|
JANUARY 14, 2008 at 8:02 AM
Posted by GERI
Source: Daily Mail
UPDATE: Some of this has been officially confirmed by Warner Bros.
This past weekend a story
hit the web stating that the last film in the Harry Potter franchise, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, will be shot as two films. While this story originally appeared in a British newspaper it has spread like wildfire around the internet. You may remember that a similar rumor appeared online while filming of Order of the Phoenix was taking place.
According to the article the reason given by an unnamed source is that splitting the two films is artistic rather than financial reasons. The article also states that Warner Bros. is rumored to be thinking of Steven Spielberg as director of the last movie.
UPDATE: Empire Online reports that the WB has let them know that "no decision has been made about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" and that Steve Kloves will be returning for the last picture but that no script has been started due to the Writer's Guild of America (WGA) strike.
Reader Comments (137)
click to read...
Your Thoughts
click to write...
Copyright © 2002-2009 HPANA. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. 
HPANA is an unofficial fan site, in no way affiliated with J.K. Rowling,
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury Publishing or Warner Bros. Entertainment. All
trademarks and copyrighted material are the property of their respective owners.
About HPANA | Movie 6 | Send a news tip | Contact us | Privacy policy
Head Girl
Points: 453
Poppysock says:
Woah! That would be cool!!
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:25 AM EST
The Jedi Who Says Ni!
Points: 6695
Jel E.Bean says:
That would be an interesting twist to end the saga but it sounds too good to be true. I'd love for it to be true but it I dunno?
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:32 AM EST
Order of Merlin, 4th Class
Points: 1328
Judas says:
It's probably not true. I would prefer if they made it into one big movie....like Lord Of The Rings. I wish Peter Jackson was directing this :P
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:33 AM EST
Witch
Points: 866
Linakekei says:
This is so cool! I don't think by any means that it will happen but it's cool! I don't know how I would feel about Speilberg directing though. He's great and all but I feel that he might make it too kiddish. And what about the trio...they only are contracted for 2 more movies (6 and 7). If 7 is split up then what?
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:33 AM EST
Prefect
Points: 302
Stacki says:
Interesting... I don't know how people from UK feel about this, I'm a bit worried, I know My friend, Deike, from Germany wasn't too keen on having Spielberg do a British based film. If he does do it, I hope that he doesn’t change the basic outlook of the film from what it is currently!!! =)
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:34 AM EST
Witch
Points: 866
Linakekei says:
Again...still super cool but I agree with mahfee they should make it one long movie.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:35 AM EST
Keeper of the Faeries
Points: 5239
juliebug04 says:
While both would be nice, I'll wait for official word from the WB on both items before I cheer or not. ;o)
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:56 AM EST
Witch
Points: 566
gryffindor 12 says:
If this is true that would be absolutely awesome!!! I wish they would have done something like that for the last four movies because there is so much information. Please keep us informed any chance you get. Thank you for posting it.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 8:59 AM EST
St. Mungo's little helper
Points: 2466
Manfred says:
I agree with you juliebug04... I won't cheer until we hear word from WB!
I still think that the movies are no good whatsoever... What WB haven't understood is that they've should have done what Peter Jackson did with the Lord of the Rings - make extended editions for fans to watch (as some ao you others seem to think as well)! :(
*Manny out*
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 9:02 AM EST
Keeper of Harry's Fate
Points: 8934
TheOneWhoMustBeNamed says:
Very unlikely to be true. This came up for Goblet of Fire as well. So no surprise here at all. My guess is one long movie. However, I would not be surprised to learn and see that they are shooting way more material so that they can then release a revised cut movie or movies as a collector edition, once the entire series is done. Just makes sense. This was done on Lord of the Rings and even Star Wars.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 9:23 AM EST
Prefect
Points: 369
Big_D says:
Its probobly not true but that would have been so awesome!!!It will probably just be one wicked long movie because that book explains everything so they can't almost any of it! I am so excited for the seventh movie!
iheartlockhart
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 9:37 AM EST
Order of Merlin, 3rd Class
Points: 1433
Brianna Huckpuck says:
This is obviously bull... They'll just cram everything into one movie, like they've been doing all along.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 9:39 AM EST
Head Boy
Points: 472
Squims says:
I might be in the minority here, but I most definitely do NOT want a two-part movie, and am 100% sure that I don't want Steven Spielberg to be let within a radius of 100 miles of the HP series.
I somehow don't think the two movie idea will work. The book is just not structured to be split into two. If it could have been done, Jo would have written the books that way. No, I prefer it to be one long movie. A run-time of just over 3 hours will do absolutely fine in my opinion. Though it's extremely doubtful that they'd make the movie so long, I'd still rather we have a single movie instead of two.
And regarding Steven Spielberg...he's a great director and all that, but if people remember what he wanted to do with the first film, I'm sure that even a single Potter fan wouldn't want him directing a HP movie. He wanted to make the first movie into an animation, combining the first two or three novels together that too! He also wanted to cast Haley Joel Osment as Harry, change the setting of the books and Americanise the whole thing! That's definitely one man I don't want to get anywhere near HP. It would be a disaster.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 9:52 AM EST
Witch
Points: 663
Severus*is*my*hero says:
This sounds HIGHLY unlikely. All of it - I think them wanting Steven Seilberg is the most unlikely of all! And why on earth would they make it two movies? Doen't even make any sense.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:08 AM EST
Witch
Points: 677
Fawkes's Lament says:
WHOA!!! I don't know how I feel about this. I want Yates to stay and I want DH to be as long as Return of the King. Is that too much to ask????
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:15 AM EST
Prefect
Points: 302
Stacki says:
Squims, I entirely agree!!! I think that Spielberg will change the entire appearance of the movie! I can see why spliting the two would help fit in more information, but JK Rowling would have made it into two books if it wasn't so important to keep it together in one book.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:19 AM EST
Mrs. Draco Malfoy
Points: 27761
Arika Granger Malfoy says:
I hope its true, but I wont get too excited until WB confirms or denys it
but wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo just to get it out of my system. :p
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:27 AM EST
Squib
Points: 152
ElvenLuna says:
I would not like him to direct it at all. It'll be too Spielberg-y. I would love the movie to be split into 2 (as long as there isn't a gap between release dates)
But don't believe everything the 'Daily Mail' tells you.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:38 AM EST
Student
Points: 249
Nymphadora_Banshee says:
What an awful rumour.
Old S isn't up for a Potter movie, I don't think.
If anyone from The States is going to do it, I think Tim Burton should, to capture the spooky feel and intense deaths of the last book...
Just a thought.
I really don't think they would split it for theatre release either, I think a lot of fans won't like that ... if it was two movies I know I wouldn't go see it in theatres even, I'd just wait for DVD release, it's like they're trying to get your money twice for it, and I already go see HP movies twice.
Gah. Rumours.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 10:38 AM EST
Prefect
Points: 331
Andros&Aiden says:
Deathly Hallows is probably the first movie in the series where doing an extended edition would actually be an option. Up until then, an inconvenient majority of the actors were underage, and thus subject to stringent restrictions on how many hours per day/week they could be asked to work. They had to concentrate on key scenes for the movie.
Two movies wouldn't make sense. One for flitting about the countryside, one for the final battle? Uh, no.
And I'd have to agree that I don't want Spielberg anywhere near this. I wouldn't mind having Cuaron back, but from comments elsewhere, I suspect I'm in the minority on that one.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 11:30 AM EST
Witch
Points: 796
saresy pie says:
Isn't this just a clever way for the movie companies to make twice as much money by splitting the film in to 2 parts. Milking it before the franchise runs out. Unnecessary, especially for deathly hallows, there's gonna be a lot to cut out with all the camping and travelling etc, there;s no need for 2 films, plus Steven Speilberg, as cool as that would be, no thank you, wrong film, wrong director.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 11:33 AM EST
Weird Sisters Bassist
Points: 8449
Paper Cut says:
That would be awful. OotP was way longer than DH and was one film. DH will manage perfectly fine as a film of about 2 to 3 hours long. I know we want a long one, but it's not really practical. And I think that lots of DH can be condensed. lots of it is descriptions of the countryside and talking. I know we all hate the idea of cutting, but I think there's scope to take out certain scenes and concentrate on the plot. I would be severaly pissed off if it was 2 filmx. Who wants to go watch a film, and then have to wait however long for the second part to come out to see what happens? And while there's probably too much material for one movie, I don't think there's enough for 2. Then we'd end up with two poor movies, that had extra stuff added in OR they used the scenes in the book down to the last word. And no one wants to see endless scenes of them sitting about in forests!
And where would be an appropriate place to split? It can't be after Malfoy Manor because everything just snowballs from there, but it's not long before then that they destroy the locket. IF it spelit before then, nothing would have really happened in the story! No no no, it would be awful. Don't do it WB!
I'm not sure about choice of diectors. I liked Mike Newman and David Yates. Tim Burton would NOT be good for HP, his films are just plain weird and HP needs to stick to the plot to make any logical sense.
Stephen Spielburg...I doubt it's true. Come on, this is the Daily Mail right! They are more liely to report rubbish than truth 9 times out of 10.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 12:01 PM EST
Squib
Points: 186
Blondie900 says:
I have mixed feelings, first I think it might be a good idea because then they could fit more things in there that deserve to be in there but then again two movies means two different release dates...not very fun.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 12:17 PM EST
Points: 26
lindaschneider7 says:
I am in complete agreement with Squims. The Harry Potter movies should have been right up Speilberg's alley considering the movies he had previously made. Choosing to do an animated feature instead of a real movie was, in my opinion, a complete cop out. I think that his choice showed a complete lack of respect for the Potter series and its fans.
As far as the length of "The Deathly Hallows," I think it should be as long as it needs to be to tell the story properly. After all, both "The Sorcerer's Stone" and "The Chamber of Secrets" were quite long and that didn't seem to hurt them at the box office. I don't know why the last two directors have been so determined to keep the movies under two and a half hours. There are, in fact, people who choose not to read the books (sad,but true) and have only seen the movies. I can't help but wonder if they're able to figure out what's going on.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 12:47 PM EST
Prof. of Cultural Literacy
Points: 4469
PowerGranger says:
It's interesting to see how many of us are not pleased with the idea of Stephen Spielberg doing the last film. I, too, am a fan of Spielberg, but he would not be a fit for the HP series.
As for the book being made into two films, I also agree that it's a terrible idea. I have always thought they'd go big and long, like "Return of the King." It's totally warranted by the material and it's been very acceptable to go all-out for the final chapter of these iconic series. Nobody would be upset about a film that topped 3 hours.
I hadn't thought that the WGA strike would affect the seventh film, but isn't Steve Kloves American? Even if he weren't , I could see him not doing the work in solidarity with American writers, especially considering he'd be writing for the huge machine that is Warner Brothers.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 12:48 PM EST
Order of Merlin, 4th Class
Points: 1270
SlytherinHeiress says:
Ugh! I can't believe the strike is affecting the writing of the script! It would be so amazing if Speilberg directed the final movie. I think he would be able to capture the mood of the book very well. I really don't want that other guy to direct DH because from what I have read about him, he wants to create a more artistic adaptation of the book, which scares me because of how PoA turned out thanks to his buddy Curaon. I really want the final movie to be portrayed well because I want the movies to end as beautifully as the books did.
Posted Jan 14, 2008 at 12:53 PM EST
Back to top of page