write the books, a lot more than the 7 years of time that elapses - which affects the films too.
Paris - because she could enwitch me anytime
Oh, there are a LOT of 'sheep' watching HP just because 'everyone' says it is the best thing since sliced bread!
Don't get me wrong, I like the books, but there is a huge dose of 'Right Place, Right Time' and media spin to their success - there are a lot of far better books sitting quietly on shelves, unread, because they are not the book of the moment.
Having "deathly hallows" as 2 films has, I think, less to do with the length of the book and more to do with the fact that Warner paid for the rights to make 8 films out of the HP books ... I think the original rationale was that they were covering themselves in case JKR decided to start an 8th book despite her continual statements that the HP series was 7 books, no more and no less. As a result they've got the ability to make one more film than than there are books so a bit of post hoc rationalisation has come up with the "its too long for one film so we'll have to make two" argument.
All this bloody suspension is half-killing me heheh geddit?
Basically the Prince is a transmission belt between the Phoenix and the Hallows - not so much of an independent book at those. It's unfair to compare them. The Hallows deserves two films cos it wraps everything up. The earlier film is a crescendo to the finale.
And films and books are different, so get over it. The actors fit their parts well. The scenes are well presented. What's missing is a lot of the atmosphere, and the subtlety of the clash of principles beyond goody and baddy - who represents what and why. And a lot of the fear behind the horror - the Dementors! Together with a lot of the fun.
Anyway good on the books and good on the films and good on Rowlings. At last someone decent is rich, and has obviously put a lot of thought and work into what she's done. And given it to the kids!
(Paris cos she gives it all, too, and mainly for the kid in us! Not too sure about the decency, thought and work, though, although the fake president thing was fun.)
I don't hate the Harry Potter books. I even managed to read up until 'The Order of the Phoenix'; unfortunately that was such a meandering mess of self-indulgant timewasting I didnt get any further.
I have always had a soft spot for a good adventure and enjoyed the preceding books up to a point. I find the series' success a bit confusing though. They don't really do anything new as the vast majority of ideas in the books being recycled from elsewhere. Rowling has just borrowed liberally from other works to create a universe and written a fairly classic 'heros journey' story against that backdrop.
I suppose their main attraction is that they are easy to read and for that reason I would put them in the same category as 'The Davinci Code' - Another book that uses interesting ideas developed by others as a backdrop for a fairly unremarkable adventure story that became incredibly popular due to a combination of zeitgeist and ease of accessibility.
As others have said the books were 'written for children', but so what? Phillip Pullman managed to write a set of 'childrens books' that still felt fresh and challenging for readers of all ages and intellects. If I had kids I would definitely read them 'His Dark Materials' in preference to potter books - I think they would enjoy them more and would benefit more from listening to them.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
