ROTTEN TOMATOES: Warners, David Yates Splitting Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in Two

Warners, David Yates Splitting Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in Two

by Jeff Giles | March 13, 2008

Summary

Remember those rumors from awhile back about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows being split into two films? They aren't rumors anymore. Back to Article

(41-60 of 92 posts) | Reply

trpsomewhere writes:
on Mar 13 2008 04:19 PM

maybe you can make it 7a and 7b... would that make everyone happy?! lol

(Reply to this)

Bane Of Anubis writes:
on Mar 13 2008 04:50 PM

The book, like the previous ones, could have been readily truncated -- for me, it's a shame they're expanding this into 2 movies -- book 7 (like 5 and 6) was typical serial writing -- a bunch of fluff culminating in a strong finish.

I never understood why people got so worked up about side stories being cut out. This filler is used to expound on character, I guess, but the movies have readily developed the characters personas (and it's not like these characters aren't prototypical archetypes). Then again, maybe if I were twelve or thirteen, I might be sorely disappointed if they didn't include The Great BFMONW Campout and other sundries.

(Reply to this)

rt_hire_me writes:
on Mar 13 2008 08:07 PM

Split the movie, include more of the story. The stuff left out isn't necessarily "filler". The racial themes, for example, coming from the oppression of the house elves would have worked great in the movies, but I'm no script writer and I understand some things have to go. So split the books up and do more movies. I sometimes wonder why more great novels like this aren't treated in 15-20 television episodes instead of feature films. Audiences would get the whole story. They'd be chomping at the bit for the next episode. And at the end of the season, the story ENDS and never has to jump the shark by dragging it on.

(Reply to this)

Floor Man writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:08 PM

"We could not imagine the final chapter of the film franchise being in better hands than those of David Yates."

Really? Really??? Like, say, maybe...Alfonso Cuarón?

(Reply to this)

writeitagain writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:14 PM

David Yates' effort in Order...was abysmal. He dampened each potential dramatic high note with an apparent refusual to trust the process. He seemed hellbent on refusing to allow climaxes, instead directing movement and emotion to atonality. His stubborn (adolescent-like) insistence that his movie would be a priori "the shortest of the series" betrayed a director whose agenda was generated, from the onset, by an idiosyncratic vision not requiring faithfulness to the organic needs of story, plot and character.
I am so sad that Mr. Yates is being given an opportunity to stupify if not kill three more films of this literary masterwork.

(Reply to this)

ajmk123 writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:15 PM

Floor Man, why use the man who made the worst movie? Cuaron is a joke, go away.

(Reply to this)

Spike1967 writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:31 PM

Is it me, or has anyone else noticed, that this is clearly a greedy move by the studio to make more money off this franchise by splitting it into 2 films.

(Reply to this)

Spike1967 writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:32 PM

Is it me, or has anyone else noticed, that this is clearly a greedy move by the studio to make more money off this franchise by splitting it into 2 films.

(Reply to this)

AquaFina writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:32 PM

Cuaron made the most interesting film of the five, the only one that might stand on its own merits, outside of the series, as a piece of art. That one of the earlier books comes across as the darkest film of the series speaks volumes for his command of the camera; the cinematography is gorgeous, the pacing tight even despite a potentially confusing time-travel plot mechanism, and the characters exist as people, not just wizards. It's also the best acted of the five.

You grumble because he doesn't spell it out for you like Chris Columbus did, like Yates is doing; because he interprets and shapes instead of laying the novels down on film line for line. If it bothers you so I'd suggest you need an upgrade of imagination. I saw these films already, when I read the fantastic books on which they were based. I'd like a little creativity when it comes to the screen versions.

(Reply to this)

Silverevilchao writes:
on Mar 13 2008 09:54 PM

The problem with PoA is NOT the director, or the script, or anything even relating to the process of the movie.

It is the source material.

Out of all of the Harry Potter books, I thought Prisoner of Azkaban was easily my least favorite. It was boring as hell and lacked suspense and a decent story. The movie sucked because its source sucked.

(Reply to this)

FlailingArm writes:
on Mar 13 2008 11:18 PM

You can read the official press statement from Warner Bros. on this here:

http://www.hollywoodchicago.com/forums/1663/harry-potter-and-the-deathly-hallows-to-be-split-into-two-movies#comment-959

(Reply to this)

Paralyzer writes:
on Mar 13 2008 11:38 PM

it's all about squeezing some more cash from the potter broomstick.yates does'nt do it for, so does the halfblood prince which is going to be 80% flashbacks...arrg.i see no reason why the deathly hallows coudn't just be 3 hours.warner is getting greedy

(Reply to this)

randomfan writes:
on Mar 14 2008 12:15 AM

Why, why are they keeping Yates and Kloves, Kloves especially. At least they got rid of Goldenberg. WB made two major huge mistakes when they decided to pursue this franchise. A) They started making the movies before the books were finished, and B) they didn't hire a screenwriter that actually read the books. I'll start with the latter first. The reason why the LOTR franchise worked was because it was fronted by someone who enjoyed the books, and wanted to see it done right. That wasn't what WB did. They hired someone to write it because the idea intrigued him.
Why they started making the movies before the books finished I will never know. It doesn't make sense from a writing standpoint. They are so tied together, that random details in the book turn out really important later on, only they happen to get cut from the film. It lacks common sense from my standpoint.
Personally, I don't like any of them, because they are horrible representations of the books, and even when I watched them without thinking about the books at all, I didn't enjoy them. I can only hope that with the two movies instead of one, that they can get more details in.
Question to those who like the 5th movie because it was darker. How do you figure, they cut all the dark parts from the book out. They cut him losing confidence in his dad/Sirius. They cut out angsty violent yelling Harry(which I was really looking forward to). And they changed the end of it so much that I was confused as to what I was watching. Where was him smashing the office and raging at Dumbledore. All in all, the movie was lacking.

(Reply to this)

TheAnswerMVP2001 writes:
on Mar 14 2008 12:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#1630356)
There is, read the article again, last paragraph.

(Reply to this)

Johnnymojo88 writes:
on Mar 14 2008 01:56 AM

In reply to this comment (#1630376)
I agree with you! OotP is my favorite movie, though PoA is a close second. Not only is the story of 5 better, but the trio (especially Radcliffe) are better actors in the most recent movie so they bring it to life better. That said, I think in the directing category, Alfonso takes the cake with 3. Yates is terrific though, and considering both the excellence of Deathly Hallows as source material, and how much better the kids are going to be as actors by the time they make that one, I wouldn't be surprised if the Deathly Hallows movies (which will be insane to watch back to back some lucky day) are the best in the series.

(Reply to this)

Johnnymojo88 writes:
on Mar 14 2008 02:01 AM

In reply to this comment (#1630482)
I'd imagine that both of the movies will be upwards of 2 1/2 hours. Hell, I'd sit through two Return of the King length Deathly Hallows movies if it means getting it right.

(Reply to this)

jdeuel writes:
on Mar 14 2008 03:24 AM

Honestly these movies just keep getting worse as the books got longer

so much cut out, so much added just to satisfy kids in the audience, and then a little fan service

(Reply to this)

Bk_Tan writes:
on Mar 14 2008 04:32 AM

In reply to this comment (#1631005)
to opTImus Nerd
you really are a complete and utter loser are you not?
well with a name like that it's obvious but your comments are incredibly distasteful and reek of idiocy and stupidity.
you are obviously not a fan and don't read a lot. you can't simply just jump into the action which is what you were hoping for wasn't it? actually in my opinion there was action throughout but you obviously cannot read too it seems. the first part of the book is not only about camping you illiterate troll. there's story development needed to set up the final scenes but action fanboys such as yourself don't think about things like that, not that you can think.
why don't you stop trolling about things you don't know and go and suck your little transformers soft toy and cry? i mean that's about the only thing you are capable of doing with a brain as non existent as yours and take your pathetic jokes and incompetent sarcasm with you.
now go little one. =)

(Reply to this)

martinscorsese25 writes:
on Mar 14 2008 05:06 AM

i know yates is a good choice. i'm okay with that. but i was really hoping for a well known director like maybe alfonso( who did an amazing job of making a potter "film") i would also prefered guelliermo( but stupid "new line" snached him up, sorry but i'm not a big fan of tolkien books, although i'm a big fan of jackson's movies. but i just don't get the fuss about "the hobbit") i would also like a chris colombus dark potter films(cause you know, 1 and 2 were a little bit childish, just hoping for him to redeem himself) , or a steven spielberg film. so to sum up, my favorites among those are the mexicans. and my second choice is spielberg or chris. just for the idea of having John Williams back, brings joy to my heart. i know hooper is godd but just imagine if john williams would have composed thsoe music. you'll be humming it everytime.

so all in all im okay with yates, AGAIN!!! just bring back john williams, i mean he just said before that there is a 90% chance of him comming back in DH. enough of hooper, he's got order and half-blood now. WB, please, convince david that his FRIEND(the only reason he got the job on order) hooper has had enough potter. its time to bring back the master.

(Reply to this)

coochiexyz writes:
on Mar 14 2008 05:06 AM

oh cool! this means more snape! me thinks alan rickman (snape) has to have more screen time since he plays one of the most complex characters in modern lit. all he did in the previous movies was to glare at harry. hopefully, he'll be able to stretch his acting muscles more on the next harry installments.

(Reply to this)