Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows (Parts I and II) discussion - Page 8

In the case of Goblet of Fire (an annoying novel loaded with filler and pointless subplots), that was probably for the best.

 

Thing is another 15 minutes to each, especially OOTF anf HBP, adding the stuff with Neville and Vold/Gaunts IMHO would have made for much better films with alot of good background info.

 

Funny I comment on those 2 films could use  more fleshing out, as they may be the ones I enjoy most.

Order Of The Phoenix is VERY well crafted to me...just a from a sheer cinematic perspective, the pace is just about perfect and relentlessly takes hold of me and never lets go. Of all the Potter films, OOTP (as well as HBP) seem to get richer with each viewing.

Why not?

Blu-ray can't hold a five hour movie? Lord of the Rings EE are split across two discs, aren't they? Hypothetically, they'd edit Harry Potter 7a & 7b together and then split the movie over two discs...giving you exactly the two movies you saw in the theater?

They'll always want to make more money by selling each part on its own rather than put it in one Deathly Hallows package.

nah they'll sell it three ways, deathly hallows part 2 (for all those who've already bought part 1) a combo pack of parts 1&2 together and an ultimate edition that has them cut together as a single film (split over two discs).

This is exactly how Warner presentted Stephen King's IT on DVD. It was originally a two-part miniseries. The two parts were edited together into a single three-hour movie, losing a bit of footage (over which the opening credits were originally displayed) from the beginning of part 2. The DVD contains this single-movie version, but split across a double-sided disc.

Also, the two parts of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows are only a little over four and a half hours, combined. I think that might fit on a single Blu-ray disc, albeit tightly, especially without all the extra audio tracks Lord of the Rings was saddled with.

I'm sure they'll keep them separate initially, but you really don't think they'll ever get around to combining them in order to market a brand new version?
Edited by cafink - 7/20/11 at 8:59am

OK, I should never say never but I'd bet that the two DHs being sold as one item (or more specifically, having the MSRP of one item) is years away at best.

I guess it means what you mean by "edited together". There's maybe 20 minutes of redundant closing and opening credits between them? So perhaps the whole thing could be trimmed to 4 hours. But LOTR:FOTR:EE is under 4 four hours and still split over two discs. So even if HP7 was "edited" together, the end result would still likely be split across two discs, playing very much like the separate movies now.

 

But I can see that a single package, and losing unnecessary credits redundancies, might make for better home viewing.

 

But it's not apparent there's a lot of "editing" to unify them into a single movie, nor would current Blu-ray, allowing for best encoding, soon give a single-disc viewing.

I think the ending felt anti-climactic, mostly because the oscar-worthy performance Rickman gave 2/3 of the way through. Snape stole the show, as he nearly always does. But if Alan Rickman isn't nominated for best supporting actor (finally) for an incredible performance capping off an amazing run as Professor Snape then the Academy is truly lost. I don't care that it's a commercially successful movie.

I'm a couple days late and it sounds like you got most of your answers, but this statement shocked me. I can't believe anyone would think it accurate. I'd question those sources.

The main things dropped from the movies was the brilliant complexity and depth Rowlings brought to the history and relationships of the people. I'm comfortable using the word "brilliant" because stringing together 3500 pages or so and making it all come together is pretty damn impressive.

Anyway, these are old wizarding families and the prejudices and alliances build over generations. Beginning especially with Prisoner of Azkaban, there are some serious explanations missing re the James/Lily/Snape triangle and the interaction of Lupin, Sirius Black and Wormtail. The movies also greatly soften what a prick Harry was at times, as well as James. In a book, it makes them seem more real. In a movie, I suppose it would take too much of a shot at the hero. Deathly Hallows and the explanation of the wands, horcruxes and Snape's redemption is particularly detail heavy so it's not surprising some of it doesn't make sense the first time through the movies. I've reread sections of DH more often than any of the other books.

They also cut out a lot of the class time and day to day student life, but that's not as much of a loss.

The books shouldn't be pigeonholed as childrens' books. They are entertaining for all ages, including children. There's a difference. Oh, and you say you're 32 like you're too old for them to appeal to you. I'm 44 and was in my mid-late thirties when I picked them up. I will admit that the first one was a bit tough to read as an adult, but they get more complex fast.

A question on the music. I really liked the song playing at the end after they cut to Harry and Hermione once the train leaves (before the credits roll)..but it's cut short. Does that music play throughout the series ? If so, which movies ? It's a theme...just don't remember if it's constant throughout all 7 films or not.

Sure, horses for courses and all that. For me, the LOTR films just appealed to me more. It appealed more to my age group. Although I'm sure there are many my age who have children and enjoy watching the films. I don't have children yet though.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) is they would have lost their PG-13 rating and it would have moved to R. Can't remember where I saw that, but I read it somewhere.

That piece was originally called 'Leaving Hogwarts', and it was written by John Williams for the finale of the very first Potter movie. It was then adapted, with some minimal changes, into 'Reunion of Friends' by composer William Ross for the end of the second film. Here composer Alexandre Desplat restated it again quite faithfully, with some minor alterations to fit the scene. While I remain saddened Williams didn't return to tackle this final film himself, this was a nice nod from the younger composer and a fitting way to bookend the series.

In terms of actual themes, it's really a summation of several different themes from the first Potter score.

If that is true, then garbage.   The MPAA is a bunch of idiots.   I'm completely at this point totally fed up with the way the ratings system works.  I've seen violent gory films that should get a guaranteed "R" get a PG-13, some films get an "R" when they are nothing short of torture porn, and now there is a concern that a fantasy death at the end of a magic wand will get an R?

 

Ugh.   I am so looking forward to the day the ratings system goes away and we just go to see a film with it labeled like TV ratings "D-MV-A-L" etc.  Whatever.   I get that parents need to know, but the system has been gamed for years.

 

Which is made all the more ridiculous when you think about the scene where Harry casts that offensive spell on Malvoy, two films back. He was bleeding everywhere...if I remember. Not sure why Snapes killing blow was omitted....it's not like his head was decapitated or anything.

In addition, Malfoy was a minor, which you would have expected to raise even more questions.

I will never understand their ratings. I don't have a teenager yet, just a little girl. But I should expect that when they become a teenager, that I think i would prefer them seeing a little exposed skin (which seems to terrify the MPAA), over the amount of violence and dead bodies that were in Part II.

Nevertheless, it was an outstanding movie.

Amazing. The Ziegfeld Theater in NYC is showing Harry Potter twice daily in 3D and twice daily in 2D.

I was instantly excited that I could see it in 2D, then I remembered... They will need to switch the lens. Will they actually do that between each show? Switching lenses on a digital projector is extremely difficult.

So I called them today and spoke with someone who had the knowledge of a blank piece of paper.

My kids and I want to see this one, but not in 3D. If we could go to the Ziegfeld, it would be amazing. But not if the picture is as dim and grim as the economic outlook.

Anyone here see it at the Ziegfeld?

2D times... 1 and 7:15 PM

3D times... 4 and 10:15 PM

Just a question for the experienced Harry Potter fans/readers. If the elder wand belonged to Harry and he was it's true master then why would he be 'killed' by Voldemort in the forest ? I assumed the elder wand would not harm it's master. Just need clarification on that.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Voldemort wouldn't be able to kill Harry with the EW in their final duel at the end of the film. No matter what he did. This is what I gathered...but I'm no expert. All the attacks from Voldemort that Harry seemingly deflected was not out of skill (which I initially thought) but actually due to the elder wand not wanting to hurt it's master ? Am I correct in saying that ?

If that is true then I'm a little disappointed. It's like Harry didn't really do anything at all. The film makes it look like Harry was holding his own meanwhile his ability to stay with Voldemort was reduced to his wand acting erratically.

"Just a question for the experienced Harry Potter fans/readers."

As a moderately experienced HP fan, I'll take a shot at this. Harry wasn't "killed" in the forest. The piece of Voldemort's soul within him was killed, and the shock sent Harry into limbo.

Re: the final duel, yes, Voldemort couldn't kill Harry with his wand. In the book, Harry explains this to him, which shows just how much he's learned about the wizarding world. Voldemort is unfamiliar with all sorts of magic that he saw as irrelevant to his quest for power, and that was a big part of his downfall.

I believe the attacks that Harry deflects are out of skill. It's incorrect to assume that V can't hurt him. There are a lot of spells Voldemort could use that would incapacitate Harry, and then rip his throat out with his bare hands, for example. If he wasn't so obsessed, he could have had someone else kill Harry as well.

It all plays out better in the book, in my opinion, with Harry shining as a true hero.

They should have done to the Potter films what they did for the LOTR movies. Make a regular edition for theatrical releases. Then an extended version released on dvd.

 

 

Actually the most significant thing Harry did was willingly sacrifice his own life for his friends, even though he didn't wind up dying. This act of self-sacrifice put a protection over his friends in the same way his mother's sacrifice protected Harry from Voldemort (at least until Goblet of Fire).

"Just a question for the experienced Harry Potter fans/readers."

Here are my theories. This a combo of book memory and inference.

1. Harry "let" himself be killed in the forest. So the Elder Wand was indeed honoring his wishes. Harry was able to come back because some of his blood was actually in Voldemort's veins, as described at the end of Goblet of Fire. In a crazy way, Voldy was Harry's Horcrux.

and / or..

2. The Elder Wand favors Harry, but only slightly. Harry still needs to put up a reasonable fight to deflect its killing curse.

The whole wand hierarchy is a tough one to wrap your head around, so I don't know how they can explain all of it effectively in a movie. I've had to read the book a few times and read others' analysis to more or less grasp what happened. In any case, Harry is unequivocally the master of the Elder Wand, so V's killing curse wasn't Harry deflecting it with skill or the wand "favoring Harry slightly." The wand simply refused to work against its master, so the killing curse backfired onto Voldemort. While this might seem disappointing that Harry wasn't able to defeat V. on sheer skill or power, it also shows that there are greater forces at work than even the most powerful wizard can comprehend. To me this is much more profound than a duel won through sheer skill.

.
Edited by Chris_T - 7/22/11 at 8:01am

To generate a Patronus charm you have to find your happy place and it manifests as an animal related to whatever that memory or feeling might be. Harry's is a stag, which is the animal his father could transform into. Harry's mother's Patronus was a doe. So Snape's happy place came from his memories of Lily Potter and effectively his undying love for her. The two were friends as children, but grew apart as he became involved with Voldemort, but when she was killed it changed everything for him.

Snape's story is perhaps the most touching and tragic, at least in the book.

I just hope there will be an extended cut... because it seems there are quite a few details left out of the movies.